mkvc
1382
You say it better in your second language than I could in my first.
"Sophistication, vulgarized."
That sells, but it's not something most of us want. The participants on this thread all seem to agree that some tourbillons are worth the trouble. At this stage, their raison d'etre cannot simply be "because it's a tourbillon!" For much of the market, however, that's all it takes.
We should probably be glad of that as the less-picky buyers are funding watch companies and making it possible for them to do the interesting work that we like to see. (And not only that we like to see: I'm confident that the watch makers and designers, even when making highly commercial watches, would always prefer to be making the kinds of watches that appeal to Purists.)
Interesting thoughts
By: dedestexhes : May 5th, 2015-12:03
One of the points I may add is that the traditional tourbillon almost never was shown on the dial side. And honestly, why the need to show it? Unless.... I agree with the fact that there is the category of the kinetic art such as Haldimann and GF. Both wi...
Different thoughts
By: jkingston : May 5th, 2015-15:30
First we have to face reality. Tourbillons in a wrist watch are not there for the chronometry. Journe once joked that the "best way to improve the performance of his tourbillon was to take out the tourbillon". Actually that was not too much of a joke, sin...