Chopard

tony p
567

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Chopard are creating some miracles at their L.U.C. Manufacture...

...nevertheless, looking at these latest creations - stunning and technically impressive as they are - I have a problem with them.

It took me a while to work out what was bothering me. I looked again and again at the (stunning) photos in the post above to try to isolate the cause of my discomfort. Finally I worked it out.

Simply put, these watches are too "busy". They are trying to be too many things to too many people, and I feel that purity of design is suffering.

That's a shame, because the level of quality here is beyond reproach. L.U.C. have proven themselves from day one to be technical leaders. It seems that each new movement showcases an innovation which truly advances the field of technical horology - whether it be an ultra-light tourbillon cage wrought from high-tech materials, a Varinar balance with variable-inertia rotating inserts, or a complex yet visually accurate way of depicting the phases of the moon.

Not only that - L.U.C.'s movement finishing is at the absolute top end of the game, and their cases and dials exhibit a luxurious sheen which very few brands can achieve, and which doubtless owes much to Chopard's parallel achievements as a jewellery brand.

So what's to criticise? Not a lot really...I'd love to own one of these beautiful watches. But they fail to achieve a timeless elegance which would elevate them to the status of classics. Look at the dial of the Lunar One:



So many dial elements competing for the attention of the viewer: the (admittedly stunning) moonphase register; the big, big roman numerals with their distorted perspective; the overly bold lettering on the calendar registers; the guilloché decoration drawing our eyes towards a prominent grande-date display. Each design element is gorgeous on its own, but none of them makes any reference to the others, and thus (at least to my eyes) they end up clashing.

Look at the L.U.C. Tourbillon Titan SL:



A simply incredible tourbillon assembly, modern, streamlined, technical and exciting. Similarly cutting-edge design for the hands. But hang on - our eyes are constantly tempted away by the busyness of the watch's keyless works, partially visible through its translucent dial. And what the hell is that catenary thingy hanging off the top, with its bold red slash (the only bit of red on the entire watch) - why, it's a humble power reserve! Oh yes - Chopard stacked this piece with an 8-day power supply, and they sure as hell aren't going to let it go unnoticed - aesthetics be damned.

The tourbillon was enough. It's simply breathtaking! I love it! Why clutter up that dial with all that other bumph? Well, Chopard are obviously well proud of their exquisite tourbillon, because they decided to feature it prominently on this next watch:



Only problem is, we shouldn't be gazing at the tourbillon...we should instead be admiring the exquisitely rendered oil painting of a panda, which surely is the point of this piece - only, we can't get to see the whole panda, because the blinkin' tourbillon gets in the way!


Really, it's a shame. Mr Scheufele has achieved so much in the short few years since he established L.U.C. as a way of recapturing Chopard's pre-eminence as a high-end watch brand. This is a man who could have chosen not to work a day in his life, yet instead he opted to risk everything in order to create something sensational in the field of watchmaking. His drive and vision have paid off - Chopard are again a "name" in horology, and the timepieces created over the past decade under the L.U.C. banner have been consistently worthy of the entire industry's attention.

I nevertheless feel that in order to propel L.U.C. into the horological pantheon, something has to be done about their design direction. It's almost brilliant - but this current crop of L.U.C. watches will, I feel, date quickly. For, once the whizz-bang factor of all these disparate design elements has dissipated, I predict that history will judge the aesthetics of these pieces harshly.

Hopefully L.U.C. will find a way to rein in the visual profligacy of their current offerings, and replace it with a simpler and more enduring aesthetic which will allow all of this technical precocity a cleaner and purer realisation.

[end of rant]

Cheers
Tony P

PS many thanks to Kong and decksurgeon for the absolutely wonderful report!