Opinions?

[redled]

http://ledwatchstop.com/store/matrix-retro-watch-neoclassic-p-131.html

Imo it's the nicest remake i've seen so far. Simple, clean, nice big dot matrix display (which looks like the Hamilton prototype, NICE!).

What do you think?

[collector]

Sorry, I absolutely HATE the pimple buttons on that watch!!!!

IMO - the only"new" LED watch presently worth buying is Jeff's Majestyk watch. I have both the red and blue versions; - no "pimple "buttons; watch displays seconds; nice design, good quality, great display ( the blue is truly outstanding), great band, stainless sttel construction, NO PRY BACK for battery replacement, etc etc.!!!!!

[redled]

The buttons aren't as obtrusive, or rather protrusive, than most new watches i've seen. They actually look more or less proportional to the case, but I agree that if they were closer in it would be an improvement. I'm attracted most to the accurate, understated lines, and the generous display/watch ratio, and the fact it's the only one i've ever seen to actually come close to the Hamilton prototype display, which I always felt they should have kept (I know it wasn't practical once mass produced LEDs were available).

[retroleds]

http://ledwatchstop.com/store/matrix-retro-watch-neoclassic-p-131.html
Imo it's the nicest remake i've seen so far. Simple, clean, nice big dot matrix display (which looks like the Hamilton prototype, NICE!).

What do you think?

I think the Hamilton prototype was just that, a prototype:ugly as shit, never produced for public consumption. I was thinking,"gee, could they have got those dots much farther apart." Tighten up the dots a little and it would be acceptable. Buttons are "a little" on big side. Since you were soliciting opinions.

Many of the new LEDs also seem awfully heavy on the wrist - smaller guts and heavier cases?

[redled]

I think the Hamilton prototype was just that, a prototype:ugly as shit

Hehe, well you see, the way I look at it, that's part of the charm, it looks primitive because it was primitive, as anything that is a first is bound to be. There's an honesty in that which owes apologies to no one. It is ironic as well, that something which was on the cutting edge of a new technology is nevertheless bound to look primitive because it is a first and it has no foundation on which to stand.

Firsts are always by necessity crude; they are the raw material from which the later refinements are made. You can't put them in the same category or hold them to the same standard as what comes after. Their beauty is not the beauty of refinement, it's the beauty of birth; pure, primal, and honest.

[retroleds]

"gee, could they have got those dots much farther apart." Tighten up the dots a little and it would be acceptable. Buttons are "a little" on big side" -

I was talking about that modern, not the old Hamilton prototype. And yes, early models of many things have a certain clunky charm. 8)

Good to see the activity here lately!!

[Planet-LED]

I own one similar to that one and regret having bought it. It's too big, too heavy, and hard to read. Because of the spacing of the dots, you have to really concentrate to be able to read it.

[redled]

I was talking about that modern, not the old Hamilton prototype.

ooohhh...but, in either case, for better or worse, you have to admit it resembles that first display. I remember seeing the Hamilton in the (Pop. Sci?) magazine article and I loved the primitive/modern look of the display. I always wished there was a watch that looked like that. I'll have to see how this watch compares in the real world (although i've never seen the Hamilton in the real world either-doh!) But hopefully they haven't doctored it too bad on the site.

sh*t. I just noticed something on the web site. In the upper picture, of the single watch, each 'segment' is composed of 5 dots. In the lower picture, of two watches, each segment is composed of 3 dots. Of course, the upper picture is much easier to read, but I bet the real watch is the one with three dots per segment, and the the 5 dot picture is doctored. Damn, I hate when websites do that. I'll have to send them an email for clarification.

[Fitron]

you are right Retroled, watches are getting bigger - it's a fashion thing according to my wife's magazines - big and chunky is sooooooo in for those who care to be sheep. Personally I like clunky beasts but there are limits and I think MJs approached the envelope with his M-I.

Beauty of birth ? Screaming and lots of bodily fluids and shouts of "see if I EVER let you near me again". Oh and the crushed hand - it still hurts when it gets cold.....thank the lord for Entonox. :D

[redled]

Beauty of birth ? Screaming and lots of bodily fluids and shouts of "see if I EVER let you near me again". Oh and the crushed hand - it still hurts when it gets cold.....thank the lord for Entonox. :D

Well, you know, nothing's 100%.

[Fitron]

HD says that you have to concentrate to read it. I seem to remember reading somewhere that when the first pulsars came out that people would "interact" with time due to pushing the button. They were supposed to have a sense of involvement and this display is just taking that to its logical conclusion in a sense. It's certainly true that digital readouts require more effort than analogue (tests done on aircraft pilots) to read.


Of course it could be shoddy design :D The originol Hamilton readout seems way more legible than this one.

[redled]

Of course it could be shoddy design :D The originol Hamilton readout seems way more legible than this one.

