Design vs Complication, what do you value more?

[rolexandlange]

two of my favorite watches are quite different.

the Royal Oak 15202 is a watch famous for its design. Unique "jumbo extra thin" case, special petite tapisserie dial, sharp angles and beautiful unique bracelet. It flows and simply becomes one with the wearer. I bought into the hype and have been surprised how much I enjoy this piece.

my grail, acquired a few years ago, is the datograph. while the case is standard across all Langes, and the dial is exceptional, this watch is about the finishing and the complicated movement. its amazing to hold this watch and observe the movement. It is large, even massive, and has incredible wrist presence. it's exceptional. you buy the datograph for its movement, not the case or the dial as you do with the 15202.

so what do you value most? exceptional case finishing and wonderful somewhat understated wearing, or exceptional movement finishing and wrist presence

[enjoythemusic]

depends on the overall aesthetic, and purpose, of the timepiece. There's no right answer.

It's like, well... I love the old 8-bit game sounds and Kraftwerk is awesome... yet acoustic jazz, orchestra, and prog are just as loved. And yes, cheap thrills can be just as fun as 'high horology'. Each has their 'place' in my heart.

jmho ymm

[brandrea]

I can easily answer that question (for me).

If the design isn’t there, I wouldn’t consider buying the watch regardless of how intricate the complication. It’s all starts with the overall “look” for me.

I realize that must sound superficial to some.

[ButtButt]

Originally Posted by brandrea

I can easily answer that question (for me).

If the design isn’t there, I wouldn’t consider buying the watch regardless of how intricate the complication. It’s all starts with the overall “look” for me.

I realize that must sound superficial to some.

Agree with this, design comes first. If I don't like the way a watch looks then the rest doesn't matter. It could have a million complications with the best finishing in the industry but if it's ugly to me I would never consider it.

[jed11]

A delicate balance but agree that it stars with design for me. You can cram all the complications you want but if it’s on a poorly designed canvas, kind of kills it for me. And outside the actual time complication and perhaps date, most complications go unused. But the deign is something that is always present.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Andad]

Design is most important for me.

[charger_vital]

I look at complications and high-end finishing like guitar players in the 1980s. They studied how to play fast like Yngwie Malmsteen, they imitated the computer-like sounds innovated by Van Halen (finger tapping, power tools, etc), and they over distorted their amps so that they all sounded the same. What it all produced was Steve Vai. An incredibly gifted technician on the guitar whose ability to play obscure scales fast was unmatched. Yet, whose music sounded soulless and boring (See the audience is listening).

Contrast Steve Vai with John Frusciante, as an example. Frusciante has enough chops to be professionally technical, but his technical ability is not on Vais level. Yet his ability to create melodies and harmonies that are simply articulated (see By The Way album) are one of the reasons that make the Red Hot Chili Peppers a HOF band. Same with Slash and Buckethead. Does anyone think buckethead made Guns n Roses sound better than Slash because he was more technically talented? No! Slash shoved his Les Paul straight into your heart and made it sing Sweet Child as loud as you could in your car on a road trip.

To me watches are the same. When I see a beautifully finished or a wonderfully complicated watch with poor attention to design detail, I appreciate the craftsmanship, but I feel emotionally dead.

Greubel Forsey is a great example. Those watches have the most impressive complications and some of the best finishings in the market. A connoisseurs dream… but their watches are a display of technical prowess (like a window of all the stuff they did to make it complicated) with little thought of how to make the watch aesthetically beautiful. Contrast that with a Rexhepi or a Laurent Ferrier (for example) who emphasize aesthetic beauty without feeling insecure that they need to throw every complication they’ve done on the canvas in random order, like some Jackson Pollock painting.

The Lange Odd is another great example of A level finishing/technical ability, with a soulless design. From a technical view and from a finishing view those watches are so impressive… Patek level to be sure. From an aesthetic point of view, however, it looks like a chunky LEGO block project, awkwardly constructed by a 3 year old. Hideous. Contrast it with a nautilus… and the aesthetic qualities are galaxies apart.

Before you GF or Lange Odd guys and gals get your feelings hurt because you love those watches, note that aesthetics are highly subjective. This is only my personal take. I appreciate if you think an Odd looks nice (though I will never understand it) and you’d prefer it to all the other nicer looking sports watches out there.

