Hmmmm...I'm not so sure about modern drum gear being superior. Easily replaceable? yes

I would be somewhat concerned about taking vintage gear out on a road tour of one-nighters. However, I own both modern and vintage gear and it is the modern gear that I would trust LESS on the road than I would my Big R Rogers kit from 1974-5. If my DW9000 pedal breaks down, I wouldn't even know how to begin to fix it. But, when my Atlas h-hat breaks, I can probably jury-rig something that will get me through the gig. The user-serviceability of vintage gear is much higher, in my opinion.

I agree, as is a 60's carburetor, as opposed to an electronically monitored fuel injection system.

Does that mean the aforementioned carburetor would be more suitable than the newer more effecient elctronic system? moreover does that make it a better choice for a long distance trip where reliability is the primary concern. Im sure you see where this is going, I just cannot believe that after 40 years of manufacturing the science of hardware design and construction has not sufficiently evolved into a more reliable, easier tougher and thus better solution.

from an entirely scientific perspective that is

Heres my thought. ...

One buys the top of the line, finest maple kit.......

Each drum on some state of the art isolation system...

Then one buys the EC2 or similar two ply damped heads for said top of the line kit because the single ply ... ambassador coated, clear, or similar single ply heads are "inferior" ..( ya I know its a lot of BS hype)...

And then One generates 35 threads on how to get the sound from Band X's Blah Blah album out of their drums because ONE has the exact same kit as Joey Blah Blah and ONE's drums sound like ESS....

Then ONE asks what everyones drumdial settings are.....

And I dont have that problem with any of my top of the line maple kits that are 40 years old or better. I have great mounts, great drums, great hardware, and ..........SOUND.

Clapping Happy2

Well put. Could have said it better myself...just a bit lazy.

Nice one P.Man.

Adolf Ludwig Once Said That If Rogers Were Ever Properly

Funded They Would Have Put Him Slingerland And Just About Everyone Else Out Of Business. Pretty Fair Statement Considering

All The Innovations They Brought To Drum Manufacturing.

forgive me mr p, but just so I am clear: essentially in summary what you are saying is that after 40 or so years the art of drum manufacture (from hardware, velums, to the drums themselves) has not improved?

I can see how with a drum this is certainly the case - it is a piece of wood steamed and shaped. but do you really believe that most of the evolution in drum technology is purely a marketing scam designed solely to make musicians part with their money for something that is, in fact, no better than any older equipment they might have?

as an idea - imagine rogers had the same ideaology and instead of investing time and money into making something like the Swiv-o-matic hardware simply accepted that what was and had been were the best and no need for improvement would ever be required?

"Heres my thought. ...

One buys the top of the line, finest maple kit.......

Each drum on some state of the art isolation system...

Then one buys the EC2 or similar two ply damped heads for said top of the line kit because the single ply ... ambassador coated, clear, or similar single ply heads are "inferior" ..( ya I know its a lot of BS hype)...

And then One generates 35 threads on how to get the sound from Band X's Blah Blah album out of their drums because ONE has the exact same kit as Joey Blah Blah and ONE's drums sound like ESS....

Then ONE asks what everyones drumdial settings are.....

And I dont have that problem with any of my top of the line maple kits that are 40 years old or better. I have great mounts, great drums, great hardware, and ..........SOUND"

also you are assuming the buyer of a new kit is simple in nature and is trying to chase a sound as opposed to create there own.

your 40 year old kits were new once, and there was probably someone sitting around saying exactly the same thing you are

Ok. I'm joining the fray.

I've owned and played oodles of "new" kits. Some were nice and others were just targets to hit.

The subject of this thread is hardware, so I will focus on that piece.

Some of the more "nicer" kits I've owned had some of the worst hardware made.

Pearl Masters Mahogany Limited Edition blah blah blah kit had the single worst hardware I've ever used...and I've used a bunch.

It was thick tubes that would not adjust to a nice playing angle. They were large and cumbersome. Yet, that is what they are still touting as the 'best' they offer. The isolation mounts were sub-par. They worked on the premise of rubber mounting around the tension rods. That's kind of stupid when you put it into practice.

DW Masters kit. The hardware was the absolute heaviest hardware I've ever put my grubby paws on. They put sturdy at the top of the list and made the mass of the stand ridiculously excessive. How much structure does it take to hold up a tom that weighs a couple of pounds that is hit with the force of a human? Not THAT much, I can assure you. So, while they are sturdy and reliable, they are definitely not an improvement. The mass of the stand makes them impractical.

Yamaha Recording Custom and a Rock Tour Custom kit. These two had some interesting hardware. The mounts harkened back to the Rogers hex mounts and held just fine. The base of those tom stands, however were another story entirely. They were freekin' heavy and WAY too much to handle a couple of toms.

These are just a couple of high end kits that failed in the hardware department. All of them were either functionally sub-par or way too massive to be considered an improvement.

If mass is an indication of improvement, then how do you explain carbon hardware? There is a fine line (actually is quite wide) between structurally improved and just flat out impractical. I think that is the distinction between our opposing views.

I don't need a shotgun to kill a fly. I can use a .45 just as easily.

Chasing your own sound is one thing. Buying an expensive set of drums and muffling them down to cardboard is an entirely different concept. Theres been much harping on the sturdiness of modern hardware, and sturdy it is. My Ayotte Custom kit has suspension mounts and sounds beautiful. I use DW 9000 series stands with that kit, and have two other sets I use with two different later Rogers kits. And Tama IC pedals. I like sturdy.

Im not against new drums, new hardware... or even advanced technology. Im just saying why waste all that money on quality and technology...then rehead it to get a sound you can get from Pulse?

I have my older vintage kits, and have them headed very similar to factory, and they are always complimented on sound, resonance, and playability, and they work.

I just picked up a Rogers kit from '74, would be interested in what y'all can tell me about it (of course I'll get pictures up as soon as I can!!!)

Anyway, they are pre-Big R, which was nice I thought. speckled paint interiors, with re-rings. Are these 4 or 5 ply maple, or what? I took them out on a gig and they sounded great. They do have the look of swiss cheese as someone decided to rework some of the hardware on the shells Violin

I had a new Rogers kit in 1980, blue, and it had de-lamination problems to the point where the dealer got me a new set. Black this time, and it did the same thing. That's all I know about Rogers.