There has not been any recent conversation on this topic. I passed this means of profiling chisels on to Gerald Mayberry. Gerald has the Period Secretary in the Gallery. Then he lost his password and could not post any more of his extensive Period Furniture work. but I digress
He is currently making a maple chest of drawers which in Period Furniture involves dovetailing the case together. In case you have not chopped maple recently, it is normally hard on chisel edges. Gerald established the Unicorn Profile with a Tormark and leather wheel, targeting that bright reflection at the chisel tip.
I just got off the phone with an astonished Gerald. Keep in mind he has made dozens of case pieces and he does not astonish easily. He reported no chipping or folding of his Two cherries chisel. He could hardly believe the result.
Our Article on this sharpening technique will appear in Jan Popular Woodworking thanks to Ellis's skilled editing and sales job.
..there will be lots of people who have never tried this that find out that they wish they had.
And then there will be a group of trolls who say tage frid belt sanding a chisel is the same thing.
or the napoleon dynamite response ("i already did that like a thousand times at scout camp").
I'm sure it's been done before, but anyone willing to explain how to get to an unfailing (but extremely keen) edge without making a blunt one instead can't manage to point out where they've seen the same thing before.
I'm definitely in the first group. Well, maybe I'm in all of these groups.
When I was a child I remember watching my granddad grinding a chisel and then buffing it on a wheel, as well as other grownups, so this is definitely has been around for a while. However they weren't cabinetmakers, not even carpenters, and their primary sharpening method was "just bang it harder". They didn't care about the finish that a chisel produces and they totally didn't care whether a chisel would shave or not. Probably this is the part being omitted by folks claiming it's not new. Well, technically it isn't, but that's not the point.
There's indeed a DVD where Tage Frid uses a belt sander and a buffer while making a comment like "this is what I teach my students". However, in his books he uses a medium stone just as you do David, and he makes some particular remarks on belts grits and stones, it's the classic "grind-hone-polish" protocol, not exactly "grind and polish" like other folks might suggest. Another detail is the chisel from the video was used for roughly squaring some previously routed half-mortises, not for fine hand tools only woodworking. We could debate what and why Tage did on the video, but that's not the point.
The point is that a simple setup provides superior results for a fraction of the cost in a fraction of the time.
After trying the Unicorn method (isn't it a true microbevel method actually?) a try I had a pretty profound realization: I wasn't an Olympic sharpener I though I was, and I did every mistake you have explained in a video and then some. I guess I secretly hated that "Paul Sellers" method, because sharpening would take me 30-60 mins, and because of this sharpening was postponed for too much, results weren't as predictable and so on. It seems like lots of beginners were conditioned by certain YT personalities that grinding is somehow wrong and there's only one true way of sharpening. But today my routine is under 2 mins per chisel, I'm not sure I'll be able to get a sharper edge ever. And if I do - it will probably cut the fabric of spacetime itself. Therefore I'd like to thank you David for what you do and share with us, the Unicorn method is one of the most important things I've learned as a woodworker.
..the conclusion is what I'm hoping for. That it just works, at least as well as something else (otherwise, do "something else") and that it's fast enough to do it as often as needed.
I've never read much of frid's stuff and I've come to learn that when people relay what he's said and I take it literally, they're usually leaving a lot out. The details they leave out are the ones that would've made the subject matter make sense.