Gaziano & Girling Appreciation & Shoe Appreciation Thread (including reviews, purchases, pictures)

[Chowkin]

Luk-cha, how do you call this kind of construction where the welt is not flush with the heel?

 

[bengal-stripe]



Luk-cha, how do you call this kind of construction where the welt is not flush with the heel?

The welt is flush with the heel. What you see is a decorative wheeling, where a wheel gets pressed into the leather and leaves a mark:



If you are referring to the step between the heel and the bevelled waist, that's a sign of the finest handmade work, as the change from rounded (waist) to square (heel) is invetabely clumsy.

 

[DWFII]



Luk-cha, how do you call this kind of construction where the welt is not flush with the heel?

Depends on how you define "flush"--at the end of the welt as it transitions to the heel seat or along its outer edge.

But BS is spot on--it is a mark of handwork, care, and by extension, quality.

 

[ShayaEXQT]

Been a while sine i have really posted any Appreciation anywhere, so here it goes.....

New bespokes for moi, Dark Brown Super rare China Buck Monks





Tan China Buck Chukka's




Laser Medalion Derby - Tan Hatch grain

Absolute shoe perfection. Is the single monk on the Deco last?

 

[thelonius]

Goodyear welted

 

[DWFII]



Goodyear welted

And the point is?

Let me address what I think your point might be...

At some point you have to come to the conclusion that "quality" has an objective basis. As opposed to a subjective basis. I think that argument can be made and, FWIW, I kind of do so in another thread [COLOR=FF0000]here[/COLOR].

If you accept the basic premise, then it follows that "quality" is, by its very nature, comparative / hierarchical--good, better, best.

Just because a shoe is GY doesn't mean that it is not good quality in the overall scheme of things. G&G may be GY but they retain so many other aspects that we associate with quality that it's hard to hold the GY against them unless you're a somewhat crusty old snab who sees his beloved Trade being lost. Not with a bang but a whimper.

So...don't let best be the enemy of the good. Despite what you may think (if you haven't been paying particular attention) I, for one, have never said it was and I try deliberately and conscientiously to not even suggest it.

--

 

[luk-cha]



Absolute shoe perfection. Is the single monk on the Deco last?

not really! just my bespoke last as always

 

[SpooPoker]



not really! just my bespoke last as always

Luk I havent seen you in forever!!

 

[luk-cha]



Luk I havent seen you in forever!!

still around, just dont post as much

 

[Fishball]



Goodyear welted

But the G&G bespoke are not Goodyear welted, they are hand welted. So, what is the point?

 

[thelonius]



But the G&G bespoke are not Goodyear welted, they are hand welted. So, what is the point?

See DWFII preceding post. The thread doesn't only concern bespoke G&Gs

 

[thelonius]



And the point is?

Let me address what I think your point might be...

At some point you have to come to the conclusion that "quality" has an objective basis. As opposed to a subjective basis. I think that argument can be made and, FWIW, I kind of do so in another thread [COLOR=FF0000]here[/COLOR].

If you accept the basic premise, then it follows that "quality" is, by its very nature, comparative / hierarchical--good, better, best.

Just because a shoe is GY doesn't mean that it is not good quality in the overall scheme of things. G&G may be GY but they retain so many other aspects that we associate with quality that it's hard to hold the GY against them unless you're a somewhat crusty old snab who sees his beloved Trade being lost. Not with a bang but a whimper.

So...don't let best be the enemy of the good. Despite what you may think (if you haven't been paying particular attention) I, for one, have never said it was and I try deliberately and conscientiously to not even suggest it.

--

Any qualitative element can be measured. It is necessary simply to identify the desired/undesired component or function, devise a way of measuring it in various samples, and apply a reliable calibration. SATRA does it for a living on shoes and boots, among other products. Not on G&Gs I imagine, but there’s no reason why they couldn’t.
Fit and comfort:
http://www.satra.co.uk/portal/page.php?id=53

Resistance, slip/grip, etc:
http://www.satra.co.uk/portal/page.php?id=42

Esthetics cannot be measured, as it has no function, being uniquely in the eye of the beholder.

Some valued members on SF have suggested that GYW shoes, on a shoe quality scale of 1 to 10, never leave 1 (whatever the make). It is not my opinion. Let’s face it, even hand-sewn shoes rely on adhesives.

I must get out of this thread and return to one more suitable. I have nothing whatsoever to say about G&Gs.

 

[niklasnordin]

And the point is?

Let me address what I think your point might be...

At some point you have to come to the conclusion that "quality" has an objective basis. As opposed to a subjective basis. I think that argument can be made and, FWIW, I kind of do so in another thread [COLOR=FF0000]here[/COLOR].

If you accept the basic premise, then it follows that "quality" is, by its very nature, comparative / hierarchical--good, better, best.

Just because a shoe is GY doesn't mean that it is not good quality in the overall scheme of things. G&G may be GY but they retain so many other aspects that we associate with quality that it's hard to hold the GY against them unless you're a somewhat crusty old snab who sees his beloved Trade being lost. Not with a bang but a whimper.

So...don't let best be the enemy of the good. Despite what you may think (if you haven't been paying particular attention) I, for one, have never said it was and I try deliberately and conscientiously to not even suggest it.

--

Without having read all the post I'd just like to add this.
This is what I have been taught.
Quality IS subjective. It is based on your expectations and good quality is simply defined as something that meets and surpasses your expectations,
whereas bad quality is defined as not living up to your expectations.
Whatever you buy, if you are happy with it and it surpasses your expectations is therefore of good quality regardless of price/brand or whatever....

just my 2 cents

 

[thelonius]



Without having read all the post I'd just like to add this.
This is what I have been taught.
Quality IS subjective. It is based on your expectations and good quality is simply defined as something that meets and surpasses your expectations,
whereas bad quality is defined as not living up to your expectations.
Whatever you buy, if you are happy with it and it surpasses your expectations is therefore of good quality regardless of price/brand or whatever....

just my 2 cents

Qualitative traits are linked to function and can be measured. See my post above.

 

[DWFII]



Qualitative traits are linked to function and can be measured. See my post above.

+1

When quality (or good and evil) is subjective, every one has a different definition and thus there is no definition...and ultimately, anything goes.

This is also known as "relativism."