ShavingUniverse.com
Register a free account now!
If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
Trying a shapton 30k
- Thread starter Emmanuel
- Start Date
vgeorge
Well-Known Member
[h1]People, People![/h1]
[h2]Did you notice this?[/h2]
Our Emmanuel is on TV!!
Terrific, terrific, Emmanuel! Congratulations! Can you tell exactly which seconds you appear on the Video? It is really lovely.
This is another of my favorites: Giorgos Alkaios & Friends - OPA!
[h2]Did you notice this?[/h2]
Our Emmanuel is on TV!!
Emmanuel said:
Terrific, terrific, Emmanuel! Congratulations! Can you tell exactly which seconds you appear on the Video? It is really lovely.
This is another of my favorites: Giorgos Alkaios & Friends - OPA!
pinklather
Well-Known Member
This thread was devoured w/ great interest. I've not used the Shapton stone, but have shaved w/ an edge done with all shaptons to 30k by one who asserted shaptons only like other shaptons - meaning switching to a shapton from another stone is not optimal.
The edge from the 30k was nightmare sharp. The shave was demanding. At the time, I was only shaving with a str8 for about 3.5 months, so maybe my skills were not adequately developed for a valid assessment. It felt harsh. I concluded it was not smooth. I would have to try again now to maintain the assertion that it was not smooth. I have done a double bevel on an asagi that was that keen, but could tell it was still smooth - just very demanding of technique.
I've wanted to know if a shapton was capable of 'smooth' in like manner of the coti or jnat. In reading, it sounds like full 30k is too keen to provide the comfort of the stones more known for smoothness. Some like that & I'm glad the tools exist & have enough experimentation to provide that edge. My pref. is for a comfort level that doesn't demand flawless technique. I want that level of skills for shaving, but don't want to be forced to be flawless in order to enjoy a shave.
Traditional vs modernist: I'm too myopic (tunnel-visioned) on the function - I'm a fan of what works well. I want all the advancement and experimentation that develops new methods, tools, techniques. I also cannot escape the sense that in our rush to discover, we are forgetting more (of what works) at a greater rate than we are discovering any quality replacement tools and methods. This was well said by Thomas Sowell (for our purposes, ignore the context being political/social comment): "The last 30 yrs of American social history has been replacing what works with what sounds good". He said that about 20 yrs. ago. Here, I strongly value those dear souls that preserve what works from the traditions. Would anyone have dreampt the technique for cleaning the linen strop that Emmanuel brings back to our memories?
It seems like each platform for honing requires a BIG investment in learning and practice. This was true of the jnat and the coti. For now, I must limit my experimentation to those stones in order to develop adequate and reliable results. Strangely, though an Escher/Thurry has some appeal, I have no compulsion to acquire because there seems little to be gained over the coti & jnat. 'Good, good stone - but for now, I'm tunnel visioned on skills acquisition, rather than more blades, stones, etc.
The edge from the 30k was nightmare sharp. The shave was demanding. At the time, I was only shaving with a str8 for about 3.5 months, so maybe my skills were not adequately developed for a valid assessment. It felt harsh. I concluded it was not smooth. I would have to try again now to maintain the assertion that it was not smooth. I have done a double bevel on an asagi that was that keen, but could tell it was still smooth - just very demanding of technique.
I've wanted to know if a shapton was capable of 'smooth' in like manner of the coti or jnat. In reading, it sounds like full 30k is too keen to provide the comfort of the stones more known for smoothness. Some like that & I'm glad the tools exist & have enough experimentation to provide that edge. My pref. is for a comfort level that doesn't demand flawless technique. I want that level of skills for shaving, but don't want to be forced to be flawless in order to enjoy a shave.
Traditional vs modernist: I'm too myopic (tunnel-visioned) on the function - I'm a fan of what works well. I want all the advancement and experimentation that develops new methods, tools, techniques. I also cannot escape the sense that in our rush to discover, we are forgetting more (of what works) at a greater rate than we are discovering any quality replacement tools and methods. This was well said by Thomas Sowell (for our purposes, ignore the context being political/social comment): "The last 30 yrs of American social history has been replacing what works with what sounds good". He said that about 20 yrs. ago. Here, I strongly value those dear souls that preserve what works from the traditions. Would anyone have dreampt the technique for cleaning the linen strop that Emmanuel brings back to our memories?
It seems like each platform for honing requires a BIG investment in learning and practice. This was true of the jnat and the coti. For now, I must limit my experimentation to those stones in order to develop adequate and reliable results. Strangely, though an Escher/Thurry has some appeal, I have no compulsion to acquire because there seems little to be gained over the coti & jnat. 'Good, good stone - but for now, I'm tunnel visioned on skills acquisition, rather than more blades, stones, etc.
