This is the first review of you that I basically completely disagree with. Here's a few points: 1. Fishing with letters is not the same thing as using an anagram. Even if you disagree with that you can't say the trailer is misleading because that part of the effect is even shown in the trailer. 2. Yes, I agree that the process takes a little longer than a rushed PA but it's also way more engaging. 3. It's not difficult to perform and there's not too much memory work. Lewis gives you a great method to remember the signs and the positions on the map are not too hard to remember either. Took me 30 minutes to be ready to perform. 4. "It does feel very transparent" - Yes, the process of elimination could be backtracked but so can the use of an PA. A PA is even more transparent imo and Star Map feels more organic. 5. Touching the hand is not required, the Star Map can also be visualized without you touching theirs. 6. I'm pretty sure it's not less reliable than a PA where the spectator for instance might miss a letter in their mind by accident. The steps of Star Map are extremely easy to follow.
It's all good. We can agree to disagree. I have made my points and given real live performances of my own showing people what I recommend. The simple contrasts are that there is much more memory work involved than a PA, the process of the star map is much more involved, you are indeed asking the spectator more than once to indicate information regarding their birthday/star sign directly, and finally you are still asking them to confirm letters in their star sign. People can decide for themselves what they would like to perform.
I agree that this is best suited for performers with star sign experience. I'd forgotten how much time I invested in learning them, and other PA's. But, I disagree about this being an invasion of personal space, and Lewis actually covers that in the tutorial. You do not need to make physical contact at all if you choose not to. But...I should also stop commenting as I watch your vid, and wait until the end :) Glad you're sharing your thoughts on this. The 1914 has been really impressive for the most part so far imo. Thx!
The point of making physical contact is to establish a deeper connection but making physical contact is an invasion of personal space to some people. How can you tell ahead of time how someone will respond?
@@UnbiasedMagicReviews Personally, I've never had an issue with making contact. Absolutely something to take care with, in general, though I agree. But, you can always ask out right, if they mind. What I was commenting on, was that Lewis addresses this, in part of the tutorial. The participant could just as easily put their hand on the table, or hold it up, or an object, etc., and not touch palms. Lewis says he prefers to "allow people to be mildly out of their comfort zone" (paraphrase) by making contact. But, as his personal preference, and not necessary. Also, and I guess there could be some hair splitting here, I don't consider what he does as using a PA/A (hoping that made sense). Or, that the participants need to know how to spell anything...so long as they know the first and last letter. And if they know their sign, they will 100% know that much imo. And if you need to go past the first question, the Derren B technique can finish the process. (I don't recall if Lewis mentions that, and I'm too lazy to check atm). As for it being transparent for an intelligent audience, I'd disagree here. If presented as a badly disguised magic trick, then sure. Just like Nu's, or any other propless can be. As you said though, these need to be fluid, and you really should be conversational on the topic, so that there's no fumbling. I hope this doesn't read as being argumentative btw at, I'm just tired and sharing some thoughts. My rating on this, all factors considered, would be a 5. With the caveat, this is going to take some work for anyone new to start signs. Nothing terrible though, imo. Overall, I like the idea of having this as a variation to use alongside traditional methods. I was surprised you came in so low on this one. But, thanks again, I really get a lot from the reviews, and most times we're in agreement.
The underlying PA is Alain Nu but the idea of immediately switching to having the spectator visualize their star sign when you get your first negative is from Chester Sass. This way I will only ever have 1 negative response.
@@UnbiasedMagicReviews Brilliant. Is Chesters work on this from '120% Chestosteron'? And i agree, using a Sven takes it to another level of miraculous.
have you seen/tried peter turners isabella star 3, i believe thats been developed quite some times since the routine you mention of his (or do you not generally like his stuff)? cheers :)
Turner's IS3 is a lot of Hocus Pocus- aka RUBBISH! I have never even heard of anyone in the real world that uses it. IT's SUPER procedure heavy and difficult for the participant to even follow. Just starting out with the person thinking of their birthday and you have to start trying to guess whether that number is a one or two digit number.... Long story short... In usual fashion his methods rely on linguistic gambits that often fall FLAT and will leave you looking like you are a poor fisherman. My advice, RUN! run away from this. I could give you TONS more reasons why IS3 is terrible but I think you already can get the picture.
