New Beats: Sound By Weights

[StatesboroBlue]

Tough thread to decide how to title. I went with my initial idea which is that I am thinking seriously about a pair of vintage New Beats Somewhere along the line I remember reading a thread, read an article or maybe heard a YouTube video that mentioned being able to choose New Beats based solely on their weights. That particular model abounds on the used market, and a goodly number of them don't have accompanying sound files or have poorly recorded sound files. So, if there is truth to this recollection of mine (that NBs can be evaluated by weight only) I'd appreciate an education--or a link to whatever resources you might know of.

My original idea was something from '60s or '70s. Honestly, if anyone knows where my '77 NBs are, I'd love those back--yeah right. The sound I seek is warmer and lower-pitched than the typical pair of NBs. I am thinking vintage here, but Zildjian has released a number of pieces that try to recreate those older cymbals. I am not locked on vintage if something modern will fill the bill.

 

[1988fxlr]

Mine, which are 60’s tall stamps my dad bought used in 1977, are 874 grams over 1272 grams.

They are warmer and darker than most more modern pairs I have played but bright enough for good versatility and heavier than a lot of vintage pairings I’ve seen advertised. If you want very warm and dark and are purchasing by weight alone, I would aim to stay under my weights

 

[Guy L]

So, as per usual Zenstat has created an incredible overview on New Beats through the years. My personal favorites are late 70s as well, though 70's had the widest range overall between both top and bottom.

A Brief History Of New Beats

 

[Tama CW]

My mid-70s New Beat 14's fall into that deeper and warmer range.....828/1165 gm. I've never had luck with bottoms over 1220 gm or tops above 875 gm or so.
I got too used to these over the years. If you want a dark sizzly sound that can handle jazz to blues to classic rock 750-850 over 1050-1195. Just my 2 cents.
Go higher if you need to include heavy rock or big band over a lighter venue.

I recall having a late 60's pairs of new beats that came with a one owner '66 Slingerland bop kit where jazz and small venues were played. Those hats were 880/1320.
I don't know how that worked for the original owner. I found them way too shrill and harsh for my tastes....esp. that 1320 gm bottom. I guess it comes down to if you
really value the foot chick and need it really sharp and bold. Then 1320 gm gets you there.

 

[1988fxlr]

I

My mid-70s New Beat 14's fall into that deeper and warmer range.....828/1165 gm. I've never had luck with bottoms over 1220 gm or tops above 875 gm or so.
I got too used to these over the years. If you want a dark sizzly sound that can handle jazz to blues to classic rock 750-850 over 1050-1195. Just my 2 cents.
Go higher if you need to include heavy rock or big band over a lighter venue.

I recall having a late 60's pairs of new beats that came with a one owner '66 Slingerland bop kit where jazz and small venues were played. Those hats were 880/1320.
I don't know how that worked for the original owner. I found them way to shrill and harsh for my tastes....esp. that 1320 gm bottom. I guess it comes down to if you
really value the foot chick and need it really sharp and bold. Then 1320 gm gets you there.

I like your idea of tying application to the discussion. I’d say my 874/1272 are probably a little bright for most peoples tastes for acoustic jazz. Perfect around classic rock/classic country/ chicago blues; and can stretch nicely up to brighter disco, funk, hard rock played bottom over top. Not enough cut for true heavy metal other than Sabbath/Stoner sort of stuff

 

[StatesboroBlue]

Mine, which are 60’s tall stamps my dad bought used in 1977, are 874 grams over 1272 grams.

They are warmer and darker than most more modern pairs I have played but bright enough for good versatility and heavier than a lot of vintage pairings I’ve seen advertised. If you want very warm and dark and are purchasing by weight alone, I would aim to stay under my weights

That's what I remember about my first set of New Beats. I never had any ideas about actual gram weights back then, but they were warmer and lower pitched than most NBs I heard or auditioned back then. Versatile is key along with being great in low volume settings and not at all clanky.

Here is one pair that might work. I just don't know based on this recording.
(broken link removed)

 

[StatesboroBlue]

So, as per usual Zenstat has created an incredible overview on New Beats through the years. My personal favorites are late 70s as well, though 70's had the widest range overall between both top and bottom.

A Brief History Of New Beats

I read through part of that. A goodly bit seems to be visually laid out--tabular. Hard for my screen software (or maybe it is just me) to make sense of the info.

 

[StatesboroBlue]

My mid-70s New Beat 14's fall into that deeper and warmer range.....828/1165 gm. I've never had luck with bottoms over 1220 gm or tops above 875 gm or so.
I got too used to these over the years. If you want a dark sizzly sound that can handle jazz to blues to classic rock 750-850 over 1050-1195. Just my 2 cents.
Go higher if you need to include heavy rock or big band over a lighter venue.

I recall having a late 60's pairs of new beats that came with a one owner '66 Slingerland bop kit where jazz and small venues were played. Those hats were 880/1320.
I don't know how that worked for the original owner. I found them way too shrill and harsh for my tastes....esp. that 1320 gm bottom. I guess it comes down to if you
really value the foot chick and need it really sharp and bold. Then 1320 gm gets you there.

Jazz and blues or blues and jazz. I definitely want a foot chick, but it doesn't need to be sharp and defined. Take the edge off it, warm it up a bit, maybe a chuck instead of chick. Off the top of my head, and I'd need to refresh memory to be absolutely sure, but think Riders on the Storm, Hold Your Head up or Christo Redempter by Charlie Musselwhite.

 

[1988fxlr]

That's what I remember about my first set of New Beats. I never had any ideas about actual gram weights back then, but they were warmer and lower pitched than most NBs I heard or auditioned back then. Versatile is key along with being great in low volume settings and not at all clanky.

Here is one pair that might work. I just don't know based on this recording.
(broken link removed)

Its not the most helpful recording as its mostly just showing them played fairly hard closed and fairly hard half open with what appear to be pretty heavy stick (wood tip promark, maybe 747 or 2b?). I would guess they would work pretty well for most genres.

The bottom cymbal looks to be in good shape with inside edges worn to a basically brilliant finish from plenty of playing. The top has less wear on the edges but looks to be pretty good with some oddness around the bell hole. Might just be a few errant runs with a lathe, but I would guess it spent some time without a felt on top of the clutch

 

[StatesboroBlue]

I

I like your idea of tying application to the discussion. I’d say my 874/1272 are probably a little bright for most peoples tastes for acoustic jazz. Perfect around classic rock/classic country/ chicago blues; and can stretch nicely up to brighter disco, funk, hard rock played bottom over top. Not enough cut for true heavy metal other than Sabbath/Stoner sort of stuff

IDK, maybe it was my inexperienced ears and not having other choices or knowing any better, but those New Beats I had back in '77 covered HS stage band, country gigs, classic rock (well then contemporary rock) and blues stuff all flawlessly in my mind's ear anyway. I have modern hats from Zildjian and Saibian, and all are way too brash for what I am looking for, and none work all that great at lower volumes and with smaller sticks. At least for me they don't.

 

[1988fxlr]

IDK, maybe it was my inexperienced ears and not having other choices or knowing any better, but those New Beats I had back in '77 covered HS stage band, country gigs, classic rock (well then contemporary rock) and blues stuff all flawlessly in my mind's ear anyway. I have modern hats from Zildjian and Saibian, and all are way too brash for what I am looking for, and none work all that great at lower volumes and with smaller sticks. At least for me they don't.

Yeah, to me you are describing my set very well. They were good in high school jazz band and can work for pretty much the heaviest music that existed in 1977 (Sabbath, Rainbow, Pat Travers, Nugent). They would be a little bright for a bebop trio, and were kind of light for Metallica and Pantera covers. They are smoother/less clangy than my early 00’s 15” set at 1224g over 1734g

If it would be helpful I can make a quick cellphone video and text it to you if you pm me your number.

 

[The Ruckus]

I’m also looking for a pair of 15”. What be made two observations, which may not be accurate. First, 60’s new beats seem to be darker and drier than those from the 70’s. Ones I’ve heard from the 70’s sound similar to the pair I bought in the 90’s. They were too heavy for my tastes.

The second observation, Zildjian hats from the 50’s and 60’s in nice condition aren’t cheap. Hard to find any under $400 after taxes and shipping. The ones I want would be close to $600 after all expenses and I’m not sure it’s worth it, but I think they pre-date new beats. They sound pretty good though

 

[StatesboroBlue]

Yeah, to me you are describing my set very well. They were good in high school jazz band and can work for pretty much the heaviest music that existed in 1977 (Sabbath, Rainbow, Pat Travers, Nugent). They would be a little bright for a bebop trio, and were kind of light for Metallica and Pantera covers. They are smoother/less clangy than my early 00’s 15” set at 1224g over 1734g

If it would be helpful I can make a quick cellphone video and text it to you if you pm me your number.

