Printable View
In terms of edge quality (not collectibility), would it be the case that some of the darker stones (blue/black) perform as well as the much sought yellow/green?
Blue/Black w/ Escher label vs yellow/green non-escher.
'Don't know how much heartburn to go through to chase the cherished Y/G.
Ideally, testing would be the way to decide, but from most private sellers, that's rarely possible.
I had a really nice Escher dark blue with the 'Celebrated Water Hone' label with the cup (E & Co) on the center of the label, and it was really good. Slower than a b/g or a light or y/g but gave great edges. I sold it to a fellow who told me not long ago that he loves the edges he's getting with it.
Jimmy, Thank You! The amounts are sizable enough to want to know more before signing up. I appreciate your help!
I can echo Jimmy's post. I have a couple and am very happy with the dark blue. Also, be patient and check out antique store/flea markets and you really don't need to break the bank (you may need to be very patient though:)).
See also this post and the responses below it.
Labels don't matter. You don't hone on the label.
What matters is the stone; and because they're naturals, they'll vary from one to another.
I've had a bunch of blue/blacks in those little wood boxes - with and without the Escher cup on the label. The best of them was greyish in color, but it wasn't branded Escher. All were good - a few were very very good.
But my larger blue/black non-label thuri was better still.
Presently - it's a shootout between my y/g (no label thuri, but probably an Escher) and my larger unknown-flavor labeled Escher (depending on the light it seems to be dark green with a hint of yellow, or possibly grey/green), and a little no-label thuri that's blue on one side and green on the other.
Funnily enough - I have a dark black/blue unknown-brand slate hone from the UK that's a smidge better than either of them. I have no idea what it is but it's a pretty phenomenal stone. It's rough on the bottom, the sides were never really finished either. It came to me in a fitted box-tray and it's held in with plaster or something. Looks like hell... hones like heaven.
I have several myself, including the one's in the little boxes, and a large dk blue with the cup on it, that say's E and Co on it. They work just a well as the Y/G, maybe just a bit slower ime. As previously mentioned, They're naturals, and vary a bit from stone to stone, but if it's Escher, it's good.
I've got a dark black/blue Escher and a y/g w/o label. The Escher I picked up at a flea market and the y/g at an antique shop. I won't tell what I paid for them but it was very cheap. I find that the edges I get off the y/g to be slightly better than the dark Escher for the most part. It's rare that I would hone on the dark, shave and then hone on the y/g and compare the shave. If fact, I don't recall doing so. Of the razors I do hone on either one of the hones are all fine shavers but the y/g edges seem slightly better. To go a little further, some of the harder steel razors I have I run over the C12k and get excellent results, some better than the Escher. Is it the steel or the hone that is making the difference? I can't say for sure but I know that the cost factor is not improving any of the edges.
It's my decided opinion that honing is 20% hone and 80% talent. Not that I'm some stellar honemeister - cause I'm not.
I can't say that a finer stone isn't capable of bringing up a finer stone though.
Cost - well that's another thing. Throwing money at a problem never guaranteed a solution...
I'd rather say 20% hone and 80% practice, honing a lot helps! :)
Absolutely, but it's really six of one, half dozen of the other. Talent comes via practice for most, if not all, of us I think.
And I can add, being used to use your hands and fingers sure helps, I'm sure my 27 years of playing guitar quite actively helps a lot, at least it gave me a head start for fine motor skills and feel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamma
No label, yet 'probably' an Escher. Really? Please elaborate. The conjecture seems baseless and, moreover, adding it is out of tune with the gist of what you write (and with which I heartily agree).Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamma
Yes. The point is, if the vintage Thuringian is not Escher, it's mostly just as good.Quote:
Originally Posted by zib
Generally speaking, I try to ask a few questions before I toss words like conjecture and baseless around in the same sentence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldengaerde
But - that's just me.
The 'probably' comment is based on my belief that when I bought it, the seller wasn't fibbing. Given the scenario and the price - there really is no reason to not believe him (no pressure, low cost).
I honestly don't care what it's heritage is to be honest. All I had to do was touch it for a few seconds and I was good to go.
I say 'probably' because I can not say with authority that it is without a doubt an Escher unless there's a label stuck to the stone.
If we had more people in Washington DC with that philosophy we'd be way better off. :rofl2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamma
Amen, Jimmy!Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
Why is it that members can make the rashest of claims, yet those who question them need to tiptoe? And can after writing that hardly get away without adding disclaimers as "not that I mean to say that Gamma's claim is amongst the rashest, nor do I doubt his motifs or good faith" just to make sure no feelings are hurt? Come on, we're grown-ups and we should be able to discuss our hobby openly and critically. We're hitting balls, and we're hitting them hard. But it's the balls we hit, not the players.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamma
Back to the matter at hand:
So if I understand correctly, the 'probably an Escher' claim is based on good faith in what a seller told you. Then I maintain: the conjecture seems baseless. After all, on what grounds could a seller possibly base that claim if there is no Escher label? Had he had anything to substantiate the claim, wouldn't he have done so? And since when is 'low cost' circumstantial evidence of Escher provenance?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamma
We just cannot and should not declare "Escher!" on the basis of hear-say, claims by anonymous third parties and the like. It is not enough that they're good people. It's about what their claim's based on. And it's not enough to add disclaimers as 'not 100% sure', 'probably' or even 'possibly' - no base is no base. If we have no objective proof we shouldn't state it at all.
And again, as long as the interest is in honing rather than collecting, there's absolutely no need for preoccupation with Escher labels. The whole point is that non-Escher vintage Thuringians — be they originally unlabelled, Escher-labelled or labelled by any other brand — are no worse than Eschers. That's what I read in your post too, and what I liked about it. It is as you emphasized here:
You have a prime vintage Thuringian that works like a charm. That's all that counts. We can't call it an Escher, and we don't care.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamma
Lets keep it cool guys. We're all members and they are still just rocks.
You"re using the term conjecture incorrectly. There is no hypothesis or inference here.
This claim - that I believe to be true - is not conjecture, nor is it baseless.
Your opinion may differ, but that's irrelevant. Demanding that I need to explain something so insignificat to the nth degree is a tired old tactic and I won't be baited into a defensive position so easily.
As cleverly stated - they're just rocks.
The seller bought it with a label, before the Internet or netheekery existed.
:OTQuote:
Originally Posted by Gamma
Okay, I broke Google trying find the meaning of "netheekery". Please explain.
hey, who broke Google!
Forunately, Wikipedia still works:
Quote:
Conjecture
A conjecture is a proposition that is unproven but is thought to be true and has not been disproven.
Jokes aside, I'm glad we all agree that as far as honing qualities are concerned and irrespective of collectibility, names and labels don't say that much.
In common use, or in common discussion, a conjecture is an inference, or a hypothesis; and the stone, the purchase, and it's heritage are neither - at least from my point of view. The Wiki definition quoted above is normally applied to theorems, or similar mathamatecal equations.
Names and labels are important; sometimes they tell us something, but often they don't tell us everything. My general feeling is that problems or issues arise when there is too much focus on the name of a thing, rather than the actual thing itself.
And I for one - totally agree with the honing qualities/labels comment. No one needs a $1500 NakahamoZudo to hone a razor and get a great shave.
Netheekery should have been netgeekery; a condition we're probably all afflicted with to some degree. :0).
... I apologize - sometimes I type too fast and I don't always proofread. I really hope you didn't spend too much time looking for that typo..sorry...
English lesson aside, wouldn't it have been easier to say that a guy you trusted said it had a label?
Well, I know one thing for sure, I don't have a Thuringian nor an Escher.
But I am worried that I might have a case of this "netgeekery". I have a had time falling asleep and a slight itch down below.
That is something that could have been kept thurreptitious!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hirlau
( Don't bother looking it up. In common usage it means whatever I want ;) )
Actually - it was easier to just say it was 'probably' an Escher.Quote:
Originally Posted by HNSB
Whatever... the point wasn't about having an Escher or a Thuringian. The direction was supposed to take the reader to the part where i seem to get better results with my unknown slate hone.