# If you had to choose only two sources of clothing, what would they be?



## Ensiferous (Mar 5, 2012)

A purely hypothetical exercise- name a maximum of two sellers of menswear to whom you will be theoretically, but strictly limited.

Basically, this is the scenario; there are only two clothing stores/suppliers left on earth, which ones would you like them to be?

Examples:

J. Press
Alden


Orvis
Land's End


Brooks Brothers
Barbour


Andover Shop
LL Bean


Polo
Mercer


O'Connell's of Buffalo
(they have it all, don't need another...)


or


"I'm a born gambler and hunter-gatherer, and I'll just take my chances thrifting everything."



Of course, some suppliers have a full range and might cover all of your bases, while manufacturers specialize and may have to be selected if they are an exclusive that you do not want to be without. The footwear issue might take some thought.

(For this exercise, a source of undergarments is the only one which may be exempted from consideration.)

What think you all?


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Does "clothing" include shoes? I assume from your reference to footwear it does.


----------



## Yodan731 (Jan 23, 2011)

O'Connell's and LL Bean. Between them they have it all, from sportswear to formalwear.


----------



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

Realistically, thrifting, but if we're talking pie-in-the-sky I'd go for bespoke everything.

Honestly, I could probably get everything I'd want from Ralph Lauren, if you include all of the different lines.


----------



## eyedoc2180 (Nov 19, 2006)

JPress/Alden first, with BB/Barbour a close second. Paul Stuart could be in there, but for a bit too much shoulder padding, and getting grief when you ask for plain front trousers. That reminds me of a JPress question....hmmmmm.......to post anew.........


----------



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

Depends who is paying for the hypothetical items.

Also only one British firm is featured -Barbour and I would not have the gift of their stuff.


----------



## Ensiferous (Mar 5, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Does "clothing" include shoes? I assume from your reference to footwear it does.


Yes, sorry Balfour, I should have been more clear. Everything clothing & footwear except undergarments. Let's asume that one could buy underwear on-the-cheap from a big box store. But I guess if an individual has exceptional taste in that area, they should consider a source.


----------



## Ensiferous (Mar 5, 2012)

Kingstonian said:


> Depends who is paying for the hypothetical items.
> 
> Also only one British firm is featured -Barbour and I would not have the gift of their stuff.


Kingstonian, only examples were given. Please do suggest all your own.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Thanks, Ensiferous. Assuming we're talking about OTR:

- Cordings for countrywear.

- Ede and Ravenscroft for everything else (on the basis that you can get everything, from shoes to accessories to casual clothes to lounge suits to white tie at Edes in the classical styles I favour).


----------



## hookem12387 (Dec 29, 2009)

Prices unconsidered, Ralph Lauren, end of. That's really all I'd need


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Balfour said:


> Thanks, Ensiferous. Assuming we're talking about OTR:
> 
> - Cordings for countrywear.
> 
> - Ede and Ravenscroft for everything else (on the basis that you can get everything, from shoes to accessories to casual clothes to lounge suits to white tie at Edes in the classical styles I favour).


You don't say?

You have neglected to somehow slip in a mention of Sam Hober.

I bet your cricket whites are *heavily* sponsored. :devil:


----------



## nolan50410 (Dec 5, 2006)

Ralph Lauren and Brooks Brothers. I don't buy much from either of them right now, because you can find better stuff that is produced on a smaller scale. But there are no companies that produce such a wide range of classic, elegant apparel than Ralphy and The Brethren.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Shaver said:


> You don't say?
> 
> You have neglected to somehow slip in a mention of Sam Hober.
> 
> I bet your cricket whites are *heavily* sponsored. :devil:




It kills me to leave off Sam Hober (and Ede's ties are not the best), but I can't burn one of my choices (in this amusing, if silly, test) simply on ties.

How would you choose?


----------



## Semper Jeep (Oct 11, 2011)

LL Bean and O'Connell's would more than fulfill all of my needs and desires.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Balfour said:


> It kills me to leave off Sam Hober (and Ede's ties are not the best), but I can't burn one of my choices (in this amusing, if silly, test) simply on ties.
> 
> How would you choose?


