grammy hat??

[Zombie_61]

I've never understood why somebody would want to intentionally distress a new hat. I can understand doing it for a role in a movie or a photo shoot but just to have an old looking hat doesn't make sense to me. In my opinion, an old hat with some character to it is very cool but not one that was intentionally distressed.

I can understand the desire to own a hat that looks as though it's seen a lot of action and had a lot of fun because I love the look of a well-used beater hat, but I'll wait until my hats develop that look on their own. Intentionally damaging a hat to achieve that look, especially an expensive hat, is foolish to me. It reminds me of posts I've read on Club Obi Wan in which people were initially proud of the way they had weathered their leather Raiders of the Lost Ark jackets by repeated soakings in water and the use of sandpaper and/or a wire brush, then later complained when their jackets started falling apart. What did they think was going to happen after they'd damaged their jackets in such a way? :eusa_doh: shakeshead

 

[Greyryder]

Is that "mountain hat" distressed, or just misshapen? It doesn't look torn up, just a bit bit rumpled. And, it seems like they're made that way.

 

[Landman]

Zombie, I agree with you. I have several leather A-2 jackets and wouldn't think of intentionally distressing one of them. On the other hand, my oldest A-2 jacket that I bought new about 20 years ago is my favorite because it has become rumpled and well worn over time. Some of my favorite hats are like that too but that beaten look came from me wearing them.

Greyryder, I think you are correct. The "Grammy" hat just looks misshapen and oversized. I was referring earlier to some of the distressed hats in the videos on the hatter's website. They looked like some really cool hats and then he would intentionally set fire to them.

The first custom hatter I ever met was back in the 70's when I was in college. He used to get upset if you handled your hat by the crown. I have a feeling he would have run somebody out of his shop if they asked him to distress one of his custom hats.

 

[Zombie_61]

...my oldest A-2 jacket that I bought new about 20 years ago is my favorite because it has become rumpled and well worn over time. Some of my favorite hats are like that too but that beaten look came from me wearing them...

Well done, good Sir! Whenever someone on Club Obi Wan would inquire about the best way to "weather" their Indy hat or jacket, my first and only thought was, "Just wear it; it'll get there eventually." lol

 

[jlee562]

the intentional distressing is always a perennial debate on guitar forums. Different strokes. I'll tell you this though, Fender sells a lot of their "road worn" instruments and distressed custom shop guitars.

 

[Landman]

I'm really surprised Fender would do that to their guitars. I can see somebody other than Fender doing it to one of their guitars but it really surprises me they would do it to their own equipment.

 

[TheDane]

I'm really surprised Fender would do that to their guitars. I can see somebody other than Fender doing it to one of their guitars but it really surprises me they would do it to their own equipment.

Stone-washed Wrangler jeans

Funny concept, but "distressed" sells in many contexts. In the Fender example, the durability of the instrument is not affected. It'll be playing for decades. A pair of distressed jeans are often bleached with chlorine and have a seriously shortened lifespan. Talking about "weird"!

A Fender guitar is just a commodity. Gold, pink, checkered, polka dotted or distressed ... if it will sell, it will be made.

 

[Edward]

Is that "mountain hat" distressed, or just misshapen? It doesn't look torn up, just a bit bit rumpled. And, it seems like they're made that way.

I'd love to handle one and see what the felt is. If it's wool, as I suspect itg might be, then the chances of reshaping it are nil. If it's furfelt, though, I reckon fifteen minutes with a kettle could turn this into something that looked pretty cool, very Ant Hill Mob. I do, sadly, suspect that they are rather too over-sized to be worn as a 30s style high-crown fedora or Western, though. Exaggerated and cartoony proportions would be in keeping with the Westwood aesthetic for many of her catwalk collections.

the intentional distressing is always a perennial debate on guitar forums. Different strokes. I'll tell you this though, Fender sells a lot of their "road worn" instruments and distressed custom shop guitars.

They do indeed. I hope Keef at least got a guitar out of it!

I'm really surprised Fender would do that to their guitars. I can see somebody other than Fender doing it to one of their guitars but it really surprises me they would do it to their own equipment.

Not at all. If it sells, they will build it. Simple capitalism. There was a time in the mis Sixties when Fender nearly discontinued the Stratocaster, but sales took off again, and its proposed replacement never reached the same dizzy heights, so they kept it going. Gibson did stop producing its (overrated, it has to be said) original Les Paul design in 1961, only bringing it back in 1968 due to popular demand.

Ford's boardroom back in the day had a sign: "We don't make cars, we make money". You'd be hard pushed to find a consumerf durables organisation of any size that doesn't subscribe to the same philosophy. anything else is marketing hyperbole.

Stone-washed Wrangler jeans

Funny concept, but "distressed" sells in many contexts. In the Fender example, the durability of the instrument is not affected. It'll be playing for decades. A pair of distressed jeans are often bleached with chlorine and have a seriously shortened lifespan. Talking about "weird"!

