| Author |
 Replies: 72 / Views: 6,997 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
601 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2739 Posts |
There isn't, and never will be, complete consensus on what constitutes a "die variety" and what constitutes a "minting error". The defects that coppercoins calls "die errors", Ken Potter would call "die varieties". These overarching categories really don't matter. As long as the nature and origin of the particular defect is understood, that's all that really matters.
Error coin writer and researcher.
Edited by mikediamond
03/26/2011 10:31 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
601 Posts |
It's a relief to hear you say that Mike, thanks. Comprehension, not absolute precision? That's an easier pill to swallow.
Edited by liveandievarieties
03/26/2011 12:20 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1547 Posts |
Quote:
There isn't, and never will be, complete consensus on what constitutes a "die variety" and what constitutes a "minting error". The defects that coppercoins calls "die errors", Ken Potter would call "die varieties". These overarching categories really don't matter. As long as the nature and origin of the particular defect is understood, that's all that really matters. I agree, Mike. Let's keep our eye on the ball. "Die Variety" and "Mint Error" are just broad categories of classification. I can see that, now, while I couldn't, very well, when I asked the question. In the abstract, we can discuss and differentiate these broad classifications all day long. That gets us nowhere, really. The only real important question is, "What happened?" Figure that out, and, to that degree, are we competent to appreciate it. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
601 Posts |
Agreed, Eddie. I dragged my feet when a member asked me to chime in and straighten this early thread out (what was I thinking?). In most cases I can tell you how a die variety was created, but I'm not going to define how other people classify it. I thought I'd be shouted out of the forum for such a take.....a relief to know that "Die Errors" won't have to plague my sleep.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
958 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
They are not doubled dies. In order to be a doubled die, then the devices would be doubled. On trails and wavysteps the dies are altered, not doubled.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3592 Posts |
coppertop5150...that's a good question you can google the traildies website to find out. Even they are not exactly positive, but there is a theory that sounds reasonable to me.
Guess I'll have to agree on Mike Diamonds statement..basically we were trying to combine precision with opinion...that works for the causes but not necessarily with broad categorical descriptions.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
Okay...there IS a cut and dried difference between a die error and a die variety. Simple enough. I do not collect die errors and have no interest in them, really. They are catalogable by die, though, because the error is ON the die.
The primary difference, as I have stated before, is that a die variety is on the die at the time the die is created, and a die error develops on the die after it begins striking coins. That shouldn't be hard to comprehend and keep straight.
Die trails are one or the other depending on what you think caused them - and nobody really knows for sure. Everyone has their speculation, but to date there has never been a rock-hard solid answer as to what causes them.
B.J. Neff believes they are created as a part of the die making process...that something goes wrong when the die is made, and trails result. This would make die trails a die variety.
I believe die trails are nothing more than the result of polishing a die with a rotary wheel, which would make them die errors...because they do NOT happen at the time the die is created - they are a result of using a tool on the die after it is hung in the press to make coins.
The only way to ascertain for sure which of us is correct is to either have someone from the mint speak up about the subject, or to find a coin with a specific marker and NO trails, then find another coin with the same markers, but WITH trails. This would prove my point.
Until that time, we can do nothing but assume the trails are placed into the die during the die making process, making them valid die varieties.
Herein lies yet another point as to why there are separate terms and why they should be KEPT separate.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
Quote:
Okay...there IS a cut and dried difference between a die error and a die variety. Simple enough. I do not collect die errors and have no interest in them, really. They are catalogable by die, though, because the error is ON the die.
The primary difference, as I have stated before, is that a die variety is on the die at the time the die is created, and a die error develops on the die after it begins striking coins. That shouldn't be hard to comprehend and keep straight. Then, these terms aren't merely of semantic significance. Rather, they go to explaining the very aspect Mike says "really matters," i.e., "the nature and origin of the particular defect." They're simply the broad categories we choose to use to describe that. Do we all understand this? Very good, Coppercoins. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2739 Posts |
How about the 1944-D half dollar with re-engraved designer's initials? By coppercoins' definition, it would not be a die variety since it wasn't present on the die when first installed. But everyone treats it as a die variety, which I think makes a lot of sense.
Error coin writer and researcher.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
958 Posts |
thanks for some input on dietrails....
I did some research awhile ago.....
Die trails seemed like a strange occurance on a coin.....
No one seemed to know when or how the dietrails started/existed/caused .
Some say while making the hubs, some say while minting the coins, coppercoins feels its due to over polishing or some kinda event that happens to the die after its been minting awhile.
making them a variety.... While if it happened on its own during minting its would be a error
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
Mike, but I'd think you'd have to start back at square one, now, because you re-created the die, once you re-engraved it. For all intents and purposes, that's a new die, now. Does that make sense?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2739 Posts |
Perhaps. But I find the whole argument over what's a die variety and what's a minting error to be sterile and stupefyingly dull. That said, my use of the two terms pretty much falls in line with coppercoins. But I don't begrudge anybody their choice of using them differently.
Error coin writer and researcher.
Edited by mikediamond
03/26/2011 10:06 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
Well, just to call that re-engraved die something, I think I'd be inclined to call it a new "die type" within the series. I do agree, however, the important thing to focus on is the cause of the defects. Understanding that is the only thing that enables us as collectors to appreciate the defects, really. The terminology, to the degree that has any use, it enables us to group the defects into broad categories of causation. To the degree we can't agree on the definitions of the terminology, however, to the same degree is the terminology useless to us, there. That's how I see it, Mike; at least, for the time being...  |
| |
Replies: 72 / Views: 6,997 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 03/26/2011 09:48 am
