Man stop with the measurements already. Really you've proven us, as you should have yourself, that your work is good. And what you seem to take out of it in general is that the knife performs overall marginally better.
Now is it impeccable... or the true question, is it just exactly how good you wanted it to become? Both are really just two different stances to a same goal... and a world of personal discinctions still.
It will take more than one knife before you'll just know. And that's ok. Notice a common point to all the best answers you've gotten already: these folks have much more experience than you.
I appreciate where further questioning comes from. No, I truly do: it's BECAUSE these folks have so much more experience than you. And so it happens, even there, that you as an invidual carry some doubts about even what these folks said. It is not because you consider yourself better, probably more quirks of your own singular experience at once with specific knives and thinning those specific ones in your best means - which of course, comes with many doubts.
Having doubts where you are is healthy. Having them even against experienced discourse is even better: it proves you sort of know what you want even though you can't entirely express it with the work nor the words. There's muscle memory in you that tells you: well this is not helping ME much, and that particular opinion goes against my grain, and then the brains come in and states: since it comes from an experienced folk, well I must be wrong.
But the truth of it is, so far and within how the back and forth happens, you both are wrong and/or right. They've got good background to tell you stuff. But since it's always gonna be you doing the next work, well you've got good background as well to hold onto some of your ideas, feelings, opinions, especially where these correlate instantly with your experience. And correlating with you experience is not only "science" you can theorize on indefinitely. It's muscle memory and the instinct and results thereof.
If you'd have presented really poor results, I'd push you towards listening to the folks. But where you've carried your work at already, it really will more come down to you. Like, being open to what folks say, but keep your doubts and stick to your experience. Do a few more knives - or try to make even better of the ones there in your possession. You'll know for yourself. Unlike me you can be patient about it and learn without compromising yourself. Or like me you buy lots of stuff for a couple years and don't hesitate a second throwing them all to the stones after some initial courtesy period - that is trying and understanding the tool before you, especially where it has some unexpected good attributes despite your so far common sense/general KKF view that it's "not very good".
What won't help you much I truly believe are these two things:
- measurements
- just blindly "do as said" and risk to lose the entire foundation you'll most readily learn from: what you've experienced and your own doubts and how you can school yourself from establishing a rationale between them and the most "instinctively helping" advice folks will give you along the way.
As you can see none of these forbids questions. But when you have like four-five questions, you're bound to encounter 4-5 different people that either worked with radically different knives than yours, either have 4-5 entirely cutting styles "agglomeration" of what's good according to them you'll never entirely tally with because it just doesn't work for you - by which I mean no obstination on your behalf, just not getting the cutting food results you figure the work should have garanteed with THAT knife that is in YOUR hand.
I've been there countless times. More often than not, in my errors of a learning curve mind you, I've found it to be a question of wanting to finish pretty and achieving it through some tricks or some real down to essential work: it'll either come as overpolishing or making something uneven very very flat. Both places are ESPECIALLY what I will do my damnedest to avoid beyond ANY other criterion you'll throw at me to question the work I do.
So according to my experience: you can thin a knife superbly and find it to be no real better than before: you've made the easiness of separation perfect, but food sticks 66% more than it did before, and suddenly the whole behavior of the knife, even where it essentially cuts excellently now, will not come out as effective as the initial no-effort cutting would like to prove it is. In most cases it traduces itself by alleviating or eliminating things like wedging or feeling blunt/low key in denser food, yet to the cost of worsening the sticking, suction, or natural food release of the knife. Which is sometimes said to be a non-variable, like cutting styles and geometry and blade type are much more important factors and such...
Well yeah they are, so you should... do... what: throw the blade to the trash? Sell it at lost? Never buy that type again? Seeking totally different geometry? Well... perhaps you should but let's start from a legitimate point where, if you decided to work on the knife, it was worth it to your eyes. What did you do that contradicted the improvement you're bound to have noticed as well, as a result of your best bet and careful work of making it better AND visibly without messing it up at all?
Do you really think I could give you a "Rule" into any of that? Otherwise than rather a "better not to" and "will work most of the time" general stance around which to attune the particular work a particular knife to your particular eye needs done. But then my advice wouldn't accord itself so well to your eye. Perhaps mine has seen more than yours... but then, just perhaps yours didn't need to see so much before doing it better than I can already.
Now is it impeccable... or the true question, is it just exactly how good you wanted it to become? Both are really just two different stances to a same goal... and a world of personal discinctions still.
It will take more than one knife before you'll just know. And that's ok. Notice a common point to all the best answers you've gotten already: these folks have much more experience than you.
I appreciate where further questioning comes from. No, I truly do: it's BECAUSE these folks have so much more experience than you. And so it happens, even there, that you as an invidual carry some doubts about even what these folks said. It is not because you consider yourself better, probably more quirks of your own singular experience at once with specific knives and thinning those specific ones in your best means - which of course, comes with many doubts.
Having doubts where you are is healthy. Having them even against experienced discourse is even better: it proves you sort of know what you want even though you can't entirely express it with the work nor the words. There's muscle memory in you that tells you: well this is not helping ME much, and that particular opinion goes against my grain, and then the brains come in and states: since it comes from an experienced folk, well I must be wrong.
But the truth of it is, so far and within how the back and forth happens, you both are wrong and/or right. They've got good background to tell you stuff. But since it's always gonna be you doing the next work, well you've got good background as well to hold onto some of your ideas, feelings, opinions, especially where these correlate instantly with your experience. And correlating with you experience is not only "science" you can theorize on indefinitely. It's muscle memory and the instinct and results thereof.
If you'd have presented really poor results, I'd push you towards listening to the folks. But where you've carried your work at already, it really will more come down to you. Like, being open to what folks say, but keep your doubts and stick to your experience. Do a few more knives - or try to make even better of the ones there in your possession. You'll know for yourself. Unlike me you can be patient about it and learn without compromising yourself. Or like me you buy lots of stuff for a couple years and don't hesitate a second throwing them all to the stones after some initial courtesy period - that is trying and understanding the tool before you, especially where it has some unexpected good attributes despite your so far common sense/general KKF view that it's "not very good".
What won't help you much I truly believe are these two things:
- measurements
- just blindly "do as said" and risk to lose the entire foundation you'll most readily learn from: what you've experienced and your own doubts and how you can school yourself from establishing a rationale between them and the most "instinctively helping" advice folks will give you along the way.
As you can see none of these forbids questions. But when you have like four-five questions, you're bound to encounter 4-5 different people that either worked with radically different knives than yours, either have 4-5 entirely cutting styles "agglomeration" of what's good according to them you'll never entirely tally with because it just doesn't work for you - by which I mean no obstination on your behalf, just not getting the cutting food results you figure the work should have garanteed with THAT knife that is in YOUR hand.
I've been there countless times. More often than not, in my errors of a learning curve mind you, I've found it to be a question of wanting to finish pretty and achieving it through some tricks or some real down to essential work: it'll either come as overpolishing or making something uneven very very flat. Both places are ESPECIALLY what I will do my damnedest to avoid beyond ANY other criterion you'll throw at me to question the work I do.
So according to my experience: you can thin a knife superbly and find it to be no real better than before: you've made the easiness of separation perfect, but food sticks 66% more than it did before, and suddenly the whole behavior of the knife, even where it essentially cuts excellently now, will not come out as effective as the initial no-effort cutting would like to prove it is. In most cases it traduces itself by alleviating or eliminating things like wedging or feeling blunt/low key in denser food, yet to the cost of worsening the sticking, suction, or natural food release of the knife. Which is sometimes said to be a non-variable, like cutting styles and geometry and blade type are much more important factors and such...
Well yeah they are, so you should... do... what: throw the blade to the trash? Sell it at lost? Never buy that type again? Seeking totally different geometry? Well... perhaps you should but let's start from a legitimate point where, if you decided to work on the knife, it was worth it to your eyes. What did you do that contradicted the improvement you're bound to have noticed as well, as a result of your best bet and careful work of making it better AND visibly without messing it up at all?
Do you really think I could give you a "Rule" into any of that? Otherwise than rather a "better not to" and "will work most of the time" general stance around which to attune the particular work a particular knife to your particular eye needs done. But then my advice wouldn't accord itself so well to your eye. Perhaps mine has seen more than yours... but then, just perhaps yours didn't need to see so much before doing it better than I can already.
Last edited:
