That's Not What I've Been Told! Drum Sound Physics

If I plug 2 different guitars into the same Amp one after the other , they sound different . Les Paul then another Les Paul.. All things being equal. well they're not..
 
What's Yours? Someone playing you tube videos to people all over the world all listening to different speakers in different rooms in different weather with different hearing capabilities is proof that things are as they are.. Go Grannie Go!
 
Last edited:
What's Yours? Someone playing you tube videos to people all over the world all listening to different speakers in different rooms in different weather with different hearing capabilities is proof that things are as they are.. Go Grannie Go!
What does any of that have to do with the principle of physics described in the video? The point of the video is how sound is produced, not what the sound is. Of course what the sound is is important, but that’s a different topic.
 
The point of the video is how sound is produced, not what the sound is. Of course what the sound is is important, but that’s a different topic.
You keep saying that, but I'm not sure it's true. Sonor was selling drums with that catalog. The sound is the whole and entire point of a drum. The physics part just explained why they chose a certain design.
 
How the sound is produced is what the sound is or will be.. Basically Vibration and Inertia, some in harmony some not.. not each piece of wood is the same.. The Weather or Room Condition is the biggest contributing factor in a drums sound in response to these Physics..The particles of each substance / material do not change in size they take up more or less space as Expansion or Contraction takes place..Giving I believe a looser or tighter sound response..
 
Last edited:
You keep saying that, but I'm not sure it's true. Sonor was selling drums with that catalog. The sound is the whole and entire point of a drum. The physics part just explained why they chose a certain design.
It doesn’t need to be ”proven“ in a Sonor marketing piece. It is a principle of physics. It happens everywhere.

Let’s look at speaker cabinets. I designed over 40 of them for Peavey so I have a bit of experience. When the speaker vibrates the cabinet some of loudness is lost. When you go back and stiffen the boxes with thicker walls or stiffer plywood (such as birch instead of common fir) or braces the boxes will get measurably louder AND the frequency responce will change. Go check out the crazy hi-fi guys building concrete speaker boxes. When you vibrate the box energy that could have otherwise been audible sound is lost in vibrating the box. The energy itself doesn’t go away. Some of it becomes resonance which is what changes the frequency response but most of it becomes heat and is therefore trapped as kinetic energy and stored in the box. Don’t think that happens? Well drop that box on your foot and you will feel that kinetic energy disappated from the box into your now smashed foot 😉

So yes, the physics part explains why they chose their designs or others choose other designs. Each is trying to design for a sound they desire. The physics just describes which knob to twist to help achieve it.
 
It doesn’t need to be ”proven“ in a Sonor marketing piece. It is a principle of physics. It happens everywhere.

Let’s look at speaker cabinets. I designed over 40 of them for Peavey so I have a bit of experience. When the speaker vibrates the cabinet some of loudness is lost. When you go back and stiffen the boxes with thicker walls or stiffer plywood (such as birch instead of common fir) or braces the boxes will get measurably louder AND the frequency responce will change. Go check out the crazy hi-fi guys building concrete speaker boxes. When you vibrate the box energy that could have otherwise been audible sound is lost in vibrating the box. The energy itself doesn’t go away. Some of it becomes resonance which is what changes the frequency response but most of it becomes heat and is therefore trapped as kinetic energy and stored in the box. Don’t think that happens? Well drop that box on your foot and you will feel that kinetic energy disappated from the box into your now smashed foot 😉

So yes, the physics part explains why they chose their designs or others choose other designs. Each is trying to design for a sound they desire. The physics just describes which knob to twist to help achieve it.
Yes, the physics part doesn't need to be proven, but the OP was about a Sonor marketing catalog, not just physics. The guy actually READS from the catalog. Anytime anyone has said anything about the totality of a drum's sound, or expressed a preference for thin shells or a certain wood, you've kind of poo-pooed it, even to the point of saying "If you're not on board, you're not understanding." I don't accept that. There are those who understand the physics just fine, but also recognize that the OP wasn't strictly about physics, but was about physics as applied to drum design, expressed in a drum advertisement.

The Peavey experience is really fascinating. I can see where the physics affecting sound reproduction are related in some ways to drum design. They don't address the whole picture, though, because you are talking about maximum efficiency in a sound reproduction system. When you are building a drum, you are building a sound PRODUCTION system, and the entire point is to use your knowledge of physics and engineering to shape the sound to meet a desired result.

I think you know all that, though. Like me, you just enjoy debate. ;)
 
Yes, the physics part doesn't need to be proven, but the OP was about a Sonor marketing catalog, not just physics. The guy actually READS from the catalog. Anytime anyone has said anything about the totality of a drum's sound, or expressed a preference for thin shells or a certain wood, you've kind of poo-pooed it, even to the point of saying "If you're not on board, you're not understanding." I don't accept that.
Ok ..,but look at the title. That’s the point of his piece. Who care about his, mine or your opinion as to what sounds best. Everyone gets to have an opinion. When I said not on board I meant specifically with the physics and not to anyone’s opinion. Opinions are neither right or wrong … they are just opinions. But most people don’t pay any attention to the mechanism. And so whether one chooses to learn what is actually going on or not doesn’t matter. It still goes on 😉

Analogies suck but think about this one. If you get shot with a bullet, you don’t die from the bullet, you die from loss of blood that follows. Everyone here seems to be talking about the bullet and not about the loss of blood that could come from a thousand different ways. Bullet with no loss of blood is no problem. Loss of blood with no bullet is. Gotta pay attention to the part that actually moves the needle.
 
