old vs new watches. new- are pissing me off...

[StatusQUO]

it's like you're my grandfather who always thinks that when he was young, the world was better and the sausages were tastier

I don't understand why you see modernization and progress as something negative. what today you think is low quality, will seem perfect to you in 50 years, when you will see the future trends
I think that modern watches are very wise and effective in all perspectives. the materials are better and more durable, the mechanisms are more efficient because they are made with the help of high-performance technologies, maybe it is not much better, but in any case, it is not worse than the watches of previous years. it is simply different, but by no means inferior

 

[PreciousJohn]

did you watch `watches and `wonders 2023?????? c'mon, I think you're not looking at the right thing....WandW has revealed some watches that will take your breath away....if you show me at least a model that is as twisted in both technique and design for a few years ago, I promise to give you credit... otherwise, I think you are not looking for the right watches

 

[BusyAsHell]

I don't know why your impression @Minimalist is so categorical about modern watches. horology goes with the times and develops in step with the demands and trends of society. in addition, what is different is the optimization of the materials, but by no means the decrease in quality. Previously, watches were made of much stiffer materials due to the lack of alternatives. today, they are more ecological, more modern. but that does not mean bad quality. Of course, each brand has more successful models and more stupid models. but for sure it was like that a few decades ago, we simply have no way of knowing. So we cannot generalize, only if we compare a certain model of watch based on which you created such an impression. personally, I continue to be amazed at how ambitious modern horology is. I don't see anything out of the ordinary and low quality. as for the design, well, that depends on personal preferences just like @dancerINTHEdark said

 

[Rochdale]

you have such a categorical attitude, so generalized. I think it is not correct to generalize this opinion on all watches. they are brands that have maintained their quality standards over time. PAtek, Vacheron, Heuer, Lange and Sohne are just a few examples..... of course some manufacturers are looking to change the materials on something cheaper perhaps, but this does not refer to absolutely all watch manufacturers as you say...
as far as design is concerned, well, every designer has his own vision, and you either resonate with it or you don't.....

personally, I don't agree with you... modern horology adapts to the changes and trends of modern society... a watch can't stay in the style it was in 50 years ago... it's normal to evolve... and if the public prefers twisted models, for example, the watch brands have no choice but to satisfy their desire... so your opinion is far too generalized

 

[Maric]

I agree and at the same time, I don't agree. I think you are generalizing too much.... while the industry has really changed as all fashions evolve, almost every one of the popular brands has at least one collection in their portfolio that preserves the tradition and the fundamental horological concepts. I think you're not looking where you should.

on the whole, the industry is shaped according to the demands and preferences and lifestyles of the final consumer. nor are people the same as they were before. so it is a change directly proportional to our changes, as humans. we want minimalist gadgets, we want to read the time quickly. we want comfort. watchmakers just offers what we are looking for

 

[HahREF5583468]

I hate generalizations and this thread is once again an argument against them..... @Minimalist you may be right in certain aspects, but if you don't give clear examples of what you are talking about, you will only accumulate hate here.....

some watches really have a downward trend, others on the contrary, are getting better and better and are phenomenal compared to the watches that the brand produced years ago... but again, I'm just I'm generalizing because I don't understand what exact models you're talking about....give me clearer data!!!!!!!!!

 

[Drinky]

your argument is a bit biased @Minimalist

this is how I see things:
let's take, for example, the Code 11.59 collection... in comparison with the previous and revolutionary royal oak collection, the code is significantly "lower". and I'm not talking about the collection technique. I'm talking about the lack of that "wooooooW" at the moment it appeared. that is, the philosophy of code is great, the execution of watches is gorgeous. But, against the background of the previous RO, the Code was not embraced by the public as well. At least at the moment. I hope that AP will recover and modify something to bring the collection up to the level of enthusiasts' expectations.

Based on this example, I agree with you when you say that old watches are better than new ones. Audemars lost something of the spirit of horology in the code, or at least, it failed to transmit it sufficiently....

From another perspective, take for example the entire Royal oak collection. Each release came with a better improvement than the previous one. In the collection, the tendency to upgrade is clear and well-defined from all perspectives, both technical and aesthetic.

Based on this example, I don't agree with your statement. for sure the first RO is not better performing or better in terms of materials than the last. At least in my personal opinion. The first is the best because it made history. But the last one is definitely the symbol of constant improvement and technical and aesthetical upgrade.

