Tom and Jerry splash cymbal tone

Iristone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
388
Reaction score
97
Location
Beijing
Been watching lots of classic Tom and Jerry cartoons during the spring festival break. Along with having a few good laughs, I kind of get interested in the cymbal tone when Tom gets hit on the floor, etc.. I guess it's an Avedis Zildjian splash cymbal typical of that era. Any insights?
 

Iristone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
388
Reaction score
97
Location
Beijing
I began to realize there's at least two different ones. Let's say, the higher one? The lower one sounds pretty much like a (pair of?) regular Avedis crash to me. :wink:
 

cworrick

The BIG Bunny on the block
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
6,981
Reaction score
887
Location
Northeast Indiana
1:18: Cowbell
2:39: Trash can

Foley effects during post production.
:scratch:
I hear the obvious cowbell at 1:13 (head even turns into a cowbell). Then Two little splashes at 1:18+ with the tail tucks.
The trashcan lid hits on the floor sound like crash/splash cymbals to me too.
:hello2:
 

dje31

Very well Known Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
511
Reaction score
55
Location
Gainesville, Florida, USA
Not sure how helpful this might be, but I remember a Stewart Copeland interview, where, before they were popularized in the late 70s / early 80s, splash cymbals were hard to find...and those that were found were often expensive (due to rarity) and/or fragile.

He said he had to pick up tiny splash cymbals off kids' toy starter kits, which were cheap, and didn't mind if he broke them. I guess Stew was able to convince Paiste to make him some, and other brands followed suit.

With that in mind, I doubt there were many (any?) kids starter trap kits in the Tom & Jerry heyday.
 

Cliff DeArment

Very well Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
639
Reaction score
196
Location
Los Angeles
I agree 1:19. Clearly splashes. Have to be Avedis, not K's (doesn't sound like it). What other cymbals would they have? Cowbell might be the same drummer (Joe Porcaro?), maybe with a towel on it? But, I can hear tape splicing on both cowbell (volume change) and trash, in my ear anyway. The trash is out of sync with the band and most likely from a foley track. Have to remember, in the 50's/60's a trash can wasn't plastic and some were pretty good items (you all know already, just have to say it). To me, at best, the "trash can" may have been a pot lid hitting the floor. Foley guys use the floor a lot.

Wish I could remember the xylophone player (not Emil). When he retired he became a USC teacher and met him a few times, well known for Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry, and many other classics. Anyone know?

Fun post! :)
 
Last edited:

Iristone

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
388
Reaction score
97
Location
Beijing
Not sure how helpful this might be, but I remember a Stewart Copeland interview, where, before they were popularized in the late 70s / early 80s, splash cymbals were hard to find...and those that were found were often expensive (due to rarity) and/or fragile.

He said he had to pick up tiny splash cymbals off kids' toy starter kits, which were cheap, and didn't mind if he broke them. I guess Stew was able to convince Paiste to make him some, and other brands followed suit.

With that in mind, I doubt there were many (any?) kids starter trap kits in the Tom & Jerry heyday.
I think in the 40s these were actually quite common (a quick search on eBay or vintage catalogues might prove right or wrong). Maybe they fell out of favour in the 70s.
 

Cliff DeArment

Very well Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
639
Reaction score
196
Location
Los Angeles
Last edited:

cworrick

The BIG Bunny on the block
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
6,981
Reaction score
887
Location
Northeast Indiana
I think in the 40s these were actually quite common (a quick search on eBay or vintage catalogues might prove right or wrong). Maybe they fell out of favour in the 70s.
The smaller size would have been popluar, but the term "splash cymbal" wouldn't have been.

I remember reading the story of how Zildjian (I believe it was Avedis) almost had a cow when Krupa came to him and requested a 16" cymbal. I don't remember the date, but it was early. They hadn't made anything that big at that point.
So, 8" ish to 14" cymbals would have been very common to find.
 

zenstat

Senior Cymbal Nerd
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
4,223
Reaction score
1,115
Location
Auckland New Zealand
In the beginning there were weight classes not named models. I'm currently working on my page with all the weight class ink and weight class ranges by diameter. Some of this is extracted from the current draft of that text. The weight classes were named

Ex. Thin (sometimes Paper Thin)
Thin
Medium Thin
Medium
Medium Heavy
Heavy

and these names were put on the cymbals using ink stamps. The differentiation began with different weight ranges for the castings depending on what diameter and weight class cymbal was to be produced. Orders were taken by weight class, and the ink stamps on the cymbals provided stock keeping and order information. The ink stamps survived when cymbals were shipped to retailers, but seldom survived the following years after the cymbals were in use. However, enough have survived to allow us to reconstruct the specific weight ranges associated with the weight class names.

Although the early days were mostly about weight classes, there were a few specific models. By 1949 there were Flange models (aka Bop Flange) and the Swish. The Swish patent was applied on Feb 7, 1938 and granted as US 2189095 on Feb 6, 1940). There was also a Ping model which was around from the mid 1950s. Specific models with names really got going after the 1960s although there were a few exceptions. I'm not sure about the first use of "SPLASH" since I have to double check ads, flyers, price lists and catalogs. The earliest I've got is a 10" with a 60s stamp and SPLASH ink which weighs 260g.

The early size distribution shows lots of smaller diameter cymbals. Splash cymbals would have been designated Ex. Thin (aka Paper Thin) or perhaps Thin. These are from the first production era (1929-mid 40s)

8 x
9
10 xxx
11 xxxxxxxxxxx (one with PAPER THIN ink = 298g)
12 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
13 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
14 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (one with one with PAPER THIN ink = 602g)
15 xxxxxxxxxxxx (one with one with PAPER THIN ink = 710g)

The largest cymbals produced don't actually fit that story about a 16" diameter being a problem to produce. Or at least whether or not the story fits depends on what you mean by "early". There are cymbals up to 22" from the first production era (to mid 40s)

16 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
17 xx
18 xxxxxxxx
19
20 xxx (2 are 30s, one early 40s based on trademark)
21
22 x (early 40s based on trademark)

The gaps at 19" and 21" as well as the relatively low number of 17" cymbals just reflect the overall pattern of even vs odd cymbal diameters. The really large diameter cymbals came in after 1945 when the largest diameters go

23 xxxxxx
24 xxxxxxxxxx
25 x
26 xxxxxxxxxx
27
28 x (swish weighing 3751g)
 

gkrk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
455
Reaction score
50
Ludwig '71 catalog, page 80, has Paiste 602 "Special Sound" cymbal #2 listed as "Splash" 11"
 

gkrk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
455
Reaction score
50
Not sure how helpful this might be, but I remember a Stewart Copeland interview, where, before they were popularized in the late 70s / early 80s, splash cymbals were hard to find...and those that were found were often expensive (due to rarity) and/or fragile.

He said he had to pick up tiny splash cymbals off kids' toy starter kits, which were cheap, and didn't mind if he broke them. I guess Stew was able to convince Paiste to make him some, and other brands followed suit.

With that in mind, I doubt there were many (any?) kids starter trap kits in the Tom & Jerry heyday.
Seems to me that Mr. Copeland didn't look very hard for professional small diameter cymbals. Maybe he contributed to the repopularization of them but not their manufacture.
 

zenstat

Senior Cymbal Nerd
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
4,223
Reaction score
1,115
Location
Auckland New Zealand
Ludwig '71 catalog, page 80, has Paiste 602 "Special Sound" cymbal #2 listed as "Splash" 11"
That's the Seven Sound Set. The wiki


has that back to 1964, although I seem to remember some revisions of that year may be in the offing.

Screen Shot 2020-01-31 at 10.46.54 AM.png


I'm not sure if that is the first naming of a Splash or if it went back further with Paiste, perhaps to an earlier line like Stambul. There were also 10" Fo602 cymbals available in that catalog on the previous page (in Thin, Medium and Heavy). An earlier catalog (1967, p72) had a more complete range of weight classes/models and provides an example of how differentiation was starting to happen between weight classes and models in the mid 60s. So the physical evidence is that Stuart Copeland could have bought a Splash out of the catalog from Paiste if he chose. Or Avedis Zildjian. They were already available if not called a Splash in some instances.

I find it helpful to remember that Paiste and Avedis Zildjian were watching each other carefully. It was a time of innovation in product lines for both of them and these changes didn't happen in isolation.

Screen Shot 2020-01-31 at 10.54.03 AM.png
 
Last edited:

Cliff DeArment

Very well Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
639
Reaction score
196
Location
Los Angeles
There is a Zildjian catalog from 1958 (MCMLVIII)...

Splash Cymbals: (Also called Choke Cymbals): Small cymbals seven to eleven inches in diameter. They are usually thin in weight and are used for fast cymbal crash work and are very often choked off fast.

