Patek Philippe

Although there are many brands currently which produces minute repeater wristwatches, some has quarter repeaters, some have more complicated mechanisms, such as Grand Sonnerie, Petit Sonnerie. 

Some brands will use a traditional slide to activate the gong, others will have a button to press.  Different brands will pack different functions inside that one wristwatch, either a tourbillon movement, a perpetual calendar.  Even some will go the extreme of split second chronograph.

As for the gongs, some has the tradition two gongs, others has three, Cathedral gong, Westmister chime etc, etc, etc.

How does one "rate" a mintue repeater ??  By the sound of the gong ??  By the most functions packed in one time piece ??

How does one "rate" the gong sound itself ?? 
How does this sound be determined to have pass the test before leaving the factory ??
Are there certain criteria in the watch manufactoring industry which Minute Repeater Watches must have ??


Great appreciated to all who can share some light regarding this type of mechanism.

.... with repeaters.  BUT one thing I do hear people say is that all repeaters are different..... literally.  Even the same reference in a patek range, say take 2 different 3739, both would sound different..... its just complicated to regulate and adjust.

But yes very subjectively.......

Hi Tic-Toc,
I'll pick the more simple, black and white part first ;-) :

Slide or pusher....?

Firstly, let's exclude sonneries here, as they're different basically different in that regard.
There  are good  reasons for each solution, a pusher is much easier to get sealed, so if
speaking of ww cases may be the way to go if  one intends to achieve a decent water tightness or
better protection against dust and humidity. There are  ways to achieve this with a slide, but needs a lot of space.
The downside of a pusher, the "travel" of  a pusher naturally is very limited, i.e. the more you'd need the more it would
"stick out" of the case which can easily destroy the design. With a short travel the actual force neede to activate the
striking train is inevitably high - not something I'd be happy with in a tiny mechanism overloaded movement.

With a slide, it's easier to integrate in the case outline and there's much more travel available, thus lower forces and in general slides tend to give a smoother more precise feel. Sealing is critical and within limiited space almost impossible. 
Sonneries, btw, usually have a seperate power source (i.e. a second mainspring barrel, or in case of FPJ sonnerie a part of the  going trains mainspring is used) - so hey only need a tiny force and short travle to trigger the sonnerie/repeating - with repeaters the slide or pusher also winds up the power source/mainspring for  striking one time.

One, two, three gongs... ?

A "normal" repeater is  equippped with two gongs with different pitch. Gong "1" is striking the hours, quarters are normally a double chime with (using two gongs "1" and "2") and if a minute repeater the  minutes are using gong "2". 
A so called "carillon" would strike the quarters on three pitches (gongs) as a "triple". 
Westminster is a  four gong chime. It's obvious that the more gongs, the more complicated the striking mechanism has to be and as even two gongs are not easy to fit into a ww movement, a Westminster chime integrated in a ww is a real treat.
As a side note and to be really picky, a real   Westminster chime would be a different sequence of the four for any quarter:
1st quarter 4,3,2,1
2nd quarter 2,4,3,1, 2,3,4,2
3rd quarter 4,2,3,1, 1,3,4,2, 4,3,2,1
4th quarter 2,4,3,1, 2,3,4,2, 4,2,3,1, 1,3,4,2
Notes: 1=D 2=G  3=A  4=B
That would need quite some "mechanical programming" and I'm curious who'll be the first to integrate into a ww

As for the different kinds of gongs, early (often  verge escapement ) pocket watches used real bells, mounted around the back of the movement and attached to the case - the sound was magnificent, but space is an issue. Also, those cases often were pierced by fancy engravings and ornaments - not really "selaed" but good for the sound.

Later on the "wire" gongs surrounding the movement on the outer circumference were introduced, a fastening "block" normally attached to the movement by screws and the "wire" protruding on one or two sides from this block - normally one time around the movement. Cathedral gongs are describing more than one revolution, sometimes full two around the movement. An interesting solution especially for small diameter movements as there is the obvious and direct correlation of length to pitch - just like a violin string. To reach a charming lower pitch the extra length of the second turn can be very helpfulll.


As for the rating part of your question - that's almost impossible to answer, but here are my personal preferences:

I'd prefer a "good sounding" minute repeater any time compared to  a lesser sounding, more complicated piece. Good sounding, that's  most difficult matter alone, maybe even the most difficult one. 
Personally pitch is very important for me and it's already hard to find a repeater which is "in tune" .
Clarity, and purity is very important to me  as well - now if that's combined with decent volume and not too nisy regulator - that would be heaven
I'd never set volume above clarity, and pitch though -  I read somewhere a repeater enthusiastically described as the "worlds loudest  ww repeater..." even adding some dB measurements - presonally I  find this as describing a great red wine by naming it's alcohol content

I'll stop now - I'm sure it's already a bit crazy and, god beware  boring....

