# J. Press Blazer



## sarakali (May 19, 2013)

Just bought my first navy blazer from J. Press at a steep winter discount from their brick and mortar store: a flannel model made in Canada. The quality is top-notch but the shoulders are RIDICULOUSLY padded (far more so than run-of-the-mill department store jackets). Kind of a caveat emptor for anyone considering a Press blazer. It might look alright on larger sizes but on a trim cut 36R, the shoulders would make a linebacker proud. Is a shoulder pad removal alteration in order? Is that even possible?


----------



## Billax (Sep 26, 2011)

sarakali said:


> Just bought my first navy blazer from J. Press at a steep winter discount from their brick and mortar store: a flannel model made in Canada. The quality is top-notch but the shoulders are RIDICULOUSLY padded (far more so than run-of-the-mill department store jackets). Kind of a caveat emptor for anyone considering a Press blazer. It might look alright on larger sizes but on a trim cut 36R, the shoulders would make a linebacker proud. Is a shoulder pad removal alteration in order? Is that even possible?


Let's see if I have this right: You recently walked into a J. Press store, tried on a Navy Blazer, looked at the fit in a mirror, decided it looked fine, and you purchased it. Now that you have the Blazer in your closet, you've just discovered it has shoulders that "would make a linebacker proud." How is it possible that you didn't notice this when you tried it on at the J. Press store? I've considered, and rejected, the idea that you've just had eye surgery and are no longer blind, but I'm quite keen to understand how you could have possibly concluded the shoulders were fine when you looked at them in the mirror at J. Press and horrible when you looked at them in the mirror at your residence.


----------



## Daveyboy (Jul 18, 2010)

*Why new members are reluctant to post*



Billax said:


> Let's see if I have this right: You recently walked into a J. Press store, tried on a Navy Blazer, looked at the fit in a mirror, decided it looked fine, and you purchased it. Now that you have the Blazer in your closet, you've just discovered it has shoulders that "would make a linebacker proud." How is it possible that you didn't notice this when you tried it on at the J. Press store? I've considered, and rejected, the idea that you've just had eye surgery and are no longer blind, but I'm quite keen to understand how you could have possibly concluded the shoulders were fine when you looked at them in the mirror at J. Press and horrible when you looked at them in the mirror at your residence.


A gracious welcome to a new member.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

Billax is back! Wow, that post must have really touched a nerve to bring you out of hibernation to post that response. Or, maybe it's just the dawning of Spring. In any case, glad to have you back....please don't be a stranger. And, start posting some of those great outfits, posthaste!


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

The response had nothing to do with welcoming a new member. It was about questioning a rather ridiculous observation, and I doubt any of us could have expressed the sentiment more precisely. I would also point out the questionable thinking that a jacket looks better just because it's in a smaller size--all things being equal, a jacket's fit should look the same in a 36R or a 46R.

But yes, basically it boils down to this: sarakali, help us understand your decision to buy a jacket that you don't like.



Daveyboy said:


> A gracious welcome to a new member.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Duvel said:


> It was about questioning a rather ridiculous observation, and *I doubt any of us could have expressed the sentiment more precisely.*


I could have, and I will.

It's not a ridiculous observation. It's just an observation. And things often look differently when you get them home. Often not as good. My Volvo for example. It's how the term_ buyer's remorse_ got coined. So let's not dump all over the gentleman who might be momentarily suffering from this.

Sarakali, yes the pads can be removed and fairly easily. But the jacket was built around them, so you may have excess cloth at the shoulder. A tailor can taper the shoulder seam to remove this, but then it leaves a stricture at the sleeve head, so this also has to be removed and reset. I have successfully removed smaller pads without seam tapering, just a repress. But I have also had to do the more extensive operation described.

Welcome, tho I'm not sure why you're referred to as a new member since you've been here for two years, but I've got a bag full o'welcomes, might as well share one with you.


----------



## Ensiferous (Mar 5, 2012)

Billax is one of the most helpful guys here.

When he goes into CEO mode, you will receive a detailed, deliberate lesson.

When he goes into coach mode, prepare for a concise kick in the seat.

Either are a valuable learning experience, though the one with the sting is always more readily remembered.



sarakali, we have all done what you have; obtained an item without making a critical assessment about it, then had to consider taking ameliorative actions afterwards.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

Ha ha! Yes, not exactly the most empathetic of coaches, is he. I've experienced my share of buyer's remorse--I just find it hard to understand how one could overlook such an obvious aspect like padded shoulders. Unfortunately the original poster doesn't understand how problematic it is to fix shoulder issues.



Ensiferous said:


> Billax is one of the most helpful guys here.
> 
> When he goes into CEO mode, you will receive a detailed, deliberate lesson.
> 
> ...


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

Meh, not bad. Not quite the same kick-you-in-the-ass precision, but a good effort. And okay, sure, it's just an observation, misguided and not really ridiculous. I'll concede that.



Peak and Pine said:


> *I could have, and I will. *
> 
> It's not a ridiculous observation. It's just an observation. And things often look differently when you get them home. Often not as good. My Volvo for example. It's how the term_ buyer's remorse_ got coined. So let's not dump all over the gentleman who might be momentarily suffering from this.
> 
> ...


----------



## gamma68 (Mar 24, 2013)

I'd suggest returning the blazer for a refund (if possible) rather than monkey with the shoulders. Pad removal is not an easy thing to do, unless you have an exemplary tailor. Better to find a blazer with natural shoulders. Try Brooks Brothers.


----------



## sarakali (May 19, 2013)

Well this has picked up. To answer the question as to why I bought it, the shoulder thing was not a dealbreaker. I still liked the jacket and it's detailing, and the price was great for a student like me. I thought that was implied but I guess not. Just posting a heads up to anyone considering one who WOULD see the shoulders as a dealbreaker. Apologies for the confusion.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

^^ You don't have to explain yourself, let alone apologize. You came here asking an honest question and looking for advice. And you ran into a brick wall. Being as how you're a student just look at him as another very small minded speed bump in your mouse race. Not that you won't run into more like him as you enter the rat race,.... And don't fool yourself, the member who termed his behavior as "C.E.O. mode" was incorrect. A middle manager worth his or her salt would never try to beat down what is obviously a young fellow like yourself just starting out. People who conduct themselves like this are usually trying to impress themselves. 

