BPM Changes in a song! (Speed)

[LeafBucket]

I have come across this problem a few times when recording bands. We always find the correct tempo for their songs from the start. Sometimes we come to a point and they say that from that point there is a tempo change. The transition always feels wrong, going from slow to faster or opposite.

Because I haven't recorded with any really professional bands yet and I know that some of these bands tend to speed up and slow down a lot live, I have begun to tell them that it is just lazy song writing. The transition is always off putting and I don't really want to have it in there. But considering that so many bands tell me there are "tempo changes" in their songs (everyone from punk to prog) is it a normal thing to do?

Is it common practice to create tempo changes in songs or should the songs be the same tempo all the way through?

I realize that music production really doesn't have any rules but does anyone here have experience with it?

 

[Steenamaroo]

I record singer songwriters and build up backing music for them a lot.
I usually find that the tempo of a song fluctuates naturally. Usually it's just a little bit, but some songs can really swing between chorus and verse.
I don't think I've ever had anyone tell me there's a conscious tempo change, though. By that I mean, at verse 2 it goes from 110 to 120, or whatever.
They usually aren't aware of it.

Depending on the song, sometimes I get the performer to work with a click, if smoothing out the tempo works OK.
If that doesn't suit the song I get them to record naturally then map out a gradually fluctuating tempo map so they have a click which moves to their performance. Make sense?

Now, I only do that because I'm going to be building up drums/bass/keys etc for these guys.
I wouldn't dream of doing it with a band.
If the drummer wants a click, that's fine. If he doesn't, he's the click,

 

[gecko zzed]

I do pretty much the same.

If a person comes in and wants me to add stuff, I'll encourage them to work to a click.

If the song warrants a tempo change, I'll build that into the click. Sometimes the tempo change is just nerves or bad time-keeping, and I tried to get this ironed out from the start. But there is plenty of material that has significant tempo changes.

I have done complicated work sent to me from interstate where there is no click and vastly varying tempos. I have to create a tempo map for this and use this for adding the extra bits. It's not strictly necessary, but it makes life so much easier, specially when working with midi.

If a band comes in, I encourage them to play live in the studio: no headphones, no click. If they've got their shit together, this works well. If they want a click, I'll give them one.

 

[RAMI]

How often does this really happen? I bet if anyone took 1,000 songs, maybe 5 of them will have deliberate, drastic tempo changes. If it's happening in every one of their songs, there's either a problem with their execution, or they think it needs to happen but it doesn't.

 

[Greg_L]

Most bands that have "tempo changes" in every song just suck. They can't write a song that doesn't have a gimmick in it, so they throw tempo and bad time changes everywhere. I hear it all the time.

If a band has legit tempo changes as part of their songwriting and it actually works, then it's easy to map out in any DAW. If the band is solid, they can track with the click as a guide with no problems. When you have a band play to a click track and it totally freaks them out, it means they suck and aren't as tight as they think they are.

Just have the band lay down a live scratch track and figure out the tempos needed.

 

[gecko zzed]

How often does this really happen? I bet if anyone took 1,000 songs, maybe 5 of them will have deliberate, drastic tempo changes. If it's happening in every one of their songs, there's either a problem with their execution, or they think it needs to happen but it doesn't.

I think it depends on the genre. Just about everything I hear on the radio has a fixed tempo: pop, rock, blues, country, metal, whatever. One of the five out of a 1000 having deliberate variations would be Bohemian Rhapsody.

However the story is markedly different if you drift into the world of classical and musical theatre.

 

[RAMI]

One of the five out of a 1000 having deliberate variations would be Bohemian Rhapsody.

For sure. I consider a song like that more a case of 3 songs in one, really. A lot of Rush and progressive rock have the 2-or-3-songs-in-one thing going on.

 

[grimtraveller]

The transition always feels wrong, going from slow to faster or opposite.

Always feels wrong ? To you or the people whose actual song it is ?

I have come across this problem a few times when recording bands. We always find the correct tempo for their songs from the start. Sometimes we come to a point and they say that from that point there is a tempo change.

Why is this a problem ? If that's the way the band has written and play the song, isn't that the end of the matter ? Isn't your job just to record them ?

Because I haven't recorded with any really professional bands yet and I know that some of these bands tend to speed up and slow down a lot live, I have begun to tell them that it is just lazy song writing.

Your logic here is baffling. You've already stated that there comes a point where "these bands" specifically tell you of a tempo change. Why does this qualify as lazy songwriting ? To tell you that "at this point is a tempo change" has nothing to do with whether or not the bands speed up or slow down when playing live which loads of people {often unwittingly} do. They are two separate issues.
It's not like you've even said that during recording they are speeding up or dragging slow.

But considering that so many bands tell me there are "tempo changes" in their songs (everyone from punk to prog) is it a normal thing to do ?

"Normal" is a somewhat misleading word to use. In much jazz, latin, punk, heavy rock, rock'n'roll, soul, funk, reggae, disco, African, blues and pop, you could find examples of tempo changes, but in general, they're not that common. Does that make those genres ones in which tempo changes are not normal ?
In a lot of classical, jazz rock, progressive rock, psychedelia and Indian stuff, you can find tons of examples of tempo changes across a large scope of artists and songs. But does that make tempo changes in those genres "normal" ?

Is it common practice to create tempo changes in songs or should the songs be the same tempo all the way through?

It's neither common practice nor uncommon practice to have tempo changes. A song is what it is. Tempo changes are simply one tool available to give some songs something different. And some of them are, in my opinion, crap. But it's not the changes in tempo that makes them so.
By the same token, tons and tons of fantastic songs have been written and recorded where the tempo doesn't alter at all. And of course, lots of shitty ones too.

does anyone here have experience with it?

Quite a few of my songs have tempo changes in them, especially where the time signatures may change or the mood alters or there is a transition from one part to the next. For me it's simply one of a number of ways of providing contrast, the same way going loud to quiet or acoustic to electric or one particular instrument offset against another {or a group of them} would be.

 

[mjbphotos]

It really depends on the drummer (assuming there is one) - some can't play to a click, some can't keep a steady beat. Then there are SOME good ones.
In 'singer/songwriter' mode, my tempo changes are usually very minor - a few BPM difference at most. More often, its not a change in tempo at all, its a change in drum beat - going from 1/4 time beat to 1/8 time beat, for example - makes it sound faster, but its not.