Ace Vanishes

Discuss your favorite close-up tricks and methods.

Postby Guest » 07/27/02 01:45 PM

This may have been discussed before, but can you guys reference some of your favorite vanishes, for use in a Macdonald/Hofzinser Ace Assmebly? I like the two in Garcia's SUPER SUBTLE book. Thank you!
Guest
 

Postby Richard Kaufman » 07/27/02 02:24 PM

Derek Dingle has developed several that are excellent. You will find them in his book, "Complete Works." Krenzel also has some very good ones (the idea of doing a different vanish for each Ace was his, published in MUM in 1962 or thereabouts). I don't know if these have been reprinted.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Sean Piper » 07/27/02 06:21 PM

For as long as I've been doing the Macdonald $100 Ace Assembly I've used the same three vanishes. Incidentally, I use the same three procedures in my Jazz Aces performance.

First Packet - Flick the cards and then Olram Subtelty
Second Packet - Vernon Through the Fist and then face up Elmsley Count
Thrid Packet - Spectator blows on cards and reveals vanish.

Nothing revolutionary here, but I like the idea of the vanishes getting progressively more impossible.
Sean Piper
 
Posts: 186
Joined: 01/26/08 01:00 PM
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby Guest » 07/27/02 07:08 PM

Not to raise any kind of conspiracy here, but it is commonly said that the Aces "vanish" from the 3 packets and then re-appear in the leader packet. This is not so in many Ace Assemblies, including the MacDolnald's Aces routine. Note that there are 3 cards placed on top of each Ace, therefore, each packet has a total of 4 cards. When the so called "vanish" occurs, there are still 4 cards in each packet. The correct term should be that they "transpose" with the 3 X cards dealt onto the leader Ace.

One example of the Aces actually vanishing from each packet and re-appearing in the leader packet is "Real Gone Aces." In effect, there are three X cards dealt onto each Ace, except for the leader Ace. This is left in the leader position as a single Ace. The Aces magically "vanish" one at a time from their packet. To show that they have vanished, each of the 3 packets are turned face up and spread to only contain the 3 X cards. The single Leader Ace now contains a total of 4 cards. The 3 Aces have re-appeared in the leader packet. This is just a basic example to show the difference between a "vanish" and a "transposition" which is often confused in Ace Assemblies.

Best,
Trini
Guest
 

Postby Mike Powers » 07/28/02 03:37 AM

Hi Trini,

You might like my routine "Impossible Travelers." It appeared in Top Secret Stuff (out of print) and also in a manuscript Jon Racherbaumer and I put out. The aces truly vanish and reappear a la Open Travelers in the leader packet. It's sort of a synthesis of Open Travelers and McDonald's Aces. The manuscript Jon and I put out contains this item as well as a reprint of Jon's "Olram Aces" from Marlo Magazine 3. This is an EXCELLENT handling of the McDonald's aces.

Mike
Mike Powers
 
Posts: 174
Joined: 01/24/08 01:00 PM
Location: Northern Indiana

Postby Guest » 07/28/02 07:28 AM

Trini, right you are! But "vanishes" seems to be the accepted magic lingo. This reminds me of others. Why is someone who does magic with boxes and ladies, etc, an "Illusionist"? Aren't we all illusionists? Why is someone who does magic with birds, and candles, and billiard balls a manipulator? Aren't we all? Why do magicians gather up a couple of hundred books on ONE subject, and call it a LIBRARY!?
So, anyone else have any favorites?
Guest
 

Postby Adam Brooks » 07/28/02 10:21 AM

Why is someone who does magic with boxes
and ladies, etc, an "Illusionist"? Aren't we all illusionists? Why is someone who does magic with birds, and candles, and billiard balls a manipulator? Aren't we all?
Ah, the joys of the English language. Yeah, we're all about inconsistencies in the magic world. But how else would we classify ourselves and our specialities? Yeah, we're all magicians, but "someone who stuffs scantily clad women into odd shaped boxes and mutilates them" and "someone who makes birds, balls, and many other manner of objects appear, vanish, and change on stage wearing overtly fancy clothing" are too long to fit on the business card.

