Four _thousand_ dollars for a _centrifugal_ cast? They want _four, THOUSAND, dollars for that?_ Seriously Tama just gtfo with that absolute fkn nonsense. Madness. I could see $2.5k. I could even wrap my head around $3k - But _four GRAND?!?!_ Tama is being disingenuous about why they went with centrifugal casting over sand casting. They went with centrifugal casting because sand casting is more labor intensive (i.e. EXPENSIVE) and because it leaves a less uniform and by finish standards a "poorer" finish, it needs even more hand processing after casting (i.e. _more_ expensive again because more labor). That would have eaten into that _TASTY_ profit margin they've created for themselves with that $4 thousand price tag and making the snare in a cheaper fashion that looses all the darkness and controlled overtones of the sand cast OG's. DW did theirs 5 years ago and it was $4k but it was sand cast, there were only 75 of them and the inside of the shell varied from 5mm on the top and bottom to 3mm in the middle to get the best of both low end and punch. The only thing it was "missing" was the extended snare wires but the DW sand cast bell bronze sounded better to my ears then this "reissue." It had that earthy dark quality and didn't have the unfocused and overly ringy overtones of this new Tama.
Currently saving up for a Tama Starclassic performer from DCP. It will take a while but it will be worth it. My wife doesn’t understand because she bought me a kit 6 months ago. But she will when she sees it
The '80 and '82 had a longer sustain and a very pronounced heavy metallic quality to the sound. The '82 sounded like it had the thinnest shell out of the bunch (i have no idea if that's true or not). The new one definitely had the attack and classic tonal quality but i didn't seem to hear as much resonance/sustain. Which was the loudest to your ears? Also, did you end up weighing the snares? Did you measure the shell thickness? How does it compare to the '80? I have so manny questions!
these were our general observations, as well. Because the shell is slightly oversized, it may take a while for the heads to get broken in? The reissue sounded the loudest in the room. It physically hurt. All snares were 3mm.
The 80’s OG BB had a nice balance of frequencies. The 82 had substantially more high end ring. The reissue had a warmth and body to it that the OG could likely be tuned (damped) to achieve. The 82 has a very “lively” sound. They’re all great drums but for me the reissue is definitely a winner!
Sadly the 1980 sounds best to me, more depth of tome, a bit more lively. The others are ball park, but sound more choked and less fat. It's shame they couldn't just replicate the 1980....exactly.
Its not possible to reproduce what 40+ years of age does to the drum. And I am 100% certain that if you were blindfolded you would not be able to tell them apart.
@@weschilton Do metal drums change with age? I’ve A/Bed a 1960’s Supraphonic in a studio with a 2000’s one and none of us could hear any difference. Yes, I could clearly hear identifiable difference between these drums. I’m not a Tama fan, nor in the market for a Bell Brass, so doubt I was particularly biased.
Thanks to Shane and the great folks at DCP for making this awesome video. You are a treasured asset to the drumming community. As the owner of just about every cast bronze snare drum made, by any manufacturer, in any year, in any size, and as an engineer with a material science PhD from MIT, it's a passion of mine to study the subject matter discussed in this wonderful video. Shane asked for someone to explain the differences in these shells. I would describe the main difference in the result of the two casting processes in one hyphenated word - micro-porosity. In the sand casting process molten metal is pored into the mold and hardens in place as it cools - this results in more natural porosity in the resultant hardened material. Micro-porosity is caused by microscopic air bubbles being trapped in the cooling metal, not necessarily impurities. The Japanese have a term called "mura" which has a negative connotation - it's less consistent and less uniform. So it's no surprise for cost and quality reasons Tama has moved to centrifugal casting. But does it sound better? Let's discuss Practically, in a sand cast shell, due to the micro air pockets the percentage of the shell that is metal (density per unit of thickness) is lower. We are talking much less than 1% to MAYBE a max of 1% different. Is it possible to measure it? Absolutely. Is it possible to hear it? I would say yes, absolutely. Porosity in a sand cast shell translates to my ear to a mellowing of the tone, that is very pleasing to the ear. It's less metallic and smoother/warmer. Sand Cast Bronze is just about the only metal drum that has warmth and sharpness. Most metal drums are sharp and bright sounding. The downside of sand casting is that pores are propagation sites for cracks and also if there is a micropore at the surface it can be viewed as a cosmetic imperfection (any mura or variation is considered a defect in Japanese lean manufacturing). As a result of the inconsistencies, the manufacturing yields on sand cast shells are lower, so the cost is higher (more scrap). Other famous sandcast drums like the original Noble Cooley Zildjian snares had notable problems with cracking. You hear about cracking less with the Tamas - and while it is possible to inspect out larger pores using ultrasound the cracking is more a function of how the drilled holes are finished since the holes the stress concentration points which are initiation sites for cracking. The newer Tamas (somewhere after the Starclassic Bell Brass but before/including SOME of the starphonics and all of the 40th anniversary is centrifugal cast (sometimes also called spin casting). With centrifugal casting you are forcing the air/porosity out of the shell by spinning the molten metal (metal goes to the outside/fills the mold as you spin it) and you get a more consistent, dense metal with higher process yield. It's certainly "better" if you want high yields and more uniform cosmetics. Better if you want to make more profit at the same selling price. But I would argue, not better, sound wise. Just a little harsher, a little more metallic. I can hear the difference, for sure. Not mentioned in the video are "rolled brass shells" which include the Ahead and some other lower cost snares and extruded shells. Those are far far from cast, to my ear. The reason the 1981's and 1982's sell for crazy prices is the sound and the limited supply. I have stated many times that my favorite cast bronze drum of all time is the 1982 6.5. I have owned three of the 1981 6.5's raw shelled drums and none sounded as good as either of the two 1982's I have owned. I also have a special place in my heart for my 1981 5" raw shell Tama , the 3rd Noble Cooley5" alloy cast with the scalloped outer surface, the Sonor Horst Link Signature 6.5, and the Paiste/Ocheltree 6.5 (that one is a different alloy and brighter).
Expertly explains the difference I hearing on the video. I mentioned in my post I was hearing a fatter sound, i.e., less high-end tone on the 1980 drum, but your description is better... It's like a smoother, fuller tone. What a collection you have. That is truly a snare drum collection. I have a sizeable, diverse collection, but nothing like the monsters you own. My strategy is to find "sleeper" snare drums, regardless of the price but I cut off at $800, and have only had to hit that trigger a few times.
I agree with Mike. To my ear, the 50th anniversary sounds more industrial, more mechanical, whereas the 2 1980’s sound, warmer, more musical. Thank you Mike for your comment and thank you Shane for this great video.
We don't want it to sound better, we want it to sound the same😡as the original that is what made it a legend....Not being sand cast is the deal breaker for me, sorry this is no reissue, redesigned/re-engineered perhaps
In 2007 my band recorded at Sage and Sound in Hollywood. Ross was hired to bring in some drums and he brought in his famous Bell Brass from the Nevermind sessions! So amazing that I got to play that drum on our album
Same exact situation for me. In 2001. At Cello Studio, Hollywood. With my band Pulse Ultra. Ross (Drum Doctors) was hired, brought in that snare and it was used on most of the tracks. Beast sound.
@@chrisinsidioso7441 Sounds like a BB on Personal self help program… I played in “Emo” Hardcore bands in the early to mid 90’s. Was a great time. Played with a lot of bands or shared the bill with bands that influenced the world but that music left me with tinnitus and sound sensitivity. The last 2 Turnstile albums have great production but I didn’t like them live.
They're all great sounding drums but all sound slightly different. it's baffling to me that they would go through all this effort to faithfully recreate the original then not even sand cast it, as if they have no idea how these finer points are hotly debated and contested. In the first part of the video when Shane is jamming at different tunings, they do sound pretty close but later in the "head 2 head" kick/snare/hat section, the original has more sustain and ring. Almost like the muffler was left on slightly on the reissue. It would be nice in the video if there could be some visual indication of whether the muffler was on or off as you seem to kinda loosely be going back and forth.
tama fucked up. this reproduction does not have that BB character. this is just another modern "bell brass" with tama hardware thrown on. and they still have the gall to charge 4k. why do corporate companies think this sort of approach is profitable? they would have sold way more if they charged 5k and got the sound exactly fucking right. i'm bummed that i'll never own the 1982, but i love my keplinger black iron and like it as a sort of "fuck you" to all the brass snares out there. nothing tougher than cold rolled STEEL.
I think the reissue did it justice! The reissue shell without the snare wires engaged sounds just a hair drier, but it has a snappier snare response with the wires engaged. Probably because the centrifugally cast shell is so new and free of inconsistencies the sand cast shell has with age. I wonder if it’ll sound closer to the original as years go by.
Hey Shane , Great video!!!! How about doing a head to head with the zildjian 400th anniversary against the 50 year anniversary???? They are both about the same price. Lets see which one sounds better.!!!
The question only *you* can answer does it sound 3,300.00 better than thee O'l Ludwig 402 or `you're fave snare drum?? Only `you can answer that question. [Maybe it does sound better than you're fave SD, but maybe only 300.00 better... lol] ALL GOOD...! Peace
They all sound identical. Now Tama brings the Bell brass market back to reality. No more snares price gouging for 10k or 15k. Thanks Tama! Still....4k is too much but its better than having to sell your car to get one. To me, If I played a thick cast aluminum snare on a record and said it was cast/bell brass....no one would know..............
I’m not saying Tama didn’t truly believe that the centrifugal cast shells were better, but I do know they’re way better for consistent production and efficiency. Looking at the shells I can see they aren’t even machined unless after they are treated with something to make them look like raw bronze castings. For consistent sand castings you pretty much have to cast them much thicker then machine them down which requires a ton of extra steps and extra labor, so my opinion is that this was a “close enough.” Kinda decision.
Every cast (especially for snare drums) needs to be machined afterwards. You never get perfect cast even from centrifugal cast method. You also confused "raw cast" look with "raw finish" look.
Casting is more messy than centrifuging. I would love to see the Snare Drums 🥁 disassembled 🪛, and the shells weighed ⚖️. I bet the sandcast is heavier and denser. The OG sounds better, the reissue sounds close. The sand-casting imperfections are the magic 🪄 secret sauce!
The three drums sound great. The reissue is a killer. I think the original will always be king of the "bell brass." DCP knocking it out of the park again!
@@archon.studio255 I agree. I think for certain folks, close enough is good enough. The original will always be sought after by some just because it's the original. Outside of studio quality recording, either would pass the test.
In my opinion, the reissue has nothing of the magic that the 1980 and the 1982 models have. I think the difference is quite big actually. Maybe in 40 years it will have the magic ingredient. It's a great snaredrum for sure and it looks amazing.
They all sound brilliant. The 82 sounds like it has a zero-ring on it…a more controlled sound without some of the wildness of the original and reissue.
I would buy if it would sound closer to the original, the reissue is definitely more choked sounding in the shell resonances kinda like the Gretsch Bell brass
I've always wanted the original Tama BB, but after listening to all three Tama's, I'd be ok with the reissue instead of shelling out $$$$$ for the original. Great video DC! Now, let's compare the new Tama with the Zildjian 400th snare. I just received one of those and love the range and tonal quality from it!
First off, ALL 3 sound great! As far as sound comparison, the 1980 model has a more extended overtone, than the 2024 and 1982. I DO think the 1982 and 2024 sound the most similar though. Godbless all those who have the $$ to buy a new one. Personally I just don't see/hear why it would be sought after unless you're buying it for a studio, and want the prestige of the option. You offer plenty of similar bell brass options at your store at a much more affordable price, when heard in a live rock environment would easily fill the Bell Brass "need"!
In my opinion the original one has more low end, I can just listen more “mass” and body out of it, while the reissue don’t has that much compared to the original. Still a great sounding snare in my opinion, very loud and crisp, but not like the first version.. The 82’ version is slightly different, but still has more body and low end than the reissue. Anyway, congratulations to Tama for producing such and amazing snares, all three of them!
Beautiful looking and sounding drum, but $4K??? I can’t justify it!!! Not like Tama will ever bring the price down on it because they’re in such high demand and there’s a market for them again.oh well, maybe I’ll have the $10K laying around to spend when the 60th reissue comes out? 😂😂😂
I think all 3 of these drums will sound great in a mix! They got drier and less overtones in order of appearance. The 1980 drum medium tuning is "the sound" I think everybody hears for rock drums whether youre a drummer or a producer/engineer, though my recording brain liked the 1982 because that lack of overtone can fit in more styles than just rock. My only gripe is the new drum sounds a little stiff and hollow and boxy under the microphone. Not bad by any means, still an excellent sounding drum. But I do think that's the key to the "magic" of the older drums. I think the key is theyve been played in for decades and those molecules of metal have been shaken up (or something im not sure if that's a real thing!) It kinda reminds me of when you get a "brand new cymbal" and it takes awhile to play it in. I hope the new bell brass will get eventually get that to point as buyers play them in! As well, I know how expensive casting metal can be! But 4 grand is a tough price point for just one snare. I think still the best "deal" out there is the gretsch bell brass for 600-950 used (I picked one up long ago before the market price hikes after watching a DCP video of "heavy metal snares!" One day I will get the gretsch bronze
FANTASTIC!!! That's exciting! (and I gotta say, the 1982 polished Bell Brass was the nicest sounding of the lot, though all are amazing drums!). I'm gonna have a hard time sleeping tonight!!! 😊
Awesome to see that Tama is reissuing these as a standard production model! There will definitely be some butthurt cork sniffers in forums and Facebook groups, but I think it's great that these will be available to more people now.
will just de-value the original ones and the 40th aniversary ones, same happened when they brought back the sabian sessions ride, at first limited numbered cymbal with a premium price, now everyone can get one🤷🏻♂️
Why’s it gotta be $4K 😫😭 Not sure I could justify buying it over the myriad of other options I could get for that price. So cool Tama is reissuing it though!!
The question only *you* can answer does it sound 3,300.00 better than thee O'l Ludwig 402 or `you're fave snare drum?? Only `you can answer that question. [Maybe it does sound better than you're fave SD, but maybe only 300.00 better... lol] ALL GOOD...! Peace
Good perspective , and I’d say no. I’d rather buy a Gretsch Bell Brass and keep the rest of the money. I personally couldn’t see myself spending 4 grand on a snare, but some may. I’d grab a Tama Bell Brass for $1K, but not much more than that. Which means I’ll never own one 😂
Super excited about this! Nice comparison, I think that in any scenario where there are other instruments playing you'd be hard pressed to pick them apart. And who cares about drums when there's no other instruments playing? But for $4000? I don't know, man. I think I'd get a Sonor Artist Bronze, the new Mastercraft rosewood, 2 hard cases, and like, insurance.
To my ears the 50th reissue is slightly more focused, probably due to the centrifugal casting resulting in a more consistent shell, but I prefer the 82's hi tension lugs more, overall TAMA have nailed it ! 🥁👋👍
To my ears, the original sounded better at the low and medium tuning. Certainly on the first hearing. The original at low tuning still sounded like the head was tighter. In comparison the reissue sounded a bit flabbier, as in i felt i could hear the looser head. At high tuning, i think the reissue sounded better. I didn't like the sound of the original at high tuning. All that said, in the head to head the differences weren't as obvious. Go figure. I think because it sounds different to the original, even though it still sounds incredible, I wouldn't want the reissue. Not for $4k. $4k is a huge budget and some astounding snares could be bought for much less. One thing I love about all of them is the internal muffler. I wish more drums had them. My go to snare, a Pearl steel from the 70s has one and it's a godsend.
Wooooooooooooow!!!!!…..finally here! The rumors were true!!!!…for the ones that say that this is expensive, just want to share that this is the usual price range for the DW true cast, Sonor Artist, Savage Custom, etc….it is what it is guys. Even the 2014 re issue is listed even higher on reverb, as second hand. In my opinion, Tama realized that they can recover the market by making this a regular snare while others were trying to imitate the sound, and yes, there is bunch of marketing behind and probably other snares could sound “better” (for each taste) but I’ll say that the magic of this snare is due a very fair reputation of the brand and this specific snare drum…just sharing my thoughts. Have some fun playing drums!
Not saying it doesn’t deserve the price but saying can get great snare that no cheap either but not 4000$. Am sure it worth it but not paying $4000 for a snare when have lesser priced snares that act like better and are TAMA.
As I watched this I thought it sounds pretty good for sure then I saw the $4000,00 price tag and considering how many snares are out there that I know I can can get that sound from that are more affordable I think I’ll use my tuning skills and save $ 3500. But thanks for the demo you guys rock
All three sound similar but the 1980 was my fave. Kudos to Tama for the reissue. I think it’s cool they did it and I think it’s worth the money. As for the vintage ones, my apologies but it’s hard to not have contempt for the collector market. Those numbers are just frickin bonkers. Absurd, really. Oh well. It is what it is. ✌️❤️🥁 Cheers to another great video.🍻
You're mad at the collector market which was simple supply and demand but not Tama for reissuing the snare with a cheaper form of casting the brass and charging four THOUSAND dollars for it?? Check Reverb, as of yesterday you can still get them for around the same price as these reissues and they'll be sand cast. Truthfully, no disrespect intended but I think you might want to examine how you're looking at it. Those used market "collector's" prices (most of those "collectors" are drummers and rental houses) took _YEARS_ to develop and they were based on slow and consistent word of mouth, a limited supply and a high demand for a snare that literally defined the sound of rock music from the late 80's right through until the 2010's. It wasn't like the pedal market where a Digitech Bad Money jumps up 200% in price overnight because a taste maker points out to a bunch of dimwits that a mid push overdrive sounds the same as any mid push overdrive. This was a unique and special thing and it's Tama that's worthy of "contempt." Not the drummers and rental houses that wanted to have _THE_ sound of rock music available to them.
@@AnodyneHipsterInfluencer It didn’t define the sound of rock. It was used on a couple of iconic albums which has caused the value for collectors to sky rocket. The Ludwig Black Beauty has been on more hit albums but Ludwig have made a lot of them and they aren’t expensive. The original Tama Bell Brass is a very nice sounding snare, end of …
@@AnodyneHipsterInfluencer no disrespect taken, as my experience and knowledge base is firm. What something is actually worth and what a collector is willing to pay are two VASTLY different numbers, and quite frankly, it gets out of hand. Shane touched on the collector value of old Les Pauls. I don’t give a crap what anybody says, a solid body electric guitar isn’t worth $300,000+. And a vintage Tama snare drum isn’t worth $15,000+ either. It’s absurd. “Defined the sound of rock music” is a bit much my friend. Literally NONE of those sessions would have turned out any less spectacular if a different model was used. It’s just a frickin snare drum for cryin out loud. It’s not like doves fly out of it when you hit it. lol. Again, I realize, it is what it is. I’ve said my peace and I shan’t comment further. No foul. Be well. ✌️❤️🥁
This is as good a comparison as you're gonna get. The takeaway from this is that the differences between the three are so small, they are essentially meaningless. In a band mix, you wouldn't be able to hear those differences. This is good news.
They all sound good for sure. The reissue, to my ears, is not close to others - sounded choked at some points, and a little less resonance perhaps? I am sure people will gobble these up (well, some people will) since they are descendants of the OG. There are some other cast options out there - Offbeat and Oriollo come to mind - that are much more reasonable in price and may be good options to look at too. As always, thanks for the video!!
Centrifugal casting will produce a better product for a drum shell. It will have better dimensional stability/uniformity, slightly better strength characteristics, slightly less potential for porosity, and more uniform density. Porosity and density would affect the sound the shell produces. I would rather purchase the centrifugal cast shell over a sand cast shell any day.
I can't confirm that all the famous recordings with that snare drum had a reverse dot, but if you watch the making of the black album documentary, you will actually see where they show the famous snare drum with a Remo reverse black dot head on the batter side. In that part, the producers are talking about the type of heads he used, and the tuning methods he used to get the sound that is on the album.
So...the Bell Brass is actually a bronze drum? Fascinating, captain. I wonder if there will be a comparison of bronze drums for 2024. Anywho, great job, guys.
