# Opinion on SuitSupply suit



## blueinc (Oct 25, 2012)

I am curious to know if SuitSupply suits respect the traditional style, or at least to be a decent modern one. Here is one example:


The jacket length is correct, if you watch the video in the right down corner, you will see the model making a twist which gives us the chance to conclude that a man's bottom is covered.

I also know that they aren't great suits, but I have heard good things about them regarding this price point. I also like the suit color in the video better than the one in the pictures.

However, I have a question: are the pants too slim?

Note that I am 23 years old, slim, and I like more slim cuts, and am in the market for a relatively affordable suit that fits the bill.


(And yes, I know, the workable sleeve buttons are a bit kitschy, but hey, we don't live in a perfect world.)


----------



## johnpark11 (Oct 19, 2009)

I like the style. Not what most on this forum will support. I think you need to dress like a 23 year old... respect traditional lines, but wear a suit that flatters you. I'm going to visit their store in Chicago when I'm there for a conference this month.


----------



## Youthful Repp-robate (Sep 26, 2011)

I like the looks of their suits. I'm kicking myself for not stopping by last time I was in the city, now that I see where they are. I walked past within three blocks. Oh well.

Of course, I'm not buying anything for a while. I need shirts and trousers now, and it's a long process of saving just to get those. My concerns, of course, are that the jackets would be too short to provide the right proportions and the pants too narrow to hold a crease and avoid stacking behind the knees.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

I'm sorry, but that tasteless promotional photography on the home page is like a slightly classier version of Indochino's. Turns me right off from buying.

"BUY FROM US AND HALF-NAKED WOMEN WILL DIVE INTO YOUR ARMS." God, what a joke. At least show the guy with a woman who's fully dressed and matching his level of attire.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

Definitely not my cup of tea. However, to each his own. I detest the use of scantily clad men or women to promote clothing (unless, of course undergarments or swimwear is what is being marketed). For that matter, the sock models used on this very site are not in good taste. jmho...


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Well, it's one thing to advertise with scantily-clad people when the items in question are underwear. Another to show a woman in her skivvies among fully-dressed men. As is often the case with D&G's tasteless adverts in GQ/Esquire. What are they trying to imply exactly?


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Jovan said:


> Well, it's one thing to advertise with scantily-clad people when the items in question are underwear. Another to show a woman in her skivvies among fully-dressed men. As is often the case with D&G's tasteless adverts in GQ/Esquire.* What are they trying to imply exactly?*


That men are simple minded. And, often, unfortunately they are correct.....


----------



## blueinc (Oct 25, 2012)

I have decided that it is a good look, even if most of you do not like it. I compare it with those short jacket suits that have narrow lapels and demand a slim tie, and which have even tighter fitting pants (not to mention other style gimmicks), and this suit wins.

I'm sorry, but I cannot wear 100% traditional clothing - it is too baggy for me, and I need something slim.

If, however, you have any other alternatives, you are free to share them - I might even change my mind.


----------



## johnpark11 (Oct 19, 2009)

You can find Hugo boss red label for a similar price when on sale. BB Fitzgerald is also a good slim suit... I own both. I bought a tux from indochinco and was very happy. . 

I think because the price is lower, we assume the quality is poor. Not the case. Indochinco and Suitsupply are cutting out the middle man and the big box store.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Jovan said:


> I'm sorry, but that tasteless promotional photography on the home page is like a slightly classier version of Indochino's. Turns me right off from buying.
> 
> "BUY FROM US AND HALF-NAKED WOMEN WILL DIVE INTO YOUR ARMS." God, what a joke. At least show the guy with a woman who's fully dressed and matching his level of attire.


The wanton use of attractive women in advertising campaigns has sold a whole lot of clothes, cars, tobacco products and even booze (back when they were advertising such on the small screen), over the years! Men were intended to be shallow and self serving...by gawd, that's how the good Lord made us! LOL.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

With respect, that sort of thinking -- "That's just the way it is, folks." -- is part of the reason we haven't totally moved beyond sexism yet. My upbringing emphasized respect for women as _equals,_ beyond being "the weaker/fairer sex" or any of that nonsense, and I'd like to think I strive to be better than just shallow and self-serving. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with admiring beauty in either men or women, but there's a thin line between that and objectification that we have to look out for. I digress though, that's a topic for another day! 

Re: Indochino -- I'd stay well clear of them. Almost every suit I've seen from them (including the one I ordered and promptly returned because it wasn't salvageable) on clothing forums is a disaster even when altered. Their construction methods are also questionable, using fusing even where department store suits don't. The lapel roll was a mess, like a three button that they forgot to put the top button in. I might also add that they neglected to follow my measurements (rise was far shorter than specfied, sleeves were also an inch too short) or style options! Despite asking for side tabs, brace buttons, and no belt loops -- I got side tabs (the zipper type you'd get on a tuxedo rental), four brace buttons (what am I supposed to do with four?), AND belt loops, presumably because I'm not a big boy who can make his own decisions or they thought my trousers didn't have enough support already. Fabric looked nothing like the close up pictures. I don't mind pick-and-pick, but it looked like a normal worsted in the pictures. Almost as if they ran out of light grey fabric and decided to replace it with whatever was available. Additionally, I hear they can be rather inconsistent with fit from order to order, even using the same set of measurements.

Okay, I'm going to admit I did some looking beyond the first page,  but Suit Supply look better in overall quality, even if I think that shot with the woman in her bathing suit in the middle of NYC is kind of tacky. I have heard some conflicting reports of them, but some people are also satisfied even if their suit has fit problems that are more obvious to us. All the proud Indochino owners are testament to that.

I just placed an order with Black Lapel. If you can wait a month, I'll give a review since no one else on AAAC has tried them yet and then you can consider your options. I'm sending pictures for them to get a good assessment of my body type -- shoulder slope, posture, etc. -- which I am told only helps the fit on the first order. They also credit you for alterations or, if the suit is not fixable by alterations alone due to working sleeves or something, they will remake it entirely.


----------



## CharlesFerdinand (Jun 18, 2010)

I actually have a couple of Suit Supply suits, and they are very good value for money. One thing though, the look and colours of their suits in the promo photos is NOTHING like the real thing. Far too much saturation and general gloss. You really need to see the suit before deciding.


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

I didn't find a single scantily clad woman on the website! Although I must confess I did very rapidly get bored scrolling through the options...

Personally, I don't like the cut. I don't like the way the belt buckle is peeping through an inverted V all the time on the 2-button suits --- it just looks messy to me. But you get that a lot with 'modern' suits, not just Suit Supply


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

The main problem with belt buckles showing isn't just the button stance, it's the trouser rise. Suits from the '60s had the waist button just as high yet the belt was hidden because the trousers sat at the natural waist of the wearer.


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

Jovan said:


> The main problem with belt buckles showing isn't just the button stance, it's the trouser rise. Suits from the '60s had the waist button just as high yet the belt was hidden because the trousers sat at the natural waist of the wearer.


Yes agreed. I really don't like it, in fact that inverted V is one of my pet peeves in life :devil:


----------



## Odradek (Sep 1, 2011)

Jovan said:


> The main problem with belt buckles showing isn't just the button stance, it's the trouser rise. Suits from the '60s had the waist button just as high yet the belt was hidden because the trousers sat at the natural waist of the wearer.


Agree 100%.
Just bought my second vintage suit from Bookster with a 12" rise.
Haven't taken delivery yet but I bet it works out better then the 10" rise on my brand new suits. Especially with a waistcoat.

Bought my wedding suit from Suitsupply 18 months ago, when I knew absolutely nothing about suits. Just knew they had something new and fresh compared to all the department stores in London.
Knowing what I know now though this forum there are one or two things I'm unhappy about with their suit. Mainly that they shortened the trousers for me by several inches, but never offered me the option of turn-ups, something that I'd always go for now. They cut off the extra material so too late to change.
Good quality suit for the price though.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

They didn't offer the option of turn-ups? Well, that's odd. Even online MTM outfits that advertise with trendy looking suits (Black Lapel, Indochino, etc.) offer pleats and turn-ups. It would be nice if they offered forward pleats, though. Even better if that were the standard -- they always look better, no matter what the Italians insist.


