(Close Window)
Topic: Coinvexed 2 Sharpie Edition Review-
Message: Posted by: Gochos (Feb 3, 2009 01:11AM)
This review was from James Brown who does not have access to this forum so I am posting this for him.

Coinvexed 2 Review – James Brown

Well, what can I say about this new utility from Dave Penn and the team.

What a FANTASTIC use of the Sharpie! Totally convincing because it is totally invisible. I have even had this handled by spectators without any hint of suspicion.
The original Coinvexed has always been my coin bender of choice but this
NEW EDITION completely surpasses anything I have used before.

I have been using this new edition OF COINVEXED for a couple of weeks now and it just fits into by pocket perfectly and removes the need to hold the original gimmick in both hands.

I have already been working on a couple of different applications THAT work perfectly and will talk with David about how we can share these ideas with YOU all soon SHOULD you choose to BUY the new Coinvexed 2 Sharpie Edition

Shot with 2 cameras with high quality picture

Goodbye for NOW!

James Brown
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 3, 2009 06:37AM)
Hi all I just noticed that Costas ( Gochos ) has not included the last couple of sentences from the Mini Review by James Brown.

Here is the post in full including the final byline by James.

This was not meant to insult the intelligence of any reader here in the Café.
as you will see from the smile at the end of the Byline. Sorry for the omission.

[quote]
Coinvexed 2 Review – James Brown

Well, what can I say about this new utility from Dave Penn and the team.

What a FANTASTIC use of the Sharpie! Totally convincing because it is totally invisible. I have even had this handled by spectators without any hint of suspicion.
The original Coinvexed has always been my coin bender of choice but this
NEW EDITION completely surpasses anything I have used before.

I have been using this new edition OF COINVEXED for a couple of weeks now and it just fits into by pocket perfectly and removes the need to hold the original gimmick in both hands.

I have already been working on a couple of different applications THAT work perfectly and will talk with David about how we can share these ideas with YOU all soon SHOULD you choose to BUY the new Coinvexed 2 Sharpie Edition

It also comes with a professionally produced instructional DVD that features two live performances shot with two cameras.

Goodbye for NOW! :)

James Brown
(I hope you liked the subliminal suggestion! )
Feb 2009
[/quote]


The original of this post is at the following link,
http://www.magicbunny.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=426623&sid=499cb2ba389ba137db5ca260ae57969c#426623
Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Rich B. (Feb 3, 2009 07:18AM)
I was not very happy with the original Coinvexed gimmick which I explained on a review when I first received it. The idea of Coinvexed is very clever. Basically I was not happy with the pocket management issues. Even though Coinvexed got fairly favorable reviews, it seems that the creator does agree with my initial assessment and has a "new" version utilizing a sharpie which streamlines the handling.

After I purchased Coinvexed last year...it is still brand new and never used, I had a gimmick machined (for my own use) that utilizes a sharpie. I've been using this for almost 6 months and it has been for great for me. All I have to do is reach for my sharpie to have the coin signed and everything I need is in play. Easy to ditch as well. It does not solve the problem of "when to do the bend" which seemed to be one of the biggest problems for most performers. For me it is quite easy and I've never been caught. Of Course David Penn's routine with Coinvexed did make the moment invisible, but for me created other problems that I could not overcome.

For the record, I have never seen the Quantum Bender and have no clue of its design. I even considered purchasing it at one time.

Rich B.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 3, 2009 09:51AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-03 08:18, Rich B. wrote:
After I purchased Coinvexed last year...it is still brand new and never used, I had a gimmick machined (for my own use) that utilizes a sharpie. I've been using this for almost 6 months and it has been for great for me. All I have to do is reach for my sharpie to have the coin signed and everything I need is in play. Easy to ditch as well. It does not solve the problem of "when to do the bend" which seemed to be one of the biggest problems for most performers. For me it is quite easy and I've never been caught. Of Course David Penn's routine with Coinvexed did make the moment invisible, but for me created other problems that I could not overcome.

For the record, I have never seen the Quantum Bender and have no clue of its design. I even considered purchasing it at one time.

Rich B.
[/quote]

Hi Rich,

Great to hear you are doing well with your coin bending.

Your own Sharpie gimmick sounds interesting. I just hope that you have not infringed the Patent Pending claimed by John Sheets the creator of Quantum Bender as you seem to be going out of your way to claim no knowledge of the the Quantum Bender for reasons that are beyond me.

Perhaps you will be able to find the Patent Pending for Quantum Bender with a search at the United States Patent Office. We carried out extensive searches under all available search headings and even used information supplied by John, but we were not able to locate this claimed Patent Pending.

I am certain that the Patent Pending is there and that we have just failed to find it.
John would not claim to have a Patent Pending knowing that it is a criminal Offence to do so where there is none.
It would also offend customers who paid top dollar to buy a protected product.

So I think you can take it as read, that there is a Patent Pending application and you owe it to John to check it with regard to your gimmick, as you claim not to have seen Quantum Bender.

I have asked John for a direct link to the Patent Pending Application on the US Patent Registry as this is public information.
To date, the information has not been supplied. If you do find the application, perhaps you could pm me with the link.

Best regards
and happy bending
Jim
Message: Posted by: Rich B. (Feb 3, 2009 10:34AM)
Hi Jim.
I know of the Quantum Bender as of reviews on the Café alone. Its been noted as the best bender on the market. I also read that some guys are able to use the Quantum Bender with 1 hand. It would be IMPOSSIBLE to do that with my own version.

Also, by watching the handling by John T.Sheets video performance of the Quantum Bender on You Tube, and I am sure it is not the same method, as John would never be able to perform it as smoothly as he does with my gimmick.

My solution is not very different from all the typical benders that already exist. However, getting "in and out" of the routine is easier.

I didn't say I had NO KNOWLEDGE of the Quantum Bender. It is easy to figure out how the gimmick is disguised in performance just by the various posts on The Café.

What I said is "I have never seen the Quantum Bender and have no clue of its design". This is absolutely true.

I've spent lots of money on magic and have no desire to cheat any creator of what is due them. I simply created a version for myself and not something that I will be selling to anyone. Good luck with your Patent search.

Rich B.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 3, 2009 10:50AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-03 11:34, Rich B. wrote:
I've spent lots of money on magic and have no desire to cheat any creator of what is due them. I simply created a version for myself and not something that I will be selling to anyone. Good luck with your Patent search.

Rich B.
[/quote]

Hi Rich I was not suggesting that you would cheat a creator, I was just advising caution and due dilligence, as you have just posted on a public forum that you had created a Sharpie Coin bending Gimmick and also quoted QB. I know that John is very touchy on this subject at the moment.
Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Dr Spektor (Feb 3, 2009 11:22AM)
So, COINVEXED 2 uses a different method than QB2? I own Coinvexed and QB2... and most benders.... so just wondering without giving away the essentials... and how do they compare in terms of ease of use, bending, pocket management etc? (Yeah, I'll likely get it anyway eventually as part of the coin bender collection... but knowing if I should buy it straight out or just wait for a second hander on the selling section will be good!)
Message: Posted by: Matthew Wright (Feb 3, 2009 11:42AM)
Jaz, You seem to be putting up your defences regarding QB already. Are you expecting trouble? Hope not. I quite fancy this.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 3, 2009 01:57PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-03 12:42, matthew wright wrote:
Jaz, You seem to be putting up your defences regarding QB already. Are you expecting trouble? Hope not. I quite fancy this.
[/quote]

Hi Matthew,
Not expecting any trouble and no defences up. However we always carry out due dilligence prior to releasing any effect. I was merely giving my opinion on the post by Rich B.

I think you will like this one and as usual VFM and integrity are our top priorities for our customers.

Dr SpeKtor, Sorry but you are going to have to wait until after the release before any further details are revealed on this. Here is something that may help.
[quote]
On 2009-01-21 22:11, Al Straker wrote:
Yes it is a Sharpie gimmick but not the same as Quantum Bender by Sheets.

I have been fortunate enough to be using a prototype for a few months, very nice way to deceptively put 'work' into a coin. The actions are natural and I would say it is one of the least 'fiddley' devices available. Gimmick will never wear out.

Cheers,
Al
[/quote]

Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: chappelly (Feb 3, 2009 03:10PM)
When is the release date for this Jim?

Chappelly
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 3, 2009 03:25PM)
Hi Chappelly,

This is being released at the International Convention in Blackpool on February 20th. It will go into general distribution via Murphy's Magic Supplies at the earliest opportunity following our return from the convention.

Pre-orders will be shipped 24th 25th February from the UK

Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: matt.magicman (Feb 3, 2009 03:35PM)
When can we pre order from WMS ?
cheers
matt
Message: Posted by: hornet (Feb 3, 2009 03:51PM)
Is there a price yet?

Paul
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 3, 2009 03:57PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-03 16:35, matt.magicman wrote:
When can we pre order from WMS ?
cheers
matt
[/quote]
Hi Matt,

Within a few days, watch out for your email with all details including price and availability.

Best Regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Feb 4, 2009 05:25PM)
[/quote]

Hi Rich,

Great to hear you are doing well with your coin bending.

Your own Sharpie gimmick sounds interesting. I just hope that you have not infringed the Patent Pending claimed by John Sheets the creator of Quantum Bender as you seem to be going out of your way to claim no knowledge of the the Quantum Bender for reasons that are beyond me.

Perhaps you will be able to find the Patent Pending for Quantum Bender with a search at the United States Patent Office. We carried out extensive searches under all available search headings and even used information supplied by John, but we were not able to locate this claimed Patent Pending.

I am certain that the Patent Pending is there and that we have just failed to find it.
John would not claim to have a Patent Pending knowing that it is a criminal Offence to do so where there is none.
It would also offend customers who paid top dollar to buy a protected product.

So I think you can take it as read, that there is a Patent Pending application and you owe it to John to check it with regard to your gimmick, as you claim not to have seen Quantum Bender.

I have asked John for a direct link to the Patent Pending Application on the US Patent Registry as this is public information.
To date, the information has not been supplied. If you do find the application, perhaps you could pm me with the link.

Best regards
and happy bending
Jim
[/quote]






I just got off the phone with John Sheets. He states that he emailed you the patent numbers a couple of days ago AND that you PM'd him that you did in fact receive the email. He'll be on here shortly to post the emails between yourself and him. I'll be receiving a copy of the email myself as well...If what John says is true, that is a shame that you would come on here and lie through your teeth. I anxiously await for the email to be posted here. Assumming you haven't handled this ethically, what else have you not handle ethically? Possibly the Coinvexed 2? I'm not accusing, but since you have brought these accusations, I think it's fair to ask some questions. And if things do come to light??? We'll have to wait and see....
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Feb 4, 2009 06:42PM)
This all does sound a bit in bad taste on your part Jim especially with the timing of your product and the incredibly long existence of the Quantum Bender (both the original as well as 2.0). Not saying that Coinvexed 2 is a copy of QB but basically it was bad taste that your wording of the situation makes it reflect badly on John Sheets.
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 4, 2009 08:08PM)
We still haven't seen these e-mails between Jim and John. There really isn't any need to fling mud. Coinvexed 2 may even use a different method.

Best,

Doug L.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Feb 4, 2009 08:11PM)
May very well be different! But the if Jim is lying about the patents, not good.
Message: Posted by: etra (Feb 4, 2009 08:59PM)
That sounds good.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 5, 2009 04:39AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-04 18:25, lunatik wrote:

I just got off the phone with John Sheets. He states that he emailed you the patent numbers a couple of days ago AND that you PM'd him that you did in fact receive the email. He'll be on here shortly to post the emails between yourself and him. I'll be receiving a copy of the email myself as well...If what John says is true, that is a shame that you would come on here and lie through your teeth. I anxiously await for the email to be posted here. Assumming you haven't handled this ethically, what else have you not handle ethically? Possibly the Coinvexed 2? I'm not accusing, but since you have brought these accusations, I think it's fair to ask some questions. And if things do come to light??? We'll have to wait and see....
[/quote]

Richard (Lunatik,)
I really do resent the "lie through your teeth comment." We have been totally truthful and ethical throughout this debacle, started by you, suggesting that we had perhaps ripped off the QB2. It is wearing a bit thin now and just to save you or John the trouble and to ensure there is no editing going on, I include below the full content of the emails spelling mistakes and all between John and myself.
As you can clearly see, John provided information that did not show up anywhere on the United States Patent And Trademark Office on any of the searches detailed in my email. I have asked for a direct link and no response has been forthcoming from John.

That aside, I do think that people should wait until the product is released before jumping to unfounded conclusions about our ethics. Or making statements that they will have to suck back up like "Lying through your teeth." If you look at the post on this by Al Straker, I think you will get the idea. Just one more thing Richard (Lunatic) In your last PM to me you requested a CV2 to "put it through the ringer" I guess that this was just another way of John trying to get his hands on our product through you and before the release.

We know our release is totally ethical and we are not under any obligation to provide you, John or anyone else with free units. That aside, units and prototypes have been with several well know magicians Including 3 regular TV magicians, and Café members since August last year.

Do you really think that we would have done that if we were about to rip off another creator. Just wait until the release then post your apology.:)

Best regards
Jim

Here are the emails referred to by Richard Lunatik

[quote]
EMAIL 1 JIM TO JOHN
From: jim
Sent: 24 January 2009 15:53
To: john@johntsheets.com
Cc: David Penn-Illusionist; Costas Damianou
Subject: Coinvexed 2 Sharpie Edition
Importance: High
Sensitivity: Confidential
Hi John,

David Penn has notified me of your pm regarding Coinvexed 2 The Sharpie Edition.
World Magic Shop own the rights to this product and it will be released at the Blackpool Magic Convention.
David tells me that you are highly concerned about the similarity between Coinvexed 2 and QB2 and that you have a patent pending.
As part of our due diligence prior to releasing this item we carried out a search of both the US and UK patent registers. We could not find any similar items.

I note that you claim to have a patent pending and obviously we would not wish to infringe upon that application. Therefore in accordance with good practice, I would request that you send me details of your application or at the very least the application for patent pending number which will be a matter of public record.
This will allow our Patent Attorneys to review your application in respect of any infringement.
We will not be sending you any review copy as they are in limited supply and we have already allocated the review copies.
I look forward to receiving the information from you that would allow us to review this matter prior to the imminent release.
Best regards
Jim Trainer
http://www.worldmagicshop.co.uk
[/quote]
[quote]
REPLY FROM JOHN
From: John T Sheets [mailto:JOHN@JOHNTSHEETS.COM]
Sent: 28 January 2009 18:48
To: jim
Subject: Re: Coinvexed 2 Sharpie Edition

Hello Jim,

Thanks for your correspondence in the matter of my concern of the simularities of "Coinvexed 2" and the "Quantum Bender 2". Yes, not only is the "Quantum Bender" patent pending but I would also hope that you wouldn't intentionally create something simular from an ethical stand point.

The "Quantum Bender" has a filing date of 05/05/2006, with the United States Patent And Trademark Office, the application number is:
12/009,445. Foreign filing license was granted: 06/06/2006. The country code and number of the priority application, to be used for filing abroad the Paris Convention, is US 12/009,445. The Projected Publication date is: 04/02/09.

Will you please tell me the differences or simularities in the "Coinvexed 2" to the "Quantum Bender"? Thank you.

I look forward to your future correspondence.

Magically,
John T. Sheets
[/quote]
[quote]
EMAIL 3 REPLY FROM JIM
From: jim [mailto:jim@worldmagicshop.co.uk]
Sent: 28 January 2009 22:18
To: 'John T Sheets'
Subject: RE: Coinvexed 2 Sharpie Edition
Importance: High

Hi John,
I have used the information that you supplied to carry out a further search of the US Patents and Trademarks registry. I can find nothing using this information searching any database. (see below)

It would be helpful if you could provide me with a direct web link to your patent pending application. As this is a public record I guess that you will not have a problem with that.

I will not divulge any information regarding our product until I have viewed this record

Best regards
Jim

Searching US Patents Text Collection
Results of Search in US Patents Text Collection db for:
12/009,445 AND "Sheets John T": 0 patents.
No patents have matched your query .


Searching US Patents Text Collection...
Results of Search in US Patents Text Collection db for:
APN/12/009,445: 0 patents.
No patents have matched your query


Searching US Patents Text Collection..
Results of Search in US Patents Text Collection db for:
PN/12/009,445: 0 patents.
No patents have matched your query

Searching US Patents Text Collection..
Results of Search in US Patents Text Collection db for:
ICL/12/009,445: 0 patents.
No patents have matched your query

Searching US Patents Text Collection
Results of Search in US Patents Text Collection db for:
12/009,445: 0 patents.
No patents have matched your query
[/quote]

As you will see from the foregoing, we have acted ethically and with great respect to John’s product which is already in the marketplace.

We had carried out all of our checks and searches prior to being contacted by John. We decided to be extra careful after being contacted by John and carried out further searches based on the information supplied by him. The results of that are above.

I have not had any response from John to my last email and therefore as in my previous post, I can confirm that the information has not been forthcoming.

I am sure you will agree that it does not make any sense for us to offer a competitor full disclosure on our product before the release. Would Coke invite the MD of Pepsi to come and taste their latest drink a month before it was launched. :)

Best Regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Feb 5, 2009 05:14AM)
Thank you Jim for clarifying that he did in fact send you the patent numbers but that you were unable to find them. As to why you were unable to find them? I'll be honest, I haven't attempted to look for them and I can only assume the format wasn't entered in correctly? I'll assume that you did your best to locate the patents. As to why he hasn't provided a direct link? He has limited internet and I do not believe he's been online since the last email he sent you. He said last night that he'll be getting online soon to address this.

