The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre,

[TheFoo]

On “dress” watches: there’s a difference between a more formal watch that only looks right with a suit and the broader category of watches worn on a strap that aren’t sport or tool watches. The latter can easily be worn casually with t-shirt and jeans while the former cannot.

 

[jischwar]

On “dress” watches: there’s a difference between a more formal watch that only looks right with a suit and the broader category of watches worn on a strap that aren’t sport or tool watches. The latter can easily be worn casually with t-shirt and jeans while the former cannot.

Mind providing some examples on the former vs the latter?

 

[Drek Galloche]

Breguet numerals font is a downmarket marketing ? But generic font is more exclusive and aloof? I dont follow.

 

[TheFoo]

Breguet numerals font is a downmarket marketing ? But generic font is more exclusive and aloof? I dont follow.

What? Who said that? All I said was that there is something to be said for aloof/generic font choice, not that anything is more “exclusive” or definitively better versus worse.

 

[TheFoo]

Mind providing some examples on the former vs the latter?

I wear my 5296 with jeans, no problem. You could do the same with any number of Pateks or Langes or JLCs, even if they are called “dress watches”. But what about a Tank LC or Golden Ellipse? Harder to pull-off.

 

[jischwar]

I wear my 5296 with jeans, no problem. You could do the same with any number of Pateks or Langes or JLCs, even if they are called “dress watches”. But what about a Tank LC or Golden Ellipse? Harder to pull-off.

Lot of grey area, but I see where you are going

 

[TheFoo]

Lot of grey area

Exactly the point.

 

[Dino944]

I strongly disagree on the dial. The date window is actually a big improvement in my book: (1) easier to read, (2) harmonizes the full date read-out (everything in a window rather than windows-and-a-dial), and (3) creates room for the 24-hour indicator (which makes sense to be in a dial format, consistent with the hour/minute/seconds read-out). Not sure why it matters that it cuts into the 24-hour indicator. It cuts approximately halfway though the outer band of the sub-dial, so there’s no awkward spaces or disruption to my eye. Meanwhile, if you’ve ever had to use or set the time on an annual or perpetual calendar, you’d experience the functional benefit of a 24-hour indicator.

The one thing I don’t love is how the ‘24’ in the 24-hour indicator is obstructed by the short ends of the hour and minute hands. However, even if a slight flaw or compromise, I don’t see how it adds up to the laughable failure of design that many are characterizing here.

Well it wouldn't be the first time you've strongly disagreed with someone on this thread.

All kidding aside, you can justify their design decisions, and yet I still find the date window cutting into the subdial very distasteful. It just looks like an afterthought to me. Oooops, where do we put the date now that we put in this 24 hour indicator where the date was..."Oh, f*ck it, just cut another window in the dial, who cares where it goes." Overall, there are just too many details that I've already mentioned that make the 3448 a far more appealing design to my eye, however YMMV.

 

[TheFoo]

Well it wouldn't be the first time you've strongly disagreed with someone on this thread.

All kidding aside, you can justify their design decisions, and yet I still find the date window cutting into the subdial very distasteful. It just looks like an afterthought to me. Oooops, where do we put the date now that we put in this 24 hour indicator where the date was..."Oh, f*ck it, just cut another window in the dial, who cares where it goes." Overall, there are just too many details that I've already mentioned that make the 3448 a far more appealing design to my eye, however YMMV.

Ah, and this isn’t your first time bashing Patek.

People obviously overlook worse sorts of things when they want to. Langes have cut-off numerals and dials all over the place. The awkward dial overlap on the Lange 1 is somehow a “feature”. Honestly, I still don’t see how the date window on the 5396 is even a problem compared to those flaws. It does not disrupt any numbers. It does not create any awkward spaces. It is a common and logical place to put a date. It is scaled similarly to the hour markers, with which it completes a circle around the dial. Most importantly for a complicated watch: it reads easily.

And who is more guilty of the inferior aping of archived models than Cartier? There is not a single model they currently sell that isn’t a worse version of a historical piece. Moreover, the mechanical side of the equation for Cartier is quite so-so. At least the likes of Patek are making functional and mechanical improvements along with their design iterations.

