Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2007 9:10:49 GMT
I recently heard of a forge called Angel Sword. They are supposed to make some of the toughest swords available. I'm kinda skeptical, though. Does anyone know anything about Daniel Watson?
|
|
|
Post by hotspur on May 7, 2007 16:34:23 GMT
He has a pretty good following but his swords are a matter of budget and taste. There has been a bit of contention over the years concerning advertising and some of his marketing. Nothing really magical there and one could easily spend as much elsewhere.
A visit ot his site and some Google searches would certainly answer many of your potential questions. If I was going to spend that much money, it wouldn't be with Angel Sword. The fellow has talent but my money would go elsewhere. There are lots of one offf and custom makers out there. It's kind of beyond the scope of this forum.
Cheers
Hotspur; some like his swords very much
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2007 17:41:06 GMT
What about his claims to have the "toughest high hardness swords in the world"? Granted, its probably unsubstanciated, but his arguement seems so convincing. I mean, he has a CHART. And a secret hardening method. It could all be statistical smoke and mirrors, and fantasy. He has videos of people cutting through not 2, or 4 tatami, but 8. Then 9. Then 12 rolled up into one big one, and then 14, rolled up as well. All done by Daniel himself. And, I almost pooped my pants when I saw this, a man in a heavy cutting competition using Angel Swords exclusively, cut through 23 tatami without breaking a sweat. And the destructive testing that he does? Amazing. Allegedly, 57RH, and able to bend it nearly in half without breaking. I wonder if the 57 RH has ever been verified? Heres a link so you can see it for yourself. www.angelsword.com/videos/videos.php
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2007 17:43:32 GMT
What about his claims to have the "toughest high hardness swords in the world"? Granted, its probably unsubstanciated, but his arguement seems so convincing. I mean, he has a CHART. And a secret hardening method. It could all be statistical smoke and mirrors, and fantasy. He has videos of people cutting through not 2, or 4 tatami, but 8. Then 9. Then 12 rolled up into one big one, and then 14, rolled up as well. All done by Daniel himself. And, I almost pooped my pants when I saw this, a man in a heavy cutting competition using Angel Swords exclusively, cut through 23 tatami without breaking a sweat. And the destructive testing that he does? Amazing. Allegedly, 57RH, and able to bend it nearly in half without breaking. I wonder if the 57 RH has ever been verified? Heres a link so you can see it for yourself. www.angelsword.com/videos/videos.php
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on May 7, 2007 18:57:36 GMT
AngelSword is located here in Texas and they have a permanent booth at Scarborough Faire. I visited them a few weeks ago and spent a little time at their booth (which is almost the size of my house!) handling 5-6 of their swords. I concentrated on falchions. They handled very well and were, in a word, exquisite. But for US$1,999.00 they had better be! I discussed how I had a tendency to break or otherwise damage my swords. The gentleman working with me at the booth said "You should buy one of these. If you break it, please try to have it on video, because no one has ever been able to break one before. We would really like to see how you were able to do it while using it in anyway remotely like a sword." They seemed very eager to stand behind their claims. Also, a guy I work with owns an AngelSword two-hander. It is ornate to the point of being a bit gaudy, but handles like a dream. However, he bought it as a wallhanger and costume piece, so he won't cut with it or otherwise use it like a sword. Boohoo, 'cause I'd love to cut with it sometime.
|
|
|
Post by hotspur on May 7, 2007 19:59:07 GMT
The thing is that Daniel Watson really isn't doing anything truly extraordinary. His Techno Wootz got some buzz a efw years ago and some appreciate and buy the blades. Some smiths are quite open about their work with heat treatment, others farm it out and there are still some that feel they are turning lead into gold and that sells swords, if you can sell your rap. Sure, WOW factor cutting demonstrations and destructive tests sell swords. Some were just as impressed with the old story on his site about living steel. If you look further back than even that, you will see him shunning the whole ABS¹ testing and grading process. Good for him, others do as well. The funny thing is that these same isolationists are quite willing to use the same criteria to sell their product. As I said, he's got some talent and a fairly unique niche market. A lot of his success has been word of mouth and his marketing. He does offer things like trading in a sword and as good a warranty as you will find anywhere. I have never handled his product. I have seen a pencil thin tang that broke and that alone started a lot of the anti-sentiment. That is pretty much pre-history to any of these sword discussion groups. The customer received settlement and pretty much went his way. I would say that one circulated photo was responsible for a lot of the adverse scrutiny Daniel has received over the years. Me, I look at the price tag and know where else I would spend the money. For folk looking for the uber techno-sword and buying into the "family" plan, they may represent a value. One usually sees an extreme reaction, either way, when discussing Angel Sword. I kind of shrug and study other things. I've read his bio, no real shame there. What tends to develop from these conversations is who makes the best sword. That depends on a lot of criteria. Cheers Hotspur; a couple of thousand dollars buys two antiques on my list¹ www.americanbladesmith.com/ABS_MSTest.htm
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on May 7, 2007 21:25:04 GMT
www.swordarts.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1224www.swordarts.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=5&t=1194&st=80entry18184--- Personally, I wouldn't buy one of his swords because of his highfalutin holier than thou attitude exceeding the snob line. I was doing research on this "Adrian Ko vs. Danial Watson" lawsuit and I found these threads. Now, I'm really not a fan of SFI, but Daniels comments, especially those of anything lower than 55 HC not deserving to be called a sword (hell, even I'm not that extreme...) rubbed me poorly. On another note, why pay so much for a sword? In all logic, his "magic" swords are a pretty poor marketting strategy and his prices are inflated about 3-4 times over compared to what they really cost. I'd prefer a company like A&A or Albion for european swords or Bugei for katana. Simply put, Daniel is not really as great of a swordsmith as he seems to fancy himself as. Just my impressions, and I may be wrong. Feel free to verbally beat me with 1337-sp34k
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2007 21:42:33 GMT
well his cutting demos are nice, but look at the size of the swords they're using, and also how INCREDIBLY long the hilts are... TONS of leverage... anyway, back to the point at hand.
Considering he's got independant studies to microscopically confirm the metallurgy in his 'techno-wootz', i'm sure that they're at least in the same league as howard clark's L6 bainite katana.
However, i must say, from an aesthetic standpoint, I'm not really impressed by a lot of his stuff. Now if i had several thousand dollars to spend(read: 2500+ easily...) and he agreed to make a custom piece, I might take him up on that. Overall, I just don't like the way his finished pieces look. A lot of it is proportions, a lot of it is the 'shiny' factor in a lot of his hilt assemblies. I imagine a lot of his swords would slip around in the hand with just a little bit of sweat from the looks of the shiny polished grips.
Anyway, that being said, his S-7 swords are probably on par with the L6 bainite swords. Smiths that specialize in a certain steel tend to be able to get the most out of that particular steel. I would imagine that the wootz is quite a bit tougher(and prettier) than the s-7.
I'm sure his 'living steel', as much work goes into it, is probably the lowest quality out of the bunch, which is silly since it's the most expensive.
I think he sells bars of the techno wootz, so If I was desperate for a sword made from that stuff I'd buy a billet, have someone else forge, shape, and grind it, then send it back to Daniel for heat treatment, then I'd have someone else mount it. Then I think it might be worth a couple grand.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2007 0:46:58 GMT
lol Hotspur, I've never heard someone sound so negative without saying anything mean.
And thanks for the links, Rammstein.
There sure is a lot of controversy around Daniel. And on his site, he claims that his swords are superior to the L6 bainite, and according to a statement in one of the forums Rammstein left us, that was independantly verified.
That T Ellis guy sure hates Angel sword. Some of his arguements don't make any sense. Regardless of wether or not it is traditionally acceptable for sword blades to be 50 HC, 57 HC swords would have significantly better edge retention.
I didn't see anything that Daniel himself said, but that whole "Anything below 55HC shouldn't be considered a sword" is only representative of his commitment. And I doubt his swords are inflated TOO much. There are things like his "Hugen & Munnin" sword, which is now selling for $20,000 that are definately pretty extreme.
The whole "Magic" thing throws me off a little, too. I'd just call him eccentric. And the look of a lot of his swords do suffer. The whole thing is very controversial, but then again, so was Nikola Teslas.
Sorry if I'm sounding biased, but I was really impressed with some of what he did. And if my new job goes through, I'm gonna be owning one.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on May 8, 2007 1:05:55 GMT
www.angelsword.com/truesword1.phphe calls people selling steel blunts (albion, A&A, etc.) obviously not students of history. Firstly, NONE of his european swords even resemble anything historically plausible in design, ecept for a few very iffy examples. The fact that he's even ascociation his swords with history is strange. Secondly, the claim that anything less than 55 rc are "Faux Swords" and don't have the strength to cut through armor is utterly rediculous in two ways. Firstly, his assumption that hardness is what determines a sword is fairly insipid and shows that he has no grasp of historical hardness. Secondly, NO sword can cut through armor, at least nothing harder than maille. And then, many of these swords that were designed for that don't meet his elitist requirements. Apparently even real swords aren't swords then. For reference, Craig Johnson, a brilliant researcher in the medieval sword and owner of A&A, wrote this article on sword hardness: www.myarmoury.com/feature_bladehardness.html
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on May 8, 2007 1:19:17 GMT
www.angelsword.com/truesword4.phpthis entire argument is false. Swords are not easy to use, and thinking otherwise is a sure sign of psuedo-intellectualism on his part. And in my opinion, that 10th century viking sword looks about 1-2 centuries too early for this given time frame, and quite probably not even viking made. It looks mainland european to me, or at least english. Secondly, it seems far too shiny and fake-looking to be an antique, although I've seen some antiques in good condition. I've never seen any that good though. I'm not criticizing the quality of their work, rather the attitude associated with them and there advertising of their swords as being "historical" in addition to their supposed knowledge of historical swords.
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on May 8, 2007 1:19:32 GMT
I have been following the whole Angelsword vs. the rest of the sword world for a year or so. It first caught my interest when the guy I work with told me about his, and showed it to me one day.
