Rogers superten vs Tama imperialstar snare

dexter74

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
209
Reaction score
69
In the market for a nice - yet affordable - steel snare.

I've owned supertens and loved them. Wondering how the king-beat era imperialstar stack up against them? Anyone have experience with both? Thanks.
 

Mcjnic

DFO Veteran
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
2,402
Reaction score
919
I don’t recall ever owning a SuperTen. I have an excellent Tama King Beat, though. Outstanding drum. It’s one of the drums that doesn’t leave when I sell equipment.
 

dexter74

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
209
Reaction score
69
I don’t recall ever owning a SuperTen. I have an excellent Tama King Beat, though. Outstanding drum. It’s one of the drums that doesn’t leave when I sell equipment.
Right on. I'd be considering a "mastercraft" model. Same as king beat with different hoops, I believe.
 

Mcjnic

DFO Veteran
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
2,402
Reaction score
919
Right on. I'd be considering a "mastercraft" model. Same as king beat with different hoops, I believe.
Depending on the year ... these varied a bit. I'll hang out in the mid 80s for simplicity.

The Mastercraft spanned six different types of shell materials. There was the Bell Brass, Rosewood, Fiberglass, Artwood, Artstar, and Metal.
These featured the One-Touch Tone Control, PC Die Cast Hoops, and the Roller Action Snare Switch.

The King-Beat was solely the Seamless Metal shell. These are pretty darn heavy. It featured the PC Die Cast Hoops, One Touch Tone Control, ... however, this is where it differed greatly ... it featured the KG Parallel Action Switch and Butt. This parallel snare system is what set this snare apart from the other high end Tama Snares. It is seriously sensitive ... and extremely powerful.

Obviously the Mastercraft lineup are the top of the line snares.
Both have the PC Die Cast Hoops.
But the King-Beat is a different animal. It has the phenomenal shell ... and that incredibly well engineered parallel snare system. It's the perfect snare.
 
Last edited:

BennyK

DFO Master
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
14,298
Reaction score
1,253
I've owned TAMA Mastercraft and Kingbeats and a Rogers Superten , neither let me down regardless of the room or clean sensitivity,even at earsplitting bar room volume .

Tough choice , but there's something extra in that seamless shell .
 

Trilock_Gurtu

Very well Known Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
622
Reaction score
298
Location
Vancouver, BC, Canada
Looooooove my Kingbeat. Heavy drum, but sounds amazing. I'm one of those that believe there is something extra sonic wise, with seamless shells. If you've ever stripped one down to just the shell, hit it with your thumb/finger/mallet/whatever, you'll hear a pure tone, almost like a bell. I've tried this with my non seamless snare shells, and just not the same, imo.
 

drumtimejohn

Very well Known Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2016
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
208
The late 70s early 80s Royalstar is the same 10 lug shell as the King Beat but has triple flange hoops like the Superten and may be closer in sound/focus.
 

Tama CW

Very well Known Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2018
Messages
1,442
Reaction score
628
Location
SE Connecticut
Depending on the year ... these varied a bit. I'll hang out in the mid 80s for simplicity.

The King-Beat was solely the Seamless Metal shell. ..........

Obviously the Mastercraft lineup are the top of the line snares.
Both have the PC Die Cast Hoops.
But the King-Beat is a different animal. It has the phenomenal shell ... and that incredibly well engineered parallel snare system. It's the perfect snare.
Are you sure about this? My Tama 1984/85 catalog says Kingbeat and Mastercraft shared the same seamless metal shell "construction process." So I'm confused. And if the KB carried an upgraded shell wouldn't they tend to promote that in the catalog rather than this "same construction process" mumbo jumbo?

1980 Tama catalog

The 1980 Tama Snare drum section describes KB and MC slightly differently, though saying basic the same thing. Seamless - perfectly round metal shell. But the KB description also says "deep drawn." Though I suspect the MC shell is deep drawn as well.

Tama Royalstar 10 lug metal share using the same king beat shell? I've never run into one. They must be pretty scarce. Why wouldn't they just let Royalstar kit buyers choose between MC, KG, and a Powerline metal snare drum as they did for Superstar and Imperialstar kit buyers? Since the Imperialstar standard drum was a Powerline, I would have thought that was standard on the intermediate line of Royalstars. In the 1983 RS catalog below the std 8 lug snare drum offered is the same drum that the Swingstars got. Most older blogs, and references I run across suggest that the MC, KB, and PL lines all used the same shell....with varying hoops, lugs, snares, and snare mechanisms.

1983 Royalstar catalog

1978/80 Tama Snare Drum flyer
 
Last edited:

Mcjnic

DFO Veteran
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
2,402
Reaction score
919
Are you sure about this? My Tama 1984/85 catalog says Kingbeat and Mastercraft shared the same seamless metal shell "construction process." So I'm confused. And if the KB carried an upgraded shell wouldn't they tend to promote that in the catalog rather than this "same construction process" mumbo jumbo?

1980 Tama catalog

The 1980 Tama Snare drum section describes KB and MC slightly differently, though saying basic the same thing. Seamless - perfectly round metal shell. But the KB description also says "deep drawn." Though I suspect the MC shell is deep drawn as well.

Tama Royalstar 10 lug metal share using the same king beat shell? I've never run into one. They must be pretty scarce. Why wouldn't they just let Royalstar kit buyers choose between MC, KG, and a Powerline metal snare drum as they did for Superstar and Imperialstar kit buyers? Since the Imperialstar standard drum was a Powerline, I would have thought that was standard on the intermediate line of Royalstars. In the 1983 RS catalog below the std 8 lug snare drum offered is the same drum that the Swingstars got. Most older blogs, and references I run across suggest that the MC, KB, and PL lines all used the same shell....with varying hoops, lugs, snares, and snare mechanisms.

1983 Royalstar catalog

1978/80 Tama Snare Drum flyer


Hahahahaha
Good grief.

Read it again.

The “solely the seamless metal shell” infers that it wasn’t Rosewood, Fiberglass, etc. It was offered SOLELY as the metal version.

They are Seamless Metal. That was understood from the writing.

Hopefully that clears up your reading error.
 
Last edited:

Tama CW

Very well Known Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2018
Messages
1,442
Reaction score
628
Location
SE Connecticut
Did read it again, several times before I posted. Your post was somewhat misleading....which was my point. Could be read as that the KG was the "sole" heavy metal, seamless snare that Tama made as if it were a standalone shell. No reading error here. You just worded it ambiguously....which read as if the KingBeat were the Holy Grail.....LOL. In fact it's the same drum as the Mastercraft Imperialstar except for the convoluted super sensitive snare mechanism set up that was overly annoying to many drummers. And it certainly didn't make them "more powerful." You can get essentially the same sound in the MC, KG, and even Powerline snare drums. That should clear up the ambiguity for anyone looking for a seamless vintage Tama metal snare.
 

Mcjnic

DFO Veteran
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
2,402
Reaction score
919
Did read it again, several times before I posted. Your post was somewhat misleading....which was my point. Could be read as that the KG was the "sole" heavy metal, seamless snare that Tama made as if it were a standalone shell. No reading error here. You just worded it ambiguously....which read as if the KingBeat were the Holy Grail.....LOL. In fact it's the same drum as the Mastercraft Imperialstar except for the convoluted super sensitive snare mechanism set up that was overly annoying to many drummers. And it certainly didn't make them "more powerful." You can get essentially the same sound in the MC, KG, and even Powerline snare drums. That should clear up the ambiguity for anyone looking for a seamless vintage Tama metal snare.

Hahahahahahahaha
Have a day.
 

EvEnStEvEn

~Lounge Lizard~
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
17,591
Reaction score
2,015
Location
Oklur Homer
Most older blogs, and references I run across suggest that the MC, KB, and PL lines all used the same shell....with varying hoops, lugs, snares, and snare mechanisms.
^
Pretty sure he's correct here according to the way the catalogs reference these models.
 

Mcjnic

DFO Veteran
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
2,402
Reaction score
919
Pretty sure he is, too.
I believe that is what I said ... These are Seamless Metal shells. Even the OP was aware the shells were the same.

Boggles the mind that TamaCW misread it “several” times.
Functional illiteracy would be my guess. 1 in 7 suffer from it. Looks like he drew the short end.

He needed to read the OPs post that I quoted to have the context of my response.

Apologies to the OP ...

Now let’s have a Language Arts Lesson, kiddos.

In a futile attempt to clear up the confused individual ...

I used a basic overview from the mid 80s ...

His (the OP) second post (the one I was answering) made it clear that the shells were the same.
“Right on. I'd be considering a "mastercraft" model. Same as king beat with different hoops, I believe.”

I was giving him the differences in the snare mechanisms and pointing out the hoops were actually the same.

“Obviously the Mastercraft lineup are the top of the line snares.
Both have the PC Die Cast Hoops.
But the King-Beat is a different animal.”

This is where you have to insert Contextual Clues in order to comprehend the text.
If you are unaware of Contextual Clues, I will steer you to this site ...





“It has the phenomenal shell”

Contextual inference here is “it has the same phenomenal shell” This is understood, as the OP had stated it so and I simply followed suit.

Now, the difference is brought to the forefront for effect.

“ ... and that incredibly well engineered parallel snare system. It's the perfect snare.”

I honestly didn’t think it was difficult to understand, but I’ve been reading for quite a few years. Some, I take it, have not. Like all new endeavors, I would think practice and time will be key.

Next time, I will attempt to write clearer for this individual, as it is very evident he has significant difficulties with reading comprehension.
 
Last edited:

Tama CW

Very well Known Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2018
Messages
1,442
Reaction score
628
Location
SE Connecticut
Yes, please do. Write more clearly next time. And by the way, your comprehension is still deficient.

"These are Seamless Metal shells. Even the OP was aware the shells were the same."

Nope. The OP left it ambiguous whether they understood the MC vs KB shells. Read it again. The "I believe" portion
brings it in doubt....allowing others to clarify, which I did. "I believe" is not certainty....never is. It allows for doubt. And requires clarification.

You seem to be quite proud of the word "contextual." Whatever floats your contextual boat. How many times do you need to repeat it to yourself? Too funny....lol. And your "contextual" use of "solely" was quite "ambiguous" and "misleading" which got the whole ball rolling......Q.E.D.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts



Top