I can understood why something like the 5396 isn’t exactly to everyone’s taste and there are certainly things one can nitpick, but I think when people are attacking it for being a critical failure of design, something else is going on.

 

[UnFacconable]

I posted an article from A Collected Man on watch typography a few days/weeks ago. Very astute and in-depth observations. One could argue, as another poster suggested, that Patek is purposefully choosing very ubiquitous/anonymous fonts.

I read that article and found the following interesting (discussing the evolution of Patek's 3940 over a 20-year period:

As the reference evolves, this brand signature becomes gradually larger and more muted, whilst the subdials also begin to evolve to a more contemporary font. As a result, if you hold a 3940 from 1985 and one produced twenty years later, they are on the surface, almost identical. However, the subtle differences in typeface size and font mean that one feels distinctly like a vintage piece, whilst the other feels much more modern. Beyond the obvious element of rarity, this is why collectors have tended to gravitate towards the earlier executions of this perpetual calendar, as they speak to a certain Patek Philippe aesthetic which is long lost today.

I will grant you that it's entirely possible that Patek has chosen modern generic fonts, including the much-reviled Arial, out of some sort of purposeful approach but that doesn't mean people have to like it.

I can understood why something like the 5396 isn’t exactly to everyone’s taste and there are certainly things one can nitpick, but I think when people are attacking it for being a critical failure of design, something else is going on.

You don't appear to be aware of the arbitrary nature of your commentary. You criticize Lange for its flashy finishing without stopping to acknowledge that in 2021 almost the entirety of finishing, beyond the very basic machining done by the likes of Rolex and ETA, is all for show. Pick your Patek - it doesn't have a better service life or performance than the simplest Rolex coming off the robotic assembly line in 2021. If there is a non-aesthetic benefit to Patek's superior finishing in 2021, I don't think I've heard of it. Of course you can choose to eschew gold chatons, blued screws, etc. in favor of the finishing details you like for whatever reason you like, but that's based on your personal priorities. Yet you continue to stridently argue that Patek's finishing choices are somehow objectively superior to Lange and others.

You talk about Poundbury as if the appropriate reference is Lange, but in reality Poundbury represents all mechanical watches built in the last 50 years. There is no reason in 2021 for anyone to produce a mechanical watch, least of all one with the sort of savoir faire that Patek is so proud of. You are certainly more than welcome to enjoy Patek and to prefer Patek to Lange for all the reasons you do, but don't be surprised if other people disagree with your arbitrarily justified positions and have their own arbitrarily justified positions. I know you will return to your stock response that I'm arguing against discernment and any objective criteria, but that's a weak argument and I think you know that by now.

There are many different paths to watch enthusiasm. Everyone else here is fairly transparent about their preferences but you seem to be alone in arguing that whatever arbitrary preference you seem to have at the moment is somehow objectively superior and beyond dispute. If you were sitting on a 3448, I have no doubt that you would reverse your argument in favor of it over the 5396 and would be telling us all about its superior balance, font style and unobstructed dial elements. You are certainly free to prefer the 5396, but don't call it Patek bashing when everyone else prefers the 3448. It often feels like you're on a HS debate team and feel compelled to argue an arbitrary position to the death. It's cool, you do you. But don't be surprised that it's entirely unconvincing.

 

[Ebitdaddy]

Whether you prefer Patonko's Phillip or Apeman Pigucci we can all agree the Millenary is underrated. Thx for coming to my ted talk. Also yes PP finishing sucks at the price range VS independents but you can also flip them in 2 days if you ever need to sell. So buying one used and flipping when you get bored is unlikely to lose you much if anything.

 

[TheFoo]

I read that article and found the following interesting (discussing the evolution of Patek's 3940 over a 20-year period:


I will grant you that it's entirely possible that Patek has chosen modern generic fonts, including the much-reviled Arial, out of some sort of purposeful approach but that doesn't mean people have to like it.



You don't appear to be aware of the arbitrary nature of your commentary. You criticize Lange for its flashy finishing without stopping to acknowledge that in 2021 almost the entirety of finishing, beyond the very basic machining done by the likes of Rolex and ETA, is all for show. Pick your Patek - it doesn't have a better service life or performance than the simplest Rolex coming off the robotic assembly line in 2021. If there is a non-aesthetic benefit to Patek's superior finishing in 2021, I don't think I've heard of it. Of course you can choose to eschew gold chatons, blued screws, etc. in favor of the finishing details you like for whatever reason you like, but that's based on your personal priorities. Yet you continue to stridently argue that Patek's finishing choices are somehow objectively superior to Lange and others.

You talk about Poundbury as if the appropriate reference is Lange, but in reality Poundbury represents all mechanical watches built in the last 50 years. There is no reason in 2021 for anyone to produce a mechanical watch, least of all one with the sort of savoir faire that Patek is so proud of. You are certainly more than welcome to enjoy Patek and to prefer Patek to Lange for all the reasons you do, but don't be surprised if other people disagree with your arbitrarily justified positions and have their own arbitrarily justified positions. I know you will return to your stock response that I'm arguing against discernment and any objective criteria, but that's a weak argument and I think you know that by now.

There are many different paths to watch enthusiasm. Everyone else here is fairly transparent about their preferences but you seem to be alone in arguing that whatever arbitrary preference you seem to have at the moment is somehow objectively superior and beyond dispute. If you were sitting on a 3448, I have no doubt that you would reverse your argument in favor of it over the 5396 and would be telling us all about its superior balance, font style and unobstructed dial elements. You are certainly free to prefer the 5396, but don't call it Patek bashing when everyone else prefers the 3448. It often feels like you're on a HS debate team and feel compelled to argue an arbitrary position to the death. It's cool, you do you. But don't be surprised that it's entirely unconvincing.

There’s just a lot that you don’t understand, which leads you to accuse me of arbitrary opinions.

Rolex finishing is highly functional. Properly finished parts reduce wear, mitigate against corrosion, and increase efficiency and precision. It is not for show. You cannot even see the damned movement in a Rolex.

Lange finishing is not merely “flashy”. What you don’t seem to grasp is that it expresses a falseness relative to their own brand, place in time, and development of the wristwatch that is not true for Rolex, IWC, Patek, Seiko, etc. I have spelled out my critique. It is not dissimilar to a distaste for McMansions. You can like McMansions all you want, and argue it’s all personal preference, but don’t pretend I’ve been vague or unspecific or ungrounded in my position.

As for the 3448–no, not such a huge fan. I would take the 5396 any day from a purely aesthetic perspective. Your assumption that such is disingenuous is exactly that—an assumption. And a boring, pedestrian one at that.

Now, a 2449? That would be a different matter entirely.

 

[Drek Galloche]

What? Who said that? All I said was that there is something to be said for aloof/generic font choice, not that anything is more “exclusive” or definitively better versus worse.

So what was the point of juxtaposing Hermes deliberate font and calling it more marketing driven vs. Patek generic font and calling it more aloof if not to compare one against the other? If you have no preference than were you just making random observation on the matter of fonts expressing no preference to either?
Employing generic elements of the design is not aloof it is generic and characterless., imho.

 

[TheFoo]

So what was the point of juxtaposing Hermes deliberate font and calling it more marketing driven vs. Patek generic font and calling it more aloof if not to compare one against the other? If you have no preference than were you just making random observation on the matter of fonts expressing no preference to either?
Employing generic elements of the design is not aloof it is generic and characterless., imho.

My point was simple: there is a give and take when carefully designing a highly specific font versus using one that is more universal and off-the-shelf. You are trying to twist/reduce this to a mere matter of better or worse at the expense of nuance and multi-faceted consideration—which, by the way, is the common and typical way that online hobbyists approach watches.

 

[Drek Galloche]

My point was simple: there is a give and take when carefully curating a font versus using one that is more universal and off-the-shelf. You are trying to twist/reduce this to a mere matter of better or worse.

I dont thin choosing generic fonts was a **** you by Patek. It would have been very cool, but then I would have to dismiss their choice for being delibrate **** you to other watch brands, and thus marketing driven and not aloof at all.