Complicated or Not ?

So all I've been doing is staring at my new VC-AT. A question has come up that I need help with from my fellow Forum members.

Please do not laugh to hard as I'm learning all the time about details of a watch.

I'm pretty sure I understand the basics of what are viewed as "Complications" and because the VC-AT is unique with this type of function, would the uni-directional internal bezel controled by a dedicated crown be considered a complication ?

While not part of the actual movement, I'm curious to the answer.

I'm expecting many LOL replies.

Andy

My guess - and it is only a guess - is that the answer is Yes (especially considering the 2nd source of information below):

Complication (horology)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In horology (study of clocks), complication refers to any feature in a timepiece beyond the simple display of hours, minutes, and seconds.
A timepiece indicating only hours, minutes, and seconds is otherwise known as a simple movement. Common additions such as day/date displays, chronographs, and automatic winding mechanisms are usually not sufficient to permit a movement to be called complicated. Moreover, that a watch movement may be a Certified Chronometer does not itself count as a complication.

from ehow:
Technical Terms
In the world of watch making, known as horology, the bezel falls under a category known as "complications." In this context, the complication does not mean the ease in which a watch is utilized, but instead refers to any watch feature that extends beyond the simple function of telling time. The term complication is most often used by high-end or luxury watch brands in referring to the features of their products. Since the watch bezel can have functional and/or decorative purposes, it is considered a complication.

I wouldn't say so. Different bezel construction like by AT or another example by Rolex GMT, couldn't be considered like horological complication imo, mechanical probably)) It's like thermometer, which was shown in one of the perfect threads about pocket watches.

Mechanical complication related to the movement.

Inner bezel is not, just a different way of displaying functions - imo.

I agree with Roman and Roberto. I think that "complicated" refers to the movement. If that's the case then an internal, rotating bezel doesn't seem to qualify. Notice that the first passage Shing quoted mentions a simple movement rather than a simple watch.

I love my VC AT even if it is simple. :)

Thank you Shing for providing the two interpretations of "Complications". From these viewpoints, what I thought was going to be a "simple" answer now opens the door to even further curiosity.

In the Wikipedia definition, "complication refers to ANY feature in a timepiece beyond the simple display of hours, minutes, and seconds." Keyword in this sentence is TIMEPIECE. IMO this would indicate the whole package, not just the movement.

In the next sentence, a simple MOVEMENT is considered one that only provides for hours, minutes, and seconds. Again IMO, the two sentences/statementsg are separate from each other.

Also confusing is the next sentence which indicates that day-date, Chrono, auto winding ( all powered by the movement ) aren't suffient to be considered movement complications. I've always been under the impression these were indeed complications. ????? Would that mean the Spitfire UTC function falls into that category ?

The final sentence regarding CERTIFIED , I get.

The ehow definition would support fully my questioning the the bezel function of the VC-AT and this posting for general comment.

Still not sure what definition would be considered more accurate/accepted in the horology world.

Anyone care to chime in with any other angles or questionable examples of a complication ?

Still curious...

Andy

It simply proves Wikipedia is not the Bible :)

whilst maybe not orthodox, I would tend to

Sorry am on a tablet on a train. Would tend to agree with Shing and wikipedia i that it is features of the time peice that add complications. I love to think that it is all linked to the main movement but at the end of the day someone has thought up a feature, engineered it and added it to a watch as a function, and be it simple or complicated, that adds to the complexity of the timepeice and that makes it a complication

I have to agree with Roberto on this issue.

Kevin

With respect, isn't the whole issue here one of semantics? Different people define differently, but it's only a label.

Consider also the "definition" of Grand Complication. It varies, and Patek atypically uses it in the context of any really complicated movement. But, regardless, each watch speaks for itself ;)