An important question...

[Randy Diefert]

An interesting topic of discussion came yp at our monthly Fly club meeting tonight.
What is a Master Fly tyer and how to they become one?

I'll share some of the questions that arose out of this discussion after I get a few replys.

Please don't name names of people are proclaimed "Master Tyers" just how they got the title.

Btw, We had Nathan From Avid Angler talk to our group about salt water flyfishing for Cut Throat and Salmon. Very interesting and nice selection of fly patterns. What good programs have your clubs peresented ?
( I'm also on the committee to help find interesting programs...)

[FT]

Simple definition: "A person who ties flies of one or more styles that are always of superior quality and craftmanship". Also, the master tyer's flies are consistent in the way they look, how they are proportioned, and put together. In other words, a master tyer can sit down and tie 1,000 flies of the same pattern in one of the styles he is a master of and the first will look nearly the same as the 1,000th one, as will all of those tied in between.

This level of skill doesn't happen overnight, nor does it happen with the tying of a few hundred flies. It takes more than a few years to acquire the skills and several thousand if not tens of thousands of flies to reach that level of tying ability and skill.

Some masters are masters of only a single fly style, Alec Jackson for example who has taken Bob Arnold's simple and effective SPADE to great heights. Some are masters of trout dry flies, such as the Dettes were. Some are masters of spey, dee, and classics such as Bob Veverka or Harry Lemire. Some do it with saltwater, like Chico Fenandez. Some with classic featherwing streamers like Klausmeyer and Martinez. Some with spun deer hair like Chris Helm. Some with hairwing salmon and steelhead flies like Haas did.

And there are those few individuals who have spent a lot of time and put in a lot of effort to practice and then master most fly styles, like Poul Jorgeson did.

[mike doughty]

I can tell you who's not one. meeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[Hywel]

There are a number of 'Master' flytyers who, well,... aren't, IMO - and a few more who are self-proclaimed.

I don't buy into the "... a master tyer can sit down and tie 1,000 flies of the same pattern in one of the styles he is a master of and the first will look nearly the same as the 1,000th one, as will all of those tied in between." thinking, either. It doesn't take much grey matter, or hand-eye coordination to bang out one-thousand San Juan Worms.

I'm not aware of any official standards, tests, or governing body or organization, that bestows the title "Master Flytyer".

Those tyers that I consider 'Masters' usually shun the title, or (at least) are a little embarrassed by it.

Hywel

[FT]

Agreed, banging out 1,000 San Juan Worms is not a good indicator of tying ability. However, a person who can bang out 1,000 Glasso Orange Herons, 1,000 Carrie Stevens Grey Ghosts, 1,000 G.P's, 1,000 Light Cahill dries, 1,000 Royal Wulffs, 1,000 Dalburg Divers, 1,000 Lefty's Deceivers, 1,000 Akroyd dees, etc. and have them all look nearly the same and be of the highest quality is someone with a lot of skill.

I agree that the best tyers don't consider themselves to be anything more than good tyers.

[Randy Diefert]

I'm waiting for a few more answers but, Please keep the names out of it...
We aren't and don't want to compare joe to Sam kind of thing.
The question IS how not Who.
Thanks for the replies though, it's a start.

[Hywel]

FT,

Were I to accept your thinking that a 'master' tyer can produce, with consistency and quality, any number of complex patterns, than *any* competent off-shore production tyer in Singapore, Thailand, or China would be given the title of 'master'. Sorry, I'm still not sold.

Randy,

No offense, but it'd be almost impossible to have a discussion of this nature without having some kind of baseline - and 'names' are that benchmark or comparative standard. Think about it for a second. You couldn't have a meaningful discussion about great composers or baseball players without dropping a name like Beethoven or Honus Wagner, could you?

Again, when it comes to the title of 'Master' tyer, there are no tests or examinations, there isn't a board or sanctioned group that you submit your work to, and there's no governing body or organization that can collectively elect or deem you a Master tyer.

'How' does one become a Master tyer? The 'how' you speak of is simply an intangible IMO.

There are however 'traits' or characteristics that comprise or define what I believe to define a Master tyer. And all of them are subject to argument and/or opinion.

Hywel

[Don Johnson]

I'm with Hywel on this one, and speaking of him, he's a guy who has NOT cranked out thousands of the same pattern to obtain the skills requisite to tie wonderfully yet each one of his flies, regardless of their flavor, is a true masterpiece. Hywel also bucks the system in that his abilities have been refined over a relatively short period of time as compared to some. His work from a few years ago was better than a lot of stuff from guys that had been at this for decades. Check out his stuff on www.salmonfly.net under "The Flies of Scotty Howell" and see if you concur.

I also think billing Alec as a master of only one fly is shortchanging his skills and contributions to the tying community. Should you ever get a chance to meet him, ask to see one of his Stimulators or saltwater baitfish patterns or a one of his simple North Country spiders and judge for yourself whether he's a well-rounded tier or not. I don't know personally most of the other names you dropped but I do know Alec and he is way more of a tier than insinuated by the original post.

As for governing bodies, there is a UK fly tiers guild that may have some criteria for obtaining the "Master" status but I haven't researched it much. In the grand scheme of things, if obtaining Master status was like earning a PhD, then I'm still trying to get out of Kindergarten so I haven't paid too much attention to the program.

Don

[Don Johnson]

FT, your identity has recently been brought to my attention. As a result, I have to ask why would you post as you did ("Some masters are masters of only a single fly style, Alec Jackson for example") about a gentleman you claim to know personally (AJ) when you undoubtedly are more than well aware of his level of skill? AJ's prowess at the vise far surpasses the majority of tiers, inclusive of the two of us, in my opinion, and he is way more well rounded than your post implies. I imagine the other dropped names are probably well-rounded too but I could be wrong. Confusion between what they are renown for and what their abilities are is something that must be avoided, agree?

[Kent Lufkin]

. . . In the grand scheme of things, if obtaining Master status was like earning a PhD, then I'm still trying to get out of Kindergarten so I haven't paid too much attention to the program.

DJ, if you're in Kindergarten, then I'm still in diapers. At the risk of others calling your fine Miracle Caddis a one-trick-pony, my somewhat trained eye has a hard time detecting much difference between the 500 or so you tie in a 24 hour period.

K

[halcyon]

I also don't find tying 1000 (or any large number) of identical flies anything more than a good commerical tyer at work. But few commerical tyers are what I would consider Master fly tiers.

My criteria for a excellent tyer is a tyer that has mastered the tools and materials of the craft; understands how to select a particular material to do a particular job; and produces flies that have a symetry of both form and color. What the individual may feel about his ability is not relevant, it is what his skills show and produce that speak to his status as tier.

Regards,

[Hywel]

DoJo is entirely too gracious with his evaluation of my fleas - it's just his nature. I just dress flies, no more, no less.

Kent,

I'm also a big fan of Don's tying, especially his Miracle Caddis...and like you, I'm still pooping' in my nappies.

FT,

At the risk of name-dropping, Alec Jackson is far more a versatile tyer than you inferred in your post. Yes, he did take the Spade to another (and more elegant) level than the original design. He also ties, as you should know from having a personal acquaintance with him, some of the most beautiful Soft Hackles, Marabou Speys, and Hair winged Steelhead flies on this planet. I also have a half-dozen Saltwater flies that Alec tied that I'd be happy to share with you...

I amazes me that anyone with such a vast historical perspective on tyers could pigeon-hole a well-rounded and gifted tyer like Alec.


Hywel

[FT]

Hywel and Don,

I'm very aware of Alec's skills at the vise and that he ties several styles of flies very well. But as you (Don) mentioned, Alec is renowned for his versions of Spade and most are not even aware of all the other fly types he ties so very well. I used his renown for Spade as simply an example or point of reference (just like the others I mentioned who are also very well-rounded tyers) for people.

Hywell,

I also disagree with you on tyers from Asia. Some of them undoubtedly have excellent tying skills and are more than competent tyers, therefore, they could easily be considered masters if we knew their names. Where the person lives geographically has no bearing on his tying skills whatsoever.

As to there not being any governing body in the US or Canada for designation of a person as a master tyer, that is correct, there is none. However, from a historical perspective, back in the late 1970's there was an attempt among some of the best tyers at the time to do such a thing and to have several levels of tying ability established. It fell flat on its face because there wasn't enough support from the fly tyers themselves.

[Don Johnson]

FT, what you wrote was "...masters of only a single fly style, Alec Jackson for example...", which implies that he hasn't mastered much beyond a certain genre; Spades to be specific. What an odiferous bunch of bunk. To the best of my reasoning, his Skunks, Pseudo Speys and Marabous (as Hywel pointed out) aren't Spades by a long shot yet he's very renown for these is he not?

You also wrote (about AJ) "most are not even aware of all the other fly types he ties so very well". Why, then, promote the opposite and fallacious misconception with your commentary?

Mean what you say and say what you mean then stand behind it. If I wanted a waffle I'd go to IHOP.

:rofl:

[Scott Behn]

Why would we even need such a title??? Sounds to me that it would be just one more thing to decorate a tying bench instead of the fly between the vise jaws.

I guess if there had to be a qualification then it must be that one must be able to tie a clean, correctly sized head...:;)

:cool:

[Big Tuna]

Seems like a master tyer is equal parts skill and innovation. There are those who can tie nice, well-proportioned flies, but they add nothing to the sport by way of innovation. That's one thing that separates the master tyer from the offshore (or in shore:) ) commercial tyer. It seems like the truly great tyers emerge because of skill, innovation, and passion. Interesting topic.

[Hywel]

FT,

I used the term "off-shore production tyer" in my post - not "tyers from Asia". (Please, either re-read my post, or stop 'furling' my words to support your rather weak and vacilating rebutals.)

In my opinion, as skilled as the off-shore production tyers I referred to are (and usually relegated to tying one type of fly), they're little more than Xerox machines.

Don made a great point. If you're aware of Alec's versatility at the vise why contradict yourself by portraying him as a single-style or one dimensional tyer? As you have such a close and personal relationship with 'the gentleman from Yorkshire', I'd think you'd choose your words much more carefully.

The hole is getting deeper, Laddie, and ye might use yon *Spade* to extracate yoursel'. *g*


Big Tuna,

Well said! I think you've hit the bulls-eye hit on a very important criteria in defining a Master tyer, that being 'innovation' - add to that, creativity, originality, and imagination. Personally, I also believe that 'passion' is at the very core of greatness and accomplishment.

Hywel

[inland]

I have thumbed through FT's FISHING FLIES in his winter steelhead boxes.

Um, Scott and DJ...anybody that has the nad to post pics of hairwing flies, and gush about them, with beads just doesn't compute. After viewing your flies on salmonfly.net they are certainly clean for a series of mostly simple hairwings. Why not step it up and produce some quality photos of what you can really do with the more difficult traditional Spey, Dee, and full dress salmon patterns (whether they are traditional recipes or YOUR OWN freestyle). Tie a real black doctor and many questions will be answered. Why not attempt the Blacker Flies? Every fly I have in my box is comparable or better than your photos and I consider every one of them a fishing fly. Nothing special and certainly not worthy of benchmarking skill. In fact I would consider this barely average skill of a competent tyer.

But this discussion is more about personal attack on FT and his views.

Tight lines,

William

[Hywel]

Inland,

"...anybody that has the nad to post pics of hairwing flies, and gush about them, with beads just doesn't compute."

You mean, 'nads' - as in juevos or cojones? I didn't realize it took a big pair of stones to post a few flies on the 'Net. What didn't 'compute', the beads? When and where did I 'gush' about my tying? The only adjectives I've ever offered about my own work are 'acceptable', 'decent', and on rare occasion, 'reasonable'. I wouldn't call that 'gushing'.

"After viewing your flies on salmonfly.net they are certainly clean for a series of mostly simple hairwings."

Thanks for your critique! I trust 'clean' and ' mostly simple' are good as it relates to tying, yes?

"Why not step it up and produce some quality photos of what you can really do with the more difficult traditional Spey, Dee, and full dress salmon patterns (whether they are traditional recipes or YOUR OWN freestyle). Tie a real black doctor and many questions will be answered. Why not attempt the Blacker Flies?"

Should I apologize for the quality of my camera or my lack of skills in macro photography? O.K., I'll play,...I'm sorry.

As to your question about 'stepping up' and tying the more difficult traditional Spey, Dee, and full-dress Atlantics, classic or free-style - everything I aspire to do eventually comes in time. Please keep in mind that I'm still learning to tie a simple, yet clean, hairwing.

And, exactly what burning question(s) will be answered if I attempt to tie a real Black Doctor or the Blacker flies?

"Every fly I have in my box is comparable or better than your photos and I consider every one of them a fishing fly. Nothing special and certainly not worthy of benchmarking skill. In fact I would consider this barely average skill of a competent tyer."

Good for you, William,...good for you! I've never thought any of my flies to be 'special' or worthy of 'benchmarking skill' - and I would hope that they'd be considered fishing flies, too.

If you judge my work to be the barely average end result of a competent tyer, then I'll take that as a compliment, and thank you.

"But this discussion is more about personal attack on FT and his views."

I disagree. It's a spirited discussion about the criteria of a 'master' tyer and a difference of opinion. Nothing more.

Hywel

[FT]

Hywel,

The three countries you mentioned as places where offshore tying is going on, Singapore, Thailand, and China, are Asian countries, at least were the last time I checked an Atlas.

However, I have not seen you post anything that provides information on what it is about the flies a person ties that makes him a master tyers, which is afterall, what this thread is supposedly about. Saying a tyer should have originality, creativity, imagination, innovation to be a master tyers tells a person nothing about what he should be looking for in the flies he is looking at to determine if they were tied by a master or not, which is after all the only criteria upon which one can determine if a tyer is a master or not. One must see the person's flies, or a photo of them; otherwise, it is impossible to measure and quantify objectively whether he ought to be considered a master tyer or not.

And saying only tyers who originate new flies, come up with a new tying technique, or use innovative or unusual materials is the criteria for determining if someone is a master tyer certainly excludes all the classic, married wing salmon tyers and the tyers of the classic spey and dee flies such as a Megan Boyd or Marvin Nolte. (I know Randy you don't want names, but there has to be some point of reference for this to make sense.)

Likewise having passion as a criteria provides nothing upon which someone can make a determination as to whether a person is a master tyer because when you look at his flies, how the heck can you possibly know if the guy or gal had passion when tying the fly?

There must be objective, measurable ways of making the determination or it is meaningless.

It is easy to determine if a person's flies are well-proprtioned, are neat and clean, have nicely formed heads that are not overly big for the fly style; have good, smooth floss work; have dubbed bodies of the proper diameter for the style of fly; have hackle of the right size, length, and quantity for the fly style (including whether the hackle is tight against ribbing tinsel on spey, dee, and classic feather wing salmon flies); have neatly tied, proper length wings, have even ribbing wraps; have well formed tips and tags; have throats that are not too bushy or too sparse; have cheeks and shoulders that are well formed, sit in the proper place, and are of an eye pleasing length and width; etc. because these are all quanifiable, observable, measurable characteristics. However, how can you possibly quanitify, measure, observe passion, imagination, and creativity? For that matter, measuring and quantifying innovation is very difficult for the simple fact that at any given time there are old techniques being re-discovered. For instance hair wing salmon flies, which were supposedly "invented" in the early 20th century, when in fact, they were in use back in the 17th century in the UK, and this is know because there have been examples of them found with authenticated dates. The use of beads on bodies is another example, this was used as far back as the late 19th century in the mid-west and northeast for streamer bodies and bass flies. And for still another example, the all Kystal Flash or Flashabou wings, there were flies tied back in the 1930's with mylar (many different colors of mylar too) wings, which is exactly the same as using Kystal Flash or Flashabou as a wing.

But then again, the materials used on the fly have no real bearing on whether it is a fly with the measurable characteristics to be consider to have been tied by a master tyer because materials used have nothing to do with proportions, etc. which are the observable, measurable, quantifiable characteristics flies must be judged by. Or else, there is no way to tell if one fly is superior to another or for that matter if a fly is poorly tied to take it to its logical conclusion. Therefore, the measurable, quantifiable characteristics of a fly must be the criteria used to determine if it was tied by a master tyer or a merely good tyer.

[Don Johnson]

William,
First of all, the content of my posts was not a personal attack on anyone. Addresing the dissemination of misinformation was the extent of my intent; no more, no less. If FT wished to convey a different meaning then it should have been worded so.

Secondly, I have never posted any of Hywel's flies anywhere. Of the various sites his work is on display, it is the ultimately the responsibility of the web host to post the pics or not. Whether those individuals have nads or not is none of my concern. If my calling his work "masterpieces" is construed as me gushing, then so be it. Last time I checked I still have the right to an opinion. If you don't concur with mine, fine. I like his work, as do others, but not I'm nearly as impressed with his flies as I am with how quickly he has gained the skills necessary to tie as well as he does, which (also, in my opinion) is well above average.

Lastly, through my response to FT's first post, I feel partially responsible for this thread diverging from the original topic. Sorry.

Randy, I don't know how Master Tyers obtain their title. I don't even know any that have that title. We ought to start a list of contemporary and historical tyers and debate how each of their respective styles differ.

[Scott Behn]

First, this is my opinion and nothing else...

I personally think this whole "master tyer" is a bunch of bunk. To me the only judge of my flies is and always will be the quarry I'm after...the fish!!!!

Now with that said, I don't think that the gracious steelie, the coniving cuttie, or even the cheapskate Mr. Whitie gives a rat's butt what materials I have used or how porportioned my ribbing might be. As long as it looks like it belongs in the water column then I assume the fish is going to like it or at the very least it will piss him off which will work for me too.

If you want to know how to judge a master tyer....become a fish!!!!:rolleyes:

:cool:

[inland]

Don,

As I said his flies are clean. I don't like the gap between the eye and his head and I don't like the up-canted angle/paint brush look of his wings. That is his style and my personal opinion it isn't as appealing to my eye. However his skills are obvious.

I guess I base my opinions on skill associated to feather wings. From full dress salmon flies to dee strips to speys and even Carrie Stevens style of streamers. Hair wings are a lazy way to dress a steelhead/salmon fly. To name a few...Where does Radencich rate? Veverka? Belarmino Martinez? Shewey and his skill with B. Mallard? Glasso?

I consider Glasso to be the finest N.A tier (to date) and certainly one of the best ever. He could tie the classics better than just about anybody and developed flies that are now considered classic. That is a master tyer that ties 'Masterpieces'. I suppose it's just a matter of perspective.

William

[Scott Behn]

"Hair wings are a lazy way to dress a steelhead/salmon fly."

Who are you calling lazy?????

I don't think fish really care what the wing is made of...at least not as much as it seems people do.

:beathead:

[Tim Cottage]

Hair wings are a lazy way to dress a steelhead/salmon fly.

William

William
I think you are making a very big mistake with the above idea. The mistake that I am refering to is the mistake of short changing yourself. If that is your opinion, you are not allowing yourself to enjoy the work and creativity of some truly masterful fly dressers. Paul Miller, Kevin Perkins, Derl Stovall, Ed Hass, the amazing Warren Duncan and any number of Scandinavian and Icelandic tyers.
As you have said, it is just a matter of perspective but I think you would be doing yourself a favor by giving these guys a longer, harder look. If you have the Art of Angling Journal, Volume #2, Issue #4, take a look at the article on Warren Duncan and the 16 pages of hair wing flys and tell me again about lazy fly dressing. And I am not just talking about the quantity of flys on these pages but the amount of creativity and consistent quality that simply can not be denied.

My 3 cents
TC

[Monk]

A master tyer is someone who will be remembered 100 years after their death for their contributions to fly tying. Alec Jackson, Wulff...these are all names that will not just last on the names of their flies, but in nearly every comprehensive book that covers the discipline.

[inland]

You can call it what you want. (Duncan is a stud hairwing tyer as was Haas) But nonetheless hairwing flies are much easier to tie. Do I like some hairwing patterns? Yes. Do I fish some hairwings? Yes again. Lazy doesn't have to mean bad. Lazy as in a shortcut.

William

[Hywel]

Inland,

Now that you've generously given your opinion about my flies and style of tying, perhaps you'd be willing to publicly share some of your work.

Are there websites or publications where one might find examples of your tying?

Tim,

You're dead-bang on about the tyers you mentioned, especially Ed Hass and some of the tyers from Scandinavia. Erling Olsen is a personal favorite of mine, and his original patterns and interpretations of some of the more 'classic' hairwings (like the Rat series) are sure worth studying. I'm also fond of Hakar Norling and Mikael Frodin needs no introduction, either!

Randy,

Sorry!

Hywel

[Tim Cottage]

It can only be a shortcut if you are trying to get somewhere else.
Hairwings are their own endpoint. It is just a different style, no greater or lesser than a full dressed classic feather wing.

TC

[FT]

Tim,

William isn't diagreeing with you. quite the contrary, he agrees wholeheartedly with you that hairwings are their own endpoint and their own style. All he is saying is that it takes a lot less skill to tie a hairwing than to tie a bronze mallard spey wing, dee strip wing, married wing full-dressed classic, or featherwing New England streamer in the fashion of Carrie Stevens, nothing more.

Monk,

Perhaps their names will be remembered, and perhaps not. I doubt if many folks alive now remember Reuben (or rube) Wood, or Dan Cahill and if it weren't for the work of Sylvester Nymes, I doubt many would know who Liesenring is. And then there are folks like Ira Gruber, Chief Needebah, and Dr. Henshaw who were all renouned for their tying skills and abilities during their lifetimes; but who are virtually forgotten by the tyers of today.

[inland]

Scott,

I haven't and won't pursue any public praise or criticism of my tying, or lack there of, skills. It's unimportant to me. If publicly showing your tying work is important to you...cool beans.

In between family, work, and fishing I hand machine custom salmon/steelhead reels for spare time fun. For some reason these things just keep selling themselves far faster than I will ever be able to keep up.

William

[Daryle Holmstrom]

I think this thread could come to end. Enough flames for a very small issue.

Daryle

[Chris Scoones]

Closed by request from Randy. Next time you might read the original post and follow it's direction. It would save a good topic like this from having to be closed.

Chris