Originally Posted by Newcomer
I tried to swing the Frills shot, but unfortunately, I think you have me beat on it
I am very attracted to my MUT Moon. It tracks the days of the month, and the phases of the moon--both complications relate only to the month. In a similar vein, this is what bothers me about watches like the Omega Speedmaster Moonphase, or the Big Pilot Perpetual Calendar. In the case of the former, you are pairing arguably the most sedentary and poetic complications with the most erratic. In the case of the latter, you are taking a pilot's watch, which is all about being "of the moment," and placing a complication that is completely irrelevant to its primary purpose.
One of the more interesting watches I have seen as of late has been the Habring2 Foudroyante with Secondes de Mort. What a fascinating combination!
Just a couple of the evening thoughts.
Newcomer - I am a big fan of your MUT moon! Congrats again!
There is something to be said about whether aesthetics sing to you or not - and the combination of specific complications is part of this. For several posts, Dino944 stated how the Patek 5059's choice of cutting off the "15" and "17" in the retrograde date function didn't sit well with him visually: I had the same visceral reaction when I saw the 5059, and I really tried to like it as it has great virtues (the officer/hunter's case is to die for). I tried wearing it over and over again (six times) - but at the end it didn't sing to me as "perfect" versus, say, the 3970's overall design and choice of complications.
Similarly, I checked out the 5496P before deciding on the 3970P. This monster retails for $115,000 (still in production!), could probably be acquired for under $100K, and features a slim profile but a larger (for Patek!) case at 39.5mm. It WEARS and LOOKS large, especially on me. And yet...
When I wore it on my wrist a few things bothered me:
1. There it is again, look at how the "15" and "17" are cut off by the leap year window. This is the successor to the 5050, and that feels much more balanced to me. I am sure it is a deliberate design decision to cut the "15" and "17" off because the 5050 is SMALLER at 36mm and yet does NOT cut off the "15" and "17":
2. Check the strange spacing comparison between the "day" window of the 5496 at "9" and the "month" window at "3." For whatever reason the fonts seem differently sized or spaced, so that the "day" fonts are bigger and spaced further apart while the "month" fonts are packed more tightly together. Threw me off a bit.
Check how the 5050's fonts are much more symmetrical.
3. Finally, there just seemed to be a lot of empty space in the 5496's dial. Is it a function of trying to preserve the 5050's "relatively ascetic" look while enlarging the case diameter by 3.5mm? Maybe. Still, it felt too empty. I almost prefer a simple, clean Calatrava face than adding stuff that don't quite mix well and leave me... wanting (to Newcomer's point).
Anyway, these were my niggly thoughts about the 5496P. I'm sure some people love it. If it sings to you, that's fantastic. It's got to feel perfect for you, there must be no tradeoffs, there can't be a single feeling of "man this watch is awesome, but...." ... not at these price points.
Originally Posted by in stitches
that sounds just like my retirement plan when i refi my house to buy a high complication PP.
What a coincidence, I just refi'd my house.........................................
Originally Posted by ChicagoRon
If I bought that PP 3970P I couldn't afford to go to any formal events anymore... It would look great on my wrist as I sit at home eating ramen noodles and watching Wife Swap reruns, though
That's kind of how I keep the calories at a minimum. Wait. Each pack of Ramen has 700 calories and lots of sodium. Well, Nissin's Ramen at least. Beef flavor.
And I like eating two packs at a time...
Oh man. Now I have to rethink this whole ramen diet...
Originally Posted by DLJr
If I catch you at a black tie event and that watch isn't sitting beneath your shirt cuff I will tease you mercilessly Frills. Of course I will then oogle the watch.
Am I only only one who perfers small, simple, "uncomplicated" watches for black tie?
Jacket cuff, jacket cuff, DLJr! See how careful I was in the post above to write "jacket cuff"!
There is totally an argument to be made for small, simple watches for black tie!