Glad to see Tama is offering this drum. They did close enough job that you'd be hard pressed to pick out the reissue from the 1980 model in a blind test... and nom-drummers just hear a nice snare drum ("oh, is that what that's called?!)" Great job by DCP, as always. Hope lots of folks buy this snare... maybe that will pull the prices down a little on two final snares I want to finish out my collection with. LOL. I'm not a metallurgist, but here is what I know from reading, years ago: Sand Casting results in an imperfect (or in the 1980 case, perfect) shell, in that it endows the shell with higher porosity. I am hearing a lower fundamental tone from the 1980s model. Logic tells me--all things being equal (which they are supposed to be and appear to be)--that the porosity is soaking up those high-end frequencies. Another explanation might be the metal used--the 1980 model shell production was outsourced to a company which no longer exists. In my humble opinion, it's more a matter of the casting method used. As far (please correct me) as I am aware, all of the current "Bell Brass" snare drums are NOT produced using Sand Casting. OK, so why was the original 1980 model as expensive and why don't other companies offer Sand Cast "Bell Brass" drums? Simply, Sand Casting results in a high enough number of unusable shells (have to melt down and try again) that even at the price Tama was charging in 1980, they couldn't justify production, i.e., either they couldn't make a profit margin high enough to justify production. This is just what I read eons ago. In my humble opinion, given the production method (very few re-dos needed) I would have liked to see--I'm a lot of you agree--a more comparable price point. I could see a premium of possibly 10-20% more than other currently produced "Bell Brass" snares, due to the need to re-tool to produce the hardware components (it needs to be mentioned, though, they are using those components on the other MasterCraft 2024 snares they just released). I would love to see another DCP Bronze snare comparison with at least 10 competitors, i.e., Apple-to-Apple comparison. I don't want to leave on a sour note and hope this post is not perceived in that manner. I am happy for everyone who wanted one of the 1980 snares... actually, I think it's great... sales help DCP and other companies... money moving around in the economy is always a good thing for everyone. Peace.
Very accurate comparison- the original(s) still win, but it's needed to say that bronze shell change a lot in time, so, maybe the new reissue will sound great as the original from 80s
From this video it sounds like the 50th anniversary has a little less sustain than the others. The 82 has the most funky, ring to it (which isn't a bad thing). I'd be happy with any of these, but honestly, the 50th anniversary snare having less overtones and ring makes it the favorite of the 3 to my ears. The internal muffler is an amazing feature on any drum. I have an original 1983 Rosewood mastercraft snare, but someone removed the internal muffler somewhere along the way.
Shane playing 3 Tama bell brass with no ear protection, the guy is a savage hahaha. great video, now lts time to speak to the wife....babe just to let you know Tama did something that nobody was expecting...
To my ears, the 1980 BB and the 50th Anniversary BB sound very similar. But that 1982 BB just sings beyond the others. That's what I hear anyway.. I"m fortunate enough to own a 1984 model and it sounds just like your 1982..Great review.
man, they are very close... but that original 80's... maybe the patina... or maybe the casting method. regardless great to see this snare available at somewhat of an attainable price now... for me though, at 4k, I choose the Zildjian 400th. I think it's an overall better package, given the price. DCP 10th anniversary Sonor HLDs were a steal thinking back on it.
During the initial demonstration, I thought the original 1980 won hands down. It did the thing I was looking for. The new reissue was not far behind it, i felt the over tones were a bit overstated compared to the original, but the muting seemed to take care of that. For whatever reason, I thought the 82 was horrendously boingy in the low and mid tunings and lacked character in the high tuning. During the last comparison however, I feel like the reissue won me over! It played really nice in the beat. The overtones weren't bothersome, and it just felt more focused than the original. Like really a finished drum tone out of the box. Quick question, what is the secondary gooseneck mic you're using on the snare? I'm assuming you use that for top end in lieu of a bottom mic, correct?
Great feedback! That mic would be the Earthworks DM20 gen 2. Yeah, I actually use a bottom as well, but the DM20 is providing the higher frequencies and harmonics while not picking up as much hi hat bleed as the primary snare top mic.
Umit from Guven Bronze (the foundry apparently manufacturing the shells) is saying that these shells are manufactured using sand casting, but the post is kind of hard to understand. Could you possibly provide some clarification as there seems to be some type of communication disconnect between Tama and Guven? Personally I really couldn't care less; the drum sounds like a VERY faithful reproduction regardless of casting method. I'm just having nightmares of all the debates that are going to hit the forums in the next 24 hours 😂
As soon as you hit the 1980 with snares on - there was that attack with body smack. The other two are different & really nice. But 1980 has ‘it’.
Four _thousand_ dollars for a _centrifugal_ cast? They want _four, THOUSAND, dollars for that?_ Seriously Tama just gtfo with that absolute fkn nonsense. Madness. I could see $2.5k. I could even wrap my head around $3k - But _four GRAND?!?!_ Tama is being disingenuous about why they went with centrifugal casting over sand casting. They went with centrifugal casting because sand casting is more labor intensive (i.e. EXPENSIVE) and because it leaves a less uniform and by finish standards a "poorer" finish, it needs even more hand processing after casting (i.e. _more_ expensive again because more labor). That would have eaten into that _TASTY_ profit margin they've created for themselves with that $4 thousand price tag and making the snare in a cheaper fashion that looses all the darkness and controlled overtones of the sand cast OG's. DW did theirs 5 years ago and it was $4k but it was sand cast, there were only 75 of them and the inside of the shell varied from 5mm on the top and bottom to 3mm in the middle to get the best of both low end and punch. The only thing it was "missing" was the extended snare wires but the DW sand cast bell bronze sounded better to my ears then this "reissue." It had that earthy dark quality and didn't have the unfocused and overly ringy overtones of this new Tama.
Currently saving up for a Tama Starclassic performer from DCP. It will take a while but it will be worth it.
My wife doesn’t understand because she bought me a kit 6 months ago. But she will when she sees it
😎👍♥️🇯🇵🥁🔊🎼I think they finally got it right this time!
The '80 and '82 had a longer sustain and a very pronounced heavy metallic quality to the sound. The '82 sounded like it had the thinnest shell out of the bunch (i have no idea if that's true or not). The new one definitely had the attack and classic tonal quality but i didn't seem to hear as much resonance/sustain.
Which was the loudest to your ears? Also, did you end up weighing the snares? Did you measure the shell thickness? How does it compare to the '80? I have so manny questions!
I agree....the 50th anniversary model had the least sustain.....I hope the internal muffler did not touch the head.
these were our general observations, as well. Because the shell is slightly oversized, it may take a while for the heads to get broken in? The reissue sounded the loudest in the room. It physically hurt. All snares were 3mm.
@@drumcenternh thanks for answering. Great video by the way….and great Snares of course.
The 80’s OG BB had a nice balance of frequencies. The 82 had substantially more high end ring. The reissue had a warmth and body to it that the OG could likely be tuned (damped) to achieve. The 82 has a very “lively” sound. They’re all great drums but for me the reissue is definitely a winner!
12:10 The WAUW meme guy is Eddy Wally. He was a Belgian handbag salesman before finding fame as a singer 🇧🇪
Xin chào , có thể giúp tôi biết mua ở đâu và giá bao nhiêu ko
Sadly the 1980 sounds best to me, more depth of tome, a bit more lively. The others are ball park, but sound more choked and less fat. It's shame they couldn't just replicate the 1980....exactly.
Its not possible to reproduce what 40+ years of age does to the drum. And I am 100% certain that if you were blindfolded you would not be able to tell them apart.
@@weschilton Do metal drums change with age? I’ve A/Bed a 1960’s Supraphonic in a studio with a 2000’s one and none of us could hear any difference.
