mahesh
[Moderator]
7984
architecture...no doubt !
finishing is cherry on top but a great architecture with a decent finish is absolutely worthier than the reverse imho !!
i recollect some one wrote few weeks ago in one of the debates...it also depends on 'who' the watch maker is...i rephrase the example given (which i think is very valid), PD focus on finishing & it is his usp. for another watchmaker, it might totally be different (like FPJ).
Best,
mahesh.,
What‘s more important to you? Movement architecture or movement finishing?
This question came into my mind after reading some other posts lately. My perspective has changed over the years. 5-6 years ago I‘ve been fascinated by beautifully finished movements, looking at the geneva stripes, anglage, engravings and other things. No...
Both
Usually goes hand in hand for the top stuff. But of course there is a relative standard for finishing, and I would accept slightly less well finished level for a an interesting movement architecture. And if you have a classical movement architecture I kno...
My apologies, Nico! Perhaps I can make up in small measure for my mistake by pointing out that the OED says "dissociate" is from the Latin dissociare
(to separate from fellowship), while “disassociate” was modeled after the 16th-century French verb désassocier. You'll have a better sense than I about what it is about your language that made that extra syllable necessary. But clearly that Latin root is ...
Thank you, Mr. Tabby, for setting me straight. Though my favorite grammarians may prefer the shorter version, the two versions of the verb do, as you
point out, "exist." Licking my wounds, here, I do seem to remember a teacher once admonishing the class, "If you're going to be wrong, then at least be wrong with conviction!" At least I got that part right. FH
Ha ha... did you have too!
Absolutely insane movement from the JLC we love. I wonder if there are any owners of this marvel creation.
A beautiful photograph!
Both are equally important to me. One is visible to the naked eye and one is not but both to me are important in high end watches.
It’s both for me .
I love a beautiful designed movement but it also has to be beautiful finished
Good quesiton!
Because I am a student, so I will vote for architecture over finishing cuz I have to give up something to afford a nice watch :P Having said that, I do generally like architecture overall more than finishing cuz it is more eye catching than finishing whic...
Claret is right up there with the best
It's too bad his newer stuff are all very big.
I know!
I feel like he started out with so much cool stuff that topping his past watches is super difficult and often leads to super large watches with just more stuff in them 🤣
Lolz, thank you!
I skipped a few steps (rolex -> patek -> AP -> Breguet -> etc..) and just went straight for the indies 😜
In terms of aesthetics Movement architecture counts more than finishing in my books - Not all mvmt look gud skeletonized.
Rolex 4130 is the worst to skeletonize aesthetically due to the architecture. A poorly finished Ming luks better than that. Breguet La Tradition vs AP chronometer New AP cal4400 chrono vs Hublot cal 1280
Interesting question
I think both are important. But I prefer the technical side of the movement to the level of finishing. When I saw the question I remembered a time when I almost got a Habring2, but what pulled me back was the unfinished nature of the mechanism. They make ...
+1. Technical proficiency first, followed by . . .
. . . functional finishing. Art ...
Depend what type of case back...
If it case up, I would not think about it. If it see through case back, then finishing as those complicated architectural movement watches are all out my purchase level! ; )
architecture...no doubt !
finishing is cherry on top but a great architecture with a decent finish is absolutely worthier than the reverse imho !! i recollect some one wrote few weeks ago in one of the debates...it also depends on 'who' the watch maker is...i rephrase the example ...
Interest
I would say the decoration on the movement must be consistent with the architecture. An Art Deco watch like the Reverso must have a semi industrial like movement so the decoration must be in keeping with the overall design and have Art Deco stripes Or oth...
That‘s a good point. I agree to your view on consistency between both.
And of course certain aspects of finishing are needed for the functionality of the watch, as is a certain minimum architecture. Nevertheless, a high percentage of today‘s finishing in haute horlogerie is purely cosmetical.
A bit like asking if you prefer wheels or tires.
Which matters more for performance, good tires or good wheels? Perhaps a cheeky analogy, but you really need both. But I should point out that "good" movement architecture is not necessarily visually pleasing. But it's nice when brands can find a way to a...
Of course, certain elements of finishing are needed for functionality. The same is true for the construction of the movement and other items.
Let‘s assume, that all requirements for functionality are met and everything is on a good, yet not high end level. Creating an outstanding movement architecture on that basis is imho more about great creativity and knowledge, while creating an outstanding...
When you talk about finish, remember we are talking about two quite different things.
First of all you have the “cosmetic” finish, what looks good on the surface. Yes, it for sure does not hurt to make something look good. Second, and in my strange mind more important, is the functional finish, pivot polishing to prevent friction, perlage ...
When we talk about architecture
My good friend is working on a new architecture with a very large balance wheel on a special cock. I cannot show toy any pictures now, but when the border to Switzerland opens, I will make one with him and I can show you all what looks like on my own watc...
Very valid points.
Still, even cosmetic (hand)finish requires craftmanship to be done well, and lots of skill and experience to be done exceptionally well. From a practical point of view, many people simply enjoy looking at nice finishing and decoration (myself included), s...
Architecture of course...
here is I think an underappreciated architecture, a Carl F. Bucherer with their peripheral rotor. (Photo from Quill & Pad) ...
Hard to choose, got to have both! :)
However, I think there are a lot of brands that have good movement finishing but are not particularly notable in architecture. I love it when the movement is distinct enough that you can immediately tell the brand by a quick glance at it. Gronefeld is a t...
Architecture
Architecture is potentially more unique to a brand than finishing which could essentially be replicated by anyone willing to invest in the time. I can appreciate that finishing is an art that not necessarily something anyone can achieve but at the end of ...