My drums sound brilliant - does it matter?

J

JohnoWorld

Guest
Hey guys,

Been recording a load of my gear recently from different kits to different snares. Different styles, different mic positions etc, but ultimately with the goal of downsizing my collection and selling a good bit of gear.

My question is: If studios are centres of "magic" or "cheating", why do we need to buy high quality gear?

Not want, need.

I know we all want high quality gear because of the way it plays and looks, plus there's also the willy-waving element. But i want to know why, with the capabilities of digital studios, do we really need to buy something that sounds amazing when it can all be cleaned-up in post-processing?

I mean, every single mix you hear will have been engineered to a huge degree, hits quantized, hits replaced, hits doubled-up, lots of compression etc.

I have always been an advocate of high-end gear, I always will be because of how it feels, looks and sounds to the naked ear. However when it comes to recording, I believe that the quality of your drums is less important.

thoughts?
 
For one, a lot of people don't record so they want good sound out of the box that doesn't have to be altered.
 
While the concept you're proposing might be relevant in modern pop music and other styles where heavy editing and processing is done, it's hardly true for every situation. Not at all.

There's also a couple of other points.

1) It's nice to keep the turd polishing and "fixing it in the mix" things to a minimum if you don't absolutely have to. It is actually a lot of work and headaches for the engineer and why the top and more expensive guys are still hired for pretty simple stuff. 1 take and you're done instead of spending the whole day getting something passable aka you didn't save any money anyway.

2) If you like the way you sound you're happier and you certainly play better.


There's also the obvious concept that whatever sound you like for a song is the right sound. Wether that's a technically perfectly executed rimshot with some outrageously expensive custom sticks on a Craviotto snare or the sound of you closing the lid on your neighbour's mailbox accented by your cat's purring is irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it matters, but it matters for what you want.

A well cooked ribeye steak doesn't need anything at all.
A well cooked hamburger still needs something on top.

Both can taste good if that's what you like to eat.
 
You have a point. I remember KD Lang said her "all you can eat" album was recorded with a toy drumset and those tracks sounded great. But the toy drumset wouldn't survive on the tour. That's why we have high end gear.
 
Odd-Arne Oseberg said:
1) It's nice to keep the turd polishing and "fixing it in the mix" things to a minimum if you don't absolutely have to. It is actually a lot of work and headaches for the engineer and why the top and more expensive guys are still hired for pretty simple stuff.
Click to expand...

That's the key for having great gear. Mics hear the drums from just inches away, and detect the little harmonic issues that drums have, that we don't hear with our ear 18-24" from the drum. The better the drum in terms of roundness and edges, and of course good tuning, makes a world of difference. That applies even when the drum isn't mic'd. This is the reason that pros rely on drum services (Drum Doctors and Chris Heuer here in Los Angeles) to provide drums that are ready to record. Starting with the best source results in the best finished product.

Put another way, if you have a photo to publish, would you rather it already look right, or would you simply rely on Photoshop to correct it? They may yield very similar results, but the quality is better if it doesn't need to be processed further.

There's another pitfall to relying on studio magic to make marginal drums sound good, and that's the likelihood that the problem drums - often the snare - will simply be "sound replaced" with a sample, and then they're not your drums at all anyway. It's just short hop to using sequences and samples in order to get the best sound without all the live drums coordination.

Bermuda
 
You're not all that wrong. I've been in paid pro studios; and before the engineers even hear the kit or setup at all they're already planning on doing sample replacement or mixing in samples at a minimum just because it's routine.

Not a fan personally. I think the drum sounds should match the music and band, not the engineers idea of "perfect".
 
Dr_Watso said:
I think the drum sounds should match the music and band, not the engineers idea of "perfect".
Click to expand...

In traditional sessions, the producer and artist run the show, not the engineer. They're the ones, the producer even more so, who decide how things will sound, and the engineer takes direction from them. I've never done a session where the engineer made 'production' decisions on their own, unless they also happen to be the producer, or even the artist.

But you're right, the drum sounds - all sounds - should serve the song, regardless who achieves that.

Bermuda
 
Semi related...why do people close mic drums when they don't have to, such as when they're tracking just drums. I understand that a 60 hz wave is like 20 feet long. In my mind, micing a drum from 3" away...doesn't make sense to me, considering how long the wavelengths are. I much prefer 2 overheads, kick and snare. Maybe a room mic. It gives the drums some air....some atmosphere, and the kit tones naturally blend together to make a cohesive sound. Not 5 separate drums, with no intermingling. For some reason, a close miced snare and bass doesn't bother me, but I don't like mics anywhere near my toms.

Your thoughts?
 
If overheads are the main thing used then they are usually the main sound. It's often just an option for dialing in a bit more attack, having separate control and of course, if appropriate separate processing. It's like with bass drums these days when it's getting normal to both 3 and up to 5 mics. Doesn't mean they're all in the final mix and certainly not at the same level. Options for final mixing. Better to have a source that just does the job rather than going crazy with EQ.

You can mic a kit with one mic. You can also mic everything + having reso mics. Rooms mics both high and low, throw an extra ribbon on the side of the snare, that magic mic at the on th left side of the bass drum shell, have an extra ambient mic in a different room......

It all depends what you're trying to do.
 
If I start with a drum that's 98% perfect, I only have to rely on the engineer for 2% of my sound. If I start with a drum that's only about 40% of the sound I want, that means the engineer, not me, is responsible for the majority of my sound. To me that's not an acceptable balance.
 
My photography days go back to film and darkrooms, but the object of the game was always to get as close to a perfect negative or transparency as possible, so that the labwork had a great image to work with in the first place.

Same principle here -- to get a great sound through the speakers, start with a great sound from the drum itself. That's why most session drummers have so many snares, so they can get as close as possible to the desired result.

One of my most satisfying moments as a builder was about eight years ago when an artist was trying out one of my snares during a sound check in an arena setting. (He was playing in a Sheila E gig, actually.) I went out to the audience area to hear it, and then went to the sound man working the board. I said, "That snare sounds terrific out here. What processing do you have on it?", and he said, "Nothing."
 
motleyh said:
What processing do you have on it?", and he said, "Nothing."
Click to expand...

There ya go. :)


Same thing with guitar amps, mics and mic placement. There's no way the right sound and perfect overtones that cut the right way from the source can be beat by tweaking later in the chain. You can't beat that right kind of complexity of the natural sound.
 
motleyh said:
My photography days go back to film and darkrooms, but the object of the game was always to get as close to a perfect negative or transparency as possible, so that the labwork had a great image to work with in the first place.
Click to expand...

This.

Good drums, good tuning, and most importantly, good playing are critical in making a good recording. While sound engineering manipulation can "save" a bad track, it works much better as a tool for enhancing an already great track, just like photoshop.
 
I'd rather have a wife that looked good without makeup than a wife who had to have makeup on to look good.

Same principle.
 
bermuda said:
In traditional sessions, the producer and artist run the show, not the engineer. They're the ones, the producer even more so, who decide how things will sound, and the engineer takes direction from them. I've never done a session where the engineer made 'production' decisions on their own, unless they also happen to be the producer, or even the artist.

But you're right, the drum sounds - all sounds - should serve the song, regardless who achieves that.

Bermuda
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was using "producer" and "engineer" a bit too loosely. At my level, they're often the same guy. =P

I also wouldn't call it a decision they made, but more like they were surprised that we didn't just default to wanting "perfect" sounds mixed into (or replacing) our tracks... The concept that we'd prefer our own sounds seemed a little foreign, though I was complimented on how it came out.

A similar concept actually comes out when doing the initial mic placement and EQ... Often times they'll want to cut frequencies that seem important to my ear or making things sound on the record how they sound to me in the room.
 
larryace said:
Semi related...why do people close mic drums when they don't have to, such as when they're tracking just drums. I understand that a 60 hz wave is like 20 feet long. In my mind, micing a drum from 3" away...doesn't make sense to me, considering how long the wavelengths are. I much prefer 2 overheads, kick and snare. Maybe a room mic. It gives the drums some air....some atmosphere, and the kit tones naturally blend together to make a cohesive sound. Not 5 separate drums, with no intermingling. For some reason, a close miced snare and bass doesn't bother me, but I don't like mics anywhere near my toms.

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...

Close mic-ing is more about isolation and cutting the bleed from other microphones. It's assumed we won't get the full wave-length of the tones, but the ones we get are much more prominent than the external sounds and therefor easier to isolate with EQ and play with later during editing and mixing. It also cuts down on another fact of life with sound waves, and that's bounce, or echo. Mics further from the source of the sound will have more ability to pick up echo from walls, other bouncy surfaces or the general features of the room.

That said, it's certainly not un-heard of to mic up the room and get a very natural sound, but it can come across as "thin" compared to the fullness achieved with close techniques that enhance the fatness and desired tones while killing the rest.
 
Matt Bo Eder said:
You have a point. I remember KD Lang said her "all you can eat" album was recorded with a toy drumset and those tracks sounded great. But the toy drumset wouldn't survive on the tour. That's why we have high end gear.
Click to expand...

Many a great studio piece was recorded with basic substandard gear, orphaned drums. A few that come to mind, the first Pearl Jam record, Supertramp's Crime of the Century....
The magic of the studio, coupled with a good drummer.
 
Maybe a bit OT, maybe not.

I was just looking for a live version of one of Allen's tunes when this popped up and simple as the tune might be Jimmy is doing all the Ts so right I'm simply floored.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eA8i83VTKk

Must be the easiest bass player to play with in the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top