The DRUM SHELL Discussion
In the last twenty years I began to share my own experience and observations of what drum shells do, and do not do, when it comes to sound. I also began to speak out against super, ultra-hype from drum companies about proprietary shells and claims about sonic differences. I decided to add this page, which is a collection of blogs I've written on the subject, adding new info from time to time. The subject can get rather intense and even irrational for some players. My YT channel displays that easily enough. 99% of comments against the position only have anecdotal testimony and a lot of ad hominem attacks. I am thankful most of the comments viewers have made are positive and encouraging.
I am not a professional drum maker. I do have my own observations and experiences in making drums over the last 30 years, and going back into the 1970's. It is not rocket science. It's a drum.
I have made drums from plywood shells (Keller), solid wood staves, stacked plywood rings, plywood sheets and shallow-shell table-top drums, PVC, sheet metal, Sona tubes (compressed paper, concrete form tubes), hand-rolled and glued veneer, siding material staves (MDF), plastic buckets, frame drums, even trash cans, and in all cases the sound has one thing in common - drum heads.
I am not a professional drum maker. I do have my own observations and experiences in making drums over the last 30 years, and going back into the 1970's. It is not rocket science. It's a drum.
I have made drums from plywood shells (Keller), solid wood staves, stacked plywood rings, plywood sheets and shallow-shell table-top drums, PVC, sheet metal, Sona tubes (compressed paper, concrete form tubes), hand-rolled and glued veneer, siding material staves (MDF), plastic buckets, frame drums, even trash cans, and in all cases the sound has one thing in common - drum heads.
*Copy and paste any links in the text or, hi-lite and Right click*
*****************************
9. It's a Drum Shell
Okay, so I am up super early this morning and somehow end up at youtube looking for sound files for hybrid wood/acrylic snare drums. I don't play wood snares. My ears like metal. But, in the interest of fair play I decided to give these hybrids a listen.
Well, I end up watching a bunch of vids placed by Memphis Drum Shop. I mean, a bunch of them, and they've got plenty of them on there. Fascinating. I have mentioned stopping in to Drums In The Wind on a trip and listening to all the sets they have lined up in the drum room. The ONLY set that stood out to me was the... I'll come back to that.
So, I'm watching these vids which show sets by (in alphabetical order) Brady, C&C, Canopus, Craviotto, DW, Ludwig, Pearl, Yamaha... did I miss any? I didn't watch them all. You know what? Given they didn't use the same recording set up for each video (at least it certainly didn't sound that way), taking that into consideration, I am just as certain as I was in that Drums in the Wind sound room that drums are drums are drums are drums. It's a cylinder with two membranes applied to it with various attachment devices for heads and mounting. I'm not going to argue that different drum companies offer different looks, but sound? I'm sorry. All things being equal with MDS's recording set-up, listening to set after set left me wondering why the DIY market is not exponentially bigger than it is. Sure, some people are not tool savvy. Never used a drill or power tool in their life. So be it. But most guys have at some point in their life, even young kids, and I am sure ANY DIY drum set sounds as good as manufactured drums. Now, maybe the finishes are better on custom drum shop or manufactured drums. But, even there with some patience and honed skills a great finish can be done by anyone. Depends on what you want. Quite a few of the featured sets were done in satin, which is really easy to do, and some were covered with wraps, another thing easily done.
To be honest, I thought some of the Ludwig sets sounded great. I was surprised that the Craviotto had no particular aural command over any other set, given all I have read about them. Everything sounded like... drums! Some were not tuned quite right, unless they wanted that 'off-sounding' pitch to toms. I heard variations, but nothing major. Their recording set up, my ear phones. I heard drums. I heard nothing that stood out as superior, or even better than anything else. Differences were slight, at best. Maybe a couple bass drums seemed to have more presence than others, but given sizes, head choices and recording set-ups...? Any of the drum sets shown would work in any given musical environment. The players auditioning each set showed that by what they played.
Heads make as an important difference on drums as anything else. Mounting systems as well. Inexpensive drums can be made to sound good with the right heads and some kind of free-floating mounting system. I've done it. In any event I am just as sold on DIY drums as ever. Maybe more so. It's a drum. And in the end, despite nuances, that's what it is, and hype is huge in this industry. "Vintage" drums are in now. Drums go from 1/4" to 1/2" to 1/8" shells and everything in between. Woods, plastics, carbon fiber, metal... sure, different materials have some different characteristics. Shell depth can make some difference. On the other hand microphones, sound equipment, and sound engineers make a huge difference. From 20' away... it's a drum. Everyone looking for that *perfect* sound. There IS NO perfect sound. Most drummers figure that out pretty quick. There might be YOUR sound, that you hear up close, but that's as far as it goes. Hype. Hype. Hype. That's what it boils down to. Proof of that is how often many professional, name drummers change companies, change drum sets.
Oh, the drums I heard that stood out in Indiana? Ayotte maples with maple hoops. I was surprised at how musical they sounded compared to everything else in that room. But, even there, that is the impression upon MY ears. The next guy in the room might think something different.
Believe the hype if you want to. For me, I'll take the drums I make any day.
Well, I end up watching a bunch of vids placed by Memphis Drum Shop. I mean, a bunch of them, and they've got plenty of them on there. Fascinating. I have mentioned stopping in to Drums In The Wind on a trip and listening to all the sets they have lined up in the drum room. The ONLY set that stood out to me was the... I'll come back to that.
So, I'm watching these vids which show sets by (in alphabetical order) Brady, C&C, Canopus, Craviotto, DW, Ludwig, Pearl, Yamaha... did I miss any? I didn't watch them all. You know what? Given they didn't use the same recording set up for each video (at least it certainly didn't sound that way), taking that into consideration, I am just as certain as I was in that Drums in the Wind sound room that drums are drums are drums are drums. It's a cylinder with two membranes applied to it with various attachment devices for heads and mounting. I'm not going to argue that different drum companies offer different looks, but sound? I'm sorry. All things being equal with MDS's recording set-up, listening to set after set left me wondering why the DIY market is not exponentially bigger than it is. Sure, some people are not tool savvy. Never used a drill or power tool in their life. So be it. But most guys have at some point in their life, even young kids, and I am sure ANY DIY drum set sounds as good as manufactured drums. Now, maybe the finishes are better on custom drum shop or manufactured drums. But, even there with some patience and honed skills a great finish can be done by anyone. Depends on what you want. Quite a few of the featured sets were done in satin, which is really easy to do, and some were covered with wraps, another thing easily done.
To be honest, I thought some of the Ludwig sets sounded great. I was surprised that the Craviotto had no particular aural command over any other set, given all I have read about them. Everything sounded like... drums! Some were not tuned quite right, unless they wanted that 'off-sounding' pitch to toms. I heard variations, but nothing major. Their recording set up, my ear phones. I heard drums. I heard nothing that stood out as superior, or even better than anything else. Differences were slight, at best. Maybe a couple bass drums seemed to have more presence than others, but given sizes, head choices and recording set-ups...? Any of the drum sets shown would work in any given musical environment. The players auditioning each set showed that by what they played.
Heads make as an important difference on drums as anything else. Mounting systems as well. Inexpensive drums can be made to sound good with the right heads and some kind of free-floating mounting system. I've done it. In any event I am just as sold on DIY drums as ever. Maybe more so. It's a drum. And in the end, despite nuances, that's what it is, and hype is huge in this industry. "Vintage" drums are in now. Drums go from 1/4" to 1/2" to 1/8" shells and everything in between. Woods, plastics, carbon fiber, metal... sure, different materials have some different characteristics. Shell depth can make some difference. On the other hand microphones, sound equipment, and sound engineers make a huge difference. From 20' away... it's a drum. Everyone looking for that *perfect* sound. There IS NO perfect sound. Most drummers figure that out pretty quick. There might be YOUR sound, that you hear up close, but that's as far as it goes. Hype. Hype. Hype. That's what it boils down to. Proof of that is how often many professional, name drummers change companies, change drum sets.
Oh, the drums I heard that stood out in Indiana? Ayotte maples with maple hoops. I was surprised at how musical they sounded compared to everything else in that room. But, even there, that is the impression upon MY ears. The next guy in the room might think something different.
Believe the hype if you want to. For me, I'll take the drums I make any day.
*****************************
25. The Sound of a Drum - March 17, 2019
What creates sound from a drum?
I have already placed these ideas in another post. I am not going to remove that post, even though someone contacted me about some inconsistency in a Ford drum co. video on youtube. I agreed and removed my video about their company. I repeat and add from my previous post in a more concise way here.
Cylinder - As anyone who has seen my youtube videos on the subject of hype in the manufacturing industry regarding drum shells https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnmLVURn6hk (parts 1-16); you know my stance: after decades of playing and making drums my constant observation and experience is the differences caused by drum shells are very small. Nuances and subtleties may be heard but, once the entire set is engaged, especially in a band, those nuances are lost, and a drum becomes a drum, as far as sound is concerned. In most cases just a bass guitar can hide those nuances of tonal character, should they actually exist. Those who disagree can place some sort of recorded evidence before us to show that conviction is wrong. I have no problem recanting. I have yet to see or hear that evidence.
Shell Depth - Basically, the more shallow the shell, the greater interaction between the heads, the livelier the sound of the drum. The deeper the shell the less interaction between the heads, the more punchy or thick the sound. But! those differences can be achieved by changing heads. Put twin-ply heads on a shallow shell and the sound of a deeper drum can be accomplished.
Shell Thickness - The thicker the shell, the greater the overall density, the more entrapment of sound waves and volume. That said, common sense applies. A thick shell made of soft woods, will not have the density of a thinner shell made of very hard wood. Again, we end up with nuances and subtlety.
Bearing edges are not magic. They are basically muting devices. The less material that touches the heads; the better positioning of the shell apex between head collar and striking surface, the more wide-open the drum will sound, with more sustain. Conversely, the more shell material touching the heads, and an improper placement of the apex results in more muted tone, sustain, and difficulty in tuning/tension. But all that is only to allow the heads to create their sound. Typically, more attention is paid to the bearing edges of more expensive drums. No argument there. Having changed the shape and placement of bearing edges on inexpensive drums I know what the better results can be, though. Bearing edges are important and the buyer should pay attention to how their heads will seat upon them for the best head tone possible. That said, it is not a drum shell contribution to sound, per se.
Ask yourself a simple question. How much mass does a drum head have? Very little. Almost none. Then how is it striking that thin mass is said to send shock waves and vibration down the sidewall of the drum shell via the bearing edge? It is not like striking a cymbal with a stick, or a note on a marimba with a hard mallet. That causes surface to surface vibration. The mass of a drum head? No. Vibration is achieved from the shock wave created by striking the head and those waves vibrating the drum from the inside out, as much as possible. Just strike a batter head with the other hand lightly touching the resonant head, and feel the difference between the instant vibration on your hand, versus placing your hand on the outside of the drum shell. It's a striking demonstration of where the sound of a drum is taking place.
Hoops - Two basic choices here. 1.6 or 2.3 mm metal hoops, or cast aluminum hoops, and wood hoops. Metal hoops can interact with the metal hoop of the head and frequencies can be effected, if not cancelled out. Wood hoops tend to allow the drum to speak with more frequencies, smoother tone, and a touch more volume. Again, nuances. I love my maple hoops. Their contribution to the sound of my drums is more than shell material because they are interacting with the heads, not the shell, and the heads are creating the sound of the drum.
Below is what contributes to the sound of a drum far more than drum shell and all its hype in the industry.
Heads - The sound of a drum is created by the drum heads, not the shell. We know that simply because Remo rototoms, Arbiter Flats, Traps, and other non-shell, basic frame drums sound like drums. The density of the sound chamber will cause sound waves to bounce around to slight varying degrees, creating nuances of tonal character. You can have sound from tensioned heads. You cannot get sound from a naked shell. Yes, the total sound of a drum is a union of its parts, which really applies to the next category but, the sound of a drum is created by the membranes tensioned on the edge of the cylinder. When two membranes are employed, sound waves are trapped and a fuller sound is achieved, generally at the expense of some volume. Single-headed drums are generally louder than double-headed drums.
Head companies have worked for 70 years to come up with some kind of membrane material to recreate the sound of calfskin heads. Not the sound of any particular drum shell that jumps out at the player but, the sound character of the calfskin heads.
There is far more noticeable difference between drum head models than drum shell material and manufacturing processes.
Mounting - A drum, depending on your taste in sound, wants to resonate freely. Affixing a chunk of metal on it, like metal lugs, decreases that natural vibration of the wood or other resonant material. Place a hunk of metal on it, and place a metal bar or tube into the hunk of metal mounted to the shell and fasten that tube tightly bound at the other end somehow and you constrict the natural vibration of the drum. Low end frequencies and sustain are lost. Hence, all the devices to try and hang a drum, or nest a drum with as little metallic interference and constriction as possible. If you involve a cylinder, a drum shell, it should be allowed to resonate freely as possible. That said, it is possible to make a drum from a drum shell material that has no natural resonance or sustain and STILL have the sound of a drum because the sound of a drum is the heads. If you doubt that, watch my videos on Tubie, the Sonatube drum. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yptk_gTwvI and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hXbIPHJmK8
Sticks and Beaters - Listen to any recording. Listen to the drums. Tell me what you honestly hear the first 99% of the time. On toms, you hear the attack of the stick on the batter head first, and depending on the music, you might, maybe, will probably not hear any appreciable sustain. You certainly are not going to hear resonance of the total drum. The music covers that up quickly. In cases where players want a more thuddy sound, thicker single-ply or double-ply heads are used and even more tap or "slap" from the stick is heard.
Wood tip sticks create a little less attack. Nylon tip, more attack. It is, after all, plastic striking plastic. And then the weight of the stick, the tip size and shape, and player velocity come into play, as well. THAT is far more the initial audible impact of the sound of a drum than any kind of special process or materials used to create drum shells.
On bass drums it is really all about heads and especially beaters. Felt, wood, cork, plastic, silicone, leather, aluminum and other materials create various levels of attack. Because so many players want a thud or even a click more than anything when it comes to sound, muted heads or stuffing materials inside the drum, or things stuck to the heads are used. Ultimately the initial attack is what is heard with a relative lower end pitch. If players want the more popular, muted sounding bass drum, shell material is really quite moot. It amounts to strength in being able to safely mount hardware on the shell for toms, in that configuration. Otherwise it is all about heads and beaters.
Player Touch - As with type of stick and beater, player touch, amounting to velocity and force and technique is a very large part of the sound of a drum. Just strike a drum with nominal force and velocity with a 7A, 5A, 2B, and 3S in hickory and maple, with various tip material and shapes and listen to what results. The sound can be weak, full, or choked to varying degrees all by the touch of the player. The drum shell is only as much of the test as the heads vibrate and release sound waves into the shell. A player with a lot of natural force can take a 7A maple and create a tone equal to someone else using a 5B hickory.
Mics - This is really where the essence of drum sound is heard, on recordings or live performance. You may have student level drums and with the right set of heads, mounting, mics, recording equipment and technique, you can make the sound of those drums appear to be high end. Likewise, you can make high end drums sound like cardboard boxes or PVC tubes. Having recorded with student level drums, the only thing that really mattered was less than favorable hardware. Otherwise they sound like... well... drums.
I am getting more and more militant about this subject. It is astounding to me the number of players that are transfixed to the hype manufacturers put out their about their shells. Logically, as I say, they are trying to sell their drums, not another company's heads. I understand that. Sell away. I just share and warn players; just because you spend thousands of dollars more in no way means you get thousands of dollars better sounding drums. You might get better hardware and finishes. Sound? No. Especially because "sound" is subjective to begin with.
As I always say, spend what you want, it's your money. Be a wise consumer, though.
I have already placed these ideas in another post. I am not going to remove that post, even though someone contacted me about some inconsistency in a Ford drum co. video on youtube. I agreed and removed my video about their company. I repeat and add from my previous post in a more concise way here.
Cylinder - As anyone who has seen my youtube videos on the subject of hype in the manufacturing industry regarding drum shells https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnmLVURn6hk (parts 1-16); you know my stance: after decades of playing and making drums my constant observation and experience is the differences caused by drum shells are very small. Nuances and subtleties may be heard but, once the entire set is engaged, especially in a band, those nuances are lost, and a drum becomes a drum, as far as sound is concerned. In most cases just a bass guitar can hide those nuances of tonal character, should they actually exist. Those who disagree can place some sort of recorded evidence before us to show that conviction is wrong. I have no problem recanting. I have yet to see or hear that evidence.
Shell Depth - Basically, the more shallow the shell, the greater interaction between the heads, the livelier the sound of the drum. The deeper the shell the less interaction between the heads, the more punchy or thick the sound. But! those differences can be achieved by changing heads. Put twin-ply heads on a shallow shell and the sound of a deeper drum can be accomplished.
Shell Thickness - The thicker the shell, the greater the overall density, the more entrapment of sound waves and volume. That said, common sense applies. A thick shell made of soft woods, will not have the density of a thinner shell made of very hard wood. Again, we end up with nuances and subtlety.
Bearing edges are not magic. They are basically muting devices. The less material that touches the heads; the better positioning of the shell apex between head collar and striking surface, the more wide-open the drum will sound, with more sustain. Conversely, the more shell material touching the heads, and an improper placement of the apex results in more muted tone, sustain, and difficulty in tuning/tension. But all that is only to allow the heads to create their sound. Typically, more attention is paid to the bearing edges of more expensive drums. No argument there. Having changed the shape and placement of bearing edges on inexpensive drums I know what the better results can be, though. Bearing edges are important and the buyer should pay attention to how their heads will seat upon them for the best head tone possible. That said, it is not a drum shell contribution to sound, per se.
Ask yourself a simple question. How much mass does a drum head have? Very little. Almost none. Then how is it striking that thin mass is said to send shock waves and vibration down the sidewall of the drum shell via the bearing edge? It is not like striking a cymbal with a stick, or a note on a marimba with a hard mallet. That causes surface to surface vibration. The mass of a drum head? No. Vibration is achieved from the shock wave created by striking the head and those waves vibrating the drum from the inside out, as much as possible. Just strike a batter head with the other hand lightly touching the resonant head, and feel the difference between the instant vibration on your hand, versus placing your hand on the outside of the drum shell. It's a striking demonstration of where the sound of a drum is taking place.
Hoops - Two basic choices here. 1.6 or 2.3 mm metal hoops, or cast aluminum hoops, and wood hoops. Metal hoops can interact with the metal hoop of the head and frequencies can be effected, if not cancelled out. Wood hoops tend to allow the drum to speak with more frequencies, smoother tone, and a touch more volume. Again, nuances. I love my maple hoops. Their contribution to the sound of my drums is more than shell material because they are interacting with the heads, not the shell, and the heads are creating the sound of the drum.
Below is what contributes to the sound of a drum far more than drum shell and all its hype in the industry.
Heads - The sound of a drum is created by the drum heads, not the shell. We know that simply because Remo rototoms, Arbiter Flats, Traps, and other non-shell, basic frame drums sound like drums. The density of the sound chamber will cause sound waves to bounce around to slight varying degrees, creating nuances of tonal character. You can have sound from tensioned heads. You cannot get sound from a naked shell. Yes, the total sound of a drum is a union of its parts, which really applies to the next category but, the sound of a drum is created by the membranes tensioned on the edge of the cylinder. When two membranes are employed, sound waves are trapped and a fuller sound is achieved, generally at the expense of some volume. Single-headed drums are generally louder than double-headed drums.
Head companies have worked for 70 years to come up with some kind of membrane material to recreate the sound of calfskin heads. Not the sound of any particular drum shell that jumps out at the player but, the sound character of the calfskin heads.
There is far more noticeable difference between drum head models than drum shell material and manufacturing processes.
Mounting - A drum, depending on your taste in sound, wants to resonate freely. Affixing a chunk of metal on it, like metal lugs, decreases that natural vibration of the wood or other resonant material. Place a hunk of metal on it, and place a metal bar or tube into the hunk of metal mounted to the shell and fasten that tube tightly bound at the other end somehow and you constrict the natural vibration of the drum. Low end frequencies and sustain are lost. Hence, all the devices to try and hang a drum, or nest a drum with as little metallic interference and constriction as possible. If you involve a cylinder, a drum shell, it should be allowed to resonate freely as possible. That said, it is possible to make a drum from a drum shell material that has no natural resonance or sustain and STILL have the sound of a drum because the sound of a drum is the heads. If you doubt that, watch my videos on Tubie, the Sonatube drum. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yptk_gTwvI and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hXbIPHJmK8
Sticks and Beaters - Listen to any recording. Listen to the drums. Tell me what you honestly hear the first 99% of the time. On toms, you hear the attack of the stick on the batter head first, and depending on the music, you might, maybe, will probably not hear any appreciable sustain. You certainly are not going to hear resonance of the total drum. The music covers that up quickly. In cases where players want a more thuddy sound, thicker single-ply or double-ply heads are used and even more tap or "slap" from the stick is heard.
Wood tip sticks create a little less attack. Nylon tip, more attack. It is, after all, plastic striking plastic. And then the weight of the stick, the tip size and shape, and player velocity come into play, as well. THAT is far more the initial audible impact of the sound of a drum than any kind of special process or materials used to create drum shells.
On bass drums it is really all about heads and especially beaters. Felt, wood, cork, plastic, silicone, leather, aluminum and other materials create various levels of attack. Because so many players want a thud or even a click more than anything when it comes to sound, muted heads or stuffing materials inside the drum, or things stuck to the heads are used. Ultimately the initial attack is what is heard with a relative lower end pitch. If players want the more popular, muted sounding bass drum, shell material is really quite moot. It amounts to strength in being able to safely mount hardware on the shell for toms, in that configuration. Otherwise it is all about heads and beaters.
Player Touch - As with type of stick and beater, player touch, amounting to velocity and force and technique is a very large part of the sound of a drum. Just strike a drum with nominal force and velocity with a 7A, 5A, 2B, and 3S in hickory and maple, with various tip material and shapes and listen to what results. The sound can be weak, full, or choked to varying degrees all by the touch of the player. The drum shell is only as much of the test as the heads vibrate and release sound waves into the shell. A player with a lot of natural force can take a 7A maple and create a tone equal to someone else using a 5B hickory.
Mics - This is really where the essence of drum sound is heard, on recordings or live performance. You may have student level drums and with the right set of heads, mounting, mics, recording equipment and technique, you can make the sound of those drums appear to be high end. Likewise, you can make high end drums sound like cardboard boxes or PVC tubes. Having recorded with student level drums, the only thing that really mattered was less than favorable hardware. Otherwise they sound like... well... drums.
I am getting more and more militant about this subject. It is astounding to me the number of players that are transfixed to the hype manufacturers put out their about their shells. Logically, as I say, they are trying to sell their drums, not another company's heads. I understand that. Sell away. I just share and warn players; just because you spend thousands of dollars more in no way means you get thousands of dollars better sounding drums. You might get better hardware and finishes. Sound? No. Especially because "sound" is subjective to begin with.
As I always say, spend what you want, it's your money. Be a wise consumer, though.
*****************************
133. A Little History On Drum Shell Super-Hype - October 7, 2020
I am going to delve into some drum history and explain to you how all the ultra-hype in the drum manufacturing business about drum shells developed. I am going to tell you, without telling you. :-) Matter of fact, I am going to let the Pearl Drum Company tell you, without telling you. Confused? You won't be.
I went to the Pearl website today to look up things about their fiberglass drums. Someone asked me about fiberglass drum shells. I learned Pearl made them. They stopped years ago, though.
While at the site I looked at all their catalogs from 1967 - 1999. Quite a journey. And very revealing.
You should check me out on this. Don't believe it just because I write it down for you to read.
1967 - First catalog they show. The only thing they state about their shells is that they are "warp-free." That's it.
1969 - The only thing added is that they are "perfect circles."
1971-72 - They just mention their fiberglass and fiberglass/wood shells. Nothing about them, in detail.
1974 - Endorsers begin signing on, like Ed Shaughnessy, Art Blakey, Jake Hannah, and others. Three paragraphs on their shells - "space age" coating inside their 9-ply shells, their "revolutionary" fiberglass/wood shells, and they show their clear, seamless, Acrylic drums for the first time.
1975 - A lot more endorsers, like Larry Londin, Russ Kunkel, Les DeMerle, Butch Miles, and Louie Bellson. Lots of Jazz and studio players. Nothing new about shells. They have been spending all catalog space on finishes, hardware, set configurations/models, and endorsers.
1977 - Six shells now - Fiberglass, Fiber/Wood, Maple, Acrylic, a Resin composite shell, and their 9-ply shell. The hype begins but, in just tiny doses, really. Couldn't even call it close to anything seen today.
1978 - Nothing about shells. A lot on their Vari-pitch Cannon drums: basically a Roto-tom with a shell around it.
1979 - Syncussion; the electronic drum invasion.
1980 - Three shells now: Fiberglass, Maple, Birch. One small paragraph for each. Mention of their heat compression method.
1982 - More endorsers: Jeff Porcaro, Ian Paice, Phil Collins, Dom Famularo, and others. Two shells mentioned - Maple and Birch. One paragraph each. Info on their new Extended Series: drums with heads 1" larger than the shells, with lugs spaced further out with thick gaskets under them. They were nice drums. Very pure tone, bypassing the collar on the heads. Literally no shell contact save for the bearing edge apex.
1985 - More new endorsers, like Carmine Appice, Steve Ferrone, and Chester Thompson, and more. The list has grown quite large. Maple and Birch, new finishes, hardware, and virtually nothing stated about their shells.
1986 - Maple and Birch. Some info on their heat compression, etc.
1988 - Nothing new on shells, mostly focuses on hardware.
1993 - And it begins. Their Masters Series. Maple and Birch. More print on tone variations created by their thin shells. Their Patented Heat Compression System, etc.
1998 - Dennis Chambers, Omar Hakim, Smitty Smith, Chad Smith, Eddie Bayers, and JR Robinson on board. They are the world leader in drum manufacturing. The Super Hype begins. A Full page of print on the Masters Series. "On-staff wood specialists." Big hype on their shells: Maple, Birch and Mahogany, and every aspect of their manufacturing process of a shell, including a new logo for their patented, HC/sms > Heat Compression, shell molding system. 154 degrees, and more. Exploded shell renderings of veneer layers, glue, and sound graphics = greatness. "A thirty-one step finishing technique." I'd guess 70-90% more print on their shells and drums then previous catalogs.
1999 - Masterworks. Even more artistic graphic design and super-hype print about their shells; Maple, Birch and Mahogany. A whole page on their molds. Fourteen pages on just the drums. And in all that print, this tell-tale statement:
"By stringently controlling every aspect of the shell manufacturing process, there is simply no reason to tap the shell and give it a note. Every Masterworks shell of the same size, constructed of the same material, in the same thickness, will sound the same when tapped. If you have variation, you simply do not have consistency."
And there it is, if you are sharp enough and familiar enough with the last 50 years of drum making history. If not, well, like I said, those of us who lived back then know how all this drum shell super, ultra-hype began. It's become a carnival act, with a carnival barker.
Now, I state clearly, Pearl makes great drums, in every model line. They are the biggest for a good reason. I do not believe they sound any better than any other drums made, including DIY. EVERYBODY makes great sounding drums because it is not a difficult thing to do, despite all the hype about wood, veneers, glue, molds, bearing edges, and all the rest. The sound of a drum comes from the heads. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum. The shell makes so little difference in the sound field of cymbals and a band, it is a wonder why anybody fights tooth and nail against the observational, empirical evidence on the subject. I understand if manufacturers will argue but, they do not even try to show the differences between drums in different model lines, simply taking a drum from each one, and striking it, to show these monumental differences in their proprietary shells. They just state all their hype like it is fact.
The competition is huge and you must make a great product if you want to stay in business. Unfortunately, today, gross, unprovable marketing hype is used to describe and sell drums. Actually reading and watching the ascent of this hype nonsense about shells and sound, has to be one of the greatest assaults on musical instrument consumers ever known. It is unbelievable. If you challenge it, you either help consumers breathe a sigh of relief or start a war. New players literally freak out over what to buy because of the absolute garbage companies put out there now, about shells and sound. They come upon my videos, I show and explain, and they thank me that I saved them headache and money. The gatekeepers of their favorite drum companies? Oh, they can get downright nasty.
Manufacturing and marketing have reached new heights of drama and untruths just to stay afloat. It's a shame, and it is a sham.
I have written other blogs on this subject, in greater detail, as far as shells and sound and I won't repeat that here. I will say, I do know what I am talking about, because I do the research, and anybody could see it, if they did that for themselves. I have come to be really grateful for those who, on my Youtube channel, REFondrums, have thanked me for my videos on this subject. I'm up to 14* (*16 and counting) videos now, and have some more ideas to share.
Nothing I say or write will change this industry. All industry functions this way now. Nonsensical hype. But, like the guy picking up sand dollars off the beach and throwing them back into the water, being asked "Why are you throwing them back? You can't save them all."
"No," said the fellow, "but, I can save this one."
I went to the Pearl website today to look up things about their fiberglass drums. Someone asked me about fiberglass drum shells. I learned Pearl made them. They stopped years ago, though.
While at the site I looked at all their catalogs from 1967 - 1999. Quite a journey. And very revealing.
You should check me out on this. Don't believe it just because I write it down for you to read.
1967 - First catalog they show. The only thing they state about their shells is that they are "warp-free." That's it.
1969 - The only thing added is that they are "perfect circles."
1971-72 - They just mention their fiberglass and fiberglass/wood shells. Nothing about them, in detail.
1974 - Endorsers begin signing on, like Ed Shaughnessy, Art Blakey, Jake Hannah, and others. Three paragraphs on their shells - "space age" coating inside their 9-ply shells, their "revolutionary" fiberglass/wood shells, and they show their clear, seamless, Acrylic drums for the first time.
1975 - A lot more endorsers, like Larry Londin, Russ Kunkel, Les DeMerle, Butch Miles, and Louie Bellson. Lots of Jazz and studio players. Nothing new about shells. They have been spending all catalog space on finishes, hardware, set configurations/models, and endorsers.
1977 - Six shells now - Fiberglass, Fiber/Wood, Maple, Acrylic, a Resin composite shell, and their 9-ply shell. The hype begins but, in just tiny doses, really. Couldn't even call it close to anything seen today.
1978 - Nothing about shells. A lot on their Vari-pitch Cannon drums: basically a Roto-tom with a shell around it.
1979 - Syncussion; the electronic drum invasion.
1980 - Three shells now: Fiberglass, Maple, Birch. One small paragraph for each. Mention of their heat compression method.
1982 - More endorsers: Jeff Porcaro, Ian Paice, Phil Collins, Dom Famularo, and others. Two shells mentioned - Maple and Birch. One paragraph each. Info on their new Extended Series: drums with heads 1" larger than the shells, with lugs spaced further out with thick gaskets under them. They were nice drums. Very pure tone, bypassing the collar on the heads. Literally no shell contact save for the bearing edge apex.
1985 - More new endorsers, like Carmine Appice, Steve Ferrone, and Chester Thompson, and more. The list has grown quite large. Maple and Birch, new finishes, hardware, and virtually nothing stated about their shells.
1986 - Maple and Birch. Some info on their heat compression, etc.
1988 - Nothing new on shells, mostly focuses on hardware.
1993 - And it begins. Their Masters Series. Maple and Birch. More print on tone variations created by their thin shells. Their Patented Heat Compression System, etc.
1998 - Dennis Chambers, Omar Hakim, Smitty Smith, Chad Smith, Eddie Bayers, and JR Robinson on board. They are the world leader in drum manufacturing. The Super Hype begins. A Full page of print on the Masters Series. "On-staff wood specialists." Big hype on their shells: Maple, Birch and Mahogany, and every aspect of their manufacturing process of a shell, including a new logo for their patented, HC/sms > Heat Compression, shell molding system. 154 degrees, and more. Exploded shell renderings of veneer layers, glue, and sound graphics = greatness. "A thirty-one step finishing technique." I'd guess 70-90% more print on their shells and drums then previous catalogs.
1999 - Masterworks. Even more artistic graphic design and super-hype print about their shells; Maple, Birch and Mahogany. A whole page on their molds. Fourteen pages on just the drums. And in all that print, this tell-tale statement:
"By stringently controlling every aspect of the shell manufacturing process, there is simply no reason to tap the shell and give it a note. Every Masterworks shell of the same size, constructed of the same material, in the same thickness, will sound the same when tapped. If you have variation, you simply do not have consistency."
And there it is, if you are sharp enough and familiar enough with the last 50 years of drum making history. If not, well, like I said, those of us who lived back then know how all this drum shell super, ultra-hype began. It's become a carnival act, with a carnival barker.
Now, I state clearly, Pearl makes great drums, in every model line. They are the biggest for a good reason. I do not believe they sound any better than any other drums made, including DIY. EVERYBODY makes great sounding drums because it is not a difficult thing to do, despite all the hype about wood, veneers, glue, molds, bearing edges, and all the rest. The sound of a drum comes from the heads. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum. The shell makes so little difference in the sound field of cymbals and a band, it is a wonder why anybody fights tooth and nail against the observational, empirical evidence on the subject. I understand if manufacturers will argue but, they do not even try to show the differences between drums in different model lines, simply taking a drum from each one, and striking it, to show these monumental differences in their proprietary shells. They just state all their hype like it is fact.
The competition is huge and you must make a great product if you want to stay in business. Unfortunately, today, gross, unprovable marketing hype is used to describe and sell drums. Actually reading and watching the ascent of this hype nonsense about shells and sound, has to be one of the greatest assaults on musical instrument consumers ever known. It is unbelievable. If you challenge it, you either help consumers breathe a sigh of relief or start a war. New players literally freak out over what to buy because of the absolute garbage companies put out there now, about shells and sound. They come upon my videos, I show and explain, and they thank me that I saved them headache and money. The gatekeepers of their favorite drum companies? Oh, they can get downright nasty.
Manufacturing and marketing have reached new heights of drama and untruths just to stay afloat. It's a shame, and it is a sham.
I have written other blogs on this subject, in greater detail, as far as shells and sound and I won't repeat that here. I will say, I do know what I am talking about, because I do the research, and anybody could see it, if they did that for themselves. I have come to be really grateful for those who, on my Youtube channel, REFondrums, have thanked me for my videos on this subject. I'm up to 14* (*16 and counting) videos now, and have some more ideas to share.
Nothing I say or write will change this industry. All industry functions this way now. Nonsensical hype. But, like the guy picking up sand dollars off the beach and throwing them back into the water, being asked "Why are you throwing them back? You can't save them all."
"No," said the fellow, "but, I can save this one."
*****************************
May 21, 2021
A perfect example of how drum shells can only offer nuances and subtleties to overall sound was presented by a commenter on my YT channel. He has 2 bass drums. One with 20 lugs, the other with 16. He cannot tune the lesser-lugged bass drum to the same pitch as the 20. Does the shell material matter? No. What matters is the drum heads and their tension. That is what creates sound and feel.
A drum is a collection of parts. All the parts have something to do with the sound. The drum vibrates as a unit to throw out full spectrum tone. Anything constricting it will effect a frequency range. The fewer points of stretching a membrane has, the less consistent tension the membrane is under all around its circumference.
Why are Roto toms known for their pure tone? They have the usual tension points all drums have but, the heads sit on a tunable frame, which offers a more uniform tension.
Why did people state Arbiter drums sounded so natural and warm and full-bodied? Because the heads were tensioned in total, not at lug points. The hoops screwed onto the shell and as you turned the hoop, the entire circumference of the head was under consistent, even tension. A brilliant idea. Some problems existed within the company, itself, apparently, and the overall look of the drums, no lugs, was not catching on with drummers used to the typical look, and the company went under. Unfortunately the company did not have much of an entrepreneurial spirit. Stained Maple can look nice, of course but, standard face-cut Maple is not a very interesting grain. They had some stain, they had some solid color lacquers. If they employed exotic veneers on their shells, the free, unobtrusive look of beautifully finished wood grains could have made those drums art museum objects of practical and gorgeous existence. I have often hoped the company would reemerge with a winning formula.
We can easily see tension points on the shell have more to do with the sound of the drum than any shell material. The hardware on the shell makes more of a difference than the shell, itself. That's just the empirical evidence proving so.
Noble and Cooley came up with their nodal point lugs, positioning them on the shell at a point where stress was less of a factor when the heads were tensioned. I never heard any significant differences in any demonstration.
Sleishman has their floating tension system. The lugs are part of the hoops, nothing on the shell. They tune up easily and are great sounding drums. Better than anything else out there? Nope. Because while the metal on the shell can make a difference, it's a subtle one. Get the heads to seat correctly on correct bearing edges, and tune them up correctly, and that is what creates the sound.
My stacked plywood ring drums have no lugs on the shells. Both heads tension at the same time. Very easy to tune and they sound great. Better than anything out there? Nope. The heads are tightened down, they react with each other, the drums sound good. A 9/16" to 5/8" of an inch shell wall does not make any significant difference one could discern in the context of music in a band.
Shell wall density means more to how sound waves reflect inside the cylinder than any particular plywood specie commonly used for drum shells, or any other material for that matter.
I don't think I mentioned I recently saw a YT video where a set of drums was made from corrugated cardboard, hardened with some kind of coating. Cardboard. Fluted cardboard. No density whatsoever. How did they sound? A little soft but, everybody in the video was pretty surprised at how good they sounded. Treated Cardboard.
Telling me the sound of a drum is the drum shell is just empty of facts and evidence.
The sound of a drum is from the heads. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum.
A drum is a collection of parts. All the parts have something to do with the sound. The drum vibrates as a unit to throw out full spectrum tone. Anything constricting it will effect a frequency range. The fewer points of stretching a membrane has, the less consistent tension the membrane is under all around its circumference.
