I own a PRX 35, and it’s fine. I like the mother-of-pearl dial, and it’s comfortable to wear. But let’s be honest-traditional watches are far from pioneering. If you’re looking for innovation, look to smartwatches, where genuinely interesting things are happening. In the realm of traditional watches, there’s only so much you can do while keeping the design functional and practical. At the end of the day, a watch is just a dial (or display) with a strap. After over 100 years of countless designs, how much room for differentiation really remains? Sure, you can revive asymmetric designs like the Ventura, but the reality is that most people don’t want them. They want the same old, tried-and-true aesthetics-“boring old things.” Traditional watchmaking is a legacy industry, appealing primarily to an older demographic. Stagnation is inevitable. The watch industry will never see a true revival or groundbreaking innovation. It’s a slow decline-the only way is down.
Watches aren't an artform, they're a craft. Calling them art is not elevating them it's mischaracterizing them. Decorative techniques will not change this as they've been part of the craft from the beginning.
What is a watch? In analogue format: a face, case, hands, and some kind of movement, a strap/bracelet....a practical means of telling the time that can only be regurgitated in a limited number of basic designs. When everyone actually needed to buy a watch, apart from the prestigious brands, the general idea of memorable styling was pretty much a lucky dip. Back then, a vast majority of people tended not to even care.
Finally. Algorithms brought me to an actual (and pretty clever must I admit) analysis of why there’s a neverending repetition instead of needed innovation. Agree with all that said here wholeheartedly.
@@NEONNOONE Thanks for the comment and for feeding the algorithm- I'll have more content like this coming soon but it can take a bit of time to get right!
Very interesting video, perhaps i don't treat watches as a piece of art but i can see you're going, sure we're living a bit of design stagnation right now that is clear but i don't know how a big change would be accepted, perhaps that's why watches haven't changed much in the last 70-80 years.
I absolutely love watches, the high end watch brands are out of my budget but the MAMACOO has literally an almost duplicate of every single watch on the market . Always a great but no matter your budget.
You offer a very interesting argument. I can't say I agree with your conception of art (recall that watches were primarily intended as functional tools which might be crafted for aesthetic appeal), but your general conclusion is spot-on. I might note that the watch community ourselves are driving the hyperrealization of watches. Affordable watches are expected to be increasingly "specked" out. Over the long-term, even affordable watched will be buffed, in a competitive arms-race. Look at the flack Seiko is taking for not providing sapphire crystals on their $300+ models. Especially in the age of the internet, what the TH-cam watch community cares about will drive mass-consumer preference. In a decade-or-two, the minimum specifications expected of watches at the entry-level point will be unrecognizable. The microbrands offer the space for innovative artistry, and the new "watch icons" will emerge from that space. I'm surprised you didn't mention the CW Bel Canto or Lumiere - chiming and striking lume for no practical purpose, but done because it can be done.
@ephraimwiedermann9352 After all what is and isn't art is subjective. But no you're spot on with CW there - possibly a driving force on the microbrand side of things as they do take their inspiration often from upmarket offerings. What they're doing is new at that price point sure - but actually new, I'm undecided
@@Dougs_watches Well Doug - you've earned another subscriber, which is a hard thing to get out of me in this competitive space. Keep putting out great content.
I agree. Being deep into the hobby it starts to feel saturated from a design perspective. So we stretch outside of the box. And innovation seems to come at a very high price, so that door is closed to me. So there is opportunity for smaller micro brands to fill the space that established mainstream brands may fear to tread. But with micro brands you have to be careful with quality or future support, I do like history, so this is a difficult space but some smaller or micro brands could tread this path.
I think what you said is indeed correct. However, I think homage watches like the PRX and others do drive the industry forward. Just not in the ways one might think. I showed for example my friend who is not into watches at all the 35mm PRX, we went to the shop and tried them on, he bought it on the spot and it's now something he wears daily and it makes him feel special. He's decidedly middle class. Now that he has the PRX he's always asking me about other watches he might like and he's now looking to get an IWC or a Zenith El Primero. As for bigger sports watches dying out. I would say yes and no. I know there are a lot of people who'd buy Panerais for example. However, they're just not size appropriate so that style I think will remain popular as it always has, however, I think they're going to need to pop out a few smaller sized ones that don't compromise on water resistance like Panerai have been doing of late. I definitely agree with your thoughts on micro brands pushing the industry forward. I think ultimately if we want to predict where the hyper real watches as you called them will end up we have to look at both the haute horology space like you mentioned and the micro brand scene as well. Ultimately I feel the big brands will then start to mimic both ends and we'll end up with some interesting and innovative ideas all around, eventually. Here's my question for you though. What complications do you think will be the next big one on the affordable side, given Seiko and Miyota now have affordable GMTs where as 4 to 5 years ago, this would be outside the realm of possibility? I feel like the next big one will be affordable chronographs. Then eventually things we'd expect from haute horology like perpetual calendars and moon phases.
@ColinLack Some interesting points made there. But in answer to your question the chronograph is the obvious choice. The speedmaster always blows up on the youtube algorithm so I reckon demand is there for affordable chronographs. The tissot pr516 a mechanical chrono for circa £2000 I believe if priced at 1k and an auto would sell massively well. However my money would be on the moonphase - a recogniseable icon of wealth thanks to Patek and not as complicated as other complications. Aesthetically speaking I think you can do some more interesting designs with it (in my opinion) and with the recent moonswatches moving this way surely they did some market research to back this up? But then I don't have a crystal ball.
@@Dougs_watches Thank you :) I actually agree with your statements in responding to me :) I would absolutely LOVE having a Longines Master Collection Moon Phase in blue! I feel like if they shrunk it from 40mm to 36mm-38mm? Yeah that would sell like crazy even at the $3k price point it's currently at! Also, another thing I could see getting big is more unique / cushion cases. Since they can wear a lot smaller and stand out in general.
Swiss watches have been boring since the decision was made in the late 90s / early 2000s to make bling watches for rappers instead of top quality, understated pieces for guys who actually work and appreciate them. Grand Seiko isn't the answer.
I'm pausing before the hyperreal discussion, as you're on something I've been thinking about, iconic watch designs and how something new enters the "canon" of Serious Watch Icons. We know Rolex has done best in this realm; nearly every one of their watches has a well known name attached to a enduring (if lightly slandered) design, and fan sourced nicknames like the Hulk, Buckley dial, or the Daytona named after an actor (you knew it before you finished reading the sentence). It's fascinating that Seiko, another brand boasting a catalogue brimming with (decently) catchy model names and fan nicknames, can't leverage their Grand Seiko heritage, design prowess, and skill into at least one iconic model. Icons are not born out of limited editions; they need significant valuation in ubiquity and perpetual positioning near the mezzo range of a product lifecycle.
Thanks for making this video. I agree with what you have mentioned. Look, I don’t mind re-issues of classic designs like the Omega CK859 or the Grand Seiko 45GS (although their prices are steep to say the least). I like such re-issues because I get a classic but created with modern manufacturing of today. I also don’t mind current models being sold having some design cues from their older watches but it has to be done with a certain level of quality that points back to that old but time accurate design with some modern creation methods employed. What I don’t want to see is way too many variants of the same watch with different colours or small aesthetical changes unless it is done right (Good example; Nomos’s 31 colour variants of the Tangente 38 Date in celebration of 175 years of watchmaking in Glashutte; that move from such a brand to me at least is daring and injected new interest in the brand). I would like to see watch brand evolve their overall design that would capture people’s imagination and that would lead to interest in the brand again. The last sentence is admitted too board a stroke to paint but that’s my hope. Cheers.
So true.. it is better to get inspiration from the very early 1900 or redesign a new watch all together. Mr Jones do very interesting watches because they redesign a watch completely. Even the case is interesting. Problem is nowadays all watches look like a submariner. Or a modern oyster. Almost every watch look like those two models. But it sells. Only if people stop buying them the whole market would be forced to change an create a new completely different design. A watch does not need to be rounded. Could be triangular . Could be rectangular. Maybe Marie Antoinette is right . Look for models that are completely forgotten. I feel for the reviewers. Reviewing every watch that look the same over and over again.
I think you're not wrong at least not entirely but I don't agree that homage watches are keeping the industry from really moving forward. There are brands that are making innovations, and sure a lot of them are in the microbrand space but watch brands have traditionally moved slow in general. Brands like Rolex consider their moves across decades rather than years which makes sense given how long they've been around for. Even before the prx, rolex hadnt released a new line in awhile, since the milguass. You can say the same for many of the other tent pole brands. Christopher Ward also released their bel canto which is a very unique watch in its own right despite them also creating the twelve. Homages are so popular in part because they make it easy to get a watch that maybe you can't afford. If you can't afford a submariner, there are any number of solid diver options from cheaper brands which can still scratch that itch to some degree. I actually really like the Nivada grenchen F77 because while it certainly is a royal oak homage, it has its own heritage and its own style. They've started releasing mineral dials and titanium options which is a step away from the royal oak. I own 3 integrated bracelet watches; a vacheron overseas dual timer that I got from my grandfather, a credor 8J82-5A00 vintage square quartz 35mm piece and a horage supersede gmt. The credor is very much its own thing and the supersede also has many unique features. Horage as a brand has been making some interesting moves with their k2 microrotor movement and the revolution 3 microreg (a watch that allows you to regulate it without opening the case). This doesn't even get into the crazy stuff that chinese brands have been doing these days. Brands like san martin, atelier wen, fiyta and cigna design are taking the factory pipelines that made superclones for years and applying them to new designs (some of those brands are also technically high horology with a lot of handcrafted elements). They've been able to scale their production while uping the value proposition against their overseas compatriots. Anyhow, just a few things to think about. Personally, as a watch snob/collector, I feel like I am spoiled for choice these days when compared to just a decade ago. I am also the type of collector that doesn't care much about brands and the current trends, my beater watches are a blancpain leman ultra slim dual timer and a seiko alpanist. I don't buy watches for fashion or for status; I only buy a watch after searching for something that speaks to me personally. Also have never liked large watches because I have a small wrist and carpel tunnel.
I agree with a lot of this. Some pillars of your arguments are off. Isn't Cartier doing so well because of the popularity of the Santos, a sports watch? Regardless, this is an interesting discussion and I'm subscribing for more.
I see your intended point but there’s a lot more nuance here. Isn’t movement development also a form of art? You can also argue all art is derivative. Artists are influenced by their contemporaries so everything you design is a reinterpretation. IMO Hublot is not subverting anything. Its gaudy designs are purely for hype. Look at who they use for marketing: Media saturated celebrities. Use of ETA movements are similarly purely cost cutting. Not developing an in house movement is cost cutting and is super capitalist.
i would like an analysis of age groups and watch buying...What are 18 year olds buying? 25 year olds? etc...do the watchmakers alalyse purchase history and factor it into production and advertising?
I wouldn't buy a Hublot or a Richard Mille even if I could afford one. I just want a traditional watch that is higly legible. That's it. Hublot and Richard Mille are like Paris Fashion Week. Yes, very "creative" designs for sure, but what person in his right mind would want to wear that crap in public?!
....the intellectual perspective on the watch world! The truth is that watchmaking has always been a business.
@doctorshawzy6477 That's what I'm going for glad it's coming through!
I own a PRX 35, and it’s fine. I like the mother-of-pearl dial, and it’s comfortable to wear.
But let’s be honest-traditional watches are far from pioneering. If you’re looking for innovation, look to smartwatches, where genuinely interesting things are happening. In the realm of traditional watches, there’s only so much you can do while keeping the design functional and practical. At the end of the day, a watch is just a dial (or display) with a strap. After over 100 years of countless designs, how much room for differentiation really remains?
Sure, you can revive asymmetric designs like the Ventura, but the reality is that most people don’t want them. They want the same old, tried-and-true aesthetics-“boring old things.”
Traditional watchmaking is a legacy industry, appealing primarily to an older demographic. Stagnation is inevitable. The watch industry will never see a true revival or groundbreaking innovation. It’s a slow decline-the only way is down.
Watches aren't an artform, they're a craft. Calling them art is not elevating them it's mischaracterizing them. Decorative techniques will not change this as they've been part of the craft from the beginning.
@@diemes5463 An interesting take for sure!
What is a watch? In analogue format: a face, case, hands, and some kind of movement, a strap/bracelet....a practical means of telling the time that can only be regurgitated in a limited number of basic designs. When everyone actually needed to buy a watch, apart from the prestigious brands, the general idea of memorable styling was pretty much a lucky dip. Back then, a vast majority of people tended not to even care.
Finally. Algorithms brought me to an actual (and pretty clever must I admit) analysis of why there’s a neverending repetition instead of needed innovation. Agree with all that said here wholeheartedly.
@@NEONNOONE Thanks for the comment and for feeding the algorithm- I'll have more content like this coming soon but it can take a bit of time to get right!
Very interesting video, perhaps i don't treat watches as a piece of art but i can see you're going, sure we're living a bit of design stagnation right now that is clear but i don't know how a big change would be accepted, perhaps that's why watches haven't changed much in the last 70-80 years.
Totally agree we are saturated with the same designs
Thanks again for a very thoughtful (downright heady, really:) perspective here Doug. Appreciate your take in this space, sir.
@@jasonsmith1375 Thanks for the comment and for feeding the algorithm!
I absolutely love watches, the high end watch brands are out of my budget but the MAMACOO has literally an almost duplicate of every single watch on the market . Always a great but no matter your budget.
You offer a very interesting argument. I can't say I agree with your conception of art (recall that watches were primarily intended as functional tools which might be crafted for aesthetic appeal), but your general conclusion is spot-on. I might note that the watch community ourselves are driving the hyperrealization of watches. Affordable watches are expected to be increasingly "specked" out. Over the long-term, even affordable watched will be buffed, in a competitive arms-race. Look at the flack Seiko is taking for not providing sapphire crystals on their $300+ models. Especially in the age of the internet, what the TH-cam watch community cares about will drive mass-consumer preference. In a decade-or-two, the minimum specifications expected of watches at the entry-level point will be unrecognizable. The microbrands offer the space for innovative artistry, and the new "watch icons" will emerge from that space. I'm surprised you didn't mention the CW Bel Canto or Lumiere - chiming and striking lume for no practical purpose, but done because it can be done.
@ephraimwiedermann9352 After all what is and isn't art is subjective. But no you're spot on with CW there - possibly a driving force on the microbrand side of things as they do take their inspiration often from upmarket offerings. What they're doing is new at that price point sure - but actually new, I'm undecided
@@Dougs_watches Well Doug - you've earned another subscriber, which is a hard thing to get out of me in this competitive space. Keep putting out great content.
I agree. Being deep into the hobby it starts to feel saturated from a design perspective. So we stretch outside of the box. And innovation seems to come at a very high price, so that door is closed to me. So there is opportunity for smaller micro brands to fill the space that established mainstream brands may fear to tread. But with micro brands you have to be careful with quality or future support, I do like history, so this is a difficult space but some smaller or micro brands could tread this path.
@jb-hw9if Thanks for the comment- glad I don't seem insane!
I think what you said is indeed correct. However, I think homage watches like the PRX and others do drive the industry forward. Just not in the ways one might think. I showed for example my friend who is not into watches at all the 35mm PRX, we went to the shop and tried them on, he bought it on the spot and it's now something he wears daily and it makes him feel special. He's decidedly middle class. Now that he has the PRX he's always asking me about other watches he might like and he's now looking to get an IWC or a Zenith El Primero.
As for bigger sports watches dying out. I would say yes and no. I know there are a lot of people who'd buy Panerais for example. However, they're just not size appropriate so that style I think will remain popular as it always has, however, I think they're going to need to pop out a few smaller sized ones that don't compromise on water resistance like Panerai have been doing of late.
I definitely agree with your thoughts on micro brands pushing the industry forward. I think ultimately if we want to predict where the hyper real watches as you called them will end up we have to look at both the haute horology space like you mentioned and the micro brand scene as well. Ultimately I feel the big brands will then start to mimic both ends and we'll end up with some interesting and innovative ideas all around, eventually.
Here's my question for you though. What complications do you think will be the next big one on the affordable side, given Seiko and Miyota now have affordable GMTs where as 4 to 5 years ago, this would be outside the realm of possibility? I feel like the next big one will be affordable chronographs. Then eventually things we'd expect from haute horology like perpetual calendars and moon phases.
@ColinLack Some interesting points made there. But in answer to your question the chronograph is the obvious choice. The speedmaster always blows up on the youtube algorithm so I reckon demand is there for affordable chronographs.
The tissot pr516 a mechanical chrono for circa £2000 I believe if priced at 1k and an auto would sell massively well.
However my money would be on the moonphase - a recogniseable icon of wealth thanks to Patek and not as complicated as other complications. Aesthetically speaking I think you can do some more interesting designs with it (in my opinion) and with the recent moonswatches moving this way surely they did some market research to back this up?
But then I don't have a crystal ball.
@@Dougs_watches Thank you :) I actually agree with your statements in responding to me :) I would absolutely LOVE having a Longines Master Collection Moon Phase in blue! I feel like if they shrunk it from 40mm to 36mm-38mm? Yeah that would sell like crazy even at the $3k price point it's currently at!
Also, another thing I could see getting big is more unique / cushion cases. Since they can wear a lot smaller and stand out in general.
Swiss watches have been boring since the decision was made in the late 90s / early 2000s to make bling watches for rappers instead of top quality, understated pieces for guys who actually work and appreciate them. Grand Seiko isn't the answer.
@@ronaldnixon8226 A sad reality - I'm yet to identify exactly ehat watch release marked this new era
Very interesting essay thanks.
@@bobbylee4431 Thanks for the comment and for feeding the algorithm a bit!
I'm pausing before the hyperreal discussion, as you're on something I've been thinking about, iconic watch designs and how something new enters the "canon" of Serious Watch Icons. We know Rolex has done best in this realm; nearly every one of their watches has a well known name attached to a enduring (if lightly slandered) design, and fan sourced nicknames like the Hulk, Buckley dial, or the Daytona named after an actor (you knew it before you finished reading the sentence). It's fascinating that Seiko, another brand boasting a catalogue brimming with (decently) catchy model names and fan nicknames, can't leverage their Grand Seiko heritage, design prowess, and skill into at least one iconic model. Icons are not born out of limited editions; they need significant valuation in ubiquity and perpetual positioning near the mezzo range of a product lifecycle.
Thanks for making this video. I agree with what you have mentioned. Look, I don’t mind re-issues of classic designs like the Omega CK859 or the Grand Seiko 45GS (although their prices are steep to say the least). I like such re-issues because I get a classic but created with modern manufacturing of today. I also don’t mind current models being sold having some design cues from their older watches but it has to be done with a certain level of quality that points back to that old but time accurate design with some modern creation methods employed. What I don’t want to see is way too many variants of the same watch with different colours or small aesthetical changes unless it is done right (Good example; Nomos’s 31 colour variants of the Tangente 38 Date in celebration of 175 years of watchmaking in Glashutte; that move from such a brand to me at least is daring and injected new interest in the brand). I would like to see watch brand evolve their overall design that would capture people’s imagination and that would lead to interest in the brand again. The last sentence is admitted too board a stroke to paint but that’s my hope. Cheers.
@melvinquah9 You're right I didn't mention all the colour variations we see. Many brands are guilty of this!
So true.. it is better to get inspiration from the very early 1900 or redesign a new watch all together. Mr Jones do very interesting watches because they redesign a watch completely. Even the case is interesting. Problem is nowadays all watches look like a submariner. Or a modern oyster. Almost every watch look like those two models. But it sells. Only if people stop buying them the whole market would be forced to change an create a new completely different design. A watch does not need to be rounded. Could be triangular . Could be rectangular. Maybe Marie Antoinette is right . Look for models that are completely forgotten. I feel for the reviewers.
Reviewing every watch that look the same over and over again.
I think you're not wrong at least not entirely but I don't agree that homage watches are keeping the industry from really moving forward. There are brands that are making innovations, and sure a lot of them are in the microbrand space but watch brands have traditionally moved slow in general. Brands like Rolex consider their moves across decades rather than years which makes sense given how long they've been around for. Even before the prx, rolex hadnt released a new line in awhile, since the milguass. You can say the same for many of the other tent pole brands. Christopher Ward also released their bel canto which is a very unique watch in its own right despite them also creating the twelve.
Homages are so popular in part because they make it easy to get a watch that maybe you can't afford. If you can't afford a submariner, there are any number of solid diver options from cheaper brands which can still scratch that itch to some degree.
I actually really like the Nivada grenchen F77 because while it certainly is a royal oak homage, it has its own heritage and its own style. They've started releasing mineral dials and titanium options which is a step away from the royal oak. I own 3 integrated bracelet watches; a vacheron overseas dual timer that I got from my grandfather, a credor 8J82-5A00 vintage square quartz 35mm piece and a horage supersede gmt. The credor is very much its own thing and the supersede also has many unique features. Horage as a brand has been making some interesting moves with their k2 microrotor movement and the revolution 3 microreg (a watch that allows you to regulate it without opening the case).
This doesn't even get into the crazy stuff that chinese brands have been doing these days. Brands like san martin, atelier wen, fiyta and cigna design are taking the factory pipelines that made superclones for years and applying them to new designs (some of those brands are also technically high horology with a lot of handcrafted elements). They've been able to scale their production while uping the value proposition against their overseas compatriots.
Anyhow, just a few things to think about. Personally, as a watch snob/collector, I feel like I am spoiled for choice these days when compared to just a decade ago. I am also the type of collector that doesn't care much about brands and the current trends, my beater watches are a blancpain leman ultra slim dual timer and a seiko alpanist. I don't buy watches for fashion or for status; I only buy a watch after searching for something that speaks to me personally. Also have never liked large watches because I have a small wrist and carpel tunnel.
I agree with a lot of this. Some pillars of your arguments are off. Isn't Cartier doing so well because of the popularity of the Santos, a sports watch? Regardless, this is an interesting discussion and I'm subscribing for more.
I see your intended point but there’s a lot more nuance here. Isn’t movement development also a form of art? You can also argue all art is derivative. Artists are influenced by their contemporaries so everything you design is a reinterpretation. IMO Hublot is not subverting anything. Its gaudy designs are purely for hype. Look at who they use for marketing: Media saturated celebrities. Use of ETA movements are similarly purely cost cutting. Not developing an in house movement is cost cutting and is super capitalist.
i would like an analysis of age groups and watch buying...What are 18 year olds buying? 25 year olds? etc...do the watchmakers alalyse purchase history and factor it into production and advertising?
@doctorshawzy6477 I'll put it on the list - would need some serious research and probably a little journalism on my part!
Tissot PRX is the greatest watch to ever be made
@keyboard.grinder A perfectly valid opinion. If you love it wear it with pride!
disagree..nevertheless i bought one..
@@doctorshawzy6477 there is no room to agree or disagree here..... its objectively the best watch ever made in the history of watches
Elaborate
Normal people love Hublot? What normal person could afford one? Despite which I find most of their designs hideous.
I wouldn't buy a Hublot or a Richard Mille even if I could afford one. I just want a traditional watch that is higly legible. That's it. Hublot and Richard Mille are like Paris Fashion Week. Yes, very "creative" designs for sure, but what person in his right mind would want to wear that crap in public?!
Plastic escapement 🤮
Inane blather alert!