So you mean that if I am new, and I can't get a great shave, buying tons of blade brands and new razors won't help my results very much? You mean the bad shaves are because I don't yet know what I am doing?

I know, shocking right? That's pretty much the exact meaning or at least a major corollary thereof. (Now I feel like I've been sufficiently pompous). Believe me, I know the temptation to buy everything in sight and try everything as fast as possible, but the best advice is still - find a blade that you like at first shave, a razor that is in good shape, a soap/cream you like and a brush that works. Use those items ONLY for 30 days to learn what to do with them. It's amazing how much better your shave will be at the end of that 30 days. THEN go ahead and mix and match if you want but don't ever forget that if the results aren't good you should look first at your technique. If it's solid and the shave sucks....then figure out what part of the equation is off.

Happy Easter!
I brought out one of my favorites today.
Irisch Moos Shave Stick
Oscar11 Brush
Wade and Butcher Celebrated Razor
Thayers Witch Hazel
Penhaligons Endymion Cologne
Have a blessed Easter!

Sounds about right here.

Well put.

Beautiful razor!!!

You know what my doubt is about the whole "blade doesn't matter" is? That, i 've read several experienced wet shavers while googling and they are divided. There are those that say "blade doesn't matter". There are those who say "blade doesn't matter, except 3-4 which i can't stand" and there are those who say "blade does matter, YMMV". Oh, and there are those who say "blade doesn't matter, only technique does and this includes prep".
Starting from the last one, i immediately discard that, because for me, prep isn't part of a technique. It's part of a "chemical attack" against the whiskers, so that even the worst blade can cut them. That's not technique, it's chemistry.

Then you have the rest of opinions. Which brings several questions:
1) What is at the end this technique and why some can have this "universal technique", while others, despite years in wet shaving, still believe that blades make difference? Are there specific instructions other than 30 deg angle and no pressure?
2) Is this technique universal and works with any blade or must you use different technique for different blade?
3) Since a person has at some point a certain technique, bad or good, if the results vary with blades, then blade does make a difference, at least, if you don't have an excellent technique.
4) How easy is to develop "excellent technique"? Because, one can drive for 30 years and be a good driver, but he won't be as good as a Formula 1 driver.

To me, the ultimate proof, would be very simple. Eliminate observer bias. It would be to gather some commonly acclaimed wet shavers, give them same razor and start changing blades, without informing them which blade they use (blind trial). And then, have them do the traditional 3 passes, but without repass. 3 passes. At the end, some judges, who also don't know the blades used (double blind trial), should assess the results (BBS, DFS etc). If technique equalizes the blades, they should all get BBS no matter the blade. If not, the blade matters. That's how you test drug efficacy vs placebo, so it's as objective as it gets. But, i understand that this would be very complicated...

Define experienced reviewers. That's the biggest problem. From my reading it's apparent that some of the strongest negatives always come from new converts or people who are not proficient with open blade shaving. I feel like many times new converts blame the gear because it's easier than admitting that they lack the fundamentals.

We are not saying blades "don't matter", rather we are saying that they catch a lot of blame that should he heaped upon the technique inadequacies. When you read a review that says a blade is "bad" or a razor model is rough, rest assured, you're not reading the opinion of someone with finely developed razor skills.

All razors are the same.

I'll equate it this way... I have skied most of my adult life. Some skis are better for ice, some better for powder, some better for speed; this is why olimpians have different skis for different events. Having said that, my technique is good enough that you could strap me to two trash can lids and I can get down the mountain in good form and without falling. This comes solely from time on the mountain. I've seen a ton of new skiers who think better equipment will help them be black diamond skiers quicker and older equipment/technology will hold them back, and so they focus on the equipment not the time on the mountain. Bottom line is, a few successful blue runs plus Tommy Moe's skis won't make them Tommy Moe. I could still outski them on 2x4s. There is no equipment that can substitute for time on the mountain, and you can't become an expert without it, no matter what anyone tells you.

It's like golf. All clubs are the same when your handicap is - 43. New equipment won't get you to par.

Think of it like golf. I am a terrible golfer. I can go and buy the best clubs you could possibly get and still be a terrible golfer. The tools aren't going to change that because I missed all the years of practice that good golfers have put in. Their technique is far superior to mine. They can play with the same crappy set of clubs I have, but they will still be under par. Their Technique Trumps Tools. For me that new $500 driver will just mean I slice it that much further into the rough. The only way for me to ever get good is to practice, practice, practice (we talkin' 'bout practice).

The pros, however all use different equipment. Different clubs, different balls, etc. Why? They have certain preferences that match their particular game. The equipment doesn't make them better, but it does fit their game a bit better.

Razors and blades are not much different from this concept. With good skill, you can shave with just about any blade and razor. As @NCoxSTL stated, the carriage bolt razor challenge from March showed this. That doesn't mean that some blades are difficult to use to just plain suck. I used a Rapira Swedish blade earlier this month that very definitely had a bad edge on one side. Quality control problems can effect blades just like everything else. I have used some blades in the past few months I swore I would never use again, and I got a good quality shave from them. Why? Did the blade change, or was it my technique? Once again, just like golf, every shaver has some preferences, but with good technique, quality shaves are achievable with any blade. The same could be said for razors.

Without good technique, consistently good shaves are difficult. Again just like golf. I get lucky every now and then and hit in the 80's (I said I was bad) for a round of golf. But I average in the upper 90's. Just like when I started wet shaving. I would get a decent shave, then several bad shaves. Honestly, I thought I was doing everything well, even spending a year on this thread, until I realized what good shaves were all about. That came when I really focused on riding the cap. I had been thinking I was good, and finally opened my mind to trying something different and found a whole new world of good shaving.

I understand that experience makes better. However, my question, remains, whether one blade can shave better than another. Passing 5 times with a Derby for example to gain the same result as 1 time with Astra, doesn't mean that the blades are equal. It means you need to do 5 times the "work" to equalize them. The discussion about technique, works both ways. Take a newbie with rudimentary technique. Like me. My technique, as rudimentary as it is, is the only one i have... So, i should be getting equally bad shaves with any blade. That's not remotely true. So what's the variable that makes that? To me the obvious answer, is the blade.

I didn't speak about "experienced reviewers". In my hypothetical experiement i spoke of commonly acclaimed wet shavers. I mean, wet shavers that the wet shaving community could accept as "experts". The other people i spoke of, are people that i found googling, that had many years of registration in a wet shaving forum and of posts. Which suggests that are not newbies.

I understand that. But the real question is. An equally experienced skier as you, with some expensive ski gear, will he outrun you? If yes, then gear matters.

Well, you basically said in three sentences what took me 3 paragraphs.

I bet if you used the Asta blades (which just happens to be one of the blades I swore off of I mentioned above) until you can get a consistently good shaves, almost automatically and then swapped back to the Derby, you might find it doesn't take 5 passes any more. You may still like the Astra better, but you'll find the Derby blades work better than you remember.

Let me throw out a quick thought as I see it from my experience. When you shave with a shavette, you are simply putting a blade in a very simple blade holder. I find that the blade used then makes very little difference. When you begin to add the components of a somewhat predetermined angle, flex, blade exposure which can determine chatter and stability, then characteristics begin to matter a bit more.

I would venture to say that the more aggressive of a razor, the blade choice becomes less important, because your touch necessarily has to be lighter. One can't simply wale away on himself and then say a blade for being rough.

I have read some blind trials where experienced shavers could not tell which blade they were given to use, despite their original contention that they would be able to.

I think in a blind test situation, I would probably be able to tell the difference between a Derby and a Feather, but likely not between a Derby and a Voskhod or a Feather and a 7:00 Black. I highly doubt I could tell between a Polsilver and a Nacet or Rapira though. To me, they are all too closely made of a blade. I would also bet that in a shavette, I would not be able to tell any of them apart; maybe if they were all new, but most likely not if they had a couple of shaves on them.

I have also not tried any of the more "exotic" blades that Neal has, and do not doubt that some of them shave like their edges were finished with a bastard file. I think it would be more than fair to say that some are certainly produced with better finishes and quality control.

Meanwhile, here in Saskatchewan, two provinces over from you, it snowed last night. We are enjoying a White Easter. And nobody's going golfing here today unless they like slush-filled shoes and hunting for a white golf ball in an acre of white field...

What I would say though is that some razors are actually crap. I have seen pics of razors whose caps leave a blade so wavy that I would rather shave with the popsicle razor. Or so much blade exposure that I can see the blade vibrating from my Ipad. I think this is the exception not the rule maybe, but some of them are razors I wouldn't want to use.

Eventually, i will certainly become better. However, getting better still doesn't solve the issue about blades being equal or not. Like i said, a double blind trial would answer that. I used Astra after 4 shaves with Derby. Derby were OK shaves. Astra was BBS. Then i used Shark SS. BBS above jawline, DFS below jawline. Why did i never get a DFS with Derby? How much of a technique one must develop to get BBS just from any blade, all the time, with the same effort? That's the big question. Because, if you need 3 repasses with Derby and 1 with Astra to have the same result, you are compensating for an inferior blade. The end result could be the same, but you put more effort. Which to me, doesn't make equal the blades. Anyway, time will tell.

What would interest me more, would be not whether one is able to tell the blade, but whether he can have BBS with the same 3 passes and no repasses. Because if you pass 5 times from the same area to get BBS, it means the blade is inferior and you are compensating. That would be the ultimate test. I don't think it's only about gear either. The type of skin also means different hair types. It's not all the same when cutting. For example, trust me, i can tell the difference between Derby and Astra SP and between Derby and Shark. Easily. The Derby is simply less sharp than Astra. By far. The Shark is more noisy when cutting and sharper than Derby. Between Astra and Shark i would have problems to guess. But this doesn't change that i can't shave with the same ease with them and they are both distant from Derby. Derby is very forgiving, i can do crazy manouvers on my face with it, but it has problem cutting hair.

In sports, the best atheletes with the best training tend to win over time regardless of whose equipment they use. I don't care what equipment you give an experienced shaver, it won't take him/her 5 passes to get a good shave.

But why then would some prefer Derby blades to Astra? There is a definite YMMV factor going on here, and I don't disagree with that. I woukd however say that you can't definitely state a blade doesn't work too well until you have truly mastered technique. When new, your technique varies more shave to shave than you think. That is why the 30 Day Rule was recommended. You provide your own variability with your technique. You don't want to complicate it with changing equipment. Once your technique is set, then changing equipment becomes easier.

Just like in golf. If I get up and hit a Calloway ball 300 yards straight down the middle of a fairway on one hole, but try then try a Pro V1 the next and shank it, would I be correct in saying the Pro V1 is inferior to the Calloway?