youve got some nice stuff there for certain. drumaholic will know exactly what they are, i'm sure.

the ride appears to be a mid 50's hollow block logo.

the first hi hat looks to be maybe the same. but, i can't see the three dots in the script. plus, hollow block logo hats are few and far between from what ive seen.

the second hat looks to be much of the same. but, i'm also seeing heavy z and heavy co which is usually indicative of trans stamp,which would be earlier 50's.

can you weight them?

mike

The hats are both trans(itional) stamped cymbals, probably early 50s (I don't see the striations that would indicate late 40s, but it's hard to tell). Mike's right on the ride, mid 50s block stamp. Nice cymbals.

Agree. The trans hats look like early '50's and the ride is what Drumaholic calls a Tyoe I Large stamp from the mid '50s. These were a nice find.

Bill may chime in, but I think the block stamp was the last in the series of the 3 types of large stamps. The first two were not block lettered, and the distinction between the two were that the first was without the three dots, and the second was with. Disclaimer: My memory has been known to be less than reliable; just ask my wife.

You're correct in your descriptions of the stamps, but with regard to the naming conventions, I'm going by the documentation that was published by him back in 2004 on another forum, of which I have a copy. If he's changed things since then, perhaps you're correct.

The correct order, if in fact there actually is any, is currently "up in the air". The large stamp series is anomalous. If they were used consecutively, then that makes for an too many trademarks changes in too short a time. Maybe if they were used concurrently that would be one explanation for this; but that would open up yet another controversy namely: why would they use three different trademark all during the same era?

I did have one "Rosetta Stone" example that had two different large stamp types on the same cymbal. But unfortunately that example still doesn't settle the consecutive vs. concurrent question. If I ever opt for using the former theory over the latter, then that example would cause me place those two types next to each other on timeline. This is because in all other such cases that has been the case. But which theory to go with is still not clear because manufacturing characteristics associated with the large stamp eras just don't seem to follow a consistent pattern for any given type. For example some large stamps look exactly like later 50's (circa '57-'60) cymbals but others with the same trademark type show characteristics that resemble early 50's eras. So without some convincing evidence to point me in one direction or the other, I can't consider this question to be settled.

Ah, gotcha Bos.

Thanks for the clarification Bill. Always interesting stuff.