I'm assuming you consider the 3-dot per segment to be the actual display of this watch. As I said, there are two different displays depicted on the website. One has 5 dots per segment and the other has 3. I have no problem reading the one with 5, in fact that's what I bought the watch based on. It was only later I noticed the dicrepancy between the two pictures. I sent an email asking for clarification on this, but I would be somewhat surprised to find out the 5-dot is the actual display.

I have to admit, i'm somewhat annoyed. If it is 3 dots per segment the other picture is blatantly misleading. I'll have to wait until I get an official answer though.

Oh BTW Fitron, how many LED's per segment did the Hamilton have? I can't find my copy of the magazine article.

[retroleds]

Oh BTW Fitron, how many LED's per segment did the Hamilton have? I can't find my copy of the magazine article.

F.F. has gone to bed(that what he told me an hour ago..

ANyway, 3 LEDS on the horizontals, two on the vertical.....but since these were ":132 discrete LEDs" there were some exceptions to that rule,e.g."1" was 6 vertically. "5" had two on the bottom horizontal with one on the horizontal making the end of the bottom curve(at left).

visit www.oldpulsars.com "Men's Models" for the picture.

[redled]

Well, I got the watch, and a response from the seller. The seller thanked me for pointing out the discrepancy, saying he was not aware of it, and confirming that there are 3 LEDs per segment. Hopefully the picture will be changed or taken down soon.

It's bigger than I thought. The webpage had not given any measurements. It's 37mm wide and 43.75mm vertically from lug to lug.

It has a screw-on back

The finish is a fine bead or sand-blast, not the brushed finish the website had claimed - another discrepancy between the real watch and the description. This sort of fine blasted finish picks up scratches very easily.

Perhaps the worst descrepancy of all is that the display is not truly red, it's more like an orange. I don't know if this is due to the crystal, the LED diffusers ( at least they appear to be small, individual diffusers when seen close), or the LED's themselves, but the effect is that the display appears much more orange than the traditional red display, which is how it's shown on the webpage.

I'm uncertain as to what to do. There are many descrepancies between how the watch was presented on the webpage and the actual watch. At the same time, I do like the watch, i'm just not certain I would have bought it had it been more accurately described. Probably not.

I need advice here. What would you do in this circumstance? I'm sure I could work someting out with the seller, I don't know if I should just accept it as it is, return it, or try to reach some middle ground. Advice?

Steve

[rewolf]

AFAICS, the possibilities are:
1. ask for a refund,
2. re-sell on ebay (probably for much less than you paid),
3. open it, have a look at the LEDs anf if it's them that aren't truly red, solder in better ones,
4. accept it :wink:

Personally, I think I'd try 3 and then resign to 4 :wink:

[retroleds]

Just an additional thought along the same line as rewolf's #3:
They probably are just white LEDs with a thin orange-red diffuser(some of the "Adidas" style drivers use this crap). You could try it without the diffuser(if there is one) or replace it with a deep red diffuser(the stuff they use for stage lights is perfect). I'd personally take #4(return) considering the display is not your only problem with it. Probably heavy as all heck too :?

[collector]

No question in my mind - the only option would be to return it !!

[rewolf]

... They probably are just white LEDs with a thin orange-red diffuser(some of the "Adidas" style drivers use this crap)...

White LEDs with colored diffuser?
If that's true, it is simply bullsh*t. Using LEDs with the desired color right away is cheaper (white are the most expensive LEDs), looks better, is *much* brighter and needs less voltage to drive.
White LEDs are phosphor-coated blue LED chips - the phosphor converts blue to white, and the diffuser would filter out most of the white spectrum again. That *can't* be efficient.

[Majestyk]

NO! The white LED segments of the Adidas LED's lit up red. The diffuser was only there to cover up the white unlit segments so you couldn't see them through the lens. I pealed if off on a few of their watches and the red LED display was much sharper.


M

[retroleds]

MJ - the "Adidas style" driver I pulled apart recently had yellowish-white LEDs...only the lens and the diffuser gave it a "Red" cast. Then again, it's my understanding that there are at least two different modules between the various "Adidas-like" driver's watches out there. Anyone else pulled these apart?

[redled]

MJ - the "Adidas style" driver I pulled apart recently had yellowish-white LEDs...only the lens and the diffuser gave it a "Red" cast.

retroleds, did the effect of the filter over these LEDs cause them to closely match the red color of the 70's LEDs or was there a noticeable difference?

In this new watch I started the thread about the red color of the LED's is quite different from the traditional red LEDs from the 70's, and even from what are considered standard red LEDs of today, which match the 70's closely. These LEDs are much more orange than pure red.

[Majestyk]

MJ - the "Adidas style" driver I pulled apart recently had yellowish-white LEDs...only the lens and the diffuser gave it a "Red" cast. Then again, it's my understanding that there are at least two different modules between the various "Adidas-like" driver's watches out there. Anyone else pulled these apart?

That's very strange! When I sold these, none of the ones I had were like this. They had red LED's, diffuser or no diffuser.

M[/quote]