Reply With QuoteNot sure myself if I like it or not. But if we removed the makers name from the dial would it be given a second glance ?
you we say "what a superbly designed watch" or " oh, that design looks a bit dated"
Having owned and worn a Nautilus since the late 80's before selling it quite recently I can agree with lots of comments here. I realised a long time ago that looking at pictures of any watch was quite different from wearing one on a daily basis. Familiarity brings with it a different way of looking I think. I can remember that the PP looked much too thin to me after years of Rolex sports models. I liked the chunky looks of the Pepsi GMT I wore and found the Nautilus too 'dressy' for quite a while. But then I began to see the shape differently and I grew to like its understated appearance. Then there was the finish and the way it caught the light too. A couple of years ago after a series of Ulysses Nardins and Girard Perregaux sports watches and a couple of years with a Breguet Marine, I went back to a Rolex GMT. It just never felt or looked right on my wrist at all. These days I am not really sure what I like anymore but the Naultilus still holds an appeal I must say. Each to his own.
Not sure myself if I like it or not. But if we removed the makers name from the dial would it be given a second glance ?
you we say "what a superbly designed watch" or " oh, that design looks a bit dated"
It's not just about branding though - the design is significant due to the designer himself, the (at the time) unique construction and concept and the period it was designed in.Originally Posted by Umbongo
However, if we'd never seen anything like it and it turned up today looking as it is from Fossil or even PP, it would be a very weird design that just wouldn't work. But it hasn't just turned up, it's been a watchmaking icon for 40 years, just as the Submariner and Speedmaster are watchmaking icons. They have the 'advantage' though of conventional looks; the Nautilus is anything but conventional in appearance.
That's the thing - if a new design looks 70s, it's a bit dated or faux retro. If a 70s design survives, it's a classic. You could say Warhol of Rothko or Jackson Pollock look a bit dated, but I'd still hang one on the wall given the chance.
One happy owner of a Calatrava. The complications are easy to set (hidden push button for each sub-dial) even if you don't wear it every day
Honestly if the above were available, and the genuine wasn't the WIS community would say it's ugly.
They'd say:
It hasn't dated well, like a moustache and flares, it's stuck in the 70s.
The angles on the bezel, are they supposed to be curved or faceted, they're neither.
What's with the weird skew on the minute numbers, and why are the minute markers straight angles and the hands rounded.
Who decided that the date should fill every mm of it's aperture, and plain black print on white, boring.
And that sub dial, what the hell is going on there.
BUT, when the Patek logo is on the dial everyone swoons, oh isn't it beautiful.
No doubt it's a fine piece of engineering and craftsmanship but I can't honestly say it's a looker, not by a long shot.
A candidate for post of the year for me.
The quintessential Patek...
Lovely!! :)
One happy owner of a Calatrava. The complications are easy to set (hidden push button for each sub-dial) even if you don't wear it every day
It does have a sad face, doesn't it?One happy owner of a Calatrava. The complications are easy to set (hidden push button for each sub-dial) even if you don't wear it every day
This one in wg with the slate dial is probably as close to 'one watch for everything' as I could ever get.One happy owner of a Calatrava. The complications are easy to set (hidden push button for each sub-dial) even if you don't wear it every day
My 5980 Nautilus Chrono showed up today. My wife's only remark was 'you sold that beautiful Panerai for... >that<?'
She's not impressed at getting rid of the 190 :(
I on the other hand am utterly blown away by the dial, case, movement, bracelet, everything. It's so much better than I hoped. I don't see much else getting a look in for while!
Does that mean it's time to nip in quick and get another
Once I have 'been there and done that' I never go back. I quite fancy replacing it with a 372; much cheaper to buy and after I'd stopped using the 190 as my dress watch it wasn't getting a look in anymore really. 372 as a roughty-toughy watch would be a nice thing. And I don't mean a beater!Does that mean it's time to nip in quick and get another
I absolutely love the nautilus and the aquanaut.
Same goes for the AP RO (not offshore)
Genta designs do it for me more than any other.