Yes, I could clearly hear identifiable difference between these drums. I’m not a Tama fan, nor in the market for a Bell Brass, so doubt I was particularly biased.
a beast¡¡¡¡¡¡
Thanks to Shane and the great folks at DCP for making this awesome video. You are a treasured asset to the drumming community. As the owner of just about every cast bronze snare drum made, by any manufacturer, in any year, in any size, and as an engineer with a material science PhD from MIT, it's a passion of mine to study the subject matter discussed in this wonderful video. Shane asked for someone to explain the differences in these shells. I would describe the main difference in the result of the two casting processes in one hyphenated word - micro-porosity. In the sand casting process molten metal is pored into the mold and hardens in place as it cools - this results in more natural porosity in the resultant hardened material. Micro-porosity is caused by microscopic air bubbles being trapped in the cooling metal, not necessarily impurities. The Japanese have a term called "mura" which has a negative connotation - it's less consistent and less uniform. So it's no surprise for cost and quality reasons Tama has moved to centrifugal casting. But does it sound better? Let's discuss Practically, in a sand cast shell, due to the micro air pockets the percentage of the shell that is metal (density per unit of thickness) is lower. We are talking much less than 1% to MAYBE a max of 1% different. Is it possible to measure it? Absolutely. Is it possible to hear it? I would say yes, absolutely. Porosity in a sand cast shell translates to my ear to a mellowing of the tone, that is very pleasing to the ear. It's less metallic and smoother/warmer. Sand Cast Bronze is just about the only metal drum that has warmth and sharpness. Most metal drums are sharp and bright sounding. The downside of sand casting is that pores are propagation sites for cracks and also if there is a micropore at the surface it can be viewed as a cosmetic imperfection (any mura or variation is considered a defect in Japanese lean manufacturing). As a result of the inconsistencies, the manufacturing yields on sand cast shells are lower, so the cost is higher (more scrap). Other famous sandcast drums like the original Noble Cooley Zildjian snares had notable problems with cracking. You hear about cracking less with the Tamas - and while it is possible to inspect out larger pores using ultrasound the cracking is more a function of how the drilled holes are finished since the holes the stress concentration points which are initiation sites for cracking. The newer Tamas (somewhere after the Starclassic Bell Brass but before/including SOME of the starphonics and all of the 40th anniversary is centrifugal cast (sometimes also called spin casting). With centrifugal casting you are forcing the air/porosity out of the shell by spinning the molten metal (metal goes to the outside/fills the mold as you spin it) and you get a more consistent, dense metal with higher process yield. It's certainly "better" if you want high yields and more uniform cosmetics. Better if you want to make more profit at the same selling price. But I would argue, not better, sound wise. Just a little harsher, a little more metallic. I can hear the difference, for sure. Not mentioned in the video are "rolled brass shells" which include the Ahead and some other lower cost snares and extruded shells. Those are far far from cast, to my ear. The reason the 1981's and 1982's sell for crazy prices is the sound and the limited supply. I have stated many times that my favorite cast bronze drum of all time is the 1982 6.5. I have owned three of the 1981 6.5's raw shelled drums and none sounded as good as either of the two 1982's I have owned. I also have a special place in my heart for my 1981 5" raw shell Tama , the 3rd Noble Cooley5" alloy cast with the scalloped outer surface, the Sonor Horst Link Signature 6.5, and the Paiste/Ocheltree 6.5 (that one is a different alloy and brighter).
Expertly explains the difference I hearing on the video. I mentioned in my post I was hearing a fatter sound, i.e., less high-end tone on the 1980 drum, but your description is better... It's like a smoother, fuller tone. What a collection you have. That is truly a snare drum collection. I have a sizeable, diverse collection, but nothing like the monsters you own. My strategy is to find "sleeper" snare drums, regardless of the price but I cut off at $800, and have only had to hit that trigger a few times.
I agree with Mike. To my ear, the 50th anniversary sounds more industrial, more mechanical, whereas the 2 1980’s sound, warmer, more musical. Thank you Mike for your comment and thank you Shane for this great video.
And that’s why I love this channel. Knowledgeable participants both presenting and watching/commenting.
@@Mr19suckerfish72 Amen.
Awesome response. Curious if you know how cryofreezing affects the tone?
We don't want it to sound better, we want it to sound the same😡as the original that is what made it a legend....Not being sand cast is the deal
breaker for me, sorry this is no reissue, redesigned/re-engineered perhaps
In 2007 my band recorded at Sage and Sound in Hollywood. Ross was hired to bring in some drums and he brought in his famous Bell Brass from the Nevermind sessions! So amazing that I got to play that drum on our album
What band and album? The pork pie big blueish metal drum sounds dope too but these are clearly classic.
Same exact situation for me. In 2001. At Cello Studio, Hollywood. With my band Pulse Ultra. Ross (Drum Doctors) was hired, brought in that snare and it was used on most of the tracks. Beast sound.
@@Maxxzinno Great album, i still listen to it ...Headspace is a must have album
@@williamperri3437 My band is called Treaty of Paris, the snare was on our full length Sweet Dreams, Sucker
@@chrisinsidioso7441 Sounds like a BB on Personal self help program… I played in “Emo” Hardcore bands in the early to mid 90’s. Was a great time. Played with a lot of bands or shared the bill with bands that influenced the world but that music left me with tinnitus and sound sensitivity. The last 2 Turnstile albums have great production but I didn’t like them live.
They're all great sounding drums but all sound slightly different. it's baffling to me that they would go through all this effort to faithfully recreate the original then not even sand cast it, as if they have no idea how these finer points are hotly debated and contested. In the first part of the video when Shane is jamming at different tunings, they do sound pretty close but later in the "head 2 head" kick/snare/hat section, the original has more sustain and ring. Almost like the muffler was left on slightly on the reissue. It would be nice in the video if there could be some visual indication of whether the muffler was on or off as you seem to kinda loosely be going back and forth.
i so love the fact it is not Limited edition! What a low kick for the collectors!
The reissue sounds as good as the OG. Good job!
tama fucked up. this reproduction does not have that BB character. this is just another modern "bell brass" with tama hardware thrown on. and they still have the gall to charge 4k. why do corporate companies think this sort of approach is profitable? they would have sold way more if they charged 5k and got the sound exactly fucking right.
i'm bummed that i'll never own the 1982, but i love my keplinger black iron and like it as a sort of "fuck you" to all the brass snares out there.
nothing tougher than cold rolled STEEL.
I think the reissue did it justice! The reissue shell without the snare wires engaged sounds just a hair drier, but it has a snappier snare response with the wires engaged. Probably because the centrifugally cast shell is so new and free of inconsistencies the sand cast shell has with age. I wonder if it’ll sound closer to the original as years go by.
I thought I noticed that it sounded a bit drier….
I like the original best.
The reissue sounds a little more refined with a hair more top end
Hey Shane ,
Great video!!!!
How about doing a head to head with the zildjian 400th anniversary against the 50 year anniversary????
They are both about the same price.
Lets see which one sounds better.!!!
I like the 82 the most! If you can get them to recreate the 1982 it would be epic 😎
I was going to say the same thing
I agree!
it hasnt the same eq, you can hear that the hihat sound different:?
Thumbs up if you actually own a Tama Bell Brass drum!
