Okay, So What ARE The Best Shells For The Studio?

[stevieb]

The Acrylic shell thread got me thinking about this.

If one were buying shells for about 95% studio use, what would one buy? Please, try to limit discussion to SHELL construction, not cost/budget, brand, size, etc. Also keep tuning, mics, heads, etc. out of it, too- I am going on the premise that all those things- mics, heads, that list- can be changed as needed, but one is stuck with the shells one has (given cost and storage limitations, for instance.)

I've allowed multiple choices in the poll.

[Greg_L]

Worst poll ever. Way too many variables that you don't touch on or want us to ignore.

[RAMI]

Originally Posted by Greg_L

Worst poll ever. Way too many variables that you don't touch on or want us to ignore.

It's like walking on egg SHELLS.

[mikeh]

As indictated, it would depend one the sound one desires, the music genre, size of the shells, heads, technique and many other factors.

That being said, if I had to select one wood, it would be birch. I am a fan of birch for recording purposes - given the tendancy of birch to produce a more focused attack.

I used maple for recording many years (and would not hesitate to use maple again) - and still prefer maple for gigging - but for the last decade or so, I've come to prefer birch.

[drossfile]

yep, i picked birch for the same reason mikeh pointed out, and specifically chose birch for my latest kit for that reason. it's been called "naturally eqed" in that the mids are scooped and you get lots of attack.

but of course there is no "right" answer. this is just my feeble opinion. different strokes and all that...

[1,2,1234...]

Birch appears to be the preferred studio drum these days. It's higher, "sweeter" attack is lost in live situations, but comes out well in a studio where sensitive micing arrangements are available. I have never heard a set of Pearl's new Reference series in a studio, but that would be an interesting experience since they combine different types of wood on individual drums for better sound, so the claim goes.

Shell thickness and depth can have an effect on the drum sound also, more so than the type of wood used. But all things being equal, I would choose birch to record an album.

[Atterion]

I picked birch drums just for the fact that they are one of the easiest drums to record, as stated above. That said I've heard nearly every shell type imaginable sound amazing through the right gear (Including the often sneared upon Poplar). Personally I'd say the absolute best sounding kit I've ever heard recorded was a set of Yamaha Oak Customs a friend of mine had.

[doctorfungi]

Acrylic kits, to me, are something that would be more suited to a live situation. Just for the lighting effects/gimmick value of them.

I can't say I've recorded an acrylic kit before, but I have played using acrylic snares and quite frankly, they sound like s**t.

[stevieb]

So if you don't like the poll options, just answer the question verbally, and ignore the poll. If it will help, I will restate the question (not seeing an "edit" button for the OP):

You are buying a set of drums for your studio, and do not have room to store a second set when they are not being used. Given that shells are the bulkiest part of a drum, what shell material would you choose, to give you the best overall sound? Assume that if a drummer wants "HIS sound," he would bring his own kit- you are providing a kit for general recording use in your studio.

Better?

[mikeh]

Originally Posted by doctorfungi

Acrylic kits, to me, are something that would be more suited to a live situation. Just for the lighting effects/gimmick value of them.

I can't say I've recorded an acrylic kit before, but I have played using acrylic snares and quite frankly, they sound like s**t.

I owned a Fibes kit in the early 70's - it was layers of fiberglass and acrylic - and was a repsonse to the Ludwig Vistalite kits. I played hundreds of gigs with that kit and probably recorded it 2 dozen times.

You are correct that for a live kit it worked well both from a visual standpoint and it cut through a mix - back in those days it was rare to mic the drum kit in live performance -and in most venues I did not have to mic.....it was a loud kit.

For recording, it was possible to get a good sound........but you needed a big, nice sounding, "warm" room with overheads spaced pretty far away from the kit (with just a little close mic'ing as needed) - and I had to use a lot of drum treatment to keep the ringing/overtones under control. Acrylic drums can be very harsh and cutting if not mic'd well.