That said, I'm not very interested in any other patek offerings, although some of them are undeniably beautiful.
I like both Nautilus and Aquanaut (and Royal Oak) very much from a design perspective, particularly in non-complicated form (although, perversely, I always think they look a little vulgar when I spot one on the wrist - not that much doesn't). I suspect most of the naysayers would be happy to wear some grotesque modern clown Rolex, something I wouldn't be seen dead in.
The name-on-the-dial argument could be applied just as well to any expensive or desirable watch (or pretty much anything else) you can think of.
Pics?
The aquanaut is not a Genta design.
It's a bit of a silly argument, and the original post could almost be read as trolling (and if it is, hats off to the poster for not picking on Rolex!).
Aesthetics are entirely subjective, and if that were the only reason for choosing a product we'd all have something from Argos that looks a bit like something else, and more people would drive those MR2s with bodykits that make them look like a Ferrari 355.
Personally I like them (not that I could afford one), but I also like Austin Allegros so obviously have absolutely no taste.
That can be a double edged sword though, as much as i believe it's great that there's a watch for every taste, it creates a market for oversized gaudy hellspawn fashion watches (a bit like owning a Max Power Nova)
If I could only have one watch, this one is it. I am amazed at how it divides opinion though, most people who doesn't know what it is, or doesn't 'get it' in some way do not see the same beauty as I do. Maybe that's what the OP was partially about..?
And looking at my own pictures, they fail miserably to convey the quality in anyway. The different finishes to the case and bracelet as they catch the light, the overall finish of every component, the quality of the rotor quietly spinning away though the caseback, the comfort of the bracelet, the subtle graduation of the blue-grey into black grey of the dial, the crispness of the flyback chrono... i could go on, but 'haterz gonna hate' regardless :)
So in answer to the OPs original question; I love this model.
It looks gorgeous . Congratulations.
I would say it is my favorite from current PP line up. Except for the Sky Moon tourbillion which belongs to the unobtainum category
I like the blingy 5980R but yours is more wearable.
Last edited by RAJEN; 8th December 2014 at 14:19.
If I could only have one watch, this one is it. I am amazed at how it divides opinion though, most people who doesn't know what it is, or doesn't 'get it' in some way do not see the same beauty as I do. Maybe that's what the OP was partially about..?
What a great watch!!
Ditto
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
http://monochrome-watches.com/patek-...vel-time-5164/
right oh.
Rephrase -
I like the aquanaut as an apparent evolution of Genta's nautilus.
Whether genta had a first hand in the design or not is unclear, but I like it anyway as it shares very similar aesthetics.
Nope - I wasn't trolling - genuine question...
...and one that's been answered on this thread now, i.e. "YES". :)
I am still curious how many of the 'yes' votes would remain 'yes' if PP was NOT on the dial (however wonderful the finish was). It's true that the same could be said for many 'luxury' brands - but most of those are more classic, timeless designs that are easier to love (Rolex, Omega, JLC, etc.).
Who says? I dislike almost all Omegas, I find Rolex designs rather conservative and JLC frankly boring (MC) or not to my taste (Reverso). If you think PP is taking the piss more than other brands, it's only because you like those other brands better, there's no hypothesis here.
Additionally, the managers of Patek would be falling short in their duty to their owners if they didn't attempt to capture some of the business in the extreme luxury sports-slash-casual market. One brand does not "belong" in that category any more than the other, no matter how aligned you are to the mainstream brands (Rolex Omega JLC IWC etc).
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
Technically the 5960/1a could possibly be considered a sports watch. It's steel and the more modern styling lends itself to a more casual look compared to the precious metal 5960s.
Imho is a nicer looking watch overall than the Nautilus, except for the bracelet.
While the braclet does look nice, i prefer the simpler design and brushed steel of the Nautilus (the super shiny rice beads are bit bling/meh) and I think possibly it would probably look awesome on a black/red stiched rallye strap for a vintage motorsport kind of look.
but still, can't say i've not been tempted.
