|
|
| Welcome to 3T! Please take the time to register and join in on the friendly,knowledgeable watch talk.Please note that not all registrations will receive an immediate activation e-mail.Those who do not receive an immediate notification will be activated manually within 48hrs. by an admin. without an e-mail activation url sent to you,you may then sign in using your username and password,if you feel there is a problem please e-mail us at timetechtalk@hotmail.com and include your name and username and we activate your account.Thank You! |
| Moderated by: 3T | Page:   1 2 3   |
|
|||||||||||||
| Why do you think>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 10:22 am |
|
13th Post |
|
Paxman 3T WIS 
|
You know thinking about your comments on movements, complications and brand names compells me to tell you most men I know are the same way and could care less about the specifics of watch or even a watch at all. Many guys hate to wear any jewelry of any sort and see a watch as a piece of jewelry. they us their cel phones for time or track the Sun's movements. Some want the basic digital which they will pound the crap out of and then toss. Repeat process. The there are the few and far between WIS. We have a bunch of them here but I don't run into all that many out on the Matrix. So our situation is much like yours except we love to place huge slabs of stanless on our massive man wrists... except for Ken!! Pax
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 12:29 pm |
|
14th Post |
|
KenC Admin 
|
Paxman wrote: You know thinking about your comments on movements, complications and brand names compells me to tell you most men I know are the same way and could care less about the specifics of watch or even a watch at all. But I do carry a sextant on a brown Alligator strap with deployant. I guess my biggest watch is 44mm (MD), but I prefer 38mm to 42mm. As to dress watches, I have a few, but strange that most do not consider dive and pilot watches as dress watches, I do........for example, I have no problem wearing my TT Rolex GMT Master II with a dinner suit....not my TT Breitling Windrider Chronomat. I also do not have any problem wearing my Movado Kingmatic Chrono on Brwn Leather with a suit (although I do have a problem wearing the suit). My Hamilton Khaki Filed Chrono (@ $190 - I just couldn't help throwing that in) looks equally at home with suit or jeans. Likewise many of my others. JK Military, Invicta Executive, 2014 & 2015, Victorinox SA 9G-600, ZENO Explorer, Seiko ANA, Poljot Buran Flight, all 3 of my TRIAS, Tissot Seastar 1000 & PRS 516 Auto and many other.             
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 07:08 pm |
|
15th Post |
|
tny795 3T WIS 
|
And, after reading what you and Ken (with his illustrated epistle to the Corinthians), I've come to 2 conclusions. 1. None of us in this thread has really addressed the issue of what, in each person's opinion, constitutes a "dress" watch. If what Ken wrote is anything to go by, it seems any watch can be a "dress" one. A new, probably short, thread ought to be posted asking just that question. 2. Women differ from men in re watches because they do NOT see them as jewelery! (which is something they all tend to go nutso over, or: over which they go nutso). I've tried to get many to convert to more than one timepiece, using the famous sentence: A watch is a piece of jewelery that happens to tell time, as well. No dice; only one reluctantly gave that some thought and has come 'round. I was very surprised that men see it just the other way around--blown away, actually. Speaking of the quartz angle--I know one very elderly gentleman who didn't know what in the aitch an automatic was and wanted to wear one of mine to "see if I like it". Cardiac arrest time for me. BTW: he didn't get one. All my words about movements and complications, etc. had no bearing on the topic either. I simply stated I had one dress watch.....no elaboration. So, Mr. Pax, start a thread and let's see how the cookie crumbles. Or, let's not start one.....whatever. After a brief riposte to Mr. KenC's illustrated essay (what I thought about that can't be printed here), I'm going to play some poker. Paxman wrote: You know thinking about your comments on movements, complications and brand names compells me to tell you most men I know are the same way and could care less about the specifics of watch or even a watch at all.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 07:15 pm |
|
16th Post |
|
tny795 3T WIS
|
Sir: Thank you for sharing your plethora of timepieces. To be succinct: what qualifies as a "dress" watch for you? I came away with the impression that there is no such animal for you.......anything goes. Thank you for even considering this question. Sincerely..... KenC wrote: Paxman wrote:You know thinking about your comments on movements, complications and brand names compells me to tell you most men I know are the same way and could care less about the specifics of watch or even a watch at all.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 08:04 pm |
|
17th Post |
|
e.avery 3T WIS 
|
A dress watch can be defined simply, it is what the person who wears it feels about it and how it makes them feel. In the end they are simple tools like a hammer, gun, scalpel, or computer, but they still define the people that wear them and also the people that made them. They are the things that bind us here in all of there forms and configurations. They are also the things that can cut like a wedge and divide, but it is not the watch that cuts at all, it is us. We are the common thread, not the watches.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 08:25 pm |
|
18th Post |
|
KenC Admin
|
Not true..................I don't consider most of my Seiko divers, for example, as dress watches (suit or better, that is), and I would never consider anything that was plastic or anything that had a "god forbid" digital readout!!! tny795 wrote: Sir:
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 09:14 pm |
|
19th Post |
|
tny795 3T WIS
|
Okay, let's try this a different way. For me personally, a dress watch is 14K gold, 18K if possible. I want neither complications nor bling......can't stand bling. The preferred hands are Bruguet in style. It must have a bracelet, no strap--don't care what exotic it could be. Too, the dial must be white and on the smaller size--20-25mm, w/crown. For most women, I think, the question of fitting nicely/comfortably under a sleeve is not applicable as it must be for a man. I think I've covered it all. I wish more of us would get in on this. I do not agree with eavery's: it is what the person who wears it feels about it and how it makes them feel. My old, old Stuhrling bubble copies are NOT dress, imho, nor are my new Explorer, Pilot, nor even my gorgeous Elysee Penelope. I really think the appearance of the piece makes a big difference.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 09:36 pm |
|
20th Post |
|
e.avery 3T WIS
|
You may not agree with me, but that does not make me wrong. I got paid to think out side of the box in the watch industry, and have been fortunate enough to retire because of my forward thinking beliefs and not being tied to a rigid belief system, and listening to others tell me that it could not be done. tny795 wrote: Okay, let's try this a different way.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 09:42 pm |
|
21st Post |
|
IW 3T WIS 
|
I agree with Eric. A watch is a dress watch if the wearer thinks so. Beauty is in the eyes. . . I've been to weddings and seen many men wearing their Submariners or Explorer IIs. Looks fine with a suit. Personally, I tend towards the slimmer more conventional 'dress' watch - like a Nomos Tangente. I guess my only stipulation is that it fit under the cuff of a dress shirt - that's all.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 10:03 pm |
|
22nd Post |
|
rws in nc 3T WIS
|
My idea of a dress watch is basically simple and reasonably thin. I'm thinking less than 10mm. Generally no sweep second hand (although I prefer one). Rich looking black or dark brown leather strap. Gold, platinum or even silver but no rose gold. No complications other than date. Definitely, no chronographs. No digital. I don't have anything that I would consider a dress watch but I have been thinking about adding one to my meager collection.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 10:22 pm |
|
23rd Post |
|
tny795 3T WIS
|
Oh, I'm very sorry. I never meant to even hint that you were wrong. We differ in opinion,that's all. Out of curiosity, you don't consider any one+ of your more dressy than others? The start of this thread was why dress watches weren't given more play. Yet, we haven't covered exactly what makes a dress watch. You said, and OG agreed, that you both wear dress watches a big percentage of the time. What I'm trying to figure out is: what do the 2 of you, and others, consider "dress". You and he and Ken, plus who knows how many others here, have much larger collections than I but, out of all you do have, which, in your opinion makes your dress ones "dress". Okay, will stop now because my head's spinning at this point, and I very well may be repeating myself. .........:) e.avery wrote: You may not agree with me, but that does not make me wrong. I got paid to think out side of the box in the watch industry, and have been fortunate enough to retire because of my forward thinking beliefs and not being tied to a rigid belief system, and listening to others tell me that it could not be done.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Oct 14th, 2006 10:38 pm |
|
24th Post |
|
tny795 3T WIS
|
Thank you for this. You, as with me, have very specific things in mind for what constitutes a dress watch. The other 3 or 4 who've been in on this discussion appear to be of the opinion that what is dressy in the eye of the wearer is what counts; the particular style makes no real difference. I had never thought of that and found it interesting. However, most women who do wear watches do, I believe, find gems and/or gold = dressy. Anything else falls into the casual, everyday category. rws in nc wrote: My idea of a dress watch is basically simple and reasonably thin. I'm thinking less than 10mm. Generally no sweep second hand (although I prefer one). Rich looking black or dark brown leather strap. Gold, platinum or even silver but no rose gold. No complications other than date. Definitely, no chronographs. No digital. I don't have anything that I would consider a dress watch but I have been thinking about adding one to my meager collection.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Current time is 08:26 pm | Page: 1 2 3 |
| TimeTechTalk.com > Time Tech Talk > Time Talk > Why do you think>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | Top |