The other replies you got are more on the mark. To be right honest, you purchased a decent blazer. You'll be able to find a tailor somewhere is the east bay who will make your J. Press blazer fit like it should. You'll be a 38R-40R before your J.Press blazer gives up the ghost. :chinese: 

Good luck and do stop by again.

Regards,


----------



## RT-Bone (Nov 12, 2013)

sarakali said:


> Just bought my first navy blazer from J. Press at a steep winter discount from their brick and mortar store: a flannel model made in Canada. The quality is top-notch but the shoulders are RIDICULOUSLY padded (far more so than run-of-the-mill department store jackets). Kind of a caveat emptor for anyone considering a Press blazer. It might look alright on larger sizes but on a trim cut 36R, the shoulders would make a linebacker proud. Is a shoulder pad removal alteration in order? Is that even possible?


From what I understand about J.Press, their blazers manufactured in Canada have stronger shoulders.


----------



## Ensiferous (Mar 5, 2012)

127.72, you are so caring, tender, and protective. That's nice.

Can I have a puppy and a pet unicorn?

:biggrin:


(Don't worry sarakali, none of us bad guys were trying to hurt you.)


----------



## SlideGuitarist (Apr 23, 2013)

Duvel said:


> ...sarakali, help us understand your decision to buy a jacket that you don't like.


My eye gets better by the month. I've bought stuff even in the last year that I might now wish I hadn't, or that I'd prefer to alter, esp. w/r/t the shoulders. I did not understand the "natural shoulder" until recently, but more to the point, I wouldn't have been able to make it part of my shopping strategy.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

If you're sincere in wanting that puppy I'll be there for you. If, however, you want to be an Oscar Meyer Winnie I won't help. I mean, who likes a bully? (And who apologizes for one?)



Ensiferous said:


> 127.72, you are so caring, tender, and protective. That's nice.
> 
> Can I have a puppy and a pet unicorn?
> 
> ...


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

Well, I can certainly see Bill's point, but the tone of his post seemed a bit out of character. Making it more odd is the fact that he "signed off" a couple months ago when he got 11 posts away from a self-imposed limit of 1,000 AAAC posts, saying that he would save his remaining posts for when he felt he had something really important to say. Well, not sure what to make of his reappearance in this thread, but my selfish wish is that he uses his remaining 10 for posting some of his trademark killer fit pics (or lifts his self-imposed limit!).


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

I'm much more interested in the truth than picking around edges. Billax is dead-on right. If you buy a jacket at a BM and then whine about the fit, well, you have some 'splaining to do. I've had the same experience with Press jacket/blazers purchased online. The shoulders are ridiculous, and this has been a common complaint in recent years. And so I'm careful about buying Press jackets. Perhaps the OP and I committed a common sin: We fell in love with the label and the price before considering whether the garment in question was actually worth wearing.

If the OP sticks around, he stands to learn a lot. If this causes him to flee, well, so be it. But we are all better off, I think, if we speak the truth, as Billax has done, as opposed to picking around edges and inviting further sartorial mistakes by people who come here to learn. And for those who worship Billax (he apparently has a following), perhaps he is trying to say something beyond just the instant case. Only he can say for sure. But this side of the forum is not what it used to be. Not by a long shot. We can, collectively, do something about it or we can continue to let it drift.


----------



## K Street (Dec 4, 2007)

This again?! It's telling that nonsense arguments like this pop up so frequently yet over on the "what are you wearing" thread, where the real men post, the few actual J. Press clients among us aren't getting any complaints about their shoulders. Enough already.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

K Street said:


> This again?! It's telling that nonsense arguments like this pop up so frequently yet over on the "what are you wearing" thread, where the real men post, the few actual J. Press clients among us aren't getting any complaints about their shoulders. Enough already.


Sorry, but you are wrong. The J. Press shoulder issue has been coming up with some regularity in recent years. The departed Trip English (whose absence should be felt by all) is but one example of people who know what they're talking about calling out Press for the linebacker look. And I guess Tweedy Don and a lot of others around here aren't real men. Perhaps they are mensch.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

And I believe you are wrong. 

Most often I've found that people who think of themselves as brutally honest are more interested in being brutal than honest. You don't need to be drawn a picture. I've watched you post for awhile now and I can say without hesitation that you are bright enough to understand the nuance when discussing honesty. 

When a new member posts and it says he's a student, a 36R, and lives in "Stanford" verses saying Palo Alto, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that he's a neophyte who could use a helping hand. A reply could have could have stated with the exact same meaning without the chastising tone and tenor.

Yeah, the young man bought a jacket at a brick and mortal store and walked out without a good fit. He doesn't have some explaining to do, he most likely didn't know any better. Heck, maybe it's the first jacket he ever bought in a men's store,...

For those who have departed for their invite only board, well, good luck to them and the diversity of their 135 members! (Some of their absence is indeed felt, like a breath of fresh air.)

The whole J. Press thing is an issue for those of us who have been followers of the Traditional American men's clothing scene. (and we've discussed it ad nauseam) Actually since the Japanese buyout of J. Press I no longer wait with baited breath each year to see their new cloth for suits and jackets. One actually has to watch carefully which J. Press jacket they purchase or they might end up with padded shoulders that are the antithesis of what J.Press built their reputation on. Who would have thought?

It is a shame but there are very few businesses these days who are content to receive a steady return/profit each year verses the giant corporate mantra of grow or perish. The perfect example would be Alden, (old school) verses Allen Edmonds with overhead that dictates they have to constantly think volume and profit or they will be sold to another investment firm. 

