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

Ask A Question, Get An Answer... - Post All Quick Questions Here - Page 1371

post #20551 of 28325
Quote:
Originally Posted by N0Direction View Post


interesting. Time to delete these tie-tying apps, I'll take 3 of you guys over them any day of the week. Obvviously the developers don't know what they're talking about.

I don't get it. Google Windsor and everything is like this (image). The fat end crosses over the skinny one (down to the left), then up behind, through the loop then back over the skinny end (back down to the left in the picture) before going behind... My fat end goes through the loop then over the fat side to the right (figure-8-ish). I maybe need to re-photograph with better lighting?

post #20552 of 28325

I have a question regarding formal wear. I am currently on the market for a Tuxedo and I am in a predicament. I'm low on funds but want to do something different than the cliche mens wearhouse rental. As of Style, I was thinking vintage... like the old Military style tuxedos or the ones with the cut away coat.... any suggestions on where to find a good one?

post #20553 of 28325
Quote:
Originally Posted by N0Direction View Post

I don't get it. Google Windsor and everything is like this (image). The fat end crosses over the skinny one (down to the left), then up behind, through the loop then back over the skinny end (back down to the left in the picture) before going behind... My fat end goes through the loop then over the fat side to the right (figure-8-ish). I maybe need to re-photograph with better lighting?


There are literally hundreds of ways of tying a tie -- many of them don't have proper names. Yours is just some odd variation somewhere between a half- and full-Windsor.
post #20554 of 28325

It is hard to tell- but I think it is a half-windsor.  Look at http://www.tie-a-tie.net/ and tie a full and a half and you should be able to sort it out. 

post #20555 of 28325
The second loop makes it look more like a full Windsor, or some approximation thereof. Pretty hard to tell from the GIF though.
post #20556 of 28325
Quote:
Originally Posted by aravenel View Post

Nailhead would maybe be OK as that's almost a texture more than a pattern, and resolves to solid... Maybe some birdseyes as well. But personally I'd stay away from anything more patterned than pick-and-pick/sharkskin in trousers.

Before anyone gets up in arms about how it's *possible* to do patterned trousers in some particular niche case, I'm coming at this from a practicality perspective. A pair of trousers that are very hard to pair and only go with one outfit are not something I want in my closet. If I had infinite money and infinite closet space, perhaps I'd consider it... But I don't, so I need my trousers to be easy to pair, and I'd wager that anyone on this forum who isn't Vox is in the same boat.



Here are the pants in question.


post #20557 of 28325
Yeah, those are definitely going to look like orphaned suit pants. Sorry.

You might, *maybe* be able to use them very casually--OCBD and sweater kinda deal--but definitely not with a SC.
post #20558 of 28325
Quote:
Originally Posted by aravenel View Post

Yeah, those are definitely going to look like orphaned suit pants. Sorry.

You might, *maybe* be able to use them very casually--OCBD and sweater kinda deal--but definitely not with a SC.

 

Exactly.  Try a white button down and a navy cardigan, or a light blue shirt and a burgundy or brownish cardigan.  Probably without a tie.  With a cravat if you're really brave. :)

post #20559 of 28325
^^
Spoo wears glen check trousers with a navy blazer from time to time -



I think that looks quite good myself. I mean, if it works with a navy cardigan, why not a navy sc?
post #20560 of 28325
That example works decently--like I said, I'm sure there is a way to do it well. This is probably pretty much it--large, bold striped shirt to 1) not clash with the pents, 2) to keep the eye from being drawn downwards.

Problem is, this is a very, very loud look, that most people probably couldn't pull off, and even if they can, they probably can't wear it very often. And frankly, I don't think its a particularly good look. It works, but I certainly wouldn't go trying to replicate this.
post #20561 of 28325

Also, the trousers in question perhaps louder than Spoo's.  Also also, I didn't like that much anyway. ;)

post #20562 of 28325
Quote:
Originally Posted by aravenel View Post

That example works decently--like I said, I'm sure there is a way to do it well. This is probably pretty much it--large, bold striped shirt to 1) not clash with the pents, 2) to keep the eye from being drawn downwards.

Problem is, this is a very, very loud look, that most people probably couldn't pull off, and even if they can, they probably can't wear it very often. And frankly, I don't think its a particularly good look. It works, but I certainly wouldn't go trying to replicate this.

Are you looking at a different picture than I am?

Checked trousers like that add some interest to an outfit- blazer and gray trousers, that's usually on the mind-numbingly boring side. It's not loud by any means, and wouldn't be loud with the other posted trousers.

Look, patterned trousers may not be your thing, but they're hardly inherently evil, nor all that limiting if your sportcoats tend to be textured more so than pattered. If you wear lots of loudly pattered sportcoats, yes, you'll run into problems. If you have lots of blazers and flannel sportcoats, an array of patterned pants adds another layer to an outfit.
post #20563 of 28325
He's wearing a shirt with 1" spaced, 1/4" thick purple stripes. That's loud by just about anyone's definition.

It's not only that patterned odd trousers are hard to pair, it's that they draw the eye downwards. Sure, you could just go with patterned trousers, solid jacket, solid shirt, solid tie. But the pattern on the trousers pulls your eye to the legs, not the face, and makes the whole thing seem off balance. To counteract that, you need a strong pattern up top, which is exactly what Spoo has done here. But then you've got a loud and distinctive outfit, which limits its utility. You can't wear that very often.

Again, one *can* do it--Spoo's outfit here looks pretty decent. But one can't wear that outfit very often given how distinctive it is.
post #20564 of 28325
Quote:
Originally Posted by aravenel View Post

He's wearing a shirt with 1" spaced purple stripes. That's loud by just about anyone's definition.

It's not only that patterned odd trousers are hard to pair, it's that they draw the eye downwards. Sure, you could just go with patterned trousers, solid jacket, solid shirt, solid tie. But the pattern on the trousers pulls your eye to the legs, not the face, and makes the whole thing seem off balance. To counteract that, you need a strong pattern up top, which is exactly what Spoo has done here.

Again, one *can* do it--Spoo's outfit here looks pretty decent. But one can't wear that outfit very often given how distinctive it is.

Eh, that shirt's not too loud in my book, though I see what you're saying. Distinctive, but not all that loud. And even so, it's the only strong element up top beside the blazer and tie. You'd have to switch that tie to something notably patterned to cross the line into loud for me- as it is, it's a one pattern outfit with a moderate level of additional interest on the pants.

I wouldn't call it subdued, but I wouldn't call it loud. Just a happy medium.
post #20565 of 28325
Looking for a second pair of shoes, and have 400usd to spend. Think I want something in dark walnut as my black Hanover wingtips are still going strong. I am pretty set on the AE Larchmosnt. Is this the best bang for my Buck or do you have any other suggestions?
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