or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1664

post #24946 of 39116

Plk,

 

Thanks for the message; I'm actually quite surprised by how long it lies across the wrist.  But I like it a lot!  There are no rules on posting external links that I know of - so thanks again! http://www.ablogtowatch.com/baselworld-2013-the-new-nomos-38-series/

 

My watch (my only "proper" watch too) is a beaten-up Omega from about 1970, which is when my mother bought it for my father.  It was sharing a pic of this, which brought me into this thread and a broader fascination as a result.

post #24947 of 39116
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post
 

Plk,

 

Thanks for the message; I'm actually quite surprised by how long it lies across the wrist.  But I like it a lot!  There are no rules on posting external links that I know of - so thanks again! http://www.ablogtowatch.com/baselworld-2013-the-new-nomos-38-series/

 

My watch (my only "proper" watch too) is a beaten-up Omega from about 1970, which is when my mother bought it for my father.  It was sharing a pic of this, which brought me into this thread and a broader fascination as a result.

 

i thought it was an omega - looks great!  nice story behind owning it - it makes it that much more special.  i was wearing the nomos when my twins (my first - and likely last - children!) were born last year.  my son will get the watch someday.  (besides what my wife is going to pass down to her, his sister will get a lovely chain given to me by my grandmother.)

post #24948 of 39116
For the many of us that dismissed Genta style watches from the beginning, then come to appreciate them down the track, if it wasn't for the brand of Patek or AP, would people even bother revisiting the design?

Since the design would be classified as very unclassic when they were first introduced, people would start to buy it as the most expensive sports watch from prestigious brands, eventually the appeal would spread to more purist watch lovers. Without doubt Gerald Genta is one great watch designer, he still needs the support of the big names to broaden his appeal.
post #24949 of 39116

Hey fellas,

 

First time poster. What's the feeling regarding mother of pearl dials on men's watches? I know Rolex does it on the Submariner. Here's another example on an homage:

 

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_u20GxB_am24/SjzkBag3vEI/AAAAAAAADTA/BDyGeLdPSIc/s800/IMG_9328.JPG

http://i720.photobucket.com/albums/ww204/MoonPhased/Fathers-Day-wrist-1.jpg

http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/3072/snv30102ht6.jpg

post #24950 of 39116
Quote:
Originally Posted by wurger View Post

For the many of us that dismissed Genta style watches from the beginning, then come to appreciate them down the track, if it wasn't for the brand of Patek or AP, would people even bother revisiting the design?

Since the design would be classified as very unclassic when they were first introduced, people would start to buy it as the most expensive sports watch from prestigious brands, eventually the appeal would spread to more purist watch lovers. Without doubt Gerald Genta is one great watch designer, he still needs the support of the big names to broaden his appeal.

hard to say. but i think that without AP and PP pushing the models, they may not have gotten enough visibility for people to realize the beauty. some things take time to be appreciated.

NO I AM NOT SAYING THERE ARE NICE BECAUSE OF TEH BRAND. I AM SAYING THEY NEEDED TIME FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND TEH DESIGN LIKE MANY PIECES OF ART OR FINE DELICACIES THAT TAKE TIME TO APPRECIATE! and that those brands were able to give the models the visibly and time, as opposed to a smaller maker possibly having to cut his loses if it was not an instant success.

also, as GG designs go, these are very tame. the stuff he did on his own was far further "out there." some of it i like, some i think is ugly, even if brilliant. there are many brilliant watchmakers that have made some ugly arse watches.
post #24951 of 39116
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


NO I AM NOT SAYING THERE ARE NICE BECAUSE OF TEH BRAND. I AM SAYING THEY NEEDED TIME FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND TEH DESIGN LIKE MANY PIECES OF ART OR FINE DELICACIES THAT TAKE TIME TO APPRECIATE! and that those brands were able to give the models the visibly and time, as opposed to a smaller maker possibly having to cut his loses if it was not an instant success.

also, as GG designs go, these are very tame. the stuff he did on his own was far further "out there." some of it i like, some i think is ugly, even if brilliant. there are many brilliant watchmakers that have made some ugly arse watches.

My point exactly, stitchy. happy.gif
post #24952 of 39116
yup. i was just pontificating. we agree 100%. cheers.gif
post #24953 of 39116
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


hard to say. but i think that without AP and PP pushing the models, they may not have gotten enough visibility for people to realize the beauty. some things take time to be appreciated.

