|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 | ||||||||||
mvmagic Inner circle Has written 1322 Posts |
Getting back to the original topic, here's another vote for Gimpy's version. Its stunningly beautiful and I just love "the works"!
Sent from my Typewriter
|
|||||||||
Sealegs Inner circle The UK, Portsmouth 2596 Posts |
Mvmagic it gives me a perverse pedantic pleasure to point out that you've still failed to get back to the original topic which was: "What is the difference between each set ? Quality? Material? Gimmick? What [are] the most important points that [one] should notice ?"
Only two posts in this thread have actually addressed these questions... but as the original poster hasn't chipped in on the topic he originally asked about nearly 9 months ago maybe he's given up on us to give him the answer he's looking for. I think the natural twists and turns that this thread ended up taking have been, for anyone one considering or owning this trick; interesting, illuminating and informative. But maybe I only think that because of the contributions I've made to it.
Neal Austin
"The golden rule is that there are no golden rules." G.B. Shaw |
|||||||||
mvmagic Inner circle Has written 1322 Posts |
Oh man, you're right! But you're very welcome for the pleasure!
I can only compare two sets which I have owned and used. Harries and Gimpy's. I stopped using the Harries version because the gimmick wasn't reliable. Or should I say it required such attention during performance I wasn't comfortable with it. I never had an accident while performing but did numerous times during practice-and I do have the habit of constantly practicing stuff I already perform. This is purely a personal preference, but keeping in mind the proper way to handle it distracted me. That grip just never came naturally or automatically to me, mostly because my fingers were barely the right length to grab the tube. Every time I had to think about it, concentrate on doing it right and that disrupted the flow. The cubes were nice, the tubes however were covered in glitter paper which I didn't care for. When I saw Gimpy's, I immediately fell in love with it. The natural look of wood was really appealing to me. To me it looked magical, but not in a magic prop way. Like something in a museum or something stored away in the corner of a forgotten dusty barn somewhere. I do love old-looking heavy things, so this is again just a personal preference. But is has a real-world look to it. Gimpy's tube is way heavier than Harries' (which is plastic) but its not so heavy it'd be a hindrance during performance. I am betting its quite a bit larger too. though I cant be very sure as I sold the Harries set over 10 years ago. I did some research (read:asked people who own it) about the gimmick on Gimpy's to be absolutely certain I won't end up with another prop I will not be using. His gimmick is nicely located as far as handling goes.With Harries' you were forced to grab the tube from the bottom every time. With Gimpy's you can naturally grab the top, which is likely the way most people would pick up a tube like that. I think...I have asked family members where would they grab the tube when picking it up and they went for the top. His gimmick is also extremely reliable, I dare say 100% reliable. In the end, it all comes down to personal preference. There is no one right look to the props. As far as gimmick goes, I only have experience with the two and for me Gimpy's was the way to go. I am sure someone else will prefer a different method.
Sent from my Typewriter
|
|||||||||
anton.magician New user 82 Posts |
I have German version of Cuba a Liblre, it has very nice black tube and good plastic, with silver corners in the sides. In my version you must grabbing the tube from the bottom, but after few rehearsals it looks natural. As for me, Gimpy's tube looks not like magic props and not natural for stage. But I beleive it's more easy to work, and it's better for darkwood cabinet perfomances.
|
|||||||||
krowboom Loyal user Chicago area 233 Posts |
I have Jay Leslie's and can definitely recommend it. It is light, easy to work with, doesn't hang up, and looks great. I have performed it several times using Jay's routine with my own patter thrown in. It always gets a good reaction. I can't comment on Gimpys since I have nevery seen or used it, but I had a Harries version (not cube-a-libre but the version with one tube only) which I did not care for. The blocks I felt were too heavy. Hope this helps
|
|||||||||
gimpy2 Special user 960 Posts |
Just moved to a new shop and found a box of nice blocks to make a few sets of these. Just found this thread again and thank everybody for the nice comments. I can make the demi or the full six block set. But only have a few.
