bad drum sounds

[noground]

I am very worried about the prospect of recording a drum set. It seems like the drum sound I'm looking for is hard to come by in the ROCK STYLE. Because of this I am really stalling on buying the mics I need.

I decided to start critically listening to the drum sounds on some rock albums I own hoping that this would shed some light...

I listened to some old stuff first like: Skid Row's self titled album, Faith No More: Angel dust, Van Halen: OU812. How do people make drums sound so bad? I'm sure it's the sound they were going for, but often the bass drum sounds like a higher note than the floor tom! Everything sounds pinched and over produced. I think the epitomy of bad drum sounds here was Extreme: III (yes I am embarrased I ever used to listen to some of these albums).

Why did they do that and how, so I can do the opposite?

I thought maybe it was just cause it was the 80's and noone knew any better and I had a bad taste in music then... So I listened to Dream Theater: Awake... Still that bad "death metal" bass drum sound. And I don't think snares sounded like that.

Then I listened to Rush:Signals. It was a big improvement, but it seemed like they tried to make the bass drum sound like it was 80 feet wide. and the hi-hat has this very colored sound to it.

Next was Smashing Pumpkins: Gish. There was this strange clicking sound on the bass and all the toms. I remember hearing that the bass drum was recorded with one mic inside and one through a large funnel. I don't know if that did much for the sound. Then I listened to Pumpkins: Mellon Collie. Again! That death metal bass drum sound and a weak sounding snare! If anyone has this CD, listen to JellyBelly and notice how much better a snare with attack would sound.

Then I listenend to Dave Matthews Band: Before these Crowded Streets. This is the only thing that came close to how drums should sound! The snare had good attack. The bass drum was consistent and you could actually hear that it was a bass drum!

I know most of the reason that these reviews are so bad is the CD's I chose to analyze. But seriously, even Takin' it to the Streets by the Dooby Brother's has this cardboard bass drum sound!

I started thinking of reasons for this and found a few things which really confuse me. It seems that on vocals and acoustic instruments the convention (though often departed from) is to use a pretty accurate condenser mic with a little bit of personality and coloration. Aren't drums acoustic instruments? Why are so many people miking rock bass drums with a Beta 52, when this mike significantly scoops out the lows and gives a 12 DB peak between 2 and 5 K!? Everyone seems to like miking the snare with an SM57. If it's a rock song, shouldn't the snare have as much snap as possible, and wouldn't this be much better achieved with a small diaphragm condenser mic? I've heard some really stellar drum sounds from a few well-produced jazz CD's. Why don't people use these sounds for rock? It's not like the rock drums sound more forceful or anything, they just sound more peaky and dull. How did producer's create those bad 80's drum sounds?

All right, I'll stop... I know I've dropped too much in people's laps here, but if anyone has any advice or thoughts on the things I've said above, I would much appreciate it!

-Matt

[smellyfuzz]

You better be very carful about what you post....
You are sounding a great deal like an audiophile.
And on this web-site, that sets you up for much ridicule.

You see, when one is an audiophile, they question the norm,
they question, what people know about sound & equipment.
They question that if you are a recording engineer, do you use your ears.
Some do not... And musicians have not a clue about what music
is suppose to sound like.

What you did with your albums, was something I doubt few on this
web-site have ever done.

I was once ridiculed for stating that when I compare cables/stand... ECT or
when I listen to CD's, I many times turn out the lights & listen in the dark.
This limits distractions for me and I can concentrate on the sound & music
& nothing else. My living room, where I almost always listen, is setup
acoustically sound. Like a control room or a room you master in.
I suspect that few musicians & engineers have done anything close to this.

My point is that many person get into the music field knowing nothing of sound,
then taught by people knowing nothing of sound, then making records knowing
nothing of sound. Thus... we have recordings like the ones you stated.

REST ASSURE..................................................

Even though there are many members here that are clueless....
There are a few with KNOWLEDGE that is unsurpassed.
Such as Sjoko2, Harvey Gerst, & even Blue Bare Sound, who I knock heads
with a lot.

SO KEEP READING & QUESTIONING!

Also you already have the right attitude for recording.
You are looking for accuracy... BRAVO!
Keep trying to match those drums you hear in a room, to those on tape/chip.

GOOD LUCK!


Love,
Sean

[Emeric]

Originally posted by smellyfuzz

... And musicians have not a clue about what music
is suppose to sound like.

That's got to win some kind of special award. How would you like NOTHING to listen to? You can sit in the dark and listen to the hiss from your $5000 poweramp. I'll assume you were joking, or I don't understand the context.

[ametth]

It all comes down to taste. Some people like the processed drum sounds, some people like more of a natural "drums in a room" sound. Ultimately it's about the music though, and if you cant get past the recording to listen to the music, then I feel bad for you.

[noground]

Hmmm... I didn't realize what I had written until I just read it now, sometimes I skip sleeping like that and go WAY overboard. I am not saying that any of that music displeased me because of the drum sound. In fact this is the first time I had spent a few hours critically listened to the drums in many of these albums I own from a production standpoint.

I love much of the production in these disks, but when looking for things I would change, the drum sound most often comes up. This makes me wonder about the conventions put in place for recording and producing rock drums. Maybe my tastes are just very different from the average listener or I'm even more wrong and there are no conventions... I basically wanted to hear peoples opinions on this.

Recording and producing is pretty new to me and these are just my initial observations. In no way am I denouncing the talent of any producers... maybe even all of the CD's were not as bad as I had remembered them. I'm sure they are mostly getting the sounds on tape that they had intended and therefore they are doing their jobs correctly. I'm just wondering why they decided to make them sound like they did.

Does anyone have thoughts on the general approach to rock drum production?

[ametth]

Originally posted by noground
I'm even more wrong and there are no conventions...

Exactly! You do what gets the job done. Sure, I guess people like to use a SM-57 on snare, 421 on toms, etc...but those are familiar sounds, I guess which could be considered a "convention", but I consider them a starting point. YMMV.

[Cyrokk]

"Does anyone have thoughts on the general approach to rock drum production?"

If you are looking for a general bread-and-butter description of what rock drums "should" sound like.. then I would state it this way: the typical drum sound for rock places most of its emphasis on the kick and the snare.. the more powerful drum sounds (ala zeppelin and metallica) stand out because you can hear the bass drum as a strong bottom component of the mix with an equally powerful (if not slightly less so) emphasis on the snare.. everything else is style of composition: closed v. open hi hats for verse and chorus.. toms for fills and bridges.. etc..

this is an (extremely broad) generalization that ignores one very important point: drummers have their own sound encoded in them... an analogy: there was an actual study done that showed that a person's guitar style could be traced to the shape of the individual's bone structure in the hand and the interaction of those bones.. this is why Eddie Van Halen sounds like Eddie Van Halen whether he is playing a Strat, Kramer, or your grandpa's old Guild acoustic.. The exact same applies to drummers: Bonham will sound like Bonham.. Lars will sound like Lars.. regardless of what or where they play...

Your statement that you want to have your own rock sound that doesn't sound like what you hear pretty much answers your own question: if you don't like what you hear, screw convention and fix it to the way you feel it should sound..

Cy

[noground]

"if you don't like what you hear, screw convention and fix it to the way you feel it should sound..."

I agree, but that is hard to do. I started this thread after looking for bass drum mics. But I realized that the same people that would be giving advice about which mic to buy as well as those that create them are probably aiming for a different sound than me (based on the "conventions" I've discovered). I'd prefer to use my own ears, but in my situation this is not too practical.

So I need to decide which would be the best mics to use. I want to get a very aggressive, dry, close-miked sound with lots of attack and little coloration. Everything else is taken care of: the drummer is great, good at tuning his drums, a great set, and a pretty dead room... Should I just get mics that one would use to record like a jazz set and just fool with placement to get any effects that I might need for rock?

[Blue Bear Sound]

Hmmm.... recording is all about coloration and compromise.

When you compromise the right way and come up with good coloration, you get a recording that rocks. When you end up with bad coloration, and you don't compromise, you get a recording that sucks. With some coloration and some compromise, you get acceptable recordings. You idea is to try for the right coloration to get what you're looking for and minimize any compromises you have to live with (for example, gear issues, improper mics, gear or budget limitations, physical abilities of the talent - you may want to get the sound of the singer swinging from the rafters - won't happen if the talent is not an acrobat and is also afraid of heights!)

What audiophiles tend to do (and what I have a big problem with) is getting so anal about recorded sound quality, that any concept of emotion and performance of the actual artist is completely secondary.

The truth is, if a song rocks, it will rock whether it's badly recorded or not. Look at all the Rush catalogue - they had some real crappy recorded sound - but the songs rocked.......

So - as an engineer, you apply proper recording techniques to try and attain the sound you're looking for - WHATEVER THAT MAY BE. If you don't like using an AKG D112 on a kick, then find another mic that gives you the sound you want! Same with guitar and vocals and snare, etc...

BUT!!!!!! - before you can do that you have to be sure that your ears already know what to listen for, and that you have gear that's not already working against you... (ie, it's fine to complain about a bad snare sound - but changing mics and mic position is not going to help you much if you're recording to a $150 PortaStudio - you've already compromised your recording by using a comparatively lo-fi recording medium!)

But hey, that's me - as always, YMMV...........

Bruce

[Dom Franco]

Why limit this discussion to drum sounds? What is real and what is not? could be asked about guitar, keyboard, vocal sounds etc.

Originally a guitar was amplified with a microphone, then magnetic pickups were added, but the intention was to make it sound like an accoustic guitar. Then people started liking the different sound of an overdriven amplifier. This is not natural, not REAL! But now it is accepted as a legitmate musical instrument.

What about vocals? aftifical reverb slapback echo, even chorus, flange and leslie effects. Is this natural or REAL?

I could continue with examples of pianos, strings, horns etc. but you get the point.

If you want accoustic purity.... use room mics with no added effects. Traditional bluegrass recordings and some jazz trios etc. have this very natural and live sound. But we have all now been spoiled by the great digital effects available to us.

Just my oppinion, but I believe it is a matter of taste for each one of us to decide how much processing is too much.

Sincerely;

Dom Franco

[JuSumPilgrim]

Noground,

Check out these records:

1. Soundgarden's "badmotorfinger"

2. Crowbar's "time heals nothing"

3. Deftones's "white pony" (I have never heard cymbals as lush and silky as these)

4. The groundbreaking snare sound on Korn's first record.


These albums are examples of great almost natural sounding drums that sit in the mix so well and are so tonal they become a melodic and almost harmonic instrument.

Also van halens drum sounds were definiely the more natural of the 80s drum sounds. Drum sounds like music styles are subject to trends. In the 80s on snares for instance you had a low attack, deep long release, low pitch on snares, then in the early 90s things went in the exact opposite direction wth the short sharp attack quick release thwack that never gets tired and is still going on in the dave mathews band. (Actually it does get tired) But if you listen to most of the shite in rock now snares have this medium attack clang, meduim pitch, long release sound which doesnt sound good if you actually can play more than a basic rock beat as the clanginess and legnth of the decay interferes with the flow and the phrasing of your fills.

Anyway, If anybody knows what mics were used as overheads on white pony, please let me know.

Thanks

Gus

[smellyfuzz]

What audiophiles tend to do (and what I have a big problem with) is getting so anal about recorded sound quality, that any concept of emotion and performance of the actual artist is completely secondary.

The truth is, if a song rocks, it will rock whether it's badly recorded or not. Look at all the Rush catalogue - they had some real crappy recorded sound - but the songs rocked.......

Bruce,
I couldn't agree with you more, but as a recording engineer & all equipment aside,
isn't YOUR JOB to insure a good representation of what the bands instruments &
vocals really sound like?

I mean if the guitarist plays a strat, before you start flanging & phasing the sound,
shouldn't you know how to, or at least aim to, reproduce it correctly?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EMERIC,
I was referring to the many discussion on this web-site about training one's hearing.

[Blue Bear Sound]

Originally posted by smellyfuzz

Bruce,
I couldn't agree with you more, but as a recording engineer & all equipment aside,
isn't YOUR JOB to insure a good representation of what the bands instruments &
vocals really sound like?

Absolutely, and I do exactly that -- or not, if that's what's required to realize the artist's musical vision. And when I mix I make it sound the way I think it should sound - given parameters such as budget constraints, the recorded tracks (if not tracked by me), or even the artist's opinions (since it's their creation!)

So I do all that, it gets mixed properly, and then mastered to sound correct, and when the end user plays the CD in stereo, they go and fiddle with the bass/treble controls! Why??? Because sound quality is a very subjective thing, barring equipment deficiencies!

So take the Rush stuff I was talking about... I personally don't think it was particularly well recorded - very mid-rangy and harsh, especially the drums, BUT - the songs make the sound, not the other way around...

Bruce

[noground]

I appreciate all the insight above, and I'm sorry to carry on with this thread any longer, but...

After reading your replies I've reconsidered and I guess a lot of those drum sounds had more going for them than I thought initially. But I think I figured out what was bugging me so much...

(First off, my complaints about albums that were not supposed to be intense rock style was unbased and should not have been stated.)

I've heard a lot of really cool, completely unnatural production that made music seem more emotional and alive to me. It was the production that wasn't just there for the sake of production, but because it added a great flavor to the song.

To me, the attempts at making the drums "bigger than life" in many hard hitting rock songs don't seem to have succeeded. (Notice I am not saying ALL). To me it seems like the production was often too forced and the drummer ended up getting turned down a notch. The feeling of standing inches from an amazing drummer who's pounding away at a great set is almost unmatched in this universe. And if my drummer had a set made of cardboard and paper cups, I wouldn't give up until I found a way to get him on record with that exact same feeling! To me it's not about real or fake, it's about capturing that feeling!

So I wish I knew enough to be an audiophilic snob (yes I made that up), but all I'm saying is that sometimes doing nothing might better than doing something in vain. Just an unbiased, yet one-sided and probably easily picked-upon thought from a newbie...

And if anyone could suggest a bass drum mic that might give me a really natural sound...

[Tim Brown]

Originally posted by noground
And if anyone could suggest a bass drum mic that might give me a really natural sound...

How much are you looking to spend?

I personally think that one of the most natural Kick mics on the market, is the Beyer TGX-50 or whatver the model # is...it's early in the morning, and I can't remember it off the top of my head....must.....have......coffee......It goes for less than $200 (generally about $180 or so).

Rode NT2.
I don't know how many of you have tried the Rode on a Kick, I did-it sounded pretty damned good-but it's putting $400 on a kick mic.

Also, You don't want to use designated kick mic's for other purposes. why? The repeated impact from the kick drum "stresses" the Mic element....what do I mean?
Ask somebody who's used a D112 on a kick drum every night for a year, what happened when they tried to use it for something else, and it was "muffled" sounding....so ever the D112 is dying a slow death in a Kick drum.

As for RUSH's drumsound.....I thought the Drumsound they got on "Test For Echo" was they best that they've had in years, but everyone seems to rag on that one-and it's one of my favorite Rush releases, since Neil started taking Drum lessons, he now has a GROOVE that he didn't have before-he's les mechanical, ad there's some swing in his playing..


Tim

[Blue Bear Sound]

Originally posted by noground
So I wish I knew enough to be an audiophilic snob (yes I made that up), but all I'm saying is that sometimes doing nothing might better than doing something in vain.

And if anyone could suggest a bass drum mic that might give me a really natural sound...

The perfect example of the subjectiveness of both performance and production....

Listen to Steely Dan's AJA - or actually, any Steely Dan album, for that matter. Some people find their stuff cold and sterile from both a production and performance point of view. Others find it high on performance, cold on production. Still others use it as reference material....

Different strokes for different folks -- if everything sounded the same, there wouldn't be anything for audiophiles to bitch about!!!!!!!!
Down Sean! I was just teasin' ya...

The bottom line is that record engineering is a creative process, much like movie-making or artists' paintings. There is a large element of the engineer's creativity at work on any given project - some will like where they're coming from, others will not..........

Bruce

PS - I happen to get good results with an AKG D112 - I like the sound, but hey - YMMV!

[Call-Of-Ktulu]

CLOSE MIC.

I think I get what you're saying and I feel the same way too. The best drum sounds to me that I know of are those juicy, tight kicks and toms, that stiff cracking snare with that nice resounding trail off, and those crisp articulate cymbols. The other thing I noticed is that with all the bands that you mensioned I don't like their drum sounds on the album either but as soon as they put out a live disc its suddenly in my CD player. Why is that? Because you can't do the room mic thing when you're playing madison square gardens with 20,000 screaming fans. It just don't work.

For your set up get a mic for each drum and a mic for your hi hat and ride and if you got the inputs a couple over heads for room sounds just so you sound like a real drummer and not a computer program. They'll catch some presence and width in your crashes as opposed to the stunning sting you get when you close mic them. You get away with it with your hihat and ride because they're SUPPOSED to be right up front and they have a more under control, refined sound when you hit them so they don't play off your ear drums like they're a set of monkey bars.

[Greg_L]

holy ancient thread resurrection batman.

[jmorris]

just a comment on the beta52 thing. I think you will find much of the mud in a kick drum is around 200-500. That is why it "scoops" out the lows as you put it.I find that true along with my taste to boost at 3-5k. Now, I have never found a beta52 to be this way. Maybe an Audix D6 which to my ears is like a pre eq'd mic. Metal music kick drums are at times very klicky without much bottom. May have something to do with the fast repeats and low freq. and time. I think sm57 's are great snare mic's. Depending on the placement I can get a ton of attack. 'Course , its all a matter of taste.

[chessrock]

Holy geez. Who created the worm hole and brought us back to 2001? ?


I have to say, however, that if you're going to resurrect a conversation, this ain't such a bad one to do it to. I like the topic, and I think it's even more relevent 5 years later. The drums recorded during the time period in question seemed to be kinda' bad.

And he brings up some good ideas about drum mic'ing. Around 2001, a lot of indie records started taking on a lot of the elements that this guy suggested (more snap out of the snare; less scoop in the kick drum). Interesting.

.

[TragikRemix]

well, its a good topic here, so this is my thought.

i would be willing to bet that all these great artists/producers WANTED the sounds that we hear on the albums.

in addition;

most of us here on HR could be considered 'audiophile' by the majority of the population. we are a distinct class of people who crave clean sound. john q. public buy logitech speakers with their dell dimensions and listen to mp3's encoded at 96kb/s and believe it sounds AWESOME. we however, contrast their views and think it sounds "OK" at best. we like the sounds that come from our studio monitors.

how many times have you been to a party and started checking out the DJ's gear?? i know i have criticized them in my head, thinking the gear was cheap. i compare my JBL MR825's to their cheapo community or kustom speakers. i use a kickass Ramsa Poweramp, and they use the likes of Gemsound.

honestly, i hear some difference in sound quality BUT ITS NOT MUCH AT ALL!
this makes me an audiophile? one could argue. i think that i'm just a stuck up audio bitch. im an audio snob, which is kinda like the equivalent to a cheerleader vs. a girl in chess club.

i listen to my ipod and get pissed off that im using earpieces. on my last plane trip, i took my Audio Technica AT40fs (or whatever) headphones that i use in the studio becuase in my mind, those Little earpieces give me a HEADACHE, and they honestly do! its all in my mind of course, i really dont know if the earpieces sound good or not because i am BIASED! i am not a typical consumer; i take brand new ipod earpieces and throw them away because my mind is set that way. MIND OVER MATTER; i think they suck and i get a headache. does this happen to 'normal' people??? no! everyone uses the ipod earpieces!

wow. check out that digression.