I remember when pre-washed and distressed 501s used to actually carry a manufacturer's label to the effect that they were subject to a more limited lifespan. I also remember daft kids among my contemporaries paying out more for them, when I looked at them and thought "these look like the jeans I'm looking to repalce because of that levle of wear!

 

[gtdean48]

Doing Civil War reenactment, you had to distress articles to give an accurate depiction of late war soldiers. There is no way that doing this maybe 1 weekend a month would yield the war-torn look of what those men endured. You had to look like fresh troops for famous battles at the beginning of the war then look like rabble for those at the war's end, especially for CSA troops. Same goes for folks doing Cowboy shooting events.

 

[Zombie_61]

Doing Civil War reenactment, you had to distress articles to give an accurate depiction of late war soldiers. There is no way that doing this maybe 1 weekend a month would yield the war-torn look of what those men endured. You had to look like fresh troops for famous battles at the beginning of the war then look like rabble for those at the war's end, especially for CSA troops. Same goes for folks doing Cowboy shooting events.

This I can understand, since the uniforms and gear would probably not be considered daily wear; I suppose "Indiana Jones" hats, jackets, boots, etc., that are worn infrequently as costume/LARP items would fall into the same category. But (and I could be wrong) I think in this conversation we were referring to the hats, suits, shoes, outerwear, etc., that we wear regularly and not strictly as costume items, and I think most (if not all) of us would like to get as many years of use out of those items as possible rather than artificially distress/weather them, damaging them in the process, and decreasing their longevity.

 

[fedoracentric]

I went to school with a guy who was a civil war reenactor. I called him about this today and he said only the doofuses (he used a word I can't remember) ruined their uniforms and equipment to look used. He said that anyone that cut holes in hats or pants or jackets are the guys that don't know anything about history. He said "remember, what they got was new when they got it and if things got ruined they just went to the quartermaster to get new stuff." He also said that the "tattered" Confederate was more myth than reality and that both union soldiers and CS soldiers had times when their supply hadn't caught up to them but that as soon as supply lines were reestablished they had replacement stuff to wear, even Confederates, and even to the end of the war.

 

[tommyK]

looks like one of these with the brim trimmed to me

 

[gtdean48]

I went to school with a guy who was a civil war reenactor. I called him about this today and he said only the doofuses (he used a word I can't remember) ruined their uniforms and equipment to look used. He said that anyone that cut holes in hats or pants or jackets are the guys that don't know anything about history. He said "remember, what they got was new when they got it and if things got ruined they just went to the quartermaster to get new stuff." He also said that the "tattered" Confederate was more myth than reality and that both union soldiers and CS soldiers had times when their supply hadn't caught up to them but that as soon as supply lines were reestablished they had replacement stuff to wear, even Confederates, and even to the end of the war.

Too many photos of tattered butternut uniforms to be a myth, diaries too. I didn't say anything about "ruining" a uniform or equipment, just "aging". Doofus is a good word....

 

[HudsonHawk]

Given the recent history that those of us that love hats endured - funny looks and even ridicule - I would like to see our community embrace style experiments such as Pharrel's. Heck, his hat style is not even new - the roughriders hats were not too far off from what we saw at the Grammys. I say kudos to Pharrel for promoting hats - which I think all of us at this forum love.

If you're wearing a hat for style over function, you look like a doofus. If you're "experimenting" with style without regard to function, doubly so.

 

[HudsonHawk]

I'm really surprised Fender would do that to their guitars. I can see somebody other than Fender doing it to one of their guitars but it really surprises me they would do it to their own equipment.

For an extra $10,000, we'll beat up your guitar to look like you've been playing it for years. The good news? You don't have to have ever actually play it.

 

[Edward]

If you're wearing a hat for style over function, you look like a doofus. If you're "experimenting" with style without regard to function, doubly so.

I wear a hat to keep my head warm/dry/out of the sun, as climate dictates. The specifc hats I choose, however, are chosen very much for how they look. [huh]

 

[HudsonHawk]

I wear a hat to keep my head warm/dry/out of the sun, as climate dictates. The specifc hats I choose, however, are chosen very much for how they look. [huh]

Right. You wear a hat first for function. You are obviously not the type to which I'm referring.

 

[hatophile]

For an extra $10,000, we'll beat up your guitar to look like you've been playing it for years. The good news? You don't have to have ever actually play it.

Ever see Willie Nelson's old Martin? I think his got that way legitimately.

 

[HudsonHawk]

Ever see Willie Nelson's old Martin? I think his got that way legitimately.

"Trigger". If you've been playing your guitar long enough to name it, you're legit. See also, "Blackie", "Lucille", "Lenny", "Tiger", etc.

 

[hatophile]

"Trigger". If you've been playing your guitar long enough to name it, you're legit. See also, "Blackie", "Lucille", "Lenny", "Tiger", etc.

For sure!