Bites: Can we learn to improve our taste in watches?

...especially those reverse threaded screws eh 😉

I think anything we do, we get better over time. Especially if we like it. And once we "unlock a new skill" we like it even more. A viscious cycle 😉

The more watches we own, see and handle the better we can understand what can and cannot be acheived and decide where we like out money to flow.

How could anyone know whether a Grand Seiko's Zaratsu is a thing they can appreciate being better without careful examination of a frame of reference. To me that's like learning.

Regardless of my "journey", and no matter how many #crotchshots I take of my GADA, God-tier strap monster, that are all 7/5 mind you, @Aurelian ...... I would say tastes don't get better just more refined.

I'll also add since I'm a #sketchy-dude ( @bulgarian ), I will never cease to admire and eventually own this monstrosity:

Simply because I enjoy the idea of #whimsicalwednesday, AND every enthusiast needs that one God-awful watch to thumb the haute crowd.

That and my unabashed love of Warhammer40K and it's wild wacky universe has lead me to the conclusion this is the only watch I know of, in my budget, that looks like something a Space Marine would wear in their down times. 😉🤘🏻🤙🏻👌🏻😎

I think it's fair to say there are objectovely bad and objectively good watches. Build quality, materials, etc., are objective measures of a watch. Where the beginner vs. expert part falls apart is the subjective criteria. Heritage, and design are entirely subjective measures of a watch, because not everybody collects watches for the same reasons.

As an example, people who rave about Seiko heritage usually ignore that Timex, and Tissot are older and have more heritage. Why? Because in the watch community praising Seiko is considered cool, and bashing Timex is also cool.

Where the wine example falls apart is that his choice of that particular wine is related to his particular taste in wine. Another person might prefer a different balance of flavours, that perhaps a £15 bottle has. The £50 bottle could have been little more than status signaling. To relate that to watches, a $10 fake off the street is objectively bad(tetra pack cheap wine), and a $10K Rolex is objectively good(£50 wine). A $200 Islander(£15 wine) can both be objectively good, and stylistically appealing to someone, and for that person more appealing than a $20K Lange(£300 wine).

All that to say, bad watches are bad regardless of price, and once poor construction is resolved, it's all down to taste. I don't care how well made GS watches are, they don't appeal to me. I don't care that my Marathon watches don't have (fancy marketing name) polishing, they aren't supposed to be flashy.

Thank you, excellent write up.

I agree, our tastes become more refined the further we go down the rabbit hole.

I'm not a wine drinker, but Whisky- and that certainly tastes better the more you consume 😜

Hail Eris

"kallisti"

There is a fine line between developing tastes and giving into group-think. American wines are distinctly different from European ones, and it boils down to preference. (I literally flip a mental switch when drinking either.)

And without getting @Aurelian started, most people can't consistently rank wines above a certain price point. It's just good wine and your personal preference.

Watches differ in the sense that they are far easier to tell apart. (With one exception I will come back to.) There are more measurable differences, and quite a few people cling to brands and the spec sheet. I think watches are closer to cars than wines in this regard. I think that many people rank brands, and watches within a brand.

The puzzling aspect are super fakes. Does it make a difference if you couldn't tell if your watch is fake? Would you get the same feel and enjoyment is you were blissfully unaware, even though as far as heritage is concerned, you'd have a turd on your wrist?

Does my taste in watches develop? Yes, because I learn more about different designs, and different types of movements. Oddly enough, I still buy/build the same type of watches, only more of them. I can explain how a coaxial movement works, and what benefits it has, but I don't necessarily feel I need to own one.

Beauty is objective, unchanging. We may have more or less capability in seeing beauty, but it is objective nonetheless. Picasso is ugly nihilism, for example. Period.

But we can all grow in our ability to appreciate things, regardless of beauty. But whether that growth is a good thing or bad thing depends on the thing. One can grow in appreciation of ugliness, like modern “art” critics who are so appalled that beauty is something appreciable by the lowly common man that they have to take it out of his dimension and understanding by making it a study in ugliness. That progress is not good progress.

But then we can grow in appreciation of true beauty, and in doing so become more human, more what we were made to be.

I can grow to appreciate other things that have less transcendent binaries. I can learn to understand and appreciate why someone likes a G-Shock for example, by understanding their lifestyle.

I will take my popcorn and sit still in the back dark rows of this mind intriguing post 😜

Thanks @Deeperblue!

I think that while watch appretiation is something you learn, the more you learn, the more you close in on some topics of your own choice / liking: design, accuracy, movement technology, heritage, price, value for money, specs, etc. and that's when the subjective thinking kicks in.

To use your example the Armani watch could be cataloged as a bad watch by an "expert", because they think it's overpriced, it has a quartz movement and has no heritage. But the owner may value design, prefers quartz and has a high income, so doesn't really care about the price, just really likes the brand and is willing to pay the premium for it. So is it really a bad watch for the owner? I say no. Is it a bad watch for the "expert"? of course.

The problem with "experts" is not their expertise per se, is that some of them fall into a trap, thinking that if someone likes something they don't, is because the people who like the "inferior watches" like them because they don't know better:

If they knew what I know, they wouldn't like that watch.

That's when the snobbery and gatekeeping kick in. When the argument is I don't like that (movement with plastic parts, homage watch, fashion watch, etc), and I know a lot, so anyone who likes it, doesn't know better.

We all have different interests and knowledge within the same hobby, that's what's so cool about it.

Sometimes we coincide in the same colour, sometimes we don't, doesn't mean any of us are wrong, it just means some of us like some stuff and others don't.

I think the point where we draw the line of what is good and bad with respect to what you refer to as objective criteria, especially for expensive watches, can change over time.

You could have AP make that Marathon watch to the same spec, it would look very similar. It wouldn't be flashy. Indeed, it would be hard to tell the difference unless one knows where to look. Which is "learned" like a skill. Once you see it, maybe you won't care at all, or maybe you'll prefer the way how they are already done by Marathon because it feels more consistent, or maybe you'll throw away the Marathon and buy 17 Royal Oaks. There is no wrong choice because which way you like it, that is subjective.

My point is, "bad" manufacturing is never objecticely resolved because ideals are never acheived. Even at AP it's eventually good enough... until someone decides that it isn't and I would argue that distinguishing between very small and very, very small imperfections based on only minute dufferences is a skill, and an "objective" one. Only what we decide to do with the realisations is subjective.

I don't know what I may have said to get a mention, but let me start...

I have lived in warm climates for most of my adult life and I blame that for my preference for warm weather wines (Spain, Portugal, and Lanquedoc). When I first started developing my taste for wine these regions were all less prominent than they are today. I was getting bargains. I know for a fact that I can't tell the difference between a $20 bottle or a $100 bottle. I have worked enough tastings to see that play out in real life.

When it comes to watches I also know that the quality of a high-end watch would be lost on me. My near vision is questionable at best and I need to use the magnification on my phone to set the date on some of my watches (a date that I can't read anyway). I need a reasonably accurate and readable watch. Some beauty is a bonus. I have learned a lot about watches in the last 20 years but I haven't learned what Beauty is the Platonic sense. (I also don't get G-Shocks, the balance of rugged functionality is outweighed by my sense of beauty - small "b".)

A few months back a Cruncher posted a watch that he was enamored of and he gushed about it. I made the mistake of pointing out an obvious, ahem, "non-original" part of the watch. He deleted the post and was not active here for months. I felt terrible and messaged him directly, but the damage was done. Part of the joy is figuring all of this out yourself. Don't ask me if something is original or a Franken, or is "worth it." Make your own mistakes. I have made, and make, mine.

As someone who has spent a career questioning experts, I know that I am not one (although I have been qualified as one). I am not impressed with expertise. YouTube does not impart it.

My horribly reductive view:

When it comes to luxury / positional goods, the only way to judge “better” or “worse” is in the good’s ability to signal what you want it to signal to your intended audience.

Is FP Journe “better” than Rolex? Only if you’re trying to flex to other watch enthusiasts or flex to yourself. If you wanna impress the nice gal at the nightclub, the Rolex is a far, far “better” watch.

When I was young and single, my Kenneth Cole Reaction watches got me attention from my intended audience - a young lady I went to college with. For its intended purpose, the Kenneth Cole Reaction watch is far superior to any Grand Seiko I may own today!

I've been wearing watches for 60 years and actively hoarding for about 30. I've been all over the map from F-91w to Chopard Mille Miglia. I've picked up a fair amount of knowledge from 20 years on various fora, a few get togethers and just chewing the fat with my watchmaker. Far from an expert in anything, but experienced in a lot.

I still enjoy "beginners" watches as much as I do "high end" watches.Maybe even a bit more.

C a S G

Congrats, @Fieldwalker! Nice shots.

It isn't just finishing though. There are functional differences such as accuracy or even durability. I just used quality of execution because I care about that. I think it's fair to say that nobody knows everything about watches, hell nobody even knows everything about the watches they are interested in.

Take your GSAR. I know next to nothing about it but durability seems to be key. I'm pretty sure that if you stress it hard enough it can break because anything can but of course it would be better if it doesn't (the unattainable ideal again). I'm also reasonably sure it has some sort of competitors which will have features that the GSAR doesn't and vice versa. They will all be very durable as that's the market they are targeting but watch A might have done something to prevent it from breaking in situation X which watch B doesn't. Unless you know about situation X, and you likely wouldn't unless you have experienced it, you can't appreciate the feature in watch A over watch B. You also need to know about both watch A and watch B (or else you wouldn't know there is a difference).

The difference between a MoonSwatch and the Marathon is big and easy to spot, but with time and experience I don't think you can rule out the possibility that there are (likely very minor) aspects in your GSAR, or it's (future) competitors, that you aren't aware of but you would appreciate if you had the knowledge/experience (that would require knowing everything about the watches you are interested in or that the GSAR attains the ideal of being indestructible). I can't tell you what that could be and maybe it will never come to that but it might not even be something that is explicitly done to serve a purpose but something that the product engineers thought could be a good idea based on their own experience and expertise. It's those kinds of things that we "learn" over time. I firmly believe that anyway 🍻

Sad to say … my taste in watches stayed the same … I ask myself,” Would this make me look Sexay??!!”… and if Yes !! That’s it!! So therefore I conclude my taste remained Sexay!! 😜🥳🍻

I'll throw yet another music analogy, sorry.

If you take a playlist of a random normal person, who don't have an obsessive interest in music and compare it to the playlist of someone with a synth collection, or a music related blog, or with a Zoom recorder, filled with ambient recordings, you could very, very possibly find that the second playlist is absolutely horrible. While your average person will enjoy some Taylor Swift tunes, or something that is as mainstream as it gets, you might think that digging the selection of a music enthusiast would show you some "high-brow" refined innovative and creative tracks, which will blow up your mind and move something inside you. And what you'd get is a set of terrifying noises, lacking harmony, or melody or rhythm or everything at once to the point of being a complete atonal mess, composed from the sounds of field recordings, random voices, and other stuff you'd never think is a part of music. The usual and pretty much normal response to that kind of music is "Is this even a music? O_O". Avant-jazz, noise rock, experimental pop, industrial electronica - those genres at they peak are so deconstructed that the actual tracks are nothing like a genres they are derived from.

But why the people with such passion, interest and knowledge in music are listening to such a mess? It's like a "Taste Curve", where you start from something mainstream and most people are staying at this stage (nothing wrong with it, btw).

Then you go to 'niche mainstream' where you have your usual "left-field" picks. Artists like Tame Impala in 2014, The XX, early James Blake, early Tyler The Creator, early J. Cole, and a music like "genre classics" - 00s UK Dubstep, 90s jungle, old-school UK Grime, overall, something which isn't viral, hype and trendy, something that isn't made as a perfect, sterile super-likeable product of industry and business, something made for the love of the craft, passion and creativity, but still a popular and digestible music. Usually this is what we consider "good taste".

