Battle Of The Flexes

[duende]

I recently purchased an Ahab pen, which as you may already know, has been designed to provide some flex with a steel nib. Do any of you know if there is a performance difference (qualitative or quantitative) between a gold and a steel flex nib? I'm a flex virgin, so your input is appreciated.

[jiraltan]

I have both steel and gold flex nibs and while gold should in theory perform better, steel works well for me too. I don't write outrageously wide letters so either one is fine for me.

 

The difference I've seen is that steel is stiffer and will railroad more easily if you push down hard, while some flexible gold nibs can be pushed until the tines spread very wide and still put lots of ink on the page. I have a Waterman that can be easily pushed to the width of a fork tine and beyond, but it makes me nervous to push it more than that, and I would need to write huge letters if I wanted to flex it that much. OTOH, I also have a surprisingly flexible steel Esterbrook 9788 nib, but it railroads if I push it more than the width of a fork tine, which is still more than I really need. It's fun to use regardless. The same goes for the Noodlers', they go up to about a fork tine width before they start to railroad.

 

A little stiffness in a flex nib isn't necessarily a bad thing if you aren't extremely practiced or disciplined or have shaky hands like me. A really thin bendy nib can be like writing with a brush made out of a single hair, it can be frustratingly unpredictable and move all over the place. It's surprising after using flex nibs for a while and then going back to a stiff nib how much easier and faster writing is.

[duende]

I have both steel and gold flex nibs and while gold should in theory perform better, steel works well for me too. I don't write outrageously wide letters so either one is fine for me.

 

The difference I've seen is that steel is stiffer and will railroad more easily if you push down hard, while some flexible gold nibs can be pushed until the tines spread very wide and still put lots of ink on the page. I have a Waterman that can be easily pushed to the width of a fork tine and beyond, but it makes me nervous to push it more than that, and I would need to write huge letters if I wanted to flex it that much. OTOH, I also have a surprisingly flexible steel Esterbrook 9788 nib, but it railroads if I push it more than the width of a fork tine, which is still more than I really need. It's fun to use regardless. The same goes for the Noodlers', they go up to about a fork tine width before they start to railroad.

 

A little stiffness in a flex nib isn't necessarily a bad thing if you aren't extremely practiced or disciplined or have shaky hands like me. A really thin bendy nib can be like writing with a brush made out of a single hair, it can be frustratingly unpredictable and move all over the place. It's surprising after using flex nibs for a while and then going back to a stiff nib how much easier and faster writing is.

 

Those are some great insights. Thanks for sharing. I really like the idea of writing with a pen that feels like a single-hair brush.

[Randal6393]

Now, if you really want to experiment with flex, get an oblique holder and a handful of dip pens, some Higgins Eternal ink, and a Rhodia or Clairfontaine notebook. Most of the dip pens that are used to do copperplate or spenserian are not gold, rather steel. Mostly because it's a lot easier to toss an inexpensive steel nib that is ruined. Gold ones cost, if you can even find any.

 

A Noodler flex pen is nice but in no way compares one for the flex experience.

 

Enjoy,

[andybiotic]

All my flex nibs are gold, I have yet to encounter a true flex in steel. Bo bo has plenty of steel flexes though, all semi to easy full flexes, don't know if he has any wet noodle steel nib. Mine superflex and wet noodle are gold. But then again, the best dip nibs are steel, I guess that is because they are meant to be cheap and replaceable so they can make the tines very thin and flexible but also fragile.

 

How do you compare flexes anyway? there are so many aspects to include. Do you just mean softness? do you include responsiveness/snap back? Plus there are so many degree of flexibility in both gold and steel nibs that it is very difficult to get a trend on either one, let alone finding a difference between them.

 

Also, like Randal says, the noodler's flex is a good introductory flex nib but there is no comparison to the true vintage flexes.

Edited December 2, 2011 by andybiotic

[smk]

I suspect that Gold flex nibs were developed so they won't rust from constant contact with ink in FPs. The use of Gold probably didn't have anything to do with it being better for flex nibs.

 

Steel nibs with dip pens do provide the best flex experience but are fragile and do not last very long.

 

Having said that, I do lust after a John Mottishaw modified needlepoint nib with full flex added :-)

 

Salman

[duende]

 

Steel nibs with dip pens do provide the best flex experience but are fragile and do not last very long.

 

Salman

 

Interesting. But shouldn't gold provide the best experience because it's more flexible than steel?

[duende]

 

How do you compare flexes anyway? there are so many aspects to include. Do you just mean softness? do you include responsiveness/snap back? Plus there are so many degree of flexibility in both gold and steel nibs that it is very difficult to get a trend on either one, let alone finding a difference between them.

