At this point an obvious question always comes up: if the shaving cream lather used in traditional multi-blade shaving is “dry,” why, then, is it called wet shaving in the first place? The reason for this nagging confusion will be found farther back in American shaving history. Prior to 1970, with the exception of the clanky, unreliable electric shaver, ALL shaving was done wet style. One need only watch any of the popular movies during the period to see what I mean. In any movie produced during the 1960s—and even later—every man is depicted shaving with a single blade razor. It was this form of shaving and none other that was called “WET SHAVING.” Indeed, what made shaving wet prior to 1970 was the simple fact that only one kind of blade was used—A SINGLE BLADE. The advent of multi-blade shaving only began as a serious venture with the advent of the Gillette Atra razor in 1970. Ultimately, the Atra would merely be the first in an entire series of such multi-blade shaving systems from both Gillette and Schick. A decade after the Atra came the Good News disposable razors. This latter form dominated the 1980s. Bic produced a very similar bladed disposable during this same period. The multi-blade shaving system eventually culminated in the famous Sensor razor in 1990. The Sensor was the first razor to ever appear on the cover of Fortune magazine.
Prior to 1970, then, the double edge blade was king. It was quite impossible to shave any other way. In any event, by the late 1970s, traditional wet shaving had largely disappeared. By then the multi-blade system was king. Few people had ever even seen a double edge razor. When I first came to shaving in the early 1990s, the very expression itself—wet shaving—had not been used in living memory. Indeed, until I offered the first definitive meaning of the expression “wet shaving” back in 2003 (wet shaving=single blade shaving) no clear rendering of the term even existed. To most people during those years, wet shaving simply meant shaving with water in any form or amount. Indeed, it was only a few years ago that most people thought that wet shaving meant shaving in the shower.
Today, the movement in shaving I initiated over a decade ago-- which goes by the name of Method shaving-- is strictly focused on reviving, teaching and perfecting the products and principles of single blade—or “wet” shaving. Those interested in learning more about this fascinating dimension of shaving, should begin their efforts with a review of my internet textbook on the subject “The Systematics of Wet Shaving.” It can be easily found at
www.enchanteonline.com.
With every brush manufacturer we see brushes of various grades such as Pure, Best, and Super. What the primary differences in these hair types and how does that effect the performance of the brush?A final word about hair quality and shaving brush performance: beginning shavers are always confronted by a virtual barrage of conflicting claims regarding the relative quality of various shaving brush brands. These claims are invariably based on the relative quality of the badger hair used to produce the shaving brush “knot.” Since badger hair used in shaving brushes is harvested from various parts of the animal’s pelt, the hair itself displays characteristic differences depending on precisely where on the animal the hair is procured. The process by which this fastidious culling process is done is maddeningly vague. Nothing in the entire process is conducted with convincing clarity, transparency or consistency. Complicating matters further; nearly all badger hair comes from China; however, wet shaving is not a Chinese indulgence.
In generations past, nearly all shaving brushes were produced in extremely small lots. As a result, the quality of the hair used was fantastically consistent with the highest imaginable standards one could invoke today. Since so few brushes were ever made at one time, it was easy enough to simply load the best available hair. Indeed, until very recently, demand for high end shaving brushes was still small enough that it was possible for manufacturers to economically use the highest grade. This grade is commonly called “silver tip” badger. For those unfamiliar with the esoteric term “silver tip”, it is enough to know that in today’s shaving brush business, the use of the term “silver tip” is used to describe a specific category of superior hair. In real terms, silver tip is a short hair badger, distinctly banded, exhibiting a very fine silky finish. In addition to silver tip, however, two other grades of badger also must be considered: these are the grades broadly called “best” and “pure.”
These three grades—silver tip (or “super” as it is also known), best and pure—comprise the general declension of hair quality for nearly all premium shaving brushes manufactured today. However, the shaver must always be alert to the fact that the distinctions between these various grades of hair quality are distressfully elastic. I have encountered many so called silver tip brushes loaded with best. Conversely, I have seen best brushes loaded with silver tip. These distinctions are so vague that even the manufacturers themselves are sometimes unsure of the hair they use.
To the above group of hair types a mass market category can also be added. It is called “junk badger” or “boar.” However, these brushes are completely irrelevant to our present discussion. So, no further consideration will be given to them.
As a broad group comprising premium grade badger, most super badger brushes are clearly superior to any other. The hair is short, fine and glossy. These distinctions are surely aesthetically pleasing. But, on their own, do these elements actually contribute to a superior shaving result? Quite frankly, they generally do not. This does not mean that a silver tip grade material is irrelevant to the overall quality of the shaving brush. It simply means that we must augment our present discussion of intrinsic hair quality with a few other equally salient points.
Aside from hair alone, what other aspects of shaving brush design need to be taken into consideration?In addition to considering the importance of super badger over the other two, less refined, grades mentioned above, we must also consider two other equally important factors affecting brush performance. These are:
1) The quality of brush construction.
2) The specific kind of wet mix that is to be used for shaving.
Point number two is discussed at length in the above section on dry versus wet mixes; thus I will not consider it further here. Right now, I want to briefly consider point number one, as its relevance to our subject is considerable.
The central role of shaving brush construction is generally ignored. Several reasons can be offered for this omission. Chief among them is an abiding lack of interest in so prosaic a subject. This omission, however, is a serious error. Nothing is more important than the careful and purposeful construction of an outstanding shaving brush. More emphatically, I submit that the skillful design and construction of the shaving brush may rank as one of the most difficult enterprises to which the modern imagination is fitted to undertake. Indeed, I currently have in my possession a very expensive silver tip shaving brush that has never been used; however, despite its impressive appearance, the entire casing is cracked from top to bottom. Clearly, when constructed, this brush was improperly pressurized. The brush itself is over $300; my own loss entirely. Please make no mistake: Proper shaving brush construction matters.
A shaving brush consists of two basic elements: at the top is the bucket; it is attached to a second half; this element is called the grip—or casing. Together they form a basic, binary construction of both fixed and motile elements. The knot is flexible; the grip is not. If one of these elements—either bucket or grip—is incorrectly sized in relation to the other, the brush will malfunction. Indeed, the mere shift of 1/16 inch of the bucket either up or down will exert a directly alter the mixing speed of the brush, the quality of the mix produced and the shutter efficiency of the brush breech.
Second, the action of the brush bucket is a fantastically complex kaleidoscope of variation and movement. In order to build mix properly, a brush bucket needs to perform two basic functions during mixing. In addition, both of these functions must occur simultaneously. First, the brush must continuously agitate the mix; it does this by efficiently mixing the hydrate (water) with the (buffer). In Method shaving this process of mixing the hydrate and emollient is achieved through the combined action of the hard primer (in the form of a shaving cube or priming round) and wet shaving paste. In traditional brush shaving, the process is simulated through direct chemical action.
The second function the brush must simultaneously perform is to divert the compounded mix outward, away from the core of the brush itself to the outer periphery. This outer periphery is called the brush gutter. This dual process of compounding the mix and then diverting it smoothly and efficiently out to the brush periphery is simply astonishing. It is also a maddeningly difficult function for the brush manufacturer to effectively create. Invariably, one function overpowers the other. It is for this reason that all shaving brush companies (except mine) shear their gutters. Indeed, it is easier to simply shear off the gutter than build it. I disagree; the shaver will know the difference soon enough.
A mix that fails to migrate efficiently through the brush is basically unformed and inert. It is nearly impossible to easily cut. This form of asymmetric mixing is notorious in traditional shaving brushes. At the same time, even the most diligent brush construction can not completely prevent its occurrence. Ideally, the wet mix media should spontaneously charge off the primer; mix efficiently with water inside the brush bucket; and release from the brush canopy fully peaked and perfect for cutting with a new single edge, platinum blade. That this process does not always occur precisely the way I have described only proves that man is a fallen creature. At the same time, readers should not despair. We are much closer to shaving nirvana today than mortal man has ever been.
The mere fact that a brush looks good in a picture proves nothing. In recent years various dabblers in wood turning have turned to making shaving brushes. Most of these are comically unsuitable. Indeed, it is not uncommon for these brushes to be constructed entirely in China. The more skilled U.S. producers will often insert pre-made knots to which they later add a hand turned grip. Purchase these also at your own risk. Currently in the United States nearly all shaving brushes are derived, either whole or in part, from China. Along with flammable pajamas and exploding cake mix, Chinese shaving brushes should probably be studiously avoided.
So, how does one intelligently discern the fact from the fraud? In this instance the matter is settled easily enough. If someone is offering shaving brushes for sale, it is helpful to make an effort to determine the sum of his knowledge of wet shaving. A few simple questions will admirably work to this end. Is the brush entirely hand made? Are all the elements of the brush constructed at one place? What kind of wet mix is the brush constructed to run? Is the brush casing properly pressurized? Are the gutters sheared or intact? What is the height of the knot loft? Why is it that height? And so on.
In my opinion, the best shaving brushes must absolutely be constructed by hand. A machine made shaving brush is garbage. The shaver who purchases a machine made shaving brush will always regret having done so. Having dissected numerous shaving brushes over the years, all acquired from a broadest range of producers, I can attest to the vast and important differences between the two types. At the same time, it is not surprising that nearly all brushes are machine turned. The creation of the hand made shaving brush is a difficult and tiring undertaking. Tying knots causes the joints to ache; specific errors of construction are never revealed until the entire brush in completed. When done properly, it is impossible for one person to accurately tie more than a few brush knots in a single day. Ultimately, any attempt to automate the process of brush making is pointless. Even the best machined brush is little more than a cosmetic tool. It is for this reason that brush manufacturers today load their brushes with standard knots, pre-made in China.
Ultimately, the best wet shaving experience in the world demands an incredibly close collaboration between the blender of the wet mix media, the brush manufacturer, the artificer of fine, single blade steel and, finally, the wet shaver himself. It is through this inspired collusion between passionate minds, devoted hands and sustained, thoughtful enterprise that the modern wet shaving experience acquires its infinite power to both please and transform.