Also, I didn't say you were lying through your teeth, I said "IF". There's a difference. At anyrate, you're posts in this thread have defintely have been insinuating that John is a liar and does not have any patents pending. Him not responding in a timely manner doesn't mean that he's not been forthcoming. In fact, you haven't been forthcoming to the people reading this thread until today. Now things are starting to come together and we'll awaite for a response by John. Next time, please give everyone the whole picture instead of a small slice.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 5, 2009 05:20AM)
There are a couple of threads on the café regarding Coinvexed 2. and here are a couple of posts from members on this thread
http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=294443&forum=218&start=0 which may help to get things in perspective

[quote]
On 2009-01-27 10:19, Rupert Bair wrote:
This is Brilliant - very well made and extremely deceptive and practical addition to the original! Really is, had the pleasure at playing around with it last week, go get one when its out, you'll love it; sorry I can't say any more as its not my place to, but if you own and love coinvexed this takes it up an even higher level. Please don't pm for any more information, you'll have to wait for the release.
Best.
R.B/M.C
[/quote]

[quote]
On 2009-01-21 22:11, Al Straker wrote:
Yes it is a Sharpie gimmick but not the same as Quantum Bender by Sheets.
I have been fortunate enough to be using a prototype for a few months, very nice way to deceptively put 'work' into a coin. The actions are natural and I would say it is one of the least 'fiddley' devices available. Gimmick will never wear out.
Cheers,
Al
[/quote]

Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 5, 2009 05:26AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-04 21:08, Doug Lippert wrote:
We still haven't seen these e-mails between Jim and John. There really isn't any need to fling mud. Coinvexed 2 may even use a different method.

Best,

Doug L.
[/quote]

Doug thanks for your Karma :thumbsup:
Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 5, 2009 05:53AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-05 06:14, lunatik wrote:
Thank you Jim for clarifying that he did in fact send you the patent numbers but that you were unable to find them. As to why you were unable to find them? I'll be honest, I haven't attempted to look for them and I can only assume the format wasn't entered in correctly? I'll assume that you did your best to locate the patents. As to why he hasn't provided a direct link? He has limited internet and I do not believe he's been online since the last email he sent you. He said last night that he'll be getting online soon to address this.

Also, I didn't say you were lying through your teeth, I said "IF". There's a difference. At anyrate, you're posts in this thread have defintely have been insinuating that John is a liar and does not have any patents pending. Him not responding in a timely manner doesn't mean that he's not been forthcoming. In fact, you haven't been forthcoming to the people reading this thread until today. Now things are starting to come together and we'll awaite for a response by John. Next time, please give everyone the whole picture instead of a small slice.
[/quote]

Richard,
I a have no obligation to provide you or anyone else with details of confidential emails. When you state that "I have not been forthcoming", to what are you referring???? We have been open and honest and answered all questions where we were able to without divulging confidential information.

You also know what they say about assume, it makes an a** out of you and me.

How can you assume that the searches were not carried out correctly.
Our Patent Attorneys carried out these searches 2 years ago and then again last year. They found no relevant conflict or infringement regarding either of our releases of Coinvexed.

We were then contacted again by John both by PM and email. The information from the emails is detailed above.
Yes, John claims to have a Patenet Pending and yes neither us nor our Patent Attorneys have found any trace of it even using the further information supplied by John.

We are within our lawful rights to demand to see this information.
Perhaps you should use the information provided by John in the above email and see if you have any luck. If you do, please let me know.
That aside, there is no conflict between the items subject of this ping pong match so perhaps we should let this branch of the thread rest.

Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Feb 5, 2009 05:53AM)
I think these emails should have been sent at the conception of the creation of Coinvexed 2. But it's possible that they were and I'm just unaware. I believe David Penn has a QB2 which should give all parties an idea of what they're working with, but if CV2 is really close in functionality, then I can see why the request for the pending patents. But if these were the only emails that were requesting the patent numbers, I think it's a little be late as CV2 is about to be released to the world. Best of luck to everyone involved
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 5, 2009 06:02AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-05 06:53, lunatik wrote:
I think these emails should have been sent at the conception of the creation of Coinvexed 2. But it's possible that they were and I'm just unaware. I believe David Penn has a QB2 which should give all parties an idea of what they're working with, but if CV2 is really close in functionality, then I can see why the request for the pending patents. But if these were the only emails that were requesting the patent numbers, I think it's a little be late as CV2 is about to be released to the world. Best of luck to everyone involved
[/quote]

Richard,
It seems that you are just not getting it.
We had no obligation to contact John at any point.
We employ professionals to research our products and if we feel that we might be close to stepping on someones toes then at that point, we would either abandon the project or contact the person and try to work something out.

The huge financial commitment to go to prototype and then production on an item like this warrants detailed research and we carried out that research.

We had no need to contact John Sheets. We immediately responded to his emails and PM's to us and we then immediately responded to your totally incorrect assumptions on this and the other thread.
As I said previously, we could go on with this Ping Pong match for ever but I think you should let it rest and just wait until the release. THis is supposed to be a review thread.

best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: danielellis_5 (Feb 5, 2009 06:08AM)
Will it be possible to pre-order coin-vexed 2 and then pick it up at the blackpool convention?Im not going to the convention untill the sunday and I would hate to find out that coin-vexed 2 is sold out.

Thanks Alot
Dan
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 5, 2009 06:19AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-05 07:08, danielellis_5 wrote:
Will it be possible to pre-order coin-vexed 2 and then pick it up at the blackpool convention?Im not going to the convention untill the sunday and I would hate to find out that coin-vexed 2 is sold out.

Thanks Alot
Dan
[/quote]

Just PM'd you details Daniel

Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Caliban (Feb 5, 2009 02:06PM)
Jim

I'm finding it hard to see the relevance of all this patent talk. Surely you're not claiming that it would be okay to rip off the Quantum Bender if John can't prove he has a patent pending? Magic is a small cottage industry where very few products are protected by patents. Instead, the magic world has a well established rule that ethical dealers do not rip off the products of others. So whether or not John Sheet's patent pending actually exists makes absolutely no difference one way or another.

And lets be honest, anyone who is well connected in magic can easily find out what a Quantum Bender is and how it works. If you didn't know already you would have easily been able to find out by ringing round a few contacts. So we can safely assume that you already know exactly what John's gimmick is, and that yours is different or you wouldn't be putting it out.

Coinvexed 2 is likely to cause some controversy: Some people will argue that because the Quantum Bender is an established coin bender disguised as a Sharpie, it's a rip off for another dealer to release their own coin bender disguised as a Sharpie, even if the methods are different. Other people will argue that, as the method is completely different there's no problem. There's no definite right or wrong on that one - it's just going to come down personal opinions.

To me, this appears to be a bit of a distraction tactic. You know that you're in a bit of an ethical grey area in releasing a coin bender disguised as a Sharpie when one is already on the market, and you know that some people (especially those with a competing product) might criticize you for it ... but if you can lead people to accuse you of ripping off the Quantum Bender before it's released and have those people proved wrong when yours turns out to be a completely different method ... then you appear to have won the argument and it steers people away from the real question, which is whether it's ethical for another dealer to market a Sharpie coin bending gimmick at all.

Or something like that.

I'm not suggesting that it IS unethical for someone else to release a different Sharpie coin bending gimmick - you could make a valid case for either side of the argument - but that debate is the real issue. All this talk of patents just comes across as misdirection.
Message: Posted by: Jon Allen (Feb 5, 2009 02:51PM)
I think part of the problem here is the vast majority have not seen the gimmick (me included). People who know about QB and the way it works are possibly wondering how different a gimmick something can be when:

1. It needs to bend a coin
2. It needs to be disguised as a Sharpie
3. It has Coinvexed in, knowing how that works.

Once Coinvexed 2 is released, people will know for sure of the similarities....or otherwise. Until then, everything is speculation.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Feb 5, 2009 03:09PM)
Personally, I feel that Jim was just a bit "loose" with his wording thus blowing this whole thing out of proportion. There may not have been any ill intention but it felt like it because of how it was originally worded.
Message: Posted by: GarySumpter (Feb 5, 2009 03:23PM)
I am looking forward to seeing this at Blackpool :)

Gary
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 5, 2009 04:41PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-05 15:06, Caliban wrote:
Jim

I'm finding it hard to see the relevance of all this patent talk. Surely you're not claiming that it would be okay to rip off the Quantum Bender if John can't prove he has a patent pending? Magic is a small cottage industry where very few products are protected by patents. Instead, the magic world has a well established rule that ethical dealers do not rip off the products of others. So whether or not John Sheet's patent pending actually exists makes absolutely no difference one way or another.

And lets be honest, anyone who is well connected in magic can easily find out what a Quantum Bender is and how it works. If you didn't know already you would have easily been able to find out by ringing round a few contacts. So we can safely assume that you already know exactly what John's gimmick is, and that yours is different or you wouldn't be putting it out.

Coinvexed 2 is likely to cause some controversy: Some people will argue that because the Quantum Bender is an established coin bender disguised as a Sharpie, it's a rip off for another dealer to release their own coin bender disguised as a Sharpie, even if the methods are different. Other people will argue that, as the method is completely different there's no problem. There's no definite right or wrong on that one - it's just going to come down personal opinions.

To me, this appears to be a bit of a distraction tactic. You know that you're in a bit of an ethical grey area in releasing a coin bender disguised as a Sharpie when one is already on the market, and you know that some people (especially those with a competing product) might criticize you for it ... but if you can lead people to accuse you of ripping off the Quantum Bender before it's released and have those people proved wrong when yours turns out to be a completely different method ... then you appear to have won the argument and it steers people away from the real question, which is whether it's ethical for another dealer to market a Sharpie coin bending gimmick at all.

Or something like that.

I'm not suggesting that it IS unethical for someone else to release a different Sharpie coin bending gimmick - you could make a valid case for either side of the argument - but that debate is the real issue. All this talk of patents just comes across as misdirection.
[/quote]

Caliban,
Seems to me you don't get it either,

We are not worried about the Patent. We are an ethical producer and for that reason alone we would not infringe on another creators product.

The whole Patent thing was raised by John Sheets as you will see from the emails above and in PM's to David Penn and myself. John used the fact that he had a Patent Pending to demand a copy of our Product. That is just not going to happen. However as John brought up his Patent, we felt it only right that having brought it up, he should follow that up with the public record information.

I merely passed his concerns on in this forum as advice to RichB
.
Then a few posters without any knowledge of either our gimmick or the background, such as yourself, chip in with comments that make no sense to me. They make assumptions in public without any knowledge, they assume that we are ripping off another creator, and then suggest that we are lying through our teeth.
None of this is true and therefore, as I stated earlier this string of conversation within the thread should be left alone before a few people end up with egg on their faces.

The people who have had the gimmick have already posted comments but all of you knockers just seem to ignore this. Are they Lying through their teeth as well????.

Wait for the release then post your apology. :thumbsdown:
Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Feb 5, 2009 05:02PM)
I look forward to its release! will it be out this month or possibly March?
Message: Posted by: Caliban (Feb 5, 2009 06:20PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-05 17:41, Jaz2005 wrote:
Wait for the release then post your apology. :thumbsdown:
Best regards
Jim
[/quote]

It's extremely unlikely that I'll have anything to apologise for.

My post clearly says that I expect your gimmick to have a different method - so I haven't accused you off ripping off the Quantum Bender. And I was the first to post in your defence when you were wrongly accused of misleading advertising over the David Blaine claim on Hank Lee's site.

I did say is that there's an ethical grey area in releasing a coin bender disguised as a Sharpie when there is already one on the market - even if it has a different method. That's true. Some people will criticize it and others will defend it.

So I'm not sure what you think I'm going to have to apologise for when your product is released. My comments were based purely on the fact that your gimmick is a Sharpie coin bender - and my source for that information was your own promotional posts.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 5, 2009 07:00PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-05 19:20, Caliban wrote:

My comments were based purely on the fact that your gimmick is a Sharpie coin bender - and my source for that information was your own promotional posts.

I was the first to post in your defence when you were wrongly accused of misleading advertising over the David Blaine claim on Hank Lee's site.

[/quote]

Hi again Caliban.
Item #1 in the quote above where, in any promotional posts have we or I or anyone associated with this product claimed that our gimmick is a Sharpie Coin Bender as claimed by you?. Soley in your imagination me thinks.

Our sole claim is that the new Coinvexed is the Sharpie Edition.

We have also stated several times that apart from the reviewers and testers worlwide who have had the product, that we will be making a full disclosure at the launch in Blackpool and not before.

David Penn will discuss it in full during both of his lectures at Blackpool and also on the stand. At that point everyone who wants to know what it is before puchasing one will get to know what it is. This is extremely unusual as normally you would have to purchase an item before you find out exactly what it is.

Item #2 Thanks for that.

So guys until the launch let's just leave the speculation and accusations on the shelf please.

Best Regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 5, 2009 07:04PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-05 18:02, lunatik wrote:
I look forward to its release! will it be out this month or possibly March?
[/quote]
Hi Richard,
It will be out February 20th at Blackpool in the UK and with Murphys Magic Supplies in the U.S. week ending February 28th and at your dealers shortly after that..
Message: Posted by: Caliban (Feb 6, 2009 02:42AM)
Hi Jim

[quote]
On 2009-02-05 20:00, Jaz2005 wrote:
Item #1 in the quote above where, in any promotional posts have we or I or anyone associated with this product claimed that our gimmick is a Sharpie Coin Bender as claimed by you?.
[/quote]

I was going from the Al Straker post that you quoted earlier in this thread.

On 2009-01-21 22:11, Al Straker wrote:
Yes it is a Sharpie gimmick ...

I do accept, though, that there would be a big difference between a single piece gimmick that's built into a Sharpie - and a gimmick that merely involves a Sharpie or has a Sharpie as part of it.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 6, 2009 03:32AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-06 03:42, Caliban wrote:
Hi Jim

I was going from the Al Straker post that you quoted earlier in this thread.

On 2009-01-21 22:11, Al Straker wrote:
Yes it is a Sharpie gimmick ...

I do accept, though, that there would be a big difference between a single piece gimmick that's built into a Sharpie - and a gimmick that merely involves a Sharpie or has a Sharpie as part of it.
[/quote]
Caliban,
AHHHH HAAAA :applause: Now I am going to plead the fifth.

Have a good weekend.
Off to make a snowman now in Scotland

Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 6, 2009 09:43AM)
A interesting story. I had purchased Coinvexed and thought it could be so much better. I had a brilliant idea and designed a solution to my handling problems. I contacted David Penn with my idea and found out he had thought of it as well and had produced prototypes. They sent me one to evaluate so I have seen it and I will say this.
1) It does not resemble in any way the method used by QB 2 - which I own.
2) If this would have been the original design I would have never bought the QB 2.
IMHO this is a great change to the design. It is different in design and handling from QB 2. It will offer additional flexibility to your routines.
I don't want to say anything else until it is released.

Tom Paxton
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Feb 6, 2009 10:45AM)
Bloody hell, how much is this going to cost me Jim? After Tom's post, I think I'm going to pick one up.
Message: Posted by: Christopher Williams (Feb 6, 2009 11:52AM)
According to the newsletter sent out from WorldMagicshop, £85 is the cost, so the same as CV1!
Message: Posted by: Gochos (Feb 6, 2009 01:21PM)
http://www.worldmagicshop.co.uk/coinvexed-sharpie-edition-david-penn-preorder-p-5789.html
Message: Posted by: Fred Masschelein (Feb 7, 2009 04:33AM)
It's seems there will be an upgrade kit for the owners of the original Coinvexed.
Jim, could you tell us more about this? Will it be also available during the Blackpool convention?

Fred
Message: Posted by: Gochos (Feb 7, 2009 11:56AM)
Yes it will
Message: Posted by: Andi Peters (Feb 7, 2009 12:32PM)
I've just looked and the upgrade kit is £45......WOW!!!!!! That's a heck of a price for an upgrade. What do they do, gold plate the thing??????
Message: Posted by: Adam Hince (Feb 7, 2009 09:45PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-07 13:32, Andi Peters wrote:
I've just looked and the upgrade kit is £45......WOW!!!!!! That's a heck of a price for an upgrade. What do they do, gold plate the thing??????
[/quote]

I doubt that would look natural.

-AH
Message: Posted by: chappelly (Feb 8, 2009 12:48AM)
Could look natural if you are performing for the top end of town!

Chappelly
Message: Posted by: misterian (Feb 8, 2009 01:46PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-07 13:32, Andi Peters wrote:
I've just looked and the upgrade kit is £45......WOW!!!!!! That's a heck of a price for an upgrade. What do they do, gold plate the thing??????
[/quote]

As the owner of 2 of Coinvexed, I say "Thank You!" for the upgrade discount. How great to be able to get some credit for being a supporter of the original effect. Appreciated here at the upgrade price! Jim
Message: Posted by: chappelly (Feb 8, 2009 03:16PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-08 14:46, misterian wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-02-07 13:32, Andi Peters wrote:
I've just looked and the upgrade kit is £45......WOW!!!!!! That's a heck of a price for an upgrade. What do they do, gold plate the thing??????
[/quote]

As the owner of 2 of Coinvexed, I say "Thank You!" for the upgrade discount. How great to be able to get some credit for being a supporter of the original effect. Appreciated here at the upgrade price! Jim
[/quote]

It's certainly better than having to buy the complete Coinvexed 2.

Chappelly
Message: Posted by: billfromoregon (Feb 8, 2009 06:24PM)
Tpax - I own the QB2 - a great gimmick that does what it is intended to very well. Given that I am happy with the QB2, do you see any reason for me to purchase the coinvexed 2? Thanks-



Bill
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 8, 2009 09:40PM)
Hi Bill
If you are happy with your routine then the short answer - No.
In the same breath if you had the new Coinvexed and asked this question about it I would give the same answer.
They both are brilliant designs and asking which is better would be asking which Playmate is prettier....
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 9, 2009 01:21AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-08 22:40, tpax wrote:
They both are brilliant designs and asking which is better would be asking which Playmate is prettier....
[/quote]

I disagree on your Playmate reference. But, I will take 2 of every hair color.. :)

I never liked the idea of having 2 coins signed to just bend one of them as that is pointless. Is this flaw removed?

