Dr No[Moderator Omega - Wristscan]
34793
I beg to disagree, gentlemen . . .
May 25, 2009,14:05 PM
. . . being a devotee of Omega since it's inception, my feeling is that the development of Omega's aesthetics has followed a linear path and that today's models are lineal descendants of their forbearers. In a purely abstract sense, one could make the argument that a 1959 Seamaster bears scant resemblence to today's model (especially mechanically), but when viewed year by year, I simply don't feel a clear break anywhere along the way. Compare the current co-axial cal 8601 Aqua Terra Teck annual calendar to the day-date cal 752 Seamasters of yesteryear . . .
. . . one can focus on the differences, of course, but taking the broader view there are many similarities without the excrescent flourishes that others (Blancpain and Zenith being examples) have grafted onto their latest offerings. The unadorned bezel, three-link bracelet, horned lugs, spike indices, arrow hour hand - all these elements existed in the recent and more distant past. Even if the surface of the dial is unique, there were certainly elaborate Seamasters in times past as well. We can agree to disagree, of course, but I certainly don't feel disconnected to Omega's past when viewing their current models; their willingness to offer the same basic model in two or sometimes three different sizes to accommodate a consumer's preference is an indication of sensitivity to individual tastes that is rare in the industry, and that I find commendable . . . cordially, Art