|
|
Go to page 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
chias Regular user 144 Posts |
Another question regarding the Invisible deck before I purchase it.
I understand that the Invisible Deck and the Brainwave deck are similar in terms of concept and prices. But which is better in terms of effect and ease of performance? |
|||||||||
Phil J. Elite user 467 Posts |
I think this is a case of 'Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder'. I personally prefer Brainwave but I know many others who would go for the Invisible Deck every time.
As for ease of performance I don't think there's much in it.
You were born original... Don't die a copy
|
|||||||||
jonnyboy Inner circle San Diego 1021 Posts |
Invisible can be technically easier, and I think lends itself to more varied presentations. See, for example, Sankey's new DVD on the subject, "Invisible".
John |
|||||||||
Don Sautter New user Arizona 58 Posts |
These are not expensive effects.
I would recommend purchasing both of them and then making your decision once you have handled them personally. Don |
|||||||||
kendavis Regular user 182 Posts |
Don has given the best advice-get them both! In fact get all four! Add to your list the large card version of Invisible Deck as well as the new version of Invisible Deck. The new version uses a different card arrangement on the face up side. I can't remember who is selling it but I will try to find out.
I have been using Invisible Deck for many years and do it standing facing the audience. I get many requests for it! The success is dependent on your presentation and patter. Depending on my interaction with the audience, I will get as much as ten minutes out of the trick! I can't explain it, but I get better reactions with Invisible Deck than Brainwave. The opposite is true if I do it as a table trick. |
|||||||||
chias Regular user 144 Posts |
To a student like myself, even these tricks can be on the expensive side.
Anyway thanks for the comments, I've decided to get both Invisible and Brainwave decks, though I'll pass out on the jumbo version that kendavis has suggested I take. Don't think I'll be doing any parlor/stage magic in the near future! |
|||||||||
hansje New user 1 Post |
I think that the invisible has a better effect. Now I don't ever use my brainwave deck anymore. But I love to perform the invisible deck... Even though it's simple and some consider it a 'beginner trick'. In my view, this is one of the best card tricks ever.
But I'll tell you now why I think the invisible deck is better. In the brainwave deck the spectator names a random card, you spread through the face- down deck and instantly reveal their card face-up, than you show as an extra effect, that the card has an different colored back. With the 'invisible deck' you spread through the face-up deck and reveal that there is one face down card. The spectators now really get the time to THINK "it can't be my card!!", which makes the effect even stronger when you are ready to reveal it. The extra revelation I don't like particularly, and because of that you can't repeat the effect. So that makes it an easy choice for me.. Hope this helps! Hans |
|||||||||
edh Inner circle 4698 Posts |
Here's a question, excuse me for getting off topic.
Can you stack the ID in an Aronson Stack? I'm guessing not, but I'm not sure. Thanks
Magic is a vanishing art.
|
|||||||||
michaelmagicart Loyal user 254 Posts |
Strange, so many people do the "Invisible Deck" and don't realize it is really the "Ultra Mental Deck" originated by Joe Berg.
|
|||||||||
jake.o Regular user 111 Posts |
I prefer the invisible deck. I also use it more as an out rather than a trick its self because I feel with it in my pocket I can attempt some more extream effects.
|
|||||||||
loyaleagle Special user Montgomery Village, Maryland 567 Posts |
It is always, as they say, a great "out" for when you botch a location or card control and need to find their card in some other way...
Visit my blog: ScienceIsMagic.com
|
|||||||||
BustedFinger New user Virginia 66 Posts |
One of the newbies here! I am going to make myself an invisible deck and I was wondering about something from the performing aspect. Does anybody ever feel uncomfortable, when you are fanning through the deck to show there is only one face-down card, by the fact that only 26 cards are visible to the spectator? I have watched several videos of the performance and I tend to notice this right away that the deck doesn't appear to be a full deck.
I realize that with a Brainwave deck, this should not be a problem. However, I think I like the suspense factor of the ID better than BW. After thinking about this problem for a while it gave me an idea to create a hybrid between the two decks. I am sure someone has already thought of this or done this. The effect would be that the spectator freely thinks of a card and then you tell them that the deck you are holding has one card that has a different colored back than the rest. The spectator names their card and you fan through the face-down deck and indeed there is one card with a different colored back. The odd colored card is then turned over and revealed to be the spectator's choice. This combines the mentalism aspect of BW (having predicted the card in advance) and the suspence factor of ID. Another advantage would be that you could show both the fronts and the backs of the deck. I suppose to make something like that work, you would probably have to carry two decks and produce the correct one depending on what card the spectator chose. |
|||||||||
Zebaztian Special user The Netherlands 655 Posts |
The spectators don't count the cards. They never say: 'Hey man, you've got only 26 cards in your hand!' Nope. Go / fan quickly through the cards and nobody will notice.
Posted: Oct 28, 2009 2:11pm I don't understand would you mean by the point that you can show the BW deck at both sides. Then the specs. see that you have all backs in your hands - well thát's strange... Both decks have the trick that one card is reversed in the deck, the only real difference is that the BW reverse card has another colour. Posted: Oct 28, 2009 2:17pm Moderator, if I'm revealing too much, remove this post. Although I don't think that would necesary, because I don't reveal how the ID works. There is a ID routine which is very mentalist. Ask a spec to take a card in his mind. Let him sum up the four suits, in every order he wants, in the order in which he thinks that nothing will be revealed. Then the spec is asked to sum up the cards, from ace to king. Try to be as neutral as possible, you tell the spec. After this you say that you've heart in the tone of voice which cards the spec had in mind. You go out of the room, or you turn around, or whatever, saying: 'I'm gonna reverse that card you have in mind.' You act if like you do something with the cards and the deck (very mysteriously). You aks the spec which card it was. You pull out the ID and voilà , that card is reversed. Actually this is just the ID routine, but with a small mentalist twist - like you can hear it in the tone of voice of the spec. Yeah right!
My mind reading routines: http://www.basjongenelen.nl/goocheltrucs/. Scroll a bit down to the English routines.
|
|||||||||
BustedFinger New user Virginia 66 Posts |
Quote:
On 2009-10-28 14:11, Zebaztian wrote: What I mean is that with this proposed hybrid deck, all the cards would be facing the same way. When you spread the deck for the spectator (say a blue-backed deck), you tell them you are looking for the one red-backed card that you inserted into the deck earlier. You come across the only red-backed card in the deck and when it is revealed, it is their selected card. You get both the mentalism and suspense aspects that BW and ID provide separately. The drawback to this is that a single deck could only reveal half of the cards. You would have to carry two decks with you. Perhaps one deck would be used to reveal red suits and the other deck would reveal black suits. You would have to wait until the spectator named his card and then you would pull out the correct deck that will reveal that card. Since all the cards face the same way, you would not have to worry about which way you pull the deck out of the case and you could show the deck front and back and it would look like a normal deck. Quote: Actually, as I think about it, if you were going to show the backs and faces, you would probably need one deck to produce odd numbered cards and one deck to produce even numbered cards. Using the suit colors (red & black) to separate the two decks would end up showing either all red or all black cards to the spectator when you showed the faces. Of course with this proposed design, you could actually fully spread the cards face-up and show the spectator that all 52 cards are present in the deck. You just could not show all the backs.
On 2009-10-28 15:29, BustedFinger wrote: The drawback to this is that a single deck could only reveal half of the cards. You would have to carry two decks with you. Perhaps one deck would be used to reveal red suits and the other deck would reveal black suits. You would have to wait until the spectator named his card and then you would pull out the correct deck that will reveal that card. Since all the cards face the same way, you would not have to worry about which way you pull the deck out of the case and you could show the deck front and back and it would look like a normal deck. Quote:
On 2009-10-28 14:17, Zebaztian wrote: I like this idea. However, a wily spectator could think of a card and then after you have them name off the suits and ranks and explain that you could tell what their choice was by the sound of their voice, they could name a different card than they originally thought of. Obviously to anyone else watching, you have performed a miracle because you reversed the card that was named, but the spectator who switched his pick at the last second will know that your "voice inflection detection" had nothing to do with it. I might have the spectator write down his choice first before having him name the suits and ranks. Perhaps even show everyone else watching. You could even have the other spectators play along and see if they "hear" the change in his voice. I bet some spectators would even say that they could hear the difference if they know what his selected card is! |
|||||||||
oldi New user switzerland 92 Posts |
I highly recommend Levents Potassy Wave Deck. Levent explains the history of the different decks using the r/s principle and the advantages of the decks in detail. His routine of the potassy deck is excellent
|
|||||||||
Zebaztian Special user The Netherlands 655 Posts |
Quote:
Obviously to anyone else watching, you have performed a miracle because you reversed the card that was named, but the spectator who switched his pick at the last second will know that your "voice inflection detection" had nothing to do with it. I might have the spectator write down his choice first before having him name the suits and ranks. Perhaps even show everyone else watching. You could even have the other spectators play along and see if they "hear" the change in his voice. I bet some spectators would even say that they could hear the difference if they know what his selected card is! That's even more miraculous! I had it right even after the switch. I can read your mind before you think about something. 'I switched to another card.' 'And I still got that right, applaud for me!'
My mind reading routines: http://www.basjongenelen.nl/goocheltrucs/. Scroll a bit down to the English routines.
|
|||||||||
moltenreality New user US 4 Posts |
Lots of great ideas, but to answer the original question:
The invisible deck is nice and you can do a cool effect, however: the brainwave can do the same effects the invisible can do…and then some. If you’re not a color change person, you can still go the static color route and keep your options open at the same time! If I’m wrong in saying the brainwave can do anything the invisible can do, please correct me. In passing, small details the audience isn’t supposed to remember anyway…those don’t count |
|||||||||
Zebaztian Special user The Netherlands 655 Posts |
The colour change of the BW is awsome.
My aproach of the ID is not possible with the BW. Or you have to show 2 decks and say: I going to pass one card from one deck to the other. But that's very manieristic.
My mind reading routines: http://www.basjongenelen.nl/goocheltrucs/. Scroll a bit down to the English routines.
|
|||||||||
moltenreality New user US 4 Posts |
How do you use the ID? (if you don't mind me asking)
|
|||||||||
Zebaztian Special user The Netherlands 655 Posts |
I don't use the ID very well, I have to admitt. I'm a bit too clumsy. Docc Hilford showed in his lecture a very easy version of the ID. He turned it into a dice trick.
My mind reading routines: http://www.basjongenelen.nl/goocheltrucs/. Scroll a bit down to the English routines.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Gaffed & Funky » » Invisible and Brainwave (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2~3 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |