I used to use the double braced Yamaha stuff too. But doing 100+ gigs a year, and being my own drum tech, I had to lighten the load.
New "Crosstown" lightweight stands from Yamaha
- Thread starter motojosh
- Start date
I used to use the double braced Yamaha stuff too. But doing 100+ gigs a year, and being my own drum tech, I had to lighten the load.
I've recently been using vintage Rogers Swivo stands, only because I caught the vintage bug and felt that the kit deserved proper hardware. Those aren't too heavy. But now I just want something that can be used with all my kits. One set of hardware that works well, is stable and light weight.
I totally bought into the "beefier is better" mentality with hardware for the longest time... DW, Pearl, Yamaha... Once I discovered that the good single braced stuff will more than handle the load, I never looked back.
ConcertTom
Senior Member
I was considering getting this but I was in pro drums in hollywood the other day and accidentally barely nudged some very lightweight DW cymbal stand with a 21" ride on a super short boom (extended out 2 or 3"). The whole thing started to fall over before i caught it. Made me realize that you put a very high center of gravity when you make your stands too light, unless you're playing those cymbals with all the tiny holes in them... i dont play that hard and i would be concerned about knock over my ride.
First off, I tend to mount multiple things on each stand, adding enough weight to keep the stands stable. Second, I just read in another thread about DW's lightweight (flat-based) stuff being pretty unstable, even compared to other lightweight flat-based stands, due to their shorter legs. Flat-based stands behave much differently than tripod stands, in my experience. I'm not worried about it. But I'll soon find out exactly what's up, and report back.
It seems to me that DW just lightened up a previous design, not much out of the box thinking there. The Crosstown seems to have been thought through quite thoroughly. I think that that C-channel legs will offer more strength than just a lighter single braced, flat style. And, the legs also look to spread out quite far, offering a wider stance which should mean more stability. I guess we'll have to wait and see, but Yamaha has always brought their A-game when it comes to hardware design.
I’ve got a heavy 20” ride on a DW Ultralight straight stand as well as 16”-18” crashes and in use they’re stable. It’s not the lightness of the stands that’s an issue, it’s the spread of the tripod legs. The tripods on the Crosstown stands look to be the same as “Normal ”stands so I’d expect them to be completely stable both in use and if knocked from the wrong angle.
The weakest link in the DW stand range is the hi hat as it doesn’t have that bracing point where tripod legs meet about 12”-18” up the vertical tubing. The Yamaha stand looks streets ahead in this department as it’s a “normal” stand just made with lightweight materials.
Whenever lightweight stands are discussed it seems that people blame flat bases and low weight for instability. It’s not the fault of the flat base per se, it’s the fact that the legs of flat bases stands are usually relatively short. Take a tripod stand and tuck the legs up to the same degree so that the feet are spaced the same as a flat bases stand and it’ll be almost as unstable but will have the advantage of the tripod legs bracing together on the vertical tube to stop the tube from swaying as much as it would on a flat base in use. Knock it from the side though and it’ll go down just as easily. I hasten to add that in use the DW UL stands work for me as they’re not getting knocked from the side. Putting a cymbal on a lighter stand will inevitably raise the centre of gravity higher than on a heavy stand but again in practical use as long as the legs aren’t too small it won’t cause a real world issue.
All that being said, if you’re in a pub and band mates are clumsily moving around your kit then a stand with legs that cover a wide area might potentially prevent mishaps.
Last edited:
Les Ismore
Platinum Member
Still an 8/30 ETA thru FRIEND, if you're not part of that order the next boat load is scheduled for November!!
Looks like you'll qualify to possibly be the first reviewer.
Note: YAMAHA is 'claiming' a sound advantage with CROSSTOWN hardware
Durable, light and stable
Channel-track aluminum bracing
Non-slip rubber feet
New micro-wing nut design
Increased natural and open sound from cymbals and snare drums
Set configuration : CS3 X2, HHS3, and SS3 with carrying case (individual protective sleeves included)
Winston_Wolf
Platinum Member
Seems reasonable. I think we've all had a case where a particular cymbal sounded better on one stand than another. Granted "better" is pretty subjective, but I've certainly noted a "difference."
Mongrel
Silver Member
Every time I change the size of my hi hats-13", 14", 15", all play just a little bit different depending on tension.
My (now ancient) Tama "Swivel-Foot" single braced stand gives me five adjustments with the turn of a knob. Simple effective...and (relatively) lightweight. Uses the larger size tubing so Tama dog-bone holders work perfectly with them saving on bringing other stands.
Hollywood Jim
Platinum Member
YES. I also use DW light weight, flat based cymbal stands. They work great for me. And I use a 22" ride.
