freddy333

Like most companies that market successful high-end products, there is alot of profit (& I say that having worked in the high-end audio industry for several years during the 80s). Whether that is good or bad is a subject for another thread. All I know is that I spent a great deal of time auditioning a number of good headphones (any or all of which I would have been happy with) & settled on the pair that provided me with me with the best overall sound for my needs. I should also note that I use electrostats for home listening & play them at moderate levels. Out of the finalists I compared, the MDTs come closest to the sound I hear from my home system. If your reference is a booming car stereo, the MDTs are probably not going to be to your liking. But, like reps, there are no perfect sound transducers & we all have our individual preferences. So, you choose your poison & try not to let the hardware get in the way of the music.

1st, read the pinned articles here. These 'What is the best....?' types of questions should be avoided because there is no best for everyone. Every rep has a set of flaws (there is no such thing as a perfect or 1:1 rep of a gen watch) & you, the buyer, needs to make the call as to which inaccuracies bother you the least & which you are willing to pay more for to mitigate. It is always best to research the gen model you are interested before searching (or posting questions) for reps. Go to your local AD (authorized dealer) & try the gen watch you are interested in on to see how it looks. Operate its functions -- wind it, set the time, change the date, operate the chronograph, etc) -- to get a feel for how the watch works & how the controls feel. Take special care to see/feel how the watch is finished, how well it is put together. Then, check out lots of pics of the watch on google, TZ or other watch sites. Knowledge is your best ally.

They include a handful of tips, but only 1 set of Monster SuperTips & no foam tips. However, I ordered a sampler set of Monster's SuperTips, which includes both silicon (for best sound) & foam (for active use). I also have a set of these aftermarket (in this case, the term aftermarket is a superlative) silicon tips, which had a couple that fit nicely (Click the pic for the link) Unless I accidentally catch the cord on my clothes while driving, I have not had problems with my previous Skullcandy Titan buds & these aftermarket silicon tips fit my ears better than the Skullcandy tips do, so I doubt that will be a problem. All mp3s with most @ 320khz.

Just a quick update for anyone who may be interesting - I received the MDTs 2 days ago & have been spending as much time as I have available listening to them (& comparing them with my reference Koss's). I think I made the correct choice because they sound wonderful on just about every type of music & have that rare ability to induce vanishing little sound of their own into the mix. I say this because great recordings sound great, bad recordings sound bad, bass heavy recordings sound bass heavy, shallow recordings sound shallow.............. I think you get the idea. The point is that the MDTs allow whatever the mics picked up in the recording venue to be presented to you in its original form, which can be a blessing (in the case of good recordings) or a curse (in the case of bad). They reveal very low level details in recordings that you never heard before & this is not due to their having a tarted-up response pattern (although Monster does say their midrange is ever-so-slightly nudged upward to complement classic jazz recordings). But I listen to a wide range of music & the MDTs handle them all with equal aplomb. I hate to sound like any number of audio magazine reviewers, but, if you are looking for a premium set of in-ear headphones (I hate to call something this advanced/good 'earbuds') & can afford their pricetags, you should definitely include these in your short-list.

Subdials look a bit small on the Silix.

Throw on a gen crown/tube & rivet bracelet & you have a very credible watch. Few would question the authenticity of such a plain, old-fashioned Rolex. To ice the cake, replace the xtal & dial crown with gens & it would fool me.

Have you been to the AD to try them on? That usually simplifies the decision.

Those Yuki bracelets make these reps.

It sounds like the hour hand may be loose, but the only way to find out is to remove the movement from the case & check the hand. If you just received the watch (with the past week), I would start by contacting the seller & asking his advice.

Back to SS sanity today

The inner (vertical) flange on the case around the dial on most gen Rolexes is relatively shallow & this is an area that most reps get wrong (by being too tall/deep). If you have to err with a rep, I would always take the rep with the too shallow vertical flange over the too tall/deep flange.

Very interesting. Once you perfect the procedure (you can get dial blanks from Ofrei, etc), I imagine you will be kept very busy.

Just for grins, I am wearing the 1 on the right today

Exactly.

In the case of the gens, the 5512 is chronometer rated, while the 5513 is not. In the case of reps, the only difference is the additional text on the 5512 dial denoting the 5512's chronometer rating. With reps, it comes down to whether you prefer more or less text on the dial. Otherwise, the cases/movements/bracelets are the same. I do not know which, if any, of the dealers' reps accept gen parts. For that, you may need to spend a bit more & build your own (buy a case, dial, movement, handset, etc & put it all together (or pay a watchmaker to assemble it for you)).

There are numerous procedures for adding an enhanced patina to hands (including my own, which uses iodine & an oven) that you can locate via the search. The GMT hand platform is wider than the standard hands & should cover the hole.

Sadly, no. While the outer diameter & shape of the casebacks are the same, the inner flange that runs perpendicular to the plane of the caseback & fits down into the case well is located differently on the 2 watches. No biggie. You have to break a few eggs to make a cake. In this case, I end up learning something new & have a nice gift for a friend's upcoming birthday. The search continues.

Ditto.

