Why Did Knitting Machines Disappear While Embroidery Machines Became Cleverer?

Craft has not disappeared. So why did some of its most promising machines fade from view just as computers should have opened up new possibilities?

The Future That Seemed About to Arrive

Years ago, domestic knitting machines seemed to offer a glimpse of the future.

There were machines from several manufacturers, with accessories, pattern systems and increasingly sophisticated capabilities. Punched cards could select needles to create repeating designs. Electronic controls then offered the prospect of greater freedom: patterns that could be stored, altered and eventually designed on a computer.

It seemed reasonable to imagine what might follow. Design a jumper on screen, choose the colours and measurements, and let the machine help turn the idea into something wearable.

Yet the broad domestic market contracted. Meanwhile, sewing machines remained familiar household tools, and computerised embroidery developed into a remarkably capable creative technology.

My own visits to craft shows leave me wondering about this contrast. There is plenty of enthusiasm for making things, but knitting machines and sophisticated looms seem much less visible than I might expect.

If people still enjoy craft, and the technology can do more than ever, what happened?

First, These Technologies Have Not Entirely Disappeared

It is important to distinguish a shrinking domestic market from a technological dead end.

The Knitting & Crochet Guild identifies Silver Reed as the main current producer supplying machines into the UK and describes an active second-hand market. Computer connections also survive: Soft Byte’s DesignaKnit links support pattern transfer on compatible electronic machines and interactive instructions for shaping and colour changes. Knitting & Crochet Guild

Computer-assisted weaving survives too. Louët offers electronic dobby systems, while Digital Weaving Norway produces the TC2 digital Jacquard loom for creative and specialist work. www.louetdobby.com

These are different approaches. A dobby selects combinations of shafts, which lift groups of warp threads. A Jacquard system allows individual warp-thread selection. Weaving did not follow one universal path from manual to punched cards and then back again.

Spinning has also developed beyond treadle-driven wheels. Ashford’s e-Spinner 3, for example, uses a variable-speed electric motor. The spinner still performs the skilled work of drafting—drawing out the fibres to control the developing yarn. Ashford Wheels and Looms

The question becomes more precise: why did these developments remain specialist interests while computerised embroidery became so much more visible?

Cheap Clothes Changed the Proposition

One explanation, in my view, is that making an everyday garment and personalising one face very different competition.

Imagine knitting a plain jumper. Before counting your time, you need yarn, suitable equipment and the knowledge to produce the fit and finish you want. A shop-bought jumper provides an immediate alternative.

A handmade jumper may offer better materials, a distinctive design or a more suitable fit. Nevertheless, the machine has a difficult sales argument if it is presented mainly as a way to obtain ordinary clothing cheaply.

Now imagine embroidering a boat’s name onto a purchased jacket, or adding a personal design to a cushion.

The starting item is already available. The machine adds individuality.

Cheap mass-produced clothing can weaken the economic argument for making a garment while strengthening the appeal of decorating one.

That helps explain why personalisation is such a useful market. A club emblem, an unusual gift or a design created for one particular person offers something beyond the standard item on the shelf.

For a sailing club, for example, a machine might personalise shirts, bags and presentation gifts. The value comes from their connection to the club and its members.

Computers Solved the Pattern—but Not the Whole Project

There is a considerable difference between computerising one operation and simplifying an entire craft.

An electronic knitting machine can help select needles for a pattern. However, depending on the machine and project, the maker may still need to:

• Choose yarn suitable for the machine’s gauge.
• Knit and measure a tension sample.
• Cast on and manage the work correctly.
• Shape pieces and transfer stitches.
• Recover dropped stitches.
• Join and finish the garment.

Being able to send an intricate design from a computer does not automatically make those tasks straightforward.

Weaving illustrates the same point. Louët explains that an electronic dobby simplifies pattern selection while warping, threading, weaving and beating remain manual activities. Louët dobby

Think of planning a striped scarf. Designing the colour sequence may be enjoyable and quick. Preparing the warp and threading the loom still require care before the first section of scarf appears.

The computer may remove a complicated decision repeated hundreds of times, yet leave the beginner’s largest obstacle largely untouched.

A machine can become much more capable without becoming much easier to start using.

The First Successful Project Matters

As a teacher, I am interested in the distance between someone’s initial enthusiasm and their first experience of success.

A beginner needs a project that says: “I can do this, and I understand enough to try again.”

Embroidery can provide a relatively contained first task: select a prepared design, use appropriate fabric and stabiliser, hoop it carefully, and stitch a sample.

There is still plenty to learn. Poor hooping, unsuitable stabiliser or an inappropriate design can spoil the result. Creating your own embroidery files introduces further skill. However, a small prepared design gives the learner a clear and limited objective.

Compare that with expecting a new machine knitter to produce a fitted jumper as their first achievement.

A better introduction might be a successful sample, followed by a simple scarf or cushion panel. The principle is familiar from teaching science or making videos: limit the first task so that the learner can see what worked and understand why.

Manufacturers need to sell that learning journey alongside the machine.

A list of impressive features may attract attention. A well-designed first project helps turn a purchaser into a regular user.

Faster Is Not Always What a Craftsperson Wants

There is another complication: people do not necessarily practise a craft because they need more finished objects.

Someone may enjoy knitting because it is portable, quiet and sociable. They can work on a few rows while talking, travelling or listening to music.

A knitting machine offers a different experience. It needs a suitable working space, preparation and attention to its operation. For some people, that is wonderfully absorbing. For others, it removes precisely what they enjoyed.

The same distinction applies to spinning. An electric spinner can remove treadling while preserving the feel of fibres passing through the hands. Automating the fibre handling itself would change the activity much more fundamentally.

The best automation removes a difficulty that the maker wants removed.

There is no single correct balance. Some people want the physical rhythm; others want to concentrate on design, colour and structure. Successful products need to understand which experience their customers are buying.

Sewing Has More Than One Reason to Survive

Sewing machines also have an advantage in the variety of useful jobs they can perform.

A machine might be used to shorten curtains, repair a seam, alter trousers, make a cushion, assemble a costume or create an original garment. The owner does not have to become a committed dressmaker to find it useful.

Embroidery adds another set of possibilities, including personalised gifts and small-business work. Brother’s current range explicitly spans domestic sewing, embroidery and business applications. 100 years of innovative excellence

That breadth matters. Different customers can justify similar equipment for different reasons.

A knitting machine is more specialised, and different gauges suit different yarn ranges. Someone who enjoys moving freely between very fine yarn and chunky wool may encounter limitations that knitting needles do not impose in the same way. Knitting & Crochet Guild

A Good Machine Needs Teaching, Repairs and Confidence

A craft machine is easier to buy when a prospective owner can see it demonstrated, take lessons and obtain help when something goes wrong.

Without that support, a minor technical difficulty can become a reason to put the machine away.

I suspect this helps explain how a market can contract even when the equipment remains impressive. Fewer buyers can mean fewer dealers and classes. Reduced access to advice then makes buying less attractive, further weakening demand.

Long-lived machines create another commercial complication. A thriving second-hand market is excellent for access and reuse, but it does not necessarily provide enough new-machine sales to fund continual development.

Electronics can introduce additional dependencies too. A mechanical machine may remain repairable while an older electronic model also needs a compatible controller, connection or software solution.

The existence of modern links for older knitting equipment is encouraging, but compatibility still has to be considered. Soft Byte continues to offer connections for several families of machines, illustrating the value of maintaining that bridge between generations of equipment. softbyte.co.uk

What a Craft Show Can—and Cannot—Tell Us

A busy craft exhibition shows that people want to make things. It does not tell us that every kind of craft machine has an equally strong market.

My suspicion is that stand economics contribute to what we see. Yarn, fabric and small accessories can generate many purchases during a day. A large specialist machine may need a lengthy demonstration and considerable follow-up before anyone buys it.

The type of exhibition matters as well. A general craft show presents a different picture from a specialist weaving event or textile-design workshop.

Even so, visibility matters. If visitors never encounter machine knitting, they cannot discover that it might appeal to them.

A lack of demonstrations can help perpetuate a lack of demand.

Could the Domestic Textile Machine Have Another Moment?

I can see the appeal of a modern knitting system that combines clear design software, reliable connections, useful diagnostics and guided projects.

For someone interested in both craft and engineering, designing a knitted structure could be as engaging as preparing a laser-cut design or a piece of embroidery.

But the opportunity requires more than a touchscreen. It needs a complete route to success:

• Suitable yarn recommendations.
• Clear setup instructions.
• Manageable first projects.
• Accessible repairs and spare parts.
• An active community offering help and inspiration.

Shared access could help too. A workshop, college or makerspace could offer equipment and tuition without requiring everyone to find room for a specialist machine at home.

There is an attractive demonstration waiting to happen: design a small two-colour motif, knit a sample, examine how the stitches create it, and then use the result in a finished object.

That connects the computer screen to something tangible and understandable.

Conclusion: Invention Is Only the Beginning

I do not think the diminished visibility of knitting machines means that people lost their creativity. Nor does it mean that computerised knitting and weaving were poor ideas.

My reading is that embroidery found a favourable combination of personalisation, achievable projects and commercial uses. Domestic knitting and weaving faced a different mixture of preparation, specialist skills, physical space and competition from inexpensive finished textiles.

Technology succeeds when its capabilities fit the lives of enough people—and when those people can learn it, maintain it and enjoy using it.

For a craft machine, the decisive question may be:

Does it help me make something I care about, while preserving the parts of making that I enjoy?

That is why the absence still interests me. The creative possibilities have not vanished. Perhaps what is missing is a better bridge between an impressive machine and an enthusiastic beginner.

Do you still use a knitting machine, an electronic loom or an electric spinner? What helped you keep using it—or what caused you to put it away?