I forgot to mention how much I love Beatkeepers set. Those cymbals are amazing too!

Isaac

Amazing kits! Lovin' the vintage Pearls!!!

-Les

[COLOR="DarkRed"]Since this thread has been resurrected...just a few comments:

1) The oval Pearl badge and the block-letter pearl badge coexisted in the late '60's...go the Pearl website and navigate to their History section.

People make a mistake in that they assume the older-looking oval badges date the drums pre-'60's. Pearl, the company name as we know it, didn't exist before the late '60's...although the company produced stencils in the decade before that.

2) With some work to the bearing edges and good heads and head tuning, these can make a respectable-sounding kit. But they are luan shells, either 6-ply, 3-ply, or even 1-ply sometimes...so, no...they do not compare sonically to a Slingy, Rogers, Luddy, Premier of the same vintage (but neither do they cost nearly as much).

3) Those snares, even the 10-luggers, really don't have a value over $120 or so. Maybe if it has one of the really cool, old Japanese wraps which are no longer made (such as Tiger's Eye, Candy-Cane swirl, or their crazier dark red oysters or such) they can get $150-75. But, generally, $50-120 range is about where they sit, the snares.

4) It varies, but some of the old Pearl hardware is actually excellent...really heavy-duty cast copies of Slingy and Gretsch stuff...good, good hardware..probably used on their higher-line kits. Their knockoff of the Rogers Swivomatic tom mount system is actually superior to the originals (dare I say).

Generally, just cool old '60's kits with a lotta vintage MOJO which can be bought for cheap, and with some tweaking, worked up into a decent kit. They are neither the sh#t many people consider them, nor the equals of the big American and European mfr's of the time.

[/COLOR]

[/QUOTE] Their knockoff of the Rogers Swivomatic tom mount system is actually superior to the originals (dare I say). [/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Ummm.........I hate to disagree with you on this one but.....I disagree......the earlier Machined Swivomatic hardware was far superior to the Pearl copy.....the later CBS cast Swivomatic, probably about the same.....either way, I will say that it took Ludwig, Slingerland and Gretsch years to catch up with Rogers' innovation in hardware......most modern hardware is a derivative of both kinds of Rogers hardware, be it Swivomatic or Memriloc.....with that said, I'd say the best imported hardware on the market today is Yamaha, and the best domestic......ok, so nothing from the domestic brands are actually domestic today...LOL!.....but if I was to pick one it would be DW.

[COLOR="DarkRed"]LD...you and I disagree ?

Whod'a ever thunk it ? Eye Ball ;)

I knew it would offend someone...BUT...there were 2 types of hex rod Japanese swivo knockoffs...one was a simplified ball joint connecting 2 straight rods, with a single screw to tighten and loosen tension. I like those, they are simple and they hold well, and are easier to use than the multiple screws on the Rogers ones. They were about the same sturdiness as the Rogers and tend to bounce a bit.

The second was a ball joint connecting 2 rods, one rod bent 90 degrees, and the other straight..with 3 tension screws to loosen and tighten coming out vertically from the mount, not horizontally the way the swivomatics did. THOSE are heavy duty kick#ss, heavier guage than the Rogers and they are much less bouncy, much more sturdy. Those suckers were seriously engineered. It's this second design which I feel is significantly superior to Rogers swivos, regardless of whether they were from Cleveland era, Dayton, or Fullerton.

Funny how timing can be, in the Dixie thread right next door in this section, member Dde just posted his Dixie kit , the red one...& it has this exact tom arm (second design) on it in his pic:

http://vintagedrumforum.com/showthread.php?t=7389

And Rufus' pic in that same thread shows the first type of arm I mention above.

I agree with you, LD, the Swivomatic was sheer genius as the first ever adjustable hardware of its kind...and all hardware using a ball joint since then owes a lot to the swivomatic...but I think the second version of the Japanese knockoff bested 'em.

Unfortunately, although people think you CAN do this...the hex arms are NOT really interchangeable between the Japanese and Rogers tom mounts...the Rogers hex rods were a tad smaller in diameter...and I have seen plenty of swivomatic plates and collets messed up because someone used the Japanese arms in the Rogers mounts, they had to force the collars open wider and some even routed out the backside of the plates of the earlier ones to make 'em fit.....:(

[/COLOR]

That snare would be a good match for my kit. I have 2 old Pearl kits (as well as one from the early 80's) and they are fun to play and sound perfectly acceptable, especially in a live situation. One has a 20" bass and the other a 22". To be fair, I use a Rogers Dynasonic snare rather than one of the originals.

i am a ludwig enthusiast. but when i came upon this early pearl snare, i just had to have it. i have since seen a matching kit on ebay but it has way too many issues. this one sounds great as well.

mike

I have a Zimgar blue sprkl kit with re rings and casr hardware so im not sure what,when or where that puts it,but im taking it on an audition tonite with a local band that is very popular here.My point is that i feel comfortable enough with its sound that im not concerned about it.All i have to do is play well enough to nail the job,and i certainly wont blame "the drums" if i goof upExcited........BTW Fayray..BEAUTIFUL KITS!!!

For what its worth..Got the gig..drums sounded fantasticMind Blowi