What does it mean to be "Finest"

Until recently, my understanding was that “Rooney Finest Badger” referred to a type of hair that hasn’t been available in new brushes for a couple or more years, and that Lee Sabini discontinued use of the label in acknowledgement of the fact he could no longer source what he considered to be “true” Finest Badger hair. That struck me as an admirable demonstration of personal integrity and pride in quality. The fact, however, is that anyone who makes a brush can call it just about anything. What mostly protects buyers from loose product descriptions are competition, market discipline, and caveat emptor. Within the B&B community, we also have the benefit of extremely helpful information exchange.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no formally recognized standards applied in connection with the terms commonly used to designate badger-hair grades. Simpson refers to both 2 and 3-band hair as “Super Badger”, Lee Sabini’s M&F “Blonde Badger” label has been applied to hair-types with a range of different qualities (e.g., “gel-like tip”, not gel-like tips, 2-band, 3-band), and other brush makers (e.g., Semogue and Frank Shaving) label brushes as “Finest” that are very unlike old Rooney Finest brushes. There's nothing wrong with any of that. But, as I’ve come to understood the phrase, “Rooney Finest” is most commonly used to denote a distinct hair-type that is rare and no longer sourceable, and which possesses a unique combination of qualities closely rivaled by no other currently available badger hair. As such, it commands a very high price. This isn’t to say it’s better than, for example, Simpson Manchurian -- just that it’s distinctively different.

This past summer Classic Shaving turned up some NOS Rooney Finest brushes that were offered to newsletter subscribers in a “private sale”. CS followed-up in September with a number of Morris & Forndran, "Blonde Badger"-labeled brushes that were reported to have knots made of authentic, old Rooney Finest hair. See this thread and also this one.

I missed out on both of CS’s sales of NOS brushes with Rooney Finest knots. But through persistence and the help of some B&B friends, I managed to acquire four brushes that I’m fairly confident are the “real thing.” They include 1) a Rooney Stubby/Style 1 Size 1 hybrid, 2) an "Olde Apothecary Shop"-labeled Rooney Style 1 Size 2, 3) a Rooney Style 1 Size 2 in faux horn, and 4) an M&F “Chubby” 1 that was among the CS NOS brushes with Rooney Finest knots.

Very recently, at least three newly made M&F 2XL brushes bearing “Finest” labels have come into circulation. I wouldn’t fault Lee Sabini if he started slapping “Finest” on all of his brushes. Why not? In my opinion they surpass the quality of any of the other brushes currently being given a “Finest” appellation. But if that were to happen, buyers should understand what they’re getting, or not getting, especially if their willingness to pay a premium is predicated on a belief in the superiority and/or rarity of the hair-type in a particular brush labeled as Finest (most especially if it's implied to be “old Rooney Finest”, aka “the real thing&#8221. This begs the question how a buyer practicing caveat emptor might go about distinguishing the real thing, assuming that is possible. If it’s not possible, then I’ve paid a high price for some basically meaningless labels.

I only have a sample of 4 brushes by which to compare old Rooney Finest badger hair with other 2-band knots. That said, it’s very easy for me to pick those 4 out from the rest of my brushes. Below is a panel that shows the tops of 12 2-band brushes. I took this shot outdoors in natural light, and the colors appear very close to true on my display. Although color fidelity isn't going to carry through on differently calibrated displays, this should still provide some useful basis for comparison.

Which 4 of the 12 have Rooney Finest knots? If you have any examples the real thing in your stable, how do they compare to mine? Can you tell them apart from other (i.e., not the real thing) brushes based on appearance? If so, how?

I've had brushes in Best that were awful and brushes in Pure that were soft as a kitten's behind.

I have given up "trusting" what any manufacture says about their brushes. Sad fact but there is such an inconsistency, even brush to brush, from the same manufacturer that it is like playing roulette. You have that chance to "win big" but you have several hundred chances to lose also

I think the only thing that finest means is that it's going to cost more than an identical brush without the word finest in its name.

turtle said:

I've had brushes in Best that were awful and brushes in Pure that were soft as a kitten's behind.

I have given up "trusting" what any manufacture says about their brushes. Sad fact but there is such an inconsistency, even brush to brush, from the same manufacturer that it is like playing roulette. You have that chance to "win big" but you have several hundred chances to lose also

Click to expand...

I don't disagree. I've been lucky. I have two Simpson Best brushes (a 58 and a Chubby 2) that are hard from me to distinguish by performance or feel from Supers.

The fact is that every badger is different, and not all of the hair on a particular badger is of the same quality. But I'm pretty confident I can tell the difference between an old Rooney Finest knot and typical M&F Blonde or Simpson Manchurian. I cannot, however, easily distinguish between some of my M&F 2-band Blondes and my Simpson T3 in Manchurian, or, for that matter, between the T3 and my M7 non-Manchurian 2-band (that came in a Manchurian box).

Pebcak said:

I think the only thing that finest means is that it's going to cost more than an identical brush without the word finest in its name.

Click to expand...

You may be right about what "finest" has come to mean, but that doesn't mean that what most have in mind when referring to old Rooney Finest isn't objectively distinguishable from other hair, whether or not labeled as "Finest".

Anyone know where I can upload photos I've taken to display them here?

Photobucket reduces resolution too much.

Im willing to post high quality images of my recent M&F 2xl finest.

My understanding is that Finest is what suppliers and manufacturers refer to 2-band hair grade. Thus, some brush manufacturers decide (reasonably) to use 'Finest' in their official brush name description instead giving it a fancy name like D01 2-band, Blonde, Manchurian, Heritage. I don't recall seeing 'Finest' describing any other hair type than 2-band; "Thater two band Finest", "TGN Finest", "Semogue Finest Badger", "Frank Shaving Finest", "Rooney Finest" are all 2-banded brushes.

hedonist222 said:

Anyone know where I can upload photos I've taken to display them here?

Photobucket reduces resolution too much.

Im willing to post high quality images of my recent M&F 2xl finest.

Click to expand...

I had to cheat a little. The panel I put up comprises four 1/4 sections of the original photo. The site still reduced the size, I think, but, if so, each was shrunk equally.

Very nice post.... and informative. I agree, it is very difficult for the average buyer to know the difference between the brushes since there really are no standardized terms from one maker to the next. The story of Lee Sabini and the Rooney Finest hair is fascinating and I agree, very admirable of him. My collection of brushes has only recently expanded enough for me to be able to start to discover the differences between the different manufacturers, and I'm still learning as a result. I think it's important for guys like you Ken who have the experience with these brushes to convey your thoughts on them because not everyone can have the opportunity to directly compare these brushes first hand. For one, they are rare and are not found everyday on B/S/T.... and secondly, they are expensive because of the quality and rareness of them. Thanks for posting.

So, if I had to guess based on your photo, I would say:

• column 1, row 2
• column 2, row 2
• column 4, row 2
• column 2, row 1

It's a stab in the dark really, but I had to play the game .

Ben

I agree that old Rooney's finest is not what I consider current 2 band finest.

People new to knots should definitely not just jump on a knot because of the named grade, since as you point out, the different companies nomenclature can be misleading.

edgerunner said:

My understanding is that Finest is what suppliers and manufacturers refer to 2-band hair grade. Thus, some brush manufacturers decide (reasonably) to use 'Finest' in their official brush name description instead giving it a fancy name like D01 2-band, Blonde, Manchurian, Heritage. I don't recall seeing 'Finest' describing any other hair type than 2-band; "Thater two band Finest", "TGN Finest", "Semogue Finest Badger", "Frank Shaving Finest", "Rooney Finest" are all 2-banded brushes.

Click to expand...

I should have made the the thread title What does it mean to be Rooney Finest? That's really what I'm most interested in drilling down on. I left it general, however, because I think, in fairness to Lee Sabini (whose work I greatly admire), a discussion of what it means when he labels a brush as "Finest" should acknowledge that other makers use the appellation liberally. So it's reasonable to ask "if others can and do, why shouldn't he?"

