Thread: please tell me the hype on natural stones

(if your a fanboy of natural stones and find what im about to say so absurd you just have to tell me how wrong i am for stating what i have heard dont bother...again this is just what i heard)

they take forever to get the job done (heard)

they are inconcsistent (common sense says to me: davey if each stone is different because they are natural, 2 yellows wont work the same)

they are about the same price, if not more than synthetic stones (theperfectedge.com had a note up saying bbw prices went up)


someone tell me why the above is wrong...im not being a dick, sometimes the only way to learn is to state wrong facts...

(i cant help but laugh because i know somewhere some guy is like "i cant believe this he is so wrong what is he stupid i love my natural stones god"

The hype is that they're old and cool-looking and that they sharpen straight razors. Beyond that I don't think there is much hype at all

Synthetic stones are consistent but naturals are fairly close. What I mean is not all coticules are the same but it is not as if they are worlds apart. Some cut faster than others, softer, harder. I have a dozen and they aren't all the same but all of them will hone a razor. The Eschers leave a finer edge IME. I don't have as many of them. Basically one of each color and there again they are all good. I'm not sure how much difference there is between multiple examples of the same color Escher. If you just like to hone playing around with naturals is variety and that is the spice of life.

My only experience of synthetic is tool sharpening, & DMT's. The natural stones i have for the razors just feel so sublime to use.
I actually like the variation between natural stones of the same type. I think it's kind've cool that one coticule can be a great bevel setter & another a superb polisher!

For me it all boils down to what kind of person you are. If you like to hone your own razors in order to have them as sharp as you like to have them, and be able to say you did it yourself, then synthetic stones will get you there quickly and consistently.
If you grow to like the act of honing as much as the end result, then maybe natual hones are for you. You learn to love the feel of different hones, and that becomes as important to you as how sharp that hone makes your razor.
I am starting to understand that I now fit into the latter category. I don't mind taking twice as long honing on naturals to get to my destination, because the journey itself is just so much more enjoyable.
For some, the journey becomes even more important than the destintion, and they end up with more rocks than razors. For others it will alway be the destination that counts, and their only worry abut the journey is how short they can make it.

Connor

I like to do the bulk of my sharpening on
synthetic stones (Shapton GS) from 1k up
to 16k. At that point, the razor is damn
sharp and ready to shave but... I have a
Nakayama that takes the edge to the next
level in smoothness.

I could stop with the Shapton 16k and be
absolutely happy, but the natural finisher
is a lot of fun and it's neat to have an edge
that is totally unique due to the uniqueness
of the finisher.

So for me, mostly just for fun.

- Scott

I like the naturals better for
- the water management cause they drink less and are dry to stack away faster.
- I have to lap them less often.
- well and they do have personality

That is above a grit of F1200.
For the gross jobs like getting a blade straight, some synthetics are good, but not all of them.
Still looking for a person I hate enough to make it a Sun Tiger for present, hehehe

I think for some of us it is the "unknowns" that provide the excitement and pleasure. And in any event, once you have used a particular natural it is not unknown any more, nor is it inconsistent.

What I like the most about naturals is the fact that no two are the same. I have a unique set of stones that no one else has.

As far as slowness goes, that is a generalisation (see point immediately above). Even if a stone is slow, I do not understand why that is bad. The way I hone is well-suited to a "slower" stone, because I like to "sneak up" on the sharpness. But I have very fast naturals too, relatively speaking.

The price of naturals reflects many things. Mining and production costs if it is a currently-produced natural (Belgians, for example). Scarcity and rarity (eg Eschers, and some Japanese naturals). Desirability and collectability, etc. etc.

In any event, synthetics are fine. They get the job done, and they get it done in a consistent and uniform way. And that is great if you want to set up some robots to hone razors, but otherwise I think the consistency argument is spurious. I can reproduce predictable edges using all my naturals.

I think the real issue when swapping information on stones and honing is being able to determine which causes the greatest variability: differences between stones, or differences between honers. I personally believe that the greatest source of variation is between honers.

James.

Originally Posted by sebell

I like to do the bulk of my sharpening on
synthetic stones (Shapton GS) from 1k up
to 16k. At that point, the razor is damn
sharp and ready to shave but... I have a
Nakayama that takes the edge to the next
level in smoothness.

I could stop with the Shapton 16k and be
absolutely happy, but the natural finisher
is a lot of fun and it's neat to have an edge
that is totally unique due to the uniqueness
of the finisher.

So for me, mostly just for fun.

- Scott

I completly agree , Scott . After the Shapton 15k , I finish on my Nakayama Asagi hone .

Originally Posted by Jimbo

In any event, synthetics are fine. They get the job done, and they get it done in a consistent and uniform way. And that is great if you want to set up some robots to hone razors, but otherwise I think the consistency argument is spurious. I can reproduce predictable edges using all my naturals.
James.

Uniform is the key word.
I've just thought they are like a home cooked meal from scratch compared to a microwave TV-dinner.