header.nohb.html

Is this the oldest New LUDWIG AND LUDWIG drum ????

Commodore

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2021
Messages
304
Reaction score
345
Location
Charlotte
Something else: The rims (hoops) are slightly deeper that that on many of my other old drums:
0.jpg

Here it is compared to a first year Leedy and Ludwig drum. You can tell it is the first version because the "L" in Leedy is more rounded than the "L" in Ludwig. (For years they were built as separate brands on the same assembly line. Lots of effort went into making them look and feel as seperate companies.) This difference was later changed to both having identical "L's."
 
Last edited:

Commodore

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2021
Messages
304
Reaction score
345
Location
Charlotte
One comment was that the unmarked shell must be taken from a Ludwig Universal. The shells on Universals were never marked, but their rims were marked "Ludwig Universal." The essence was that the rims from a deluxe snare were married to a Universal shell.

However, The center beads on the old snare are way thicker than the center beads on Universals:

0.jpg


Looking at the drum "in person" gives me more confidence in the claim of "NOS." That's how I bought it. None of the aging is usage wear. It is an early, early drum ...so at least around 100 years old. I am satisfied enough to claim that!
 
Last edited:

Bijan

DFO Veteran
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
2,480
Reaction score
438
Location
Saco Maine
Hahahaha a no serial number keystone badge with the (R) is late 60’s. Plus look at that replaced grommet. Get a grip!!!
 

Bijan

DFO Veteran
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
2,480
Reaction score
438
Location
Saco Maine
You’re grasping at straws. That black drum is clearly a normal supraphonic that was repainted by a previous owner. I don’t even know why I try with you; constant facepalms.
 

Commodore

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2021
Messages
304
Reaction score
345
Location
Charlotte
Here is another Oak Island mystery: Is it a 1958 transition badge supraphonic if the rims have been changed? @Bijan
0.jpg
0.jpg
 
Last edited:

1988fxlr

DFO Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2021
Messages
2,172
Reaction score
2,672
Location
Nj
Here is another Oak Island mystery: Is it still an original 1958 transition supraphonic if the rims have been changed? @Bijan
View attachment 544811 View attachment 544812
I’m not an expert but that badge looks 1980’s. Just before the move to North Carolina ludwig brought back the keystone badge and not all had serial numbers. That looks like one of them. With the 80’s die cast hoops I would suspect its an 80’s drum. What strainer is on it and what lead you to believe 50’s? Most importantly how does it sound? With the die cast on shallow metal I expect its got a serious crack to it
 

Commodore

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2021
Messages
304
Reaction score
345
Location
Charlotte
I’m not an expert but that badge looks 1980’s. Just before the move to North Carolina ludwig brought back the keystone badge and not all had serial numbers. That looks like one of them. With the 80’s die cast hoops I would suspect its an 80’s drum. What strainer is on it and what lead you to believe 50’s? Most importantly how does it sound? With the die cast on shallow metal I expect its got a serious crack to it
Thanks @1988fxlr The drum has all late model features ...and you're right!
I live @40 miles from the Monroe factory and often drag stuff back and forth. I was directed to it through an old employee. I was told it is from the LAST batch built in Chicago from leftover parts...
The badge has no serial number, is a shell drilled for B/O badge ...and the bow-tie lugs and cast hoops were original because they were using up the remaining stock.

You're further correct! It's got smoookin' Crack....
 
Last edited:

Bijan

DFO Veteran
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
2,480
Reaction score
438
Location
Saco Maine
And now you claim an 80’s drum is a transition badge era drum from ‘58-‘60. It only gets more hilarious.
 

rikkrebs

DFO Master
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2005
Messages
5,970
Reaction score
1,079
Location
Middletown Ohio
I've been following this post for awhile and I believe it to be a joke. I truely believe the OP is just having some fun with us.
 

georgelawrence

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
64
Reaction score
20
Location
Memphis Tennessee
I don't think I need to explain myself or verify my sources since I'm one of the sources (You quoted an article in my magazine, Not So Modern Drummer) and most of this is common knowledge in the Ludwig reference books and in the general knowledge of known Ludwig expert collectors. Correct me if I'm wrong somebody, but the problem with your dating is that the date of the strainer's patent is not the same as the date of the first manufacturing of it. That is a Tango strainer which was manufactured and used from 1922 to 1953 on Tango models, universal models and other models. It may have been patented in 1908 but there is no evidence that it was manufactured before '22. There were several other strainers and throw off strainers that were manufactured and sold on L&L drums way before the Tango. We could look up the patents for those strainers and they were probably patented years in advance of their manufacture as well. The Ludwig brothers were inventing new things and patenting things all the time. There is no way that they manufactured them all from the get go. Ergo, the patent date on a part does not date the drum. Yes, Ludwig sold unbranded drums and parts to Lyon and Healy. It was common practice back then; a way to distribute their product. They didn't care if their name was on it or not - keep the cash flowing and the light bills paid. The lack of an engraved brand has nothing to do with dating. They sold lots of unbranded drums and parts. You also have no idea or evidence of when Lyon and Healy put that particular drum in their archive. Who's in charge of that archive? Where are the records, etc.??? You should be asking these questions and finding evidence instead of bassackwards positing a story that is not based in provenance and asking others to disprove it. Just because something can't be disproved does not mean that it has been proven. My opinion is the drum is a stock Universal model, unbranded, made somewhere between 1922 and 1953. This opinion and $5 will get you an overpriced cup of coffee at Starbuck's.
 
Last edited:

Commodore

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2021
Messages
304
Reaction score
345
Location
Charlotte
I don't think I need to explain myself or verify my sources since I'm one of the sources (You quoted an article in my magazine, Not So Modern Drummer) and most of this is common knowledge in the Ludwig reference books and in the general knowledge of known Ludwig expert collectors. Correct me if I'm wrong somebody, but the problem with your dating is that the date of the strainer's patent is not the same as the date of the first manufacturing of it. That is a Tango strainer which was manufactured and used from 1922 to 1953 on Tango models, universal models and other models. It may have been patented in 1908 but there is no evidence that it was manufactured before '22. There were several other strainers and throw off strainers that were manufactured and sold on L&L drums way before the Tango. We could look up the patents for those strainers and they were probably patented years in advance of their manufacture as well. The Ludwig brothers were inventing new things and patenting things all the time. There is no way that they manufactured them all from the get go. Ergo, the patent date on a part does not date the drum.
Thanks George! I appreciate you're taking the time to post.

The Not So Modern Drummer article cited hardly mentioned the 1908 patent. I linked to the article ...but noted that the article was largely unhelpful regards the 1908 patent.
Yes, Ludwig sold unbranded drums and parts to Lyon and Healy. It was common practice back then; a way to distribute their product. They didn't care if their name was on it or not - keep the cash flowing and the light bills paid. The lack of an engraved brand has nothing to do with dating. They sold lots of unbranded drums and parts. You also have no idea or evidence of when Lyon and Healy put that particular drum in their archive. Who's in charge of that archive? Where are the records, etc.??? You should be asking these questions and finding evidence instead of bassackwards positing a story that is not based in provenance and asking others to disprove it. Just because something can't be disproved does not mean that it has been proven. My opinion is the drum is a stock Universal model, unbranded, made somewhere between 1922 and 1953. This opinion and $5 will get you an overpriced cup of coffee at Starbuck's.

Not exactly helpful date-wise. Glad you could pinpoint within 30 years, though. Thanks! You do have a point about private-label goods ...and that I will explore, further

As per Provenance, I need help verifying the drum's case. Anyone know the dates this store was active. I can trace the drum forward from here. Thanks again!
CCABB995-8C7B-4FDC-9A07-B44653BF67E9.jpeg
44360A4D-4168-4C71-A2D8-D3099A297D58.jpeg

Ends up, the site is now a biological conservatory located between the Hilton and Marriott in downtown Ft. Wayne.
Case includes this label. Found references to this company from 1912 to 1935,





This label is a later "type face" than the one on the drum case.
We actually know the later label is from the early 1930's. Detectives wanted!
 

Attachments

  • 594A8953-F156-4457-A002-9E775B650925.jpeg
    594A8953-F156-4457-A002-9E775B650925.jpeg
    56.3 KB · Views: 8
Last edited:

4MoreYearsOhNo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
433
Reaction score
69
Location
Boston
I don't think I need to explain myself or verify my sources since I'm one of the sources (You quoted an article in my magazine, Not So Modern Drummer) and most of this is common knowledge in the Ludwig reference books and in the general knowledge of known Ludwig expert collectors. Correct me if I'm wrong somebody, but the problem with your dating is that the date of the strainer's patent is not the same as the date of the first manufacturing of it. That is a Tango strainer which was manufactured and used from 1922 to 1953 on Tango models, universal models and other models. It may have been patented in 1908 but there is no evidence that it was manufactured before '22. There were several other strainers and throw off strainers that were manufactured and sold on L&L drums way before the Tango. We could look up the patents for those strainers and they were probably patented years in advance of their manufacture as well. The Ludwig brothers were inventing new things and patenting things all the time. There is no way that they manufactured them all from the get go. Ergo, the patent date on a part does not date the drum. Yes, Ludwig sold unbranded drums and parts to Lyon and Healy. It was common practice back then; a way to distribute their product. They didn't care if their name was on it or not - keep the cash flowing and the light bills paid. The lack of an engraved brand has nothing to do with dating. They sold lots of unbranded drums and parts. You also have no idea or evidence of when Lyon and Healy put that particular drum in their archive. Who's in charge of that archive? Where are the records, etc.??? You should be asking these questions and finding evidence instead of bassackwards positing a story that is not based in provenance and asking others to disprove it. Just because something can't be disproved does not mean that it has been proven. My opinion is the drum is a stock Universal model, unbranded, made somewhere between 1922 and 1953. This opinion and $5 will get you an overpriced cup of coffee at Starbuck's.
Yes, indeed anyone who is paying attention agrees with you. With the addition that even the suggestion that this drum was ever in a "Lyon and Healy archive" is a fabrication. Or even that there was such a thing as a "Lyon and Healy archive".
 

Commodore

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2021
Messages
304
Reaction score
345
Location
Charlotte
Preliminary Conclusions:

1.) This is likely not a Ludwig "Universal." Pictures have been posted as evidence that the center bead is wider and the shell is deeper than the 5" shell that the catalog lists for the Universal model. Review the pictures!

2.) It is early. Lack of identifying brand usually signifies early production. However, it could also mean that the drum was produced for another company to market. The inside sticker indicates it could have been marketed as a Lyon and Healey brand. This most likely would have occurred before Ludwig and Ludwig became a known brand. Certainly, contract manufacturing would not be a priority once Ludwig was successful.

3.) Condition is unused. This drum may not have been purposefully archived ...but it has remained unused for 100+ years. ...All I have are speculations, no proof other than what I know of it's later history and overall condition. I bought it as NOS and definitely paid less than what it would cost for the seller to fake. He owned a music store and bought it from another music store. The consolidations of the family owned music stores within the past decades make it highly logical that the story he told me was genuine.

I've edited this entire thread to make it more readable. It had gotten large and overly wordy. Should you wish to edit or delete anything you've posted, ...that's fine with me. (For historical accuracy, of course!)
 
Last edited:


Top