And if for some twisted reason you are going further, and you really shouldn't go further to enjoy the best tunes, you end up in a realm of 'niche'. Music which is made for musicians and enthusiasts. Music which is deliberately unlikable. Music which is made to invoke the worst thoughts and emotions - darkness, desperation, hatred, depression, insanity, etc. This music, as I already mentioned is not even considered music by most people and it is intentionally written this way. It's 100% an acquired taste and you either find that music in a times of big crisis or you find it through participation in a music enthusiast community. You need a seasoned enthusiast to guide you through this field and explain why this is cool. It requires as much reading as listening and as much technical knowledge as music erudition.

But when you are constantly listening to music, when you are producing music, or work in music industry in general, after a while music just doesn't hit as hard as before. And you are so used to have strong emotional response to music, so you became a music addict, looking for a bigger and stronger dose. Also, it might come from a sheer boredom you have from listening to popular tunes.

This is even more pronounced and obvious in art.

So yes, you can improve or refine your taste, but the further you climb that curve, the more you go into "radical zone", where the product itself is not enough to be cool and you need a context and explanation to understand why it is cool.

I’ve had many craft beers over many years. Still looking for that hoppy IPA appreciation, though. Maybe there is still hope for my taste buds?

Wow, there is a lot to unpack there!

This reminds me of the meme when some buys the cowoker they hate an extremely posh coffee taste kit. (The reason behind it, is they always drank instant and now they now what good coffe tastes like, they won't be able to go back and they will spend thousands of dollars a year on good coffee)

I guess my rambling point, goes to the question.... Would you like to go back to when the £5 wine tastes like the £50 and just not know any better and save a fortune or is it better to be more educated and spend a small fortune.

I think sometimes it might be nice unlearn it all andbe happy and content. Others days I look at the earlier pieces in my collection like a bad hair cut and just go what was I thinking?!?!? 😂

@Deeperblue Thank you for the mention. Appreciate it. Though I’m the farthest thing from knowledgeable and/or creative.

There is no good or bad, old or new. Anything that ticks is good enough for me.

Ok - I think the problem is a lack of clarity - what do you mean by "taste"? Because this has two broad components/uses:

1. disinterested appreciation. The identification, analysis and understanding of what is good regardless of whether you personally like it.

2. interested preference. Personally liking something.

Neither is innate - both are learned, which I believe means that you can get "better" at both.

Learning how to appreciate a watch is relatively straightforward mostly because its not a hard sell - convincing someone they might like to learn a little about the craft of hand finishing in order to appreciate the work makes sense. People might say they cant be arsed but I doubt anyone will fight you and say "no - I cant learn that!".

Learning to like something is way harder mostly because people like to believe they are unique special flowers that have an innate "taste", they simply buy what they like and thinking about it too much is somehow wrong (a line of thinking every advertiser wants you to have btw). Trust me because I do this all the time - telling people that they were taught to like whatever they think they like by marketing departments spending billions of dollars to do so gets people really angry and defensive. Its a bit matrix-like (to bend the spoon you have to realise there is no spoon) - yes you can learn to like things better but first you have to acknowledge you learnt to like the things you like now.

I think Marianne Williamson got our relationship to our tastes exactly right when he said:

"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure."

I think the error here is to conflate disinterested appreciation with personal preference. Also in the meaning of "objective" - ie in the philosophical or scientific sense. Is it objective in that it can be measured and given a number or is it objective in that a reasonable person with the appropriate level of expertise in the field and with no personal stake in the outcome would most likely think the same?

Fair, maybe it was mostly a West Coast thing... Eastern craft beer tends to be different.

I clarified later that I meant objectivly bad, as in a watch that breaks under normal use, or fails to function properly.

I will admit though, I tend to think along the lines of "what would a reasonable person think", as it is a good enough system to gage the "hazy" areas in most aspects of life.

In my not so humble opinion, taste doesn't "improve", taste evolves along side you.

“Improve our taste”? Surely this is the antithesis of what this space stands for? “Taste”, is subjective & shouldn’t be defined by, “influencers”, sponsored opinions or biased reviews of their own catalogued stock. Influencers are responsible for secondary market prices going through the roof. Anyone buying a watch purely due to a biased review from a self appointed expert is devoid of taste & style in my opinion.

As you move along in this hobby at some point in time your mind is opened up. Experience counts, eventually this reflects in your actions and taste.

Thank you for mentioning my video on your post. Really appreciated