I don't know why you'd bring Tweedy into it. Yes, I recall the recent thread where it was said: "Men should dress like men." (Kind of funny actually.) I just don't see the connection. After exchanging many messages over my time here I can say without a doubt that TweedyDon is indeed a Mensch. 

Traditional American men's clothing can be discussed without being caustic.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

I brought in TD in response to a school of thought, most recently brought up here up by K Street, that the "real men" here are those who post on WAYWT. I don't know how or why this Balkanization began, but I wish that it would stop because I think that it is silly. TD is, indeed, a mensch, and he doesn't post on WAYWT. Nor, so far as I know, does Dr. L, and he's a mensch, too (a mensch who was subjected to some pretty vicious attacks when he first showed up here, but that's a different story, and those who did it know who you are). When someone posits a silly notion such as K Street did, that can only be divisive, I think that he should be called to account. If there is disagreement as to whether WAYWT is some sort of litmus test that separates real men from fake men, perhaps that should be made clear so that the appropriate people can move to the back of the bus.

I value your opinions and posts because they are generally thoughtful and informed, but in this case, I think that we should examine the instant case. Someone bought a jacket at a BM that did not fit to his liking. But he bought it anyway and is now complaining. That's what I think got Billax's dander up, and it is not hard to understand why. Did he communicate it as well as some might like? Perhaps not, but it is hard to argue with his underlying logic. And what ensued? A discussion of whether it is possible to rescue the jacket in question, which you and I and anyone who knows anything about clothing knows is a fool's errand. Does such a well-maybe-you-can-salvage-this discussion help the OP? I don't think so.

I think that we would all do well to recognize that political correctness is not necessarily a good thing and that everyone has their own way of expressing things. Does it have to be caustic? No, but caustic is not necessarily a bad thing. Caustic often gets a point across better than any other approach. Was caustic called for here? I think that you can make a case for it. Due apologies to the OP--and do stick around because there is much to be learned--but we do have, at the end of the day, a case of someone who paid for something after trying it on and then realized that he made a mistake and is now blaming the shop.

Billax had a point, and he has a right to make it in the way that he made it. There are way too many posts where people ask silly questions and it takes an inordinately long time to make the salient point, if in fact, the point is ever achieved. Billax made the point in simple, direct fashion, and he should not be attacked for doing so. He's earned that right.

This is my opinion, and I respect yours.



127.72 MHz said:


> And I believe you are wrong. Most often I've found that people who think of themselves as brutally honest are more interested in being brutal than honest. You don't need to be drawn a picture. I've watched you post for awhile now and I can say without hesitation that you are bright enough to understand the nuance when discussing honesty.
> 
> For those who have departed for their invite only board, well, good luck to them and the diversity of their 135 members! (Some of their absence is indeed felt, good riddance.)
> 
> ...


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

You mention some issues that I'd never want to debate against. Most notably the number of, I can't sugar coat it, silly questions here. I just think it's the price AAAC has to pay for being one of the premier forums on the topic of men's clothing.

Moreover, while hate is a strong word, I'll say it, I hate political correctness and it's treason masquerading as free thought. The fact that the whole movement got it's start on college campuses which are supposed to be bastions of free thought makes my skin crawl. If they're dictating what you can say how long will it be before they're trying to dictate what you think? (Okay I'll let it go)

Billax and his reply. Context is *very* important. I have no issue with Billax, yourself, or any other long time, several hundred posts members taking the gloves off so to speak with one another. We've been around and discussed the issues. Especially where "Trad" is concerned. I always try to make the distinction that while I love Traditional American Men's clothing this board, talking about many of those who have departed, taught me that *I am not "Trad!"* Why? Because there is no room for deviation as to the ridiculous "Rules" that are often subjective and cannot even be agreed upon amongst the most fervent followers. I believe this attitude led to the hundreds of comical and sometimes nauseating questions about what is "Trad?" From girlfriends, automobiles and haircuts to social attitudes. Jeeze Louise I'm waiting for a what's a "Trad" jock-strap thread! How far can this "Trad" thing go? Look at some of Japanese "Trad" web postings. They've turned it into a sick caricature of a life-style they long for yet know nothing about.

As for Billax having "Earned the right" to act this way. He is a recognized authority on traditional Ivy Style, Traditional American Mens clothing, or whatever the label Du jour one wishes. He's been around as a stalwart in the way he puts himself together since a couple of years before I was born. I concede these facts. I admire his style and have looked at his blog. However I still disagree in that someone of his stature would reply to this young man's post the way his did.

I'm not just trying to make peace with you. I do respect your opinions and thoughts and I always read your posts with genuine interest. We just disagree on the tone and tenor of Billax's reply to this young guy who came here looking for advice. Oddly enough I have enjoyed Billax's posts and I'm right there with Florida Cracker in liking his observations on mens clothing, especially fit.

Kind regards,


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Isn't 'buyer's remorse' a concept predicated around the notion that one may have paid too much and/or acquired an item that was more frivolous impulse than genuine requirement? Bemoaning a purchase that one actively dislikes is another type of remorse entirely. Fool's remorse perhaps?


----------



## RT-Bone (Nov 12, 2013)

We're talking about clothes, not a person's integrity and self worth, right?


----------



## Tahmasp (Mar 15, 2014)

K Street said:


> This again?! It's telling that nonsense arguments like this pop up so frequently yet over on the "what are you wearing" thread, where the real men post, the few actual J. Press clients among us aren't getting any complaints about their shoulders. Enough already.


Yikes. Manhood questions aside, as an "actual J. Press client" I can attest that their Cohen-made jackets do feature shoulders structured beyond what could be considered "natural." If you buy a Southwick-made jacket from their Pressidential line, you won't have this problem, but that's a significant bump-up in price.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

We're not far apart here, I don't think. I hate the T-word, actually. I think that I have used it just once, in desperation, trying to sell a sport coat on eBay that wasn't moving any other way (it's still not moving). Like a lot of folks here, your roots (I think), and mine, are in classic American style, but we, or at least I, don't eschew darts or pleats. I'm not one of those people who obsess over whether my car is the "right" TNSIL car or whether my wife dresses "the part" or whether my dog is the "right" dog. Fred Astaire wore pleats, and if pleats are good enough for Fred Astaire, they're good enough for me.

This said, I get what the OP was saying regarding shoulders on J. Press jackets. I've had the same issue, twice. They were big, too big, even for Abboud or Chaps or any other given OTR jacket. This is counter intuitive when it comes to J. Press. I have other J. Press jackets that are fine. The issue I have here is, when you have the opportunity to try a jacket on before buying (which I do not when it comes to J. Press), it seems odd to have issues with shoulders after it is safely home and, presumably, already altered. If it is not altered, the OP, I suspect, will be able to return it.

Gloves off on new posters? I think that it depends. While I understand the shoulders issue, I don't understand the buying it after trying it on and then being aghast at fit. It doesn't really matter whether it was a garment or a piece of artwork or a puppy--if issues are obvious, it is puzzling that a purchaser would complain after the fact. I suspect that this is where Billax might have been coming from, and I think that he had a point. Did he make it too strongly? Opinions obviously vary. I don't think that he did. I was reminded here of a recent post not long ago by a new person who complained about an SA at JAB--the poster knew a bit about clothing and was upset that the SA didn't know as much as he did (there are more details to the story, but that's the gist). He was criticized by several people, including myself, and I think deservedly so. His premise, that an SA at JAB would be able to intelligently discuss canvassed vs. fused, was not realistic. I'll leave it at that.

We're all grown ups. If someone, and I'm speaking generically here, says something silly, we should be able to call it what it is without fear of the PC police (and I use this term generically as well). It's a different matter, of course, if someone has a habit of uncouth behavior or harsh criticism that consistently misses the mark. I don't think that's the case here. Billax has been wrong about stuff, you've been wrong about stuff and I've been wrong about stuff, but we all, I think, have been right more often than we've been wrong. And I'm not trying to make peace with you here anymore than you are with me. We're just being real, I think, which is as things should be.



127.72 MHz said:


> You mention some issues that I'd never want to debate against. Most notably the number of, I can't sugar coat it, silly questions here. I just think it's the price AAAC has to pay for being one of the premier forums on the topic of men's clothing.
> 
> Moreover, while hate is a strong word, I'll say it, I hate political correctness and it's treason masquerading as free thought. The fact that the whole movement got it's start on college campuses which are supposed to be bastions of free thought makes my skin crawl. If they're dictating what you can say how long will it be before they're trying to dictate what you think? (Okay I'll let it go)
> 
> ...


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Gentlemen: Get back on topic with your postings to this thread or you may expect it's closure. If you do not have a constructive thought to add to answering the question posed in the OP, well then, keep your thoughts to yourself! Think before you type. Thanks for your cooperation.


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

J.Press jackets seem to trigger a Pavlovian response from some of the posters in this Forum. Some people cannot refer to J. Press without making some reference to the shoulders, to the point, I believe, that the issue itself has taken on proportions well beyond their size. While I would agree that the jackets could use less padding, they are in no way so outrageous as to disqualify Press as a serious option for someone looking for good quality blazers, tweed jackets or suits. While I take a certain pride in my clothing, I'm not so obsessed that I would be willing to pay an extra $500 for custom made jackets. I currently own two blazers, several J.Press tweeds and suits and I'm happy with them. I think it a bit crazy for a young man to strive for sartorial perfection.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

I like the advice from several here simply to return the jacket, and the recommenndaton to go with Brooks instead. While the scolding from Billax seems a bit severe, I think he was only trying to make a point. The interesting thing, to me, is that Billax's own J. Press jackets always look perfect, to me, even in the shoulders. So maybe it does have something to do with one's build, posture, etc.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Duvel said:


> I like the advice from several here simply to return the jacket, and the recommenndaton to go with Brooks instead. While the scolding from Billax seems a bit severe, I think he was only trying to make a point. The interesting thing, to me, is that Billax's own J. Press jackets always look perfect, to me, even in the shoulders. So maybe it does have something to do with one's build, posture, etc.


This is a very valid point and one that is often overlooked. I recently picked up my first Brooks Brothers 3/2 Sack from my tailor. The shoulders are VERY minimally padded. My naive thoughts were it would look as good on me as it does on so many others. Unfortunately, my shoulders still appear very square. I thought if I had the right jacket, it would soften the look of wide square shoulders. It did not. Don't get me wrong it looks better than nearly every other jacket in the shoulders. But, I realized the jacket isn't going to change the way my shoulders are shaped. So, I agree with Duvel that sometimes build and posture make a big difference and you can't get away from your genetics.


----------



## gamma68 (Mar 24, 2013)

eagle2250 said:


> Gentlemen: Get back on topic with your postings to this thread or you may expect it's closure. If you do not have a constructive thought to add to answering the question posed in the OP, well then, keep your thoughts to yourself! Think before you type. Thanks for your cooperation.


Thank you for bringing the ad nauseum pontificating to a halt. It's long overdue.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

xcubbies said:


> J.Press jackets seem to trigger a Pavlovian response from some of the posters in this Forum. Some people cannot refer to J. Press without making some reference to the shoulders, to the point, I believe, that the issue itself has taken on proportions well beyond their size. While I would agree that the jackets could use less padding, they are in no way so outrageous as to disqualify Press as a serious option for someone looking for good quality blazers, tweed jackets or suits. While I take a certain pride in my clothing, I'm not so obsessed that I would be willing to pay an extra $500 for custom made jackets. I currently own two blazers, several J.Press tweeds and suits and I'm happy with them. *I think it a bit crazy for a young man to strive for sartorial perfection*.


