Options
CBH newp, and a "hunting" lesson
scoobydeux
Posts: 498 ✭✭
1832 P64 O-106, recut star 1, and short thick top of 5. Previously CAC, but now "lost" with a regrade (no change) and trueview photo.
The strike of the upper curls are a bit flat, as are part of the eagle's wings, particualrly the left inner portion, whereas the bust draperery and clasp are nicely struck, as is the "e pluibus." I also found the double profile and doubling of the right handed stars most intriguing; however, what appealed to me most about this specimen is the natural, old time toning. The luster is pleasant and cartwheeling, and just a bit muted for the darker toning, as one would expect.
I happen to like blast white dipped out coins, just not blast white dipped out CBHs!
Ironicially, 1832 has been a bear of a year for me to find. One would think that, having amongst the most numerous MS specimens for the series, that 1832 would be a snap. But, I have not found this to be the case. Most are unappealing, dipped out, or both. Futhermore, many 1832 varietes have misshapen arrowheads that put a proverbial "bee in my bonnet."
On to the hunting lesson--this coin went through (at least) 2 lowball offers (by others) before I had the good fortune to pick it up. I'm not a big supporter of wild, indiscrimanant spedning. But the fact is, that must have/good fit coins just aren't coming up that often in this tight market. So, my advice is to step up and pull the trigger, when the situation arises.
The strike of the upper curls are a bit flat, as are part of the eagle's wings, particualrly the left inner portion, whereas the bust draperery and clasp are nicely struck, as is the "e pluibus." I also found the double profile and doubling of the right handed stars most intriguing; however, what appealed to me most about this specimen is the natural, old time toning. The luster is pleasant and cartwheeling, and just a bit muted for the darker toning, as one would expect.
I happen to like blast white dipped out coins, just not blast white dipped out CBHs!
Ironicially, 1832 has been a bear of a year for me to find. One would think that, having amongst the most numerous MS specimens for the series, that 1832 would be a snap. But, I have not found this to be the case. Most are unappealing, dipped out, or both. Futhermore, many 1832 varietes have misshapen arrowheads that put a proverbial "bee in my bonnet."
On to the hunting lesson--this coin went through (at least) 2 lowball offers (by others) before I had the good fortune to pick it up. I'm not a big supporter of wild, indiscrimanant spedning. But the fact is, that must have/good fit coins just aren't coming up that often in this tight market. So, my advice is to step up and pull the trigger, when the situation arises.
"Discipline is never an end in itself, only a means to an end."
0
Comments
I like the toning on it.
Member, Society of Silver Dollar Collectors.
Looking for PCGS AU58+ 1901-P, 1896-O, & 1894-O
Successful BST Transactions!SIconbuster, Meltdown, Mission16, slothman2000, RGjohn, braddick, au58lover, allcoinsrule, commemdude, gerard, lablade, PCcoins, greencopper, kaz, tydye, cucamongacoin, mkman123, SeaEaglecoins, Doh!, AnkurJ, Airplanenut, ArizonaJack, JJM,Tee135,LordMarcovan, Swampboy, piecesofme, Ahrensdad,
zap
102 capped bust half dollars - 100 die marriages
BHNC #198
We willl see if you are still of the same opinion when I re-price that early half you are trying to get from me.
The doubling is pretty cool, as well. Unfortunate that the image is not in better focus.
Lance.
<< <i>Agree with your point to step up when the nice appealing coins are available.
We willl see if you are still of the same opinion when I re-price that early half you are trying to get from me. >>
Ha ha! Bring it on!
<< <i>I happen to like blast white dipped out coins, just not blast white dipped out CBHs!
Lovely bust half, love the toning! Please explain your last sentence, I can't make heads ot tails of it. Foir a collector who assumingly hates toned silver you got yourself an incredible specimen, but in a way you really shouldn't own it since you don't care for toning and thus imo don't deserve such a nicley toned bustie, know what i am saying here
< Agree with your point to step up when the nice appealing coins are available.
We willl see if you are still of the same opinion when I re-price that early half you are trying to get from me. >>
Holy smoke! This is a tough crowd today!
Ok to be clear:
C'mon Dale you know that I practice what I preach, so steeping up for the right coin has never been a problem for me. Maybe too much of a problem?
Realone: To clarify--I collect (naturally, or at least market acceptable) toned CBHs. In principle I have no problem with blast white headlights--Walkers, Peace Dollars, SLQs, Frankies. But in my mind the older CBHs are in a different category. Sure, they were blast white off the screw press, but there isn't anything "natural" about a blast white CBH 174 years+ later. I realize that this has been discussed on the forums many times, but without any reasonable means of storage (i.e.--no airtight zip locks dating to 1807-1836) how could it be otherwise? I asked Edgar Souders about this once, and he is of the opinion that a 200 year old silver coin should, without any manipulation whatsoever, be black. So, I'd rather have a coin dipped out 60+ years ago with that amount of aged patina acquired in the historically consistent manner, rather than a CBH with a fresh dip. Just the way I see things in my Bizarro world....
<< <i>Very nice! It has great eye appeal. Congrats on the pick-up.
The doubling is pretty cool, as well. Unfortunate that the image is not in better focus.
Lance. >>
Thanks Lance.
Is it coming in out of focus for you? It looks ok on my end. Shall I try a smaller size?
<< <i>
<< <i>Very nice! It has great eye appeal. Congrats on the pick-up.
The doubling is pretty cool, as well. Unfortunate that the image is not in better focus.
Lance. >>
Thanks Lance.
Is it coming in out of focus for you? It looks ok on my end. Shall I try a smaller size? >>
No. It's lovely as it is. I just meant the focus isn't as crisp as it should be. And that would be nice, especially to show doubled profile.
Here's the reverse of my '32. Looks a bit like yours, huh?
Lance.
Super nice. Looks like an O-106 from the reverse pic. Any obverse pic? Grade?
Scoobydeux
edited to add: Obverse has some nice green hues....not seen on many Busties.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I happen to like blast white dipped out coins, just not blast white dipped out CBHs!
Lovely bust half, love the toning! Please explain your last sentence, I can't make heads ot tails of it. Foir a collector who assumingly hates toned silver you got yourself an incredible specimen, but in a way you really shouldn't own it since you don't care for toning and thus imo don't deserve such a nicley toned bustie, know what i am saying here
< Agree with your point to step up when the nice appealing coins are available.
We willl see if you are still of the same opinion when I re-price that early half you are trying to get from me. >>
Holy smoke! This is a tough crowd today!
Ok to be clear:
C'mon Dale you know that I practice what I preach, so steeping up for the right coin has never been a problem for me. Maybe too much of a problem?
Realone: To clarify--I collect (naturally, or at least market acceptable) toned CBHs. In principle I have no problem with blast white headlights--Walkers, Peace Dollars, SLQs, Frankies. But in my mind the older CBHs are in a different category. Sure, they were blast white off the screw press, but there isn't anything "natural" about a blast white CBH 174 years+ later. I realize that this has been discussed on the forums many times, but without any reasonable means of storage (i.e.--no airtight zip locks dating to 1807-1836) how could it be otherwise? I asked Edgar Souders about this once, and he is of the opinion that a 200 year old silver coin should, without any manipulation whatsoever, be black. So, I'd rather have a coin dipped out 60+ years ago with that amount of aged patina acquired in the historically consistent manner, rather than a CBH with a fresh dip. Just the way I see things in my Bizarro world.... >>
Scooby,
thanks for clarifying your position, while I understand, I don't agree wih it at all, nd I resptively disagree with your reliance on what Mr Souders stated. I have siver busties, dimes and half dimes with photographs from over 100 years ago that match the particular coins perfectly. A silver coin doesn't have to turn black over 100 years or even 200 years for that matter if handled and stored properly. Silver busties that were owned by knowledgeable numismatists were handled with great care and not like silerware ie they were weren't constantly rubbed clean, they were put away and left alone and stored very differently than silverware besides not being used like silverware. So you are talking apples and oranges when comparing silverware with coins. The knowledgeable numismatist like today probably handled the coins gingerly.
Now I am speaking about knowldegeable numsimatists who collect high end coins who wanted their coins preserved for future generations. Look at what Eliasberg devised to hold his coins and that was well within your time frame of 60 years, there are photos of his storage containers for your perusal. And he got a number of his coins from John Clapp who got his coins either directly from the mint or via Chapman. >>
Realone: The real issue boils down to defining a "knowlgedable numismaitist" and trying to quantify the number of the same. As coin collecting didn't become really popular until the late 1850s with the cessation of the half cent, the production of the flying eagle cent, and the founding of the ANA, it's hard to know who was doing what before this time.
The bottom line for me is that although I'll concede that, under optimal conditions, a silver coin could still be bright white after 175 years, I find ithighly improbable. Or to put it another way--why should I assume that a blast white cbh has not been dipped? How can that be proved? Why should I pay a premium under these conditions? The reverse, however, is not true in regards to old natural toning.
Besides, I like the toners better.
<< <i>Love her.....Super toned look for a CBH!!
edited to add: Obverse has some nice green hues....not seen on many Busties. >>
GB: Thanks for your thoughts...The tricky part is to find the right toning AND to find it eye appealing--eihter criterion alone is not much of a problem, but finding both is a bear.
Realone: Another thought: tough by no means is this a definitive arguement, but look here at the King of Siam proof set:
Amonst the most famous of all early coins, it is reasonable to assume that they were cared for in the most sophiticated numisatc fasion of the time.
And the silver is clearly not bright white.
So again, the possiblility of a coin remaining bright white after this length of time is possible.
But not probable.