I cheated, sorry(, not sorry?). They were actually both gaffs: CS coins of different makers.

I'm not talking about a slight better here. On a scale of 1 to 100, where real coins are at 100, and a brick is a 0, I'd say most CS gaffs are at 20, and I think this one is easily 85-90. Sure, if you compare it side-by-side with a real coin, you can hear the difference. Looking at the spectrum plot for the audio, you can also see the reverberation/harmonic tones is slightly more extended for a real coin. But I'd put this one high enough to describe it as "sounding like a real coin."

You're absolutely right that it has to do with how well sealed the coin is - and in retrospect I should probably have realized that - clad US coins are essentially C/S coins as they have multiple metals - they're just fused together as malaki mentioned.

I guess that's the essence of my original question, though: which gaff makers make coins that are fused (rather than glued)? Which ones do it with better precision, so that the coin vibrates like a single piece of metal?

Is that phrasing more to your liking?

So all this dancing around was to ask who makes the best coin gaffs. LMAO. bro.... I'm done. I'm thinking you pretty much know.

I can say that's possible to make double faced or cs etc. Gaffed coins they sounds like real coins. Just the coin maker have to use the right glue

The best gaff maker may not make the best sounding.

Please stop putting words in my mouth. That was not what I said, and was never my question.
There's no such thing as "best", and I've told other people as much when they ask.

Go check out my original post again (the end included here for convenience):


Now, (7.5 months later, I'll add), I finally have a better understanding of what causes some coins to sound (close to) correct, versus those that go thud instead. Awesome: progress.

The additional parts of my original question were:

Which types of coins can be made to sound normal (it would be amazing in a split coin, for example, but I suspect very difficult)
and
Which manufacturers (if any) do this reliably? By special order?

People can make their own decision about whether this is a feature they care about (you seem not to, which is totally fine) versus other considerations like price, lead time, custom coins, etc.

I hope that's clearer.

Hi Jerome, since you're here, I was wondering if you can make that happen ? I know that you stopped (temporarily?) making coins, but if you can make a gaffed one that sounds almost like a real coin, I would be very, very interested.

Hi mh1001, that's possible for only the double faced coins or copper silver coins (or inserts coins for sun moon, csb etc.). Of course a gimmicked coin made with 2 separate parts (or more), who're no glued together can't have the same sound like an ungaffed (flipper, shelled coins,split etc).
https://youtu.be/lK1K3EzJaZE

Ooh, an expert! I eluded to some of this in my very first post.

I get why a flipper or folder wouldn't work. You didn't mention magnetic/shimmed coins in your list, but I'm assuming that counts as "double faced".

But why would, say, a split coin not work? Clearly the whole thing together can't sound right, but would it be possible for an individual "split" to? I'd think using the right glue might have the same effect as on a C/S coin, but it's possible I'm missing something.

Yes you're right, the half part of a split (with one magnet) will sound the same (a bit higher frequency because the less weight).

I was reminded of this post.

While not related to a C/S or "solid" gaff coin, I have noticed something worthwhile with a shelled coin. While tossing coins one at a time from hand to hand, I noticed that when the drop of a shelled coin occurs laterally the sound is way better than a vertical drop. I was counting through the coins as a display before CoinOne, the shelled coin was the third from the top so there would be an impact/sound before and after it was displayed/counted. By tossing the coins more horizontally, I have found the sounds created by all coins are very similar. I would go as far as to say it would disarm anyone familiar with the dud sound of a shelled coin. Just though someone else might benefit from this thought. Cheers

I have explored the use of sound as a method of inferential enforcement or misdirection for about six decades. It can be a valuable tool or source of problems. There is always a choice.
I even have a "Coins Across" routine in which I move the sound first and the coins follow. This used to work well. Today's audience seems more deaf or will often not provide the essential focused attention. Sigh!

Thus, if you desire to have sound an important element in the routine, a number of ploys and moves can be employed to overcome any difficulties, or build upon the unique sounds.

If you feel that sound might be a distracting or destructive factor, then certain ploys and moves can be employed to minimize the concerns.

However, this concern is more a magician's fantasy than any spectator based reality. Your objective should be what the observer remembers rather than what they hear or suspect or appreciate.
You can train the observer to notice sound or ignore it. You can make the "moment of magic" so powerful nothing else matters.

I am suggesting that if your effect is destroyed by a distinction of clink between a couple of coins there is something wrong with what you are doing in the "must be magic" artistry. (opinion)
If you are only juggling coins, of course, this sound may be critical.

For example - when handling invisible coins, do they make a sound or is the sound only a function of their visibility? What does a lay observer think on this subject?
They will believe exactly what you tell them the property of invisible coins is. You are the experienced expert, right?

"When this silver dollar travels magically to my other hand it actually becomes invisible first. It then has less mass and is easier to transport. It also may not ring as loudly and seem cold to the touch."

or some such instructions.

When I was creating effects for the TUC I wrote about the sound concern and offered suggestions for faking the sound as part of the instructions. Since then I have shifted to thinking it does not matter much.

If you believe this variance in sound makes a difference, then do not do such effects. Your doubt will be infectious.

If you "know" that this sound variance is minimal compared with the power of the effect (magic-wise), then that understanding will be infectious too.

Magic occurs within the mind of the observer and is only kindled or guided by the performer. Think of magic and not skill demonstration and the problem fades away.

Many might disagree, of course - so try your favorite trick with stones instead of coins. When a white and back stone switch places in the hands of spectators I doubt anyone will say, "They sound different."

With coins, they will only be concerned about the sound if you make/allow them to be concerned over the sound. Left to themselves it is 'non-starter."

Wow, Funsway, you always have an insightful perspective on matters of magic. To me, this could be your most insightful observation yet. I think this is something all coin workers should read and consider and it probably applies to magic in general. Even if one doesn't fully agree with your experienced observations it provides a perspective to reinforce the idea of powerful magic. As, an amateur, one of the biggest apprehensions is, of course, being caught out. This possibility always exists with poor handling but following your line of thought, a well designed performance explains away or negates any concern of those small "tells" that we fear the audience focus on.

Thank you,
Randy

While I understand your point, it is worthwhile if given the choice to select options which further the "realism."

I believe it was on one of David Williamson's earlier tapes that he discussed belief vs. conviction. Williamson said something such as, "The difference between belief and conviction is the audience will believe you in as far as they will go along with it. A conviction is they are convinced something is some way." The observation I was offering, for me, falls into the conviction or subtlety realm.

Consider Charlie Justice's pursubtlety (sp?). Some people will never see the display he creates, some will see it and not be moved, but some will see it and intuit its implications become convinced of the empty purse. The latter will be devastated by their convictions derived from such an insignificant detail.

It is probably equally worthwhile to say no one, save children, believe what we perform is "magic." At best they are puzzles for them to figure out or brief diversions for entertainment. Conviction becomes paramount when viewed though this lens. So at the end of the day, who are you doing it for? I humbly submit you are not doing it for those that the subtlety is lost upon.

Paint by number may be art, but it is neither elegant nor refined.

Thanks funsway. very good insights. I would add. if you are a coin guy you have the ability to diminish the sounds so that they are not important to the spectator. so an obsession with this shows a lack of sufficient and moderate skill, or else just focusing on one part of the performance that is not important to the spectator.