Evidence that "AI" is still artificial

[jsrnephdoc]

Yesterday I watched a video made at the V&A Museum during the tenure of a "tartan history" exhibit featuring a wandering interview of Peter MacDonald.

That led me to wondering about having a kilt made from Glen Affric tartan.

And THAT led me to discussing with potential kilt making artisans HOW it should be made.

A few of the items in my wandering thoughts centered on what might be most appropriate for the blistering heat of Las Vegas summers, and most realistic for someone existing on retirement savings. The latter included realization that a kilt made from less fabric could be a LOT less expensive ($250 US less from USA Kilts, for example) AND more comfortable outdoors in the ≥ 100°F summer Las Vegas heat.

However, one of the most experienced of the artisans suggested I just would not like the larger and less numerous pleats of a 5-yarder, especially given the lighter weight of the HoE 13 oz fabric. She did suggest that box pleating might be a decent compromise, however.

My understanding to that point was that HoE was the only legitimate source for the fabric, and only in 13 oz weight.

But, I decided to ask my browser, which dutifully borrowed time from its AI bot to answer my query. As sources of information it provided:

1. House of Edgar
2. XmarkstheScot

to announce it's conclusion that, yes, 16 oz fabric IS available in that tartan.

Obviously we haven't yet reached whatever that inflection point is when the bots become less perceptive than their human creators.

[CBH]

I don't know if you have any 5 yard kilts, but I have a 5 yard semi-traditional wool kilt from USA Kilts. I also have two 8 yard kilts made from heavy wool. I'm not sure there is a ton of difference between 13 and 16 oz fabric.

But there is a HUGE difference in the weight of the 5 vs 8 yard garment. The lighter weight of the 5 yard is immensely easier to wear. I think the pleats look just as good. The 8 yd kilt has much deeper pleats, but the same portion of the kilt is pleated. The depth of the pleats seem to add nothing but additional weight IMHO.

I heartily agree with the suggestion to go with the 5 yard kilt.

[OC Richard]

For those not aware, on traditional kilts the excess interior fabric behind the stitched portion of each pleat is cut out so that the part of the kilt in "the small of the back" is scarcely heavier/thicker than the overlapping aprons in front. The 5-yard wool kilts from USA Kilts don't have the pleats cut out so the part of the kilt in "the small of the back" is several times thicker and heavier.

This means that there's not a direct correlation between the number of yards and the kilt's weight; the methods of construction impact weight and thickness too.

[OC Richard]

...a kilt made from less fabric could be a LOT less expensive AND more comfortable outdoors in the ≥ 100°F summer Las Vegas heat.

However, one of the most experienced of the artisans suggested I just would not like the larger and less numerous pleats of a 5-yarder, especially given the lighter weight of the HoE 13 oz fabric. She did suggest that box pleating might be a decent compromise, however.

There are three entirely independent factors at play which I think are being somewhat conflated.

These factors are:

1) weight of cloth

2) number of yards

3) style of pleating (knife versus box).

Thus you can have a 16 ounce 8-yard box-pleated kilt, a 13 ounce 4-yard knife-pleated kilt, or any other possible combination of the three above factors.

Only the cloth weight and yardage impact weight; the style of pleating does not. (However see my separate post about the cutting out of the pleats which does impact thickness and weight independently of cloth weight or yardage.)

Yes there's a recent fad, the revival of the early-19th century 4-yard box-pleated kilt, which has made many people think that there's a necessary link between the yardage and pleating style. Yes the two can go together, but they don't have to go together.

HoE is the only legitimate source for the fabric, and only in 13 oz weight.

...16 oz fabric IS available in that tartan.

Yes only HoE weaves authorised Glen Affric and sadly only in 13 ounce weight.

Certainly the "16 ounce tartan" the AI bot found is crappy Pakistani fabric.

I'm sure that no legitimate UK mill would weave knockoff Glen Affric cloth.

And of course the stuff the Pakistani weavers call "16 ounce" is absolutely nothing like actual 16 ounce wool kilting cloth. I know, I've had a "16 ounce wool" Pakistani kilt in my hands and the cloth was strange flimsy waxy stuff.

