I have a Slingerland tom with date of Nov 1961 and a 'P' stamp. It has not got the air vent or tone control. Without an air vent, there is also no badge to ID the drum, though everything about it indicates to me to be a Slingerland.
comments?
Thank you.
No badges/air vents on Slingerland toms till June 1966. The "P" indicates the drum would be wrapped as opposed to a natural finish or paint. The interior of your drum would be expected to be mahogany with the grain running horizontally.
The interior is as you say, which was one of the indicators to me that it was indeed a Slingerland. Thanks.
I would attach a photo of the interior but getting failed message.
I finally was able to upload a photo of the interior into my original post as an edit.
No badges/air vents on Slingerland toms till June 1966. The "P" indicates the drum would be wrapped as opposed to a natural finish or paint. The interior of your drum would be expected to be mahogany with the grain running horizontally.
With the P versus M drums, were the "maple" drums set up to have the same overall outside diameter as a drum with pearl wrap?
With the P versus M drums, were the "maple" drums set up to have the same overall outside diameter as a drum with pearl wrap?
Yes, that's why its always a head-fit risk when wrapping drums that were originally laquered/painted. Some will cut the wrap down slightly from the bearing edge, but even that brings it's own issues to the table.
I have not owned an extensive quantity nor variety of drums during my life time, (I started playing in 1963 and keep my sets for a long time except in the 80s when I went on a buying spree, and have only owned Rogers and Ludwig), but I have noticed heads fitting tighter than others and even wondered if the heads were the reason.
I really don't know what procedure the factory followed on the shell thickness with reference to pearl or non-pearl finishing. I have read that or understood or interpreted that shells were manufactured first, then inspected to determine if the grain pattern was suitable for staining. Those with proper grain patterns would be candidates for stain finishing and those that weren't were covered. Did each manufacturer establish their own practices?
Towards the end of Rogers existence (80's) they started putting plastic pads under the tension casings, which I thought was specifically due to stained (non-pearl) shells. I'd have to go back to my literature and take a look.
Thank you all for your input, much appreciated
With the P versus M drums, were the "maple" drums set up to have the same overall outside diameter as a drum with pearl wrap?
Think about it... Slingerland did not have separate molds to turn out shells with and without a wrap. Wraps of the time were thinner than they are now. I just removed all the original Red Glass Glitter from my 1965 shells and it is so much thinner that what is available today, or for the last few decades! Gretsch's shells were notoriously not undersized from the start. Add a wrap, and now you have a shell that is extremely difficult to get heads on and off! Today's cure for these Gretsch shells? Remo Classic Fit heads!!
-Mark
Yes, that's why its always a head-fit risk when wrapping drums that were originally laquered/painted. Some will cut the wrap down slightly from the bearing edge, but even that brings it's own issues to the table.
I guess in hindsight my comment above should only be applied to WFL and pre-69 Ludwig drums, which went into the molds with the wraps already attached. Thus a finish-ply drum which gets wrapped later in life will have more head-fit challenges than a pre-69 drum that started life with a wrap.
This is not new information - sorry for muddying the conversation!