Best regards
Suitbert 



 

 

Mr. Suitbert, please continue, it is MOST enlightnening.

I certainly agree with you when it comes to choosing a certain brand, we tend to make decisions quite subjectively.  But there is more to just the brand when buying a Minute Repeater ( MR ) wristwatch ( ww ).  If anyone were to consider buying a MR, $$ is not on the mind.

Lets continue with your earlier discussion.

In various types of MR wristwatches, MR tends to give out a very distintive and unique sound of their own, is it due to the thickness of the wire ?  Or because of the size or weight of the hammers ??  Would a different material used for the hammers creates a better sound ?  Most hammers uses stainless steel as the material, but would ( lets say ) Titanium be better ??  What about the strength of the spring when the gong strikes the wire ... also a factor ??

Earlier mr. JC mentioned that even with the same brand, same reference, the gong sound of the ww can varies .. why ??

Some MR will strike faster than others .. what is the cause of that ??

In terms of material, many brand uses the same case material for their case back, some uses sapphire glass  on the back, does that also deviates the quality of the sound ??  Earlier posts, many states Stainless steel is the best material use for outer case, to achieve the best sound.

http://www.seikospringdrive.com/sonnerie/index.html

You will need to turn up the volume to truly appreciates the sound.

mr. Suitbert, what is your opinion on this MR ??

thank you again .....

It is same for MRs.

Just to name a few...different hammer weight, striking force, how "tight" the gong is attached to the movement, lenght /curvature of the gongs.... etc, etc... A very tiny difference could make the sound very differently.

Regarding the speed of striking, there is a regulating device in the MR to control (i.e. regulate) how fast the striking should be.

Different (case) materials would make the MR sound differently. It is because of the "resonance" property of the material and how it transmit sound wave. The speed of sound is different in different metals/materials.

IMO, there is a lot of "luck" involved in finding an excellent MR... especially the MR is made by hands.

Cheeers

My favorite topic! Suitbert, I remember talking to you about regulators in minute repeaters and you mentioned that the centrifugal regulator used to be considered a "less elegant" design.  Patek Philippe has used this type of regulator and made it into what is widely considered the purest sounding repeater out there.  The difference of this type of regulator can be characterized as having a "whirring" sound rather than a "buzzing" sound of the anchor type regulators.  Is the Patek design of this type of regulator similar to the ones in the IWC Portugese MR and the JLC Reverso MR? 
During our trip to visit AP in LeBrassus, I've noticed that AP claims to have a noise reduction solution to their anchor type regulator. I noticed that on the MR's that I saw at the AP factory, they have this little L-shaped wire sticking out of the post that the anchor repeatedly knocks on.  Is this the device that reduces the buzzing sound?  I recall seeing this wire in a Breguet MR too and that one was really noisy.  So is there any clue as to what this AP solution is?
Thanks again, Suitbert.

Here's a good article on the regulators:
http://culture.hautehorlogerie.org/IMG/pdf/sound_machine.pdf

Regarding the quality of MR, I would like to add the following too:

- The speed: how long does it take for the MR to complete all the strikes. I had heard some MRs that are really quick. Personally, I like a slow one. It is like tasting a fine wine. You don't want to drink the whole bottle in a minute. Right?

- How the MR striking mechanism is regulated.... I believe most noise of MR came from the MR regulator. However, I was told (by a reputable watchmaker) that the traditional regulator (even it may be a bit noiser than the new style one) is, actually, better. I don't know why and don't know the validity of this statement...

BTW, all the fellow purists, please do share your MR if you do own one. I think most of us would love to see its photos, movie, a sound files.

Cheers!

thank you all

I have longed for a minute repeating wristwatch ever since I was introduced to the Patek Philippe brand by a successful businessman / client many years ago, after he had taken delivery of his new yellow gold ref. 3974, and was proudly wearing it.  I was blown away by the musical ting-tang of the repeater, and the under-stated simplicity of the watch's design.

Since then, I have considered many minute-repeating wristwatches by a multitude of Swiss manufacturers, and always come back to the same conclusion.  PP has no rivals!!  The repeaters "within my realistic budget" (such as the J-L-C Reverso, IWC Portugueser, IWC Grande Complication, AP Shaeffer, etc.) were a great disappointment as the chimes sounded very "tinny" and "insignificant".  

The Patek repeaters I have had the opportunity to handle have all had a rich resonance and depth of sound which makes them very pleasing on the ear.  I am aware that unofficially PP sources say that 18ct gold repeaters "sound best", but I haven't really found any difference between gold and platinum watches.

One day, maybe...!