Thanks everyone for weighing in with comments. Always appreciate your opinions and expertise.
Tommy: Thanks for your input regarding the differences between 3 vs 5 ply. It would be really interesting to have your/our expert shell designer and builder do a test between 3 and 5 ply shells with identical wood and bearing edges. That would definitively demonstrate the influence of ply vs bearing edge. Keep us informed. (Note the snare behind my double basses. Look familiar?)
SanityClause: As has been mentioned before by a few of the other Rogers guys, you alluded to the brief time in which 3-ply shells returned during the Fullerton 9/72 series. Does anyone know for certain when this was? I have a bunch of 9/72 series drums, and they’re all 5-ply. I’ve never seen an actual example of a 3-ply 9/72 shell.
Glenn: I know you’ve been working on your Cleveland B&B restoration for quite some time. I have no B&B era hardware for you, but I have tons of Fullerton stuff so why don’t you just drill out all your shells for Beavertails (KIDDING!!). Interesting about the smaller B&B lugs on your newly acquired FT. The 1960 catalog shows three different sized B&B lugs, but I always thought that they were sized for bass (Lg), FT (Med), and mounted tom (Sm)…
[Attachment: 89978]
Blair: You’re right about the difference in Beavertail weights, but I have no Cleveland era lugs, so that’s why I just slapped on the Fullertons, but Fullerton lugs on both basses did provide for a fair comparison between the shells. Maybe I’ll eventually get the Cleveland hardware and outfit it right.
Thanks for your interest.
Mike