The jump into men's wristwatch fashion
When you get older, you stop dressing like an idiot and start getting civilized.
When I became middle aged, several things changed concerning my personal appearance.
First, I lost a bunch of weight and am no longer overweight. When I started, I had a BMI of 29 (which is borderline obese). I now have a BMI of 22.
Second, I stopped dressing in t-shirts all the time and started wearing polo and casual button-down shirts. Rarely will I go in public wearing a t-shirt these days.
Third, I started wearing wristwatches again.
I used to know next to nothing about wristwatches, but I've been learning more about them; what I've learned is quite interesting.
All-analog or nothing?
My current daily watch is a digital, a Casio B640WD. Cheap, retro and has all the features I want...
...but I know it's not really a man's watch.
And just what is a true man's watch?
Answer: Something with a proper analog face, doesn't look like it came out of a Transformers movie, doesn't look like something an old coot would wear, and has a 9-to-3 face measurement of 40mm to 45mm.
Analog-digital doesn't count. The watch has to be all-analog or nothing for it to be a true man's timepiece.
Examples of true men's watches
Omega Speedmaster Professional
If you know watches at all, the Speedmaster Professional is the famous "man on the moon" watch or just "moonwatch", as it was the one worn by an astronaut during the Apollo 11 mission.
The Speedmaster is really expensive, but has a timeless design and is a standard when it comes to what a proper man's wristwatch should be.
When you see a Fossil men's model, you know it's for a man. This one has a really nice blend of old world + modern world design going on. The knurled crown is a nice touch as that's an easy-grab style.
Dive watches usually aren't my thing, but I like this one. With a 12-3-6-9 design, it's either totally right or totally wrong, and the Aquadiver gets it totally right. The blue works too because it is a dive watch, after all. The nicest part is that the price is low for this timepiece. Looks expensive, to be sure, but it isn't.
Why list a cheap-ass Casio analog? Because this is one of the very few watches that's an analog with round face, no numbers and no date that is a proper 9-to-3 40mm men's size.
It's the no-date part that makes a style like this tough to come by.
There are a lot of guys out there that want a watch just like this simply for the fact they don't want to deal with a date display. All they want is the time, only the time and nothing but the time. That's what you get with this Casio without it looking like a watch an old fart would wear.
When you want a watch that "goes with everything", so to speak, a basic black Casio analog really works.
Another one from Casio?
See the MTP-1370L model. I have one on order at the time I write this. It's not a basic black as it has day/date on the face - but I wanted that because I think it looks cool.
What got me interested in analogs again?
Since turning 40, I examined what I was wearing on a daily basis and made a decision that it was time to change things around. I started researching men's fashion, and something that popped up routinely was the watch. A proper man wears a proper watch, so that's where things started.
I began with a Timex Weekender, which is a nice, basic watch. I swapped out the nylon strap with a leather NATO strap, and yeah, it looks good.
After that I decided to go all retro-digital and bought a few Casio watches with metal bands, which is far superior to resin bands. Casio digitals appeal to the geeky/nerdy/nostalgic side of me, and there is a "geek chic" style with a retro-styled digital. But a Casio digital is obviously not a true man's watch as I noted above.
The Casio analog I have on order is the second analog watch I've ever bought. Will it be my last? No, because there are a few other styles I'd like to try out, such as a 12-3-6-9 and maybe a few others.
Do I plan on having a crazy amount of watches? No. I've already bought a few that I've returned. At the moment, my daily is the Casio B640WD I mentioned. But if the MTP-1370L works out, I might start wearing that one full time.
Why don't I wear my Timex Weekender full time? It's for just one reason that is well known to Weekender owners. Pronounced ticking. You can really hear a Weekender tick, which to some is annoying. Most of the time the ticking doesn't bother me, but there are times it does, and that's why I don't always wear it.
Casio analogs as far as I can tell have a much quieter tick. Not as quiet as a Seiko (which to my understanding have near-silent if not absolutely silent ticks,) but darned close.
