Pearl's protrusion arm tom mounts

Hello.

I don't know if this has been discussed before. But don't you think its odd how Pearl seem determined to keep using those protrusion arms? The only other drum manufacturers I know using them are budget kit makers.

Granted, Pearl have made some great steps to make their arms attractive and strong, but to me even the best one doesn't offer the same usability and flexibility of the ball-bearing mount. It's almost as if Pearl decided a long time ago to work with the protrusion arms and they refuse to change it for whatever reason. (I have my own theories here.)

I think Pearl make great drums and hardware, but those arms just put them behind so many other manufacturers. What do you think?

I Agree.To me they are the ugliest mounts on the market.Hands down...Nothing personnel,but since you asked........

Yeah... Pearl makes great drums... But my 60's era Ludwig L-Arm mounts offer easier positioning. I have always hated the pearl mounting system. And it seems really silly to me that they kept using it even after adding suspension mounts... A protrusion arm that does not "protrude" seems even more useless.

Add my voice to that chorus. It's bizarre, as Pearl make some of the absolute best hardware out there. The mounting hardware is too heavy, bulky and awkward to adjust - especially from behind the drums themselves.

AtonalConductor said:

It's bizarre, as Pearl make some of the absolute best hardware out there.

Click to expand...

Bizarre indeed. In the days of L-rods and ball and socket mounts allowing unidirectional placement, I don't get why they persist with it.

Agreed.......fabulous hardware......cumbersome and limited tom mounts.

Ya man I always thought they would mess with the sound a bit. Like why couldn't they just move the hole to outside the shell like with the yamahas?

jwildman said:

Ya man I always thought they would mess with the sound a bit. Like why couldn't they just move the hole to outside the shell like with the yamahas?

Click to expand...

Well.. they did do that... again - what makes no sense is that they kept the huge bulky mount when it does not extend into the drum any longer... and of course if you have bass drum mounted toms - the mounting plate is twice as large as most and has 2 holes penetrating the bass drum.

The most frustrating thing about this mount is the lack of lateral positioning capability... it drives me nuts having to loosen the entire arm at the bottom in order to move the drums side to side.

Funny, I've never had a problem with them. Since they adjust in every direction, they can place toms wherever you wish. Once they're set where I want I never undo their positioning when I move the drums. Everything's memory locked, so setup is super quick: stick the tom arms in the bass drum, slip on the toms and you're done.

Meanwhile, I have used ball-type tom mounts and have had them take a "set" after a period of time--i.e., they get indentations that actually preclude infinite adjustment after a while.

I dunno...I like 'em. I find it easier to adjust where my 12" tom sits than with RIMS-style suspension mounts. Where you put the drum is where it will sit when you tighten up the arm. On suspension mounts, there always seems to be some "settling" that you have to account for and it's harder to get it right. It seems more stable too, where as suspension mounts allow the drum to bounce and wiggle more, when played.

I like the larger tube + Optimount. I care less about how it looks (even though I don't think it looks bad) than how it functions, and it functions quite well.