Living with a "full numbers" analog dial watch
This dial design is still the best for analog watches.
An example of a "full numbers" analog watch is the Casio MW240. Yes, it's cheap. But it does have every hour of the day on the dial, 1 through 12. You would be surprised how difficult it is sometimes just to find a dial design like this.
Part of the reason for the recent purchase of my Casio MTP-V006 is because it has a full numbers dial. This is without question my favorite analog dial design because it is one of the fastest to read.
To be clear, full numbers means every hour is displayed. If hour 3 or 6 isn't there because of a date window, then it doesn't count as a full numbers dial.
What's supposed to happen is that if you want a full numbers dial, it should be as easy as searching for field watch and just picking out the one you think looks the best. But as you'll see, that's not always exactly what you get.
Yes, you will see some full numbers dial watches there. But you're also going to see a bunch with complicated chronograph dials, date windows blocking hour 3, partial numbers dials, minute track numbers where the hours should be, and so on.
A true field watch is supposed to have something like the dial design of the Casio MW240, as in ultra-legible with high contrast on an uncluttered dial. Strangely, there's really not that many field watches that match the legibility of the MW240. Funny how a dirt cheap $20 watch is actually more legible that other field watches that sell for much, much more.
I need those hour numbers
I definitely need all those hour numbers on the dial, otherwise at certain times of the day I have to stare at the dial longer to figure out what time it is. That may not sound like a big deal, but it gets annoying having to repeatedly do that.
For whatever reason, I just can't get used to a symbols-only or any other analog dial that doesn't have all the hour numbers on it.
Some watch wearers are totally okay with hour markers that are all symbols. Most dive watches are like that where almost all the hour markers are just big dots with no numbers present. I owned one of those before and just couldn't get along with it.
Digital is, of course, the easiest of the easy to read because it's nothing but numbers for the time. But analog looks better, even if it's just a cheap MW240.
Although I've been a digital watch wearer for years, I've purposely been wearing the MTP-V006 just to see if I could live with it. Yes, I can. And it's mainly because of the all numbers dial. Reading the time is easy with all the hours there. Easy as a digital? No. But I've finally found an analog dial design that works for me, meaning I can wear it daily and not be annoyed by the display.
On a final note, I would get an MW240 if it weren't for the fact it's slightly goofy-big for my wrist with its 43.6mm diameter. If it were a 38mm (which is what my MTP-V006 is), I would have already bought one.
Will an Epiphone Les Paul appreciate in value like a Gibson Les Paul?
No. Let's find out why.
I have owned an Epiphone Les Paul guitar before. Two, actually. One that was dirt cheap and another that was mid-priced. Both were decent for what they were. But I knew neither would ever command any sort of decent resale value.
These are the reasons why Epiphone Les Paul guitars do not appreciate in value like Gibson Les Pauls do.
Not made in USA
A big part of what guitar players lust after with a Gibson LP is the fact it's American made. Epiphone has a very specific factory where they make all their Les Pauls, and it's obviously not based in the United States.
While absolutely true you can get an Epi Les Paul with 100% American electronics in it (they've been doing that for a while now on upper end models,) the guitar itself is not made in the USA, and that detracts from its resale value.
Purists don't believe Epiphone makes "a real Les Paul"
If an Epi LP exactly matches a Gibson LP in every measurement, every wood choice, every electronic and even every screw, it doesn't matter. Purist Gibson snobs will never consider any LP by Epiphone to be "the real thing".
Furthermore, guitars buyers will not spend extra on LPs made by Epiphone. They simply won't do it. The perceived value of an Epi LP is lower than what they sell for new, and that's not about to change any time soon.
Of course, there will always be That Guy who says he was able to sell an Epi LP for good money. He's either lying through his teeth, or he found a sucker. Or he currently has an Epi LP that he's trying to sell for way too much and is desperately trying to convince buyers it's worth something when it isn't. (Usually the same kind of idiot who posts a guitar "with upgrades" on eBay, thinking that actually increases the value of a guitar when it doesn't and never did.)
Epiphone Les Paul will always be seen as second banana to the Gibson
There's only one original Les Paul, and it's made by Gibson. That's the name on the headstock people want, and that will never change.
I'm not arguing which is the better guitar. I'm saying that when you think Les Paul, you think Gibson first and always. Not Epiphone. Never Epiphone.
Guitarists buy Epiphone Les Paul guitars because they want a Les Paul that's made like a Les Paul with all the Les Paul features without the Gibson Les Paul price. It's what you buy when you desire LP character over brand.
It is a foolish decision to buy an Epiphone Les Paul guitar as a collector's piece, because the likelihood of it appreciating in value is very low.
Do any Epiphone electric guitars appreciate in value?
An Epiphone brand guitar that stands a much better chance of appreciating in value is whenever it's a model Gibson does not make. More often that not that means looking at Epiphone Archtop series. As in Sheraton, Casino, Riviera, Wildkat and Uptown Kat.
Archtop models by Epiphone exclusive to their brand only are the guitars that are not second banana to Gibson since their isn't a Gibson equivalent. This means if you want one, you must buy Epiphone brand to get it. Exclusivity counts where value is concerned. You can get that with Epiphone, just not with a Les Paul.
Squier Affinity or Ibanez GIO?
Where low budget guitars are concerned, which to go with depends on a few factors.
Squier Affinity series and Ibanez GIO series guitars are more or less priced evenly, give or take 30 dollars. We're talking about a price range of roughly $200 to $230.
As far as which is the better guitar, overall I give it to Ibanez because it's the most compatible.
I'll explain.
If all you want is the guitar that is "most compatible" with amps, effects and recording to phone or PC, Ibanez GIO is the better choice.
I can say confidently that an Ibanez GIO will work with any amp and/or effect you have. In addition, having this guitar also makes shopping for amps and effects a lot easier. Why? The pickups. They are voiced in a way that sounds right with just about anything.
However, if you're going after clean tone, country twang, funk or anything else where clear clean tone matters, a Squier Affinity Strat or Tele will destroy the Ibanez.
HOWEVER... Squier Affinity Strats and Teles are not compatible with all amps and effects. In fact, there are many amps and pedals which Affinity guitars would just sound outright awful with. Careful attention needs to be given to what sounds better with a Squier Affinity series guitar and that's just the way it is.
Knowing this, why would anyone bother with an Affinity Strat or Tele in the first place knowing it doesn't work with everything? Answer: Tonal character. As in a character that only Strats and Teles have that's very specific, and to many very pleasing to the ear.
In the end, if just starting out and just want something that works with everything, get the Ibanez GIO. But if you lean more towards clean tone with that specific tonal character Strats and Teles have, get the Squier Affinity.
Classy minimalist watch - Casio MTP-V006
This is definitely one of the best looking Casio analog watches I've ever seen.
To begin, this watch does come in several colors and styles. The one I have is the MTP-V006D-7B2 model.
Here are the other models for this particular style their respective colorways:
- MTP-V006L-1B2 - Steel with black dial and black leather strap
- MTP-V006L-1B3 - Steel with black dial and brown leather strap
- MTP-V006L-3B - Steel with gray dial and green leather strap
- MTP-V006D-1B2 - Steel with black dial and steel bracelet
- MTP-V006D-2B - Steel with blue dial and steel bracelet
- MTP-V006D-7B2 - Steel with white dial and steel bracelet
- MTP-V006G-1B - Gold tone with black dial and gold tone bracelet
- MTP-V006G-7B - Gold tone with white dial and gold tone bracelet
I say "this particular style" because there is also a version of the V006 like this one where the dial looks totally different with its Roman numerals.
What's the big deal with the railroad track inner ring?
The inner ring of my MTP-V006D-7B2 has what's known as a railroad track because it actually looks like train tracks. This is not to be confused with railroad watches a.k.a. railroad chronometers like those from Ball Watch. The railroad track thing in this instance is just for appearance's sake...
...but oh, what a nice appearance it is.
Certain luxury timepieces do make use of a railroad track on the dial. A. Lange & Sohne uses one on the 1815 model. Other luxury timepieces with a railroad track are Rolex Day-Date, Omega Railmaster, IWC Portugieser and several others.
