Please show me your "Monster" toned coin. I want to know what each of you think is a "Monster".

WingedLiberty1957 · January 28, 2019 3:50PM

ponderit · January 28, 2019 6:08PM

david3142 · January 28, 2019 6:12PM

Here’s one I like:

ilikemonsters · January 28, 2019 6:13PM

This one is average.

Southcounty · January 28, 2019 6:22PM

edwardjulio · January 28, 2019 6:28PM

edit

OldIndianNutKase · January 28, 2019 6:46PM

My type set of Monster Toners......

OINK

jgenn · January 28, 2019 7:03PM

ChrisH821 · January 28, 2019 8:12PM

These are the only ones I have that might be considered "monster toning" The pics are a little dark, they were just taken to track my inventory of stuff.
81-S 1 sided target

Toned '21 P$1

toyz4geo · January 28, 2019 8:34PM

DIMEMAN · January 28, 2019 8:36PM

Some beautiful coins here. Here is one of my Dimes I like.

AuroraBorealis · January 29, 2019 1:10AM

@U1chicago that is a nice and cool 81-S of yours that you posted with the double crescent... Below are Trueviews that I had taken this past year of the 3 (Christmas Tree, Lightning Bolt, and The Moose) that you posted earlier... I have also added one more at the bottom for my addition of another Monster that I call "Crimson and Clover".... AB

DarkStar · January 29, 2019 3:11AM

I showed the following coin to a friend. He doesn't collect coins, but he has a collector mentality in his own areas of interest. He took a look at it, looked at me, and said, "Bling." In retrospect, I thought that was pretty accurate.

cameonut2011 · January 29, 2019 3:16AM

While there are a lot of nice coins in this thread, I would only consider the coins posted by TonedDollars and AB's last two coins as true monsters.

Edited: Depending on how the 1981 proof SBA presents in hand, I might also consider it a monster.

ilikemonsters · January 29, 2019 3:59AM

@cameonut2011 said:
While there are a lot of nice coins in this thread, I would only consider the coins posted by TonedDollars and AB's last two coins as true monsters.

Edited: Depending on how the 1981 proof SBA presents in hand, I might also consider it a monster.

Unfortunately, the “dislike” button was taken away from us.

jesbroken · January 29, 2019 4:39AM

Monster for me.
Jim

toyonakataro · January 29, 2019 5:23AM

I have some pretty toned US coins, but when it comes to monster, I only have this one.

DCW · January 29, 2019 5:59AM

Henry Clay medal in silver by Merriam NGC MS65

Probably not a "monster," but great toning just the same.
Dunn & Co Oyster House PCGS MS66BN

A very rare Merriam Civil War token from Charlestown, MA with electric blues.

Elric · January 29, 2019 6:17AM

bolivarshagnasty · January 29, 2019 7:48AM

@CommemKing said:
I want to know what each of you think is a "Monster" in your collection. Then critique everybody's "Monster" to se if they are correct. A monster to you might not be a monster to me. Lets just see what happens.

What did you learn from this exercise?

CommemKing · January 29, 2019 10:29AM

@bolivarshagnasty

Glad you asked the question. I haven't learned much besides we clearly all have different ideas as to what a "monster" really is. IMO over half of the coins posted would not be considered monster toned coins. They are very nice, well toned coins with great eye appeal, but not monsters. If I'm wrong, I have a few more monsters in my set that I was not aware that fit the bill.

A few months back I posted this Morgan Dollar asking if anyone felt it was a monster. It was almost unanimous here that the members felt it wasn't a monster. I still don't know. Anyway, I sold the coin nowhere near monster price. That being said, I feel it has more monster appeal than many of the coins posted in this thread. Not sure what I really learned, if anything.

bolivarshagnasty · January 29, 2019 11:01AM

@CommemKing Now we know why the phrases "monster" and "rainbow" are used so often. Everyone has their own threshold for what those terms mean. As they say, ownership always adds a bump in grade or designation.

mt_msla · January 29, 2019 1:58PM

Objectivity is subjective. Or something sage like that.

DollarAfterDollar · January 29, 2019 1:59PM

jesbroken has a coin very similar to my avatar coin.

dmwest · January 29, 2019 2:04PM

My precious.

dmwest · January 29, 2019 2:07PM

Not too much of a Monster...

grip · January 29, 2019 2:07PM

Picture was a copey from the boards years ago..NOT MINE.

MattTheRiley · January 29, 2019 2:52PM

Here are a few of my favorite toners, monster or otherwise!

WingedLiberty1957 · January 29, 2019 3:06PM

Unknown · January 29, 2019 3:09PM

This content has been removed.

CommemKing · January 29, 2019 3:19PM

I guess this is then:

Nic · January 29, 2019 3:36PM

Monster toning is as subjective as monster Thai food.

Any original toning is better than mall Thai food.

SkyMan · January 29, 2019 3:53PM

I think one thing to understand too, when defining a "Monster", is how does it relate to it's series. In other words, some of the Liberty Seated material above is much less toned up than some of the other series, let's say Morgans, where it's more common to find nice toning. IMO, the lesser toned LS material is just as much a Monster as the more toned Morgan, it's just different. Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to have some of the Monster toned Morgans above, it's just that I can appreciate the Monster toned LS material too.

This can also work within a series. Given that my favorite series is Franklins I'll use them as an example. Unquestionably the most commonly nicely toned Franklin date/mm is the 1958-D. Something on the order of 40% of all NGC starred Franklins are 1958-D's (out of a series of 35 date/mm). Even though this 1948-D Franklin has been in it's Mint Set a little too long, IMO it's more of a monster, for the date/mm, than this 1958-D is (although obviously the 1958-D color wise is more spectacular).

thisnamztaken · January 29, 2019 4:01PM

I don't care for the fairly subjective "Monster" coin term either, but I have seen a few Battle Creek Morgans that I might designate as "Monster- toned" .
Here are a couple of mine that I designate as "attractively toned", but eye appeal is really in the beholder's eyes.

Stuart · January 29, 2019 6:25PM

Most of you know that I typically prefer to purchase Morgan Dual-Sided Toners, but I broke with that tradition for this coin back in 2010.

1884-O Morgan Dollar - Vibrant Turquoise, Green & Magenta Toning - PCGS MS-63

Photos courtesy of KryptoniteComics - AKA Shane

RogerB · January 29, 2019 6:32PM

100% natural toning on this monster !

OldIndianNutKase · January 29, 2019 7:01PM

@RogerB said:
100% natural toning on this monster !

Roger........no selfies........please.

OINK

SeattleSlammer · January 29, 2019 7:07PM

RogerB · January 29, 2019 7:10PM

That was the wife at our wedding reception ! "Selfies" hadn't been invented back then.

marcmoish · January 29, 2019 7:17PM

Edited, this thread is about monsters not toned gems, no cheatin allowed

OldIndianNutKase · January 29, 2019 7:24PM

If I recall correctly, the first use of the term Monsters was used to describe the Sunnywood Collection of Morgan Dollars. In this definition only Morgans can be Monsters. Some of us have adopted this description of exceptionally toned coins as Monsters. High grade plus great toning is quite rare. The term Monster is much more special than DCAM and should be a grade adopted for toned coins by PCGS. Not sure if PCGS is capable of grading toning though.

OINK

Josh32 · January 29, 2019 7:46PM

Best I can do.

cameonut2011 · January 29, 2019 7:50PM

@ilikemonsters said:

@cameonut2011 said:
While there are a lot of nice coins in this thread, I would only consider the coins posted by TonedDollars and AB's last two coins as true monsters.

Edited: Depending on how the 1981 proof SBA presents in hand, I might also consider it a monster.

Unfortunately, the “dislike” button was taken away from us.

I'm sure I would have received a lot of disagrees for my post. It wasn't to be mean or snarky, but very few are true monster. Some may be high end color wise, but not what I consider monster.

Ezmoney · January 29, 2019 8:35PM

OKCC · January 29, 2019 8:48PM

pwrnapper · January 29, 2019 9:10PM

This is my first "high-end" coin (over $1,000) that I won at a Legend Regency auction years ago. I've collected plenty of higher-end Morgans since then and now my collection is exclusively filled with them, mostly proofs and Carsons, plenty of DMPLs too. The second coin is an example of some of the proofs I own and the last coin is one of my favorite DMPLs. I cherish everyone of these coins and hope my kids will someday too and not just dump them with some dealer.

koynekwest · January 29, 2019 9:26PM

Justacommeman · January 29, 2019 9:27PM

ColonelJessop once called this is monster. Hawaiians just don’t come like this

m

AuroraBorealis · January 29, 2019 10:31PM

@grip said:

Picture was a copey from the boards years ago..NOT MINE.

I made that collage from my set of proof Indians @grip some years back... Glad you liked it enough to save the pic! The only one that I kept out of there is the neon green 1864 just right of the center... That is one of my favorite proof Indians that I have ever seen and a nice memento of an amazing set... AB

ACop · January 29, 2019 11:56PM

@RogerB said:
100% natural toning on this monster !

He's missing his feathers.

Please show me your "Monster" toned coin. I want to know what each of you think is a "Monster".

Comments

Leave a Comment

Categories