It's no better than all the other star sign divinations that use a "special card". The procedure feels transparent. There are only 12 star signs. If you could really read minds.... Why would you need special cards and all the procedure? A mind reader should be able to quickly discern a person's star sign by having them mentally concentrate on it in less than 10 seconds. That is how I want the spectator to perceive the experience.
I learned this effect from David off-camera so to speak and I have performed it many many times and it blows people away. They don't know what to think! It seems inconceivable to a mere mortal. That's all I can say.
Thanks for the through review. The comments are also very enlightening and I see merit in both points of view. As stated, people will have to decide which approach best suits them. I appreciate the respectful discourse.
I didn't find it too hard to memorize and touching them is not a part of the method. If you're trying to read their mind or something, that automatically makes people suspcious and maybe they'll back track. It's not transparent if you deliver it casually or with some sort of story telling. I personally dont like Lewis presentation of it and find his a bit obvious when you're doing the mind reader presentation. The method is clever though.
Hey Brother, in another video you mentioned that you use a combination of two methods for your astrology readings. I think you also mentioned that you could be flattered into explaining your combined method... am I remembering correctly? Please let me know.
As always thanks for the review, I don't normally comment (don't have the trick) but you're getting a fair bit of flack on this one and I just want to show some appreciation because even people disagree with the review, it at least highlights possible problems, things to consider etc and to overcome with our own performances. I'd much rather someone say what they don't like about it and I can decide for myself whether they're problems for me than to just say it's great without any real insight or discussion (plus you still gave it a good review so why complain 😏 )
Great review. It's arguably controversial, but that's why I like watching your reviews. You call it as you see it without fear or favour - but always in a balance way. At the end, we make up our own mind.
I just tried to present an open and honest review. Fans of Lewis Le Val might not like my recommendations and that's ok. I have reviewed other products of Lewis Le Val on this channel and highly recommended them!
I’m curious after this video what your thoughts are on Doug Dyment’s work on this? I know you’ve covered Calculated Thoughts so I’m sure you’ve read it.
Dyment does over the history well and uses the standard PA as we know it. He has a slightly different take on the effect but it is not far from what is mainstream. I thought his ideas of how to turn negative responses in positive ones was very clever. Personally, I perform my own version that will only ever get 1 negative response during the routine.
@@UnbiasedMagicReviews I’ve not memorized one of these star sign reveals yet. It’s nice to know Doug’s work can be a good platform to start from. I appreciate your time and thoughts on this. Many do not understand that you are a self funded one man consumer reports effort. I find your efforts very valuable.
@@13randon13ell Thanks, I appreciate how you notice what I am doing. My mantra is to keep these reviews completely honest and up front. Unfortunately, I can't endorse every project or product because many are going to end up in your junk drawer.
David, man, you already know how I feel. You and Nique are the only reviewers I'm excited to watch. Period. Thanks for your work, excellent review. Now... How can I bribe you to share your handling? And yes, that extra tool is an awesome way to make this even better!
Another great review. I always enjoy your Star Sign divination presentation. Thanks, once again, for helping me spend my money wisely. Your reviews are priceless.
It is an invasion of personal space. The alternative presentation that is given is asking your spectator to give you their hand for a palm reading!? That is again close up hand to hand. He briefly talks about having the person hold an object that you are going to use in your next routine?? What if you aren't going to perform anything else?
I never said it wasn’t an invasion of space. Around the 10:35 you imply that you have to touch the specs hand as part of the process. This is just patently false. You do not have to touch the spec at all.