Gimpy
Gimpy
www.gimpysmagic.com |
|||||||||
wzakaras New user 8 Posts |
I and a fellow brother have built a version of cube-a-libre ( Or whatever you call it) based on Geoffrey Durham's published design. We made very minor changes like added heat shrink tubing to cover the tube. This version is bases on the bottom tube lift. One issue is stability of the 6 blocks. Has anyone drilled holes and stacked them on a dowel or such. I am aware that you are then limited in the position the blocks can be stacked (90 degree shift etc) My second question is this. Can this version(bottom tube) perform the finale where a spectator stacks the blocks in their preferred order. the performer stacks the other pile, not matching, pops the tube and they match. I have seen several u-tube performances which do this but this may require a different type gimmick. If anyone would care to share this info with me as how to accomplish this finale, I would be grateful. Just PM me, please. I have an idea but cannot be certain that this is the solution. I will be glad to offer my thoughts prior to anyone offering their assistance via a PM. I have mastered all the other parts of the routine but just cant figure out the finale and Mr. Geoffrey Durham does not discuss this finale in his works. (maybe because it can't be done?) Thanks in advance and I would welcome any PM's to assist me
|
|||||||||
Bill Hegbli Eternal Order Fort Wayne, Indiana 22797 Posts |
Wzakaras, the reason Durham does not offer this kind of spectator stacking is most likely because this is a Stage trick, not a close-up trick. Bring a spectator on stage, is only asking for more possible problems in exposure. I see no reason to do this in the 1st place, slowing down an already complicated routine to present in the 1st place. Involving a spectator only muddies the water even more for the audience. Mr. Durham does give his finale, not another performers idea.
What you have done is very much trying to drive a nail when all you have is screw driver. You really should have done more research before you built the wrong prop. All tricks are not the same in working, even thought the look similar on the outside. As far as the blocks not being stable, well you built it. If you present it on a level floor on a 4 legged table, then the blocks are not perfectly square and level. So the choices would be to find a level floor, obtain a good 4 legged table, or check the square-ness of the blocks. |
|||||||||
Geoffrey Durham New user 30 Posts |
Wzakaras, if you've read the introductory paragraphs in the 'Blocks' chapter in my book, you'll know that the first routine I devised finished with a spectator stacking the blocks exactly as you describe. I changed it because it didn't play well with audiences. As I say in the book, it worked as a trick, but failed as entertainment.
There's no risk of exposure in using a spectator at the climax, but it does make the audience wonder why he or she isn't involved in the routine's first phases. It's not good showbiz to present a piece in two sections - one without a spectator, followed by another in which a spectator's involvement has suddenly become important. That disturbs the flow and rhythm of the thing. It never worked for me. Flow and rhythm - and crucially speed - are essential to a smooth performance of this routine. During your early performances, you will occasionally knock a stack down by accident (it happened to me), but as with any trick constant rehearsal and repetition pay off in the end. The climax I eventually used was a winner in my shows. I gradually came to understand that, whereas audiences of magicians appreciate this as a trick about wooden blocks, lay audiences often see it as a trick about numbers. So devising a routine in which the whole stack turned magically upside-down reinforced the point that six solid objects have changed their positions, rather than just the numbers printed on the front. I found it to be a great addition to my repertoire. If you perform it fast with a bang-bang-bang rhythm, audiences love it. Good luck with it. |
|||||||||
gimpy2 Special user 960 Posts |
I like the audience being involved at the end. You don't need to bring somebody on stage. just pick somebody and have them call out the numbers from their seat and stack them your self as they call them out. stack one number they call on its side and you have that great gotcha ending. I think it all fits together great as the numbers stacked get more and more complex as you go until you have a completely impossible stack at the end as the audience is sure you have made a mistake in stacking the blocks. Made a set with letters for a customer who flips the tube upside down at the end to spell the key word then knocks the stack of blocks over.Pretty neat take on the old classic.