 

Also, like Randal says, the noodler's flex is a good introductory flex nib but there is no comparison to the true vintage flexes.

 

These are good questions. I am not familiar with flex to answer them, but perhaps there are others who can elucidate the matter. You state that there is no comparison between the Ahab nib and "true vintage flexes". So, you must have some criterion to make this judgement. Why would a vintage flex be better than the Ahab nib?

[Columba Livia]

Looking at 19th century sources for information about gold (dip) pens, the focus does seem to have been on the fact that they lasted longer than steel dip pens. Generally people seemed to regard them as a useful convenience but not as good for fine writing as steel dip pens, here for example, the Penman's art journal in December 1892:

 

http://i.imgur.com/j8Nei.jpg

 

http://www.archive.org/stream/penmansartjourna16unse#page/n117/mode/1up

 

When the author refers to steel pens there, he means steel dip pens, not fountain pens with steel nibs.

 

The September 1881 issue of the Penman's Art Journal recommends that people who want to improve their penmanship use a steel dip pen rather than a gold pen, in the March 1877 issue of the Penman's Art Journal they state that gold pens are "indifferent", that they don't wear out like steel dip pens do, but that steel dip pens can produce better writing.

 

I think in the end, it is not how much the nib flexes and what material it is made of that counts, but what you do with it. This writing by the famous late 19th century American calligrapher George A. Gaskell doesn't use much flex, but makes it count when it is used:

 

http://i.imgur.com/mj6so.jpg

[Randal6393]

Hi, duende,

 

Was wondering -- have you any experience with italic? Or any of the broad-edged alphabets? What are your goals? Flex is fine and gives a subtle shading to writing. Shading is also given by using an edged nib (think chisel-shape). Historically, most writing has been done with edged nibs and flex has not been part of the equation.

 

Don't know your level of knowledge with pens -- are you looking for a new hand to study? A way to improve your existing hand? Or ... ?

 

As for "a performance difference between a gold and a steel flex nib" -- your original question -- I would have to reply "not really." You will find good steel nibs and good gold nibs. My theory as to why good gold nibs tend to be vintage is that our industrial society has replaced annealing and tempering and hand manufacture with metallurgy and mass manufacturing. Thus cheaper nibs that work but are not as finely tuned and quality-tested as vintage nibs. The real trick with selecting a nib is to know what you want and to be able to select from amongst the many pens out there.

 

Best of luck to you,

I recently purchased an Ahab pen, which as you may already know, has been designed to provide some flex with a steel nib. Do any of you know if there is a performance difference (qualitative or quantitative) between a gold and a steel flex nib? I'm a flex virgin, so your input is appreciated.

[Columba Livia]

Historically, most writing has been done with edged nibs and flex has not been part of the equation.

 

I've been doing a bit of reading of 19th century sources, and it does seem that flexibility was part of the equation when writing with a quill pen. In fact, one of the criticisms first levelled at steel dip pens was that they were not as flexible as quills which suggests that people both expected and desired flexibility/elasticity.

 

An encyclopaedia published in 1836:

 

"Mr Perry first overcame the rigidity complained of in steel pens generally, by introducing apertures between the shoulders and the point of the pen; thus transferring the elasticity of the pen to a position below instead of above the shoulder."

 

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=CmUIAAAAQAAJ&dq=quill%20steel%20pen%20slit%20elasticity&pg=PA733#v=onepage&q=quill%20steel%20pen%20slit%20elasticity&f=false

 

A book published in 1866:

 

"metallic pens, or rather steel pens, became more popular, and were found to be equal in flexibility and far more durable than the old-fashioned quill"

 

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=S_w9AAAAcAAJ&dq=steel%20pen%20flexibility&pg=PA634#v=onepage&q=steel%20pen%20flexibility&f=false

 

From a magazine published in 1838:

 

"although the metallic nibs greatly increased the durability of the pen, it was at the expense of the elasticity of the quill"

 

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=i1YFAAAAQAAJ&dq=quill%20steel%20pen%20slit&pg=PA63#v=onepage&q=quill%20steel%20pen%20slit&f=false

 

Here, in 1864, "double elastic" pens which were were advertised for sale as being equal to a swan quill:

 

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=nmAVAAAAIAAJ&dq=steel%20pen%20elasticity&pg=PA141#v=onepage&q=steel%20pen%20elasticity&f=false

 

So people must have expected a fair bit of flex from swan quills to expect a steel pen with double flexibility to be their equal.

 

A book published in 1980, on drawing, states that:

 

"Unlike the reed pen, quill pens were light and pliable, responded readily to variations in of touch and pressure and consequently, made a responsible, smooth and flexible line."

