Huntsman bespoke shirts

[alden]

With MTM, like Michael wrote, you START with a built-in error to which, by the very nature of the process, you bring successive corrections

Costi

What is the one thing any great bespoke tailor dreads doing after finishing a garment?

Alterations.

A tailor knows that every alteration action has an equal and opposite reaction. If you touch one part of a coat, you impact another part. So alterations can be a never ending spiral into the ruin of a garment.

And yet, MTM has as a fundamental of its model, alterations.

No, MTM has as a fundamental of its model the knowledge that few of its garments will have to be altered because the client of MTM is hopefully not fit sensitive but more interested in good fabrics and details.

It is a perfectly sound model for maker and client. I am simply asking that it not be called bespoke tailoring or anything remotely associated to the sartorial craft. It is a model of its own.

I confess to being stubborn on this point out of gratitude to all the men and women who have spent hours of hard work hand crafting garments for me according to traditional methods that we may be losing. Someone has to put a foot down and “protect the tailors” (Guy Talese) from the incursions of disloyal marketing. And if it doesn't happen here in the LL, where in the world will these thoughts be advanced and expressed?

Cheers

Michael

[andreyb]

I don't know what "my definition" of MTM is, as opposed to Michael's. I call MTM a process that starts from a "default" or stock pattern which is then altered to a certain degree.

Costi, I said this before several times in this very thread -- Lachter's shirts (which is one of the subjects of the discussion and which Badden refers to) are NOT made this way. Thus, you comments are right in general sense, but absolutely not relevant to what Badden said.

How the shirt is then assembled is less relevant (but have you ever heard of handsewn MTM shirts?!).

Yes, many times. Borrelli, Finamore, Kiton... should I continue?

Andrey

[andreyb]

Michael,

This is what a bespoke shirtmaker looks like painstakingly fitting a client. This is a second basted fitting. What I "explicitly" confirm is that if you did not have two or three of these kinds of fittings, you did not have a bespoke shirt made.

Last year I interviewed some well known Jermyn street "bespoke" makers who are in vogue and they told me about the factory near (or in) London and said that all the shirtmakers use the same one. Their cloth selections from their books are stored there and they fill out a form that indicates how the shirt is to be made and it is made at the factory by machine. It is an efficient, sensible, cost effective and lucrative way to make shirts. It just isn't traditional bespoke.

I believe these picture were made at Lanvin.

As Pierre told me, Lanvin now sends shirts for sewing to a factory outside of Paris... Same for Charvet... So, not traditional bespoke?

I understand your arguments; OK, as I said, I can accept that Lachter's shirts are not traditional bespoke. Call it MTM, but this is a kind of MTM that *does* employ a new pattern for each customer and subsequent pattern manipulation.

Leaving bit and pieces of pockets or a paper pattern on the wall as decoration does not a bespoke maker make. Scenes from the real life of tailoring as evidenced above are more convincing. And as for marketing material on web sites.....lest we even waste our breath.

I believe what I saw is work-in-progress, not decorations. As for marketing materials... yep, I take them with a grain of salt, but when I saw simple facts (like "hand-drawn pattern created for each new customer") I tend to believe them. Otherwise, this is a fraud, as simple as that.

Let me show you a picture, too: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_bjSrV5IgOT0/S ... gelli7.JPG. This is me, wearing a try-on shirt and stretching my arms to see how comfortable I am in this posture. I guess you should recognize the atelier. However, end result, while very-very good, still fits and feels a bit less well than what Mr Lachter acheived. My conclusion is that experience, amassed by Mr Lachter, does matter. Even if he employs a lesser method (no fittings).

Andrey

[Gruto]

As regards to fittings, I have experienced three methods in London. The first shirtmaker completed one of four shirts. He sent the shirt to me asking me to wash it a couple of times. I guess he was hoping that I would be happy with it, so he could finish the order. The second shirtmaker prefered that we could make a fitting with a completed shirt. The third insisted on a fitting as well, but with the shirt only pinned together.

