Getting back to the Soul of the bike?

[William]

In a sense, this thread may be the antithesis of the "Impact of Aesthetics" thread. In my list building endeavor I'm looking at many builders I haven't looked at or may have never heard of before. It's an interesting study in how well, or bad a web site can be in getting information across to possible customers about their products.

In the other thread there is much talk about aesthetics vs function with the nod tipping toward aesthetics. At the Soulcraft web site I found an interesting take on getting back to the basics (Though the end product still looks sweet :) ). The video is one of the better ones I've seen on what goes into building a frame.

"I've seen a lot of trends come and go over the 20 years since I began working in frame shops and building frames, and over the 10 years since starting Soulcraft, the industry’s increasing emphasis on aesthetics and paint seems to have overshadowed engineering and craftsmanship. It's high time we returned to embracing the bicycle for what it is; a simple and efficient tool.

Our focus is making better frames; built to be ridden rather than idolized, not something to be coveted for what they are, but for what they can do. The goal is always "build it quicker, build it better", and we achieve it by investing in machinery, fixtures, materials, and by designing new construction processes and more accurate fitting methods. Then we move the goal post and start all over again, constantly moving forward. All so your bike can do whatever it is you ask of it, and do it well. "

http://vimeo.com/18969652




William

[oldpotatoe]

In a sense, this thread may be the antithesis of the "Impact of Aesthetics" thread. In my list building endeavor I'm looking at many builders I haven't looked at or may have never heard of before. It's an interesting study in how well, or bad a web site can be in getting information across to possible customers about their products.

In the other thread there is much talk about aesthetics vs function with the nod tipping toward aesthetics. At the Soulcraft web site I found an interesting take on getting back to the basics (Though the end product still looks sweet :) ). The video is one of the better ones I've seen on what goes into building a frame.

"I've seen a lot of trends come and go over the 20 years since I began working in frame shops and building frames, and over the 10 years since starting Soulcraft, the industry’s increasing emphasis on aesthetics and paint seems to have overshadowed engineering and craftsmanship. It's high time we returned to embracing the bicycle for what it is; a simple and efficient tool.

Our focus is making better frames; built to be ridden rather than idolized, not something to be coveted for what they are, but for what they can do. The goal is always "build it quicker, build it better", and we achieve it by investing in machinery, fixtures, materials, and by designing new construction processes and more accurate fitting methods. Then we move the goal post and start all over again, constantly moving forward. All so your bike can do whatever it is you ask of it, and do it well. "

http://vimeo.com/18969652




William

Yep, he's one sharp cookie. Learned from Ross Shafer school of building, still in the same shop. He makes very well designed and constructed bicycle frames. Gonna have a SoulCraft 29er hard tail on the floor this year as a demo.

[rugbysecondrow]

I have seen that before and enjoyed seeing it again.

His bikes are more my flavor, beautiful in their simplicity, purposefulness, quality craftsmanship.

Bikes are tools.

[Climb01742]

In the other thread there is much talk about aesthetics vs function with the nod tipping toward aesthetics.

aesthetics vs function is, i believe, a false choice and a false dichotomy. i don't believe a frame can only be one or the other. and i certainly wouldn't argue that aesthetics are worth more than function. but i would argue that not trying to make a frame more graceful, more proportioned, with appealing graphics and paint is, at the very least, a missed opportunity and at worst, just lazy.

shouldn't a writer be asked to both tell a good story and write gracefully?

shouldn't a chef be asked to cook a delicious dish that is also appealing to the eye?

shouldn't a furniture maker be asked to build a chair that is comfortable, sturdy, enduring and that pleases the eye?

aesthetics aren't shallow and pointless. it is half of almost any craft. again, to be clear, it isn't more important than function. it is function's twin sibling. and beyond that, aesthetics are varied and open to a builder's interpretation. for example, i think moots has an aesthetic, in the same way that shaker furniture has an aesthetic.

[phcollard]

Awesome video. Thanks for sharing!

[William]

aesthetics vs function is, i believe, a false choice and a false dichotomy. i don't believe a frame can only be one or the other. and i certainly wouldn't argue that aesthetics are worth more than function. but i would argue that not trying to make a frame more graceful, more proportioned, with appealing graphics and paint is, at the very least, a missed opportunity and at worst, just lazy.

shouldn't a writer be asked to both tell a good story and write gracefully?

shouldn't a chef be asked to cook a delicious dish that is also appealing to the eye?

shouldn't a furniture maker be asked to build a chair that is comfortable, sturdy, enduring and that pleases the eye?

aesthetics aren't shallow and pointless. it is half of almost any craft. again, to be clear, it isn't more important than function. it is function's twin sibling. and beyond that, aesthetics are varied and open to a builder's interpretation. for example, i think moots has an aesthetic, in the same way that shaker furniture has an aesthetic.

I don't believe a frame should be one or the other either. His focus is more on the function, but in honing his skills for function, a simple yet appealing aesthetic comes through.



William

[Vientomas]

"embracing the bicycle for what it is; a simple and efficient tool."

This sounds a lot like the builders aesthetic.

[rugbysecondrow]

Agreed, but then it can look ridiculous, like people putting chrome rims on a 4x4...it just looks silly. At some point, each of us will draw our own line where a bike crosses over from a useful tool something more reminiscent of jewelry. To me, that is when there has been an overshadowing, the function has been lost, sacrificed for bling, pomp. For some, anything more than a Surly is too much for a bike, for others a Speedvagan makes perfect sense...we all draw our own lines.

The best builders are the ones who can do this, find the proper balance between the two for the customer. Not all builders are for all customers.:






aesthetics vs function is, i believe, a false choice and a false dichotomy. i don't believe a frame can only be one or the other. and i certainly wouldn't argue that aesthetics are worth more than function. but i would argue that not trying to make a frame more graceful, more proportioned, with appealing graphics and paint is, at the very least, a missed opportunity and at worst, just lazy.

shouldn't a writer be asked to both tell a good story and write gracefully?

shouldn't a chef be asked to cook a delicious dish that is also appealing to the eye?

shouldn't a furniture maker be asked to build a chair that is comfortable, sturdy, enduring and that pleases the eye?

aesthetics aren't shallow and pointless. it is half of almost any craft. again, to be clear, it isn't more important than function. it is function's twin sibling. and beyond that, aesthetics are varied and open to a builder's interpretation. for example, i think moots has an aesthetic, in the same way that shaker furniture has an aesthetic.

[JLNK]

A builder who has both an aesthetic and function in his frames is Richard Sachs. When I got my frame from him I wanted to just look at it like a piece of sculpture, until I rode it. A most wonderful frame in every sense.

[William]

"embracing the bicycle for what it is; a simple and efficient tool."

This sounds a lot like the builders aesthetic.

In a literal sense yes. In today's usage of the word it boils down to being pretty. atmo of course.

...the industry’s increasing emphasis on aesthetics and paint seems to have overshadowed engineering and craftsmanship.




William