G
Guest
A razor is a tool to remove facial hair, and a hone is a means to keep the razor serviceable. Logically, everyone should aim for what works best, and stick with that. But razors were re-discovered only fairly recently, and a lot of knowledge has been lost in the meantime. Again, logically, groups of like-minded individuals should form and try to collect, aggregate, refine, and make publicly available what is the respective state of the art. But social media often bring out the worst in men. Instead of more canonical information, we get more sciolism, often poisoned with a hidden agenda.
[c]
[/c]
You see, I did something that I still find reasonably clever. I watched Bart hone razors on my hone, and learned two things: 1) I simply do not have the required mechanic skills, and likely never will have; 2) it is not rocket science, and although I will likely never get my razors as well honed as Bart, I can still achieve a satisfactory result, given enough time and patience. Add to that the fact that I have shaved with so called honemeister edges that were finished on every hone with a braindamaged nickname in the market, none of them were better than the Coticule edges, and more than a few were actually worse.
Therefore, I stick with what I know can produce optimum results, yet also matches my razors in terms of tradition and down-to-earth handling and feel. I do not suffer from any obsessive-compulsive disorders, nor am I prone to idolisation. Which is why am still amazed how this site manages the fine balance between genuine interest in a niche product, and tool-oriented nerdiness. Nice.
[c]
You see, I did something that I still find reasonably clever. I watched Bart hone razors on my hone, and learned two things: 1) I simply do not have the required mechanic skills, and likely never will have; 2) it is not rocket science, and although I will likely never get my razors as well honed as Bart, I can still achieve a satisfactory result, given enough time and patience. Add to that the fact that I have shaved with so called honemeister edges that were finished on every hone with a braindamaged nickname in the market, none of them were better than the Coticule edges, and more than a few were actually worse.
Therefore, I stick with what I know can produce optimum results, yet also matches my razors in terms of tradition and down-to-earth handling and feel. I do not suffer from any obsessive-compulsive disorders, nor am I prone to idolisation. Which is why am still amazed how this site manages the fine balance between genuine interest in a niche product, and tool-oriented nerdiness. Nice.
vgeorge
Well-Known Member
[h2]Just asking ... [/h2]
I do not mean to be impolite in any way. I genuinely believe the assertions of people who say 30K-Shapton is not smooth for them.
But .... why is there the problem with the 30K-S edge? You might say, that is because faces are different. I would suggest, please state the problem in terms of the edge - what is it about the edge that causes trouble for some faces? (We can not calibrate all faces!)
Paul mentioned fewer strokes on a 30K-S - why does the HHT reduce with increasing (X) strokes?
And .... why is 30K-S alright after synthetics and not after Coticule?
I am asking these questions for a very simple reason. In choosing a 'razor' and sharpening many things come together - convenience, time, cost, sharpness, smoothness, etc. If you think about market share of facial hair removal gadgets, you will notice how different groups arrive at their optimum among these different dimensions that influence their use. You might say, most people have 'outsourced' the sharpening part. After reaching a level of acceptable sharpness, does further honing causes smoothness to be inversely proportional to sharpness? For all hones? If that is true, can we just do a bit of toning down by dragging across Denny's wet horn ( oops
: ) or a cork? Or, just increase the bevel angle? Or, both? Do over-sharp/too-thin edges cut hair worse?
I would think efficiency for sharpening would be a good thing if you can control it.
I do not mean to be impolite in any way. I genuinely believe the assertions of people who say 30K-Shapton is not smooth for them.
But .... why is there the problem with the 30K-S edge? You might say, that is because faces are different. I would suggest, please state the problem in terms of the edge - what is it about the edge that causes trouble for some faces? (We can not calibrate all faces!)
Paul mentioned fewer strokes on a 30K-S - why does the HHT reduce with increasing (X) strokes?
And .... why is 30K-S alright after synthetics and not after Coticule?
I am asking these questions for a very simple reason. In choosing a 'razor' and sharpening many things come together - convenience, time, cost, sharpness, smoothness, etc. If you think about market share of facial hair removal gadgets, you will notice how different groups arrive at their optimum among these different dimensions that influence their use. You might say, most people have 'outsourced' the sharpening part. After reaching a level of acceptable sharpness, does further honing causes smoothness to be inversely proportional to sharpness? For all hones? If that is true, can we just do a bit of toning down by dragging across Denny's wet horn ( oops
: ) or a cork? Or, just increase the bevel angle? Or, both? Do over-sharp/too-thin edges cut hair worse? I would think efficiency for sharpening would be a good thing if you can control it.
