Wow - this post is a real education for me. Thanks for posting. :)
FYI: there is a lot of information about the early stages of quartz, the industry revolution it headed and the results that took place to be found in the WUS´s HEQ section.Originally Posted by Shakir Khaja
It is well worth taking a look. Use the search.
Nice post Tom, you defo do have some time on yer hands LOL!
Im a huge fan of quartz and see them as equals to mechanical, but only the early quartz and then mostly the HEQ (most of it was back then anyway :D
To add a few more pics.... Here are a few of mine...
Time Computers... I love these and am waiting for my restored WGF to come back as that will be my daily wearer, the YGF is a bit 'bling' :)
My old 3 pic set... Waffle, MC and 1510 Prototype... (2 of these are now gone to fellow forumers, but of course have been replaced LOL!)
A 'vulgar' Lapis 1510 LOL
And I am also a fan of the later 1310 and 1611 Omegas, still a great inhouse movt at that point...
And just for Jussi... a 352... Favre Leuba...
Excellent post Tom ,
I certainly am a fan of the Early Quartz and the accuracy along with the grab and go factor are fantastic .
I love my Vintage watches with Mechanical movements but right alongside are my Megaquartz and Hummers
All the best,
Vic :)
I have just the one :)
Perhaps all that needs to be said about the Oysterquartz has already been said, however it is obviously unusual or special for Rolex both in the style and movement. I hope the picture conveys just how sharp the design is, very very different feel to the usual oyster case like my SD. Even the brushing seems to be heavier and more 70's. It is also the loudest watch I have owned by some margin, loud enough to hear it tick whilst driving an average car. I reckon though its an unavoidable side effect of it using a proper mechanical drive train from its automatic caliber brothers. It is heavy as well, came in about 20g less than my SD so almost identical to a Submariner I guess, however a lot of the weight is in the bracelet so its pretty well balanced on the wrist.
I love this watch but the picture shows the one flaw which grates on me, real shame Rolex couldn't have put a more toolish dial and hand set on some oysterquartzes, especially given the toughness and high anti-mag rating (same as milgauss) it would have been the ideal movement for a tough sports watch. Sometimes the dial and hands are perfectly legible and sometimes the light doesn't catch it right at all :roll:
I'm late to this thread, but my hat's off to you Tom for an excellent post.
To echo a couple of the comments above, I also think Omega has been a much more interesting brand than Rolex because of their historical willingness to try different directions. It's a pity that, like Rolex, they've now ossified their brand proposition entirely around mechanicals.
But what other option do they have?
Look at their Co-axial page.
How cán they offer a Constellation with tc quartz engine 300 times more accurate at half price of the co-axials?
Ditto Rolex. They háve to keep the no worries quartz movement in some Cellinis veiled if they are not to slaughter the sub hype selling for golden egs.
The 6620 is a very, VERY well designed and -made time proven module that would vástly improve the subs on every count save for the intangible ´apprication´ but it would not be possible to sell them at the current prices because of the pink mechanical cloud those float on.
An excellent and very informative post, Tom.
Best wishes for your recovery.
Regards
Ian
Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.
Jon
My old 3 pic set... Waffle, MC and 1510 Prototype... (2 of these are now gone to fellow forumers, but of course have been replaced LOL!)
How many times???? :cry: You know the middle one would be so so so much happier at my house :D
I disagree, as I think once you decide to spend on an expensive watch then the movement is a secondary issue - as seen by Omega happily selling both quartz and automatic Seamasters for years.But what other option do they have?
Look at their Co-axial page.
How cán they offer a Constellation with tc quartz engine 300 times more accurate at half price of the co-axials?
Ditto Rolex. They háve to keep the no worries quartz movement in some Cellinis veiled if they are not to slaughter the sub hype selling for golden egs.
The 6620 is a very, VERY well designed and -made time proven module that would vástly improve the subs on every count save for the intangible ´apprication´ but it would not be possible to sell them at the current prices because of the pink mechanical cloud those float on.
As you say, Rolex sales are held aloft on a pink, fluffy cloud - if they offered the option of quartz timekeeping [at a minor price saving of a couple of hundred pounds], you'd still have lots of sales of the automatic model as many people just like the way the seconds hand moves. After all, it will still be a Rolex.
