After decades of mostly focusing on cards for my close-up routines, I find myself suddenly interested in coins and I’m having a ball! Maybe it’s the feeling of being a newbie again, or maybe it’s just the challenge of learning something that feels fresh to me. Who knows? Anyway, I’ve always loved and admired the matrix routine performed by the late, great, Dean Dill. I am fortunate to have seen Dean perform it live (several times) and I have a video of him explaining the routine in detail. I’m working and working on it, but I feel there’s something missing. More to the point, I’m starting to think Dean’s routine is maybe a little too advanced for me at this stage of my learning.

So, I’m wondering if you coin experts can point me to a matrix resource that’s a little more basic, but will help me build the necessary skills (and confidence) to do justice to Dean’s routine?

Thanks in advance for your guidance.

There's a nice matrix about half way through this youtube that you might like.

https://youtu.be/klqUqMV9FY8

Try Al Schneider's original Matrix. There's a thousand out there, but Al's is a good starting point.

Howdy Wiz and welcome to these parts…

Here’s something I posted a bit beyond just advice on the subject, but from more of the history of it all where good references are given and credit to all those involved in the varying & related ways it’s been done. Worth a good look-see & learn as to it all.

Good journey to you.

I'll second All Schneider is original. If I recall correctly, the manuscript has exactly what you are looking for, exercises to take you through every part of the routine.

WOW! Thanks to you all for the great advice and references. The Doug Conn reference is particularly inspiring. I’ve never heard of or seen him before and holy moly, he looks like a Jedi coin master to me! Truly amazing and so, so smooth!

if it’s not too much trouble, I’m curious about your opinions regarding the bare handed matrix vs. matrix with cards. Both versions, done well, are beautiful in my opinion, but the more I think about it the more I wonder if the bare handed matrix seems more impossible and magical. Why even bother with the cards, as they seem to introduce another element into a routine that looks so amazingly clean and “pure” when performed with nothing but the hands? I’ve watched Doug’s routine a dozen times now and wow … just wow!

Thanks again for the great leads and now I’ve got some work to do. I’m not sure I’ll ever get matrix down as well as Doug, Dean, et al., but I’ll sure have fun trying!

I’m glad you enjoyed my posting. And I was going to also mention exactly the question you ask here, but decided to wait. As for me, I have always thought that the bare-handed way looked so much more magical. I’ve played with Matrix using the cards and while a nice trick for sure, to me it doesn’t compare to being able to do basically the same thing with just your bare hands. The simplicity of Roth’s Chink a Chink made me feel that way long ago. Of course mileage may vary here, but I’ve played with them both from a variety of magicians and just feel the way I do, the way you seem to be leaning here now. Some will say there’s nothing like the classic Matrix, but I’ve seen otherwise, even using cards. The barehanded methods allow you to do so much more IMHO, and with different objects as Doug Conn shows and aptly explains.

For me, ain’t nobody doing a Matrix to compare to what you see Doug Conn do there with his bare hands, but that’s just me. The classic Matrix is easy enough to learn & do, as is some of, the barehand versions with a bit more practice. I think a great set to learn is exactly what Doug shows there, just a perfect little set to better yourself towards. I don’t think you have to do it as neatly as he does, to do it pretty well enough. Good practice will make it better & better for you, either as a complete unit or as individual effects. And then you’ll be able to go out there and do it anywhere as magical as you see it being done here. And y’know, I’ve seen some stuff even better than that as to the subject, but this is a great place to start and finish IMHO. *Oh, and Doug Conn is a treasure to follow as to coin magic, actually as to any kind of closeup magic. He is a real treat and a treatise to watch and appreciate as to the craft.

Thanks for your insights MB. My humble guess is cards were introduced to give the impression the coins appear and disappear without ever physically touching them. But from a layperson’s perspective (and at this point I’m far closer to being a layperson than a “coin man”), the bare hands approach is just so darn clean. The one downside I see in Doug Conn’s beautiful routine is it looks like he has to do it seated to help facilitate the last assembly. I could be wrong about that, but my instincts (and my “lap dog”) say otherwise. That’s only a tiny drawback, though, as I’m sure there are many ways to do most, if not all, of that routine while standing.