My comments regarding the CHS system are based on the original run. However, the new/current version appears to be using the same movement & no mention is made of the factory having spent the time/money to manufacture a proper set of purpose-driven GMT components to increase longevity. And, actually, even if the description contained big red words proclaiming we copy Rolex movement 1:1, I would not count on any of that until/unless either 1 of the RWG watchsmiths have disassembled 1 & given it a thumbs-up or a good number of these have been field-tested by RWG guinea pigs.....er, members.

Find a good pic of a gen, send it to a couple of dealers & ask them to find the rep.

Same stem. 1210 is the base movement for the 1215/1225.

The stem needs to be matched to the movement. Which movement is it? If a 1210/1215 caliber, then you need a 7549 stem, which you can find here (just to be sure, check with the seller to be sure that is the correct stem for your movement).

Sounds like a problem. Can you post a good, clear macro pic of the clasp (max size 1024 x 768)?

In my ongoing efforts to locate a shallower caseback for my 116520 Daytona, I purchased my 1st rep in 2 years -- Andrew's entry-level TT GMTIIC (ROLGMT055). Upon opening & removing the watch from its packaging, I couldn't help but notice this rep's heftiness, which was an unexpected & very pleasant surprise. So I thought I would post a brief, mini-review of the watch I received -- Initial Impressions This is a heavy watch, which, for a rep, is both unusual & welcome since 1 of the hallmarks of fakes is their lightness (relative to their gen counterparts). Unfortunately, I do not know the actual weight of the gen 116713LN, but, as you can see, Andrew's economical gold & SS (two-tone) rep outweighs my premium-priced SS ETA-powered CHS GMTIIC by 12 grams & you can easily feel this added weight when the watch is in your hand or on your wrist Although yellow gold is not generally my thing, it is a very handsome watch Additional Views Here it is next to my CHS (with gen crown/tube & crystal) The Positives The ROLEXROLEXROLEX anti-theft feature that runs around the case's inner flange adjacent to the dial is now a proper engraving (as opposed to the laser etching on my CHS & many previous GMTIIC reps) The lume in the index markers has been enlarged (& the metal surrounds narrowed) to match the gen (the lume area on many previous GMTIIC reps (including my CHS) was too narrow ). The engraving on the leaves of the clasp is now a credible-looking engraving (as opposed to the give-away laser etching on many previous reps (like my CHS)) The Counter-Positives (Negatives) The ROLEXROLEXROLEX anti-theft feature that runs around the case's inner flange adjacent to the dial is still misaligned (the hour markers between 7 - 11 should all be in alignment with the R in Rolex & the hour markers between 1-5 should all align with the X). There is a bit too much play in the bezel, which you would not find on the gen. But, more importantly, the 'ceramic' (plastic) insert is misaligned, so that when in its null position, the arrow is slightly askew of the 12. This misalignment is easily seen from several feet away, making it 1 of the best ways to ID this watch as a rep (I have only ever seen 1 gen GMTIIC with a similar misalignment & its (understandably neurotic) owner, having posted pics on his 'irregular' watch on TZ & receiving immediate directives to return the watch to the AD, returned the watch to Rolex, who fixed the problem toot-sweet). The arrow in the insert is shallower & much less 3-dimensional on this watch than on either the gen or my CHS. In fact, when viewed close-up, instead of the relief having vertical sides, it looks more nearly concave. Sort of like a lake where the depth gradually increases as you move towards the center. Because the depth & angularity of the relief is so prominent on the gen, the lack of same makes the insert on this watch look fake & is very noticeable from a foot or so away (from an arm's length, my rule-of-thumb for credibility, it is difficult to detect) Although I have only had the watch for a few hours, its Asian 2813 automatic movement failed to restart after I stopped it to set the time. This has happened several times & is likely due to the usual problems 1 encounters with the used/unserviced movements that come in rep watches. I have not yet opened the case to check the movement's condition, but I have enough experience with reps to know what I am likely to find when I do. Being a low-end mechanical, if/when the movement dies, it is more cost-effective to replace it (with an ETA or similar) than to repair it, especially since parts are unlikely to be available, at least not readily. Similarly, if I gently shake the watch, the rotor continues to spin for a number of seconds, which indicates the need for cleaning/oiling. Again, no surprise there. The datewheel font is serifed, while the gen (& my CHS) is not. Conclusion Overall, for its price, this is a very impressive watch. It's weight & solid feel give it a presence that is unusual for an inexpensive rep. The gold flashing looks good, but is not likely to remain so for long. The improved lume & engravings (inner flange & bracelet) mitigate some of the issues that have plagued previous reps, while its generic low-end motor & remaining inaccuracies belie its bargain basement price point & Far East-of-Switzerland source. Bottom Line - Recommended p.s. I should also note that, as usual, the transaction was smooth & trouble-free. Andrew sent good, clear pics of MY watch prior to shipment & even had his photog snap a couple of additional shots per my request. He also offered to cancel the sale if the watch did not meet with my expectations (if it is not clear from my comments above, it exceeded them). p.p.s. For those of you who missed out on the original (limited release) of the CHS GMTIIC, it is available again here. For those who are unaware, besides looking more authentic, the GMT hand on the CHS version functions exactly the same as the gen. Be forewarned that the GMT hand function on the CHS is also prone to break-down when used, so it is best used infrequently, if at all (I have used it 3 times (twice by accident while setting the date) in the 3 years I have had the watch). For reference, here is the gen 116713LN