Need advice please

May 21, 2014
127
6
Staunton, VA
The best advice I can offer is to learn how to play with people and subtly lead them around to the idea that they should be excited and expectant about whatever's going to happen. Building a sense of anticipation and often confusion can set someone up for a big catharsis. In a way, this is kind of like working as a hypnotist; the most important thing you say isn't going to come out of your mouth.

Everything about you should suggest that you are knowledgeable, magical, and worthy of great praise and reactions: body language, demeanor, even clothing. All your handling should seem smooth and casual, as if you're doing a simple, logical task and have nothing to hide. If you create that reality out of non-verbal cues, people will accept it as if they had reasoned it out for themselves. Once you get someone to that point, where they think they believe something because they decided on it and not because of you, then you can get past the Critical Factor and bring in the element of surprise after the basis for the false reality is established. Blowing minds is more a social and psychological thing than it is a thing of finding the right effect and doing it perfectly. You have to learn how to engineer that moment of catharsis, and there is no trick I've seen that will do that for you or even help you with it very much. Do magic that you love and that looks magical to you, magic that you can get really excited about even if you know the method. The most important job an entertainer has is to have fun. If you're not having fun, your audience will know, and then they won't be having fun either.
 
Jul 13, 2014
176
27
Modern versions in my opinion do count. Doing anything with a gaffed deck is fantastic! Would you rather do an impromptu invisible deck, or the one with the gaffed deck? To me, spectators can tell the difference! I think if you did an effect like CAAN with you dealing vs them dealing, obviously if they did it it is much more powerful! ALWAYS WILL BE! Again my opinion...
that's different. If you do it well enough they won't see or remember the difference. You could do triumph with a stripper deck, but it's just not worth it. It would barely differ from sleight of hand. Anyway dani daortiz's open triumph is the best one I've ever seen.
Additionally it's always best to leave out gaffs wherever possible. If I have to change decks every time I do a trick.... Also you mentioned the invisible deck. That's the fourth most common gaff deck out there so sleight of hand is better for that. Gaffs are good but gaff addiction can become a problem. But you're still thinking like a magician. If they deal its usually more impressive. But good routining will eliminate that. Most of the time they won't even know how you could fake the deal, and once you've convinced them it's completely legitimate draw their attention to the fact the card was in the Xth position, not who dealt there. After a while you can imply, then say they dealt there. Gaffs are easier, but not better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Feb 18, 2014
146
0
that's different. If you do it well enough they won't see or remember the difference. You could do triumph with a stripper deck, but it's just not worth it. It would barely differ from sleight of hand. Anyway dani daortiz's open triumph is the best one I've ever seen.
Additionally it's always best to leave out gaffs wherever possible. If I have to change decks every time I do a trick.... Also you mentioned the invisible deck. That's the fourth most common gaff deck out there so sleight of hand is better for that. Gaffs are good but gaff addiction can become a problem. But you're still thinking like a magician. If they deal its usually more impressive. But good routining will eliminate that. Most of the time they won't even know how you could fake the deal, and once you've convinced them it's completely legitimate draw their attention to the fact the card was in the Xth position, not who dealt there. After a while you can imply, then say they dealt there. Gaffs are easier, but not better.

I use to think in that sense too. But no matter what anyone says, magic in the spectators hands is always always always the most powerful magic, period. Gaffs are good, I use to be a purist, only sleights. But the invisible deck with the gaffed deck is the best. Impromptu versions can't touch it. You do not really have to change decks, I am just saying. I don't really use gaffs, but for certain tricks, I feel I have to. Im not saying you need a gaffed deck to do triumph. Also, even if your routine is flawless, it doesn't change the level of impression you leave on them when it comes to them doing the magic. If there were two magicians at a party and they both performed CAAN to the same group of people, the one who let the spectator deal the cards and turn over the prediction will get way better reactions and the people will be more impressed then with the magician who deals the cards himself. Gaffs are definitely easier I know, and I do not enjoy using them when not necessary as I prefer sleights, but, sometimes you just need to.
 
