Jaeger Lecoultre Geophysic True Second

Modest_Proposal

It has always struck me deeply that people are so affected by the perception that dead-beat seconds watches tick "like a quartz" or are (secretly) afraid that their peers will think them wearing a quartz that they would pass on such an interesting complication. Ideally, this shouldn't make a lick of difference and highlights some of the dirt hiding in the shadows.

I don't like the look of the watch, but applaud their step into a new and lovely complication.

Riviera Paradise

@Modest_Proposal : some of us (I include myself in this group) could really not care less about their "peers" perception of a watch (in terms of making a purchasing decision or not), they just don´t like the start-stop nature of a quartz or a dead-beat seconds movement.

As I stated above for me the mechanical sweep of an automatic movement and the flow of a spring drive movement are much more interesting interpretations of the passage of time than a dead-beat seconds movement.

I have found some interesting research that our perception of time is actually something artificially created by our mind, and that time could actually be more of a continuum with past present and future connected in ways perhaps our conscious three dimensional brains cannot rationalize, some interesting ideas can be explored here: http://scienceandnonduality.com/

I do respect your personal admiration of the dead-beat seconds complication, I just don´t see the need for you to question the motivation of those that don´t.

Modest_Proposal

I am not questioning the rationale of all the people who don't like dead seconds - just those who will avoid the complication on the basis that it reminds them of a quartz watch or might be mistaken for one.

If you're speaking from a neutral stance, I can see your point that this might not be a smart move on their part, since most people would just say - "Dude - why would I wear something expensive if it's just like a quartz?". But it was hard to tell from your post:

"Why go to all this effort to generate a movement with a quartz type feel[?]"

The thing is, as you likely know, - the dead-beat seconds complication is not designed with a quartz like tick, tick, tick in mind (it's been around for at least 175 years). It was originally meant to help with precision timing. If you think of the complication in terms of the history and the fact that it's a very cool thing for a watch to do, you'll see that it's just a coincidence that the result is the same as a quartz and the coincidence shouldn't matter.

Mechanical watches (or clocks) were the first mechanisms to be dead beat - so in some humorous way, quartz's are actually like dead beat mechanical watches rather than the other way around, though the reason quartz watches tick only once per second is undoubtedly to conserve battery life rather than to emulate the dead beat seconds.

Still, my post wasn't directed at you specifically per se and if you meant the entire thing as a general comment of the decision of JLC when dealing with non-WIS's, I understand and agree.

Also, the ticking of time from a mechanical watch is not so much a nifty interpretation of time as it is a necessary output, due to the nature of how a movement operates. Still, I do rather like the way time ticks away on a sweep seconds watch, myself.

Humans and other creature have evolved in ways that help them reproduce. Since we exist within a fixed direction of time, it makes sense that our brains have evolved and adapted around that concept.

Riviera Paradise

Very good post @Modest_Proposal, reading my post again I can see where confusion might have arisen. I should have clearly separated the post in two distinct points:

1. Marketing analysis: JLC might have created a flop with the True Second, offerng a mechanism that looks like quartz to people who are indeed concerned about peer perception of their luxury watch investment;

2. Personal taste: I personally prefer the sweep of the mechanical, spring drive over a dead-beat seconds movement, from an aesthetic point of view.

Second effort: I think I managed to clear that up😀

PS. your evolutionary theory for our perception of time is spot on, but it could still be a necessary survival "trick" of our mind😀

Archer

Spot on - many of the reactions I've read to this watch over the last 2 days on other forums miss this fact completely, and in some ways show the shallowness of many collectors. This complication was originally for accuracy in timing, not to emulate a type of watch movement that didn't exist at the time.

As you know I was very temped by the Habring seconde morte watch you had for sale not long ago...

I don't think this is as unusual in the marketplace as some might think. JLC is just joining the list of makers who already produce this complication. At Baselworld alone this year 5 new watches were introduced with seconde morte complications. Makers were Jacquet Droz (lovely watch!), Angelus, Arnold & Son, Gronefeld, and Leroy.

There are others as well, such as the Habring you had/have, F. P. Journe, and I'm sure there are others I am missing. This is not the big marketing risk some think it is, because there are people who do really understand it and appreciate it for what it is.

Cheers, Al