M.D. Smith Back No.2 (Blue)
Where to buy: Conjuring Arts Research Center
Price: $3.99 (Non-Member) $3.49 (Member)
For more information about my reviewing methods and a list of other reviews: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=156760&p=1224367#p1224367
If you are interested in my Buyers guide
check out this link: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=159568 http://forums.theory11.com/showthread.p ... yers-Guide
Initial Impressions: The key word on this one is “Hybrid.” This is an attempt to make a card that will perform as well for a gambling demo as it will for card magic. My initial thoughts….Success!
The Look:
The Smith Back, like the Acorn back I have previously reviewed( see: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=159668 ) uses the artwork in Expert at the Card Table as inspiration. Covering the white back is a series of four different blue silhouettes of hand positions that are illustrated throughout EATCT. You can read the Acorn Back review for specifics which illustrations from EACTC were depicted on the back. You can also see that review for specifics on the face designs as all of the add cards, Jokers, Ace of Spades, and court cards are the same. What is different is the overall color and look of the backs. Gone is the centerpiece SWE and the bordered green back with white silhouettes has been replaced with a simple white back with blue silhouettes. There is a border on the Smith back but it is not clearly defined and this gives the deck a look somewhat similar to a Bee Stinger design. This can serve as a nice balance between a bordered design, preferred by most magicians, and a borderless design, preferred by demo guys. Overall a nice simple design that gives a nod to “the Card Bible” without screaming “I’m a magic man’s deck!”
Card Construction:
The Smith Back uses the same stiff Bee Casino Grade stock that was used for the Acorn Backs. It is a nice stock that measures about the same thickness as a Bike 808(15.5mm Out of The Box) but provides a much stiffer card. Though it won’t beat the European manufacturers (Fournier and Piatnik) in terms of stiffness it easily matches the venerated UV500s and, considering it comes it a few cards thinner that the hefty UV’s, I would say it is the best “Stiff” stock USPCC has ever produced. Upon opening the box the Smith Backs had the tell tale signs of a traditional cut card, the Smiths also seem to faro better face down, so I think that the Smith backs are indeed a traditional cut card. This should cheer up the Demo guys!
Handling:
Though it handles close to the previous cards from the Conjuring arts and it is using the same stock they do feel a tad different. For one these are a cambric finish and the feel stiffer than the cambric finished Acorn Backs. They also did not feel quite as “slick” as the acorn backs though I couldn’t tell the difference in a blind fold test. I could just be fooling myself but as I went through my various tests these did handle slightly differently than the Acorn Cambric and the Acorn Ivory decks.
Fanning: OOB: 9
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
No substantial difference from a bike.
Spring Energy: OOB: 8.5
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
A nice stiff deck that should do well for aggressive card handlers.
Dribble: OOB: 8
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
The added stiffness of the Smiths won’t be appreciated by those wanting to do long flourishes but it should be quite adequate for sleight of hand purposes.
Crimp Hold/Recovery: OOB: 6
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
Just as noted with the Acorns this seems to be the Achilles Heel of this deck. The low crimp recovery never got bad enough to prematurely end the Acorn back review but time will tell how it effects the Smiths.
Single Card Glides: OOB: 8
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
An good deck for one handed glide work. The stiffness and smoothness of the cards is just about perfect.
2+ Card Obfuscations: OOB: 8
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
More high marks here. All the doubling moves I test with performed better than an 808 except for the Derek Dingle(Knock-out) DL which performed about the same.
Gaff construction and availability: Homemade only.
XCM Flourishing: It should be a good deck for cuts and aerials, average for fans, and a bit lacking for long dribbles and springs.
Who Should Buy?: If you like stiffer decks or want to try one this would be a top recommendation.
Who should not buy: I can’t think of a reason not to buy the Smith Back.
Final thoughts:
Get These NOW! These are a limited run and Conjuring arts is selling them to members and non-members alike. I had to pay $8.00 to get my Acorns when they hit the secondary market and these are available for $4.00 to a non-member. Furthermore, if you’re a member! $3.50 is the average retail of a Tally Ho. You would have to be nuts not to buy a brick of these. In all seriousness I was planning on giving this deck a “Good” review before I considered the price of these. At the stiffness I rate this deck at I put the Smiths in the “Workers” category and quite frankly the “workers” category has some seriously stiff competition(pun not intended but I’ll take credit anyways.) Would I feel more confident doing a grueling sequence of moves with a Piatnik than this?….yes. But the Smith back will do those moves better than just about any USPCC card and when factoring in the price there is no contest. If you want a high quality stock, printed with high a quality press, you will not find a better card. Indeed the cheapest “high quality” decks from other magic companies rarely come in cheaper than $5.00/deck. One final feather in the Smith Backs cap is its’ ability with gambling demos. This deck, stiff as it is, is surprisingly good at gambling moves. A combination of, what I believe to be, a traditional cut and art design make this deck work quite well for demos. Would I still prefer the softer Aristocrat for a gambling Demo?...yes. But then again, the cheapest high quality Aristocrats sell for $5.00/ deck and I wouldn’t dream of using an Aristocrat for a tricky “Silver Surfer” sequence. So all in all, when you factor the price, the quality, and the versatility of this deck you have a deck that is very hard to beat. Jack of all Trades…master of none?....but pretty damn good at most!