Best,

Doug L.
Message: Posted by: Ustaad (Feb 9, 2009 01:22AM)
Going thru the various posts on the subject & seeing the Ad for an up-grade pack; it seems that the NEW Coinvexed-2 is a two part unit comprising of 1 * Coinvexed version-1 + 1 * Coinvexed Version-2.

If my above assumption is correct, then I think this is really a very brilliant idea of mix-n-match.

I only hope that Coinvexed-2, besides help bend a coin, can also be used as a writing instrument. And if so, I must say it is GREAT thinking on the part of the creator - David Penn. This will open up a totally new concept in coin bending deception, misdirection & subtlety - right in the face of the spectator(s).

I would love to see (if possible) a live performance demo video without those nasty cuts.

Good luck!

:xmas:
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 9, 2009 08:18AM)
[quote]
I never liked the idea of having 2 coins signed to just bend one of them as that is pointless. Is this flaw removed?
[/quote]

Yes.
Message: Posted by: borjuist (Feb 9, 2009 11:11AM)
Hi, coinvexed 2 can used with 1 coin ???? :D


Best,

Rick..
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 9, 2009 11:37AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-09 12:11, borjuist wrote:
Hi, coinvexed 2 can used with 1 coin ???? :D


Best,

Rick..
[/quote]

The spectator only needs to handle one coin.
Message: Posted by: bond19 (Feb 9, 2009 11:41AM)
So, do you need to purchase coinvexed 1 in order to use coinvexed 2??
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 9, 2009 03:05PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-09 12:41, bond19 wrote:
So, do you need to purchase coinvexed 1 in order to use coinvexed 2??
[/quote]

If you are just "upgrading" then, yea.

Best,

Doug L.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 10, 2009 07:52AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-09 12:41, bond19 wrote:
So, do you need to purchase coinvexed 1 in order to use coinvexed 2??
[/quote]

Hi Bond,
CV2 is complete you do not need to own CV1.
However, if you already own a CV1 then you only need to buy the upgrade kit which we produced to save previous purchasers from having to buy a complete CV2
best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Nick Wait (Feb 11, 2009 05:24AM)
I have not read the entirety of this thread, so firgive me if this has been said previously. The issue is regarding the Patent Pending on the QB. I believe the rammifications of this have been misinterpreted, and perhaps by me as well.

My understanding was that a "Patent Pending" meant that the Patent had yet to be issued, and that the US patent office offers no protection for Patent Pending items. I believe this might be different in the UK, so long as the Patent is accepted. This is not a formality. I also did not think you could search for "Patent Pending" only Patents. And yes it is illegal in the UK, to claim Patent Pending.
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 11, 2009 08:34AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-11 06:24, Nick Wait wrote:
The issue is regarding the Patent Pending on the QB. I believe the rammifications of this have been misinterpreted, and perhaps by me as well.

My understanding was that a "Patent Pending" meant that the Patent had yet to be issued, and that the US patent office offers no protection for Patent Pending items.
[/quote]

Hey Nick,

I think Mr. Sheets applied for a provisional patent application because it is substantially cheaper than hiring an attorney to file a non-provisional patent application. I hope magic doesn't get patented because it exposes the workings to anyone that can search the online database. Just look at The Lean or David Copperfield flying..all exposed. :(

Best,

Doug L.
Message: Posted by: Eric Gretencord (Feb 11, 2009 10:39AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-09 02:22, Ustaad wrote:
I only hope that Coinvexed-2, besides help bend a coin, can also be used as a writing instrument.
[/quote]

I would like to know too. As well as if v2 provides better leverage?
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 11, 2009 10:59AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-11 11:39, Eric Gretencord wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-02-09 02:22, Ustaad wrote:
I only hope that Coinvexed-2, besides help bend a coin, can also be used as a writing instrument.
[/quote]

I would like to know too. As well as if v2 provides better leverage?
[/quote]

Hi Eric, Ustaad.

Coinvexed 2 can be used as a writing instument by the Spectator with no sw***h required.
Hope that helps
best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 11, 2009 11:06AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-11 11:59, Jaz2005 wrote:
Coinvexed 2 can be used as a writing instument by the Spectator with no sw***h required.
[/quote]

Sign me up!!!!! This destroys Quantum Bender 2.0. No flames please.

Best,

Doug L.
Message: Posted by: Ustaad (Feb 11, 2009 11:31AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-11 11:59, Jaz2005 wrote:

Hi Eric, Ustaad.

[b][i]Coinvexed 2 can be used as a writing instument by the Spectator with no sw***h required.[/i][/b]

Hope that helps
best regards
Jim
[/quote]

[b]Fantastic![/b]

Thank you for clarifying my doubt.

IMHO, in spite of [b]Coinvexed-2[/b] being a two part coin bending tool, [b]Coinvexed-2[/b] is going to be the ultimate tool for bending a coin in the face of the spectator(s) - at least for some time to come. I say this on two counts:-

(a) One part of the tool acts as a perfect deception, while the other part is a perfect camouflage.

(b) Immediately after the effect you have good reason(s) to pocket one part of the tool, while the second part can remain in the hand till the end of the effect.

I must say that in developing this new coin bending tool some deliberate brainstorming & brilliant thinking has gone into. And with [b]Coinvexed-2[/b], I feel that everything gets beautifully synchronized & fits into place starting from performance, method, misdirection, patter (probably) and timing.

As I have already mentioned in my previous post that I have no idea of Coinvexed-2. This is just an educated guess - but I think this time I won't be totally off track/ wrong. :)

This is on my purchase list.

:xmas:
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Feb 11, 2009 01:26PM)
Awe, Doug can finally afford a good coin bender :P J/k for old times sake. This could possibly replace a QB if all goes well. I'm going to pick one up myself as well.

I'm guessing that this is a real time bend and only one coin is in play the entire time? No extra coins introduced or taken away?
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 11, 2009 03:34PM)
It is a real time bend and, if you like, only one coin needs to be handled by the spectator. I never had a issue with signing two coins, it was always the two hands full of coins.
It will not, IMHO, improve leverage much over the original.

What happens:
The spectator sees a hand full of change and a sharpie. Spec takes sharpie and signs chosen coin, or own coin, hands coin to magician. Signed coin bends in magicians hand (or their hand), spectator returns sharpie while shaking their head saying WOW.

If you own Coinvexed and are still looking for a great bender but don't want to invest in the QB2 then get the upgrade. You won't be sorry.
If you have the QB2 and arn't happy with it you won't be happy with Coinvexed 2
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Feb 11, 2009 03:57PM)
Ok, tpax, you've given more insight here. What I am asking really is, spectator's viewpoint:

Spectator takes out one of his/her own coins, I hand them Sharpie, they sign coin, I get coin back and do what I need to do, then proceed with the presentatio of the bend. In other words, is Coinvexed 2 as clean and streamlined as the QB?

I've played with the QB quite a bit and absolutely love it for out in the open live bends. There's literally no other coin in play or in sight... ever. I also know the original Coinvexed but absolutely HATE the fact that I had to take out a pocket full of change or get a pocket full of change.
Message: Posted by: chappelly (Feb 11, 2009 04:01PM)
Hi Jim,
Is the CV2 as sturdy as CV1 ?

Chappelly
Message: Posted by: Gochos (Feb 11, 2009 04:40PM)
http://www.worldmagicshop.com/coinvexed-2-sharpie-edition-by-david-penn-preorder.html
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Feb 11, 2009 05:07PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-11 12:06, Doug Lippert wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-02-11 11:59, Jaz2005 wrote:
Coinvexed 2 can be used as a writing instument by the Spectator with no sw***h required.
[/quote]

Sign me up!!!!! This destroys Quantum Bender 2.0. No flames please.

Best,

Doug L.
[/quote]


Quantum Bender 2.0 destroys CV2!!! No flames please.
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 11, 2009 05:23PM)
I really can't comment on presentations other then what I've posted. It would not be fair to the guys bringing this out. I will say you can do a live, out in the open bend that, in the spectators eye, would look just like QB2. Because they are different methods they require different handlings to make them work.
Coinvexed 2 and QB2 each have their advantages. If you like QB2 and are happy with it don't get this. It will sit in your drawer. If you are looking for a good coin bender, wait until this is released before making your decision.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 11, 2009 07:42PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-11 17:01, chappelly wrote:
Hi Jim,
Is the CV2 as sturdy as CV1 ?

Chappelly
[/quote]
Hi Chappelly,
Rock solid, it will last a lifetime and if is doesn't we will replace it f.o.c.

best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Ogre1234 (Feb 12, 2009 07:09AM)
Wow, this sounds excellent. With a great price to boot. I can hardly wait!
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Feb 12, 2009 08:12AM)
Thanks tpax, I appreciate the honesty :D
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 13, 2009 08:40AM)
Less than a week to go now guys. I am really looking forward to Blackpool and the Launch of Coinvexed The Sharpie Edition.

For customers outside of Europe, it is available on http://www.worldmagicshop.com for shipping on 24th February.

Thanks to all of you guys who have pre-ordered this limited edition or the upgrade kit.
Have a great day
best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: rochaz (Feb 13, 2009 09:03AM)
Jaz2005,
Forgive me for not figuring this out on my own...
I am an owner of the original CV and was looking to upgrade.
When I visit the "worldmagicshop" site I don't see where I can order the just the upgrade package. Am I just missing it completely? :)
Would someone please educated me on this?

I would certainly appreciate it!

Respectfully,
JRRocha
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 13, 2009 09:46AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-13 10:03, rochaz wrote:
Jaz2005,
Forgive me for not figuring this out on my own...
I am an owner of the original CV and was looking to upgrade.
When I visit the "worldmagicshop" site I don't see where I can order the just the upgrade package. Am I just missing it completely? :)
Would someone please educated me on this?

I would certainly appreciate it!

Respectfully,
JRRocha
[/quote]

Go to their website and type "upgrade" in the search box, it will come up.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 13, 2009 09:51AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-13 10:03, rochaz wrote:
Jaz2005,
Forgive me for not figuring this out on my own...
I am an owner of the original CV and was looking to upgrade.
When I visit the "worldmagicshop" site I don't see where I can order the just the upgrade package. Am I just missing it completely? :)
Would someone please educated me on this?

I would certainly appreciate it!

Respectfully,
JRRocha
[/quote]

Thanks Tom,
Rochaz

Just click on the main Coinvexed Ad on the front page. That takes you to a new page and the upgrade is under the main item.

Best Regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: rochaz (Feb 13, 2009 12:36PM)
Tpax and Jaz2005,
Found it!
Will be ordering very soon...thanks for your help. :)

JRRocha
Message: Posted by: caigy (Feb 15, 2009 10:46AM)
Does the upgrade kit make the original CV1 EXACTLY the same as CV2, or just similar? That is, would I be as well selling the original and buying the new, or is the upgrade the same quality?

Many thanks,
Paul Mc.
Message: Posted by: Gochos (Feb 15, 2009 01:34PM)
Caigy The upgrade Kit will make your CV1 exactly the same as CV2.
Message: Posted by: caigy (Feb 15, 2009 05:00PM)
Thanks Gochos.

Paul Mc.
Message: Posted by: jprace (Feb 15, 2009 05:12PM)
IF you buy the Coinvexed 2 Sharpie edition, can you remove the gimmick and have the original Coinvexed?
Message: Posted by: gdw (Feb 15, 2009 06:48PM)
So it sounds like you still have to have at least one hand full of coins with CV2.
Message: Posted by: gdw (Feb 15, 2009 06:57PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-11 06:24, Nick Wait wrote:
I have not read the entirety of this thread, so firgive me if this has been said previously. The issue is regarding the Patent Pending on the QB. I believe the rammifications of this have been misinterpreted, and perhaps by me as well.

My understanding was that a "Patent Pending" meant that the Patent had yet to be issued, and that the US patent office offers no protection for Patent Pending items. I believe this might be different in the UK, so long as the Patent is accepted. This is not a formality. I also did not think you could search for "Patent Pending" only Patents. And yes it is illegal in the UK, to claim Patent Pending.
[/quote]

I always wondered about this when I heard "Patent Pending." It's like the advertiser is saying "if your gonna rip us off, NOW is the time to do it. If you wait, we'll be protected, but right now, this very moment that we are advertising, we just want to make it abundantly clear that we are NOT currently protected in any way shape or form."

At least that's what I always wondered.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Feb 16, 2009 02:35PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-15 18:12, magicman4646 wrote:
IF you buy the Coinvexed 2 Sharpie edition, can you remove the gimmick and have the original Coinvexed?
[/quote]

Hi, the answer is no. Different products.

Regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Lord Freddie (Feb 17, 2009 10:12AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-11 16:57, kissdadookie wrote:
Ok, tpax, you've given more insight here. What I am asking really is, spectator's viewpoint:

Spectator takes out one of his/her own coins, I hand them Sharpie, they sign coin, I get coin back and do what I need to do, then proceed with the presentatio of the bend. In other words, is Coinvexed 2 as clean and streamlined as the QB?

I've played with the QB quite a bit and absolutely love it for out in the open live bends. There's literally no other coin in play or in sight... ever. I also know the original Coinvexed but absolutely HATE the fact that I had to take out a pocket full of change or get a pocket full of change.
[/quote]

This was exactly my point concerning the original CV. If CV2 enables you to cleanly bend one coin without the suspicious introduction of another one and a pocket full of change, I'm in.
No one seems to want to answer this question though. I take it must be similar to the original...

I can't wait to read a review from an actual purchaser of this effect. If it does what I hope it does then it could well be an excellent release.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Feb 17, 2009 11:04AM)
It seems to me that they are essentially two completely different types of bends with very different feels. I personally prefer the streamlined handling for QB and QB 2 as opposed to that of the original Coinvexed because if one really wanted to backtrack, even though they would not stumble upon the method for either, only QB and QB 2 will get you that very direct "I took out a coin and signed it, then it bent/melted/warped/etc." For all intent and purposes, the directness just feels so pure and it's so hands off.
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 17, 2009 01:39PM)
Please wait until the product is released before you make judgements. Coinvexed 2 has a very natural handling due to the design of the upgrade. I have seen and used the new coinvexed. It is well designed and can do almost every routine the QB can do, and some things the QB can't.
You do need to wait until it's released and hear others thoughts.
I will make a prediction that this thread will be overflowing with positive reviews!
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Feb 17, 2009 01:45PM)
I am so on the fence (tipped more towards the positive than theoretical negative) about picking it up so no worries about prejudgement affecting this individuals purchase (I'm waiting for my local dealer to start carrying them instead of pre-ordering though).
Message: Posted by: Andi Peters (Feb 17, 2009 04:02PM)
I saw this today. If you like CV 1 you'll like CV 2. If you didn't like CV1 you won't like CV2. The two are actually very similar.
Message: Posted by: Lord Freddie (Feb 18, 2009 02:48AM)
Thanks Andi, that's clarified things a bit for me. The million dollar question seems to be, can you perform the aforementioned bend with just one borrowed coin?

I have a feeling that the routining must be similar to the first one.
Message: Posted by: Rich B. (Feb 18, 2009 06:45AM)
Its not very hard to figure out what the new version of Coinvexed might be(if you own the original Coinvexed). If it is what I think it is, it would cut down the original problems for me by 50%. I guess that's quite an improvement, but I still think it is not as streamlined as this effect can be.

Of course this is just speculation on my part, and when the product is released, we will know how much of an improvement it actually is, and maybe its fantastic...we'll have to wait and see.

Rich B.
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 18, 2009 08:15AM)
Rich B is right, easy to figure out.
I never had a problem with bringing out a handful of coins, it is a natural movement when looking for change. After Rich's post I realized some may not like that. Others seem to be stuck on only one coin from the spectator being used (IMHO, it's NOT natural to ask a stranger for change - unless you are panhandling. And if they are seated it is a hassle and stops the flow of your routine).
Anyways, for those that own coinvexed and are interested in the upgrade, yes, it replaces one of the coinvexed gimmicks.
Message: Posted by: Lord Freddie (Feb 18, 2009 08:26AM)
If you are going to bend a coin (borrowed, what's the point of bringing out another one that's superflous to the effect?

Just asking, that's all.
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 18, 2009 08:57AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-18 09:26, Lord Freddie wrote:
If you are going to bend a coin (borrowed, what's the point of bringing out another one that's superflous to the effect?

Just asking, that's all.
[/quote]

Yes, and that's exactly why Coinvexed 1 wasn't an improvement to the plot. Hopefully Coinvexed 2 will be!

Best,

Doug L.
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 18, 2009 09:58AM)
If you haven't noticed, most women don't have pockets in their clothes. If you are strolling corporate/fancy parties and you ask a woman for a quarter where do you think they have it? In their purse is the typical answer. And they may have one in their purse, but most women don't carry their purse into business functions and parties, just a little clutch with license, Credit Card, and a few bucks for parking. And a lot of men avoid carrying change in these situations as a pocket full of coin can distract from the look they are trying to acheive. So if you depend on borrowing a coin you may not find one - tough to do a coin bend without a coin.
Introducing coins allows them to make a choice, keeps the flow of the routine, gives a reason to go to the pocket, and avoids the awkward moment where they want you to unbend or replace their quarter. This is true with all coin bending routines, not just coinvexed!
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 18, 2009 11:00AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-18 10:58, tpax wrote:
If you haven't noticed, most women don't have pockets in their clothes. If you are strolling corporate/fancy parties and you ask a woman for a quarter where do you think they have it? In their purse is the typical answer. And they may have one in their purse, but most women don't carry their purse into business functions and parties, just a little clutch with license, Credit Card, and a few bucks for parking. And a lot of men avoid carrying change in these situations as a pocket full of coin can distract from the look they are trying to acheive. So if you depend on borrowing a coin you may not find one - tough to do a coin bend without a coin.
Introducing coins allows them to make a choice, keeps the flow of the routine, gives a reason to go to the pocket, and avoids the awkward moment where they want you to unbend or replace their quarter. This is true with all coin bending routines, not just coinvexed!
[/quote]

I agree with you. Not everyone will have a quarter,etc. on them. You may need to provide the quarter. The problem is the fact that TWO coins need to be signed and only ONE gets bent. It is pointless. I hope that is not the case with Coinvexed 2.

If that is not the case, I eagerly await this new coin bender.

Best,

Doug L.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Feb 18, 2009 11:48AM)
If spec A doesn't have a coin, surely a spec in the vicinity will have a coin. I feel that two coins is something that will fly by the spec but for the sake of streamlining, a pocket full of change isn't all that ideal, clutters the handling a tad plus it provides a unneccessary pause to the routine. However, the routine is different for Coinvex than it is for QB as the Coinvex routine was obviously tailored for Coinvex. In the end, both provides different feels to the coin bend so it comes down to which one a person prefers. I personally like the streamlined handling provided from the QB so since the air has cleared on what CV2 is (for myself at least) I can now make a well informed decision on to or not to purchase CV2. Thanks guys, it's been very helpful.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Feb 18, 2009 06:25PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-18 09:57, Doug Lippert wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-02-18 09:26, Lord Freddie wrote:
If you are going to bend a coin (borrowed, what's the point of bringing out another one that's superflous to the effect?

Just asking, that's all.
[/quote]

Yes, and that's exactly why Coinvexed 1 wasn't an improvement to the plot. Hopefully Coinvexed 2 will be!

Best,

Doug L.
[/quote]

in one of your earlier posts, you said that CV2 destroys the QB2. But what you just wrote today say that you hope it's an improvement over CV1. You don't even own the CV2 or seen it's workings and you say that it destroys the QB2? Ummmmmmm.....ok you make a lot of sense
Message: Posted by: animation (Feb 19, 2009 05:48PM)
As an owner of both the original CV1 and quantum bender 2.0, I feel that both these products have a good presentation and handling. The extra advantage that QB2 has over CV1(and this purely presentational advantage), was that only one coin was in play and in the mind of the spectator this is the only thing they need to remember. That is, 'the guy took my signed coin and then bent it', this is simple and very direct. With CV1 they MAY remember, 'he gave me two signed coins and one of them bent in my hand', while this is equally as amazing, it is less logical and just not as direct as the first effect. Why sign two coins but only bend one?

However, if the new CV2 gimmick is what I expect it to be and this is an ASSUMPTION, then I think this will be a huge improvement on the previous gimmick, and will be a major step forward on the presentation/handling of the signed coin bend. I also think it will have the edge over the QB2.
Firstly, pocket space will no longer become an issue, or rather the pocket space problems you have with QB2 will be almost identical to CV2,(2 gimmicks and one coin), but I think in terms of handling CV2 will now have the edge.

Consider this presentation:
You take out some change, hand the spectator a pen to sign a 10p coin. You then hand him your business card or coin envelope, and then ask him/her to write todays date on the back of your business card or on the envelope and then sign it (because you want them to remember this special moment). You then reveal the bend in whatever magical way you choose, then give them the coin and your business card or put it inside the envelope along with your business card, saying 'this is now your lucky coin'. The cool thing is you always get to hand out your business card!

Both the QB2 and CV2, can do the above presentation. But if we were to compare the products now, I think CV2 would give the better handling, due to the direct misdirection provided in the above presentation. Now if we look at the whole picture then, QB2 and CV2 both will have the same pocket space issues, both will provide a single coin bend, both presentations will be clean, but CV2 will be more than £400 cheaper! So taking that into consideration, I think CV2 will destroy the QB2!

But this is only if my assumption of what CV2 is, is correct. Anyway, this is just my thoughts.
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 19, 2009 10:45PM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-18 19:25, lunatik wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-02-18 09:57, Doug Lippert wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-02-18 09:26, Lord Freddie wrote:
If you are going to bend a coin (borrowed, what's the point of bringing out another one that's superflous to the effect?

Just asking, that's all.
[/quote]

Yes, and that's exactly why Coinvexed 1 wasn't an improvement to the plot. Hopefully Coinvexed 2 will be!

Best,

Doug L.
[/quote]

in one of your earlier posts, you said that CV2 destroys the QB2. But what you just wrote today say that you hope it's an improvement over CV1. You don't even own the CV2 or seen it's workings and you say that it destroys the QB2? Ummmmmmm.....ok you make a lot of sense
[/quote]

Please disregard what I wrote above. It does sound very confusing..sorry.


I do know the workings of Coinvexed 2 and I will keep this information to myself to respect the creators.

I think it is okay to say this-

Coinvexed 2 is very clever!!! You won't believe the method and it is practical as well.

I will be buying one.

Best,

Doug L.
Message: Posted by: Lord Freddie (Feb 20, 2009 07:45AM)
Before I consider this, I shall wait to see if it's as stuck to one routine as the original was.
And also read some reviews that are written by people that have actually bought one, rather than the creator's friends.
Message: Posted by: tpax (Feb 20, 2009 10:47AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-20 08:45, Lord Freddie wrote:
Before I consider this, I shall wait to see if it's as stuck to one routine as the original was.
And also read some reviews that are written by people that have actually bought one, rather than the creator's friends.
[/quote]
FYI I have never met David Penn or anyone associated with this item. As I posted in the begining, I had a brilliant idea for an improvement to the original, sent it to David, and found out they had the same idea and were in the prototype stage. I was sent a prototype for evaluation, and that is the extent of my involvement with this. I also own/use/like the QB2 so it is easy to compare the two. Yes, I'm biased because we shared the same great idea, but if it was a piece of crap I wouldn't support it.
Not everyone can afford the QB2. Coinvexed 2 can achieve the same effect at a lower cost.
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 25, 2009 01:04AM)
When will it be released to the dealers?

Thanks!

Doug L.
Message: Posted by: Rich B. (Feb 25, 2009 06:53AM)
Since Coinvexed 2 was released at the Black Pool convention, do we have any reviews from someone that actually purchased this ...and maybe offer some additional insight.

Rich B.
Message: Posted by: animation (Feb 25, 2009 05:06PM)
I think the best way to do the effect is how I described the routine above. Don't get them to sign an extra coin, tell them to sign a coin envelope, when you have completed your routine, put the coin in the envelope with your business card for them to keep. Anyway Rich B, the gimmick is exactly what you think it is.
Message: Posted by: matt-g (Feb 25, 2009 05:20PM)
Neat idea animation, I like it
Message: Posted by: andykean (Feb 25, 2009 08:38PM)
In this thread it appears its not just the coins which are getting bent out of shape!!
Message: Posted by: toph (Feb 26, 2009 01:21AM)
[quote]
On 2009-02-25 21:38, andykean wrote:
In this thread it appears its not just the coins which are getting bent out of shape!!
[/quote]

HAHAHAH!! Tell me about it! Almost child like. Its just plain "Lunacy". Lol.
Message: Posted by: magicjluc (Feb 26, 2009 06:14AM)
Can you also bend an Australian 20 cts coin as they are thicker than the US quarters?
Thanks
Message: Posted by: chappelly (Feb 26, 2009 06:25AM)
CV1 won't bend the 20cent .It will only bend a 10cent and 5cent .I assume this is the same for CV2

Chappelly
Message: Posted by: animation (Feb 26, 2009 10:39AM)
It is
Message: Posted by: danielellis_5 (Feb 27, 2009 11:25AM)
I gto coinvexed 2 at black pool and so far I really like.Ill give a proper review tomorrow after I'v tried it out tonight but from practising it to friends and family its getting great reactions.

Thanks
Dan
Message: Posted by: daviaac (Mar 2, 2009 05:57PM)
Does the new version need two coins or just one???

thanks
Message: Posted by: caigy (Mar 2, 2009 06:58PM)
Dan,

what reactions have you received from the good people of Yorkshire?

Paul Mc.
Message: Posted by: Photo-Wizard (Mar 3, 2009 02:55PM)
Check out this thread for an eye witness account of the ultimate ACAAN and also ultimate Visible Coin bending and straithening routines which I witnessed being performed in the Ruskin Hotel late Saturday night/early sunday morning at this years Blackpool Magic Convention

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=285699&forum=22&19&start=0#18

Its in the "Are you feeling sleepy" section
Message: Posted by: poesjenel (Mar 4, 2009 02:25AM)
It is awfully silent around coinvexed 2. No review yet of any of the early buyers. A lot of people probably still wondering if it can be done with one coin or two. I tried to do a search to find the patent on the Quantum Bender, impossible to find, makes you wonder if anything is pending. I'll wait a bit longer to buy a coinbender.
Message: Posted by: Monsieur Las Vegas (Mar 4, 2009 08:41AM)
I've received my up-grade pack today (pre-ordered by WMS).

It's a good work and a good idea. I'll prefer to do my coinbending with the coinvexed 2. It's a more natural handling than CV 1.

poesjenel:
To do the coinbend with two coins is for the misdirection. You can do it with just one coin, but you have to put a other misdirection instead of a second coin signing. For example like "animation" suggested on page 3 in this thread.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 4, 2009 09:50AM)
I guess this thread pretty much summed it up for the CV2 vs QB question.
Message: Posted by: matt.magicman (Mar 5, 2009 11:21AM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-04 09:41, Monsieur Las Vegas wrote:
I've received my up-grade pack today (pre-ordered by WMS).

It's a good work and a good idea. I'll prefer to do my coinbending with the coinvexed 2. It's a more natural handling than CV 1.

poesjenel:
To do the coinbend with two coins is for the misdirection. You can do it with just one coin, but you have to put a other misdirection instead of a second coin signing. For example like "animation" suggested on page 3 in this thread.
[/quote]

I cant find the "animation" post?
Message: Posted by: Bungle (Mar 5, 2009 12:16PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-04 10:50, kissdadookie wrote:
I guess this thread pretty much summed it up for the CV2 vs QB question.
[/quote]

Absolutely! QB-Rocks CV2 sucks.

Ultimately the fact that with the CV2 you need two separate devices to enable the bend is its weakness.

CV2 really is the poor mans choice but in the eyes of the laymen the effect should be the same, so providing you can handle all the pocket management and a misdirected presentation you'll be fine. If however you're a working pro then you have to opt for the most technically efficient solution and without a doubt that is the Quantum Bender 2. I've been asked to do this effect repeatedly to the same people and have done with no suspicion on the gaff, I doubt the same could be said for the CV2.

Thanks MR Sheets for a great product!!
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 5, 2009 01:27PM)
Hi Matt,

-Instead of them signing another coin make them sign a small coin envelope, then perform the REVEAL, afterwards, put the coin in the envelope with your business card, as their lucky coin.
- Get them to sign a small rectangular piece of paper. Fold the paper around the coin ( paper coin fold vanish), then rip the paper around the coin revealing the bend just like the Richard Busch's pk coin routine. Basically, get them to sign anything just give a logical reason.

I prefer the CV2 purely for the built in misdirection you get with your routines, the gimmick is really clever. I find it very difficult to openly bend a UK 10p in front of spectators using the QB2. 10p's are a little bit thicker than quarter's so you need a little more time to perform a smooth bend and still remain natural looking. With pennies this isn't a problem.

Also, when they are doing the signing especially the envelope or business card, if you can get them to do it on a table, it diverts everyones eyes completely away from you. Another cheeky suggestion if you are all standing, is to get them to sign the envelope using your back for support, then turn around do the dirty work come back and perform the bend (just make sure within your performance you have enough time delay so they forget all the dirty things.

There are loads of ideas just think of some logical ones, the gimmick is very flexible for your PERFORMANCE of the bend.

I think people are too concerned with the gimmicks,they think that the QB2 will make people believe that they can bend coins, but it is not the gimmick its a combination of good acting, good gimmick, good MISDIRECTION and a GREAT routine. When performing a coin bend casually, then a switch is most definately the way to go, like Skin or Psyche.
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 5, 2009 01:43PM)
Great post Bungle! Nice rhyme. But do you have the CV2? I doubt it, because with the CV2, pocket issues are EXACTLY the same as with QB2, the misdirection just plays out differently.
When you say the most technically efficent solution what do you mean? The bending process? The misdirection? A lot of pro's use the CV2, some use the QB2 and many still use a switch. The process of bending in all the three methods should be invisible, so if the methods are all good and the effect is the same, then what is the cheapest option for a signed coin bend in a professional situation?
Message: Posted by: parmenion (Mar 5, 2009 01:54PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-05 13:16, Bungle wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-03-04 10:50, kissdadookie wrote:
I guess this thread pretty much summed it up for the CV2 vs QB question.
[/quote]

Absolutely! QB-Rocks CV2 sucks.

Ultimately the fact that with the CV2 you need two separate devices to enable the bend is its weakness.

CV2 really is the poor mans choice but in the eyes of the laymen the effect should be the same, so providing you can handle all the pocket management and a misdirected presentation you'll be fine. If however you're a working pro then you have to opt for the most technically efficient solution and without a doubt that is the Quantum Bender 2. I've been asked to do this effect repeatedly to the same people and have done with no suspicion on the gaff, I doubt the same could be said for the CV2.

Thanks MR Sheets for a great product!!
[/quote]

Bangle are you Sheets's brother or father ? :)
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 5, 2009 01:58PM)
Animation, I bend US nickles just fine with the QB2. US nickles are considerably thicker than a quarter so I don't see how a 10p is going to be all that much harder to bend. The misdirection that you speak of, as from my experience with CV1, was ultimately created to cover up a flaw with the CV method of bending the coin. From a pure analytical aspect, QB2 is still the most invisible (even though the bend is VERY out in the open, even when you bend coins a bit slower, there's still no heat on the coin). Let's just put it this way, if a very observant spectator was watching and then backtracking, when they backtrack to the point where that second item was signed, they can theoretically figure out that something happened at that moment. QB2 has the advantage here of nothing added and nothing taken away, even if they were to backtrack, there's nothing there to backtrack to.
Message: Posted by: Caliban (Mar 5, 2009 02:24PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-05 14:58, kissdadookie wrote:
I bend US nickles just fine with the QB2. US nickles are considerably thicker than a quarter so I don't see how a 10p is going to be all that much harder to bend. [/quote]

It's not so much the thickness of the coin, but what it's made from that makes the difference. I believe the metal used for British silver coins is harder than the metal used for American ones.
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 5, 2009 02:37PM)
Really? Think about it any routine can be backtracked if poorly executed. If you have a logical reason for signing something extra, then when backtracking everything is justified. The routine with QB2 is excellent, but it still has flaws, if you put the pen away after the coin has been signed, then why bring it back out again? There is actually no logical reason for bringing out the pen again. Obviously, this flys by most spectators but so do all the other routines when performed well.
With the QB, when you perform the bend you rely on speed and your patter to execute the bend. You can use exactly the same techniques with the CV2 speed, patter and of course that extra logical diversion. With the CV2 the execution of the bend will fly by better, you don't have to JUST rely on speed or quick up and down motions, you also have signatures as well

But remember the bend happens in the performance, not during the signing process, or the patter as with the QB2. So your performance should sell the effect not the gimmick
Message: Posted by: Rudy Sanchez (Mar 5, 2009 03:39PM)
What makes the QB2 the ultimate bending device [for me] is that I do the bend one handed. Nothing can top this hidden moment.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 5, 2009 04:28PM)
Animation, you don't seem to understand that there is misdirection employed for when you switch out the Sharpie. The whole idea here is the appearance that the Sharpie never left. The reason you ask the spectator to blow on the coin and to check that the ink is dry is so that you have a perfect oppertunity to switch out the Sharpie. The other great built in brilliance is that all heat is on the coin at all times. There's no suspicion of the Sharpie thus even if you are seen as going to near your pocket with the Sharpie, in their minds, nothing has happened, the coin is still in the spectator's hands. You don't need speed to bend the coin with QB, the real key is to NOT make a move out of the move. The demo video is excellent for showing how invisible the move with the QB2 is done but it's also how J. Sheets performs it, this is not how others may perform with the QB2. Just take a look at the last David Blaine special, he uses the QB2 and it is not done the same way as John Sheets performs with the QB2. To be quite honest, you're a lot more flexible with the QB2 as even when the move is done, the gimmick and how it functions is so invisible that one really does not have to worry about much apart from fumbling (only real practice needed is to be able to fluidly get the coin into the gimmick casually and without looking down, this comes with practice and muscle memory, getting it out of the gimmick happens automatically). I'm quite familiar with the original CV and I do like it but it's very obvious that it has a major point that needs misdirection thus the routine is constructed the way it is (just by this point alone, you're a little less free with the handling than you are with QB2, you really need to have the spectator sign the secondary item let that be a coin (which never made much sense) or the envelope (which makes more sense but then you can't really do nice open bends since you need the coin to go into the envelope or else the envelope part is not motivated). I'm not saying that CV2 is bad, I'm just pointing out the facts so that folks who are on the fence as to which to purchase can make a better choice. I'm also posting to answer the question on other's minds as to which is the cleaner and more streamlined method for the coin bend so please don't take my posts as CV bashing. I felt my posts were needed as the initial posts for the CV2 was considerably vague which somewhat made the CV2 sound like a lot more than what it really is (just an updated CV1 that makes the two piece gimmick slightly less bulky, but the fundamental "flaws" of the CV1 still remains, ie: there's still a small pile of change required, it's still a two piece gimmick, it still requires the spectator to sign a secondary object to provide misdirection, and if you think about the routine as provided, it still involves the secondary object to be a second coin). Rudy also makes a good point that the bend can be done with just one hand with the QB2 as it's a one piece tool.