 

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wy-sAAAAIAAJ&lpg=PA396&dq=quill%20responsive&pg=PA396#v=onepage&q=quill%20responsive&f=false

Edited December 2, 2011 by Columba Livia

[smk]

 

Steel nibs with dip pens do provide the best flex experience but are fragile and do not last very long.

 

Salman

 

Interesting. But shouldn't gold provide the best experience because it's more flexible than steel?

 

Gold is softer than steel which is not the same as being more flexible. In fact flexible nibs in Gold are often made of 14c Gold as any more Gold content, as in 18c or 21c, makes the nib prone to springing.

 

Just to be clear, my contention is not that one material is inherently superior than the other. Gold nibs can be, and in some cases are, equal in performance to Steel dip pen nibs with added durability. However, these nibs are usually quite expensive.

 

S.

[WestLothian]

This is an informative technical article comparing the metal properties. http://www.pentrace.net/penbase/Data_Returns/full_article.asp?id=418

 

The perfect snap-back and much finer hairlines of good-quality, dip-pen, steel nibs (with no tipping) are hard to beat even with the earliest and softest eyedropper gold nibs.

It's a pity that there is no practical and simple fountain pen feed for the Gillott 303 or Leonhardt EF Principal. I know that there is a pump pen on the market with mixed reviews.

[duende]

Looking at 19th century sources for information about gold (dip) pens, the focus does seem to have been on the fact that they lasted longer than steel dip pens. Generally people seemed to regard them as a useful convenience but not as good for fine writing as steel dip pens, here for example, the Penman's art journal in December 1892:

 

http://www.archive.org/stream/penmansartjourna16unse#page/n117/mode/1up

 

When the author refers to steel pens there, he means steel dip pens, not fountain pens with steel nibs.

 

The September 1881 issue of the Penman's Art Journal recommends that people who want to improve their penmanship use a steel dip pen rather than a gold pen, in the March 1877 issue of the Penman's Art Journal they state that gold pens are "indifferent", that they don't wear out like steel dip pens do, but that steel dip pens can produce better writing.

 

I think in the end, it is not how much the nib flexes and what material it is made of that counts, but what you do with it. This writing by the famous late 19th century American calligrapher George A. Gaskell doesn't use much flex, but makes it count when it is used:

 

http://i.imgur.com/mj6so.jpg

 

That's a wonderful sample! Thanks for sharing.

[duende]

Historically, most writing has been done with edged nibs and flex has not been part of the equation.

 

I've been doing a bit of reading of 19th century sources, and it does seem that flexibility was part of the equation when writing with a quill pen. In fact, one of the criticisms first levelled at steel dip pens was that they were not as flexible as quills which suggests that people both expected and desired flexibility/elasticity.

 

....

 

 

It's hard to imagine how something so small and deceptively simple has generated such a long history.

[duende]

Hi, duende,

 

Was wondering -- have you any experience with italic? Or any of the broad-edged alphabets? What are your goals? Flex is fine and gives a subtle shading to writing. Shading is also given by using an edged nib (think chisel-shape). Historically, most writing has been done with edged nibs and flex has not been part of the equation.

 

Don't know your level of knowledge with pens -- are you looking for a new hand to study? A way to improve your existing hand? Or ... ?

 

As for "a performance difference between a gold and a steel flex nib" -- your original question -- I would have to reply "not really." You will find good steel nibs and good gold nibs. My theory as to why good gold nibs tend to be vintage is that our industrial society has replaced annealing and tempering and hand manufacture with metallurgy and mass manufacturing. Thus cheaper nibs that work but are not as finely tuned and quality-tested as vintage nibs. The real trick with selecting a nib is to know what you want and to be able to select from amongst the many pens out there.

 

 

The reason I brought up the topic is because I was under the idea that only gold nibs were capable of "true" flex. So, I thought that because the Ahab's nib was steel, it would not be true flex...some kind of "fake" flex. Now I know better.

Edited December 4, 2011 by duende

[handwriter]

jiraltan

"The difference I've seen is that steel is stiffer and will railroad more easily if you push down hard"

That has to do with the feed more than with the nib, and probably most often more expensive pens with a gold nib were fit a better, more capable feed

[Randal6393]

Oh, yes, from about 1600 or so hands were written with flex in mind. And flexibility in a quill was always a consideration for a master penman. By historically, I was referring to over 2000 years of writing in Europe. Hands such as Roman Capitals, Rustica, uncial, half-uncial, carolingian, italic, etc. While flexibility was great for manipulating the pen, flex is not a necessary part of writing many hands. The thicks and thins are more a product of an edged nib, held a certain way.

