Smaller diameter tom deeper than the succeeding tom...
- Thread starter Lee-Bro
- Start date
GetAgrippa
Platinum Member
I guess if you had the 13 right over kick and 12 in offset so set lower but tops even it might not be noticeable. It's only an inch shorter maybe a lil faster decay. You might like it?
Winston_Wolf
Platinum Member
I wouldn't discount the nagging feeling the tom depths are going to look weird next to one another.
I've used a 10x9" next to a 13x9" and the matching depth didn't look too bad, but when I put that 10 next to a 12x8" it really seemed out of place visually in a way I couldn't get over.
I've used a 10x9" next to a 13x9" and the matching depth didn't look too bad, but when I put that 10 next to a 12x8" it really seemed out of place visually in a way I couldn't get over.
SYMBOLIC DEATH
Senior Member
This isn't what I was expecting at all. I was thinking it was a question about how some 8" toms are as deep as the 10" tom.
I think the difference would drive you nuts to the point that you'd end up with another kit after searching the world for a matching tom. I know that it would bother me and I wouldn't be able to not see it.
I think the difference would drive you nuts to the point that you'd end up with another kit after searching the world for a matching tom. I know that it would bother me and I wouldn't be able to not see it.
Swissward Flamtacles
Member
If you need a 13" and can't find another one, how about setting them up like Purdie?
ineedaclutch
Platinum Member
This gets my vote too. I usually play a 4pc, but if I do 2u/1d it’s 12/10/14, 12/10/16/, or 13/12/16.
Lee-Bro
Senior Member
I've thought about experimenting with this type of setup. But my free time to be able to practice is so limited that I have to work on the things that I need to work on first, and there's not enough time for that.
Perhaps I'll pull the trigger on the shorter 13" and tell myself that it's all part of the big shell bank I'm trying to build anyway.
notvinnie
Senior Member
Really? I've never heard of that size. 9" is the regular depth for a 13".
This all probably mean nothing, lol! I was just curious myself but I generally don't like 13s
cylindrical volume:
12x8 = 904.78
12x9 = 1017.88
13x8 = 1061.86
Then there is Nolly's guide to tuning:
8″ – F-F#
10″ – C#-D
12″ – A#-B
13″ – F#-G
14″ – E (maybe F if rack tom)
15″ – D-D#
16″ – C-C#
18″ – A#-B
cylindrical volume:
12x8 = 904.78
12x9 = 1017.88
13x8 = 1061.86
Then there is Nolly's guide to tuning:
8″ – F-F#
10″ – C#-D
12″ – A#-B
13″ – F#-G
14″ – E (maybe F if rack tom)
15″ – D-D#
16″ – C-C#
18″ – A#-B
Lee-Bro
Senior Member
Yup. I had the guy verify the depth.
Sakae2xBopster
Well-known member
Purdie's snare seems really low in this video. Is it common?
Lee-Bro
Senior Member
That's not even an option I would consider. I like the 12x9, I specifically ordered it.
Plus, the cost of redoing the reinforcement rings and the logo badges no longer being centered on the shell would drive me nuts.
If I were going to go w/ 12x8 tom, I'd still want a 13x9.
steadypocket
Gold Member
The average punter in a crowd, or band mate, won’t care as long as it sounds good. Among my many kits is a Sonor ProLite, with 13, 16, and 18 toms. Big drums. Well, a Sonor dealer happened to have a new 7x10” tom in the same blue sparkle finish. I bought it, figuring it would give me some configuration options. The 7” deep 10” tom looks goofy on a double tom stand next to a 10” deep 13” tom. The pitch interval between those drums, however, is just perfect. I couldn’t care less now how it looks. I picked up the 10” at a great price and now I have options. Thanks Sonor Sam! Don’t worry about the aesthetics.