The Cutting Edge – Which makers have you recently discovered that excite?

Wow, thanks for the mention, Coop! I'm honored and humbled!!!

I have my own votes, here too, and most agree with Dudley's post.

Will Morrison knocks me over.

John April staggers me. Every single time he posts something, it's like he's gained another ten years of experience. Makes me feel like a rookie.

Ben Tendick. Aside from being a great friend, he effectively reinvents himself every 90 days. Crazy.
 
thank you matthew and dawkind for the mention :) spencer clark makes some cool stuff. this is his brute ironwood subhilt.
 
While I agree with you to a higher degree, it still demonstrates a lack of observation to kick up a thread that is 5 years old.

If JZS is JUST discovering the makers he mentioned, he must have been sleeping under a rock for those 5 years, lol.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

I fail to see what the problem is with resurrecting an old thread.

For anybody that's new to the world of custom/handmade knives, these can provide a wealth of information.

Likewise, for a newer maker, a lot can be learned from an old thread that's suddenly been bumped to the top of the thread list, rather than getting lost in the dark depths of the internet.

A couple of good examples that spring to mind are Lorien's 'Wheeler's Steel' thread and Kevin Jones' 'Bruce Bump Allan Pinkerton Bowie'. Any maker Googling certain knifemaking terms in a bid to improve their work or simply clicking on a picture they like the look of after searching for 'Bowie Knife' for example, can suddenly find they've struck gold in terms of learning some new skills.

Surely that can only do good to the world of knives?

To say that an older thread isn't relevant is rather an insult to anyone who has contributed to it.

You yourself have written some very informative and thought provoking posts, which I'm sure would be of great interest to new members, surely you don't feel your old posts are irrelevant should they exceed your suggested 'Thread expiry date'?

Ian.
 
I fail to see what the problem is with resurrecting an old thread.

For anybody that's new to the world of custom/handmade knives, these can provide a wealth of information.

Likewise, for a newer maker, a lot can be learned from an old thread that's suddenly been bumped to the top of the thread list, rather than getting lost in the dark depths of the internet.

A couple of good examples that spring to mind are Lorien's 'Wheeler's Steel' thread and Kevin Jones' 'Bruce Bump Allan Pinkerton Bowie'. Any maker Googling certain knifemaking terms in a bid to improve their work or simply clicking on a picture they like the look of after searching for 'Bowie Knife' for example, can suddenly find they've struck gold in terms of learning some new skills.

Surely that can only do good to the world of knives?

To say that an older thread isn't relevant is rather an insult to anyone who has contributed to it.

You yourself have written some very informative and thought provoking posts, which I'm sure would be of great interest to new members, surely you don't feel your old posts are irrelevant should they exceed your suggested 'Thread expiry date'?

Ian.

Yet I absolutely and resolutely feel my old posts are irrelevant to NOW if the person kicking up the OLD post(say a moldy-oldy two years or more, is that fair?) hasn't contributed something substantially NEW and relevant. Just kicking up the old because they are too stupid or unobservant of the last post date is BS imo.

The world of knives is constantly changing, and looking to old posts to provide relevance for today is almost like applying the "old" rules of fit, finish and good value to the buyer, which has become laughable under the current set of criteria....just look at the Spencer Clark subhilt knife that John April posted.....it's a solution in search of a problem....and posted by a maker no less....someone who should know better but clearly doesn't.

It's an elephant designed by committee....a little Sam Lurquin, a little Don Hanson, and touch of Loveless, some Jason Knight....says NOTHING about the maker except he can appropriate lines shamelessly, knows his way around a grinder, and continues the long list of Western makers who understand NOTHING about the historical significance of hamon.

Great job.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
Last edited:
Yet I absolutely and resolutely feel my old posts are irrelevant to NOW if the person kicking up the OLD post(say a moldy-oldy two years or more, is that fair?) hasn't contributed something substantially NEW and relevant. Just kicking up the old because they are too stupid or unobservant of the last post date is BS imo.

The world of knives is constantly changing, and looking to old posts to provide relevance for today is almost like applying the "old" rules of fit, finish and good value to the buyer, which has become laughable under the current set of criteria....just look at the Spencer Clark subhilt knife that John April posted.....it's a solution in search of a problem....and posted by a maker no less....someone who should know better but clearly doesn't.

