Describing dynamic levels quantitatively?

Winegums

Silver Member
In a band situation when I'm playing drums or any instrument I tend to break the song's energy/volume/power into a scale of 1-10 in my head. 1-3 being the softest (intro), 5-7 being the middle (verse/chorus) and 8-10 full tilt (solo/height of song), (sometimes this goes to 11!). I do this so when I'm playing in a band I can remind myself of the numbers I picked out in my head and adjust my playing accordingly. I've found it keeps me playing exactly the level I need to for certain parts of a song.

For example a hard song to get right dynamically is Hey Joe, it constantly builds during the song from levels 3-7 stepping up another level every verse and chorus. It's an easy song to overwhelm by playing too much too soon and the solo sounds weak and the opposite can also happen where you don't build it enough and the solo (8-10) is overwhelming.

As drummers we have about 50% of the dynamics in the band in our hands, so we should be very mindful of how hard or soft or how much we're playing. I use my number system for tough songs where the transitions from one volume level to the next is very subtle or are erratic. It's not highly accurate and not as clinical as it might seem but it gets me the results I'm looking for.

My questions to everyone else is, how do you look at the dynamics of the song? and how do you figure out your drumming level for certain parts?
 
Cool idea man. You have to scale it down and up for the room/crowd size I would think. As far as your QIB, (question in bold), I try to never go in with any agenda at all. Everything I do depends on everything else....is the room crowded, is the leader doing the song differently tonight? (slower, reggae style, faster...) So nothing preconceived. I mean I have my parts, but how I play those parts from a dynamic context is a constant adjustment to varying crowd sizes, and the requirements of the set. Like on my regular gig the first set is a dinner set, so I am tapping on everything, even if it's a burner. I get to ramp it up a little volume-wise as the night goes on. So it's all according. I don't think when I play, I try to shut that off and just feel. Which comes easy for me. Then I check what I thought happened against my recordings to see what actually happened and make any adjustments next time I play. Anything I don't like, gets tossed. Sometimes I come up with stuff that worked better than I thought and I try and keep doing it. It's always evolving. Many songs I've been playing for like 4 years now, so naturally the parts mature over time.

Every song is brand new. The goal is to create, not re-create. But dynamics are on the fly, always.
 
Interesting - I've been giving this idea some thought lately.

Sometimes when I hear complaints that drums are too loud, I think it's because there's just too much drumming going on, and it seems like this is subject to some interpretation (and specific circumstances, of course).

There are definitely times when it's sheer volume of what's being hit, but oftentimes it's more nuanced than that, like just reducing the drum part to something less busy, with less cymbals is an easy fix. Riding quietly on the hats (or on my knee) and taking the bass drum down to next to nothing (or exactly nothing), but keeping the snare backbeats about as loud as they were during the louder parts can be a very effective strategy for leaving that extra space.

This is just what I like, but it's based on hearing bands where the drummer tries to exactly match the volume of the other players - only to have the rhythm feel like is just kind of trailed off somewhere. That's something I don't like to hear.

No reason to let the beat fade into obscurity just because the melodic dynamic went low when going to a more minimal drum part can match the spirit of the dynamic without leaving the listener wondering what happened to the beat.

I know that isn't exactly what you were talking about, but hopefully it relates somehow ... :)
 
My questions to everyone else is, how do you look at the dynamics of the song? and how do you figure out your drumming level for certain parts?

In my head I just call the levels - soft, quiet, medium, loud. Yours is more quantitative.

I'm very conscious of dynamics, when to be loud/quiet, but the problem I always have with dynamics is other bandmates have to be paying attention to them, or the don't work.
Even when covering a loud/quiet song, they seem to hear/play it all as one level (medium), until I point it out.
 
Mike, your post is exactly what I'm talking about. It's about creating a cue for yourself to say "this is where I step up what I'm playing" and add a bit more to that fill, add an accent here or play a bit harder.

Larry, the scale that I keep in my head is always relative to the song and situation and I adjust accordingly. It's not a major part of my playing it's more of a tool than a method for me. I'm all for choosing to play what feels natural to me and what the song calls for but if that doesn't line up I'll turn to it for guidance. I would use it more for a studio situation where I'm prepping myself to do some recording and I'm weaving a fine line in the song.
 
In my head I just call the levels - soft, quiet, medium, loud. Yours is more quantitative.

I'm very conscious of dynamics, when to be loud/quiet, but the problem I always have with dynamics is other bandmates have to be paying attention to them, or the don't work.
Even when covering a loud/quiet song, they seem to hear/play it all as one level (medium), until I point it out.

Yeah I feel you man, it feels like trying to stop a freight train when a band doesn't pay attention.
 
On another note, what ever happened to . . .ppp, pp, p, mp, mf, f, ff, fff. . .? I guess that works better in writing than verbally. I like the 1-10 scale and have used it many times in bands, The only problem is getting drums to go to eleven, I haven't figured that out. With guitars all you need to do is buy one of those knobs for your amp that goes to 11.
 
On another note, what ever happened to . . .ppp, pp, p, mp, mf, f, ff, fff. . .? I guess that works better in writing than verbally. I like the 1-10 scale and have used it many times in bands, The only problem is getting drums to go to eleven, I haven't figured that out. With guitars all you need to do is buy one of those knobs for your amp that goes to 11.

I never could grasp traditional notations not for lack of trying but it never made the transition from notes on a page to something I can imagine in my head.

My holy china goes to 11 =)
 
Dynamic means more than just hitting things harder or softer to me. It could be the difference between say a part played on the toms, and the next part laying into the crashes. Even the difference between voicing a groove on the ride vs the hats implies levels of dynamics in playing.

Anyway, part of what I'm getting at is that each song or feel or part is going to have it's own dynamic floor to start from, and everything is relative to that. Assigning numbers implies that a 7 in Hey Joe, will be the same as a 7 in Watch Tower... I don't think that's generally the case.
 
Everybody has some little thing that works for them. As long as dynamics are recognized and attempted, that's the main thing. How you get there is all personal.
 
Back
Top