Why do magicians gather up a couple of hundred books on ONE subject, and call it a LIBRARY!?
This one's easy. A library is defined as an organized collection of printed material, that's it.

So, anyone else have any favorites?
Alright, here we go:

Why to we park of driveways and drive on parkways?
If #2 pencils are the msot popular brand, why is it still #2?
Why in baseball is it called the World Series if it is only played in the U.S.A & Canada?
Why is it, that when we send something by ship, it is called cargo, and when we send something by car, it is called a shipment?
Why is an alarm clock going "off" when it actually turns on?

Ok, enough silliness for now...

-Adam
Adam Brooks
 
Posts: 163
Joined: 03/13/08 08:57 AM
Location: Boston, MA

Postby Robert Kane » 07/28/02 11:25 AM

Racherbaumer's Olram Aces from Marlo Magazine No. 3 (I believe) has some killer vanishes for MacDonald's Aces.
Robert Kane
 
Posts: 227
Joined: 09/03/08 01:24 AM

Postby Richard Kaufman » 07/28/02 03:11 PM

Good call, Robert--"Olram Aces" IS a killer routine. Rock has created some very good stuff, but he tends to play it down.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Bill Mullins » 07/28/02 04:56 PM

Originally posted by Richard Kaufman:
Krenzel also has some very good ones (the idea of doing a different vanish for each Ace was his, published in MUM in 1962 or thereabouts). I don't know if these have been reprinted.
The Krenzel One-Man Parade in the Linking Ring from about 3 years ago has a sequence of vanishes for the MacDonald's Aces -- don't know if they are the same ones.

Also, isn't there some sort of controversy about Frank Garcia "borrowing" the routine of Krenzel and publishing it? Maybe in New Stars of Magic?
Bill Mullins
 
Posts: 2931
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Huntsville, AL

Postby Richard Kaufman » 07/28/02 07:11 PM

Frank Garcia stole Ken Krenzel's idea without credit (doing a different vanish for each Ace) and put it into The New Stars of Magic. This is not a controversy, just a plain fact.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Pete McCabe » 07/29/02 10:39 PM

I hate that there's even a chance this will be interpreted as a knock on Ken Krenzel, but...

Is there really an argument about who gets credit for the idea of doing a different vanish for each ace in an assembly? Can something so basic and obvious possibly be worthy of discussion?

The question isn't who gets credit for varying the vanishes, the question is who gets the blame for doing them all the same in the first place. It's only basic dramatic structure that if you're going to vanish three aces, you make each vanish more impressive (or more clean, or more visual, or more dramatic, or whatever) than the last.

With all that Ken Krenzel has contributed to magic, it's hard to believe that something as trivial as this should be counted.
Pete McCabe
 
Posts: 2077
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Postby Guest » 07/29/02 11:22 PM

John, for me the best concept is the idea of using Face up ace vanishes during an Elmsley count. It belongs to Three times champion cardman Piet Forton. Gabriel Parera variants of these are superb (one of best underground spanish cardman) you can see them in his notes and in the Video "Best from Spain".

Yet, I'm doing the original Hofzinser routine, some variants are in Tarbell, Merlin "And a pack of crads", J. G. Thomson "My best".

I like,before studying variants mastering the original effect and methods, they have the freshness and are oriented to the effect. Quoting Al baker phrase " the straigth line its the shorter distance between two points"
Guest
 

Postby John Pezzullo » 07/30/02 03:26 AM

Gabriel Parera variants of these are superb (one of best underground Spanish cardman) you can see them in his notes and in the Video "Best from Spain".
MCUESTA,

Are you referring to Gaby's "Smooth Ace Assembly" that appears on "The Greater Magic Video Library - The International Series - Magic of Spain - Number 2"?
John Pezzullo
 
Posts: 455
Joined: 03/16/08 05:19 AM

Postby Guest » 07/30/02 03:44 AM

Yes, Pezzullo you're rigth and very well documented.

I think that the effect of changing the aces into indiferent cards takes off heat of the gimmicks.
Because if the aces only dissapeared. People would like to be anxious to look for the three cards.

If you tale a look at Hofzinser's original version: After showing face up, the three indiferent cards delays a little the effect by not showing the face of the isolated fourth card (suppossed ace)inmediately. Builds up the effect,and turns it over proving it's not an ace. Being the heat in this lonely card,(a normal one).
Guest
 

Postby Rafael Benatar » 07/30/02 07:29 AM

quoting from Trini's post: "When the so called "vanish" occurs, there are still 4 cards in each packet. The correct term should be that they "transpose" with the 3 X cards dealt onto the leader Ace."

Right, that's more like a transposition but nothing wrong with that(and nothing wrong with the physical vanishes either). It's one of those little paradoxes that can make magic feel magical. You're not vanishing the actual pasteboard, just the identity, an illogical event that might establish a complicity with the spectator, with an implication such as: "we all know the card didn't actually vanish, but it's not there anymore."
Rafael Benatar
 
Posts: 223
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Madrid, Spain

Postby Brad Jeffers » 07/30/02 05:47 PM

Ahh ... but you are vanishing the aces! A transposition consists of two vanishes and two reappearances, done simultaneously.
Brad Jeffers
 
Posts: 447
Joined: 04/11/08 05:52 PM
Location: Savannah, GA

Postby Guest » 07/30/02 07:25 PM

Brad,
A vanish is a disapearance of a card. A transposition is when 2 or more cards change places with each other. In MacDonald's Aces, the Aces change places with the X cards in the leader packet one at a time, therefore, this is a transposition. In Real Gone Aces, the Aces dissappear from their packets and then reappear with the leader Ace, therefore, thes are vanishes. There is a difference.

Best,
Trini
Guest
 

Postby Brad Jeffers » 07/31/02 05:00 PM

I agree that the correct term to use, when two objects exchange places is a transposition, however, when transposing two objects via magic, the transposition consists of the vanish (or as Charlie Miller would say, the envanishment) and reappearance of the two objects simultaneously. In MacDonald's Aces, an ace vanishes from the packet in your hand while at the same instance, a spot card vanishes from the tabled leader packet, and each is materialized in the place formally occupied by the other. So while transposition is the correct term, to ask "What are your favorite vanishes in an ace assembly", is also technically correct, and I think, aesthetically, it's better also. A common failing of many transposition effects is a lack of clarity. Even in MacDonald's Aces, which is one of the most powerful tricks ever, the spectators will not at first be aware that a transposition is occuring. The initial vanishes of the aces will most likely be viewed as a transformation of the ace, into a spot card. It's not until the end, when you reveal that the four aces have gathered together, in the pile formally containing one ace and three indifferent cards, that the effect of a transposition is clearly defined. In this particular trick (MacDonald's Aces), I don't believe the initial lack of clarity has any negative effect however, as the whole thing is just so totally magical looking!
Brad Jeffers
 
Posts: 447
Joined: 04/11/08 05:52 PM
Location: Savannah, GA

Postby Pete McCabe » 08/02/02 01:18 AM

It is certainly true that a conventional ace assembly vanish can be thought of as two separate effects:
1) The ace is taken away
2) Another card is inserted to replace it.

But which of these is more important, dramatically? The Ace is the important card in the hand, and removing it is the essence of the trick's meaning. The replacement of it with another card is less important.

So there is often -- depending on your presentation, of course -- a strong reason to focus on the ace vanishing and not on it transposing.
Pete McCabe
 
Posts: 2077
Joined: 01/18/08 01:00 PM
Location: Simi Valley, CA


Return to Close-Up Magic