Any year. Mine has the bell brass hoops & snare wires!
Loud as F!!!
The question only *you* can answer does it sound 3,300.00 better than thee O'l Ludwig 402 or `you're fave snare drum?? Only `you can answer that question. [Maybe it does sound better than you're fave SD, but maybe only 300.00 better... lol] ALL GOOD...! Peace
Okay, I'll be the guy who says it. I liked the 82 bell brass the most.
They all sound identical. Now Tama brings the Bell brass market back to reality. No more snares price gouging for 10k or 15k. Thanks Tama! Still....4k is too much but its better than having to sell your car to get one. To me, If I played a thick cast aluminum snare on a record and said it was cast/bell brass....no one would know..............
I love how the 50th sounds cranked, fuckin immaculate
I’m not saying Tama didn’t truly believe that the centrifugal cast shells were better, but I do know they’re way better for consistent production and efficiency. Looking at the shells I can see they aren’t even machined unless after they are treated with something to make them look like raw bronze castings. For consistent sand castings you pretty much have to cast them much thicker then machine them down which requires a ton of extra steps and extra labor, so my opinion is that this was a “close enough.” Kinda decision.
Every cast (especially for snare drums) needs to be machined afterwards. You never get perfect cast even from centrifugal cast method.
You also confused "raw cast" look with "raw finish" look.
@@betulaobscura ya learn something new every day
Casting is more messy than centrifuging. I would love to see the Snare Drums 🥁 disassembled 🪛, and the shells weighed ⚖️. I bet the sandcast is heavier and denser. The OG sounds better, the reissue sounds close. The sand-casting imperfections are the magic 🪄 secret sauce!
@@grayknight836 Comparing with centrifugal cast method, sand cast is not denser and it is not heavier.
To me in this video the 1982 version sounds the best.
So is this the place where we will DIALOGUE at?
The 1980 version does seem to possess some sort of crazy mojo. I honestly sounds slightly better to my ears.
The three drums sound great. The reissue is a killer. I think the original will always be king of the "bell brass." DCP knocking it out of the park again!
Agreed. They are all great but the price for the 1980 version will keep going up not only due to it’s rarity, but also sound as shown in this video.
@@archon.studio255 I agree. I think for certain folks, close enough is good enough. The original will always be sought after by some just because it's the original. Outside of studio quality recording, either would pass the test.
In my opinion, the reissue has nothing of the magic that the 1980 and the 1982 models have. I think the difference is quite big actually. Maybe in 40 years it will have the magic ingredient. It's a great snaredrum for sure and it looks amazing.
I saw Elvin Jones at the Village Vanguard in NY playing the ‘82 version of this drum. I’m still recovering… great drum!!!
They all sound brilliant. The 82 sounds like it has a zero-ring on it…a more controlled sound without some of the wildness of the original and reissue.
that could be the heads and hoops more than anything.
I would buy if it would sound closer to the original, the reissue is definitely more choked sounding in the shell resonances kinda like the Gretsch Bell brass
They're all fantastic. For some reason that 1982 just really spoke to me!
I've always wanted the original Tama BB, but after listening to all three Tama's, I'd be ok with the reissue instead of shelling out $$$$$ for the original. Great video DC! Now, let's compare the new Tama with the Zildjian 400th snare. I just received one of those and love the range and tonal quality from it!
First off, ALL 3 sound great!
As far as sound comparison, the 1980 model has a more extended overtone, than the 2024 and 1982. I DO think the 1982 and 2024 sound the most similar though.
Godbless all those who have the $$ to buy a new one. Personally I just don't see/hear why it would be sought after unless you're buying it for a studio, and want the prestige of the option.
You offer plenty of similar bell brass options at your store at a much more affordable price, when heard in a live rock environment would easily fill the Bell Brass "need"!
You guys take payments in the form of deeds to houses?
I know it’s expensive but in my humble opinion you can keep your ludwigs, these are the best snares money can buy. Sadly it will remain a dream.
Jesus Christ its so expensive. The whole four Grands of the bucks 😮😊
In my opinion the original one has more low end, I can just listen more “mass” and body out of it, while the reissue don’t has that much compared to the original. Still a great sounding snare in my opinion, very loud and crisp, but not like the first version.. The 82’ version is slightly different, but still has more body and low end than the reissue.
Anyway, congratulations to Tama for producing such and amazing snares, all three of them!
The 40th anniversary reissue sounds incredible as well.
Will you guys be doing a video on the rosewood, artwood and steel? Thanks!
Beautiful looking and sounding drum, but $4K??? I can’t justify it!!! Not like Tama will ever bring the price down on it because they’re in such high demand and there’s a market for them again.oh well, maybe I’ll have the $10K laying around to spend when the 60th reissue comes out? 😂😂😂
I think all 3 of these drums will sound great in a mix! They got drier and less overtones in order of appearance. The 1980 drum medium tuning is "the sound" I think everybody hears for rock drums whether youre a drummer or a producer/engineer, though my recording brain liked the 1982 because that lack of overtone can fit in more styles than just rock.
My only gripe is the new drum sounds a little stiff and hollow and boxy under the microphone. Not bad by any means, still an excellent sounding drum. But I do think that's the key to the "magic" of the older drums. I think the key is theyve been played in for decades and those molecules of metal have been shaken up (or something im not sure if that's a real thing!) It kinda reminds me of when you get a "brand new cymbal" and it takes awhile to play it in. I hope the new bell brass will get eventually get that to point as buyers play them in!
As well, I know how expensive casting metal can be! But 4 grand is a tough price point for just one snare. I think still the best "deal" out there is the gretsch bell brass for 600-950 used (I picked one up long ago before the market price hikes after watching a DCP video of "heavy metal snares!" One day I will get the gretsch bronze
FANTASTIC!!! That's exciting! (and I gotta say, the 1982 polished Bell Brass was the nicest sounding of the lot, though all are amazing drums!). I'm gonna have a hard time sleeping tonight!!! 😊
So the Starphonic is now a deal at 3k. Love the bell brass but cant justify the price. Guess the Holy Grail will be just out of reach.
Awesome to see that Tama is reissuing these as a standard production model! There will definitely be some butthurt cork sniffers in forums and Facebook groups, but I think it's great that these will be available to more people now.
Ugh…there’s nothing worse than butthurt cork sniffers. Well, maybe corkhurt butt sniffers but that’s a story for another day…
will just de-value the original ones and the 40th aniversary ones, same happened when they brought back the sabian sessions ride, at first limited numbered cymbal with a premium price, now everyone can get one🤷🏻♂️
@@kspocketngroove3973 "now everyone can get one" and this is a bad thing why?
Not everyone can get one, I don't have $4,000 laying around to buy a snare!
@@muertelicious_tooyou should ask that question to someone who actually thinks it's a "bad thing"
Why’s it gotta be $4K 😫😭 Not sure I could justify buying it over the myriad of other options I could get for that price. So cool Tama is reissuing it though!!
The question only *you* can answer does it sound 3,300.00 better than thee O'l Ludwig 402 or `you're fave snare drum?? Only `you can answer that question. [Maybe it does sound better than you're fave SD, but maybe only 300.00 better... lol] ALL GOOD...! Peace
Good perspective , and I’d say no. I’d rather buy a Gretsch Bell Brass and keep the rest of the money. I personally couldn’t see myself spending 4 grand on a snare, but some may. I’d grab a Tama Bell Brass for $1K, but not much more than that. Which means I’ll never own one 😂
The new one sounds more like the 1982 version. But the 1980 sounds the best. They all sound great though.
The original and the reissue sound very similar, the 82 has a slightly different tone. But they are all stunning sounding snares. Great job
Totally agree
Super excited about this!
Nice comparison, I think that in any scenario where there are other instruments playing you'd be hard pressed to pick them apart. And who cares about drums when there's no other instruments playing?
But for $4000? I don't know, man. I think I'd get a Sonor Artist Bronze, the new Mastercraft rosewood, 2 hard cases, and like, insurance.
To my ears the 50th reissue is slightly more focused, probably due to the centrifugal casting resulting in a more consistent shell, but I prefer the 82's hi tension lugs more, overall TAMA have nailed it ! 🥁👋👍
To my ears, the original sounded better at the low and medium tuning. Certainly on the first hearing. The original at low tuning still sounded like the head was tighter. In comparison the reissue sounded a bit flabbier, as in i felt i could hear the looser head. At high tuning, i think the reissue sounded better. I didn't like the sound of the original at high tuning.
All that said, in the head to head the differences weren't as obvious. Go figure.
I think because it sounds different to the original, even though it still sounds incredible, I wouldn't want the reissue. Not for $4k. $4k is a huge budget and some astounding snares could be bought for much less.
One thing I love about all of them is the internal muffler. I wish more drums had them. My go to snare, a Pearl steel from the 70s has one and it's a godsend.
4K? Nah…
Wooooooooooooow!!!!!…..finally here! The rumors were true!!!!…for the ones that say that this is expensive, just want to share that this is the usual price range for the DW true cast, Sonor Artist, Savage Custom, etc….it is what it is guys. Even the 2014 re issue is listed even higher on reverb, as second hand. In my opinion, Tama realized that they can recover the market by making this a regular snare while others were trying to imitate the sound, and yes, there is bunch of marketing behind and probably other snares could sound “better” (for each taste) but I’ll say that the magic of this snare is due a very fair reputation of the brand and this specific snare drum…just sharing my thoughts. Have some fun playing drums!
Not saying it doesn’t deserve the price but saying can get great snare that no cheap either but not 4000$. Am sure it worth it but not paying $4000 for a snare when have lesser priced snares that act like better and are TAMA.
Doesn't justify it. People don't listen to songs and care about what snaremit is. Us drummers are the real suckers
Proud to be in this moment of Drum history!
Got mine a few days ago! Thanks for hooking me up sooner than expected! About to spend 4 days recording this beast nonstop.
Hope you enjoy it!
As an aside, "Terminator Pimp" would be a great band name lol
And only for the low, low price of $4,000
As I watched this I thought it sounds pretty good for sure then I saw the $4000,00 price tag and considering how many snares are out there that I know I can can get that sound from that are more affordable I think I’ll use my tuning skills and save $ 3500. But thanks for the demo you guys rock
Agree! It a beautiful sound but many more affordable TAMA snares are just as awesome. If someone want to gift one, would def not turn it down :)
All three sound similar but the 1980 was my fave.
Kudos to Tama for the reissue. I think it’s cool they did it and I think it’s worth the money.
As for the vintage ones, my apologies but it’s hard to not have contempt for the collector market. Those numbers are just frickin bonkers. Absurd, really.
Oh well. It is what it is. ✌️❤️🥁
Cheers to another great video.🍻
You're mad at the collector market which was simple supply and demand but not Tama for reissuing the snare with a cheaper form of casting the brass and charging four THOUSAND dollars for it?? Check Reverb, as of yesterday you can still get them for around the same price as these reissues and they'll be sand cast. Truthfully, no disrespect intended but I think you might want to examine how you're looking at it. Those used market "collector's" prices (most of those "collectors" are drummers and rental houses) took _YEARS_ to develop and they were based on slow and consistent word of mouth, a limited supply and a high demand for a snare that literally defined the sound of rock music from the late 80's right through until the 2010's. It wasn't like the pedal market where a Digitech Bad Money jumps up 200% in price overnight because a taste maker points out to a bunch of dimwits that a mid push overdrive sounds the same as any mid push overdrive. This was a unique and special thing and it's Tama that's worthy of "contempt." Not the drummers and rental houses that wanted to have _THE_ sound of rock music available to them.
@@AnodyneHipsterInfluencer It didn’t define the sound of rock. It was used on a couple of iconic albums which has caused the value for collectors to sky rocket. The Ludwig Black Beauty has been on more hit albums but Ludwig have made a lot of them and they aren’t expensive. The original Tama Bell Brass is a very nice sounding snare, end of …
@@AnodyneHipsterInfluencer no disrespect taken, as my experience and knowledge base is firm.
What something is actually worth and what a collector is willing to pay are two VASTLY different numbers, and quite frankly, it gets out of hand. Shane touched on the collector value of old Les Pauls. I don’t give a crap what anybody says, a solid body electric guitar isn’t worth $300,000+. And a vintage Tama snare drum isn’t worth $15,000+ either. It’s absurd.
“Defined the sound of rock music” is a bit much my friend. Literally NONE of those sessions would have turned out any less spectacular if a different model was used. It’s just a frickin snare drum for cryin out loud. It’s not like doves fly out of it when you hit it. lol.
Again, I realize, it is what it is. I’ve said my peace and I shan’t comment further. No foul. Be well. ✌️❤️🥁
The 82 was my fave. Had a little more bite up top or something
This is as good a comparison as you're gonna get. The takeaway from this is that the differences between the three are so small, they are essentially meaningless. In a band mix, you wouldn't be able to hear those differences. This is good news.
They all sound good for sure. The reissue, to my ears, is not close to others - sounded choked at some points, and a little less resonance perhaps? I am sure people will gobble these up (well, some people will) since they are descendants of the OG. There are some other cast options out there - Offbeat and Oriollo come to mind - that are much more reasonable in price and may be good options to look at too. As always, thanks for the video!!
reissue has a monster crack. and the volume - 11:21 says it all
first
😂🤟
OH lets go!! DCP always brings TOP SHELF content. Much respect! 🥁🥁
4 G's is pricey though mate.
Centrifugal casting will produce a better product for a drum shell. It will have better dimensional stability/uniformity, slightly better strength characteristics, slightly less potential for porosity, and more uniform density. Porosity and density would affect the sound the shell produces. I would rather purchase the centrifugal cast shell over a sand cast shell any day.
I can't confirm that all the famous recordings with that snare drum had a reverse dot, but if you watch the making of the black album documentary, you will actually see where they show the famous snare drum with a Remo reverse black dot head on the batter side. In that part, the producers are talking about the type of heads he used, and the tuning methods he used to get the sound that is on the album.
