Kick Drum sound

M

Moley1390

Canberran Amatuer
For any modern jazz or fusion listeners out there, often on live gigs the kick drum has this HUGE fat, punchy sound, that i don't hear very often on records. Is there a reason that it is not generally recorded? And how do I get this sound! For some kind of idea what i'm talking about see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0P7Pi47Va0
It's not that audible, but if you've heard it before at a live gig you'll know what i'm talking about...
 
mic choice is critical in recordings. I use a Shure Beta52 inside the kick about an inch from the head pointed straight at the mallet. I have the mallet making contact with the head on the plastic side, not the padded side. Then I throw a blanket over the front of the kick and stick an LDC a few feet in front of the drum. I blend the two together so I get the attack of the mallet and the boom of the drum itself.

Compression is a factor, too.

I don't play jazz or fusion but get the sound you described in that manner.
 
Moley1390 said:
For any modern jazz or fusion listeners out there, often on live gigs the kick drum has this HUGE fat, punchy sound, that i don't hear very often on records. Is there a reason that it is not generally recorded?
Click to expand...
I can only guess at the motivation of other artists, but in general I'd say that the fact that backbeat and heavy bass percussion are not commonly lead elements in modern jazz and fusion composition; heavy kick can cramp the freestylin' of the bass guitar (important to both styles), and the "smooth" nature of most modern jazz tends not to call for much explosive percussion.

G.
 
yeah. i agree. unless the featured musician is the drummer, he is usually pushed back in the mix.
 
Thanks

Yeah, that sounds reasonable. But then they use it lots on live shows for the energy? I suppose they can also afford a lot more dynamic range at a live show, so it's not so important. Any more suggestions on how? i usually use an sm-57 or Rode NT1-a outside, simply because that's what i have access to, but i'll definitely try micing from inside as well. If i can't get inside the drum what are some alternatives for getting the attack?
 
Moley1390 said:
Yeah, that sounds reasonable. But then they use it lots on live shows for the energy?
Click to expand...
I can't say that has been my experience...at least not that I've noticed a majority of the time. I think it probably boils down to who is doing the sound and what their experience or preferences are.

If it's a house system with a house engineer, I'd wonder if they are used to FOH mixing for mostly rock and simply applying the same technique across the board. Not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that, but it can certainly give a different sound than what the studio engineer/producer is going for.

I'm also not sure whether you're talking local club-type gigs or stadium gigs. If it's a small venue, just the act of miking the kick can cause that difference in balance. Personally, if I were setting up for a small club venue with that kind of band, there's a strong possibility I wouldn't even mic the kick. Some small rock FOH guys (and performers who set up their own PA) just assume that if it's a kick, it gets miked, and if it gets miked it gets used.

Of course, if it's a mid-scale or stadium-type gig, you pretty much *have to* both mic the kick and use it, and in a big space it can boom.
Moley1390 said:
Any more suggestions on how? i usually use an sm-57 or Rode NT1-a outside, simply because that's what i have access to, but i'll definitely try micing from inside as well. If i can't get inside the drum what are some alternatives for getting the attack?
Click to expand...
I understand you're using what you have available to you and probably don't have deep pockets, but that NT1a is probably not greatly helping your cause; they tend to emphasize the upper-mids and HFs and are not the greatest with providing tight low end. The 57 is a good jack of all trades mic, a real workhorse, but like most jacks of all trades, it's not an expert at many.

Willis mentioned the Beta52, which is a classic go-to mic for great kick sound, that's a good choice. My personal favorite is the Sennheiser e602, which has (IMHO, FWIW) a cleaner, less-veiled/less-muddy sound than either the B52 or the AKG D112. If you can't afford to buy a bass/kick mic, if you live in or near a town or city that has a theatrical/stage/video supply company (common in most bigger cities), you can usually rent them for just a few bucks a night.

Also important, of course, is the PA you pump it through. If you're running an anemic amp through a couple of small porta-towers, you're not going to get great bass sound no matter what mic you're using.

And then there's compression....

G.
 
this is not an uncommon kick drum sound. it's a pretty common sound in rock albums. for any instrument it has to sound good in the room. if you're getting the sound you want in the room micing it to get the sound you want is pretty easy. the hard part is probably gonna be in tuning the kick to what you want. sm57 isn't the best mic for the job, but i've seen lots of sound guys with really good rep use it. Again, tuning is the key to getting good drum sound.
 
greyharmonix said:
Again, tuning is the key to getting good drum sound.
Click to expand...

meh, I don't think it's all that critical with a kick drum. At least for rock or anything heavier, and I know he mentioned modern jazz/fusion, but the sound he described was different. I look for the attack of the mallet more than anything. I compress the hell out of it on the way in, too.
 
Moley1390 said:
For any modern jazz or fusion listeners out there, often on live gigs the kick drum has this HUGE fat, punchy sound, that i don't hear very often on records. Is there a reason that it is not generally recorded? And how do I get this sound! For some kind of idea what i'm talking about see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0P7Pi47Va0
It's not that audible, but if you've heard it before at a live gig you'll know what i'm talking about...
Click to expand...

Technically, when you hear it live you hear everything....the space, wide dynamics..there is no room or limitation. Unlike in recordings, there are some limitations, one of each is the dynamic range..It limits the full power of recorded sound.

In recorded CD , theoretical dynamic range is around 96dB (16 bit). But our ears can hear more, which is around 140dB.

This wide differences in dynamic range combined with limitations in EQ and other aspects (space or location of sound, CD is mixed with stereo but if you hear it live you hear the surround sound.) can appear that live is more punchy and strong compared to hearing it in recordings.

Also , the preference of the mixer and producer plays role. If they decide to push the sound of the drums farther in the mix, because of some reasons (like it is not the featured artist) this can affect also.
 
Moley1390 said:
For any modern jazz or fusion listeners out there, often on live gigs the kick drum has this HUGE fat, punchy sound, that i don't hear very often on records. Is there a reason that it is not generally recorded? And how do I get this sound! For some kind of idea what i'm talking about see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0P7Pi47Va0
It's not that audible, but if you've heard it before at a live gig you'll know what i'm talking about...
Click to expand...

Hey Moley,

Well first things first, when it comes to live mixing and studio mixing, the process becomes two completely different things.Alot of the physics are the same, but two entirely approaches because of the limitations of a) the media and b) the end user.

(Research "speaker voicing")

Now some philosophy:

A live mix is born out of live situations, while a record mix is born out of preserving an artistic ideal.

In live sound, you're mixing to reinforce. On record, you're mixing to recreate something that's going to be heard as a feature presentation on x number of systems. It's an audiophiles nightmare.

What alot of people don't realize is that a good recording is not overblown at all. It has nothing to do with volume, but rather tone shaping and dynamic processing for effect and control. Good mixes are actually pretty flat. And there's a reason for that:

Flat, untethered mixes tend to translate best over a wide variety of systems.

This especially goes for the kick, being the anchor for most types of mainstream music. You name it, reggae, rock, hiphop, country...

A kick on record has a traditionally different timbre. It's a matter of getting used to the difference. Learning the difference. Accepting that there is going to be a major difference.

Think about it:

In live, you have different variables. The sound system is alot louder, probably produces a better lows and highs, is *unmastered* so you hear everything raw and more to the actual source.


Record mixes are at the mercy of mastering. Everybody wants loud, so they get loud. But transients suffer big time.


You really do get a limited amount of sonic real estate to mix with anyway. You figure that you only have a 20hz to 20khz range to work with, with an ultimate dynamic range of 90-144db (depending on your final medium), a kick's fundamental alone takes up the entire lower portion of the spectrum.

So things get eaten up real quick.


So your question was "why does the kick suck on record?"

Because overtime, tons of smart engineers figured this was the best way to do it. :D


It took me (and is still taking me) a long time to get over the romance of what I used to think a sound on record was like and learning what it *actually* sounds like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top