[Costi]

I don't know what "my definition" of MTM is, as opposed to Michael's. I call MTM a process that starts from a "default" or stock pattern which is then altered to a certain degree.

Costi, I said this before several times in this very thread -- Lachter's shirts (which is one of the subjects of the discussion and which Badden refers to) are NOT made this way. Thus, you comments are right in general sense, but absolutely not relevant to what Badden said.

How the shirt is then assembled is less relevant (but have you ever heard of handsewn MTM shirts?!).

Yes, many times. Borrelli, Finamore, Kiton... should I continue?

Andrey

Andrey, you have it right, my comments are absolutely not relevant to what Mr. Lachter does or does not do, as I am unacquainted with the details of his activity (I re-read the whole thread before posting this and I still feel even the facts are not clear, let alone opinions on them). I felt Badden's comments were just general enough to allow me to intervene (on page 4 of a debate from which I abstained as I didn't feel the need to contribute in any way, but rather to sit back and learn what others do). My comments are, indeed, "in general".
As for the names you quote, aren't those examples of hand-FINISHED (buttonholes, buttons, collar stitching, side gussets) rather than hand-SEWN shirts? If anyone pays the price of a handsewn shirt knowing it is MTM, it is not the fault of he who asks, but of he who gives. Would you buy a bespoke luxury car built around a Ford Fiesta chassis?

However, if you would kindly explain to me exactly how Mr. Lachter makes shirts, I could offer my PERSONAL OPINION on whether it is MTM or bespoke and why. That won't make anyone's shirts fit better or worse than they already do

[alden]

As Pierre told me, Lanvin now sends shirts for sewing to a factory outside of Paris... Same for Charvet... So, not traditional bespoke?

Charvet sends it shirts to be sewn in its own workshop, owned by Charvet, that happens to be outside Paris in Argenton-sur-Creuse, the historical center of the shirtmaking industry in France since the 18th century. Very much bespoke.

Lanvin, after all the fitting is done, sends the marked cloth to be sewn in a factory also near Argenton-sur-Creuse, just like any SR tailor sends work be finished by outworkers . Absolutely bespoke.

The bespoke aspect is not a result of sewing, it is a result of the fitting process clearly displayed in text and photos in this thread.

People criticize A&S because they often only do a forward fitting. What would you think about a tailor who offered no fitting at all, or offered a fitting with a suit that was already finished?

I guess another reason we are sticky on this subject is to guarantee that people who read this board and are potential customers, know exactly what to expect from each kind of work. Like I said before, they are not going to get this information anywhere else. I am less concerned about Mr Lachter, Mr Flynn or Mr Bugelli per se (I think we are among the first on the net to even write about and post pictures of these craftsmen) who I know to do fine work and more interested to know that the variety of processes and techniques, that each have their pluses, minuses and relative costs, be clearly explained.

Charvet is actually an excellent example. They offer RTW, MTM and full bespoke at different price points. The processes are clearly explained and each is well executed.



Cheers

[alden]

As regards to fittings, I have experienced three methods in London. The first shirtmaker completed one of four shirts. He sent the shirt to me asking me to wash it a couple of times. I guess he was hoping that I would be happy with it, so he could finish the order. The second shirtmaker prefered that we could make a fitting with a completed shirt. The third insisted on a fitting as well, but with the shirt only pinned together.

I guess that can be pretty confusing for the most sensible sartorial client.

[andreyb]

Costi, got it... in a thread like this, with general (MTM vs bespoke) and specific (Mr Lachter, UK shirtmakers, ...) topics intervened, it is easy to get confused.

However, if you would kindly explain to me exactly how Mr. Lachter makes shirts, I could offer my PERSONAL OPINION on whether it is MTM or bespoke and why.

