The Monster Toned Coin Game Thread

Most of these tend to go dark. 3.9

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Looks lighter in person... I give it a 4.5

 

The obverse has some terminal toning—fade to black. It isn’t higher than the 3s. Many proofs tone unattractively,

 

2.7

I like the moose, but the toning just isn’t one.

 

Geez you guys are brutal on toning. I find it beautiful.

 

It is an attractive coin, but we are comparing it to some beasts. I would own your coin, but it does not compare to really high level toning on some of the coins. Many of the toners we’ve evaluated are thousands of dollars, and lots of them have pedigrees.

 

I like it much better than a white coin, but kind of hard to put a number on it. Maybe 3.8

 

Pedigree (or more appropriately provenance) is irrelevant for scoring. The toning should speak for itself.

 

To me it has some relevance, as certain collections are know for spectacular toning. The Sunnywood collection, as a whole, has so many spectacular toned coins, that it is almost a primer on toning. Pedigree is linguistically appropriate in referring to coins that are celebrated by ownership, or association.

 

Provenance is the correct word, not pedigree. Unless you know of someone who has spawned the coins in their collection. Precision in language is important. These are coins, not dogs.

I get that there are some collections known for nicely toned coins, but that provenance does not make a coin a monster. The coin is the coin, regardless of who previously owned it. Likewise the amount of money paid for a coin is not always indicative of a coins toning.

Implying that someone’s coin isn’t a monster simply because it wasn’t in some named collection and it wasn’t sold for stupid money is not a fair argument.

 

Here we go again. .https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/pedigrees/

NGC disagrees with you.

 

Where are we going? Someone of your “sophistication” should know better than to make blanket statements as you did, and should know that provenance is the word, not pedigree. Be cranky if you’d like, but that doesn’t change reality.

 

Read what NGC says in/re a coin’s pedigree. Not my words—theirs. If you have an issue with referring to a coin’s “pedigree,” please contact NGC. Do you need their phone number?

 

I couldn’t give two spits what NGC calls it, that doesn’t make it right. Open a dictionary.

 

I will stick with the vernacular used by most numismatic experts, and TPGs. Provenance is used more frequently, with respect to fine art. Pedigree is used to indicate celebrated ownership, as in “Ex Jack Lee.” NGC and PCGS both utilize pedigree. If you don’t choose to agree with accepted numismatic authorities, so be it. I could care less.

https://www.pcgs.com/news/pedigrees-why-theyre-important

 

Good day everyone. I will just set the scene. I inherited a collection at the end of Dec 2019. Among them is a collection of Norwegian .925 commemoratives. I have 12 of the one I am featuring and 60 of other denomonations. They were all stored individually by my father-in-law in these little coin envelopes (shown below). Only one other coin shows any toning at all and that is very light and around the outside under the rim. This one on the other hand seems to have a liking for standing out from the crowd. I rate this toning as at least a solid 4.
Over to you

 

I like it as a 4.1
...it's interesting that only one toned like that despite all being in the same packaging and likely being in the same environment (maybe one envelope was closer to a toning source or the coin was already toned/partially toned when it went into the envelope?)

 

That is possible but something I will never know now.

 

I like it also. Not every coin has to have blazing toning. The soft blend of pastels especially on the reverse is very attractive. Envelope toning,
I go 4.4

 

Exactly the same difference between "science" and common sense. I am not about giving up my tastes just because someone say's I should.