I use to think in that sense too. But no matter what anyone says, magic in the spectators hands is always always always the most powerful magic, period. Gaffs are good, I use to be a purist, only sleights. But the invisible deck with the gaffed deck is the best. Impromptu versions can't touch it. You do not really have to change decks, I am just saying. I don't really use gaffs, but for certain tricks, I feel I have to. Im not saying you need a gaffed deck to do triumph. Also, even if your routine is flawless, it doesn't change the level of impression you leave on them when it comes to them doing the magic. If there were two magicians at a party and they both performed CAAN to the same group of people, the one who let the spectator deal the cards and turn over the prediction will get way better reactions and the people will be more impressed then with the magician who deals the cards himself. Gaffs are definitely easier I know, and I do not enjoy using them when not necessary as I prefer sleights, but, sometimes you just need to.

Again that goes back to only if spectators have seen both versions, you seem to be thinking like a magician. Most laypeople have never actually seen a magician, so the exact process of the effect doesn't matter so much as long as the presentation is good. I agree that gaffs and gimmicks can let you do some awesome stuff, i just never use them with cards.
 
Feb 18, 2014
146
0
Again that goes back to only if spectators have seen both versions, you seem to be thinking like a magician. Most laypeople have never actually seen a magician, so the exact process of the effect doesn't matter so much as long as the presentation is good. I agree that gaffs and gimmicks can let you do some awesome stuff, i just never use them with cards.

Still, I think that you should make it as best as possible. The better and cleaner the magic is, the more people will remember you, for sure. Even if they have not seen both versions, they are more likely to remember you if your quality of magic was fantastic rather than good.
 
Feb 18, 2014
146
0
laymen can't tell fantastic from good, hell they can't even tell bad from good. magic is magic regardless, it's the performer that makes it.

Well at least for me, I want my magic to be as good as possible, not for me, for them. I owe it to them to give them the best show I can, and I won't go for lower quality things..
 
Jul 13, 2014
176
27
I use to think in that sense too. But no matter what anyone says, magic in the spectators hands is always always always the most powerful magic, period. Gaffs are good, I use to be a purist, only sleights. But the invisible deck with the gaffed deck is the best. Impromptu versions can't touch it. You do not really have to change decks, I am just saying. I don't really use gaffs, but for certain tricks, I feel I have to. Im not saying you need a gaffed deck to do triumph. Also, even if your routine is flawless, it doesn't change the level of impression you leave on them when it comes to them doing the magic. If there were two magicians at a party and they both performed CAAN to the same group of people, the one who let the spectator deal the cards and turn over the prediction will get way better reactions and the people will be more impressed then with the magician who deals the cards himself. Gaffs are definitely easier I know, and I do not enjoy using them when not necessary as I prefer sleights, but, sometimes you just need to.

Again, I have to disagree. It does leave more of an impact if they do it. But that can be compensated for. The primary reason it increases their reaction is because it raises how much they care by actively involving them. But again, this can be compensated for. Also many feel that you may be doing something, even though they don't see it and have no idea what it would look like. This can also be worked around until the routine is nearly indistinguishable. Besides changes can be made. Just about any gaff deck they can handle themselves, could have its effect done with sleight of hand. Even if they deal or whatever. Anyway as I've said earlier sleight of hand invisible deck is much better than gaffs, of it's done well. Every magician and a lot of laymen know it. So magicians know both(I'm being generous here) and laymen only know one. It doesn't take a genius to work the rest out.
 
Feb 18, 2014
146
0
Again, I have to disagree. It does leave more of an impact if they do it. But that can be compensated for. The primary reason it increases their reaction is because it raises how much they care by actively involving them. But again, this can be compensated for. Also many feel that you may be doing something, even though they don't see it and have no idea what it would look like. This can also be worked around until the routine is nearly indistinguishable. Besides changes can be made. Just about any gaff deck they can handle themselves, could have its effect done with sleight of hand. Even if they deal or whatever. Anyway as I've said earlier sleight of hand invisible deck is much better than gaffs, of it's done well. Every magician and a lot of laymen know it. So magicians know both(I'm being generous here) and laymen only know one. It doesn't take a genius to work the rest out.

I disagree. Involvement is very important and reactions will always be increased. There is no good sleight of hand invisible deck that is better than the gaffed one. The gaffed one is clean as hell, and the box can be in their hands, its so much better. Gaffs are better in certain situations regardless if the laymen have not seen previous versions. I know though, if I were being hired for a party, I want to leave the best impressions with the best magic, period...
 
Jul 13, 2014
176
27
Again you're wrong, an almost as good looking and much more clean and open invisible deck can be done with a stacked deck and Marlo's future reversal. Furthermore Active involvement is very good, and should be used wherever possible. However it's the involvement that's good and another kinds can yield an indistinguishable effect to a lay audience, and even to magicians. Take acaan/caan: the magic is that their card is instantly at a named number. So you have to convince them it really is at that number while raising their interest and suspense. For example dealing into their hands(also active involvement but not quite as much) or sliding from a spread. You could use gaffs, and have them so it. Or you could do it with sleight of hand and have everything be much cleaner. They are always interested in themselves and what they are doing, especially when they are actively involved in a trick. It may be difficult, but it is not impossible to compensate for that. Also bear in mind that having them select a card is active involvement.when they shuffle or cut the deck it's active involvement. It's not always as powerful as you say.
 
Feb 18, 2014
146
0
Again you're wrong, an almost as good looking and much more clean and open invisible deck can be done with a stacked deck and Marlo's future reversal. Furthermore Active involvement is very good, and should be used wherever possible. However it's the involvement that's good and another kinds can yield an indistinguishable effect to a lay audience, and even to magicians. Take acaan/caan: the magic is that their card is instantly at a named number. So you have to convince them it really is at that number while raising their interest and suspense. For example dealing into their hands(also active involvement but not quite as much) or sliding from a spread. You could use gaffs, and have them so it. Or you could do it with sleight of hand and have everything be much cleaner. They are always interested in themselves and what they are doing, especially when they are actively involved in a trick. It may be difficult, but it is not impossible to compensate for that. Also bear in mind that having them select a card is active involvement.when they shuffle or cut the deck it's active involvement. It's not always as powerful as you say.

I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that I am wrong as this is opinion based. Gaffs do make things cleaner and easier, if you could eliminate a half pass, two passes, angle jog, etc (an example) with one gaff, I would do it. And who wants to carry a stacked deck for that just carry the invisible deck! There is no version cleaner! I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from, but most people would agree that gaffs are necessary in the right time and place. I love sleight of hand, but gaff's can help make things alot more visual and cleaner for an audience and Im all for visual magic
 
Jul 13, 2014
176
27
I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that I am wrong as this is opinion based. Gaffs do make things cleaner and easier, if you could eliminate a half pass, two passes, angle jog, etc (an example) with one gaff, I would do it. And who wants to carry a stacked deck for that just carry the invisible deck! There is no version cleaner! I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from, but most people would agree that gaffs are necessary in the right time and place. I love sleight of hand, but gaff's can help make things alot more visual and cleaner for an audience and Im all for visual magic

As I've said before everyone knows the invisible deck. Sleight of hand is cleaner. After a brief period of pinky/thumb counting(if done well) followed by a future reversal and you really are completely clean. The spectator could actually spread the deck and find the card since active involvement seems to be so important to you. There is never only one solution to a problem. Gaffs are good but sleight of hand is better. And both can be done indistinguishable to a lay audience.
 
I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that I am wrong as this is opinion based. Gaffs do make things cleaner and easier, if you could eliminate a half pass, two passes, angle jog, etc (an example) with one gaff, I would do it. And who wants to carry a stacked deck for that just carry the invisible deck! There is no version cleaner! I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from, but most people would agree that gaffs are necessary in the right time and place. I love sleight of hand, but gaff's can help make things alot more visual and cleaner for an audience and Im all for visual magic

Yeah there definitely is no right or wrong here, just opinions.
I agree that the invisible deck is the cleanest version of the trick but on the flip side if you do use a stack you can go right into other tricks without switching decks. Plus if you do tricks that retain the order of the deck you don't have to use it as an opener.

Gaffs are good but sleight of hand is better.
No such thing as "better" just different
 
Jul 13, 2009
1,372
0
31
The Man Behind The Tools Makes Things Last

Just gonna say, Craig already gave a terrific answer to the original poster's question.

Let me just say this, I knew a guy who considered himself a carpenter. He bought the most expensive tools and the best wood money could buy him. He built himself a chair and when he sat on it, it crashed to the ground and splintered into pieces. One of those pieces slashed into an artery and the man died.

Another man, a skilled carpenter, built himself a chair using handed down chisels and saws. His father taught him how to use the tools when he was very young. Time, sweat, and blood was put into crafting of the chair. When he was done he sat on it and enjoyed till he died of old age.

The moral of this story is of course, wood loves blood. ;)
 
Hey guys....I am looking for a Magic DVD That has some mind blowing tricks on it that you can do with a normal deck with very little if any set up. I love purchasing tricks that envolve gaffs and big endings that blow people away completely, but I feel like I need a DVD that can give me more tricks to do just with a normal deck at anytime. Any ideas? Thanks guys

Hi guys. Sorry I'm late to the party and with four pages of replies I'm sure you've got a wealth of information to work with but I'd like to pitch in my advice for either Sparks, or gosh there's been a couple I reviewed recently that would be good for you I just am blanking on their names. Just take a look in the review forum though. I'd do it for you but I'm
On my cell typing this so multiple windows isn't an option. Lolz
 
Feb 18, 2014
146
0
I see what you mean, I actually agree with it. There are different advantages to both. I simply prefer sleight of hand because it's more versatile.

I disagree, gimmick make your magic much more powerful and open a new realm of possibilities, sleight of hand can only go so far...
 
May 21, 2014
127
6
Staunton, VA

I kind of hate to stir the pot further, but there's some serious gimmick-hate going on here, and gimmicks are your friend.

I'd just like to try to dispel a few myths concerning them.

Gimmicks do not require less skill and/or practice than classic sleight of hand. A trick's skill level and practice requirements are independent of its method. Some gimmicked tricks can be done with little to no practice, while some require years of dedication to master. The same is true of non-gimmicked tricks, though; some are very easy, and some are very challenging.

Furthermore, I don't know what kind of gimmicks you guys are using, but most of the ones I encounter require some level of proficiency with sleight of hand anyway. If anything, gimmicks are a way to enhance sleight of hand, not replace it. I usually have to practice with a new gimmick at least as much as I have to practice a new sleight. Some gimmicks, like the Rings, even require the learning of a whole set of sleights that are specific to that trick and that gimmick. Gaff cards, decks, and coins might make certain things "easier," but what they're really for is taking magic that's already heart-stopping and giving it that extra edge: that clean visual, that bit of cleanup that just looks fishy otherwise, that spot that really needs to not look like a "move," or what have you.

There also seems to be this idea that if you're using gimmicks, you'll be screwed the second they want to examine anything. To me, this betrays a lack of audience control. I'm probably going to get accused of being a mean old jerk for that, and "Oh some people are just evil hecklers who love hurting magicians' feelings and boo hoo hoo," but seriously, you're the Performer. You're in control. You decide when someone examines something and what they examine. If they want to examine something they're not supposed to, it's because you gave them a reason to want to do that. In most of the effects I've seen that involve gaffed anything, either the props can be examined at one point or another, they're made to seem innocent without examination being necessary, or they're treated as incidentals that don't warrant enough attention or consideration to arouse suspicion.

The bottom line is that gimmicks are a method, and methods are neutral. What makes them good or bad is how they're used and how well. It's been my experience that people who really stick with this tend to grow out of the idea that one method is inherently better or worse than another. When I was young, I always wanted to do raw sleight of hand with borrowed props whenever possible. Now that I've got 20+ years into this and am transitioning into professional performance, I pretty much look at tricks in terms of the actual effect and practicality of performance; the method, gimmick or not, is mostly immaterial. If I can pull it off in a likely performance setting/angle and it delivers an effect I like and that jives with my character, I see no reason not to use it.
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results