Why are Roto toms known for their pure tone? They have the usual tension points all drums have but, the heads sit on a tunable frame, which offers a more uniform tension.
Why did people state Arbiter drums sounded so natural and warm and full-bodied? Because the heads were tensioned in total, not at lug points. The hoops screwed onto the shell and as you turned the hoop, the entire circumference of the head was under consistent, even tension. A brilliant idea. Some problems existed within the company, itself, apparently, and the overall look of the drums, no lugs, was not catching on with drummers used to the typical look, and the company went under. Unfortunately the company did not have much of an entrepreneurial spirit. Stained Maple can look nice, of course but, standard face-cut Maple is not a very interesting grain. They had some stain, they had some solid color lacquers. If they employed exotic veneers on their shells, the free, unobtrusive look of beautifully finished wood grains could have made those drums art museum objects of practical and gorgeous existence. I have often hoped the company would reemerge with a winning formula.
We can easily see tension points on the shell have more to do with the sound of the drum than any shell material. The hardware on the shell makes more of a difference than the shell, itself. That's just the empirical evidence proving so.
Noble and Cooley came up with their nodal point lugs, positioning them on the shell at a point where stress was less of a factor when the heads were tensioned. I never heard any significant differences in any demonstration.
Sleishman has their floating tension system. The lugs are part of the hoops, nothing on the shell. They tune up easily and are great sounding drums. Better than anything else out there? Nope. Because while the metal on the shell can make a difference, it's a subtle one. Get the heads to seat correctly on correct bearing edges, and tune them up correctly, and that is what creates the sound.
My stacked plywood ring drums have no lugs on the shells. Both heads tension at the same time. Very easy to tune and they sound great. Better than anything out there? Nope. The heads are tightened down, they react with each other, the drums sound good. A 9/16" to 5/8" of an inch shell wall does not make any significant difference one could discern in the context of music in a band.
Shell wall density means more to how sound waves reflect inside the cylinder than any particular plywood specie commonly used for drum shells, or any other material for that matter.
I don't think I mentioned I recently saw a YT video where a set of drums was made from corrugated cardboard, hardened with some kind of coating. Cardboard. Fluted cardboard. No density whatsoever. How did they sound? A little soft but, everybody in the video was pretty surprised at how good they sounded. Treated Cardboard.
Telling me the sound of a drum is the drum shell is just empty of facts and evidence.
The sound of a drum is from the heads. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum.
*****************************
295. July 25, 2021 - There is No Such Thing as a Bad Sounding Drum
There is no such thing as a bad sounding drum.
You shake your head in aghast. Is this guy high on something? Nope. Is he ignorant of the sound of a good drum? So you say. Tell me. What is a "good" sounding drum?
Regardless of what your answer(s) may be, let's look at sound. Sound is a wave that passes through Earth's elements containing air, and travels into an ear canal, vibrating various parts within the ear, which sends signals to the brain, which tell you audibly and perhaps from memory, corn is popping on the stove. For drummers, it's about all the recognizable sounds in the field of percussion. Dozens of pitches, both tuned and untuned, and mixed, combined frequencies. and all the rest.
Out of all that, what is "good?" Define "good," in terms of sound and make it objective, NOT subjective. You may know what you like to hear. That is subjective. What is good sound by any objective definition you want to use. It does not matter if it is a snare, a tom, a bass drum, a ride cymbal, a crash, a splash, a china or any other effect cymbal, or cowbell, or tone block, a bongo, a conga, a djembe, or any other instrument struck with sticks, hands or anything else. Sound, by its very nature, is a subjective experience, different from one human being or animal or anything that hears sound, to the next of its phyla. While many dogs could not care less about a thunderstorm, we had a dog that literally shook and was terrified. She was a rescue dog. We didn't know her history. Loud noises freaked her out. Trucks, gun shots, airplanes, loud voices. Something was in her past that affected how she related to sound.
Humans are no different. We relate to sound through experience, as well. You love drums and cymbals and all the rest? Your neighbor may hate it all, even if you're a Buddy Rich or Vinnie Coliuta. I don't play drums on the weekend. Why? My wife does not like the sound of drums and cymbals, especially low frequencies, which can really upset her. She can hear low frequencies a mile or more away and they reverberate in her like Chinese water torture. I love China cymbals. Some drummers would not use one if you paid them to.
Sound, any sound, is not always pleasurable to all ears. We all know that. Why is it drummers feel the ability to tell people what drums sound good and what drums sound bad, without some kind of objective standard or benchmark to determine such a position? It cannot be based on any particular tone. It cannot be based on resonance, sustain, volume or any other parameter. No particular shell, head, stick or hand can be used to create a benchmark for sound. No cymbal, no effect, no ears can be used to make such a determination. The variables may as well be infinite.
It is the same with music. It is the same with color, with food, with clothing, with anything and everything that involves subjective taste.
We all know the parameters for good, better, and best when it comes to hardware because that has standards of adjustment options, performance criteria (home, weekend warrior, full scale touring), ease of use, chrome plating or any other plating, etc., etc. Sound cannot come under such criteria. Louder drums do not make them good or bad, just louder than the drums next to it, and suited for a particular situation. It makes them good for certain conditions. It does not make the sound "good," in and of itself.
What sounds good to me - wide open toms with single-ply, uncoated heads - might sound bad to you, liking more muted heads at different tensions and pitches, drum to drum. Same for every other drum and every other cymbal and every other musical instrument known to man, and who hears them.
When I hear drums played by traditional Jazzers, I don't like the tones. They sound choked to me. Well, technically, depending on my subjective approach to sound, they are choked. Not to the players going for sound that stands apart from the stand-up bass player and allows for easy double-stroke rolls, though. They choose that sound for whatever reasons personal to them. It does not matter what anyone thinks of it, aside from other musicians in the band listening to it. Compromise may have to enter but, that does not mean the drums do not sound good or bad. It only means the musicians do not like the sound in the context of the music they are making, or how their own ears hear things.
Many new names out there are playing very muted drums and cymbals these days. They did not invent the sound. Ringo, with his towels on his drums, did that, and others followed. They have tape and muting devices and all kinds of things stuffed into bass drums and choose very "dry," "dark" sounding, unlathed cymbals for their sound. Lightyears from sound I like. I could make a case for: here is a drum. If left alone, here is what it sounds like - cylinder, membrane(s), parts to tension the head(s) and hold the drum in place. That is the "good" sound of a drum but, wait. Even those parameters can change the sound of a drum, circumstance to circumstance. Then someone says, nope, too much sustain, too bright, too loud, and they put muted heads on it. Still others go for a drier sound than that and get to extremes of literally killing almost all of what a drum naturally sounds like. Bad sound? No. Their sound. Not your sound. Not my sound but, they like it. It sounds good to them, therefore it is a good drum sound.
You may be old enough to remember the muting devices placed on all drums. Turn the knob, the felt pad rises closer to the head to muffle the tone. Then, open tom sound became the thing and those mufflers went the way of vintage collections. I have seen some returning, because muted drum sound is popular again.
Since I made the series of videos on drum shell hype in the manufacturing business, I have seen it over and over again in comments about the sound of drums being good or bad. Opinion abounds but, no objective proof is offered, nor can be offered. All sound is what your ears hear and no one else. It may sound like singing birds or bells to you, and screeching, fighting cats, or dirt shoveled into a wheelbarrow to someone else.
We see warm, cool, fat, thin, dry, wet, round, abrasive, harsh, woody, metallic, dark, bright, thuddy, throaty, wide open, choked, musical, and other descriptive terms used to measure and describe sound in the world of drums, and they all need definitions because they mean different things to different people. All of these terms, however efficient they are to describe the sound of percussion instruments in any general way, fail to describe "good" sound. Obviously, if someone sees dry as a good sound, wet would not be, and vice-versa. Yet dry and wet are often used in the same context at times. What does wet have to do with the sound of a drum? It is coupled with fat, and double ply heads most of the time but, it can also be a sound used to describe the sound of a snare drum. They are not discussing the sound of the shell. They are describing the sound created by the heads. The shell can only magnify or lessen whatever frequencies the heads throw off, in subtle ways, that get lost when the music comes in. Hoops contribute to that, as well. Maybe a small Jazz trio in a small club can have an atmosphere where such nuances are discerned by the player and audience. I could make a decent empirical case against that, as well, when it comes to an audience.
We all know there are drums, good drums, better and best by way of manufacturing techniques and details of components but, as can be demonstrated in many ways, such details may make a drum look better and last longer yet, that is no proof they will sound better.
Would I expect a drum set made from the finest materials available to sound better than a beginner's set? Not if the same heads are on the drums and they are mounted the same way, and things are equal, like the number of lugs on each drum, floor tom bracket style, bearing edges, etc. BUT, that is a subjective observation based on what I like for sound. The more expensive set will look better, and even there, if I like wood and you like solid color, a finish is also subjective, and a black, white, wine red, or blue wrap may suit a player's taste just fine. I'd certainly expect the expensive drums to tune up easier, based on the lugs and lug nuts and tension rods supplied. That is mechanics, though. Not sound. It improves the way you get to a sound, that's all. Beginner's drums come in the current "in" sizes, like power toms and such but, take the same sizes in any model, mount them the same, put them in place the same, same heads on them, same tension/pitches, and no true significant differences are going to be heard because one shell is Maple or Birch and the beginner set is Luan or some other less expensive material to work with in manufacturing. I have shown that. Just how much difference do you think 1/4" or 1/8" of plywood is going to make, with different glues, ply dimensions, ply configurations and all? The hype has told consumers, a great deal. But the 'hypers' offer no real comparisons to show that. Why not?
What about overtones? That is not a shell subject. That is a head tension subject, in relation to batter and resonant heads vibrating together. This entire idea of perfectly flat bearing edges is a joke. Heads STRETCH. Unless there is some kind of gouge in the edge, slight variations of space are adjusted by head stretch. Old, even beat up Vintage drums prove that. Take a shell and put it on a marble table and some light shines through a gap less than a 64th of an inch and all of a sudden you have a dud on your hands? That is so illogical, it is ridiculous on the face of it. Heads stretch!
Sometimes heads are manufactured with slight defects in the mounting of the plastic to the hoop and a dimple might be created, or a slack spot. That can cause overtones between the heads that can be a nightmare to deal with. It's easier to just put another head on the drum. Heads are not perfect objects. Think of that. They must be manufactured with a collar/flat that sits on a bearing edge, with slack so they can be tightened. That's a pretty intricate manufactured object. I can take a few of the same model heads out of their boxes and tap each one and one will have a tone already, one will be a a silent flap, and the other somewhere in between. Watch a video on how heads are manufactured. As tech as it seems, the materials can be highly variable in their assembly.
Matter of fact, in speaking with Mark Taribassi recently, co-owner of Cardinal Percussion and Attack drum heads, he mentioned a 'perfect storm' can happen when the joint in the head hoop can be placed on a lug that receives all the 2 and 4 all night long, and a head can lose integrity from the constant impact at that point and ultimately fail. Variables exist, when it comes to manufacturing, use and sound.
The entire shell specie subject, gurgling and slashing about in the drum world, seems the most useless discussion ever hoisted on a consumer group I've ever seen.
You may want to protect your big investment in top of the line drums with whatever rhetoric you want. It cannot be proven with any empirical evidence, as far as sound goes. I have shown that in the video series, making drums from all kinds of materials. I still get comments about the trash can set, especially the bass drum, and how "good" it sounds. If the toms had actual lugs on them, or I made my dual-tension, no lug system for them, and had more range of tension, they'd sound even better BUT!, that is for my subjective taste in drum sound. To my ears and my taste, the toms are "dry." Others have commented how good they sound. They prefer dry or more muted tones.
Sound is subjective. It is personal. It cannot be good or bad in any dogmatic way.
There is just no way around that.
You shake your head in aghast. Is this guy high on something? Nope. Is he ignorant of the sound of a good drum? So you say. Tell me. What is a "good" sounding drum?
Regardless of what your answer(s) may be, let's look at sound. Sound is a wave that passes through Earth's elements containing air, and travels into an ear canal, vibrating various parts within the ear, which sends signals to the brain, which tell you audibly and perhaps from memory, corn is popping on the stove. For drummers, it's about all the recognizable sounds in the field of percussion. Dozens of pitches, both tuned and untuned, and mixed, combined frequencies. and all the rest.
Out of all that, what is "good?" Define "good," in terms of sound and make it objective, NOT subjective. You may know what you like to hear. That is subjective. What is good sound by any objective definition you want to use. It does not matter if it is a snare, a tom, a bass drum, a ride cymbal, a crash, a splash, a china or any other effect cymbal, or cowbell, or tone block, a bongo, a conga, a djembe, or any other instrument struck with sticks, hands or anything else. Sound, by its very nature, is a subjective experience, different from one human being or animal or anything that hears sound, to the next of its phyla. While many dogs could not care less about a thunderstorm, we had a dog that literally shook and was terrified. She was a rescue dog. We didn't know her history. Loud noises freaked her out. Trucks, gun shots, airplanes, loud voices. Something was in her past that affected how she related to sound.
Humans are no different. We relate to sound through experience, as well. You love drums and cymbals and all the rest? Your neighbor may hate it all, even if you're a Buddy Rich or Vinnie Coliuta. I don't play drums on the weekend. Why? My wife does not like the sound of drums and cymbals, especially low frequencies, which can really upset her. She can hear low frequencies a mile or more away and they reverberate in her like Chinese water torture. I love China cymbals. Some drummers would not use one if you paid them to.
Sound, any sound, is not always pleasurable to all ears. We all know that. Why is it drummers feel the ability to tell people what drums sound good and what drums sound bad, without some kind of objective standard or benchmark to determine such a position? It cannot be based on any particular tone. It cannot be based on resonance, sustain, volume or any other parameter. No particular shell, head, stick or hand can be used to create a benchmark for sound. No cymbal, no effect, no ears can be used to make such a determination. The variables may as well be infinite.
It is the same with music. It is the same with color, with food, with clothing, with anything and everything that involves subjective taste.
We all know the parameters for good, better, and best when it comes to hardware because that has standards of adjustment options, performance criteria (home, weekend warrior, full scale touring), ease of use, chrome plating or any other plating, etc., etc. Sound cannot come under such criteria. Louder drums do not make them good or bad, just louder than the drums next to it, and suited for a particular situation. It makes them good for certain conditions. It does not make the sound "good," in and of itself.
What sounds good to me - wide open toms with single-ply, uncoated heads - might sound bad to you, liking more muted heads at different tensions and pitches, drum to drum. Same for every other drum and every other cymbal and every other musical instrument known to man, and who hears them.
When I hear drums played by traditional Jazzers, I don't like the tones. They sound choked to me. Well, technically, depending on my subjective approach to sound, they are choked. Not to the players going for sound that stands apart from the stand-up bass player and allows for easy double-stroke rolls, though. They choose that sound for whatever reasons personal to them. It does not matter what anyone thinks of it, aside from other musicians in the band listening to it. Compromise may have to enter but, that does not mean the drums do not sound good or bad. It only means the musicians do not like the sound in the context of the music they are making, or how their own ears hear things.
Many new names out there are playing very muted drums and cymbals these days. They did not invent the sound. Ringo, with his towels on his drums, did that, and others followed. They have tape and muting devices and all kinds of things stuffed into bass drums and choose very "dry," "dark" sounding, unlathed cymbals for their sound. Lightyears from sound I like. I could make a case for: here is a drum. If left alone, here is what it sounds like - cylinder, membrane(s), parts to tension the head(s) and hold the drum in place. That is the "good" sound of a drum but, wait. Even those parameters can change the sound of a drum, circumstance to circumstance. Then someone says, nope, too much sustain, too bright, too loud, and they put muted heads on it. Still others go for a drier sound than that and get to extremes of literally killing almost all of what a drum naturally sounds like. Bad sound? No. Their sound. Not your sound. Not my sound but, they like it. It sounds good to them, therefore it is a good drum sound.
You may be old enough to remember the muting devices placed on all drums. Turn the knob, the felt pad rises closer to the head to muffle the tone. Then, open tom sound became the thing and those mufflers went the way of vintage collections. I have seen some returning, because muted drum sound is popular again.
Since I made the series of videos on drum shell hype in the manufacturing business, I have seen it over and over again in comments about the sound of drums being good or bad. Opinion abounds but, no objective proof is offered, nor can be offered. All sound is what your ears hear and no one else. It may sound like singing birds or bells to you, and screeching, fighting cats, or dirt shoveled into a wheelbarrow to someone else.
We see warm, cool, fat, thin, dry, wet, round, abrasive, harsh, woody, metallic, dark, bright, thuddy, throaty, wide open, choked, musical, and other descriptive terms used to measure and describe sound in the world of drums, and they all need definitions because they mean different things to different people. All of these terms, however efficient they are to describe the sound of percussion instruments in any general way, fail to describe "good" sound. Obviously, if someone sees dry as a good sound, wet would not be, and vice-versa. Yet dry and wet are often used in the same context at times. What does wet have to do with the sound of a drum? It is coupled with fat, and double ply heads most of the time but, it can also be a sound used to describe the sound of a snare drum. They are not discussing the sound of the shell. They are describing the sound created by the heads. The shell can only magnify or lessen whatever frequencies the heads throw off, in subtle ways, that get lost when the music comes in. Hoops contribute to that, as well. Maybe a small Jazz trio in a small club can have an atmosphere where such nuances are discerned by the player and audience. I could make a decent empirical case against that, as well, when it comes to an audience.
We all know there are drums, good drums, better and best by way of manufacturing techniques and details of components but, as can be demonstrated in many ways, such details may make a drum look better and last longer yet, that is no proof they will sound better.
Would I expect a drum set made from the finest materials available to sound better than a beginner's set? Not if the same heads are on the drums and they are mounted the same way, and things are equal, like the number of lugs on each drum, floor tom bracket style, bearing edges, etc. BUT, that is a subjective observation based on what I like for sound. The more expensive set will look better, and even there, if I like wood and you like solid color, a finish is also subjective, and a black, white, wine red, or blue wrap may suit a player's taste just fine. I'd certainly expect the expensive drums to tune up easier, based on the lugs and lug nuts and tension rods supplied. That is mechanics, though. Not sound. It improves the way you get to a sound, that's all. Beginner's drums come in the current "in" sizes, like power toms and such but, take the same sizes in any model, mount them the same, put them in place the same, same heads on them, same tension/pitches, and no true significant differences are going to be heard because one shell is Maple or Birch and the beginner set is Luan or some other less expensive material to work with in manufacturing. I have shown that. Just how much difference do you think 1/4" or 1/8" of plywood is going to make, with different glues, ply dimensions, ply configurations and all? The hype has told consumers, a great deal. But the 'hypers' offer no real comparisons to show that. Why not?
What about overtones? That is not a shell subject. That is a head tension subject, in relation to batter and resonant heads vibrating together. This entire idea of perfectly flat bearing edges is a joke. Heads STRETCH. Unless there is some kind of gouge in the edge, slight variations of space are adjusted by head stretch. Old, even beat up Vintage drums prove that. Take a shell and put it on a marble table and some light shines through a gap less than a 64th of an inch and all of a sudden you have a dud on your hands? That is so illogical, it is ridiculous on the face of it. Heads stretch!
Sometimes heads are manufactured with slight defects in the mounting of the plastic to the hoop and a dimple might be created, or a slack spot. That can cause overtones between the heads that can be a nightmare to deal with. It's easier to just put another head on the drum. Heads are not perfect objects. Think of that. They must be manufactured with a collar/flat that sits on a bearing edge, with slack so they can be tightened. That's a pretty intricate manufactured object. I can take a few of the same model heads out of their boxes and tap each one and one will have a tone already, one will be a a silent flap, and the other somewhere in between. Watch a video on how heads are manufactured. As tech as it seems, the materials can be highly variable in their assembly.
Matter of fact, in speaking with Mark Taribassi recently, co-owner of Cardinal Percussion and Attack drum heads, he mentioned a 'perfect storm' can happen when the joint in the head hoop can be placed on a lug that receives all the 2 and 4 all night long, and a head can lose integrity from the constant impact at that point and ultimately fail. Variables exist, when it comes to manufacturing, use and sound.
The entire shell specie subject, gurgling and slashing about in the drum world, seems the most useless discussion ever hoisted on a consumer group I've ever seen.
You may want to protect your big investment in top of the line drums with whatever rhetoric you want. It cannot be proven with any empirical evidence, as far as sound goes. I have shown that in the video series, making drums from all kinds of materials. I still get comments about the trash can set, especially the bass drum, and how "good" it sounds. If the toms had actual lugs on them, or I made my dual-tension, no lug system for them, and had more range of tension, they'd sound even better BUT!, that is for my subjective taste in drum sound. To my ears and my taste, the toms are "dry." Others have commented how good they sound. They prefer dry or more muted tones.
Sound is subjective. It is personal. It cannot be good or bad in any dogmatic way.
There is just no way around that.
********************
328. Back to Drums - August 22, 2021
I continue to get comments on my drum shell and hype in the manufacturing industry series of videos on my YT channel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnmLVURn6hk&list=PLRvd-mVMdjwLmAPgUesHnoSPlHvvXhalx
I haven't made a new one in quite some time. There's really nowhere else to go to prove the point. I've got some ideas to try but, right now, in the pulverizing heat of summer, going into a metal building in Texas is not conducive to a happy work atmosphere. Picture a potato in an oven. When it cools down I'll get back in there.
The sound of a drum comes from the tension put on the heads, not the shells. The shells, speaking of industry manufactured plywood shells, can only do things to the sound thrown off by the heads by virtue of shell wall density and depth. Bearing edges can impede the sound or aid the sound by virtue of how the heads seat upon them and vibrate. Wood species, layering of veneers, glues, and all the proprietary things manufacturers super-hype these days... not so much. At best, nuances and subtleties. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum. Change the tension on the heads, change the sound of the drum. Dozens of models to choose from, which can all modify the tone in ways far more noticeable than a shell wall.
That makes sense to most people, especially when I display the drums I have made from various anti-typical materials but, there are those who vehemently disagree, and that's okay. Ultimately sound is in the ears of the listener, and that includes perceived sound. I know they cannot provide empirical proof. Whatever slight differences can be produced by a drum shell's materials and all, get lost in the spectrum of sound an entire set throws off, especially in the context of a band, in the context of mics, sound equipment, or recording equipment, especially recording software.
The thing I wanted to share today was a comment from one of the world's most well-known players. He is one of the few players in the history of modern music that is an original member of a top tier band for half a century. You might already know who that is just by stating that. He has played Premier drums, Ludwig for many years of his career, and currently plays Drum Workshop. He could play any and all drums out there. If I had his income, trust me, I'd have something from everybody out there and have my own museum of drums.
His name is Nick Mason, founding member of Pink Floyd. I never got into Pink Floyd's music but, when you play drums for a band that has traveled the planet, used everything out there to reinforce sound and record sound, a statement like the one below makes quite an impact.
Interestingly enough, I saw it in DW's Edge magazine, #14, pg. 48,49 in an interview with Nick. He has been instrumental in keeping a well-known drum shop in London alive and kicking and was asked about the first drum set he bought there and about his saving the shop and being involved and why.
"NM: Well, I think that acoustic instruments shouldn’t be something that one buys online. It’s a silly thing; you really need to hear them! It’s been interesting. One of the things I did was to take a beginner’s kit, a proper kit not a toy kit, and I customised it so that I could I take it into a studio myself, if I needed to. It doesn’t cost much to upgrade an introductory kit to something you can do that with. It’s mainly a matter of upgrading the heads, damping down the bass drum, and possibly replacing the snare. You end up with something that is really quite good."
Now, having done that myself, since the 1970s, I know that statement is true. I would add one thing: making sure the heads seat correctly on the bearing edges. I'll add another, if necessary to the player. If you want a more wide open, full spectrum frequency range from the drums, isolate them from sound absorbing materials, like mounting hardware and floors. Dampening a bass drum is purely a matter of taste. Today, most dampening is done with the various heads that are made. Nothing is necessary inside the drum, unless you are using single ply heads want some muted tone from the drum's roar. And there are those who might use the most muted heads produced and still want a more muted sound and will add something to the inside of the drum.
Changing snare drums can be an issue if a certain depth is desired for feel off the batter head, or the number of lugs to tension the heads, and an efficient and trustworthy working strainer system and wires. Beginner snare drums can be quite deficient in those areas but, in other cases a nice drum is provided with a beginner's set. Just depends on the company and what they offer.
A beginner's set is not going to be a road worthy set if you are a touring musician. The hardware will never cut it. As far as sound? With modern PA systems and recording software the options for sound enhancement are so broad and deep no one in the band or in the audience could ever notice. Most beginner sets come with whatever is popular in Rock music. That means "Power" toms, those with added depth. If you wanted that extra punchy, tubby kind of sound, you're good to go. If you want a livelier sound you get with more shallow toms, depending on lug placement, you might be able to cut down the shells, add a new bearing edge, and remount the lugs.
I get a lot of comments about what wraps do to the sound of a drum, muting its tone. All I can do is mention I have wrapped drums since the 70s, with everything from traditional wraps, to wall paper, to an added layer of exotic wood veneers, to one of my current sets with tooled leather on them. I have yet to hear any difference in sound doing so. Why? Because everything is happening inside the cylinder chamber, not outside.
Is it not really interesting professionals have their choice of any manufacturer out there and yet they still choose to use heads from Remo, Evans, Aquarian, or in some cases, Attack heads, like I use? Attack heads are not as well known and are considered less worthy than other makes. That's unfortunate. I like their brighter tone myself and their prices but, when I am whipping around the set, the difference between single-ply clear Attack and Remo, while noticeable just striking each drum, is lost in the midst of runs, with cymbals clanging, as well. Pitch is what you hear, not the nuances of Mylar the heads are made with. When you begin changing coatings and plies and all, then you really begin changing the sound of the drum. The thicker you go, the more muted the tone. Whether that means ply thickness or coupling, or coatings, the sound will gradually get more muted.
I have mentioned the video put on YT, by Timpano Percussion, where they use 62 different models of snare drum batter heads on one drum, and you can hear what happens. Same with their video on bass drum heads. If you missed that before, here are the links again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq4SNkt53Q0list=PLnpcMWzeo6RDyJqb7OJDvIzRvVWezuscj&index=4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0ekSlGVZoU
I found it interesting the interviewer had no comment or follow-up question for Mason's statement. I'll take that as an acknowledgment of agreement or at least not being willing to challenge Mason's take on the issue, even though Mason plays DW drums, a company with a couple dozen different model lines and shell configurations to choose from, etc., etc.
Am I suggesting someone purchases a beginner's set and fixes it up and shall get something equivalent to a top of the line series kit from any of the companies out there? Absolutely, if good sound is all you are after. BUT, bare in mind, if finishes are important to you, and hardware allowing full-spectrum tone, especially mounting hardware, and you need hardware that is able to be put up and torn down repeatedly, and you want a lot of size options, no. Purchasing a beginner's set of drums and fixing it up is not your answer, unless you go that extra mile for those options and add them yourself but, then you are just spending money for something you can find in levels up the line. Depending on the company, intermediate lines and models may suffice. Maybe not. Depends on what you want and need. Must you spend top dollar for the best sound? No. No such hype can be proven for that, all things being equal when it comes to hardware, etc.
I know how crazy radical that sounds. That's why I made the series of videos. I demonstrate it in various ways.
Like I wrote earlier, #295, there is no such thing as a bad sounding drum because sound is completely subjective. What sounds great to me may not to you, and vice versa. That's a matter of taste. Want ketchup, mustard or mayo on that? Taste is subjective, person to person, food or sound, regardless of restaurant or drum set.
It's your wallet, spend what you like. You cannot prove spending more guarantees the best sound. It may guarantee more inspiration, though, which is also very subjective and personal. Personally, after 57 years with drums and drumming, I'll do my thing on anything you put in front of me. Music moves me more than drums.
Now cymbals...
I haven't made a new one in quite some time. There's really nowhere else to go to prove the point. I've got some ideas to try but, right now, in the pulverizing heat of summer, going into a metal building in Texas is not conducive to a happy work atmosphere. Picture a potato in an oven. When it cools down I'll get back in there.
The sound of a drum comes from the tension put on the heads, not the shells. The shells, speaking of industry manufactured plywood shells, can only do things to the sound thrown off by the heads by virtue of shell wall density and depth. Bearing edges can impede the sound or aid the sound by virtue of how the heads seat upon them and vibrate. Wood species, layering of veneers, glues, and all the proprietary things manufacturers super-hype these days... not so much. At best, nuances and subtleties. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum. Change the tension on the heads, change the sound of the drum. Dozens of models to choose from, which can all modify the tone in ways far more noticeable than a shell wall.
That makes sense to most people, especially when I display the drums I have made from various anti-typical materials but, there are those who vehemently disagree, and that's okay. Ultimately sound is in the ears of the listener, and that includes perceived sound. I know they cannot provide empirical proof. Whatever slight differences can be produced by a drum shell's materials and all, get lost in the spectrum of sound an entire set throws off, especially in the context of a band, in the context of mics, sound equipment, or recording equipment, especially recording software.
The thing I wanted to share today was a comment from one of the world's most well-known players. He is one of the few players in the history of modern music that is an original member of a top tier band for half a century. You might already know who that is just by stating that. He has played Premier drums, Ludwig for many years of his career, and currently plays Drum Workshop. He could play any and all drums out there. If I had his income, trust me, I'd have something from everybody out there and have my own museum of drums.
His name is Nick Mason, founding member of Pink Floyd. I never got into Pink Floyd's music but, when you play drums for a band that has traveled the planet, used everything out there to reinforce sound and record sound, a statement like the one below makes quite an impact.
Interestingly enough, I saw it in DW's Edge magazine, #14, pg. 48,49 in an interview with Nick. He has been instrumental in keeping a well-known drum shop in London alive and kicking and was asked about the first drum set he bought there and about his saving the shop and being involved and why.
"NM: Well, I think that acoustic instruments shouldn’t be something that one buys online. It’s a silly thing; you really need to hear them! It’s been interesting. One of the things I did was to take a beginner’s kit, a proper kit not a toy kit, and I customised it so that I could I take it into a studio myself, if I needed to. It doesn’t cost much to upgrade an introductory kit to something you can do that with. It’s mainly a matter of upgrading the heads, damping down the bass drum, and possibly replacing the snare. You end up with something that is really quite good."
Now, having done that myself, since the 1970s, I know that statement is true. I would add one thing: making sure the heads seat correctly on the bearing edges. I'll add another, if necessary to the player. If you want a more wide open, full spectrum frequency range from the drums, isolate them from sound absorbing materials, like mounting hardware and floors. Dampening a bass drum is purely a matter of taste. Today, most dampening is done with the various heads that are made. Nothing is necessary inside the drum, unless you are using single ply heads want some muted tone from the drum's roar. And there are those who might use the most muted heads produced and still want a more muted sound and will add something to the inside of the drum.
Changing snare drums can be an issue if a certain depth is desired for feel off the batter head, or the number of lugs to tension the heads, and an efficient and trustworthy working strainer system and wires. Beginner snare drums can be quite deficient in those areas but, in other cases a nice drum is provided with a beginner's set. Just depends on the company and what they offer.
A beginner's set is not going to be a road worthy set if you are a touring musician. The hardware will never cut it. As far as sound? With modern PA systems and recording software the options for sound enhancement are so broad and deep no one in the band or in the audience could ever notice. Most beginner sets come with whatever is popular in Rock music. That means "Power" toms, those with added depth. If you wanted that extra punchy, tubby kind of sound, you're good to go. If you want a livelier sound you get with more shallow toms, depending on lug placement, you might be able to cut down the shells, add a new bearing edge, and remount the lugs.
I get a lot of comments about what wraps do to the sound of a drum, muting its tone. All I can do is mention I have wrapped drums since the 70s, with everything from traditional wraps, to wall paper, to an added layer of exotic wood veneers, to one of my current sets with tooled leather on them. I have yet to hear any difference in sound doing so. Why? Because everything is happening inside the cylinder chamber, not outside.
Is it not really interesting professionals have their choice of any manufacturer out there and yet they still choose to use heads from Remo, Evans, Aquarian, or in some cases, Attack heads, like I use? Attack heads are not as well known and are considered less worthy than other makes. That's unfortunate. I like their brighter tone myself and their prices but, when I am whipping around the set, the difference between single-ply clear Attack and Remo, while noticeable just striking each drum, is lost in the midst of runs, with cymbals clanging, as well. Pitch is what you hear, not the nuances of Mylar the heads are made with. When you begin changing coatings and plies and all, then you really begin changing the sound of the drum. The thicker you go, the more muted the tone. Whether that means ply thickness or coupling, or coatings, the sound will gradually get more muted.
I have mentioned the video put on YT, by Timpano Percussion, where they use 62 different models of snare drum batter heads on one drum, and you can hear what happens. Same with their video on bass drum heads. If you missed that before, here are the links again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq4SNkt53Q0list=PLnpcMWzeo6RDyJqb7OJDvIzRvVWezuscj&index=4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0ekSlGVZoU
I found it interesting the interviewer had no comment or follow-up question for Mason's statement. I'll take that as an acknowledgment of agreement or at least not being willing to challenge Mason's take on the issue, even though Mason plays DW drums, a company with a couple dozen different model lines and shell configurations to choose from, etc., etc.
Am I suggesting someone purchases a beginner's set and fixes it up and shall get something equivalent to a top of the line series kit from any of the companies out there? Absolutely, if good sound is all you are after. BUT, bare in mind, if finishes are important to you, and hardware allowing full-spectrum tone, especially mounting hardware, and you need hardware that is able to be put up and torn down repeatedly, and you want a lot of size options, no. Purchasing a beginner's set of drums and fixing it up is not your answer, unless you go that extra mile for those options and add them yourself but, then you are just spending money for something you can find in levels up the line. Depending on the company, intermediate lines and models may suffice. Maybe not. Depends on what you want and need. Must you spend top dollar for the best sound? No. No such hype can be proven for that, all things being equal when it comes to hardware, etc.
I know how crazy radical that sounds. That's why I made the series of videos. I demonstrate it in various ways.
Like I wrote earlier, #295, there is no such thing as a bad sounding drum because sound is completely subjective. What sounds great to me may not to you, and vice versa. That's a matter of taste. Want ketchup, mustard or mayo on that? Taste is subjective, person to person, food or sound, regardless of restaurant or drum set.
It's your wallet, spend what you like. You cannot prove spending more guarantees the best sound. It may guarantee more inspiration, though, which is also very subjective and personal. Personally, after 57 years with drums and drumming, I'll do my thing on anything you put in front of me. Music moves me more than drums.
Now cymbals...
********************
358. Just Whose Drums, Anyway? - September 20, 2021
There's a guy that trolls me on YT. He's nasty. I have been to his own channel, as well as his personal website to try and understand this guy. I'll be honest and state, I have given up. If he comments on my channel, I just delete it. He is not welcome there. He isn't just negative. He's ugly, and gets that way with others. He loves to agree with people who may disagree with my positions, and I can generally have rational discussion with them. This guy? No.
Sometimes you wonder or see that two people who are "enemies" end up being friends when the circumstances change or rational discussion can take place. I have wondered that about Chris. Not anymore, though. I have come to the conclusion he has some kind of mental illness or something. A snap in the neurons somewhere. A childhood experience that just flips him out over certain things. He cannot be nice. He must be sarcastic and acidic. I don't know what it is.
He incessantly challenges me on the fact that different plywood sounds different. That all the manufacturing ultra, super-hype about proprietary shells and sound is all correct. I'll spare you what he says about me. You would think if he hates what I state that much he would just move along. Nope. He is now attacking me on comments I made on other's channels. Pretty old comments, too. I try to reason with him but, I have come to see it is not possible. He cannot even agree to disagree. He must attack my character, personality, and positions, relentlessly. He has yet to put up a video demonstrating how my position is wrong. I have asked. It is not forthcoming.
Well, watching the Drums Compilations channel, I noticed how many players are using different drums. Now, these videos are collections of things the players have done in just the last couple of years. While some players have changed endorsements in that time, some would have to be changing every few months, based on the videos. Just whose drums are they playing, anyway? Obviously, anything put in front of them for gigs.
A lot of people have endorsements, and some stay with that company their whole career, like Steve Smith and Sonor. Others change, for one reason or another, generally a business reason, not a matter of superior sound. Peter Erskine's move from DW to Tama surprised everyone, especially when he stated he and some other players put different sets in a home, iirc, and they all agreed Tama had the best tone. That's a pretty immense comment. I'd love to have been there to hear what those people heard. Of course, "best" has to have parameters. I don't know what they chose. Sustain? Mix or blend of high and low end frequencies? Brightness? I don't know. Here's something Peter has stated in an interview:
"We did an AB test, well it was more of an A, B, C, D, E, F, G test with every drum set I could get my hands on. Immediately I noticed the STAR drums sounded better and were more fun to play. I was having to dig in with the other drums, but the tonal response for the Tama kit was better. All drums are created equal, but some drums are more equal than others. The Bubinga shells are the thinnest in the Tama line and they're beautifully made. They're handmade in Japan and I'm very fond of Japanese craftsmanship." [editing of the transcript]
https://www.musicradar.com/news/drums/peter-erskine-talks-joining-up-with-tama-615628
"Fun to play" is totally subjective, of course. I have had comments from people telling me the Tama mounting system makes for the best tone in rack toms. I've never seen anything about tone in snare drums, ft, or bd based on how their hardware treats the sound, comparatively speaking.
Erskine went on to state Tama had a better Jazz backline set-up. DW's provisions for players centered more around Rock drummers. So, there was a business decision in there, as well.
The thing is, watching all these players on the Drums Compilation channel using backline kits (rented for the occasion), or using someone else's drum set, and not hearing any difference in their playing, or in the drums, for that matter, I know my position is correct. Any player that loves playing will do their thing on anything put in front of them, and sound like them.
