The main difference between the two types which is not mentioned here is the flexibilty aspect. The machine made shoe is more ridged due to the gemming process making the shoe less comfortable.
Rob Major: Yeah know some say this, but I’ve also heard that it’s very little that this affects, and to be honest I’m not sure about what’s true here, so I left that out.
NK
Hi, thanks for posting this. I learned quite a lot. I’d like to clarify something: do goodyear welted shoes always use a canvas rib and hand welted never? And to what extent do you think the differences between goodyear and hand welted in your example lies in the makers only? For instance, could it be the case that some goodyear welted shoes from other makers have a smaller cavity? And on the flip side, could other hand welted shoemakers have larger cavity?
DWFII
NK,
Just saw this blog (followed a link from SF)…
The original GY technique cut two opposing channels in the under-surface of the insole and bent them upward at a 90°angle to form a ridge or ‘holdfast’. But because the fibers of the leather were being bent in opposition to the natural lie of the fibers, they tended to break. And the whole holdfast began to separate from the ‘bed’ of the insole.
When GY makers understood this, they began reinforcing the leather holdfast with linen or canvas cloth and glue. Eventually, it occurred to the makers that the leather holdfast was not needed. And so the machines were redesigned and today, if only because of the way those machines are meant to work, almost every GYW manufacturer in the world uses a ‘gemming’ strip of virtually the same proportions and mounted in an identical fashion. It should be noted that this process results in what is fundamentally a cement construction…in many ways the welt is just for show. There is only one maker in the world still doing it close to the original way…that I know of.
In the original technique, an insole of comparable thickness to what would be used on HW was used. When the makers discovered that gemming would suffice and that they didn’t need to cut into the insole, they switched to a lighter weight insole. Saves money / saves time, everybody wins (except the customer).
And the probable became certain: Insoles got thinner and of poorer quality leather and then leatherboard (ground up leather scraps in a neoprene matrix–think particleboard) insoles were introduced, and then paperboard.
Various makers, from high end to low, make different choices about the quality and thickness of their insoles. but the gemming and the techniques for mounting and filling remain much the same across the spectrum…again, because of the limitations imposed by the design of the machines themselves.
Handwelted work can vary with the individual but the insoles must be at least thick enough to cut the ‘feather’ and the ‘channel’ and admit a relatively large inseaming awl to ‘hole’ the holdfast without tearing. The forepart cavity depends on how tight the maker wants to trim the inseam–some makers trim it so close that virtually no filler is needed (although one is nevertheless mounted to prevent ‘creaking’), other makers trim such that a fairly deep cavity results and they fill accordingly.
The main difference between the two types which is not mentioned here is the flexibilty aspect. The machine made shoe is more ridged due to the gemming process making the shoe less comfortable.
Rob Major: Yeah know some say this, but I’ve also heard that it’s very little that this affects, and to be honest I’m not sure about what’s true here, so I left that out.
Hi, thanks for posting this. I learned quite a lot. I’d like to clarify something: do goodyear welted shoes always use a canvas rib and hand welted never? And to what extent do you think the differences between goodyear and hand welted in your example lies in the makers only? For instance, could it be the case that some goodyear welted shoes from other makers have a smaller cavity? And on the flip side, could other hand welted shoemakers have larger cavity?
NK,
Just saw this blog (followed a link from SF)…
The original GY technique cut two opposing channels in the under-surface of the insole and bent them upward at a 90°angle to form a ridge or ‘holdfast’. But because the fibers of the leather were being bent in opposition to the natural lie of the fibers, they tended to break. And the whole holdfast began to separate from the ‘bed’ of the insole.
When GY makers understood this, they began reinforcing the leather holdfast with linen or canvas cloth and glue. Eventually, it occurred to the makers that the leather holdfast was not needed. And so the machines were redesigned and today, if only because of the way those machines are meant to work, almost every GYW manufacturer in the world uses a ‘gemming’ strip of virtually the same proportions and mounted in an identical fashion. It should be noted that this process results in what is fundamentally a cement construction…in many ways the welt is just for show. There is only one maker in the world still doing it close to the original way…that I know of.
In the original technique, an insole of comparable thickness to what would be used on HW was used. When the makers discovered that gemming would suffice and that they didn’t need to cut into the insole, they switched to a lighter weight insole. Saves money / saves time, everybody wins (except the customer).
And the probable became certain: Insoles got thinner and of poorer quality leather and then leatherboard (ground up leather scraps in a neoprene matrix–think particleboard) insoles were introduced, and then paperboard.
Various makers, from high end to low, make different choices about the quality and thickness of their insoles. but the gemming and the techniques for mounting and filling remain much the same across the spectrum…again, because of the limitations imposed by the design of the machines themselves.
Handwelted work can vary with the individual but the insoles must be at least thick enough to cut the ‘feather’ and the ‘channel’ and admit a relatively large inseaming awl to ‘hole’ the holdfast without tearing. The forepart cavity depends on how tight the maker wants to trim the inseam–some makers trim it so close that virtually no filler is needed (although one is nevertheless mounted to prevent ‘creaking’), other makers trim such that a fairly deep cavity results and they fill accordingly.
Hope that helps.