You Sir, are then in even more of a minority than PP Aquanaut/Nautilus lovers!
...but it's this variety of tastes that makes the World go round, I suppose. :)
I agree that PP probably HAD TO try and jump on the 'hip, Pseudo-Sports' bandwagon as their traditional customers continue to die off. ;)
The 'wonderful finish' is due to Patek being on the dial. If, using the earlier example of 'Fossil' on the dial, they quality, horology, feel and finish couldn't be there. The watch has to be seen as a package to make sense; the history of the brand, the history of the design, the history of the movement, the continuity of all those things.
The same can be said of the Royal Oak series, it's an anachronism, but then almost all mechanical watches are, to a greater or lesser extent.
I looked at that and though 'awful' BECAUSE it had Patek on the dial; it's not their bag etc.
But take a step back and imagine it as a very big budget alternative to a Zenith EP, Daytona or Speedmaster and it makes a whole lot of sense. And now I rather like it...
At least you can get the Zenith in an annual calender ;)
That is if knowing what day of the week it is, is vaguely important
Exactly. If your customer base died off and was replaced by a crowd of moneyed, bull-necked, flip-floppers on holiday all holding wodges of cash looking to buy a big heavy steel sportwatch, would you not instantly exploit your brand and go after that market? Besides, you can still buy simpler, more classic Pateks if you want. And it's not as if the Nautilus has only recently jumped on the Dubai bandwagon; it was launched nearly 40 years ago. I still don't see why you're singling out Patek for going into the business of making watches for people who want a Patek, and not casting aspersions on all the other brands that operate in that market. (Hence the point about brand preference)
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
My objective hadn't been to criticise a brand for trying to increase market share...
...that's just sensible business practice (and they would be failing their shareholders if they didn't).
I just genuinely think the Nautilus and Aquanaut are quite ugly and therefore was curious as to who GENUINELY loved their design (as opposed to the brand). :)
I genuinely like the design of the Royal Oak. I thought I'd give the Bulova 'Royal Oak' a go for that reason - it's a similar looking homage that's a great deal cheaper, but in the end the quality just wasn't there so I moved it on. I like the design but the execution of the design is no less important. The brand isn't just a label on the watch, it's a measure of the quality of the execution. Equally, if you left the quality identical but changed the brand to 'Lidl' or 'Poundland' or 'Kentucky Fried Chicken', no I probably wouldn't like it as much, as it would look terrible and people would laugh at it. It turns out to be very hard to separate the design, the brand, and the history, they are all part of what makes the watch what it is. They combine to give the watch as certain aura that makes it attractive. We are not just attracted to watches because they are 'pretty', their aura is not based purely on their shape - it's much more complex than that. The story of the watch colours our perception of it. That allows the Nautilus to be powerful, attractive, cool, and have an aura about it, without having to be simply 'pretty'. It's quite a challenging piece of 70s design, but in the end you could look and feel pretty damn good wearing one. It's a bit like the Barbican Centre for me - no one would ever accuse it of being 'pretty', and many think it's ugly as sin, but I find it fabulous, a great visionary piece of architecture and a utopian expression of its time. It's brutal, powerful, futuristic, and also luxurious. A good place to wear your Nautilus, should you be so lucky.
Do you contribute to: http://www.compulink.co.uk/~stevemann/pseuds.htm ??? :)
Cracking summation there, great post!
Honestly if the above were available, and the genuine wasn't the WIS community would say it's ugly.
They'd say:
It hasn't dated well, like a moustache and flares, it's stuck in the 70s.
The angles on the bezel, are they supposed to be curved or faceted, they're neither.
What's with the weird skew on the minute numbers, and why are the minute markers straight angles and the hands rounded.
Who decided that the date should fill every mm of it's aperture, and plain black print on white, boring.
And that sub dial, what the hell is going on there.
BUT, when the Patek logo is on the dial everyone swoons, oh isn't it beautiful.
No doubt it's a fine piece of engineering and craftsmanship but I can't honestly say it's a looker, not by a long shot.
Sorry, did I use long words? I don't want to upset the hard of thinking ;-)
No, no hard thinking at all required to see it was a great candidate for Private Eye's "Pseuds Corner"...
Hush now, the grown-ups are talking.
I accept that aquanaut/Nautilus design is polarizing and wouldn't be surprised or offended if some one said they didn't like it.
But, even after so many years in the hobby and on the blogs I still am surprised and disappointed by the tendency on the part of some to ascribe motives to someone's ownership or liking for a watch or make sweeping generalizations about the same.
I have some theories as to why this happens
But am not going to indulge in the same behavior that I find offensive.
Ultimately it's about as useful as discussing what music is 'good'. Some teenager's favourite pop might sound like repetitive noise to their parents, meanwhile the kid thinks classical music is dull and neither of them 'get' jazz. You can't solve it.
But while expensive things can have an allure that gives them the benefit of the doubt, implying that people like something that they would otherwise think is ugly just because it's expensive is always going to wind people up. It's a variation on telling a Rolex owner that they bought their watch because they're a show off. That said, I'm willing to believe the OP honestly can't see why anyone would like the watch!
Last edited by Itsguy; 9th December 2014 at 17:37.
I would have granted that based on his opening comment but subsequent responses
Tell a different story.Just my opinion.
I know I'm not the person who typed out the posts in here you take issue with, but I don't think there's anything wrong with liking a watch in part because it says Patek on the dial. Or Rolex on the dial, as that's more often the gist of these threads. You have to consider the possibility that the people who have suggested this is what is going on might not necessarily attach negative connotations to this either, so might not be casting aspersions in the way you think they are. Although, to be fair, they probably are. :)
I don't own a patek or a rolex, but I can totally see why some completely hypothetical person, presented with two identical watches, of the same quality, might prefer the one with the luxury brand name on it. I can even see why, even if there were no differences, they might feel like the one with the branding might be better. I don't see that as a negative trait, and would argue it's probably quite close to being universal -people associate positively or negatively with brands. That's how brands work. So it's fine to like a watch you might otherwise not be interested in at all if it weren't a patek. Not that I'm saying you do. I don't know what's going on in your head when you, or anyone else buys something.
However I'm happy to say branding is a big factor for me. Seiko and Sinn for instance are two brands I really like, and I don't mind admitting I might not look twice at some of the watches I admire if they didn't have these, or certain other names on the dial. How often do we go on a website and "shop by brand" to narrow our search?
A sound comment.
But, we are on a watch forum where I would believe there is a little more that goes into a watch selection.
Nothing wrong with branding but there are tons of watches amongst brands that I like that are not to my liking, so the question of liking a watch because of what it says on the dial doesn't even arise. Hope it makes sense.
A lot here ( overwhelming majority)don't buy a watch just because of the brand,IMO
So, the implication that people like Aquanaut/ Nautilus just because it is a PP is silly.
Might apply to non-WIS though.
I like this one :) whats teh model numebr plse
In fact, there was a long running thread not so long ago about the late night drunken purchase of a PP that was universally derided (happily it eventually got sold on for much the same as it cost). People don't just want any PP. The Nautilus does have the advantage of being a known success and a symbol though - the name on the dial and the backstory certainly enhance its allure. But that doesn't imply people would actually not like it if you took those things away.
I'd agree with that. I'd be surprised to find anybody here had bought a nautilus just because they wanted to flash the logo on the dial. After all, most people wouldn't recognise it.
Same goes for rolexes. Most people here are too into watches in general to just go out and buy a rolex just because that's the brand you have to have on your wrist in their peer group, or whatever.
Like all of us though, they may been drawn to certain watches more than others partly because of admiration of the brand, as well as the watch itself.
Thanks Tony, it's reassuring to know someone understood my post!
Last edited by Itsguy; 9th December 2014 at 20:12.
You are very active, if you count raising a tankard to your lips.
The tropical strap on your Aquanaut is essential given the amount of beer you tend to spill...
Posting Permissions