Where to buy: Conjuring Arts Research Center
Price: $3.99 (Non-Member) $3.49 (Member)
For more information about my reviewing methods and a list of other reviews: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=156760&p=1224367#p1224367
If you are interested in my Buyers guide
check out this link: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=159568 http://forums.theory11.com/showthread.p ... yers-Guide
Initial Impressions: The key word on this one is “Hybrid.” This is an attempt to make a card that will perform as well for a gambling demo as it will for card magic. My initial thoughts….Success!
The Look:
The Smith Back, like the Acorn back I have previously reviewed( see: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=159668 ) uses the artwork in Expert at the Card Table as inspiration. Covering the white back is a series of four different blue silhouettes of hand positions that are illustrated throughout EATCT. You can read the Acorn Back review for specifics which illustrations from EACTC were depicted on the back. You can also see that review for specifics on the face designs as all of the add cards, Jokers, Ace of Spades, and court cards are the same. What is different is the overall color and look of the backs. Gone is the centerpiece SWE and the bordered green back with white silhouettes has been replaced with a simple white back with blue silhouettes. There is a border on the Smith back but it is not clearly defined and this gives the deck a look somewhat similar to a Bee Stinger design. This can serve as a nice balance between a bordered design, preferred by most magicians, and a borderless design, preferred by demo guys. Overall a nice simple design that gives a nod to “the Card Bible” without screaming “I’m a magic man’s deck!”
Card Construction:
The Smith Back uses the same stiff Bee Casino Grade stock that was used for the Acorn Backs. It is a nice stock that measures about the same thickness as a Bike 808(15.5mm Out of The Box) but provides a much stiffer card. Though it won’t beat the European manufacturers (Fournier and Piatnik) in terms of stiffness it easily matches the venerated UV500s and, considering it comes it a few cards thinner that the hefty UV’s, I would say it is the best “Stiff” stock USPCC has ever produced. Upon opening the box the Smith Backs had the tell tale signs of a traditional cut card, the Smiths also seem to faro better face down, so I think that the Smith backs are indeed a traditional cut card. This should cheer up the Demo guys!
Handling:
Though it handles close to the previous cards from the Conjuring arts and it is using the same stock they do feel a tad different. For one these are a cambric finish and the feel stiffer than the cambric finished Acorn Backs. They also did not feel quite as “slick” as the acorn backs though I couldn’t tell the difference in a blind fold test. I could just be fooling myself but as I went through my various tests these did handle slightly differently than the Acorn Cambric and the Acorn Ivory decks.
Fanning: OOB: 9
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
No substantial difference from a bike.
Spring Energy: OOB: 8.5
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
A nice stiff deck that should do well for aggressive card handlers.
Dribble: OOB: 8
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
The added stiffness of the Smiths won’t be appreciated by those wanting to do long flourishes but it should be quite adequate for sleight of hand purposes.
Crimp Hold/Recovery: OOB: 6
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
Just as noted with the Acorns this seems to be the Achilles Heel of this deck. The low crimp recovery never got bad enough to prematurely end the Acorn back review but time will tell how it effects the Smiths.
Single Card Glides: OOB: 8
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
An good deck for one handed glide work. The stiffness and smoothness of the cards is just about perfect.
2+ Card Obfuscations: OOB: 8
1st Week: TBD
2nd Week: TBD
3rd Week: TBD
4th Week: TBD
More high marks here. All the doubling moves I test with performed better than an 808 except for the Derek Dingle(Knock-out) DL which performed about the same.
Gaff construction and availability: Homemade only.
XCM Flourishing: It should be a good deck for cuts and aerials, average for fans, and a bit lacking for long dribbles and springs.
Who Should Buy?: If you like stiffer decks or want to try one this would be a top recommendation.
Who should not buy: I can’t think of a reason not to buy the Smith Back.
Final thoughts:
Get These NOW! These are a limited run and Conjuring arts is selling them to members and non-members alike. I had to pay $8.00 to get my Acorns when they hit the secondary market and these are available for $4.00 to a non-member. Furthermore, if you’re a member! $3.50 is the average retail of a Tally Ho. You would have to be nuts not to buy a brick of these. In all seriousness I was planning on giving this deck a “Good” review before I considered the price of these. At the stiffness I rate this deck at I put the Smiths in the “Workers” category and quite frankly the “workers” category has some seriously stiff competition(pun not intended but I’ll take credit anyways.) Would I feel more confident doing a grueling sequence of moves with a Piatnik than this?….yes. But the Smith back will do those moves better than just about any USPCC card and when factoring in the price there is no contest. If you want a high quality stock, printed with high a quality press, you will not find a better card. Indeed the cheapest “high quality” decks from other magic companies rarely come in cheaper than $5.00/deck. One final feather in the Smith Backs cap is its’ ability with gambling demos. This deck, stiff as it is, is surprisingly good at gambling moves. A combination of, what I believe to be, a traditional cut and art design make this deck work quite well for demos. Would I still prefer the softer Aristocrat for a gambling Demo?...yes. But then again, the cheapest high quality Aristocrats sell for $5.00/ deck and I wouldn’t dream of using an Aristocrat for a tricky “Silver Surfer” sequence. So all in all, when you factor the price, the quality, and the versatility of this deck you have a deck that is very hard to beat. Jack of all Trades…master of none?....but pretty damn good at most!
Last edited by a moderator: