Thread: Confused about "backbone"

I am not sure if I understand the term backbone. From what I've read, some backbone seems to be a desirable feature of a good brush. Yet, silvertip brushes are softer (less backbone?) than pure badger, yet are considered better brushes. Aren't silvertip brushes better for creating lather?

Backbone is separate from "Softness"

Softness at least in my mind is how the tips feel on the face. Backbone is the density of the knot in relation to the loft,, ie: how easily the brush bends

That is just my opinion

Ok. So, if I understand this correctly, a brush that has more hair, has more "backbone" (?).

Yes

But also you could create backbone by sinking the knot lower

Backbone is a equation of Density (amount of hair in a given knot size) and Loft (height of knot above the handle) so it can be variable..


I swear Nothing in this hobby is easy to explain hehehehe

You can also create more backbone by cutting the hairs lower too.

What was so great about the old two banders was they had great backbone but also had soft tips which I think is the perfect combo.

Usually you get one or the other. You can get a pure badger with backbone in spades but is so scratchy, well its scratchy or a Silvertip that is like a marshmallow but is way floppy in use.

The best way to think about backbone is take the dry brush and push down on it (the hair side of course) with your hand and see how much resistance there is. I guess you could use some instrument and get a numerical value.

Wow, thanks to both senior moderators for this explanation. I feel like I learned something new now.

Going to go up against the senior heavy hitters here by adding some other thought on achieving backbone. The hair itself is a big part of this equation. Simpson Manchurian for example, seems to have hair with stiffer individual shafts yet soft tips. Backbone with less density than otherwise required and provides better flow through. In contrast, their similarly (a tick lower) priced two band seems to have less stiffness in the individual hair and depend more on density of the knot for perceived backbone and results in less flow through. These are my casual observations from using a variety of their products.

Possibly an easier way to view this is with horse hair brushes. There the ratio of softer mane vs stiffer tail hairs plays a major role. Those doing custom orders or seeking a specialized brush play with the ratios and layer in loft and knot diameter. It is easier to figure out with horse because of fewer manufactures and grading games in the smaller less lucrative market. I have been dabbling with a few Vie-Long horses and the net traffic on them seems very accurate and much in accord with my small collection and experience.

I can say from experience that Vulfix and Kent were floppy for me. YMMV. Simpson supers, Rooney finests and Heritages had nice backbone as did Shavemac and Plisson. The Thater is the one that really surprised me because the tips are butter soft but the knot has as much backbone as any I've felt. BTW, most of my brushes are in the 50mm loft category, though a few are maybe 55 or 57.

As far as flow through ..... Lynn gave me a tip that really solved that problem for me. With some, not all, brushes, particularly those with larger dense knots, I'd have a problem getting the lather to release. Lynn hipped me to not 'pumping the brush' when loading. Work off the tips to load and to lather. This keeps the soap within the tips and it doesn't get 'locked in' to the midst of the brush. Just my 2 bits.

it's like honing a kamisori. You have to know how much pressure to use to load the brush and how much (or little) to use to whip it up.

+1 on pressure, I used to use pressure when lathering, making the brush splay out everywhere. Now I just use the tips and get much better results :P