Ok ..,but look at the title. That’s the point of his piece. Who care about his, mine or your opinion as to what sounds best. Everyone gets to have an opinion. When I said not on board I meant specifically with the physics and not to anyone’s opinion. Opinions are neither right or wrong … they are just opinions. But most people don’t pay any attention to the mechanism. And so whether one chooses to learn what is actually going on or not doesn’t matter. It still goes on 😉

Analogies suck but think about this one. If you get shot with a bullet, you don’t die from the bullet, you die from loss of blood that follows. Everyone here seems to be talking about the bullet and not about the loss of blood that could come from a thousand different ways. Bullet with no loss of blood is no problem. Loss of blood with no bullet is. Gotta pay attention to the part that actually moves the needle.
Haha!! Fair enough. The thread title does mention physics, lol. I think we all know how this stuff works by now. The horse is dead, and my arm is tired.

Except, ironically, you mention how analogies suck? I feel like we've been discussing the bullet (the starting component) rather than the blood loss (the resulting, and literally life or death, effect)...

Nonono, I'll stop. Lol I'll stop.
 
For the record, I agree with everything said regarding the physics of how sound interacts with and emanates from a drum. However I disagree with the conclusions from the video. I’ve played thick shelled drums and thin shelled drums, and there are no ifs ands or buts—I vastly prefer the sound of thin shells. While the head vibrations may lose some energy to the shells on thin shelled drums, I don’t see that as a negative. The shells contributing to the overall sound makes a huge improvement to the tone, and frankly I find it strange that anyone would think otherwise. To each their own, but I’ll happily continue to play my thin-shelled Renowns anyday.
 
Are there any German speaking bros out there that can confirm that Chester Thomas purchase receipt?
Was that 50,000 euros for a sonor drum set? 🤯

Screen-Shot-2022-05-21-at-3.26.47-PM.png


Dear Mr. Frost,

the company Sonor once produced a drum set of the Signature Series (custom build) in the year 1992 for the tour "The way we walk" for the drummer Chester Thompson of the band Genesis. The drum set was used on the tour between 8th of May 1992 and 17th of November 1992. Afterwards the ownership of the drum set switched over to Chester Thompson and it was kept in its original condition after a restoration accomplished by Chester Thompson, Brad Marsh and Uli Frost. Regarding this context it was put on display in 2012 on the vintage show on Musikmesse Frankfurt.

The drum set is a Sonor Signature "Special Edition" SSE, built as "NoMount" system and was modified with PureCussion RIMS later on.

The following drums were built with inside and outer plies of original Bubinga:


[ list of drums ]


Additionally a 14x8 HLD 590 Bell Brass Snare was used by Chester Thompson, which he also used on the Phil Collins tour "But Seriously Tour" earlier.

The drum set is in possession of Uli Frost and has (excluding the additionally existing microphone and trigger technology) an approximated value of around 50k€ according to the current vintage market.

Sincerely yours

SONOR GmbH

Karl-Heinz Menzel
Brand Manager
 
interesting when Sonor decides- revives a series from their past they bring back the sharktooth/+/- era .

Question:

Can you spec a SQ2 - today- with the exact shell composition of the 70s Phonics?
 
interesting when Sonor decides- revives a series from their past they bring back the sharktooth/+/- era .

Question:

Can you spec a SQ2 - today- with the exact shell composition of the 70s Phonics?
Close but not really. The Phonics were 9ply beech shells, then you added the veneer on top of that. Each ply of veneer was an additional 1mm. So for example the rosewood inside out Phonics are 11mm.

So an SQ2 heavy in a lacquer finish is 8mm. The maximum they make any shell today is 8mm. That’s pretty close, but if you want a veneer on the outside and inside then Sonor subtracts the veneer plys from the total count with 8mm being the total max. Max plys is 4 down from 9 plys on Phonics.

Most of the veneers are man made ALPI which is made from poplar. So if you get a rosewood SQ2 heavy with inside out ALPI rosewood veneer; then you have 4mm of beech and 4mm of poplar and not 9 plys of beech like Phonics.

You almost always see SQ2 kits with inside and out ALPI; so imho I say no. How do you call that SQ2 a beech heavy when half the drum is poplar and the beech is less then half a standard Phonic not even getting into the ply number comparison

Sonor did not set the market on fire with heavy drums. The public wants thin shells to medium shells which is why the Vintage Series was based on 6ply Teardrops.

Phonics turn 50 in 2025 marking the 150 anniversary of Sonor. Would be shocked to see a return of the Phonics

BBB5EB4E-DA7D-480F-8999-70B247304361.jpeg
 
Last edited:
sort of like the Paiste Sound Creation cymbal series was/is/was to Paiste.../ kidding

How come no mention of shell material besides/ V/T/M/H and Acr/ on the charts/ whats what
what's/ where's/ the material/option there;
 
sort of like the Paiste Sound Creation cymbal series was/is/was to Paiste.../ kidding

How come no mention of shell material besides/ V/T/M/H and Acr/ on the charts/ whats what
what's/ where's/ the material/option there;

From the company website

Birch​

Scandinavian Birch has an aggressive, distinctive tone with tremendous projection. Providing low and high frequency clarity with a smooth balanced mid range.
csm_bars_0000_birch_66d25a8403.jpg


Maple​

North American Maple offers a mellow, warm and very balanced full tone providing low frequency punch and a mixed balance of mids and highs.
csm_bars_0001_maple_4b43f190ef.jpg


Beech​

German Beech wood offers a full, warm tone with evenly balanced lows, mids and highs. Tremendous projection, tone and dynamics.
csm_bars_0002_beech_9ceaf6b19c.jpg


Acrylic​

German Acrylic has a full-bodied tone with great presence and powerful dynamics. Accentuated highs and lows are more dominant with reduced mid range frequencies.
csm_bars_0003_acrylic_897c5ece22.jpg
 
index.php


Got it/ still a little confusing/ what is the Vintage shell make up and is it the only one with rings?
 
Back
Top