armen.y
43
100%!
A great attitude about the ever-changing "drift" of terms and how we use them.
The only caveat I would add is to beware when a term's new meaning becomes harmful to knowledge, or to those efforts most meaningful to our communities. Thankfully, that is seldom the case in the watch world ;-)
“tri-compax”= 3 subdials ? No
We often hear the term “tri-compax” with some thinking it means 3 subdials. ❌ Picture from the internet for illustration purposes =============== The term "tri-compax" is not completely accurate when referring to the number of subdials on a watch. While i...
Thanks for this clarification 😊👍🏻
So if you have a chronograph with central seconds and minutes hands (no subdials), one subdial for the moonphase and the calendar on discs, would that still be a tricompax? 🤷🏻♂️
Technically yes … but
I generally avoid using the “tricompax” term entirely. Bi-compax = 2 subdials Tri-compax= next to no purpose in terms of clarifying value. Just thought that as “purists” we best know. ☺️
The word compax is a UG brand specific naming of complications.
As Universal Genève was once a brand with a strong chronograph portfolio, they invented this phrase. And as they became very popular, the industry simply copied it when referring to Chronographs… And yes, as watches became more complicated, they needed to...
Thanks for the education, Marc.
I love watches with bi, tri, quad compax - be it sub-dials or complications 😁
Thanks for explaining. I see how it can be a bit confusing.
At least for me it is. Compax referred to 3 complications, chronograph, date and moon phase. Chronograph usually has a an hour and minute dial. There are already two sub-dials. Date sometimes can also be displayed using a dial. Usually it is a date window...
☺️🫶🏼
I hear you believe me I hear you. So what I do is just not use the term tri-compax. Even if technically correct, it may serve to confuse and that’s never our intention. For bi-compax, I use it only to indicate there are two sub-dials. Usually for chronogr...
Interesting. I wonder if this is a term that has been modified so much
that the meaning, and usage, has changed? If virtually everyone has forgotten the original meaning and have used it to mean something else - has the term evolved or have we all been just so uninformed? I find such language interesting when trying to under...
Quite possibly so
As long as we consciously realize the history of the term, we can choose to go with the flaw (☺️) or not. 🫶🏼
100%!
A great attitude about the ever-changing "drift" of terms and how we use them. The only caveat I would add is to beware when a term's new meaning becomes harmful to knowledge, or to those efforts most meaningful to our communities. Thankfully, that is sel...
Yes true dat 💯
Language is supposed to add clarity but uniformity of understanding is key. Age old problem. 🤝
Hello Marc! Very interesting post and a wonderful UG example you share here in all its glory. Of course the prefixs "bi" and "tri" relate with "two" or "three" ...
... but the use of "bi compax" and "three compax" is a bit confusing. So we should relate to the history of the name to understand this matter. As a matter of fact it was originated in a name given by Universal Geneve to designate different models of thei...
Hello Abel 👏
Yes, exactly as I said in my original post. It has to do with complications and not with subdials. First started by UG. For Bi-Compax, would it be fair to say that it now means any standard chronograph with 2 subdials? Or technically, even that is not cor...
Hello Marc. Agree with you: the terms bi-compax and …
… tri-compax are widely used today to designate chronos with two and three dials respectively. Regret to say that as confusing it may be the so common use makes now impossible to change this. But is someone asks how these terms were originally coined or w...