Do you like your watches to tell a story, or do you like them to tell your story?

[Rocket Man]

I have a very small collection including a couple of vintage watches that I enjoy because of their age and history. Recently I've bought two new watches from an AD (there's a first time for everything!) and I'm enjoying the fact that I have owned them from new. The vintage watches tell a story but the new ones will eventually tell my story.

This has got me wondering what to make of the recent heritage/anniversary re-editions. Where do they fit in and what story do they tell? Does their faithfulness to the original watches make them retro-cool or will they never be as cool as the originals?

I recently read this review of the Speedmaster 60th anniversary edition that made me smile:

"Vintage watch guys say they like patina on watches because it shows the watch has had a life. That it's been through some stuff and would have stories to tell if only we could listen. That's mostly a lie. We like stories, but with few exceptions we don't want the submariner that was dragged against rocks at the bottom of the ocean every weekend since 1960. We want the one that sat in a safe and was worn on special occasions, with nice matching creamy markers, a crisp unpolished case, etc. We tend to value condition over all else. We want new-old-stock. This looks like a NOS 2915. And that's incredible."

[verv]

I don't think reissues will ever be as cool as originals but they're different beasts. You don't have to be as mindful of them because they're made using modern tech but with a nod to past history and designs. Usually ones that have endured.
I'd like to hope that mine have a mix of their own histories and mine.

[walkerwek1958]

Some of the TAG / Heuer reissues are excellent, and so are most of the Longines offerings. They offer the opportunity to own a watch in the style of the original but with all the durability of a modern watch.That’s got to be an appealing proposition for many and I can definitely relate to that.

Part of the appeal of a genuine vintage watch is the history, you always wonder who owned it and what stories it could tell. In my early days of collecting this was a big draw, I revelled in the mystique and the kudos of owning a watch 30-40 years older than me, it’s something I enjoyed and sadly it’s something I’ve lost. I still like old watches but nowadays I think purely in terms of the condition of the watch, the history/back story doesn’t even cross my mind, all I see is what’s in front of me on my bench in February 2018.

One watch will always stick in my mind. Back in the mid-90s I bought a 1925 ladies gold watch at an antiques fair for my former wife. The watch was a typical gold watch from that period but the condition was unbelievable, it looked virtually unworn and was obviously all original, a time- warp watch if ever I’ve seen one. Clearly, it had spent around 70 years in a drawer, there as no ageing whatsoever to the dial. That’s strange, so say the least, and I couldn’t help wondering whether the watch had a very sad history. Whoever had received it originally had never had chance to wear it often, or chose not to wear it. Whichever way you look at it the back- story can’t have been cheerful, I doubt wherher anyone had fun owning or wearing the watch.

Trust me, it’s far easier when you don’t over- think these things.

Paul

[Mikee]

A very good question...

I like "my" watches. In so far as they become mine over time and in an odd way i like the idea of handing them down. My father in law recently showed my son his watch (his best watch not his working watches as he said) and even a young lad is excited at the idea of owning this watch that is now something more than a simple time piece...

Most watches I buy are bought to celebrate an event, but i don't have that many compared to some on here. Some I grow to have a real affection for and I keep. Others do not, for what ever reason, and are slowly moved on though i'm in no rush and hardly a "flipper".

So I like my watches to tell "my story".

Equally, apart from a very few I suppose I find most watch "stories" which are supposed to be intrinsic to the watch to be pure marketing fluff. Not that I'm wholly immune to branding and fluff but some of it is just silly and almost all of it is highly tenuous.

[Bannon]

I don't think reissues will ever be as cool as originals but they're different beasts. You don't have to be as mindful of them because they're made using modern tech but with a nod to past history and designs. Usually ones that have endured.
I'd like to hope that mine have a mix of their own histories and mine.

I'm not too concerned about the story. More concerned that a watch records the time with reasonable accuracy. Agreeing on the re-issue comment. They will never be as cool or desirable as an original. They're just a marketable and affordable copy for those with an interest in the legacy.

[johant]

I just was given a brand new Speedmaster, as a present for my 50th birthday. I could have chosen a vintage one, and there were beautiful examples for sale. However, I deliberately chose a new one, because it was a present that now travels with me, and tells my story from day one.

[kaiserphoenix]

The reissues are just replicas imo. Aged lume to make it look old, is like buying ripped or worn out jeans. I prefer to buy selvedge raw and wear them in myself. There are exceptions however. Like the AP Royal Oak 15202 Jumbo which was reintroduced a few years ago which does not have any of these false ageing or whatever and even the reference remains the same. A pure modern reincarnation. That one i can agree with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rocket Man]

The reissues are just replicas imo. Aged lume to make it look old, is like buying ripped or worn out jeans.

I think that's a little harsh, and that's coming from another Selvedge denim fan!