Anyway, yeah I will be picking up a few more analogs eventually. But as for digitals, I'm done with those for now because in all honesty, there's really nothing better than what I already have.
Will I ever completely give up digitals?
No, because there are functional conveniences with digital that analog just can't do. For example, my Casio B640WD can run a stopwatch, timer, hourly chime and alarm all at the same time. My AE1200 can do all that plus show 5 time zones all with optional DST on/off settings and run 5 separate alarms besides that. Can't do that with analog.
Digital's strength is function. Analog's strength is style.
Can you have style and function with a watch? In my experience, that would be a no. With digital, I've seen a bunch of different brands try to make digital look upscale and it just doesn't work. For example, a really expensive analog-digital is the Omega Speedmaster Skywalker. Simply put, it looks cheap and there's just no avoiding that. When you want that look, you get the Speedmaster Professional analog and not the Skywalker.
I use both, but keep them separate because I've not found an analog-digital that looks good. When I want features and retro geek chic, I wear digital on the wrist. When I want a man's timepiece, I wear analog.
Does wearing a watch really make that much of a difference?
It does in my experience.
Whenever you wear something shiny on the wrist, it gets attention; people will stare at it.
If wearing a digital, anyone who stares will think, "Oh. Cheap watch".
If wearing an analog with some nice style to it, anyone who stares will think, "Wow, nice watch".
Does getting the better reaction - even if unspoken - really matter in the grand scheme of things? Yes. It can mean the difference between a good or bad experience when dealing with pretty much anyone.
If you're sporting a cheap digital, people think you're cheap. But if wearing an analog with some nice style to it - even if it's cheap - you're treated better.
This is part of the reason I bought a digital that uses a metal band. Digital looks cheap, but at least the metal band offsets that somewhat.
However, a proper analog with good style is still the best thing going to make the best impression, at least with a watch.
Cheap guitar of the week #35 - Ibanez Paul Stanley PS40 Signature
This guitar is worth buying - but not because Paul Stanley's name is on it.
One of the absolute coolest guitars that Ibanez has ever released has been the Iceman model. The modern Iceman is the the IC520.
Why bother with a PS40 when you could get the IC520 instead?
Two reasons.
First, the PS40 is $400 cheaper than the IC520.
Second, the PS40 is the absolute cheapest way to get an Iceman shape that's an actual Ibanez guitar.
Is the PS40 a "true" Iceman? No. You'll notice the electronics are different along with a few other things. The point is that you do get that Iceman shape on an actual Ibanez guitar for the cheapest possible price.
Hate "signature" guitars but love the Iceman shape?
No problem. The PS40 is fairly easy to "de-Stanley", as the only two things on it with the dopey signature stuff are the pick guard and truss rod cover plate, both of which can be modified easily or just removed.
Without the dopey Paul Stanley crapola, the PS40 is actually a cool guitar. And like I said, it is the cheapest way to get a legitimate Iceman shape by Ibanez.
Is the guitar any good? I've no idea. But even if the guitar is crap, it's worth it just to get an actual Iceman shape. Remember, the IC520 is $400 more, so even if you have to spend a little to fix up the PS40 after buying it, you're still saving huge.
Should you start collecting guitars?
I think you know my answer to this one, but in case you're new here, I'll tell you.
A real-deal 1960 Gibson Les Paul Standard is well into 6 figures.
I mention this guitar for a specific reason. I don't think anyone should collect guitars. But I do agree that you should buy "that one good guitar", whether vintage or new.
Bear in mind the "good guitar" doesn't have to be expensive. For some, just owning a Mexico-made Fender Standard Stratocaster is that good guitar. And that's fine.
If you have the cash to buy that '60 Paul and have it be the last guitar you ever buy in your entire life, go ahead and buy it, with my blessing. Yes, really.
Where I get real rude real quick on people is when it comes to guitar collecting.
A collection is literally defined as set of items. You can't have a collection of just one thing.
Now it's true that I own a few guitars. But they all serve a purpose. Every one of them. And the number of guitars I own is small.