Do you know, I'm not sure that I _could_ choose. I have more of a magpie approach: see something I like and grab it. I do not really possess a brand loyalty. I shop in John Lewis a lot, prole that I am.

Your choices probably wouldn't see me too far wrong, though. Indeed I have been eyeing up Cordings trousers just today (on-line). I may PM you for your opinions on this.


----------



## firedancer (Jan 11, 2011)

Paul Stuart and Ralph Lauren. That would cover any base very well.


----------



## Danny (Mar 24, 2005)

LL Bean and O'Connell's.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Shaver said:


> Do you know, I'm not sure that I _could_ choose. I have more of a magpie approach: see something I like and grab it. I do not really possess a brand loyalty. I shop in John Lewis a lot, prole that I am.
> 
> Your choices probably wouldn't see me too far wrong, though. Indeed I have been eyeing up Cordings trousers just today (on-line). I may PM you for your opinions on this.


Oh, for sure: This is a major compromise, so I'm with you and nolan in the real world rather than the situation contemplated here. Sam Hober and ties being a perfect illustration of that, in fact.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde (Sep 5, 2008)

CGC - Karlstad
Ströms - Stockholm


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)

Ralph.


----------



## salgy (May 1, 2009)

just so happens that i currently buy all my stuff from 2 places: Brooks Brothers and Allen Edmonds, they have everything i need... i don't see myself changing now!


----------



## TSWalker (Nov 2, 2011)

This isn't that hypothetical for me: Lands End and Joseph A Bank (yes, yes, I know, but great selection for the "big and tall"), supplemented with Brooks Brothers via eBay and the Sales Forum. I aspire to the BB/AE couplet.


----------



## Andy (Aug 25, 2002)

Polo/Ralph Lauren
Brooks Brothers


----------



## TradThrifter (Oct 22, 2012)

LL Bean 
G.H. Bass


----------



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

TradThrifter said:


> LL Bean
> G.H. Bass


Aiming a little high there, don't you think? ic12337:

But hey, I'd be okay with it myself. I'd want a shoe company that made more than three styles I'd wear, though, but I guess LL Bean shoes are alright, too.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

J.Press 

Ben Silver


----------



## CMDC (Jan 31, 2009)

I'm going to not use O'Connells because I think it's 1) kind of cheating because they offer absolutely everything--therefore not really requiring you to choose / sacrifice and 2) I've never bought from them up until now and I'm doing ok.

My first choice would be to live off the land by thrifting. I've done exceptionally well by that for the most part. Shoes are the most challenging and least predictable.

So...

Given that JPress isn't really a shoe option, I'm going to have to nix them even though they'd be my first choice otherwise. Thus...

1) Brooks Brothers. Even though there are a lot of things to complain about, they're not what they used to be etc. etc. etc., if we're looking for breadth and quality then they are a clear choice. Plus, I can get shoes there.

2) LLBean. Not stellar but when it comes to casual / outdoorsy / beater needs, I think they're the best compared to LE and others.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

A silly question. No offense intended, honest. 

Purely hypothetical, again because the premise is completely unrealistic, I'd set about to complete an apprenticeship as a Tailor.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

At worst, silly but entertaining (and what's wrong with that?). At best, (mildly) interesting and diverting - despite the unrealistic premiss - in requiring one to focus on what one's priorities would be.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

1. Goodwill
2. Salvation Army

This way, I could afford to buy nice clothes. Those other shops are nice, but my closets would be sparse.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

^^ This is my favorite reply! Bravo!


----------



## danielm (May 2, 2012)

I'm with 32, except I'd switch out Salvation Army with St Vincent De Paul.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

danielm said:


> I'm with 32, except I'd switch out Salvation Army with St Vincent De Paul.


I wish there was a Vinnie's around here. That was always the hip-pocket thrift store back in the day. Didn't go very often, but when I did, usually worth the while.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Brooks Brothers
The Bargain Barn, Sharon, Conn.