One cannot totally understand Erskine's personal experience, which is somewhat ethereal or supernal, if not esoteric but, the number of pros who can make the same kind of comparisons and don't, shows they are happy with the sound they get, regardless of the couple dozen drum companies out there, as well as all the boutique companies, and they are not subjecting themselves to instruments that are inferior or dramatically different in any way.
That is important. Tens of thousands of kids, hundreds of thousands, and even adults, think of that "dream" set. I used to. Until I began making my own drums and significant facts began to encircle me with every new set I made, I had the whole "dream set" gig in my head, too. You cannot really help it because of the hype created by manufacturers. You read about proprietary drum shells and you just begin to get caught up in it all. The prestige and everything. I have ascended the mountain and made it to the drum set mecca of percussive sound.
Well, it ain't so. I have admitted, often, Bubinga is a hard species of wood and would reflect sound waves and frequencies thrown out by the heads in a greater degree than less hard woods. To a degree that can make it through the surrounding range of frequencies thrown out by a band? Please. Someone show me the video that demonstrates that.
Why won't the drum companies demonstrate the differences between their lines and show all their proprietary hype is legitimate? I ask it all the time. Could anything be more logical? Hit as drum, put it down. Pick up another, one line at a time, and demonstrate the differences? I cannot imagine anything more easy to accomplish. They don't, though. They can't. There will not be enough difference to legitimize the hype. The sound of a drum is the heads, not the shell.
People have asked me, if I did not make drums myself and purchased a set I felt would offer the best overall sound, for me, what would I choose? I have stated it here before. Tama Bubinga. Of course, like I have also stated, Bubinga is now a protected species. Handing over big money for it, without knowing the source of the wood, could be a financial nightmare because the instruments could be seized at the border. These are laws that went into effect 4 or 5 years ago. I have not checked what the current situation is. I just know hard wood reflects a greater range of frequencies and volume. BUT!, not to any real world degree I would be unhappy with any set made of anything out there that is less hard and dense. Nay. Frankly, if Tama did not offer a finish I liked a lot, I'd not be getting Bubinga for a set of drums I'm not really happy looking at.
I have come to see, even if I had the money to purchase toms from top lines from all the major companies and did another test and demonstrated the results, people would still believe the hype.
I know everybody makes great drums, in all model lines. Some lines will always have greater attention to details and you'll pay more for that, and for rack toms, especially, get fuller tone because of better mounting hardware. For me, my eyes and my wallet would have a far bigger influence on a purchase, then proprietary plywood shells.
I know. I state that a lot. To me, based on what I see and hear out there, it bears repeating.
Sorry, Chris (and other detractors). I go with evidence, facts, and physics, not hype and anecdotal commentary, especially nasty commentary.
Play on, brethren. Play on.
Sometimes you wonder or see that two people who are "enemies" end up being friends when the circumstances change or rational discussion can take place. I have wondered that about Chris. Not anymore, though. I have come to the conclusion he has some kind of mental illness or something. A snap in the neurons somewhere. A childhood experience that just flips him out over certain things. He cannot be nice. He must be sarcastic and acidic. I don't know what it is.
He incessantly challenges me on the fact that different plywood sounds different. That all the manufacturing ultra, super-hype about proprietary shells and sound is all correct. I'll spare you what he says about me. You would think if he hates what I state that much he would just move along. Nope. He is now attacking me on comments I made on other's channels. Pretty old comments, too. I try to reason with him but, I have come to see it is not possible. He cannot even agree to disagree. He must attack my character, personality, and positions, relentlessly. He has yet to put up a video demonstrating how my position is wrong. I have asked. It is not forthcoming.
Well, watching the Drums Compilations channel, I noticed how many players are using different drums. Now, these videos are collections of things the players have done in just the last couple of years. While some players have changed endorsements in that time, some would have to be changing every few months, based on the videos. Just whose drums are they playing, anyway? Obviously, anything put in front of them for gigs.
A lot of people have endorsements, and some stay with that company their whole career, like Steve Smith and Sonor. Others change, for one reason or another, generally a business reason, not a matter of superior sound. Peter Erskine's move from DW to Tama surprised everyone, especially when he stated he and some other players put different sets in a home, iirc, and they all agreed Tama had the best tone. That's a pretty immense comment. I'd love to have been there to hear what those people heard. Of course, "best" has to have parameters. I don't know what they chose. Sustain? Mix or blend of high and low end frequencies? Brightness? I don't know. Here's something Peter has stated in an interview:
"We did an AB test, well it was more of an A, B, C, D, E, F, G test with every drum set I could get my hands on. Immediately I noticed the STAR drums sounded better and were more fun to play. I was having to dig in with the other drums, but the tonal response for the Tama kit was better. All drums are created equal, but some drums are more equal than others. The Bubinga shells are the thinnest in the Tama line and they're beautifully made. They're handmade in Japan and I'm very fond of Japanese craftsmanship." [editing of the transcript]
https://www.musicradar.com/news/drums/peter-erskine-talks-joining-up-with-tama-615628
"Fun to play" is totally subjective, of course. I have had comments from people telling me the Tama mounting system makes for the best tone in rack toms. I've never seen anything about tone in snare drums, ft, or bd based on how their hardware treats the sound, comparatively speaking.
Erskine went on to state Tama had a better Jazz backline set-up. DW's provisions for players centered more around Rock drummers. So, there was a business decision in there, as well.
The thing is, watching all these players on the Drums Compilation channel using backline kits (rented for the occasion), or using someone else's drum set, and not hearing any difference in their playing, or in the drums, for that matter, I know my position is correct. Any player that loves playing will do their thing on anything put in front of them, and sound like them.
One cannot totally understand Erskine's personal experience, which is somewhat ethereal or supernal, if not esoteric but, the number of pros who can make the same kind of comparisons and don't, shows they are happy with the sound they get, regardless of the couple dozen drum companies out there, as well as all the boutique companies, and they are not subjecting themselves to instruments that are inferior or dramatically different in any way.
That is important. Tens of thousands of kids, hundreds of thousands, and even adults, think of that "dream" set. I used to. Until I began making my own drums and significant facts began to encircle me with every new set I made, I had the whole "dream set" gig in my head, too. You cannot really help it because of the hype created by manufacturers. You read about proprietary drum shells and you just begin to get caught up in it all. The prestige and everything. I have ascended the mountain and made it to the drum set mecca of percussive sound.
Well, it ain't so. I have admitted, often, Bubinga is a hard species of wood and would reflect sound waves and frequencies thrown out by the heads in a greater degree than less hard woods. To a degree that can make it through the surrounding range of frequencies thrown out by a band? Please. Someone show me the video that demonstrates that.
Why won't the drum companies demonstrate the differences between their lines and show all their proprietary hype is legitimate? I ask it all the time. Could anything be more logical? Hit as drum, put it down. Pick up another, one line at a time, and demonstrate the differences? I cannot imagine anything more easy to accomplish. They don't, though. They can't. There will not be enough difference to legitimize the hype. The sound of a drum is the heads, not the shell.
People have asked me, if I did not make drums myself and purchased a set I felt would offer the best overall sound, for me, what would I choose? I have stated it here before. Tama Bubinga. Of course, like I have also stated, Bubinga is now a protected species. Handing over big money for it, without knowing the source of the wood, could be a financial nightmare because the instruments could be seized at the border. These are laws that went into effect 4 or 5 years ago. I have not checked what the current situation is. I just know hard wood reflects a greater range of frequencies and volume. BUT!, not to any real world degree I would be unhappy with any set made of anything out there that is less hard and dense. Nay. Frankly, if Tama did not offer a finish I liked a lot, I'd not be getting Bubinga for a set of drums I'm not really happy looking at.
I have come to see, even if I had the money to purchase toms from top lines from all the major companies and did another test and demonstrated the results, people would still believe the hype.
I know everybody makes great drums, in all model lines. Some lines will always have greater attention to details and you'll pay more for that, and for rack toms, especially, get fuller tone because of better mounting hardware. For me, my eyes and my wallet would have a far bigger influence on a purchase, then proprietary plywood shells.
I know. I state that a lot. To me, based on what I see and hear out there, it bears repeating.
Sorry, Chris (and other detractors). I go with evidence, facts, and physics, not hype and anecdotal commentary, especially nasty commentary.
Play on, brethren. Play on.
********************
October 20, 2021 - A Detailed Analysis
I got an email notification from YouTube for another comment on my channel. Whoah. It's a long comment and I am going to place it here. I have had a lot of different people, from different professional backgrounds, comment on my video series about hype in the drum manufacturing industry and proprietary shells. This one comes from someone uniquely qualified to offer some insights. I went to his website, and it is obvious his company is a big dog in addressing sound issues in industry and acoustics, noise, and all the rest.
I have edited the comment only in separating sentences and a few typos. Creating my own typos all the time, I know how easy it is to do, and miss. You know what YT comments can be like: one single paragraph and in haste, forgetting to check your spell check, if you have one. Of course, being from the UK, some spellings will be different, by default.
*******************************
"SCENIC ACOUSTIC
I couldn't agree more with REFonDrums. Great videos. Although there were some very small tonal differences they really are not significantly different. It has nothing to do with the mic or the room acoustics. They were all tested under the same conditions and therefore had the same influences from the room modes and from the mic/recording system.
Its to do with the propagation of the acoustic pressure wave in the drum cylinder when it is enclosed at both ends by two skins. Look up closed pipe acoustics on Google for the physics. Basically, the energy is a back and forth between acoustic pressure and particle velocity of the wave.
When the pressure at the skin surface is zero, the partial velocity is maximum, when velocity is zero, the pressure is maximum. When the drum is tuned to its fundamental pitch frequency, a standing wave is formed which bounces from batter skin to resonant skin and this is then reflected with the opposite phase back towards the batter skins, hence the transfer of energy from one state to another.
This fundamental pitch frequency of the drum is inversely proportional to the speed of sound in air divided by the longest wavelength the column of air in the drum shell can accommodate.
The shells also generate waves although these propagate around the circumference of the drum shell. They are higher in frequency than the dominant fundamental pitch produced by the skins in the direction of the impact, and as a result, do not produce enough energy to dominate the modal response of the drum although they do add colouration (timbre).
It should be noted that shell resonances are also significantly damped by hardware. The tone of the drum is dependant on the skins used and the bearing edge.
It stands to reason that the vibratory energy from the drum is going to be dominant in the direction of impact. Also, the skin is the least rigid part of the drum in the direction of impact and therefore has a much larger displacement than any other part of the drum. As the skin has the most displacement the dominant sound wave will be in the direction of impact.
The shell has more inertia than the skin and is, therefore, more rigid. The increased shell stiffness restores the displacement of the shell much quicker than the skin stiffness can restore the skin displacement.
My name is Colin Armstrong. I am a professional acoustic and vibration engineer and I am the Managing Director at Scenic Acoustic and Vibration Engineering Ltd (www.scenicacoustic.com), a leading specialist in industrial, environmental, and architectural sound and vibration engineering and control.
You may ask what my interest is in this topic? Well. Quite simply, I have also played drums for 30yrs. I combined my experience of acoustics, vibration and drumming and set out to design my own bespoke drum kit. The design was based on vibration and acoustic particle velocity and acoustic pressure measurements of the modal responses of various-sized drums shells from different manufacturers (Rogers Big R, Yamaha 7000, Yamaha Stage custom) and various hardware configurations.
During these measurements, we found that the most significant factor affecting drum pitch was indeed the bearing edge shape and angle, and the type of skins used, although some less obvious changes in pitch were also noted due to shell construction and thickness (glue adds viscose damping to the shell which has a small effect on the natural frequency (pitch) of the shell); the mass of the drum hardware (lugs, rims) can also affect the natural frequency of the shell although this is only really noticeable when the shell or rim are impacted rather than the skin. This change in tone may also be attributed to the effect of the mass of the hardware on the skins ring (Diecast hoops sound higher pitch than triple flange).
There are changes to the drum shell resonances and perceived pitch when the drum is impacted on the drum hoops or directly on the shell. The type of material and the thickness of the shell would affect the tone under these conditions. This is because the energy is released over a very short time period as the stick hits the hard surface of the rim or shell. Short impacts unload all the acoustic energy into the drum shell in an instant, which excites the full broadband frequency spectrum. When this happens all the drum modes are excited with equal energy across a wider frequency range and all the axial, tangential and oblique drum modes are excited. This is why rim shots are high in pitch, although still retain the same fundamental undertones. Individual drums often hold their secret in the harmonics released when playing a rim shot.
So in fairness to drum builders, under some impact conditions, there could be a significant difference in the perceived pitch of different drums from different manufacturers when the modes of the drum shell are excited through short impact time rim shots or shell taps.
Having this understanding has allowed Scenic Acoustic to concentrate on the important aspects of the drum design (the bearing edge shape and angle for tone control, shell density (wood choice) for dynamic control, changing attack and sustaining the fundamental modes; the depth for volume (shallower are louder providing bearing edges are correct); the relative mass of the drum hardware; the control of vibration transmission through the hardware; and most importantly the type of skins used to provide a signature sound.
The shell type is probably the least important aspect of the drum design or drum sound. The drum kit we designed here at Scenic Acoustic was built under commission by TIKI Drums here in the UK in 2017.
Thanks to our intuitive modal analysis, mode shape recognition, and design experience and technologies, and to TIKI Drum's outstanding craftsmanship (Hats off to Preston), this kit sounds nothing less than sensational, with a huge dynamic range across the full drum frequency spectrum simply by tuning them to the correct pitch to make the modes sing, or by changing the skins from single-ply to double-ply, or from coated to clear this kit beautifully compliments any music genre, and any drummers ambition for a unique signature sound.
During the design of the specified bearing edges for each drum to get the best seat and natural tone of the drums. The depth of all the shells are shallow (Depth x Diameter= Toms - 7x10", 8.5x12", & 10x13", Hanging Floor Toms - 11.5x14", & 14x16", and the bass drum is deeper than standard 8x20", [18x20?] this is to allow for a lower fundamental tone as the extra depth supports a longer wavelength. All shells are 7 ply Maple.
The finish is a vibrant orange with black nickel hardware, all mounted on black nickel Rims System. The same Modal Analysis, and Mode Shape Analysis technology and design criteria were used for all drum sizes to best match the desired modal response for each drum to the desired sound of the player (Me in this case).
Because of our success with this project we are now expanding and offering this as a service to serious musicians who want to achieve the very best out of their equipment and themselves. The quality of components is more important and manufacturers all know this. This is why they all have different designed lug types and sizes. DW for example has a fantastic range of drums. They manage to get really low-frequency drum sounds. This has more to do with the bearing edge design, the mass of their hardware, and the viscose damping ratios of the glues they have used rather than the drum shell material and depths. Also, note that DW produces a lot of shallower drum shell ranges. This improves their dynamic range.
As mentioned above, the high energy, short impact time rim shots and shell taps will excite the shell modes into vibration. These modes will be affected by the shell properties such as shell tension (thick shell high tension when steam bent, lower tension when staved or ply is in diagonally layers, or cross-layered vertical/horizontal layers, etc.
I hope this has helped to support the REFon Drums argument, and help to explain the physics behind the arguments made.
I have proof that shell type and depth do not affect the fundamental pitch. You only have to listen to my kit to experience the difference in drum technology and what is achievable. Because of our success with this project we are now expanding and offering this as a service to serious musicians who want to achieve the very best out of their equipment and themselves. If you are interested in our bespoke design services to help you find your desired drum sound please feel free to contact me at Scenic Acoustic and Vibration Engineering Ltd - [email protected] (www.scenicacoustic.com).
We would love to help you find your bespoke signature drum sound. Thanks for reading. Colin Armstrong"
************************************
I haven't replied to Mr. Armstrong yet but, will, after posting this.
I found a small inconsistency in his stating drum depth does not affect tone/pitch, when he then states his own drums use a deeper than standard (18?) bass drum to achieve a lower fundamental tone. Unless I am just misunderstanding his verbiage, in my own experience, deeper shells tend to slow down the air column enough to warrant the tubby tone in smaller toms, though the difference between an 8x12 and 10x12 is minor. 12x12 is far more noticeable but, we have to remember rebound qualities in play when you go deeper with a shell. The air column moves more slowly back and forth, and regardless of actual speeds involved for sound and the nuances created, our hands can sense differences in stick response off the heads.
I believe it was DW that began offering slightly more shallow "floor" toms, which had been square for decades up to that time, or close to it: 14x14, 16x16, 16x18 and 18x20. Today, 12x14 is common, as is 14x16. In my case, you know my favorites are the same dimension configurations as my toms. I like the cascading sound and feel of the drums much better.
His comments on DW are not something I endorse or detract from, and not having heard his own drums, based on the science and experience he puts into it, I refrain from comment there, as well. His own channel has no content, which seems like the obvious place to showcase his drum set. Nor can I find any info on his drums, beyond what he states here. The company website is impressive, nonetheless.
I appreciate his comments. As you know, I am not one to sit behind the finding of detailed spectral analysis to define the sound of drums. If one needs such devices to prove an aural point, one has gone way past practical use of the instrument in the context of a band, where nothing of such details will really be heard. I've seen these attempts as marketing and not much more. In Mr. Armstrong's case, I admit my mind is definitely scratched to hear any significant differences based on the "science."
I look forward to hearing his drums, in some format or other. Now to see if I can connect with him. If I develop further info to share, I'll place it in this blog entry.
******************************************************************
I sent Colin an email and he graciously replied and sent me some pics of his kit, which is really striking looking with the orange shells and black hardware.
He mentioned something in his email that I have mentioned before but, only in a cursory way, and that is room acoustics. Human ears cannot just hear the sound of anything by itself in a closed environment. Every room has an effect on the sound waves and how our ears hear things. Room dimensions, room surfaces, proximity to walls, etc., all have an effect on sound we hear.
I have mentioned numerous times the sound of a drum set, mic'd up, in a huge colosseum or civic center, arena, etc., offers no realistic elements of how the drums actually sound. There is no way an audience can really know what a drum set sounds like up close and personal in such an environment, let alone the plywood the shells are made with. The mics, PA system, including all the various sound sculpturing electronics, and the room acoustics totally overshadow details of what the drum set literally sounds like.
You can really hear this phenomenon from drums set up outside. The first time I set up a drum set outside, I was shocked at how dead they sounded, and the actual playing surfaces changed because nothing was coming back at my ears, like inside a room, or in my case at the time, a concrete basement, where sound waves are bouncing around all over the place. I felt like I was playing on pillows. It's an important point to consider when consumers watch videos of drum demos. Rooms matter more than we might think.
As Colin gets into it more, he'll be taking time to put the results of his knowledge of acoustics and all, out there for people to see and hear. I wish him well.
I have edited the comment only in separating sentences and a few typos. Creating my own typos all the time, I know how easy it is to do, and miss. You know what YT comments can be like: one single paragraph and in haste, forgetting to check your spell check, if you have one. Of course, being from the UK, some spellings will be different, by default.
*******************************
"SCENIC ACOUSTIC
I couldn't agree more with REFonDrums. Great videos. Although there were some very small tonal differences they really are not significantly different. It has nothing to do with the mic or the room acoustics. They were all tested under the same conditions and therefore had the same influences from the room modes and from the mic/recording system.
Its to do with the propagation of the acoustic pressure wave in the drum cylinder when it is enclosed at both ends by two skins. Look up closed pipe acoustics on Google for the physics. Basically, the energy is a back and forth between acoustic pressure and particle velocity of the wave.
When the pressure at the skin surface is zero, the partial velocity is maximum, when velocity is zero, the pressure is maximum. When the drum is tuned to its fundamental pitch frequency, a standing wave is formed which bounces from batter skin to resonant skin and this is then reflected with the opposite phase back towards the batter skins, hence the transfer of energy from one state to another.
This fundamental pitch frequency of the drum is inversely proportional to the speed of sound in air divided by the longest wavelength the column of air in the drum shell can accommodate.
The shells also generate waves although these propagate around the circumference of the drum shell. They are higher in frequency than the dominant fundamental pitch produced by the skins in the direction of the impact, and as a result, do not produce enough energy to dominate the modal response of the drum although they do add colouration (timbre).
It should be noted that shell resonances are also significantly damped by hardware. The tone of the drum is dependant on the skins used and the bearing edge.
It stands to reason that the vibratory energy from the drum is going to be dominant in the direction of impact. Also, the skin is the least rigid part of the drum in the direction of impact and therefore has a much larger displacement than any other part of the drum. As the skin has the most displacement the dominant sound wave will be in the direction of impact.
The shell has more inertia than the skin and is, therefore, more rigid. The increased shell stiffness restores the displacement of the shell much quicker than the skin stiffness can restore the skin displacement.
My name is Colin Armstrong. I am a professional acoustic and vibration engineer and I am the Managing Director at Scenic Acoustic and Vibration Engineering Ltd (www.scenicacoustic.com), a leading specialist in industrial, environmental, and architectural sound and vibration engineering and control.
You may ask what my interest is in this topic? Well. Quite simply, I have also played drums for 30yrs. I combined my experience of acoustics, vibration and drumming and set out to design my own bespoke drum kit. The design was based on vibration and acoustic particle velocity and acoustic pressure measurements of the modal responses of various-sized drums shells from different manufacturers (Rogers Big R, Yamaha 7000, Yamaha Stage custom) and various hardware configurations.
During these measurements, we found that the most significant factor affecting drum pitch was indeed the bearing edge shape and angle, and the type of skins used, although some less obvious changes in pitch were also noted due to shell construction and thickness (glue adds viscose damping to the shell which has a small effect on the natural frequency (pitch) of the shell); the mass of the drum hardware (lugs, rims) can also affect the natural frequency of the shell although this is only really noticeable when the shell or rim are impacted rather than the skin. This change in tone may also be attributed to the effect of the mass of the hardware on the skins ring (Diecast hoops sound higher pitch than triple flange).
There are changes to the drum shell resonances and perceived pitch when the drum is impacted on the drum hoops or directly on the shell. The type of material and the thickness of the shell would affect the tone under these conditions. This is because the energy is released over a very short time period as the stick hits the hard surface of the rim or shell. Short impacts unload all the acoustic energy into the drum shell in an instant, which excites the full broadband frequency spectrum. When this happens all the drum modes are excited with equal energy across a wider frequency range and all the axial, tangential and oblique drum modes are excited. This is why rim shots are high in pitch, although still retain the same fundamental undertones. Individual drums often hold their secret in the harmonics released when playing a rim shot.
So in fairness to drum builders, under some impact conditions, there could be a significant difference in the perceived pitch of different drums from different manufacturers when the modes of the drum shell are excited through short impact time rim shots or shell taps.
Having this understanding has allowed Scenic Acoustic to concentrate on the important aspects of the drum design (the bearing edge shape and angle for tone control, shell density (wood choice) for dynamic control, changing attack and sustaining the fundamental modes; the depth for volume (shallower are louder providing bearing edges are correct); the relative mass of the drum hardware; the control of vibration transmission through the hardware; and most importantly the type of skins used to provide a signature sound.
The shell type is probably the least important aspect of the drum design or drum sound. The drum kit we designed here at Scenic Acoustic was built under commission by TIKI Drums here in the UK in 2017.
Thanks to our intuitive modal analysis, mode shape recognition, and design experience and technologies, and to TIKI Drum's outstanding craftsmanship (Hats off to Preston), this kit sounds nothing less than sensational, with a huge dynamic range across the full drum frequency spectrum simply by tuning them to the correct pitch to make the modes sing, or by changing the skins from single-ply to double-ply, or from coated to clear this kit beautifully compliments any music genre, and any drummers ambition for a unique signature sound.
During the design of the specified bearing edges for each drum to get the best seat and natural tone of the drums. The depth of all the shells are shallow (Depth x Diameter= Toms - 7x10", 8.5x12", & 10x13", Hanging Floor Toms - 11.5x14", & 14x16", and the bass drum is deeper than standard 8x20", [18x20?] this is to allow for a lower fundamental tone as the extra depth supports a longer wavelength. All shells are 7 ply Maple.
The finish is a vibrant orange with black nickel hardware, all mounted on black nickel Rims System. The same Modal Analysis, and Mode Shape Analysis technology and design criteria were used for all drum sizes to best match the desired modal response for each drum to the desired sound of the player (Me in this case).
Because of our success with this project we are now expanding and offering this as a service to serious musicians who want to achieve the very best out of their equipment and themselves. The quality of components is more important and manufacturers all know this. This is why they all have different designed lug types and sizes. DW for example has a fantastic range of drums. They manage to get really low-frequency drum sounds. This has more to do with the bearing edge design, the mass of their hardware, and the viscose damping ratios of the glues they have used rather than the drum shell material and depths. Also, note that DW produces a lot of shallower drum shell ranges. This improves their dynamic range.
As mentioned above, the high energy, short impact time rim shots and shell taps will excite the shell modes into vibration. These modes will be affected by the shell properties such as shell tension (thick shell high tension when steam bent, lower tension when staved or ply is in diagonally layers, or cross-layered vertical/horizontal layers, etc.
I hope this has helped to support the REFon Drums argument, and help to explain the physics behind the arguments made.
I have proof that shell type and depth do not affect the fundamental pitch. You only have to listen to my kit to experience the difference in drum technology and what is achievable. Because of our success with this project we are now expanding and offering this as a service to serious musicians who want to achieve the very best out of their equipment and themselves. If you are interested in our bespoke design services to help you find your desired drum sound please feel free to contact me at Scenic Acoustic and Vibration Engineering Ltd - [email protected] (www.scenicacoustic.com).
We would love to help you find your bespoke signature drum sound. Thanks for reading. Colin Armstrong"
************************************
I haven't replied to Mr. Armstrong yet but, will, after posting this.
I found a small inconsistency in his stating drum depth does not affect tone/pitch, when he then states his own drums use a deeper than standard (18?) bass drum to achieve a lower fundamental tone. Unless I am just misunderstanding his verbiage, in my own experience, deeper shells tend to slow down the air column enough to warrant the tubby tone in smaller toms, though the difference between an 8x12 and 10x12 is minor. 12x12 is far more noticeable but, we have to remember rebound qualities in play when you go deeper with a shell. The air column moves more slowly back and forth, and regardless of actual speeds involved for sound and the nuances created, our hands can sense differences in stick response off the heads.
I believe it was DW that began offering slightly more shallow "floor" toms, which had been square for decades up to that time, or close to it: 14x14, 16x16, 16x18 and 18x20. Today, 12x14 is common, as is 14x16. In my case, you know my favorites are the same dimension configurations as my toms. I like the cascading sound and feel of the drums much better.
His comments on DW are not something I endorse or detract from, and not having heard his own drums, based on the science and experience he puts into it, I refrain from comment there, as well. His own channel has no content, which seems like the obvious place to showcase his drum set. Nor can I find any info on his drums, beyond what he states here. The company website is impressive, nonetheless.
I appreciate his comments. As you know, I am not one to sit behind the finding of detailed spectral analysis to define the sound of drums. If one needs such devices to prove an aural point, one has gone way past practical use of the instrument in the context of a band, where nothing of such details will really be heard. I've seen these attempts as marketing and not much more. In Mr. Armstrong's case, I admit my mind is definitely scratched to hear any significant differences based on the "science."
I look forward to hearing his drums, in some format or other. Now to see if I can connect with him. If I develop further info to share, I'll place it in this blog entry.
******************************************************************
I sent Colin an email and he graciously replied and sent me some pics of his kit, which is really striking looking with the orange shells and black hardware.
He mentioned something in his email that I have mentioned before but, only in a cursory way, and that is room acoustics. Human ears cannot just hear the sound of anything by itself in a closed environment. Every room has an effect on the sound waves and how our ears hear things. Room dimensions, room surfaces, proximity to walls, etc., all have an effect on sound we hear.
I have mentioned numerous times the sound of a drum set, mic'd up, in a huge colosseum or civic center, arena, etc., offers no realistic elements of how the drums actually sound. There is no way an audience can really know what a drum set sounds like up close and personal in such an environment, let alone the plywood the shells are made with. The mics, PA system, including all the various sound sculpturing electronics, and the room acoustics totally overshadow details of what the drum set literally sounds like.
You can really hear this phenomenon from drums set up outside. The first time I set up a drum set outside, I was shocked at how dead they sounded, and the actual playing surfaces changed because nothing was coming back at my ears, like inside a room, or in my case at the time, a concrete basement, where sound waves are bouncing around all over the place. I felt like I was playing on pillows. It's an important point to consider when consumers watch videos of drum demos. Rooms matter more than we might think.
As Colin gets into it more, he'll be taking time to put the results of his knowledge of acoustics and all, out there for people to see and hear. I wish him well.
*******************
404. Okay, Back to Drums - November 2, 2021
I think I have really reached a point where I see, I literally see the divide in this world between those with common sense and those without it. It does not matter which subject is on the table. Critical thinking, logic, common sense, is either employed or non-existent, regardless of the issue.
Someone sent me an email this morning about a new law in Philadelphia taking away traffic signs and stop signs because they are racist. ?!?! You cannot make this stuff up.
I was replying to a comment on my YT channel and saw a video in the sidebar I thought I'd check out. It was a Nashville drummer comparing Ludwig drum sets. He mentions he does Country and R&R gigs and recordings. In his opening comments he mentioned how different these Ludwig sets sound. Now, bear in mind, this is a comparison video about drums, specifically shells, and how they affect sound; in this case the shell materials and the bearing edges, is what he wanted to emphasize. Then, as if it has no bearing on the comparison, at all, he tells viewers the sizes of the drums are different, the bass drum muffling is different, and the heads on the kits are different. ???
I see this over and over and over in such videos, even videos from drum shops that do comparison videos. "We used these heads because..." and they proceed to tell us how the low end was changed, or whatever.
The very essence of a comparison is to make as many things in the comparison as equal as possible. In the case of comparing drums: same sizes, same heads, same room, same mics and if mounting and lugs and hoops are significantly different, so be it but, they have to be mentioned as artifacts that can make a difference in final results.
I have shown bearing edges do not make significant differences that can be ascertained in any dramatic way when it comes to playing a full set of drums with cymbals and all, especially in the context of a band. Just listening to drums-only shows so little tonal variation it staggers the mind how the subject of bearing edges could have possibly become as big as it is. Add in the live sound system or studio equipment, and everything becomes a matter of electronics. Whatever acoustic properties a drum might have, can be so manipulated and morphed, the same sized drum from every category, from every company on the planet will make, literally no major differences live or on a recording.
It is amazing to see the number of young players asking what to do to get such and such, from so and so's bass drum sound, and then find out an edrum patch was used to augment the recording. Next to nothing you hear on a recording, I'll even go so far as to say nothing of the drum set's acoustic properties are the final thing you hear on a recording, with the possible exception of drums on a Jazz recording but, even then, things are manipulated by just mics, reverb, compression, and final mastering. All of that is an artform, in and of itself.
Go back into the 1950s and you'll hear drums sounding like whatever drum set was used and heard in the studio. Even back then, before all the electronic wizardry came along; microphones affect tone, rooms affect tone, and player sticks and touch affect tone, and obviously stereo systems affect tone and human ears affect tone, person to person. The variables are many.
At least, as a standard, legitimate comparison, if one wants it to be real, make all things equal, as much as possible, or no such "comparison" is made, as far as what drum shells may do to sound.
Would drummer's themselves, consider a test of speed between vehicles legitimate, if a truck was placed next to a dragster, just because they had the same engines in them? If you want to say engines affect speed, you put different engines in the exact same model vehicles.
"All things being equal." That is the bottom line for comparing anything, including drums. When it comes to comparing the proclaimed affects of drum shells - Same sizes, same heads, same hoops, same mounting, same mics, same positions, same room, same recording equipment, same player, same sticks.
Someone sent me an email this morning about a new law in Philadelphia taking away traffic signs and stop signs because they are racist. ?!?! You cannot make this stuff up.
I was replying to a comment on my YT channel and saw a video in the sidebar I thought I'd check out. It was a Nashville drummer comparing Ludwig drum sets. He mentions he does Country and R&R gigs and recordings. In his opening comments he mentioned how different these Ludwig sets sound. Now, bear in mind, this is a comparison video about drums, specifically shells, and how they affect sound; in this case the shell materials and the bearing edges, is what he wanted to emphasize. Then, as if it has no bearing on the comparison, at all, he tells viewers the sizes of the drums are different, the bass drum muffling is different, and the heads on the kits are different. ???
I see this over and over and over in such videos, even videos from drum shops that do comparison videos. "We used these heads because..." and they proceed to tell us how the low end was changed, or whatever.
The very essence of a comparison is to make as many things in the comparison as equal as possible. In the case of comparing drums: same sizes, same heads, same room, same mics and if mounting and lugs and hoops are significantly different, so be it but, they have to be mentioned as artifacts that can make a difference in final results.
I have shown bearing edges do not make significant differences that can be ascertained in any dramatic way when it comes to playing a full set of drums with cymbals and all, especially in the context of a band. Just listening to drums-only shows so little tonal variation it staggers the mind how the subject of bearing edges could have possibly become as big as it is. Add in the live sound system or studio equipment, and everything becomes a matter of electronics. Whatever acoustic properties a drum might have, can be so manipulated and morphed, the same sized drum from every category, from every company on the planet will make, literally no major differences live or on a recording.
It is amazing to see the number of young players asking what to do to get such and such, from so and so's bass drum sound, and then find out an edrum patch was used to augment the recording. Next to nothing you hear on a recording, I'll even go so far as to say nothing of the drum set's acoustic properties are the final thing you hear on a recording, with the possible exception of drums on a Jazz recording but, even then, things are manipulated by just mics, reverb, compression, and final mastering. All of that is an artform, in and of itself.
Go back into the 1950s and you'll hear drums sounding like whatever drum set was used and heard in the studio. Even back then, before all the electronic wizardry came along; microphones affect tone, rooms affect tone, and player sticks and touch affect tone, and obviously stereo systems affect tone and human ears affect tone, person to person. The variables are many.
At least, as a standard, legitimate comparison, if one wants it to be real, make all things equal, as much as possible, or no such "comparison" is made, as far as what drum shells may do to sound.
Would drummer's themselves, consider a test of speed between vehicles legitimate, if a truck was placed next to a dragster, just because they had the same engines in them? If you want to say engines affect speed, you put different engines in the exact same model vehicles.
"All things being equal." That is the bottom line for comparing anything, including drums. When it comes to comparing the proclaimed affects of drum shells - Same sizes, same heads, same hoops, same mounting, same mics, same positions, same room, same recording equipment, same player, same sticks.
********************
November 14, 2021 - Depth and Density
One of the things about the differences in snare drums, not so much sound but, feel, is something not often brought into the drum shell discussion. There's a science, physics-thing going on there, that can play an important role in why someone may like one drum over another.
Obviously things like the tension of the wires against the snare head plays a significant part, especially involving rolls and such. Each player has a "zone" that they like, where the snares are in a space of tension that makes the drum easy for them to play, plus the 'snap' or crispness of sound get in there and is balanced differently for each player.
We have all heard zones we'd never feel right with, too tight or too loose. Loose wires make a drum easy to play but, the slack may sound more like a baby rattle than crunching potato chips. Tight wires can create a great "pop" but, the drum can feel choked with the wires too tight against the head. On the other hand some music or songs might benefit from those sounds and players love the feel, as well.
Hoops affect the feel of rim shots and can add a tone some like more than others. 1.6, 2.3, 3.0, triple flange, stick saver, straight hoops for claws, die cast, all in steel, brass or aluminum. Plywood or solid shaped blocks with joints are the general pair of wood hoops... lots of choices of wood species. I prefer wood hoops. If I use metal I tend to like stick savers. The kind of sticks a player uses gets into that discussion, too. Triple flange hoops eat my maple sticks to bits in no time. I have never had or tried cast hoops because I know my softer sticks will get demolished. They do tend to focus or dry out the tone from the heads, as metal head hoops meet the more beefy die cast metal. Not liking a very ringy snare drum, I'd appreciate that effect but, not at the sacrifice of my sticks.
How many tension rods, make a difference. I recorded with a student line 5x14 chrome over steel drum with 6 lugs. The drum just had no life to it. I made it through the session and we made our first Miledge Muzic recording from it because the music had character and great dynamics and stuff, and nobody would know the struggles I had doing my thing on that drum. I have played 13" drums for at least 25 years and prefer 10 lugs providing a certain tension and feel off the batter head. Some drums work okay with 8. I have made them when I couldn't find any 10 lug hoops. It's just easier to crank the batter head with 10 lugs than 8, for the tension I prefer. There are 14" drums out there using 12 lugs, and some players love them. I've never tried one, and have yet to find 12 lug hoops for sale from drum parts merchants to make one.
Having played 13" drums for so long, playing on a 14 feels like a pillow. I can get used to it. I only own one 14" drum, one I purchased. I like it but, always go back to 13's.
The discussion of shells and sound, for me, as you know, is rather moot. I can generally get any material to sound like any other material when the heads are tensioned where I like them. I have shown that on my YT video series on shells, #12 and 13. What nuances of sound that may exist would never be discerned on a recording or live in a band. If I mess around with the tension of the heads, tighter/looser, especially looser, more character of shell material may enter in but, drum to drum, if all the heads are tensioned to those same parameters, they all sound so close, I just stopped making snare drums.
Shells can affect feel though. Shock waves, the reaction of the air column in the cylinder, is affected by shell depth and density. My first real snare drum was a 3 1/2x14 Ludwig Jazz model. I used it for quite some time, learning to play, until I got my first 5x14 Ludwig Supraphonic, and then a 6 1/2x14 which became my workhorse. I also used an Acrolite in a club band I was in. I never got into wood snares as I got older though. I liked the brightness of metal. Then I discovered, making stave shell drums, I can use thick hardwoods that end up having the same tone as metal. I was shocked when that first revelation hit me. Plus, on recordings in my younger days, I never realized players using typical plywood snare drums, also tensioned the heads that made for a more boxy, warmer tone and I just associated that with wood drums and just stayed away from them. When I began making my own drums, I found out even plywood snare drums can get so close to metal, no differences can be discerned.