It's an elephant designed by committee....a little Sam Lurquin, a little Don Hanson, and touch of Loveless, some Jason Knight....says NOTHING about the maker except he can appropriate lines shamelessly, knows his way around a grinder, and continues the long list of Western makers who understand NOTHING about the historical significance of hamon.

Great job.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

OK, Steven how do you know for certain none of these makers understand NOTHING about the historical significance of a traditional hamon? Please explain?
 
OK, Steven how do you know for certain none of these makers understand NOTHING about the historical significance of a traditional hamon? Please explain?

Sure Scott.

The hamon is historically there to harden a portion of the blade so that it doesn't break in use but has a tendency to bend...this is battlefield use, not some namby pamby apple/water bottle cutting.

The HIGHER the hamon goes up the blade the greater the chance for breakage. The Western style blades that have what we call a "high" hamon might as well be through hardened.

Now I "get" that these are smaller blades and not subject to the forces that swords are....but the aesthetic established so many years ago in Japan WAS for looks as well as performance....it was optimized, and from my experiments, has yet to be improved upon.

The formula is fairly simple. The edged portion of the blade and no more than roughly 30% of the blade have hamon, the rest is left softer. There is a slight and mostly shallow hardening on the turnback of the top called a boshi.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
All that you say may be true but the western makers making high hamons, and maybe putting more emphasis on the artistic portion than on functional. Because after all I don't think too many of these blades will ever see a battle field. That much being said, I don't think I could ever look at a blade with a hamon and decide that the maker knows nothing about traditional hamons. Many of the makers making these hamons are journeyman and master smiths, if anything I would assume that they do know about traditional hamons to earn those ratings.
 
All that you say may be true but the western makers making high hamons, and maybe putting more emphasis on the artistic portion than on functional. Because after all I don't think too many of these blades will ever see a battle field. That much being said, I don't think I could ever look at a blade with a hamon and decide that the maker knows nothing about traditional hamons. Many of the makers making these hamons are journeyman and master smiths, if anything I would assume that they do know about traditional hamons to earn those ratings.

......And you would be talking out of your hat.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
Yet I absolutely and resolutely feel my old posts are irrelevant to NOW if the person kicking up the OLD post(say a moldy-oldy two years or more, is that fair?) hasn't contributed something substantially NEW and relevant. Just kicking up the old because they are too stupid or unobservant of the last post date is BS imo.

The world of knives is constantly changing, and looking to old posts to provide relevance for today is almost like applying the "old" rules of fit, finish and good value to the buyer, which has become laughable under the current set of criteria....just look at the Spencer Clark subhilt knife that John April posted.....it's a solution in search of a problem....and posted by a maker no less....someone who should know better but clearly doesn't.

It's an elephant designed by committee....a little Sam Lurquin, a little Don Hanson, and touch of Loveless, some Jason Knight....says NOTHING about the maker except he can appropriate lines shamelessly, knows his way around a grinder, and continues the long list of Western makers who understand NOTHING about the historical significance of hamon.

Great job.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

......And you would be talking out of your hat.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

Fair enough, maybe I am talking out of my hat, so tell us what are your qualifications to decide that makers like Sam Lurquin, Don Hanson and Jason Knight don't know anything about the historical significance of a hamon.
 
Fair enough, maybe I am talking out of my hat, so tell us what are your qualifications to decide that makers like Sam Lurquin, Don Hanson and Jason Knight don't know anything about the historical significance of a hamon.

I know them all. Well.

....and you are talking out of your hat.

Why should I dignify that with a courteous response?

Do you really request knowledge or do you try to sport because you experience some sort of misguided and ignorant outrage?

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
Sure Scott.

The hamon is historically there to harden a portion of the blade so that it doesn't break in use but has a tendency to bend...this is battlefield use, not some namby pamby apple/water bottle cutting.

The HIGHER the hamon goes up the blade the greater the chance for breakage. The Western style blades that have what we call a "high" hamon might as well be through hardened.

Now I "get" that these are smaller blades and not subject to the forces that swords are....but the aesthetic established so many years ago in Japan WAS for looks as well as performance....it was optimized, and from my experiments, has yet to be improved upon.

The formula is fairly simple. The edged portion of the blade and no more than roughly 30% of the blade have hamon, the rest is left softer. There is a slight and mostly shallow hardening on the turnback of the top called a boshi.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

What does the historical significance of the hamon have to do with anything?

We are working in a different time, making different blades, with different materials and equipment, and a whole lot more metallurgical knowledge.

Do you think it is possible that these modern makers thoroughly understand the traditional role of the hamon, and also understand that it is no longer necessary to leave two thirds of the blade dead soft to prevent it from snapping? Modern steel, properly hardened and tempered, is strong and tough, not brittle. Unhardened steel bends.

Why should the hamon on a modern Bowie knife, made in the west, adhere to an aesthetic established by Japanese sword smiths hundreds of years ago? What makes it correct in this context?
 
What does the historical significance of the hamon have to do with anything?

We are working in a different time, making different blades, with different materials and equipment, and a whole lot more metallurgical knowledge.

Do you think it is possible that these modern makers thoroughly understand the traditional role of the hamon, and also understand that it is no longer necessary to leave two thirds of the blade dead soft to prevent it from snapping? Modern steel, properly hardened and tempered, is strong and tough, not brittle. Unhardened steel bends.

Why should the hamon on a modern Bowie knife, made in the west, adhere to an aesthetic established by Japanese sword smiths hundreds of years ago? What makes it correct in this context?


Because it looks like ASS when the line goes up past halfway, and only an idiot or someone of decidedly low intellect/artistic ability would argue otherwise.

If that is you, than own it.

Being from Australia, that would not be a surprise, as only my good friend Bruce Barnett seems to have a fekkin clue down there.

I think a hamon is completely unnecessary as demonstrated by my good friend Dan Keffeler with CPM3v in a tradtional shape and structure, frankly. If you are going to do it for art, do it RIGHT!!

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
Last edited:
This is always a hot topic. I much prefer the look of a traditional hamon, and aim for traditional in every one I do. I find the artificial zigzag line so often seen on modern knives distracting, and just missing the point. I believe I'm in the minority here though.
 
I find it curious that the concern regarding the historical relevance of hamon to new makers, and the concern regarding the historical relevance of old threads to new viewers aren't being held to the same standard, Steven
 
I find it curious that the concern regarding the historical relevance of hamon to new makers, and the concern regarding the historical relevance of old threads to new viewers aren't being held to the same standard, Steven

Because you have no standard for judgement on this, Lorien. One is sacrosanct and one is up for interpretation.

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
I know them all. Well.

....and you are talking out of your hat.

Why should I dignify that with a courteous response?

Do you really request knowledge or do you try to sport because you experience some sort of misguided and ignorant outrage?

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
What are your qualifications to make assumptions that none of theses makers know the historical significance of a hamon, are you a metallurgist? are you a journeyman or master smith yourself? Once again what are your qualifications to judge these makers knowledge other than looking at a posted photo and saying they don't know anything about a hamon? Personally I don't think your qualified to pass judgment on what these talented blade smiths know or don't know about hamons, at least not until you get your own master smith rating. I guess a courteous response is not with in your capacity during normal conversation, I guess maybe you think everyone around you misguided, ignorant and lives under a rock. What your saying is like going to the dentist's office looking at his or her credentials on the wall and proceeding to tell them that they don't know the basic function of teeth. I am not a blade smith, but I am not ignorant or misguided, but you on the other hand are clearly not qualified to assess what a journeyman or master smith, eastern or western, know about blade smithing.
 
Judging for JS, or MS is done by western makers. There is no expectation of even doing a hamon or rules to judge them by.

I mean no disrespect to the smiths who earn these ratings, just pointing out there is no criterion for western smiths.
 
on the one hand, Steven, you're arguing that old threads shouldn't be resuscitated because the historical perspective contained therein isn't worth anything, while on the other hand arguing that people who make knives have to have a full historical understanding of one aspect of knife making if they are to employ that aspect. I find the contradiction or double standard or whatever it is to be odd, that's all

now, I understand what you mean when you say that you have a hard time with people's motives for necromancing threads. The contribution to this one, however, did include subject matter in keeping with the thread- by a 7 year member and paid subscriber. If it was some kind of spammy plot, that's bs and will be dealt with in accordance with bf rules

it's cool if this thread drifts a bit, hamon is one thing that we've seen really catch on over the past five years, but we can really do without insults, or thrashing on someone's work who didn't ask for it. That's just damn rude
 
Back
Top