----------



## bllusc (Aug 19, 2011)

O'Connells and Mercers. I have a seersucker suit from J.Press but living in Canada, O'Connells is practically next door.

Brian


----------



## blue suede shoes (Mar 22, 2010)

O'Connells and Allen Edmonds


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

I was scrolling down to enter my "uniquely" clever reply when, lo and behold, I see 32 beat me to it. :icon_jokercolor:


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Brooks Brother's and O'Connell's does it for me. I'm pretty sure I could buy anything currently hanging in my closet from one of those two sources.


----------



## Uncle Bill (May 4, 2010)

For me it would be Brooks Brothers and Barbour.


----------



## Tom Buchanan (Nov 7, 2005)

WouldaShoulda said:


> J.Press
> 
> Ben Silver


Excellent choices for clothing, but you might hear a few snickers when you show up on the tennis court with these as some of your only "athletic" shoe options 

If price is no object, I would probably go with Polo and J Press.


----------



## blue suede shoes (Mar 22, 2010)

I am changing my answer to O'Connells and Hansens as Hansens carries the full line of Allen Edmonds in addition to every item of clothing needed. Customer service is great also.


----------



## Rugby (May 21, 2011)

Polo/Ralph Lauren and Rugby...

(I am really disappointed by Rugby's closing. Some of their stuff was gaudy, but then, often Polo is at times. Despite the easy generalizations, not everything at Rugby has skulls and crossbones. If you know how to wear it, you can really accomplish a lot.)

I realize that Ralph's quality is supposedly on the decline, but if you buy from the boutiques and online at their site, there isnt much to be disappointed with. However, if you are buying Polo at the outlets and the TJ Maxx's, you are likely to come away wanting.. 

I don't own much Brooks Brothers, but it doesnt do it for me. Perhaps I have been too influenced by the marketing genius of Ralph, but Brooks always seems so ho-hum. 

I certainly do not wish to impugn the tastes of the Brooks aficionados who are present. I lurk here regularly and I am well aware of the devotion to Brooks and the burnout that Polo's unrealistic lifestyle advertising can generate.


----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

Paul & Shark and Brioni. 

I could easily substitute Ralph Lauren for Paul & Shark, as their inventories are much the same, although RL's line is admittedly much larger and at lower price point if you exclude purple and black label. 

The main shortcoming of this choice is the shoe selection, but as so many people love to point out, I have terrible taste in shoes anyway!


----------



## nerdykarim (Dec 13, 2005)

wrwhiteknight said:


> Paul & Shark and Brioni.


What do you like about Brioni? I've never really been able to understand that brand.


----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

The main reason is that we are supposed to choose two companies, so I chose one that has a sporty and casual focus, while the other (Brioni) has a more formal dress focus, although they do casual and sporty stuff as well.

As for their clothes, I really like their shirts because their 16.5 L is fairly slim and fits me near perfect off the rack. As for style they make everything from your basic white or blue to some really sharp contrast collar/cuffs which I enjoy very much. 

Brioni ties also span the spectrum from conservative to ultra-flashy, which has allowed me to stay within the brand on diverse purchases. Also, even though the bulk of their ties are 100% silk, I like that they do manufacture some wool, cashmere, and cotton blend varieties.

I just purchased my first pair of pants from them (but they have yet to arrive), so hopefully those will work out well. Their suits also seem quite sharp, and although I do not own one, the styling appeals to me very much.


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)

wrwhiteknight said:


> Paul & Shark and Brioni.


I was almost certain this was a joke.


----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

Well, I don't own anything from Brooks Brothers (although 5 ties are on the way from Dr Livingston), and I don't own anything from Allen Edmonds or O'Connells, so that takes out 70% of the list so far! Also, I am really fond of LLBean, but I can't chop wood and walk my dog _all_ the live-long-day (just part).


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Anderson and Sheppard

and

John Lobb


----------



## ArtVandalay (Apr 29, 2010)

Trip English said:


> I was almost certain this was a joke.


I think we're being punked...


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)

The Eccos were the first clue.


----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

Trip English said:


> The Eccos were the first clue.


Please do explain.


----------



## leisureclass (Jan 31, 2011)

Explanation: https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?50714-Trad-101


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)




----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

Leisureclass: thanks, but would you mind distilling that down for me? I don't have the time right now to read all of that.


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)

It basically says square toed shoes at great, nothing has to match, and don't sweat how your clothes fit.


----------



## nerdykarim (Dec 13, 2005)

The short version, in my opinion, is that Brioni follows a classical Roman tailoring tradition, which emphasizes a structured shoulder and, often, a roped sleevehead. Although the brand is objectively quite nice and the clothes are very high quality it is probably the least "trad" of all the Italian brands I'm familiar with (because, as you know, the "trad" aesthetic appreciates a soft shoulder).

Additionally, Brioni ties tend to be rather satin-ey, which violates the "absorb light, don't reflect light" principle mentioned in another thread.

Basically, when I think about Brioni, I think about Donald Trump which (again, in my opinion) is not a good association. Especially when there are other brands that serve the same function (focus on dress clothes; wide variety of ties; etc.) and also meet many of the aesthetic preferences that trad forumers prefer (ie: Borrelli).


----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

hahaha, ok. Do you own anything from Paul & Shark or Brioni? I imagine that the traddies certainly wouldn't, or at least not as a focus of their wardrobe. I think that a lot of people aren't familiar with the great range of garments that Paul & Shark produce; I really am quite fond of their casual cotton shirts and their wool sweaters in particular. They do a lot of stuff with many patches and emblems related to yachting, and I don't purchase any of that stuff, but their less logo emblazoned stuff is top notch in my opinion.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

He is entitled to his opinion. At least he does have the guts to post pictures of himself. Don't let a simple question devolve into a "my trad penis is bigger than your trad penis" thread.


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)

wrwhiteknight said:


> Leisureclass: thanks, but would you mind distilling that down for me? I don't have the time right now to read all of that.


In all seriousness the above quote sums up your reputation. It's great that you want to be active on the forums, but you seem unwilling or incapable of accepting criticism. Your knowledge of clothing, even something as superficial as brands, seems fairly shallow and the posts of your attire display a need for some attention to fit, color coordination, and general taste.

There are rules. Ask Flusser. Ask O'Brien. Ask Boyer. Crack the books. And don't get a "who, me?" attitude when you show up to a style forum in square toed shoes and goofy ties and refuse to understand why that sort of careless throwing on of clothes is why many of us come here for a break.

This is not meant to be harsh, but it hasn't gone unnoticed that each time you're offered criticism (always delivered in gentler terms than appropriate) you respond that hey thanks, but I'm cool with how I dress.


----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

Sorry Trip, but I didn't know I had a reputation. I think that people may mistake my very precise language for attitude, but I can assure you that it is not. I simply am a person who works very hard to say exactly what I mean, and so when I receive commentary that is imprecise, I simply ask people to rephrase it so it is in "my language" so that I can understand it.

I can appreciate that you may be frustrated by newcomers like me, because you have been here longer than I, and you perceive yourself as being more knowledgeable and better dressed than I am, or at least able to tell me what is wrong with what I am wearing (and very well may be on all counts).

However, what I do not understand is blatant rudeness, snide remarks, or under-handed comments; and this is not directed only at you. I work very hard to carry myself as a gentleman all day long, in person and on the internet, and if I ever fall short here at AAAC, I apologize. I think that if you read my posts you will see that I am in fact quite open to criticism and that I ask genuine questions in order to get genuine answers.

If somebody says something like: "your shoes must go", I may respond "why", which IS NOT me disagreeing (although I may ultimately say that I like them nonetheless), but I AM looking for is an explanation of why they must go; maybe you perceive my question of "why" as unwillingness to accept criticism?

I also perceive that many of the posters here are confused about the relationship between sharing opinions and willingness/ability to accept criticism. The confusion seems to lie in that they believe that if they give an opinion to someone, and that other person does not adopt that opinion as well, that that other person is unwilling to accept criticism; this is a logical disjunction. Accepting criticism _does_ mean listening to and internalizing same, it _does not_ mean necessarily adopting the criticism as your new line of thought. If I ask for your opinion, I am not saying "please tell me what you think so that I may think _that_ also"; I am simply looking to see what a wider audience thinks about a given subject.

Below you will see an assortment of my Brioni shirts and Ties, just as an interest piece. NerdyKarim's response was very informative, and so I thought I would show a bit of the variety that _I_ perceive in Brioni, as opposed to the one-dimensional view that those who do not wear the brand may have of Brioni in their mind.

The shirts range from flashy contrast collars to very traditional (even a button down collar!), while the ties range from the satiny finishes referenced by NerdyKarim, to a cotton blend (third from left) and an extremely textured burgundy/yellow woven silk on the far right.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Trip English said:


> In all seriousness the above quote sums up your reputation. It's great that you want to be active on the forums, but you seem unwilling or incapable of accepting criticism. Your knowledge of clothing, even something as superficial as brands, seems fairly shallow and the posts of your attire display a need for some attention to fit, color coordination, and general taste.
> 
> There are rules. Ask Flusser. Ask O'Brien. Ask Boyer. Crack the books. And don't get a "who, me?" attitude when you show up to a style forum in square toed shoes and goofy ties and refuse to understand why that sort of careless throwing on of clothes is why many of us come here for a break.
> 
> This is not meant to be harsh, but it hasn't gone unnoticed that each time you're offered criticism (always delivered in gentler terms than appropriate) you respond that hey thanks, but I'm cool with how I dress.


Yes, quite.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

arkirshner said:


> Anderson and Sheppard
> 
> and
> 
> John Lobb


No fair! Note I disclaimed bespoke when I responded.:wink2:


----------



## leisureclass (Jan 31, 2011)

wrwhiteknight said:


> Leisureclass: thanks, but would you mind distilling that down for me? I don't have the time right now to read all of that.


Interesting that you can write lengthy responses, but not spend a few minutes learning about the basics of traditional style.

This is a forum for people who do have that understanding and appreciation, without it, you can probably expect more snide comments.

There's a lot of history here, not just in old threads, but in the style itself. Look into it - if that does not interest you, I would recommend looking to other forums


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

Andy said:


> Polo/Ralph Lauren
> Brooks Brothers


Ditto.


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

The problem here is that you're posting in the wrong forum. The Fashion Forum is where that stuff is welcomed.


----------



## Balfour (Mar 23, 2012)

Topsider said:


> The problem here is that you're posting in the wrong forum. The Fashion Forum is where that stuff is welcomed.


Not necessarily ...:icon_smile_wink::devil:


----------



## egerland (Aug 18, 2008)

I could get by with BB for daily wear and REI for outdoor pursuits.


----------



## Cowtown (Aug 10, 2006)

I will take Ben Silver and O'Connells (with the stipulation that they offer Mercer shirts).


----------



## ArtVandalay (Apr 29, 2010)

drlivingston said:


> He is entitled to his opinion. At least he does have the guts to post pictures of himself. Don't let a simple question devolve into a "my trad penis is bigger than your trad penis" thread.


It's not that he isn't entitled to his opinion. It's like going on to a Beach Boys forum and gushing about Revolver, Rubber Soul, and Sgt. Pepper in 90% of your posts, and then getting incredulous when people question you about it.


----------



## Haffman (Oct 11, 2010)

Ralph Lauren and Edward Green


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

Ralph Lauren and ..... Well, I guess that I would just be content with that.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Dude,

Don't take this the wrong way, but if I had a closet that looked like that, I would burn it. So would most everyone else who inhabits this thread.



wrwhiteknight said:


> Sorry Trip, but I didn't know I had a reputation. I think that people may mistake my very precise language for attitude, but I can assure you that it is not. I simply am a person who works very hard to say exactly what I mean, and so when I receive commentary that is imprecise, I simply ask people to rephrase it so it is in "my language" so that I can understand it.
> 
> I can appreciate that you may be frustrated by newcomers like me, because you have been here longer than I, and you perceive yourself as being more knowledgeable and better dressed than I am, or at least able to tell me what is wrong with what I am wearing (and very well may be on all counts).
> 
> ...