Haha. I am one of the weirdos who doesn't do cell phones. Actually, I just don't need one, and fifteen years doing IT support ... well I hate telephones now.

 

[StatesboroBlue]

Its not the most helpful recording as its mostly just showing them played fairly hard closed and fairly hard half open with what appear to be pretty heavy stick (wood tip promark, maybe 747 or 2b?). I would guess they would work pretty well for most genres.

The bottom cymbal looks to be in good shape with inside edges worn to a basically brilliant finish from plenty of playing. The top has less wear on the edges but looks to be pretty good with some oddness around the bell hole. Might just be a few errant runs with a lathe, but I would guess it spent some time without a felt on top of the clutch

Thanks. I would never have known any of that. I was disappointed there was no jazzy samples in there. Knowing the stick is also nice. My stick of choice is Regal Tip Jazz. those are hard to find now, and I am searching for a new stick. Vic Firth Combos at the moment, but the current prices will have me looking elsewhere.

 

[zenstat]

I read through part of that. A goodly bit seems to be visually laid out--tabular. Hard for my screen software (or maybe it is just me) to make sense of the info.

Sorry to hear that. I hand coded all of that in an early HTML spec which makes no use of later or fancier browser capabilities. It should run on just about anything. I certainly don't use HTML tables, I use lots of graphs. Are you having browser trouble with tabs themselves?

That New Beats summary needs a re-write to adapt it to the things I've discovered since it was written. I froze that version and was going to put all the updates in the new wiki, but I still haven't got very far on that. All of the graphs are correct, but they classify cymbals by which trademark stamp they have as if that tells us the decade. 60s stamps 1960-1969 and 70s stamps 1970-1979 turns out to be a myth. We now know that the years of use for the trademark stamps which seemed settled in 2008 are quite wrong. Years overlap, so everything needs a tidy up. The number of pairs of New Beat pairs with 60s stamps was actually one of the first signs that something was wrong.

The old overview:

The one minute overview is that New Beat hi hats can be usefully divided into seven eras when you are trying to determine year of manufacture. They are

1. 1963-mid 70s ink: straight BOTTOM HI HAT / NEW BEAT stamp: 60s or 70s
2. mid 70s - 1981 ink: curved BOTTOM NEW BEAT / HI HAT; hollow ink Zildjian 1978 onwards
3. 1982 - 1991 ink: solid Zildjian
4. 1992 ink: Avedis added to Zildjian script on top
5. 1994 - onwards laser serial numbers give year of manufacture
6. 1997? ink: cursive A next to model ink
7. 2013 redeisgn of A series; large cursive A above model ink

These eras are based mostly on changing ink styles, and the changing ink styles are related to die stamps when this is possible. If you've been here before and just need a refresher, you just got it. If you need to know more about what these ink styles actually mean, read on.

The new overview:

• 1963-1969 New Beat bottom hat sold by itself with ink saying NEW BEAT HI-HAT. 60s stamp. Currenly combing my databases for a 70s stamp on one of these to date the earliest use of the 70s stamp. Tops can have ink saying HI-HAT and some have weight class ink like THIN.
• 1970: New Beat hats sold as a pair. Straight BOTTOM HI HAT / NEW BEAT for the bottom and TOP HI-HAT for the top. 60s stamp continues until 1979, so there are plenty of pairs with 60s stamps (short and tall)
• mid 70s - 1981 ink: curved BOTTOM NEW BEAT / HI HAT; hollow ink Zildjian 1978 onwards; stamp 70s; yet to investigate my database for the association of curved in and the end of 60s stamps.
• 1982 - 1991 ink: solid Zildjian; stamp 70s or CO
• 1992 ink: Avedis added to Zildjian script on top
• 1994 - onwards laser serial numbers give year of manufacture
• 1997 ink: cursive A next to model ink
• 2013 redesign of A series; large cursive A above model ink

None of which helps you choose likely weights. Sorry.

 

[StatesboroBlue]

Sorry to hear that. I hand coded all of that in an early HTML spec which makes no use of later or fancier browser capabilities. It should run on just about anything. I certainly don't use HTML tables, I use lots of graphs. Are you having browser trouble with tabs themselves?

It's the graphs that would present a problem, and honestly I looked through that before getting caffeine levels up to minimum standards. I am coming to the conclusion that buying in absence of quality sound files is a dicey proposition. I checked out some of the hats on MyCymbal.com earlier today, and interestingly, the 15" (all modern of course) got closer to the sound I have in my head than any of the 14"s. I skipped all the stuff that had been sold. Maybe I will go back and check those later.

 

[hsosdrum]

... I am coming to the conclusion that buying in absence of quality sound files is a dicey proposition ...

This right here. You say it in your OP: "The sound I seek is warmer and lower-pitched than the typical pair of NBs." The only way to get cymbals that match a sound in your head is to hear them. Everything else ranges between pure guesswork (i.e. buying based solely on them being New Beats) and trial-and-error (i.e. buying based on weights, but without hearing sound samples). Even sound samples are no guarantee, but short of a personal audition they're your best bet when you want to match a sound you have in your head.*

*Don't give up hope here. I looked for 50 years for a crash cymbal that matched the sound of one that was stolen from me a half-century ago (the sound of which I've had in my head ever since). I finally found one two years ago.

 

[StatesboroBlue]

This right here. You say it in your OP: "The sound I seek is warmer and lower-pitched than the typical pair of NBs." The only way to get cymbals that match a sound in your head is to hear them. Everything else ranges between pure guesswork (i.e. buying based solely on them being New Beats) and trial-and-error (i.e. buying based on weights, but without hearing sound samples). Even sound samples are no guarantee, but short of a personal audition they're your best bet when you want to match a sound you have in your head.*

*Don't give up hope here. I looked for 50 years for a crash cymbal that matched the sound of one that was stolen from me a half-century ago (the sound of which I've had in my head ever since). I finally found one two years ago.

As I said, I had seen something someplace online that choosing NBs could be done fairly accurately by weights. I don't recall when, where or how I got that info. The followup poster will hopefully forgive me for not mentioning by name, but there is much to be said for knowing the visuals by sight as opposed to reading a description that, while maybe not dishonest, may be skewed to flattery. And there is also a good bit to be gained from knowing the stick and the technique used in the demo. And another thing I noticed on MyCymbals.com, they have no set standard whatsoever in how they demo their cymbals. Being a non visual cat, I am pretty sure there are different players. Demoing a cymbal to show its best side is fine, but keeping as many variables the same is to the buyers' advantage. That is what I meant when I said dicey.

 

[The Ruckus]

This right here. You say it in your OP: "The sound I seek is warmer and lower-pitched than the typical pair of NBs." The only way to get cymbals that match a sound in your head is to hear them. Everything else ranges between pure guesswork (i.e. buying based solely on them being New Beats) and trial-and-error (i.e. buying based on weights, but without hearing sound samples). Even sound samples are no guarantee, but short of a personal audition they're your best bet when you want to match a sound you have in your head.*

*Don't give up hope here. I looked for 50 years for a crash cymbal that matched the sound of one that was stolen from me a half-century ago (the sound of which I've had in my head ever since). I finally found one two years ago.

I agree quality sound samples are best. However, lighter/thinner hats are generally warmer, darker, and more papery. If size is the same, thinner should also have a lower pitch, but bigger is *usually lower pitch than smaller

 

[zenstat]

It's the graphs that would present a problem, and honestly I looked through that before getting caffeine levels up to minimum standards. I am coming to the conclusion that buying in absence of quality sound files is a dicey proposition. I checked out some of the hats on MyCymbal.com earlier today, and interestingly, the 15" (all modern of course) got closer to the sound I have in my head than any of the 14"s. I skipped all the stuff that had been sold. Maybe I will go back and check those later.

I just read in another thread that you are blind and using software which reads the text on the screen to you. All is explained. My parents taught in a school for the blind so I grew up somewhat familiar with visually impaired people. My site is very visually oriented, despite me saying that it is hearing cymbals which carries the greatest information.

My choice of New Beats is a pairing of 732g over 1120g. These are both at the lighter end for tops and bottoms. I chose them because I had a spare 1120g bottom and I did the work demonstrating the 2 over 3 ratio. So I went looking for a top in the range 730g to 740g. They work for me to get the warmer lower pitched sound. I will see if I can locate a sound file for you.