We all know that not every Resonance has worked as intended for their owners
Several members here have had that direct experience, and for certain it must be frustrating.
I’ve also heard stories of others with similar issues, important collectors and customers of Journe. The Resonance does not discriminate!
Talking to some of this temperamental behavior of the Resonance, F.P. has said that for the watch to work the tolerance for even the tiniest of errors or deviations in the initial assembly is very very low, more so than any other movement.
Each balance wheel must deviate by less than 5 secs in all six positions.
The shape of the balance spring must be almost identical. Every setting must be precise.
If one component part, or gear, is not to standard the this risks the entire system.
Again, this may seem obvious and intuitively it should be the case for all watches. But Journe stressed that for the Resonance these sensitivities were amplified.
In general my take away from any interaction with Journe is that sometimes it’s more art than science, by that I mean he often responds in generalities instead of details, a little vague perhaps when you really want specific answers.
But that was always the charm here; if I wanted graphs and data on chronometric performance of a single tourbillon versus a double versus a triple versus an inclined double then I can go ask Stephen Forsay and he’d have a presentation, numbers , graphs and all, right there in his pocket. (This is not a slight on GF, horses for courses that’s all).
I’m genuinely excited to see the new Resonance despite the fact that I will never own one (unless I somehow win the Powerball, National Lottery, Lotería Nacional, Mark Six etc). This in itself is unusual for me as once something is out of range I generally pay little attention (and that has been true for other Journe watches too). But this one is different because for me the Resonance is Journe. Not the CB, the Resonance.