Supraphonic vs. Acrolite?

[alba359]

Hi, Is the Arcolite and Suprophonic made from the same shell? Thanks, Don

[corworld]

The answer is generally yes, from the early 60's until about 84-85 although the ludalloy is chromed on the supraphonic. The old supraphonics were COB and the acro prototypes had all aluminum hardware (hoops, lugs) and had reliability issues.

[joeq]

I have an acrolite that seems to weigh about half of what my supra weighs

[biggator6]

Acros have less lugs and no chrome - otherwise, they're basically the same.

The weight difference is likely the two extra lugs and the chrome.. chrome is heavy.

[cajonezzz]

An 8 lug Acro sounds a lot different than a supra.

Best to have both. 6.5 supra gets 70% of all duties done in my place. I love my acro for quieter tracks, and for gigs ( quieter) and drier.


cz

[alba359]

Thanks for the responses guys. Sounds like a supra and an acro would cover a lot of bases.

[vitreouswindows]

The Acrolites shells were fashioned from aluminum and the Supraphonics were (as previously noted) fashioned from brass; in the early sixties they switched to a copper alloy to save money. The Supraphonics were chrome-plated and the Acrolites were not.

Both instruments sound wonderful. I always preferred the Acrolite. In the vintage drum world it is a common perception that if the Supraphonic was rare it would be extremely high-priced. It is perhaps the most recorded snare drum in rock music history and it was the flagship of the company for years.

Wm. F. Ludwig Jr. told me that they always tried to hide the fact that the Acrolite was of the same quality as the Supraphonic (though they had their distinct tonal flavours) as the price points were disparate and the profit margin on the Supraphonic was greater.

You can readily find used examples of both models at very good prices. It is good to know that exceptional instruments can be had for little money.

[pan60]

i have two Acrolites, ( love them, thank fellow slutz for the recommendation ), the shells seem to be of a different finish, did they just polish the older ones?
i have seen a few older ones that almost look chrome.

[Hazer]

Originally Posted by vitreouswindows

The Acrolites shells were fashioned from aluminum and the Supraphonics were (as previously noted) fashioned from brass; in the early sixties they switched to a copper alloy to save money. The Supraphonics were chrome-plated and the Acrolites were not.

This is true that some Supras were made of brass, but later they were changed to aluminum. I can't give an exact date, but I believe it was late sixties. This is why they're plagued with pitting -- aluminum doesn't take chrome very well.

[MJGreene Audio]

Originally Posted by Hazer

This is true that some Supras were made of brass, but later they were changed to aluminum. I can't give an exact date, but I believe it was late sixties. This is why they're plagued with pitting -- aluminum doesn't take chrome very well.

I have to wonder about this. I have a early 70's olive badge acrolite that I have tweaked out and it sounds fantastic. I also have a pre serial Supra that is an amazing drum but sounds totally different than my Acrolite. It is chromed but is aluminimum as far as I can tell. (A magnet won't stick to it) It has more of a Black Beauty sound than the Acrolite will ever do.

Both are great drums and on both I have changed out the strainers to a 30 or 32 strand Pure sound and it balances out both drums great. FWIW I hate bottom snare mics and with the bigger strainers it gives me enough of the snare sound that I don't feel like I need the bottom mic at all ever. Of course I have kept the original strainers but I wouldn't ever put them back on unless I sell the drum.

Michael Greene

[HeavyG]

...I remember being in 3rd grade band in the early 70s...and the other guy who played snare had a Ludwig Acrolite and I had a Slingerland (Radio King, I think)...what I do know is that his Ludwig sounded so much better to my ears. I then figured out that just about every snare (even if it isn't made by Ludwig) mimics the Supra, Acro or Black Beauty. Kenny Aronoff or Gadd gives Yamaha or Tama a Black Beauty and says "make me something like this". I researched setups of the pros and saw how many guys used Ludwigs...and those "holy grail" albums where I said to myself "I love that snare sound...it is probably a Ludwig".

But I knew that back in 3rd grade. :)

As for the shell composition...it depends on the year. Ludwig changed their shell from brass to spun aluminum for cost reasons. As similar as they are...they sound decidedly different. Supras remain metal shelled...Black Beautys are brass. The consensus is that Supras and Black Beautys are the holy grail...but Acros are beautiful, unique and almost as amazing (for a fraction of the cost). Shhhhh...it will drive the prices up. :)

[s12512]

i have 3 of them!! just bought my 3rd one 2day for $20!! got 2 acrolites and a supra. yaaaayy me!!

[biggator6]

I've got a 70's Acro, a 70's 5x14 Supra and a 70's 6.5x14 Supersensitive.

Damn, they're all great sounding snares. I've got the 6.5 cranked way up, JB style, and the Acro low & fat. The 3rd one sits right in between.

[pootkao]

How do the newer/black&white badge Acro's compare to the old ones?

[Benlittlejohn]

ive got 2 acro's and one supra...'

traded a arcolite for a supraphonic at a local school in the theatre department (they used it as a prop)... that acro had horrible pitting and broken drum heads but i guess they loved it as much as a prop as i like the supra for recording .

love em all but much prefer my mid sixties rogers wood powertone.

well that and my perfect condition gretsch wood round badge snare got at a estate sale for $15 with the orginal stand. (sorry but sometimes i just have to brag)

there's something about wood snares that always sounds way betters to me.

[biggator6]

Originally Posted by pootkao

How do the newer/black&white badge Acro's compare to the old ones?

They're the same. They haven't really changed them in.. well, pretty much ever. Not in any significant way anyway.