@@prawnee9827 Its not false. The main method involves touching the spectators hand. The alternative presentation involves palm reading - again touching the person's hand. People who are not comfortable with palm reading are not going to like being told this is an alternative solution. Asking them to hold up an object that you are going to use in another routine with a specific hand is not a good alternative especially if you are not going to perform anything else. My review is not misleading. The main method taught involves touching the spectator's hand with yours.
@@LeValLife Wow - I'm really surprised to hear you say that. My review and comments reflect what you teach directly. Sorry if it is not what you want to hear. I agree that Star Map can be performed without having to go near the spectator but you still have an issue with coming up with a reason for why they would have to hold up their hand. Saying that it is "my problem to justify that" doesn't sound good coming from the creator.
@@LeValLife No worries - It's not about being right/wrong. It's just an opinion and a perspective. Wish you all the best of luck with all of your products and look forward to what you put out next.
Appreciate the review as always, really like that you did a performance of different methods
Glad you found the review helpful!
As always, a very fair and thorough review. Your star divination routine looks great. I would appreciate a link to this technique. Best regards.
I just picked this up, and really like it. But, I like everything LeVal has released in the past few years.
He has put out some high-quality mentalism!
This is the first review of you that I basically completely disagree with.
Here's a few points:
1. Fishing with letters is not the same thing as using an anagram. Even if you disagree with that you can't say the trailer is misleading because that part of the effect is even shown in the trailer.
2. Yes, I agree that the process takes a little longer than a rushed PA but it's also way more engaging.
3. It's not difficult to perform and there's not too much memory work. Lewis gives you a great method to remember the signs and the positions on the map are not too hard to remember either. Took me 30 minutes to be ready to perform.
4. "It does feel very transparent" - Yes, the process of elimination could be backtracked but so can the use of an PA. A PA is even more transparent imo and Star Map feels more organic.
5. Touching the hand is not required, the Star Map can also be visualized without you touching theirs.
6. I'm pretty sure it's not less reliable than a PA where the spectator for instance might miss a letter in their mind by accident. The steps of Star Map are extremely easy to follow.
It's all good. We can agree to disagree. I have made my points and given real live performances of my own showing people what I recommend. The simple contrasts are that there is much more memory work involved than a PA, the process of the star map is much more involved, you are indeed asking the spectator more than once to indicate information regarding their birthday/star sign directly, and finally you are still asking them to confirm letters in their star sign. People can decide for themselves what they would like to perform.
I agree that this is best suited for performers with star sign experience. I'd forgotten how much time I invested in learning them, and other PA's. But, I disagree about this being an invasion of personal space, and Lewis actually covers that in the tutorial. You do not need to make physical contact at all if you choose not to. But...I should also stop commenting as I watch your vid, and wait until the end :) Glad you're sharing your thoughts on this. The 1914 has been really impressive for the most part so far imo. Thx!
The point of making physical contact is to establish a deeper connection but making physical contact is an invasion of personal space to some people. How can you tell ahead of time how someone will respond?
@@UnbiasedMagicReviews Personally, I've never had an issue with making contact. Absolutely something to take care with, in general, though I agree. But, you can always ask out right, if they mind. What I was commenting on, was that Lewis addresses this, in part of the tutorial. The participant could just as easily put their hand on the table, or hold it up, or an object, etc., and not touch palms. Lewis says he prefers to "allow people to be mildly out of their comfort zone" (paraphrase) by making contact. But, as his personal preference, and not necessary. Also, and I guess there could be some hair splitting here, I don't consider what he does as using a PA/A (hoping that made sense). Or, that the participants need to know how to spell anything...so long as they know the first and last letter. And if they know their sign, they will 100% know that much imo. And if you need to go past the first question, the Derren B technique can finish the process. (I don't recall if Lewis mentions that, and I'm too lazy to check atm). As for it being transparent for an intelligent audience, I'd disagree here. If presented as a badly disguised magic trick, then sure. Just like Nu's, or any other propless can be. As you said though, these need to be fluid, and you really should be conversational on the topic, so that there's no fumbling. I hope this doesn't read as being argumentative btw at, I'm just tired and sharing some thoughts. My rating on this, all factors considered, would be a 5. With the caveat, this is going to take some work for anyone new to start signs. Nothing terrible though, imo. Overall, I like the idea of having this as a variation to use alongside traditional methods. I was surprised you came in so low on this one. But, thanks again, I really get a lot from the reviews, and most times we're in agreement.
Is the first performance you did the Alain Nu version? It was really strong and direct. I will have to pick that up if so.
The underlying PA is Alain Nu but the idea of immediately switching to having the spectator visualize their star sign when you get your first negative is from Chester Sass. This way I will only ever have 1 negative response.
@@UnbiasedMagicReviews Brilliant. Is Chesters work on this from '120% Chestosteron'? And i agree, using a Sven takes it to another level of miraculous.
have you seen/tried peter turners isabella star 3, i believe thats been developed quite some times since the routine you mention of his (or do you not generally like his stuff)?
cheers :)
Turner's IS3 is a lot of Hocus Pocus- aka RUBBISH! I have never even heard of anyone in the real world that uses it. IT's SUPER procedure heavy and difficult for the participant to even follow. Just starting out with the person thinking of their birthday and you have to start trying to guess whether that number is a one or two digit number.... Long story short... In usual fashion his methods rely on linguistic gambits that often fall FLAT and will leave you looking like you are a poor fisherman. My advice, RUN! run away from this. I could give you TONS more reasons why IS3 is terrible but I think you already can get the picture.
@@UnbiasedMagicReviews thanks! :)
Hi do you have any thoughts on Iris by Lewis ?
It's no better than all the other star sign divinations that use a "special card". The procedure feels transparent. There are only 12 star signs. If you could really read minds.... Why would you need special cards and all the procedure? A mind reader should be able to quickly discern a person's star sign by having them mentally concentrate on it in less than 10 seconds. That is how I want the spectator to perceive the experience.
Transparent magic not so great, but transparent and honest reviews, much appreciated!
I learned this effect from David off-camera so to speak and I have performed it many many times and it blows people away. They don't know what to think! It seems inconceivable to a mere mortal. That's all I can say.
Thanks Dan! Glad to hear you are still using one of my secret weapons!
Thanks for the through review. The comments are also very enlightening and I see merit in both points of view. As stated, people will have to decide which approach best suits them. I appreciate the respectful discourse.
Exactly. Every mind is a world in itself! =)
Can we have a link to the other Mentalism reviewer you mentioned Nick Cannes? ( Not sure of the spelling) Thanks
Nique Tan Chats - th-cam.com/video/ctBSNWFFE3M/w-d-xo.html
I didn't find it too hard to memorize and touching them is not a part of the method. If you're trying to read their mind or something, that automatically makes people suspcious and maybe they'll back track. It's not transparent if you deliver it casually or with some sort of story telling. I personally dont like Lewis presentation of it and find his a bit obvious when you're doing the mind reader presentation. The method is clever though.
The main handling that is taught involves touching the spectator. Just saying…. Gotta keep it real!
@@UnbiasedMagicReviewsFair enough 🤣
Hey Brother, in another video you mentioned that you use a combination of two methods for your astrology readings. I think you also mentioned that you could be flattered into explaining your combined method... am I remembering correctly? Please let me know.
Send me an email
@@UnbiasedMagicReviews Hey Brother, having a difficult time finding an email for you. Where do you hide it?
@@geolitz2665 unbiasedmagicreviews@gmail.com
Using 'that tool' is a fantastic idea to further obfuscate what you are doing. Wonderful tip. Thank you.
Try it out so you can see people mind's melt!
As always thanks for the review, I don't normally comment (don't have the trick) but you're getting a fair bit of flack on this one and I just want to show some appreciation because even people disagree with the review, it at least highlights possible problems, things to consider etc and to overcome with our own performances.
I'd much rather someone say what they don't like about it and I can decide for myself whether they're problems for me than to just say it's great without any real insight or discussion (plus you still gave it a good review so why complain 😏 )
Great review. It's arguably controversial, but that's why I like watching your reviews. You call it as you see it without fear or favour - but always in a balance way. At the end, we make up our own mind.
I just tried to present an open and honest review. Fans of Lewis Le Val might not like my recommendations and that's ok. I have reviewed other products of Lewis Le Val on this channel and highly recommended them!
I’m curious after this video what your thoughts are on Doug Dyment’s work on this? I know you’ve covered Calculated Thoughts so I’m sure you’ve read it.
Dyment does over the history well and uses the standard PA as we know it. He has a slightly different take on the effect but it is not far from what is mainstream. I thought his ideas of how to turn negative responses in positive ones was very clever. Personally, I perform my own version that will only ever get 1 negative response during the routine.
@@UnbiasedMagicReviews
I’ve not memorized one of these star sign reveals yet. It’s nice to know Doug’s work can be a good platform to start from.
I appreciate your time and thoughts on this. Many do not understand that you are a self funded one man consumer reports effort. I find your efforts very valuable.
@@13randon13ell Thanks, I appreciate how you notice what I am doing. My mantra is to keep these reviews completely honest and up front. Unfortunately, I can't endorse every project or product because many are going to end up in your junk drawer.
David, man, you already know how I feel. You and Nique are the only reviewers I'm excited to watch. Period. Thanks for your work, excellent review. Now... How can I bribe you to share your handling? And yes, that extra tool is an awesome way to make this even better!
Glad you enjoyed my review Nathan.
Nice review
Thanks
Great review, I've never been a huge fan of star sign divinations so didn't pick it up myself.
Thanks Mexie!
Another great review. I always enjoy your Star Sign divination presentation. Thanks, once again, for helping me spend my money wisely. Your reviews are priceless.
Thanks Thom!! 😀
Dude! That second performance is GREAT! what a wonderful idea!
Glad you liked my idea!
Bit naughty to talk about an invasion of space and not mention that’s there is alternatives presentations in the download that address that.
It is an invasion of personal space. The alternative presentation that is given is asking your spectator to give you their hand for a palm reading!? That is again close up hand to hand. He briefly talks about having the person hold an object that you are going to use in your next routine?? What if you aren't going to perform anything else?
I never said it wasn’t an invasion of space. Around the 10:35 you imply that you have to touch the specs hand as part of the process. This is just patently false. You do not have to touch the spec at all.
@@prawnee9827 Its not false. The main method involves touching the spectators hand. The alternative presentation involves palm reading - again touching the person's hand. People who are not comfortable with palm reading are not going to like being told this is an alternative solution. Asking them to hold up an object that you are going to use in another routine with a specific hand is not a good alternative especially if you are not going to perform anything else. My review is not misleading. The main method taught involves touching the spectator's hand with yours.
@@LeValLife Wow - I'm really surprised to hear you say that. My review and comments reflect what you teach directly. Sorry if it is not what you want to hear. I agree that Star Map can be performed without having to go near the spectator but you still have an issue with coming up with a reason for why they would have to hold up their hand. Saying that it is "my problem to justify that" doesn't sound good coming from the creator.
@@LeValLife No worries - It's not about being right/wrong. It's just an opinion and a perspective. Wish you all the best of luck with all of your products and look forward to what you put out next.
Always enjoy your performances
Thanks Tony!!
Wow, hearing Doc perform was amazing. He's the real deal!
Glad you enjoyed my review and my performances!
Thank you David. Really appreciate your taking the time for these reviews
My pleasure!