Clearly Avedis Zildjian. If they were Quick Beats they would have those 4 extra holes in the bottom, but no bell. Since the holes are there but there is clearly a bell, they aren't factory Quick Beats. That leaves New Beats (with the heavier bottom) or ordinary hats (both cymbals a more similar weight) from the Avedis Zildjian line as the two most likely models. The holes were most likely drilled ex factory.

The lathing style and visible hammering look 60s or 70s to me. And of course, the pressed in die stamp looks 60s. Here (for the rest of you) is the link to the auction:

http://www.trademe.co.nz/music-instruments/instruments/drums/cymbals/auction-913663171.htm

where you can see the other photo properly.

There are Rock Hats as well, but I'm not sure exactly when that model first appeared (and I haven't got that part of my site finished yet). What you want is for the seller to tell you the weights, but that's usually hard to achieve. Otherwise you could ask them if they feel about the same weight or if one seems heavier than the other. Usually those vent holes (the extra 4) would be drilled in the bottom hat, so that's probably the heavier one (if one is heavier).

Thanks Steve. Very helpful indeed but not too keen on the idea of the holes being retrospective.

And another pair of Zildjian hats have just come to my attention on the NZ site TradeMe.

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=917863031

These are claimed to be 1950s "Big Stamp" hats. The identification is incorrect. Don't be fooled. There are a few Large Stamp Hollow Block stamped hats out there, but not many. I've seen 3 or 4 pairs over 7 years or so. They are extremely rare. I haven't kept close track but misidentified ones are more common than real Hollow Block hats. Real ones do get higher prices. But those are not Hollow Block.

A real Large Stamp Hollow Block (often just called Hollow Block) stamp looks like this:

[img]http://black.net.nz/cym2014/blockstamp.jpg[/img]

and my detailed writeup: http://black.net.nz/avedis/avedis-gallery.html#large

and all you need to do is look at the AVEDIS to see the difference from the 60s "three dot" stamp.

[img]http://black.net.nz/avedis/images/60s-stamp-measure.jpg[/img]

and my detailed writeup: http://black.net.nz/avedis/avedis-gallery.html#60s

Those are the "non New Beat" style (closer to equal top and bottom weight) I referred to before, but once again the 3 small vent holes in the bottom are very unlikely to be factory drilled.

I was wondering why he thought it was a hollow logo, what with the logo not being hollow and all:)

And the $1100 valuation he got is interesting too.

BTW, I actually have a hollow logo bottom 14" hat. I haven't come across another so not likely to find its other half unfortunately.

And thanks for your informative writeup. I know a lot more than i did before.

Thanks Andrew.

I forgot you had an HB bottom. Rare beast indeed. Some day I'd love to hold it in my hands and examine it closely. For research purposes, you understand. :)

I seldom post information about mis-identifications on auctions, and did so in this case with great trepidation. It's not my place to mess up other people's auctions, but it is my burden that I've learned a little...and tried and document it properly.

Fortunately he accepted my concern without getting all agro about it. As part of my background research I've actually collected up a set of pics of die stamp impressions which might be mistaken for Large Stamp Type I (aka Hollow Blocks). I plan to use them in a future page to document the range of variation in how the letters look when that particular die stamp is pressed in. Sometimes they can look a bit HB-ish to the casual observer, or to the innocent victim of Hidehitters.

And I've got proper data on valuations for old As, old Istanbul Ks, as well as 602s and Sound Creations now. So I know how bogus his idea of value is. But until I publish my old A and old K price data I have to forgive people making stuff up. That's what happens in the absence of proper published data.

He's relisted now, and let's just say he's asking well over top dollar for what appear (on lathing, visible hammering, and die stamp) to be garden variety 60s hats. No harm in asking...except that drumbum also has a pair of hats which pass the 1950s tests (die stamp, lathing, visible hammering) and are for sale (no reserve) if somebody comes up with NZD300.

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=919798486

That's what I paid for my 1950s small stamp flange hats. Otherwise I might be interested. But I'm a happy flange fan.

Oh, and I've got 4 pages of major site revisions pending. A whole new (competing) theory of the 1954 stamp, complete revision of the First and Second stamps (I've got examples of 4 and possibly 5 types now). Much new illustrated info on lathing and visible hammering patterns and how they changed over time. So it's all a moveable feast. Some of what you've learned may change without notice. :)

Steve - I usually stay out of other people's auctions, too, but sometimes, when the claims are made with such authority but clearly wrong, I have to say something. And i saw that auction and thought standard 60s Avedis hats in good condition and weights (if you like them light) but nothing special. I'm glad you said something.

I pulled out my hollow block 14" this afternoon and I'm not sure why I thought it was a bottom as it could be a top as it's around 850g

Oh, and I'm looking forward to the revisions

BTW, I've got some flange hats too. You may have seen them when they were FS on TM last year. They are interesting hats and I've used them for some quieter gigs

I think you're the guy to talk to about what I believe to be a prototype (or at least very early) American K. It is the first I've seen like this- "K" on top and bottom of course (no "Zildjian" ink) but the block ink ID stamp as well as the stamp are upside down in relation to every other Zildjian I have owned or seen. I guess this is from 1983. Oh, and it sounds SOOOO sweet- 17" crash.

I have seen plenty of "EAK's" with a "K" only top and bottom but the block ink and metal stamp are "right way around".

Any comments? Should I start a new thread?

I don't know much about the EAK and Canadian K stuff. I've got some info from Paul Francis about production dates (not that there aren't other pieces of info about production dates out there) and I remember his comment on the ink stamps sometimes being upside down was something like "looks like somebody loaded some upside down in the machine that day". So I've never known whether there is some significant chronology difference (say early versus late production era) or things are just...variable.

Pics of yours might help. I've collected up a few pics in my reference collection (and notes in my file system) pending getting to Canadian Ks and EAKs and IAKs. But I haven't got there yet.