or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...) - Page 2019  

post #30271 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Nickels View Post

^ I think you can find something very simple and elegant in that department. I really like a timeless, vintage watch with character.


edit: A couple of quick searches on TZ (now you've got me thinking about one too!) happy.gif

http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=6751558&rid=0

http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=6717084&rid=0

http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=6712324&rid=0


Those are all too rich for my taste at the moment, but I'm saving slash looking. Even something from a different brand with that style... But man those watches are built supremely well.

 

And damn those are all gorgeous.

I figure since I won't wear a formal watch much, I should get an auto without day/date. But those are so nice, I'll probably wear them all the time. Leather irritates my skin sometimes though. I get contact dermititis from it sometimes. It could have just been a crappy strap though.


Edited by ridethecliche - 3/24/14 at 6:39pm
post #30272 of 48312
Elegant, classic and timeless (or any combination of the 3) have to be the most awful copy in fashion/watch advertising.
post #30273 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyc wid it View Post

Elegant, classic and timeless (or any combination of the 3) have to be the most awful copy in fashion/watch advertising.

 

Why's that?

They define those 60's-70's era formal watches pretty well. They still work well and fit the situation they were designed for. 4 decades is pretty timeless, no?

post #30274 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by ridethecliche View Post


And damn those are all gorgeous.

I really dig this one.

post #30275 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyc wid it View Post

Elegant, classic and timeless (or any combination of the 3) have to be the most awful copy in fashion/watch advertising.

Thank goodness that's not my industry.
post #30276 of 48312
I guess I can see the irony of calling a watch timeless.
post #30277 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Nickels View Post

I really dig this one.


My (soon to arrive) Rolex looks almost the same as that. Yes, it's a timeless, classic and simple look, I quite agree.
post #30278 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnguy001 View Post

Dino - I couldn't agree with you more. Well said!

Admittedly I came late to the Rolex game and I'm not ashamed to admit I had many of the apprehensions talked about when discussing Rolex ownership. I'm not ashamed because I can admit I was wrong about many of them.

When I bought my Deepsea I mentioned to my wife that it's not exactly the most popular Rolex model. When she asked why I told her many feel it's too big, not true to the classic Rolex design, etc. etc. She looked at me like I was being stupid and said "Who cares? Look, why can't people just appreciate that it's a great looking watch and that it's incredibly well made?" Though very simplistic I think it resonated with me for some reason.

Anyways back to the topic of Omega v. Rolex. There's plenty of room in the stable for both IMO

photo IMG_1822.jpg

rnguy,

 

Thank you for your kind words, for sharing your your wife's words of wisdom, for sharing your Rolex experience, and the great photo of your Deep-Sea with one of its roommates, the Speedmaster.  I love seeing watches from competing brands in the same collection. I also enjoy chatting with owners of both, because they often have a perspective that die hard Rolex or die hard Omega fans may not be able to see.  I also think its great when people throw away concerns about what others will think of their watches or of them for wearing certain watches. When we do this we express our own sense of style and it opens up many more avenues for the direction in which to take our respective watch collections.  

 

While I can appreciate collections dedicated to just one brand, I really like a variety of brands, and many years ago goal as a collector become to try to have at least one example of each great watch brand.  Obviously, between the costs of the hobby, lots of new independents, and at times getting side tracked by purchasing more than one piece from a few companies, I can see it is not a goal I am likely to ever reach.  However, we can and should have our dreams.  I've always liked the idea of having a diverse collection with a few pieces from competing brands.  Competing brands often look at a task differently, approach it differently and come to different but brilliant solutions.  

 

We all have different tastes and preferences, and that is what makes this such a great hobby and thread to visit.  I did want to mention that I don't have a problem with people hating Rolex or other nice brands (as it leaves more of them for me ;)).  In the end, we are pretty lucky to have a rather diverse group of collectors here who can appreciate a wide variety of brands.  

post #30279 of 48312

I am holding out for a rose gold Royal Oak Offshore Tourbillon.  When I wear it, people will immediately be able to recognise me as a successful hiphop artist.  Although I might change the rubber strap for something special, like panda.

post #30280 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

I guess I wanted to find out why you think an Aquanaut would necessarily look better on a leather strap if you think a Nautilus looks bad on one. I don't follow.

I was going to include some stock photos of Nautili with straps for this post, but my Google image search only turned up fakes. I'm serious.

To me the Nautilus strap is too wide and is essentially more of a wristband then a watch on a band. The strap overwhelms the watch, which should basically never happen. And that points to the fact that the bracelet is an integral part of the Nautilus design.

On the other hand, the Aquanaut is an analog to the Nautilus but made specifically for a strap. At least in my humble opinion, it makes more sense for an exotic skin strap to be the luxury option for the Aquanaut as opposed to a bracelet.

Anyways I see the Aquanaut and the Nautilus as two variants of the same design: one is designed to go with a bracelet, the other is designed to go on straps.

With regard to the Rolex versus Omega thing: I suspect a lot of Rolex' leg up is due to the fact that as a brand it was cultivated for English-language consumers. If you think about it, Rolex is basically a British brand, that happens to manufacture in Switzerland. And given that so much marketing in the past century was driven by entertainment media, it's only natural that Rolex would be on top, dominating an English language entertainment driven market.

In any case the new version of Rolex versus Omega argument is the Rolex versus Grand Seiko argument. If you don't believe me check out the watch forums. Please, no links to Archie Luxury.
post #30281 of 48312
On the other hand, fakes do offer a look at design possibilities, some less palatable than others:



post #30282 of 48312
Those are horrid
post #30283 of 48312
Yes, but they remind me of things like the workshop guns made in places like Darra Adem Khel or China in the early 20th century, which had all sorts of hodgepodge features from different designs put together in weird ways. Somebody somewhere must want an Aquanaut chronograph, so here it is.

Sort of.
post #30284 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by academe View Post


Liking that Rolex, I must admit! satisfied.gif


beautiful picture...and very nice model...Rolex strap that I love it.

post #30285 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Details man...or at least a hint lurker%5B1%5D.gif

Iconic origins, nobel metal, more than a little frivolous nod[1].gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


wow. im shocked you sold that nipple dial, well not so much since you do have 2, but that was one of my fave watches all time. ill miss seeing you wear it here, but sometimes watches need new homes.

I would not want to make you sad, stitch! So here are some nipples just for you. This is an old picture that you've probably seen before, but I promise to take more cheers.gif

Klokkebilder668.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post

On the other hand, the Aquanaut is an analog to the Nautilus but made specifically for a strap. At least in my humble opinion, it makes more sense for an exotic skin strap to be the luxury option for the Aquanaut as opposed to a bracelet.

Anyways I see the Aquanaut and the Nautilus as two variants of the same design: one is designed to go with a bracelet, the other is designed to go on straps.

Maybe. I find it difficult to see clearly as the existing Aquanaut bracelet is a horrible, horrible abomination. It might be possible to make a better one ...

I too would like to see the Aquanaut on a PP skin strap! I never warmed to the rubber strap on the Aquanaut (though I generally like rubber straps), but I do like both the case and the dial!
Edited by NonServiam - 3/25/14 at 2:45am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)