To be very very very fair about this all, if you're going to have to go through all the extra little steps to perform CV and CV2, you really might as well just go the really cheap route and learn a coin bend routine utilizing the pre-bend method. QB2 really is the only truly streamlined and invisible method for bending a borrowed and signed coin.
Message: Posted by: Bungle (Mar 5, 2009 06:26PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-05 14:43, animation wrote:
Great post Bungle! Nice rhyme. But do you have the CV2? I doubt it, because with the CV2, pocket issues are EXACTLY the same as with QB2, the misdirection just plays out differently.
When you say the most technically efficent solution what do you mean? The bending process? The misdirection? A lot of pro's use the CV2, some use the QB2 and many still use a switch. The process of bending in all the three methods should be invisible, so if the methods are all good and the effect is the same, then what is the cheapest option for a signed coin bend in a professional situation?
[/quote]

I am in no way related to My Sheets, I simply applaud him for creating a wonderful gaff.

In answer to some of animations questions, I do not currently own a CV2 but I have played with it and used in the real world for all but a day, solely due to the fact I own the QB2 which for me is the better method.

With regard to technical efficiency I refer to the whole process. The bending process used will affect your presentation, so if you have more to do, to bend a coin as you do with CV2 then then the onus will be on that moment not the effect.

Pocket issues are not exactly the same, how can they be? QB2 is one solid unit which works independently albeit for the strength applied b yourself. CV2 is two units, in fact at one point there's a few (3) different props to handle, the gaffed pen c*p, the coins and then the other gaff with coins.

I'd like to say if you pay peanuts you get monkeys but CV2 isn't exactly priced along side peanuts but since I am talking protein why not ingest this morsel of info. I heard from a reputable source Penn didn't even invent the QV2 but Jim Trainer of World magic Shop did, the fact being they needed a name to shift the product so Jim attached to his name and it sold.



Animation do you have a QB2 ?
Message: Posted by: Bungle (Mar 5, 2009 06:39PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-05 15:24, Caliban wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-03-05 14:58, kissdadookie wrote:
I bend US nickles just fine with the QB2. US nickles are considerably thicker than a quarter so I don't see how a 10p is going to be all that much harder to bend. [/quote]

It's not so much the thickness of the coin, but what it's made from that makes the difference. I believe the metal used for British silver coins is harder than the metal used for American ones.
[/quote]

Caliban, British coins are made from better stuff than US coins, seriously though they are. Obviously the Royal Mint have far lees people to mint coins for than the US mint so quality wins versus quantity. Basically there is a higher nickel content in Silver UK coins, the newer shield type variety of coins here in the UK are even tougher and require more strength to enable the bend.
Message: Posted by: tpax (Mar 5, 2009 07:16PM)
I have them both. Each has their advantages.

In regards to pocket space
- the volume required FOR ALL PROPS is the same for both. QB needs Gimmick and sharpie, which is technically the same for CV2.
- The QB can not be carried in a pocket with change or keys as it will damage the paint. I find this annoying and limiting.
So when everything is considered CV may provide better pocket management.

Other comparisons:

QB will bend the coin with less effort. That being said, I found I had to change my presentation because of the tensing in my face when I did the bend. Couldn't get rid of it so I scripted in a line where I can react with tension covering the bend.

QB2 is easier to align the coin. Overall it is a easier tool to operate.

With CV2 you do not have to take the sharpie back to do the bend. This allows you more freedom of when the bend happens. IMHO this is CV2's biggest advantage (other then price)

With CV2 you will need one hand full of coins, which is very natural in the course of a routine.

You notice I don't say which is better. They both are excellent benders. There is a big price difference. What's better for me may not be better for you. I use QB2 because I've had it a while and I'm used to it. And I paid a lot of money for it....
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 5, 2009 07:58PM)
I feel, when considering that the British coins are harder to bend, MAYBE the CV may provide more time for the work to be done (I have not handled the British coinage however). In regards to grimacing when doing the work with ANY bender I've ever used, that's always been a non-issue for me but of course, people's physiques vary widely. Honestly though, if more than one coin has to be introduced and when you need to produce a hand full of change, then more or less construct the routine AROUND that fact, I would personally go with pre-bent coins as opposed to a real time bend. I've used the pre-bent method quite a bit BEFORE US quarters changed over to state quarters (there's a good chance that spectator's may note WHICH state quarter is in play) but since the state quarters are in consistently regular circulation, this no longer gives me all that much peace of mind. I don't believe that British coinage has this characteristic so it's more likely it's a non-issue. Personally, the pre-bent method is a lot easier to handle and if I had a choice I would choose it over any live bend method on the market.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Mar 6, 2009 05:57AM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-05 19:26, Bungle wrote:
Pocket issues are not exactly the same, how can they be? QB2 is one solid unit. CV2 is two units, in fact at one point there's a few (3) different props to handle, the gaffed pen c*p, the coins and then the other gaff with coins.

I'd like to say if you pay peanuts you get monkeys but CV2 isn't exactly priced along side peanuts but since I am talking protein why not ingest this morsel of info. I heard from a reputable source Penn didn't even invent the QV2 but Jim Trainer of World magic Shop did, the fact being they needed a name to shift the product so Jim attached to his name and it sold.



Animation do you have a QB2 ?
[/quote]

Bungle,
("Often described as an annoying six-foot, cross dressing bear, Bungle was always so self righteous, it's amazing that Zippy didn't slap him". "Character Most Likely To: End up amongst the foundations of Heathrow Terminal Five.")Quote associated with Bungle.

6 degrees of separation and timing of your last 3 posts lead me to believe that I have uncloaked your anonymity. I firmly believe that you were already a Café member known for malicious posts and previously excluded from this community. That aside, I think I should address your comments quoted above.

Firstly, With QB2 you also handle 3 objects. 1. The Sharpie, 2. The Gaff and 3. the coin just the same with CV2. Therefore same pocket management. However, with CV2 you do not have to put the sharpie away and then retrieve it again to do the dirty work.

As for peanuts and monkeys well that one comment, I think I will let slide.

Coinvexed was an idea that David originated during a brainstorming lunch one day with me. We discussed possibilities of hiding a gaff in plain view with coins and I went off and developed the prototype and finally designed the finished product.

The same is true for CV2. This is how it has always been between David and myself. we discuss ideas, brainstorm and develop.

What, is wrong with that?.

Just for the record I also designed the envelope that is used in Bang On by Marc Oberon. I commercialised the effect which was and still is a top seller. However, it was from an original concept invented by Marc and discussed over a meeting that I had with him one day.

I invented and designed Spike and also the Worlds best selling and original 100% M****tic PK ring for use by magicians, The Wizard PK Ring.

I have also designed or been heavily involved in the design of several more marketed effects but my name is not on the box. This is my choice and I do not expect it to be made out as though there is ulterior motive behind it.

The Wizard PK ring has sold over 55,000 units since I launched it and it did not have David Penn’s name on the box although David was one of the first 10 people to see it when I invented it.

I fail to see the relevance of you comment regarding CV2 and my involvement in the development of it other than to try to devalue the product.

David Penn and I happen to be very good friends who meet when we are free, to discuss and brainstorm ideas.

For you to suggest that David would take credit for another mans work where he had no involvement is purely malicious. 1. he has no need to do this and 2. he is one of the most ethical Professional Magicians that it has been my pleasure to call a friend.

Now, sorry about the lengthy reply but your point was??????????

Regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: dp (Mar 6, 2009 07:54AM)
Hi Guys,

It was great to see so many people at the Blackpool convention for the launch of CV2.

Since then I have had numerous emails and pm’s through magic forums from magicians who have used the gimmick and Coinvexed concept to create there own routine with one or two coins.

In my lecture at Blackpool I also discussed the principle of bending one coin yourself and then empowering the spectator to do the same. You end up with two coins bent, both signed and I give these away in a branded ring box. PM me if you want to know more about this.

Personally, I love the fact that everything is in view from the start. I never need to switch anything in from my pocket and the only time I go to my pockets is to put things away. To me this makes sense.

It was great to meet David Blaine at Blackpool who visited our stand before any others to see Coinvexed 2. David has his own ideas for the gimmick that are not mine to discuss. He said that it was ‘Awesome’! He immediately could see the potential and couldn’t wait to get one out of the packet and leave with his supply.

I will also be attending the South Tyneside Magic Convention next week. I will not be on the stand at the convention but please feel free to ask me anything about my products that will also be available from The World Magic Shop booth.

All the best

David Penn
Message: Posted by: Rich B. (Mar 6, 2009 11:20AM)
I've already mentioned early in the thread that I had a bending gimmick (2 piece) created last year. All the spectator sees is the quarter which I make appear and a short 1 coin routine...I then say that was obviously sleight of hand ....but I wanted to show you some real magic...but I'm going to need your help.

I hand them the quarter to check out as I retrieve a sharpie. I remove the cap and have them sign the quarter. I take back the sharpie as they blow on the coin. I get the coin back...do the magic move while asking a question(Some people seem to have a problem with this part). Coinvexed both 1 and 2 solved this part...but for me created some others. I put the sharpie away and finish by ending with the coin bending in the spectators hand.

If I were to borrow a quarter...all I would need to do is reach into my pocket to retrieve the sharpie, and put it away when I'm done. NO going to the pockets in between. So as far as pocket management all I need to do is carry my sharpie...which most magicians have anyway...nothing extra. That is about the best pocket management you could have.

A little hint...Coinvexed 2 is about 50% improved from Coinvexed 1. If you were to buy an additional Coinvexed 2 (2sets)...you would be able to perform it exactly as I do.

My prediction...Coinvexed 3...the newest streamlined version will be exactly what I've been using for the past year. I'm not claiming to be a genius with what I came up with...it was just a very simple and logical progression.

Rich B.
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 6, 2009 11:27AM)
Bungle I do have a QB2 and I paid £600 long before a dvd was even in the making. I saw the potential with the gimmick, but I was very disappointed with the little support material that was provided with the product, considering I paid such a large sum of money. YEARS later Mr Sheets eventually came out with a dvd (after a long list of customer complaints mind you) that finally explained the full workings of the gimmick, which was great but I was one of the original sufferers!

However, David and the guys at world magic shop provided a product that is considerably cheaper than the QB2 and just as effective. They also made sure that the FULL workings of the product was supplied, thus their customer support has been excellent!

Anyway, both gimmicks are excellent at camourflarging a live bend. Kissadookie, with the CV2 there is no reason why you can't use the same script and choreography that Mr Sheets uses, 'Do you know what metal 10p is made from? Well you know you can't physically BEND a 10p'.
Personally, I prefer a little more cover because of the most observant spectators.If you want to perform the routine how David Blaine did, you can do as well. And if performed like this with the CV2 at least nothing will be taken away, to then be brought back again for no apparent reason.

Kissadookie really( and I mean really) observant spectators will only query things that have no logic. Unfortunately, with the QB2 you cannot adapt this part of the routine to make it more logical. Thus CV2 is a lot more flexible with routines. In any case, in the spectators eyes, the real routine should only begin after the work is done. The only purpose to sign a coin is as proof after the performance is over, I don't advise incorporating the BEND as part of a routine.

But the QB2 does allow you to do a one handed bend( only with pennies in the UK), so I guess that is a bonus, but not a major one.

I think when performing in an informal situation for a small group when the moment is right the BEST and most natural way to perform a single SINGNED coin bend is with a switch! Just get both you and her to sign the coin afterwards, if the routine and moment was right nobody remembers, or rather they will mis-remember! I think dvds like Psyched and Skin are a must for any serious coin bender
For a larger group or in a more formal situation QB2 or CV2, will both do the job very well. I have both.

But I think if you look at the current market QB2 is overpriced. Just look at the amazing True astonishments set for example. This set is half the price with tons of material and gimmicks and you still get taught a GREAT coin bend.

But if you still really want a luxury bender then the best value in money without a doubt is the CV2. This product is very flexible with your own personal routines and routines can play almost identically to the QB2, apart from the one-handed method.
If you have a big budget then buy both, having a variety of techniques and methods is always an advantage if you are a frequent bender!
Message: Posted by: Rich B. (Mar 6, 2009 01:57PM)
Animation. I do the bend with a signed coin in real time for small or large groups....it doesn't matter. Its all in the presentation.

I do not see the point in signing it after the effect. I'm sure there are ways to make the spectator believe they sign the coin BEFORE the bend...but why do that when you can strengthen the routine by leaving NO DOUBT that it is the same coin...and bend it in real time. Magicians have been switching bent coins for many years and it has worked well...but bending a signed coin in real time is a huge improvement.

In my opinion Coninvexed 1 or 2 is for people that have anxiety when it comes time to do the bend. The Coinvexed routine does have a built in misdirection which makes it very easy to the the move. David Penn did a nice job with this. There is just too much stuff in play and pocket management issues for me.

Rich B.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 6, 2009 03:53PM)
Animation, the non-sharpie half of the CV2 gimmick will definitely not pass scrutiny if you were to perform it the same way one was to perform with QB2. There's the stiff stack of you know what that looks fine sitting in your hand but does not look fine at all when you're doing the work. David Penn most definitely considered this aspect and thus his routine is constructed the way it is with having the second object being signed. The CV gimmick is not made for scrutiny while the work is being done, it's made so that the gimmick is hidden when it's out in full view. I'm curious, what did you find to be illogical with QB and QB2? You mentioned "Kissadookie really( and I mean really) observant spectators will only query things that have no logic. Unfortunately, with the QB2 you cannot adapt this part of the routine to make it more logical." There's nothing illogical with it as there's literally nothing for your spectators to see. There's really nothing to hide as there's nothing to see. Even the switch-out of the Sharpie is invisible because there's no attention drawn to it and even if someone sees the Sharpie go into your pocket and then come back out, there's no suspicion as in their mind, you're just holding a Sharpie which they have just handled moments ago.

All in all, CV and CV2 is a well hidden in plain sight bender but it has more drawbacks than QB and QB2, however, the price difference is of course very welcoming and I personally wouldn't recommend a QB2 for casual performers unless they have the money and actually want the cream of the crop. Even at $400 the QB2 is really aimed at the workers out there and not the mass market consumers. Price aside, in the end, what you have is the CV and CV2 needing a very specific (and to some, limited) routining constructed around the gimmick to hide the specific drawbacks that it has while the QB2 really has very little routining around it as it is what it is, the most invisible live coin bending tool, thus it's supplied pretty much bare bones (alas, I haven't seen the DVD for the QB2 so I don't know what's on it, but I still see the QB2 as just a tool so I felt that the DVD, though a great bonus, wasn't neccesarily needed). Now, it may seem like the QB2 being bare bones is a drawback but it's really a positive plus point as it does not need the routine to be structured around the way it works, it's really that fluid and that invisible.
Message: Posted by: HusssKarson (Mar 6, 2009 04:27PM)
I still favor the previous one more. As it's apparently more logical to use when performing.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 6, 2009 04:35PM)
CV1? I think CV2 is a big improvement over CV1 because replacing half the gaff with the Sharpie gaff is quite clever and the Sharpie half of the gaff is small and easy to conceal.
Message: Posted by: gdw (Mar 6, 2009 05:39PM)
So, do you still require a handful of coins when doing the routine/move?
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 6, 2009 10:10PM)
Yes but a lot less than the original (half of the gimmick is now built into something else that is more organic and invisible).
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Mar 6, 2009 11:04PM)
Can someone please post or pm me a link of David Blaine doing the coin bend? I missed the special because of work.

Thanks,

Doug Lippert
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 7, 2009 02:46AM)
Rich B, you can do a signed bend for a smaller group as well. What I meant was that it is easier to change the perception of events with a smaller group when using a switch. The point of signing a coin after the effect is to add importance to the coin making it a 'special coin' or 'lucky coin'. If you sign before the bend then its more about additional proof. But a good presentation should sell the effect anyway

Kissadookie I do understand your points
Message: Posted by: Gochos (Mar 7, 2009 04:30AM)
Actually Bungle, I was involved in all the World Magic Shop releases but you don't see my name anywere.

Whats your point?
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Mar 7, 2009 04:46AM)
Regarding Coinvexed 2 this post just appeared on Magic Week News Page from Curtis Ori-Orison. [url]http://www.magicweek.co.uk/[/url]
"One of the many great moments of my weekend in Blackpool (meeting David Blaine). After reading other reader's accounts of their weekend in Blackpool I decided to send you my photo taken with the one and only David Blaine. I was standing upstairs opposite Dan and Dave’s stand when I saw him approach with a friend of his. I politely asked if I could have my picture taken with him “Sure” was the reply after the picture had been taken he then asked what I had been up to. I told him what I had bought and asked him if there was anything he would suggest buying. After telling him what kind of magic I did he advised me to get[b] Digital Dissolve and almost insisted on Coinvexed 2.[/b]
Thanks to everyone who made Blackpool 2009 what it was, the best one yet and I loved every minute." 7.3.09

Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 7, 2009 09:14AM)
Wow, you guys are going to sell a TON of units.
Message: Posted by: Jared (Mar 7, 2009 12:20PM)
I just received mine today and I'm so happy I feel like running around the streets like a madman screaming for joy! The gimmick is exactly what I was hoping for and the two pieces work in conjunction beautifully!

To add my two cents about the debate of Coinvexed versus Quantum bender here's one man's opinion for what it's worth:

Coinxed 2- The original gimmick has gone undetected after many many performances. It's biggest advantage is the final product itself. The coin takes on a 'warped' appearance, which really sells the illusion perfectly. There is simply no explanation from a spectator's vantage point. The bend in the actual quarter itself is the best of any bending device. I find that bending the coin itself is super easy.

The value for the selling price is the best and Coinvexed is my preferred method for performing in close-up situations. Coinvexed is my 'workhorse' quarter bend. I'm extremely happy with this product and cannot say enough about it.

Quantum Bender 2- is a wonderful piece of apparatus and also employs a clever method. It is well suited for any performing situation where you simply want to bend a quarter without anything else in play (motivations such as business cards, other coins etc.. As an example, if I were performing in a parlor situation it is my preferred method.

The bend in the quarter is nice but more of a 90 degree type. This might be more desireable for those performers that wish to reveal the bending action in their hands rather than the spectators. Personally, I've found that the reactions are much stronger when the bending takes place in a spectator's hands with both Quantum and Coinvexed.

I'm very happy with the Quantum Bender and glad that I purchased it. My only is issue is the price. I'm not a big fan of carrying around a $500.00 bending device for everyday useage. If it were priced at $250.00 then I'd probably pick up a spare.

For somebody that is just getting into coin bending, I'd recommend Coinvexed 2 hands down. This is the bending device that I plan to use the most. The results will never dissapoint! Simply put, Coinvexed 2 is the BEST money you'll spend on a bending device. This product is truly as good as I've been touting. And for the record, I already bought TWO of them!

-Jared
Message: Posted by: Ogre1234 (Mar 7, 2009 01:22PM)
Great review Jared. This really clarifies things for me.

Werner
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 7, 2009 01:35PM)
Yesterday me and a couple of magicians were at the Shunts lounge in London Bridge.

My friend wipped out the new CV2 and was doin the original routine with the two coins all night. The reactions were amazing! For some reason people don't care about the second coin, no explanation was necessary for them, they were too busy concerned with the 10p. I have to admit the original routine works perfectly. Every time people always said the 10p, I think psychologically this will always be people's prefered choice. Wonder if anyone has had someone choose the 2p. I also think it is important to take the 2p completley away after the reveal, out of sight out of mind. The reveal is so strong with this that no one remembers the 2p.

But I do have some other ideas with the 2p that I am gonna have try to see if I can make the two coin phase SIMPLE but still logical.

The two coin phase does play out very well it flows very smoothly and their is no break in the routine
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Mar 7, 2009 01:52PM)
Hi Guys,
Thanks for all the great comments.

Best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: Andi Peters (Mar 7, 2009 02:18PM)
I have been road testing CV2 and concur with animation. It's the Mutz Nutz!
Message: Posted by: matt.magicman (Mar 7, 2009 03:39PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-07 13:20, Jared wrote:
This product is truly as good as I've been touting. And for the record, I already bought TWO of them!

-Jared
[/quote]
I loved the first one, and cv2 even more!
but why buy 2?
Message: Posted by: gdw (Mar 7, 2009 03:43PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-06 23:10, kissdadookie wrote:
Yes but a lot less than the original (half of the gimmick is now built into something else that is more organic and invisible).
[/quote]

Ah, so half the gimmick has been changed for a sharpie instead of a handful of change. I never liked the hand full of change to begin with, so if this only half eliminates it . . .
Message: Posted by: Royston South (Mar 7, 2009 04:50PM)
Hi guys can you tell me does the CV2 bend 2p, 50p, I have QB2 it is great but can CV2 do these coins? I know my QB2 can not!

Royston.
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 7, 2009 05:28PM)
Royston, it can bend a 1p, 2p, 10p, 20p, and a 50p. I think the best coin to bend though is a 10p.

Andi I am loving this gimmick too, the routines play out really well. This gimmick may make my switch redundant!
Message: Posted by: Jared (Mar 7, 2009 05:53PM)
[/quote]
I loved the first one, and cv2 even more!
but why buy 2?
[/quote]

If you own the original Coinvexed then you'll two of one half of the new version. Buy two upgrade kits and you'll have a spare!

Jared
Message: Posted by: tpax (Mar 7, 2009 09:09PM)
If you can routine two sharpies then you wouldn't need any coins other then the one to bend.
Message: Posted by: Jared (Mar 8, 2009 11:17AM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-07 22:09, tpax wrote:
If you can routine two sharpies then you wouldn't need any coins other then the one to bend.
[/quote]

That would be correct. Although, I'm not sure that it would add much to the spirit of the routine.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 9, 2009 01:58PM)
If you're going to routine this with two Sharpies, you might as well just use the supplied routine (that is if I understand where' tpax and Jared is going with this as essentially you'll have two coins being signed and most probably bent, but I would think that this adds almost zilch to the routine).
Message: Posted by: tpax (Mar 9, 2009 02:28PM)
Use different color sharpies. "Pick the color that fit's you" or something like that. One coin needed.
Any way, would it bring anything to a routine? Don't know, I'm just saying if you HAVE to do a one coin routine then you can do it with 2 units. This is a versitile device.
Message: Posted by: martinkey (Mar 9, 2009 04:01PM)
I have now performed Coinvexed 2 as a professional about 40 times exactly as David shows on the DVD. I have had the 2p chosen about 25% of the time but David's stickman idea solves that for me. The reactions I have had are enough to make sure that I will always carry this with me for close-up shows. Thank you David and World Magic Shop for a brilliant idea. By the way, I previously used Coinvexed 1 and this also got great reactions but the routine is now much easier and more logical.
Martin
Message: Posted by: Jared (Mar 10, 2009 10:24PM)
I personally would not go with a two Sharpie routine. I've been performing (essentially) the original routined supplied with Coinvexed and it plays wonderfully after countless performances. The new Sharpie gimmick avoids having to hold two hands of change to make the bend, which was arguably the weakest part of the original routine. This new gimmick makes this effect World class!!!

Jared
Message: Posted by: Review King (Mar 13, 2009 08:06PM)
That is F****** Awesome! Can I get that now?"
- David Blaine – After seeing a demonstration of CV2 at Blackpool.


Well, David likes it.
Message: Posted by: sleightofhander (Mar 15, 2009 05:34PM)
Has anyone solved the suspicious d*** or M**** on the coin. It's the only thing I don't like.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Mar 15, 2009 06:21PM)
Yes, QB2!
Message: Posted by: Andi Peters (Mar 16, 2009 12:38PM)
QB2 leaves an obvious mark imho
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 16, 2009 01:53PM)
So I have been playing around with the cv2 alot. I have to say the original routine has a perfect natural flow and almost anyone can bend that coin, it seems too easy. Anyway, here is something I have been doin that has been gettin great reactions:
Start the routine as normal, talk about the warmth when you put your hands between theirs. Tell them that the coins should be gettin warm now, ask them to loosen their grip, so you can remove the 2p with your thumb and index finger. Note, I place the coins in the spectators hand like Ben Earl does in his Skin routine.

As soon as you remove the 2p, ask them to tighten their fist again. Then you say that 'this coin is quite warm so I should be able to do this' rub the coin between your hands as an extra convincer then do a muscle pass! This for me is really strong, but only do this no more than 3 times. But the best bit is when you reveal the last coin in their hand, obviously with a little more theatrics.

I continue with the whole warmth thing, and then ask them to squeeze the coin (similar to the skin routine), then reveal the coin. Be ready for some screams when they see that smooth bend on the coin!

Give them both coins in a small coin envelope as a souvenier!

You kinda need a decent muscle pass to pull this one off. I do have some other variations I am stil trying, but this one has been frying people. I will post some other variations when I finish experimenting
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Mar 16, 2009 11:26PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-16 13:38, Andi Peters wrote:
QB2 leaves an obvious mark imho
[/quote]


I have 2 QB2's and neither leave a mark.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 16, 2009 11:42PM)
QB2 SOMETIMES leaves a mark because of the angle you have it in. This happens very infrequently though and if you have gotten down the mechanics of it, committed it to muscle memory, you would pretty much end up with clean coins each and every time.
Message: Posted by: murli (Mar 17, 2009 03:14AM)
Coinvexed 2 leaves a mark in my coins!###
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 17, 2009 08:43AM)
Whats the big deal about the marks no one cares, I have had no one say to me 'wow my coin is bent but there is a mark here' , and even if they were to query any mark I would just say 'wow that's amazing and you did that all by yourself' or something of that nature
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 17, 2009 09:23AM)
There's a BIG deal of having marks on the coin. They now can deduce the method but they would just be in the dark as to when it happened and with what you did the work with. How is it NOT a big deal when the difference is "Wow, he did that using his/her/my mind!" and "Wow, I wonder what he/she used and when he/she used it." The mark looks exactly like what it is, a mark left from using some kind of plier. Your "wow that's amazing and you did that all by yourself" will fall on deaf years and make everything you've done prior and afterwards turn into a puzzle rather than magic or mentalism. The mark in essence gave away the method and now it's just speculation on behalf of the audience as to with what and when.
Message: Posted by: Jaz2005 (Mar 17, 2009 09:43AM)
Gotta tell you guys I have used both of the CV units hundreds of times and not once has it left a mark. I have used it with US UK EU and Swiss Currency

I have also used QB2 and it definitely left marks on the UK 10p coin which is the only feasible UK coin that it works with.

Even if there was a mark on the coin, it would fly past a spec who should just be amazed at the fact that they have just bent a coin in their own hands.

Try this in the real world and just look at the reactions from real spectators..

I had a woman last week who came up to me 30 minutes after the routine to tell me that he hand was still hot from the energy that was created when the coin bent.

The whole routine amazed her group in the restaurant.

best regards
Jim
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 17, 2009 09:58AM)
I have no doubt that when practice is put in and when done correctly, both CV and QB2 should NOT leave a mark on the coin.
Message: Posted by: martinkey (Mar 17, 2009 06:44PM)
I have never seen a mark left by CV1 or CV2 and I have performed it many times. No spectator has said anything about a mark either and I always leave the coin with them. I've only performed with UK coins though.
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 17, 2009 09:19PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-17 10:23, kissdadookie wrote:
There's a BIG deal of having marks on the coin. They now can deduce the method but they would just be in the dark as to when it happened and with what you did the work with. How is it NOT a big deal when the difference is "Wow, he did that using his/her/my mind!" and "Wow, I wonder what he/she used and when he/she used it." The mark looks exactly like what it is, a mark left from using some kind of plier. Your "wow that's amazing and you did that all by yourself" will fall on deaf years and make everything you've done prior and afterwards turn into a puzzle rather than magic or mentalism. The mark in essence gave away the method and now it's just speculation on behalf of the audience as to with what and when.
[/quote]

How the hell are spectators gonna deduce the method? She signed the coin it wasn't bent before and then she felt it bend in on her own hand! If you have a good structured routine, no explanation is possible. You are thinking too much like a magician, both the CV2 and QB2 are camourflaged really well so don't worry, its almost impossible for a lay person to deduce a method everything should be invisible. And trust me even if there was marks (which I have never seen on the QB2 or CV2), just play it like that was what was meant to happen remember she doesn't know what to expect.
They will still be amazed.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 17, 2009 09:41PM)
You have got to be kidding me right? You actually give spectators THAT much credit? It's not magician's thinking, it's common sense. They may not come to you and tell you what they are guessing is the method immediately right then and there but you have to understand that they WILL be trying to figure out how it happened especially since they will be fiddling around with that coin quite a bit later on. No disrespect but your logic here is flawed and shows a bit of inexperience with at least the coin bend since you are showing that you are disregarding the fact that a good portion of those who you perform for will try to backtrack. Let me give an example, when a spectator came up to me about 20-30 minutes later one night and basically retold the events to me and then told me that it was impossible because they put the card back in the deck which was in the box which was closed and then their card appeared in the back pocket of my pants, I knew that the Extractor was second to none for the card to pocket application because it doesn't leave them with ANY room for backtracking. Though this has nothing to do with coin bends, the fact that the spectator was able to give me the rundown of pretty much the entire process of what occurred for the signed card to pocket tells me something, that they do and will backtrack thus if there's any bits of business that can be traced back to something being awry, that's not a good thing.

Back to coin bends and marks, I've bent a LOT of coins and the marks that appear from bending coins is VERY obvious. You will see what I mean when one day you come across the mark on a bent coin. It's very distinctive and the mark is very exact, it's obvious it's been in a clamp/vice of some sort. There's a reason why even when one uses pliers, one needs to use something between the pliers and the coin, because you do NOT want marks on that bent coin. There's a lot of heat on it and it is basically evidence which you leave with the spectator. Not even a well structured routine will get you out of the fact that laypeople do backtrack and try to figure thing out, it's human nature and not everyone takes things on face value, even though we all wish that they did so that our jobs would be easier.

This also brings me to my next point. There's always going to be the debate of: regardless of cost, which bender is better? The answer is going to be QB2 because of what it is and the kind of natural cover it provides. It's truly invisible in the mind of the spectator and (I do not recommend this but it is true) even with the worst presentation in the world, if you don't fumble with it, you can do a slow bend of the coin with the gimmick and still get away with it. You can't do that with at least the original CV because of how the CV gimmick is constructed, this is the reason why with at least the original CV you have to have them sign a second coin, because you have a very high chance of getting caught if they are burning you. To make things clearer, QB they can pretty much be looking at the general area of where the work is being done and not see a thing and the reason is because in their minds, all you have is a Sharpie and their signed coin, both items which they have already handled. The key is to make sure that they understand that your hands are holding nothing else. This is why QB is better and costs substantially more, because it is that natural and that invisible. There's also no room to backtrack with QB as there's nothing to raise any alerts. There's no backtracking with CV either but you're restricted to having to routine it a certain way so that all the props are natural and organic. BIG difference here but in the end of course they both do what they do quite well. CV has it's place in the market and CV and QB work completely differently so there's no overlap apart from the fact that they are both coin bends.

animation, I apologize in advance if you feel insulted in any way from what I said but I'm a pretty straight forward kind of person especially with things that are pretty apparent. I also lack the skills to sugar coat what I say, I'm still a work in progress ;)
Message: Posted by: animation (Mar 18, 2009 12:21AM)
Kissdadookie no offence is taken. To be honest, I have only been performing the coin bend for about 3 years now, it was something that never really interested me and I am not really a mentalist. But when I read the info about the QB2, that ad really sold me, the effect sounded really impossible! I then became addicted to the coin bend plot, and that's when I done some research and really appreciated the potential of the effect. So my FIRST ever bending tool was actually the QB2. I never could perform the original routine because I found the instructions really poor and at the time a waste of my £600, so I just used the QB2 as a tool to get prebent coins. When Andrew Gerard revealed his handling in Psyched, this was the main method I used in switching the coins.

I honestly never noticed any marks on the bent coins. However, I just took out my QB2 and bent some 10ps and I have actually noticed some marks for the first time. And looking through my stack of bent coins, I have also seen similar marks. I have never even taken notice of these marks, imo these marks are not obvious and I never noticed them in 3 years so I doubt the people I have performed to will have noticed them, or even have questioned those marks. And I have mainly been using a switch.
So maybe I have been giving out coins with marks on them but nobody noticed (neither did I) and no one has come up to me and said you must have switched my coin. But I do know some people who still have their bent coins in their purse (signed by me!).

Anyway, lets assume that people notice these marks and then query them, if you wanna compare benders well lets quickly look at the two routines in action.

QB2: you openly bend the coin in full view 'you know you can't bend steel', then a bent coin is revealed with marks, if your spectators starts to backtrack, what they MAY remember is you putting away your pen, to only bring out again for no real logical reason ( note Mr Sheets even says in the dvd that some people have queried him so that's why he came up with the comedic line ' you ever seen the trick where the magician takes the pen and dissapears the coin, well this isn't that trick'). Now if you do the SLOW bend that you talk about OPENLY, then MAYBE a really observant spectator will think something is really fishy at that point when they backtrack, they may then dissect the routine.

CV2: With the CV2 logical misdirection is employed when you do the bend, so there is no OPEN SlOW bending action, the gimmick is carmourflarged well, so nothing should appear out of the ordinary. Now a spectator finds some marks on their coin, well when they backtrack I think they are lost. Now obviously, not all spectators will believe what has just happened, most people know magic isn't real, but imo they will be absolutely clueless on how the coin came to be in that state. If you were a spectator where would you start? Since, using the CV2 I have found spectators have no where to go

Anyway, I have never noticed these marks before so now if someone does query them, I honestly will just say NOTHING, because that was what was meant to happen. I will let them struggle to figure the rest out!

Since, performing the signed coin bend or any other bend has any spectator ever queried any marks you may have left on their coin?
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 18, 2009 07:55AM)
I haven't gotten the QB2 to leave any marks. However, I use the pre-bend method frequently and I basically throw out any of the coins I pre-bend that has the mark left on them. I agree that most folks will probably not notice the mark BUT there will always be the chance of the folks that do. There's also the fact that this is now a impossible object to the spectator thus they will be examining and thinking about it in much more detail than the performer because the bent coin to the performer is just a coin they bent and not a impossible magical object.

The part about backtracking back to the pen switch with QB2 I don't feel is possible. As you know, the moment the switch is done is while they are drying the ink on the coin. There's no heat and even if they see you go to your pocket, that theory negates itself because when you take back the coin and show your hands totally empty except for the coin and the Sharpie, in their mind all you have is a their coin and the Sharpie that they have just handled.

With CV, there's a bit more specific routining that needs to go into it because of how the gimmick is constructed. The camouflage is great if it's just sitting in your hand and not moving. Things gets a little funky if they are looking in the direction of your hands when you do the bend because there's no way the you know what would stay in a static clump like that and result in no sound. This is the reason at that moment the routine takes this into consideration and thus you have the spec sign a second coin. I would suppose most will not notice BUT one always has to account for the few odd ones out that may potentially ruin everything.

Now, when done with the right routine, CV will be just as invisible as QB BUT you also have to factor in that you have to routine with CV in a specific way at specific points because you need to create the moments to hide the work. With QB it's a bit different because the camouflage is a bit better thus all you need is the small moment to do the pen switch which is motivated because you really would want a spectator to make sure the Sharpie ink is dry. Though they both need their moments of slight misdirection, you can obviously see that one requires more than the other and also one is more restrictive than the other when it comes to freedom of routining. Both are good and both have their place but of course you and I both know that one edges out the other a bit more however it's also more than double the price of the other.
Message: Posted by: Christopher Williams (Mar 18, 2009 11:15AM)
I only have CV1, and there has been times where I have seen the marks where the gimmick has done the work...HOWEVER, the coins that I have borrowed, have lots of scratches and marks on them, that although I know which marks are made by me, the spectator just believes they are there anyway. It is common for coins to have scratches and marks on them, as they go through wear and tear of dropping on the floor, rubbing against other coins in pockets and wallets, in casino/game slots etc, so I really don't think the marks are an issue here
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 18, 2009 12:02PM)
I think it really depends on the mark though. When I prebend coins some will have slight marks which are negligible while other loop like clamp marks. Needless to say, the clamp marked ones I would straighten back out and spend them while the negligibly marked ones I would keep. Again, the obvious marks are negligible with either bender so the issue is a bit of a non-issue in the end unless you get obvious marks consistantly.
Message: Posted by: sleightofhander (Mar 18, 2009 09:06PM)
I have found the mark to be right at the "valley" of the bend. It seems to be less noticeable when I camouflage the bend into the design on the quarter. I have found the state quarters to be more noticeable since they are more flat. I may go back to my switch.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 18, 2009 10:38PM)
How extreme of an angle are you bending those coins sleightofhander? With the CV (and presumably the CV2) there should be any marks in the middle curved section of the bent coin. The marks I referred to appears near the edges (when they are there, they are pretty obvious as to how the coin was bent). The QB2 does not exhibit the marks in the curved area of the coin either.
Message: Posted by: sleightofhander (Mar 18, 2009 10:42PM)
About the shape of half a coin. Nothing extreme. I did notice that one of my slots is not rounded like the other 3. It's not rounded at all.
Message: Posted by: sleightofhander (Mar 18, 2009 10:48PM)
The insert edges are rounded except one if that helps.
Message: Posted by: tpax (Mar 19, 2009 08:08AM)
If the marks are a big concern to you add a few words in your scripting. Something to the effect that the coin is changing, it's stretching and deforming. Then look for the stretch marks, point them out as evidence that the coin has deformed.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 19, 2009 09:10AM)
I did think about that once but when there's a obvious mark on the coin, they don't look like they were there from stretching, they look like vice marks. Generally, the part of the gimmick that comes in contact with the INSIDE side of the bent coin should be rounded to decrease the changes of the marks. Heck, if you really want to prevent marks 100%, I would have to say that all the edges of the gimmick that comes in contact to the coin should be rounded.
Message: Posted by: naicols1971 (Apr 25, 2009 04:45AM)
Hello please someone can tell me what is the correct sharpie to use with coinvexed 2.0 ??

I have some 'Fine Print' sharpies but don't match with the gimmick...

Thank you very much
Message: Posted by: Andi Peters (May 3, 2009 04:56AM)
[quote]
On 2009-04-25 05:45, naicols1971 wrote:
Hello please someone can tell me what is the correct sharpie to use with coinvexed 2.0 ??

I have some 'Fine Print' sharpies but don't match with the gimmick...

Thank you very much
[/quote]
Use normal ones
Message: Posted by: Bierdo (Jun 4, 2009 07:52AM)
Hi all,
I do not own any coin benders. I am interested in either QB 2.0 or CV 2.0. Question about CV 2.0: When people talk about the misdirection in their routines, they seem to mention the spec signing a second object. Is this because it would be too cumbersome to hold the sharpie while doing the deed? I guess a simpler question would be, can I do some other kind of misdirection that does not involve the spec signing another object? Can I be holding the sharpie at the moment of misdirection? From what I gather, CV 2.0 needs more routining that QB 2.0 so I'm trying to think of routines that fit my style before purchasing.
Thanks!
Stephen
Message: Posted by: tpax (Jun 4, 2009 03:46PM)
[quote]
On 2009-06-04 08:52, Bierdo wrote:
can I do some other kind of misdirection that does not involve the spec signing another object? [/quote]
Yes.
However, CV has a gimmick in both hands. The second coin gives you a reason to keep the hand holding the coins in play.
Message: Posted by: Bierdo (Jun 4, 2009 04:29PM)
Gotcha, thanks tpax.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Jun 4, 2009 07:38PM)
You especially need to have a second coin signed for CV 2 as half the gimmick is now related to the Sharpie. You can technically not have anything signed but the handful of change is not really justified in that case. The best solution is to have the signing of a second coin. For the cleanest single borrowed coin bend (signed) is to use a QB2 as you have virtually nothing added or taken away plus all items in play (Sharpie and coin) have been freely handled by the spectator. CV2 isn't bad though at a fraction of the price but the routine (due to the nature of the gimmicks) is not as streamlined and "clean" as that of QB 2.0. If you do not mind bending coins that are NOT quarters then you can use any of the excellent pre-bend methods out there. If you live in a foreign country then again, you can use any of the pre-bend methods out there. Having a live bend gimmick like that of QB2 or CV2 is however a necessity in the US since most readily available coins are the quarters and they mostly have different backs as well as vary in polish tremendously.
Message: Posted by: tpax (Jun 4, 2009 08:18PM)
I would thnk these would work.

Sharpie is handed to spec with quarter.
Quarter is signed.
Quarter is picked up by hand with coins, displayed, returned to hand with sharpie top. Hands remain together.
INSERT MISDIRECTION HERE (bend coin)Hands separate
Sharpie is returned to hand with coin.
Sharpie is capped
Separate hands with bent coin in one and Sharpie/change in other.
Deposit sharpie and coins in pocket
Do presentation

Or

Sharpie is handed to spec with quarter.
Quarter is signed.
Quarter is picked up by hand with coins, displayed, returned to hand with sharpie top.
Sharpie is returned to hand with coin.
Sharpie is capped. Hands remain together.
INSERT MISDIRECTION HERE (bend coin)
Separate hands with bent coin in one and Sharpie/change in other.
Deposit sharpie and coins in pocket
Do presentation

Don't look at the hands with the coins and the spectators won't either!
Message: Posted by: disneywld (Sep 30, 2009 01:23PM)
My "out" on the topic of marks. I explain, "see these (finger) nails? - Tough as steel!"

Then I move onto the next magical experience.
Message: Posted by: John T. Sheets (Sep 30, 2009 03:38PM)
A short note on the topic of "marks" using the QB2. The QB2 should'nt leave any marks right out of the box. However if you got one that does leave a small mark, you will find on the QB2 DVD under the topic "Care & Maintinence", that there are directions on how to "adjust" the QB2 device to no longer leave marks. I hope this helps.
Message: Posted by: Doug Peters (Sep 30, 2009 06:01PM)
After bending dozens and dozens of pennies with the CV2, I have yet to notice, or have a spectator notice any marks. And folks who have seen it before multiple times still have no clue (I do not use the routine in the DVD -- I have some really fun misdirection :) )
Message: Posted by: tgplano (Oct 1, 2009 07:45AM)
I have recently had hand surgery. How much strength do you need to do this?
Message: Posted by: Tennispro (Oct 22, 2009 09:01AM)
I have some questions, I just ordered and got Coinvexed 2. What I got was a sharpie cap (and no sharpie pen) was something wrong with my order package? I now have to go out and buy a sharpie, as the sharpie I had in my house, this gimmicked cap did not fit. The dvd indicates you get the whole sharpie. Also I did not get any 'glue dots" the dvd indicated they were included. Was something wrong with my order with these things missing? I would think for the price the whole shrpie should have been included. Thanks for help, you can PM me if you like.
Message: Posted by: pduffie (Oct 22, 2009 03:13PM)
Hi

It sounds as if they may have sent you the Upgrade Pack. This is for those who already own the original Coinvexed. Apart from the cap, did you also receive another gimmick? If no - then you have the ypgrade pack.

Peter
Message: Posted by: GMakl (Oct 24, 2009 03:55PM)
Hi - I recently started working on a routine for coinvexed 2. My starting point, of course, was the routine done by David Penn - which I like. My biggest fear is getting caught at the time of the bend. Has anyone come up with any misdirection they think would work better than the misdirection used by David on his DVD? Thanks.
Message: Posted by: chappelly (Oct 24, 2009 05:46PM)
[quote]
On 2009-10-24 16:55, GMakl wrote:
My biggest fear is getting caught at the time of the bend. Has anyone come up with any misdirection they think would work better than the misdirection used by David on his DVD? Thanks.
[/quote]
It's highly unlikely you will get caught as the misdirection is so strong as you focus your attention on the second signing.I have done this many times and only once been challenged.That was by a friend who does not take his eyes off my hands when I do magic.He is a real pain.BTW he couldn't work out how it was bent.

Chappelly
Message: Posted by: Tennispro (Oct 24, 2009 06:09PM)
I don't use the second coin signing that Penn does. I hand them a magnetic or steel quarter, and then do some patter about another name for the sharpie is "magic marker" I ask them to wave the magic marker over the coin I placed in their hand and explain that the 'magic marker' has endowed the quarter in their hand with super powers (it is while the patter and their waving the 'magic marker' back and forth over the steel quarter is being done that I bend the coin). I then put it back in their hand have them cup their hands together and use my PK Block in my attached to my wrist under my jacket to make the steel/magnetic quarter flip so the feel it. Upon opening thie hands they see the 'super powers' of the 'magic marker's magic quarter' as it has bend the other coin! The use of a magnetic or steel coin with a PK block REALLY adds tot he effect because the person holding the coins actually felt something happen.
Message: Posted by: GMakl (Oct 24, 2009 07:09PM)
Thank you Chappelly and Tennispro for your comments. I will try the original and the one suggested by Tennispro - I ordered the PK block today.
Message: Posted by: chappelly (Oct 24, 2009 08:40PM)
Hi GMaki,
I just sent you a pm with my routine.However this is for CV1,I don't have CV2.You could probably adapt it though.
Message: Posted by: Tennispro (Nov 17, 2009 12:19PM)
Hi there I appearly lost my coinvexed sharpie last week doing walkaround in a nursing home. Perhaps I dropped it somehow walking into the building. Anyway by the time I reached for it in my pocket and found out it wasn't there a half hour had passed. I told nurses what it looked like, front desk staff, etc and walked my outside route 3 times with no success (and to date they have still not found it). All I need is the sharpie cap, how can I get this with having to spend so much money to buy this again? Thanks
Message: Posted by: cnsheets (Dec 15, 2009 04:36PM)
Regarding the first pages of this post, I do not understand how it is so difficult for someone, let alone an attorney to be able to find the information. 30 seconds on the US patent site.....

http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=20&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=Sheets.IN.&OS=IN/Sheets&RS=IN/Sheets
Message: Posted by: Decomposed (Dec 16, 2009 12:54AM)
[quote]
On 2009-11-17 13:19, Tennispro wrote:
Hi there I appearly lost my coinvexed sharpie last week doing walkaround in a nursing home. Perhaps I dropped it somehow walking into the building. Anyway by the time I reached for it in my pocket and found out it wasn't there a half hour had passed. I told nurses what it looked like, front desk staff, etc and walked my outside route 3 times with no success (and to date they have still not found it). All I need is the sharpie cap, how can I get this with having to spend so much money to buy this again? Thanks
[/quote]

Did you find it yet?
Message: Posted by: Decomposed (Dec 16, 2009 12:58AM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-16 13:38, Andi Peters wrote:
QB2 leaves an obvious mark imho
[/quote]

I have never seen a mark with mine.
Message: Posted by: Decomposed (Dec 16, 2009 01:04AM)
What is sad is whoever uses google will discover this. They only need to google bend c**n and Sh****e. :(
Message: Posted by: John C (Jan 8, 2010 03:03PM)
I received CV 2.0 a few days ago. I made my gimmick with a lot of change I had hanging around. I can only say this is a FINE tool. I mean, you are able to hold your hand out to a spec and say, "Do you have come change or should we use mine."

On stage it's fantastic because the entire audience can see the spec looking into your hand.

Have them sign the coin with the HEH, HEH. It's like the old TT gag pointing to the spec with the gimmick right under their nose. There's not a better feeling.

The entire thing is totally camouflaged. Not need to ever use misdirection on this one. There's nothing to misdirect!

I take the signed coin place it where it needs to be and the spec has another coin I have them mime me attempting to bend a coin. I'm doing it for REAL!

Then hand them a bunch of change including the bent and they use their mind to bend the coin they just signed.

I'm tellin' ya there's no misdirection required. Everything is built into two items that are part of reality.

Couldn't be happier!!

Can't wait to use this over and over.

John
Message: Posted by: John C (Jan 8, 2010 03:06PM)
[quote]
On 2009-03-05 13:16, Bungle wrote:
[quote]
On 2009-03-04 10:50, kissdadookie wrote:
I guess this thread pretty much summed it up for the CV2 vs QB question.
[/quote]

Absolutely! QB-Rocks CV2 sucks.

Ultimately the fact that with the CV2 you need two separate devices to enable the bend is its weakness.

CV2 really is the poor mans choice but in the eyes of the laymen the effect should be the same, so providing you can handle all the pocket management and a misdirected presentation you'll be fine. If however you're a working pro then you have to opt for the most technically efficient solution and without a doubt that is the Quantum Bender 2. I've been asked to do this effect repeatedly to the same people and have done with no suspicion on the gaff, I doubt the same could be said for the CV2.

Thanks MR Sheets for a great product!!
[/quote]

Oh I am glad that you are so misguided my friend. More magic gigs for me.

Why a repeat using a handful of change and a pen put off a repeat? Nonsense.

J
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Jan 8, 2010 03:19PM)
QB2 is definitely IMO better than CV1/2, a lot better!
Message: Posted by: John C (Jan 8, 2010 03:32PM)
[quote]
On 2010-01-08 16:19, lunatik wrote:
QB2 is definitely IMO better than CV1/2, a lot better!
[/quote]

I am not saying either way Mr. Tik. Just that I LIKE CV2. For all I know QB2 MAY BE BETTER! ;)

I love opinions! The duel is ON!!! ;)

J
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Jan 8, 2010 05:39PM)
Woo hoo! I hope that you get to pick one up soon!!!! It's such a great product, I'd almost sell you spare QB2......almost lol
Message: Posted by: John C (Jan 8, 2010 06:31PM)
Hey Mr. Tik can you go play in the QB2 playground. This thread is for SERIOUS coin benders only. ;)

Thank you.

J
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Jan 8, 2010 07:08PM)
Lol the QB2 playground is actually DisneyWorld!! Come visit soon, we can't wait to see you!! even though we have fun, we are very serious about bending coins hehe
Message: Posted by: animation (Jan 10, 2010 02:13PM)
I glad John is now on our side! We need to convert more Americans!

By the way I like your routine John, I think you could combine it with Mt Sheets handling based on your description to get an even smoother effect
Message: Posted by: John C (Jan 10, 2010 03:10PM)
[quote]
On 2010-01-10 15:13, animation wrote:
I glad John is now on our side! We need to convert more Americans!

By the way I like your routine John, I think you could combine it with Mt Sheets handling based on your description to get an even smoother effect
[/quote]

My real routine would only work with the CV2. I may post it here if there is enough demand. I am not concerned about the QB2 folks "borrowing" the routine as it is specific to the CV2.

J
Message: Posted by: nowyoucme (Jan 11, 2010 09:49AM)
WoW great routine johncesta. I think I will try useing that next time I use my CV2. When you look at the price of the QB2 when they both do the same thing in the end. I will take my CV2 anyday.
Message: Posted by: jimesw (Jan 22, 2010 11:01AM)
Is it just me being weak or does anyone else have pain and trouble bending the coin with the gimmicks? It leaves marks on my hands and it requires a lot of effort. I watched the dvd a few times to see how Mr Penn bends it but I am struggling. Am I doing something wrong. Has anyone else experienced this. Please PM me if you think you can help. It would be appreciated.

Cheers
James
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Jan 22, 2010 02:46PM)
[quote]
On 2010-01-22 12:01, jimesw wrote:
Is it just me being weak or does anyone else have pain and trouble bending the coin with the gimmicks? It leaves marks on my hands and it requires a lot of effort. I watched the dvd a few times to see how Mr Penn bends it but I am struggling. Am I doing something wrong. Has anyone else experienced this. Please PM me if you think you can help. It would be appreciated.

Cheers
James
[/quote]

What country are you from?

In the U.S., I rank the coins from easiest to hardest to bend in this order:

dime
penny
quarter
nickel

I don't own a CV1/CV2 but the QB gimmick works very well and allows coins to be bent with ease.

Try to acquire a GripMaster hand exercise device. It's not very expensive and it will give you increased finger strength. For increased grip strength, I recommend you hit the gym and lift weights. Your grip will increase by just holding onto dumbbells and going through your regular gym workout.

If none of that helps, you may have arthritis or carpal tunnel syndrome. (hope not)
Message: Posted by: aukt (Jan 22, 2010 05:49PM)
I wished I lived in the usa permanently.

your coins bend like butter.
Message: Posted by: jimesw (Jan 23, 2010 03:33AM)
Thanks Doug

Although I am skinny as a rake, my hands are chubby. Shoot Ogowa told me I had fat hands when I was asking him to comment on my muscle pass :)
I will work on it.
Message: Posted by: madcats9 (Jan 23, 2010 09:24AM)
Does coinvexed work with Euros?
Message: Posted by: jimesw (Jan 23, 2010 11:28AM)
Oh yeah, I'm from the UK by the way Doug. Our coins are a bit tougher. Oh well..
Message: Posted by: mike storz (Jan 23, 2010 11:37AM)
I have to say that I've been looking for a great coin bend that makes sense, has a lot of misdirection so there's no heat on the bending, and hits hard. Well, CV2 is it! I have seen QB2 it's great but you still have to switch things out. CV2 there's no switch and everything is just so natural. I love it and will never sell it! Well, unless something better comes out. Bill over at madhater magic has a killer price on this too. You just cannot beat it!
Message: Posted by: John C (Jan 23, 2010 12:34PM)
[quote]
On 2010-01-22 12:01, jimesw wrote:
Is it just me being weak or does anyone else have pain and trouble bending the coin with the gimmicks? It leaves marks on my hands and it requires a lot of effort. I watched the dvd a few times to see how Mr Penn bends it but I am struggling. Am I doing something wrong. Has anyone else experienced this. Please PM me if you think you can help. It would be appreciated.

Cheers
James
[/quote]

Remeber the thing about not using the fingers. And I bend in. Not hard. I always use a quarter.

j
Message: Posted by: HusssKarson (Jan 23, 2010 02:01PM)
There's a door method in TA. I think it's a great replacement to prep proplessly. Just to give everyone a heads up.
Message: Posted by: Andi Peters (Jan 24, 2010 05:23AM)
[quote]
On 2010-01-08 16:19, lunatik wrote:
QB2 is definitely IMO better than CV1/2, a lot better!
[/quote]
You keep on saying that, do you get 10% of each one sold! Either that or you're mates with the inventor, come on, time to own up.
Message: Posted by: John C (Jan 24, 2010 08:13AM)
[quote]
On 2010-01-24 06:23, Andi Peters wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-01-08 16:19, lunatik wrote:
QB2 is definitely IMO better than CV1/2, a lot better!
[/quote]
You keep on saying that, do you get 10% of each one sold! Either that or you're mates with the inventor, come on, time to own up.
[/quote]

Or at least explain why. Perhaps put up a video of your performance!

J
Message: Posted by: Douglas Lippert (Feb 13, 2010 01:05PM)
[quote]
On 2010-01-23 04:33, jimesw wrote:
Thanks Doug

Shoot Ogowa told me I had fat hands when I was asking him to comment on my muscle pass.
[/quote]

Haha, that's pretty funny.

I guess you just have to keep bending coins. Some day, and that day will come, you will be bending your European money like butter.



[quote]
On 2010-01-23 12:37, mike storz wrote:
I have seen QB2 it's great but you still have to switch things out.
[/quote]

Yes, but you switch things out when it doesn't matter. There is no heat on you because the coin is being passed around for examination of the signature at this time. QB2 is also very simple to use.
Message: Posted by: aukt (Feb 18, 2010 07:26AM)
John Cesta;

I always listen to your recommendations, because it's obvious - like me - you work.

May I ask you to post more detail on your cv2 routine? w ould love to hear about it.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Feb 18, 2010 11:32AM)
I can give you a hint Aukt about his routine, not too much, but a little. has something to do with the word 'cockroach' hehehe
Message: Posted by: John C (Feb 19, 2010 01:04PM)
[quote]
On 2010-02-18 12:32, lunatik wrote:
I can give you a hint Aukt about his routine, not too much, but a little. has something to do with the word 'cockroach' hehehe
[/quote]

I think what Mt. Tik must mean is I haven't posted it yet 'cause the routine still has bugs in it.

j
Message: Posted by: aukt (Feb 19, 2010 01:12PM)
Well I'd love to hear it.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Feb 19, 2010 04:02PM)
LoL I like John :)
Message: Posted by: aukt (Feb 19, 2010 05:14PM)
Question for owners;

When DP demo's this on the dvd - he seems to be affecting the bend with the coins of his cv1 gimmick facing upwards. Given that he bends upwards and towards himself, this means he's bending the coin against the SHARP edge of the cv1 gimmick, and not the smooth rounded edge.

Has anyone else noticed this? To me, the only way I can affect the bend on the soft rounded edge using the same motion as him is to turn the original cv1 gimmick so the coins are on the underside.

am I making sense?
Message: Posted by: chappelly (Feb 19, 2010 07:26PM)
I just tried reverse bending the coin as you suggest. For me this makes the bend more difficult, that is more strength required.
I think CV1 has been designed for maximum leverage.
I don't know whether it is Australian coins,but the CV1 never leaves a mark when done the way DP does it and I've been through quite a few coins.
Message: Posted by: aukt (Feb 19, 2010 07:27PM)
The thing is - on the dvd for 2.0, he is definately bending coins against the 'sharp' i.e. non rounded edge of the gimmick. I've watched it ten times and freeze framed it.
Message: Posted by: chappelly (Feb 19, 2010 07:44PM)
I can't comment on 2.0 as I don't have it. But I believe the CV1 was designed to bend on the sharp edge, at least this is the way I started doing it and still do. You get more leverage doing it this way.
Message: Posted by: aukt (Feb 19, 2010 07:48PM)
Hmm, that's interesting - one would think it would have been designed to bend on the smooth/curved edge.

anyway - thanks for the input chapelly really appreciate it!

anyone else doing the exact same?
Message: Posted by: mike storz (Feb 20, 2010 06:06AM)
Hi aukt,

I do the bend exactly like he does. It works perfectly and no marks on US coins. I find it's easier to bend when you have more coins in your hand. Hope that helps.

Mike :)
Message: Posted by: doktorp (Feb 23, 2010 06:50AM)
I will stay with my QB 2.0. I love it and I love the reactions you get.

Patrick
Message: Posted by: MaxfieldsMagic (Mar 28, 2010 12:14AM)
Question: do you really need the PK Block that WorldMagicShop sells in order to do Penn's extra handling on the DVD? How about using a good PK ring or an M5? Is there anything special about the PK block that justifies the 35 pound expense? I'm thinking "no," but if I'm wrong, please educate me. Thanks.
Message: Posted by: Phil J. (Mar 28, 2010 04:11AM)
I've tried a PK ring and it isn't powerful enough.
Message: Posted by: Russell (Mar 28, 2010 04:22PM)
[quote]
On 2010-03-28 01:14, MaxfieldsMagic wrote:
Question: do you really need the PK Block that WorldMagicShop sells in order to do Penn's extra handling on the DVD? How about using a good PK ring or an M5? Is there anything special about the PK block that justifies the 35 pound expense? I'm thinking "no," but if I'm wrong, please educate me. Thanks.
[/quote]

The PK block is a super powerful magnet, A Pk Ring is not powerful enough, because remember it has to attract the coin and move it through their hand.

So as far as I'm aware, without going to a specialist magnet supplier, this is the only one available.

Russell Leeds
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Mar 28, 2010 04:59PM)
Shawn farquar has one that is built into a wrist band and is super powerful, perfect for what you guys are trying to accomplish. Here's the link, it's called MatriXpress, also, pick up his other effects, totally awesome imo!


http://www.shawnfarquhar.com/backroom.html
Message: Posted by: MaxfieldsMagic (Mar 28, 2010 11:10PM)
[quote]
On 2010-03-28 17:59, lunatik wrote:
Shawn farquar has one that is built into a wrist band and is super powerful, perfect for what you guys are trying to accomplish. Here's the link, it's called MatriXpress, also, pick up his other effects, totally awesome imo!


http://www.shawnfarquhar.com/backroom.html
[/quote]

Thanks! Does the wrist band look innocent? Are we talking leather here, or one of those rubber wrist bands that were hot a couple of years ago?

Can anyone compare the PK block with the M5? I'm assuming the block is smaller than the M5, but is there any reason to get the block if you already have the M5? Sounds like you need cover for either, so the wrist band might be the way for many situations.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Mar 29, 2010 06:39AM)
This type of wrist band looks like the type someone would workout with, black, wide and stretchy
Message: Posted by: MaxfieldsMagic (Mar 29, 2010 08:40AM)
Got it. Thanks.
Message: Posted by: Craig Dickson (Apr 5, 2010 08:41AM)
TBA
Message: Posted by: Andi Peters (Apr 5, 2010 08:52AM)
[quote]
On 2010-04-05 09:41, Craig Dickson wrote:
What's funny is I wrote that routine, and it was provided with the SL Coin Bender in 2001. It was in my lecture, and I gave it to Steve Lancaster after he showed me the prototype. And that is when I made the wrist bands to go along with that routine and all the PK stuff I do. So nice Mr Penn just takes what he wants, and actually admitts he bought all the benders, and dismissed them, and this is the routine "he" came up with. Sure after seeing what everyone else worked on for years.
[/quote]
Gosh, that's quite a revelation. I hope Dave pops up here with a response.

I bought coinvexed I and II in good faith.

I hope it was a case of independent invention and not simply lifting another's material for material gain.
Message: Posted by: Craig Dickson (Apr 5, 2010 09:45AM)
Jim wrote me about all of this. And I deleted all of my stuff, as Jim will always be someone I respect and consider one of the best. Like I said, the rest just didn't matter.
Message: Posted by: Grant Mitchell (Apr 12, 2010 04:09PM)
Hi, just received Coinvexed 2 today, and have already just about destroyed my hands - I'm obviously doing something very wrong! Really would appreciate if somebody could PM me with a little advice.

Many thanks,
Grant
Message: Posted by: dp (Apr 24, 2010 08:52AM)
[quote]
On 2010-04-12 17:09, Grant Mitchell wrote:
Hi, just received Coinvexed 2 today, and have already just about destroyed my hands - I'm obviously doing something very wrong! Really would appreciate if somebody could PM me with a little advice.

Many thanks,
Grant
[/quote]

Hi Grant,

I will be away in Hong Kong until Friday but when I gat back maybe we could have a web video chat and I can help you out?

All the best,

David
Message: Posted by: Blindside785 (Sep 22, 2010 04:34PM)
I just ordered CV2 today :D
Message: Posted by: Blindside785 (Sep 26, 2010 01:18AM)
So sadness fell upon me this morning.

I ordered CV2 with 4 Quarters by NYMP.

Got the package but inside on the receipt was ...Your CV2 is on backorder

Woe is me!! WOE IS ME!!!
Message: Posted by: toph (Sep 26, 2010 11:26PM)
Great pickup, Blindside. I feel your pain. I had a lot of fun with CV2 before venturing off to pick up QB 2.0
Message: Posted by: Blindside785 (Sep 27, 2010 01:25AM)
Thanks toph, yeah I'm not limiting myself to CV2. One day when I make better money I will venture into QB 2.0 land. CV 2.0 is in my budget for right now. Maybe I'll just set aside 100 a month just for the effect so I can get QB 2.o sooner.
Message: Posted by: Blindside785 (Sep 27, 2010 02:25AM)
I have no problem with having 2 coins in play. We will see once I have it (Ehh 2 weeks..thanks penguin.not.) I will give real world performance views on it.
Message: Posted by: gjmagic (Sep 27, 2010 03:19AM)
[quote]
On 2010-04-12 17:09, Grant Mitchell wrote:
Hi, just received Coinvexed 2 today, and have already just about destroyed my hands - I'm obviously doing something very wrong! Really would appreciate if somebody could PM me with a little advice.

Many thanks,
Grant
[/quote]

Hi Grant,

You're not doing anything wrong my friend, it's a bit like going back to the gym after a long layoff, you're using muscles you haven't used before, or not used for a long time. I would recommend that you have a day or two off from practising, then go back to it again, do this for a week or so and your muscles will have developed enough for this to problem to go away.

I remember having this when I first started using CV2, but now I can bend a coin like it was butter. This is the best piece of kit I have in my magic repertoire, would never leave home without it, I absolutely think this is one of the most powerful effects you can do on a spectator!

If you need any other tips or advice please feel free to contact me at any time.

Regards,

Gary Jones.
Message: Posted by: toph (Sep 27, 2010 09:31AM)
[quote]
On 2010-09-27 03:25, Blindside785 wrote:
I have no problem with having 2 coins in play. We will see once I have it (Ehh 2 weeks..thanks penguin.not.) I will give real world performance views on it.
[/quote]

Yeah, it wont be a problem with the patter that's included. It really does a fantastic job and I would have stuck to CV2 if I didn't have a little extra money to get the QB2.0

Putting $100 away for a few months is a sound plan and will be soo worth it. You will be spoiled for the rest of your life when it comes to coins bends with the QB2.0

Hope you get your package from Penguin soon! There is nothing worse than the anxiety of waiting for a new "toy". They better give you extra packs of M&M's for your troubles.
Message: Posted by: hellohiashley (Jun 12, 2011 11:56AM)
Hey Every one.
I recently got coinvexed 2.0 after wanting a coin bending routine.
I have to say the reactions I am getting are unreal and that's without the PK block!
Was wondering if I could buy a pro PK Magic Kik as I can get one for £50 and would this still give me the affect as the original coinvexed pk block?
Thank you !
Message: Posted by: timski523 (Jun 14, 2011 04:11PM)
Hi hello
Just to warn u... I have great reaction too, but when I started to use the pk5, it sort of started to raise susspision, as it was so unreal, the effect was great apart from the movement part, I would not recommend the magnet instead you will be surprised what you can do with a bit of mental force.. Ie... Its getting hot, can you feel it" or.. U will start to feel it move, allmost pulsing" etc.. Read up a bit about some mentalist force, I like Luke jermays feraion of a ring getting hot but have a look try it, it's amazing but when I fo it people realky thing it's getting warm or sometimes moving!
Cheers
Tim
Message: Posted by: timski523 (Jun 15, 2011 09:16AM)
Mind you if you want to buy a pk5 kit Im thinking of selling mine!
Message: Posted by: hellohiashley (Jun 18, 2011 11:50AM)
Private messege me :) thanks!
Message: Posted by: Mach (May 11, 2012 05:08AM)
Does the routining for this version still require a handful of coins and or anything else to perform the effect with? Or are you all set with just the gimmick and two coins?

Thanks

Mach
Message: Posted by: jimhlou (May 11, 2012 07:30AM)
Hey Mach:

You need the Sharpie gimmick plus 4 - 6 various coins to perform. I use 3 quarters, 3 pennies, and a dime. I then do the effect with one of the quarters and one of the pennies. The remaining coins are used over and over.

Jim
Message: Posted by: lunatik (May 11, 2012 04:49PM)
Handful of coins
Message: Posted by: MR Effecto (May 12, 2012 10:16AM)
I have Coinvexed 2 Sharpie Edition I love it. I would like to get a QB but just don't want to spend that much on the QB when I know what it is. It does look nice and very clean but I can get the same reactions from my Coinvexed 2 Sharpie Edition for way less.
Message: Posted by: Christopher Williams (May 12, 2012 05:43PM)
I have both a QB2 and CV2... personally I prefer the CV2 and although I have only had it for a couple days, I can already see I will use it more than the QB2
Message: Posted by: bertietonks (May 17, 2012 05:23PM)
CV2 is great and the use of magnet to excentuate the effect is a super good idea as the impact is then experienced in the specs hands, a powerful moment of magic. I was thinking about buying pure smoke to add further sparkle but I guess how far does one go towards layering multiple sensing to one effect without losing the impact of any singular one.

Any thoughts?
Bertie
Message: Posted by: Larry Davidson (May 17, 2012 07:06PM)
I think that it adds to the effect, particularly if the spectator is holding the coin and you make it appear as if the smoke is coming from his hand (which I've done).
Message: Posted by: rowland (Dec 2, 2012 01:41AM)
Does anyone know if this is still available it doesn't seem to be on their web site ?
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Dec 2, 2012 10:18PM)
Wait for the QB3 that is soon to come! :)
Message: Posted by: Jamie Ferguson (Dec 3, 2012 04:43AM)
[quote]
On 2012-12-02 02:41, rowland wrote:
Does anyone know if this is still available it doesn't seem to be on their web site ?
[/quote]
It's still available from other suppliers if you do a search.

I'm not surprised it's sold out at WMS though. It's simply the best bender on the market.
Message: Posted by: rowland (Dec 3, 2012 02:52PM)
[quote]
On 2012-12-03 05:43, Jamie Ferguson wrote:
[quote]
On 2012-12-02 02:41, rowland wrote:
Does anyone know if this is still available it doesn't seem to be on their web site ?
[/quote]
It's still available from other suppliers if you do a search.

I'm not surprised it's sold out at WMS though. It's simply the best bender on the market.
[/quote]
thanks a lot, this has got some grear reviews
Message: Posted by: paisa23 (Sep 19, 2013 08:12PM)
This might have been addressed and I'm sorry but after page four I had to get to the end. A lot of good info but I'm curious as to what else can be used in the states. As we know us coins are not the same as euro coins so PM the best trial and error for creating the gimmick. I bought mine second have so I don't have that Adhesive, and I want to not use Gorrilla since its very powerful. I can provide proof of purchase if need be,
Message: Posted by: jimhlou (Sep 20, 2013 02:00PM)
Mine was put together with gorilla glue. Works great - in 2 - 3 years I've never had a reason to take it apart. Give me your email address and I'll send you a photo.

Jim
Message: Posted by: paisa23 (Sep 21, 2013 07:22PM)
Ok I'm building my gimmick tonight. Those that were gonna email me theirs please do so, so I can compare and make it clean. I'm going with quarter nickel quarter.. paisa23@gmail.com
Message: Posted by: paisa23 (Sep 22, 2013 04:37PM)
OK better question. Is Gorilla strong enough? I made my gimmick. Left it over night to rest then tried it today and it came undone... How do I take off the dried up residue and reset? Or best placement to avoid it happening again.
Message: Posted by: paisa23 (Sep 25, 2013 02:21PM)
DO NOT! Bend Nickels!!! Just tried it after having my gimmick set up for two days to practice and POP! Gimmick fell apart... Not the apparatus, but what I needed to add on.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Sep 25, 2013 03:58PM)
QB will bend nickels :0
Message: Posted by: paisa23 (Sep 25, 2013 05:14PM)
If I buy a QB ill never have another Nickel too bend.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Sep 25, 2013 06:31PM)
You know how Murphy's Law works! haha