Back to the feel because of the movement of the air column and shock wave moving inside the shell. A 3.5" depth can feel so much different than 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, etc., regardless of material, I just liked the feel of deeper drums. Some players like really tight heads and shallow depths. They get a comfortable rebound for them, and away they go.
I made a 3.5x15 drum back in the 90s, from a piece of shell left over in making a tom. Man, that drum felt good to play. How? The 3.5" depth was off set by the 15" diameter and using regular 8 lug hoops, I could only get the tension just so tight all the way around the drum but, it just worked out nicely. I need to try that again with a shell piece I've had for years. I sold that drum to a guy who was amazed at the feel and sound of the drum.
That would not be a drum I'd use behind my full set. With regular metal or wood hoops hoops it would be around 16" wide and with my plywood hoops, around 17.5" wide and create a lot of set-up problems but, on a smaller kit...
Right now I'm making a stacked plywood ring shell, 8.25 x 13. It will tension the same as the rest of the set, both heads at the same time, and I am curious if the extra depth will improve the feel. For awhile, I was using a 10x13 Keller maple shell and I really liked that drum. I think I let it go, back in the 90s, with a set I sold. We'll see how the 8.25 works, with 5/8" thick rings.
Butt end plywood is very hard, and that's why many wood hoops are configured that way. On the stacked ring set, I'm just using regular 3/4" thick, flat hoops on toms but, I added a 1/2" piece of Walnut as a stick buffer on the 5.5 x 13 I have used. I like that snare but, want to see if the shock wave and movement of the air column between the heads is made less restrictive by increasing the depth 3." I'm sure it will be but, perhaps too much? I'll find out. I'll be using a Maple stick buffer this time.
The concussion waves created upon stick impact move instantly to the snare head and back and will move until dissipation into the shell wall or just loss of energy between the heads. The more dense the material, the more activity inside the shell which affects how rebound can feel.
There's also the mind. A harder or softer sounding drum can cause the brain to send out messages, based on prior experience and memory, which affects the nerves in your hand. It especially noticeable with electronic drums. The feel of a pad can seem to change when turning the knob to bring up different sounding instruments. The same can happen with acoustic drums. The sound can affect the feel. If feel is your thing, shell material can make a difference in playing snare drums.
Wire tension, number of lugs, the style of hoops, shell depth and density, and of course, the type of heads used, all go into the mix of how a snare drum feels when tracking rudiments and lighter or heavier ghost notes, which is what I do a lot in my style of play. It's the same for players doing 2 and 4 all night, as well.
Like I stated on the videos, some players go for a sound, some for feel, some for a balance between the two, swinging towards one or the other. My goal; swinging more towards feel. Just an 1/8 of turn on each lug can make a big difference in feel for me. Regardless of sound, I need to be able to get that right rebound feel or I'm just not comfortable.
The way sound waves, shock/concussion waves and the air column move around inside a shallow drum, as most snares are compared to toms of the same diameter, can be greatly affected by shell material, which can affect how a drum feels, based on your style of play.
Something to keep in mind when shopping for your next drum.
Obviously things like the tension of the wires against the snare head plays a significant part, especially involving rolls and such. Each player has a "zone" that they like, where the snares are in a space of tension that makes the drum easy for them to play, plus the 'snap' or crispness of sound get in there and is balanced differently for each player.
We have all heard zones we'd never feel right with, too tight or too loose. Loose wires make a drum easy to play but, the slack may sound more like a baby rattle than crunching potato chips. Tight wires can create a great "pop" but, the drum can feel choked with the wires too tight against the head. On the other hand some music or songs might benefit from those sounds and players love the feel, as well.
Hoops affect the feel of rim shots and can add a tone some like more than others. 1.6, 2.3, 3.0, triple flange, stick saver, straight hoops for claws, die cast, all in steel, brass or aluminum. Plywood or solid shaped blocks with joints are the general pair of wood hoops... lots of choices of wood species. I prefer wood hoops. If I use metal I tend to like stick savers. The kind of sticks a player uses gets into that discussion, too. Triple flange hoops eat my maple sticks to bits in no time. I have never had or tried cast hoops because I know my softer sticks will get demolished. They do tend to focus or dry out the tone from the heads, as metal head hoops meet the more beefy die cast metal. Not liking a very ringy snare drum, I'd appreciate that effect but, not at the sacrifice of my sticks.
How many tension rods, make a difference. I recorded with a student line 5x14 chrome over steel drum with 6 lugs. The drum just had no life to it. I made it through the session and we made our first Miledge Muzic recording from it because the music had character and great dynamics and stuff, and nobody would know the struggles I had doing my thing on that drum. I have played 13" drums for at least 25 years and prefer 10 lugs providing a certain tension and feel off the batter head. Some drums work okay with 8. I have made them when I couldn't find any 10 lug hoops. It's just easier to crank the batter head with 10 lugs than 8, for the tension I prefer. There are 14" drums out there using 12 lugs, and some players love them. I've never tried one, and have yet to find 12 lug hoops for sale from drum parts merchants to make one.
Having played 13" drums for so long, playing on a 14 feels like a pillow. I can get used to it. I only own one 14" drum, one I purchased. I like it but, always go back to 13's.
The discussion of shells and sound, for me, as you know, is rather moot. I can generally get any material to sound like any other material when the heads are tensioned where I like them. I have shown that on my YT video series on shells, #12 and 13. What nuances of sound that may exist would never be discerned on a recording or live in a band. If I mess around with the tension of the heads, tighter/looser, especially looser, more character of shell material may enter in but, drum to drum, if all the heads are tensioned to those same parameters, they all sound so close, I just stopped making snare drums.
Shells can affect feel though. Shock waves, the reaction of the air column in the cylinder, is affected by shell depth and density. My first real snare drum was a 3 1/2x14 Ludwig Jazz model. I used it for quite some time, learning to play, until I got my first 5x14 Ludwig Supraphonic, and then a 6 1/2x14 which became my workhorse. I also used an Acrolite in a club band I was in. I never got into wood snares as I got older though. I liked the brightness of metal. Then I discovered, making stave shell drums, I can use thick hardwoods that end up having the same tone as metal. I was shocked when that first revelation hit me. Plus, on recordings in my younger days, I never realized players using typical plywood snare drums, also tensioned the heads that made for a more boxy, warmer tone and I just associated that with wood drums and just stayed away from them. When I began making my own drums, I found out even plywood snare drums can get so close to metal, no differences can be discerned.
Back to the feel because of the movement of the air column and shock wave moving inside the shell. A 3.5" depth can feel so much different than 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, etc., regardless of material, I just liked the feel of deeper drums. Some players like really tight heads and shallow depths. They get a comfortable rebound for them, and away they go.
I made a 3.5x15 drum back in the 90s, from a piece of shell left over in making a tom. Man, that drum felt good to play. How? The 3.5" depth was off set by the 15" diameter and using regular 8 lug hoops, I could only get the tension just so tight all the way around the drum but, it just worked out nicely. I need to try that again with a shell piece I've had for years. I sold that drum to a guy who was amazed at the feel and sound of the drum.
That would not be a drum I'd use behind my full set. With regular metal or wood hoops hoops it would be around 16" wide and with my plywood hoops, around 17.5" wide and create a lot of set-up problems but, on a smaller kit...
Right now I'm making a stacked plywood ring shell, 8.25 x 13. It will tension the same as the rest of the set, both heads at the same time, and I am curious if the extra depth will improve the feel. For awhile, I was using a 10x13 Keller maple shell and I really liked that drum. I think I let it go, back in the 90s, with a set I sold. We'll see how the 8.25 works, with 5/8" thick rings.
Butt end plywood is very hard, and that's why many wood hoops are configured that way. On the stacked ring set, I'm just using regular 3/4" thick, flat hoops on toms but, I added a 1/2" piece of Walnut as a stick buffer on the 5.5 x 13 I have used. I like that snare but, want to see if the shock wave and movement of the air column between the heads is made less restrictive by increasing the depth 3." I'm sure it will be but, perhaps too much? I'll find out. I'll be using a Maple stick buffer this time.
The concussion waves created upon stick impact move instantly to the snare head and back and will move until dissipation into the shell wall or just loss of energy between the heads. The more dense the material, the more activity inside the shell which affects how rebound can feel.
There's also the mind. A harder or softer sounding drum can cause the brain to send out messages, based on prior experience and memory, which affects the nerves in your hand. It especially noticeable with electronic drums. The feel of a pad can seem to change when turning the knob to bring up different sounding instruments. The same can happen with acoustic drums. The sound can affect the feel. If feel is your thing, shell material can make a difference in playing snare drums.
Wire tension, number of lugs, the style of hoops, shell depth and density, and of course, the type of heads used, all go into the mix of how a snare drum feels when tracking rudiments and lighter or heavier ghost notes, which is what I do a lot in my style of play. It's the same for players doing 2 and 4 all night, as well.
Like I stated on the videos, some players go for a sound, some for feel, some for a balance between the two, swinging towards one or the other. My goal; swinging more towards feel. Just an 1/8 of turn on each lug can make a big difference in feel for me. Regardless of sound, I need to be able to get that right rebound feel or I'm just not comfortable.
The way sound waves, shock/concussion waves and the air column move around inside a shallow drum, as most snares are compared to toms of the same diameter, can be greatly affected by shell material, which can affect how a drum feels, based on your style of play.
Something to keep in mind when shopping for your next drum.
This is an addendum to the last post. Above you see a snare I had for awhile. I showed it in the drum shell Hype series, #13. It's one of three drums I made for the video. It's the PVC drum. 6.5 x 13. It had black hardware in the video, which was all I had to work with when I made the drum but, I found some good prices for some new hardware at Drum Factory Direct, and I like the look of the brass a lot more. The finish is just an experiment with sparkles I got from an online bulk merchant. I got different colors and flake sizes, mixed them all up and put a bunch of layers on the drum, and then sprayed a whole can of high gloss over it all. It's anything but, smooth. Looks pretty cool, though. I like it.
The sound? Well, as you can hear in the video it isn't really any different than the metal or wood snares I used. Someone commented they were surprised at the pop it has. Consider the thickness and weight of the material. Half inch thick PVC. It's a heavier drum than a wood or sheet metal counterpart. I was surprised how heavy it is when I got the piece of PVC to cut it from. It's 12" pipe but, that's the inside measurement. The half inch thick shell makes it a 13. Just under 13, which is just right for seating heads.
The sound? Well, as you can hear in the video it isn't really any different than the metal or wood snares I used. Someone commented they were surprised at the pop it has. Consider the thickness and weight of the material. Half inch thick PVC. It's a heavier drum than a wood or sheet metal counterpart. I was surprised how heavy it is when I got the piece of PVC to cut it from. It's 12" pipe but, that's the inside measurement. The half inch thick shell makes it a 13. Just under 13, which is just right for seating heads.
As you can see I just made a full 45 inside cut and left a 1/16" flat surface the head sits on. The pipe is not perfectly round. After all, it's just meant to carry liquids, not become a drum so, the bearing edge is not perfect but, the heads seat well, and that's what matters.
While the sound is comparable to any metal or wood share I have, the feel... ah, that's the "gut punch" feel I get from my Ipe shell, which is 1/2" thick, as well, and Ironwood is very heavy stuff.
Density causes a problem for sound waves and the concussion wave to get into the material and move it. For a thin-walled shell, it's easy. On a thicker shell the waves are contained more and an energy seems to build up and just bust out and you can feel it in your gut on rim shots, and even just center strikes on the head.
If I under-crank or over-crank the heads, the punch diminishes some but, thankfully the sweet spot for the effect is my rebound range, which is medium-high. Of course, tension descriptions are pretty subjective, player to player. That's because so much feel is involved and everybody's hand's and sticks change the equation.
The drum ends up being fun to play, for me. I'd rather have ten lugs but, I can make 8 work.
So, think about shell depth and density next time you think about getting another snare drum, if the feel is as important as the pitch/sound. It's all part of the equation.
Up next is the 8.50 x 13 stacked plywood.
While the sound is comparable to any metal or wood share I have, the feel... ah, that's the "gut punch" feel I get from my Ipe shell, which is 1/2" thick, as well, and Ironwood is very heavy stuff.
Density causes a problem for sound waves and the concussion wave to get into the material and move it. For a thin-walled shell, it's easy. On a thicker shell the waves are contained more and an energy seems to build up and just bust out and you can feel it in your gut on rim shots, and even just center strikes on the head.
If I under-crank or over-crank the heads, the punch diminishes some but, thankfully the sweet spot for the effect is my rebound range, which is medium-high. Of course, tension descriptions are pretty subjective, player to player. That's because so much feel is involved and everybody's hand's and sticks change the equation.
The drum ends up being fun to play, for me. I'd rather have ten lugs but, I can make 8 work.
So, think about shell depth and density next time you think about getting another snare drum, if the feel is as important as the pitch/sound. It's all part of the equation.
Up next is the 8.50 x 13 stacked plywood.
*****************************
December 6, 2021 - Oops!
Above you see the two stacked plywood-ring snare drums I've made. They both utilize the same dual tension as the toms and bass drums: both heads tension at the same time. An acorn nut is secured with some Loctite Red on the 1/4" threaded rods which pass through decorative wooden dowels and into Tee-nuts secured to the bottom hoops.
The first, on the left, I made last year (maybe two years ago?), is a 5.5 x 13, with two DW Mag strainers, and a Walnut hoop protector. I had no idea how the tension system would work for a snare drum but, I played that drum with the stacked kit for a long time. It worked out as well the rest of the drums. Granted, if someone likes their snare head tight and batter head loose, it won't work but, I like both heads tight so, success.
The second is an 8.5 x 13 w/2 Gibraltar strainers and a Maple hoop protector that also covers 4 tension rods, than 3 on the first drum, which adds stability. Having just 3 caused two problems. Striking it moved it, which caused difficulty with a driver getting into the hole onto the nut, and two, I was generally striking it right on that nut, which cause the wood to begin deteriorating. The longer footprint on the maple hoop works great.
Oops? Yeah, that's a real slap upside the head - what is wrong with you? - gig. Look closely. The lever on the strainer hits the dowel so, I can't drop the snares, nor even set it up correctly to begin with. DUH. Never even gave that a thought. The dowels are slightly bigger, as well, which I didn't notice when I purchased them. They look fine that way and the extra width doesn't make a difference on the lever. It would still hit the dowel regardless. Obviously the Mag strainer moves east/west, if you will. Lever strainers then move north/south, depending on how you position the drum. My intention was to make the metal parts brass but, I already had the chrome strainers so, I went chrome but, at some point I'll make it all brass.
Because striking the drum happens far more than toms, the shockwave tends to send all the dowels all over the place, especially ones with a slightly looser fit from the drilling process, I put nuts top and bottom to prevent that, another reason I wanted to go brass, for cosmetics, and I decided to stain the dowels this time, for something a little different. I purchased threaded rods that had some kind of electroplating that made them look brass. The four under the protector are those. The rest are typical zinc plated. I'll switch rods if I go all brass on the hardware. The price of Mag strainers went up, and using two of any strainer on drums I make, to really allow the wires to drop and not rattle against the head in tom mode, I decided to go with a couple thumb/finger, flip-drop strainers (east/west). I couldn't find any in brass, well I could but, each merchant only had one in stock. I went chrome to get two from one supplier and dropped the brass idea for now.
You can imagine my surprise when I went to drop the strainer to set up the wires. I stood there, stunned for a moment and said, "No you didn't." To keep things correct on hole spacing I had to find strainers that had the same distance between holes. That left one choice, in keeping with what I wanted to spend. I rarely drop my wires in anything I play so, all the fancy design features in specialty strainers just do not warrant the cost, for me. I don't care about sound or silence or smoothness or all the rest. If the things work and are not junk; prone to collapse under pressure, I'm good. If I were an orchestral percussionist and the slightest noise could resonate from a stage throughout a hall, yeah, a quiet strainer would be considered.
Right now the shipping industry and supply-line fiasco has drum parts sitting in off-shore cargo containers and DIYers are frustrated, certainly not more so than the merchants who sell the parts and can't get them on shelves.
So, the sound? Hardly any difference at the same head tension. A touch more volume, expected. The drum sounds a tad "bigger." What is noticeably different is the feel, which is what I wanted. That extra 3" of air column allows for a slightly softer feel at tight tension, and playing the drum feels great.
As I mention, depth is not proprietary to any manufacturer for big-hype. Anybody can cut any tube to any length. You can't patent or call out shell depth as yours.
Players need to ask themselves a question, though. Can the slight cubic inch space of adding depth to a shell, to increase volume and presence a little, possibly make a difference in an electrified band, compared to what a mics and a PA system and electronics can add? The cosmetic look of deeper drums makes more of a difference than any sound differences depth can add in the real world of bands and gigs. I do not say adding 4" to a drum, 8x12 to 12x12 does not add a "tubbiness" to the sound. Again, that cannot be made proprietary by any manufacturer. Interestingly enough, when players went to floor toms 2" shorter, mounted on stands or other hardware, the sustain, resonance and feel became the biggest comments. For me, they are all toms so, I stay within a mathematical sequence on all drums, save for snares and bass drums but, even there I have used kicks with the same dimension sequences as all the toms. To me, it all feels and sounds more consistent, and nobody who has ever heard my "floor toms," mounted on modified snare drum stands, has ever commented they are not just as loud. Many have been surprised how much volume they put out, even more the typical floor toms grounded by legs at the floor. In that case, the reversal of depth made more noticeable difference than what players, for seven or eight decades, have been used to.
Logically, and practically, the feel a player gets in rebound means more than slight sound differences that can be more than made up for with sound equipment and recording software. In an acoustic setting - a small room - the slight extra "oomph" or "dahooom" sound deeper drums can create might make possible tonal differences discerned. And that's for mounted toms anyway because kicks become moot in that department with muffling, and floor toms have been deep for almost a century, so no differences there. How much would a performing band or audience notice any difference? If the player notices and causes a change in inspiration of performing, that's another subject.
This brings up the entire existence and what a typical drum set is. For ALL the super hype manufacturers make about their shells and sound, bass drums are bound by popular head choices and dampened by spurs into floors, as well as toms still mounted to them in some configurations. Floor toms have been the same for so long, a drum on legs; their sounds are static. You can increase sustain by shortening the shell and mounting them on stands as has become popular but, by and large, the lower frequencies of floor toms are already in a category where differences between a 16 and 18 are just about negligible in the context of a band, especially with the more muted heads out there. Practically speaking, only rack toms seem to be the most effected by manufacturer ultra-hype about shells.
I continue to maintain my stance on this topic because nothing out there empirically exists that makes any dramatic difference to sound because of a super-hyped, proprietary drum shell. The sound of stick attack striking various membranes under tension, is the bulk of what creates the sound of a drum. How much shell or frame material touches the membranes creates nuances of difference, i.e. bearing edges, and how the drums are isolated from sound absorption with certain types of hardware, and then floor absorption will always mean more than any material drums shells are made of. As posted a few blogs ago, rooms and their acoustical properties can mean as much or more to actual human, physical sound than the actual drums do.
I'm open to be convinced otherwise. I mean, I have no financial dog in this discussion. For me it's just testimony of my own observations and sharing them.
Honestly, I would love to be convinced otherwise. You know why? It would truly mean all the hype does, in fact, create real differences in the sound of musical instruments we call drums, and that would mean some really cool consumer options to choose from besides finishes and all the different hardware designs.
I think I'll make a video comparing the two drums and post it on my YT page. Have to wait for the new strainers to arrive though.
The first, on the left, I made last year (maybe two years ago?), is a 5.5 x 13, with two DW Mag strainers, and a Walnut hoop protector. I had no idea how the tension system would work for a snare drum but, I played that drum with the stacked kit for a long time. It worked out as well the rest of the drums. Granted, if someone likes their snare head tight and batter head loose, it won't work but, I like both heads tight so, success.
The second is an 8.5 x 13 w/2 Gibraltar strainers and a Maple hoop protector that also covers 4 tension rods, than 3 on the first drum, which adds stability. Having just 3 caused two problems. Striking it moved it, which caused difficulty with a driver getting into the hole onto the nut, and two, I was generally striking it right on that nut, which cause the wood to begin deteriorating. The longer footprint on the maple hoop works great.
Oops? Yeah, that's a real slap upside the head - what is wrong with you? - gig. Look closely. The lever on the strainer hits the dowel so, I can't drop the snares, nor even set it up correctly to begin with. DUH. Never even gave that a thought. The dowels are slightly bigger, as well, which I didn't notice when I purchased them. They look fine that way and the extra width doesn't make a difference on the lever. It would still hit the dowel regardless. Obviously the Mag strainer moves east/west, if you will. Lever strainers then move north/south, depending on how you position the drum. My intention was to make the metal parts brass but, I already had the chrome strainers so, I went chrome but, at some point I'll make it all brass.
Because striking the drum happens far more than toms, the shockwave tends to send all the dowels all over the place, especially ones with a slightly looser fit from the drilling process, I put nuts top and bottom to prevent that, another reason I wanted to go brass, for cosmetics, and I decided to stain the dowels this time, for something a little different. I purchased threaded rods that had some kind of electroplating that made them look brass. The four under the protector are those. The rest are typical zinc plated. I'll switch rods if I go all brass on the hardware. The price of Mag strainers went up, and using two of any strainer on drums I make, to really allow the wires to drop and not rattle against the head in tom mode, I decided to go with a couple thumb/finger, flip-drop strainers (east/west). I couldn't find any in brass, well I could but, each merchant only had one in stock. I went chrome to get two from one supplier and dropped the brass idea for now.
You can imagine my surprise when I went to drop the strainer to set up the wires. I stood there, stunned for a moment and said, "No you didn't." To keep things correct on hole spacing I had to find strainers that had the same distance between holes. That left one choice, in keeping with what I wanted to spend. I rarely drop my wires in anything I play so, all the fancy design features in specialty strainers just do not warrant the cost, for me. I don't care about sound or silence or smoothness or all the rest. If the things work and are not junk; prone to collapse under pressure, I'm good. If I were an orchestral percussionist and the slightest noise could resonate from a stage throughout a hall, yeah, a quiet strainer would be considered.
Right now the shipping industry and supply-line fiasco has drum parts sitting in off-shore cargo containers and DIYers are frustrated, certainly not more so than the merchants who sell the parts and can't get them on shelves.
So, the sound? Hardly any difference at the same head tension. A touch more volume, expected. The drum sounds a tad "bigger." What is noticeably different is the feel, which is what I wanted. That extra 3" of air column allows for a slightly softer feel at tight tension, and playing the drum feels great.
As I mention, depth is not proprietary to any manufacturer for big-hype. Anybody can cut any tube to any length. You can't patent or call out shell depth as yours.
Players need to ask themselves a question, though. Can the slight cubic inch space of adding depth to a shell, to increase volume and presence a little, possibly make a difference in an electrified band, compared to what a mics and a PA system and electronics can add? The cosmetic look of deeper drums makes more of a difference than any sound differences depth can add in the real world of bands and gigs. I do not say adding 4" to a drum, 8x12 to 12x12 does not add a "tubbiness" to the sound. Again, that cannot be made proprietary by any manufacturer. Interestingly enough, when players went to floor toms 2" shorter, mounted on stands or other hardware, the sustain, resonance and feel became the biggest comments. For me, they are all toms so, I stay within a mathematical sequence on all drums, save for snares and bass drums but, even there I have used kicks with the same dimension sequences as all the toms. To me, it all feels and sounds more consistent, and nobody who has ever heard my "floor toms," mounted on modified snare drum stands, has ever commented they are not just as loud. Many have been surprised how much volume they put out, even more the typical floor toms grounded by legs at the floor. In that case, the reversal of depth made more noticeable difference than what players, for seven or eight decades, have been used to.
Logically, and practically, the feel a player gets in rebound means more than slight sound differences that can be more than made up for with sound equipment and recording software. In an acoustic setting - a small room - the slight extra "oomph" or "dahooom" sound deeper drums can create might make possible tonal differences discerned. And that's for mounted toms anyway because kicks become moot in that department with muffling, and floor toms have been deep for almost a century, so no differences there. How much would a performing band or audience notice any difference? If the player notices and causes a change in inspiration of performing, that's another subject.
This brings up the entire existence and what a typical drum set is. For ALL the super hype manufacturers make about their shells and sound, bass drums are bound by popular head choices and dampened by spurs into floors, as well as toms still mounted to them in some configurations. Floor toms have been the same for so long, a drum on legs; their sounds are static. You can increase sustain by shortening the shell and mounting them on stands as has become popular but, by and large, the lower frequencies of floor toms are already in a category where differences between a 16 and 18 are just about negligible in the context of a band, especially with the more muted heads out there. Practically speaking, only rack toms seem to be the most effected by manufacturer ultra-hype about shells.
I continue to maintain my stance on this topic because nothing out there empirically exists that makes any dramatic difference to sound because of a super-hyped, proprietary drum shell. The sound of stick attack striking various membranes under tension, is the bulk of what creates the sound of a drum. How much shell or frame material touches the membranes creates nuances of difference, i.e. bearing edges, and how the drums are isolated from sound absorption with certain types of hardware, and then floor absorption will always mean more than any material drums shells are made of. As posted a few blogs ago, rooms and their acoustical properties can mean as much or more to actual human, physical sound than the actual drums do.
I'm open to be convinced otherwise. I mean, I have no financial dog in this discussion. For me it's just testimony of my own observations and sharing them.
Honestly, I would love to be convinced otherwise. You know why? It would truly mean all the hype does, in fact, create real differences in the sound of musical instruments we call drums, and that would mean some really cool consumer options to choose from besides finishes and all the different hardware designs.
I think I'll make a video comparing the two drums and post it on my YT page. Have to wait for the new strainers to arrive though.
*Incredible Commitment to Craftsmanship*
My cousin watched the blizzard out his windows yesterday, up in Rhode Island, and we sent some emails back ands forth. He sent me this link to Indian craftsmanship, making Dhols: large, two-headed drums involving a lot of steps. I found it fascinating to watch.
In the last couple days I have received a number of comments on my plywood-ring drums. The set keeps growing. I'll be doing some recording with the current set-up this week but, what I do to make those drums is nothing compared to the work these guys put into their instruments. Not just the craftsmanship but, the ingenuity, even teamwork, is fantastic.
It also goes to show how drum making, as far as drum shells, may contribute tonal nuances based on shape, depth and density but, sorry, not sorry, the super-hype manufacturers put out there about their plywood shells, or any shells, for that matter, is nonsense.
When you come to the end of this video, look at some others by other builders and tell me if you hear any significant differences because of the tree species used, or techniques involved. I don't.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QEN8hhkSyc
And with all the work and techniques that go into making those drums, they are using plastic heads, not skin, which is interesting because most "world" drums continue to use skin heads. There is a definite tonal difference between plastic and animal skin heads, especially in the feel of playing them for the individual. Drum shells and sound? Not so much.
As more and more players become exposed to and aware of this issue, hopefully the manufacturers will tone down their rhetoric and ultra-hype and get back to a lion's share of hardware innovation, like things used to be, in a more honest and simple time in the world of drums.
In the last couple days I have received a number of comments on my plywood-ring drums. The set keeps growing. I'll be doing some recording with the current set-up this week but, what I do to make those drums is nothing compared to the work these guys put into their instruments. Not just the craftsmanship but, the ingenuity, even teamwork, is fantastic.
It also goes to show how drum making, as far as drum shells, may contribute tonal nuances based on shape, depth and density but, sorry, not sorry, the super-hype manufacturers put out there about their plywood shells, or any shells, for that matter, is nonsense.
When you come to the end of this video, look at some others by other builders and tell me if you hear any significant differences because of the tree species used, or techniques involved. I don't.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QEN8hhkSyc
And with all the work and techniques that go into making those drums, they are using plastic heads, not skin, which is interesting because most "world" drums continue to use skin heads. There is a definite tonal difference between plastic and animal skin heads, especially in the feel of playing them for the individual. Drum shells and sound? Not so much.
As more and more players become exposed to and aware of this issue, hopefully the manufacturers will tone down their rhetoric and ultra-hype and get back to a lion's share of hardware innovation, like things used to be, in a more honest and simple time in the world of drums.
*****************************
November 2, 2021
I forgot to post this at the time.
****************************************
I think I have really reached a point where I see, I literally see the divide in this world between those with common sense and those without it. It does not matter which subject is on the table. Critical thinking, logic, common sense, is either employed or non-existent, regardless of the issue.
Someone sent me an email this morning about a new law in Philadelphia taking away traffic signs and stops because they are racist. ?!?! You cannot make this stuff up.
I was replying to a comment on my YT channel and saw a video in the sidebar I thought I'd check out. It was a Nashville drummer comparing Ludwig drum sets. He mentions he does Country and R&R gigs and recordings. In his opening comments he mentioned how different these Ludwig sets sound. Now, bear in mind, this is a comparison video about drums, specifically shells, and how they affect sound; in this case the shell materials and the bearing edges, is what he wanted to emphasize. Then, as if it has no bearing on the comparison, at all, he tells viewers the sizes of the drums are different, the bass drum muffling is different, and the heads on the kits are different. ???
I see this over and over and over in such videos, even videos from drum shops that do comparison videos. "We used these heads because..." and they proceed to tell us how the low end was changed, or whatever.
The very essence of a comparison is to make as many things in the comparison as equal as possible. In the case of comparing drums: same sizes, same heads, same room, same mics and if mounting and lugs and hoops are significantly different, so be it but, they have to be mentioned as artifacts that can make a difference in final results.
I have shown bearing edges do not make significant differences that can be ascertained in any dramatic way when it comes to playing a full set of drums with cymbals and all, especially in the context of a band. Just listening to drums-only shows so little tonal variation it staggers the mind how the subject of bearing edges could have possibly become as big as it is. Add in the live sound system or studio equipment, and everything becomes a matter of electronics. Whatever acoustic properties a drum might have, can be so manipulated and morphed, the same sized drum from every category, from every company on the planet will make, literally no major differences live or on a recording.
It is amazing to see the number of young players asking what to do to get such and such, from so and so's bass drum sound, and then find out an edrum patch was used to augment the recording. Next to nothing you hear on a recording, I'll even go so far as to say nothing of the drum set's acoustic properties are the final thing you hear on a recording, with the possible exception of drums on a Jazz recording but, even then, things are manipulated by just mics, reverb, compression, and final mastering. All of that is an artform, in and of itself.
Go back into the 1950s and you'll hear drums sounding like whatever drum set was used and heard in the studio. Even back then, before all the electronic wizardry came along; microphones affect tone, rooms affect tone, and player sticks and touch affect tone, and obviously stereo systems affect tone and human ears affect tone, person to person. The variables are many.
At least, as a standard, legitimate comparison, if one wants it to be real, make all things equal, as much as possible, or no such "comparison" is made, as far as what drum shells may do to sound.
Would drummer's themselves, consider a test of speed between vehicles legitimate, if a truck was placed next to a dragster, just because they had the same engines in them? If you want to say engines affect speed, you put different engines in the exact same model vehicles.
"All things being equal." That is the bottom line for comparing anything, including drums. When it comes to comparing the proclaimed affects of drum shells - Same sizes, same heads, same hoops, same mounting, same mics, same positions, same room, same recording equipment, same player, same sticks.
****************************************
I think I have really reached a point where I see, I literally see the divide in this world between those with common sense and those without it. It does not matter which subject is on the table. Critical thinking, logic, common sense, is either employed or non-existent, regardless of the issue.
Someone sent me an email this morning about a new law in Philadelphia taking away traffic signs and stops because they are racist. ?!?! You cannot make this stuff up.
I was replying to a comment on my YT channel and saw a video in the sidebar I thought I'd check out. It was a Nashville drummer comparing Ludwig drum sets. He mentions he does Country and R&R gigs and recordings. In his opening comments he mentioned how different these Ludwig sets sound. Now, bear in mind, this is a comparison video about drums, specifically shells, and how they affect sound; in this case the shell materials and the bearing edges, is what he wanted to emphasize. Then, as if it has no bearing on the comparison, at all, he tells viewers the sizes of the drums are different, the bass drum muffling is different, and the heads on the kits are different. ???
I see this over and over and over in such videos, even videos from drum shops that do comparison videos. "We used these heads because..." and they proceed to tell us how the low end was changed, or whatever.
The very essence of a comparison is to make as many things in the comparison as equal as possible. In the case of comparing drums: same sizes, same heads, same room, same mics and if mounting and lugs and hoops are significantly different, so be it but, they have to be mentioned as artifacts that can make a difference in final results.
I have shown bearing edges do not make significant differences that can be ascertained in any dramatic way when it comes to playing a full set of drums with cymbals and all, especially in the context of a band. Just listening to drums-only shows so little tonal variation it staggers the mind how the subject of bearing edges could have possibly become as big as it is. Add in the live sound system or studio equipment, and everything becomes a matter of electronics. Whatever acoustic properties a drum might have, can be so manipulated and morphed, the same sized drum from every category, from every company on the planet will make, literally no major differences live or on a recording.
It is amazing to see the number of young players asking what to do to get such and such, from so and so's bass drum sound, and then find out an edrum patch was used to augment the recording. Next to nothing you hear on a recording, I'll even go so far as to say nothing of the drum set's acoustic properties are the final thing you hear on a recording, with the possible exception of drums on a Jazz recording but, even then, things are manipulated by just mics, reverb, compression, and final mastering. All of that is an artform, in and of itself.
Go back into the 1950s and you'll hear drums sounding like whatever drum set was used and heard in the studio. Even back then, before all the electronic wizardry came along; microphones affect tone, rooms affect tone, and player sticks and touch affect tone, and obviously stereo systems affect tone and human ears affect tone, person to person. The variables are many.
At least, as a standard, legitimate comparison, if one wants it to be real, make all things equal, as much as possible, or no such "comparison" is made, as far as what drum shells may do to sound.
Would drummer's themselves, consider a test of speed between vehicles legitimate, if a truck was placed next to a dragster, just because they had the same engines in them? If you want to say engines affect speed, you put different engines in the exact same model vehicles.
"All things being equal." That is the bottom line for comparing anything, including drums. When it comes to comparing the proclaimed affects of drum shells - Same sizes, same heads, same hoops, same mounting, same mics, same positions, same room, same recording equipment, same player, same sticks.
*****************************
CP on Drum Shells - February 10, 2022
Some years back I bought a whole bunch of back issues of Not So Modern Drummer magazines. I peeked at a few of them but, never dug in. With the ice storm and loss of power, I pulled the box out and found an issue I hadn't looked at yet. Candle light was not really happening for me so, when the power came back on but, the internet was still down, so I went back to the magazine.
In the Vol. 2, #5, Spring/Summer 2000 issue is an article on the drum sets Carl Palmer had used up to that point: Ludwig, Premier, Yamaha, Gretsch and Remo, plus his renowned stainless steel set: perhaps the greatest innovative work of art in the history of drum sets. Then he had other custom wood sets made with component parts from Brady, Gladstone and custom metal works manufacturers. That took us to 2000.
Carl Palmer is one of the five biggest influences upon my playing. My first exposure to him was Arthur Brown's "Fire," though I had no idea Palmer was the drummer on that recording. When ELP hit, I was an instant fan and Palmer blew us all away with fantastic abilities not generally seen in Rock. He raised the bar for anybody and everybody looking to refine their skills and the artform of playing a drum set.
He's very picky as a player with his instruments. And most of that has to do with hardware, not so much drum shells. He looks at the entire kit with meticulous detail. Make a great shell but, not hardware? He moved on. Make nice hardware but, not the finest shells? He moved on. He's rarely seen endorsing drum companies throughout his career because he moves on. He called himself, "high risk." He's known for moving on. He mentions most players go through three companies in their careers settling on one. He went through five or six and still searches for - "the one." That is especially true for snare drums.
Anyway, in this article, covering a career of manufactured drums, both modern and vintage gear, he makes a comment I must reproduce here because it is the bottom line. People can throw me into the fire or under the bus all they want but, I know the truth; therefore, I know the ultra, super-hype of fictitious "rubbish," as the Brits like to say, put out by manufacturers of plywood drum shells, and others, as well. Here's the quote, and the truth, on page 21, the section - "Thoughts on Customized Gear:
"Now none of this means anything these days because if you stick a mic in front of a drum - give me the cheapest drum set - some good heads and some good mics and I'll process it and make it sound as good as my Gladstones. I'm not a fool - there has to be a certain amount of love and artistic input - gratifying to the eye - I enjoy that part as much as the sound. The story with a high end drum kit is you set it up and it sounds the absolute bollocks without any graphic equalisers. That's the only difference. You can get that sound out of a cheap kit but you've got to carry a lot of hardware. I still use my Remo drum kit and it will sound as good on record."
It's interesting. I have a friend up in Oklahoma. He owns over five dozen snare drums and ten or eleven drum sets, and the one set he claims sounds different than all the rest, are his Remos. I visited him a couple years ago and spent a day jamming and hanging out but, I didn't hear the Remo kit and we decided to get together again sometime and do a tom comparison video for the drum shell series on my YT channel.
Aside from any possible differences particleboard shells can make (because that is essentially what Remo shells are), as far as sound, what Palmer states is absolutely correct. Any differences are slight, and he makes that observation but, as an artist, he likes the idea of details and meticulous craftsmanship. The high end kit may sound great without any EQ but, with all the bells and whistles in today's recording software and all, anything can be made to sound good. The player might not feel as "artistic" or "musical" behind the inexpensive set but, get over that issue, if it fits, and put your passion into the music and when all is said and done, nobody is going to know you played an inexpensive drum set on any particular recording. Good heads, proper seating on the bearing edge, good tuning, good mics, all the software and anybody is good to go. Mounting of toms can be an issue for resonance and sustain, and floor tom legs grounding out on floors, as well but, both of those matters are easy to fix; utilizing ways to isolate the drums from issues that cancel out full-frequency response.
To those who believe I must be wrong, or crazy, or both, prove it. That's all I have asked. Show us the significant differences in sound the inexpensive drum has to the mid-level or high end drum - same heads, same mics, same room, etc. There's the obvious reason the drum companies themselves do not do such comparisons for consumers. There are no significant differences. "Nuances and subtleties," maybe. All lost in the complexity of sound a band produces, live or on record.
Yes, again, inexpensive drums do not pay attention to bearing edges and seating of drum heads. That is why I made sure on my test drums I redid any edges that were problematic. You'll get no argument from me there. If the finest made heads cannot sit correctly on the edge, tuning and tone become difficult, if not even impossible, for developing an optimum sound. The inexpensive, beginner drums are not about artistic inspiration in the details. They are about giving a new student player something to learn on. That said, most companies go the extra distance to put good edges on drums in all lines now. It's just a fact of selling merchandise today. If you don't, others will, and take that share of the market.
Even hardware has gotten exponentially better on starter drums. Not road worthy, no but, much better than starter drums when I was young. For mid-level drums, which is the lion's share of all drum markets combined, great sound and hardware is available, right out of the box.
My stacked plywood ring drums: as inexpensive as a drum can be made, and people may dislike the look but, nobody has said the sound is not as good as anything else out there. They have their quirks and more money input would allow for creating a better drum specimen, all-around but, that's just not necessary for me to be inspired to play here in my home.
Pay what you want. Just do not believe all the extra money is purchasing a much better sound. Not as far as drum shells are concerned. That is not an endorsement of beginner drums. That is an observation against all the super-hype companies put into advertising and explaining their proprietary drum shells. It's mostly erroneous nonsense.
In the Vol. 2, #5, Spring/Summer 2000 issue is an article on the drum sets Carl Palmer had used up to that point: Ludwig, Premier, Yamaha, Gretsch and Remo, plus his renowned stainless steel set: perhaps the greatest innovative work of art in the history of drum sets. Then he had other custom wood sets made with component parts from Brady, Gladstone and custom metal works manufacturers. That took us to 2000.
Carl Palmer is one of the five biggest influences upon my playing. My first exposure to him was Arthur Brown's "Fire," though I had no idea Palmer was the drummer on that recording. When ELP hit, I was an instant fan and Palmer blew us all away with fantastic abilities not generally seen in Rock. He raised the bar for anybody and everybody looking to refine their skills and the artform of playing a drum set.
He's very picky as a player with his instruments. And most of that has to do with hardware, not so much drum shells. He looks at the entire kit with meticulous detail. Make a great shell but, not hardware? He moved on. Make nice hardware but, not the finest shells? He moved on. He's rarely seen endorsing drum companies throughout his career because he moves on. He called himself, "high risk." He's known for moving on. He mentions most players go through three companies in their careers settling on one. He went through five or six and still searches for - "the one." That is especially true for snare drums.
Anyway, in this article, covering a career of manufactured drums, both modern and vintage gear, he makes a comment I must reproduce here because it is the bottom line. People can throw me into the fire or under the bus all they want but, I know the truth; therefore, I know the ultra, super-hype of fictitious "rubbish," as the Brits like to say, put out by manufacturers of plywood drum shells, and others, as well. Here's the quote, and the truth, on page 21, the section - "Thoughts on Customized Gear:
"Now none of this means anything these days because if you stick a mic in front of a drum - give me the cheapest drum set - some good heads and some good mics and I'll process it and make it sound as good as my Gladstones. I'm not a fool - there has to be a certain amount of love and artistic input - gratifying to the eye - I enjoy that part as much as the sound. The story with a high end drum kit is you set it up and it sounds the absolute bollocks without any graphic equalisers. That's the only difference. You can get that sound out of a cheap kit but you've got to carry a lot of hardware. I still use my Remo drum kit and it will sound as good on record."
It's interesting. I have a friend up in Oklahoma. He owns over five dozen snare drums and ten or eleven drum sets, and the one set he claims sounds different than all the rest, are his Remos. I visited him a couple years ago and spent a day jamming and hanging out but, I didn't hear the Remo kit and we decided to get together again sometime and do a tom comparison video for the drum shell series on my YT channel.
Aside from any possible differences particleboard shells can make (because that is essentially what Remo shells are), as far as sound, what Palmer states is absolutely correct. Any differences are slight, and he makes that observation but, as an artist, he likes the idea of details and meticulous craftsmanship. The high end kit may sound great without any EQ but, with all the bells and whistles in today's recording software and all, anything can be made to sound good. The player might not feel as "artistic" or "musical" behind the inexpensive set but, get over that issue, if it fits, and put your passion into the music and when all is said and done, nobody is going to know you played an inexpensive drum set on any particular recording. Good heads, proper seating on the bearing edge, good tuning, good mics, all the software and anybody is good to go. Mounting of toms can be an issue for resonance and sustain, and floor tom legs grounding out on floors, as well but, both of those matters are easy to fix; utilizing ways to isolate the drums from issues that cancel out full-frequency response.
To those who believe I must be wrong, or crazy, or both, prove it. That's all I have asked. Show us the significant differences in sound the inexpensive drum has to the mid-level or high end drum - same heads, same mics, same room, etc. There's the obvious reason the drum companies themselves do not do such comparisons for consumers. There are no significant differences. "Nuances and subtleties," maybe. All lost in the complexity of sound a band produces, live or on record.
Yes, again, inexpensive drums do not pay attention to bearing edges and seating of drum heads. That is why I made sure on my test drums I redid any edges that were problematic. You'll get no argument from me there. If the finest made heads cannot sit correctly on the edge, tuning and tone become difficult, if not even impossible, for developing an optimum sound. The inexpensive, beginner drums are not about artistic inspiration in the details. They are about giving a new student player something to learn on. That said, most companies go the extra distance to put good edges on drums in all lines now. It's just a fact of selling merchandise today. If you don't, others will, and take that share of the market.
Even hardware has gotten exponentially better on starter drums. Not road worthy, no but, much better than starter drums when I was young. For mid-level drums, which is the lion's share of all drum markets combined, great sound and hardware is available, right out of the box.
My stacked plywood ring drums: as inexpensive as a drum can be made, and people may dislike the look but, nobody has said the sound is not as good as anything else out there. They have their quirks and more money input would allow for creating a better drum specimen, all-around but, that's just not necessary for me to be inspired to play here in my home.
Pay what you want. Just do not believe all the extra money is purchasing a much better sound. Not as far as drum shells are concerned. That is not an endorsement of beginner drums. That is an observation against all the super-hype companies put into advertising and explaining their proprietary drum shells. It's mostly erroneous nonsense.
*****************************
February 11, 2022
I just watched a YT video on bearing edges. Most of the time, maybe all the time, videos on edges don't do any kind of comparisons. They just make claims about what bearing edges do to the sound of a drum and show how edges are done on router tables, etc.
When I did my videos on edges, parts 6, 7 and 8 ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GB-B0fqr3c part6 ) I wanted to make comparisons, real world comparisons. With six different edges, using three different shells, I showed variations are slight to none. A bearing edge is a muting device, essentially. The more shell surface that touches the heads the more muting you get in the overall frequency ranges, with slight variations in that range, per head and drum. The inside cut can also effect the head's vibration rates around its perimeter, which effects harmonics. As I always say, nuances and subtleties exist in the overall character or personality of the sound: sustain, resonance, sound-body /sound-profile of a drum.
The video I just watched was made in a German recording studio, in July, 2021. After some time introducing the people involved they get down to it. ST drum company made four identical toms. They all had Remo Ambassadors on them, batter and reso. They claimed the drums were tuned the same but, I heard differences a little too wide to be called the same. Getting four drums made of wood, an organic substance with cellular structure that literally breathes and moves, is difficult. I would never expect perfection but, the pitch differences were a little too noticeable.
Four edges were put on the drums:
1. A full, single round-over outside to straight shell wall inside.
2. A slight round-over outside, w/30 degree counter-cut inside.
3. A slight round-over outside, w/45 degree counter-cut inside.
4. A slight round-over outside, w/60 degree counter-cut inside.
I watched and listened, wearing my Etymotic Research ER4 XR ear monitors.
The demonstration showed a frequency graph readout for each drum.
Were there differences? You know what? It's meaningless. I would defy anyone, ANYONE, to tell me what differences they hear in the context of a full set of drums and cymbals in the middle of a band, with the edges portrayed. The differences were slight, owning to what you are hearing: a drum with single strokes every 3 seconds. Small differences of fundamental pitch and how high, mid and low frequencies changed were demonstrated.
Differences? Yes. The people involved commented how dramatic the differences were and I sat there thinking, did I just watch and hear the same thing they did? Are they serious?
I'm serious about this. Drums are not a piano. Drums are not an acoustic guitar. Drums are not orchestral chimes. They are very basic, ancient, percussion instruments comprised of a cylinder and a membrane or two, somehow placed under tension.
The sound of the drum is produced by a hand or stick striking a membrane and the membrane vibrates and resonates at a certain speed to produce a pitch. The sound wave leaves the membrane and moves down the cylinder and out, or gets trapped, resonating off the bottom head, back and forth until the concussion force in the air column weakens to dissipation. The density of the cylinder wall and the depth of the cylinder will offer a slight amplification of the sound wave to enhance or detract from its overall frequency range.
When people get so intricate with frequency ranges of a drum one needs to see on a graph to realize, something is so wrong, I cannot contain my perturbation. Common sense literally flies out a window with people. Playing drums is not messing around with filters and sine waves on a synthesizer. It is the fundamental aspect of striking a stretched membrane, and the fact is, where you strike the membrane, how you strike the membrane, and with what you strike the membrane has far more to do with the sound of a drum than anything the cylinder contributes.
Even though I make no argument about a drum being a unit of components and how it all contributes to its sound, how the drum is mounted in place has more to do with the overall sound of a drum than what the cylinder is made of or how it is treated.
Remember, even if you buy a drum set that will never leave your room, every room contributes a great deal to how a drum sounds to your ears or what a microphone picks up. Even if you never play in a band and never compete with any other sound, NOBODY sits at a drum set and strikes each drum every three seconds. NOBODY hits each tom in the exact same spot. Bass drums do get struck in the exact same spot. Snare drums generally get struck within a much smaller diametric range. Toms, because we are swinging arms extended from us, moving in a much greater physical range of motion, generally creates a larger diameter strike zone that develops drum to drum, especially in improvisation and off the cuff, in the moment execution. The more drums, the more memory involved in how the strike zones cascade across each surface around the kit, diameter to diameter. That is real world drumming. And the variations are a universe away from striking a drum once every three seconds.
Then the video changes things a little. And my points are made. They take drum 1 and put a coated Ambassador on it and tune it higher, and they take tom 4 and put an Emperor on it and tune it much lower and the drums then portray differences that would get noticed in the context of a band.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5f94hBS2WA
There is a reason I made the video with the mystery drum set -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNhTW3jCz8Y.
When you cannot see, and all you can do is hear, your ears will tell you what is happening, not manufacturer super-hype on proprietary drum shells. And what happens is; the fundamental pitch each membrane is tensioned at and the pitch created is what is heard. That's all there is time for. Music infiltrates and masks everything else of the subtleties and nuances drums may produce.
My convictions remain. I honestly hoped that video would show me something I could really hang a hat on. Didn't happen. Not as far as real world music situations.
Do I hear differences in my "Leather" set, with mostly Keller shells (though not all), my stacked plywood ring drums, and my tabletop drums? Sure. Would I know which set was which if everything was tuned the same, and someone else played them and I heard them on a recording. Maybe? Maybe not, because the sound of a drum, ultimately, is the heads. Same heads, same tension, same room, same mics, same player, same sticks; the differences are minimal.
Play what you want, for whatever reasons you want, of course. Just use critical thinking and common sense before you spend the really big bucks and think those super-hyped shells will make a big difference in the sound of the drums.
When I did my videos on edges, parts 6, 7 and 8 ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GB-B0fqr3c part6 ) I wanted to make comparisons, real world comparisons. With six different edges, using three different shells, I showed variations are slight to none. A bearing edge is a muting device, essentially. The more shell surface that touches the heads the more muting you get in the overall frequency ranges, with slight variations in that range, per head and drum. The inside cut can also effect the head's vibration rates around its perimeter, which effects harmonics. As I always say, nuances and subtleties exist in the overall character or personality of the sound: sustain, resonance, sound-body /sound-profile of a drum.
The video I just watched was made in a German recording studio, in July, 2021. After some time introducing the people involved they get down to it. ST drum company made four identical toms. They all had Remo Ambassadors on them, batter and reso. They claimed the drums were tuned the same but, I heard differences a little too wide to be called the same. Getting four drums made of wood, an organic substance with cellular structure that literally breathes and moves, is difficult. I would never expect perfection but, the pitch differences were a little too noticeable.
Four edges were put on the drums:
1. A full, single round-over outside to straight shell wall inside.
2. A slight round-over outside, w/30 degree counter-cut inside.
3. A slight round-over outside, w/45 degree counter-cut inside.
4. A slight round-over outside, w/60 degree counter-cut inside.
I watched and listened, wearing my Etymotic Research ER4 XR ear monitors.
The demonstration showed a frequency graph readout for each drum.
Were there differences? You know what? It's meaningless. I would defy anyone, ANYONE, to tell me what differences they hear in the context of a full set of drums and cymbals in the middle of a band, with the edges portrayed. The differences were slight, owning to what you are hearing: a drum with single strokes every 3 seconds. Small differences of fundamental pitch and how high, mid and low frequencies changed were demonstrated.
Differences? Yes. The people involved commented how dramatic the differences were and I sat there thinking, did I just watch and hear the same thing they did? Are they serious?
I'm serious about this. Drums are not a piano. Drums are not an acoustic guitar. Drums are not orchestral chimes. They are very basic, ancient, percussion instruments comprised of a cylinder and a membrane or two, somehow placed under tension.
The sound of the drum is produced by a hand or stick striking a membrane and the membrane vibrates and resonates at a certain speed to produce a pitch. The sound wave leaves the membrane and moves down the cylinder and out, or gets trapped, resonating off the bottom head, back and forth until the concussion force in the air column weakens to dissipation. The density of the cylinder wall and the depth of the cylinder will offer a slight amplification of the sound wave to enhance or detract from its overall frequency range.
When people get so intricate with frequency ranges of a drum one needs to see on a graph to realize, something is so wrong, I cannot contain my perturbation. Common sense literally flies out a window with people. Playing drums is not messing around with filters and sine waves on a synthesizer. It is the fundamental aspect of striking a stretched membrane, and the fact is, where you strike the membrane, how you strike the membrane, and with what you strike the membrane has far more to do with the sound of a drum than anything the cylinder contributes.
Even though I make no argument about a drum being a unit of components and how it all contributes to its sound, how the drum is mounted in place has more to do with the overall sound of a drum than what the cylinder is made of or how it is treated.
Remember, even if you buy a drum set that will never leave your room, every room contributes a great deal to how a drum sounds to your ears or what a microphone picks up. Even if you never play in a band and never compete with any other sound, NOBODY sits at a drum set and strikes each drum every three seconds. NOBODY hits each tom in the exact same spot. Bass drums do get struck in the exact same spot. Snare drums generally get struck within a much smaller diametric range. Toms, because we are swinging arms extended from us, moving in a much greater physical range of motion, generally creates a larger diameter strike zone that develops drum to drum, especially in improvisation and off the cuff, in the moment execution. The more drums, the more memory involved in how the strike zones cascade across each surface around the kit, diameter to diameter. That is real world drumming. And the variations are a universe away from striking a drum once every three seconds.
Then the video changes things a little. And my points are made. They take drum 1 and put a coated Ambassador on it and tune it higher, and they take tom 4 and put an Emperor on it and tune it much lower and the drums then portray differences that would get noticed in the context of a band.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5f94hBS2WA
There is a reason I made the video with the mystery drum set -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNhTW3jCz8Y.
When you cannot see, and all you can do is hear, your ears will tell you what is happening, not manufacturer super-hype on proprietary drum shells. And what happens is; the fundamental pitch each membrane is tensioned at and the pitch created is what is heard. That's all there is time for. Music infiltrates and masks everything else of the subtleties and nuances drums may produce.
My convictions remain. I honestly hoped that video would show me something I could really hang a hat on. Didn't happen. Not as far as real world music situations.
Do I hear differences in my "Leather" set, with mostly Keller shells (though not all), my stacked plywood ring drums, and my tabletop drums? Sure. Would I know which set was which if everything was tuned the same, and someone else played them and I heard them on a recording. Maybe? Maybe not, because the sound of a drum, ultimately, is the heads. Same heads, same tension, same room, same mics, same player, same sticks; the differences are minimal.
Play what you want, for whatever reasons you want, of course. Just use critical thinking and common sense before you spend the really big bucks and think those super-hyped shells will make a big difference in the sound of the drums.
*****************************
527. Four Drums - March 18, 2022
Okay, back to drums.
I made a new YT video for my channel; #19 in the series of Drum Shells, Sound and Hype in the drum manufacturing industry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBoHagIi1HE
I took four different "drums" and compared them, all 14" diameter, 3 of which are 7x14. Three (at least two), of the drums can be considered free-floating shell systems. I tuned them all to the same relative pitch.
The video before this one, I made a drum out of a plastic food bucket. The sound is surprisingly good. I show that drum again for more comparison.
Drum #1 - a very simple single-headed "frame" drum I made from two layers of 3/4" plywood (1.5" total width), 1/4" thick, w/bearing edge, sitting on another circle of 3/4" plywood. I used a regular metal hoop (though only 6 ears), regular 12-24 tension rods, and tightened the head into some 12-24 star nuts underneath the circle. The star nuts dig in enough to maintain grip.
The second drum employed galvanized metal roll roofing, or flashing material. I looked at some sitting on the floor of my shop and thought, "Can I make a drum out of that stuff? Of course I can." Extremely thin, no musical tone to speak of. The roll was 10' long. Allowing it to expand when I cut the tape holding it tightly together, I maneuvered the wrap around or coiled layers into a 13 7/8" circle, which gave it three wrap around layers. I just took a file to the outside edges to make sure nothing sharp contacted the heads. The total thickness of the "shell" is less than a 1/16" and the length is held in place with some tape, and the layers are basically held together with some two-sided tape every 8 or 9" - there is zero rigidity to the circumference of the shell. Hold it up with one finger and it sags into an egg shape. Just the same, with two heads under tension, it's rigidity increased a hundred fold. I used two triple flange hoops, 10-24 threaded rods, acorn nuts, and star nuts below to tension the heads. Works fine.
The third drum is a stacked plywood ring shell, w/plywood hoops and my simple, dual tension system of 1/4" threaded rod with an acorn nut on the batter hoop and a tee-nut in the reso hoop to thread the rod into. Works really well. The shell is 5/8" thick, with a dble 45 degree bearing edge, around 3/16" outside and the rest sloping inside the shell.
The fourth drum is from my "Leather" set; a 10-ply Keller shell, 1/4" thick, with some tooled leather for a wrap and solid Maple hoops. I employ a single lug around the equator of the shell. The bearing edge is a dble 45.
I made a new YT video for my channel; #19 in the series of Drum Shells, Sound and Hype in the drum manufacturing industry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBoHagIi1HE
I took four different "drums" and compared them, all 14" diameter, 3 of which are 7x14. Three (at least two), of the drums can be considered free-floating shell systems. I tuned them all to the same relative pitch.
The video before this one, I made a drum out of a plastic food bucket. The sound is surprisingly good. I show that drum again for more comparison.
Drum #1 - a very simple single-headed "frame" drum I made from two layers of 3/4" plywood (1.5" total width), 1/4" thick, w/bearing edge, sitting on another circle of 3/4" plywood. I used a regular metal hoop (though only 6 ears), regular 12-24 tension rods, and tightened the head into some 12-24 star nuts underneath the circle. The star nuts dig in enough to maintain grip.
The second drum employed galvanized metal roll roofing, or flashing material. I looked at some sitting on the floor of my shop and thought, "Can I make a drum out of that stuff? Of course I can." Extremely thin, no musical tone to speak of. The roll was 10' long. Allowing it to expand when I cut the tape holding it tightly together, I maneuvered the wrap around or coiled layers into a 13 7/8" circle, which gave it three wrap around layers. I just took a file to the outside edges to make sure nothing sharp contacted the heads. The total thickness of the "shell" is less than a 1/16" and the length is held in place with some tape, and the layers are basically held together with some two-sided tape every 8 or 9" - there is zero rigidity to the circumference of the shell. Hold it up with one finger and it sags into an egg shape. Just the same, with two heads under tension, it's rigidity increased a hundred fold. I used two triple flange hoops, 10-24 threaded rods, acorn nuts, and star nuts below to tension the heads. Works fine.
The third drum is a stacked plywood ring shell, w/plywood hoops and my simple, dual tension system of 1/4" threaded rod with an acorn nut on the batter hoop and a tee-nut in the reso hoop to thread the rod into. Works really well. The shell is 5/8" thick, with a dble 45 degree bearing edge, around 3/16" outside and the rest sloping inside the shell.
The fourth drum is from my "Leather" set; a 10-ply Keller shell, 1/4" thick, with some tooled leather for a wrap and solid Maple hoops. I employ a single lug around the equator of the shell. The bearing edge is a dble 45.
There are obvious differences of tone with each drum. It is also obvious that, again, the sound of a drum is produced by the heads. The shells provide a surface for sound waves off the batter head to pass back and forth between the batter and resonant heads. They are trapped and move until the concussive force from the strike dissipates. That is affected by shell wall density and depth.
The frame drum has no shell, per se,' and the system can only produce a sound of one head under tension. In this particular case I only had one G12 to use, while the other drums have 10 mil clear heads, save for the Leather drum which employs an Evans Black 7.5 mil reso head. I'll get into the differences there.
The frame drum has harsh overtones. Using a 10 mil head would have increased those. A twin-ply or hydraulic head would be my choice if I used the drum in a set-up. The volume was obviously low. Nothing to trap the concussion force and sound wave. Strike the drum and the sound is out, away and gone but, that is not to say the drum has no sustain. The head vibrated and that is where sustain comes from: a sustained head vibration at optimum speeds. The 12-mil head, being slightly thicker than 10-mil, means under the same tension force, it's pitch is lower than the other drums. To bring it to the same relative pitch I had to put more force on the head, decreasing its vibration rate and duration, and changing the nuances of its tone under the greater stress at the tension points. These are the little things that go into sound.
The metal drum sounded a little muted and "dry;" not as lively a tone but, still efficient and full. It actually sounds better and better each time I strike it. It's volume was higher than the frame drum but, less than the next two. Bear in mind: no specific bearing edge. Any kind of thicker shell to place an edge on, would add some volume but, would dry out the sound even more: more shell material touching the head, affecting vibration with extra muting. Again, really nuances and subtleties impossible to hear in the context of a band.
The third drum, the stacked rings, offered "good" tone: and remember, there are no sufficient, agreed upon standards by all drummers as to what "good" sound is, or for that matter, "bad" sounding drums. There is only personal, subjective taste each player goes by. The drum meets my own personal standards of tone, sustain, and volume.
The bearing edge on the outside of the shell is a little wide but, plywood can be very tricky to work with. Remember the layers are not vertical, like regular plywood shells with the but ends making up the bearing edge. They are lateral, butt ends creating the shell wall. I leave a little more wood because a router bit spinning at 25k RPM's can yank that small area of the layer right off the shell. How each layer is glued by some manufactures of plywood better than others. Leaving that extra area of wood touching the head creates another aspect of muting so, a little less sustain and volume but, while it can be heard up close, in a band setting, if I used them that way, live or recording, those small aspects are totally hidden. At 5/8" thick, should it not be the loudest of the four? Nope.
The fourth drum was livelier, brighter, louder, and had the most sustain. Why? Shell wall density. Vertical plywood makes for a more dense shell wall; flat cut veneers that make up the layers, regardless of the number of plies glued together.
Think of a board. It has a planed edge and a butt end. Place the board vertical or horizontal, there's your shell wall, a bearing edge going on the butt end and planed end of plies glued together with the shell wall being flat cut veneer. Glue up the layers and you get a really hard, dense shell.
Stack a bunch of boards on top of one another and cut the ends off at 5/8." The cellular grain structure is different and not as dense using wood that way. Making only an inner 45 degree edge, leaving just a touch of wood to do a little sanding on is pretty risky using butt end plywood. Having wrecked enough edges that way, I leave more material on the outside cut.
***********
Rule out drum #1 for obvious reasons. It's technically a drum but, has no true musicality for my tastes. That does not mean it could not be used. Remember, mics, cables, and signal into electronic equipment can manipulate sound into a thousand parameters. That "sour" drum could be turned into something perfectly useful because of electronic equipment. The thing is, time is money. Studio engineers don't want to bother with things like that. For them it's "Bring in the best stuff you have." (UPDATE - I put a heavy-duty, thicker head on the drum and it really helped the sound. Overtones greatly diminished and under the use of mics and software, a perfectly acceptable sound could be produced on a recording).
Shell wall density (and depth) are the two most decisive elements of what shells contribute to sound. Think of it this way. Around 20 years ago I got into making stereo speakers: book shelf, 4' towers, etc. Parts Express has everything you need to make your own speakers and the results can be, like DIY drums, pretty cool. My cousin used to be into it and that was my first exposure to DIY speakers.
A speaker receives an electronic signal to its magnet and coil and sound is heard. Consider that striking a drum head. The science of building speakers is an entire industry and has been since the beginning of the entire discovery of sound coming through horns of some kind. Electricity, electronics and sound. Over a century of discovery, research and development.
Speakers create sound, NOT speaker cabinets. That does not mean cabinets do not contribute to what speakers throw out. A lot of science goes into speaker enclosures.
I never got onto the science. I just used 3/4" plywood. I never added fancy veneer or anything else. My first pair of speakers, back in the 90's, employed Pine boards, stained and finished. I used 4 speakers: woofer, midrange and tweeter and a horn tweeter on the top of the cabinet. From the top of the woofer, set in at the typical 90 degrees, I angled the shape of the front of the cabinet a few degrees. The midrange and tweeter angled up a little. The horn on top pointed straight up. I saw a picture in a magazine and replicated what I saw. They were 4' tall and sounded great. I was amazed.
Enclosures can be shallow, deep, insulated or uninsulated, contain port tubes or not, to increase low end frequency range and other parameters. I use those same port tubes in my front bass drum heads. Even passive woofers can be installed, which render some extra low end by virtue of the hot woofer vibrating and pumping inside the enclosure. So, cabinets - the drum shell - can have an effect on the sound of speakers in subtle ways, nothing dramatic, enclosure to enclosure, using identical sets of speakers. With drums, nuances can be heard by what the shell wall density can trap and reflect of the sound waves thrown off by the heads. That is the physics of the process. Heads produce sound, not drum shells. Speakers produce sound, not speaker enclosures. Enclosures handle sound from the speakers. Shells handle sound from the heads. Even more so, the source of the sound, from the electronics, has as much or more to do with the sound than the speakers the signals are sent to. Consider that aspect the head manufacturers and how they make their heads and what they make them of. You get the drum stick and employ your velocity and touch upon them.
Regardless of all the super-hype manufacturers claim about their proprietary shells and sound, think this. Take some top of the line, custom made speakers; and they can cost tens of thousands of dollars. I remember a pair in a hi-fidelity magazine going for $60,000 dollars a pair and that was four decades ago. Today, well over a hundred grand can be spent for a pair of speakers. Also, things have individualized: midrange and tweeters in one cab, woofer/subwoofer in another cab, and vocal range speakers in another enclosure. Plus, surround sound. Here's a system that goes for 2 million dollars: Transmission Audio Ultimate. Check out the others at this site:
https://www.whathifi.com/us/features/11-worlds-most-expensive-loudspeakers
The frame drum has no shell, per se,' and the system can only produce a sound of one head under tension. In this particular case I only had one G12 to use, while the other drums have 10 mil clear heads, save for the Leather drum which employs an Evans Black 7.5 mil reso head. I'll get into the differences there.
The frame drum has harsh overtones. Using a 10 mil head would have increased those. A twin-ply or hydraulic head would be my choice if I used the drum in a set-up. The volume was obviously low. Nothing to trap the concussion force and sound wave. Strike the drum and the sound is out, away and gone but, that is not to say the drum has no sustain. The head vibrated and that is where sustain comes from: a sustained head vibration at optimum speeds. The 12-mil head, being slightly thicker than 10-mil, means under the same tension force, it's pitch is lower than the other drums. To bring it to the same relative pitch I had to put more force on the head, decreasing its vibration rate and duration, and changing the nuances of its tone under the greater stress at the tension points. These are the little things that go into sound.
The metal drum sounded a little muted and "dry;" not as lively a tone but, still efficient and full. It actually sounds better and better each time I strike it. It's volume was higher than the frame drum but, less than the next two. Bear in mind: no specific bearing edge. Any kind of thicker shell to place an edge on, would add some volume but, would dry out the sound even more: more shell material touching the head, affecting vibration with extra muting. Again, really nuances and subtleties impossible to hear in the context of a band.
The third drum, the stacked rings, offered "good" tone: and remember, there are no sufficient, agreed upon standards by all drummers as to what "good" sound is, or for that matter, "bad" sounding drums. There is only personal, subjective taste each player goes by. The drum meets my own personal standards of tone, sustain, and volume.
The bearing edge on the outside of the shell is a little wide but, plywood can be very tricky to work with. Remember the layers are not vertical, like regular plywood shells with the but ends making up the bearing edge. They are lateral, butt ends creating the shell wall. I leave a little more wood because a router bit spinning at 25k RPM's can yank that small area of the layer right off the shell. How each layer is glued by some manufactures of plywood better than others. Leaving that extra area of wood touching the head creates another aspect of muting so, a little less sustain and volume but, while it can be heard up close, in a band setting, if I used them that way, live or recording, those small aspects are totally hidden. At 5/8" thick, should it not be the loudest of the four? Nope.
The fourth drum was livelier, brighter, louder, and had the most sustain. Why? Shell wall density. Vertical plywood makes for a more dense shell wall; flat cut veneers that make up the layers, regardless of the number of plies glued together.
Think of a board. It has a planed edge and a butt end. Place the board vertical or horizontal, there's your shell wall, a bearing edge going on the butt end and planed end of plies glued together with the shell wall being flat cut veneer. Glue up the layers and you get a really hard, dense shell.
Stack a bunch of boards on top of one another and cut the ends off at 5/8." The cellular grain structure is different and not as dense using wood that way. Making only an inner 45 degree edge, leaving just a touch of wood to do a little sanding on is pretty risky using butt end plywood. Having wrecked enough edges that way, I leave more material on the outside cut.
***********
Rule out drum #1 for obvious reasons. It's technically a drum but, has no true musicality for my tastes. That does not mean it could not be used. Remember, mics, cables, and signal into electronic equipment can manipulate sound into a thousand parameters. That "sour" drum could be turned into something perfectly useful because of electronic equipment. The thing is, time is money. Studio engineers don't want to bother with things like that. For them it's "Bring in the best stuff you have." (UPDATE - I put a heavy-duty, thicker head on the drum and it really helped the sound. Overtones greatly diminished and under the use of mics and software, a perfectly acceptable sound could be produced on a recording).
Shell wall density (and depth) are the two most decisive elements of what shells contribute to sound. Think of it this way. Around 20 years ago I got into making stereo speakers: book shelf, 4' towers, etc. Parts Express has everything you need to make your own speakers and the results can be, like DIY drums, pretty cool. My cousin used to be into it and that was my first exposure to DIY speakers.
A speaker receives an electronic signal to its magnet and coil and sound is heard. Consider that striking a drum head. The science of building speakers is an entire industry and has been since the beginning of the entire discovery of sound coming through horns of some kind. Electricity, electronics and sound. Over a century of discovery, research and development.
Speakers create sound, NOT speaker cabinets. That does not mean cabinets do not contribute to what speakers throw out. A lot of science goes into speaker enclosures.
I never got onto the science. I just used 3/4" plywood. I never added fancy veneer or anything else. My first pair of speakers, back in the 90's, employed Pine boards, stained and finished. I used 4 speakers: woofer, midrange and tweeter and a horn tweeter on the top of the cabinet. From the top of the woofer, set in at the typical 90 degrees, I angled the shape of the front of the cabinet a few degrees. The midrange and tweeter angled up a little. The horn on top pointed straight up. I saw a picture in a magazine and replicated what I saw. They were 4' tall and sounded great. I was amazed.
Enclosures can be shallow, deep, insulated or uninsulated, contain port tubes or not, to increase low end frequency range and other parameters. I use those same port tubes in my front bass drum heads. Even passive woofers can be installed, which render some extra low end by virtue of the hot woofer vibrating and pumping inside the enclosure. So, cabinets - the drum shell - can have an effect on the sound of speakers in subtle ways, nothing dramatic, enclosure to enclosure, using identical sets of speakers. With drums, nuances can be heard by what the shell wall density can trap and reflect of the sound waves thrown off by the heads. That is the physics of the process. Heads produce sound, not drum shells. Speakers produce sound, not speaker enclosures. Enclosures handle sound from the speakers. Shells handle sound from the heads. Even more so, the source of the sound, from the electronics, has as much or more to do with the sound than the speakers the signals are sent to. Consider that aspect the head manufacturers and how they make their heads and what they make them of. You get the drum stick and employ your velocity and touch upon them.
Regardless of all the super-hype manufacturers claim about their proprietary shells and sound, think this. Take some top of the line, custom made speakers; and they can cost tens of thousands of dollars. I remember a pair in a hi-fidelity magazine going for $60,000 dollars a pair and that was four decades ago. Today, well over a hundred grand can be spent for a pair of speakers. Also, things have individualized: midrange and tweeters in one cab, woofer/subwoofer in another cab, and vocal range speakers in another enclosure. Plus, surround sound. Here's a system that goes for 2 million dollars: Transmission Audio Ultimate. Check out the others at this site:
https://www.whathifi.com/us/features/11-worlds-most-expensive-loudspeakers
So, here's the thing. Take the highest priced system on Earth, place it in huge room. Play some music, crank it up. Put a guitarist, a bassist, a keyboardist and a singer in the room. Crank them up and have them play the same music. Tell me if anything special would be heard from the stereo system. Nope. If everything was played note for note, at the same decibel level, nothing from the stereo system would be distinguished.
It's the same with a drum set. What ever we may hear in those subtle, nuanced differences in the overall sound acoustic drums put out; in a band context, the bassist is putting out the same frequency range. The guitarist is throwing out an even wider frequency range. The keyboardist is throwing out the widest frequency range of all, and the singer is doing their thing. Whatever acoustic differences you might hear in different drums are gone in the context of a band. Far too much competition in the sound stage. For volume in modern music performance, drummers need mics and PA, as well, to compete. Uh oh. Now comes the significant effects of mic design, cable function, electronic outboard or recording equipment and the entire digital world of it all. So much could be done in the analogue world. Today? It's a whole universe.
I have mentioned my experience, decades ago, recording 'From the Fjords.' Seeing pics of my Ludwig set back then, elsewhere on the site, we went into the studio with most of it. At least 17 of 24 drums, and as many or more cymbals. Buddy, the engineer, didn't like the sound of my snare drum. He dropped his wallet on it and told me to try that. ?!?!? I hated it. Dead. Box. Pillow. No way. He had me play it a little than made some adjustments inside the recording room and called me in. Hm. Okay. I went with it. Then he wanted to take the front heads of the bass drums! No way!!! The guys said to give him the chance and see what he does. He put mics about half way into each drum; a 24x26 and a 14x20. I hated the sound and the feel and was not happy. I played awhile and once again he called me in. I was shocked. It was gargantuan. Okay... so be it. That was the analogue days of 1978. Today? There is nothing that cannot be done with anything. I have seen Tom work wonders with just three mics on his student line set I renovated for our Miledge Muzic recordings.
I could easily make a whole set of roof flashing drums and use them live or on a recording and nobody would know what they are. With slightly better made frame drums for a set, with appropriate heads, the same could be accomplished.
If you want to spend top dollar for drums, that's your choice. No matter how you slice it, paying top dollar does not guarantee better sound than lower lines of drums. Better than beginner lines? Sure but, even there, if the sound of toms mounted at the shells, and typical floor tom mounting and legs appeals to you, even many of today's manufactured beginner's drums can easily give you plenty to work with for recording and playing live. Some companies offer an amazing line of sizes for starter drums. The hardware will not be road worthy and the finishes will not have as much to offer but, even there many more choices exist today than back in my day. The lugs will be the least expensive things companies can attach to the shells, and you'll probably want to change out the heads to better quality Mylar. Maybe not. Those are things far different than claims made for top of the line drums because of specially made proprietary plywood shells.
Everybody basically desires quality, and even the best of the best. Nothing wrong with that. Interestingly enough, a clunker will still get you there just as easily as a Rolls Royce or Ferrari. The clunker won't last as long, and it will have some problems and less than perfect details and probably a little less of a smooth ride but, it will get you there. Do you remember the days when Hollywood stars drove around in clunkers to make their statements about Hollywood excess? "Rent a Wreck." It was "the thing" back then. Didn't last long.
People have tried to use the differences in cars in my sharing of this subject. Don't try and tell them a Volkswagen can be compared to a Jag. Well, let's face it. Automobiles have tens of thousands of parts. It's apples and onions compared to drums. If you want to ride in style or you can get there in simplicity, either way, you get there. Do I want wine red or black wrap on my drums? No. Do I want lugs prone to failure? No. But, having renovated inexpensive drums and recorded with them, I know what can be done.
The sound of a drum is produced by heads under tension, and there are no Volks versus Jag heads coming from head manufacturers. They do not sell beginner, mid-levels and top of the line heads. They just sell variations of top of the line Mylar and coating products. Remember that.
Marketing hype must be seen for what it is: a way to sell product. Most of it, when it comes to drum shells, is just hollow, impractical and expensive talk.
Everybody makes great drums. Everybody is not completely honest about the super claims they make about their drums. That's unfortunate for both makers and consumers.
It's the same with a drum set. What ever we may hear in those subtle, nuanced differences in the overall sound acoustic drums put out; in a band context, the bassist is putting out the same frequency range. The guitarist is throwing out an even wider frequency range. The keyboardist is throwing out the widest frequency range of all, and the singer is doing their thing. Whatever acoustic differences you might hear in different drums are gone in the context of a band. Far too much competition in the sound stage. For volume in modern music performance, drummers need mics and PA, as well, to compete. Uh oh. Now comes the significant effects of mic design, cable function, electronic outboard or recording equipment and the entire digital world of it all. So much could be done in the analogue world. Today? It's a whole universe.
I have mentioned my experience, decades ago, recording 'From the Fjords.' Seeing pics of my Ludwig set back then, elsewhere on the site, we went into the studio with most of it. At least 17 of 24 drums, and as many or more cymbals. Buddy, the engineer, didn't like the sound of my snare drum. He dropped his wallet on it and told me to try that. ?!?!? I hated it. Dead. Box. Pillow. No way. He had me play it a little than made some adjustments inside the recording room and called me in. Hm. Okay. I went with it. Then he wanted to take the front heads of the bass drums! No way!!! The guys said to give him the chance and see what he does. He put mics about half way into each drum; a 24x26 and a 14x20. I hated the sound and the feel and was not happy. I played awhile and once again he called me in. I was shocked. It was gargantuan. Okay... so be it. That was the analogue days of 1978. Today? There is nothing that cannot be done with anything. I have seen Tom work wonders with just three mics on his student line set I renovated for our Miledge Muzic recordings.
I could easily make a whole set of roof flashing drums and use them live or on a recording and nobody would know what they are. With slightly better made frame drums for a set, with appropriate heads, the same could be accomplished.
If you want to spend top dollar for drums, that's your choice. No matter how you slice it, paying top dollar does not guarantee better sound than lower lines of drums. Better than beginner lines? Sure but, even there, if the sound of toms mounted at the shells, and typical floor tom mounting and legs appeals to you, even many of today's manufactured beginner's drums can easily give you plenty to work with for recording and playing live. Some companies offer an amazing line of sizes for starter drums. The hardware will not be road worthy and the finishes will not have as much to offer but, even there many more choices exist today than back in my day. The lugs will be the least expensive things companies can attach to the shells, and you'll probably want to change out the heads to better quality Mylar. Maybe not. Those are things far different than claims made for top of the line drums because of specially made proprietary plywood shells.
Everybody basically desires quality, and even the best of the best. Nothing wrong with that. Interestingly enough, a clunker will still get you there just as easily as a Rolls Royce or Ferrari. The clunker won't last as long, and it will have some problems and less than perfect details and probably a little less of a smooth ride but, it will get you there. Do you remember the days when Hollywood stars drove around in clunkers to make their statements about Hollywood excess? "Rent a Wreck." It was "the thing" back then. Didn't last long.
People have tried to use the differences in cars in my sharing of this subject. Don't try and tell them a Volkswagen can be compared to a Jag. Well, let's face it. Automobiles have tens of thousands of parts. It's apples and onions compared to drums. If you want to ride in style or you can get there in simplicity, either way, you get there. Do I want wine red or black wrap on my drums? No. Do I want lugs prone to failure? No. But, having renovated inexpensive drums and recorded with them, I know what can be done.
The sound of a drum is produced by heads under tension, and there are no Volks versus Jag heads coming from head manufacturers. They do not sell beginner, mid-levels and top of the line heads. They just sell variations of top of the line Mylar and coating products. Remember that.
Marketing hype must be seen for what it is: a way to sell product. Most of it, when it comes to drum shells, is just hollow, impractical and expensive talk.
Everybody makes great drums. Everybody is not completely honest about the super claims they make about their drums. That's unfortunate for both makers and consumers.
*****************************
The Final Snare Drums? - April 18, 2022
God blessed me with a father who would try just about anything. He was a consummate DIYer. He made a lot of things in his life; worked with wood as well as being a longtime machinist. While I never got into machinery, per se', I like tools and have been fortunate to have my father's genes and have made a lot of drums and things over the years. I've sold some, especially snare drums. Regretted some of that but, the path to making new ones is always there and that was the case after I saw some new boards at the hardware store in town. I mentioned that last time and showed some pics of the stave shells I made. Here are the finished drums.
Honestly, all things considered, probably the last drums I will make.
These are "rustic" by my standards. As I get old and worn out, so are my tools and peripheries. I don't do this for a living so, techniques get a little rusty, much like some of my tools sitting in the humid air of Texas for years. Although, drilling straight holes in dowels is a satanic nuisance all the time, regardless.
These last two snare drums will end up either played because they offer something other drums I have made do not have, or sitting on a shelf with other drums I've made, like old friends sitting around and not doing much of anything but, watching the world go by. They'll get sold some day.
A drum offering something different is not so much sound, as feel. That's what I go for in all drums but, especially snare drums. This is where density and depth come in, again. I have addressed both aspects as it equates to sound but, density is really involved in feel, as well.
Density affects how the sound wave/percussive air column explodes and moves within the cylinder. That affects how the drum heads react, which affects the impact of the sticks, which affect how my hands feel in playing the drum. I have always liked metal snare drums because of that harder feel. That said, when I began making my own drums and working with thick, domestic and exotic hardwoods, the differences were insignificant to metal, save where wood density was greater than sheet metal used in manufactured drums or my own metal drums. I always liked my 3/16" aluminum shell best (made for me by a good friend who worked in an aircraft facility), because it was more dense than any other metal drum I played and felt better.
I have made 1" thick wood shells and 3/4" thick wood shells but, in fact, the original Purpleheart snare I made 20 years ago and sold, had a nicer feel than 1" thick Maple snares I made. The Maple tone is very... woody, for sure, at less head tension. The Purpleheart had a metallic sound and feel. Why? Because Purpleheart is a lot harder than Maple. Purpleheart ranges from the mid-1800s to over 2000 pounds of force on the Janka scale. Again, that's a steel ball dropped onto a 2" thick board and the dent is measured; equated to how much force was required to put the depth of the dent into the wood. Typical Maple and Birch are around 1450 pounds of force but, other species vary. That's a pretty fair distance between them and is noticeable just with the tooling necessary to cut staves. My blades and bits are not dull by any means, using them for regular Pines I work with but, burning the harder woods is a regular occurrence. The speeds at which blades and bits spin also figure into that. Aside from tool wear, just how much sound difference takes place because woods are harder?
If you have seen my two videos on snare drum shell comparisons, using 8 and 10 drums, you have seen the evidence that with the heads tensioned the same, no dramatic, significant, or even minor sound differences can be heard in most cases. Depth created some differences in snare wire performance and "crispness" of overall drum sound. Variations in different materials and depths made some to no difference. Change the head tensions and variations of sound can be heard but, again, that has to do with the cylinder density and the power wave thrown out by striking the batter head. Obviously a head with less tension is going to sound different than one with high tension, regardless of shell material but, density of the shell wall does come into play.
In this case, Padauk and another Purpleheart are both are very hard woods, the Padauk being around 100 pounds less in force to cause the measured dent. The raw, though roughly planed boards were 7/8" and stayed pretty close to that after I dressed the outside faces. I left the inside as is.
I used some black hardware I originally used on the PVC drum, and it looks really sharp on the more brown/orange color of the Padauk, set up in traditional fashion; 8 lugs and triple-flanged hoops. Again, I did not round the drums. I left the staves flat, both sides. I showed that works just as well using the shell made from MDF hardboard siding material for a shell.
Honestly, all things considered, probably the last drums I will make.
These are "rustic" by my standards. As I get old and worn out, so are my tools and peripheries. I don't do this for a living so, techniques get a little rusty, much like some of my tools sitting in the humid air of Texas for years. Although, drilling straight holes in dowels is a satanic nuisance all the time, regardless.
These last two snare drums will end up either played because they offer something other drums I have made do not have, or sitting on a shelf with other drums I've made, like old friends sitting around and not doing much of anything but, watching the world go by. They'll get sold some day.
A drum offering something different is not so much sound, as feel. That's what I go for in all drums but, especially snare drums. This is where density and depth come in, again. I have addressed both aspects as it equates to sound but, density is really involved in feel, as well.
Density affects how the sound wave/percussive air column explodes and moves within the cylinder. That affects how the drum heads react, which affects the impact of the sticks, which affect how my hands feel in playing the drum. I have always liked metal snare drums because of that harder feel. That said, when I began making my own drums and working with thick, domestic and exotic hardwoods, the differences were insignificant to metal, save where wood density was greater than sheet metal used in manufactured drums or my own metal drums. I always liked my 3/16" aluminum shell best (made for me by a good friend who worked in an aircraft facility), because it was more dense than any other metal drum I played and felt better.
I have made 1" thick wood shells and 3/4" thick wood shells but, in fact, the original Purpleheart snare I made 20 years ago and sold, had a nicer feel than 1" thick Maple snares I made. The Maple tone is very... woody, for sure, at less head tension. The Purpleheart had a metallic sound and feel. Why? Because Purpleheart is a lot harder than Maple. Purpleheart ranges from the mid-1800s to over 2000 pounds of force on the Janka scale. Again, that's a steel ball dropped onto a 2" thick board and the dent is measured; equated to how much force was required to put the depth of the dent into the wood. Typical Maple and Birch are around 1450 pounds of force but, other species vary. That's a pretty fair distance between them and is noticeable just with the tooling necessary to cut staves. My blades and bits are not dull by any means, using them for regular Pines I work with but, burning the harder woods is a regular occurrence. The speeds at which blades and bits spin also figure into that. Aside from tool wear, just how much sound difference takes place because woods are harder?
If you have seen my two videos on snare drum shell comparisons, using 8 and 10 drums, you have seen the evidence that with the heads tensioned the same, no dramatic, significant, or even minor sound differences can be heard in most cases. Depth created some differences in snare wire performance and "crispness" of overall drum sound. Variations in different materials and depths made some to no difference. Change the head tensions and variations of sound can be heard but, again, that has to do with the cylinder density and the power wave thrown out by striking the batter head. Obviously a head with less tension is going to sound different than one with high tension, regardless of shell material but, density of the shell wall does come into play.
In this case, Padauk and another Purpleheart are both are very hard woods, the Padauk being around 100 pounds less in force to cause the measured dent. The raw, though roughly planed boards were 7/8" and stayed pretty close to that after I dressed the outside faces. I left the inside as is.
I used some black hardware I originally used on the PVC drum, and it looks really sharp on the more brown/orange color of the Padauk, set up in traditional fashion; 8 lugs and triple-flanged hoops. Again, I did not round the drums. I left the staves flat, both sides. I showed that works just as well using the shell made from MDF hardboard siding material for a shell.
The Purpleheart has been another experiment. 32 flat staves, with 4 routered decorative channels; 16 "lugs" or tension points using 10-24 threaded rods, rather than 1/4", and my usual acorn nuts and Tee nuts, using plywood hoops; these made from three, 1/4" layers of varying plywood I had in the shop. They are only 1" in width, not the usual 1 3/8". I figured 16 points of tension and I would not put anywhere near the stress at any given point as with 8 or 10 lug points.
16 tension points for the free-floating idea I use. The drum looks bizarrely busy, cosmetically. Instead of round Poplar dowels I made some out of Oak boards, beveled the 90 degree edges, dyed them Purple, as the hoops but, I dipped them in Polyurethane. So the look goes from wax to poly and it's pretty complex to see it all, as snare drums go.
Like I said, look close and see lots of cosmetic issues owing to tools, bits, eyesight, and other stuff, and my days of "perfection" in woodworking never existed and never will, anyway. These just have more cosmetic defects than usual. I have never had a nice wood shop and tools, never will, and have learned to do the best I can with what I have to work with. You have lemons, make lemonade, as the saying goes.
Not making stave drums in a long time, techniques come into play and the shells are not perfectly round, and slightly undersized. Of course, having the flat-sided staves removes round, technically, and no one would ever know it by hearing the drums. The heads seat fine and do their thing.
16 tension points for the free-floating idea I use. The drum looks bizarrely busy, cosmetically. Instead of round Poplar dowels I made some out of Oak boards, beveled the 90 degree edges, dyed them Purple, as the hoops but, I dipped them in Polyurethane. So the look goes from wax to poly and it's pretty complex to see it all, as snare drums go.
Like I said, look close and see lots of cosmetic issues owing to tools, bits, eyesight, and other stuff, and my days of "perfection" in woodworking never existed and never will, anyway. These just have more cosmetic defects than usual. I have never had a nice wood shop and tools, never will, and have learned to do the best I can with what I have to work with. You have lemons, make lemonade, as the saying goes.
Not making stave drums in a long time, techniques come into play and the shells are not perfectly round, and slightly undersized. Of course, having the flat-sided staves removes round, technically, and no one would ever know it by hearing the drums. The heads seat fine and do their thing.
As usual, I added a hoop protector for rim shots, Maple, and left it natural to offset it from all the purple.
Striking each drum, the extra depth of the Purpleheart is not enough to create any significant sound differences. Both drums sound a tad brighter than plywood shells but, as always, it's nuances and subtleties.
Drum making is a hobby; one I have both enjoyed and screamed at, relating to humanity and its quirks and fallibility. I admire those who produce truly magnificent works of drum art. Art is art but, sound is sound and perfectly beautiful drums does not mean they sound any better. They're drums, not pianos. They sound no different than perfectly round drums. The heads seat fine on the edges and away you go. Edges, depth, and density of shell material are the major players when it comes to shells. It's all nuances and subtleties. Each player has to decide how wide their wallet will open in paying for whatever they play, when sound is objectively close or identical, especially in the context of a band.
I like these two drums for both looks and sound. I imagine if I had a decent shop and ability for higher finished standards I could sell such drums for their looks, alone. In fact, entire drum sets could be made, no? Round is great. 24 flat sides is great, too. I imagine even rustic drums, for the right price, would do well, maybe better than other manufactured drums. Though it must be said, Pine drums would be significantly less expensive than either domestic or certainly exotic hardwoods. Prices have gone crazy, with everything, and if things go as expected, even buying a new snare drum will be a great luxury for most of us. We'll be far more concerned with other matters affecting daily life, thanks to those who care far more about their personal power and control, than the freedoms and liberty of the masses.
I had my run. Now it's the turn of the young. I hope they fare better than what my generation has taught and left them to work with.
"Trees? What are those? You mean a tree actually had purple and orange wood?"
Don't laugh. It may come to that.
Striking each drum, the extra depth of the Purpleheart is not enough to create any significant sound differences. Both drums sound a tad brighter than plywood shells but, as always, it's nuances and subtleties.
Drum making is a hobby; one I have both enjoyed and screamed at, relating to humanity and its quirks and fallibility. I admire those who produce truly magnificent works of drum art. Art is art but, sound is sound and perfectly beautiful drums does not mean they sound any better. They're drums, not pianos. They sound no different than perfectly round drums. The heads seat fine on the edges and away you go. Edges, depth, and density of shell material are the major players when it comes to shells. It's all nuances and subtleties. Each player has to decide how wide their wallet will open in paying for whatever they play, when sound is objectively close or identical, especially in the context of a band.
I like these two drums for both looks and sound. I imagine if I had a decent shop and ability for higher finished standards I could sell such drums for their looks, alone. In fact, entire drum sets could be made, no? Round is great. 24 flat sides is great, too. I imagine even rustic drums, for the right price, would do well, maybe better than other manufactured drums. Though it must be said, Pine drums would be significantly less expensive than either domestic or certainly exotic hardwoods. Prices have gone crazy, with everything, and if things go as expected, even buying a new snare drum will be a great luxury for most of us. We'll be far more concerned with other matters affecting daily life, thanks to those who care far more about their personal power and control, than the freedoms and liberty of the masses.
I had my run. Now it's the turn of the young. I hope they fare better than what my generation has taught and left them to work with.
"Trees? What are those? You mean a tree actually had purple and orange wood?"
Don't laugh. It may come to that.
*****************************
542 - A New Drum Shell Company - April 18, 2022
Okay, back to drums.
For most of my life Keller is the go to company for drum shells for DIYers. Eames offers Birch shells, and the only other company I knew of, that made shells for Gretsch - Jasper - is no longer in service.
Awhile back I came upon a new USA company making drum shells. It's a nice website, and their shells look great, and testimony to that fact is made by numerous quotes from customers; both individuals and custom drum makers. As I perused the site I came upon the page giving details about their various wood species they use for their plywood shells. I was surprised to see the same, typical misnomers for plywood drums and hyped-up sound. Especially in this case because they placed in columns the Janka scale reference for hardness of the various species they use.
They make three different series, and a custom selection of the customer's choosing. Some are full drum set sizes and others are just 14" snare drum sizes.
There are no sound files offered, just the typical statements of what the sound qualities of each specie is. Here's where I watched the boat sink, for me. I'm not naming the company because, as I said, they obviously make fine products and I'm not throwing anyone under a bus. That stated, this is the opening statement for one series:
"Made exclusively of one standard wood, the ____ Series amplifies the wood’s character and creates a pure tone and resonance true to its species."
Now remember, density of the shell wall, shell depth, and a proper bearing edge to allow for best head seating are the lion's share of what shells can do to impact what the heads throw off, regardless of species. No membranes vibrating - no cylinder makes a sound by itself.
They offer six different species. That's pretty cool. Full Maple, Ash, Birch, Cherry, Mahogany and Walnut, in 4 thicknesses: 6, 8, 10 and 12 ply, with very slight variations of millimeter thickness, specie to specie veneers for total layup of the shells.
Here's what they chart:
Maple - Hardness - 1450; Sustain - Long; Tone - Bright, Mid-low.
Ash - 1320 - Medium - Bright, Crisp, Loud.
Birch - 1260 - Medium - Mids, Focused.
Cherry - 950 - Medium - Punchy.
Mahogany - 1100 - Short - Low, Warm.
Walnut - 1010 - Medium - Warm, Dark.
Look at those hardness numbers. At 1100, how could Mahogany have a shorter sustain and a low, warm tone when it is only a listed 220 lbf less than Ash? That's actually high, though. On lists I have seen, African Mahogany is 800 lbf but, that's moot. None of those numbers are far enough apart - the hardness/density of the species - to significantly change what the drum heads throw off when struck. The cellular structure of thin plywood is not the same as a 2" thick board used in the Janka tests. Drop the metal ball used on a 1/4" or less piece of plywood and destroy its cellular structure. I'm telling you, without audio confirmation, these numbers and sound qualities are nonsense. How can Ash, with less hardness than Maple, be a louder sound chamber? What is the difference between low and warm, and warm and dark when only 90 lbf exists between the listed Mahogany and Walnut? How can smaller tom, using the same heads, be darker than another tom of another species? Let me hear the darker tone of an 8" or 10" Walnut plywood tom over Maple. Don't say it. Show it.
These typical sound profiles are so ubiquitous in the manufacturing industry it's almost criminal. Consumers are being mislead. Even if the detailed profiles were actually existent, the subtle nature of the differences are meaningless when you put that drum set in the middle of a band, a PA system and outboard equipment, or studios and recording software. And the differences in prices are substantial, especially when they get to exotic woods.
Here's the layout for the combination series.
Maple/Gum - Sustain - Long, Tone Focused.
Now, wait. We know Maple is harder than the other species used thus far. The softest Gum is listed at over 1300 lbf. How do you get a "Focused" tone when some Gum is harder than Maple, and Maple gives a Bright, Mid-Low tone? Do you see the issues here?
Maple/Poplar - Medium - Punchy and Round.
I never understood "Round" used for a sound profile. Drums are round. What does round mean, as opposed to... square? Admittedly, Poplar is softer than Maple. Why was Poplar used back in the day? It's inexpensive. An inner and outer layer of Maple with a Poplar core made for Ludwig and Slingerland's shells. As Ludwig Senior admitted, the action is within that first inner ply. Beyond that the sound waves are nothing by the time they get into the shell core. Drum shells cannot modify the sound waves enough to turn a vibrating sound wave into something "punchy." Heads can, though. That's the point of some models of drumheads.
Mahogany/Poplar - Medium - Warm and Focused.
You want warm and focused? Put 2-ply heads on your Maple drums, or any drums. Done.
This blew my mind though.
Bubinga. 1980 - Long - Deep and Round.
Stop the music! Bubinga is over 500 lbf beyond Maple. Maple is hard enough to provide a "Bright" tone. How is it Bubinga, being that much harder, does not provide that much more brightness to the tone? And, the 10 ply Bubinga shell is only 4.9 mm thick. It's a very thin shell. Ah, then. It is not the species of wood. It truly is the density of the shell wall, and a very thin Bubinga shell will not have the density of a thicker Maple plywood shell. Although, let it be stated, the sound profiles are given for any shell thickness, which should not be. If you are going to list sound profiles and state them the same for any thickness of shell wall you have just reduced your validity to naught. Sorry. Stay consistent, and then prove it, or just leave the shells as cosmetically different. Walnut shells are very attractive. Bubinga is really nice, too. The lightness of Maple can be fairly blank for cosmetic grain patterns, though it stains, dyes and finishes well. Getting into sound profiles? Change my mind with some evidence.
When you expect and ask players to weed through all this hype, confusion is created, as well as misgivings and disappointment when consumers receive their product and find out no significant or dramatic sound characteristic differences exist. With NOTHING to compare things to, any customer gets what they get and just thinks their instruments meet the hype. They have no empirical way to know otherwise.
If you take a Maple tom and mount it with a shell bracket, and a Poplar tom mounted with isolation hardware, the Poplar tom will have a wider range of frequency and sustain. If you take a Bubinga tom and put twin-ply heads on it, the Mahogany tom with single-ply clear, is going to sound brighter than the much harder Bubinga. That is just physics and common sense.
And don't forget, sustain is moot. In the context of moving music, nobody hears how long your drums sustain. It's impossible. What's heard is the initial impact of the velocity of a stick upon the batter head and whatever transfers through a microphone into all the rest. Even in an acoustic setting, sustain, as much as I love it and make drums to provide it, hits too much competition from the rest of the band.
How easy would it be for this shell company to make a single tom from each line and demonstrate the veracity of the sound profile claims? They do not. They are just parroting what has been stated by the manufacturers for the last few decades. They seek to prove nothing. Nobody else does. Why should they?
Change the heads, change the sound of a drum.
Like I said, I have no desire to throw any company under the bus. I'm just committed to truth, and the truth is, plywood drums cannot be as different, specie to specie used, as manufacturers super-hype. It's just marketing to sell product. Broken record but, true.
For most of my life Keller is the go to company for drum shells for DIYers. Eames offers Birch shells, and the only other company I knew of, that made shells for Gretsch - Jasper - is no longer in service.
Awhile back I came upon a new USA company making drum shells. It's a nice website, and their shells look great, and testimony to that fact is made by numerous quotes from customers; both individuals and custom drum makers. As I perused the site I came upon the page giving details about their various wood species they use for their plywood shells. I was surprised to see the same, typical misnomers for plywood drums and hyped-up sound. Especially in this case because they placed in columns the Janka scale reference for hardness of the various species they use.
They make three different series, and a custom selection of the customer's choosing. Some are full drum set sizes and others are just 14" snare drum sizes.
There are no sound files offered, just the typical statements of what the sound qualities of each specie is. Here's where I watched the boat sink, for me. I'm not naming the company because, as I said, they obviously make fine products and I'm not throwing anyone under a bus. That stated, this is the opening statement for one series:
"Made exclusively of one standard wood, the ____ Series amplifies the wood’s character and creates a pure tone and resonance true to its species."
Now remember, density of the shell wall, shell depth, and a proper bearing edge to allow for best head seating are the lion's share of what shells can do to impact what the heads throw off, regardless of species. No membranes vibrating - no cylinder makes a sound by itself.
They offer six different species. That's pretty cool. Full Maple, Ash, Birch, Cherry, Mahogany and Walnut, in 4 thicknesses: 6, 8, 10 and 12 ply, with very slight variations of millimeter thickness, specie to specie veneers for total layup of the shells.
Here's what they chart:
Maple - Hardness - 1450; Sustain - Long; Tone - Bright, Mid-low.
Ash - 1320 - Medium - Bright, Crisp, Loud.
Birch - 1260 - Medium - Mids, Focused.
Cherry - 950 - Medium - Punchy.
Mahogany - 1100 - Short - Low, Warm.
Walnut - 1010 - Medium - Warm, Dark.
Look at those hardness numbers. At 1100, how could Mahogany have a shorter sustain and a low, warm tone when it is only a listed 220 lbf less than Ash? That's actually high, though. On lists I have seen, African Mahogany is 800 lbf but, that's moot. None of those numbers are far enough apart - the hardness/density of the species - to significantly change what the drum heads throw off when struck. The cellular structure of thin plywood is not the same as a 2" thick board used in the Janka tests. Drop the metal ball used on a 1/4" or less piece of plywood and destroy its cellular structure. I'm telling you, without audio confirmation, these numbers and sound qualities are nonsense. How can Ash, with less hardness than Maple, be a louder sound chamber? What is the difference between low and warm, and warm and dark when only 90 lbf exists between the listed Mahogany and Walnut? How can smaller tom, using the same heads, be darker than another tom of another species? Let me hear the darker tone of an 8" or 10" Walnut plywood tom over Maple. Don't say it. Show it.
These typical sound profiles are so ubiquitous in the manufacturing industry it's almost criminal. Consumers are being mislead. Even if the detailed profiles were actually existent, the subtle nature of the differences are meaningless when you put that drum set in the middle of a band, a PA system and outboard equipment, or studios and recording software. And the differences in prices are substantial, especially when they get to exotic woods.
Here's the layout for the combination series.
Maple/Gum - Sustain - Long, Tone Focused.
Now, wait. We know Maple is harder than the other species used thus far. The softest Gum is listed at over 1300 lbf. How do you get a "Focused" tone when some Gum is harder than Maple, and Maple gives a Bright, Mid-Low tone? Do you see the issues here?
Maple/Poplar - Medium - Punchy and Round.
I never understood "Round" used for a sound profile. Drums are round. What does round mean, as opposed to... square? Admittedly, Poplar is softer than Maple. Why was Poplar used back in the day? It's inexpensive. An inner and outer layer of Maple with a Poplar core made for Ludwig and Slingerland's shells. As Ludwig Senior admitted, the action is within that first inner ply. Beyond that the sound waves are nothing by the time they get into the shell core. Drum shells cannot modify the sound waves enough to turn a vibrating sound wave into something "punchy." Heads can, though. That's the point of some models of drumheads.
Mahogany/Poplar - Medium - Warm and Focused.
You want warm and focused? Put 2-ply heads on your Maple drums, or any drums. Done.
This blew my mind though.
Bubinga. 1980 - Long - Deep and Round.
Stop the music! Bubinga is over 500 lbf beyond Maple. Maple is hard enough to provide a "Bright" tone. How is it Bubinga, being that much harder, does not provide that much more brightness to the tone? And, the 10 ply Bubinga shell is only 4.9 mm thick. It's a very thin shell. Ah, then. It is not the species of wood. It truly is the density of the shell wall, and a very thin Bubinga shell will not have the density of a thicker Maple plywood shell. Although, let it be stated, the sound profiles are given for any shell thickness, which should not be. If you are going to list sound profiles and state them the same for any thickness of shell wall you have just reduced your validity to naught. Sorry. Stay consistent, and then prove it, or just leave the shells as cosmetically different. Walnut shells are very attractive. Bubinga is really nice, too. The lightness of Maple can be fairly blank for cosmetic grain patterns, though it stains, dyes and finishes well. Getting into sound profiles? Change my mind with some evidence.
When you expect and ask players to weed through all this hype, confusion is created, as well as misgivings and disappointment when consumers receive their product and find out no significant or dramatic sound characteristic differences exist. With NOTHING to compare things to, any customer gets what they get and just thinks their instruments meet the hype. They have no empirical way to know otherwise.
If you take a Maple tom and mount it with a shell bracket, and a Poplar tom mounted with isolation hardware, the Poplar tom will have a wider range of frequency and sustain. If you take a Bubinga tom and put twin-ply heads on it, the Mahogany tom with single-ply clear, is going to sound brighter than the much harder Bubinga. That is just physics and common sense.
And don't forget, sustain is moot. In the context of moving music, nobody hears how long your drums sustain. It's impossible. What's heard is the initial impact of the velocity of a stick upon the batter head and whatever transfers through a microphone into all the rest. Even in an acoustic setting, sustain, as much as I love it and make drums to provide it, hits too much competition from the rest of the band.
How easy would it be for this shell company to make a single tom from each line and demonstrate the veracity of the sound profile claims? They do not. They are just parroting what has been stated by the manufacturers for the last few decades. They seek to prove nothing. Nobody else does. Why should they?
Change the heads, change the sound of a drum.
Like I said, I have no desire to throw any company under the bus. I'm just committed to truth, and the truth is, plywood drums cannot be as different, specie to specie used, as manufacturers super-hype. It's just marketing to sell product. Broken record but, true.
*****************************
When it Comes to Drum Shells, I'm not the Only One - April 19, 2022
In doing a search for a new blog entry today, I came upon a website page that was an interesting read. I don't know how old the page is. There's no date on it but, it pretty much coincides with my own position on the subject of shells and sound I've had for years now. I don't agree 100% with what is stated but, hey, 99% is good.
Now, admittedly, this is a site about drum heads and they have a ton of info about heads and I'd expect such a site to downplay the element of plywood shells and sound, right? I mean, they sell drum heads (and they, too, mention the Timpano YT video showing one drum played with 60-something heads).
(2) Aquarian vs Evans vs Remo: 62 heads - ULTIMATE Snare Head Comparison - Timpano Percussion - YouTube
That said, the principles they espouse about shells, with sound files, shows me I am not the only person to take this public position that the sound of a drum is not the shell, it mostly the heads. A drum is a unit of parts and sounds "best" when the entire unit vibrates fully but, ultimately, change the heads, change the sound of the drum. Shell wall density, depth and proper bearing edges to seat the heads; that's the lion's share of what a shell contributes.
What did I disagree about? Well, they got into a little bit about plies, and directions they're laid, and their thicknesses in layup, etc., and how that all affects the sound. I have yet to hear any evidence that is true. Even they state it's tiny differences. Matter of fact, that is their go to word - "tiny" or "small." I choose 'nuances' and 'subtleties.' Same difference. It all gets lost in full set play or especially in the context of a band, and they get into all that, too.
It's a long article. They cover all the ground. Respect.
https://drumheadauthority.com/articles/forget-the-best-drum-wood/
Now, admittedly, this is a site about drum heads and they have a ton of info about heads and I'd expect such a site to downplay the element of plywood shells and sound, right? I mean, they sell drum heads (and they, too, mention the Timpano YT video showing one drum played with 60-something heads).
(2) Aquarian vs Evans vs Remo: 62 heads - ULTIMATE Snare Head Comparison - Timpano Percussion - YouTube
That said, the principles they espouse about shells, with sound files, shows me I am not the only person to take this public position that the sound of a drum is not the shell, it mostly the heads. A drum is a unit of parts and sounds "best" when the entire unit vibrates fully but, ultimately, change the heads, change the sound of the drum. Shell wall density, depth and proper bearing edges to seat the heads; that's the lion's share of what a shell contributes.
What did I disagree about? Well, they got into a little bit about plies, and directions they're laid, and their thicknesses in layup, etc., and how that all affects the sound. I have yet to hear any evidence that is true. Even they state it's tiny differences. Matter of fact, that is their go to word - "tiny" or "small." I choose 'nuances' and 'subtleties.' Same difference. It all gets lost in full set play or especially in the context of a band, and they get into all that, too.
It's a long article. They cover all the ground. Respect.
https://drumheadauthority.com/articles/forget-the-best-drum-wood/
*****************************
Yep. It's the Sound of the Heads.
I came across a few videos of drumist, Gary Chaffee, doing three short solos. The video seems to take place in a small studio of some kind and might even be a teaching situation, Chaffee being one of the premier drum instructors of his era.
Notice the set he's using. Two 12" toms. Two very different 12" toms, pitched high and low. Just struck alone, the difference is apparent. Rack tom bright w/high tension on the heads, "floor" tom dry. In the context of the entire kit and various patterns being played, they become almost indistinguishable, and pretty much just blend into a whole-set sound field.
When I take the position the sound of a drum is the mostly the heads, not the shell, and what shells contribute are nuances and subtleties, the evidence is there. The shell traps the sound waves between the heads, provides volume and resonance, and substantial differences in shell depth provides some extra low end presence, but comes with other aspects that may or may not be desired when it comes to feel. In the context of music, who would notice what Chaffee was using if piano, bass, horns or guitar, whatever, was added into the mix?
Anyway, check out the videos and see what I mean: the sound of a drum is the heads. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum.
Plus, Chaffee is one of the masters of the instrument. Always interesting to watch his complexity at work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XXCDoADzUY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODeWDidoDuk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6dbmDPWAAA
Notice the set he's using. Two 12" toms. Two very different 12" toms, pitched high and low. Just struck alone, the difference is apparent. Rack tom bright w/high tension on the heads, "floor" tom dry. In the context of the entire kit and various patterns being played, they become almost indistinguishable, and pretty much just blend into a whole-set sound field.
When I take the position the sound of a drum is the mostly the heads, not the shell, and what shells contribute are nuances and subtleties, the evidence is there. The shell traps the sound waves between the heads, provides volume and resonance, and substantial differences in shell depth provides some extra low end presence, but comes with other aspects that may or may not be desired when it comes to feel. In the context of music, who would notice what Chaffee was using if piano, bass, horns or guitar, whatever, was added into the mix?
Anyway, check out the videos and see what I mean: the sound of a drum is the heads. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum.
Plus, Chaffee is one of the masters of the instrument. Always interesting to watch his complexity at work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XXCDoADzUY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODeWDidoDuk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6dbmDPWAAA
*****************************
April 27 - Three Shells Compared
I was watching a YT video on making a drum shell and when it finished the channel showed a video about a comparison of three different shells in a free floating frame: Acrylic, Brass and Maple.
I always say 'nuances and subtleties' for a reason. Aside from the Maple being tuned to a higher pitch, you can hear the subtle differences, which are lost in the music. The drums become the same sound in the context of competing for space in the sound stage of the band.
The reasons for subtle differences and main similarities? Shell density handling the frequencies in the sound waves from the heads. The heads are what produce sound. The shells enhance or dehance those frequencies.
I have yet to hear a drum shell dramatically enhance or dehance anything drum heads throw off in dramatic ways that are truly discernible in the context of music when the same heads and tensions are employed.
Now, if you tension heads at variable rates, you change the sound waves and frequencies put out. At that point corresponding shell densities may react differently and coincide better, tension to tension. You may notice small differences between shell material but, if all things remain equal, anything and everything a cylinder does to seat a couple drum heads under tension pretty much cannot really effect the sound very much. The range of main frequencies and densities available in drums is just not very wide.
I've done my own videos for snare shell comparisons on my YT channel and it really is shocking how little things change when heads are the same and tensioned to the same pitch.
Here's a link to the video I just watched. Check it out yourself and see, or hear any dramatic differences.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NV0mnxVlxDE
Links to my own comparison videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-rXprDgHsc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiMdtofZ_OY
I'm finishing up three new snare drums. Two are done, one remains and I'll do a video of the three soon, and once again, we'll see if shell materials make a dramatic difference that equals the super-hype in the manufacturing industry over drum shells and sound.
I always say 'nuances and subtleties' for a reason. Aside from the Maple being tuned to a higher pitch, you can hear the subtle differences, which are lost in the music. The drums become the same sound in the context of competing for space in the sound stage of the band.
The reasons for subtle differences and main similarities? Shell density handling the frequencies in the sound waves from the heads. The heads are what produce sound. The shells enhance or dehance those frequencies.
I have yet to hear a drum shell dramatically enhance or dehance anything drum heads throw off in dramatic ways that are truly discernible in the context of music when the same heads and tensions are employed.
Now, if you tension heads at variable rates, you change the sound waves and frequencies put out. At that point corresponding shell densities may react differently and coincide better, tension to tension. You may notice small differences between shell material but, if all things remain equal, anything and everything a cylinder does to seat a couple drum heads under tension pretty much cannot really effect the sound very much. The range of main frequencies and densities available in drums is just not very wide.
I've done my own videos for snare shell comparisons on my YT channel and it really is shocking how little things change when heads are the same and tensioned to the same pitch.
Here's a link to the video I just watched. Check it out yourself and see, or hear any dramatic differences.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NV0mnxVlxDE
Links to my own comparison videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-rXprDgHsc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiMdtofZ_OY
I'm finishing up three new snare drums. Two are done, one remains and I'll do a video of the three soon, and once again, we'll see if shell materials make a dramatic difference that equals the super-hype in the manufacturing industry over drum shells and sound.
*****************************
May 22, 2022 - Thomas Lang on Roto-Toms
I do not know anyone who would question the technique, talent, abilities, and drum knowledge of Thomas Lang. Has has been recorded playing more different drum sets than Baskin-Robbins has flavors. Traditional two-headed drums, edrums, single-headed concert toms, tube drums, you name it. He knows his stuff.
I just watched a video of him playing a Roto-tom set. I played a Roto-tom set back in the 90s and even made a 28" single-headed pancake drum with spurs for a bass drum. I still have that 28" head. I sold the smaller Rotos to Tom and recorded Miledge Muzic CDs with them added to Tom's set on CDs #3, 4 and 5. The larger drums got left behind in a move. Maybe someone is enjoying them today.
Now, Thomas Lang talking about his Roto-toms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2UeQbdnUPs
Referring to them as tunable percussion instruments, he makes no bones about referring to them as drums. They are drums. They have drum heads. They sound like drums. So, is the sound of a drum the shell or the heads? Even a Roto-tom frame can be used as a percussion instrument. I don't know any player that uses a blank drum shell as a percussion sound of some kind. They might tap on the side of a floor tom. I've seen that done many times but, what player uses a naked drum shell for anything?
Manufacturers can super-hype their proprietary drums shells all they want but, the fact is, the sound of drum is from the drum heads, and once again, the density and depth of the cylinder adds some nuances and subtleties that get lost within the soundfield produced by a band.
Rototoms have been used and recorded for 50 years. Bill Bruford and Terry Bozzio both had Rotos in their kits or full kits made up from them. I saw UK live back in the 70s, when Bruford used his Rotokit and it sounded excellent.
This has never been about putting down any kind of drum made by any manufacturer. It remains a position of ultra-hype and marketing from manufacturers about their shells and sound, which is not just a shame, it's a sham.
I've got more evidence coming up to show the truth of it.
Out for now.
I just watched a video of him playing a Roto-tom set. I played a Roto-tom set back in the 90s and even made a 28" single-headed pancake drum with spurs for a bass drum. I still have that 28" head. I sold the smaller Rotos to Tom and recorded Miledge Muzic CDs with them added to Tom's set on CDs #3, 4 and 5. The larger drums got left behind in a move. Maybe someone is enjoying them today.
Now, Thomas Lang talking about his Roto-toms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2UeQbdnUPs
Referring to them as tunable percussion instruments, he makes no bones about referring to them as drums. They are drums. They have drum heads. They sound like drums. So, is the sound of a drum the shell or the heads? Even a Roto-tom frame can be used as a percussion instrument. I don't know any player that uses a blank drum shell as a percussion sound of some kind. They might tap on the side of a floor tom. I've seen that done many times but, what player uses a naked drum shell for anything?
Manufacturers can super-hype their proprietary drums shells all they want but, the fact is, the sound of drum is from the drum heads, and once again, the density and depth of the cylinder adds some nuances and subtleties that get lost within the soundfield produced by a band.
Rototoms have been used and recorded for 50 years. Bill Bruford and Terry Bozzio both had Rotos in their kits or full kits made up from them. I saw UK live back in the 70s, when Bruford used his Rotokit and it sounded excellent.
This has never been about putting down any kind of drum made by any manufacturer. It remains a position of ultra-hype and marketing from manufacturers about their shells and sound, which is not just a shame, it's a sham.
I've got more evidence coming up to show the truth of it.
Out for now.
*****************************
June 2, 2022 - 5 New Snare Drums
Pictured are 5 new drums I made. I made them for couple reasons. One, each represents something sitting around far too long and needed to be made into something, and two, another video for my YT channel on Drum shells, sound and manufacturer hype. Part 21 is now uploaded:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n4kNd5aBJo
Part 22, a video on just the shells, bearing edges and beds will get uploaded later today (June 2).
The 5 drums are as follows: top right clockwise:
1. - 3.75 x 14; 1/4", 10 ply Keller Maple, w/Mahogany veneer; single round over edge; single ply coated batter, medium weight snare side heads; standard steel wires (20); shallow, flat beds; 1.6 TF chrome hoops - (10 lug). Weighs 6+ lbs.
2. - 5.6 x 14; 1/4", stacked plywood rings; single round over edge; Reverse Black Dot batter, medium weight snare side heads, bronze wires (20), shallow, flat beds; 1.6 TF hoops - (10 lug). Weighs 7+lbs.
3. - 4 x 13; 1/2" PVC, w/Oak veneer inside and out; round over edge, w/slight vertical cut and 45 degree back cut; EC4 Dot batter and Emperor snare side heads; bronze wires (40); wide, shallow, flat beds; 2.3 SS hoops - (8 lug). Weighs 8+ lbs.
4. 6.75 x 13, 7/8" Purpleheart staves (32) - flat both sides; easy sloped edge w/45 degree back edge; Evans coated G12 batter, 300 snare side heads, bronze wires (20), deep, sharp beds; plywood hoops w/Maple hoop protector - 16 tension points using 10/24 threaded rod, acorn nuts and Tee nuts - dual tension system (meaning both heads tension at once, which can also be called a single tension system); Oak decorative dowels, dyed to match the natural shell color. Weighs 10+ lbs.
5. - 6.5 x 13, 7/8" Padauk staves (24) - flat both sides; easy sloped edge, w/45 degree back edge; Ambassador coated batter, 500 snare side heads; bronze wires (20); deep, sharp beds; 2.3 TF hoops (8 lug). Weighs 11+ lbs.
Each of the drums could use some details to sharpen them up a bit but, I'll address those issues at the end.
I did not tension the heads for a single reference point on a meter. I tensioned the heads for overall pitch. Each drum was pitched in a separate room, and I got them all very close, if not identical and yet, placed behind the drum set, their pitches changed. That shows me right off the bat room acoustics do play into the way a drum sounds. Fact, not fiction. A drum set's aural personality and character is impressed upon our ears by the rooms they sit in. We never just hear a drum or collection of them. Our ears hear the acoustic properties of the rooms they sit in.
1. I didn't think I'd like the feel of the drum but, it actually plays well, for me. It's a light drum and I kept it light using 1.6 hoops. The sound is lighter, more airy such as 1/4" or thinner, typical Maple plywood shells give us. It's the main reason I always gravitated to metal snare drums. They generally have a more dense shell wall which helps the sound waves and percussion air column stay more active, which causes a different impact back and forth between the heads. My tension rods bottomed out inside the lugs, meaning they are touching and cannot be tensioned down any more. I'll have to change them out if I want a higher pitch and crisper response because I'm just not crazy about the feel of 14" drums but, that pitch was the template for the other drums. Tension rods for piccolo snare drums, using such small lugs, is tricky. I just used stuff I had, rather than buy new ones.
2. Had no idea what a 1/4" thick, stacked plywood ring shell wall would sound and feel like. Once again, I didn't expect to like it but, to the contrary, I did. The two drums sound almost identical save for the Black Dot batter head which muted and dried up the tone a little. I had an awful time finishing the drum, which I mention on the DIY page. I like the look, though. The video does not capture the true color of the drum. Just compare the camera shot above with the video camera. Actually, that is just the camera for all colors. It never captures hues close to what they actually are. I'm often shocked when I watch videos I make.
3. Such a heavy drum for its size and that extra density in the shell wall created a bigger overtone ringing at the end of each rim shot. The EC4 head dampened it a little. The drum felt and sounded "harder" to my ears, than the first two drums. The 40 wires are just overkill. The wires never stopped vibrating, lol. I just wanted to experiment. I love the look of the drum more than anything but, not liking piccolo drums, I was surprised how well it played for me. I've already switched snare side head and wires on it to something more appropriate. The bearing edge was meant to be a round over and 45 degree back cut. I raised the router bit a touch to high on the table and it cut into the shell with the straight, vertical edge of the bit. If you looked at the profile of the edge you see the round-over, then it stops, goes straight up a bit, then back cuts at the 45 degrees. I thought, well, I can sand it down. Looking at it, I decided to leave it and see what so little actual shell surface touching the head would do. Nothing noticeable.
The first three drums have "flat" snare beds, meaning when I take a Dremel tool to make the bearing edge, the sanding wheel takes down the wood and leaves a flattened surface in the process. I can sharpen that up or leave it. In these beds I left them thick and flat.
4. Ah, that Purpleheart, other-worldly, vintage-looking instrument. I love the look of the drum. It's just complicated looking. I love the feel of it, too. Again, owing to shell wall density, the feeling and sound of a harder tone came forth. The dual tension system just works great for me, liking both heads on the tight side. The last two drums, the beds were made on the router table, using a 45 degree chamfer bit, which gave me sharp edges.
5. My favorite of the bunch. The Purpleheart is a more dense wood by around 100 pounds of force on the Janka scale but, the Padauk just played the easiest, having just the right mix of shell wall density, depth, and head combination. I'll either purchase or make some wood hoops for it. That will make the sound more musical to my ears. I just prefer woods hoops. Leaving the staves flat, once again, like with the snare made from siding material, made no difference in the tensioning of the heads or sound of the drums. Bear in mind, leaving them flat made different diameters around the circumference of the drum. At the joints, the drums are wider than in the flat area. Creates no problems at all. It should, if all the hype about shell roundness is believed but, nope.
None of the bearing edges or snare beds influenced the overall sound of the drums in any distinctive way. I never used the single round over before. I recently found out Gretsch used that edge for years on their drums. I didn't know that. It's a very simple edge to do, rounding over one side, no back cut. It provides more wood touching the head collar than any other edge. Still, it essentially made no noticeable difference in sustain or tone compared to the other drums.
Just look at a drum head. Metal ring, 1/2" of sloping collar, then the flat of the head. That collar is very stiff. Tap the flat, tap the collar and the difference is apparent. There is just not much music going on with the collar of a drum head. That means regardless of the bearing edge, you really cannot change the sound of the head under tension much at all. The bearing edge is there to seat the head correctly for some degree of vibration. Keep the apex of any edge outside the collar; place it where the collar and flat of the head meet, and the head will tension fine. Get it back into that collar and tension/tuning will have issues. Whatever shape is employed to marry with the head collar, if it mutes the vibration of the head, at all, it is a nuanced minimal, by physics, alone. I have yet to hear a bearing edge that allows the head to seat correctly, change the tonal personality and character of a drum.
Changing out the heads and wires on the 4x13, which created some obvious differences in the sound of the drum, I would defy anyone to tell me what drum I was playing without seeing it. At the same relative pitch, you might guess correctly on the 1/4" shells versus the heavier, thicker shells but, between the PVC, Purpleheart or Padauk? No way. The only difference in the lighter drums is the drier sound created by the Black Dot head, otherwise, the differences, if any discernible, would not give the listener enough clues to know which is which.
The sound of each of the drums was due to head combinations and shell wall density. The material made no difference, save for that fact. The heavier drums sounded different from the lighter drums. Would those differences play out to the ears of bandmates or an audience during a live or recorded performance? Maybe. I hear no empirical reason why they should. Based on what can be done to modify sound with software or outboard equipment, the sound of a drum, naturally, is moot. It can changed so easily, it's amazing.
So, that's the commentary review on the new snares. I'm going to end up selling a bunch of drums. I don't need three shelves of snare drums. It would make more sense to turn them all into ceiling lights than sitting on a shelf. Hm. I may do that in the next dwelling. LED lights are great for emitting no heat. A room with hanging drum ceiling lights. Cool.
In the end, once again, all manufacturer ultra-type about proprietary shells and sound just does not meet empirical evidence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n4kNd5aBJo
Part 22, a video on just the shells, bearing edges and beds will get uploaded later today (June 2).
The 5 drums are as follows: top right clockwise:
1. - 3.75 x 14; 1/4", 10 ply Keller Maple, w/Mahogany veneer; single round over edge; single ply coated batter, medium weight snare side heads; standard steel wires (20); shallow, flat beds; 1.6 TF chrome hoops - (10 lug). Weighs 6+ lbs.
2. - 5.6 x 14; 1/4", stacked plywood rings; single round over edge; Reverse Black Dot batter, medium weight snare side heads, bronze wires (20), shallow, flat beds; 1.6 TF hoops - (10 lug). Weighs 7+lbs.
3. - 4 x 13; 1/2" PVC, w/Oak veneer inside and out; round over edge, w/slight vertical cut and 45 degree back cut; EC4 Dot batter and Emperor snare side heads; bronze wires (40); wide, shallow, flat beds; 2.3 SS hoops - (8 lug). Weighs 8+ lbs.
4. 6.75 x 13, 7/8" Purpleheart staves (32) - flat both sides; easy sloped edge w/45 degree back edge; Evans coated G12 batter, 300 snare side heads, bronze wires (20), deep, sharp beds; plywood hoops w/Maple hoop protector - 16 tension points using 10/24 threaded rod, acorn nuts and Tee nuts - dual tension system (meaning both heads tension at once, which can also be called a single tension system); Oak decorative dowels, dyed to match the natural shell color. Weighs 10+ lbs.
5. - 6.5 x 13, 7/8" Padauk staves (24) - flat both sides; easy sloped edge, w/45 degree back edge; Ambassador coated batter, 500 snare side heads; bronze wires (20); deep, sharp beds; 2.3 TF hoops (8 lug). Weighs 11+ lbs.
Each of the drums could use some details to sharpen them up a bit but, I'll address those issues at the end.
I did not tension the heads for a single reference point on a meter. I tensioned the heads for overall pitch. Each drum was pitched in a separate room, and I got them all very close, if not identical and yet, placed behind the drum set, their pitches changed. That shows me right off the bat room acoustics do play into the way a drum sounds. Fact, not fiction. A drum set's aural personality and character is impressed upon our ears by the rooms they sit in. We never just hear a drum or collection of them. Our ears hear the acoustic properties of the rooms they sit in.
1. I didn't think I'd like the feel of the drum but, it actually plays well, for me. It's a light drum and I kept it light using 1.6 hoops. The sound is lighter, more airy such as 1/4" or thinner, typical Maple plywood shells give us. It's the main reason I always gravitated to metal snare drums. They generally have a more dense shell wall which helps the sound waves and percussion air column stay more active, which causes a different impact back and forth between the heads. My tension rods bottomed out inside the lugs, meaning they are touching and cannot be tensioned down any more. I'll have to change them out if I want a higher pitch and crisper response because I'm just not crazy about the feel of 14" drums but, that pitch was the template for the other drums. Tension rods for piccolo snare drums, using such small lugs, is tricky. I just used stuff I had, rather than buy new ones.
2. Had no idea what a 1/4" thick, stacked plywood ring shell wall would sound and feel like. Once again, I didn't expect to like it but, to the contrary, I did. The two drums sound almost identical save for the Black Dot batter head which muted and dried up the tone a little. I had an awful time finishing the drum, which I mention on the DIY page. I like the look, though. The video does not capture the true color of the drum. Just compare the camera shot above with the video camera. Actually, that is just the camera for all colors. It never captures hues close to what they actually are. I'm often shocked when I watch videos I make.
3. Such a heavy drum for its size and that extra density in the shell wall created a bigger overtone ringing at the end of each rim shot. The EC4 head dampened it a little. The drum felt and sounded "harder" to my ears, than the first two drums. The 40 wires are just overkill. The wires never stopped vibrating, lol. I just wanted to experiment. I love the look of the drum more than anything but, not liking piccolo drums, I was surprised how well it played for me. I've already switched snare side head and wires on it to something more appropriate. The bearing edge was meant to be a round over and 45 degree back cut. I raised the router bit a touch to high on the table and it cut into the shell with the straight, vertical edge of the bit. If you looked at the profile of the edge you see the round-over, then it stops, goes straight up a bit, then back cuts at the 45 degrees. I thought, well, I can sand it down. Looking at it, I decided to leave it and see what so little actual shell surface touching the head would do. Nothing noticeable.
The first three drums have "flat" snare beds, meaning when I take a Dremel tool to make the bearing edge, the sanding wheel takes down the wood and leaves a flattened surface in the process. I can sharpen that up or leave it. In these beds I left them thick and flat.
4. Ah, that Purpleheart, other-worldly, vintage-looking instrument. I love the look of the drum. It's just complicated looking. I love the feel of it, too. Again, owing to shell wall density, the feeling and sound of a harder tone came forth. The dual tension system just works great for me, liking both heads on the tight side. The last two drums, the beds were made on the router table, using a 45 degree chamfer bit, which gave me sharp edges.
5. My favorite of the bunch. The Purpleheart is a more dense wood by around 100 pounds of force on the Janka scale but, the Padauk just played the easiest, having just the right mix of shell wall density, depth, and head combination. I'll either purchase or make some wood hoops for it. That will make the sound more musical to my ears. I just prefer woods hoops. Leaving the staves flat, once again, like with the snare made from siding material, made no difference in the tensioning of the heads or sound of the drums. Bear in mind, leaving them flat made different diameters around the circumference of the drum. At the joints, the drums are wider than in the flat area. Creates no problems at all. It should, if all the hype about shell roundness is believed but, nope.
None of the bearing edges or snare beds influenced the overall sound of the drums in any distinctive way. I never used the single round over before. I recently found out Gretsch used that edge for years on their drums. I didn't know that. It's a very simple edge to do, rounding over one side, no back cut. It provides more wood touching the head collar than any other edge. Still, it essentially made no noticeable difference in sustain or tone compared to the other drums.
Just look at a drum head. Metal ring, 1/2" of sloping collar, then the flat of the head. That collar is very stiff. Tap the flat, tap the collar and the difference is apparent. There is just not much music going on with the collar of a drum head. That means regardless of the bearing edge, you really cannot change the sound of the head under tension much at all. The bearing edge is there to seat the head correctly for some degree of vibration. Keep the apex of any edge outside the collar; place it where the collar and flat of the head meet, and the head will tension fine. Get it back into that collar and tension/tuning will have issues. Whatever shape is employed to marry with the head collar, if it mutes the vibration of the head, at all, it is a nuanced minimal, by physics, alone. I have yet to hear a bearing edge that allows the head to seat correctly, change the tonal personality and character of a drum.
Changing out the heads and wires on the 4x13, which created some obvious differences in the sound of the drum, I would defy anyone to tell me what drum I was playing without seeing it. At the same relative pitch, you might guess correctly on the 1/4" shells versus the heavier, thicker shells but, between the PVC, Purpleheart or Padauk? No way. The only difference in the lighter drums is the drier sound created by the Black Dot head, otherwise, the differences, if any discernible, would not give the listener enough clues to know which is which.
The sound of each of the drums was due to head combinations and shell wall density. The material made no difference, save for that fact. The heavier drums sounded different from the lighter drums. Would those differences play out to the ears of bandmates or an audience during a live or recorded performance? Maybe. I hear no empirical reason why they should. Based on what can be done to modify sound with software or outboard equipment, the sound of a drum, naturally, is moot. It can changed so easily, it's amazing.
So, that's the commentary review on the new snares. I'm going to end up selling a bunch of drums. I don't need three shelves of snare drums. It would make more sense to turn them all into ceiling lights than sitting on a shelf. Hm. I may do that in the next dwelling. LED lights are great for emitting no heat. A room with hanging drum ceiling lights. Cool.
In the end, once again, all manufacturer ultra-type about proprietary shells and sound just does not meet empirical evidence.
*****************************
594. The Wood Debate: Drums/Guitars - June 12, 2022
The debates about wood species affecting the sound of drums and solid body, electric guitars is one that persists. You know my position on the subject, based on playing drums for 55 years and making them for 30. If any differences exist at all, it is because of the varying density of shell wall thickness, regardless of specie, all things being equal: meaning - a 1/4" shell of any specie used for manufactured, plywood drums, and even solid shell drums, will only enhance or dehance sound waves off the drums heads in nuanced ways and subtleties lost, drowned out in the context of a band. The same for drum depth, which can add tonal differences when the depths are significant. Drum heads will affect the sound of a drum more than shells. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum, and even there, with modern sound reinforcement and recording equipment there are no natural parameters anymore. Anything and everything can be enhanced or dehanced with mics, knobs and sliders, a mouse and all the digital world.
When drummers or guitarists have brought up the subject of wood and solid body, electric guitars, believing what I believe and knowing what I know by experience and by the evidence, I have just stated I know guitarists who say exactly the opposite. I've never gotten into it. Today, I did.
I sent my cousin a couple emails today. He plays guitar, refurbishes and makes guitars. Here's what I sent him:
************************************
On another note, seeing you are really into guitars, could you explain to me the distinct or at least practical differences between a Strat, a Telecaster, a Les Paul, a Rickenbacker and then why all the dozens of other makes and models of solid body electrics exist out there? I understand the differences in things like pick-ups and stuff; and Epiphone and price differences but, do all these guitars really sound that different from each other, plugged into an amp, running through pedals, coming out a cab, and a PA?
I know there are playing action differences in the height of strings off the neck, and just overall weight differences that affect players but, I'm just wondering how much difference there is in the sound that each displays, as a unique instrument, if they actually are unique.
**************************************
I hadn't gotten a reply and decided to check out YouTube. Oh, boy. Lots of stuff on that subject so, I dug in, and sent another email.
***************************************
I found a bunch of YT videos on the comparisons of three. The Rick doesn't seem to be a very popular guitar.
To my ears, one was thinner, more brilliant or brittle sounding, one was thicker and rounder sounding and one was in between but, as I type I am listening to a video in the background and I can't tell which is which in the context of the music playing as he switches back and forth.
I switched listening devices to a more expensive, definitive pair of ear monitors and slight differences advanced in my hearing but, nothing consequential, though the LP had the more different tone at the same basic settings.
I asked about this because drummers are always talking about the differences in guitar sound because of wood species. Just like drums, nuances and subtleties lost when the whole band is involved. And obviously guitars have all the electronics drums do not have but, that too, is somewhat moot based on what I hear in these three guitars, not knowing what they're being played through in any of the comparisons and I imagine that plays a big part.
Obviously the tremolo bar is noticeable but, listening objectively, I get the impression guitarists have some kind of historical characterization for each guitar and play them subjectively, even playing the same riffs and solos.
The Strat seems a guitar that has enough options to play any style authentically without getting too technical about things but, in every demonstration I watched, each of them could be used in any genre.
One guy played each guitar in Bridge, Middle and Neck positions and differences could be heard there, the most. The LP is just a more... heavy? sound.
I can see how the shape of each body can affect a player; contours and all that, and one guy made distinct mention of the differences. That would fit into how drummers set-up their kits; angles and heights and such.
I noticed each demonstrator had a definite difference in touch upon the strings, light, medium and heavier, which made a difference in how I heard each instrument.
As I mentioned, there's the whole thing with amps and pedals which contribute their own sounds, as well as mics, when used.
I will say I did seem to hear a 'way back in the day' Clapton, Beck and Page in the varying tones but, that seemed to disappear when backing tracks were used or live drums and bass.
I even decided to type in how woods effect tone, knowing the same debate exists in the guitar industry. Wow. Lots of opinions but, not much for empirical evidence that goes beyond, again, nuances and subtleties that make a much bigger difference in acoustic guitars than electric solid body. One guy got downright in your face about it and next thing I see is a guy playing wood species used for necks, with hammers! And the guy goes, See?! What did I tell you.
I dropped my jaw. Everybody knows when you knock on a piece of wood it's natural density will produce higher or lower tones in the same size piece. What does that have to do with an electric, stringed instrument?
One guy had a couple videos, three actually, and I found them interesting. He's one who believes that wood does not change tone that much, nowhere near enough that people should make a big deal about it. Knobs make a far more different tonal impact on the sound, as well as the amps the guitars are played through. He makes things out of scrap woods and reclaimed things. Cool website. The last video was strictly serious guitar shop concepts, though, with different woods used, and done more scientifically. Having a CNC router there's a lot he can do, and extremely fine tuned.
In that video he stated he believes the density of the wood would increase volume and sustain; pretty much my position on drums receiving and enhancing or dehancing sound waves and air column movement off the drum heads when struck. I'm still listening to that video in the background and he hasn't played each guitar yet.
Well, I watched the rest of it and aside from him hearing a slightly brighter sound with one wood, they all sounded the same, and the recorded wave forms showed that, as well.
Here's the link if you're interested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbyg0d1njk0
I don't know as I have ever heard any of your guitars but, I am thoroughly convinced that DIY drums and guitars sound as good as any comparably manufactured instrument. The only major difference might be finishes, owing to environments manufacturers have for finishing quality. Most DIYers don't have that kind of thing. It's all basements, garages and wood shops or bedrooms and kitchen, whatever.
Anyway, thought I'd share before you replied to my last email.
Later...
******************************************
I watched a couple other videos and just to be fair, watched one where the Tag line began - "Proof!" A couple guys that run a guitar company, showing a couple models of the same guitar in different woods. Honestly, there is no possible way the slight differences in tone could be heard in the context of a band. It's the same as drum shell involvement. Nuances, subtleties, and considering what can be paid for guitars... it's your wallet but, way too much super-hype exists in the guitar industry, as well.
One of the guys even said how YouTube is not really a good test platform because they compress everything so much. Well, not enough that I could not tell the difference in their voices. I have said that from the beginning. The mic used, the camera, the cell phone used, none of that matters if you can tell the difference in the voice character of each person talking. They may even be close in tonal character but, you can tell the difference. If anything existed in the contribution of wood for tone that was truly unique, you would hear it.
This guy, an acoustic guitar luthier, addresses the issue really well, especially the history of the subject of guitars and tone -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V76yWZ3-OuM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNxTD818WqE
Tom has played guitars as long as I've played drum set and he told me years ago the debate about tone woods is nonsense. After checking this out myself, that seems to be the obvious case.
Yes, a drum, and a guitar, is a unit of parts that all contribute to sound. The issue, for me, is the real world, not the video demonstration world. It's my wallet compared to the manufacturer super-hype about their proprietary products and proclaimed sound they produce.
In the real world of a performing musician in a band or whatever group, what exists in nuanced wood tones affected by striking or plucking something other than the wood, that can cut through every other frequency in the soundstage produced by more than you and your instrument? Nothing noticeable. Until I hear otherwise that must be the position I stand on.
And I get the entire ear/hearing variations argument. As complex as ears are, they are not a measurement device or laboratory graph. Well, sorry. On the other hand, they are the real world hearing device and your brain produces the only real graph one needs because we don't perform music in laboratories. To me, the entire nature of music and those who play it is hardly about labs and graphs. I could care less about what people discover in labs when it comes to the sound of a drum. My ears are the only real world investigation that matters. Same with guitars. Someone with perfect hearing may hear ever so slight nuances more than someone with older ears and connections in the brain. Given. What does that mean to a band, in a room, playing to an audience of dozens, hundreds, thousands, tens or hundreds of thousands of ears through a bunch of electronic equipment to get the sound to those ears?
For those who require the laboratory aspect, count me out. It has no meaning to me. It's superfluous to this subject.
Nobody I am aware of has done anything close to laboratory experiments, in the full scientific method, to address the sound of drums based on the drum shells. Same with guitars and probably every other wooden musical instrument known to man. The variables, alone, would take tremendous amounts of time to weed through. It's unnecessary.
Let me hear your collection of drums, same heads, etc., and let's hear the significant, real world differences. They don't exist. They cannot exist. The physiology of wood species used for making plywood drums does not allow for it. I have come to the place where if I had a 1/4" shell of Australian Buloke and one of Basswood the only difference I might expect to hear is a slight volume difference, which is moot because a mic and PA or recording equipment address that; and the difference between Buloke and Basswood is over 4500 lbf. And if the Basswood drum was floating and Buloke shell mounted, the Basswood might have more volume and sustain. In a bass drum, I would expect the Buloke to have more power in the thump but, again, mics, software, electronics make up for all that. That is the real world, not the fanciful world of drum catalogs, manufacturer websites and super-hype.
The real world. That's the bottom line.
UPDATE!
My cousin sent me a link to a YT video that, for me, not only settles the argument, especially at the end but, completely shatters it to bits. Well over one million views. For a video about wood effecting electric guitar tone? Oh, yeah. The end is gold.
https://youtu.be/n02tImce3AE
The debates about wood species affecting the sound of drums and solid body, electric guitars is one that persists. You know my position on the subject, based on playing drums for 55 years and making them for 30. If any differences exist at all, it is because of the varying density of shell wall thickness, regardless of specie, all things being equal: meaning - a 1/4" shell of any specie used for manufactured, plywood drums, and even solid shell drums, will only enhance or dehance sound waves off the drums heads in nuanced ways and subtleties lost, drowned out in the context of a band. The same for drum depth, which can add tonal differences when the depths are significant. Drum heads will affect the sound of a drum more than shells. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum, and even there, with modern sound reinforcement and recording equipment there are no natural parameters anymore. Anything and everything can be enhanced or dehanced with mics, knobs and sliders, a mouse and all the digital world.
When drummers or guitarists have brought up the subject of wood and solid body, electric guitars, believing what I believe and knowing what I know by experience and by the evidence, I have just stated I know guitarists who say exactly the opposite. I've never gotten into it. Today, I did.
I sent my cousin a couple emails today. He plays guitar, refurbishes and makes guitars. Here's what I sent him:
************************************
On another note, seeing you are really into guitars, could you explain to me the distinct or at least practical differences between a Strat, a Telecaster, a Les Paul, a Rickenbacker and then why all the dozens of other makes and models of solid body electrics exist out there? I understand the differences in things like pick-ups and stuff; and Epiphone and price differences but, do all these guitars really sound that different from each other, plugged into an amp, running through pedals, coming out a cab, and a PA?
I know there are playing action differences in the height of strings off the neck, and just overall weight differences that affect players but, I'm just wondering how much difference there is in the sound that each displays, as a unique instrument, if they actually are unique.
**************************************
I hadn't gotten a reply and decided to check out YouTube. Oh, boy. Lots of stuff on that subject so, I dug in, and sent another email.
***************************************
I found a bunch of YT videos on the comparisons of three. The Rick doesn't seem to be a very popular guitar.
To my ears, one was thinner, more brilliant or brittle sounding, one was thicker and rounder sounding and one was in between but, as I type I am listening to a video in the background and I can't tell which is which in the context of the music playing as he switches back and forth.
I switched listening devices to a more expensive, definitive pair of ear monitors and slight differences advanced in my hearing but, nothing consequential, though the LP had the more different tone at the same basic settings.
I asked about this because drummers are always talking about the differences in guitar sound because of wood species. Just like drums, nuances and subtleties lost when the whole band is involved. And obviously guitars have all the electronics drums do not have but, that too, is somewhat moot based on what I hear in these three guitars, not knowing what they're being played through in any of the comparisons and I imagine that plays a big part.
Obviously the tremolo bar is noticeable but, listening objectively, I get the impression guitarists have some kind of historical characterization for each guitar and play them subjectively, even playing the same riffs and solos.
The Strat seems a guitar that has enough options to play any style authentically without getting too technical about things but, in every demonstration I watched, each of them could be used in any genre.
One guy played each guitar in Bridge, Middle and Neck positions and differences could be heard there, the most. The LP is just a more... heavy? sound.
I can see how the shape of each body can affect a player; contours and all that, and one guy made distinct mention of the differences. That would fit into how drummers set-up their kits; angles and heights and such.
I noticed each demonstrator had a definite difference in touch upon the strings, light, medium and heavier, which made a difference in how I heard each instrument.
As I mentioned, there's the whole thing with amps and pedals which contribute their own sounds, as well as mics, when used.
I will say I did seem to hear a 'way back in the day' Clapton, Beck and Page in the varying tones but, that seemed to disappear when backing tracks were used or live drums and bass.
I even decided to type in how woods effect tone, knowing the same debate exists in the guitar industry. Wow. Lots of opinions but, not much for empirical evidence that goes beyond, again, nuances and subtleties that make a much bigger difference in acoustic guitars than electric solid body. One guy got downright in your face about it and next thing I see is a guy playing wood species used for necks, with hammers! And the guy goes, See?! What did I tell you.
I dropped my jaw. Everybody knows when you knock on a piece of wood it's natural density will produce higher or lower tones in the same size piece. What does that have to do with an electric, stringed instrument?
One guy had a couple videos, three actually, and I found them interesting. He's one who believes that wood does not change tone that much, nowhere near enough that people should make a big deal about it. Knobs make a far more different tonal impact on the sound, as well as the amps the guitars are played through. He makes things out of scrap woods and reclaimed things. Cool website. The last video was strictly serious guitar shop concepts, though, with different woods used, and done more scientifically. Having a CNC router there's a lot he can do, and extremely fine tuned.
In that video he stated he believes the density of the wood would increase volume and sustain; pretty much my position on drums receiving and enhancing or dehancing sound waves and air column movement off the drum heads when struck. I'm still listening to that video in the background and he hasn't played each guitar yet.
Well, I watched the rest of it and aside from him hearing a slightly brighter sound with one wood, they all sounded the same, and the recorded wave forms showed that, as well.
Here's the link if you're interested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbyg0d1njk0
I don't know as I have ever heard any of your guitars but, I am thoroughly convinced that DIY drums and guitars sound as good as any comparably manufactured instrument. The only major difference might be finishes, owing to environments manufacturers have for finishing quality. Most DIYers don't have that kind of thing. It's all basements, garages and wood shops or bedrooms and kitchen, whatever.
Anyway, thought I'd share before you replied to my last email.
Later...
******************************************
I watched a couple other videos and just to be fair, watched one where the Tag line began - "Proof!" A couple guys that run a guitar company, showing a couple models of the same guitar in different woods. Honestly, there is no possible way the slight differences in tone could be heard in the context of a band. It's the same as drum shell involvement. Nuances, subtleties, and considering what can be paid for guitars... it's your wallet but, way too much super-hype exists in the guitar industry, as well.
One of the guys even said how YouTube is not really a good test platform because they compress everything so much. Well, not enough that I could not tell the difference in their voices. I have said that from the beginning. The mic used, the camera, the cell phone used, none of that matters if you can tell the difference in the voice character of each person talking. They may even be close in tonal character but, you can tell the difference. If anything existed in the contribution of wood for tone that was truly unique, you would hear it.
This guy, an acoustic guitar luthier, addresses the issue really well, especially the history of the subject of guitars and tone -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V76yWZ3-OuM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNxTD818WqE
Tom has played guitars as long as I've played drum set and he told me years ago the debate about tone woods is nonsense. After checking this out myself, that seems to be the obvious case.
Yes, a drum, and a guitar, is a unit of parts that all contribute to sound. The issue, for me, is the real world, not the video demonstration world. It's my wallet compared to the manufacturer super-hype about their proprietary products and proclaimed sound they produce.
In the real world of a performing musician in a band or whatever group, what exists in nuanced wood tones affected by striking or plucking something other than the wood, that can cut through every other frequency in the soundstage produced by more than you and your instrument? Nothing noticeable. Until I hear otherwise that must be the position I stand on.
And I get the entire ear/hearing variations argument. As complex as ears are, they are not a measurement device or laboratory graph. Well, sorry. On the other hand, they are the real world hearing device and your brain produces the only real graph one needs because we don't perform music in laboratories. To me, the entire nature of music and those who play it is hardly about labs and graphs. I could care less about what people discover in labs when it comes to the sound of a drum. My ears are the only real world investigation that matters. Same with guitars. Someone with perfect hearing may hear ever so slight nuances more than someone with older ears and connections in the brain. Given. What does that mean to a band, in a room, playing to an audience of dozens, hundreds, thousands, tens or hundreds of thousands of ears through a bunch of electronic equipment to get the sound to those ears?
For those who require the laboratory aspect, count me out. It has no meaning to me. It's superfluous to this subject.
Nobody I am aware of has done anything close to laboratory experiments, in the full scientific method, to address the sound of drums based on the drum shells. Same with guitars and probably every other wooden musical instrument known to man. The variables, alone, would take tremendous amounts of time to weed through. It's unnecessary.
Let me hear your collection of drums, same heads, etc., and let's hear the significant, real world differences. They don't exist. They cannot exist. The physiology of wood species used for making plywood drums does not allow for it. I have come to the place where if I had a 1/4" shell of Australian Buloke and one of Basswood the only difference I might expect to hear is a slight volume difference, which is moot because a mic and PA or recording equipment address that; and the difference between Buloke and Basswood is over 4500 lbf. And if the Basswood drum was floating and Buloke shell mounted, the Basswood might have more volume and sustain. In a bass drum, I would expect the Buloke to have more power in the thump but, again, mics, software, electronics make up for all that. That is the real world, not the fanciful world of drum catalogs, manufacturer websites and super-hype.
The real world. That's the bottom line.
UPDATE!
My cousin sent me a link to a YT video that, for me, not only settles the argument, especially at the end but, completely shatters it to bits. Well over one million views. For a video about wood effecting electric guitar tone? Oh, yeah. The end is gold.
https://youtu.be/n02tImce3AE
Well, the kitchen/eating area got a renovation today. A drum set got the spot for a few hours.
What are you looking at? Well, I've already shown the drums on the DIY page but, here it is set-up as a kit. I recorded a video today, edited it and will send it up to my YT channel so you can hear the results: Drum Shells and Sound, Part 23 - Mystery Set #2. It will bear more objective proof to the testimony of the instruments themselves that the sound of a drum is all about the heads, not the over-hype manufacturers state about their proprietary, plywood shells.
Pictured (R>L) is a Birch tom, a Maple tom, a Mahogany tom (Poplar core with two thin veneers of Mahogany inside and out), as well as an unknown shell specie I covered inside and out w/Oak veneer, set into a hoop/self-standing frame, and an inexpensive Griffin piccolo snare drum I purchased on Amazon years ago, now covered with the Galvanized roof flashing, inside and out, I made the 6x14 tom out of. The shell is very light and the metal gave it a little density. They're all 6x10.
The three toms have baseball bat bearing edges.
Save for the lack of "bass" from that mini-kick drum, the set was fun to play and actually would make a unique set for a child, or even a small gig band, like a wedding band. In that order, I may make a 6x16 kick drum, which will have far more punch, and sell it all that way.
Watch the video, after I place the link here, and see if you can tell which toms are which because I switch them around out of camera view. ;-)
*************************************
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-HXnC40clo
*****************************
620. You Can Make Drums Out of Anything - July 14, 2022
Okay, I finished another simple drum set I call Mystery Set #3. Numbers 1 and 2 are on my YT channel. I'll link to this new set when I upload the video.