While the railroad track on the Casio is an inner ring and not one that "hugs" the perimeter of the dial, it's still a very fancy look on a watch that sells for under 40 bucks.
White dial is the best option
The first reason I went with the white is specifically because the date wheel is also in white, resulting in a monochromatic elegant look. The only time any other color appears on the dial is on Sunday when the day reads SUN in red.
The second reason is that the look of this dial strongly resembles old Swiss mechanical stopwatches. My dad had one of these that looked similar to this. And I'm genuinely surprised this specific look hasn't been used more for wristwatch dial design. There was a time when a lot of people used mechanical stopwatches. The vast majority of them had a stark white dial with printed black indices. Some had red markings on them too. It was never anything fancy because it was built for function first and always.
Casio, intentionally or not, totally nailed the look of an old Swiss mechanical stopwatch with the white dial MTP-V006D-7B2.
Yes, this is minimalist
Some people think just about anything by Movado is the ultimate for a minimalist watch. True? Yes. But there is such a thing as having too much minimalism, and Movado timepieces trip that line. Movado does make great fashion timepieces and I don't take that away from them. But Movado's whole thing is fashion and not function first.
Then there are watches that have so much going on that you can barely read the time on them. The best (worst?) example I know of this is the Seiko Flightmaster. Wow, does that thing have a ridiculously complicated dial. You thought the Breitling Navitimer was complicated? Seiko will one-up you there with the Flightmaster. Granted, some guys like really complicated (but functional) dials and think that's looks cool. I can't do that. I need a dial I can read quickly.
...and that's why I say the MTP-V006 is minimalist. It's more complicated than a Movado but nowhere near as busy as a Seiko Flightmaster. If there were a rating system of 1 to 10 on how complicated/busy a watch dial is, the MTP-V006 would be right around a 4. Most chronographs are a 7 and then after that comes the stuff with the slide rule bezel on it where I'm amazed anybody could actually read the time on one of those.
A few notes for things I didn't say in the video
The bracelet has brushed links but with polished thin "stripes." Looks nice. Had they went with any more shine however, that would have been too much. Casio fortunately knew when to stop and got the look of the bracelet correct.
The back of the case is totally boring and very plain. Obviously there is no exhibition case back since it's a quartz movement, and all you see back there is a stamped Casio logo with some basic movement reference information.
100% of the watch case is polished with the exception of the case back.
The case is a snap-back, meaning it will be annoying to change the battery in this thing when that time comes.
All printing on the dial is raised. It's a light raise, but still, that is better than just flat printing.
The outline around the date window is also raised ink.
I dig the look of this watch a lot, and oh yes, this is a keeper for sure.
To GPS or not to GPS?
I bought two more GPSes. This is getting ridiculous - but I felt it was necessary.
When I say GPS, in other parts of the world this is called a satnav, meaning "dedicated GPS" or "satellite navigation," meaning a navigation device that looks similar to a phone but cannot receive calls or texts. All the map data is preloaded on one of these things either internally or using a memory card, and its one job is navigation. One of these things works by use of its internal GPS antenna to get its position literally from space, then use that in combination with the map data to tell you where you are and give you directions.
It still amazes me to this day that most people don't realize that GPS does not require any sort of paid subscription whatsoever. You have already paid for it. The GPS satellite grid in space? Paid for by taxpayer dollars. There are no fees to use it. The only thing you used to have to pay for are map data upgrades, but both Garmin and TomTom have been offering that for free for years. The only time you actually pay for a map upgrade is on really old GPSes, but with Garmin you can opt to use OpenStreetMap map data instead for a 100% totally free maps update. I wrote a whole book on how to do this. As long as your Garmin was made in 2008 or later, yes you can absolutely load free map data on it.
I tried using the phone. It didn't work.
To be more accurate, I should say it didn't work well enough for my needs.
I use an Android phone and tried the following apps for navigation:
- Google Maps
- Waze
- HERE We Go
- OsmAnd
- MAPS.ME
- Magic Earth
- TomTom GO
All of these work, but the only app that actually displays everything I want to see on a single screen is HERE We Go.