Regardless of age, I think that we should all strive for sartorial perfection. That's why most of us are here. The reason that Press generates so much frustration and so many complaints here is that it was once known as a paragon of TNSIL style and once you get that reputation, it can be difficult to shake, especially if you milk it, as Press does. This side of the forum is dedicated to TNSIL. Natural shoulders are an absolutely essential part of this aesthetic, moreso than sack construction or pleats or, arguably, button-down collars. Big shoulders are not inherently bad, but they are better appreciated, I think, on the other side of the forum.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

Rather than salivating as with Palov's dogs I'd say it's more like foaming at the mouth as with a grand mal seizure.  But in all fairness to those of us who used to anticipate the arrival of the new cloth in the suits and jackets from J. Press each year it has been a real disappointment. There was a time when J. Press used to make Brooks Brothers seem fashion forward. Twenty five plus years ago I actually made payments to obtain my first J.Press blazer just to get "That look." Sartorial perfection as a young man? Maybe not but everyone wants to look their best and everyone knows what they like,....Once they see it!

With the exception of their Presidential line I will no longer purchase a J. Press jacket because of what I see as excessive padding in their shoulders. But you make a good point in that a young man looking for some of his first better than department store clothing might not have a point of reference to judge the J. Press of today verses what they used to be. I can say that until I got out in the world to see what some of the older men wore I too had no point of reference. I spent quite a bit of time in New York city in my first real job and I actually stopped a gentleman on the street to ask him where he purchased his suit. It was the beautiful roll to his lapels that caught my eye. I was in my mid-twenties and he was in his mid-fifties. He steered me to J. Press in New Haven. A nice example of how mentoring can occur even in chance encounters.

No doubt the young man who began this thread will develop his own sense of style based on what he's exposed to.



xcubbies said:


> J.Press jackets seem to trigger a Pavlovian response from some of the posters in this Forum. Some people cannot refer to J. Press without making some reference to the shoulders, to the point, I believe, that the issue itself has taken on proportions well beyond their size. While I would agree that the jackets could use less padding, they are in no way so outrageous as to disqualify Press as a serious option for someone looking for good quality blazers, tweed jackets or suits. While I take a certain pride in my clothing, I'm not so obsessed that I would be willing to pay an extra $500 for custom made jackets. I currently own two blazers, several J.Press tweeds and suits and I'm happy with them. I think it a bit crazy for a young man to strive for sartorial perfection.


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

You guys really crack me up. I can't say that I've ever striven for sartorial perfection, though I make an effort to be certain that I don't have any egg on my shirt when I leave the house in the morning. For me the traditional elements represent comfort and ensure that I don't look foolishly conspicuous, whatever style wars are raging outside the door. 

I've never worn a necktie when I didn't feel that one was expected of me, though, with time, I've assembled a decent collection of them, despite that some wear food stains from meals past. I first came to AAAC looking for additional options for khakis, and have stayed around mostly for the entertainment of the cat fights that frequently erupt, no longer needing to expand my wardrobe in retirement. If I buy anything new it will be a warm coat to put on over my sweater.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

sarakali said:


> Just bought my first navy blazer from J. Press at a steep winter discount from their brick and mortar store: a flannel model made in Canada. The quality is top-notch but the shoulders are RIDICULOUSLY padded (far more so than run-of-the-mill department store jackets). Kind of a caveat emptor for anyone considering a Press blazer. It might look alright on larger sizes but on a trim cut 36R, the shoulders would make a linebacker proud. Is a shoulder pad removal alteration in order? Is that even possible?


I am going to try to stay out of the fray and address your question.

It is hard to say specifically what alteration you would need without seeing your shoulder profile. I will assume that you are hoping to achieve a subtly sloped shoulder line, but if you are looking for something else, please let me know.

The first point I would make is that padded shoulders can often look very natural. The natural-ness does not really come from a lack of padding, but rather from the slope of the shoulder seam, the width of the shoulder in relation to the chest, the stiffness of the canvas or felt supporting the shoulder, and, perhaps most importantly, the way in which the sleevehead is attached to the shoulder seam.

The J. Press Canadian jackets are, somewhat incorrectly, derided as being overly padded. While they have a moderate amount of padding, that is not what makes them look big. The awkwardness of the shoulder profile comes from their having a high shoulder to chest ratio, while still being somewhat softly constructed. The sleevehead is also attached to the shoulder seam at a higher angle, which makes them appear slightly squared off.

This construction makes them ideal for a moderately athletic person with broad, but sloped, shoulders. The shoulders have little shape of their own, so if you have square shoulders, they will come out looking very square. If you have narrow shoulders, they will drop at the ends because there is nothing to support the edges.

If you are unable to return the jacket and would prefer to fix it, prepare to spend about $150 on tailoring. You do not need to remove padding, unless you are a body builder. Without seeing your pictures, I would wager that you need to (1) narrow the shoulders, (2) have your tailor reset the sleevehead to sit at a lower angle, and (3) potentially add some structure at the sleevehead to ensure the edge of the shoulder presents a clean, "natural" line.

It's not an easy job, but hopefully this will be a good lesson toward finding the appropriate shoulder construction for you. The truth of the matter is that there is not a single natural shoulder model that fits everyone.

Some manufacturers do a relatively unconstructed shoulder and, if you are certain that is what you want, consider H. Freeman or Ralph Lauren next time around. But be forewarned, a minimally constructed shoulder will only look "natural" if it fits perfectly and if your shoulders are already sloped at a pleasing angle.

Some manufacturers do a faux-natural shoulder, which is constructed to maintain a certain slope no matter what shoulder sits beneath it. Empire, who make jackets for Eljo's, Eddie Jacobs, And Peter Millar does this shoulder constructed very well. The shoulder doesn't feel natural, but it looks natural.

I hope you will post a photo of yourself in the what are you wearing thread. You can get some useful feedback that way and we might be able to lead you in the right direction as far as where to buy your next jacket.

