The London Lounge

Gentlemen,

I have a few ties, which I suspect need to be shortened a bit. It's hard to make a four-in-hand knot on them without the narrow end showing from behind the wide end. Some are so long as to practically only allow for a Windsor knot. So my question to you is: what's the acceptable length range of the narrow end of a tie? How long is too long and how short is too short?

Thanks for your help,

Alexey

With those of my ties that are a tad too long I use the Prince Albert knot (double four-in-hand) with very pleasing results.

Somewhere else it was stated that Italians seem to wear their ties long, the English short and the Americans in between. So your correct tie length would not only depend on your torso and neck size but also on where you are.

Nixxbox, I prefer the narrow end not to be longer than the wide one, but even that is not a real rule. If wear your ties so that both ends are visible, they look best when the ends are equal or the narrow one is a just a few cms shorter. If the short one is always hidden behind the wide blade, it doesn't matter much.

The usual tie length for a tie untied is between 52 and 54 inches.

No matter what length the tie is, you'll want the tip to rest right on the waist line of your trousers.

Even if you're thin, having the tie too short just makes one look heavier, and a tie too long is plain weird looking.

If you look at old ties from the 1920s to 40s ties were very short, and I think it had to do with the high waisted trousers.

Another thing to consider, is tie width. Some four and hands can look like a nice half windsor, and some half windsors can end up just looking like a four and hand.

Then if you just don't want to worry about length all together, try on a bow tie.

Best Regards,

Cufflink79

Cufflink79 wrote:No matter what length the tie is, you'll want the tip to rest right on the waist line of your trousers.

Even if you're thin, having the tie too short just makes one look heavier

I'm afraid that bit of advice comes a little late for this gentleman:

Thanks for your answers, gents.

I don't like the look of narrow end being longer than wide blade, so I'll definitely give the Prince Albert knot a go.

I don't like the look of narrow end being longer than wide blade, so I'll definitely give the Prince Albert knot a go.

If it makes you feel any better, Angelli used to have his ties made long on purpose so the more narrow end would be quite a bit longer than the wide one. He tucked the thin end into his trousers. I took to doing this a few years ago myself with my longer ties. Try it.

(Costi, I imagine Windsor had a habit of doing the same thing, as per the photo you posted
Cheers

Michael Alden

A tie is composed of three sections: the blade, the neck, and the tail. There are any number of knots that can be used, though I think there should be some complementary relationship to the shape of the wearer's face (oval, angular or full), the style and height of the collar (spread, point or button-down), and the formality or informality of the shirt fabric. My standard knot is a half-windsor, which I find to be the most elegant style. Some men prefer a center dimple at the bottom of the knot, while others like a double dimple at the sides of the knot. It depends upon the weight of the silk. As to the proper length of the tie, the blade should ideally just graze the top of the waistband of your trousers when standing. That presumes you have the good sense to wear your trousers where they belong, on your natural waistline. How wide should the blade be? 3 3/4- to 4-inches or 9.5- to 10.1-centimeters. The measurement depends upon your build and width of your lapels. If you prefer to wear a vested suit or sport jacket so you can arch your tie, blade width is of secondary importance. Keep all of your ties to classic proportions so they never go out of style, regardless of fashion.

A final thought. Any tie can be lengthened or shortened, widened or narrowed. If you want to remodel a
tie, you need to find a talented seamstress or tailor who sews by hand. The only work done with a sewing machine is joining the three sections together and the self-tipping at the blade and tail. There is more underneath the outer silk shell than you might imagine, and it's all done by hand.

JMB

Too long, too short, too narrow, too wide, too thin, too thick, too tapered, not tapered enough, wrong number of folds, interlining too light, interlining too stiff... I know the feeling. This knot for that tie, that knot for this tie... Too much fuss for this lazy character. I got fed up, had a couple of bespoke ties made and never turned back.

Cufflink79:

Short ties dating from the early part of the 20th century had more to do with the size of the screens used for the patterns than high-rise trousers. By the same token, the size of the blank silks used for hand-painted ties of that period were also smaller.

Re: average tie lengths, 52-54 inches is suitable for a diminutive man; 56-59 inches will usually suffice for an average size man, ie, under six feet in height; and 61-63 inches is adequate for a tall man up to six feet
four inches. Regardless of size, the tail of a tie should never extend below the blade.

JMB

Where can one get a lined six-fold tie made in the UK?

Jordan Marc wrote:Short ties dating from the early part of the 20th century had more to do with the size of the screens used for the patterns than high-rise trousers. By the same token, the size of the blank silks used for hand-painted ties of that period were also smaller.

You learn something new everyday. Thanks JBM.

Best Regards,

Cufflink79

alden wrote:(Costi, I imagine Windsor had a habit of doing the same thing, as per the photo you posted

Indeed, Michael. It's always reassuring to see another "rule" busted
What about this one?


He seemed more concerned with getting the knot as he liked it, which requried a certain width of tie, regardless of whether it resulted in a very short blade (and very long narrow end):


In fact I think treating the tie's two halfs equally is more stylish. For some reason, a tie that hides perfectly its narrow half (including restraining it behind the loop) looks contrived and artificial to me - like those fake ties with a ready-made knot and an elastic band to slip under the shirt collar.


The beauty of the tie is that it is a piece of fabric that you TIE around your neck, so why try to hide what everyone knows? What is so shameful about the narrow half of the tie that it cannot be shown in public?

The standard day tie derives from the cravat and the hunting stock. I have just measured a hunting stock (what it is doing here, when there are more useful things still in the UK, is a question that I ask myself). Anyway, it is curved at the front and shaped along each length, slit along one and 58 inches long. It is worn with a neckband hunting shirt and serves, effectively, as both collar and tie. The reason that it has survived is that, since it goes around the neck twice (and tied properly - another matter - the art being a surviving memorial to Brummell's famous careless trouble with his cravats), it serves as protection for the neck in the event of a heavy fall. Once it is tied and pinned, you'd be lucky to see more than a couple of inches of the ends, to tuck beneath your vest. Maybe, that's it: when vests were usual daily wear, the length of tie was nearly irrelevant, as long as its ends were hidden beneath the vest. Then the Duke and his generation abandoned day vests with lounge suits and tie length began to matter, unless you were in a position to tie the thing with the reckless abandon that the Duke evidently favoured; in ties, as in everything else .
NJS