Gimpy
www.gimpysmagic.com |
|||||||||
Bill Hegbli Eternal Order Fort Wayne, Indiana 22797 Posts |
Geoffrey Durham, when you find a trick that a rhythm to it, it is fantastic to perform and very enjoyable to present. I have found this to be true for a number of effects.
Audience participation is good, but to much slows down the show and presentation. I would never cut out a great audience participation trick, just to over prove a point for a trick like the Cube a Libre effect. Some trick it is better to enjoy the journey, then to try to prove you are a miracle maker. On the Café, the members get so tied up in proving beyond a doubt you really did perform a miracle. That is not magic, magic is a play and an actor presenting enjoyable seeming miracles for the enjoyment of the audience. Don't get carried away trying to prove you are a miracle maker, because at some point you will show you are not, then what will you be seen as. |
|||||||||
wzakaras New user 8 Posts |
Geoffrey Durham, I reread the intro and as stated it is there. Your description on how to build this was excellent and I want to thank you for sharing it. My copy has only minor changes to your original print copy. I use black blocks with yellow vinyl overlays. The "Cricut" machine is a wonderful aid in product development Watching this a few times on u-tube made it clear that my original belief was correct on accomplishing the final scenario. I gather you need a STURDY work table to eliminate any rocking/swaying of the blocks. Thank you for your reply and I wish you all the best.
|
|||||||||
funsway Inner circle old things in new ways - new things in old ways 9981 Posts |
I have performed this occasionally since 1960 when I won a set in a contest (Merv Taylor I think).
As a kid I could not use the recommended story line and began thinking of alternative narratives to justify the demonstration for various audiences. Not saying that a story that makes sense is essential, but that it has worked for me to make the story relevant to the chosen audience. Thus, making the effect about "numbers" or about "blocks" can both work, but combining the approaches amy be confusing. There is a danger today (as compared with 50 years ago) of some in the audience not being able to remember what the original stack was. In fact, a lecture on "short term memory" could be an exciting story line as a side-bar, One Chinese Supplier has a set for $119. I won't say which one since I don't want too many people doing this incredible effect. Can't speak to the quality -- probably plastic.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
gimpy2 Special user 960 Posts |
Been getting some emails from folks who purchased a cube a libre called "Gimpy cube a libre" from China. Gimpys magic has nothing to do with this product. I no longer make full size cube a libres. The images of these cube a libres show very colorful tubes, everything I make is natural woods except the blocks that are always black and white. Have no idea what the quality of this is but I understand the limited instructions are written in Chinese.
Gimpy
www.gimpysmagic.com |
|||||||||
Michael Baker Eternal Order Near a river in the Midwest 11172 Posts |
Quote:
On Sep 9, 2016, gimpy2 wrote: Wow, that sucks! But... if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, at least they are imitating one of the best builders out there.
~michael baker
The Magic Company |
|||||||||
61magic Special user Sacramento California 775 Posts |
No flattery with this, the stuff is just knock off junk from China pushed on the big auction site.
You also find ripoff versions of Dean's Box and most of the illusions with rights belonging to others. I for one won't buy this junk and I report it to the auction site as many times as I can.
Professor J. P. Fawkes
|
|||||||||
Rainboguy Inner circle 1915 Posts |
Before I, personally, would buy ANY specific Cube A Libre prop manufactured by any Maker I would ask myself this question: "Do I expect to perform this as one, or with an assistant?"
The answer will help determine which specific TYPE of prop will most likely be useful to YOUR performing requirements...IE: With an assistant and Onstage....BIGGER may be better....all things being equal...In a Parlor or more intimate setting, performing "as one"..smaller and more manageable versions may be more appropriate. Better to think this through upfront than regret it down the road after you've allready "coughed up". Just my 2 cents worth.... |
|||||||||
Magicalos Special user 557 Posts |
Looking to buy a set...anyone have any up to date places...i know gimpys still does them...anyone have other sources?
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Boxes, tubes & bags » » How to choose a "Cube a Libre" ? (8 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 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 < |