Different watches for different markets - the Cellini's are bought by by the fashion types (the same ones who buy Quartz Cartier, PP24's, Dior, Channel, Piguet, etc) and who do not really give a stuff about whats in side the watch as long as it tell the time.But what other option do they have?
Look at their Co-axial page.
How cán they offer a Constellation with tc quartz engine 300 times more accurate at half price of the co-axials?
Ditto Rolex. They háve to keep the no worries quartz movement in some Cellinis veiled if they are not to slaughter the sub hype selling for golden egs.
The 6620 is a very, VERY well designed and -made time proven module that would vástly improve the subs on every count save for the intangible ´apprication´ but it would not be possible to sell them at the current prices because of the pink mechanical cloud those float on.
The Oyster range is much more geared towards the more tradition watch buyers market - the majority of which want a mechanical watch in the same way they want a FO petrol engined bentley rather than an electic smart car. Rolex do however provide a electric option, however given the amount they sell speaks volumes about how much demand there is for it.
It also come down to percieved value for money - why spend £4K on a quartz watch when its pretty much identifical to a £100 quartz watch from Argos. A bit like trying to justify a 10K B&O TV over the price of a Panasonic.
This however is a much less clear cut process when comparing two mechancial watch products - more like trying to compare a VW Golf with perhaps a 911. both have motors, wheels, suspension, etc, etc, however why is one so much more than the other (and this differece can be quantified). At this point its becomes a choice of the heart rather than the head.
Plus I am sure Rolex know very well what they are doing and the buyers there are targetting.
Tom, A great WIS post - most enjoyable.
Andy
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
That is another myth created by the Biver&Hayek marketing after the accutron had disappeared from the collective memory.
Also the quartz seconds hand does not nééd to step per second. It has been proven that it can move smoother than an accutron´s; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tEAwynNu3Y
Not unlikely that the 5S21 was an early victim of the spring drive myth thriving on the ´unique´ smoothness :roll:
They certainly did with their F300's, LED and LCD digitals and analogue quartz, however I think that the dilution of the mechanical brand also led to their downfall as they were directly competing with the cheap oriental quartzes (most buyers wouldn't know the difference) at a far higher price.
I think in the past that just concentrating on mechanical and fewer models was the saving grace at Rolex and kept them from the near bankcruptcy Omega suffered.
Cheers,
Neil.
So what are you saying - no-one would buy a Rolex Submariner with a quartz movement?That is another myth created by the Biver&Hayek marketing after the accutron had disappeared from the collective memory.
No - it is a fact that many people prefer a sweeping second hand to one that jumps every second. You may not. That is fine, but we are entering a discussion of taste rather than fact.
Also the quartz seconds hand does not nééd to step per second. It has been proven that it can move smoother than an accutron´s; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tEAwynNu3Y
However, you must know that most quartz watches don't do this - for whatever reason, the manufacturers, almost to a man, stick to the once-a-second jump
Not unlikely that the 5S21 was an early victim of the spring drive myth thriving on the ´unique´ smoothness :roll:
Please explain this comment, and the use of the :roll:
My understanding of the one tick a second motion on quartz watches is that it helps prolong battery life. If the quartz is oscillating at 32,768 Hz (as an example) and the second hand moved at the same rate I'd imagine the batteries wouldn't last too long. Whereas counting the oscillations and moving the second hand once every 32,768 is far more efficient and most people can relate to a second as a measure of time.
ESA 9162/4 (tuning fork movements) get through a battery roughly once every 18 months in my experience and they oscillate at a mere 300 Hz. So if you were to times this by over 100 the battery life would presumably be considerably less.
Cheers,
Gary
Given how rare steel oysterquartzes are, it appears that history has shown that hardly anyone would buy any Rolex with a quartz movement, unless of course it is the sort of ladies dress models as discussed where many famous brands provide quartz powered watches.
Excellent post & pics, Tom. By coincidence I only read about the Citizen Crystron 4 this very week. A stunning 3 sec/year without thermo-compensation. Stunning price too!
True - possibly proving my point that people prefer a sweeping seconds hand :D - although I wonder if this would be different for people buying the sports models.Given how rare steel oysterquartzes are, it appears that history has shown that hardly anyone would buy any Rolex with a quartz movement, unless of course it is the sort of ladies dress models as discussed where many famous brands provide quartz powered watches.
Does anyone know the prices that an Oysterquartz and a Datejust went for when both were available?
Can you back your claim up with factual data?
Quartz movements outsell mechanicals by thoúsands to 1.
An you back up why this prefference for smooth you state would apply to a 28.880 bph movement?
The most common 4 Hrz. mechanical action is a clearly visible jitterbug :!:
Bulova set the smooth accutron action of against the mechanicals in their advertisements :idea:
Lastly, the stepping quartz swept the réally smooth accutron away and ´smooth´ was not used for the 4Hrz jitterbug untill thát smooth had been forgotten.
The reason seems to be that people are sufficiently satisfied by it to prefer 3 year battery life to 2 and smooth.HC: Also the quartz seconds hand does not nééd to step per second. It has been proven that it can move smoother than an accutron´s; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tEAwynNu3Y
However, you must know that most quartz watches don't do this - for whatever reason, the manufacturers, almost to a man, stick to the once-a-second jump
The smooth sweep is not at all an exclusive feature. The Accutron and 5S21 are the same to the human eye.HC: Not unlikely that the 5S21 was an early victim of the spring drive myth thriving on the ´unique´ smoothness :roll:
Please explain this comment, and the use of the :roll:
^^^
Not that you'd accept, no. I could set up a poll here but you'd say "WIS don't count" I could point out that on those rare occaisions I talk about watches to people at work, they all comment on the movement of the second hand - if you are only used to quartz, thenthis is an obvious difference after all. I doubt there is any proof either of us can offer to support our views.
Quartz do outsell automatics but then, the choice for quartz is greater and they tend to be cheaper.
I don't deny that Accutrons have a nice smooth sweep, but how many of those can be bought now?
Tom - forgot to say, great topic, very interesting
Sorry mate... its hibernating in the bank vault... :roll:Jon
My old 3 pic set... Waffle, MC and 1510 Prototype... (2 of these are now gone to fellow forumers, but of course have been replaced LOL!)
How many times???? :cry: You know the middle one would be so so so much happier at my house :D
LOL, well I always think that any post about HEQ and includes the 1510 should have a photo of the proto LOL
This is hugely misleading:the accutron relies on vibrating a great big lump of metal using electromagnetism while the quartz uses the piezoelectric effect to vibrate quartz. The power requirements are utterly different and cannot really be compared. The Hz isn't what matters here.ESA 9162/4 (tuning fork movements) get through a battery roughly once every 18 months in my experience and they oscillate at a mere 300 Hz. So if you were to times this by over 100 the battery life would presumably be considerably less.
Conceptually, it is important to distinguish between the frequency of the quartz and the frequency of the stepper motor. One is the time base, the other powers the mechanical train for the hands and so on.
As for the 5s21, it did, in fact, tick four times a second, but used an impressively Heath Robinson technique (involving springs) to smooth it out)
I describe how here:
http://forums.watchuseek.com/f9/any-qua ... l#poststop
(post four)
It was a victim of the fact that it was an overcomplicated solution to a problem people didn't care much about that was difficult to maintain.
More to the point, the reason that, until recently, we have not seen 'smooth quartz second hands until very recently (in the new Bulova) is simply because a stepping motor had to be used as it was the only way to accurately represent the signal which had been reduced in base two from 32.768hz down to 1 hz as the stepper motor would 'step' by a predictable amount under the pulse of electricity this signal caused. This single step could then drive the rest of the drive chain.
This is where the battery life issue came in: powering the stepper motor accounts for a large amount of the power drain in a quartz watch. Having the stepper motor tick twice a second or more significantly increases the power consumption. Obviously Bulova have solved this problem with their new watches; I'm really curious as to how, but the details are not out there yet.
The 9Fxx have a high torque ´twin pulse´ stepper motor (to further reduce the forces on the drive train) and this is the main reason why it has such a significantly shorter battery life than the 8F.
I lóve your way to capture the working of a vibrating mechanism made from metal or quartz. Electricity is the energy that makes them vibrate. The freqency and stability are determained by material and shape.
Quartz is superior because the frequency is a pure ´tone´. This gives a véry exact frequency that only needs reduction like you write from from (usually) 32.768hz down to 1 pulse per second to be converted into a ditto exact clock speed.
The smoothness versus step and jitterbug has been the subject of much marketing. Bulova were the ones who started that.