At any rate, I hope you will keep in mind in the future that there are many different kinds of "natural" shoulders, and not everyone means the same thing when they say "natural." Soft construction, or lack of padding does not always mean you will end up with a "natural" silhouette.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Nobleprofessor said:


> This is a very valid point and one that is often overlooked. I recently picked up my first Brooks Brothers 3/2 Sack from my tailor. The shoulders are VERY minimally padded. My naive thoughts were it would look as good on me as it does on so many others. Unfortunately, my shoulders still appear very square. I thought if I had the right jacket, it would soften the look of wide square shoulders. It did not. Don't get me wrong it looks better than nearly every other jacket in the shoulders. But, I realized the jacket isn't going to change the way my shoulders are shaped. So, I agree with Duvel that sometimes build and posture make a big difference and you can't get away from your genetics.


You actually may benefit from a jacket with padded, faux natural shoulders, as I was describing above. They can create the appearance of a subtle slope where none exists and actually work to minimize your shoulders.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Excellent post and explanation. But the point remains somewhat the same: For a lot of folks, for whatever reason, Press jackets aren't cutting it as they once did regarding shoulders. The takeaway here is universal: Everyone's body shape is different and no two manufacturers are alike, and so it pays to shop around to find the jacket that works for you. Ultimately, altering shoulders is an expensive, nigh impossible, game--and yes, there are those who will say my tailor is a magician, he can do it for $30, etc. The tried-and-true advice remains the same: Nothing trumps fit when it comes to clothing, and if shoulders don't fit on a jacket, keep looking.



L-feld said:


> I am going to try to stay out of the fray and address your question.
> 
> It is hard to say specifically what alteration you would need without seeing your shoulder profile. I will assume that you are hoping to achieve a subtly sloped shoulder line, but if you are looking for something else, please let me know.
> 
> ...


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

My tailor once attempted to alter a smoking jacket that wasn't up to snuff with something he referred to as a Brooks Brothers shoulder, which wasn't overly expensive. It was better than when he started, but still not up to snuff. Can you address that?



L-feld said:


> You actually may benefit from a jacket with padded, faux natural shoulders, as I was describing above. They can create the appearance of a subtle slope where none exists and actually work to minimize your shoulders.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Charles Dana (Nov 20, 2006)

sarakali said:


> Just bought my first navy blazer from J. Press at a steep winter discount from their brick and mortar store: a flannel model made in Canada. The quality is top-notch but the shoulders are RIDICULOUSLY padded (far more so than run-of-the-mill department store jackets).


It's OK and normal and even necessary to make mistakes when you are young and inexperienced: that's how you learn things. (Well, that and paying $50,000 a year to attend Stanford.)

Advice time:

1. Be aware that when you try on clothes in a store and check yourself out in the dressing room mirror, you and whatever garment you are trying on are going to probably appear slimmer, trimmer, smaller and narrower in the mirror's reflection than you and it will actually look in the real world. That's because people who run clothing stores are devious--and smart. They use distorting mirrors to make all dimensions seem trimmer than they really are. A trim silhouette presents a more flattering appearance, which is an inducement for the customer to go ahead with the purchase. Then when you get home and look at yourself, all decked out in your brand-new duds, in front of your dresser mirror, you say, "Hmmm....The shoulders (or the legs or the hips or whatever) look wider than I thought. Oh well."

Besides simply being aware of Distorting Mirror Syndrome (DMS), there are two other things you can do to avoid falling victim to this dastardly disease:

(a) until you are older and wiser, take a sartorial mentor to the store with you whenever you are going to buy a sport coat, blazer, suit, or quality dress shoes--you know, something relatively major. The mentor will be a man. Not a woman! Not even your sister! And especially not your girlfriend!! A man who has spent years buying and wearing classic clothes. You and he will have an understanding: whenever you try something on, he is to give you his cold, unvarnished, brutal opinion. A guy like Billax. Seriously. Someone who, unlike the store salesperson, will give you the antithesis of BS. In exchange for this mentor's time and advice, you will treat him to lunch and a drink or two (if you are not rich) or to a latte at Starbuck's (if you are rich).

(b) Make the most of cell phone technology. It exists now--might as well use it. When you are in the store trying on the new garment, have your mentor shoot videos and maybe some still photos of you from all angles--360 degrees, in fact. This way, you will get instant feedback on how the garment will look out in the real world rather than in front of the dressing room mirror--a mirror that wants only to deceive you and seduce you and separate you from your money--a mirror that is never going to tell you how wide that blazer's shoulders really look on you. But your cell phone won't lie to you.

The above steps may seem drastic, but as I said, you should consider taking them only until you reach a point--and you will reach that point--when you are savvy enough to go it alone in the perilous world of retail tailored clothing.

2. Forum member 32rollandrock noted, insightfully, that sometimes we let the price of, and label on, an item tempt us into making an imprudent purchase. So keep in mind that, where clothes are concerned, a potential purchase is like a chair: the seat of the chair is the item itself--the thing you are considering buying. But in order for that seat to do you any good, it must be supported by four legs: fit, quality, utility and price. All of those legs have to be there so that you don't end up falling on your ass when you sit down. In your case, you are unhappy because one leg is missing from your chair: fit. You let price seduce you. Don't let that happen again, OK? Four legs need to be present and accounted for.

EDIT:

127.72 MgH, in his response above, related how a mentor once helped him in New York City; I want to acknowledge his comment.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

xcubbies said:


> ...no longer needing to expand my wardrobe in retirement...if I buy anything new it will be a warm coat to put on over my sweater.


Goodness. Do not go gentle into that good night.

You and I are both from Maine. Don't let me be the lone standard bearer who hasn't given up. I know there's that other guy, Fatman or something like that, from up in Orono, but his posts make no sense to me. And yes, there's a Dr. Something from the Rocky Coast of Maine, but he's always talking about thrifting, ewwww. Don't hang me out to dry here. I would like to think that you can give a rat's a** about duds way past your 70s, which would be me, tho not way past, more like 6 weeks in.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

I'm 10 years out. I hope to have a substantial wardrobe at that time. At the same time, there is something about the idea of paring things down to a great shawl cardigan, some choice chinos, and a few ocbds.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

32rollandrock said:


> My tailor once attempted to alter a smoking jacket that wasn't up to snuff with something he referred to as a Brooks Brothers shoulder, which wasn't overly expensive. It was better than when he started, but still not up to snuff. Can you address that?