So...the Bell Brass is actually a bronze drum? Fascinating, captain. I wonder if there will be a comparison of bronze drums for 2024. Anywho, great job, guys.
São três belas Obras de Arte da TAMA com um som incrível. Parabéns a DCP pelo vídeo ! Abraços a todos.
i just wish someone could make a bell brass 13" snare...
I'd like to hear a comparison between the 50th Anniversary Mastercraft Bell Brass and the Star Reserve Hand Hammered Brass 14x6.5 snare drum.
4000 usd? seriusly??.. get lost
4K for this snare drum is madness! Sounds great though 😊
It's the closest thing you're gonna get too the original Snare that has recently been selling between 14k to what I saw on eBay 22k 😅
It ain't cheap!
Not paying 22,000$, not 4000$. It nice but other less expensive snares just as nice. Love the reissue but not 4000$ much.
@@Calj_Music89people are idiots lol
Glad to see Tama is offering this drum. They did close enough job that you'd be hard pressed to pick out the reissue from the 1980 model in a blind test... and nom-drummers just hear a nice snare drum ("oh, is that what that's called?!)" Great job by DCP, as always. Hope lots of folks buy this snare... maybe that will pull the prices down a little on two final snares I want to finish out my collection with. LOL.
I'm not a metallurgist, but here is what I know from reading, years ago: Sand Casting results in an imperfect (or in the 1980 case, perfect) shell, in that it endows the shell with higher porosity. I am hearing a lower fundamental tone from the 1980s model. Logic tells me--all things being equal (which they are supposed to be and appear to be)--that the porosity is soaking up those high-end frequencies. Another explanation might be the metal used--the 1980 model shell production was outsourced to a company which no longer exists. In my humble opinion, it's more a matter of the casting method used. As far (please correct me) as I am aware, all of the current "Bell Brass" snare drums are NOT produced using Sand Casting.
OK, so why was the original 1980 model as expensive and why don't other companies offer Sand Cast "Bell Brass" drums? Simply, Sand Casting results in a high enough number of unusable shells (have to melt down and try again) that even at the price Tama was charging in 1980, they couldn't justify production, i.e., either they couldn't make a profit margin high enough to justify production. This is just what I read eons ago.
In my humble opinion, given the production method (very few re-dos needed) I would have liked to see--I'm a lot of you agree--a more comparable price point. I could see a premium of possibly 10-20% more than other currently produced "Bell Brass" snares, due to the need to re-tool to produce the hardware components (it needs to be mentioned, though, they are using those components on the other MasterCraft 2024 snares they just released). I would love to see another DCP Bronze snare comparison with at least 10 competitors, i.e., Apple-to-Apple comparison.
I don't want to leave on a sour note and hope this post is not perceived in that manner. I am happy for everyone who wanted one of the 1980 snares... actually, I think it's great... sales help DCP and other companies... money moving around in the economy is always a good thing for everyone. Peace.
Very accurate comparison- the original(s) still win, but it's needed to say that bronze shell change a lot in time, so, maybe the new reissue will sound great as the original from 80s
These are awesome and I’m buying one. The 82 is my favorite but I love the sound of all of them
All three sound great, but the "82" sounds best to me 👍👍👍
Agreed.
i'll second that!
Do you know if the hardware will be available in a parts catalog? Would be great to get that strainer system, extended wires with "tape" straps, etc.
great VIDEO, amazing SNARES!!
what is the tuning method? Does is with the tune-bot?
and if so can you tell the numbers, thank you
We do have the tune bot settings for the head to head part somewhere…standby
@@sarchasm8513 will post in description later today!
Any update on the tune bit settings???
Any update on the tune bit settings???
1980
From this video it sounds like the 50th anniversary has a little less sustain than the others. The 82 has the most funky, ring to it (which isn't a bad thing). I'd be happy with any of these, but honestly, the 50th anniversary snare having less overtones and ring makes it the favorite of the 3 to my ears. The internal muffler is an amazing feature on any drum.
I have an original 1983 Rosewood mastercraft snare, but someone removed the internal muffler somewhere along the way.
New sounds new, old sounds old.
please get new mics, those mics you guys use for all your videos are utter trash and low quality
Please elaborate.
Why is it worth 4K?
Shane playing 3 Tama bell brass with no ear protection, the guy is a savage hahaha. great video, now lts time to speak to the wife....babe just to let you know Tama did something that nobody was expecting...
To my ears, the 1980 BB and the 50th Anniversary BB sound very similar. But that 1982 BB just sings beyond the others. That's what I hear anyway.. I"m fortunate enough to own a 1984 model and it sounds just like your 1982..Great review.
It just rings more, there's more overtones on the old one, I'm sorry but this one doesn't come close, it chokes
82 definitely sounds the best. How much do they go for? I remember not too long ago they were under 1,000 but I guess things have changed 😮
@@williamperri3437 LOL, add another zero to that
@@CrappyProducts yeah, I thought I remember them being crazy. I know 1 thing, no way when I pay 4,000 for a new one! 😂
man, they are very close... but that original 80's... maybe the patina... or maybe the casting method. regardless great to see this snare available at somewhat of an attainable price now... for me though, at 4k, I choose the Zildjian 400th. I think it's an overall better package, given the price. DCP 10th anniversary Sonor HLDs were a steal thinking back on it.
During the initial demonstration, I thought the original 1980 won hands down. It did the thing I was looking for. The new reissue was not far behind it, i felt the over tones were a bit overstated compared to the original, but the muting seemed to take care of that. For whatever reason, I thought the 82 was horrendously boingy in the low and mid tunings and lacked character in the high tuning. During the last comparison however, I feel like the reissue won me over! It played really nice in the beat. The overtones weren't bothersome, and it just felt more focused than the original. Like really a finished drum tone out of the box. Quick question, what is the secondary gooseneck mic you're using on the snare? I'm assuming you use that for top end in lieu of a bottom mic, correct?
Great feedback! That mic would be the Earthworks DM20 gen 2. Yeah, I actually use a bottom as well, but the DM20 is providing the higher frequencies and harmonics while not picking up as much hi hat bleed as the primary snare top mic.
@@drumcenternh thanks for the reply!
Umit from Guven Bronze (the foundry apparently manufacturing the shells) is saying that these shells are manufactured using sand casting, but the post is kind of hard to understand. Could you possibly provide some clarification as there seems to be some type of communication disconnect between Tama and Guven?
Personally I really couldn't care less; the drum sounds like a VERY faithful reproduction regardless of casting method. I'm just having nightmares of all the debates that are going to hit the forums in the next 24 hours 😂
Umut never says that Güven is casting these shells for Tama or that they used a sand cast method for these shells.
Whoa! I had no idea these were actually cast bronze. That just blew my mind…🥴
the more you know...🌈
yeah. when you buy one you can sue for misrepresentation as you got no Brass that was advertized.
I wish they would reissue the turn of the century Bell Brass with the Bell brass hoops.
All Hail the King..🏰
1980
That reissue really comes alive with a harder hit....my kind of drum.
Lord almighty
$3,999.99 USD
Beautiful ❤️
Nice touch to throw in Eddy Wally at 12:11 😂