Very well Known Member
- Feb 8, 2016
- Reaction score
- Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Steve missed the boat on this movie for sure, comparing two sets that aren’t even ment to look/sound/vibe/be build like each other from the start.YT Comments- that floor tom on the Santa Monica's- It's human to err..
And reading the comments,it mis-informs a lot of people By being online as it is.
Bellbrass said it best:
I was the lucky recipient of the first Santa Monica kit made available to the public. There are a few things to note: 1) The Santa Monica line is not, nor was it ever, intended to re-create the sound of Oaklawn / Chanute Camcos. They are an attempt to re-create the sound of LA Camcos. Modern shell construction will always result in stiffer shells than most vintage shells, hence the "harder" sound, compared to vintage. 2) Mid-60s-onward Oaklawn & later Chanute shells were maple and gum, with a different bearing edge profile than the LA Camcos. The LA shells were all maple and had a sharper edge. A side-by-side with later LA-era Camcos, or even some of the very first Drum Workshop kits, would be a more accurate comparison. 3) The closest modern drums to the sound of Oaklawn Camcos are probably Ludwig Legacy Maples, especially since they are undersized, and the Oaklawn / Chanute shells were very undersized. The undersized shell and the bearing edge are key parts to the Oaklawn Camco sound. I believe the LA-era shells were also undersized. The Santa Monica kits sound fantastic, but they aren't the soft, vintage kit sound. And yes, the tunings in this video are not the same. Steve is a jazzer, and all of his demos seem to be with the toms tuned way up high, which doesn't always give the best indication of shell sound. I think the Santa Monicas sound great; but they are different than Camco Oaklawns, for sure. In fact, at jazz tunings, I like the Santa Monicas better than Camcos.