[jsrnephdoc]

I don't know if you have any 5 yard kilts, but I have a 5 yard semi-traditional wool kilt from USA Kilts. I also have two 8 yard kilts made from heavy wool. I'm not sure there is a ton of difference between 13 and 16 oz fabric.

But there is a HUGE difference in the weight of the 5 vs 8 yard garment. The lighter weight of the 5 yard is immensely easier to wear. I think the pleats look just as good. The 8 yd kilt has much deeper pleats, but the same portion of the kilt is pleated. The depth of the pleats seem to add nothing but additional weight IMHO.

I heartily agree with the suggestion to go with the 5 yard kilt.

Thanks for your vote!

I'll be in CA next month. I hope to have a chance to visit Wm Glen & Son and eyeball a traditional 8 yard kilt and a 5 yarder (they call them "6" yarder). Their prices are dramatically higher than USA Kilts. I don't know whether they're made in the US or in Scotland, and if the latter, by whom. But it should give me a chance to compare apples and oranges.

[jsrnephdoc]

There are three entirely independent factors at play which I think are being somewhat conflated.

(and)

Yes there's a recent fad, the revival of the early-19th century 4-yard box-pleated kilt, which has made many people think that there's a necessary link between the yardage and pleating style. Yes the two can go together, but they don't have to go together.

I don't think I conflated those variables in my post. I was not aware that USA Kilts took a shortcut by not scalloping their pleats on their "economy class" wool kilts. I'll chat with Ian Anderson about that.

My concerns about lower-yardage kilts are that there IS of course a compromise, and that compromise for knife-pleated kilts is that they'll be fewer in number and less deep, so just won't "swing" as nicely, and just not LOOK as nice, and the lesser "heft" of 13 oz fabric could compound that with lighter fabric used to make a kilt from less OF it. Of course, if I'm having a Glen Affric kilt made, there IS no fabric choice. To paraphrase Henry Ford's "you can have any color you want, as long as it's black" pronouncement, I can have any fabric weight I want, as long as it's 13 oz. But I CAN choose pleating style and 5 vs. 8 yard fabrication. I've chatted a bit with Barb Tewksbury about this. She did not recommend skimping on the amount of fabric.

Certainly the "16 ounce tartan" the AI bot found is crappy Pakistani fabric.

I don't think it's necessarily true that the AI bot "found" ANYTHING from Pakistan. I've read that such knockoffs exist, of course. My personal experience with AI search bots is extraordinarily limited, but I've read in several places that, when the bot can't discover an answer, it often just makes things up.

Hence the assertion in the bot's reply that it found its information on House of Edgar's and XmarkstheScot's websites (!!)

[PiperPadre]

I bought a 5 yard of beautiful cloth, but having worn with 8-9 yard kilts since the 70's, I can't get used to the shallow pleats. It seems skimpy.

[jsrnephdoc]

For those not aware, on traditional kilts the excess interior fabric behind the stitched portion of each pleat is cut out so that the part of the kilt in "the small of the back" is scarcely heavier/thicker than the overlapping aprons in front. The 5-yard wool kilts from USA Kilts don't have the pleats cut out so the part of the kilt in "the small of the back" is several times thicker and heavier.

This means that there's not a direct correlation between the number of yards and the kilt's weight; the methods of construction impact weight and thickness too.

I asked Ian Anderson at USA Kilts about this. He gave me permission to quote his reply, which is what follows:

I could interpret “sculpted” to mean two different things.

The nearest to the definition of that word would be: do we shape the pleats to accommodate a waist to hip difference? The answer to that is yes we do. The same exact way we do to 8 yard kilts.

I suspect that they meant that we don’t “scallop” the pleats, and if so that is correct. There is no need to. This is pretty standard for low yardage kilts.

I’ll (over) explain in a way that you are free to copy/paste and quote me directly:

There are two reasons a 5 yard kilt is less expensive than an 8 yard kilt. The more obvious reason is that it has less material. It is also less labor. 8 yards is positively “too much” cloth to pleat up. Especially in the seat, it just bulks up too much. To combat this, scalloping out the backs of the pleats in the top ~1/3 of the kilt is necessary to reduce bulk. That does have a compromising effect on the structural integrity though. After you scallop, you have to reinforce with horsehair, steeking, and a cotton liner to cover all that up. It’s a lot of work fixing what you have “broken!”

Why 5/8’s the material? Why not 1/2 or 3/4? The truth is that 5/8’s is the goldilocks zone. If you only use ½ of the material (or less), then you have to let the pleats be too wide, too few, or too shallow, or more likely a balance of a little bit of all three of those. The kilt starts to drift from the ideal too much. ¾ is a bit too much cloth in there. Ideally, you’d still do the scalloping/lining/steeking. 5/8’s hits the balance perfectly. The pleats ARE wider/fewer/shallower than an 8 yard kilt, but to within a reasonable tolerance, and there is no need for scalloping.

Sometimes folks ask us to scallop our 5 yard kilt. We won’t do it. The finished garment would be too flimsy and we’d have to charge A LOT more for it. We wouldn’t want to put our name on it. Others ask for a 5 yard kilt, but with more material. We refuse this as well because it really aught to have scalloping in that case, which means it is being made like an 8 yard kilt and should be priced more like an 8 yard kilt, but with a yard or two less. We broke our own rule once for a rather insistent customer, and they took to the internet to compare their 5 yard kilt with extra material against another kiltmaker’s 8 yard kilt in a way that made ours look rather unfavorable. Though our 8 yard kilt would have been very similar.

Bottom line? I'm still considering a 5 yard Glen Affric kilt, as much as a defense against the Las Vegas summer inferno as a concession to save money. But I'm hoping to reaffirm that with a "hands on" visit to Wm Glen & Son late next month when we visit dear friends in Northern CA.

[RockyR]

I will slightly disagree with Ian's take (he's my store manager and was one of our kiltmakers before that). I HAVE made a 5 yard kilt for myself with the pleats scalloped out and horsehair canvas put in along with the lining. It was a little (very little) lighter than our normal 5 yarder and was NOT flimsy at all due to the horsehair I used. As a kiltmaker, I just wanted to see what it felt like to wear it, which is why I did it as an experiment (this was back in like 2010 or so).

Is that kilt lighter? Slightly. Was the extra time worth the weight savings? Not really, IMHO. Is it "cooler" since there's a bit less cloth in the small of the back? Again... Slightly.

That said, a 5 yard kilt (or a 4 yard "Casual" kilt like some Scottish kiltmakers produce) does not need the cloth to be scalloped out. 8 Yard kilts need the pleats to be scalloped out for weight reduction and for heat. Think of it this way (broad numbers quoted here):

An 8 yard kilt has 1 yard (roughly) of cloth in the front apron, 1 yard in the under apron and 6 yards stacked up in the pleats.

A 5 Yard kilt has 1 yard (roughly) of cloth in the front apron, 1 yard in the under apron and only 3 yards in the pleats.

The extra 3 yards in the pleats of an 8 yard kilt, all stacked up, make it much warmer, which means it has to be scalloped out. The lesser quantity of 3 yards (roughly) of pleats in a 5 yarder means that it's not nearly as necessary from a warmth or weight perspective. Some people would still prefer the upper portion of a 5 yard wool kilt to have the cloth scalloped out, but that extra time in labor would cost extra money. I have found that most people aren't able to feel the weight savings or heat difference of a 5 yard kilt with scalloped pleats vs. one without.

My $.02. :-)

[IGA]

I don't think it's necessarily true that the AI bot "found" ANYTHING from Pakistan. I've read that such knockoffs exist, of course. My personal experience with AI search bots is extraordinarily limited, but I've read in several places that, when the bot can't discover an answer, it often just makes things up.

(!!)

I think the AI "saw" that HOE produces the cloth AND that they offer both weights and assumed that both must be true simultaneously. And while both CAN be true at the same time for other tartans, I can confidently state that HOE only produces Glen Affric in 13 oz.

I'm now jumping (only slightly) out on a limb here to speculate: it's the colors. They're not standard, so they had to arrange custom dyes to get that tartan done. They only wanted to do that in one weight, not both to limit how much extra cost/time/risk went into developing that tartan. And in general, they lean into 13 oz. tartans and yarn supplies A LOT more. That's a bit of conjecture, but I fell reasonably confidant in it.