[Rimshot]

It depends on what you are looking to hear from your kit. Maple and birch are bright with warmth, acrylics are bright. Metal is glaring bright. All of those can be good for different things. I own a few kits. I prefer a birch snare no matter what kit I use. For a lot of the recording that I do, I use the old mahogany shell Slingerlands that I have because they are rich and warm. For live work, I prefer my custom maple Tama kit (8 and 10 ply Kellar shells)but I use my Yamaha birch snare with the wood rims. I also have a small Rogers kit (4 piece that is even warmer than the Slingerland).
For blues and jazz it is ideal for me, maybe not for everybody.

[xistance]

like all have say - shell just depends on the type o sound...
Whats more important (from the recording isde of things) is to tune them right other wise it doesnt matter what thier make of or how made them.

[Greg_L]

Originally Posted by xistance

like all have say - shell just depends on the type o sound...
Whats more important (from the recording isde of things) is to tune them right other wise it doesnt matter what thier make of or how made them.

I agree with this. Quality drums tuned properly will sound fine no matter what they're made of. The heads and tuning will affect your sound more than the shells will. I'm betting that most people can't tell the difference between maple, birch, or oak.

[1,2,1234...]

Originally Posted by Greg_L

I'm betting that most people can't tell the difference between maple, birch, or oak.

LOL, and that's the truth. Between tuning and micing and everything else it is hard to tell the difference. And in a lot of cases pretenders will try to blame the quality of the drum for their inability to tune a kit.

[RawDepth]

Originally Posted by 1,2,1234...

LOL, and that's the truth. Between tuning and micing and everything else it is hard to tell the difference. And in a lot of cases pretenders will try to blame the quality of the drum for their inability to tune a kit.

...nail on the head. If I got a nickle from every drummer out there who can't tune their drums, I'd be retired early.

[zacanger]

I reeeaaaallly like mahogany drums in the studio, but I have also used a maple set a lot. Also use steel and brass snares.

[stevieb]

Originally Posted by xistance

like all have say - shell just depends on the type o sound...
Whats more important (from the recording isde of things) is to tune them right other wise it doesnt matter what thier make of or how made them.

That may be true, but it ignores something:

One can tune a drum in THOUSANDS of different ways, but once one buys a shell, it is what it is- nothing is going to change, or even be changeable. So, one should choose the shell carefully.

And I would suggest that there are some shell materials, construction methods, thicknesses, etc. that would make for a drum that is easier to record, and sounds better recorded, than others. Yes, tuning and drummer technique are no doubt more important to the overall sound, but why handicap yourself? It would be better to use shells that make the recording process easier and better sounding, than to use shells that make both the drummer and the engineer work harder to get a good recording.

That is what I am driving at, with this thread.

[1,2,1234...]

Originally Posted by stevieb

That may be true, but it ignores something:

One can tune a drum in THOUSANDS of different ways, but once one buys a shell, it is what it is- nothing is going to change, or even be changeable. So, one should choose the shell carefully.

And I would suggest that there are some shell materials, construction methods, thicknesses, etc. that would make for a drum that is easier to record, and sounds better recorded, than others. Yes, tuning and drummer technique are no doubt more important to the overall sound, but why handicap yourself? It would be better to use shells that make the recording process easier and better sounding, than to use shells that make both the drummer and the engineer work harder to get a good recording.

That is what I am driving at, with this thread.

All things being equal, you will find that birch is famous for its "naturally equalized" sound. You will do less to make birch sound compressed, dampened, and warm. Maple will take a little more work to tame, but sometimes you want the extra resonance it affords. Bubinga will be more resonant still. The latter two will require less reverb, whereas birch will have a more short-lived focused, punchy sound. The movement to birch in studios started in the early 1970s and doesn't seem to have abated. Some manufacturers even name their kits as such, like Taye "StudioBirch" and Pearl Masters BRX Studio Birch. Information on the acrylic kits is less abundant, I know some people like the acrylic sound yet others absolutely hate it.

The thickness and depth of the shell will have a defining effect on the drums you use. I would recommend standard depth drums, not powertoms or the new trendy shallow hydras. Slightly thicker shell drums are surely going to be the choice in the studio also. Thick shells will give you the punchy, higher pitched, less sustained resonance compared to a lower and lasting resonance of thinner shells. A typical shell will be 6-7mm thick. Some have been sold as thick as 10mm, and they are in high demand on the second hand market (tama's vintage 70s-80s Superstars for example, or the old Sonor shells).

It is difficult to say what is 'best' because everyone's taste it different. But you have a poll and I think the results are clear.

[PhilGood]

You guys wanna know something?? The cut of the bearing edge has just as much to do with the sound as the type of wood used. Plain and simple. Its why Ludwigs always have that Ludwig sound no matter what. Likewise with other brands. A 45 degree cut will not sound like a cut with a rounded outside edge. A sharp cut has a different tone than a rounded point.

Just like changing heads for tone, the type of wood is but one factor! Don't dwell on it!

[stevieb]

Well, here's an interesting thing- birch, so far, has double the votes of maple- but it seems I see more maple sets for sale. Wonder why...

[1,2,1234...]

Originally Posted by stevieb

Well, here's an interesting thing- birch, so far, has double the votes of maple- but it seems I see more maple sets for sale. Wonder why...

Maple is the traditional wood used to make drums. Since the advent of the trap set it has been the favorite, used in Slingerland, Ludwig and several other brands. Over the years other woods like beech, bass, and birch were integrated from year to year. Maple is a more resonant wood, great for live work and especially better if you don't have pricier microphones. It was Slingerland who began using birch mixed with maple in their drums. Ludwig, depending on the year used basswood inner plys wrapped with maple and 100% maple.

The advent of better mic technology and general advancements in recording gave rise to birch shells from Slingerland. Later, other manufacturers began offering the choice of birch or maple shells.

Also, as Philgood has said, the bearing edge cut does have a lot to do with the sound of a drum. Most manufacturers will use a 45 degree cut from the inside (like Sonor), others will use a 45 degree cut from both inner and outer sides shaving about 1/8-1/4" off the circumference of the drum (Tama). Still others, particularly vintage makers, used a rounded bearing edge (very old Slingerland, Ludwigs).

Trends have come and gone. Nobody should have to be an absolute expert either. There are excellent drums out there and most are very versatile soundwise. Testing drums out for sound at the music store is a good idea also. If you can't do that, try going with the flow. Again, look at the poll results.

[ddrummer8]

I have not really experienced a lot different shell types in the studio, as i only have and ash wood kit but i find i get a big sound for the size of drums they are, anybody else ever used any ash wood in the studio?

[drossfile]

Originally Posted by stevieb

Well, here's an interesting thing- birch, so far, has double the votes of maple- but it seems I see more maple sets for sale. Wonder why...

i wouldn't read too much into it--maple drums will always be a staple--they absolutely SING live, and it's not like they sound like crap on tape if you know what you're doing. there are more for sale because there are more maple sets around, i'd guess--because they're a staple!!!

i personally feel that birch is the easiest to get a good sound out of on tape (as i was getting at in my first response), but that's not to say that one is empirically "better" than the other.

i will say that i was surprised to see one person cite mahogany as their favorite, as those shells generally have a very dark sound--noticably darker than maple. but it goes to show you that there's no accounting for taste or method.

[Rimshot]

Originally Posted by drossfile

i will say that i was surprised to see one person cite mahogany as their favorite, as those shells generally have a very dark sound--noticably darker than maple.

If you are referring to me and my post, I stated that I really like my old mahogany sets for recording jazz and blues in the studio, but I use a birch snare. For live work, I use very thick maple shells because they are bright and a bit louder and crisper. I find the mahogany toms and kick very warm for jazz and I use only Zildjian Custom A's for cymbals. I really like the contrast.

[stevieb]

Originally Posted by 1,2,1234...

...Maple is a more resonant wood, great for live work and especially better if you don't have pricier microphones.

...The advent of better mic technology and general advancements in recording gave rise to birch shells from Slingerland...

More interesting stuff. I am liking this thread (except for the two wiseguys- you know who you are).

I would think that the above quote would suggest that, as everyone has a limited budget, maple would be the best way to go: Maple sets are probably less expensive than birch (due to their greater supply) and further savings could be realized on mics. As the set we have for recording is a maple set, and our drum mics are not bleeding-edge, I think this thread has served me well.

Thanks, folks.