Wow! 10th Anniversary Sonor SQ2 Cast Bronze...

You're a comic in disguise, FT! Many thanks for infusing my Sunday morning with a little cheer! (y)

I'm sucking up and loving every word you're saying! Paiste, just so happens to own my soul. Have a series of 2002's, a Master, and will be filling in the gaps in the months to come, so am delighted to hear your take on sonic bliss through the marriage of Sonor and Paiste.

I've been reveling in the sound and magic of Simon Philips as of late, and the Tama Starclassics he plays are irresistibly splendid in every way, which leads me to my next point, diecast hoops. Related to Sonor, the only aspect I am not 100% pleased with is the absence of diecast hoops on their toms, but knowing the company has been doing what they've been doing since 1875, I'm placing my trust in their expertise and hardware choice.

It's drummers like yourself that truly help orient me, so many thanks to you for your meticulous breakdown and insight into this.

A truly superb read!
 
Stroker said:
You're a comic in disguise, FT! Many thanks for infusing my Sunday morning with a little cheer! (y)

I'm sucking up and loving every word you're saying! Paiste, just so happens to own my soul. Have a series of 2002's, a Master, and will be filling in the gaps in the months to come, so am delighted to hear your take on sonic bliss through the marriage of Sonor and Paiste.

I've been reveling in the sound and magic of Simon Philips as of late, and the Tama Starclassics he plays are irresistibly splendid in every way, which leads me to my next point, diecast hoops. Related to Sonor, the only aspect I am not 100% pleased with is the absence of diecast hoops on their toms, but knowing the company has been doing what they've been doing since 1875, I'm placing my trust in their expertise and hardware choice.

It's drummers like yourself that truly help orient me, so many thanks to you for your meticulous breakdown and insight into this.

A truly superb read!
Click to expand...
Haha. You are too kind. Thank you.

I knew you were a fellow Paiste aficionado so those comments were specifically injected for you. Definitely threw away any sense of objectivity there, but it was truthful bias. :cool:

Long time fan of Simon Phillips as well. Believe your time is being well spent!

Regarding die-cast hoops, I used to have a more hard-line stance with DC vs TF, but it has significantly softened over time. As you noted, Sonor has (among others) certainly done their homework. And the SQ2 options for shell material & thickness can be leveraged. Without reservation, I would sincerely not give any concern to TF hoops on their toms. Overtones from their wood shells are typically very pleasant and not overly wild.

Also, when you get to selecting shell thickness, this anecdote of self-inflicted pain may help relieve a little stress...

For my initial config, I spent a good bit of time trying to determine ideal thickness for different drums. Attempting to balance what I had experienced with that of different recordings and research by others, I treated it as an engineering problem. Not to the point of paralysis by analysis, but definitely belabored over it.

I then found a good deal on a preconfigured kit with thin toms and medium bass. Looked at my notes, listened to a recording, tossed my notes and rolled the dice. Was tickled pink when it arrived.

Bottom line: Don’t spend a lot of time with it!

Best regards!
 
Last edited:
fl.tom said:
Haha. You are too kind. Thank you.

I knew you were a fellow Paiste aficionado so those comments were specifically injected for you. Definitely threw away any sense of objectivity there, but it was truthful bias. :cool:

Long time fan of Simon Phillips as well. Believe your time is being well spent!

Regarding die-cast hoops, I used to have a more hard-line stance with DC vs TF, but it has significantly softened over time. As you noted, Sonor has (among others) certainly done their homework. And the SQ2 options for shell material & thickness can be leveraged. Without reservation, I would sincerely not give any concern to TF hoops on their toms. Overtones from their wood shells are typically very pleasant and not overly wild.

Also, when you get to selecting shell thickness, this anecdote of self-inflicted pain may help relieve a little stress...

For my initial config, I spent a good bit of time trying to determine ideal thickness for different drums. Attempting to balance what I had experienced with that of different recordings and research by others, I treated it as an engineering problem. Not to the point of paralysis by analysis, but definitely belabored over it.

I then found a good deal on a preconfigured kit with thin toms and medium bass. Looked at my notes, listened to a recording, tossed my notes and rolled the dice. Was tickled pink when it arrived.

Bottom line: Don’t spend a lot of time with it!

Best regards!
Click to expand...
(y)

Appreciate your insight on hoops. Must confess, the whole diecast vs trifle flange hoop quandary has been gnawing at me for weeks, though after reading your entry I feel I can lay it to rest.

Marvelous of you to share the shell thickness of your kit. Many thanks for that! I do like it.

Special thanks to you for your polished replies. Very refreshing and of exceptional help to me. A notable member and peerless asset to this forum you are.
 
Diecast subtract frequencies to focus the sound. I used to be a big diecast fan but not any more. TF lets the toms sing all the way, to my ear anyway.

I wouldn't fret over TF's. They are the better choice if you asked me.
 
larryace said:
Diecast subtract frequencies to focus the sound. I used to be a big diecast fan but not any more. TF lets the toms sing all the way, to my ear anyway.

I wouldn't fret over TF's. They are the better choice if you asked me.
Click to expand...
Many thanks for weighing in on this, Larry!

Appreciate and highly respect your expertise.

Grandiose thanks to you and FT! (y)
 
I agree with the others, triple-flanged is the way to go!

Die-cast hoops can work great for certain drums like USA Customs because they counteract the warmth of the shells by adding more attack. That's my theory anyway.

But in my opinion, die-cast hoops usually have a slightly more aggressive sound. Kinda like the sound of a Ludwig Keystone X relative to the Classic Maple. More bite, maybe a little less warmth. That's good or bad depending on your preference.

In terms of resonance, die-cast are kinda like pre-muffled heads and triple flanged are like unmuffled heads. You always have the option to apply moongel to triple-flanged toms, if you know what I mean.

IMO, Sonor drums generally don't need die-cast hoops because their tone is so pure to begin with and they don't have unwanted overtones that need to be stifled.
 
When talking TF, they are far from equal. 1.6, 2.3, 3.2. I can’t say TF is more open than cast, as a blanket statement. Most of the top brands have thick TF hoops that can easily be in the same realm audibly as cast. On my snares I love cast. I dig the Gretsch 302 hoops (DF) on my toms too. While a bit more flexible and open than cast, they aren’t as stiff as say DWs TF hoops. My old TF hoops were just pathetic and can’t even be compared to anything of higher quality.

I would have to go with, it depends.
 
Last edited:
Stroker said:
(y)

Appreciate your insight on hoops. Must confess, the whole diecast vs trifle flange hoop quandary has been gnawing at me for weeks, though after reading your entry I feel I can lay it to rest.

Marvelous of you to share the shell thickness of your kit. Many thanks for that! I do like it.

Special thanks to you for your polished replies. Very refreshing and of exceptional help to me. A notable member and peerless asset to this forum you are.
Click to expand...
Wow. Thank you for the very generous and gracious compliments. You and others here are notably more deserving of them. You always treat others with the utmost dignity and respect, and it stands out. My sincerest thanks to you for your many enjoyable posts and contributions.

While the Thin+Medium shell thickness setup ultimately worked for me, I believe my initial UPID had something like small toms = Vintage, med toms = Thin, floors = Medium, bass = Heavy. And years later, I heard a kit that was almost inverted with med toms = Heavy, floors = Thin, bass = Medium so it’s definitely personal.

And if you feel like you reach a stalemate, at least shying away from extremes like Heavy small toms and Thin bass drums should provide favorable results.
 
Last edited:
larryace said:
Diecast subtract frequencies to focus the sound. I used to be a big diecast fan but not any more. TF lets the toms sing all the way, to my ear anyway.

I wouldn't fret over TF's. They are the better choice if you asked me.
Click to expand...
As a general rule of thumb, I agree Larry. It just can’t be used a hard fast rule.

As AzHeat astutely noted, there are notable differences in thicknesses/weights and designs of both TF and DC hoops.

Additionally, drums like Gretsch USA Custom, Tama STAR, Tama Starclassic, etc. have what are commonly classified as heavier DC hoops and they all have very musical voices.