Bart
Well-Known Member
vgeorge said:After a level of acceptable sharpness, is smoothness inversely proportional to sharpness? For all hones? If that is true, can we just do a bit of toning down by dragging across Denny's wet horn ( oops
I would think efficiency for sharpening would be a good thing if you can control it.
Those are very valid questions, George. What makes an edge smooth?
I don't know. But I have a couple ideas.
First we need to answer the important question. What is that: smooth?
If an edge doesn't cut the beard well, people will say that it's not smooth, for the reason that it pulls at their whiskers. It will also likely invite the user to apply more pressure, which will have a detrimental effect on the skin. That too will add to an experienced lack of "smoothness".
On the other hand, when a edge is too sharp, it'll cut through whiskers without pull, but the user may feel how it damages the outer layer of the skin at the same time. He will likely find the shave "not smooth". "Harsh" is another term often heard.
What this demonstrates is that a lack of smoothness does not always means the same thing. The first thing we need to do, it come up with a properly defined set of terms, so we can communicate in a more exact manner.
But regardless how that linguistic problem can be solved, the question is also whether a good edge is merely a matter of the correct keenness? Or is them something unaccounted that can make one equally keen edge smoother than the other? Something that is offered by the way a hone cuts, the shape of it abrasive particles, their hardness, what binds them together? The answer is probably yes on all acounts, but at which ratio?
For the most part of my experience on Coticules, the keener I could make my razors, the better they shaved. It was (and is) that simple. A while ago, I discovered something that allowed me to push the keenness barrier on a Coticule further than I ever could before (the soap/wax/shellac trick). And I found edges that were starting to show signs of harshness. That provides empirical evidence for something I've always accepted as obvious: an edge can be keener than good for my shave. I've made the "too keen" statement about the Naniwa Chosera 10K as well, but one could argue it was the result of an "unaccounted difference" between Choseras and a Coticules. But now that we can also get too keen off a Coticule, it's a proven fact: edges can be to keen (for my taste). Not too "Chosera", or too "Escher", just: too keen.
And that brings us seamlessly at your very interesting question: can the too keen edge of, for instance, my Chosera 10K, be made less keen to resemble the perfect Coticule edge? It think it can be done, and the "unaccounted hone magic" might turn out be just a metaphor for that what has not been explained yet. Something that doesn't exist in the end.
But why bother with mimicking the perfect edge, is I already have a hone that offers me just that?
Bart.
Paul
Well-Known Member
Varghese,
My experience with the Shapton stones was that once you get to the 30K (working from 1k up), the radius of the edge is so small that more than 5-8 strokes on the 30 the edge was just getting to be too thin (speculation) to withstand the forces at the edge and it would just start to crumble. I don't have any firm documentation, but I do know that my best results were with fewer strokes
Cheers,
Paul
My experience with the Shapton stones was that once you get to the 30K (working from 1k up), the radius of the edge is so small that more than 5-8 strokes on the 30 the edge was just getting to be too thin (speculation) to withstand the forces at the edge and it would just start to crumble. I don't have any firm documentation, but I do know that my best results were with fewer strokes
Cheers,
Paul
Paul
Well-Known Member
Also, I'd like to say that I found the Shapton 30K capable of being smoothed out with a lot of stropping. It really is just so keen that it takes a really, really light touch and can be rough on the skin. My coticule edges are less damaging to my skin. I don't really have a great explanation for why, but that's my observation.
Paul
Well-Known Member
Well, Emmanuel, I don't know.
I believe it was Bart who speculated on why that the spessartine garnets in coticules are dissimilar in the way remove steel. While I don't understand it, I do know that keenness is lost with excessive strokes on a Shapton 30K, and I have not noticed the same on Coticules.
Maybe I will need to send my Shaptons to Bart for experimentation and imaging B)
I believe it was Bart who speculated on why that the spessartine garnets in coticules are dissimilar in the way remove steel. While I don't understand it, I do know that keenness is lost with excessive strokes on a Shapton 30K, and I have not noticed the same on Coticules.
Maybe I will need to send my Shaptons to Bart for experimentation and imaging B)
Emmanuel
Well-Known Member
To add something else. I haven't magnification to check both edges ,but I learned from my father to look at one edge under a bright light how uniform and smooth is.And despite all these,
there are big differences between them, regarding the impressions.If an experienced has both ,magnification and 30K S is the best way to share the images,and I think then you will
consider i am right.
Friendly
Emmanuel
there are big differences between them, regarding the impressions.If an experienced has both ,magnification and 30K S is the best way to share the images,and I think then you will
consider i am right.
Friendly
Emmanuel