Anyone else tired of triggered drum sounds?

The Scorpio

Senior Member
I was cruising around Facebook checking out unsigned bands, and started to notice a disturbing pattern: triggered drum sounds. It seems like most of the bands I listened to had these sounds, and I honestly can't stand it.

I know that in some cases, playing through an electric kit is the most cost-efficient way to have a good drum sound. I'm not disputing that. Recording real drums in a real room can be challenging.

My concern is that there is little to no tonal variation, and an electronic kit can mask some ineptitude of the drummer, in turn making a band sound disproportionately better than they really are.

I was talking to a friend and he put it best, I think. His point was that nobody really seems to mind if you have electronic drums sounds, but if you programmed a MIDI guitar part, there would be an uproar.

Yeah it's an apples to oranges comparison, but it illustrates a very important point: Nobody really seems to care that much about getting real drum sounds as much as they do with other instruments. Which is a shame.
 
As long as I live I will wave the flag of the acoustic drum. I am disturbed about the lack of skill that is required anymore what with your e-drums, auto-tune, pro tools and every other modern device that is designed to remove the skill and humanness from music.
 
I know that in some cases, playing through an electric kit is the most cost-efficient way to have a good drum sound. I'm not disputing that. Recording real drums in a real room can be challenging.

.

It basically comes down to that: Cost.

It is much, much, much cheaper to trigger than buying good mics, a pre-amp, and build a good drum room, or rent a good quality studio, and then out a kit with new heads. Not to mention, a hell of a lot easier to mix.

I've done a lot of recording with e-drums, and it's always been due to money (since I already owned an e-kit anyway). If you're a band on a tight budget, it makes sense. And If you're looking on facebook at unsigned bands, most of them made their recording on shoe string budgets.

Although in dealing with bad cables, mis triggers, double triggers, I'm not sure triggering saves time. I've recently sold off much of my e-drums and bought mics. But that is because I have the room now to do it in.

In the end, I don't see why so many are "anti" trigger.
What is a triggered sound? A recording of an acoustic drum that has been processed with compression/EQ and other effects.
What is a drum sound on a record? A recording of an acoustic drum that has been processed with compression/EQ and other effects.
 
And If you're looking on facebook at unsigned bands, most of them made their recording on shoe string budgets.

No doubt. However, my band is on a shoestring budget as well and we always record live drums. With advances in recording technology and the portability of recording rigs, it's totally possible and feasible to record real drums!

In the end, I don't see why so many are "anti" trigger.
What is a triggered sound? A recording of an acoustic drum that has been processed with compression/EQ and other effects.
What is a drum sound on a record? A recording of an acoustic drum that has been processed with compression/EQ and other effects.

It's a feeling thing. There's just no possible way to get the same feeling out of a drummer on an electric kit vs. the same drummer on an acoustic kit. Not yet anyway. You miss the little tonal variations, mis-hits, and the basic imperfections that make a drum part live and breathe.

My money says that after a while, you won't want to go back to an electric kit....ever=)
-Kyle
 
I was talking to a friend and he put it best, I think. His point was that nobody really seems to mind if you have electronic drums sounds, but if you programmed a MIDI guitar part, there would be an uproar.
Are you sure? I play weddings with a very successful band that has a sequence for everything, on every song. They almost never have a bass player, the bass is played by our good buddy Mac. There is percussion and a complete horn section. I haven't been stuck with them without a guitar yet to see what happens, but I've played that gig with only sequenced horns and keys, I've had nights where the sax guy would decide it's time to go get wasted half way into set two, and let Mac sub for him the rest of the night. People still danced like drunken strippers, they didn't know jack for the most part.

My point is that it's even worse than we may think, and all that much more important for us to insist on real music.
 
Are you sure? I play weddings with a very successful band that has a sequence for everything, on every song. They almost never have a bass player, the bass is played by our good buddy Mac. There is percussion and a complete horn section. i haven't been stuckm with them without a guitar yet to see what happens, but I've played that gig with only sequenced horns and keys. People still danced like drunken strippers, they didn't know jack for the most part.
My point is that it's even worse than we may think, and all that much more important for us to insist on real music.

I completely agree with you. Most people generally don't know the difference.

Two quick observations/examples:

There was a fairly successful local band that played with sequencer. No bass player. Just a drummer (a VERY good drummer) and a guitarist/singer. Thing was, I knew about five excellent bass players that weren't in a band and needed a gig. It wasn't a personality thing with those bassists. I believe the term the band used was that they wanted "complete creative control." And that's all fine and well, but what about jamming? What about real-time grooving with a real bassist? What about feel and collaboration?

Second: Magnetic Tape. Up until the digital revolution and DAW's, tape was the way-to-go to get professional sound. Enter the hard drive and add 25 years. Now almost every DAW has some type of "Analog Emulation" plug-in. Its kind of backwards to me. Why not just buy a freaking tape-machine, dump the audio into Pro-Tools and enjoy? More Difficult? Yeah. But it's the real deal, and in the day and age of technology overload, a little dose of the real thing is much needed and appreciated (and paid for.)

Same thing with triggered sounds or sequencers. Why not just have a real bassist or a real drummer or a real horn section. More difficult? Yes. But the crowds would know. There's a huge difference in hearing a real live horn section in a dance hall verses a sequenced horn section through a PA. Even drunken crowds know the difference lol

-Kyle
 
By triggering, I assume you mean sequencing? Or do you actually mean playing an e-kit?

Either way, there's a place where sequences/samples/triggers excel, just as there are places where only an acoustic kit can excel. They're both part of making music today, actually for the last 30 years or so. But it depends largely on what styles of music one plays. I'm sure it's possible to completely avoid electronics and still have a career in music, but those who do both tend to be busier than those who take a hard line against electronics.

But the idea that sequences and samples are inhrently sterile and not human is an old idea. Those programmers who wish to invest a little extra care can make a thoroughly believable drum track. You would never know the difference. Ironically, any lack of human-ness is actually the result of a lazy human.

I've found that some drummers take a personal stand against programmed drums and the music associated with that kind of production, simply because they think they were somehow cheated out of a gig. Apart from being a presumptuous and arrogant position, it's simply not true, not very often anyway. I've never lost a gig or session because someone else programmed a part, although I've done a lot of work I wouldn't have otherwise been eligible for, because I program.

Anyway, it all has its place in making music.

As for programming being less expensive than using acoustic drums, that is often true. Without a live kit, it's usually not necessary to have a drum room, so a less-expensive 'production' room can be used, and of course someone with the correct equipment and a vocal booth can make master quality recordings in their apartment. But anyone making music on a professional level should not be concerned with the extra few hundred dollars needed to record live drums, to the extent that they would deliberately compromise their sound. Or else their drummer had better be ready to program a believable drum track, if that's what they're after.

That's another point, who says that a drummer can't be a programmer? Sure a keyboardist or producer can program, but they won't program like a drummer would. Most artists still need drummers, whether they play live, or do sequencing. No drummer ever lost his career because he was replaced by sequences. In fact, the most successful drummers are the ones who learned machines early on, then ProTools, Logic, etc etc.

It all has its place in making music.

Bermuda
 
My stance on this began when MIDI began back in the early 80s. And like Bermuda, it all has its place. I could program a mean Roland R8 rhythm track in my day, and when I got into the Macintosh, I was a wizard with Mark of the Unicorn's Performer (note I didn't say Digital Performer - I was into it long before that came along). My last stint with electronics was when I invested in a Zendrum and went off to replace actual drums with bands and solo.

But these days I prefer the feel of the real, and I'd probably spend the time and money to get the recording of my acoustics right. But if there's music to be recording or performing, I tend to look at each project like, "which one would be better for what we're doing?". I'd take a hard stance against electronics, but I can't because I've done both. I play acoustics exclusively now, but there's no guarantee someone won't hire me next year just to play the zendrum, so I keep my options open.
 
It's a feeling thing. There's just no possible way to get the same feeling out of a drummer on an electric kit vs. the same drummer on an acoustic kit. Not yet anyway. You miss the little tonal variations, mis-hits, and the basic imperfections that make a drum part live and breathe.

I 100% agree. But, as Bermda said, it depends largely on what styles of music.

Look at pop/rock/metal of the last 25 years, especially in the last 10: Even when "real" drums are used, the kick and snare are so compressed, any little tonal variations are removed, and the end result is doesn't sound any different than a triggered sample of the same drum.

Triggering has been going on since the 80's, and a lot of famous drummers and/or drum tracks have employed them. This isn't exactly new.

And every since the late 1960's, drum tracks have been pieced together by splicing tape, over dubs, or flat our replacing the drummer with a session guy. Recordings have focused on removing the imperfections since the multi-track was invented.


My money says that after a while, you won't want to go back to an electric kit....ever=)
-Kyle
Well, I already said I sold most of it off. I don't own an e-kit anymore. I don't really need one at this point in my life.
 
I dig e drums as long as there is a human hitting all the notes.


I hate all forms of electronicly sequenced "music"
 
What you have to keep in mind is that most people that listen to music on the radio or iPods are listening to music that has substantial number of drum triggers, sequencing, etc. And that's if there are any real drums on the recording at all.

So playing live, most people probably don't care if you are playing accoustic or electronic. My old band just plays drum tracks on several dance-type songs.

That being said, I've played both e-drums and accoustic extensively, and I'm firmly in the accoustic camp.
 
By triggering, I assume you mean sequencing? Or do you actually mean playing an e-kit?

Both

But the idea that sequences and samples are inhrently sterile and not human is an old idea. Those programmers who wish to invest a little extra care can make a thoroughly believable drum track. You would never know the difference. Ironically, any lack of human-ness is actually the result of a lazy human.

+1 I totally agree. Apparently I am hearing a lot of lazy programming these days lol. When it comes to underground music at least.

I've found that some drummers take a personal stand against programmed drums and the music associated with that kind of production, simply because they think they were somehow cheated out of a gig. Apart from being a presumptuous and arrogant position, it's simply not true, not very often anyway. I've never lost a gig or session because someone else programmed a part, although I've done a lot of work I wouldn't have otherwise been eligible for, because I program.

Anyway, it all has its place in making music.

As for programming being less expensive than using acoustic drums, that is often true. Without a live kit, it's usually not necessary to have a drum room, so a less-expensive 'production' room can be used, and of course someone with the correct equipment and a vocal booth can make master quality recordings in their apartment. But anyone making music on a professional level should not be concerned with the extra few hundred dollars needed to record live drums, to the extent that they would deliberately compromise their sound. Or else their drummer had better be ready to program a believable drum track, if that's what they're after.

That's another point, who says that a drummer can't be a programmer? Sure a keyboardist or producer can program, but they won't program like a drummer would. Most artists still need drummers, whether they play live, or do sequencing. No drummer ever lost his career because he was replaced by sequences. In fact, the most successful drummers are the ones who learned machines early on, then ProTools, Logic, etc etc.

It all has its place in making music.

Bermuda

I don't know, Bermuda, I'm just more of a purist (read "sometimes elitist") when it comes to music and musicians. I know its all got it place. A freaking kazoo has its place sometimes. I just feel like we are going down a dangerous slope, and music as a whole may suffer if we (musicians and producers) don't make make sure that we don't loose that human-ness in our music. I'm not worried about losing a gig, personally, as e-kits and sequencers are just not there yet. Maybe in about twenty-years, but for now its not happening.

In the short term one thing that technology is doing, is masking poor performances. I'm sure you've noticed this as well. I can name at least ten bands (on the regional level) that sound fantastic on record. Then I hear those same bands live, and to be honest, it's a little disappointing.

In my mind, it kinda works like this: With the advent of the digital revolution, physical album sales went down. The better money is now in live playing (it is for me and most of my peers, anyway, as we don't have marketing, PR, etc..) Since technology is helping to mask poor performances, bands (some bands) that sound great on record sound horrible live and no one wants to come back and see them again.

I'm concerned this may be hurting live music in the long run. The flip side is that some bands use technology with great success!! I'm just not sure the positive externalities outweigh the negative ones concerning the long term growth of music and musicians.

-Kyle
 
I'm concerned this may be hurting live music in the long run. The flip side is that some bands use technology with great success!! I'm just not sure the positive externalities outweigh the negative ones concerning the long term growth of music and musicians.

I definitely agree. Less and less people are picking up musical instruments. And more and more of the huge names in pop music are lip syncing or doing whatever to make their live performances sound exactly like the record. I really think its destroying the way people appreciate live music.

I think its the same with triggered drums. I really don't think there are many problems with a drum's sound that you can fix acoustically. with all the combinations of heads, shell materials, shell constructions, bearing edges, finishes, hoops, sticks, muffling, there is something out there that will get you the right sound. There is no need, in my mind, to trigger your kick. Unless, the trigger activates something totally not drum related like an explosion or a whistle or something.

Otherwise, sequencers, triggers, samples, anything electronic that simulate an acoustic instrument, takes away from the music, especially in a live setting, without question. If you can't pay a bass player or if your samples don't emulate acoustic instruments, fine, that something different. But people can tell there are fake instruments playing, and it takes away from the performance. People can definitely tell.
 
I ask, what's so bad about making mistakes as a live acoustic drummer anyway? Went to a kd lang show last week and heard he voice actually crack a few times. Makes me more impressed to hear/see that, then I know there's probably no trickery go on. I'm jsut not a fan of machines and electronics doing everything to makes things sound "perfect".

p.s. Yes, I'm old.
 
I ask, what's so bad about making mistakes as a live acoustic drummer anyway?