----------



## HerrDavid (Aug 23, 2012)

wrwhiteknight said:


> If somebody says something like: "your shoes must go", I may respond "why", which IS NOT me disagreeing (although I may ultimately say that I like them nonetheless), but I AM looking for is an explanation of why they must go; maybe you perceive my question of "why" as unwillingness to accept criticism?


You do realize that one is not always _entitled _to an explanation, right ? Or more specifically, that one can act in ways that directly disentitle him to an explanation. If I submit an article to on Kant's third antimony to _Public Affairs Quarterly_, I can expect that article to go straight into the trash. And rightly so. It would be silly of me to complain of mistreatment in such a case, say, along the lines of "they rejected me without even telling me why!"


----------



## Dockside (Nov 16, 2012)

Barbour and Sebago.


----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

32 Roll and Rock: very pointless, thanks for that.

Leisure Class: Do you often send people away that you don't mesh with? And yes, I can write lengthy responses because I am conveying information. When you wanted to convey information to me, you did not do so, but instead asked me to go read at length. Your point about the history on the forum is well taken though as I have had many questions answered by long-idle or long-ago-started threads; good point on that one.

Herr David: That is a very sensible and very well put response, thanks for that.

Art Vandalay: Thanks, that does make a lot of sense.

I must admit with great embarrassment that this entire debacle is mostly my fault, as I _honestly_ did not realize that this thread was in the trad forum. Honestly. I browse the site by simply clicking "What's New", and I made the mistake of not paying attention to where I was. Can I secretly sew little ponies onto my Brioni shirts? I stand by my comments about how rude some of your are, but I do apologize for my mistake and for instilling terror in you all by putting flashy Italian clothes in front of your eyes. I completely agree with what Herr David and Art Vanadaly said on the point of the venue being incorrect, and again for that I apologize.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Apology accepted. Let's just chalk it up to a misunderstanding.

The reason folks got testy, I think, is because you didn't seem to listen when posters wrote, Hey, we're all old-school here and wouldn't wax our cars with Italian stuff. Heels got dug in. Now that we know it was an innocent mistake--and I'm thankful for folks who can admit when they are mistaken--it all makes sense. Finally, keep in mind that this and other threads get trolled with some degree of regularity. I think that might have raised some antennae. There have been more than a few trolls who have pulled the what's-wrong-with-Prada schtick.

Have a good Thanksgiving, and you're not a bad dresser. Just not our cup of tea.



wrwhiteknight said:


> 32 Roll and Rock: very pointless, thanks for that.
> 
> Leisure Class: Do you often send people away that you don't mesh with? And yes, I can write lengthy responses because I am conveying information. When you wanted to convey information to me, you did not do so, but instead asked me to go read at length. Your point about the history on the forum is well taken though as I have had many questions answered by long-idle or long-ago-started threads; good point on that one.
> 
> ...


----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

32: what is "trolling"?

And thanks - happy Thanksgiving to you as well.

See you around....in the proper threads hopefully.....


----------



## Mississippi Mud (Oct 15, 2009)

Ed Hardy and Crocs



wrwhiteknight said:


> 32: what is "trolling"?


----------



## mr.v (Sep 26, 2011)

Ralph Lauren and Alden


----------



## bd79cc (Dec 20, 2006)

Cable Car and O'Connell's. I tried on some jackets at the Press in Cambridge last Saturday. The place, along with the New Haven store, is my sentimental favorite, and I would like to buy a lot more things there, especially suits and jackets, but there's only so much shoulder padding one can take. CCC and O'Connell's come a lot closer to my (modest for this Forum) ideal for jackets nowadays. If Press would fix the shoulders of their jackets I might list them and ShoeMart as my two places.


