Couple of quick Ludwig Supraphonic Questions.

[jimmyz]

hi guys,

i've been scouring here and the net to find a million answers to question on this snare, I'm 90% on the answers so far.

Does anyone know which dimensions are available for the supraphonic? I just saw what is listed as a 14'' x 5.5'' when I thought they came only in 14'' x 5'' and 14'' x 6.5''? I guess this may have varied over the years. I am quite keen to get a 70's or earlier.

Also, I know for the L400 to be a supraphonic, it would have a P83 strainer but what about the model on the but end? Would this be a P83 as well?

If anyone know a site or resource for finding this stuff out that I may not have come across thus far, give me a shout.

Thanks,

Jimmy.

[tiny333]

ask this guy

Vintage Drums - Specializing in Quality Vintage Drums and Percussion.

good luck

[Jimbo]

Supraphonics come in 5" and 6.5".

They sported several strainers over the years. The P83 was used prior to the 70s. After that the P85 became standard. Personally, I prefer the looks and operation of the P83.

The butt ends for both strainers are probably quite similar.

[jimmyz]

thanks for the replies - tiny, the guys site looks really cool, lots of amazing kit!

Jimbo, so there is no 5.5''?

Jimmy.

[Bang]

I've got a 5" and a 6.5" Supraphonic, not sure about the strainers. Both are 70's. A quick search revealed a new Ludwig 5.5 featured at NAMM 08 but I bet it was a misrprint...

My recommendation is to try before you buy... like don't get a vintage one on ebay...

My search for my supraphonics was to find one that closely resembled Bonham's for my drum sample software. So I bought a few off ebay and only one sounded "right". When searching for the 5" I found it in person and played it before buying it. Even with metal drums, things happen over the years that can affect the tonal resonances.

[Grumblefoot]

Get an acrolite it is essentially the same drum for ALOT less $$$$$$$.

[Bang]

Acrolites are great drums and of great quality. To my ears they will sound different then the Supraphonic.

Supraphonics and Acrolites are based on the same aluminum shell (although a certain era of Supraphonics are brass) but the big difference is that Supraphonics have chrome plating that changes the sound quite a bit. Supraphonics also have 10 lugs (my acrolite is not in front of me but I think it has 8) which leads to different tension characteristics on the head, which again, yields different tone.

But Acrolites are no joke, and sound great. The two snares actually compliment each other nicely. Good suggestion Grumblefoot.

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by jimmyz

thanks for the replies - tiny, the guys site looks really cool, lots of amazing kit!

Jimbo, so there is no 5.5''?

Jimmy.

I think that when you see "5.5" mentioned it must be a misprint...but I cannot guarantee it.

[ed97643]

Or do what I did (also an acrolyte guy here):

- buy like 3 or so acrolytes on ebay
- take them all apart and frankenstein up a "best of the best" super acrolyte
- sell the other two back on ebay

Get a killer acrolite for next to no money if you do your buying and selling wisely.

[Grumblefoot]

Acrolites are 8 lug snares instead of the 10 lug supraphonics , but I don't think the sound is that big a difference to my ears anyway. Plus you can get an acrolite on e-bay for under $150.00.

[chrisso]

I've rented and owned 6.5" Supraphonics from all eras including new and couldn't hear a difference, by ear or back off tape.
Honest respect to those who can.
But I don't think most people should worry too much when buying any Supra.

[Rob-K]

We have two Acrolites and a Supraphonic, the Supraphonic definately sounds different. I love it, but in my opinion the Acrolites are AMAZING on heavy rock stuff. I believe that Chad Smith from the Red Hot Chili Peppers used an Acrolite on their last record quite a bit - not bad for a $100 drum!

Rob

[chrisj]

Another big Acrolite fan here- but they're not going to be exactly like Supraphonics.

The one thing very good about them for your purposes is they're aluminum or Ludalloy- Bonham insisted on that and not chrome-over-brass. With Bonzo you're hearing an aluminum or alloy sound, which gives it air and focusses the attack in a special way.

Acrolites will happily do that but I find the sound sort of drier, funkier- less imposing, more fun. Definitely less intimidating. Perhaps because the fewer lugs make them lighter, hold the rims less rigidly?

I believe Nick Mason is hitting an Acrolite in Live at Pompeii on 'Echoes', including on the Backbeat Of Doom section where Gilmour and Wright trade solos. The airy, mind-numbing CRACK of that backbeat has been a touchstone for me for ideal drum sound for years... not that much like Zep, but in the same family. To do Zep, for starters the snares will be looser and the batter head might be as well...

[jimmyz]

Originally Posted by ed97643

Or do what I did (also an acrolyte guy here):

- buy like 3 or so acrolytes on ebay
- take them all apart and frankenstein up a "best of the best" super acrolyte
- sell the other two back on ebay

Get a killer acrolite for next to no money if you do your buying and selling wisely.

Ed, thats a really good suggestion.