I wish I could! Yes, this is a weak point in all of my arguments, and the reason I asked smudger on whom Mr Lachter uses to cut patterns (see pg. 3)

However, I know that he creates a personal pattern from scratch; I learnt that from the description on Norton's web-site. This, in my opinion, is what really differentiates bespoke from MTM.

People criticize A&S because they often only do a forward fitting. What would you think about a tailor who offered no fitting at all, or offered a fitting with a suit that was already finished?

Of course no.

Would I prefer a shirtmaker who practices fittings with a muslin try-on rather than one who doesn't? Absolutely! But here is the catch: provided all other things being equal. But they never are.

For example, there is an atelier in Moscow that does muslin fittings. But their collars are... leave much to be desired. Same for their knowledge of shirt styles, types of cloth, etc. In the end, they created a very well-fitting shirt, but with some room for improvement still left. I wasn't able to explain what is wrong, I just felt that something is not quite right -- perhaps only due to properties of the particular material. They stuck. They executed what they know how to do (getting a reasonably well-fitting shirt with the help of a muslin try-on), and were unable to advance from that point. Whereas Mr Lachter were able to provide satisfactory answers to all my questions -- both regarding issues of cut / fit and style / cloth selection. I attribute this to his long experience (he started at Hawes & Curtis in late 70s).

Thus, my conclusion is that knowledge and experience matters as much (if not more) as methods employed.

And yes, personal pattern is a must!

I guess another reason we are sticky on this subject is to guarantee that people who read this board and are potential customers, know exactly what to expect from each kind of work. Like I said before, they are not going to get this information anywhere else. I am less concerned about Mr Lachter, Mr Flynn or Mr Bugelli per se (I think we are among the first on the net to even write about and post pictures of these craftsmen) who I know to do fine work and more interested to know that the variety of processes and techniques, that each have their pluses, minuses and relative costs, be clearly explained.

Absolutely!

I can repeat that I learned best part of what I know on bespoke on this very forum, so I understand value of these discussions. Especially with such superb companions!

Andrey

[smudger]

Costi, got it... in a thread like this, with general (MTM vs bespoke) and specific (Mr Lachter, UK shirtmakers, ...) topics intervened, it is easy to get confused.

However, if you would kindly explain to me exactly how Mr. Lachter makes shirts, I could offer my PERSONAL OPINION on whether it is MTM or bespoke and why.

I wish I could! Yes, this is a weak point in all of my arguments, and the reason I asked smudger on whom Mr Lachter uses to cut patterns (see pg. 3)

However, I know that he creates a personal pattern from scratch; I learnt that from the description on Norton's web-site. This, in my opinion, is what really differentiates bespoke from MTM.

People criticize A&S because they often only do a forward fitting. What would you think about a tailor who offered no fitting at all, or offered a fitting with a suit that was already finished?

Of course no.

Would I prefer a shirtmaker who practices fittings with a muslin try-on rather than one who doesn't? Absolutely! But here is the catch: provided all other things being equal. But they never are.

For example, there is an atelier in Moscow that does muslin fittings. But their collars are... leave much to be desired. Same for their knowledge of shirt styles, types of cloth, etc. In the end, they created a very well-fitting shirt, but with some room for improvement still left. I wasn't able to explain what is wrong, I just felt that something is not quite right -- perhaps only due to properties of the particular material. They stuck. They executed what they know how to do (getting a reasonably well-fitting shirt with the help of a muslin try-on), and were unable to advance from that point. Whereas Mr Lachter were able to provide satisfactory answers to all my questions -- both regarding issues of cut / fit and style / cloth selection. I attribute this to his long experience (he started at Hawes & Curtis in late 70s).

Thus, my conclusion is that knowledge and experience matters as much (if not more) as methods employed.

And yes, personal pattern is a must!

I guess another reason we are sticky on this subject is to guarantee that people who read this board and are potential customers, know exactly what to expect from each kind of work. Like I said before, they are not going to get this information anywhere else. I am less concerned about Mr Lachter, Mr Flynn or Mr Bugelli per se (I think we are among the first on the net to even write about and post pictures of these craftsmen) who I know to do fine work and more interested to know that the variety of processes and techniques, that each have their pluses, minuses and relative costs, be clearly explained.

Absolutely!

I can repeat that I learned best part of what I know on bespoke on this very forum, so I understand value of these discussions. Especially with such superb companions!

Andrey

Unfortunately I do not know who exactly is the person who cuts Mr Lachters patterns but I believe it is someone from Jermyn street who does this for him. The problem that I have with all this is that Mr Lachter is acting as a conduit to the third party which I was not aware of at the time. I would be absolutly horrified to find out that my cutter at Huntsman Mr Ward actually could not act upon the measurements that he took from my torso! Upon asking Mr Ward one day how he actually transfers the written information into a 2 dimensional pattern his reply was something along the lines of this. He described seeing the pattern as he was taking the measures, at every slope, bump and sticky outee bit he said that whilst taking in this information he was actually going through the process of cutting the pattern. Because there is consistency with measuring, pattern cutting and striking the cloth I believe this to be the recipe for why my suits fit so well. I just can't see how the elimination of the template ie cutting ones pattern after measurements can be a good thing? This is why in the end I decided to change shirt maker and after I did the results could not have been greater! I'm sure Mr Lachter's shirts work for some but after the experience of having shirts made buy an individual who can cut a pattern and one who cannot on completion of the garments one stuck out and the other didn't,
Mr Lachter seemed more of a middle man than a bespoke shirt Jedi!

[sartorius]

This is why in the end I decided to change shirt maker and after I did the results could not have been greater!

Smudger, an interesting story. Perhaps you could expand on the differences? Photographs of each finished garment would be even better... (As sometimes happens on these threads, we end up arguing subjectively and in the abstract. It is hard to form a view based on one man's preferences over another's, without reference to illustrations of the pros and cons of one maker or process as compared with the alternatives.)

Michael, as I seem to have been censored since my last post , perhaps I can re-phrase it? Rather than simply saying that those who are satisifed with a particular maker or process must (a) be easy to fit, or (b) just don't know any better, would it not be more helpful to demonstrate the benefits of one particulat process over another through photographs of the garments themselves? I am not suggesting we name and shame individual artisans or firms (although there is plenty of that already) but it seems to me these discussions would be a great deal richer with some tangible examples.

[alden]

Rather than simply saying that those who are satisifed with a particular maker or process must (a) be easy to fit, or (b) just don't know any better, would it not be more helpful to demonstrate the benefits of one particulat process over another through photographs of the garments themselves?

I am not ashamed to say that at one point in my life I was a young bespoke customer who “didn’t know any better” except that I felt my clothes fit poorly. One day, a kindly old tailor sat me down and explained why I was so hard to fit and why most tailors did not have the will (even if they had the talent) to deal with my problem. He made me clothes that fit and taught me to “know better.”

One of the reasons I created the LL was to make learning about bespoke easier for young men who “don’t know better.”

As I have written many times on the LL, any process is only as good as the practitioner. Some of the most brutal clothes making failures I have seen have been the work of fully bespoke tailors. That would have been a lot easier to accept had they not been made for me.

“Photographs of the garments themselves” are useless. The photos would need to show the garments being worn. And in my case, they would show only the particulars of fit that have not been addressed well either by the MTM or bespoke process as opposed to a well fitting shirt. And that would only instruct the viewers as to my own particular and specific fitting issues.

“Photographs of the garments themselves”, if they were of sufficient quality, could show the aesthetic differences between hand made, detailed shirts and machine made shirts. At one time on the LL I posted photos of a variety of hand sewn buttonholes. But this does not advance the subject of fit.

I have always wanted to use photography or video more, but it is very tricky to do well without professional photographers or a video team. That being said, I think it is safe to say that among the various people who write about style either in print or on the net, I am among the most photographed and filmed. So there are countless ways to see my shirts and collars.

[sartorius]

“Photographs of the garments themselves” are useless. The photos would need to show the garments being worn. And in my case, they would show only the particulars of fit that have not been addressed well either by the MTM or bespoke process as opposed to a well fitting shirt. And that would only instruct the viewers as to my own particular and specific fitting issues.

Michael, I wholeheartedly agree.

I did of course mean photographs of garments being worn.

I accept that photographs of an individual will only point to the particulars of fit as they apply to him or her. But it seems to me this is still likely to be far more instructive than an abstract discussion about one process as compared with another (which, personally, I don't find terribly enlightening).

I suppose I also feel quite strongly that if one believes one process to be better than another, or that maker A isn't quite what he holds himself out to be, then it ought to be incumbent on that person to illustrate the point by reference to the clothes rather than by reference to the individual. "Easy to fit" or "doesn't know any better" are not much help to this particular (relatively) young bespoke customer of 41.

Anyway, rant now over.

[alden]

Sartorious

I suggest you take your issue up with someone who has mentioned any “individuals” in this thread. The only mention I have made is here and clearly says that my interest is to explore the variety of processes used in making clothes for the benefit of those who are open minded and would like to learn.

“I am less concerned about Mr Lachter, Mr Flynn or Mr Bugelli per se (I think we are among the first on the net to even write about and post pictures of these craftsmen) who I know to do fine work and more interested to know that the variety of processes and techniques, that each have their pluses, minuses and relative costs, be clearly explained.”

Let’s try to be as practical as possible: men might do well to have a good conversation with their tailor to understand if they have any major fitting issues that could not be addressed by a standardized process. Armed with this knowledge, they could query potential shirtmakers to know how much personalization of the pattern is available and make an informed decision. If you have a head cold you go to the generalist, if you have a tumor you go to a specialist.

Unfortunately today’s clothing market (in Europe) is muddled by misleading claims by all kinds of makers of being "bespoke" or hand made or personalized etc. Sadly buyers must beware in a way that was not necessary even ten years ago. Clarity about process is one way, assuredly not the only way, to arm oneself in this regard. The other way is through study, strong personal references, and first hand experience.

[smudger]

I would think the process of myself standing in some unflattering pose whilst pointing to a particular element of a shirt pointless as 1, I really don't think that it would enhance any of my points and two a photograph is still a photograph with no depth and lacking in urganomic quality.

I understand your need for specifics so I shall try. The fitting process with Mr Lachter lacked the overall finess that I experienced with Mr O'Flynn. O'Flynn seemed to be much more considerate to my wishes and comments where by Mr Lachter on several occasions seemed to "fob me off" and the completed garment lacked the specific aspects that were present after a more pleasant experience with Mr O'Flynn. After having shirts completed by both Mr Lachters shirts were baggier across the chest deeper in the armhole did not fit at all around my shoulders with what seemed to be excess fullness and puckering around the collar stand. I brought my concerns to the attention of Mr Lachter and unbelievably he commented that this was the norm for a bespoke shirt? Hence the fobbing off!!

The first batch of shirts completed by Sean were crisper in the line and fit and clung to my body in a way that was neither restrictive or uncomfortable? The general finishing of the shirt ie stitching seemed so much cleaner that the shirts made by Lachter. In essence I am sorry to say Mr Lachters shirts were about as bespoke as a Lewin's sale shirt.


I hope this helps.

[J.S. Groot]

Lanvin, after all the fitting is done, sends the marked cloth to be sewn in a factory also near Argenton-sur-Creuse, just like any SR tailor sends work be finished by outworkers . Absolutely bespoke.

I wasn't aware that Lanvin still made bespoke shirts. Looking at what they're currently hurling down the runway (http://www.lanvin.com/#/en/collections/ ... 1/lookbook, sacre bleu!), it's rather surprising that they're able to create anything stylish. A pleasant surprise of course!

Their website mentions nothing, however. Where does one go? Who makes them?