Vintage 1970's Zildjian ride with mass hammering top and bottom.

jimilove5

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
9
Reaction score
1
Greetings, my first post here though I have visited many times! Here I have this 1970's Zildjian ride with mass hammering top and bottom. It is 20'' and 2400 grams. Very interested in in how this came to be. I have looked at http://black.net.nz/avedis/hammering.html , with who a while back I spoke with about a "54 stamped ride that I had. Any comments will be greatly appreciated! Cheers!
 

Attachments

zenstat

Senior Cymbal Nerd
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
4,188
Reaction score
1,062
Location
Auckland New Zealand
Welcome to the madhouse. :happy11:

That looks like 1970s machine hammering to me, using a small hammer face. I still don't have a simple way to illustrate the difference between the look of that hammering style and the earlier style. On the top side the 70s machine hammering is much more pronounced with those small distinct hammer marks (indentations). In contrast the earlier top hammering (50s and into the early 60s) looks more like a gently rumpled surface. Like this:



where the hammering is much less distinct. The bottom of 1950s to early 60s cymbals tend to show more hammering then the top



But the individual blows are less distinct, a bit further apart, and not always in perfect alignment when you compare them to the machine hammered 1970s ones.

Bill Hartrick claimed that hammering on the bottom stopped some time in the early 1960s, but I have found a number of cymbals which suggest it might not be so simple. There do seem to be cymbals with 70s stamps (as yours has) and hammering on the bottom. That could be because they are early 60s cymbals which sat in the vault for a few years and when they came out the 70s stamp was used on them. Or it could be that bottom hammering didn't stop entirely, or that it dropped out for a time in the 60s and then came back. I don't know. :dontknow: What I do know is that sometimes what looks like hammering on the bottom can actually be "print through" from the hammering on the top. For example, I am coming around to suspect that that this



is actually "print through" from hammering on the top. But I need more hands on examples to be sure because "print through" is hard to pick in photos, but easier to see if you can hold the cymbal in your hands and explore it.

The other issue is that sometimes lathe chatter on the bottom can look a bit like some kind of hammering. I'm not 100% sure if I'm seeing hammering on the bottom of your cymbal. I'm not 100% sure which are bottom photos. If this is one



then what I see could be either lathe chatter or "print through". The other whole cymbal photos all look to me like they are of the top side, because it looks like the bell is sticking up. Occasionally the perspective in photos goes strange and the bell is actually being seen from the bottom. What might help is a photo of the bottom of the whole cymbal in dramatic side lighting. If one of the above photos is actually a bottom photo my apologies but I just can't get the perspective right. If you place that one bottom photo in a post all by itself that might help me out.
 

Cliff DeArment

Very well Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
632
Reaction score
192
Location
Los Angeles
I agree with Zenstat that it's machine hammered. The hammering here is a bit more obvious than others. Maybe this cymbal was made thinner that day so they didn't lathe it as much.

Always wondered about cymbals that were "not hammered" like the Hartrick 60's claim. Is it really possible to make a usual cymbal sound without hammering in some way? The only thing I can really think of without hammering at all would be like an Earth Ride. Here's a little theory... (as I often do...) A cymbal could be hammered and then lathed more times, faster, or lathed heavier where it wouldn't show any hammering. We know for sure that all Trans were hammered, but we can also sometimes see a Trans without obvious hammering (often with a hi hat or splash), so there's truth right here. Maybe later 60's were made to make it look "better"? I have a 60's 24" ride what "looks" like there's no hammering, but when I look for it more closely there's one little spot (less than an inch) where just a little hammering is left to see. Lathe it one more time and seen hammering will be gone and would have to be called "not hammered".

The 70's above shows the extreme "obvious hammering", as others may go all the way through the range of "unseen hammering". Either way a cymbal will have a similar sound with hammering seen or not. To say there's an Avedis lathed "not hammered" cymbal?... my theory is.... there isn't one! It might be wrong, but it makes sense.
 

jimilove5

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
9
Reaction score
1
Zenstat... Thank you for the info and the 'Welcome'! The 2 photos with ink ink splot on the bell are the bottom of the cymbal.......this cymbal plays much lighter than it's weight and is almost glassy sounding like a vintage Paiste 602.......
 

zenstat

Senior Cymbal Nerd
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
4,188
Reaction score
1,062
Location
Auckland New Zealand
jimilove5 said:
Zenstat... Thank you for the info and the 'Welcome'! The 2 photos with ink ink splot on the bell are the bottom of the cymbal.......this cymbal plays much lighter than it's weight and is almost glassy sounding like a vintage Paiste 602.......
Ah ha, I missed the handy ink spot.
Having a closer look now...

Yes that does look machine hammered on the bottom.

Different manufacturers mention sightly different sonic effects from giving a cymbal a brilliant finish like that one has. But "glassy" is usually included in the descriptions. Although 602s seem to manage "glassy" for other reasons.

A little more on hammering, since we've started. Bill Hartrick didn't say all hamering stopped. Bill's claim was that Zildjian quit bottom hammering (not top hammering) around 1964. And he made that claim in the context of how to tell a late 50s small stamp from a 70s stamp:



Apparently he hadn't observed the bold/not bold distinction nor the vertical alignment which distinguish the late 50s trademark from the 70s trademark. This lasted at least until 2012, possibly longer. It's just that 2012 is the last time I spotted him needing to check for hammering on the bottom of a cymbal to see if it was 70s or 50s, when it had an obvious 70s trademark from my perspective. Plus 70s lathing style on the bow, and 70s lathing style on the bell. In fact, Bill's philatelic confusion (which is also manifest in several other sites) is why there is a specific section on my timeline which deals with that. I haven't updated it yet, but I've since found out it was Biggles (of Cymbalholic) who noticed the H over E alignment difference. I have yet to update that entry on my site to thank him, and add one or two other diagnostic attributes I've discovered since my last update which help us tell a 70s from a 50s small stamp.

I think the specific year 1964 (Bill mentions 1964 in some places but not in that quote) owes more to the beliefs about the Zildjian (and Ludwig) order book filling up the day after the Beatles were on the Ed Sullivan Show, than it does to actual research on a representative sample of cymbals manufactured before and after 1964. Bill made the claim but never presented his evidence, and since he won't discuss methodology I can't say for sure why he believes what he believes. I came along and started to collect information and ran into a few cymbals with 70s stamps which had bottom hammering. Now Bill might claim those are all pre 1964 manufactured cymbals which received a 70s stamp much later. But in other places he dismisses the notion that cymbals stayed in the vaults for several years before being stamped using a later stamp. That's the trouble with quoting from Bill's work. He's a bit like the bible. He's said so many things over the years you can find a chapter and verse from Bill to support just about anything. And that's why I started my project to replicate all of his claims. Some of his claims I've been able to replicate. Some are not consistent with the evidence (eg not being able to tell a 70s stamp from a late 50s stamp). Some like the "1954 trademark stamp" remain in an indeterminate state.

Another interesting issue with top only hammering is that independent cymbalsmith Matt Bettis offers a line of cymbals which are called Hard Top Rides, which are shaped with 100% of the hammering on the top side. That can be either hammering by hand, or sometimes using an antique machine he's restored. In that case it is guided by Matt himself. No automation here.

http://www.bettiscymbals.com/hard_top.php

Looking at some of Matt's hard top cymbals (in photos only -- I have yet to come across one in person) I see what looks like bottom hammering but I believe must be the "print through" I was discussing before. The other cymbals I've seen (this time in person since I own several of each) are Paiste 602s which seem to be top hammered only, and Paiste Traditionals which seem to be hammered on both top and bottom, but also show signs of "print through".

As Cliff mentioned, some cymbals seem to have a lot more visible hammering than others. I've always considered that lathing plays a part in that, as does weight and how much curvature of the bow is desired. But I haven't ever felt I have an adequate theory of how those factors work together in producing the degree of hammering we see on the finished cymbal. The other somewhat random observation I'll throw out is that hat pairs often show different degrees of hammering. Here's a pair of New Beats I had.



The top (left, with enlarged hole from years of being "loose in the clutch") shows more distinct (deeper) oval mechanical hammer blows. The top of the bottom hat looks more like a round hammer face with the marks not as distinct. Was the bottom older than the top and hammered differently in a different era? If they were from the same era, was the difference in hammering style to make the bow higher on the top vs the bottom? Were they more similar looking before the lathing? Or am I just seeing things and making up a story? I dunno. :dontknow:
 

jimilove5

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
9
Reaction score
1
Also , where is the best place to put rivets on this cymbal? A cluster of 3 like the Ziljian sweet baby ride ...or old school 6 or 8 an inch from the edge....though I would not use more than 1 , 2 at the most! OK maybe 3!
 

zenstat

Senior Cymbal Nerd
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
4,188
Reaction score
1,062
Location
Auckland New Zealand
jimilove5 said:
Also , where is the best place to put rivets on this cymbal? A cluster of 3 like the Ziljian sweet baby ride ...or old school 6 or 8 an inch from the edge....though I would not use more than 1 , 2 at the most! OK maybe 3!
Ah rivets. I'm no rivet expert, but I recommend that you experiment with tying rivets on a piece of dental floss (this is the Mers Method thanks to another Cymbalholic).



If you put one rivet on one piece of floss at various distances out from the bell you can experiment with what seems best to you. Then you can tie another rivet on the same piece of floss to see the sonic effect of two rivets. Or you can use a second piece of floss to spread them further apart.

Some people like the Beautiful Baby 3 rivet cluster, others like the 6 or 8 holes drilled evenly around the circumference about 1" in from the edge. Hopefully some others with more experience than I have will chime in (or should that be sizzle in) with their suggestions.
 

jimilove5

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
9
Reaction score
1
Wow, Zenstat , thank you for your knowledge and time concerning my questions! Just wondering, where does the screen-name Zenstat come from? All the best, Jimi
 

multijd

Very well Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,158
Reaction score
480
Location
Buffalo, NY
It's always great to read your insights on cymbals Steve! Thanks for your research, accuracy and willingness to share. Off topic but I remember you discussing Bosphorus cymbals a couple of weeks ago. I have a few. Would pictures help?
 

mbettis

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Messages
443
Reaction score
250
Location
Elk Creek, Idaho
Thanks for mentioning my Hard Top cymbals, Zen. You are correct about "print through" on those. They get no bottom hammering whatsoever. Anything that may look like bottom hammering on a Hard Top is merely the ghost of top hammering.

As far as Paiste and 602's go, I very much doubt that they are formed through top hammering only. Forming a cymbal using only top forging requires multiple trips between the anvil and the lathe. That kind of additional material transfer, and extra time on the lathe is not in line with streamlined production, so I doubt that Paiste does it. I would think that any Paiste that receives hammering only on the top would have to be pressed into rough shape prior to that forging process.

Matt
 

zenstat

Senior Cymbal Nerd
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
4,188
Reaction score
1,062
Location
Auckland New Zealand
Thanks Matt. I was hoping you would chime in. I'm just an armchair academic and in some cases just working from photos. That's a long way from the intimate knowledge gained by actually making cymbals.

Paiste are adamant that they don't do any pressing into rough shape on any of their professional lines (including B8, B15 and B20). I haven't been in the factory to see the process mid way through, so I'm just talking about what I see on the finished lathed 602s. I've got 5 pre serial 602s and although I don't see bottom hammering it could start out subtle and then get lathed away. I have certainly seen visible bottom hammering on Sound Creations (and lots of "print through" on Dark Rides as well as bottom hammering), and various B15 and B8 models. But the only thing I've ever noticed on the bottom of the occasional 602 is what looks like a ring near the outer edge. There may be other hammering which just isn't very visible post lathing.

 

zenstat

Senior Cymbal Nerd
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
4,188
Reaction score
1,062
Location
Auckland New Zealand
Meanwhile, back to Avedis Zildjian (and a bit more on topic)

I forgot to specifically mention pressing into shape and top hammering only in the history of Avedis Zildjian cymbals. I used to assume that the hammering shift in 1964 was the outcome of pressing into rough shape. Except that as time has gone on I've been able to get a bit more info about pressing into shape, and it looks like 1968 is the more likely year for the beginnings of pressing into shape. It also looks like the experimentation for this was done at AZCO (the Canadian Zildjian operation) which split off as Sabian in the early 1980s. The production innovations done by Robert Zildjian were later taken up in the USA. So it looks like there is a bit of a gap in the historical timeline.

If the evidence lines up that way then we've got to re-examine the evidence for 1964 (or "early 60s") as some sort of watershed change to top only hammering. The year for preliminary ("rough") pressing into shape could need adjustment. Or the disappearance of bottom hammering could need adjustment. If early 1970s is the production era when we might expect pressing into preliminary shape and top only hammering to be found in the USA plant, then a correlation of 70s stamp and no bottom hammering should be what we expect. It's also possible that some other machine came on the scene after the Quincy Drop Hammer. Some sort of reciprocating hammer is likely. If this came in before the production use of pressing into preliminary shape then there could be an intermediate phase which lasted for half a decade between the "second half of the 1950s" style hammering and the "1970s style pressing into shape hammering". Or it could be they still used a Quincy Drop Hammer but it had a smaller hammer face. And as we see from the example in this thread there may be a number cymbals with bottom hammering and a 1970s trademark stamp on them. Do they represent cymbals from an earlier production era which sat in the vault and received the 1970s stamp when they were selected to fill and order? I dunno. :dontknow:
 

mbettis

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Messages
443
Reaction score
250
Location
Elk Creek, Idaho
The thing about power hammering is the potential for ease of control.

Now, my two power hammers are ancient bucking broncos in comparison to the sweet hammers Paiste have, and have had for quite a long time. Their hammers are... well... what you would expect from a Swiss manufacturer: smooth, fast, precise.

My hammers? Not so much. Both of mine are very, very old, powerful, slow, and fairly cantankerous. Mine aren't even bucking broncos, because broncos are horses. My hammers aren't, beautiful, regal horses. My hammers are mules... old mules. My power hammers are work-like-Hell, take-no-crap, kick-you-in-your-head-when-angry Mules.

Like me, the weakest link in the Paiste hammering processes is not the machine, but the cymbalsmith that uses it. And, those Paiste dudes are not weak at all. They are masters of their machines, their instruments, if you will. Hammers should very much be regarded as instruments within the context of making cymbals.

Personally, I view each cymbal that I make as a one-time performance that is captured in bronze. Making a cymbal is very similar to performing on any instrument. I use tempo, I use dynamics, I use my instrument(s), I use my body. What comes out in the end, as a cymbal, is the expression of everything that went into that performance. I put it out there, hoping that some drummer will like it, and like to play it.

Actually..... I hope for more, much more.

I hope to inspire music... any music,
Matt

 

jimilove5

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
9
Reaction score
1
Zenstat,
Once upon the time there was an old farmer who had worked his crops for many years. One day his horse ran away. Upon hearing the news, his neighbors came to visit. Such bad luck, they said sympathetically.
Perhaps, the farmer replied.
The next morning the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses. What great luck! the neighbors exclaimed.
Perhaps, replied the old man.
The following day, his son tried to ride one of the untamed horses, was thrown, and broke his leg. The neighbors again came to offer their sympathy on his misfortune.
Perhaps, answered the farmer.
The day after, military officials came to the village to draft young men into the army. Seeing that the sons leg was broken, they passed him by. The neighbors congratulated the farmer on how well things had turned out.
Perhaps, said the farmer
 

Cliff DeArment

Very well Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
632
Reaction score
192
Location
Los Angeles
Sorry folks, I should be more precise. Went into the full range of extreme hammering to no hammering. I've heard by a few saying "oh, that cymbal isn't hammered". We've seen the following from the 60's to 70's (at least me)... Hammering seen on both sides, hammered only on top, hammered only on the bottom (they're out there), or no hammering seen at all. That odd "theory" is that all of them might be hammered on both sides either way, possibly by more lathing. So, still feeling the Hartrick claim may be wrong. It would be nice to hear from Paul Francis. That would end any discussion.
 

Bri6366

Very well Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
302
Location
Levittown, PA
This is from the February 2000 "It's Questionable" section of Modern Drummer. It's an interesting explanation in the next to last paragraph of some perceived variations we see in cymbal hammering.


Zildjian Mystery

Q
I have a question about my A
Zildjians. I bought a pair of 19" medium
crash cymbals in 1974. At least I
thought they were a pair; when I ordered
them there was to be no difference. I finally
gave in to cleaning them (twenty-five
years later) and discovered that they are not
the same. One is a normal A Zildjian, but
the other has a different hammering effect
on it. The hammering looks exactly like
that on my A Custom Ping Ride. What
gives? Upon further cleaning I discovered
that I also have a 16" crash, purchased in
1979, that has the same hammering design.
To top it all off I have two sets of 14" New
Beat hi-hats that I thought were the same.
But now I find out that one is hammered
and one is not. I don't recall any advertising
of different models back in the '70s, so
why did I end up with these different styles
of cymbals?
Bill Shine
via Internet

A
Zildjian's director of education, John
King, replies, "Your question concerning
variations in appearance of Zildjian
cymbals is a query that I respond to quite
frequently. The fact of the matter is that
very few changes in the Zildjian cymbal
making process have taken place over the
last 376 years. New technology has indeed
been implemented, but only with new cymbal
introductions that offer more "variations
on a theme" against the standard
models that Zildjian produces. We have
replaced the hand shaping technique
(which is very inconsistent) with the ability
to press in a perfect central shape with a machine, and then fine-tuning the proper
sound textures with our various hammering
techniques. All of our cymbal models continue
to use the same manufacturing
process once the criteria of that model has
been established.

The differences between your cymbals
reflects the fact that each of our cast cymbals
has its own identity. When the molten
alloy is poured, each casting has its own
density level. As these castings are heated
and rolled, they can be affected further by
atmospheric conditions such as temperature
and humidity, as well as by the timing
of when each casting is sent through the
rolling mill. Considering that the rolling
process occurs five to twelve times
(depending on the thickness needed for that
particular cymbal) these variables on the
castings are expanded further. This produces
a batch of cymbals that have varying
degrees of surface oxidation and density.
Even the amount of time it takes for those
"cymbal blanks" to get to the shaping,
hammering, and lathing processes will
change how each blank accepts those
processes. On top of all that, the relative
"sharpness" of the tooling being used, such
as hammer heads and lathing knives, is in a
state of constant change throughout the
process.

All of these variables are factored into
our specification sheets. This assures that
each cymbal model arrives within the sonic
parameters that we have set for it. After
those specifications have been verified to
accomplish what we want, the process does
not change from that point on. There are
times when hammering impressions might
be more or less visible between examples
of the same model, because of conditions I
have described above. But despite such
cosmetic differences, "the song always
remains the same."
 

Latest posts



Top