----------



## wrwhiteknight (Mar 20, 2012)

Mississippi Mud said:


> Ed Hardy and Crocs


Oh, trolling must be purposefully being a jerk with the hope that you will incite a riot.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 17, 2008)

Brooks Brothers
Ralph Lauren


----------



## navyblazer (Oct 12, 2012)

Lands End
E-Bay (buying mainly Brooks Brothers items)

Navy


----------



## Starting Late (Apr 26, 2010)

I am having a hard time with this because I can't stop trying to hit the exact balance bewteen quality and price. Guess I'm just cheap.

Anyway, I'll go with Brooks Brothers and Paul Stuart. Between the two, I'll find everything I need, including English, Italian and American styles, fabrics and shoes. (It hurt a little to say Paul Stuart.)


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

If this covers everything we do in clothing - Filson and Brooks. My answer may be different if we're talking only week-day clothing, or some other limiting factor.


----------



## Eric W S (Jun 6, 2012)

Paul Stuart/O'connell's.


----------



## Uncle Bill (May 4, 2010)

Gustin for my jeans and Brooks Brothers for everything else.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

BB / LLBean

(This thread reminded me of how little I've missed a certain someone.)


----------



## VaBeach (Oct 14, 2013)

BB/AE


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

VaBeach said:


> BB/AE


Don't sell yourself short, BB already sells AE.


----------



## godan (Feb 10, 2010)

BB
STP (I live close to the STP Mothership in Cheyenne.)


----------



## VaBeach (Oct 14, 2013)

Tilton said:


> Don't sell yourself short, BB already sells AE.


Fair enough and i'll add Alden.


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

TweedyDon and Drlivingston?


----------



## dkoernert (May 31, 2011)

Reuben said:


> TweedyDon and Drlivingston?


QFT

I'd probably pick BB and PRL


----------



## MaxBuck (Apr 4, 2013)

1. Nordstrom

2. LS Men's Clothing


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

I'll never have to choose just two sources of clothing, silly thread.

By the way, Orvis sells many classic styles that are, except for their *small* line of American made products, all made in the lowest bidder country, extremely low quality.
I wouldn't buy something for my dog from Orvis.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

127.72 MHz said:


> By the way, Orvis sells many classic styles that are, except for their *small* line of American made products, all made in the lowest bidder country, extremely low quality.
> I wouldn't buy something for my dog from Orvis.


Interesting. I'm not about to count, but it looks to me like Orvis offers more Made in America items on their site than Brooks does. But, I am a die-hard Orvis customer and I've had far fewer QC issues with them than I have with places such as LLB, BB, LE, or Filson. Frankly, though, between Orvis, LLB, and Filson, the difference is only in your personal tastes for their looks because all basically have the same warranty, so even if something is subpar for your expectations and not actually lacking a major flaw, they'll take it back and give a refund or exchange no questions asked. Try wearing a shirt for a year and returning it to Books for an exchange without any solid reason and see how that goes. One of the two times I have contacted Orvis over minor flaw in an item, they shipped me a new one and told me to keep the old one.


----------



## AshScache (Feb 4, 2013)

Pentheos said:


> BB / LLBean
> 
> (This thread reminded me of how little I've missed a certain someone.)


I second this--BB for dress clothes and shoes; LL Bean for casual items.


----------



## rowanlane (Nov 12, 2013)

FLCracka said:


> Brooks Brothers
> Ralph Lauren


seconded


----------



## rowanlane (Nov 12, 2013)

AshScache said:


> I second this--BB for dress clothes and shoes; LL Bean for casual items.


then again I really might want to include LLBean in the mix, you do need some good sturdy outdoors clothes sometimes


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Pink
Nunn Bush


----------



## M Go Crimson (Aug 20, 2011)

Epaulet and Ralph Lauren

I would abuse the MTO options like whoa.


----------



## rsgordon (Dec 6, 2012)

BB + Filson

Filson seems to fly a bit under the radar as an option with the popularity of Barbour on the forum


----------



## mcfrankshc (Dec 8, 2013)

BB, Press


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

rsgordon said:


> BB + Filson
> 
> Filson seems to fly a bit under the radar as an option with the popularity of Barbour on the forum


My picks as well. Re: Filson, different gear, much different demographic. Barbour is great for one thing, Filson is great for much more than just one waxed/oiled jacket.


----------

