These exact colors on a morgan would go unquestioned

[Kurtdog]

James, how do you define "improperly toned"? Thanks.

You mean IT? Mark, you're an experienced and reputable dealer, how do you define AT and NT? Thanks.

[kryptonitecomics]

The reasons peace dollars don't historically come that way is well documented

 

Can you clarify what you mean by "that way ?"

 

 

Please do a forum search as I don't want to rehash something that has come up probably a few hundred times in the last 5 years.....the reasons are well documented and include planchet preparation, Peace dollar design, Silver used, length of storage and methods of storage. (thumbs u

[Catbert]

I'd like to contribute a coin to this discussion, but from one who is a novice regarding Morgan toners.

 

I bought this coin from Mr. Feld because I wanted a colorful Morgan for my type set. What I think is different about this coin (and what was attractive to me) is that the color intensity is muted - or not neon toned as seen on the "monsters" one often sees pictured on these forums. The reverse has a satin sheen - consistent with the overall coin's reserved demeanor

 

These pics are accurate (taken by messydesk):

 

 

My instincts tell me this is a NT coin. Beyond the muted look, there is that toning break on the neck that reinforces my conclusion (along with the speckled color toning).

 

What does the chattering class say?

[kryptonitecomics]

I would say its unquestionably NT but I don't see how the toning break has anything to do with that determination

[Kurtdog]

What does the chattering class say?

From what I've seen, it will "play" with any TPG, if that's what you're asking. If that's not what you're asking, get off these hysterical grading standards they're perpetuating, use your own eyes, collect what appeals to your own eyes, that's my advice.

[MarkFeld]

I'd like to contribute a coin to this discussion, but from one who is a novice regarding Morgan toners.

 

I bought this coin from Mr. Feld because I wanted a colorful Morgan for my type set. What I think is different about this coin (and what was attractive to me) is that the color intensity is muted - or not neon toned as seen on the "monsters" one often sees pictured on these forums. The reverse has a satin sheen - consistent with the overall coin's reserved demeanor

 

These pics are accurate (taken by messydesk):

 

 

My instincts tell me this is a NT coin. Beyond the muted look, there is that toning break on the neck that reinforces my conclusion (along with the speckled color toning).

 

What does the chattering class say?

 

Great image!

[TonerGuy]

The reasons peace dollars don't historically come that way is well documented

 

Can you clarify what you mean by "that way ?"

 

 

Please do a forum search as I don't want to rehash something that has come up probably a few hundred times in the last 5 years.....the reasons are well documented and include planchet preparation, Peace dollar design, Silver used, length of storage and methods of storage. (thumbs u

 

I really dont need to look up any threads. I have pretty much read all of them. I wanted to know what you meant by your statement.

 

 

[Coindude]

My two coolest toners, a Peace and a Morgan. And yes I do agree, that they do tone completely different and as Shane specified for many different reasons.

 

[James_OldeTowne]

James, how do you define "improperly toned"? Thanks.

Not properly toned .

 

Actually, I don't define "improperly toned". Instead, I define "properly toned", and everything else falls under "improperly toned".

 

Generally, a properly toned coin exhibits toning that appears to derive from either traditional numismatic storage or normal circulation, or from the expected form of storage associated with the particular coin.

[coinman_23885]

James, how do you define "improperly toned"? Thanks.

Not properly toned .

 

Actually, I don't define "improperly toned". Instead, I define "properly toned", and everything else falls under "improperly toned".

 

Generally, a properly toned coin exhibits toning that appears to derive from either traditional numismatic storage or normal circulation, or from the expected form of storage associated with the particular coin.

 

How does that substantially differ from the NT v. AT terminology used today?

[Kurtdog]

It's the same thing just dressed up differently.

[coinman_23885]

It's the same thing just dressed up differently.

 

Agreed. I am assuming that he is attempting to eliminate the debate of whether something is "natural" and instead settle on what is "proper" but I am not sure that this distinction is any more practical than the NT v. AT designations used today. Although I admit that there are some gray areas, I do not think that most coins are difficult to categorize correctly. Most are either clearly AT or clearly NT, and probably less than 20% or so are either questionable and either market acceptable or unacceptable.

[newprepper]

I still like "forced"

[Kurtdog]

It's the same thing just dressed up differently.

Agreed. I am assuming that he is attempting to eliminate the debate of whether something is "natural" and instead settle on what is "proper" but I am not sure that this distinction is any more practical than the NT v. AT designations used today. Although I admit that there are some gray areas, I do not think that most coins are difficult to categorize correctly. Most are either clearly AT or clearly NT, and probably less than 20% or so are either questionable and either market acceptable or unacceptable.

Speaking of "gray areas," Kenny, let me ask you this. Why are all these people buying these so-calld "AT" coins? Did you notice that? Look around. There are dealers out there who are even admitting to what they're doing, and yet those coins are selling like crazy. Why do you think that is?

[Kurtdog]

I still like "forced"

Oh that'll solve everything.

[coinman_23885]

It's the same thing just dressed up differently.

Agreed. I am assuming that he is attempting to eliminate the debate of whether something is "natural" and instead settle on what is "proper" but I am not sure that this distinction is any more practical than the NT v. AT designations used today. Although I admit that there are some gray areas, I do not think that most coins are difficult to categorize correctly. Most are either clearly AT or clearly NT, and probably less than 20% or so are either questionable and either market acceptable or unacceptable.

Speaking of "gray areas," Kenny, let me ask you this. Why are all these people buying these so-calld "AT" coins? Did you notice that? Look around. There are dealers out there who are even admitting to what they're doing, and yet those coins are selling like crazy. Why do you think that is?

 

When I say that there are fewer gray areas, I am meaning that there are fewer gray areas for those in the know. If you take a complete group of novices, then yes, things will not be as clear cut for them. With minimal training, I think most people with ordinary vision can be trained to spot the differences.

[Kurtdog]

Kenny, they're buying them because they're novices without adequate training and as such things understandably aren't as clear cut for them as they are for others, namely, "those in the know?" Is that pretty much what you think?

[coinman_23885]

Kenny, they're buying them because they're novices without adequate training and as such things understandably aren't as clear cut for them as they are for others, namely, "those in the know?" Is that pretty much what you think?

 

Perhaps I misunderstood your question. This is what you wrote:

It's the same thing just dressed up differently.

Agreed. I am assuming that he is attempting to eliminate the debate of whether something is "natural" and instead settle on what is "proper" but I am not sure that this distinction is any more practical than the NT v. AT designations used today. Although I admit that there are some gray areas, I do not think that most coins are difficult to categorize correctly. Most are either clearly AT or clearly NT, and probably less than 20% or so are either questionable and either market acceptable or unacceptable.

Speaking of "gray areas," Kenny, let me ask you this. Why are all these people buying these so-calld "AT" coins? Did you notice that? Look around. There are dealers out there who are even admitting to what they're doing, and yet those coins are selling like crazy. Why do you think that is?

 

I took this to mean that you were suggesting that novices buying AT coins believing they are NT somehow negates my comment about 80% or more of toned coins are capable of being accurately categorized as NT or AT with a reasonable certainty. My comment was that these percentages are for those that have at least some knowledge. That was my point.

[Kurtdog]

I see. Why don't I just start over? Why do you think these "AT" coins are selling? I ask because I think many here just throw it off on these buyers are dumb, unknowledgeable, uneducated...

[jom]

I see. Why don't I just start over? Why do you think these "AT" coins are selling? I ask because I think many here just throw it off on these buyers are dumb, unknowledgeable, uneducated...

 

People buy them because they think they are pretty and they like them. Nothing wrong with that, IMO.

 

The problem really comes down to whether a buyer is being duped into buying something that is being mis-represented. If said buyer doesn't care whether it's "natural" then they should just continue to do what they want.

 

Whether the coin resides in a slab probably only affects the price the coin goes for I suppose. But regardless of a certain coin's toning "manufacture" each coin is worth SOMETHING...maybe it's a premium, maybe it's just bullion value. Each buyer just needs to know what he is buying so the TPG's help to screen out what is considered market acceptable. That doesn't mean any of us have to accept this label of "MA"...not any more than I have to accept a grade that is applied or strike designation. To each there own.

 

I still don't know why this is subject is such a big deal....way overblown, IMO.

 

jom

[newprepper]

I see. Why don't I just start over? Why do you think these "AT" coins are selling? I ask because I think many here just throw it off on these buyers are dumb, unknowledgeable, uneducated...

 

Simple, because they are MA, maybe not to you or some others, but there is a segment that considers them OK. Maybe not NGC, or other TPG's, but apparently some do.

 

 

[lehigh96]

I honestly wouldn't have sold it if I thought for a second it was AT and to add to that I thought it was one of the most eye appealing Peace dollar I have seen

 

Personally I dont mind the discussion of the coin or any other coin good or bad, I think its a good thing and the point of forums. But he and I have gotten into it before and he ratted me out for rejoining PCGS. So I'm just giving him a hard time for that.

 

You are such a little baby, do you know that? If you are going to talk spit then be honest. I didn't rat you out. I posted on this forum that your name on the PCGS forum was Peacemonkey and someone else ratted you out. I had no idea that you had been banned ATS and were using Peacemonkey as an ALT so get over it.

 

As for criticizing your precious Peace Dollar, I kept pretty quiet about it until you publicly threatened me on this forum. Missed you at the Borgata Winter Open btw!

 

Anyway, if you need confirmation from others that your 1921 Peace Dollar is NT, that is your problem. I have many questionably toned coins in my collection that I proudly display despite the fact that many numismatists would consider them AT. I am speaking specifically about my Appalachian Toned Jefferson Nickels. However, if you have a questionably toned coin in your collection, you should at least be able to admit it. Here is a photo of the coin in question.

 

 

You might not know this but I collected toned Peace Dollars before you started your collection so I know full well what is available in the marketplace. And I can state that I have never seen another Peace Dollar fully enveloped by bright lavender and orange toning. In addition, your coin has two very curious spots on Liberty's neck that could be that application points of electrical wires. IMO, there is a possibility that the toning on your coin was created by submerging the coin in an aqueous solution containing sulfur and adding an electric current. Who knows, I could be wrong! Maybe it toned some other natural way and maybe there is an innocent explanation for those dots on the neck.

 

Personally, I love the coin and think it has dynamite eye appeal whether it is NT or AT.

[Coindude]

I think electrodes would have eroded the coin in those spots if that's what it is. It would be too easy to detect. Doubt those are electrode application points. I do however believe the coin to be AT.

[newprepper]

vampire bite, my kids have all the twilight movies, so I know what I'm talking about

[Catbert]

My nickname for that pretty 21' piece would be Frankenpeace!

[coinman1794]

Dont get me wrong. I think it is 100% AT...but on a morgan it would be your typical crescent toner. It would match sunnywoods transitions rules, and yet most think that a doctor can do this to a Peace dollar but cant do this to a morgan.

 

 

I certainly would not accept this as natural toning, on any coin; especially if the untoned portion looked as obviously stripped as this one does. As a general rule, I recommend examining the whole coin for evidence of tampering.

[jom]

vampire bite, my kids have all the twilight movies, so I know what I'm talking about

 

I hope they don't force you to watch those movies as well. I've seen, maybe, 15-20 min. of those movies and I'm pretty sure I'd cut my throat if I had to watch anymore.

 

jom

[coinman_23885]

Other than the electric current theory, what basis are the rest of you using to conclude that it's AT? The fact that something is unusual or rare is not conclusive evidence that it is AT per se.

[coinman1794]

I don't think the 1921 is AT. I have seen other Peace dollars tone this way. In fact, many of the monster Peace dollars I have seen that I believe to be natural developed this lilac and blue hue.

 

Also, small round milk spots on peace dollars are ubiquitous, and are not evidence of electrode conduction.

[coinman_23885]

I don't think the 1921 is AT. I have seen other Peace dollars tone this way. In fact, many of the monster Peace dollars I have seen that I believe to be natural developed this lilac and blue hue.

 

I agree and that's why I posed the question that I did to the others. Like you, I have seen several Peace Dollars with less significant amounts of toning that contain shades of purple, blue, and even reds. The patterns that I have seen on these coins is consistent with normal storage methods (album toning, etc.), and the amount of toning on some is insignificant enough that I doubt a doctor would have stopped at the periphery. The point of all of this is to illustrate that I have seen these and similar colors to lesser extents on other coins, which I believe many would find more convincing and are NT. If these colors can develop naturally, then it is quite possible that this coin developed from similar methods. The fact that the amount of toning present is unusual does not mean that it is AT per se.

 

Also, Paul, can you manage to find a larger image of this coin? I was thinking more that the toning agents resulted from gas deposition rather than an electric current.