4 mic drum recording - help!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dark Imagery
  • Start date Start date
Dark Imagery

Dark Imagery

New member
Hey everyone, I'm brand new to this site and excited to have found a website dedicated to what I do. I've been a musician for 12 years though have only been serious about recording for about 3 years. I can't wait to learn more!

I'm currently working on a project and am about to track my drums. I'm going for a Glyn Johns type sound to get a raw, realistic feel. At most I want to use four mics - a spaced overhead pair, kick mic, and snare mic. It'd be wise to point out that this is a black metal album so audible kick and snare are essential. I've tried many techniques I found on the internet as well as some ideas of my own. I've gotten some good sounds but with one pattern that has emerged that I can't get a handle on...

The cymbals overpower everything! I've tried placing the mics a bunch of distances from the kit, as well as even lowering the mics as low as the top of the floor tom. The mics I'm using are pretty low end condensers, however the frequency response seems pretty flat. Basically, everything, especially the toms, sound weak under the cymbals.

Is my problem in mic placement? Is my problem in the mics im using? Are my toms and snare too small? I'd like some of your opinions on this problem. Thanks!
 
Most likely the problem is a combination of that micing technique and the playing style. Either play the cymbals more softly compared to the toms or try another micing technique. Many players, especially in metal, seem to think playing drums is their therapy where they get to take out their frustrations by bashing things. The Glyn Johns method doesn't fare well with these players. Because of that, and that many metal styles call for deconstructing and reconstructing the drums, more mics may be the ticket.

A second issue is that the Glyn Johns technique calls for two of the same large diaphragm dynamic mics, not condensers, for the overhead and side-of-the-kit mics.
 
Hey, thanks for the response. I'll try to keep in mind my playing volume and see if that helps at all. Also, I had thought the Glyn Johns method used condensers. Large diaphragm dynamics would explain how he got such and awesome, dark sound! Thanks!
 
Dark Imagery said:
Hey, thanks for the response. I'll try to keep in mind my playing volume and see if that helps at all. Also, I had thought the Glyn Johns method used condensers. Large diaphragm dynamics would explain how he got such and awesome, dark sound! Thanks!
Click to expand...

I just did some checking and ribbons are common on the overhead/side mics.
 
Ha. One more thing to add to the list...

Still going to figure out how to get a dark live sound for my album.
 
Dark Imagery said:
Large diaphragm dynamics would explain how he got such and awesome, dark sound! Thanks!
Click to expand...

one can actually achieve 'awesome dark sound' with another number of mic designs, hard to imagine getting a 'darker' sound then with one of modern U47 clones with electronics that do not gut low frequency response

generally speaking LDCs can be considered to have a slightly slower transient response time that can contribute to the impression of less 'detail' then a SDC thus favoring, emphasizing something like cymbal vs.. snare for example.

Additionally dynamic mics tend to be able to achieve superior off axis rejection compared with most condensers (at least among the well designed ones). This can make mic placement a tad easier in some circumstances

Cymbals are always going to be problematic, in the studio, and it is not unusual for talent to enamored of a live kit that is simply overkill in a recording situation, difficult and expensive, in terms of time to control. While there is nothing in a Glyn Johns mic set up that inherently favors a so called 'raw' capture (other then that the fewer mics you use the easier and fast the set up can be) what it is, inherently, is very dependent on the room and specific placement. Generally speaking we aren't deploying 13 mic's to achieve a 'big' drum sound (see early Zep) but to surgically be able to deal with issues inherent in record a trap set in the first place

the room can be interfering with appropriate capture of kick (and snare) thus further accenting the sound of the cymbals. in a decent room, depending on content and performance you can typically find 90% of the sound for the final mix in a well placed stereo overhead (captured with more or less any type of mic)

so?

well first suggestion is to work with mic placement to achieve the specific balance of transient and sustain (thump (or thwack) vs. Uoomph) you want in each individual component (I'd solo them first) . . . if you are not getting the kick sound you want the impression of the cymbals can easily seem to overpower it. Same is true for each of the other elements of a trap set. and look at where and how the kit is placed in the room. Because of the challenges of recording drums pretty much everything else needs to 'float' around drum placement. If you are unhappy with percussion sound sans cymbals after experiments with kit and mic placement look at mic selection. sennheiser MD421's, a dynamic, can be a fairly decent choice for almost any percussion task . . . while known as 'the' tom mic for a while it was my mic of choice for kick. Using the 'null' feature of figure of 8 ribbons or multi-pattern LDCs, i.e. trying to position the null position on the mic so that capture favors the tom's transient (for example) over the cymbal can sometimes help

and trying to encourage talent to realize that in the studio they should not have to play in a way to overcome pin ball machines (perhaps dating myself), ventilation systems and/or unruly crowds for which music is the least significant conscious sensation also tends to help the recording process

occasionally, when nothing else works I've had (varying degrees of) success tracking cymbals separately from other percussion elements (and there are times that this can sound extremely 'raw')

good luck
 
I use the Gyn method, too. If anything is ever too loud with that method, for me, it's the snare. I often have trouble fitting the snare mic in my recordings because Glyn picked it up way too well with the overheads. Because of this, I'd say it's more likely playing style. I hit my snare HARD. Chances, you hit your cymbals HARD. Nothing wrong with that. But you might either want to think about laying back on the cymbals, hitting everything else harder, or experimenting with other micing techniques.
 
Great response, Oretez! I have two of the MXL 990/991 mic packs (yeah I know, cheap) and was using the 991 pencil mics for the overheads. The 990 is a LDC but I can't really hear a difference in the sound compared to the 991s. Would you suggest using a pair of the 990s for the overheads? A problem I expect for that is that the response pattern may capture even more cymbals than the 991s even if the transient response time is slower.

As far as the room goes its pretty dead. I suppose I could have someone play the drums while I walk around the room listening to sweet spots. I did try close micing everything and got a better sound, I just really like the idea of a raw, 4 mic sound. I may have to just deal with the limitations of my room and equipment. It's not like I can track my drums in a castle!
 
based on mic's you have I'd probably use the 991's (sdc) as the overheads merely try to work with placement to try to reduce cymbal emphasis . . . while it flies in the face of raw performance capture there are editing efforts using some Dolby type compression and EQ that can help shift emphasis of mixed tracks . . . but even slight minor improvement in overheads pays major dividends in the editing process

and if you are not going to close mic, track elements separately (via what ever strategy) then the room remains a significant variable, probably the most significant . . . close mic'ng, tracking elements individually evolved largely due to acoustic issues with ambient venues (studios included) As I alluded when recording an orchestra recording a pre-recording age composition there is no significant limitation to using one, two, three microphones. Attempting to track a 30-90 piece string orchestra individually would honestly be a nightmare and might well be very difficult to obtain adequate results. But as we've discovered from any number of hall renovations around the world, if the room sucks any ambient based recording is going to suck

And the difficulty (for the range of possible adequate results, obtaining specific goals is a bit different) is not 'dead' vs. 'live'. Difficulty is dimension, geometric, construction materials. A concrete block wall basement might be improved significantly if you poured sand into the block voids and stacked, floor to ceiling, rolls of glass fiber insulation in two corners (which two depends on specific dimensions). And using 3/4" sheets of plywood, flat on the concrete floor (in same basement venue) might improve things as well. Even reducing cymbal intrusion. Lining walls, floor to ceiling with bookcases filled with books (planned parenthood used to booksales in Aug. where on the last day you could buy unsold items at prices far cheaper then even glass fiber insulation).

but if a room is a too small rectangular box there is unlikely to be much one can too (within a reasonable cost/benefit ratio) to fix the room. Doesn't mean, obviously, that it can't be used to record (see 50's Memphis Sun 'studio') merely that the room is going to control results, what techniques tend to work. Thus why close mic'ng, individual tracking, DI, etc. evolved. I'm seldom happy about it but have used electronic drum pads/triggers to track then replaced individual sounds with multi-velocity, layered samples from personal sample library. And personally I quite content to believe that the dominant voice in anything 'pop' (which includes 95+% of anything marketed as 'rock') is the drum/percussion . . . (followed closely by vocal (divorced of course from lyric content))

even working in studios with which I'm familiar, with drummers and kits I know it is not unusual to spend 3+ hr. after drums are rough tuned setting up, placing kit and positioning mic's and the time does not change significantly whether I use 3 or 13 mics, prior to beginning a tracking session. At the personal project studio while I always 'budget' the time it is never debited to the client directly and depending on my schedule always appreciate drummers who are willing to come in a day early, assuming they won't/can't use studio kit, to set things up . . . I've never found one guy to be adequate for this.

Nor is anything I say meant to be 'rules'. I started as client in commercial studios and the only reason I even thought about drifting to the dark side (technical stuff) was due to unresolvable anger @ so called engineers and producers . . . does not mean I was right (in beginning, I was not) or they were wrong . . . I was merely so enraged by attitude, treatment and cost that I started recording myself, then friends, then viola! You use what ever gear you have, what ever space you have, what ever time and talent you have to create. but interesting thing about audio is that physics will always trump fashion . . . fashion might or might not get you famous but fashion unsupported by physics won't get you in neighborhood of good (if physics is axiomatic, to recording, the studio aphorism 'Quick, Cheap, Good . . . you get to pick two!' is an appropriate corollary) . . .

so you use the 991's explore the 'raw' of a four mic (though you might even think about dropping that to three . . . the worse the room the more problematic stereo tracking is . . . and sans stereo a single overhead can capture everything you need) trap set up . . . but I would start budgeting for different better mics (some 421's and look into cost of modifying the 991's . . . not necessarily cheap if you do a complete capsule, transformer mod but I've had several 603's abandoned in the studio (after clients heard difference between theirs and some k84 variation) that I found to be virtually unusable that after a mod valuable work horse mic's) 991's might well be better the 603's but guess is they could benefit from a mod) and unfortunately if you are going to remain interested in recording building a mic cabinet/locker is a process that will never end. Modifying the room is always a bigger more complicated expense and not always one possible depending on control of the venue . . . and adequately modifying the room, regardless of the items I mentioned (books, sand, plywood, bales of glass fiber insulation, etc.) is not amenable to 'quick' fix . . .

good luck

(and most iconic Castle recording is serendipitous accident not achieved primarily by design . . . you use what you have and unfortunately not all castles are created equal)
 
Ha, wow, thought about writing a book!? I appreciate the time you've taken in your posts. I'm playing every instrument on the album so I'll definitely be tracking instruments seperately. You raise a good point about the room. Over the last year I've come to realize the limitations of my space. I've got a pretty big room with a carpeted floor, one carpeted wall which my dad and I thought would help sound proof the building when my band used to practice in there, later realizing that's a project that'd cost a few grand. Two of the other walls are completely lined with wooden workbenches full of all kinds of junk, and the far wall (...ready for this?) is a big aluminum garage door! I built a portable carpeted wall to cover the door - not that my studio ear is trained enough to hear a difference with or without it, it just feels better knowing it's there. So in this room, a great live drum sound could mean thousands of dollars of reworking the building, especially since the floor under the carpet is concrete.

Last time I was in there I close mic'd everything on the kit and got a WAY better sound than I had been getting. I still used two 991s in a stereo pair to capture the cymbals and attack on the heads. That brings up another quick question: If I'm close micing the kit, are two overheads necessary or would one above the kit trained on the snare work better (as long as I pan toms for some placement.)
 
You're mistaken thinking that it would take thousands of dollars to treat the room for recording (as opposed to sound-proofing). First of all, get rid of the carpeting on the floor, if that's an option. You want hard floors. Concrete floors are great for recording, much better than carpeting. Most studios have hard-wood floors and many now are being built with concrete floors. Ideally, you need a reflective (hard) floor and an absorbing (soft) ceiling (rigid fibreglass,etc...).
 
We recently switched to a new overhead for our kit, and really love it: a single Shure VP88 (figure 8/MS dual condenser.) Whether you want to call it one mic or two depends upon whether you're counting the mic itself or the number of input channels it's takes up ;), but either way, it really performs. We just set it up for fig8 configuration and hang it straight down above the center of the kit.

G.
 
Hmm... not sure if I'd be able to rip up the carpet. Anything you'd suggest laying on the floor? It's not a huge room or anything. Funny, I knew hardwood was great but assumed concrete would be terrible.

Glen: Does that mic get a good beef from the toms? Are you using it along with other mics?
 
Dark Imagery said:
Glen: Does that mic get a good beef from the toms? Are you using it along with other mics?
Click to expand...
The mic just seems to have a very good, balanced sound all-around. Even though I have never seen it mentioned on this forum, it is pretty known for use as an OH in the more semi-pro circles.

We do have close mics set up on everything except the crash and ride cymbals. Which ones we actually throw in the mix on any given project can change, but they're there as we want or need them.

G.
 
Well it sounds nice. I couldn't find any demos of it on you tube. Mind me asking what you gave for it? I like your practice of micing everything whether you need it or not, bet it adds alot of flexibility down the line.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
We recently switched to a new overhead for our kit, and really love it: a single Shure VP88 (figure 8/MS dual condenser.) Whether you want to call it one mic or two depends upon whether you're counting the mic itself or the number of input channels it's takes up ;), but either way, it really performs. We just set it up for fig8 configuration and hang it straight down above the center of the kit.

G.
Click to expand...

^^^^+100000000000000^^^^
I tried it with my x/y rode and it was a great recording.
Now to find a used VP88 for cheap.

Thanks again Glen. :D





:cool:
 
Dark Imagery said:
Well it sounds nice. I couldn't find any demos of it on you tube. Mind me asking what you gave for it? I like your practice of micing everything whether you need it or not, bet it adds alot of flexibility down the line.
Click to expand...
Technically we haven't paid anything for it yet. We got it on a trial tryout from a friend who rents and sells them for a local sound supply company, but we like it so much that we are going to buy it and keep it. I don't remember the exact price offhand, but I do remember that he offered us a price that's about $150-$200 below the standard street price as we found it on the web.

We have one song so far that we did with that mic. I don't have a copy of it here at home, but next time I head down to the studio - later this week - I'll grab a copy and see if I can put a sample up on the Interthing for you to hear.

I admit that we get a pretty good result from using them all, even though traditionally I've been a minimalist when it comes to miking a drum kit. But considering we record others than just ourselves, ya kinda need to have the full close mic compliment because you never know how any given drummer is going to play or what is drumming style will be.

G.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top