Thanks, Mark.

I picked that up maybe 10 yrs ago from Dave Sims at the Chicago show. I too love that fruitwood stain.

Dave

My apologies while not vintage I absolutely love my new Rogers Patrionyx kit and had to share. Only 21 of the snares and 21 kits made.

So cool!!

Cheers

In a post a while back, I expressed surprise at the choice Rogers made to make a tri-onyx set before making any set in singular colors of that type. At the time I wasn't aware that it was intended for such limited production. Enjoy it!

Nice drum set. I hear that their new tom holder spin-off from the trusty old Swivomatic is a very good piece of hardware. But, I guess that, if you're going to play a "modern" twist to a venerable old brand name, it's your choice to use a snare stand for the "mounted" tom.

The tom set on the snare stand seems to be the current approach in all the new sets. Many drummers, if not most, view that as leaving the tom in the best position to resonant and avoid choking. Personally, I can't say I've ever thought my Swivomatic setup was creating issues that way, so I've always been happy enough to have a mounting setup so I don't need to carry one more stand.

As to the new arm, I've seen that used as a replacement for the original, but haven't seen that Rogers has issued new pieces to go on either end of it. That is, no mounts are offered to go with it.

Have you (or anyone) seen any re-issued mounts?

And of course, there is the dreaded concept of XLS. CTMichaelV can hardly proceed to start drilling the tom and bass to add mounts on a 1 of 21 kit.

I will say this much on the new kits; they have the sound and look of real Rogers stuff. I might have liked a little better approach on the spurs. I have wondered why they used a Ludwig approach on that particular part of the hardware.

I think that you are wrong in saying that most if not all drummers prefer the use of a snare drum stand for the MOUNTED tom. Among drummers preferring pre-1970s drums, that statement is very wrong. It looks to me that the two versions of the Dynomatic are designed for one of them to work with Swivomatic collets and the other one to work with mounting hardware that accept round rods a la Ludwig.

I think it's the new approach that many companies are going to because it is the cheapest, least labor-intensive way to mount a tom without having to drill holes for a mounting system. That's my take on it, anyway.

As far as tom tom mounting systems go, I hate anything that relies on those synthetic plastic/rubber ball things. I reckon those things will distort, dry out, crack and otherwise degrade, eventually.

To turn the page on this topic, Here is a nice 3 ply top hat that I have. I already had the powertone. It was in really nice shape when I bought it (pic 1) but decided to give it a total cleaning (pic 2.) The following are post clean up.

Dave

Interesting discussion. I too have never understood (or heard?) a need for those modern tom mounting systems that are designed to improve the resonance of toms. That's just more over-engineered stuff that increases the weight of your hardware, in my opinion.

And related to that, a virgin bass drum means you have to carry a second snare stand to mount the tom. More weight, more stuff.

My only real (adult) experience is with 60s-70s Ludwigs, and they are overflowing with resonance, using the original mounting hardware and single ply heads - Remos and Aquarians - with top and bottom heads tuned pretty much the same. I always have to use cut-portions of those clear plastic rings and "drum dots" to DECREASE the resonance of my toms.

But as I always say, to each his own. Whatever floats your boat.

Enjoy whatchoo got.

Regards, MB