I've heard that term once or twice, and I think it just refers to a mildly structured shoulder with a bald sleevehead. But there is room for variation in how that is cut. In my experience, the structured slope of the shoulder is something that is more or less fixed when the pattern is cut. If a pattern has a sloped shoulder, and that is coupled with a moderate amount of structure and padding, the shoulder expression will look relatively natural regardless of who is wearing it.

I've posted some pictures of jackets from the manufacturer Empire, who construct their shoulders in this manner. The shoulder has a slight amount of structure, enough to keep it straight, and the padding tapers down slightly to the shoulder. As a result, the shoulder presents at a more or less 30 degree angle, regardless of the shoulder shape of the wearer. The sleevehead is relatively bald, so that also contributes to a slightly rounded effect.

I will try to dig up the post, but I compared the shoulders to a few other brands, including S. Cohen, Southwick and H. Freeman. The Empire shoulders were equally padded and wide compared to the the S. Cohen, but they presented much more naturally.

Southwick and H. Freeman are also notable in their differences. H. Freeman make a very soft, narrow, relatively unstructured shoulder. Southwick's are not very padded, but it has structure, which looks square on someone with unsloped shoulders.

I don't think that J. Press or S. Cohen is ultimately the problem. If you go into J. Press looking for an unconstructed shoulder, you're looking in the wrong place.

For reference, here is a Corbin jacket that I have, which has no padding whatsoever. But due to other elements of shoulder construction, it looks less natural than one of my Empire jackets


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

Peak and Pine said:


> Goodness. Do not go gentle into that good night.
> 
> You and I are both from Maine. Don't let me be the lone standard bearer who hasn't given up. I know there's that other guy, Fatman or something like that, from up in Orono, but his posts make no sense to me. And yes, there's a Dr. Something from the Rocky Coast of Maine, but he's always talking about thrifting, ewwww. Don't hang me out to dry here. I would like to think that you can give a rat's a** about duds way past your 70s, which would be me, tho not way past, more like 6 weeks in.


Hey, it's just clothing, worn to keep me warm and protect my modesty.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

Whoa, is that a foot?!


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

xcubbies said:


> Hey, it's just clothing, worn to keep me warm and protect my modesty.


No. It's not _just_ clothing. It's much more. However, I'm speaking for myself. And if your chef concern is to stay warm and protect your modesty then you might want to consider just staying in bed. Go Sea Dogs. (Only you and I will know what that means.)


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

Peak and Pine said:


> Go Sea Dogs. (Only you and I will know what that means.)


Nuh uh. But have you heard of the Greenville Drive?


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

I've missed Slugger over the Winter.


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

vpkozel said:


> Nuh uh. But have you heard of the Greenville Drive?


Anyone with the Drive that we should expect to see here in Portland during the Summer?


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

xcubbies said:


> Anyone with the Drive that we should expect to see here in Portland during the Summer?


I am not sure. They generally send all the good, young pitchers there because the Sox built the stadium to be an exact replica of Fenway. I saw Bucholz and Masterson pitch there. My cousin has season tix. I will ask him and let you know.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

FLCracka said:


> Whoa, is that a foot?!


Haha, yes, it's my 11eee Flintstone foot.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

L-feld said:


> Haha, yes, it's my 11eee Flintstone foot.


Yabba dabba￼ doo


----------



## MythReindeer (Jul 3, 2013)

L-feld said:


> Haha, yes, it's my 11eee Flintstone foot.


As an 8.5 narrow, I often mutter curses as I walk through shoe sections. "Who the hell has the boulder feet these monstrous shoes require? I mean honestly." Now I see and my heart goes out to you. That looks like enough trouble; you don't need my rancor.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

MythReindeer said:


> As an 8.5 narrow, I often mutter curses as I walk through shoe sections. "Who the hell has the boulder feet these monstrous shoes require? I mean honestly." Now I see and my heart goes out to you. That looks like enough trouble; you don't need my rancor.


Haha, I do okay. AE, Rancourt and Ferragamo take care of me pretty well. Thankfully, I have a taste for round, clunky shoes, so I don't feel like I'm missing out too much.


----------



## MythReindeer (Jul 3, 2013)

L-feld said:


> Haha, I do okay. AE, Rancourt and Ferragamo take care of me pretty well. Thankfully, I have a taste for round, clunky shoes, so I don't feel like I'm missing out too much.


Yea, I have AE and Quoddy, and have looked at Rancourt. The thing about being outside of the "D to E" range is that I have resigned myself to paying full price for expensive shoes, or looking for something lightly used on eBay. Discount stores, sales, etc.? Nope.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

MythReindeer said:


> Yea, I have AE and Quoddy, and have looked at Rancourt. The thing about being outside of the "D to E" range is that I have resigned myself to paying full price for expensive shoes, or looking for something lightly used on eBay. Discount stores, sales, etc.? Nope.


Depending on how narrow your feet are, I bet you can get some really sweet deals on British made loafers. Most I have seen are UK E fitting, which is equivalent to a US C width. The last time I was in the Club Monaco store in New York, they had gorgeous Grenson tassel loafers on sale for probably $150.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

I feel your pain. Narrow feet can be one heck of a curse. I've always been a C in most lasts and occasionally a B. Although one benefit of age is that I'm becoming more of a D in many lasts. Man have I had some bad experiences trying to get a good fit with Alden's Barrie last. (Finally given up after $2-3K worth of Alden's I can't wear.)



MythReindeer said:


> As an 8.5 narrow, I often mutter curses as I walk through shoe sections. "Who the hell has the boulder feet these monstrous shoes require? I mean honestly." Now I see and my heart goes out to you. That looks like enough trouble; you don't need my rancor.


----------



## zzdocxx (Sep 26, 2011)

^Ouch.