The issue as I see it is that based on history -- notably including the position Lee presumably took in ceasing to label his brushes as "Finest" because hair meriting that designation in his estimation was no longer obtainable by him -- knowledgeable buyers assume they're getting something special when they pay up for a Rooney or an M&F brush represented to have a knot made of Rooney Finest hair. So, if someone offers me an M&F 2XL with a "Finest" label (as far as I know there are only 3 such brushes in existence) at a price of $320, when I can get a Rooney Heritage 2XL (or an M&F 2XL in Blonde Badger) for under $200, I'm going to assume the "Finest" label indicates the brush contains the type and quality of hair Lee used to reserve that label for. Otherwise, I'd just be paying $100+ for a different label -- i.e., a distinction without substantive difference. I suspect most who have paid the price to own brushes supposed to be made of Rooney Finest hair at least want to believe they are distinguishable on some basis independent of the label. In fact I do believe that. Discussing and, if possible, identifying that difference is the purpose of this thread.

The brush described in this BST listing is one of the four I have that I'm quite sure contains what B&B old-timers have in mind when they refer to Rooney Finest. Note that the listed brush does not bear a "Finest" label; it says "Blonde Badger." That's really why I started poking around the subject. I asked jepeck about it, and his straight-forward reply included the two links in the OP (this one and this one). Then I asked Amir if the M&F 2XL Finest discussed in this thread had a "Blonde Badger" or a "Finest" label. It turned out to be "Blonde Badger", however, as Amir's post explained: "Today I received a Morris and Forndran Stubby 2XL with the famed Rooney Finest hair. At first I was reluctant when I heard about ClassicShaving offering these, so I called Lee to clear up exactly what they are. He told me these were made at least 3 years ago and are indeed 2XL’s Finest in M&F handles. He was shocked they hadn’t been sold yet and urged me to secure one immediately as they will likely never be available again."

And then this thread appeared! When ridnovir inquired about the difference between Amir's new M&F 2XL with a Finest label and the 2XL ridnovir had recently bought, Amir replied: "This one is Finest 2-band whereas yours is Heritage 2-band. Finest is a little harsher, with extreme density and some scritch. Heritage is ultra-soft, no scritch and still great density."

That response begged an obvious question: if Rooney Finest hair is 1) truly different and 2) no longer available per Lee, then how did a brand-spanking-new M&F brush come to have a Sabini-made Finest knot, which I take to mean a knot made of the hair Lee used to label as "Finest" but hadn't for over two years because he could no longer get it and he wasn't willing to place the label on a brush that didn't, in his mind, meet that standard? In other words, was/is the new M&F 2XL Finest a $320 brush (in my estimation) or a $200 brush with a $100+ label?

This seems to me to be a good topic for gentlemanly discussion in this Forum, especially since these brushes now appear to be coming into circulation (again, I know of three).

Thanks, Ben. But I'm no expert. I didn't get into brushes until October. I did, however, dive straight into the deep end. Now I'm trying to make sure I get all I can out of the tuition I've paid.

Let's let the game run a little longer. I'd like to see what some others might choose.

mistercitizen said:

Very nice post.... and informative. I agree, it is very difficult for the average buyer to know the difference between the brushes since there really are no standardized terms from one maker to the next. The story of Lee Sabini and the Rooney Finest hair is fascinating and I agree, very admirable of him. My collection of brushes has only recently expanded enough for me to be able to start to discover the differences between the different manufacturers, and I'm still learning as a result. I think it's important for guys like you Ken who have the experience with these brushes to convey your thoughts on them because not everyone can have the opportunity to directly compare these brushes first hand. For one, they are rare and are not found everyday on B/S/T.... and secondly, they are expensive because of the quality and rareness of them. Thanks for posting.

So, if I had to guess based on your photo, I would say:

• column 1, row 2
• column 2, row 2
• column 4, row 2
• column 2, row 1

It's a stab in the dark really, but I had to play the game .

Click to expand...

An interesting and very thought-provoking thread, Ken. Although I have quite a few brushes, I am yet to try a Rooney Finest (and obviously the chances of that happening grow smaller with each passing year). I'm looking forward to reading thoughts from some of our other members.

OK, the identities of the brushes shown in the OP are set out below. The characteristic honey/amber hue that appears at the very tips of those with old Rooney Finest knots is, IMO, the giveaway. It often doesn't show up much, if at all, when viewing a brush from the side. I've acquired two more M&F Blondes from Lee since taking these photos, and although he assured me they were as close to Finest as any he could offer, they are both similarly distinguishable.

First row:

1) Rooney 2XL in 2-band, 2) Simpson Tulip 2 in 2-band, 3) M&F Blonde w/ natural horn handle, 4) Simpson Tulip 3 in Manchurian

Second row:

1) M&F "Chubby 1" in Finest but labeled "Blonde Badger", 2) Rooney Stubby 1/Style 1 Size 1 "hyrbrid" in Finest, 3) "Olde Apothecary Shop"-labeled Rooney Style 1 Size 2 in Finest, 4) Rooney Style 1 Size 2 in Finest w/ faux horn handle

Row 2:

1) Semogue 2011 LE labeled "Finest", 2) Thater SRP 2011 LE in 2-band, 3) Simpson M7 in labeled "Super Badger" but came in a box marked "Manchurian" and is indistinguishable by me from my T3 in Manchurian, 4) Simpon Eshan

Below are top-down shots of the four brushes. The brush at top-left brush is the Olde Apothecary Shop, which is choked up in the bottom photo to show its appearance with comparable density.

Great thread, Ken. Any pictures of the brushes from the frontal view?

This thread isn't supposed to be about my brushes, but I'll post photos of what I have. Below are front and back shots of the Stubby 1/Style 1 Size 1 hybrid and the "Olde Apothecary Shop"-branded Rooney Style 1 Size 2. Links to past listings of these brushes are embedded in the post above that identifies brushes shown in the OP. I'll put up photos of the other Style 1 Size 2 and the M&F "Chubby" when I get a chance.

Note that while the honey/amber coloration of the extreme tips just barely shows in side-on views of the Stubby/Style 1, virtually none is visible from the same perspective on the OAS. Note also that the OAS has considerably less density than the other three brushes I have with old Rooney Finest knots. When the knot is choked, however, the tips appear virtually identical in color from a top-down perspective. This is shown in one of the photos in a previous post.

ChiefBroom said:

Thanks, Ben. But I'm no expert. I didn't get into brushes until October. I did, however, dive straight into the deep end. Now I'm trying to make sure I get all I can out of the tuition I've paid.

Let's let the game run a little longer. I'd like to see what some others might choose.

Click to expand...

So they are all the brushes in the second row? I got 3 out of 4 then, right?


Ben

Below are side shots of the other two brushes. The flash doesn't serve well to bring out the tip coloration. Jepeck's listing of the M&F Chubby shows the tips under different lighting. Lighting consistency is a challenge in capturing and comparing photos of these brushes. The subtle honey/amber hue that graces the tips is highly dependent on both light conditions and angle of perspective. The steeper the angle, the more the color tends to show. I assume this holds for other brushes with the Rooney Finest knots. I hope a few more make appearances here.

Rooney Polo Finest - M&F Finest- Rooney 3/3 Finest - Rooney 3/1 Finest - Rooney 3/3 Finest.

Rooney polo and 3/1 from first batch of rooney finest ,scritcy .very dense and yellowish tips ..

Rooney 3/3's are same batch but different than the polo and 3/1 they are long loft but great scritchy and enough backbone.

M&F is current version of the finest and different than the others so similar to blonde badger but little bit scritcy and densely packed and long white hair.

Very interesting, here I leave a picture of my Finest by if they will help.





Cheers

Luis.