Sett Size

[Spc. Scott]

I was going to mention Isle of Skye as well. I really like the look of the tartan but prefer the look of it in wool rather than the PV. I seem to remember reading that a lot of this is due to the size difference in yarns?

I guess my question is this: Is the yarn size that different between PV and 16oz wool or does a lot of the sett size difference due to changing the thread count?

[Paul Henry]

I was going to mention Isle of Skye as well. I really like the look of the tartan but prefer the look of it in wool rather than the PV. I seem to remember reading that a lot of this is due to the size difference in yarns?

I guess my question is this: Is the yarn size that different between PV and 16oz wool or does a lot of the sett size difference due to changing the thread count?

It so happens I am working on two different Isle of Skye kilts at the moment, both fabric from Marton Mills, but one in 16 oz the other in 13 oz.The photo is of both of them side by side
The thread size in the lighter weight one is a little bit finer, so that makes a smaller sett. Truth be told I much prefer the 16 oz , but I'm making what the clients wanted!

[fshguy]

As it is a matter of proportions, I feel that one should factor in the size of the individual wearing the kilt. My Robertson Red from Robert Noble has quite a smaller sett size than the typical offering. However, I feel it works better for my body type.


Conversely, my Wyvern sporran, while beautifully crafted, gets little wear because it feels disproportionately large for my frame.


It is somewhat humorous for me to read the frequent posts about individuals needing extra long garters, or barrel-chested jackets, when I seem to have just as much trouble locating items for my short stature. I’ve been hunting a second hand 42 Short tweed jacket for years.

[be da veva]

I’ve been hunting a second hand 42 Short tweed jacket for years.

I'm a 42r and I'm always finding 42s..... I've tried to make a 42s work for me, but it doesn't fit right or feel right....

[fshguy]

I'm a 42r and I'm always finding 42s..... I've tried to make a 42s work for me, but it doesn't fit right or feel right....

I would be very appreciative if you would share any new finds as they pop up.
Thanks!

[Newfoundlander]

As it is a matter of proportions, I feel that one should factor in the size of the individual wearing the kilt. My Robertson Red from Robert Noble has quite a smaller sett size than the typical offering. However, I feel it works better for my body type.


Conversely, my Wyvern sporran, while beautifully crafted, gets little wear because it feels disproportionately large for my frame.


It is somewhat humorous for me to read the frequent posts about individuals needing extra long garters, or barrel-chested jackets, when I seem to have just as much trouble locating items for my short stature. I’ve been hunting a second hand 42 Short tweed jacket for years.

To echo this, I think the size of the person certainly makes a difference. I was at a wedding not too long ago actually and remember contemplating this very thing. For the life of me, i can't find the picture I took though... you'll have to settle for my description I guess:

The Brides Father and Uncle are both "gentlemen of substance" shall we say, and both in their Anderson kilts. However, the Uncle has a much larger sett size, and the Father of the Bride had the "usual" sett size. Now, both looks very good I have to say, but the large sett did make the kilt look a bit more subtle than the normal intricate Anderson tartan. So, I think if subtle is what your after, larger sett sizes are great. The brides' sister's boyfriend also had an Anderson kilt on as well in the usual sett size, and being a much more slight lad, it seemed to suit his body type well.

Granted, I could be biased, because I like the intricate Anderson tartan in the usual set size.

My humble opinion only of course...

[Orvis]

As others have said, I look at sett size as a byproduct of cloth weight. The yarns in a 16 oz tartan are thicker than in a 13 oz, so the sett of a 16 oz will necessarily be larger than that of a 13 oz in the same tartan (see illustrations above). Reaching back into tartan history, I've noted that Wilson's & Sons had plaiding and they had kilting setts of the same tartans, and that the kilting setts seemed to be smaller. Figheadair has showed us photos of 18th c. plaids with really large setts (2-1/2 sets to a 27" width), including that tartan set of MacDougall curtains with the 20" sett. Perhaps he could enlighten us on whether there were differences in the sett sizes of kilting and plaiding cloth of the same tartan during the early days of tartan. Thank you in advance!

[figheadair]

As others have said, I look at sett size as a byproduct of cloth weight. The yarns in a 16 oz tartan are thicker than in a 13 oz, so the sett of a 16 oz will necessarily be larger than that of a 13 oz in the same tartan (see illustrations above). Reaching back into tartan history, I've noted that Wilson's & Sons had plaiding and they had kilting setts of the same tartans, and that the kilting setts seemed to be smaller. Figheadair has showed us photos of 18th c. plaids with really large setts (2-1/2 sets to a 27" width), including that tartan set of MacDougall curtains with the 20" sett. Perhaps he could enlighten us on whether there were differences in the sett sizes of kilting and plaiding cloth of the same tartan during the early days of tartan. Thank you in advance!

An interesting question and one for which there is not easy answer for three reasons (this assumes that by during the early days of tartan you mean pre-c1770 and that by kilt we are meaning feileadh beag:

1. There are relatively few extant examples from the period and portraiture of the period ranges from very good to impressionistic.

2. With the exception of the Murray of Tullibardine I don't know of any extant examples/portraits from that period that show the same sett let alone in different sizes.

3. It is not always possible to determine how a fragment of tartan was used. Many of the larger setting pieces were plaids or at least woven with that intention. Some of the small sett pieces have a herringbone selvedge which is an indicator that they were similarly intended for use as plaids but others could have been for a range of clothing including kilts (feileadh beag).

The only evidence for feileadh beag settings we have is from portraits such as those of the MacDonald Boys, James Moray, Yr of Abercairney and the like. Interestingly they generally show large setts, often with a selvedge mark which would suggest that off-set single width plaid material was being used unjoined. This makes sense as people would have been more interested in the garment from material that was available and less concerned about fitting the sett. It was probably the case that the growth of a smaller, non-plaid sett size has its origins with the military where numbers and uniformity would have been the contributing factors.