I cannot find it on the web but I remember quartz being sold with ´Have you ever seen a second?´
That made the mechanical movement pretty much a sitting duck untill the Accutron had been forgotten. Biver & Hayek had timed it right :wink:
I'm not sure that quartz is superior in that way. Both produce a 'pure tone' as you put it. In this case it is certainly true that quartz is less affected by temperature, but that is more to do with the rates of expansion of a very large metal tuning fork compared to a very small quartz crystal (depending on how it is cut).Quartz is superior because the frequency is a pure ´tone´.
Every watch is a compromise. While a good non TC quartz is currently more precise in normal use, I personally think that tuning forks are wonderfully simple and elegant as the timebase also drives the rest of the works minimising part count.
I suspect that, with further development, a good invar tuning fork would be able to get extremely close to quartz accuracy while a silicon resonator of the same design with a mounted magnet could easily better the A660 E510 or 9F. Remember that quartz is one of the few cheap options for a piezoelectric resonator while a tuning fork can be made of any material with a magnet mounted in it. More to the point, you could build a tuning fork with around a dozen moving parts.
Quartz just happened to be in the right place at the right time for ultra cheap mass produced mosfet technology to make them viable. Now that silicon can be grown in very accurate ways I would not be at all surprised if the sort of technology that was starting to develop in the F720 has a resurgence. It is easy to look at what happened and assume it was inevitable. Usually this is a mistake.
Surely there is a place for all types of timekeeping without one having to be 'superior'? Each have their strengths and weaknesses. Polarising the debate with sweeping (no pun intended) statements simply doesn't help.
Excellent posts Matt, even I could understand it.
I can always rely on you for answers when stuff gets electronic and nerdy. :D
Thanks for making the effort.
Cheers,
Neil.
You are perfectly right - and I would also add that at that time (around 1995-1998) smooth moving seconds were not so much a strong sales point (while now I can really see Bulova cashing-in on a huge lot of the marketing made before by both the Swiss and also Seiko for their SpringDrive).
I have also tested the idea with a caliber F230 from Citizen and while it is 'unusual' and quite interesting I must say that I like more a perfectly-aligned seconds hand ticking precisely once/second :P
However here is a small discussion on that:
http://www.pmwf.com/Phorum/read.php?4,1 ... msg-187351
That is what I wrote; it was not an issue until made an issue by marketing.You are perfectly right - and I would also add that at that time (around 1995-1998) smooth moving seconds were not so much a strong sales point (while now I can really see Bulova cashing-in on a huge lot of the marketing made before by both the Swiss and also Seiko for their SpringDrive).
What ´most people´ prefer I do not know and nowadays is partly a product of marketing anyway.
As a user I generally prefer the accurately alligned second sized steps that are simplest to set, synchronise, etc.
For exact timing or even fairly inaccurate heart rate checks, the smoother the sweep is better since it ´pauses´ less.
This is why the smoothed out seiko quartz was mostly fitted with a heartrate scale on the dial; second sized steps are quíte large inaccurate lumps on a 15 or 30 seconds measuring period.
It is very easy to be off simply because of the seconds stepping hand. Not a disaster for a q&d check, but it is unnecessary d.
This also makes the SD such a wonderful instrument for a chronograph as the exactness of the timing is solely limited by the increments of the scale. The hand stops where it is stopped; not at the nearest ´tick´.
Actually, the problem with exactness of timing isn't in the watch, it is in the user. Our conscious experience is smeared over anything up to 800ms and our non conscious processes well over double that. When we try to be accurate to halves of seconds let alone tenths of seconds we simply are not precise enough ourselves to be able to make a difference. The only reason we don't realise how dreadfully poor we are at this sort of timing is that we are rarely put in a situation in which we have a criterion against which we can judge ourselves. We are so crap at it we don't realise how crap we are.This also makes the SD such a wonderful instrument for a chronograph as the exactness of the timing is solely limited by the increments of the scale. The hand stops where it is stopped; not at the nearest ´tick´.
If you are interested, there has been good scientific work done by theorists like Ben Libet as well as good metaphysical (and scientific) work by philosophers like Nelson Goodman and Dan Dennett.
I love this place when I read posts such as the above.
Thank you, M4tt.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Cheers Ralphy an Neil, praise from you both is praise indeed.
By way of thanks, and to exasperate Neil, here are all three of Rolex's (non Cellini) quartz movements:
(not my pictures I hasten to add)
However, these are: a GP in very poor taste
The only Omega thermocompensated movement currently produced
The three makers using the GP 352 movement: GP FL and JLC:
The JLC mecaquartz
A GP 352 immediately after being opened for the first time in a very long time:
and the most interesting quartz movement available for less than $100:
There you go, hope this is worth the effort.
That is the unconscious incompetence.
You do not know what you do not know.
This is one crucial reason why it is so important to take objective measurements when possible. I started checking my horse riding and training methods with heartrate meters on the horses on normalised routes per example some 10 years ago. Even with seemingly unimportant little things it is a way to check what you are doing in the perception of the horse since it tells you about stress (physical or mental).
Both informative and confronting but :bounce: to be conscious.
A surprising work about the weak link is ´Bem Cavalgar´ by Dom Duarte 1438. Yes fourteen.
There has also been statistical work done and WIS Southpender is a pro. He will be able to explain is doen not matter we are crap.
Also we are pretty constant crap. The same user will add the same error.
As I wrote checking q&d heartrate with a watch is just that but quite accurate enough when the error margin is not increased by the second steps.
p.s. I will try find some about the work you mentioded. Thanks. It is such a valuable area to oneself.
I agree that his work is impressive and impeccable, but this isn't about that sort of timing. I agree we are moderately consistent, (say within 100ms or so) when doing basically the same task in basically the same way under basically the same conditions with basically the same degree of attention in basically the same emotional state and in basically the same state of expectation etc etc etc. Once you have negotiated your way around this endless hedge of caveats you are absolutely right.There has also been statistical work done and WIS Southpender is a pro. He will be able to explain is does not matter we are crap. Also we are pretty constant crap. The same user will add the same error.
My appologies Matt for not being clear enough.
You underlying point is very valid.
Conditions are not ceterus paribus and thus human crappy performance ís a real factor. That is not all what I tried to get at.
The crux of the matter is that the human error will get compounded by other margins.
Thát is why pushers need be ergonomic, why the read out need be as inequivocable as possible, why the timer needs be as spot on as possible; to not compound the human error.
Much apreciated.
RIght to the point IMHO.
Lets be honest here - there are a myriad of factors that affect the way how we perceive and appreciate things accordingly. Some of them tangible, some not. I am of the opinion that should quartz not had walked the path it did but had it stayed on the course it originally set to follow, the overall tone in these forums towards it would be somewhat different. Dislike or like them all you want but please be honest to yourself for the reasons why. – Public opinion matters whether you think you are being influenced by it or not, as inevitably you are, one way or the other, degrees ranging from much to nil. Stating otherwise is futile if you function, interact and live within a society as a part of it. Everything - public opinion and advertising included - affects everything some way or the other whether you acknowledge it or not.
My personal view on this is simple: previous to WISdom I solely did quartz. - Thought of it as a much more savvy technology from the perspective of actual usage in real life situations. Then I ran onto a vintage mechanical Seiko on a pawn shop. The watch had a mystical aura. I felt drawn to it. Resistance was futile. I was not strong enough and did the mistake of both buying it and typing the numbers in its back-case onto google. It was then that I began to learn about the marvels of the mechanical movements and all that goes with them: the heroic stories, the epic sagas, the technological advancements, the justifications, the nostalgia, the feeling of belonging to a anonymous international brotherhood hidden in plain sight from the uninitiated within the vast frontiers of the internet - a brotherhood with possession of an ancient secret knowledge - The Higher Order of Mechanical Timekeeping. A New World Order, or at least, a new - to me - way of timekeeping.
First I became thrilled, then converted. I soon began preaching the mantra I had learnt, the mantra which ties the brothers together, the mantra which protects and sperates them, the Chosen Ones, from the commoners with no understanding of the Sole Truth of The Higher Order of Mechanical TImekeeping: "Quartz is convenient but not for the true WIS, not for the true aficionado, not for the true collector for it lacks soul." – I learnt to associate quartz with all things evil and bad. I learnt to associate quartz as a demonic technology. An alien technology which reign would mean the end of all things good and worthy. The end of the brotherhood. The end of superiority. The end of possessing something that others do not.
The quartz as seen by the Order of Mechanical Timekeeping
This era lasted for long. But, there were doubts. And these doubts grew stronger in time.
Through the years I many times gritted my teeth together for paying absurd amounts of money for getting mechanical movements serviced, tweaked and repaired. Through the years I many times gritted my teeth together for having to re-set, wound, shake and just pay additional effort and time on getting a piece I´ve not used for a couple days to be OK for wrist-time again. It was rarely that I needed to pay additional attention to a quartz piece never mind I had not used it for weeks. Deep inside I felt betrayed by the brotherhood. Deep Inside I had accepted that what they preached was not true. That there was no Higher Order, no superior technology, no hidden truth. There were no chosen ones, instead there were ardent enthusiasts whose belief system and behavior did not differ much from that of a cult. Little by little I grew back apart from seeing the mechanical timekeeping as The Ultimate. I again began flirting with the quartz. It was a mixed feeling - a feeling of joy burdened by the guilt of enjoying what should not be enjoyed :lol:
And then I did the unforgivable: I let the snake onto the garden. The bastard son of a quartz mother and automatic father: the Kinetic movement. I loved the watch that housed it but felt like the strongly audible swirl of the rotor accusing me of the deadly sin I had committed every time it turned around it´s axis on my wrist. I could not wear it for long as I wore it with such mixed feelings. I sold it. Not much later I bought another one. Sold that one too in denial. Decided I did not like the Kinetic technology to begin with and again concentrated on the Higher Order only. Have not enjoyed that path much to be honest. There is just too much fuss if you have more than just a couple. To end this story on a way suitable regards the tone I wrote it, I have an announcement to make and I fear it might shock some of you; so please embrace yourselves. Here goes:
I like quartz, I am a quartz guy, I most often prefer quartz over mechanical timekeeping.
There. I said it and now feel relieved. - No more lying, no more hiding. Through the years when the quartz bashing has gone overboard I´ve sought refugee in the WUS HEQ-forum, mostly not participating as to not be exposed but just to read how others like me find quartz as a viable alternative for the mechanical timekeepers. As stated previously on this thread the overall grade of discussion is pretty good there. You´d might want to take a look and not only find that quartz rocks but that it too has it´s Stories and Sagas alike its mechanical brothers and sisters! That said I´d like to end with M4tt´s words as I cannot think of a better way to end this:
Technologies evolve and mature. Some suit certain needs better than others. There is no one-fix-for-all. I hope that the Spring-Drive technology will lead us onto a new venue which will fuse together the best traits of the mechanical and quartz together so that the overall package is healthier than either of the parent technologies used to fruit it. That often happens with cross-breeds. In case of the Kinetic, it was not the idea that was bad per se, it was the execution that was still lacking. All fuss about which is better is futile. They are all good for what they are good for. - Some for use in the real world, some for trial and error, research and development.
Choose what you like and change if you want. Do not make a fuss of it or else you too are acting like a member of a cult, right? :wink:
Thanks,
Nearly wet my pants when reading your chronologic essay.
Right.
After mucking the pig stie, changed the ´beater´ 9F for a vintage handwind.
It is after all sunday and time to appreciate untimed quality time :wink:
I've argued for years that an appreciation of quartz is a sign of WIS maturity.
A minor point in an excellent thread. I think this is the first time since I joined TZ-UK that I've read anyone saying they preferred the one-second tick of a quartz to the smoother sweep of other watches.
Having just bought a Bulova Precistionist I love the smooth sweep though if you look you can count the 'ticks'. Ten maybe. More than my 2824 Stowa I was comparing it with.
If you equate what I wrote to second hand movements you can, but it is not what I wanted to communicate. - It is what you wanted to interpret. In other words I am not partial to how the sec hands move for as long as there is no back-lash. But yeah, given the choice I´d probably prefer a similar model with HEQ over one with a mechanical movement. But not always though as some pieces are just right with a mechanical heart in them. Which is the reason why most of my watches are... not quartz :wink:
You have indeed, I recall reading your comment along the lines of "I predict next year will be the year of the quartz" just before I bought my first one, the B-1 - which has remained with me to this day (a record for me, in fact).
