Bill challenged me in another thread to explain the relatives merits of ssk vs sl1,k1,psso.
My very imperfect understanding is that one is a more perfect mirror of the right-slanting k2tog and one is a more invisible decrease. I can never remember which is which, and can't always see the difference.
Could the experts, perfections and Master Knitters out there please help clarify the question for both of us? And I will go sit in the corner and knit a swatch to compare the two.
BaaBaa (on Ravelry as well)
Posts: 2368 | Location: 10024 | Registered: 24 June 2002
BaaBaa, I am not an expert (ex being an unknown quanity and a spert being a drip under pressure). I kind of like this definition. LOL. In "The Principles of Knitting, June Hiatt says the SSK more closely mirrors knit 2 together. However, I don't like the enlarged stitch on the SSK. I have even resorted to knitting that stitch on the previous row on a smaller needle to pull down the amount of yarn in the stitch. Sometimes I will use a smaller needle when making the SSK and working on the tips. This helps to minimize the larger loop. Tell us what you come up with. I think I will try both of them also. This would be a good experiment for all of us to do and post our results.
I really didn't expect this to generate a discussion.
The SSK and the K2Tog are supposed to be mirror images of each other. There is a "modified" SSK where you can slip the first stitch as if to knit, slip the second stitch as if to purl, and then knit the two together as in the standard SSK. In my most recent experience of using this on a V neck sweater, it produced a beautiful decrease bilaterally and it has not produced a larger SSK stitch. This is demonstrated at the attached link. http://www.knittinghelp.com/knitting/basic_techniques/decrease.php
Another version of Bill's last method is from Helen an editor of CAST ON a few years ago. Insert the needle in the first stitch as if to knit then tuck the needle around and into the 2nd st and knit them both together.. it seems shorter, quicker and more efficent.
Knit on ! Ennwhy
Posts: 336 | Location: The Island of Martha's Vineyard | Registered: 21 June 2002
When Helen Rush's version was posted a few years ago, there was a discussion that said this method changed the lay of the two loops, possibly one stitch was twisted. Does anyone use this method, and can you verify if this is true? I can't remember the exact statement but if it works it is certainlly worth the try. I am not thrilled with the regular method because I get an enlarged loop. June Hiatt mentions this in her instructions in her book, and cautions against allowing the stitch to be stretched out. So I guess this is a problem with the regular method.
Pam-- Modesty aside, you arean expert whom we can always count on for precise, knowledgeable answers to questions of technique.
Bill-- I printed the swatch pictured on your link and am going to knit a copy. I am very much not a visual learner, but this illustration is so clear that I could see the differences immediately. A real "aha!" moment.
I've learned a lot from this discussion.
BaaBaa (on Ravelry as well)
Posts: 2368 | Location: 10024 | Registered: 24 June 2002
Originally posted by Pam: When Helen Rush's version was posted a few years ago, there was a discussion that said this method changed the lay of the two loops, possibly one stitch was twisted. Does anyone use this method, and can you verify if this is true? I can't remember the exact statement but if it works it is certainlly worth the try. I am not thrilled with the regular method because I get an enlarged loop. June Hiatt mentions this in her instructions in her book, and cautions against allowing the stitch to be stretched out. So I guess this is a problem with the regular method.
Pam
I use this method, and yes the second loop is twisted, but it is behind the other one so it doesn't show.
Here's another interesting twist (so to speak): in the row prior to working the decrease, wrap the stitches to be ssk'd the following row the opposite way: instead of counterclockwise, wrap clockwise. Those 2 stitches will now present themselves correctly for a k 2 tog through the back loop, which is what you do for an ssk after you have slipped the sts back to the left needle. This is a huge time saver if you can train yourself to remember to do it in the row before. I have been fooling around with lace patterns and have been able (after a few repetitions) to work the entire preparation row in the appropriate wrap so that all sts present correctly for either k 2 tog or ssk on the next row. And, since you are not lifting stitches and moving them around, they don't get big loops from being manipulated.
Originally posted by laura b: Here's another interesting twist (so to speak): in the row prior to working the decrease, wrap the stitches to be ssk'd the following row the opposite way: instead of counterclockwise, wrap clockwise. Those 2 stitches will now present themselves correctly for a k 2 tog through the back loop, which is what you do for an ssk after you have slipped the sts back to the left needle. This is a huge time saver if you can train yourself to remember to do it in the row before. I have been fooling around with lace patterns and have been able (after a few repetitions) to work the entire preparation row in the appropriate wrap so that all sts present correctly for either k 2 tog or ssk on the next row. And, since you are not lifting stitches and moving them around, they don't get big loops from being manipulated.
When I SSK, I don't put the stitches back on the left needle. I knit them together from the right needle by puttin the left needle through the front of both loops. I also don't have any issue with a larger loop for the SSK.
Jon
I would rather knit than many other things....
Posts: 1213 | Location: Denver, CO | Registered: 05 August 2002
Jon, that is actually the proper way to do an ssk--but I find that most knitters tend to put the sts back to the left hand needle by habit. All of that manipulating is what usually makes the first loop get too large. At any rate, wrapping the wrong way on the row before eliminates the need to move the sts at all. Doing an ssk is as simple as a k2tog.
I echo dances' "Wow" to you, laura b: What a clever manoeuver! I wonder if I too could have the presence of mind to do the manipulation on the row before. . . ?
I also have been bothered by the enlarged top loop in my SSK, but have found that it improved alot when I switched to not-slipping the second stitch -- in effect, slipping as if to purl & replacing. I slip the first stitch, get both needle tips through both stitches, and then k2tog-tbl. Still doesn't perfectly match my k2tog, though. Perhaps this new idea will do the trick for me.
Posts: 472 | Location: Flagstaff, AZ elev. 7000'+ | Registered: 20 November 2003
I think the reason that not slipping the 2nd st results in a better looking ssk is that the 2nd stitch is then worked with a twist in it (which doesn't show because it is behind the 1st st), and that twist helps pull the top stitch tighter (or actually keeps it from getting looser). Not a bad solution at all.
At any rate, wrapping the wrong way on the row before eliminates the need to move the sts at all. Doing an ssk is as simple as a k2tog.
I tried laura b's techinique a couple nights ago. It worked great! This was on a pattern with decreases every-other row; and I had stitch markers at the decreases. All I had to do was pay a little bit of attention to the markers on the plain row. And it was much faster than working SSK by actually slipping stitches. I should add that I knit English, so it was just a matter of changing how I throw the yarn. I don't know if it would be as quick for Continental knitters. Thanks, laura b!
Posts: 51 | Location: Mableton, GA (suburb of Atlanta) | Registered: 16 December 2005