----------



## blueinc (Oct 25, 2012)

Haffman said:


> Yes agreed. I really don't like it, in fact that inverted V is one of my pet peeves in life :devil:


I read in Flusser's Dressing the Man that the inverted V was introduced for horse riding needs, along with center vents, for a better fit during a horse ride. Is there something wrong with it? (Should it have stayed at the country side along with slanted pockets?)

(Off topic: I have seen Bernhard Roetzel's website, and in all of the pictures where I can spot pockets, he wears slanted/hacking pockets.)


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

blueinc said:


> I read in Flusser's Dressing the Man that the inverted V was introduced for horse riding needs, along with center vents, for a better fit during a horse ride. Is there something wrong with it? (Should it have stayed at the country side along with slanted pockets?)
> 
> (*Off topic: I have seen Bernhard Roetzel's website, and in all of the pictures where I can spot pockets, he wears slanted/hacking pockets.)*


Remembering, of course, that he is merely a German trying to be an English gentleman. :devil:


----------



## johnpark11 (Oct 19, 2009)

blueinc said:


> I read in Flusser's Dressing the Man that the inverted V was introduced for horse riding needs, along with center vents, for a better fit during a horse ride. Is there something wrong with it? (Should it have stayed at the country side along with slanted pockets?)
> 
> (Off topic: I have seen Bernhard Roetzel's website, and in all of the pictures where I can spot pockets, he wears slanted/hacking pockets.)


It's just the result of a super slim suit... Mostly on more modern cuts and younger guys. I like my suits right on the verge of that V... Nice and "twight".

I'd much rather see that than most dudes out there that buy 2 sizes too large OTR

Unfortunately for these guys, this has been the trend and even BB and J Press are going to it. I say just be happy these young bucks are still wearing suits... We almost lost an entire generation until these designers put some flare into it.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Are we talking about the same inverted 'v' here? I believe that the esteemed Mr Haffman was describing the 'v' of shirt that sometimes rudely manifests itself twixt trouser top and jacket, a loathsome triangle of abomination, and resultant of an inadequate rise. What other 'v' might there be?


----------



## blueinc (Oct 25, 2012)

Shaver said:


> Are we talking about the same inverted 'v' here? I believe that the esteemed Mr Haffman was describing the 'v' of shirt that sometimes rudely manifests itself twixt trouser top and jacket, a loathsome triangle of abomination, and resultant of an inadequate rise. What other 'v' might there be?


Yes, hmmm, I was referring too the inverted V that is sort of a cut-away of a jacket's skirt, which I believe was fashioned to accommodate a better fit during horse riding.

Here's an example: https://www.suitsupply.com/suit-grey-check-lazio-p3407/P3407,en,pd.html?start=4&cgid=Suitsas opposed to this:

But you are right, I think Haffman was referring to the small portion of the shirt, which together with the belt's buckle, peep out through the jacket - yes, it _is_ disgusting, now that I have acknowledged it.

But I'm still not convinced how the cut-away jacket skirt is viewed.


----------



## Youthful Repp-robate (Sep 26, 2011)

blueinc said:


> Yes, hmmm, I was referring too the inverted V that is sort of a cut-away of a jacket's skirt, which I believe was fashioned to accommodate a better fit during horse riding.
> 
> But I'm still not convinced how the cut-away jacket skirt is viewed.


Those are the quarters that you're talking about. They can be open (SuitSupply) or closed (Brook Taverner). The inverted v other members object to is the area of shirt and belt visible when a jacket with a high button stance and open quarters is worn with trousers that have a low rise.


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

blueinc said:


> But you are right, I think Haffman was referring to the small portion of the shirt, which together with the belt's buckle, peep out through the jacket - yes, it _is_ disgusting, now that I have acknowledged it.
> 
> But I'm still not convinced how the cut-away jacket skirt is viewed.


Sorry I missed all this - yes, you are right I was referring to the shirt/tie/belt buckle _peep_ inverted V. I hate it and all the more because a few years ago I was guilty of it on a regular basis! Seems like most fashion brands these days have it with gay abandon, due in large part to the trouser rise as Jovan says.

The other cut-away you refer to is not something I have (consciously) seen before


----------

