|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
scottds80 Special user Victoria, Australia 730 Posts |
Hello tech savvy mentalists,
I have recently been reading up a lot on reviews of the UFO II vs. Rhinesense/Probe. Ok, I have seen plenty of debate about these two, which is now done to the death. But I would like to look further into Nana's box. There isn't as much speculation on it as I have expected. This seems to be up with the ultimate of ultimates of electronic mentalism. The prices are as follow: Probe - $550 AU UFO II - $899 EUROS Nanas Box - 1000 POUNDS Nana's box is much dearer than UFO II. Why? What does Nana's box offer above and beyond UFO II? I have the Educating Archer DVD, by far my favorite of my decent collection, and it is clearly obvious that with Nanas box the mind reading can be achieved by being several meters away from the volunteers - on the other side of the room! I would love to see some in depth critical reviews on this! Hopefully similar to the threads concerning Probe vs. UFO II. This will help me with some decision making on my next purchase. Thanks, Scott.
"Great Scott the Magician", Gippsland
|
|||||||||
BlakeAdams Special user Texas 641 Posts |
I don't even think that nana's box is even comparabl to the others. ITs like aples and oranges. Diferent things.
I have the probe and have played with the ufo. Nanas box I have never seen live. Diferents is. Nanas box is for parlor while probe and ufo can be close up or parlor. I could be wrong about don't need a that, but unless you want to carry a box around then I don't think its would be fun for close up. Lol or walkaround. Again I'm not nocking the box, I think its great. Beautiful prop. IF you want something else to think about then I would sugest T3 by Taylor. Its amazing and you don't need a box for the effect. |
|||||||||
scottds80 Special user Victoria, Australia 730 Posts |
Thanks for your thoughts, Blake.
I am a parlour performer myself - moreso than closeup. So that doesn't concern me about the closeup limitations of nana's box, if that is the case. From the spectators point of view, I still think this is comparing apples to apples. Ultimately, you have a spectator take a small object, hold it tight in their hand, the performer correctly reveals the item. This is achieved with all 3 effects in question. It looks as though Nanas box a 'rolls royce' version of the effect. Still looking forward to some more talk about it.
"Great Scott the Magician", Gippsland
|
|||||||||
Caliban Special user 727 Posts |
I've had a look at a Nana's Box. It's definitely for stage or parlour. The box can contain any 9 small objects and you will always know which items have been removed and in what order. The fact that the objects can be anything at all (up to about the size of an egg) means that it's very adaptable to whatever type of routine that you want to present.
It's certainly a brilliant prop. My only reservation is that that the unit is rechargable but doesn't use replaceable shop bought batteries. My personal experience of rechargable products from outside magic is that they have a limited lifespan and eventually won't charge up anymore - so if I bought one I'd want to make sure that the rechargable parts can easily be replaced. |
|||||||||
Looch Inner circle Off by 3362 Posts |
Yes Nanas box and the UFO 2 are not comparable.
Nanas box should be compared to the mental table IMO, Both are excellent pieces of equipment and can accomplish similiar effects. The question you would need to ask yourself is "What do you want to do?" the decide on which product In short both are excellent pieces of equipment and have been designed with both functionality and practicality in mind. They are also both made to the highest quality and seem to be very reliable in performance.
Mentalism Products: https://www.readmymind.co.uk/ Learn Mentalism with the Pro's: https://www.mymind.rocks
|
|||||||||
scottds80 Special user Victoria, Australia 730 Posts |
That is interesting about the box being rechargable. I wonder how easy this would be to repair, if in 10 years time it became too tired?
I am sure the local electronics technician would be able to tinker with it & give it new life.
"Great Scott the Magician", Gippsland
|
|||||||||
Christopher Taylor V.I.P. British Columbia Canada 2314 Posts |
And then -- at $450 -- there is T•3. Cheers.
Christopher |
|||||||||
mesmer Inner circle 1186 Posts |
Any Electronics will do.....but do you have a back up plan if it fail on you?
|
|||||||||
Tony Iacoviello Eternal Order 13151 Posts |
For the effect, there are low tech/no tech options that have similar and even stronger effects/routines than those mentioned above.
|
|||||||||
BlakeAdams Special user Texas 641 Posts |
Yes there are low tech versions but there not as clean as the electronics.
Again I would sugest that you take a big look at T3. even though its not as much as the nanas box doesn't mean its less impresive. I love the t3 more then probe or ufo2. again I havnt played with nanas box but you can use up to four objects with the T3. that's a lot. IF you have a good routine to play off the box for Nanas routine then go for it. OTherwise why a box. T3 just uses the object with no box. very nice |
|||||||||
Tony Iacoviello Eternal Order 13151 Posts |
"Yes there are low tech versions but there not as clean as the electronics. "
Maybe, maybe not. But you don't have to worry about the batteries. |
|||||||||
Caliban Special user 727 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-17 11:20, Tony Iacoviello wrote: David Regal's trick with the DVD's in his new book is a teriffic no tech routine that produces a similar effect. I've also seen T-3 and I prefer John Archer's box as a stage routine just because three times as many objects are used and they can be anything, whereas with T-3 you are restricted to certain items that can be prepared. Plus with Nana's Box you can have the illusion of even more items because only one person ever sees inside the box, so to everyone else it can be a box that is full of different stuff. T-3 is also very good, though - and a fifth of the price. |
|||||||||
BlakeAdams Special user Texas 641 Posts |
Tony
Totally agree with the battery thing. One time I was so worried about the batteries, (i change them every performance). That I forgot to turn the dang unit on. Lol So I missed the first time, so worried that the unit was failing me until I realied I never turned it on. I casually reached my hand in my pockit and fliped the thing on. IT looked good in the end bc I hit everything after and it looked more powerful bc I missed. lol Stupid me |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
Did you make sure that you brought the electronic techicians in for a round of applause?
All of this discussion about which electronic mindreading toy is the best makes me think of all of the work that goes into making a wealthy actor look like a magician so he can win a prize that is equal to about half of what he spent to be able to impress a bunch of judges. Develop your skills. Then you won't have to worry about what to do when you forget to turn your "brain" on. One of the best pieces of publicity Hanussen ever got posthumously is in Willifried Kugel's book. He thinks that Hanussen "may" have actually been psychic, because when his advance man was detained by the Nazi's, Hanussen still managed to hit 100%. Was this because he was psychic? Or was it because he knew his craft?
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
MagicbyCarlo Inner circle has squandered his time making 1062 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-17 18:08, Bill Palmer wrote: Well put, Bill!
Carlo DeBlasio
<BR>Entertainment specialist <BR>and all around fun guy! |
|||||||||
Christopher Taylor V.I.P. British Columbia Canada 2314 Posts |
So Bill, are you saying that we are abdicating our commitment to honing our craft by employing electronics? If so, I would certainly beg to differ.
Christopher |
|||||||||
BlakeAdams Special user Texas 641 Posts |
Lol I agree. it seemed a little harsh Bill. Im sure I'm taking it wrong but would you mind explaining.
All of us here know that mentalism is only sold by a good performance that requires great skill, but the way one receives information, be it through slight of hand or electronics makes no difference. But the way one reveals this information determines a bad performance over a good one. Blake Adams |
|||||||||
Al Straker Grammar Host Australia 1129 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-07-17 18:08, Bill Palmer wrote: Bill you know I respect you a lot and I think I understand that a point you are making is that the low tech traditional skills are vitally important to all who wish to pursue our art in earnest. They tend to be what will get you out of a bind and allow you more flexibility to perform impromptu in a variety of situations etc. However, I don't think all performers who choose to use an electronic method do so because of a lack of other, more traditional skills. It is certainly not the case for many performers I know and myself personally. I use a couple of modern electronic methods simply because they are the most suitable, least hassles and they have replaced another traditional method due to being cleaner and more impossible seeming. Sure it adds another layer of responsibility in making sure everything is prepared correctly - for me - this is worth the effort! I do belive it is important to have the skills to construct a decent entertaining presentation and if you can't do this, no particular method is going to improve the impact of the performance. I for one will continue to keep an open mind to ANY method that embelishes the entertainment, appearance, show structure, flow, timing or gives me an advantage somehow in my performance. I also think there are examples of electronic props available now that are far from being 'toys' as they really serve their function very well while not even registering any interest (therefore suspicion) with the audience. Cheers, Al
Al Straker
Resident Mystery Entertainer at Multiple Venues Music & Mentalism Specialty Act 'Completely Mental' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyGhApqnG7I (Old clip, show has changed quite a bit since then!) Jazz & Contemporary Musician/Composer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnN3JNmeKns https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU_zfOvpneA |
|||||||||
scottds80 Special user Victoria, Australia 730 Posts |
Since beginning this thread, I have actually purchased t.3 from Alakazam. Considering the broad functionability & far lower price than its competitors.
I thought Nana's box would be something I could only dream of at 1000 pounds, but t.3 offers to achieve a very similar effect at US$400. It actually offers far more brilliant options than its competitors, rendering the others limited in their use. The movement activated chip, with a 30 ft range, opens up a whole different world of presentation. For example, with your t.3 you can do a psychic taste test of flavored lollies, or even a drink. My imagination is beginning to run wild with presentation ideas. Thanks again Christopher!
"Great Scott the Magician", Gippsland
|
|||||||||
Rocketeer Special user Westchester, NY 965 Posts |
I disagree with you Bill. I don't think using electronics means one would have to credit the electricians any more than I'd have to bring Roth on for a round of applause if I used Homicide.
Illusion is illusion is illusion. Any method that's not harmful or dangerous is up for exploitation as far as I'm concerned.
I'm selling my hardcover autographed limited edition copy of Jerome Finley's "Thought Veil"
PM me for info. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Labco's UFO II vs. John Archer's Nanas box (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |