Gilgamesh2003 wrote:

Renowned tailor* Alexander Kabbaz favours us with the honour of a very long post on shirt collars:
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru … ost1305815
Anyone with a good relationship with a bespoke shirtmaker care to weigh in?

l wonder why Kabbaz would go to such efforts for the type of people who frequent that place.

Sammy Ambrose wrote:

EDIT: Does anyone have Andy's Encyclopedia to hand?

I do.

Jimmy Frost Mellor wrote:

The_Shooman wrote:

Gilgamesh2003 wrote:

Renowned tailor* Alexander Kabbaz favours us with the honour of a very long post on shirt collars:
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru … ost1305815
Anyone with a good relationship with a bespoke shirtmaker care to weigh in?

l wonder why Kabbaz would go to such efforts for the type of people who frequent that place.

That is the golden question. Sell much to the Andy-ites does he?  Surely not.

I don't think he sells much of anything to the idiots who are regular posters.  I think he scores big off the drive-bys, people who might come to the internet looking for the world's finest shirtmaker, drop a few grand with Tailorin' Al, then move on with their lives. His Olympian pronouncements help lure them in and are cheaper than advertising, which he doesn't do very well.

Last edited by Popeye Doyle (2012-06-24 11:41:19)

Fritz the Cat wrote:

formby wrote:

Gilgamesh2003 wrote:

Renowned tailor* Alexander Kabbaz favours us with the honour of a very long post on shirt collars:
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru … ost1305815
Anyone with a good relationship with a bespoke shirtmaker care to weigh in?

Well, here's my take for what its worth.

A fused collar is easier to iron than a traditionally constructed one due to the fullness present in a traditionally constructed collar.

Many men can't iron them, iron them badly or have them badly ironed.

To iron them you have to start at what I believe shirtmakers call the 'presentation point' that's the points of the collar and push the the iron to the centre of the collar do not go back and forth with the iron as you'll push the cloth to the points and get those nasty creases you sometimes see along the edge of the collar. Do each half on the collar separately. Ditto [French] cuffs. Some cottons are more 'sensitive' than others however. Twill (easier) compared to Batiste, (difficult) for example.

I believe Kabbaz uses a lot of those super fine Italian/Swiss cottons which as I've said before are a bitch to iron. I have some I know.

Therefore they tend to look crisper on the everyman.

The problem with fused is the quality of the fusible and the skill of the shirtmakers/operators in setting/operating the machine more so in a RTW/mass production environment.  A lot of fused RTW collars/cuffs bubble after repeated washings. Chemicals present in detergents can be aggressive and attack the fusible if of poor quality/incorrectly applied.

Another potential disadvantage is that fusible could make the collar stiffer and therefore less conformable to wear. The advantage of the increased stiffness afforded by this method is that it allows him to make more 'flamboyant/unique' collar designs.

Slightly related, I've heard several tailors voice the opinion that lightweight superfine suitings are better made by fusing than by traditional coat making techniques.

The guy has probably made thousands of shirts, speaks with the benefit of [his] experience. A good, informative, even handed post I though.

Would you care to elaborate on your experiences with these cottons? I have a couple of Bruli shirts, very durable and their linen-shirts have the least tendency to wrinkle compared to the few others I have tried to far.

Nothing really to elaborate on. As I said, I've found them difficult to iron and in my experience they don't stay crisp throughout the day. I've also found that they don't last as long as my other 100's cotton shirts from the likes of Acorn and Ringhart.

I machine wash and iron my shirts myself, I don't send them out to be laundered.

However, I haven't tried every merchants cotton so there may be some super dupa high count cotton out there that is easy to iron and maintains a crisp appearance throughout the day. Let us know if you discover one.

Gilgamesh2003 wrote:

Quoted without comment:
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru … ost1307392

I personally do not care for the look but the buyers at Nordstrom's are not fools and these tie are compatible with some,(certainly not all), of the suits and shoes they carry which when put together can create a consistent look.

On the other hand it is something more serious than a faux pas to do anything one's wife hates. From a utilitarian ethical point of view, the small additional pleasure you derive from wearing these ties, as compared to wearing other ties, is more than off set by the displeasure that your wife suffers because you wear them. From a cynical point of view, there are more good ties out there than good women and good ties are easier to find. From a practical point of view, if mama's not happy, no one is happy. From a Machiavellian point of view, if you say; Darling, because I love you, I will give up these ties", if she is normal, she will feel the need to do something nice for you. From the devious point of view, keep them in your car and change ties after you leave home. From the loving point of view, giving up the ties because you love her is the right thing to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8A4DrP11sw

Gilgamesh2003 wrote:

Quoted without comment:
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru … ost1307392

I personally do not care for the look but the buyers at Nordstrom's are not fools and these tie are compatible with some,(certainly not all), of the suits and shoes they carry which when put together can create a consistent look.

On the other hand it is something more serious than a faux pas to do anything one's wife hates. From a utilitarian ethical point of view, the small additional pleasure you derive from wearing these ties, as compared to wearing other ties, is more than off set by the displeasure that your wife suffers because you wear them. From a cynical point of view, there are more good ties out there than good women and good ties are easier to find. From a practical point of view, if mama's not happy, no one is happy. From a Machiavellian point of view, if you say; Darling, because I love you, I will give up these ties", if she is normal, she will feel the need to do something nice for you. From the devious point of view, keep them in your car and change ties after you leave home. From the loving point of view, giving up the ties because you love her is the right thing to do.

And more advice for the modern man.

Though women often like a man who knows what he wants and will stand up for that. From what I've seen and experienced, some of these pushes are tests to see if the man she is with will bow to the pressure. If you've ever heard a woman say that she wants a man to be more assertive (or similar language), this is the kind of thing she's talking about.

Sammy Ambrose wrote:

Nemesis wrote:

Sammy Ambrose wrote:

Does anyone know what the 'masculine' form of seamstress is? I'd really like to find a more precise way of describing what Kabbaz does. Were he an artificer of women's blouses and dresses he'd be a dressmaker. The equivalent for men's shirts is ..

A seamster, like Corporal Trim.

A seamster it is then.


But which Corporal Trim did you have in mind? The one  from Tristam Shandy was a manservant who was find of giving advice, particularly when it gave him the chance to look knowledgeable. Surely you couldn't be thinking of him to describe the great seamster to the rich and famous for 30 years ( and purveyor of the finest socks and underwear)?

[Corporal Trim] attending my uncle Toby‥as a valet, groom, barber, cook, sempster [seamster], and nurse.

If the hat fits..

Gilgamesh2003 wrote:

Quoted without comment:
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru … ost1307392

I personally do not care for the look but the buyers at Nordstrom's are not fools and these tie are compatible with some,(certainly not all), of the suits and shoes they carry which when put together can create a consistent look.

On the other hand it is something more serious than a faux pas to do anything one's wife hates. From a utilitarian ethical point of view, the small additional pleasure you derive from wearing these ties, as compared to wearing other ties, is more than off set by the displeasure that your wife suffers because you wear them. From a cynical point of view, there are more good ties out there than good women and good ties are easier to find. From a practical point of view, if mama's not happy, no one is happy. From a Machiavellian point of view, if you say; Darling, because I love you, I will give up these ties", if she is normal, she will feel the need to do something nice for you. From the devious point of view, keep them in your car and change ties after you leave home. From the loving point of view, giving up the ties because you love her is the right thing to do.

Blather, as opposed to the treatise on cheesy collars which was Gobbledygook.

This is the GreatTwizz at his Twizziest: Mason, Top of the Field in his Chosen Career, Event Planner, Sexual Absolutist, Attractor of the Better Sorts from Gated Communities on the Gold Coast of NJ, Social Magnet, Refuser of Having the Wedding in Atlantic City as his future In-Laws suggested ("The Duke would never have gone to a wedding in Atlantic City!!"), Respected Presence in the City of Brotherly Love,  Admirer of the Dress Uniform of the United States Marine Corps...


...and his Best Man is a Screw?

Please do, and wear your evening clothes inside-out.

The Great Twizz wrote:

Also, as I omitted it in my post before: Thank you all for the wonderful wishes!!! This won't be the last of my threads about it

aah cheap entertainment.

Last edited by fxh (2012-06-28 19:52:20)

Gilgamesh2003 wrote:

Film Noir Buff wrote:

Blather, as opposed to the treatise on cheesy collars which was Gobbledygook.

Which one is this?
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru … e-REQUIRED

Turning to those of you with the experience who may have received many more invites than I.....

For our nuptials next summer (June 8th to be exact), we are having a strict black tie affair. How can we, politely (this is key for me, as I tend to be a dick about such things), indicate to our guests that a tuxedo is required, and a lounge suit is unacceptable? We do have a wedding website that will contain some info, and I planned on putting a link to the black tie guide (or robbing Andy's), but how can we convey the message of 'If you don't care enough to wear a tux, we don't want you there'?

