The founder of SalonQP revises the future of watch design
The business of watchmaking is constantly evolving. Hence, nothing much has changed, argues James Gurney
Imagine the bucolic scene: a group of friends watching as their horses thunder towards the finish line of a chase over a measured mile. A common enough event in the decades following the Restoration (Cromwell had banned racing in 1674, despite reputedly owning a breeding stud).
This time, however, something was different. As the lead horse went over the line, Richard Dashwood, a well-to-do Norfolk landowner, did something no one had ever done before: he pressed the lever on his pocket watch, stopping the movement and allowing him to measure the horse’s mile-sprint down to the second. Not only was the concept of a second having currency outside clockmaking and astronomy new at the time, the notion of a watch with a seconds hand and a lever to stop it was also revolutionary.
The timepiece in question is thought to have been made by Charles Goode circa 1690-95. It was, quite possibly, the first watch to have such a mechanism and sold at Sotheby’s London for £22,500 last December.
Fast-forward to the 21st century and it’s hard to argue that much has fundamentally changed. Yes, the Apple Watch and TAG Heuer Connected can store boarding cards, deliver messages and order pizza but, at heart, these devices are more accessory than instrument; more toy than tool. They alter how you do things, not what you do.
Then again, Dashwood’s watch wasn’t for measuring pulse rates, timing astronomical events or for philosophical enquiries into the nature of time. It was a luxury and a pleasure: a gizmo. As Sotheby’s catalogue for the December sale points out, this would have been the gadget with which Dashwood could impress his friends. Still, it was a horological first and, by the standards of the time, unbelievably smart.
The following century saw much of the essential technology that underlies modern watchmaking developed. Temperature compensation, shock absorption systems, remontoires, jewelled-bearings, escapements (including tourbillons) and even the essential architecture of a watch movement were all in place by the end of the 18th century.
So, from this perspective, today’s smartwatch starts to look rather less impressive or, at least, less exceptional. The idea that it represents some existential threat to the idea of a watch as we know it, is nonsense.
However, Dashwood’s watch had marked a turning-point, after which change is fractional rather than fundamental (save for the advances clockmaker John Harrison made in terms of precision over time and changing environments), but still possible and desirable.
The timepiece enhanced the sport, but didn’t fundamentally change it just as Breitling’s B55 Exospace (see page 2) adds to the experience of flying a plane, but doesn’t change it. Adding connectivity and processing power is not on the same game-changer level as a stoppable seconds hand, despite all noise to the contrary. This isn’t to say that new technologies can’t enhance watches, but that the smartwatch is not always what it seems.
Paradoxically, it’s the watch business that is smart (and nearly always has been). Apple is merely a particularly smart entrant.
The business of watchmaking constantly evolves; pioneering or adopting new technologies, and reflecting shifting tastes and styles. The intelligence is in the way these advances are used, whether that’s materials, manufacturing techniques or basic horological design.
Take, for example, Audemars Piguet’s eight-year research programme that culminated in the Royal Oak Supersonnerie (see page 9) unveiled in January this year. The AP team set out to improve the way that chiming wristwatches sound, irked by the clear gulf in volume and clarity between the best wristwatches and traditional pocket watches.
Having amassed all the knowledge it could, the team examined museum pieces (AP has a long history in sonnerie watches), consulted audio engineers and instrument makers and, in the process, came to understand how sounds resonate through a wristwatch. Then devised a solution.
Along the way, the team used every technology available to measure and analyse the gongs, hammers, watch cases and movement bridges. The end result is a Sonnerie wristwatch that is almost shockingly loud and pure of tone. Yes, it’s still an analogue “dumb” watch in essence, but that’s not to say it isn’t smart thinking.
Omega has long been one of the more technologically ambitious watch brands, having adopted great English watchmaker George Daniels’ Co-axial escapement. Its new Master Co-Axial movements would be completely recognisable to a watchmaker from a century ago in form, but the performance, durability, materials, manufacturing techniques, numbers made and cost would be utterly alien.
Again, the watch is smart in conception rather than function, something you could arguably say about the Apple Watch.
So, yes, smartwatches are part of the future. But, then again, they always have been.
‘The idea that a smartwatch represents an existential threat to a watch as we know it is nonsense’