In any event, I think I’ll play with the bare handed versions for awhile. If nothing else, learning the moves and timing will be a fun challenge.

This is like a whole new world for me. I’ve always had a few basic coin tricks in my arsenal but for whatever reason I never really got into coins that much. I always enjoyed seeing masters like Roth do their thing, but never got the itch to jump in the deep end. I’ve no idea what changed and triggered my sudden interest, but I’m just going with it and we’ll see what happens. One thing I’ve noticed right off is it’s a heck of a lot easier to carry around a few old coins than a couple decks of cards!

NP.

From what I remember of it, the Matrix does have a scientific story as to it, and being created by a Physicist in Al Schneider, well it all came together into existence. But I’ve always liked Roth’s Chink a Chink more. Anyway, what you’re saying right above is about how I see it as well…as to barehanded seeming more magical. But again, mileage can vary, and at the end of the day, you can always do them both as there’s always room for two stellar effects like these that have prompted so much amazing creativity.

Conn’s presentation is beautiful to watch in every way, and it just rolls from him so perfectly. I love watching him do it as well.

I have played with it but am happy to do bits & pieces of it as well. I will tell you that people marvel at it as it is just so darn magical to watch.

Coins now for you is what it was like for me a few years back to better play around with a deck of cards. The pandemic lockdown helped me to concentrate on them more than I ever had along my journey. While I could do some things, and over-enjoyed the easiness of packet tricks, but nothing beats just using a regular deck for some impromptu effects. I’ve got a few faves, that help make a decent-at-best coin guy look like a pretty darn good card man as well.

I’ve found that the greater variety is more fun for the specs and myself, and I like fiddling around with both. I have truly surprised myself. Really nice to find that you have some good ability in other parts of it all. And as to coins, it really taught me that I can do anything else if I just gave it a chance, and so glad I did. Now I go from coin tricks to card tricks and even throw in a few closeup effects. And I haven’t missed a step with the coins. Magicians like Doug Conn, Doc Eason, Jamy Ian Swiss, Gregory Wilson, even an Eric Jones, etc., have been tremendous inspirations along the way to a better day as to it all.

So, it’s a couple/ few coins and a deck of cards down this part of the journey. So far, I’m never bored and keep learning new things from both…from it all.

Do keep us posted on your progress and have fun.

I don’t yet own “Al Schneider Magic” but I think I’ll be picking it up soon. Doug Conn as well as Café members above seem to hold his work in high esteem and I understand why. His book looks like quite the tome, but I think it will give me a lot to work with on my own coin journey.

As an aside, last week I had a friendly discussion with a few avid card guys who really tried to discourage my sudden interest in coins. “Coins are dead,” they say, “Nobody even carries them anymore!” One guy added, “Besides, there are only three things you can do with a coin … make it appear, disappear or change … BORING!” On the “coins are dead” comment I had to agree. In fact, cash as we knew it is pretty much “dead” thanks to Apple Pay, credit cards, etc. I can’t remember the last time I received a Kennedy half or Eisenhower dollar as change. But on the flip side, I argued, the “rarity” of coins in general and old silver coins in particular, to my mind makes them almost seem more magical. I don’t really care that coins are becoming less and less “everyday objects,” because we all know coins do exist in the real world and I think that makes their growing scarcity more novel and interesting when used in a magic routine. As to the “only three things to do with coins” comment, I suggested the same could be said about 99.999% of card trick plots in which a spectator chooses a card and the magician finds it. Cards can be a total snooze-fest, too! The bottom line, IMO, is that magic isn’t an attribute of one prop or another, but an attribute of the presentation shared. Watching Doug Conn’s bare handed matrix again for about the 20th time, it really doesn’t matter to me that he’s using coins. That he makes a small item magically transport from place to place in such a fun and entertaining way, IS the magic.

Anyway, I’ve heard the anti-coin talk for years and I’m plowing ahead anyway. I’m an old dog but I’ll learn a few new tricks, with coins no less. Maybe someday our grandkids’ generation will be performing matrix with iPhones as “currency.” Until then, I’ll keep working on my classic palm with my trusty old Walking Libertys!

I have to agree with you, as I used to feel the same way as you mention about cards. Nothing was more boring to me than to watch a guy do one card trick after another, after another and another. It became more confusingly monotonous than magical. I quickly came to understand that basically people couldn’t keep up with the back of cards, and as such, deception was inevitable. And back then so many card tricks were “pick a card, any card” type effects. Plus, many of them lose a spec’s focus and concentration as they go on and on often times. So, basically coin guys feel about the same away about card tricks, but I’ve honestly never heard them say it as explicitly as you point out here about coin magic. Hmmmm…

Now me, I love coin magic but I come from a time when coins were out there far & wide. Now things have changed a bit for sure, but I think you are more right about this than your friends. It’s really about what you do with the coins as an object, as you see Doug Conn demonstrate. That’s what continues to amaze people about them still to this day and forever, IMHO. They can do more than just 3 things for sure, but look at all of what you couldn’t do in card magic without a DL, false cut, shuffle or pass?

With all that, I guess you can say to each his own. But what I know for sure, is that a magician that can do cards & coins, is much more appreciated than those old sticks in the mud that really think one of anything is better than two…or more. Whoever said variety is the spice of life was right, it’s what life and progress is all about, it’s what keeps us interested in our time here, that is that it changes and gives us more to think and do about it. Now we have some coin guys that are coin magic all the time and darn proud of it. And I say, “God bless them too.” But I applaud you trying something else. I really think you will be happy you did. I’m happy I did.

Besides coin assemblies, look into a some coins across, and look to the big, small & all of what’s out there. The big names are good, but there are many names that aren’t big, that are still plenty good too.

Thanks MB, I will look at some of the other coin gurus. I’ve seen Curtis Kam and Kainoa Harbottle do some amazing stuff, for example. Heck, there are even some future greats I’ve seen around, who are just kids and already look like little David Roths!

Looking back, you said a mouthful there, but totally agree with you about Doug Conn…simply magic! And I truly believe people appreciate and enjoy that most of all.

And y’know, I remember a few years back showing my little grandson a coin trick (as my grandpa once showed me) and he’d never seen any coins before, and he loved it, I’ll never forget his pure excitement…Never! And I’ve come better to understand that that’s about what magic looks like to just about all people, aka, “Children of all ages”.

So, with that, I’ve never thought about coins not being here or relevant, seems quite a bizarre idea. I would think that anytime you pull out a few coins (whether we’re still using them much or not), people would be very interested to see what you do with them. Not so much for the kind of coins but as you say, “for the magic” of it all. How could a coin invisibly/ magically going from one hand to the other ever grow old??? Impossible!

I wouldn’t worry about what magicians think, as fortunately it’s always been more importantly about what the spec’s think. And that part of the mind’s eye works the same whenever & wherever magic appears…Thank God!

Funny you should mention showing a coin trick to your grandson. I just did the same this morning with my youngest grandson (he’s only 3). Being such a little guy, who has a super-short attention span and only a developing notion of object permanence, I figured he wouldn’t pay much attention to a simple retention vanish. Boy was I wrong! The first thing he said when he saw the bright, shiny coin was, “What’s that Grandpa?” I answered, “It’s a coin” and he repeated with a big smile, “A coin!” I “put” the coin in my hand, closed it into a fist and held it out in front of him. To my surprise, he instantly grabbed my hand and started opening it to get at the coin. When he realized the coin wasn’t there, he got this stunned look on his face. Then he did something that stunned me … he immediately reached for my other hand to see what might be in it! Now I’ve worked with kids forever and performed magic for children as young as 5, but I don’t ever recall doing a magic trick for a 3 year old. The fact my grandson thought to check my other hand for the coin (which had already been safely pocketed) just blew me away. Evidently, even at the tender age of 3, we’ve acquired enough logic in our brains to figure out there must be some trickery behind a magician’s trick!

This experience with my little grandson made me think about something we magicians have all heard and/or read a thousand times; “If you believe the object is really being placed into your hand, your audience will believe it too.” I’ve learned through experience that if my acting is convincing enough, yes, people will buy it. But the question is, for how long? It literally took a 3 year old about two seconds to realize that if the coin didn’t go where it appeared to go, it simply must be somewhere else and since it was last seen in my other hand, it must still be there.

Basic logic at work.

Which makes me question another piece of advice I’ve heard and/or read a number of times; “Don’t rush trying to ditch whatever you just vanished … no need to run if you’re not being chased.” Hmmmmm. I’m not so sure about that! It seems to me that about a second after an item “vanishes,” the chase is on! I guess that’s why we have sleeves, topits, Ravens, etc!

Yes, kids are so interesting. I experienced some of the same things with my grandson. Had to stop RV’ing to my mouth before he actually swallowed a coin.

And yes, as I pointed to as to the “mind’s eye,” it works unto itself, and that’s why I think most all magic is pretty safe, unless you’re performing for skeptics and hecklers.

And as to your conclusion about “…no need to run if you’re not being chased.” I actually very rarely ditch coins. I just act as though the coin is completely gone and try to show my hands to be such. If you watch some of my work, you’ll see how I do this. It causes that same mind’s eye to accept what they see (or don’t see) because you present it that way and give any suspicion a reason to relax as you go on with your show. You just have to create an alternative that tells their mind something they also see as logical.

Hey, you gotta walk before you run, but you’ll get there. Sorta like when you mentioned above as to the “lap dog”… Well, not necessarily.

*PMd you.

Just gotta tell’ya Wiz…I don’t think I’ve seen any card tricks done as well as this coin effect done by Doug Conn. Now, I’ve seen some wonderful card tricks along my journey, enough to have kept a healthy interest in that part of the art. But to watch him do this so magically, well, I just haven’t seen anyone do anything better with a deck cards, and I’ve seen a lot of the best, including Darwin Ortiz, Bill Malone and many more. All are wonderful to watch work, though I gotta say, it always touched me more as to a demonstration of elite skill than magic. Now, those coins look like magic to me. I’m just sayin’.

WOW. Bravo Doug. Thank you so much for sharing. That's some serious motivation.

I’ve been working on Doug’s coin assembly as shown in his video. With some modifications from
Kozmo’s coin assembly shown on ReelMagic (he credits Doug).

Lots of fun. Challenging too. Need the right coins and matt (at least I do).

To add a bit of context to the history...
A barehanded assembly and Matrix are two different types of routines. Matrix is the name given by Al Schneider to his routine where 4 cards cover 4 coins in square formation in order to give the illusion that the hands don't touch the coins. It is not a matrix if no cards are used, or if the cards are placed in other than square formation.
Roth's routine was created in the early 70's and published in his first set of lecture notesin 1977. The innovation by Michael Ammar was published as Shadow Coins (with Roth's permission) in 1995 in a stand alone booklet (also appearing on his Easy To Master Money Miracles vol 2 dvd). It used a [. Not mentioned was another barehanded assembly by John Kennedy called Translocation, published in 1983 in his third set of lecture notes. It was a barehanded assembly where instead of placing the coins first in square formation, they were placed in a line on one side of the mat and covered with a hand. The coins then traveled one at a time to the other hand, but the coins were not picked up as with a coins across. It also used a [ to facilitate the magic.So it would seem that this was more the first innovation to Roth's assembly, followed by Ammar (although I am sure Ammar performed his routine for a long time before actually publishing it).