A&S handiwork/stitching

[Houndstooth]

Dear All

I noticed a recent post on another forum (ahem!) which was submitted by an existing A&S customer and which was rather 'guarded' regarding the typical handiwork/stitching on the A&S product.
This in turn reminded me of a much earlier comment (quoted in Richard Walker's 1988 SR book) by Professor John Karl of the Fashion Institute of Technology (New York) to the effect that the stitching on an A&S jacket/coat he had examined looked like it had been "done by an orangutang" (!!)

This prompted the following thoughts:
1. what substance (if any)is there to the above observations?
2. if there is substance, what are the special/unique elements of the A&S product/experience that clearly outweigh the shortcomings (and keep A&S flourishing to this day)?
3. is this subject in fact 'irrelevant', given that the useage of tailoring outworkers means that the A&S product is no more or less 'vulnerable' to either high-quality construction or below-par construction than any other SR firm's output?

I would value your thoughts and observations,
Houndstooth

[Mark Seitelman]

You should discount the statements by Prof. Karl.

A follow-up story.

The foregoing was the subject of an article in a Conde Nast publication, such as Conde Nast Traveler. The reporter want to compare a Savile Row suit against a much cheaper Hong Kong suit. The learned professor pronounced the Hong Kong suit to be better. Of course, the Hong Kong suit was about 1/3 of the cost.

Now fast forward about five years. The reporter filed a follow-up story. He found that the Hong Kong suit either wore out or wore badly. In comparison the A & S suit looked almost new and was still going strong. The reporter wanted to visit the esteemed premises of A & S to report his findings. However, he was summarily asked to leave because of the original unflattering article. He was told "we don't want your custom!" In any event, he concluded that the A & S suit was the real deal.

Y would have to talk to an A & S customer. I suspect that the workmanship is still tops or else its customers would have drifted away over the years.

[manton]

In general, sewing is Savile Row's weak link. By which I mean, hardly anybody can sew with the precision, cleanliness and overall "prettyness" of the Italians. There are exceptions. For intance, Andrew Ramroop and his firm Maurice Sedwell consistently turns out garments with top-notch sewing. I have also seen garments by little-known tailors on which the needle work was so good I could have sworn the coats were Italian. But those are the exceptions. I find the overall quality of sewing in New York to be higher than in London, especially at the peak -- for instance, Nicolosi, who for my money sews and finishes as well as any tailor in the world.

I have seen very well sewn A&S coats, and some that were not so well sewn. I can say the same thing about other SR firms. I have yet to see any that were sewn so badly that I thought apes had done the work.

[TVD]

I have no experience with A&S. I use another Savile Row house, luck more than preference initially, and as they are doing a sterling job, why experiment. I am not in a league of ordering suits by the dozen so that I could easily spread my custom.

In general, I find that the regularity of the visible stitching is better on Italian MTM (I do not see that much Italian bespoke) than in Savile Row. The old Chester Barrie used to be very impressive, too. The cheaper (virtually always off the Row) English bespoke tailoring is sometimes drearily finished, but then I recall some 1970s and 1980s Huntsman suits a former boss of mine had, and their buttonholes would make any tailor blush. But the shape was perfect and the suits lasted well.

However, I would be surprised A&S should be an offender, as the owners take great pride in the business and have the resources to get it right.

Nonetheless, one should always be vigilant. I was discussing tailors once with somebody in the trade, but do not feel free to share what was said as it was spoken in confidentiality. However, it transpired that the quality of a certain cutter was superior to the others in a particular SR house, not only because of his cut, but also because the outworkers went the extra mile for him. His overall project management was superior, he commanded respect.

Generally, I find the knowledgeable and APPRECIATIVE customer receives the better service whereever he goes. But being knowledgeable must never mean resistant to advice and inflexible! You would not tell your physician how to cure your diseases either.

[Mark Seitelman]

I have found the sewing to be excellent on my clothes from Davies & Son. I never had a complaint about sewing or finishing of seams, edges, buttonholes, etc.

[Concordia]

I think it might have been my remarks that sparked this thread, so perhaps I should obfuscate further:

A&S's handwork is generally good, although I would say that they are more prone than many firms to have it look handmade SOME of the time. I can't honestly look at anything they've done and feel that the stitching sabotages work done elsewhere in the shop. But there is one shoulder blade on a jacket where I can actually see stitches (not a usual thing on SR). Of course, it may be some aspects of the construction that make the seam visible enough to comment on. And one might argue, I suppose, that those particular stitches were essential to the shape of that particular shoulder. Anyway, there it is.

Additionally, the buttonholes are good but not as gaudy as you might get from, say, Kilgour. As that sort of work is done by freelancers, I'd guess that going for more laid-back buttonholes is a matter of choice for A&S.

Virtues-- excellent DB cut, made even better by repetition at the hands of John Hitchcock. Their last dinner jacket was really superb in this respect. Also, one of my preferred sources for trousers, especially with belt loops (a hard thing to really get right, as Manton often laments).

Drawbacks-- it's their way or the highway. Also, for someone of my build, their SBs are not at all flattering. At least, not if you use normal-weight wool. There might be a fighting chance with 20-ounce tweed.

And prices are not low. Add to that their penchant for using a courier (not the Royal Mail); duties are sometimes higher than they might be from a more obscure address.

[tteplitzmd]

My insistence on Royal Mail vs. Couriers being ignored, ended my relationship with Dege.

I like the Queen's service. Similarly I favor USPS for overseas to most locales, except for Italy.

[Metcalfe]

The problem with Anderson & Sheppard--or any large firm with an in-house training program--is that your suit might be assigned to an inexperienced tailor. Now that there are several A&S alumni who can offer the soft cut and assign your suit to a more experienced tailor, why pay A&S to teach others sewing on your suit? The same argument applies to large management consultancies, University teaching hospitals, etc.: excellent strategy, but unreliable execution.

[A Harris]

As far as the finishing goes, the many A&S garments I have seen have been good. Not the best on the Row, but certainly not the worst. Some were finished to a higher standard than others though (eg better buttonholes.)

[Jhudder]

the genius of A&S is that they were the true pioneers of a soft drapey suit during times when most sutis were tailored to military stiffness. Their innovative use of cuts (without darts) and interlining materials was groundbreaking in their time and become their USP. Today though when it comes to soft tailoring (not to be confused with drape) and immaculate finishing the Italians are far ahead - the best neoplitan talilors all took their insipiration from the A&S shilloute. A&S offers you a slice of history with each item of clothing you buy from them, and while many ex A&S tailors can make you the same garment (sewn by the same tailors), none can offer you the tradition, if it matters to you. Personally if you are looking at the quality of finishing the italians are light years ahead of most of the English.

[zjpj]

For what it's worth, here is an A&S jacket. Hand-stitching but not everywhere. Unlike some makers, none of the visible pick stitching at the shoulders. None along seems. The armholes are very very low indeed. As you can see from the inside the jacket shot, the work around the inner pocket isn't even straight, very sloppy. Maybe that is part of the charm? I don't see it myself.
Best,

[Mark Seitelman]

At least the linining is hand stitched rather than machine stitched to look like hand as found in many of the higher end Italian makes.

[TVD]

Stitching is partly a matter of taste. Where stitches are visisble, obviously they should be as neat as possible. High end RTW / MTM and especially Italy (whether bespoke or not) seem to have an edge in this respect.

However, whether stitches should be visible or not, is a matter of preference. The first tailor I used, and one I still remember with the utmost admiration, had been trained around the time of the Great War in Prague in the old Austro-Hungarian tradition. He was working until the late nineties (his and those of the last century), his cutting skills absolutely magnificent. His preference was always to make any stitching invisible.

The edges were stitched in the finest, thinnest silk thread, the lining hand stitched invisibly and not in the straight stitch preferred by Naples. A visible stitch on the side seam of a trouser leg or the front dart of a jacket would have raised both of his eye brows.

Savile Row appears to occupy the middle ground.

Maybe the answer is that stitching should match the cut: rather prominent on anything Italian, and more discreet elsewhere.