She feels that an explanation of 'Black Tie' on our website, with 'Black Tie Required' on the invitation is sufficient; I think that there are people on the guest list who either won't know, or won't care. (3 or 4 people out of 100 on the guest list would wear their military dress, and I will convey that privately to them instead of 'Black Tie or Uniform')

This is our position, our day, and given the expense we and her family are going to for the event, asking even the courtesy of our guests to spend $100 on a rental is not out of line.

Thoughts?

Thank you all for the many (prompt) replies. Guessing it is a slow morning at work worldwide.

Before I get into the rest, let me note that we are, relatively speaking, young, and our guest list is right around 100 people. This is a first (and only [yea yea, everyone says that]) marriage for us both; we're having a civil ceremony at the Masonic Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania at 5:30 pm (time set so evening wear is appropriate) with reception to follow 4 blocks away. Calling each and every one is not an option, but we are doing 'Save the Date' cards imminently, as well as a wedding website that will contain such details. My intention is to CLEARLY spell out what is expected by 'Black Tie' in a section on the website. For the sake of convenience, we're treating this as a destination wedding, as the Bride's friends and family are 60 miles or more away (NYC/Jersey Shore; wedding in Philadelphia).

I'd also like to state that yes, while I'm familiar with historical etiquette of event invitations, 99.9% of America is not. If I were exclusively inviting AAAC members, nothing more would need to be said beyond 'Black Tie', but given the degradation of dress in the US, especially with the amount of fashion-y and flamboyant NJ/New Yorkers in attendance, I cannot see any other way to get the desired result without spelling it out (bow tie, cummerbund or vest, dinner jacket, etc.).

-There will be security at the event, albeit not in the form of a 'bouncer'. We've discussed having them turn away those inappropriately dressed, but seeing as we'll see everyone prior to the reception, having family (or my best man, a large corrections officer) handle that after the ceremony is an option. However, Mike Petrik's words are weighing on me. Initially, the plan was to have (no-no words deleted) the Tailor from Charleston handle arranging all the rentals and fittings with his trips up here, but given our events as of late, I'm left to find another place. I'm thinking of using Men's Wearhouse for this, and setting up the rentals and specs as though we're just a giant bridal party, this way those who travel can get fitted locally.

-Forsberg; re: social circle - the reasonableness of the requirement is directly correlated to the event. As Titus stated 'Throw a party that was worth getting dressed up for.' is exactly what we're doing. Catered by THE restaurateur in Philadelphia (Steven Starr), 11 piece band, ultra-premium top shelf bar, ceremony in what is considered one of the most exquisite rooms in North America, etc. In short, our position is that if you can't (of which there is nobody invited who wouldn't have the means; I have a few family members, but I'm taking care of theirs) or won't spend the $100 on a tux rental to arrive attired as we requested at our WEDDING (not some random party), then you don't deserve to share the evening with us. For those that don't own a tux (which there are many, especially our friends who are in our age bracket and may have never needed one), we consider the cost of the rental to be a subsidized price of admission much in the way that most women will go out and buy new dresses, shoes, bags, etc for such an event.

-To further discuss what Titus said in point #3: It isn't that we expect them to break out their dinner jackets, we're telling them 'This is a Black Tie event, if you can't arrive in proper attire, don't show the eff up.' While yes, I agree, it is rude to state that, I find it much more rude to blatantly ignore the host's request for attire because you're a lazy (or cheap) dickhead. Further, there are actually folks on the guest list that would find the humor in wearing a rainbow dinner jacket just to screw with us, and we're not sure how to address that.

-Racer/AR - Yes, I absolutely understand their full dress uniform is appropriate for Black Tie, but seeing as there are only 3 or 4 who would wear it (two marines [who happen to be a couple, and she outranks him]; and a light bird in the Air Force, who may be deployed). Quite correct in my intentions. My reason for excluding 'uniform' from the invite (as the Duke and Duchess's invitations stated 'Morning Dress or Uniform') was that there are so few I can communicate with them and express how we would be honored if they would wear their full dress uniform.

I can faintly hear the ghost of Paul Fussell whispering "high prole...high prole..."

Good grief -- who is marrying this prat?

I am enjoying the style in which Shaver writes on AAAC. Two recent examples :-

http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru … ost1308243

http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/foru … ing-shoes-(3-pairs)!&p=1308212#post1308212

''I concur; Herring are a valuable supplier. The range exhibits taste, the quality is in accord with the cost, and the service is first rate. I must allow that a pair of Wilson chelsea boots I obtained from them are manufactured from the most gorgeous calf skin and are the pride of my footwear. ''

Last edited by Kingston1an (2012-06-30 05:47:03)