A mistake or two or three? That's fine. But there are drummers/musicians/singers who just cannot reproduce live what production has accomplished on recordings. Indeed, there are artists who only make recordings and don't attempt to 'play' live. The ones who fancy themselves a band simply because they participated in a well-produced recording are the real problem. They should learn to play. Or bring the appropriate players with them on stage. Or just stay home. Or put a little more foam on my carmel machiato.

Bermuda
 
A freaking kazoo has its place sometimes.

Umm, I play kazoo on most of our albums. :)

In the short term one thing that technology is doing, is masking poor performances. I'm sure you've noticed this as well. I can name at least ten bands (on the regional level) that sound fantastic on record. Then I hear those same bands live, and to be honest, it's a little disappointing.

It's very disappointing. With as demanding and cynical as today's youth and music fans seem to be, it's curious why this persists. I suppose it boils sown to the concept of what music is, and from where it eminates. Traditional artists and musicians will say that it comes from one's heart, and one's hands. Many creators of new music undoubtedly feel that it is a pre-fab artform, to be manipulated in a computer the same way you'd Photoshop a picture. Maybe performance is simply a by-product of what they do, and actually viewed as a burden, rather than the joy picking up an instrument is supposed to be.

But at a time when recordings aren't selling well, artists and bands have to rely on live performance to make money (and I assume that's what most people who create music want to do.) Those who can do it will survive, and those who can't will die a quick and deserved death (figuratively speaking) at the hands of those same demanding, cynical fans who just spent $30 to hear that 'band'.

For many bands who incorporate programmed music on their recordings, performing live is a chance to make those songs come alive. I have to cite my boss here, as often up to half of each album involves my programming parts. Although when playing live, I play drums on those songs. Sometimes it also involves a loop or other sounds from the original recording, but it's always me playing. There's an energy and sense of performance that comes from that, and the fans - and critics - recognize and appreciate it.

But, I'm one of those traditional musicians who has adapted programming into my routine, rather than someone who only knows music as a computer-generated artform. I'm fine with it both ways, but I've also enjoyed a nice balance. If someone said I'd be doing nothing but programming from now, I would definitely miss sitting behind the kit.

And I would also go ahead and take the money. :

Bermuda
 
I just feel like we are going down a dangerous slope, and music as a whole may suffer if we (musicians and producers) don't make make sure that we don't loose that human-ness in our music....


I can name at least ten bands (on the regional level) that sound fantastic on record. Then I hear those same bands live, and to be honest, it's a little disappointing.

To me, this isn't a new thing.

It's not different than the Beach Boys (and dozens of other 60's bands), who had Hal Blaine on the record while Dennis Wilson (or whomever) appeared on stage, giving a different performance than the one you heard on the album.

The dangerous slope started as soon as producers realized they could sub in sessions musicians for the band guy.

Or think about the Beatles. They had a session drummer on some early singles. And after they stopped playing live, they put our records using loops, tape effects, and essentially made music they could NOT pull off live given technology at the time. Was that bad? Most don't think so.
 
Here is the situation:

Hot band is signed to record label.
Hot band's drummer is good live, but struggles a bit in the studio, and his drum set doesn't sound great.

What does the producer do?

If this situations takes place in the 1960's, the producer secretly has Hal Blaine, Earl Palmer or such come in an do the drum track, but they still put the band's drummer's picture on the album.

If this situations takes place in the 1980's, the producer secretly has Jeff Pocaro or such come in an do the drum track, but they still put the band's drummer's picture on the album.

If this situations takes place today, the producer uses sound replacement software to improve the drum tones, and uses a bit of quantization to improve the shaky performance, but they still put the band's drummer's picture on the album.

Which is more representative of how the band sounds?

.....................................

Something Derek Roddy talked about in his clinic, which has also been brought up a few times in interviews in Modern Drummer and such, is that sometimes it has nothing to do with the drummer or the band. The producer knows he has to deliver an album of a certain quality with in a certain time line at a certain cost, and if he doesn't, he doesn't get the next job. So regardless of the quality of the drum track or the quality of the drum tones, the producer is going to break out the software to fix the tracks because he is expected to deliver a certain sound to the record label.

Which is nothing new: Mike Portnoy complained from day one that the drum sounds on Images and Words were triggered, but he had no control over it. In the newest issue of Modern Drummer, Pink Floyd's Nick Mason addressed the rumor that Jeff Pocrarro appeared on "The Wall" and Nikh admits he really doesn't know, because the album was mixed in Los Angeles while he was in New York at the time. Stuff happens that is often out of the control of the drummer.
 
Back
Top