| Author |
Message |
|
Kenton Spaulding
|
 Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 4:34 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Mathew Morris wrote: | | Joe Fults wrote: | | Mathew Morris wrote: | | This may sound strange but somewhere down the line ive had really bad swords that were promised to be amazing. so when ever i recieve a new sword i put it through a "gauntlet" of regerous tests to see if its up to par. if it is i love and play with...if not....i either take the hit or talk to the maker. |
Makes sense to me.
If you don't mind me asking too much, is Albion still on your approved vendor list? |
Nice fellows.. but i'll never buy another albion, i was disappointed, its important to me to have a sword i can rely on. I will buy there spears, Del tins and other products though and i have a Senechal Dagger thats lasted really well. |
And I think this perfectly illustrates the point that not all swords will nessasarily fulfill everybodys desires. For me, even after reading about Mathew's trouble with albions, I am not dissuaded from buying more swords from them; because I like the looks, and I like the hilt assembly. But for Mathew, they aren't a good fit seemingly, as he is looking for a super tough blade. Interesting to see different views, especially since almost everything one reads about Albion swords is positive.
|
|
  |
 |
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kenton Spaulding wrote: | | Mathew Morris wrote: | | Joe Fults wrote: | | Mathew Morris wrote: | | This may sound strange but somewhere down the line ive had really bad swords that were promised to be amazing. so when ever i recieve a new sword i put it through a "gauntlet" of regerous tests to see if its up to par. if it is i love and play with...if not....i either take the hit or talk to the maker. |
Makes sense to me.
If you don't mind me asking too much, is Albion still on your approved vendor list? |
Nice fellows.. but I'll never buy another Albion, i was disappointed, its important to me to have a sword i can rely on. I will buy there spears, Del tins and other products though and i have a Senechal Dagger thats lasted really well. |
And I think this perfectly illustrates the point that not all swords will nessasarily fulfill everybodys desires. For me, even after reading about Mathew's trouble with albions, I am not dissuaded from buying more swords from them; because I like the looks, and I like the hilt assembly. But for Mathew, they aren't a good fit seemingly, as he is looking for a super tough blade. Interesting to see different views, especially since almost everything one reads about Albion swords is positive. |
At the risk of being a little critical: One person's use is another's definition of abuse or at least getting really close to it.
If one has the money to buy lots of expensive swords and push them hard to almost destructive testing I guess that`s fine as these are his swords. 
On the plus side the AT swords seem to be very abuse resistant and since I have one on order I am happy that the AT swords survived Mathew`s tests and that at least tells me something useful to know. At the same time I don't think I am overly concerned about the quality of Albion swords when used as a sword would have been historically.
I can't help but wonder what Mathew considers normal use ? Sorry if this might sound confrontational: I don't want it to be, but if his expectations are that swords are supposed to hit trees and not risk being damaged after a hundred strikes .......
well his expectation are for movie " superswords " that cut marble columns in half and suffer no visible damage ?
Now, it`s possible that he may well have had a faulty sword in some cases.
So I guess the question is where is the line between hard but reasonable use and destructive testing ?
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mathew Morris
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 5:20 pm Post subject: Senechal dagger |
|
|
Its not that im looking for a super Tough Blade. Just something i can Trust. but Albions do look Nice = )
The Senechal Dagger was make by mark Grysibowski, he use to be on the Albion atrisans list....i dont see him on there right now. he has his own web site up, if i find it theres a good picture of the dagger on there. except the fittings on my dagger are all steel per his recommendation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mathew Morris
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | On the plus side the AT swords seem to be very abuse resistant and since I have one on order I am happy that the AT swords survived Mathew`s tests and that at least tells me something useful to know. At the same time I don't think I am overly concerned about the quality of Albion swords when used as a sword would have been historically.
I can't help but wonder what Mathew considers normal use ? Sorry if this might sound confrontational: I don't want it to be, but if his expectations are that swords are supposed to hit trees and not risk being damaged after a hundred strikes .......
well his expectation are for movie " superswords " that cut marble columns in half and suffer no visible damage ?
Now, it`s possible that he may well have had a faulty sword in some cases.
So I guess the question is where is the line between hard but reasonable use and destructive testing ? |
lol that didnt sound bad!! comepletely reasonable.
i dont consider the rigerous use "normal" at all!! actully i think its extreme. but thats what a great sword should live up to.
if it does though, i name it, engrave it and give it a scabbard.
i know what u mean by movie use. i deal with it alot. how many people tell you fansical (did i just made that word up?) things that swords do? i would hate to go blade on blade with one of my swords or hit a concrete wall.
but.. if i slip on a swing, and it hits a wall a time or two. i expect it to ding, chip and scratch...i can continues to use it, if it bends....its only a sharp metal club now with out balance or geometry....or worse the pommel falls of... Crickey!
any swung a bend sword?
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 5:43 pm Post subject: Re: Senechal dagger |
|
|
| Mathew Morris wrote: | Its not that im looking for a super Tough Blade. Just something i can Trust. but Albions do look Nice = )
The Senechal Dagger was make by mark Grysibowski, he use to be on the Albion atrisans list....i dont see him on there right now. he has his own web site up, if i find it theres a good picture of the dagger on there. except the fittings on my dagger are all steel per his recommendation. |
Mathew, I too would like the most damage resistant blade possible and finding a brand that gets you as close to your goal as possible is perfectly fine with me. 
Oh, and I`m glad that you didn`t take offence at my slightly critical observations due to my different goals and expectations . 
Web site for Mark Grzybowski at Ollin Sword Design: http://www.ollinsworddesign.com/
( Edited: Your last post makes your quest for the best possible sword sound very reasonable if somewhat expensive.  )
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark G.
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I knew that name sounded familiar, I can't believe I would have forgotten that. It's true I used to be an Albion artisan, but that was a long time ago. I'm just glad to hear the dagger has held up well for you.
Mark
www.ollinsworddesign.com
|
|
  |
|
|
Joe Fults
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | ...when used as a sword would have been historically...
...if his expectations are that swords are supposed to hit trees and not risk being damaged after a hundred strikes....well his expectation are for movie " superswords " that cut marble columns in half and suffer no visible damage ?
|
Jean,
In this case I think we should note that Matt's sword was first replaced at the vendor's discretion, and then credited, again apparently at the vendor's discretion. Pilot error and user abuse do not normally get that kind of treatment in the marketplace. I think the 'historical use" explaination, which effectively is a "you didn't use it right" action to blame the user, is a bit of a stretch (in this case).
Just an observation. Cool
"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
Last edited by Joe Fults on Sun 21 May, 2006 9:04 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Fults
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It seems of late that there are quite a few posts on multiple forums excusing things that would have gotten vendors skewered a couple years back, because it is "historically correct" for a period piece. In some cases this is a very good thing. Unfortunately I also think it has the potential to get consumers and vendors onto a slippery slope, and this bothers me.
Granted in the not so distant past there was clearly a huge tendency for people to expect swords to take unreasonable use and abuse. Today some people, probably even most people, still have overly high expectations. However, I think expectations have been changing in the market and community over the last 18-24 months. After a point I have to wonder if "historical" is being over used to lower expectations, even where they have already been previously adjusted.
I'm a big fan of historical construction, historical look, histroical feel, and historical function. I also value durability and some margin for user error from modern tools I buy. Since all my tools use modern production processes and modern materials, even if they seek to mirror historic examples, I'm unconvinced I should expect much less than what modern methods and materials can achieve, in the name of historical accuracy.
"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joe Fults wrote: | | Jean Thibodeau wrote: | ...when used as a sword would have been historically...
...if his expectations are that swords are supposed to hit trees and not risk being damaged after a hundred strikes....well his expectation are for movie " superswords " that cut marble columns in half and suffer no visible damage ?
|
Jean,
In this case I think we should note that Matt's sword was first replaced at the vendor's discretion, and then credited at the vendor's discretion. Pilot error and user abuse do not normally get that kind of treatment in the marketplace. I think the 'historical use" excuse, which effectively is a "you didn't use it right" attack on the user, is a bit of a stretch (in this case).
Just an observation. Cool |
No problem, the first sword seemed to have had a bad temper and Albion replaced it but the next one seemed to not meet Mathew`s level of wished for durability. Well, even Mathew said later that he was testing his swords and that his use was more than normal use but maybe not abuse in his opinion.
For me, and just for me, his tests borders on destructive testing: Which he seems to want to do and can afford to do.
I do appreciate that my words may have seemed like an attack and I did try to apologize in advance because Mathew could have taken offence, and I wanted to avoid that, while still giving my opinion: I may not wish to duplicate his testing style but I do respect his mature reaction to my criticism. Hopefully, constructive criticism.
Again, no problem.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Fults
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | | Again, no problem. |
All good then, and I did notice that you tried to gingerly navigate the minefield.
"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Joe, your point is well met and not something worth worrying over in the morning.
I personally think that historical attributes *will* yield a product that is different than what the community has deemed "performance-oriented" products. Likewise, it won't appeal to a modern audience who uses these products with a different set of expectations than what may have been seen historically.
I think most people now days in our small community realize this and it's an accepted truth, to one degree or another.
Having said that, however, there is also the issue of variance and error. We've heard of many instances where products simply have not met the expectations set by the vendor, themselves. It's those products that concern me, as this will lead to surprises and disappointment that extends far outside of the world of the "appropriate fit of product and consumer."
In other words, I'm not as concerned with the issue of historical accuracy being used to lower expectations as much as I am concerned with it masking manufacturing variance and flaws.
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Elrod
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nathan Robinson wrote: | | In other words, I'm not as concerned with the issue of historical accuracy being used to lower expectations as much as I am concerned with it masking manufacturing variance and flaws. |
Interesting point. The trick is determining which is which.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mathew Morris
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 11:47 pm Post subject: Mark!! |
|
|
Well Hello Mark!! its so good to see you on this site!! and thank you a 1000 times for the dagger! its amazing!! it is my most trustworthy and well used Dagger in my collection!!! = )
speaking of Historical swords, im an antique Weapons collector aswell, i have over 30 swords, from a small sword made by A&K from england to An American civil war sabre and many others. (i never play with them, they'd loose there value)
but the reason i have the faith i do in new swords is because of the old ones, i was able to handle a 13th Century single hand Broad Sword. it was in terrible shape.
but it could of slayed a dragon..... won a Castle and not been to worse for wear...i compare all my swords to that one
(Little Jon offered it to me for 3000$ i didnt have the money)
i also have a 17th century suit of riding armour aswell (its my Pride and joy)
i worked for Little Jons Antique Arms, he's the best Antique Auctioneer on the west coast. go to his Auctions or talk to him. hes full of Knowledge and can help you find something hard to get. i recently went to MAS (mousouri Auction School) came home with a Certificate and started up my own Auctioneering company....its not paying the bills Quite yet.
so i stick to my Day Job...Im am a Knight and Medieval Times, Beauna park, Ca..
i love, i get to joust, play with horses and swords all day!! (talk about sword abuse, we use real swords and its all edge to edge) we have a custom maker who supplies all our stuff.
if anyone ever comes to my show, let me know i'll kill someone for you!!
i really really really like these things..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mathew Morris
|
| Posted: Sun 21 May, 2006 11:51 pm Post subject: just a Thought |
|
|
Mark just a thought. i notice on you website that the "peasent Dagger" has a sheath with it!!! why couldnt you of made one back then?? = )
could i buy one of you now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark G.
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Mon 22 May, 2006 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I didn't have enough spare time back then to make a sheath for it as well ...
I don't want to take this thread too far off topic, so I'll shoot you a PM about it.
Mark
www.ollinsworddesign.com
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 22 May, 2006 11:06 am Post subject: Re: Mark!! |
|
|
| Mathew Morris wrote: |
so i stick to my Day Job...Im am a Knight and Medieval Times, Beauna park, Ca..
i love, i get to joust, play with horses and swords all day!! (talk about sword abuse, we use real swords and its all edge to edge) we have a custom maker who supplies all our stuff.
if anyone ever comes to my show, let me know i'll kill someone for you!!
i really really really like these things.. |
Well, that explains a lot It would seem to me that you would tend to evaluate swords as working tools and not only as precious collectable to be admired and not used or as cutting swords to be used on soft targets at the most.
How are those jousting swords surviving / maintained ? Not full sharps I would imagine if not completely blunts either ?
Dented edges or deep notches ?
Just shows that context is important in judging use.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mathew Morris
|
| Posted: Mon 22 May, 2006 3:21 pm Post subject: lol |
|
|
lol i never thought about that!! maybe thats why im so hard on the swords!!! ive always pictured a sword to be so durable, it was not only a weapon of knights but a symbol, a strong symbol of pasion and chivalry. I feel that swords should stand up to many challenges, but not all.
At Medieval Times we joust with 9 foot lances, the last 3 feet are made from bolsa wood (thank god) all the sword we use are made from an aluminum and titanium mix, very durable, but do not hold an edge. I really enjoy what i do =) They have trained me to swing a mace and chain and sword fight on horse back.
I actually am injured at the moment, i had a two handed battle axe strike me in the hand... Thank God it wasnt sharp and i had gauntlets on, although i did break my finger and can barely move my hand.
Matthew...
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 22 May, 2006 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mathew;
OUCH ! Hope it heals quickly. Just thinking about the differences between enthusiastic sparring and real fighting being that with real fighting your first big mistake is going to be your last mistake ! This would make one much more cautious about what openings to risk taking advantage of on the one hand, but on the other hand, one who hesitates and misses a good opening to strike might well not get another one.
One thing I think is that a gifted fighter could fight and easily survive many fights against average fighters but against an equally elite fighter there would be a lot of prudent sizing up followed by a short sudden exchange with a high probability of mutual elimination.
The best fighters might well be able to quickly identify an equal and might well avoid each other unless the situation made avoidance difficult or dishonourable.
Could be wrong, but I think I read somewhere that the best Samurai would recognize each other' s skill level and avoid each other ! The exception maybe when directly challenging each other to see who was the best !
Sorry, if a bit off topic but as you are constantly fighting others, some of this may have crossed your mind.
Oh, are the fight you do mostly planned out to give a good show ? Are they sometimes more spontaneous and a real competition ? I would think you would do both kinds.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Fults
|
| Posted: Mon 22 May, 2006 8:01 pm Post subject: Re: lol |
|
|
| Mathew Morris wrote: | | I actually am injured at the moment, i had a two handed battle axe strike me in the hand... Thank God it wasnt sharp and i had gauntlets on, although i did break my finger and can barely move my hand. Matthew... |
Ahhh....but did the show go on?
"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
|
|
|
|
|
James A. Vargscarr
Location: Englishman living in Canada Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 92
|
| Posted: Tue 23 May, 2006 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nathan Robinson wrote: | I personally think that historical attributes *will* yield a product that is different than what the community has deemed "performance-oriented" products. Likewise, it won't appeal to a modern audience who uses these products with a different set of expectations than what may have been seen historically.
I think most people now days in our small community realize this and it's an accepted truth, to one degree or another.
|
Point well made Nathan, but I think that it would be supremely helpful to clarify exactly what those differences are; or should be. The bottom line is that most people are talking toughness of steel when this issue comes up. Those who want to mask that issue often bring up differences in blade geometry between modern 'performance' swords that may exhibit ahistorical parameters in design that appeal to the backyard cutter, and which are more abuse-resistant than a finely tuned battlefield tool; but if we can just compare quality of steel we'd all be talking apples-to-apples.
I would imagine that anyone using a sword in a historical context would wish for the finest, toughest heat treating available. Of course, that wasn't always possible. We know there were a huge number of poor swords made in the past to meet different budgets - from munitions grade to fine custom work - and the abilities of makers varied just as much as they do today. Should accidental failings in historical manufacture be preserved deliberately for the sake of historical accuracy?
I certainly don't mean to be confrontational, but I feel that many people who were once told that "historical swords are the best swords - they used to be life saving tools, and no modern sword maker can ever hope to better them" are now being told "yes, modern swords can be tougher, but historical swords of this period were less well heat treated on average - so in a historical replica an imperfect heat treat is fine."
I agree that most people in our community recognise that swords made to follow a philosophy of performance, as opposed to a philosophy of accurate recreation, will exhibit different characteristics to their historical counterparts. But if anyone proudly chooses to make a historical sword that lacks the toughness that a modern heat treat ought to bring to a 50-55 Rockwell through-hardened blade, I would say that is unacceptable unless totally traditional methods are being employed in the sword's creation.
Fair enough if the period accurate lack of toughness is caused by steel which is accurate in its impurity, or by a heat treat that lacks computerised precision. But if a maker is using modern steels and heat treating methods, I would hope that they would be quite explicit about any deliberate dampening down of a sword's toughness to meet their design philosophy.
My point boils down to this: performance and reproduction swords may have many differences, but quality of heat treat shouldn't be one of them - at least in my opinion. If others disagree, I think it might be sensible to be explicit about our differing expectations, and hope that companies who cater to differing groups will be explicit about their products.
| Nathan Robinson wrote: |
In other words, I'm not as concerned with the issue of historical accuracy being used to lower expectations as much as I am concerned with it masking manufacturing variance and flaws. |
Hear hear. Though I am concerned with the first issue, I completely agree that the second is just as important.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic