Pearl equivalent to Sonor Force 3007/Select Force Series

[streetmachine79]

Hi everyone...

Does anyone know what the current Pearl equivalent would be to the Sonor Force 3007 series (previous) / Select Force series (current)...both of the Sonor series being maple? I checked Pearl's website, but I'm not quite sure which series would be the equivalent.

Thanks!

[crispycritters]

Pearl Vision Maple.

[MDK]

maybe the vision but I doubt the wood in the vision is as good as the 3007. I believe the sonor is chinese and canadian maple while I suspect the vision is all chinese. IMO you have to go up to the Masters to get on par with the 3007 series with the edge going to the masters but of course there are always + and - to every comparison.

Looking at pearls website i do not see a maple vision but I know they used to make one. I have always steered clear of pearl so do not know as much as others who have owned and love the brand. IMO stick with the 3007's

[Pearl MCX Man]

I would guess Pearl MCX ( masters custom) would be the closest to the Sonors 3007going by your description. MCX is 6 ply North American Maple.

[Russ]

I'd say vision maple, even though you're going to get a real rough comparison between the two. 3007's are 9 ply with mixed american and chinese maple layers, triple flange hoops, not to mention a tom suspension system that goes through the tension rods. Not exactly MCX style design, with it's 6 ply american maple, die cast hoops, and higher quality finishes(one of them is birdseye maple). MCX was originally marketed as a taste of the flagship Masterworks line at a midrange price point, using a couple of the options available for them.

Some of the same finishes found on Masterworks have been at times available for this series(even if they weren't done the exact same way, as i've heard), which I think is an awesome decision on Pearl's part. I'd consider it a high end kit sold as a mid-level, but not quite a flagship/custom class. For the customers without the deep pockets, the MCX is likely as close as you'll realistically get to a Masterworks without hitting the lottery. It would be tough because i'm a fan of Sonor and Pearl both, but between these two offerings i'd go for the MCX - assuming they had the finish I wanted available at the time.

[Pearl MCX Man]

I remember a while back reading somewhere that the downfall of the MCX where a heavy shell at 6 ply but the Sonors with 9 plies now that would make it a lot heavier

[Pearl MCX Man]

Looking at pearls website i do not see a maple vision but I know they used to make one.

I was surprised too. The only Vision available are Birch. Why would they have discontinued the Vision Maple is beyond me. Maybe it is push their sales towards the MCX maple who knows.

[Russ]

I remember a while back reading somewhere that the downfall of the MCX where a heavy shell at 6 ply but the Sonors with 9 plies now that would make it a lot heavier

I've learned to sort of sweep the ply counts under the rug, until knowing the total thickness of the shell entirely. Sonor may be using more plies, but at times each ply is thin enough to hit under the thickness rating of another kit by another maker(in this case, Pearl). It's deceptive, but more plies doesn't always mean more density.

[Pearl MCX Man]

Makes sense Russ but no matter what I still love my MCX heavy or not

[Russ]

I like thick shells a bit, too. I personally feel that bigger depth(or diameter) drums like the kick, and floor toms benefit most from thicker shells, but smaller ones can be a little thinner on account of their natural tendency to project easily. That's just my opinion, because in the past i've had a difficult time hearing the kick or the floor tom, instead hearing them drowned out by the snare or rack toms.

[ludleg]

I've learned to sort of sweep the ply counts under the rug, until knowing the total thickness of the shell entirely. Sonor may be using more plies, but at times each ply is thin enough to hit under the thickness rating of another kit by another maker(in this case, Pearl). It's deceptive, but more plies doesn't always mean more density.

Good point , Russ. C&C drums have made a point of returning to the older formula of fewer, but thicker plies. In their view - more wood, less glue is a good thing.

[slinglander]

...And don't forget the tom mounts: Pearl uses tubes, Sonor does not.

[Russ]

I never thought about the glue.. What effects are to be expected there?

[davewilson]

The Sonor Force 3007 was replaced by the Select Force... a while ago. And having owned 2007 and 3007 (Birch and Maple) series Sonors ( we still own a 2007 kit) I would conclude the Pearl MCX is a far better kit than the Sonor 2007 (now Essential Force) or the 3007 (now Select Force).

Getting too nitpicky over the wood and the glue when the overall build quality is more of an issue... The Sonors I've seen and owned in this price range were beginner/intermediate quality at best.. welded hoops with deformations, uneven bearing edges, voids in the wood.

That being said, My stepson still gigs a Sonor 2007 2 up/ 2 down setup and he loves them. but I would put them slightly above Pearl Exports and a tad below Pearl Visions for overall quality

[davewilson]

Here's a short clip of the stepson Tanner playing the Sonor kit at a biker rally.. he didn't bring the 14" floor tom for this gig

[Bish]

Hi everyone...

Does anyone know what the current Pearl equivalent would be to the Sonor Force 3007 series (previous) / Select Force series (current)...both of the Sonor series being maple? I checked Pearl's website, but I'm not quite sure which series would be the equivalent.

Thanks!

Could you be more specific in what you mean by equivalent? Are you referring to construction, material, sound, maybe even hardware quality?

Your question can be addressed several different ways.

I'm not trying to sound harsh, maybe I'm just denserers.

[dangermoney]

Good point , Russ. C&C drums have made a point of returning to the older formula of fewer, but thicker plies. In their view - more wood, less glue is a good thing.

I measured my old '88 maple/poplar/maple 4-ply Ludwig Super Classic shells the other day and they were about 1/4" thick, close to the same overall thickness of my current 7-ply maple Ludwig Classic Maple shells. However, the individual plies were noticeably thicker, especially the inner poplar plies, and I couldn't help but wonder what the Classic Maples would sound like if the shells were 4-ply all maple in the same thickness ...

[slinglander]

"Getting too nitpicky over the wood and the glue when the overall build quality is more of an issue... The Sonors I've seen and owned in this price range were beginner/intermediate quality at best.. welded hoops with deformations, uneven bearing edges, voids in the wood."
My Special Editions(2010) maples have none of those imperfections...plus they sound great!

[MDK]

The Sonor Force 3007 was replaced by the Select Force... a while ago. And having owned 2007 and 3007 (Birch and Maple) series Sonors ( we still own a 2007 kit) I would conclude the Pearl MCX is a far better kit than the Sonor 2007 (now Essential Force) or the 3007 (now Select Force).

Getting too nitpicky over the wood and the glue when the overall build quality is more of an issue... The Sonors I've seen and owned in this price range were beginner/intermediate quality at best.. welded hoops with deformations, uneven bearing edges, voids in the wood.

That being said, My stepson still gigs a Sonor 2007 2 up/ 2 down setup and he loves them. but I would put them slightly above Pearl Exports and a tad below Pearl Visions for overall quality

Ummm yeah, I know everyone has their own opinions but you are truly the 1st person I have heard complain about sonor quality. I have owned 2 different sonors and both were very very sturdy and well built.

[Johnny G]

The Sonor Force 3007 was replaced by the Select Force... a while ago. And having owned 2007 and 3007 (Birch and Maple) series Sonors ( we still own a 2007 kit) I would conclude the Pearl MCX is a far better kit than the Sonor 2007 (now Essential Force) or the 3007 (now Select Force).

Getting too nitpicky over the wood and the glue when the overall build quality is more of an issue... The Sonors I've seen and owned in this price range were beginner/intermediate quality at best.. welded hoops with deformations, uneven bearing edges, voids in the wood.

That being said, My stepson still gigs a Sonor 2007 2 up/ 2 down setup and he loves them. but I would put them slightly above Pearl Exports and a tad below Pearl Visions for overall quality

Made me a little sad to have you bash Sonor a bit. My Force 3007's have perfect finish (red sparkle lacquer), bearing edges, and, the hardware is all heavy heavy duty stuff. They tune up easily and sound freakin great. I have never seen any of the problems you did. I consider my kit a professional grade kit at a reasonable price point that I would proudly show up with at the Power Station in NYC (if it even exists any more).
I just went a removed and inspected one of my hoops. Can barely find the weld point, let alone any deformations.
I have never owned a Pearl kit, so I can't attest to the comparison.

[crispycritters]

I have a Pearl Forum shell pack (starter kit) and an early Sonor Jungle kit - quite honestly I cant find any manufacturing faults on either. The Pearl has the 90s style badges so may be close to 20 years old, the Sonor is a 3001 series and about 14 years old. The only sign of age is the odd scuff on the wraps of the Pearl and a few small chips on the kick of the Sonor

The bearing edges on both are in great condition. Likewise the hoops. lugs, legs, tom mounts are pristine with no pitting or rust. Definitely no visible welds on the hoops or anything of that order. I think the chrome-work of the Sonor is superior to the Pearl - however it is maybe 5 years newer (and originally over twice the price of the Pearl). The hardware that came with the Sonor is also immaculate and problem free - I bought the Pearl as a shell pack so it didn't come with hardware, but I have bought a Pearl 900 series stand which is just as good quality as the Sonor.

I couldn't comment on which is better - the Sonor 3007 or Pearl MCX/Vision ranges, but from my personal experience with both companies I would be confident to buy from any of these manufacturers. It just comes down to personal taste.

[Pearl MCX Man]

The OP wanted the closest equivalent Pearl kits to the Sonors not which one was the better of the two.

[davewilson]

Ummm yeah, I know everyone has their own opinions but you are truly the 1st person I have heard complain about sonor quality. I have owned 2 different sonors and both were very very sturdy and well built.

I think my Sonors are great.. especially for the price, but I don't put them in the same class as my Starclassics or Pearl MCX series drums. I honestly think they are closest to Pearls Vision series.. even if Pearl doesn't have a maple shell in that range anymore.

[davewilson]

Made me a little sad to have you bash Sonor a bit. My Force 3007's have perfect finish (red sparkle lacquer), bearing edges, and, the hardware is all heavy heavy duty stuff. They tune up easily and sound freakin great. I have never seen any of the problems you did. I consider my kit a professional grade kit at a reasonable price point that I would proudly show up with at the Power Station in NYC (if it even exists any more).
I just went a removed and inspected one of my hoops. Can barely find the weld point, let alone any deformations.
I have never owned a Pearl kit, so I can't attest to the comparison.

I really ain't tryin to bash Sonor kits... I still own a Force 2007 and a Safari jungle kit... The Maple kit was actually a 3005 (not a 3007) but that's just an age thing. I Just thought comparing that particular series to the MCX line was a stretch.. and getting into such tonal variations like the glue..
The finish on my Sonor kits are awesome, I prefer the tom mounting hardware to Pearl...
Finding the closest comparable kit in the Pearl line is tough, since Pearl doesn't really make an all-maple shell in that price range... probably the closest thing Pearl has is the Vision Birch. The MCX is Pearls lowest end all-maple shell... but I think it's in a class well above my Sonors, in both price and quality.
On my 2007 kit 3 of the 10 metal hoops have visible welds near the top edge (not where the rim contacts the flesh hoop of the head) and half have a slight wave or bobble you can feel with your finger... my 3005 kit was pretty much the same.. and there are a couple drums with tiny voids in the plies near the bearing edges.
These are not huge or glaring imperfections and I wasn't trying to imply they were.. just that a slightly uneven seat on a drumhead or loose lug would have a much more noticeable affect on the tone than the glue used.

[davewilson]

The OP wanted the closest equivalent Pearl kits to the Sonors not which one was the better of the two.

I'd have to go with the Vision series (although Maple is no longer an option)... MCX is now the first 100% maple shell in Pearl's current line.. but that's a big jump.