One minute lather: Duke 2 vs Aesop (EJ287/Muhle STF v2)

stillshunter

stillshunter

a man of resolve, a man of conviction
State Convenor - ACT
Group Buy Associate
2015 Sabbatical Fail
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Location
Walbunja country
Warning: pic heavy

Thought for the first outing with my new Aesop brush, I would put it up against one of my most reliable latherers - Simpsons Duke 2 in Best.

By way of background, you will find little on an "Aesop" brush anywhere. I bought it on impulse from the Aesop store - which concoct top-shelf apothecary. I fell for the feel of the brush - I have not felt any hair on any brush softer. Utterly amazing! So after some research this brush is a rebadged Edwin Jagger EJ287 synthetic - this one is LARGE which specifies to:
Overall height 105mm (4.1 inches)
Handle height 51mm (2 inches)
Handle diameter 36mm (1.4 inches)
Knot size 23mm

Seems the handle is made by Edwin Jagger but the knot is a Muhle Silvertip Fibre

…and for my research this is Muhle's "v.2" 4th-generation synthetic fibre - otherwise known as STF2.

Anyway now that we know a little more about our challenger, let's back to the lather-off.

Here are the two brushes side-by-side


Their shared lather task was Tabac soap


To warm them up, each brush was allowed exactly 15 seconds charging time. Here they are with a head full of potentiality.


Each could have done with more but for the purposes of this short bout it'll suffice. As you can see these brushes hold the lather very differently. The badger looks tighter but wetter, while the synthetic is dryer but looser.



So next they were allowed one minute to lather, with a break at 30 seconds just to see how they fared.

First up the Duke 2
First 30:

After one minute:

You can see the Duke needs a little more work to get it to yoghurt. I'd say another minute would see it readier.

Meanwhile the Aesop
First 30:


After one minute:


To my eye this lather is ready to go. Thick, moist, yoghurty. Also the smell was amazing it really exploded after being worked over by the Aesop, Edwin Jagger, Muhle STF2.

The winner for me in lathering has to be the Aesop


…though when it comes to the beauty contest - especially in bloom. I think we can all agree on the better shape and form.
 
Too good!!!!
 
Good work Stillsy. I've always heard (and experienced) that modern synthetics load with smaller amounts and lather very well.

I think you need to also see how they go at releasing their lather. So the next test would have to be lather applied to the face. That may be a bit more subjective but - hey! - that's shaving.
 
filobiblic said:
Good work Stillsy. I've always heard (and experienced) that modern synthetics load with smaller amounts and lather very well.

I think you need to also see how they go at releasing their lather. So the next test would have to be lather applied to the face. That may be a bit more subjective but - hey! - that's shaving.
Click to expand...
Doesn't this contravene specific P&C doctrine (or some Drubbism) - regarding photography that contains the actual faces of our members?

Seriously though, a great idea and I will have to figure how best to document the differences in lather release to the face. Also like to demonstrate the differences in face feel, splaying, backbone, etc. Preliminary tests indicate the face feel finds one more exfoliating and the other softer….but I'd prefer not to preempt the results.
 
Nice photos. You'd get a lotta love YKW with that photo-porn.

If I could be pedantic, I think your brushes might be too wet for loading. A lot of wet and suds on the handles. Could mean you're not getting the best lather out of either brush. The extra loading time might sort that, but with that short experiment they both look at bit ordinary for finished product.

Both look like great brushes though.
 
Drubbing said:
Nice photos. You'd get a lotta love YKW with that photo-porn.
Click to expand...

Haha! Looks like it was made for KYW.

Drubbing said:
If I could be pedantic, I think your brushes might be too wet for loading. A lot of wet and suds on the handles. Could mean you're not getting the best lather out of either brush. The extra loading time might sort that, but with that short experiment they both look at bit ordinary for finished product.

Both look like great brushes though.
Click to expand...

Lots of opinions (& preferences) when it comes to shaving. I think I know at least 3 different lathering methods based on how much water there is in the brush:
1) squeezed and damp only
2) shaken and quite moist
3) saturated and dripping

I used to prefer #2 but now go for #1 like you Drubs. I find that i'd rather take the time to build the lather by adding water. Also some soaps/creams need a better load to begin with.

But I still reckon it's preference...
 
Drubbing said:
1 & 2 are much the same thing. 3 is crap - takes far longer and is less consistent.. Everyone knows that. It's a rule.