My point is that while watches like GF and Akriva or Patek and Lange may be on equal footing when it comes to finishing and complications, etc., and perhaps even a little more technically proficient, decisions on which ones to buy are based on how the aesthetics affect me emotionally… not because one has more power reserve than the other. In the same way that I listen Slash GnR and press skip when buckethead come on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[buddenfan]

For me it’s design and dials. As for complications I personally love. What MB&F does as well as wandering hours complications

[ts3]

Originally Posted by charger_vital

I look at complications and high-end finishing like guitar players in the 1980s. They studied how to play fast like Yngwie Malmsteen, they imitated the computer-like sounds innovated by Van Halen (finger tapping, power tools, etc), and they over distorted their amps so that they all sounded the same. What it all produced was Steve Vai. An incredibly gifted technician on the guitar whose ability to play obscure scales fast was unmatched. Yet, whose music sounded soulless and boring (See the audience is listening).

Contrast Steve Vai with John Frusciante, as an example. Frusciante has enough chops to be professionally technical, but his technical ability is not on Vais level. Yet his ability to create melodies and harmonies that are simply articulated (see By The Way album) are one of the reasons that make the Red Hot Chili Peppers a HOF band. Same with Slash and Buckethead. Does anyone think buckethead made Guns n Roses sound better than Slash because he was more technically talented? No! Slash shoved his Les Paul straight into your heart and made it sing Sweet Child as loud as you could in your car on a road trip.

To me watches are the same. When I see a beautifully finished or a wonderfully complicated watch with poor attention to design detail, I appreciate the craftsmanship, but I feel emotionally dead.

Greubel Forsey is a great example. Those watches have the most impressive complications and some of the best finishings in the market. A connoisseurs dream… but their watches are a display of technical prowess (like a window of all the stuff they did to make it complicated) with little thought of how to make the watch aesthetically beautiful. Contrast that with a Rexhepi or a Laurent Ferrier (for example) who emphasize aesthetic beauty without feeling insecure that they need to throw every complication they’ve done on the canvas in random order, like some Jackson Pollock painting.

The Lange Odd is another great example of A level finishing/technical ability, with a soulless design. From a technical view and from a finishing view those watches are so impressive… Patek level to be sure. From an aesthetic point of view, however, it looks like a chunky LEGO block project, awkwardly constructed by a 3 year old. Hideous. Contrast it with a nautilus… and the aesthetic qualities are galaxies apart.

Before you GF or Lange Odd guys and gals get your feelings hurt because you love those watches, note that aesthetics are highly subjective. This is only my personal take. I appreciate if you think an Odd looks nice (though I will never understand it) and you’d prefer it to all the other nicer looking sports watches out there.

My point is that while watches like GF and Akriva or Patek and Lange may be on equal footing when it comes to finishing and complications, etc., and perhaps even a little more technically proficient, decisions on which ones to buy are based on how the aesthetics affect me emotionally… not because one has more power reserve than the other. In the same way that I listen Slash GnR and press skip when buckethead come on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great post. How do you see Romain Gauthier along those lines?

I value design and comfort ahead of anything else. Often enough I find highly complicated watches aesthetically less attractive and/or too bulky for great comfort on the wrist. For example, I'd rather own a slim Patek 3940 PC plus 5170 chrono than a PCC or ACC.

[charger_vital]

Originally Posted by ts3

Great post. How do you see Romain Gauthier along those lines?

I value design and comfort ahead of anything else. Often enough I find highly complicated watches aesthetically less attractive and/or too bulky for great comfort on the wrist. For example, I'd rather own a slim Patek 3940 PC plus 5170 chrono than a PCC or ACC.

Gauthier is a stud. His sports watch is unique, streamlined and complexly simple. Also his use of colors is spot one (love the new salmon dial). I would love to wear one. And though not my style, the dress watches he has like the heritage, are a gorgeous rendition in that style of watch.

So yeah. I rate him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[John Doyle]

Watches to me are like women - i am first attracted by the looks. Then even more when i get to spend time with. First and foremost, the looks.

[DGB]

Depending if you have 1 watch or many. Obviously for a single watch you own, it would be because you like its look therefore the design you be prioritised.
Once you start having a collection you’ll vary your pleasure and go with various complications, finish quality etc..
But do agree with the guys, you need the like a watch to buy it thus the design comes first.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ChetBaker]

There has to be a visceral reaction when I look at the watch. A Ferrier Origin Opaline does that to me. It’s perhaps the most balanced watch I have ever seen. Complex in its simplicity. It calms my mind. Nice finishing is the cherry on top, but is irrelevant if there’s no harmony in the design.