First, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I think that my intermediate K with a golden bronze patina is a thing of beauty and not ugly at all. The main point of my post was to counter the argument that to return cymbals to their like new shiny state would more accurately give us the vintage sound that many of us crave. In truth even back in the day, most cymbals that were played and recorded had a patina, and were not pristine with a like new shine. Regardless of why that occured, that's the way they were played and that sound is what we hear today. To argue as I think someone did that they weren't cleaned due in part to laziness, or that not polishing them made younger drummers somehow feel cool, is silly. There were pleanty of prducts available that would do the job,they were just not marketed by drum companies. And no one, I repeat, no one, thought it was somehow cool to play cymbals without a shine. The reason they weren't cleaned is very simple. Musicians who played those cymbals were more interested in how they sounded than how they looked. They simply did not care if they weren't shiny. And, over time these cymbals took on a darkness and woodiness due mostly to extensive playing, and in part to the patina. Seems like some drummers today are more interested in how things look rather than sound. So maybe shiny cymbals make them feel cool, eh?
Not really I am going for a vintage new look. Not a vintage 54 year old look. I care how they sound but I am sorry there isn't enough crap built up on there to change the sound that much. I just would rather kill the "vintage" sound at the expense of it looking new and shiny. I personally would like to see some scientific evidence on the changes in pitch, weight and numerous other things to prove that it works.
Them are my thoughts. I bet the change even with 50 years isn't nearly as much as people think. The metal can only absorb so much dirt, grease anyway.
