Money Morph

[Guest]

Has anyone purchased Kevin King's Money Morph DVD? If so, I'd be keen to read your reviews.

Joe Finkler
Vancouver, CANADA

[000]

Hi Joe

Its problaby worth it.....call it a small variation of others, keep in mind that your bills preferably need to be the same colour, or the morph will show (which they are not in my country. Therefor I dont use it, and have wasted my money)

Also something to keep in mind for Genii reviewers.

[Brian Proctor]

I got the Money Morph years ago when It was just available on VHS. It was some of the best money spent. It was the smoothest bill switch I had ever had the pleasure of learning. Now I have used it daily for the last few years. You will learn to do it, and have a hard time ignorning it. I keep it prepped on me wherever I go. :)

[John Lovick]

While researching and writing "SWITCH" I saw many dozens of different bill switch techniques, and talked to hundreds of magicians about the bill switch, and I would have to say that "Money Morph" is my least favorite bill switch variation.

While there are no hard and fast rules in art or magic, Money Morph goes in the exact opposite direction of what are almost universally regarded as the best guidelines to effective bill switch performance, in terms of speed, magic moment, handling, etc. I would recommend you learn almost any other $100 bill switch handling available.

[mrgoat]

While researching and writing "SWITCH" I saw many dozens of different bill switch techniques, and talked to hundreds of magicians about the bill switch, and I would have to say that "Money Morph" is my least favorite bill switch variation.

What would you say was your favourite John?

Damian

[Dustin Stinett]

in terms of magic moment

I was originally enamored by Money Morph until I started working on it and realized that itin my opinionhad no magic moment at all.

Dustin

[John Lovick]

What would you say was your favourite John?

I prefer non-thumbtip bill switches for most contexts. The one I use is in the book. Also, Simon Coronel of Australia has a great one (so far unpublished, but that may change). It uses some aspects of Richard Sanders's Visibill.

Of the thumbtip variations, I think Roger Klause and David Harkey both had very good approaches.

I think Lonnie Chevrie's switching action looks the most magical though -- especially if the bills contrast.

[mrgoat]

What would you say was your favourite John?

I prefer non-thumbtip bill switches for most contexts. The one I use is in the book. Also, Simon Coronel of Australia has a great one (so far unpublished, but that may change). It uses some aspects of Richard Sanders's Visibill.

Of the thumbtip variations, I think Roger Klause and David Harkey both had very good approaches.

I think Lonnie Chevrie's switching action looks the most magical though -- especially if the bills contrast.

Gonna have to buy the book then, aren't I? Bring one along to International for me to save the shipping. :D

Damian

[sathyan]

Ya i brought it a long time back .you pay for it and you will never regret it.such a good book.
---
sathyan

Make Money

[KenAbbott]

I have been trying to learn the Paper Bill method. I certainly like how it looks on the Chevrie DVD. But, the thing I like about Money Morp is the smooth handling. You can keep moving without stopping.

While I like the visual look of the Papar Bill, it seems that once the second bill appears you have to move the hidden bill to the right to get your index finger into the left side of visible bill, then move it back to left so you can open the visible bill with right fingers. In Money Morph, oce the bill has been opened to 1/8, you merely open the bill on the right side, with the hidden bill ready to slip into TT.

The visual nature of the change doesn't seem to be that different. The major difference I see in the two is that the TT comes off of thumb in Money Morph when there is less cover. With Paper Bill you have the entire height of the bill versus only one half the height of the bill with Money Morph.

Is there something I am not seeing or appreciating about the two handlings?

[JHostler]

Given the myriad methods/possibilities, there's really no reason to risk (or bother with) a TT. At this point in history, it seems more of a tradition - and impediment - than a necessity. Additionally, any technique requiring the bill to leave sight (even for an instant) should either have a huge payback or be thrown under a train.

[George Olson]

Here's another that I found useful: http://arthur.tivoli.free.fr/

It's really fast.

GO

[Steve Hook]

Given the myriad methods/possibilities, there's really no reason to risk (or bother with) a TT. At this point in history, it seems more of a tradition - and impediment - than a necessity. Additionally, any technique requiring the bill to leave sight (even for an instant) should either have a huge payback or be thrown under a train.

John H:

As Lovick would tell you, it depends on the situation.

I've been using the Klause method for over twenty years, in standup and closeup situations. After thousands of individual closeup performances, I can tell you that you want to end "clean".

When doing closeup, the TT methods are usually far more convincing, thus safer.

I learned this the hard way but John can save folks a lot of time since this was discussed extensively in his book: Close up, you have to convince the specs that there is no other bill in your hands.

Note, too, that the bill does not leave sight in the Klause method. (Well, it shouldn't!)

Also, re: Money Morph, there has been some discussion that one can actually perform the switch inappropriately too quickly, i.e., you may have a reason to delay the revelation. You may want it to look initially like nothing happened yet, and so on...

The great result of performing multiple/varied bill switch routines over time and/or reading Lovick's invaluable book, SWITCH, is that you'll figure out that different methods work better in different situations.

- Steve Hook

[JHostler]

As Lovick would tell you, it depends on the situation... Note, too, that the bill does not leave sight in the Klause method. (Well, it shouldn't!)

Therein lies the rub: The very presence of a TT drags the *average* performer into cramped, unnatural territory. I've even seen "big names" completely destroy otherwise well-constructed routines with visibly awkward handlings. The fact that we, as magicians, find somewhat odd folding/unfolding procedures acceptable has no bearing on the true (and often unspoken) perceptions of the laity.

With full acknowledgement that magicians have "gotten away" with traditional TT methods for decades...

JMH

[Steve Hook]

Therein lies the rub: The very presence of a TT drags the *average* performer into cramped, unnatural territory. I've even seen "big names" completely destroy otherwise well-constructed routines with visibly awkward handlings. The fact that we, as magicians, find somewhat odd folding/unfolding procedures acceptable has no bearing on the true (and often unspoken) perceptions of the laity.

With full acknowledgement that magicians have "gotten away" with traditional TT methods for decades...

JMH

The folks you don't don't think are doing it right need to buy SWITCH and/or IN CONCERT and read them very carefully, word by revealing word.

But I still don't agree with your original proclamation, John, that tipless switches are best. While one could do a TT switch flawlessly, one could conversely do a tipless switch (which involves similar potentially "unnatural" folding procedures) poorly.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Heck, the "big name pros", whose thoughts about this issue Lovick presented in SWITCH, didn't agree unanimously either.

What I'm guessing we do agree on is that whatever one does, he/she should do it well!

Regards,

Steve "TT" Hook