I cannot agree enough with you about the performance and softness of the Thäter. To me, it really is like lathering with a fluffy cloud. They are gorgeous specimens! I can't wait to see your reviews of the other 5 brushes.
An Education from Big Brushes
- Thread starter oakeshott
- Start date
Nice write ups. Subscribed. 
Definitely subscribed. Can't wait to hear about the rest of them!
- Thread starter
- #24
Normally I'll wait till the next day to post my experience with each new brush, but tomorrow I'm up at 3:30 in the morning and off to NYC for a few days of work and know that my time will be limited while there. So, these reflections are unmused upon and any meandering in thought can be blamed upon the quick turnaround from deed to thought to writing.
Tonight's guest was the the Thater 3 band. Over the last half year plus, I've grown nothing but confused about what three band characteristics were vs. 2 band. I kept reading contradictory reports and my own limited experience illuminated nothing. I was hoping tonight's brush might shed some light. Maybe it did. Here are the specs and a pic:
View attachment 266866
Thater 3 Band Bulb
Loft 55mm
Handle 51mm
Knot 30mm
L2H 1.078
L2k 1.833
It's a beautiful brush and you can see from the pic that the proportions are lovely. Balance, in almost anything, is the secret to success and this Thater looks and feels great in the hand. It just feels solid...durable. I don't have an automatic attraction to the clear lucite handles (unless you stick a salmon fly in the middle and then my coin purse unhinges on its own), but this one works. Notice also that the shape of the bulb is different from most; it is more pointed. Dramatically so. You could describe it as a Tulip Bulb and that would be near to the mark.
This was my third Thater in a row and so I knew the drill when it came to getting the lather right. Drain the brush real well and then begin. It's hard to tell whether the initial lather results were due to the knot or my knowing to limit the amount of water in retained in the brush, but it loaded up like a champ and as a side effect generated from some very rich, dense creamy proto lather that stayed in the bowl in that area between the puck and the sides of the bowl. I've never used a scuttle, but can imagine that this would be an excellent brush for that.
Right away, I could tell the difference between this brush and the previous two brushes. In several ways. That unique and luxurious "cupping" effect that both of the two band Thaters had was absent here. It was just as soft as the others, but balanced by backbone. It had what I thought of at the moment as the perfect balance between the two. Did it make it easier to control this pointed bulb and increased backbone? Not that I could tell. It was just different...more perfect, I suppose.
Finished my first pass and started the second one and within a second or two of the brush hitting my face I thought "OMG, what was that?? Was that a hint of scritch?" I tried to pay close attention to this on both the remainder of the second and all through the third lathering to see if I was imagining it, but it was there. It was a feeling as if about a dozen or two of the hairs right in the very center were more than just a tad stiffer. Had I been using any one of my other brushes (except the Kent) on the previous nights, I guarantee that tiny hint of scritch would never have been noticed. It is, almost literally, splitting hairs, but there really seemed to be a difference in this Thater over the other two.
For the past few days I'd been using these giant soft brushes and comparing them in my mind to the only truly soft brush I owned, the Kent BK4. On a whim, I decided to, as the sheriff in Blazing Saddles said, "whip it out" and make an on the spot comparison. I won't belabor the point, but the Kent was just as soft as the Thaters, but without even remotely the same amount of backbone. I had never thought of this brush as floppy, but after my experience of the last few days, I could describe it no other way. Sure it's an unfair comparison. The Kent is a 23mm knot and the others are 30mm while the lofts are nearly identical (52mm for the Kent, 55 for the 3band and 54 and 52 for the 2 band bulb and fan respectively). Of course the Kent would feel floppier. Still, I was crushed. After days with these other brushes, my Kent felt insubstantial in my hand, like a toy brush rather than a grown up brush. And now, I finally knew what "floppy" meant. Can one buy viagra for brushes on the BST?
Having gone through two 2 bands and two 3 bands, what did I conclude? Well, both of the 3 bands had more backbone and both had more scritch than the 2 bands so maybe one concludes that 3 bands are scritchier and have more backbone? The only problem with that is the 3 band Thater was much, much, much more akin to the other Thaters than to the M&F. In other words, the number of bands had less to do with performance than the maker.
The Thaters have all had their turn now and one can't help but conclude that they are an extraordinary family of brushes. Consistent bristle quality, well turned handles and performance one cannot possibly fault. Of the three, the three band is perhaps the most perfect, but screw perfection. I never much cared for it. My heart was lost to the 2 Band Fan. Not only a great brush, but a great name for a Rock and Roll Band.
Tomorrow, the last of the Germans.
Tonight's guest was the the Thater 3 band. Over the last half year plus, I've grown nothing but confused about what three band characteristics were vs. 2 band. I kept reading contradictory reports and my own limited experience illuminated nothing. I was hoping tonight's brush might shed some light. Maybe it did. Here are the specs and a pic:
View attachment 266866
Thater 3 Band Bulb
Loft 55mm
Handle 51mm
Knot 30mm
L2H 1.078
L2k 1.833
It's a beautiful brush and you can see from the pic that the proportions are lovely. Balance, in almost anything, is the secret to success and this Thater looks and feels great in the hand. It just feels solid...durable. I don't have an automatic attraction to the clear lucite handles (unless you stick a salmon fly in the middle and then my coin purse unhinges on its own), but this one works. Notice also that the shape of the bulb is different from most; it is more pointed. Dramatically so. You could describe it as a Tulip Bulb and that would be near to the mark.
This was my third Thater in a row and so I knew the drill when it came to getting the lather right. Drain the brush real well and then begin. It's hard to tell whether the initial lather results were due to the knot or my knowing to limit the amount of water in retained in the brush, but it loaded up like a champ and as a side effect generated from some very rich, dense creamy proto lather that stayed in the bowl in that area between the puck and the sides of the bowl. I've never used a scuttle, but can imagine that this would be an excellent brush for that.
Right away, I could tell the difference between this brush and the previous two brushes. In several ways. That unique and luxurious "cupping" effect that both of the two band Thaters had was absent here. It was just as soft as the others, but balanced by backbone. It had what I thought of at the moment as the perfect balance between the two. Did it make it easier to control this pointed bulb and increased backbone? Not that I could tell. It was just different...more perfect, I suppose.
Finished my first pass and started the second one and within a second or two of the brush hitting my face I thought "OMG, what was that?? Was that a hint of scritch?" I tried to pay close attention to this on both the remainder of the second and all through the third lathering to see if I was imagining it, but it was there. It was a feeling as if about a dozen or two of the hairs right in the very center were more than just a tad stiffer. Had I been using any one of my other brushes (except the Kent) on the previous nights, I guarantee that tiny hint of scritch would never have been noticed. It is, almost literally, splitting hairs, but there really seemed to be a difference in this Thater over the other two.
For the past few days I'd been using these giant soft brushes and comparing them in my mind to the only truly soft brush I owned, the Kent BK4. On a whim, I decided to, as the sheriff in Blazing Saddles said, "whip it out" and make an on the spot comparison. I won't belabor the point, but the Kent was just as soft as the Thaters, but without even remotely the same amount of backbone. I had never thought of this brush as floppy, but after my experience of the last few days, I could describe it no other way. Sure it's an unfair comparison. The Kent is a 23mm knot and the others are 30mm while the lofts are nearly identical (52mm for the Kent, 55 for the 3band and 54 and 52 for the 2 band bulb and fan respectively). Of course the Kent would feel floppier. Still, I was crushed. After days with these other brushes, my Kent felt insubstantial in my hand, like a toy brush rather than a grown up brush. And now, I finally knew what "floppy" meant. Can one buy viagra for brushes on the BST?
Having gone through two 2 bands and two 3 bands, what did I conclude? Well, both of the 3 bands had more backbone and both had more scritch than the 2 bands so maybe one concludes that 3 bands are scritchier and have more backbone? The only problem with that is the 3 band Thater was much, much, much more akin to the other Thaters than to the M&F. In other words, the number of bands had less to do with performance than the maker.
The Thaters have all had their turn now and one can't help but conclude that they are an extraordinary family of brushes. Consistent bristle quality, well turned handles and performance one cannot possibly fault. Of the three, the three band is perhaps the most perfect, but screw perfection. I never much cared for it. My heart was lost to the 2 Band Fan. Not only a great brush, but a great name for a Rock and Roll Band.
Tomorrow, the last of the Germans.
I have that same 3 band thater you just reviewed. It is a wonderful brush!!! I never noticed any scritch but I'm really only comparing it to my duke 2 and tgn finest.
You are doing a great service with these critiques, thank you!
You are doing a great service with these critiques, thank you!
- Thread starter
- #26
Jtb
note that I said scritch in comparison to the previous two brushes. It was like watching TV and thinking you heard a mosquito. That faint. If I used it in a month, I wouldn't bet I could detect any. Again, these are my impressions after single three pass shaves.
Now to bed. My bride reminds me I have to get up in four hours.
Be honest, man...what did you do?
- Thread starter
- #28
Nothing. Remember, I didn't go out with her.
Enjoy your write ups - and writing style. 
I can't find Round 3 in the thread. It jumps from the second to fourth review.
- Thread starter
- #31
yeah, I know I wrote it several days ago, but it's missing. Have a question in to the mods to see if a server ate my post or it was some stupid user error on my part.
Well, now I have to try a Thater Two Band. Dang it. Thanks a lot.
Note taken. You inspired me to take out my thater and MWF this morning, excellent shave.
Can't wait to read your next write up.
Enjoying this thread so far as I just purchased a Thater(4125/2) and have been enjoying every minute of using it since then. However, I noticed that the ones you are using look almost brand new, with no opening or flowering that I can tell by the pictures. Are they indeed new brushes? If not, do you know how much they have been used? Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Very nice of you indeed to post those wonderful observations. I hope the lost episode will resurface, or else you might have the moral obligation to do it all over again 
. Looking forward to the next review!
. Looking forward to the next review!
Excellent post, and a great line up of brushes.
Well done, Sir, and I am looking forward to the second half of your dates!
Well done, Sir, and I am looking forward to the second half of your dates!
- Thread starter
- #37
Very nice of you indeed to post those wonderful observations. I hope the lost episode will resurface, or else you might have the moral obligation to do it all over again
I have the notes from the lost episode at home but the repost will lack the elan vital of the original. The good moderator looked into it and determined that this was user error...the most common and demeaning of all errors. We all need to cross our fingers and hope that the sheet of paper with my notes that I now recall leaving on the dining room table at home is recognized by my bride as something important and not purposeless scribblings.
- Thread starter
- #38
The lender of the brushes sent me the following in response to your question:
"...all are well used and some were not even new to the lender. Due to the shape of the Thater 3 band bulb it does not bloom much. That said, even my most used brushes don't see water more than 3 times a month (once every 10 days). "
To which I would add that they do bloom quite a bit right after the shave but then, as you noticed, tend to go back to their as new shape in the absence of usage.
- Thread starter
- #39
Let's get to it. Lots to comment on. Tonight's heavyweight:
Shavemac 3 Band Silvertip D01
Loft 51mm
Handle 49mm
Knot 28mm
L2H 1.04
L2K 1.82
View attachment 267080
At the beginning of this Bildungsrasieren (education in shaving...Germans can make up whatever word they want), I'd committed to keeping everything consistent but the brush. I forgot about my business trip which caused several things to change. First of all, I ended up using a different razor. That shouldn't matter because it's a familiar one and not directly related to brush performance. The soap is also the same brand, BUT a different scent and sometimes that makes a difference. More importantly is that another key ingredient is different: water. NYC water and my small town Virginia water are almost certainly different. The NYC water is undoubtedly a much more efficient "Hey, I'm walkin' here" kind of lathering agent while my gentle Virginia water says to the soap to "C'mon to the porch and set a spell". Please take these variables into account during the report. Finally, I'm coming down with something and they almost certainly affects my judgment...it is beyond doubt affecting my will to live.
The Shavemac brings us back to the 28mm knot, but I wasn't aware of that when I picked it up. In every respect, it performed on a par with the 30mm Thater. It loaded just as well, in fact it loaded faster, much faster than the Thater 3 band. It picked up just ton's of soap and released it as I continued to slowly add water to get the consistency right. I suspect, though can't know, that this might be a slightly denser brush than the one from the night before. It reminded me most of the Thater 3 band, but with more backbone. I didn't find it scritchy and the softness was superb, but it did have a massage like feeling which the 2 band thaters didn't have.
There were no surprises in pass 2 and pass 3. All the lather you could possibly want in those final passes. Could easily have had a fourth.
This Shavemac, like the Thater last night, is a brush whose architecture can best be described as balanced. Perfect combo of backbone and softness and weight. The remarkable thing is that it performs easily on a par with the Thater 30mm which got me thinking at the end of the shave about the importance of knot size to lathering. I didn't have a ready answer so, being on the road, reached for whatever help was close at hand and that was my restored Gillette vintage brush with the 16mm TGN Finest (thank you Bob Farvour). Let's have a showdown between these two, I thought. Not only did the restored Gillette have a commonly used knot many people here are familiar with, but it was a chance to see if a much smaller brush could stay in for a round or two with a bigger brush. After all, the Shavemac 28mm performed as well or better than the Thater 30mm in loading and delivering lather.
Well, I'm an idiot. OF COURSE, a 16mm knot can't generate and hold as much as a 28mm knot. It's obvious now, but I just had to try. I also realize that while i've been getting three passes off my smaller knots, it's because I've been settling for less, much less, lather. I got hung up on not reloading the brush as if it were some sign of masculine inferiority to have to go back to the well. No more. It's unrealistic to expect a knot of that size to hold three really excellent passes of lather...at least compared to what these bigger bruisers can do.
pic of the two of them together:
View attachment 267079
In terms of brush feel, the TGN Finest was less luxuriously soft with much less backbone and density. On the other hand, it was still quite soft with excellent face feel and this brings us to the question of value. The Shavemacs and Thaters are some of the most expensive brushes in the world and for the difference in price, the value of the TGN Finest is extraordinary. In a blind test, I might, I say "might" be able to tell the difference and some of you more experienced members could assuredly distinguish between them. But I do not think anyone would say that one was 4, 5 or 6 times better than the other. In short, if you're using a TGN knot, then you've got a product that can at least hold its tips high in your shave den with any other manufacturer's brush but at a much, much lower price. I think it's like so many things in that you pay far, far more for each 9 to the right of the decimal point than for the previous one.