I visited the Anglesword site and read the claims. Then I read some things on myArmoury and SFI. Quite a big stink if I remember correctly.
I am not a big fan of the whole mindset at Angelsword toward marketing their swords as anything "magical or mystical" or hyper-superior to every other sword out there, but they do seem to make a high quality sword. They also design and produce each one as an individual, unique sword. I have not seen a single sword in their line that is historically accurate. But I've only looked at what's on their site and what was in their booth. That's maybe 200-300 swords in total. So they could make historically accurate swords, based on surviving specimens. I just haven't seen any.
Every single Angelsword sword I've looked at seems to have been built along the lines of making a piece of artwork, and assembling it around a fancy blade. It is something that appeals to a certain type of sword collector. Personally, I would never buy one, not even at a 50% discount. But at the same time I would never begrudge my coworker his Angelsword. Nor would I offer any disparaging comments about him spending enough on it to buy one of Albion's Museum line swords.
What I mean to say is, minus the marketing hype and hoohaa, these strike me the same way Jody Sampson's swords strike me. Beautiful works of art, rendered by artists who happen to also be fine swordsmiths.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2007 1:43:26 GMT
The whole what is historically correct arguement is somewhat open to specualtion, we werent there.We only know of what has been left behind that we have found.As I showed in the "katana is boring thread" a lot of experimentation went on,I'm sure the same happened in europe,so "historically correct" is a broad term. However I always stay clear of anyone who surrounds them selves with lots of hype.I think if the product is really that good it will speak for itself. Shooter, I love Jody's work ,altho some of his stuff is a bit "out there" he makes some beautifull peices,I even like his katana.I'm surprised that when I see his stuff come up for sale second hand it is always well under what the person payed for it. I would have thought it would hold its value better.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on May 8, 2007 1:49:43 GMT
Ronin, true, but we do know what WASN"T there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2007 2:19:00 GMT
do you? how? There may have been designs that were entirely regional that no one has found an example of. All of history is just speculation and assumption based on available data.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2007 2:20:28 GMT
Rammstein, yeah, your right. His claims to superiority are pretty pompous, and his swords are pretty far from historically accurate. Jody Samson does some pretty cool work. But what turns me off about it is all of the pieces that I've seen are heavily hollow ground. Now I do understand that it is a historically accurate way to grind certain types of swords, but hollow grinding scimitars just seems... wrong.
|
|
|
Post by hotspur on May 8, 2007 2:25:23 GMT
I knew this was going to go down the comparison road and it's easy to do for the wrong reasons.
A Daniel Watson S7 blade is better than a Howard Clark L6 banite blade. What is the context?
I put good money on the Howard Clark blade looking a whole lot nicer. Howard developed a process to meet his needs of fullfilling requests for a tough blade that would present well. He made no secret of the fact that anyone could do it, the information was out there.
S7 is a good tough steel. I've yet to see anyone getting good visual results with it, in terms of a nice hamon. As far as I'm concerned, the steels that Gus, A&A, Albion and Del Tin use makes fine swords. Daniel may feel S7 provides him some benefits in a forging context. He was actually a bit late to jump on the cryogenic bus and that has a whole other following of its own.
If I'm not saying anything mean, it's because there is no real need to. One likes the product or they don't. One understands the background and contexts, or they don't.
If this was Blade Forums, the popcorn and hot dog vendors would be setting up. Old news, really old news. I tend to view it in the nostalgic perspective one might take when watching old films. I'd poke around for the rather good biography that is out there and share it here but I figure anyone that is really interested in a topic is capable of doing some research.
Cheers
Hotspur; Dan has his fans
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2007 2:29:35 GMT
So there are more people experimenting with cryogenic metal enhancement? You sure know a lot, Hotspur. Thanks for the info, again.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on May 8, 2007 9:58:46 GMT
Ronin, was the semi automatic machine gun availible to the 16th century samurai? That's how obvious it is, just for a comparison. It has nothing to do with my skill to tell period designs (which I don't have too much of). It has to do with what was availible and what wasn't. When a sword with reverse profile taper is discovered in 11th century europe, I'll change my views The hornedgod, Jody smason has good reputation as a custom smith. I think the hollow grind is custom designed, so if you're interested, better t ask him. On the subject of angel swords, they are extremely good swords. I just don't like the advertising and claims of their mnufacturers. They may very well be the best swords in the world, but with an attitude like that, I'd rather stick to my price range and buy a gen2. And for those prices, I'd buy 10 albions for each sword I could buy from angel sword.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2007 12:45:07 GMT
not quite, but they were working on it by the 17th century What I'm saying is in a thousand years a historian could dig up this and from that conclude that all 49 Mercs looked like that when in fact they looked like this Just because we havent found evidence that some thing existed doesnt mean it didnt. Who's to say Vikings didnt have leaf blades? Just cause no one has found one doesnt mean they didnt.History is conclusions, not fact more so where there are no written records. Where there is its been edited and revised for both social and economic reasons just like the bible and every other manuscript depending on the translators leanings.
|
|