Conversely, I’ve played other upper-level kits with 1.6mm & 2.3mm TF hoops that have had unwieldy voices and were difficult to tame to a more musical palette with heads & tuning alone.

So letting some drums sing openly isn’t always desirable and why some manufacturers incorporate DC hoops in their design.

Fortunately, we have a lot of options to choose from nowadays.
 
Years ago I did a comparison recording of TF vs DC. I used just one tom, a 10" DW, recorded it with both TF and DC...on the batter only... and posted it here.

The gist of it is I could not tell the difference in the recorded sound between the different hoops. At the time. I want to re-listen to it and see if my opinion changed.

Check it out:

Die cast rims A/B'd with triple flanged

Hey all, I did an experiment the other day and wanted to share. I've always had die cast rims on all my toms. I got my first set of DW's in June, they come with regular rims and I was always curious to see how the die casts would affect things. So I performed an experiment. First I got the Drum...
www.drummerworld.com
 
IBitePrettyHard said:
I agree with the others, triple-flanged is the way to go!

Die-cast hoops can work great for certain drums like USA Customs because they counteract the warmth of the shells by adding more attack. That's my theory anyway.

But in my opinion, die-cast hoops usually have a slightly more aggressive sound. Kinda like the sound of a Ludwig Keystone X relative to the Classic Maple. More bite, maybe a little less warmth. That's good or bad depending on your preference.

In terms of resonance, die-cast are kinda like pre-muffled heads and triple flanged are like unmuffled heads. You always have the option to apply moongel to triple-flanged toms, if you know what I mean.

IMO, Sonor drums generally don't need die-cast hoops because their tone is so pure to begin with and they don't have unwanted overtones that need to be stifled.
Click to expand...
Fantastic read, IBPH. Many thanks for it!

It's been a real learning experience for me, delving into the many aspects of ordering a custom kit, and members as yourself have been incredibly instrumental in educating me along with the way.

Can't tell you how much I appreciate having members as yourself on my side! (y)
 
AzHeat said:
When talking TF, they are far from equal. 1.6, 2.3, 3.2. I can’t say TF is more open than cast, as a blanket statement. Most of the top brands have thick TF hoops that can easily be in the same realm audibly as cast. On my snares I love cast. I dig the Gretsch 302 hoops (DF) on my toms too. While a bit more flexible and open than cast, they aren’t as stiff as say DWs TF hoops. My old TF hoops were just pathetic and can’t even be compared to anything of higher quality.

I would have to go with, it depends.
Click to expand...
Superb insight, AZ!

Extending my appreciation your way for you taking the time to share your experience and knowledge!
 
fl.tom said:
Wow. Thank you for the very generous and gracious compliments. You and others here are notably more deserving of them. You always treat others with the utmost dignity and respect, and it stands out. My sincerest thanks to you for your many enjoyable posts and contributions.

While the Thin+Medium shell thickness setup ultimately worked for me, I believe my initial UPID had something like small toms = Vintage, med toms = Thin, floors = Medium, bass = Heavy. And years later, I heard a kit that was almost inverted with med toms = Heavy, floors = Thin, bass = Medium so it’s definitely personal.

And if you feel like you reach a stalemate, at least shying away from extremes like Heavy small toms and Thin bass drums should provide favorable results.
Click to expand...
Don't sell yourself short, FT, you're more than well deserving of such my friend. (y)

The more I think about a thin/medium thickness configuration, the more I like it.
 
larryace said:
Years ago I did a comparison recording of TF vs DC. I used just one tom, a 10" DW, recorded it with both TF and DC...on the batter only... and posted it here.

The gist of it is I could not tell the difference in the recorded sound between the different hoops. At the time. I want to re-listen to it and see if my opinion changed.

Check it out:

Die cast rims A/B'd with triple flanged

Hey all, I did an experiment the other day and wanted to share. I've always had die cast rims on all my toms. I got my first set of DW's in June, they come with regular rims and I was always curious to see how the die casts would affect things. So I performed an experiment. First I got the Drum...
www.drummerworld.com
Click to expand...
I picked up on a slight variation between the two, with triple flange coming on top for my ears.

Many thanks for providing direction to these sound files!
 
The difference between thin, medium and heavy shells are pretty subtle, but still worth caring about for 'people like us.' haha

Here are the differences as I understand them: (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong)

[All these differences are slight, they aren't night and day]

Thin: lower fundamental note, more resonance, less projection
Medium: balanced
Heavy: higher fundamental note, less resonance, more projection

Thin is great for lighter styles, vintage styles, but doesn't cut quite as much. It doesn't take as much effort to excite the shells.
Medium is the best of both worlds.
Heavy is great for louder music where projection is necessary. It takes slightly more effort to excite the shells.

If you want more cut or bite or presence from, say, your bass drum.....make it a thicker shell. If you're more about nuance and delicate playing, choose a thinner shell.

All that being said, if for example you choose Heavy shells, they'll still sound great on a jazz gig.....and Thin shells will sound great at a rock gig. It won't be a huge difference one way or the other.
 
Pretty much spot-on IBPH.
And the differences will be most notable:

— for smaller (8”) and larger (18”) toms,
— from behind or in close proximity to the kit,
— in smaller rooms,
— unmiked...
— only to nerds like us. ;-)

Also worth mentioning is Sonor’s classifications are on the thinner side of what is generally considered for them:

Generally
Thin = < 6mm
Medium = 6 - 8mm
Thick = > 8mm

Sonor
Vintage tom = 4mm + 2mm re-ring
Vintage bass = 6mm + 2mm re-ring
Thin = 5mm (N/A for bass)
Medium = 6mm
Heavy = 8mm

Contrastingly, something like the Pearl Reference (original, not Pure) has 7.5mm toms and 10mm bass, and are considered medium and thick respectively.

Thus, think Sonor’s small variations all biased towards a thinner shell add to the subtlety.

EDIT: Forgot to note thin is n/a for bass drums.
 
Last edited:
IBitePrettyHard said:
The difference between thin, medium and heavy shells are pretty subtle, but still worth caring about for 'people like us.' haha

Here are the differences as I understand them: (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong)

[All these differences are slight, they aren't night and day]

Thin: lower fundamental note, more resonance, less projection
Medium: balanced
Heavy: higher fundamental note, less resonance, more projection

Thin is great for lighter styles, vintage styles, but doesn't cut quite as much. It doesn't take as much effort to excite the shells.
Medium is the best of both worlds.
Heavy is great for louder music where projection is necessary. It takes slightly more effort to excite the shells.

If you want more cut or bite or presence from, say, your bass drum.....make it a thicker shell. If you're more about nuance and delicate playing, choose a thinner shell.

All that being said, if for example you choose Heavy shells, they'll still sound great on a jazz gig.....and Thin shells will sound great at a rock gig. It won't be a huge difference one way or the other.
Click to expand...
An enjoyable walk-through to better understanding! Many thanks, IBPH!
 
fl.tom said:
Pretty much spot-on IBPH.
And the differences will be most notable:

— for smaller (8”) and larger (18”) toms,
— from behind or in close proximity to the kit,
— in smaller rooms,
— unmiked...
— only to nerds like us. ;-)

Also worth mentioning is Sonor’s classifications are on the thinner side of what is generally considered for them:

Generally
Thin = < 6mm
Medium = 6 - 8mm
Thick = > 8mm

Sonor
Vintage tom = 4mm + 2mm re-ring
Vintage bass = 6mm + 2mm re-ring
Thin = 5mm (N/A for bass)
Medium = 6mm
Heavy = 8mm

Contrastingly, something like the Pearl Reference (original, not Pure) has 7.5mm toms and 10mm bass, and are considered medium and thick respectively.

Thus, think Sonor’s small variations all biased towards a thinner shell add to the subtlety.

EDIT: Forgot to note thin is n/a for bass drums.
Click to expand...
Additional thanks to you as well, FT! Nothing like being taken under the wings of a member or two to help bolster ones sonic acumen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top