Would You Rather A Set Of Same Grade Or Best Grade Possible?

Lots of people like to collect all same grade but I get whatever floats my boat. I have a complete Merc album of very worn coins that is my favorite, they look cool.

It depends (isn't THAT a wishy-washy answer).

My birthyear set is a matched grade set.
I also have a matched grade set of War Nickels (MS-67).
And a matched grade set of silver business strike Roosevelt dimes (MS-66).
Plus a matched grade set of silver Proof Roosevelt dimes (MS-67).
And finally a matched grade set of silver business strike Full Torch Roosevelt dimes (MS-66).

But the rest of my collection is the best grade I can afford.

I like my sets to be cohesive. They don't have to match completely, but they have to match, to keep the " look " of the set. Like higher MS with low MS, or low MS with high AU coins. The look of the set is just as important to me as the "possesion" of a full set.
An MS set with a few VF keys mixed in just offends my sense aesthetics. Or even a VF set with a few MS common dates mixed in. I always try to plan, budget and availability before starting a set. But that is just me.

I'm with Joe2007:

This was my point ........



I don't think that I could even start a set knowing that I could never afford to complete it. I don't know that I could present my set as " here is my complete set of Morgans, minus the 1893s, 1889cc,1885cc and 1895o. Or Peace dollars, IHCs, Lincoln cents except for ........... If you know you can't complete it because of budget or availability, then what is the point. There is a fine line between a 'collection" and a "hoard" But again ........ that is just me !

Believe the answer is, eye appeal. Regardless if slabbed or not, THE rule of our affliction.....buy the coin, not the _ _ _ _.

As all of us know, just because a coin, in ANY series is grades MS65, there are MS63's that blow it out of the water in terms of strike, luster, etc, etc. So, eye appeal is my answer.

My personal aesthetic has always been visual balance between the coins when possible.

That implies coins of generally the same grade and more importantly similar surface condition and eye appeal.

There are time where this is not possible - series where the coins are so seldom seen that a collector will take any example available.

I'm traveling that path during my quest for a complete type set of circulated classic silver commemoratives - many rarely seen coins have conspired to force my current set to range in grade from FR02 to AU55.

For sets where patience and a good numismatic eye can result in 'balance' - that is my preferred approach.

David

IIRC, about a year ago, I finally assembled a complete date set of modern Russian non-commemorative circulation coins. (Got the 1999 1 kopek - my last missing non-recent date - early in the year, then had to wait until December for the elusive 2013 5 ruble.)
That is to say, a complete date set except for the 2001-03 dates on 1, 2 and 5 rubles, 2011 on 1 and 5 kopeks, and 1999 on 5 rubles (and, IIRC, there was one other such date, but I don't precisely remember).

Those who don't follow Russian numismatics probably don't realize this, but I pretty much just gave a list of ludicrous rarities (the 2002 coins only appeared in mint sets, and it only gets worse from that; some of these dates are known in less examples than the 1894-S dime).
I knew I couldn't possibly find them in change - and, except for the (then) $60-odd 2002 mint sets, I couldn't really afford them either - so I just ignored them as if they didn't exist at all (or, perhaps, as if they were patterns).

I did get the 1999 2 ruble, which is notoriously hard to find (and, if not for these ludicrously rare dates, would've been a major key) but is far from a ludicrous rarity.