Peavy radial pro 1000

Vandalay

Member
Just wondering if anyone has owned/played this kit? ...the only well known drummer I've seen playing them was Don Brewer Of GFR in the late 90s
 

Tamaefx

Silver Member
I have a friend who has got many kits. Among those, he has got one or two Radial pro, he definitely loves those kits and says they sound marvellous. very good build quality. Aesthetically, they’re a bit strange of course.
 

Ransan

Senior Member
As a teen in the 90s I would gawk over these.
I loved the oil satin stain finishes they seemed to have, and their looks were primo!

I know they have a free floating type lug less design so the tension remains kept throughout the hoop and not within shells for ultimate resonance at all tunings.

I still wouldn’t mind owning a set honestly.
 

larryace

"Uncle Larry"
There was a member here some time ago. I can't remember his handle, but he had a set of Radials and just thought they were all that and a Playa bowl.

He told me the shell was only 3mm. Wow. 3mm is thin. The thinner the better to my ear, especially with wood.
 

averageguy

Junior Member
Just wondering if anyone has owned/played this kit? ...the only well known drummer I've seen playing them was Don Brewer Of GFR in the late 90s
I played on several Peavey Radial Pro Kits back in the 90's and even early 2000's. All of the ones I played sounded amazing. Peavey was just distributing and I believe had a licensing deal if memory serves me correct. I used to have the business card of the guy who was the brainchild of the whole thing, I think his last name was Volpp, but I can't exactly remember. He was making them well before Peavey got involved. This guy was deadly serious about having no interference of any kind within the shell of the drum. I remember looking through the top head and seeing nothing but wood when looking downward, it was really impressive. I remember speaking with a Peavey rep at the NAMM show and they told me that they had to tell him (Volpp?) lacquer finishes were a must, because initially he only wanted the finish applied by hand, similar to a hand varnish, but Peavey couldn't guarantee quality control with something like that. Again, this guy was serious about maximum resonance. I actually own a Radial Pro snare drum to this day. The Radial Pro drums could rip your head off is the best way to describe the sound. Thin maple shells with no interference. They were very powerful and full sounding. I strongly considered getting a set many times, but never pulled the trigger because I was worried (justifiably) that the concept and look wouldn't win people over, and that a few years later they might not be selling them any longer, which would make add ons or potential repairs extremely difficult etc. That is exactly what happened. They did sound great though. I played on 3 different kits that I can remember, and they all sounded fantastic. I liked the look of them, though most consumers seemingly did not.
 

Ransan

Senior Member
There was a member here some time ago. I can't remember his handle, but he had a set of Radials and just thought they were all that and a Playa bowl.

He told me the shell was only 3mm. Wow. 3mm is thin. The thinner the better to my ear, especially with wood.
I did look into unbelievably correct statement Uncle Larry, and yes that would be the Radial Pro 1000 series in OP's inquiry, they are 3 ply 1/10 inch or 2.5 mm shells. Ultimate resonance maple shells, I wonder how they project live?

Reading this article below took me back, to which as a kid, I fondly gazed at their bubbly snares, and glass finishes also.

http://peaveydrums.moonfruit.com/history/4519786597
 

pgm554

Platinum Member
The ones I've played were as good as any other high end kit I played.
There was one selling locally @ about 5 or 6 hundred at one point.
Problem is getting parts on a defunct non standard product.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TJK

PorkPieGuy

Platinum Member
There was a guy locally who used to have a set of them who loved them.

I've always heard that the 1000-series was awesome, but the 750-series was prone to unfixable breaks. I've never heard anything negative at all regarding the sound of the 1000-series. Everyone has their own opinions of the looks, and they always seem to command a premium price. I ran across this set for sale not too long ago. This is actually a really great price from what I've seen online. (I'm neither the seller nor know the seller in any way.)

 

cbphoto

Gold Member
Once again, an innovative concept that sounded great died because the hardware wasn‘t designed around the concept. So what if that ”lug ring” looks weird. It’s no worse than Pearl’s plumbing pipes. No worse than Tama’s heinous bolt-on badges. No worse than Mapex’s antigravity robocop tom mount.

And they did resonated very well. But I’m finding that, in the studio, my 5-second tom decay is about 4 seconds too long. Plus, four toms humming simultaneously due to sympathetic vibrations really reduces the clarity of its sonic image.
 

s1212z

Well-known member
Once again, an innovative concept that sounded great died because the hardware wasn‘t designed around the concept. So what if that ”lug ring” looks weird.
These shells were crazy thin; 1/10 inch or ~2.5mm...the apex of the thin maple 90s! I had assumed the Radial Bridge was acting as a reinforcement hoop as well as a lug system :unsure:

 

larryace

"Uncle Larry"
Lest we forget this ad:
;)

View attachment 104570
I played a set of these at an open jam once. Same color too. They were tuned so poorly that I really couldn't hear what they were capable of.

I always thought they looked goofy with the rounded bridge. Squared off and 'much smaller overall' outer bridges like oh I don't know, let's see...oh! Guru Origins! Yea Guru Origin outer bridges look so much better than the Peavey cartoon-ish rounded outer bridges. Squared off blends right in.

And I'm not biased at all :p
 

Ransan

Senior Member
Anyone else notice the congruency with Peavey advertising?

960C408C-76FC-42D5-85E3-D08284111C65.jpeg

Also for layered context, I’m guessing he’s no coffee aficionado, or he might be?...
 
Top