Harry Winston

Your work with the watch is indeed unusual and to me..imaginative, and clever.

I criticised Opus 8 not for your work, but that it was marketed by the Harry Winston's new management as an "Opus".

In fact, at the price of over half a million sf, and also with respect to to previous Opus creatons..the legends of Opus holds great responsibility.

It is with the legends, the footsteps of the forefathers of the Opus 1 to 7, that the positioning of Opus 8 does NOT measure up..in my opinion.

Your watch, this Opus 8 deserves to BE an Opus 8  and deserves even more praise ...in fact, I came to Basel to buy Opus 8..as a customer. Knowing full well the price would be about there.

But what I felt instead..was the "Panerai 2008" syndrome...that is not your fault. What is the "Panerai 2008" syndrome? Make the watch expensive and hard to get and those "fools" will buy it and desire it more. This is NOTHING to do with the watchmakers like yourself, who work hard at making cultural and artistic contributions to our world of business and mercenary attitudes.

But it is the fault, IMHO again, of management at the highest level....in this year..probably not Hamdi. Management which may focus the company to go for quartz, and to go for economical overheads with higher margins and higher prices..bringing disrepute to watchmaking as a culture, but creating the Birkin Bag environment.

I do like the watch as Opus 8...but for an honest impact and contribution to society...Harry winston's Rare Timepiece executives could have said.."look..we have had 7 years of legendary watches, and 7 good years...lets make ourselves the classs leaders, and make...50 Opus 8 (or less) and price it at cost...no profits...and sell them to show the world what we are about...the Nth degree..the absolute."...and probably we won't be seeing a 500k tag on this watch.

These are personal opinion, and I again..may be totaly off track..totally.

To me..the movement is imaginative, but like a music box pin roller..adaptation to a disc format. essentially, I see it as 2 discs, for hours and mins respectively.

The owner needs to press the slide to raise the discs to press the "digits" on the "dial" up...

Clever. Imaginative. I would not buy it, because it approaches the finest line between toy and machine of art....that fine line for Opus8..it crossed it. As such, the executives working at hWRT did not see how clever your watch was and that it should have been marketed as a mischevious and playful thing...with fun...with retro looking fun and humor...not with grandiose seriousness and Holy Grail overtones...that was projected by the price.

At the end of the day..it was the price that stung.

Dear Bernard,

This Opus is yet a great master piece because it is a dream come true and no limit impose by HW. It is a wild creation from Frederic and it is a pity that the change of managment affects you so much. But the direction of the brand in terms of Opus has never changed, an Opus is still an Opus, after Max, Hamdi or anybody else. This one shows like Opus 3, that HW can always go futher, but still promoting a wearable watch. The price is much lower than 500.000 CHF.

Then from one of your previous post, you are making a mistake, the Foundation Time Aeon is separate from Opus, or may be let's say, it is even going further, in order to promote the project of an unknown watchmaker and to help him with transfer of knowhow.

Thanks for you understanding.

Thank you for this response to the forum.

I guess I will soon get a second look at the Opus 8? If so, please communicate with me.

I am in the process of deciding, as I do each year, for several  Asian publications as to which are the 10 watches of 2008/9 that are landmarks.

I did manage to come into the Basel HWRT booth almost incognito, except that with due  courtesy, I did identify myself when I asked a question during one of your sessions.

As in all previous years, the Opus has almost always been included in my top 10 lists, and as the records should show, I acquired more than a few from HWRT personally thru the agents here in SE Asia, usually after a visit to Basel.

The Opus to me, has always been a very serious topic, and a platform for advancement of the arts.

I do not usually attend or use the press as a source of information, but rather I follow my "nose"...in the last 7 years, the Opus did not dissapoint.

Again..my mind is open for discussions.

Thank you with sincerity!!!

"The owner needs to press the slide to raise the discs to press the "digits" on the "dial" up..."  you try to explain why the Opus 8 just doesn't do it for you, on the other hand you have praised the Opus 7 which also needs the pushing of a button to read the hours and then the minutes so I'm just trying to find out what makes the Opus 8 less of an Opus comared to the 7.

I'm a bit late to the party regarding the Opus 8 debate but I like it, I like it alot it is in line with the Opus 3 and 5 but I still think HW should have stopped at 5 (didn't like 6 and 7 but that's because of my personnal taste)

the lever, but the O 8 appears to be a cripple or some animal lacking an arm or leg...or possibly the strong resemblence to a music box. The O 7 was not one of my favorites, but I always ask myself..would I have bought it. The answer was yes, but my budegt went into another piece that year 2007.

Anyway, the O 7 was alive, like a clockwork of sorts..and it had the resemblence to the silent minute repeater.

It is the very slight touch, that finest of lines...between an award winning Cabernet and a one that gets the "no prize".

ones from Max, Vianney, Urwerk etc... its the emotion that speaks to us first!

You wish to engage in debate and the fact that you see that such debate is a benefit for all concerned is very encouraging.  I have written on this forum a terse and sarcastic remark which given your encouragement of debate, is sadly lacking on my part.  Hence, here I will try and provide a more detailed response.  I will state at the outset that I am afraid that I do not like your watch Opus 8, and will attempt to explain why.

First, let me set out my preferences and outlook, so that my arguments are couched in my viewpoint and are not seen as placed out of context.  I am not a fan of any watch using disks as a device to tell the time.  Watches such as the Urwerk 103 line and the De Grisogono digital offering this year are watches that I consider to be a step backward.  I see little merit in the ability to use a base movement, drill a hole (however small), and then hang a satellite and a series of disks.  It does little to improve the time keeping ability of the movement.

I am willing to accept that there are exceptions.  And the exception that disproves this rule was Opus 3.  That the complete set of ‘jump’ functions still has not been worked out shows how difficult the problem actually is and kudos to HWRT for not giving up on the project.  Such research is necessary.  I might still take issue with the escapement, but here I am quibbling about the secondary issues in this case.  I am also willing to see some merit in Opus 5 (and the Urwerk 202 series) but only because the robotics involved are sufficiently complicated to warrant some plaudits.  As a device for improving time keeping, once again, I see little merit.

Second, and given the lead statement, I believe what distinguishes a basic mechanical watch (that only tells the time and perhaps date) from a quartz lies in the escapement, the power reserve, and the drive chain.  Hence, watches produced by the likes of the members of TimeAeon are superlative watches – in all probability the leading watch makers on the planet.  GF’s double axis tourbillons, Invention piece number 1, Kari Voutilainen’s pieces, Dufour, Halter, all produce watches of my dreams.  Some have used disks to tell the time, but this has only been when there is something else of merit to be learned in production of the watch.  I might add that kudos is also due to HWRT for setting up a partnership with TimeAeon so that these masters of watchmaking can help in the nurturing of younger watchmaking talent in the industry.

This brings me to Opus 8.  Opus, as defined by a standard dictionary, is a masterpiece/a great work.  Why do I believe that Opus 8 is not a great work?  We can all be clever and start to write about post modernist interpretations of what has gone before, and cite perhaps ‘pop art’ and ‘the shock of the new’ as a way to justify why we have a mechanical watch, where disks rotate, be made to look like a 1970’s quartz with LED or LCD readout.  Yes, it could be fun, it could be tongue in cheek, or it could be nothing more than rotating disks (certainly less than those involved with Opus 3), matched onto a panel that displays the disk underneath.  Like the little boy pointing at the Emperor, I will call this for what I believe it is, nicely finished but ultimately nothing of more than that.  Stripped naked, for me, the watch does not resemble an Opus.  Try as HWRT might, disguising a mechanical watch to look like a 1970’s quartz does not in and of itself determine a watch as something that would make a watch collector sit up and take notice.  Is there something else that would make me think, ‘yes, but, the watch contains something truly unique where the LCD readout is a natural bi-product, and hence, considered as a whole, the watch is a benchmark piece’.  The short answer, that is the sum of the parts above, is a no.  Unless I can be shown otherwise, then this is where my answer lies.  You cite that there are four complications to watchmaking – perhaps you could list them for us and provide some background on their importance.  I would be only to happy to retract my statements and state that I have been proved wrong.

One of the true benefits of Opus 8 may yet lie in the debate it has sparked and how it has been played out here on this forum.  As such, this forum serves not only to inform, but to share passions about watches, and your entering into the debate with such enthusiasm is a welcome event.  Opus 8 may yet end up as the beginning of a trend.  From my personal perspective, I hope not.  I believe that a return to such designs would only serve to be the un-doing of what has been gained by the Swiss watch industry.  At my most hateful, I see little to delight the senses or intellect with Opus 8 – casing a basic mechanical movement with disks into a perfunctory quartz casing and display is not a forward looking or benchmark work. 

That said, Mr Garinaud, I wish you all the success in the world; my thanks for your entering debate with such an open agenda.

Andrew H   

i just think it's an amazing debate and i am very praise about that.

could You imagine that 7 years before i was in aircraft engineering, and 5 years before now i made the first  tourbillon on carbon plate for Richard Mille !
at this time i couldn't think that one day i would make such debate in watchworld.

Do you know that since the Rm009 light, i ever made fanciful project ? the most , except OPUS 8, was the RM012 tubes, i would, this time transform the traditionnal skeleton in a new futurist way..

Not so long ago, an enchanting woman  who works for press, said me:

Frédéric, if U want to make money, do always traditionnal watch and work
if U want to stay like u are, a maverick and magician child, continue to make fantaisist watch just to hurt hearth of people.

in fact i love watchmaking just to give people some emotions.
Perhaps somebody loves, perhaps someother hates. No matter
There are too much brands in watchworld now, and many put complications in their watch just to make money, what a pity !

You know my tag line ?
                                              LA COMPLICATION AU SERVICE DE L'EMOTION


i am not a serious guy, i am not a strict man, i am not watchmakers, i am not designers, i am not a mysterious guy, somebody says that i am all at the same time. perhaps.... i am just a big child and i love that.

Now, about HARRY WINSTON and OPUS (1..2.3...4...5..6..7... 8 ), i think that many subjetcs or debates in many forum are puerile, perhaps that some peolpe have frustation or a flak but i think that it's very unhealthy !

Now just to answer about complications of OPUS 8

1 armage de répétition minutes ( avec système de compression par rateaux et ressorts )
1 rouage auxiliaire avec volant régulateur
1 système de disques avec combinaisons de pin's pour activer les unités d'heures sur 12h et l'AM/PM sur 24H
1 système combiné au disques, pour activer les dizaines d'heures
1 minutes rétrogrades de 5 en 5
1 sous système rattrapage de temps avec spiral

1 nouveau mouvement 3Hz avec réglages des heures / minutes / am-pm sur disques
porte échappement avec balancier vis réglantes

someone makes do with a tourbillon in a standard movement and a new design,  i could'nt put complication just to see complication, i prefer combine, mix, adjust mechanic systèms to give one new function.

In final, do You know that OPUS 8 is a concept ?
or would You think that it's an UPSET of Watchmaking ? ;-)
Nooooooooo just a concept, just an emotion from my childhood.

And Thank You to Harry Winston, thank you every body to be optimist and enjoy in this luxury - world !!


Ps : i hate when peolpe says Mr.GARINAUD...lol
 Frédéric or Garinaud it's better, thank's

So what is in English for the rest of the forum readers?

 1 armage de répétition minutes ( avec système de compression par rateaux et ressorts )
1 rouage auxiliaire avec volant régulateur
1 système de disques avec combinaisons de pin's pour activer les unités d'heures sur 12h et l'AM/PM sur 24H
1 système combiné au disques, pour activer les dizaines d'heures
1 minutes rétrogrades de 5 en 5
1 sous système rattrapage de temps avec spiral

That these have gone over our heads?

Maybe I look at it again. But first impressions were really bad.

We are here to share and to learn.

BTW..I liked the RM 012 tubes was one of the super watches that I consistently praised in Asia, and that is something I would buy? But I hated the light weight RM..all of them...especially those carbon plate ones..arrrghhh.

Not having seen those mechanisms, thus not being familiar with them, this is my guessed translation for you to discuss the piece ad nauseum (BIG pun intended).

1 armage de répétition minutes ( avec système de compression par rateaux et ressorts )
    Minute repeater type of activator/releaser (with compression system by means of springs and rakes)

1 rouage auxiliaire avec volant régulateur
    Auxiliary geartrain with "flying" regulator (aka as butterfly or governor, as met in some minute repeaters)

1 système de disques avec combinaisons de pin's pour activer les unités d'heures sur 12h et l'AM/PM sur 24H
    Pinned disc system to activate a) 12 hours (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12) and b) am/pm indications

1 système combiné au disques, pour activer les dizaines d'heures
    combined to the above, system to activate the thenth of hours (10, 11 and 12)

1 minutes rétrogrades de 5 en 5
    jumping retrograde mechanism for the 5 minutes display

1 sous système rattrapage de temps avec spiral
    compensating elapsed display time system with hairspring


And for more pun now, regarding the extensive discussions happening over a watch (mechanical atop of it!)(ok it' s an expensive one):
(from Trainspotting's opening, author unknown to me)

Choose Life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family.
Choose a fxxking big television, choose washing machines, cars,
compact disc players and electrical tin openers. Choose good
health, low cholesterol, and dental insurance. Choose fixed
interest mortage repayments. Choose a starter home. Choose your
friends. Choose leisurewear and matching luggage. Choose a
three-piece suite on hire purchase in a range of fxxking fabrics.
Choose DIY and wondering who the fxxk you are on a Sunday morning.
Choose sitting on that couch watching mind-numbing, spirit-crushing
game shows, stuffing fxxking junk food into your mouth. Choose
rotting away at the end of it all, pissing your last in a miserable
home, nothing more than an embarrassment to the selfish, fxxked up
brats you spawned to replace yourself.

Choose your future.

Choose life.


Cheers!
This message has been edited by MTF on 2008-04-22 09:48:49

I am of the view that the debates are in no way "puerile" or "unhealthy".

As long as the reasons given in the debates are honest and genuine, there is no reason for you to doubt otherwise unless you smell some fishy things going on here.

Regards

Ling