 

The rise of Copperplate, English Roundhand, Spenserian, etc is a relatively recent thing. By many accounts, it is an attempt by writers to mimic the ability of the engraving burin to create swelled thicks and thins. But these swells are not needed to write a readable, clear hand. Nor is an edged pen. Personally, my favored hand is an italic hand, written with the standard Italic nail. Sharp enough to cut paper almost.

 

Enjoy,

Historically, most writing has been done with edged nibs and flex has not been part of the equation.

 

I've been doing a bit of reading of 19th century sources, and it does seem that flexibility was part of the equation when writing with a quill pen. In fact, one of the criticisms first levelled at steel dip pens was that they were not as flexible as quills which suggests that people both expected and desired flexibility/elasticity.

 

....

 

 

It's hard to imagine how something so small and deceptively simple has generated such a long history.

[Columba Livia]

Oh, yes, from about 1600 or so hands were written with flex in mind. And flexibility in a quill was always a consideration for a master penman. By historically, I was referring to over 2000 years of writing in Europe. Hands such as Roman Capitals, Rustica, uncial, half-uncial, carolingian, italic, etc. While flexibility was great for manipulating the pen, flex is not a necessary part of writing many hands. The thicks and thins are more a product of an edged nib, held a certain way.

 

As far as I know, people used the flex of quills to thicken certain strokes for effect, in many medieval cursive hands for example, but scripts continued to be written with a quill cut to an edge until the steel dip pen. In addition, people did not always hold the broad pen at a constant angle, but might change the angle it for different strokes or even while making strokes, depending on the hand.

 

I believe that Edward Johnston arbitrarily decided that many hands after the 16th century were mostly or solely the product of the engraver and that a quill cut to a fine point and used like a steel dip pen was used. This idea was then taken up by his disciples and propagated as a historical fact. John Howard Benson, who produced a translation of Arrghi's "L'Operina" in 1954, stated in the introduction: "the variations in width produced by pressure on a flexible pointed pen and printed from engraved copper-plates in many 17th and 18th century writing books [...] Such letters although quite suited to the technique of metal engraving, are not the best pen forms".

 

However, original sources state that a broad edged nib is used for roundhand:

 

"Make all your body strokes with the full, & all Hair Strokes with the corner of your pen" (p4)

 

"Make the nib of your pen for the round & round Text Hands the breadth of the full stroke" (p6)

 

c.1733, George Bickham, "Penmanship made easy or the young clerks assistant", Dover reprint

 

"the point should be cut exactly off square and the breadth proportional to the size it is to write" (p27)

1839, Enoch Noyes, "Noye's Penmanship", http://www.iampeth.com/books/noyes/noyes_penmanship_page27.html

 

Given that, I don't understand the claim that these were "not the best pen forms", since they were done with a broad edge pen and reproduced by the engravers as accurately as possible. If they were "not the best pen forms" they would never have become so popular.

 

Of course, part of the Edward Johnson myth was that there was some sort of decay of calligraphy from about the 17th to the 19th centuries which he single-handedly reversed, therefore claims about how the calligraphy of that time was not "real calligraphy" for various reasons are necessary to the myth. Some of the stuff written by and about Edward Johnson is a bit odd, such as his claim that when he came to London in 1898 there was no one to teach him calligraphy because no one knew anything about it(!) and his daughter wrote that calligraphy, after the invention of the printing press, had completely vanished.

 

Thinking about it, if these hands genuinely were a product of the engravers burin, it logically follows that italic, for example, is the product of wood cutters tools and not the best pen form due to the italic handwriting manuals of the early 16th century being printed from woodcuts with people struggling to imitate the woodcut forms imperfectly with an edged pen.

 

It is interesting to note that in the "compendium of Spencerian or Semi-Angular penmanship", which was published in 1866, a genuinely pointed quill appears to be depicted:

 

http://www.iampeth.com/books/spencer_compendium_1866/spencer_compendium_1866_page6.html

 

However the mass production of steel dip pens had started by 1804 in England, and by the 1860s they were in common usage in America (quills were still sold and used), therefore it might be possible that quills were cut to points in imitation of them. Could also be that, since quills wear quicker than steel pens, the quill was expected to rapidly wear down to a fine stub which produced no appreciable line variation without pressure.

Edited December 5, 2011 by Columba Livia

[duende]

 

As far as I know, people used the flex of quills to thicken certain strokes for effect, in many medieval cursive hands for example, but scripts continued to be written with a quill cut to an edge until the steel dip pen. In addition, people did not always hold the broad pen at a constant angle, but might change the angle it for different strokes or even while making strokes, depending on the hand.

 

.....

 

 

Wow, this is excellent history. I'm beginning to think that aside from making writing aesthetically pleasing, flex also induces a bit of madness in the scribe.