Weights of Cymbals: Each category of Avedis Zildjian cymbals is available in the following weights: Extra-thin, paper-thin, thin, medium-thin, medium, medium-heavy, heavy and extra-heavy. Inasmuch as there is a distinct difference in the weights used for dance work compared to those used for band and symphony work, it must be pointed out that all cymbals must be classified according to category before their weight can be classified, (i.e. certain heavy dance cymbals can be equivalent of a medium band or symphony cymbal in actual weight and at the same time completely different in playing characteristics. Medium-heavy for band is entirely different than medium-heavy for dance.)

 

zenstat

Senior Cymbal Nerd
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
4,223
Reaction score
1,115
Location
Auckland New Zealand
There is a Zildjian catalog from 1958 (MCMLVIII)...

Splash Cymbals: (Also called Choke Cymbals): Small cymbals seven to eleven inches in diameter. They are usually thin in weight and are used for fast cymbal crash work and are very often choked off fast.

Weights of Cymbals: Each category of Avedis Zildjian cymbals is available in the following weights: Extra-thin, paper-thin, thin, medium-thin, medium, medium-heavy, heavy and extra-heavy. Inasmuch as there is a distinct difference in the weights used for dance work compared to those used for band and symphony work, it must be pointed out that all cymbals must be classified according to category before their weight can be classified, (i.e. certain heavy dance cymbals can be equivalent of a medium band or symphony cymbal in actual weight and at the same time completely different in playing characteristics. Medium-heavy for band is entirely different than medium-heavy for dance.)

Thanks Cliff. Yes that's one of the 40 or so ads/flyers/price lists/catalogs I need to review again while I'm trying to bring things all together in a nice simple summary which does justice to the complexity. The distinction between band and dance is something which has changed over time, both in terminology and in emphasis. I've got a few examples with ink which says DANCE or BAND and that stamp can be combined with the other weight class stamps. And the Extra Heavy made an appearance for some production eras but not others. I don't think I've come across an example of Extra Heavy ink but to be sure I need to finish indexing 3000+ cymbal photo sets. This one also puts Extra Thin as thinner than Paper-Thin and I had forgotten that. My brain filled up some time ago and my record keeping deteriorated at the same time. :blink:

Sometimes I get the impression that they made up the text about product lines for each major catalog change and nobody checked for continuity and consistency with earlier stories. I'd love for somebody to come up with the recipe book from the factory which states what the weight ranges are for the castings and the finished cymbals for each named weight class and diameter. How that recipe changed over the production eras is one of the questions. Everybody I know who cares about cymbals believes that Zildjian cymbals got heavier in the 70s and/or 80s, but I'm trying to add more detail to the story. I was able to track the weight changes associated with the 2013 reset of the A Zildjian line


so I figure we ought to be able to pick up the change in the 60s vs 70s vs 80s vs 90s. In order to do so we need to be comparing cymbals within weight classes. For example comparing Mediums across the production eras, and not accidentally comparing a HEAVY cymbal from the 50s with a THIN cymbal from the 70s when the weight class ink is gone. From 1970 or so things are easier because models are better defined and documented in the ink, and there are cymbals which retain their ink. And all of this started because people ask these sorts of questions

I've got this 20" 1900g A Zildjian from the 1950s -- what model is it? Crash Ride or a Ride?

Or consider this thread:


Where we eventually end up with

"Got a new 20" 70's Zildjian. Exactly 2041 grams. Any idea about what line it would be? The bell is larger and less tapered. Maybe a thin crash?"

The answer from my posts earlier in that thread is 20" 2041g larger cup = Crash Ride not Thin Crash.

Now some may consider those sorts of questions irrelevant because if you have the cymbal then you play it and decide for yourself whether it meets your needs as a Crash Ride in the musical context or you want to use it just as a Crash. I agree with that sentiment and also wonder if there is some general application of weight classes which can help provide insight by adding context about the weight distribution for a particular diameter and production era. Hence the info on models and bell sizes and weights I've been working on over the past couple of years. Despite the occsional burst of vintage Joe in that thread, I do think we are making a little progress.
 

Cliff DeArment

Very well Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
639
Reaction score
196
Location
Los Angeles
Image wanting a cymbal in the 70's. Send a letter to Zildjian "I want ________". I'm sorry Sir, we don't have names for those. How thick? :rolleyes:
 

Latest posts



Top