I am really into the 70's low warm fat sound (Electric Warrior, 10,000HZ Legend, Sea Change etc.) Would it be fair to say that the Supraphonic wins out on these types of sounds compared to the Acrolite?

thanks

J

[filthyrich]

Has anyone used an acrolite and a pork pie big black snare?

I'm up in the air between the two.

[Jimbo]

I don't believe the difference in tone between the Acrolite and the Supraphonic has anything to do with a 1 or 2 micron thick chrome over the shell. I do think it has everything to do with the lugs.

Those two extra lugs put additional weight on the shell which changes how the shell vibrates and resonates. Also, the Imperial lugs on the Supra are probably much more substantial than the Acro, meaning event more weight on the Supra shell.

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by jimmyz

I am really into the 70's low warm fat sound (Electric Warrior, 10,000HZ Legend, Sea Change etc.) Would it be fair to say that the Supraphonic wins out on these types of sounds compared to the Acrolite?

The 6.5" Acrolite is rare and expensive. On the other hand, the 6.5" Supraphonic is a staple. I've created that 'Sea Change' sound with a deep Supraphonic with no problems.

[Bang]

Originally Posted by Jimbo

I don't believe the difference in tone between the Acrolite and the Supraphonic has anything to do with a 1 or 2 micron thick chrome over the shell. I do think it has everything to do with the lugs.

Those two extra lugs put additional weight on the shell which changes how the shell vibrates and resonates. Also, the Imperial lugs on the Supra are probably much more substantial than the Acro, meaning event more weight on the Supra shell.

A quick study into the physics of drum shells can provide information that will claim that it takes VERY little modification of a given shell to affect its tone. While tonewoods are more susceptible to tonal changes, so can metals, especially when these metals are 40 years old.

Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if the chrome plating affects the sound of the acrolite. Its pretty much certain the extra lugs do.

Overall I made an attempt to get the acrolite and supraphonic to sound similar this morning with fresh new heads and as similar a tuning as humanly (at least this human) possible. Even when changing both snares to Puresounds, there is still quite a difference. But both rocked.

[jimmyz]

Bang,

would it be fair to say (bearing in mind I have yet to use either type of drum) that the Acrolite provides a more metallic/ringing sound whilst the Supraphonic has more warmth and deeper tone?

Very general sonic descriptions there, sorry!

Also, does anyone know the year Ludwig started manufacturing Acrolite's?

Thanks for all the help on this.

J

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by Bang

A quick study into the physics of drum shells can provide information that will claim that it takes VERY little modification of a given shell to affect its tone. While tonewoods are more susceptible to tonal changes, so can metals, especially when these metals are 40 years old.

Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if the chrome plating affects the sound of the acrolite.

I would! I doubt there is a person on this planet that could here the difference between a standard Acro and one that has been chrome plated, all other factors being equal.

That layer of plated chrome is so thin that the additional mass it imposes on the shell is such a small percentage of total mass that its effect on tone is insignificant.

The four additional holes in the shell of the Supra (to support 10 lugs instead of the Acro's 8 lugs) removes more mass from the shell than the chrome plating adds.

Which is why I believe your assertion:

Originally Posted by Bang

the big difference is that Supraphonics have chrome plating that changes the sound quite a bit.

is just not correct.

[Bang]

coating a whole drum shell with a layer of chrome surely has to have an affect on the shells weight. It takes very little weight to be added to a shell to change some tone. Now I'm not saying that the chroming makes it sound like a whole new drum, but I'd imagine it changes the sound. I do agree though that most of the sound differences would be caused by extra hardware and extra tension distribution due to the increase in lugs.

[Jimbo]

The mass of the shell certainly increases with the plating. However, the additional mass is such a small percentage of the total mass that its affect on tone is insignificant.

Plating is measured in microns. Those drum shells are measured in millimeters. (1 micron = .001 mm)

I think the thickness of the Acro/Supra shell is about 1 mm. Let's say the chrome plating is about 2 microns thick . That means that if you were to look at a cross-cut of a Supra shell you'd see 1 layer of plating next to 500 layers of Ludalloy! In this example the plating accounts for 0.2% of the thickness of the shell.

The density of the plating vis-a-vis Ludalloy is certainly a factor here, but I doubt the difference is enough to overcome those proportions.

[biggator6]

The 6.5" Acrolite is rare and expensive.

Older ones are... new ones are $289 at musicansfriend. probably cheaper elsewhere
"-)

[Bang]

Originally Posted by Jimbo

The mass of the shell certainly increases with the plating. However, the additional mass is such a small percentage of the total mass that its affect on tone is insignificant.

Plating is measured in microns. Those drum shells are measured in millimeters. (1 micron = .001 mm)

I think the thickness of the Acro/Supra shell is about 1 mm. Let's say the chrome plating is about 2 microns thick . That means that if you were to look at a cross-cut of a Supra shell you'd see 1 layer of plating next to 500 layers of Ludalloy! In this example the plating accounts for 0.2% of the thickness of the shell.