Mine is a narrow heel with high instep and arch, very difficult to fit, also it is around size 13, so the AE stores have very little inventory. Which has led to ordering and returning around 30 pair over the last year or so, painful !

What did you do with those Aldens ? Were you able to re sell them online or ? ? ? Just curious.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

The narrow heel thing is a true curse. I know, believe me. In my motivation to "Break them in" I did such a number on my heels, left especially, that it took almost 6 months to completely get over the bruising. (Yes, it was a stupid move on my part.)

What to do with 6-8 pairs of Alden's that don't fit? I haven't decided. I gave a couple of pairs away to my pals who could actually care less that they're Aldens. I can't bring myself to take them the others to Goodwill,...I don't want to just give them away for $50.- knowing that some have been worn twice! I do buy on EBay but I just don't have the time or the patience to sell. So, at one point in time I'll put them up here at AAAC,.....And someone else will buy them to flip! :surprised:


----------



## jimw (May 4, 2009)

I would give my eye teeth for a pair of AE Kenwoods. A few years back, a local (Oakville) shop had pair of 9EEE (in saddle, even!), but when I went to try them on, my heart sunk like a stone; they couldn't even get beyond the ball of my foot. High arches and a cinder block size 9 5E foot seriously limit my options, especially when it comes to my beloved loafers. Wide or narrow, I feel your pain!


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

Great thing about this forum is how an initial question about a blazer ends up discussing E-width shoes.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

:hidden::hidden::hidden::hidden:At least the OP got his answer,...


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

This is a good point. I was wondering who would bring it up! 



xcubbies said:


> Great thing about this forum is how an initial question about a blazer ends up discussing E-width shoes.


----------



## oxford cloth button down (Jan 1, 2012)

zzdocxx said:


> ^Ouch.
> 
> Mine is a narrow heel with high instep and arch, very difficult to fit, also it is around size 13, so the AE stores have very little inventory. Which has led to ordering and returning around 30 pair over the last year or so, painful !
> 
> What did you do with those Aldens ? Were you able to re sell them online or ? ? ? Just curious.


This is pretty much my issue as well. Narrow heel, high instep, and not necessarily narrow fore foot. I love loafers, but like others here I have failed to find any that really fit well. Most won't "catch" my heel. I have found that Bass Logans fit me. It is disappointing, because of their quality, but I am also grateful.

I am not suggesting that the Weejun is the answer for anyone with this foot type, but rather to inspire hope that you can find some type of loafer that will fit you. I will continue on my search. I want to believe that answer is the Alden unlined LHS:devil:


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

oxford cloth button down said:


> This is pretty much my issue as well. Narrow heel, high instep, and not necessarily narrow fore foot. I love loafers, but like others here I have failed to find any that really fit well. Most won't "catch" my heel. I have found that Bass Logans fit me. It is disappointing, because of their quality, but I am also grateful.
> 
> I am not suggesting that the Weejun is the answer for anyone with this foot type, but rather to inspire hope that you can find some type of loafer that will fit you. I will continue on my search. I want to believe that answer is the Alden unlined LHS:devil:


Unfortunately, the LHS probably isn't going to do much for you. Even though there is supposedly a 2 width drop from the forefoot to the heel, my experience has been that it's not really the case.

How do you feel about bit loafers? The AE Verona has a really favorable forefoot to heel ratio. The instep isn't super high, but it's now that low either and the leather is soft and stretchy.


----------



## zzdocxx (Sep 26, 2011)

Now this discussion is getting good !

127, what size are those Aldens? Yes I bet there is someone on this forum who would love to purchase them from you.

I had a bunch of pretty nice clothes that I wanted to "get rid" of, but they were too nice to just take to the Goodwill.

I sent them to drlivingston and he put them up on ebay. I really just wanted them to go to good homes, but he sent me the proceeds, minus something for himself. So that might be another idea.



> Bass Logans


 OK I will have a look, thanks !


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

I'm on my handheld and I'm not so good with it. They're 10.5C,10.5D,10.0C, nst, 2xcap toe. I'm still on the fence with some 975's in#8,....
I've also got a twice worn pair of walkover saddles in 10.5,...They run large, I need a 10D.
Severalother AEs,.....
I'm either going to post them here or a couple of other members have offered to list them (-), some for their effort.



zzdocxx said:


> Now this discussion is getting good !
> 
> 127, what size are those Aldens? Yes I bet there is someone on this forum who would love to purchase them from you.
> 
> ...


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

127.72 MHz said:


> The narrow heel thing is a true curse. I know, believe me. In my motivation to "Break them in" I did such a number on my heels, left especially, that it took almost 6 months to completely get over the bruising. (Yes, it was a stupid move on my part.)
> 
> What to do with 6-8 pairs of Alden's that don't fit? I haven't decided. I gave a couple of pairs away to my pals who could actually care less that they're Aldens. I can't bring myself to take them the others to Goodwill,...I don't want to just give them away for $50.- knowing that some have been worn twice! I do buy on EBay but I just don't have the time or the patience to sell. So, at one point in time I'll put them up here at AAAC,.....And someone else will buy them to flip! :surprised:


what size are these narrow Aldens? I wear anywhere from 11C to 12B (with most falling in the 11.5B or 11.5C range.

SORRY, just saw your post with the sizes.


----------



## zzdocxx (Sep 26, 2011)

Good heavens, I just went back and read the first page and a half of this thread.

:surprised:


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

^ yeah.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

zzdocxx said:


> Good heavens, I just went back and read the first page and a half of this thread.
> 
> :surprised:


Isn't shoe talk a lot more pleasant?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Charles Dana (Nov 20, 2006)

zzdocxx said:


> Good heavens, I just went back and read the first page and a half of this thread.
> 
> :surprised:


"Good heavens" just about says it. Before morphing into a Q and A about wide shoes and hard-to-fit feet, this thread set a record for the longest replies in the shortest amount of time.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

sarakali really started something, didn't he.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

:deadhorse-a:


----------

