Some pics of the snare:

I don't B~ this looks like a Star. They began stenciling in early 61. The timeline is muddy, as you know, but I honestly have my doubts as to some of the division amongst us as to the Hoshino deal. Since Hoshino is the family name of the company, I am all but certain we are talking about the Star company after the intro of TAMA. My inclination is that they used the Hoshino name after TAMA to keep the coffers full and only a few companies took advantage of it. We know for sure that SLMS took their contracts to Pearl in the interim of the TAMA company name.

The Hoshino drums we can verify are of lower quality than Star ever built, and I am sure this was to kill off all their existing stencil biz so they could bring all focus to TAMA. I know this is heresy, but it is the only logical explanation for the small count of Hoshino badged drums out there. The early Hoshino stuff was great, but those from the 70s are junk.

The lugs look more to be from the Teisco drum company to me- that snare strainer -I have the identical one (same lugs as well) on a Dau (Del Ray)- those were all manufactured by Teisco.

[IMG]http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn87/Osakabop/P1010015-3.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn87/Osakabop/P1010014-1.jpg[/IMG]

The Teisco shells were weak, thin and used very dry luan- I bet the snare caved in simply due to lug stress over the years. Still, a very nice find! A great piece for restoringFYI

Teisco it is!

Well, I'm glad we are starting this conversation again. Seems we never really get to the bottom of it, but I think we may slowly be getting closer.

John, I can see where you think this might look like a Star, the cymbal mount and floor tom mounts look more like the Star octagonal type than the Pearl diamond shape ones. However, some earlier Pearl sets might have had the 8 sided shapes, too, as it looks like a Ludwig copied design.

The snare lugs look just like the ones on my red Norma snare, which I still think is a Pearl make.

What I'm sort of getting at is this: the 'other' 3 MIJ companies that we have discussed, Tiesco, Gracy, and Topper (there might be others, but these are three that we think were exporting in addition to Pearl and Star) have similarities, like the similar parts John has mentioned. So I dont know if we can really say for sure that these were stand alone companies/manufacturers. It is my feeling that Pearl could have been the maker for these 3 companies as they all seem to share common traits (like lug designs, mufflers, shells, etc.) It is entirely possible that these companies assembled the drums from other manufacturer's parts, like John posited, but without some kind of primary info, how are we to know if any of these companies are more than just a stencil of an existing company (ie; Pearl)?

Thanks John and O-Bop for keeping this conversation/investigation going. I really do feel that given enough time, enough examples, and with enough discussion, we can get to the bottom of this.

Yes, it`s very interesting to me. It`s easier to look at the external metal hardware and try to guess the maker on some of these- but less obvious are the shells themselves- I have seen enough Teisco shells now to see how the Pearl stencils were superior (IMO) The shells themselves can tell us about who the maker was- atleast Pearl/not Pearl I think. The Star set I have has ultra thin shells with reinforcing rings-- I have never seen a Pearl as thin as the Stars I own- I love them and they sound great- I am just starting to look at the shells themselves- and seeing how they themselves varied in the stencil period.

We are stencilologists? Stencilology?Excited

What's with the sponge on the tom-tom?

Cool set but did someone move the Tom holder to the other side of the bass drum for some reason? :confused:

The sponge on the tom, well... The previous owner, who was a working drummer, had a true DIY spirit. The sponge is used as a muffler. I think he played mainly jazz. There was a set of very thin Gretsch sticks and a couple of sets of old brushes that came with the drums. He must have really needed the ability to control the volume. I need to post a pic of the other side of the bass drum, it's got two sponge mufflers rigged up. Kinda funny and awesome at the same time.

And yes, for some reason he decided that having the tom mount on the other side of the shell worked better for him. Maybe he wanted to have the tom on the same side as the spurs to help stop the bass from creeping forward?

I also need to post some interior shots of the snare. The shell has caved in at a few spots, and the owner added some 'reinforcement' in there. Man, I tell you, a find like this really tells a story!

O-Bop, yes, these shells are super thin, like the Tiesco's you mentioned. I think that all the Japanese makers were making very thin 3 ply shells early on. Then the shells eventually got thicker through the next 12 years or so - 3 ply, then 5 ply, then 6, then 9. I'm not sure how closely this copies the American drum making at the time, but I'm sure as rock drumming and harder hitting came along, the need for more durable shells was met by all makers.

However, as for identifying the luan shells themselves, if you stripped a shell of the hardware and wrap, I dont think I'd be able to tell any of them apart whatsoever, other than thinking that the thinner they were, the earlier they were made. John has the idea that perhaps an independent metal foundry made all the parts for the drums, the lugs, mounts, rims, etc. I've had the thought that it could have been just one company supplying all the shells, but maybe I just haven't learned how to tell them apart yet.

Yep, 'stencilology' is still a pretty young science. But all kidding aside, we really do need to look at these drums in a somewhat archaeological manner to try and get the history right. I'm still learning stuff about these things all the time. In fact, I just learned today that Star was producing as early as 1961 and that Pearl was possibly exporting as early as 1954! Where are all those drums???