We need to work as a team here, and do it my way.
Click to expand...
Over YKW one must create their lather using the "Marco Method"….which, if I recall, is a lot like #3. Here where the water whizzes down the plug-hole as it should, so lathering must be done differently - must be done the Drubbing Way.
I, for one, welcome the step-by-step photo-essay showing us the 'Way'.
NB: For any newbies watching the Drubbing Way for lathering makes up only a fraction of the whole Drubbing manner of shaving which, in turn, is only a fraction of how one conducts oneself mrs broadly. "Following his Doctrine, leads to the Life Drubbing" so say Chairman Drubbing.
 
filobiblic said:
Haha! Looks like it was made for KYW.

Lots of opinions (& preferences) when it comes to shaving. I think I know at least 3 different lathering methods based on how much water there is in the brush:
1) squeezed and damp only
2) shaken and quite moist
3) saturated and dripping

I used to prefer #2 but now go for #1 like you Drubs. I find that i'd rather take the time to build the lather by adding water. Also some soaps/creams need a better load to begin with.

But I still reckon it's preference...
Click to expand...

Makes absolutely no difference if you know what you're doing. Best to start off drier as adding water is much less of a pain than adding soap. The only formula there is to end up with a lather that has a yoghurt like consistency. If you've just started shaving and want to use a bowl you'll have much more success if you start with face lathering to get a much better feel for how to make a good lather. You can feel it on your face and you can actually hear when it's almost ready. And in the process you'll learn to appreciate what a good brush is all about.
 
Pjotr said:
Makes absolutely no difference if you know what you're doing. Best to start off drier as adding water is much less of a pain than adding soap. The only formula there is to end up with a lather that has a yoghurt like consistency. If you've just started shaving and want to use a bowl you'll have much more success if you start with face lathering to get a much better feel for how to make a good lather. You can feel it on your face and you can actually hear when it's almost ready. And in the process you'll learn to appreciate what a good brush is all about.
Click to expand...
Hmmm…yeah but who's going to tell @Drubbing ?
 
There was guy YKW that posted a 10 minute vid of what later became known as the Marco method, and the guy was shit canned from one end of the site to the other. Poor bloke ended up pulling whole YT account and was never seen on any shave site again (probably for the best really). Granted, 10 minutes to make lather is a bit of a palaver. He made a meal of the whole thing and wasted a heap of soap and made a hell of a mess. It showed how boring and wasteful the process was.

However, a year later Marco came up with the same thing (sans video), and all of a sudden the sycophantic fanbois fawned over him like a messiah of lather.

So many questions! Tell us Marco, what do I do when my lather looks like yesterdays washing up lather, should I swirl clockwise, counter clockwise, add more soap? How many counter clockwise to clockwise rotations per gram of soap and ml of water. What do we do if we're using tallow soap and not Proraso?! Please Marco, share the secrets, we have to know!!

Macro revels in the nano-celebrity of of being a personality on YKW. It's a painfully low ambition. But he's done it like no other..

I'm sure anything can work. But it shouldn't have to be work. I just want to make the stuff. I don't want to take have to my soap out for a nice dinner, get back to a candlelit bathroom and lather up to Barry White in the background.
 
Last edited:
Drubbing said:
I'm sure anything can work. But it shouldn't have to be work. I just want to make the stuff. I don't want to take have to my soap out for a nice dinner, get back to a candlelit bathroom and lather up to Barry White in the background.
Click to expand...
Wow I thought @Marlow was our lone shaving voyeur - how'd you look in on my morning's ritual?

Got to say though @Drubbing , if economies of time are also important, then the synth well outdoes any of my badgers or boars so far. I know synths are already well-known for using less product (a plus for the more parsimonious in our membership) but also ended up face lathering in half the time. Seriously, done in a minute or so. Incredible these man-made fibres!!!
 
stillshunter said:
Hmmm…yeah but who's going to tell @Drubbing ?
Click to expand...

I'm sure he would agree. It's basically adding enough water to enough soap. The former is easier to achieve if you start off with a relatively dry brush. The latter is something you need a bit of experience with as all soaps/creams are different. Again if you face rather than bowl lather the amount you start of with becomes very important very quickly. Too much and you end up with it dripping down to your elbows and making a mess of almost the entire bathroom. I actually prefer to slightly overdo the amount of water so the consistency is more like that of reduced fat yoghurt rather than the full cream stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top