When navigating, HERE We Go will display:
- The map (obviously)
- Current speed
- Posted speed limit of road you're on
- The current road you're on
- The next turn you need to take
- Estimated arrival time
- Distance to destination
Out of all navigation apps, HERE We Go displays the most useful stuff all on one screen...
...but it's still not as good as a Garmin DriveSmart, hence the reason I just bought two of them used.
In addition to everything I just mentioned, a Garmin DriveSmart will also optionally display a list of upcoming turns on the same screen. Up to 4 turns are listed, and the list auto-updates with each turn taken. Garmin calls this turn list a Map Tool simply titled Turns.
The map display, colors, arrows and pretty much everything is far, far better than the HERE We Go interface.
Phones are good for traffic and walking, but terrible for car navigation
For city traffic reporting, you can't beat Waze. For city walking navigation, you can't beat Google Maps. If you have a phone with an unlimited data plan, the combination of Waze for traffic and Google Maps for walking would serve you well.
But for car navigation, it's still true that you can't beat a Garmin, and that's why I went back to using one. It has the best interface for driving, gives me all the info I need on one screen, and doesn't need a data connection to work.
Yes, I have to manually update the maps twice a year. I'm okay with that minor inconvenience.
While true I could connect my Garmin DriveSmart via Bluetooth to my phone for call and text alerts, I don't. My GPS acts just like another gauge on my car, which is how I prefer it. The last thing I need is a screen flashing call and text alerts at me when I'm navigating somewhere.
Will phones ever get better at car navigation?
Here are my thoughts on that...
Phone navigation for the car will not get truly good until data is free
The biggest problem with using the phone for car navigation isn't the phone but rather the network itself.
All phone plans should offer unlimited data across the board for no extra charge, and it should be cheap.
In the USA, T-Mobile does offer this. But it's not cheap. Their basic Essentials plan does offer unlimited talk and text along with unlimited 4G LTE data "on our network" (that's the way they put it) for $60 a month + taxes and fees on a single line.
If I assume $70/mo after taxes and fees, that's an $840/yr financial commitment just to get unlimited data. Too much. Way too much.
Unlimited data for the moment is expensive. Eventually, it won't be. But for now it is.
Phone navigation works best when it uses data. Yes, there are apps like HERE We Go and even Google Maps itself where you can preload map data and use it offline, but where they work best is when data is fully enabled. You get all the features, much better location searching, faster route calculations and more when that data is turned on. But oh, are you going to pay for it.
Where car navigation solutions are concerned, using a Garmin GPS is still the best deal.
Can you imagine running out of data while navigating somewhere? That's a real thing that happens right now, and a very stupid problem to have. That never happens when using a Garmin GPS. Ever.
When unlimited data is free...
...then concentration can be placed on getting the map interface redesigned so it can be used for driving properly.
If I were still using the phone for navigation, I would use HERE We Go because a) it can be used 100% offline, and b) gives me almost all the info I want on one screen. But again, Garmin has the better interface and the on-map turn list feature is really, really nice.
And what's this Turns list that I'm gushing about so much?
I'll show you.
This is what I'm talking about concerning the Turns list on the Garmin DriveSmart
This works in portrait or landscape mode on a DriveSmart.
First, start a route.
Second, tap the little wrench icon and then tap Turns (if this isn't visible, it can be added to this menu as it is configurable).
The map then gets a little smaller and a turns list appears.
There is no navigation app for the phone shows this. To view the map with directional arrow and the next 2 to 3 turns and the speed limit and current road being traveled on and current speed and time to destination all at once, you need a Garmin DriveSmart.
That Turns list in particular, while seemingly insignificant, is actually very significant. It comes in handy more than just a little - especially in places where turns are really close together.
In unfamiliar territory, the Turns list is a godsend. Whether it's in the city, a residential neighborhood or even a highway ramp, oh yeah, it's nice to have. And on the DriveSmart you can enable Turns at whim any time you want it.
If I had any say in the matter, I would tell all navigation app developers to outright make navigation apps act like a Garmin DriveSmart, because it's still the best interface there is for car navigation. Perfect? No. But nobody to date has done it better.