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Nice write-up, a couple of typos you may want to fix : 8192Hz not 8192Khz and it's Besançon, not Besacon ;-)
I'd give some space to Omega's recent HEQ efforts too like the Double Eagle Perpetual Calendar with the 1680 Caliber (an adapted ETA) although sadly they removed the full size version (38m) from the 2010 catalog, leaving the midsize 35mm version (hard to tell apart, possibly the space between the date window and the bezel). It's fortunate ETA only make perpetual calendars with TC movements if not Omega would probably have gone for non-TC again. If anyone knows what possessed them to drop TC at the end of 1988 (1441->1438 and 1445->1444) I'm all ears.
Anyway that Double Eagle has IMHO some of the majesty and boldness of the earlier Quartz monuments from the 1970s :
Full size version - 38mm - Mid size version - 35mm
Great to see Matt and Jussi posting their thoughts in here, really great discussion guys. (Also nice to see Matt's brother to my FL, but that's just cos Matt and I are sado's who love those watches LOL- in fact that wast gets more comments from non WIS than almost any other ive ever owned, mostly cos Fossil / DKNY etc loosely copied the design i think), anyway...
Like Jussi I also grew up mostly on quartz and have a bizarre fascination with rectangular ani digitals because of that, and I think Eddie does too as he was a fan of the late 80s Tissot's TwoTimer like I was. Those were an amazing package and I still have my original one I bought new in 1987, tho it is tiny! LOL
During my WIS (If i could count myself in that hallowed company) journey Ive also got to thinking about what I liked and loathed about quartz and also watches in general and Jussi's comment on the Kinetic rotor building his guilt amused me, Ive been there too. LOL I also got to thinking about what i didnt like about quartz and tuning forks and also some mechanicals... mostly its the tick.
Bizarrely i have a Rolex GMT2 that makes no noise. I promise im not lying. From new its rotor has been silent and the the tick is inaudible, dont ask me how or why. If i didnt love other watches i would be totally happy with that watch.. hmm... :D
What I always hated about quartz watches, and especially Swatch with its 'schhh-ttticKK' that kept me awake at night, is the loud and constant annoying tick. So when I started with watches I took a foray into tuning forks and after collecting a few (about 15) I had a great watchbox full of cool things with lovely sweeping secs hands and no tick... but, opening that box sounded like taking the top off a bee hive! So I reasoned that maybe I should go back to mechanicals... and then I went thru some that did my head in... the 7750 and the 6159s that spun their rotors for no reason and also a B-Uhr that ticked like a Grandafther clock... damn... Then Seiko introduced the Spring Drive... I had to have one... I bought it new in Tokyo and I loved it, but... after a while i found it sterile as it didnt make any real noise, and strangely i felt it should probably hum... damn...! :roll: :D
Ive since decided that the tick, whirr, whine etc of a watch is part of its appeal for me. The fact that a 1510 sounds like a huge hammer being wellied against a concrete slab is great, even if i can hear it over the car's exhaust when driving, with the window down... LOL. The whine of an f300 (whilst somewhat more refined than my Accutron) is there to keep me awake in meetings when i prop my head up with my left arm... and I even begrudgingly now will wear a 7750 engined Panerai as that wobbly whirr does mean the watch is telling you its doing something, perhaps its saying 'sell me', who knows!
Anyway, Like a few of us here I do subscribe to the comment by Seamaster73 that 'an appreciation of quartz is a sign of WIS maturity'. Some will argue that they adopt a 'Live n let live' approach to quartz, and that's all well n good, but there should be more than that really. The work in the 60s/70s to take timekeeping forward that brought us quartz was borne out of a scientific approach to fixing the problems with timekeeping that had plagued the industry for many years and also as for as long as anyone can remember the companies had strived to build the most accurate watches ever made, spending much time in competitions with each other to prove who could build the best timekeeper, this was an extension of that and of course the Swiss spent too much time looking inwardly and got themselves burnt in the process. Its no real surpise that many of them would like to forget about quartz since it almost killed the Swiss industry off, but no one can rewrite the history books and before all that bad stuff happened they did bring us some amazing, and highly accurate watches.
Bonjourno all
I've just read this post after being away from the forum for a few days, some great new information in there too, just cracking!
A few people asked me if I had any original ads of the MQ's, this one came from a superb source of Omegas literature: http://www.old-omegas.com
I thought I'd through a few more pics of a some of my other favourite quartz's from that era, those of you who know me know I am very Omega biased but I welcome contributions from others:
Omegas Time Computers, a short lived LED technology but very very cool and retro predecessor to the LCD we all know today, at the time cutting edge technology, a quartz (32K) module in a solid state unit, until recently a nightmare to repair but thanks to people like Piotr at crazywatches and strikes and spares, we can now all enjoy these retro beauties again! For you mechanical purists out there, for gods sake don't buy one, take the case back off one of these and even the most die hard quartz nut like me will weep, a mass of black plastic, but man where they cool and still are!
Interestingly the one at the bottom is 1/circa 45 18K models made, to my knowledge owned by a TZ forum lurker too!
The Omega Chrono-quartz or Albatros was introduced for the 1976 Montreal winter Olympics, a real feat of technology the call 1611 was the first hybrid quartz chronograph, a traditions (32K controlled) quartz anologue time set up with an LCD chronograph function! The only production Omega (to my knowledge) which has a dedicated movement, only used in this one model!
An interesting geek fact is that these watches where also presented to a number of NASA Astronauts! These are really one of my favourite Omegas, so representative of the time, it was a tough choice between this and my other in my original post, an exceptional watch, produced in (by modern starts) very small numbers, made at a time (as I said in my original post) when boundaries where far greater and when design really was at a peak, I say this because there are a great many fashion brands making reproduction or homages to this very design!
JonW BTW, it's still cruel and unfair, get that prototype out the safe and in the post to me! :D
Cheers Tom
Ahh loving the new additions to the post, the TC are superb watches and the 1611 fulfills my ani digi cravings as well as being a monster, its a watch to rival the size of the PloProf etc.
Tom... I'll do half that, probably the half you least like... I'll get it out of the safe... and wear it :D
Matt,
Firstly sorry to hear about your pain i hope your finding relief. As a side note pain is a specialist subject of mine, after suffering a spinal injury and the resultant Cauda Equina Syndrome a few years ago.
Back to the thread, I'm new here and i'd like to send you a big thank you for the discussion, i've just read it [and what a good read it is] it demonstrates precisely the feelings and attitudes people have for and against quartz time keeping. Personally I collect watches and it doesen't matter what flavor they come in. Normally it's what ever comes my way or takes my fancy. Within the next 12 months I'm going to buy a thermo-compensated quartz i haven't decided
yet if it's going to be Swiss[longines conquest] or Japanese [Seiko 4843] but there are others. Why? i fancy a watch thats accurate to a few seconds a year.
As I read your initial post and subsiquent replys I notice you convey such a great enthusiasm for the subject, which is very appealing to the reader.
When it comes to quartz, tunning forks and electronics in general the Swiss do it so well. I marvel at the detail which transforms the electro-mechanical device into an instrument. They [yours] are the most refined quartz instruments ever to be mass produced and thank you for showing me.
I have a few in my collection but only a couple i've photographed. The Universal at 3.5mm was once the thinest quartz watch and the F300 is interesting because it was a retirerment gift. I found out from the daughter of the original owner it has always been metalic blue. After working in Switzerland all his life he retirerd to Israel in 1974. The back is hand chased with his name. As a true watchmaker he loved the modern mechanical movement. He was also proud of the watch because he chose it and knew there wasn't another like it.
Here go's
Steve
The cruelty :cry: Looks like I might have to hold someones freshly re-plated TC to ransom, desperate times call for desperate measures! On a plus not though Jon, I have some good news for you, will mail you in the AM! :wink:
Yeah, I know mate, cruel to be kind really, youd be bored of it quite quickly... its just a boring quartz... ahem! :DThe cruelty :cry: Looks like I might have to hold someones freshly re-plated TC to ransom, desperate times call for desperate measures! On a plus not though Jon, I have some good news for you, will mail you in the AM! :wink:
Cool on the TC etc, catch you tomorrow. hope the pain is easing :)
There have been some really interesting additions to this already imposing thread, but it has got me wondering, what happened next? How did we get from these HEQ beauties to todays market? Was it the case that as production costs were reduced the quartz movement became the best option for mass produced watches? Who was the manufacturer that first put quartz in to mass production and steered the ship from quality to quantity?
Oh, and one more question, is HEQ going to up in value in the future, or decline because of the parts situation?
Great post, good reading Jussi.
Cheers,
Daddel.
Got a new watch, divers watch it is, had to drown the bastard to get it!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