The 5pc. kit is made of two different materials; sheet materials made for siding. I have used it for siding a shed, and the other for siding the front of the garage when I closed it in. One comes in 4x8 sheets, around 7/16" thick and the other, in this case, 12" x 12' boards, 3/8" thick.
Both are embossed with a faux, weathered wood grain, which is primed and ready for finish painting. The form of the wood is pressed into the material. They recreate knots and all.
One material is OSB - Oriented Strand Board. The other is a type of compressed fiber material. The two rack toms were made of the compressed fiber board and the floor tom and bass drum were made of the OSB. 6x10, 8x12, 10x14, 14x20, and the 6.5x13 snare drum, which is actually the fiber board with the staves back to back, making it almost 1" thick. The drum weighs 10 lbs. 13 oz. I showed that back in the Shell Hype videos with my other snares, #12 and 13. It has some Walnut lugs on it, which I made a good 20 years ago, now.
The other drums utilize my single tension system. Both heads tension at once on the free-floating shells. The toms have a double 45 degree bearing edge, with just a touch of the outside edge being routered. The kick has a full round-over to a straight inside shell wall, no back cut. It's a great edge for bass drums.
So, two completely different materials. You can feel the weight difference between the 10 and 12" from the 14" drum. The fiberboard is a heavier material. The sound? Check out the video when I upload it. They sound great, as nice as any drums I have ever made. Stave drums, free floating, no hardware on the shells. My system for tension, same of the stacked plywood drums; both heads tension at once. Can you tell a difference in sound from the different materials? You cannot. Why? How can that be? Different materials create different sounds, right? Not necessarily. Because, even though the material creates a pretty crazy bearing edge, the heads seat correctly, do their thing, and the sound of a drum is not about shells as much as it is about heads.
Plus, I left the staves flat, inside and out. I stained and finished the plywood hoops and decorative dowels on the tension rods, painted the shells inside and out with our dark green house paint, and they look really cool to me.
I'm rearranging the drums on my big set of the stacked plywood ring drums, so I just set up this new kit in the empty space. You can see some of the other drums in the pics.
This set was made with leftover material. I bought a sheet of cabinet grade plywood for the hoops and also for more rings for some drum shells to add depth for a 20" and 22" drums. Hardware store parts. Real drum sound. No one could tell a difference. I knew these drums would sound good but, they even surprised me at just how nice they sound.
Notice this picture of the shells.
The 5pc. kit is made of two different materials; sheet materials made for siding. I have used it for siding a shed, and the other for siding the front of the garage when I closed it in. One comes in 4x8 sheets, around 7/16" thick and the other, in this case, 12" x 12' boards, 3/8" thick.
Both are embossed with a faux, weathered wood grain, which is primed and ready for finish painting. The form of the wood is pressed into the material. They recreate knots and all.
One material is OSB - Oriented Strand Board. The other is a type of compressed fiber material. The two rack toms were made of the compressed fiber board and the floor tom and bass drum were made of the OSB. 6x10, 8x12, 10x14, 14x20, and the 6.5x13 snare drum, which is actually the fiber board with the staves back to back, making it almost 1" thick. The drum weighs 10 lbs. 13 oz. I showed that back in the Shell Hype videos with my other snares, #12 and 13. It has some Walnut lugs on it, which I made a good 20 years ago, now.
The other drums utilize my single tension system. Both heads tension at once on the free-floating shells. The toms have a double 45 degree bearing edge, with just a touch of the outside edge being routered. The kick has a full round-over to a straight inside shell wall, no back cut. It's a great edge for bass drums.
So, two completely different materials. You can feel the weight difference between the 10 and 12" from the 14" drum. The fiberboard is a heavier material. The sound? Check out the video when I upload it. They sound great, as nice as any drums I have ever made. Stave drums, free floating, no hardware on the shells. My system for tension, same of the stacked plywood drums; both heads tension at once. Can you tell a difference in sound from the different materials? You cannot. Why? How can that be? Different materials create different sounds, right? Not necessarily. Because, even though the material creates a pretty crazy bearing edge, the heads seat correctly, do their thing, and the sound of a drum is not about shells as much as it is about heads.
Plus, I left the staves flat, inside and out. I stained and finished the plywood hoops and decorative dowels on the tension rods, painted the shells inside and out with our dark green house paint, and they look really cool to me.
I'm rearranging the drums on my big set of the stacked plywood ring drums, so I just set up this new kit in the empty space. You can see some of the other drums in the pics.
This set was made with leftover material. I bought a sheet of cabinet grade plywood for the hoops and also for more rings for some drum shells to add depth for a 20" and 22" drums. Hardware store parts. Real drum sound. No one could tell a difference. I knew these drums would sound good but, they even surprised me at just how nice they sound.
Notice this picture of the shells.
You say, "Wait a minute. The bass drum is way out of round!"
Yes, it is. One of my band clamps failed and pushed in two or three staves, creating a real problem. I sliced the seam of the offending staves and re-glued and repositioned things but, could not bring the shell back to perfect round.
"The bass drum must sound awful. Too bad."
Nope. Sounds really good. Why? Because the heads seat fine, despite the shell being out of round. If the shell exceeded an outside dimension and I could not seat the heads properly, then I'd have a real problem but, such was not the case.
The world of drums is filled with bogus information; super, ultra-marketing hype about drum shells and all the things that manufacturers do to their shells that gives premium sound, and you pay premium prices. It's mostly BS. A drum is a very simple instrument, anciently so, and modern drums, as well. About the only real advancements have been made in finish materials and hardware innovations. Plywood drums, solid wood shells? Not so much, contrary to manufacturer hype about proprietary shells.
This drum set is made from odd materials, not perfectly round shells, using flat staves, with anything but, perfect bearing edges, yet they sound beautiful. How can that be?
If you can seat the heads correctly, you get good drum sound. If you want lots of sustain and resonance, make sure the bearing edge allows for full vibration of the heads, and isolate the drums from hardware touching the shells and the floor. That allows for full frequency range aural presence as the heads sing. All kinds of products exist to accomplish that.
Shell density, shell depth, proper bearing edges are what work with drum heads to enhance or dehance what the heads throw off in sound waves. I say it all the time because it is true - the sound of a drum is from the heads, not the shell. The shell contributes nuances and subtleties but, striking the heads is creating the sound. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum.
Check back here, where I'll post a link to the video of the set in action and info about it.
https://youtu.be/iWzkJVNPRFs
Yes, it is. One of my band clamps failed and pushed in two or three staves, creating a real problem. I sliced the seam of the offending staves and re-glued and repositioned things but, could not bring the shell back to perfect round.
"The bass drum must sound awful. Too bad."
Nope. Sounds really good. Why? Because the heads seat fine, despite the shell being out of round. If the shell exceeded an outside dimension and I could not seat the heads properly, then I'd have a real problem but, such was not the case.
The world of drums is filled with bogus information; super, ultra-marketing hype about drum shells and all the things that manufacturers do to their shells that gives premium sound, and you pay premium prices. It's mostly BS. A drum is a very simple instrument, anciently so, and modern drums, as well. About the only real advancements have been made in finish materials and hardware innovations. Plywood drums, solid wood shells? Not so much, contrary to manufacturer hype about proprietary shells.
This drum set is made from odd materials, not perfectly round shells, using flat staves, with anything but, perfect bearing edges, yet they sound beautiful. How can that be?
If you can seat the heads correctly, you get good drum sound. If you want lots of sustain and resonance, make sure the bearing edge allows for full vibration of the heads, and isolate the drums from hardware touching the shells and the floor. That allows for full frequency range aural presence as the heads sing. All kinds of products exist to accomplish that.
Shell density, shell depth, proper bearing edges are what work with drum heads to enhance or dehance what the heads throw off in sound waves. I say it all the time because it is true - the sound of a drum is from the heads, not the shell. The shell contributes nuances and subtleties but, striking the heads is creating the sound. Change the heads, change the sound of the drum.
Check back here, where I'll post a link to the video of the set in action and info about it.
https://youtu.be/iWzkJVNPRFs
*****************************
The picture below shows my snare drums and other drums on a shelf rack in the drum room. All of the drums are pictured in one place or another on the website, or my YT channel. I just had my daughter, visiting this week, take a shot of them with her phone, which takes nice photos.
All the drums but three are 13" diameter. The others are 14. You can see the different materials they're made of. If you have watched any of my videos on hos these drums sound, all tuned to the same relative pitch, you know they all sound relatively, the same. Freaks people out. Any slight differences heard would be completely drowned out by a band. Even the depth difference of the 8x13 would be masked by all the rest of the sound frequencies put out by the other instruments and vocals. How can that be? Because the sound of a drum is mostly from tensioned heads.
What I can tell you is that each drum, tensioned at the same pitch, has a different feel to it. In some cases a very noticeable difference, in other cases, not so much. Why? The density of the shell walls and how sound waves and the concussive air column are handled. Drums with the same depth can feel tighter or harder than other shells but, even there, small things that drummers know how to adapt to. Honestly, there are times I will play a particular drum for months and replace it and the next drum feels so different it may take days to get used to it. Other times, no big changes at all.
Top Left across -
Compressed fiber sheathing material - stave, flat surface inside and out
Keller 1/4" Maple
Stacked plywood rings
Stacked plywood rings
Stacked plywood rings
1/2" PVC w/sparkles
Keller 1/4" Maple
A naked, DIY rolled and glued, Oak veneer shell
PVC w/Oak veneer inside and out
The bottom drum is a 14 stacked plywood ring tom
Right to Left -
3/4" Padauk stave, flat surface inside and out
3/4" Purpleheart stave, flat surface inside and out
1" Quilted Maple stave, flat surface inside
1" Fiddleback Maple stave, flat surface inside
12"x6x3/4" Pine stave, flat surface inside
3/4" Poplar stave, flat surface inside
3/16" seamless Aluminum
Steel
Black nickel over brass.
At the kit right now is my 1/2" Ironwood.
I know it seems these drums have to sound different. Well, yes, if I tension the heads to different pitches. Otherwise, no. They feel different to play. They do not sound significantly different so that a listener would know what material was being played or hear any major differences at all. I enjoy the different look each drum has but, playing them for individual sounds, no. If you don't believe me, check out the snare drum videos on my YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-rXprDgHsc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiMdtofZ_OY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t_FMTsNRMI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n4kNd5aBJo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNrKShLKfts
What I can tell you is that each drum, tensioned at the same pitch, has a different feel to it. In some cases a very noticeable difference, in other cases, not so much. Why? The density of the shell walls and how sound waves and the concussive air column are handled. Drums with the same depth can feel tighter or harder than other shells but, even there, small things that drummers know how to adapt to. Honestly, there are times I will play a particular drum for months and replace it and the next drum feels so different it may take days to get used to it. Other times, no big changes at all.
Top Left across -
Compressed fiber sheathing material - stave, flat surface inside and out
Keller 1/4" Maple
Stacked plywood rings
Stacked plywood rings
Stacked plywood rings
1/2" PVC w/sparkles
Keller 1/4" Maple
A naked, DIY rolled and glued, Oak veneer shell
PVC w/Oak veneer inside and out
The bottom drum is a 14 stacked plywood ring tom
Right to Left -
3/4" Padauk stave, flat surface inside and out
3/4" Purpleheart stave, flat surface inside and out
1" Quilted Maple stave, flat surface inside
1" Fiddleback Maple stave, flat surface inside
12"x6x3/4" Pine stave, flat surface inside
3/4" Poplar stave, flat surface inside
3/16" seamless Aluminum
Steel
Black nickel over brass.
At the kit right now is my 1/2" Ironwood.
I know it seems these drums have to sound different. Well, yes, if I tension the heads to different pitches. Otherwise, no. They feel different to play. They do not sound significantly different so that a listener would know what material was being played or hear any major differences at all. I enjoy the different look each drum has but, playing them for individual sounds, no. If you don't believe me, check out the snare drum videos on my YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-rXprDgHsc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiMdtofZ_OY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t_FMTsNRMI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n4kNd5aBJo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNrKShLKfts
October 29, 2022
I just wrote this on the recording blog and thought I'd copy it to this page, as well.
*********************************************************
Okay, everything is ready. I dealt with the room yesterday, making it less reflective, as well as stuffing an outside window cavity to lessen the intrusion of outside noise getting in.
I have to admit, thinking of setting up a kit, playing it and taking it down and setting up another one is not a real pleasure in my mind. Kind of a hassle but, in the past the point has been performance of concepts of soloing. This time it's about sound: the sound of drums: what creates it, and how it can be made to sound good if you can seat the heads correctly and mount the instruments for as full a vibration as possible, if that's your thing.
I got a real lesson on sound the other day. I was working on drums, listening to some YouTube recordings of the Mahavishnu Orchestra from the early 70's. The MO was a very loud band. The loudest I can remember hearing back then. One particular recording was from a concert I attended back then, in Yale, New Haven, CT - Woolsey Hall to be specific. The band was excruciatingly loud and the sound was just total mush, save for more quiet selections of their music. When the whole band revved up, it was a cacophony of chaos. Painfully so, to eardrums. Mine anyway.
The recording sounded like it was made off the boards and everything was clean and clear. I never heard Billy Cobham's drums sound so good. Seriously. Even better than their studio recordings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMkxk4vMSog
In more quiet sections, you can hear some sustain from Billy's toms, and actual pitches. Normally, on a MO recording, you hear the impact of the strike of his sticks on the heads but, anything else of the drum's character and personality is just lost in the overall sound created by the band, live or, in the studio, even. Every little thing Billy did that night came out brilliantly. If anything, the recording put Billy farther out front, with McLaughlin, than the other guys. A rare treat.
Billy was playing his Fibes set, and back then, it was typical mounting of tom bracket to shell, to tom mounts, and the drums sounded really fine, not really choked, at all, as bracket mounting can cause, or, we are told it causes. I'm not saying what we've been told is not true. Bracket mounting takes away some resonance and low end but, if you get things right in tuning and all, you get good sound, and STILL, in a band context - and I mean an electrified band, not a simple acoustic Jazz trio or something - so much is lost. Most of the details of a drum's sound are just lost in competition for sound and frequency bands in the audio spectrum. It's just a fact of a musician/drummer's life.
This recording is going to showcase sound. Sound coming from instruments that should not produce good sound, if the marketing is correct about the necessity of manufactured, proprietary drum shells.
Today, I begin. Two weeks is my estimate to completion. We'll see.
Later...
*********************************************************
Okay, everything is ready. I dealt with the room yesterday, making it less reflective, as well as stuffing an outside window cavity to lessen the intrusion of outside noise getting in.
I have to admit, thinking of setting up a kit, playing it and taking it down and setting up another one is not a real pleasure in my mind. Kind of a hassle but, in the past the point has been performance of concepts of soloing. This time it's about sound: the sound of drums: what creates it, and how it can be made to sound good if you can seat the heads correctly and mount the instruments for as full a vibration as possible, if that's your thing.
I got a real lesson on sound the other day. I was working on drums, listening to some YouTube recordings of the Mahavishnu Orchestra from the early 70's. The MO was a very loud band. The loudest I can remember hearing back then. One particular recording was from a concert I attended back then, in Yale, New Haven, CT - Woolsey Hall to be specific. The band was excruciatingly loud and the sound was just total mush, save for more quiet selections of their music. When the whole band revved up, it was a cacophony of chaos. Painfully so, to eardrums. Mine anyway.
The recording sounded like it was made off the boards and everything was clean and clear. I never heard Billy Cobham's drums sound so good. Seriously. Even better than their studio recordings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMkxk4vMSog
In more quiet sections, you can hear some sustain from Billy's toms, and actual pitches. Normally, on a MO recording, you hear the impact of the strike of his sticks on the heads but, anything else of the drum's character and personality is just lost in the overall sound created by the band, live or, in the studio, even. Every little thing Billy did that night came out brilliantly. If anything, the recording put Billy farther out front, with McLaughlin, than the other guys. A rare treat.
Billy was playing his Fibes set, and back then, it was typical mounting of tom bracket to shell, to tom mounts, and the drums sounded really fine, not really choked, at all, as bracket mounting can cause, or, we are told it causes. I'm not saying what we've been told is not true. Bracket mounting takes away some resonance and low end but, if you get things right in tuning and all, you get good sound, and STILL, in a band context - and I mean an electrified band, not a simple acoustic Jazz trio or something - so much is lost. Most of the details of a drum's sound are just lost in competition for sound and frequency bands in the audio spectrum. It's just a fact of a musician/drummer's life.
This recording is going to showcase sound. Sound coming from instruments that should not produce good sound, if the marketing is correct about the necessity of manufactured, proprietary drum shells.
Today, I begin. Two weeks is my estimate to completion. We'll see.
Later...
679. Vintage vs Modern - November 8, 2022
"Go Full Hybrid This Holiday Season!"
"Now is the time to Go Full Hybrid! The best of Hybrid shells in one Hybrid Kit. The maple/walnut bass drum paired with birch/walnut toms is our bold yet classic interpretation of today's modern drum sound. The birch toms deliver clear and punchy sounds while the maple bass drum produces a warm, round tone in the low end. Resulting in a redefined sonic identity that speaks to today's music scene." (emphasis mine)
I received an email this morning with that paragraph in the advertising. I won't mention the brand of drums. Mostly because it doesn't matter. Most of the companies use that kind of marketing and have for a many years now.
Before I comment, and you already know what I'm going to write, I watched a YT video a couple days ago, comparing vintage and modern drums. The link is below -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UO-KXo7B5ws
The guys at Drumeo seem like really nice fellows, and go about things with both passion and honesty, and even childlike wonder when it comes to drums and drumming. I'm not a member but, I've watched many of the YT videos, and this particular one hit all the check boxes for me on this subject of super-hype about manufactured drum shells.
Watch the video and you will hear three different guys try to pick out the sound of the vintage kits versus those of the modern kits. You will hear them listening very closely, having a difficult time, making their choices, if not guessing (though one guy mentions a bass drum gave it away very quickly for him). You hear the recording engineer mention the word "nuances" at least once.
The same player say behind each kit, six in all - 3 vintage, 3 modern - and played the same patterns. They had a tough enough time listening and choosing between soloed drums. Imagine how tough it would have been if a band was involved, and that is my point, and has been all along.
If someone wants to own a bunch of drum sets and set them up all over their house and play them and hear any nuances and subtleties that exist, set to set, so be it. Go for it. For all intents and purposes most players will own drums and play them to recordings they like, or just mess around on them from time to time. Most players who own the instruments are not in professional bands and that goes for all other instruments, as well. Most musicians are a hobbiest at one level or another. They may be weekend warriors, they may just get together with other musicians and have some fun. Do they need to spend big bucks to 'redefine' their 'sonic reality?' No, of course not. If they're in a dance club band or wedding band, keeping basic time for a gig, they have no defining of any sonic realities, at all. They'd be just as well served to have the most interesting drum set to look at in such settings, as any concern for sound. Nobody is paying attention to a player's sound. It's a drum set.
The obvious point is made so clear in the video it's really pretty telling. Drums are drums. Put the same heads on any set of drums, same room, same mics, etc., etc., and you'll hear sound so close, only nuances and subtleties exist, if at all, and my point has consistently been - once you put that drum set, any drum set in the context of a band, nuances and subtleties are masked, drowned out, overshadowed, or just pulverized. Any differences that may be heard up close, set to set, can be manipulated with all the recording tools and software used today, to totally change the sound of any drum set.
The ad mentions "low end." That is simply the touch of a mouse or changing heads. The ad mentions "clear and punchy." Same thing. Software manipulations, or live, sound reinforcement equipment, or head changes, does it all.
Shell wall density, shell depth, drum mounting, drum head choices and room acoustics will mean the most to the particular sound any drum throws off in the frequency spectrum a drum set occupies.
When 'Solos for Concept Drum Sets' is released, a body of recorded proof will exist that will challenge the efficacy of any brand's ultra-marketing hype about 'redefining sonic identity' because of drum shells: wood species used, glues, shell formation techniques, bearing edges, finishes, lugs, hardware, and all the rest.
This is not a knock against any brand's instruments. Everybody makes great drums today. Everybody; simply because competition requires it. The super-hype about shells and sound is what I aim at because it's all a marketing device to sell product, that's it. There is no intrinsic, audible reality to it. None that they even attempt to prove, themselves.
I get it. It's hard to sell drum sets in any economy, let alone the current one. What can you do or say to stand apart? Lots of money is spent for advertising companies to come up with things to grab attention. Telling drummers they will set themselves apart from the norm if they purchase this or that set of drums, because of how drum shells are made, is an incredible ruse. "Full hybrid!" What does that even mean? Drums shells have been hybrid for a century. Full hybrid as opposed to part hybrid? It's all just marketing words. That's the definitive sonic reality. Do it all "this Holiday Season." Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa is coming. Time for a new drum set, right? It's all marketing.
Watch for the 4th Concepts recording on my YouTube channel, and info I'll have on a page on the site, here. I believe you'll find it interesting and very revealing.
Stay tuned.
"Go Full Hybrid This Holiday Season!"
"Now is the time to Go Full Hybrid! The best of Hybrid shells in one Hybrid Kit. The maple/walnut bass drum paired with birch/walnut toms is our bold yet classic interpretation of today's modern drum sound. The birch toms deliver clear and punchy sounds while the maple bass drum produces a warm, round tone in the low end. Resulting in a redefined sonic identity that speaks to today's music scene." (emphasis mine)
I received an email this morning with that paragraph in the advertising. I won't mention the brand of drums. Mostly because it doesn't matter. Most of the companies use that kind of marketing and have for a many years now.
Before I comment, and you already know what I'm going to write, I watched a YT video a couple days ago, comparing vintage and modern drums. The link is below -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UO-KXo7B5ws
The guys at Drumeo seem like really nice fellows, and go about things with both passion and honesty, and even childlike wonder when it comes to drums and drumming. I'm not a member but, I've watched many of the YT videos, and this particular one hit all the check boxes for me on this subject of super-hype about manufactured drum shells.
Watch the video and you will hear three different guys try to pick out the sound of the vintage kits versus those of the modern kits. You will hear them listening very closely, having a difficult time, making their choices, if not guessing (though one guy mentions a bass drum gave it away very quickly for him). You hear the recording engineer mention the word "nuances" at least once.
The same player say behind each kit, six in all - 3 vintage, 3 modern - and played the same patterns. They had a tough enough time listening and choosing between soloed drums. Imagine how tough it would have been if a band was involved, and that is my point, and has been all along.
If someone wants to own a bunch of drum sets and set them up all over their house and play them and hear any nuances and subtleties that exist, set to set, so be it. Go for it. For all intents and purposes most players will own drums and play them to recordings they like, or just mess around on them from time to time. Most players who own the instruments are not in professional bands and that goes for all other instruments, as well. Most musicians are a hobbiest at one level or another. They may be weekend warriors, they may just get together with other musicians and have some fun. Do they need to spend big bucks to 'redefine' their 'sonic reality?' No, of course not. If they're in a dance club band or wedding band, keeping basic time for a gig, they have no defining of any sonic realities, at all. They'd be just as well served to have the most interesting drum set to look at in such settings, as any concern for sound. Nobody is paying attention to a player's sound. It's a drum set.
The obvious point is made so clear in the video it's really pretty telling. Drums are drums. Put the same heads on any set of drums, same room, same mics, etc., etc., and you'll hear sound so close, only nuances and subtleties exist, if at all, and my point has consistently been - once you put that drum set, any drum set in the context of a band, nuances and subtleties are masked, drowned out, overshadowed, or just pulverized. Any differences that may be heard up close, set to set, can be manipulated with all the recording tools and software used today, to totally change the sound of any drum set.
The ad mentions "low end." That is simply the touch of a mouse or changing heads. The ad mentions "clear and punchy." Same thing. Software manipulations, or live, sound reinforcement equipment, or head changes, does it all.
Shell wall density, shell depth, drum mounting, drum head choices and room acoustics will mean the most to the particular sound any drum throws off in the frequency spectrum a drum set occupies.
When 'Solos for Concept Drum Sets' is released, a body of recorded proof will exist that will challenge the efficacy of any brand's ultra-marketing hype about 'redefining sonic identity' because of drum shells: wood species used, glues, shell formation techniques, bearing edges, finishes, lugs, hardware, and all the rest.
This is not a knock against any brand's instruments. Everybody makes great drums today. Everybody; simply because competition requires it. The super-hype about shells and sound is what I aim at because it's all a marketing device to sell product, that's it. There is no intrinsic, audible reality to it. None that they even attempt to prove, themselves.
I get it. It's hard to sell drum sets in any economy, let alone the current one. What can you do or say to stand apart? Lots of money is spent for advertising companies to come up with things to grab attention. Telling drummers they will set themselves apart from the norm if they purchase this or that set of drums, because of how drum shells are made, is an incredible ruse. "Full hybrid!" What does that even mean? Drums shells have been hybrid for a century. Full hybrid as opposed to part hybrid? It's all just marketing words. That's the definitive sonic reality. Do it all "this Holiday Season." Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa is coming. Time for a new drum set, right? It's all marketing.
Watch for the 4th Concepts recording on my YouTube channel, and info I'll have on a page on the site, here. I believe you'll find it interesting and very revealing.
Stay tuned.
*****************************
The Worst Drum Kit He Could Find
When thinking about recording the Concepts 4 album, and all the different drum sets used, proving the point of any "drum" sounding just fine for recording or playing live (depending on endurance factors), if you use good heads and can seat them correctly on any properly cut bearing edge, was easy to do. The proof is in the recording.
Today, I came upon a YT video of a guy who also proves the point. He admits to some software usage, which is fine. That's also the point - modern recording technology. He uses the cheapest drum kit he can find and works them over with new heads and you be the judge. You absolutely do not need high end drums to record with. Good heads, seated well, with isolation mounting of some kind and you're good.
Personally, because I can, I would have redone the bearing edges a touch but, he shows the edges the drums came with worked okay. Check it out -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=94bEUOLwhxQ
I am not endorsing the use of poorly made drums, and I am obviously not endorsing spending money for high end drums if you think you need them to record with or play live. I am endorsing truth. That's what means the most to me. The truth is, expensive drums mean little with today's technology in recording software and outboard equipment.
When the drum manufacturing industry stops the ultra-hype about proprietary shells and sound, consumers will be the winners, especially young players taught and influenced by a false psychology that the more money you spend, the better sound you get by virtue of drum shells.
Today, I came upon a YT video of a guy who also proves the point. He admits to some software usage, which is fine. That's also the point - modern recording technology. He uses the cheapest drum kit he can find and works them over with new heads and you be the judge. You absolutely do not need high end drums to record with. Good heads, seated well, with isolation mounting of some kind and you're good.
Personally, because I can, I would have redone the bearing edges a touch but, he shows the edges the drums came with worked okay. Check it out -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=94bEUOLwhxQ
I am not endorsing the use of poorly made drums, and I am obviously not endorsing spending money for high end drums if you think you need them to record with or play live. I am endorsing truth. That's what means the most to me. The truth is, expensive drums mean little with today's technology in recording software and outboard equipment.
When the drum manufacturing industry stops the ultra-hype about proprietary shells and sound, consumers will be the winners, especially young players taught and influenced by a false psychology that the more money you spend, the better sound you get by virtue of drum shells.
He Was Mislead
I came upon someone who takes the same basic position as I have about what is the lion's share of the sound of a drum, all other things creating nuances and subtleties. I have not watched all of his videos on the subject of shells, heads, edges, etc. but, it seems logical if I did, I would find we are at least in the same chapter, if not on the same page on the subject.
Check him out and realize, the subject is not going away. The manufacturers and their marketing hype have created this situation and opened the doors for logic and common sense, observations and experience to take a serious shot at the bow of super-hype on proprietary shells.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKDRDRAphy8
Check him out and realize, the subject is not going away. The manufacturers and their marketing hype have created this situation and opened the doors for logic and common sense, observations and experience to take a serious shot at the bow of super-hype on proprietary shells.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKDRDRAphy8
Ludwig Tom Shootout
Here's a guy who asks, "Does the shell matter?" Four Ludwig toms: different shell configurations; mic'd up, same heads, same room, same stick, same velocity strike by the same player. Aside from some slight tuning differences in his attempts to get the four toms to the same pitch, you listen as critically as you like, and ask yourself if ANY differences you hear could possibly be heard in the context of a band, live or in the studio and also ask yourself if any of the differences could not be achieved with the other of the drums through a touch of EQ or other software changes in a recording environment.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DbD1fe4iHE
The obvious answer here is so blatantly laying down the truth, a child could answer those questions easily and accurately. The channel poster honestly makes that same observation, as do commenters. Those who claim to hear significant differences of shell-contributed tone would find themselves up against a wall of truth when the consequences of drums, surrounded by the frequencies of other instruments get into the mix, especially bass; whether guitar or keyboards. So much gets masked it becomes all about rooms, mics, software, outboard equipment and other parameters that will change the natural sound of acoustic drums.
The proprietary shell-hype in the drum manufacturing industry is total marketing for product sales and nothing more. They should, at the very least, make known any manufactured differences are subtle, not significant.
Whatever subtleties and nuances the density of a shell may offer to the overall sound of a drum, they are completely eradicated in the context of a band. There is just no way around that that fact.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DbD1fe4iHE
The obvious answer here is so blatantly laying down the truth, a child could answer those questions easily and accurately. The channel poster honestly makes that same observation, as do commenters. Those who claim to hear significant differences of shell-contributed tone would find themselves up against a wall of truth when the consequences of drums, surrounded by the frequencies of other instruments get into the mix, especially bass; whether guitar or keyboards. So much gets masked it becomes all about rooms, mics, software, outboard equipment and other parameters that will change the natural sound of acoustic drums.
The proprietary shell-hype in the drum manufacturing industry is total marketing for product sales and nothing more. They should, at the very least, make known any manufactured differences are subtle, not significant.
Whatever subtleties and nuances the density of a shell may offer to the overall sound of a drum, they are completely eradicated in the context of a band. There is just no way around that that fact.
New Pearl Drum Lines - More Super-hype
Pearl's drum line - The Reference series, High End - Reimagined is all over the place on YouTube. Watch the video and hear their own mention of things beginning in this hype war back in 1990. No, they don't mention the war. They just mentioned when they had to up the ante to remain a big player. That's what it amounts to. I posted about their catalogs through the years, which you have seen if you are following these posts top to bottom; how Pearl's mention of shell construction goes from zip to a paragraph, to an ultimate 14 pages of full color shots and text by the time the 1990's roll around. The current video opens with shots from the new catalog and more hype about their mounting system and shell design and it is beautiful but, sickening to me. In the current videos, well known Pearl players are interviewed. They are as professional as videos can be made. Watch the trailer video, YES, a trailer video for the event of the unveiling of these drum sets, with the Cory Wong band playing in the background: one of the most high-energy bands out there. Pearl will have the ignorant salivating by the time the two-minute video is over.
To go along with that, they also made videos of well-known Pearl players - Dennis Chambers, Omar Hakim, and Mike Mangini and probably more to come, all beginning a couple months ago. The players walk around a curtain into a big room, with an unveiling of a set, up and ready for trying out by each guy.
You can go to the Pearl YT channel and see it all -
www.youtube.com/@PearlDrumsUS/videos
"Masterworks Sonic Select Studio Recipe, Masters Maple Gum shells are composed of an Even Ply-Six layer shell combination of Vault-cured premium North American Maple (4-ply exterior) and hand-selected USA Gumwood (2-ply interior) for dramatic resonance and improved projection." (emphasis supplied)
Pearl, and all other manufacturers using this kind of ultra-hype marketing, should be ashamed of themselves. Truly, while we all understand the need for advertising to sell product in a very saturated field of competition, the gross nature of overstatement now present is ubiquitous and revolting, if not just totally confusing for so many consumers.
Spend the money, get the sound is a lie; a marketing tool, that's all.
Just do a test. Listen to each player and the sound they get, alone, with these new lines and compare. If you were not told what you are hearing, aside from obvious pitch differences, could you tell, blindfolded, what you are hearing, shell to shell, knowing mics and sound manipulation are involved? Go watch other videos of them playing live, from previous times in their careers, where Pearl is not involved in the production, and notice what you hear of their drums recording to recording, live film or studio environment and know all the parameters of live performance or studio recordings change the sound of a drum set and can all be manipulated to change the sound of a drum set. Nothing you hear cannot be achieved for just about any drum set through today's software and outboard equipment. I say just about any drum set because there will always be differences between toms that are isolated from constriction mounting and those mounted with tom brackets of some kind on the shells. That is a given, even for the same drum line.
Dennis states the drums are exploding all over the place. Is that through speaker monitors in a large, empty room or what he's hearing acoustically in that large, empty room? Will the explosions change in a small, crowded room? Without question. If you use different mics with different coloring enhancements, will the sound of the drums change? Oh, yes. If the player changes heads and sticks will that affect the sound? Indeed.
Watch each player in a live environment and ask yourself if the sound you hear on a Pearl video, of them playing alone, is the same sound you hear when the rest of the band surrounds them; especially a band like Dream Theater with a massive volume and frequency range the drum set has to literally fight against to be heard. Nuances of shell design and sound? Forget it. Just forget it.
Spend the extra money if you want, for nicer finishes and better hardware but, expecting the sound to be dramatically changed because of proprietary shell manufacturing? Spend at your own risk.
To go along with that, they also made videos of well-known Pearl players - Dennis Chambers, Omar Hakim, and Mike Mangini and probably more to come, all beginning a couple months ago. The players walk around a curtain into a big room, with an unveiling of a set, up and ready for trying out by each guy.
You can go to the Pearl YT channel and see it all -
www.youtube.com/@PearlDrumsUS/videos
"Masterworks Sonic Select Studio Recipe, Masters Maple Gum shells are composed of an Even Ply-Six layer shell combination of Vault-cured premium North American Maple (4-ply exterior) and hand-selected USA Gumwood (2-ply interior) for dramatic resonance and improved projection." (emphasis supplied)
Pearl, and all other manufacturers using this kind of ultra-hype marketing, should be ashamed of themselves. Truly, while we all understand the need for advertising to sell product in a very saturated field of competition, the gross nature of overstatement now present is ubiquitous and revolting, if not just totally confusing for so many consumers.
Spend the money, get the sound is a lie; a marketing tool, that's all.
Just do a test. Listen to each player and the sound they get, alone, with these new lines and compare. If you were not told what you are hearing, aside from obvious pitch differences, could you tell, blindfolded, what you are hearing, shell to shell, knowing mics and sound manipulation are involved? Go watch other videos of them playing live, from previous times in their careers, where Pearl is not involved in the production, and notice what you hear of their drums recording to recording, live film or studio environment and know all the parameters of live performance or studio recordings change the sound of a drum set and can all be manipulated to change the sound of a drum set. Nothing you hear cannot be achieved for just about any drum set through today's software and outboard equipment. I say just about any drum set because there will always be differences between toms that are isolated from constriction mounting and those mounted with tom brackets of some kind on the shells. That is a given, even for the same drum line.
Dennis states the drums are exploding all over the place. Is that through speaker monitors in a large, empty room or what he's hearing acoustically in that large, empty room? Will the explosions change in a small, crowded room? Without question. If you use different mics with different coloring enhancements, will the sound of the drums change? Oh, yes. If the player changes heads and sticks will that affect the sound? Indeed.
Watch each player in a live environment and ask yourself if the sound you hear on a Pearl video, of them playing alone, is the same sound you hear when the rest of the band surrounds them; especially a band like Dream Theater with a massive volume and frequency range the drum set has to literally fight against to be heard. Nuances of shell design and sound? Forget it. Just forget it.
Spend the extra money if you want, for nicer finishes and better hardware but, expecting the sound to be dramatically changed because of proprietary shell manufacturing? Spend at your own risk.
RDAVIDR Does Trash Cans
As I mentioned elsewhere, I got in touch with David Raouf, YouTube channel, rdavidr, and asked him to take a look at the website and my YT channel and let me know if he saw anything he'd like to have. He chose the trash can set. I boxed them up and sent them off.
David posted the video today (9/16). It looks like the two bigger drums took a beating in transit. Still, they performed okay.
There's over 200 comments and 99% of them are very positive. Many were shocked. :-)
I love it when the point is proved.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlDGOZIPPas
I know I can make drums out of anything round. If I can seat the heads correctly, they'll sound fine. Sound is subjective but, when it comes to drums, it's really all about heads, tension/tuning, sound gear and engineers.
I don't know if David applied a lot of processing. Some people questioned that. There's obviously no processing on my videos of the kit. Just the ZOOM Q8 camera. That said, however John Mayes processed the set for the Concepts recording, I'd use that set on any Rock recording made. It's a little too beefy sounding for Fusion or Jazz. For genres of Rock or Metal? I'd use it. And I think I got a slightly higher tuning out of them on the latest recording.
Thanks, David, for showing it on your channel. :-)
As I mentioned elsewhere, I got in touch with David Raouf, YouTube channel, rdavidr, and asked him to take a look at the website and my YT channel and let me know if he saw anything he'd like to have. He chose the trash can set. I boxed them up and sent them off.
David posted the video today (9/16). It looks like the two bigger drums took a beating in transit. Still, they performed okay.
There's over 200 comments and 99% of them are very positive. Many were shocked. :-)
I love it when the point is proved.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlDGOZIPPas
I know I can make drums out of anything round. If I can seat the heads correctly, they'll sound fine. Sound is subjective but, when it comes to drums, it's really all about heads, tension/tuning, sound gear and engineers.
I don't know if David applied a lot of processing. Some people questioned that. There's obviously no processing on my videos of the kit. Just the ZOOM Q8 camera. That said, however John Mayes processed the set for the Concepts recording, I'd use that set on any Rock recording made. It's a little too beefy sounding for Fusion or Jazz. For genres of Rock or Metal? I'd use it. And I think I got a slightly higher tuning out of them on the latest recording.
Thanks, David, for showing it on your channel. :-)