The conclusion is that it depends from which angle you look, and how you interpret things. also, it depends on what watch or collection of watches you are talking about. Otherwise, your statement is always somewhere between "yes" and "no"

 

[Encantadore59935]

so strange your point of view... there is no rule that obliges manufacturers to produce their watches exclusively on a vertical line from a design and quality perspective... I think it's normal for releases to fluctuate between them, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse... at least, the manufacturers are always sure that each released watch is better than the previous one, otherwise they wouldn't have released it... it's the public who ultimately validates whether or not the released watch lives up to expectations... resulting from this, manufacturers make iterations of improvement . so this ping pong between better and less better watches I see as absolutely normal

 

[BenStone]

nope i don't agree

the industry is developing and has never proposed watch models that combine so many functions and high-end materials as now... perhaps the only difference is that what used to be done manually, is now produced by automated machines, although- the watches modern are just impressively great

 

[Grigio]

well, some manufacturers are better in this aspect, others less good.... for your thought, I see the Code AP collection as a good example. This is not even compared to the previous RO. So, the collection is ok, but there is nothing in it that makes me say WOW. But with the RO watches, every release was like taking my breath away... So, yes, I give you credit for what you say, although it is not valid for absolutely every watchmaker

 

[GeorgeClintonBiden]

you talk as if all the watches in the past were WOOOOW....

a few years ago there were also more mediocre models and more outstanding models, exactly as it happens in today's industry.... you probably got stuck with the most outstanding models of the past and think that they were all like that

in every era of the watch industry there were good and less good models))))) and today nothing has changed)

 

[CityBreak]

I understand what you are talking about, to some extent. but I think it's just a purely subjective view. I am sure that the great watchmakers take into account the current trends and adapt to what the public demands. That is why they create what they create. Audemars PIGUET FOR INSTANCE, CREATED THE RECENT CODE. The public did not understand this collection at first, criticizing it hard. However, I don't think that AP created this collection neglecting some technical or aesthetic aspects. For sure, the watchmaker has invested everything he knows best about horology and technique in them. The fact that the public did not understand this collection is not because AP did something wrong, but because the public needs time to abstract from Royal oak to perceive the beauty and complexity of Code.

Thus, I think that you may not understand the philosophies of the new watches. Meanwhile, you appreciate the old ones precisely because you understood their philosophy. So, I don't rule out that you need a bit of time to understand the specifics of the New Watch Order in order to fully resonate with them

 

[RoyaInk]

I'm sure that a millennial is totally against your opinion) the new generation of youngsters would certainly come up with arguments such as that modern watches are much more comfortable, functional, qualitative, etc... than those of decades ago. I think that in the middle, it is more a conflict of generations than the watches themselves. We older people see more advantages in the industries that developed before. This is probably why you find modern watches inferior.

It's like music. It seems to us that decades ago, music was full of meaning. But a millennial is sure that there is no better music than modern one, no lyrics, only beats, and unclear rap... Same with watches

 

[Eugene]

I understand what you're saying... seems like old days were much better than modern... this nostalgia is specific to many, but I still think that modern watches are not as bad as you describe them... and I guess, because of the age, we are already closer to the old tyle of making things than the modern ones... a youngster will surely not agree with you) there's smth we can't accept in the modern world and probably modern vision of watches is is a part of that

 

[Albert]

new watches are part of the evolution... i like the new designs and the new technical improvements in modern watches... appreciate a lot what watchmakers were doing decades ago, but now, watches are just fabulous... don't see much point on what u say @Minimalist

 

[StevenOhio]

no way.... the old ones are the classics of the genre, without a doubt. but do not underestimate modern industry. This is very innovative in materials. brands are constantly looking for solutions to make watches more lightweight, more comfortable, more durable, more useful, more functional, more ecological if you want. So, it's a shame not to appreciate them. I follow the watch industry with great love and am impressed by the technical and aesthetic capabilities demonstrated by modern brands

 

[MiracuLuis]

I kind of agree. watches used to be more complex somehow... today they are more innovative. They are also complex, but they lack the human part in them. I mean that the watches of years ago kept the complexity of horology in them, many details were made by hand, which gave them a special value... Today, the watches are ultra precise, ultra complex and thin at the same time, but they are produced with the help of modern technologies, which somehow destroys their value. at least for me... either way, I understand that the watch industry conforms to modernity and the era of technologies, so they have their charm... after all, things cannot stand still, they must evolve