The density of the plating vis-a-vis Ludalloy is certainly a factor here, but I doubt the difference is enough to overcome those proportions.

So then we'll have to say that the tone differences (which to me are fairly large) are due to the lug issue. I'm sure some of it has to do with the fact that these drums are 40 years old as well. Either way, I can't get my acrolite to sound like the supraphonics and vice versa. Both great drums.

[ed97643]

jimmyz asked: "I am really into the 70's low warm fat sound (Electric Warrior, 10,000HZ Legend, Sea Change etc.) Would it be fair to say that the Supraphonic wins out on these types of sounds compared to the Acrolite?"

This is only my own opinion, but when I want a low, warm fat sound, I prefer a maple snare, 6.5" deep. When I want high pitched, tight, dry 'crack', then I turn to the acrolite. This is only my own personal approach; your mileage / opinion may vary. As for acro vs. supra for low / warm / fat, probably the supra wins over the acro.
----------------------------------------
jimmyz also asked: "does anyone know the year Ludwig started manufacturing Acrolite's?"

I believe it was 1963, based on the linked article below (with Ludwig catalog citations included).

Note that the 60s ones are prized but hard to come by; the 70s ones are also prized, and are easier to find; and lastly, that the "galaxy finish" (black finish, not silvery in color) that were sold from the early 1980s to today are NOT prized at all by drummers and snare afficionados.

Here is the article:
The Ludwig Acrolite - DRUMMERWORLD OFFICIAL DISCUSSION FORUM

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by ed97643

the "galaxy finish" (black finish, not silvery in color) that were sold from the early 1980s to today are NOT prized at all by drummers and snare afficionados.

I guess that would be a matter of opinion. I've seen a few Acrolite lovers say they like the drum. Probably advisable to suck it and see, rather than let others decide.

As to the Acrolite vs Supra debate....
If someone with considerable drum recording experience says they sound different in a side by side test (for whatever reason), I'd probably accept it.

[jimmyz]

thanks for all the info and replies - its an amazing resource we have here and its a great thing to be able to ask a couple of questions and get a wealth of info.

Can anyone comment on how COB and later (alloy) Supra's differ in sound? I know the COB is more desirable and I would love to hold out for one of these. Mainly I want to know if there is a massive or subtle difference between them. As we all know, a subtle difference can be massive when tracking...

Also, I believe earlier Supra's had COB hoops too (I might be wrong with this)?

J

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by jimmyz

Can anyone comment on how COB and later (alloy) Supra's differ in sound? I know the COB is more desirable and I would love to hold out for one of these.

Is it more desirable?
I know the very early Supraphonics are more desirable for collectors.
Collectability has little bearing on performance for a player.
Ludwig continued to make chrome over brass Supraphonics after the Ludalloy one came out.
Both Bonham and Steve Gadd played the Ludalloy version - both total drumming legends I think you would agree.
I have both Ludalloy and COB Supras.
The COB offers no improvement IMO, it's kind of blech compared to the Ludalloy.
The basic 6.5" Supra is a classic. It sounds great too. End of story.

[jimmyz]

thanks chris.

the snare is only for recording so I dont really mind:

A- What it looks like
B- What its made of.

It just has to sound great.

Maybe a 6.5'' might be an option, so far I've been thinking only about the 5''. Care to comment on how the 6.5'' differs tonally?

One other question I had was with regards to bubbling in the alloy: if this starts to happen (as I suppose it will in a drum as old as the 60's), should I only expect it to get imminently worse, or is this par for the course in a drum that old? Just thinking about how the condition of the drum will be once I've had it several years.

Many thanks,

J

[HeavyG]

Jimmy,
Supra's are one of the members of the snare drum hall of fame. Great choice. As for chrome plating...chrome plating pits and degrades over time regardless of the underlying material...but brass adds a special character to the Supra since they don't mesh very well in metalurgist terms with the chrome plating. That said, I have never seen a COB Supra in poor visual condition...they just look like a 35 year drum should. Finely aged.

Regarding your size question...I own a newer (8 years old) 6.5 x 14 hand hammered tube lugged Ludwig Black Beauty which has many of the same characteristics as a Supraphonic. As far as difference in tone between shallow and deep snares...the laws of physics say that the deeper drum will have a slightly lower fundamental pitch but should project a little more. The shallower drum will have a shorter decay and a higher fundamental pitch, so it should sound a bit crisper. This all goes out the window when you factor in heads, tuning, player, etc. I have heard fat drums that sound thin and vice versa...just listen to Matt Chamberlin's piccolo snare on Wallflowers "One Headlight" and you will know what I mean...that thing sounds HUGE.

What does this mean? You will have a world class drum that can adapt to any number of requirements in the studio or live. You can't ask for more than that ...but if you had to chose one...the shallower snare may be a bit more versatile (again on paper).