Reply With QuoteVery interesting, thanks for sharing.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing.
No problem. I think quartz has a lot to offer even in its current incarnation. And a HAQ watch is on my list of wants. Sadly it's a very long list...Originally Posted by Plume
For a few years I deplored quartz watches but oddly thought that tuning fork movements were cool (no doubt because my first "real" watch was a Bulova Accutron Spaceview bought new for £15 from Exchange and Mart in 1976). I did lust after Quartz dial watches then in the 70's (Times seemed popular at the time) but only for a short time before LED and then LCD took my interest away from them and then as money started to come in and my tastes became more "mature" mechanical watches took over at ever increasing prices and my snobbishness about electronic movements took over (ironical given my Electronic Engineering background).
Now, I've lost the snobishness, initially because a builder mate of mine asked if I could save an old Seiko quartz that he bought new when he was in the Royal Navy in 1980..that turned out to be a 7548 diver and since resurrecting that for him it triggered and my own interest in the model and I now have a small collection of 7548's. I then became interested in Grand Seiko Quartz and picked up a 9F movement model from Ebay last year and then just a couple of weeks a ago a Sinn UX which claims to have a seven year battery change period.
So Quartz watches now form probably 50% of my collection, I still enjoy wearing mechanical watches and tolerate their relatively poor time keeping vs quartz because they have other attributes but see each as having their own unique benefits.
Now to get that Accuquartz ressurected...its in pieces and I'll have to recall what goes where!
Keith
Stopped reading after a few sentences.
Rehash of oft repeated stuff.
The relatively low maintenance cost of a quartz watch may start to have more appeal; unless you're unlucky you can expect a quartz movement to run for 15 years or more with nothing more than battery changes required.
I think the article makes good sense. The watch industry needs to focus on getting people to wear watches routinely; so many have stopped since the mobile phone became the ubiquitous item it currently is. Far more chance of getting people to wear a low cost watch with low upkeep than an expensive mechanical anachronism.
Paul
I thought the same for the first few sentences - another article horrified that 18-24 year olds don't wear £5k luxury watches, as if they ever did, and predicting the end of times. But read on, and it has a bit more to say than you'd think at the start.
I like the odd quartz, as a compliment to mechanical, but it has to be 'interesting' quartz, and the ones mentioned mostly don't qualify. Then again I'm a long way from being 18-24. The article seemed to be suggesting a new generation of quartz might be a kind of gateway drug for millenials, who would later graduate to higher end watches. Probably they always were, but what's on offer may have improved lately.
I would like to see more attempts at higher end, interesting or even 'luxurious' quartz, there aren't too many apart from GS that work for me. The thought about Bulovas precisionist tech eventually going out of patent and being more widely adopted by different brands was interesting, but was this not quite a recent invention? It would be nice to see this properly utilised in better built and styled watches (no offence to the owners!). Or a revival of the even better Omega Marine Chronometer tech with the tricky and different, but hugely more accurate crystal cut. It seems this technology was lost in time and superseded by the easier thermocompensation route, but it's actually a more satisfying idea that should have been mastered after four decades, had anyone been trying.
Seemed the same to me. I read it all, but didn't seem like anything I hadn't seen before.
On the subject of this..
I have seen a few comments about the industry being affected by the smart watch industry. On your point of the mobile phone, I think a lot of people will obviously get a smart watch to tie in with their phone. Now, people in the industry look at that as a bad thing, but is it?
The mobile phone has negated the use of a watch, the mobile phone user then gets a smart watch, it's still getting someone to wear a watch. So they go online, find forums, see what else is out there. They then discover our world and become a consumer of regular watches after liking wearing a 'watch'
So if it weren't for the smart watch you could argue that the people (that would have just used their mobile for time keeping forever more) may well have more chance of getting a regular watch because of the smart watch.
This is where the manufacturers that think they are getting affected by the smart watch need to get their foot in the door. Even if it's a coloboration with an established company, discover the brand and they're in.
On the quartz subject. I was totally against quartz but I think that may have been due to only ever having cheap quartz pieces before having automatics. I think it's part of the watch collector's journey to discover quartz at some point. A bit like a knife collector getting a Swiss Army knife or an opinel. A high quality quartz movement can still be a thing of beauty, you just have to appreciate it for what it is. Some of the Swiss Quartz movements look so sturdy and you'll wish you were working on a mechanical watch when you try and service the train gears on some of them! The train gear can be absolutely tiny and the sweet little bridges with the minuscule jewels.. lovely.
Last edited by jameswrx; 10th February 2017 at 09:12.
I totally agree with this journey idea, and as someone very new to this world it's really interesting to see the appreciation for the higher end quartz watches like the Grand Seikos.
After 20 years of collecting, I now realise that there is nothing wrong with with quartz or non-mechanical watches. About 10 years ago, I turned my nose up at opportunities to buy classic non-mechanical divers such as the Aquadive Time Depth and various tuning fork and quartz watches because they were not automatic. I regret that sniffiness now because I would now consider these watches as the equal of the mechanical divers.
I quite like them but cant do much about my aversion to plastic. I know that its illogical but there you are. Upon looking at the block of cheap looking plastic housing the movement in some pieces - including numerous plastic or nylon components I feel most uneasy.
What converted me was seeing the beautiful quartz movement of a Seiko 7a28 for the first time. Fine and intricate metal housing and parts. Lovely.
Thanks for sharing but the industry has been there and passed the test, albeit with a struggle. The big threat is smart watches but they are at a price point.
There is no way I am swapping my DaytonaC for one or even my Breitling.
I don't see it as a test being passed tbh. To me it's more a case of balance in the marketplace. Quartz, smart watches and mechanical will constantly be gaining and losing ground. For a while to come at least anyway. Breitling already have watches that are smart, they just don't call them smart watches. Having a heart rate monitor or message notifications aren't the defining qualities of a SmartWatch. They're just marketed that way.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing
Want to see something REALLY interesting?
Hand cut quartz crystal controlled balance wheel driving a gear train :-)
It ever so clearly illustrates that the 'mechanical' vs quartz controversy is a lot of bs.
The above movement is a step UP in respect to the Seiko spring drive as it eliminates the main spring which is the biggest single problem in traditional movements.
Great picture. There is also no reason why it could not be embellished and or hand finished either. Would be nice to think something like that nestled away inside a quartz watch.
Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
Your right - that's an interesting design
Quartz accuracy and no main spring force on the gear chain.
The balance spring/wheel act as the stepper motor which was a bit of a challenge in the early quartz days. The brilliant high quality GP one was cutting edge tech and patented, giving them a serious edge at the time. Hence Rolex's work around too.
There were only five manufacturers walking the quartz/balance spring path.
I like them A LOT because they illustrate what the engineers set out to do to improve the traditional movement: 1, Eliminate the load of the main spring on the gear train and 2, find a more exact oscilator.
The electric movements were developed to do the first. The tuning fork and then the qco addressed the second.
As I commented it is imo something worth reviving as it would give the watch lovers their balance wheel and quartz accuracy without the load of the main spring. An example of both having and eating your cake ;-)
I have a bid out on a:
p.s. the typical deviation is about half a second per day either way.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 13th February 2017 at 22:59.
Interesting read! Thanks for sharing!
IMHO the quartz has already made its revolution back in the 70s, although with cell phones being part of most people life, many don't feel the need to wear watches nowadays, especially younger people. But at least for men it is their main jewelry in most cases. Regarding the prices, watches are so overpriced nowadays they have a lot of margin in this area
Agreed. How the various manufacturers deal with the apparent apathy of young people towards wearing watches is going to be interesting I think. SmartWatches are interesting but currently offer little substance over what is already in the smartphone. Effectively buying the same thing twice. Trimmed down connectivity in a luxury watch is more appealing to me, but then I'm not the target market.
Its a huge market dominated by quartz that the budget players are exploiting and the cost of luxury watches means the big boys will find it more difficult to tap into. Probably why Biver said he wanted to reposition Tag in the marketplace to a point that was more accessible.
Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
There is no doubt that Swiss main stream brands will reintroduce/expand the quartz engines to their ranges, responding to the gap created by the mass produced mechanicals moving upwards in price.
Omega bringing out the Spacemaster Z33 was already a very clear pointer towards things moving.
It is very much noteworthy too that same Omega has not succeeded/dared entirely deleting the quartz from their range.
For Rolex that is no option but they have the solution in their Tudor branded range.
That covers their bottom and the quartz can add a lower range to Tudor without doing harm, in fact connecting a link upwards. Or perceived to be upwards
This is how I would imagine it would play out. The issue is with the budget end of the market aimed at younger buyers with little knowledge of what makes a 'good' watch. Luxury brands would likely have to distance themselves via a sub brand, such you mentioned with Rolex and Tudor, for fear of devaluing their product. And yet Tudor would not be seen as 'budget' by a young 'know-nothing' being asked to part with say £2k when 'in his eyes' a comparable watch could be bought for a quarter of that. The Swatch group have got all their bases covered given that they seem to own something out there at any given price point.There is no doubt that Swiss main stream brands will reintroduce/expand the quartz engines to their ranges, responding to the gap created by the mass produced mechanicals moving upwards in price.
Omega bringing out the Spacemaster Z33 was already a very clear pointer towards things moving.
It is very much noteworthy too that same Omega has not succeeded/dared entirely deleting the quartz from their range.
For Rolex that is no option but they have the solution in their Tudor branded range.
That covers their bottom and the quartz can add a lower range to Tudor without doing harm, in fact connecting a link upwards. Or perceived to be upwards
Agreed that they would probably have to create a different brand. But even then they will refuse to make a quartz as good as it could be, they will never create a level playing field. Imagine if Girard Perregaux had offered a version of their new Laureato, with exactly the same case and dial, but with a 10sec/year quartz annual calendar and lower price tag. Of course they could do, but of course they never would! In the past it happened, Vacheron Constantin made an Overseas Quartz almost identical to the mechanical, but those days are long gone. To have a quartz that's as good as it can be, it will have to offer some new technology to differentiate it. Otherwise, because it must be cheaper, they must make it look cheaper. The only exception is Grand Seiko, and even they keep their European market quartz offerings basic. Then again perhaps one day, someone will do for quartz what the Royal Oak did for steel, and offer a luxury quartz that's much more expensive than most mechanicals!
345K Euros quartz.
The key being, it looks utterly mechanical! Quite something though...
Having read that it brings home the fact that a level playing field is a bit of a non starter let alone quartz getting the upper hand. At least not from within anyway. Even with pieces like the Credor above, I can't see them getting much traction beyond wealthy collectors. As lovely as it was. I'd love to be proved wrong tho.
Girard Perregaux already did…but not a regular production piece.
http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...igh-end-quartz – post #9
The Credor is Spring Drive, not quartz in the traditional sense.
Yeah I get that. The point I was trying to make (badly hehe) was about what quartz can bring to the party. Whether it's as a power source, a means of regulation or as the brains behind the functionality of the watch. 👍
Last edited by Halfling; 14th February 2017 at 21:46.
'Quartz in the traditional sense' does not exits.
There is a most used architecture but there have been a great many. There still are!! Or do you not count rc/gps controled analogues or any solid state ones as quartz watches either?!
The crux of the definition of a quartz watch is it having a movement regulated by using a quartz crystal oscilator.
In other words; ANY movement using a qco to regulate the speed IS a quartz watch.
THUS the spring drive architecture is a variety of quartz watch, just not the same as the most common one.
The absolutely wonderful Credor minute repeater simply proves general preconceptions about quartz wrong.
Oh man... don't get me started!
There are many examples of movements using a quartz crystal oscilator and looking more steam punk mechanical than the run of the mill mass produced mains stream Swiss mechanicals.
Girard Perregaux already did…but not a regular production piece.
http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...igh-end-quartz – post #9
The original Laureato was
with inside
High quality with high accuracy.
Then the Hayek-Biver marketing revolution happened, funded by ... Swatch quartz watch success!!!
This may fall into both camps.
More info here http://oysterquartz.net/
I recently sold "The Citizen" and regret it.
Some really interesting watches there. I gotta say the Spacemaster and X33 Skywalker both call to me....
I recently got an Aerospace and love it. Always liked ana-digi, and I've always had G-Shock's too, but "proper" watches have been auto for over 10 years now....my opinion is changing though
Even though some quartz watches are 'space-certified' by US/Russia, all astro/cosmonauts also take a mechanical watch as 'back-up'; sometimes one technology alone is not good enough where it really counts.
I love my vintage JLC Quartz.
I must admit, I was a bit of a snob when it came to quartz initially, but I've warmed to them, especially vintage.
Of which the 'daddy'.is perhaps the Grand Seiko spring-drive; that really does feel mechanical, but has the precision of quartz. Under-estimated watches in my opinion. Yes, the technology is 'pointless', but then so are mechanical watches in general.....
Long live the Oysterquartz!!
I love the way the Springdrive is so anachronistic. They didn't come to SD as a way just to make a more accurate time keeping device. They've been there and done that before. No, this was how to make a mechanical watch, powered by a mainspring more accurate. Pointless in engineering terms as you suggest but then with a market obsessed with mechanicals, what are you to do? Oh and then there's that SWEEEEEEPPPP is so mesmerising. Its like Seiko engineers are saying "Look into my eyes, not around the eyes but into the eyes..."
I must admit, since obtaining an SD watch, i've become HAQ curious.
I agree.
'Pointless' in horological sense.
It is exactly that pointlessness that makes it a luxury to wear it.
That was the crux of the marketing that Biver & Hayek started in the eighties; reinventing the mechanical tech from obsolete horology to desirable accessory.
Posting Permissions