But, I don't use a DW lite for my boom stand. For the cymbal boom stand I use a Gibraltar Flat based stand. Still very light and the legs are longer !!!
.
As far as structural support, leg radius is important, but the higher attachment point is key to why a tripod base is generally a more stable design than a flat base here. If you've taken physics or statics/dynamics courses, think of the forces involved from a engineering mechanics perspective. Alternatively, consider the guy-wires used on newly-planted trees, boat masts, radio towers, etc. Similar principles. If costs could be cut by significantly lowering guy mast attachment points and slightly increasing ground radius (i.e. less cable, labor, etc. required) -without- jeopardizing structural support, guaranteed it would have been done. ;-)
I have a set coming early next week and will join you with a review. I don't expect them to replace the 700s, but rather just an alternate lighter weight setup when appropriate. A few initial things I'm interested in evaluating are:
CS3
- How functional it is as a lower height two-section stand. The top and middle clamps are an open design that allow for the top tube and insert to be moved to the base for this purpose.
- If the diameter of the top tube is 5/8" so a 600 series boom top can be used instead. The middle tube is 7/8" so the top two sections of a 700 boom could be used, but that would add unnecessary weight.
- If the top offset tilter is the same as the 600 or an improved design. Yamaha offset tilters only lasted one model generation (CS*45) on the 700, 800 and 900 series due to their susceptibility to breaking.
- How stable the base is with a TH904 3-hole receiver in the middle section and a tom hanging off it. Plan to iteratively test 10", 12", 13" and 14".
HS3
- Default spring tension. I've gotten used to being able to adjust the HS740 tension up or down a notch or two when using different size/weight cymbals. Swapping springs would be too inconvenient so may need to come up with a homegrown adjustment. Maybe something as simple as an external shim and Les-style cable tie in the chain to reset the footboard angle when stronger tension is needed.
The lack of yension adjustment on the hihat is a concern of mine too.
If they're sturdy enough, they will definitely replace my 700 stands. The whole hardware pack is about the same weight as just two of my 700 series cymbal stands. I gig a lot, and that kind of weight reduction would be a dream.
I'm so bummed! The package just arrived today, but I won't have time to swap all the stands out before I have to leave for my gig. Some things I will say though upon first impression.
* They actually look nicer in person. Not that there was anything wrong with the pictures/videos. Or maybe it's just that "new gear high". Either way, they look great.
* The hihat tension (without cymbals on it) definitely seems workable.
* The tilters and top sections of the cymbal stands are small, but seem very sturdy.
* They are shockingly light compared to how sturdy they look. I'm sitting down, and just picked the hihat stand up very easily just grabbing the upper tube between my toes.
Maybe I'll take the hihat and snare stand to the gig today. Not too much adjustment needed with those.
* They actually look nicer in person. Not that there was anything wrong with the pictures/videos. Or maybe it's just that "new gear high". Either way, they look great.
* The hihat tension (without cymbals on it) definitely seems workable.
* The tilters and top sections of the cymbal stands are small, but seem very sturdy.
* They are shockingly light compared to how sturdy they look. I'm sitting down, and just picked the hihat stand up very easily just grabbing the upper tube between my toes.
Maybe I'll take the hihat and snare stand to the gig today. Not too much adjustment needed with those.
Agreed. I'm just being cautious with expectations for the CS being able to support toms. Could certainly combine two 700 CS with the rest lightweight though.
Thanks for taking the time to share these. Not sure what prompted you to lift the HS with your toes, but perfect visual of just how light it is.
These stands seem like they could take a couple toms mounted off the center section. I certainly wouldn't dare mounting anything off the upper tube though.
Hahaha, sheer curiosity.
Just got back from my first gig with the Crosstown hihat, and snare stand...
The snare stand is perfect (to me). The adjustment points hold secure. It's got a non-geared tilter, so I can get it exactly where I want it. It goes low enough to accommodate my height preferences. It's way more compact (in use, and in the case) than the Gibraltar Turning Point stand it has replaced. And, of course, it's crazy light. But it's still very sturdy, and stayed put for the whole gig. Maybe partially because the contact area of the ribbed rubber feet is pretty sizeable, which equals better gripping power.
The hihat stand, overall, is awesome. Same good points as the snare stand... Super light. Folds up smaller than the hihat I've been using (Yamaha 700 series). Nice, solid adjustment points. Doesn't seem to creep like my 700 tends to. Another small, but nice feature that all Yamaha hihats seem to share, is that it has a pretty short rod. Not too short by any means. But noticeably shorter than most hihat rods I've come across, that end up with like a foot of extra rod sticking out the top. Also, it has a smaller spread when set up.
The two small personal complaints I have... First, there's is no tension adjustment, and the set tension is a fair amount lighter than what I normally prefer. And second, in order to fold the footboard up for packing, you have to disconnect the support bars. Which means you have to reattach them every time you set it up (a very small inconvenience, but something I noticed). Neither of those small gripes are going to make me go back to my other stand, considering the benefits.
Something i noticed that doesn't affect me, but may affect someone else... Because of the hihat's smaller legspan, and somewhat thick beefy legs, it doesn't seem to leave a lot of room for a nearby double bass slave pedal. I've seen some people position the slave pedal underneath their hihat leg, and next to the hihat footboard. There is no room for that here. As someone mentioned in this thread, there is a set screw that can probably be loosened to make the legs swivel (haven't tried it yet). But it looks like even that wouldn't get the hihat pedal and a slave pedal to sit comfortably together. I'll test it next time I can, and post my findings.
The snare stand is perfect (to me). The adjustment points hold secure. It's got a non-geared tilter, so I can get it exactly where I want it. It goes low enough to accommodate my height preferences. It's way more compact (in use, and in the case) than the Gibraltar Turning Point stand it has replaced. And, of course, it's crazy light. But it's still very sturdy, and stayed put for the whole gig. Maybe partially because the contact area of the ribbed rubber feet is pretty sizeable, which equals better gripping power.
The hihat stand, overall, is awesome. Same good points as the snare stand... Super light. Folds up smaller than the hihat I've been using (Yamaha 700 series). Nice, solid adjustment points. Doesn't seem to creep like my 700 tends to. Another small, but nice feature that all Yamaha hihats seem to share, is that it has a pretty short rod. Not too short by any means. But noticeably shorter than most hihat rods I've come across, that end up with like a foot of extra rod sticking out the top. Also, it has a smaller spread when set up.
The two small personal complaints I have... First, there's is no tension adjustment, and the set tension is a fair amount lighter than what I normally prefer. And second, in order to fold the footboard up for packing, you have to disconnect the support bars. Which means you have to reattach them every time you set it up (a very small inconvenience, but something I noticed). Neither of those small gripes are going to make me go back to my other stand, considering the benefits.
Something i noticed that doesn't affect me, but may affect someone else... Because of the hihat's smaller legspan, and somewhat thick beefy legs, it doesn't seem to leave a lot of room for a nearby double bass slave pedal. I've seen some people position the slave pedal underneath their hihat leg, and next to the hihat footboard. There is no room for that here. As someone mentioned in this thread, there is a set screw that can probably be loosened to make the legs swivel (haven't tried it yet). But it looks like even that wouldn't get the hihat pedal and a slave pedal to sit comfortably together. I'll test it next time I can, and post my findings.
Last edited:
Thanks for the 2nd update Cut. Sounds very promising and appreciate the caveats.
As far as mounting a tom on the cymbal stand, plan on doing it the same way as is typically done on the 700 series... insert their 3-hole receiver into the base tripod section, move the top two sections into one of the holes and insert a tom arm into another hole. This shifts more of the weight support for the tom to the base section and eliminates any denting or collapse of the middle tube.
The top tube diameter does look very small in the photos and I've been wondering if it might be 1/2" instead of the 5/8" used on the 600 series. If it is, will just look for an alternate plastic insert for the middle section to accommodate a 5/8" or 3/4" top tube. Then a 600 or 700 series boom top could be used instead.
Thanks again.
As far as mounting a tom on the cymbal stand, plan on doing it the same way as is typically done on the 700 series... insert their 3-hole receiver into the base tripod section, move the top two sections into one of the holes and insert a tom arm into another hole. This shifts more of the weight support for the tom to the base section and eliminates any denting or collapse of the middle tube.
The top tube diameter does look very small in the photos and I've been wondering if it might be 1/2" instead of the 5/8" used on the 600 series. If it is, will just look for an alternate plastic insert for the middle section to accommodate a 5/8" or 3/4" top tube. Then a 600 or 700 series boom top could be used instead.
Thanks again.
Based on Cutaway's review, I'm really looking forward to the HH stand!
Sadly, it is backordered again at Musician's Friend. I shoulda just asked Yamaha if they can sell me one, but I really try to support the retail sector, and at $129 the price is certainly not unreasonable.
Bermuda
Sadly, it is backordered again at Musician's Friend. I shoulda just asked Yamaha if they can sell me one, but I really try to support the retail sector, and at $129 the price is certainly not unreasonable.
Bermuda