One last observation that is preliminary, but reflects my most current thinking. I'm coming to the conclusion that past a certain level of quality hair grade has far, far less to do with performance than the combination of knot size and density of hair and loft. This is preliminary, however, and open to revision.
Shavemac 3 Band Silvertip D01
Loft 51mm
Handle 49mm
Knot 28mm
L2H 1.04
L2K 1.82
View attachment 267080
At the beginning of this Bildungsrasieren (education in shaving...Germans can make up whatever word they want), I'd committed to keeping everything consistent but the brush. I forgot about my business trip which caused several things to change. First of all, I ended up using a different razor. That shouldn't matter because it's a familiar one and not directly related to brush performance. The soap is also the same brand, BUT a different scent and sometimes that makes a difference. More importantly is that another key ingredient is different: water. NYC water and my small town Virginia water are almost certainly different. The NYC water is undoubtedly a much more efficient "Hey, I'm walkin' here" kind of lathering agent while my gentle Virginia water says to the soap to "C'mon to the porch and set a spell". Please take these variables into account during the report. Finally, I'm coming down with something and they almost certainly affects my judgment...it is beyond doubt affecting my will to live.
The Shavemac brings us back to the 28mm knot, but I wasn't aware of that when I picked it up. In every respect, it performed on a par with the 30mm Thater. It loaded just as well, in fact it loaded faster, much faster than the Thater 3 band. It picked up just ton's of soap and released it as I continued to slowly add water to get the consistency right. I suspect, though can't know, that this might be a slightly denser brush than the one from the night before. It reminded me most of the Thater 3 band, but with more backbone. I didn't find it scritchy and the softness was superb, but it did have a massage like feeling which the 2 band thaters didn't have.
There were no surprises in pass 2 and pass 3. All the lather you could possibly want in those final passes. Could easily have had a fourth.
This Shavemac, like the Thater last night, is a brush whose architecture can best be described as balanced. Perfect combo of backbone and softness and weight. The remarkable thing is that it performs easily on a par with the Thater 30mm which got me thinking at the end of the shave about the importance of knot size to lathering. I didn't have a ready answer so, being on the road, reached for whatever help was close at hand and that was my restored Gillette vintage brush with the 16mm TGN Finest (thank you Bob Farvour). Let's have a showdown between these two, I thought. Not only did the restored Gillette have a commonly used knot many people here are familiar with, but it was a chance to see if a much smaller brush could stay in for a round or two with a bigger brush. After all, the Shavemac 28mm performed as well or better than the Thater 30mm in loading and delivering lather.
Well, I'm an idiot. OF COURSE, a 16mm knot can't generate and hold as much as a 28mm knot. It's obvious now, but I just had to try. I also realize that while i've been getting three passes off my smaller knots, it's because I've been settling for less, much less, lather. I got hung up on not reloading the brush as if it were some sign of masculine inferiority to have to go back to the well. No more. It's unrealistic to expect a knot of that size to hold three really excellent passes of lather...at least compared to what these bigger bruisers can do.
pic of the two of them together:
View attachment 267079
In terms of brush feel, the TGN Finest was less luxuriously soft with much less backbone and density. On the other hand, it was still quite soft with excellent face feel and this brings us to the question of value. The Shavemacs and Thaters are some of the most expensive brushes in the world and for the difference in price, the value of the TGN Finest is extraordinary. In a blind test, I might, I say "might" be able to tell the difference and some of you more experienced members could assuredly distinguish between them. But I do not think anyone would say that one was 4, 5 or 6 times better than the other. In short, if you're using a TGN knot, then you've got a product that can at least hold its tips high in your shave den with any other manufacturer's brush but at a much, much lower price. I think it's like so many things in that you pay far, far more for each 9 to the right of the decimal point than for the previous one.
One last observation that is preliminary, but reflects my most current thinking. I'm coming to the conclusion that past a certain level of quality hair grade has far, far less to do with performance than the combination of knot size and density of hair and loft. This is preliminary, however, and open to revision.
Two more to go... and looking forward to the re-posting of #3. Great reviews! I'm going to hold back on my Thater purchase until I read your final installment.