I don't see the lume as being aged, it's just a nice colour. I think this quote (from the same review as my initial post) puts it quite well:

Probably the most controversial element of the design, the ‘fauxtina’ as some call it, I would argue really has to be seen to be appreciated. It’s not bright or garish yellow, and complements the overall aesthetic of the watch. I try look at it purely as color. White is a color. So is beige. In this case, the beige contrasts nicely with the polished silver hands, white subdial hands, and stainless case. That little bit of color prevents the watch from feeling cold and brings out the brown tones in the dial. I love the look of aged tritium and radium. I'm not specifically interested in the chemical changes in the compound that caused tritium lume to turn gold, but I appreciate the warmth that it brings to the dial.


Also, the modern lume won't go puffy and crumble away over time, that is not a good look IMHO!

I also really like the colour of this JLC Tribute to 1931 and nobody seems to mind the brown/aged lume on this one!



https://www.watchtime.com/featured/v...ibute-to-1931/

[snowman]

I think that's a little harsh, and that's coming from another Selvedge denim fan!

I don't see the lume as being aged, it's just a nice colour. I think this quote (from the same review as my initial post) puts it quite well:

Probably the most controversial element of the design, the ‘fauxtina’ as some call it, I would argue really has to be seen to be appreciated. It’s not bright or garish yellow, and complements the overall aesthetic of the watch. I try look at it purely as color. White is a color. So is beige. In this case, the beige contrasts nicely with the polished silver hands, white subdial hands, and stainless case. That little bit of color prevents the watch from feeling cold and brings out the brown tones in the dial. I love the look of aged tritium and radium. I'm not specifically interested in the chemical changes in the compound that caused tritium lume to turn gold, but I appreciate the warmth that it brings to the dial.


Also, the modern lume won't go puffy and crumble away over time, that is not a good look IMHO!

I also really like the colour of this JLC Tribute to 1931 and nobody seems to mind the brown/aged lume on this one!



https://www.watchtime.com/featured/v...ibute-to-1931/

It's a matter of opinion, of course, but I hate faux aged lume and trying to deflect the inauthenticity of it by saying "Oh, it's just a nice beige lume" is disingenuous.

It's there to make the watch look old, not because someone at the factory has a beige fetish...

Everyone has a pet hate, but this is one that ranks far above cut away numbers (which I thought I had a problem with until this fad developed!) for me.

So, yes, some of us do have a problem with it, regardless of how expensive the watch it - In my view, it's even less acceptable on a JLC than an Invicta - They should know better!

To answer the OP, I don't really worry about it - I simply buy watches I like - I loved the earlier Cosmonautes, so I have a 1967, rather than a new one, but I don't really think about its 'story', it's just a lovely watch to me.

M

[verv]

It's a matter of opinion, of course, but I hate faux aged lume and trying to deflect the inauthenticity of it by saying "Oh, it's just a nice beige lume" is disingenuous.

It's there to make the watch look old, not because someone at the factory has a beige fetish...

Everyone has a pet hate, but this is one that ranks far above cut away numbers (which I thought I had a problem with until this fad developed!) for me.

So, yes, some of us do have a problem with it, regardless of how expensive the watch it - In my view, it's even less acceptable on a JLC than an Invicta - They should know better!

To answer the OP, I don't really worry about it - I simply buy watches I like - I loved the earlier Cosmonautes, so I have a 1967, rather than a new one, but I don't really think about its 'story', it's just a lovely watch to me.

M

Nope.
The 605 has beige lume because it suits the anthracite dial.
It's a modern watch with no pretence of reissue heritage or age.

Sometimes it just works better in the eye of the manufacturers (and buyers) than white which can look sterile.

[snowman]

Nope.
The 605 has beige lume because it suits the anthracite dial.
It's a modern watch with no pretence of reissue heritage or age.

Sometimes it just works better in the eye of the manufacturers (and buyers) than white which can look sterile.

Not sure what a 605 is.

You surely can't mean the "Jaeger-LeCoultre Grande Reverso Ultra Thin Tribute to 1931" when you say "no pretence of reissue heritage or age"?

M.

[Chairman LMAO]

Nope.
The 605 has beige lume because it suits the anthracite dial.
It's a modern watch with no pretence of reissue heritage or age.

Sometimes it just works better in the eye of the manufacturers (and buyers) than white which can look sterile.

Nope.

I'm with Snowman When it comes to that particular example. It would be interesting to work out how many watches used faux lume, let's say, 10 years ago.

[ac11111]

In general I dislike fake age lume and I think it was manufacturers trying to cash in on vintage watch trend for a period which is likely fading. Watches which pay a bit of homage to historical models whilst being its own thing does it the best E.g. Tudor pelagos snow flake hands and indices


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[paskinner]

This is an IWC 'F A Jones'....after the founder of IWC. IT was a limited run from 2005, and incorporates key features of the Portugeiser...including a mechanism with a design back to the 30s. I still see it as a new watch, not a 'replica',of anything.


In contrast, a 'Museum Collection' Doctors watch, which Omega say is based on a 1938 model. But it never existed in that form, it's an amalgam of several designs. I like it a lot, but for me it's not authentic in the way the IWC is.
In the end, they are watches, you get along with them, or you don't. And no fake lume in sight. As for Panerei, it's another case of you either like them or you don't. Not for me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk