An incredible piece and surely one of the most important watches to appear for auction in some time. I’m a huge devotee of Daniels’ work and it’s quite an achievement that you have three pieces for sale next month! I hope these realise their true worth…I’ll be watching (sadly not bidding 😕) with great interest 💜
I had a friend who had a George Daniels wrist watch. He claimed it was made for him. If George only made two wrist watches that would be a very rare watch indeed.😮
I own a Seamaster Diver and a Planet Ocean. Both contain the Coaxial escapement developed by this English legend. I'd never want a watch without a coaxial
0:44 If a man seeking perfection, who is almost never content with his work, is seen to always wear a watch of his own design, then it could say a lot about what that watch means to him. The implication by Aurel Bacs is that Daniels believed that his Spring Case Tourbillon watch was perfect, so much so that he wore it as a daily driver. But, wearing it daily could be for a very different primary reason: 1. Sentimental: he may wear it if it was given to him, or it was with him when he experienced an important milestone in his life. E.g. he wore an Omega coaxial watch after he sold his coaxial to the company. 2. Practical: a watch may be worn to help regulate, compare, etc. to the watches he makes. He may simply wear say, a G-Shock because it's a beater watch that keeps incredibly accurate time that he can sync his mechanical watches to, without worrying about damaging it throughout the day. 3. Motivator: it could be a means to push himself to do better. Daniels may wear a watch that is made to as close to the pinnacle of haute horlogerie there is, and it could be a means to motivate him to push further and do better. 4. Occasional: he wore one watch more frequently that his other watches, because it suited his activities the most. Watch collectors often talk about having a "daily wearer" for most activities, but there are also watches that are specifically designated for: more formal/special occasions, high intensity activities (e.g. sports), vacation (i.e. not only for the beach and more active leisurely activities, but also to bring a less expensive option in case of theft/loss), and otherwise those that are designated for specific purposes (e.g. if one is constantly surrounded by high magnetism for work such as at a hospital, then one may wear a highly anti-magnetic watch for work, only to swap it for a more preferable watch for after work and the weekend). From those examples above, it's clear that a very meticulous watchmaker that is almost never satisfied with a design and creation to be worthy of a daily wearer his whole life, may not wear a watch because he believes it to be perfect. In fact, at one time he wore his ca. 1991 4-Minute Tourbillon creation on one wrist, and an Omega coaxial on the other. So, he didn't _always_ choose the ca. 1992 Spring Case Tourbillon. That may have been an exception, given the circumstances of an interview, but he only showed that he wore a watch on both wrists only after being asked (though, I believe that he expected to be asked what's on his wrist). Regardless, it goes to show that there are other reasons that he may have for wearing a watch "daily".
The flip case is nice to look at the movement, but the design lends itself to breakage. Now, it wasn't meant to be handled rough, but as someone who seeks perfection, I would think that Daniels would want a more robust solution. Obviously, JLC has a more robust solution seen in the Reverso, but I don't think that Daniels is the sort of person who would have simply copied a better solution that was widely recognized as being a JLC innovation. If he had more time, energy, and fewer projects, then maybe he would have designed it so that it could rotate 180 degrees and lock securely into the housing so that one could wear it that way.
Will probably sell for less money than a 'super rare' Rolex Daytona, or a Patek Tiffany dial stainless Nautilus, or a 'super rare' Richard Mille. The watch market is a stupid joke!
No. This should not be compared to a Picasso. It should be compared to a Vermeer. From the artistic and technique perspective, there is little overlap between Daniels and Picasso, but there is significant overlap with Vermeer. And not just that, but also with respect to the volume of Vermeer’s and Daniels’ output.
I had the exact same thought. Picasso was prodigious and deliberately industrial in his output… he also spent most of his life aiming to regain a childlike simplicity in his aesthetic, as compared to Daniel’s who was obsessed with sophisticated intricacy of every moving part. Vermeer and the enormous sense of mystery around him and his work (the camera obscura question, etc) is a much better fit indeed when looking for an analogous figure to Daniels.
Honestly one of the best watches I've ever seen imagine if the tourbillion was skeleton and you could see it from the front also, but then your going to lose the spring loaded open case back is really a piece of art 🎭 in all its glory pity he wasn't born in the 60's-70's can you imagine what watches he would be designing now with all the 3d printers just to show himself proof of concept. Thank you @NicoLeonard for putting me wide to this man and if you wanna know what putting me wide is it's basically Dublin slang for letting me know he exists and the work he did unreal all respect. David in Dublin Ireland 🇮🇪 Èire.💯❤️🙏🇮🇪🇮🇪🇮🇪☘️☘️☘️🇬🇧🇭🇲🇯🇵🇰🇷🇵🇹🇺🇲🏴🏴🇳🇴🇯🇲🇮🇪🇬🇷🇫🇷🇫🇮🇪🇺🇩🇰🇩🇪🇨🇿🇨🇴🇧🇪🇧🇧⚛️🌐