NO I AM NOT SAYING THERE ARE NICE BECAUSE OF TEH BRAND. I AM SAYING THEY NEEDED TIME FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND TEH DESIGN LIKE MANY PIECES OF ART OR FINE DELICACIES THAT TAKE TIME TO APPRECIATE! and that those brands were able to give the models the visibly and time, as opposed to a smaller maker possibly having to cut his loses if it was not an instant success.

also, as GG designs go, these are very tame. the stuff he did on his own was far further "out there." some of it i like, some i think is ugly, even if brilliant. there are many brilliant watchmakers that have made some ugly arse watches.

 

Agree here - hard to disentangle the catch-all term "brand" with (a) the specific design and (b) the contribution of the individual designer.  After all, the "brand" is affected by the individual piece too, for good or for ill.

 

In a sense the Genta designs are a bit of an anomaly for the "big brands" - for them to even acknowledge an individual's contribution to the design of a piece. Did Genta have sharp IP lawyers advising him, insisting that he attach his name to the design to benefit somehow from association?  Or was it such a risk back then that PP or AP hedged their bets by naming Genta as the designer so that they could pin the blame on him if the product did not work out?  I mean - the watchmaker who designed the Caliber 89 is still alive and well: that piece exceeded the Graves Supercomplication in 1989 as the most complicated watch in the world.  But Patek doesn't seem to be in a rush to get the watchmaker's name out there to give him credit.  Anyone know more details about Genta's involvement with PP and AP in the early 1970s?

 

It's an interesting business strategy - take The Economist, a venerable publication that I read from cover to cover every week.  Unlike other publications it remains profitable, and yet they do not even allow their journalists/writers to be named (at most, they take over a generic columnist's space, like "Lexington," who writes about US issues).  In this sense they avoid the risk of nurturing "superstars" who will command larger salaries because of their status: this helps keep costs down.  But are their journalists being exploited by not giving the credit "they deserve"?


Anyway, this has veered well beyond the original topic.  Sorry.  Brand and product design/"look" aside, there were little elements like the quality of finishing that prompted my 180 on the Nautilus - which meant that it had to be appreciated on the wrist.  Can't convey stuff like "OMG the bracelet is so comfortable around my wrist, and the blue/green/gray dial changes so magically under different angles and lighting conditions!" without seeing it in the flesh.

post #24954 of 39116
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post
 

 

Agree here - hard to disentangle the catch-all term "brand" with (a) the specific design and (b) the contribution of the individual designer.  After all, the "brand" is affected by the individual piece too, for good or for ill.

 

In a sense the Genta designs are a bit of an anomaly for the "big brands" - for them to even acknowledge an individual's contribution to the design of a piece. Did Genta have sharp IP lawyers advising him, insisting that he attach his name to the design to benefit somehow from association?  Or was it such a risk back then that PP or AP hedged their bets by naming Genta as the designer so that they could pin the blame on him if the product did not work out?  I mean - the watchmaker who designed the Caliber 89 is still alive and well: that piece exceeded the Graves Supercomplication in 1989 as the most complicated watch in the world.  But Patek doesn't seem to be in a rush to get the watchmaker's name out there to give him credit.  Anyone know more details about Genta's involvement with PP and AP in the early 1970s?

 

It's an interesting business strategy - take The Economist, a venerable publication that I read from cover to cover every week.  Unlike other publications it remains profitable, and yet they do not even allow their journalists/writers to be named (at most, they take over a generic columnist's space, like "Lexington," who writes about US issues).  In this sense they avoid the risk of nurturing "superstars" who will command larger salaries because of their status: this helps keep costs down.  But are their journalists being exploited by not giving the credit "they deserve"?


Anyway, this has veered well beyond the original topic.  Sorry.  Brand and product design/"look" aside, there were little elements like the quality of finishing that prompted my 180 on the Nautilus - which meant that it had to be appreciated on the wrist.  Can't convey stuff like "OMG the bracelet is so comfortable around my wrist, and the blue/green/gray dial changes so magically under different angles and lighting conditions!" without seeing it in the flesh.

In my opinion, it's the most elegant sports watch that you can buy.

post #24955 of 39116
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

there are watches that i liked that i no longer like, but i think a lot of that has to do with the progression of seeing something as finely finished versus a fossil, and then comparing it to something like PP or AP or ALS, or even JLC and IWC and the 5-20k crowd.... and then feeling that what i thought was so fine, was not as finely finished as i thought. combine that with admitted snobbery, and i feel out of like with some "lower end" models.

This sentiment, I think, is the blessing and curse of SF.
post #24956 of 39116
Very interesting post Mister Frilly, I think you pose some very interesting questions. I enjoyed the tangent. I think even more anomalous than having a watchmaker's or designer's name attached to a watch is having the same designer attached to three different watches from three rivals, all created within a relatively short time period (although the new Ingenieur is admittedly the bastard child of Genta's vision). It is pretty amazing that Genta's legacy has survived through these watches. Hell, even VC released the Overseas which is of a similar ilk.

However, I feel like it is a bit more common in the industry when you really think about it. With IWC, the name Kurt Klaus comes to mind. When I think of Ulysee Nardin and the Freak, I think of Ludwig Oeschlin. Omega's Co-Axial movement is strongly associated with George Daniels, and they seem to rely fairly heavily on his name in advertising. Also Grand Seiko, who claims that the finishing of their watches was taught to them by the one and only Dufour.

Here is a little blurb that I read a while back on the history of the Royal Oak:

"At the very beginning of the seventies, Audemars Piguet, just like many other Swiss watch manufacturers, was facing troubled financial conditions. Quartz watches from Japan caused a serious crisis - the period is often referred to as "the quartz crisis" - to the Swiss watch making industry which had no clear ideas on how to stop the dramatic sales drop.

In 1971 Audemars Piguet realized that, without a disruptive change, a financial collapse was inevitable. Elaborating some feedback that they received from the Italian market about possible interest for a steel luxury watch, the management of the manufacture decided it was time to introduce something totally new, a sporty yet elegant timepiece as never seen before.

The designer of choice for this task was a designer born in Geneva in 1931 from an Italian father and a Swiss mother: Gerald Genta. Not a new designer, rather one of the most famous watch designer at that time, having created successful watches for Universal Genève (Polerouter Microtors, White Shadow, Golden Shadow), Omega (Constellation) and Patek Philippe (Golden Ellipse).

On the eve of the 1971 Basel fair (one year before the launch) Audemars Piguet's managing director at the time, Georges Golay, called Gerald Genta at 4pm explaining that the Italian market was expecting an “unprecedented steel watch" for which he needed a design by the following morning. A sports watch for all occasions with the most beautiful finishes ever seen.

By the morning after Gerald Genta had invented the watch that was to become Royal Oak. He will later state that the Royal Oak was the masterpiece of his career."

LINK TO SOURCE: http://www.timeandwatches.com/p/history-of-audemars-piguet-royal-oak.html

It certainly does seem to be a counter-intuitive method of advertising for the brands, but at the same time, by introducing some of the "big dog rock star" watch designers, it definitely helps to make a large brand seem smaller. It is easier to forget that I am paying up the wazoo for a semi-mass-produced item when I think "this has touched the hands of this department," or this minute repeater has personally been inspected by THE Mr. Stern. I think it definitely adds to the romance of it all. New Breguet has little to do with old Breguet. But I would be more interested to hear about the inner workings of their department, and the strides that some of the watchmakers are making within the company as it stands now.
post #24957 of 39116
Quote:
Originally Posted by mktitsworth View Post

This sentiment, I think, is the blessing and curse of SF.

nod[1].gif

but for watches, i had this sentiment long before i found SF.
post #24958 of 39116
Calibre 89 was a collaborated team effort. Most famous for the movement but not the case design. I remember reading a Sunday newspaper article on the progress of it's construction way back in either 1987 or 1988 (NY Times, I believe). I did come across the name of the development team leader but frankly I don't recall it now.

In contrast, Genta was mostly a case designer.

The Graves watch was designed without the aid of computers. That should make it extraordinary impressive compare to any modern complicated watches. And it is a unique piece. How many 89's were constructed? At least four, plus a prototype movement at PP.

Speaking of the "un-Patek" models, remember the Neptune and Sculpture?

The rectangular PP I posted a couple of days ago was the Pagoda of 1997. Ref 5500, solid back. It is a relatively common commemorative model made in fairly large numbers.
post #24959 of 39116
I am (once again) contemplating selling a bunch of watches, including an IWC Portuguese 7-days, vintage nipple dialled 18k GMT-Master and original Jo Siffert Autavia, to fund an Audemars Piguet ROC in rose gold.

Am I crazy?

Or am I Ari Gold? icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

tumblr_mrqtq9SqbL1ryv722o1_500.jpg
post #24960 of 39116
NS - beautiful watch. If you have the itch, then you might just have to scratch it

btw for what it's worth I like it on that brown strap. I wouldn't be as big a fan of it on a gold bracelet, though I'm sure it would be buttery comfortable.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread