其實我原來並不是死忠的機芯派, 但近來總覺得若不是使用自家的機芯, 這錶似乎就失去了他應有的味道, 我覺得錶廠的歷史, 傳統, 文化, 技藝, 機芯與設計, 價位, 拋光, 用料同樣重要.
我有一位朋友是死忠的Patek Philippe迷, 而且特別偏愛複雜功能表款, 印象中它有2/3的錶都是PP(他有一打以上的錶), 另外也有Jaeger LeCoultre, Zenith, Franck Muller, Revue Thommen.
Revue Thommen純粹是買來玩玩蟋蟀鬧鈴聲, 也不太在乎是不是自家機芯.但Franck Muller是買了之後才發現是使用ETA機芯, 花了二十幾萬, 買不到原汁原味的原創設計, 確實會很失望. 就好比買了BMW的車, 但裝的引擎是裕隆改裝的一樣.
我目前知道全系列產品皆使用自家機芯的廠牌如下, 但不曉得有沒有錯.
A.Lange & Sohne
Jaeger LeCoultre
Glashüte
Patek Philippe
Roger Dubuis
Seiko
Union
Vulcain
Zenith
| 發表人 | 內容 |
|---|---|
|
Robin_Wang
初級會員   |
|
|
Watchbus
腕錶巴士站長   |
發表於: 星期四 2003-05-29 01:06
依據 Timezone 的 Hans Zbinden 的說法，使用 Inhouse Movement 的錶廠有：
1. Chopard LUC 系列使用全自家製機芯，其他系列使用 ETA 或 Piquet；宣示將朝全自家製機芯錶廠發展 2. Chronoswiss 有Cal. 122 全自家製機芯，另有庫存Enicar 全自家製機芯，其他使用 Valjoux 機芯 3. Girard-Perregaux有 auto calibre GP 3000 全自家製機芯，但有一小部分錶款也使用 ，GP 3000 機芯也提供給 Daniel Roth 和 Vacheron Constantin 使用。 4. Glasshutte Original 完全使用全自家製機芯 5. IWC有 Cal. 8541 全自家製機芯，其他則使用ETA、Valjoux 和 JLC 機芯 6. Jaeger LeCoultre 完全使用全自家製機芯 7. Lange & Soehne 完全使用全自家製機芯 8. Minerva 有手上鍊 Cal. 48 全自家製機芯，其他使用Valjoux機芯 9. Patek Philippe 幾乎完全使用全自家製機芯，但有很少部分計時碼錶使用NOS Valjoux 10. Piaget 幾乎完全使用全自家製機芯，少部分計時碼錶使用 Piguet 1150 11. Rolex 幾乎完全使用全自家製機芯，除了著名的 Daytona 使用過 Zenith 的 El Primero 12. Seiko 完全使用全自家製機芯 13. Zenith 完全使用全自家製機芯 14. Audemars Piguet 完全使用全自家製機芯 (有一兩款使用 JLC 的機芯，但A. P 擁有 JLC 40% 的股權，因此算完全使用全自家製機芯？) 15. 少數蘇俄及大陸手錶也可算完全使用全自家製機芯，如果不計較其品質相當粗糙的話。 此外，近年來錶廠快速集團化的影響，應該會使得這個問題越來越複雜些，不過我倒不完全認同 "但Franck Muller是買了之後才發現是使用ETA機芯, 花了二十幾萬, 買不到原汁原味的原創設計"的說法，不妨看一下 Martin Braun 或Christiaan van der Klaauw 的絕佳腕錶，可都是ETA 改的呢! |
|
changcarl
初級會員  |
|
|
Flyback
訪客 |
發表於: 星期六 2003-10-18 05:13
what about Breguet, Blancpain and other elite brands? I think breguet own Lamania (sp?), so does it consider in house? Thanks in advance for answering.
|
|
swaylone
訪客 |
發表於: 星期六 2003-10-18 12:45
1.Breguet既已經把Lemania全部整併,稱為自家機芯亦無不妥.
2.Blainpain使用Frederic Piguet的機芯,也跟Lemania合作,反正都同屬Swatch集團 ,是不是也可叫 in -house movement?或許有人會講那麼反正Swatch集團內使用ETA的都也可以叫"in-house"囉?!ㄝ...這一點我就無法置評了. 3.只擁有一枚自家機芯也算的話,VC的Cal.1400,Revue Thommen的Cal.GT12, Vulcain的Cal.120,Cartier的9901MC/9902MC/9701MC,Longines的L990(雖然後來權利賣給Lemania),Omega的Cal.2500/3313/3303,Parmigiani的Cal.331/11001,IWC另一枚的Cal.5000,甚至Ebel的Cal.137也算是,都可入籍仙班啦.又忽然想到Philippe Dufour的手上鏈小三針是不是也算. 以上拉哩拉雜一串已使我搜索枯腸,錶友是否知道其它滄海遺珠呢? 4.Roger Dubuis據雜誌寫道已有九枚自製機芯,若是屬實那可是厲害,短短幾年間有這等實力不容小覷.只是Roger伯伯投奔Franck Muller後以後還有這等光景嗎? 而Franck Muller固然有些驚世鉅作,但也有不少的搶錢產品,是不是也因為如此讓 Franck老兄離家出走呢? |
|
Flyback
訪客 |
發表於: 星期二 2003-10-21 11:55
swaylone,
Thanks a lot for your response. I think Lemania is an exclusive supplier for Breguet, so it's fair to say that they are in-house. But ETA... nah... 
The following is a post from thepurists.com: http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/message?forumid=234648&messageid=1064256822 you don't have to agree with the ranking, but I think the guy who start that thread did a pretty good job in terms of starting a discussion. With my limited knowledge, I think it's fair. |
|
swaylone
訪客 |
發表於: 星期四 2003-10-23 19:44
Hi Flyback,
謝謝提供了一篇有趣的文章. 的確,當看到那些獨立製錶師的作品,那種夢幻逸品時,管它是不是ETA ebauches,在那些巨匠巧手下早已脫胎換骨,直嘆人間那得幾回聞. 一個回覆者也回得好,"THe more you know about it,the more you realize how little you know and the less you're willing to say about it definitively." 我從不知道機芯到很在乎in-house movement,到現在只是別再買到重複的機芯就好了.反正錶海無涯,銀彈有限,計較甚麼,計較得完麼?!對我而言,例如2892-A2加上 AGENHOR AGH2302逆跳模組就可以視為不同機芯了,更別提Ulysse Nardin一堆 頗具精采創意的傑作,他們對錶壇的供獻何曾少過只因沒有一顆in-house base movement !這樣看待錶豈非更有趣. |
|
flyback
訪客 |
發表於: 星期四 2003-10-23 22:48
Swaylone,
Sorry for not being able to type Chinese. Hope you don't mind. May I ask how you can know so much about the movement models and who's using which? Is there any book that you'd recommend a newbie like me to read? I just want to learn more about it, but I couldn't learn anything from those movement manufacturers site. Even though I'm a newbie, and you may not like to hear this, I quickly fell for the in-house gang. I think I'd appreciate the artwork more if they make it from start to end. Because you don't see painters like Van Gogh would ask someone to paint the background for him first. Sure he doesn't make his own paint and brushes (those are just tools), but he was still the sole contributor to his artwork. I do agree with you that, if they modified the hack out of an ETA movement, then they should be credited too. But ETA is still ETA. It's kind of like some folks who like to modify a Honda Civic (or even a BMW) and make it super fast (this is just an analogy, and I don't mean to offend anyone), but at the end, you still can't change the essence of the car. In this case, it's a bit different, b/c you actually get to build, or rebuild it yourself, and you can be proud of your work. But at the end, a Ferrari is a Ferrari, and a Honda is a Honda. Again, this is just an analogy, and I'm not trying to argue about cars. So back to the point, if we are going to pay USD$ 2000 for a watch, ETA or not doesn't seem to be a problem. But I think anything that cost over $5000, I'd expect a lot more in-house. Seriously, if you get to get a USD$46,000 PP 5040 (a beautiful watch), I don't think you'll feel so swell if it's a ETA movement. Or if you have the money to get a Breguet Tourbillon, would you want it to be made by ETA? I suppose the prestige counts (a lot) too, b/c someone brought up a good point in another forum, saying Seiko do everything in-house too, and they do a good job at polishing as well. But would you pick a Seiko over a Rolex? Anyway, I'm just a newbie, and enjoy discussion like this. Don't mean to get all philosophical on you. I guess at the end, each movement has a soul, and that's something you can't change. And I think in-house movements reflects the brand image and character more so than ebausches. my 2 cents. |
|
swaylone
訪客 |
發表於: 星期五 2003-10-24 20:06
Flyback,
如果你是住在外國應該有更多的書雜誌可以買,像Wristwatch Annual之類也很具參考價值.在臺灣也有幾本雜誌可以看.當然我接觸腕錶雖不長久,但是也有約四年的時間,有時看到某些資料還是要做做筆記,免得忘記或下次想到一時找不到資料. 賞錶其實沒甚麼對錯,重要是自己高興就好.對自製機芯偏愛也沒甚麼不對,畢竟我自己也經歷過,即便要買齊所有in-house movement也不是件容易的事,夠你琢磨好幾年了. 腕錶與藝術品的比較以前也有人討論過,我就再簡單地說一遍.in-house movement雖說可以代表某家錶廠的實力,但因牽涉到形象,成本的問題,是不是每家錶廠都要弄出自家機芯也不一定. 好,今天這家錶廠的技師設計出自家機芯,哪天那名技師跳槽到別家錶廠也再搞出一顆機芯,你說這份技藝是屬於那名技師或那錶廠的?又瑞士製錶分工極細,各種零件都有專門廠家在做,機芯也不例外.除了幾家大廠外,小型的工作室也有不少.於是有的製錶大廠或是跟這種工作室技術合作;或是乾脆買下專利技術,甚至於買下工作室,然後順理成章地成為自己的''in-house" movement.這就是現代的商業行為,跟幾百年前一脈相承,技藝相傳的情況早已不同,不必把它 想得太浪漫.要知道廠商刻意營造出來的氣氛是有附帶價值的,另外要跟消費者收錢的!多少 Prestige brand倒閉幾十年上百年了,近年來紛紛借屍還魂,強調傳統.他們看中的是你我的口袋,而真正的古老傳統早隨它們的老祖宗入土為安久矣.如果真要那種感覺的話,大廠我會選PP, 小廠就只能找一些獨立製錶師啦.像Philippe Dufour簡易小三針手上鍊一只訂價180萬買的就是獨立工匠古老工藝. 工藝品與藝術品是不同的.再精密稀罕的鐘錶只要做了兩只,大家一定會認為兩只是一樣的東西;而梵谷畫了好幾幅向日葵卻從來沒有人認為是一模一樣的作品.至於比喻成汽車改裝,同樣以前也有人這樣說過,只是我個人不太贊同這種比喻.Civic改到400hp仍然看得出是Civic,不會誤認為Porsche或Ferrari;但是機芯經大師級的一改,基因還在,面貌內涵早就判若兩人雲泥之別! 至於Soul of movement的問題便不是我等philosophaster所能瞭解囉! |
|
flyback
訪客 |
發表於: 星期五 2003-10-24 22:30
Swaylone,
Great response as usual. I agree with what you say and have a much better understanding now. Because I just started getting into this stuff (literally, 3-4 weeks ago), so I only know about the history and general corporate structure of some of the bigger or more well known shops. And I have not yet read any book or magazine. I've been hanging out in forums like this one and just trying to absorb. I think your reasoning is very fair and genuine. I know we can't compare watches to artworks or cars completely, but it's hard to put things like this in words and drawing a close enough analogy may be a better way to get my points across. Altough I mentioned that I'm leaning towards the in-house gang, but I think I'm still at a stage which I'm not a 100% sure exactly what I want or what I care. I guess that's why I'm hear and trying to find people like yourself to discuss this with me. I think the most appealing part about being in-house is that you know your watch is different than other brands. I don't know if they make their own screws and rubies, but at least I know that's their design and they put it together. I guess it makes me feel exclusive. I admit is mostly psychological and superficial to a certain extend, but I'm dumb in that sense. And you are right, I'm being romantic with this kinda stuff. 
And I think everyone agrees that, at the end, it's all about personal preferece. And speaking of a soul, I think most craftworks do have a soul, in an abstractive sense anyway. Even though it doesn't have any life (what's that anyway), but it behaves differently. However, I can't give you quotes from Descartes, Nietzsche, or Kant to elaborate my point. So, I guess I'm a philosophaster myself too.
How did you learn about those small workshops? Did you read it in the Mag too? Btw, are you in the industry? I told my wife about your comment, and that's what she asked...
Question... Is it just Taiwan (or Asia), or in general that PP is the most sought brand? I've read through a few threads here, and noticed that quite a few folks listed PP as their dream. I still haven't looked into PP thoroughly, so I'm not sure why. For some reason, I don't hear nearly as much attention to VC, Breguet, Lange and other bigger and more expensive ones. As for myself, I actually find Breguet very appealing. Although I like Blancpain's Leman Flyback better than Type XX (I sometimes even feel that this is like the Mercedes A class, if you know what I mean). However, I'm not ready to spend this much at a watch yet. On the other hand, I'm totally thinking about Union Glashuette. I've been contacting them, but it's just a pain to order it. They actually make it for you after they receive the money, so it takes 6-10 weeks to get it. But they don't do business outside of EU, so service can be a pain. Anyway, could you please tell me what you know about the aforementioned 3 brands and your impression about them? Thanks, Flyback |
第1頁(共2頁)
您 無法 在這個版面發表文章
您 無法 在這個版面回覆文章
您 無法 在這個版面編輯文章
您 無法 在這個版面刪除文章
您 無法 在這個版面進行投票
您 無法 在這個版面上傳附加圖檔
您 可以 在這個版面下載已上傳之附加圖檔
您 無法 在這個版面回覆文章
您 無法 在這個版面編輯文章
您 無法 在這個版面刪除文章
您 無法 在這個版面進行投票
您 無法 在這個版面上傳附加圖檔
您 可以 在這個版面下載已上傳之附加圖檔