or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Ask A Question, Get An Answer... - Post All Quick Questions Here (Classic menswear)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ask A Question, Get An Answer... - Post All Quick Questions Here (Classic menswear) - Page 414

post #6196 of 33197
Quote:
Originally Posted by onix View Post
I went to both John Lobb and Edward Green websites and their derby shoes include both types. Now, it is a possibility that there was such distinction before, but it now becomes obsolete. I don't entirely dismiss your opinion, just that I haven't heard of that before.

Cosigning this. There may be individual entities who use a (possibly archaic?) distinction between the two illustrated versions of derbies but most reference books, websites, vendors and sales assistants use the terms in their more generic sense and would include both, so any actual distinction has rightly or wrongly fallen by the wayside in common parlance. It's now gotten to the point where the term 'oxford' bleeds over to include open laced shoes too, and 'loafer' to include just about any slip on shoe.

It's a bit like the term 'button down' which outside of America means a button collar shirt, but in the ever more casual US it's often used to denote a shirt with 'buttons down the front' as opposed to a polo or t shirt.
post #6197 of 33197
Can I use hearing aid battery for my watch replacement or should I use watch battery specifically for my new watch? It's an analog of course.
post #6198 of 33197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surreal View Post
What do you think about these suits. Both are Pierre Cardin and from wool.
...
Worth it?

Tough call, comparatively each has pros and cons. The first jacket appears to have more problems than the second, but the pants on the second look too tight, with bunching around the knee, fitting almost like slim jeans. The jacket in the first has obvious problems with the left-arm sleeve, as you can see in the side-shot with the bunching behind the upper arm. Also, the back on the first jacket has some weird wrinkle in the center, below the collar. Some of those wrinkles could be exaggerated by the lighting and reflection from the fabric. Also, the first jacket might be a tad short. It looks to cover your butt, but compared to the second, looks a little short. The second just looks to be a better length, but that could be due to different camera angles.

In both cases, the pants need to be hemmed. When trying on, tuck the pant cuffs inward and up so that the pant leg is to the mid-point of your laces, to give a better idea of how the pants
will hang when not all bunched at the foot.

Are either of them worth it? Hard to say. I wouldn't go for it, but I don't know about your other constraints. What is your budget? What is your timetable? What are your other choices? Do you have a lot of suit-shopping options? How much time+effort do you want to spend?
post #6199 of 33197
Quote:
Originally Posted by gusgusterson View Post
I am taking a navy blazer with basted sleeves to the tailor to be finished with shank buttons.
Are shank buttons meant to be sewn on with or without button hole stitching? I am assuming the later, but have never had this done. Thanks!

It's just preference. You can do it either way:

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

None:


Working, with stitching obvi:


post #6200 of 33197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ianiceman View Post
Cosigning this. There may be individual entities who use a (possibly archaic?) distinction between the two illustrated versions of derbies but most reference books, websites, vendors and sales assistants use the terms in their more generic sense and would include both, so any actual distinction has rightly or wrongly fallen by the wayside in common parlance. It's now gotten to the point where the term 'oxford' bleeds over to include open laced shoes too, and 'loafer' to include just about any slip on shoe.

It's a bit like the term 'button down' which outside of America means a button collar shirt, but in the ever more casual US it's often used to denote a shirt with 'buttons down the front' as opposed to a polo or t shirt.

A lot of shoe terminology is mixed up and differs amongst areas and sources. I certainly would not call the distinction you make between blucher and derby meaningful.

Hell, oxford, in its original usage, was simply in reference to any short shoe as opposed to a boot, as was the style in oxford at the time. They were made with closed lacing at the time becuase they were basically chopped off dress boots, what we know as a balmoral boot, of course. Of course, that style took over soon and they started making the shoe/boot distinction instead, and oxford started referring to a type of shoe. And even more confusingly, you still run across the word used in its original sense. Thus an open laced gunboat gets lumped in the 'oxford' category on occasion.

And as a sidenote, oxfords as the lower cut shoe, were viewed much as many SFers still view loafers- as inappropriate in anything but casual settings. Becuase I often harp on the complete and utter arbitrariness of distinctions of formality, gotta throw that in there.
post #6201 of 33197
I was not sure that this was deserving of its own thread. I've done a search (or ten) and not found a satisfactory answer.

I've recently moved to DC and was wondering if anyone knew where to get Mabitex on clearance. I guess I was spoiled by Daffy's. I've been to filene's without success. Any useful advice (other than keep checking b&s)?

Thanks in advance.
post #6202 of 33197
If a groom wants to wear a brown lounge suit to his wedding, should the groomsmen also wear shades of brown, or can they venture out into navy/charcoal/mid grey?
post #6203 of 33197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
If a groom wants to wear a brown lounge suit to his wedding, should the groomsmen also wear shades of brown, or can they venture out into navy/charcoal/mid grey?

Well, wearing a brown suit to a wedding is a bit strange to begin with, but if that's already decided then there's no rule against the groomsmen wearing different colours.
post #6204 of 33197
Quote:
Originally Posted by cptjeff View Post
A lot of shoe terminology is mixed up and differs amongst areas and sources. I certainly would not call the distinction you make between blucher and derby meaningful.

Hell, oxford, in its original usage, was simply in reference to any short shoe as opposed to a boot, as was the style in oxford at the time. They were made with closed lacing at the time becuase they were basically chopped off dress boots, what we know as a balmoral boot, of course. Of course, that style took over soon and they started making the shoe/boot distinction instead, and oxford started referring to a type of shoe. And even more confusingly, you still run across the word used in its original sense. Thus an open laced gunboat gets lumped in the 'oxford' category on occasion.

And as a sidenote, oxfords as the lower cut shoe, were viewed much as many SFers still view loafers- as inappropriate in anything but casual settings. Becuase I often harp on the complete and utter arbitrariness of distinctions of formality, gotta throw that in there.

Thanks jptjeff, Ianiceman, and Onix for your views. You're all rightly pointing out that if the distinction ever was accurate it not used anymore, certainly in the English language regions. Searching some more, the only pages which made the distinction were German ones, so maybe its a geographical oddity, archaic usage, or maybe even not correct at all.

The story about Oxford is very interesting. Though it seems that at least here (as opposed to the Derby/Blucher) the English (UK) terminology is as of now separating two types of shoes (or rather separating the Balmoral as a subtype of the oxford). In any case - and before we stretch the "ask a quick question"-thread beyond its intention, thank you for the enlightening contributions

Cheers
Reto
post #6205 of 33197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguis Mortuum View Post
Well, wearing a brown suit to a wedding is a bit strange to begin with, but if that's already decided then there's no rule against the groomsmen wearing different colours.

Thanks!
post #6206 of 33197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
If a groom wants to wear a brown lounge suit to his wedding, should the groomsmen also wear shades of brown, or can they venture out into navy/charcoal/mid grey?

What does the bride want?
post #6207 of 33197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archivist View Post
What does the bride want?

I asked, and the bride and groom are both fairly open. My only concern was that navy or charcoal might upstage the brown on the formality spectrum.
post #6208 of 33197
Hai Guys, I am a blogger in Holland on mens style. I'd like to know your view/opinion on Dutch street style. Here is a variaty of things I came across. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_iq1GFpFsTx..._27-1-2011.png Please react. I am curious! Greetings, Ché.
post #6209 of 33197
I have newbie question about shell. Can you have shell cordovan belt as a belt strap so that you can secure it with whatever buckle you wish instead of the permanent buckle belts you see out there?
post #6210 of 33197
Questions about Loakes.

If I am a 10D, should I order a 9 or 9.5F?

I got two pairs of Loake 758's from Herring in 9.5F but they feel big, should I go down to 9 or will they be uncomfortable?

Thanks!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Ask A Question, Get An Answer... - Post All Quick Questions Here (Classic menswear)