That's a looker, indeed!

[SIZE=1]If we've discussed this before, just ignore it ... it looks like the cymbal holder on the tom side is too far forward and reversed. The blunt side should be towards the drummer on that one.

Again, if this has been covered ... my apologies. I'm just blown away at the looks of the kit and just happen to see a very minute inconsistency.[/SIZE]

Dang! I do love an 80N. Great kit and a great year for Slingerland builds.

Lovely set indeed.

Would love to be able to listen to them in person. And play them too!

Nice.

Yes we have and ya know I made a mental note to flip it around when I put the second set of spurs on............do you think I remembered??? NOOOOOOOOO :(

Of course not, but as always thank you for reminding me, that'll be on my long weekend to do list.

It was orignally a 50N Rock Outfit which you probably remember from a previous post.

The second floor tom is a 65 vintage and the snare is a 65'ish Artist with Radio King top hoop that makes it sound even better to my ear.

BGT

Nice drum set & cymbals!!

thanks for jogging my gray. I do remember.

either way, that is a seriously beautiful kit made from some of the absolute best vintage shells ever. kudos to you.

Thanks very much. I certainly will defer to you, as to your opinion as far as the "quality" of of the shells and overall sound. What timelines are the best for Slingerland in your opinion?

I'm alway thinking the late 50's 60's as to the "golden age" for Slingerland.

I have a Hollywood Ace Chicago snare that's from around 1958-60 that has great sound and feel and I just scored a Radio King from the early to mid 50's that I haven't got yet, so I'm really curious about that sound and how it compares to the few Artist's Models and the Ace that I have.

I have calf on all of the snares except for an early 70's COB Sound King that was my first snare.

But the 65' Artist is my favorite.

BGT

I currently own four Slingerland kits ... 68, 71, 76, and a 79.

The 68 is very different from the others. The shellis thicker, rounded over and almost non-existent edges, and rougher woodwork. The sound is blunt, round, warm, and more like the other 3ply builders of the day. Not bad, but not the greatest I've ever played.

The 71 shell is the thinnest of all. It is very thin. The edge is sharper with a slight round over. The woodwork is much better. The sound is unbelievable. It is warm and round and very very resonant. There is a marked difference between the sounds of Slingerland and other 3ply builders with these changes.

The 76 and 79 shells are by far the most artistic builds. The interior ply is flat out beautiful. The shells are consistent and even. The edges are sharp and clean. The woodwork is stunning. The sound is deep and warm and open and very full. They can be sensitive or very powerful, depending on head choice and approach.

My experience is not based on hundreds of kits. It's based on less than fifty. That's less than some of the respected dealers, but it is fine for my use.

I like the 50s and very early 60s builds, but there are some issues. The good is the wood utilized. It is a sweet African Mahogany that remains fairly untouched inside which is beautiful to my eyes. The edges are calf friendly, much like the later 60s edges, but more so. They are not as flat as the WFL dead thumpers, but close to it. Slingerland managed to build a shell that actually sounds sweet in spite of the contrary elements. They are highly sought after for a reason.

If you want, there is a thread on here ... somewhere ... that demonstrates the Slingerland edges. Do a search and check it out.

That's seriously one of the nicest kits I have seen so far. Them are just awesome. Congrats and you better keep them ;)

Billy - That's a seriously beautiful set of drums. Museum piece! I hope you're playing the hell out of them and having fun with them for all of us.

Those drums are so sweet, they make my teeth hurt...

John