True guitar collectors dedicate space in their house to waste on instruments that will never be played. These instruments won't be put in glass cases for friends and family to enjoy, mind you. What will happen is that most if not all of the guitars will be put into regular guitar cases, then stacked on a shelf somewhere or shoved in a closet. Nobody will ever see them except on very rare occasion, and only for a few minutes so as not to "damage the investment".
There's also another type of guitar collector. The hoarder who thinks he's collecting but in reality has a pile of junk guitars that are worthless. Oh, it's a "collection", all right. A bad one that's nothing but crap.
No, you should not collect guitars.
If you want to buy "that one good guitar", go ahead. It's just one guitar. But please, and I really mean this, PLAY THE THING.
If you have a bunch of guitars right now that never get played and hold no sentimental value to you, SELL THEM ALL. Keep the guitar you actually play, sell all the rest.
Remember, guitars are machines that can go into a state of disrepair easily just by sitting there doing nothing. Machines are meant to be used. Use them. If you don't, the guitar will literally destroy itself (usually from the neck twisting up from non-use and becoming unplayable).
You don't need 5 Strats and 5 Les Pauls. I could see owning one of each and switching back and forth between the two guitars routinely so they both get played and provide years of enjoyment. But if you've got guitars just sitting there going unplayed for months if not years, they've got to go.
Finally, if you've been thinking of collecting guitars, don't start. Guitars take up too much space and require way too much maintenance just to keep them playable. And again, if you want to buy that one good guitar, I don't have a problem with that. But if the guitars start piling up and don't get played, that is a problem.
Vintage guitar of the week #18 - 1979 Martin EM-18
An affordable vintage electric that's actually quite nice from a name you wouldn't expect.
Martin is obviously not the first brand name you think of when it comes to electrics, but yes, they did build them at one point, and the EM-18 from 1979 is one such example.
Being it's a Martin, concentration is placed on the woods. There is a solid layer of birdseye maple on both wings, plain maple center and what looks like walnut stripes. You can tell this is proper woodwork as those stripes do go all the way through the body, so there's definitely not any cheapo style crapola going on. The neck is (or should be) a one-piece Honduran mahogany with German-made Sperzel tuning keys at the headstock. Another staple of '70s design is on this Martin as well, a brass nut.
I believe the way the electronics work is really simple. Think of a Les Paul with two small toggle switches to split the humbuckers into single-coil mode, similar to how push/pull knobs work now.
Very nice looker overall and one of the better builds of the '70s.
As far as I'm aware, only 1,375 of the EM-18 model was ever made. However, it's important to note the serials start with the number 1000.
Is there a a modern equivalent to the EM-18?
Generally speaking, the closest you'll get to the EM-18 is a PRS SE CE 24. That guitar is obviously not an exact copy, but it's not too far off, either.
Casio A500WGA-1DF watch review
I actually received this watch by mistake.
A few posts ago I mentioned that I had a A500WA-1 model on order. I received a watch, but not the one I ordered. Instead, I received a A500WGA, with "G" for "Gold". Gold models typically sell for 33% higher to almost double the price of the chrome versions. The reason? Scarcity. Gold versions of their watches are far fewer in number compared to other models.
And no, there isn't any real gold on this. The band is stainless steel with adjustable clasp, and the case plating is... well, I don't know what it is, actually. Could be plastic, could be metal. I'm not exactly sure.
There are several variants of the A500WGA. There's the A500WGA-1, A500WGA-1D and A500WGA-1DF. In the way Casio makes watches, certain models are made for certain markets. Mine, according to its tag that came with it, is a 1DF model.
What makes a 1DF different from a 1 or 1D? I've no idea.
Too complicated for most people, but I genuinely find it useful
Being I already own an AE1200WHB-1BV, I already knew the A500WGA as the feature sets between the two are identical in every way. You get 5 alarms, countdown timer, chronograph, a bunch of time zone options, forward/reverse digit direction, ability to mute button press beeps if you want, etc. The watch is loaded with goodies.
I know my way around the A500W because of the AE1200W. But for most other people, yeah it can be difficult at first just because its packed with so much stuff.
I'll put it another way. Casio digital watches generally act mostly the same, with minor variations from model to model. If you know Casio G-SHOCK or have ever owned a Casio watch with an alarm or countdown timer feature, you can figure this one out.
At this point I've every feature on the watch memorized and know where everything is. If I want to jump between alarms, turn DST on or off, switch from 12-hour to 24-hour or do whatever, I can, and do it all from memory.
Borderline tacky, but gloriously retro
Now although I received a watch significantly more expensive than the chrome version, I did entertain the idea of sending it back. Why? Because in gold, it looks borderline tacky.
After mulling it over, I've decided to keep the watch. It is the first gold watch I've ever owned, and I figure that I must have been destined to own this timepiece since I received it by mistake.
I came to the realization that I'm just not used to wearing gold on my wrist. With metal/chrome, oh yes, I can wear that easily. But I am just not used to the gold. It's not a bad look. It's just different.
"I've seen this watch before..."
If you're a Casio digital watch fan, yes, you have seen this before. The original model from the 1980s is the A300U. The A500W is a reimagining of the old A300U, no question about it.
I personally would not seek out the older A300U. It commands way too high of a price on eBay, but even if money were no object, I wouldn't buy it anyway because of practical reasons. The time zones have changed since the A300U was made, and the recessed upper left button is annoying to use, whereas all the A500W's buttons protrude (that's a good thing).
Do I plan on wearing my gold Casio watch regularly?
Yes. And that does mean it will get nicked and scratched up. I know this and am willing to accept that.
I know I just horrified any Casio watch collector that read the above. To those collectors, let me put your mind at ease right now. In less than just one day of wearing this watch, and wearing the watch safely protected under a cotton long-sleeve shirt cuff, the bottom of the casing somehow got a hairline scratch. It's barely visible and can only be seen if the case is tilted at a specific angle.
Again, that's just from owning it one day. The casing on this particular Casio watch is a total scratch magnet. Scratches will happen and there's nothing I can do about it.
This doesn't mean I'm going to rough up the watch. I will do my best to keep it looking nice. But I don't think there is any way to wear this thing and keep it 100% scratch-free.
For collectors out there, what I'd say is that if this watch appeals to you and you want to collect it, buy this timepiece but never wear it.
Another Casio watch I own, which I may write a review on at some point, is the B640WD-1A. This is the one I'd wear and be less conscious about damaging it, given the case is frost-painted resin and has true water resist. The A500W does have water resist, but I think it's better described as splash resist. I wouldn't shower with the A500W. Not a chance. With the B640WD, I could shower with that and not care. And with my AE1200, oh yes, that one can absolutely be showered with.
Verdict: Capable, but scratch-prone
The A500WGA is, as said above, loaded with goodies. And I do use those goodies.
Looks-wise, either you like the gold or you don't. At this point, I'll say the gold is growing on me. I'm not totally in love with it, but yeah, it's classy, I admit. But I meant what I said in that it's borderline tacky. Not absolutely tacky, but just nipping at the heels of being that way. The only thing keeping it not tacky is a clean, uncluttered look.
My only complaint is that the casing is really scratch-prone. That's the one fatal flaw of this timepiece. It's a-okay otherwise.
And oh yeah, tons of '80s retro flavor.
On a final note, part of my reason for getting this originally was the low profile so I could specifically wear it with long-sleeve shirts where the cuff would slide over the watch easily. A Casio F-91W, which is as thin as a Casio watch can possibly get as far as I'm aware, has an 8mm thickness. The metal-bracelet version of that watch, the A158W-1, also has an 8mm thickness.
The A500W has a thickness of 10mm. Believe me, it's plenty thin enough to slide under the shirt cuff without a problem. If you want super-low-profile with the metal band, get the A158 (or A159 for a gold,) but I think the A500W looks better. That, and it has many more features.