House of Drumming.com

I'm all the way with Josiah and Chirch Bustom!

A drum track, or any other one for that matter, is not a surgeoned product manufactured from sterile parts put together in laboratory conditions. It's a performance with heart and soul, at the base of which lies the amalgamation of resonances, dynamics, a steady flow of notes which are the extension of the performer's personality. Whoever decides to record a song the abovementioned way puts the superficial quality of purity of sound over the quality of something that is the performance, and which has been the very essence of music since the beginning. Edith Piaf hated recording her songs because she didn't consider it necessary. The stage performance was the ultimate way for her to convey what she wanted to convey through her music.

It think it's redundant to remind everybody that at the dawn of popular music, songs were recorded in one go, be it jazz, rock and roll, reggae, and this was the only way to capture perfectly the interplay of performance with its immediate result which is the music. If I practice a song I practice to play it as well as I can from the beginning til the end on the instrument, not on it's respective parts. If a sound engineer wants to have the perfect sound he should either come to terms with the limitations of his gear or invent something better, but under no circumstances should the 'performance' be compromised.

This is yet another testimony that the music is going in a very bad direction. Protools, Skrillex, now this. What the hell?

electrizer wrote:I'm all the way with Josiah and Chirch Bustom!

A drum track, or any other one for that matter, is not a surgeoned product manufactured from sterile parts put together in laboratory conditions. It's a performance with heart and soul, at the base of which lies the amalgamation of resonances, dynamics, a steady flow of notes which are the extension of the performer's personality. Whoever decides to record a song the abovementioned way puts the superficial quality of purity of sound over the quality of something that is the performance, and which has been the very essence of music since the beginning. Edith Piaf hated recording her songs because she didn't consider it necessary. The stage performance was the ultimate way for her to convey what she wanted to convey through her music.

It think it's redundant to remind everybody that at the dawn of popular music, songs were recorded in one go, be it jazz, rock and roll, reggae, and this was the only way to capture perfectly the interplay of performance with its immediate result which is the music. If I practice a song I practice to play it as well as I can from the beginning til the end on the instrument, not on it's respective parts. If a sound engineer wants to have the perfect sound he should either come to terms with the limitations of his gear or invent something better, but under no circumstances should the 'performance' be compromised.

This is yet another testimony that the music is going in a very bad direction. Protools, Skrillex, now this. What the hell?

I agree in keeping it real. Hey, this is only a technique used for certain tracks, when wanting to process the tracks to the hilt. There is nothing wrong with this way. It is not a threat to real playing===there is no way this will ever take the place of playing live in one swipe.

But being a studio drummer--------this way is the best for an hourly rate. Your sessions will run longer and you will get paid more.

Jim Richman wrote:
But being a studio drummer--------this way is the best for an hourly rate. Your sessions will run longer and you will get paid more.

Ah ha! Didn't even think of that!

Josiah wrote:

Jim Richman wrote:
But being a studio drummer--------this way is the best for an hourly rate. Your sessions will run longer and you will get paid more.

Ah ha! Didn't even think of that!

Oh, that's right, money. Fuck the music then!

electrizer wrote:Oh, that's right, money. Fuck the music then!

Well you know, every discussion about the industry you hear revolves about money... it's not about the amazing distribution of music to the masses. It's about lost profits...

Yeah, I was asked to do this once...on a fucking BLUES recording! I was against it form the beginning but I figured the whole thing was a disaster to begin with since I was replacing a friggin' drum machine! They had this brilliant idea to record everything over a machine, then replace the machine with a human. For something like this that 1) screams to have everyone in the same room at the same time and 2) would benefit from a bit of bleed and non-high tech recording, it was a clusterf*ck right from the get go. Then they're asking me to track the kit elements individually...talk about suck the feel out!

This was a case where the artist allowed the engineer/studio owner to bully him into doing something completely wrong just so he could stretch the recording time IMO.

It's funny how people are saying this won't groove... How do people think percussion parts are laid down?!?

Luis Conte can string several parts on top of each other and make it sound sick.

Saying a drummer can't overdub separate parts because it won't groove is essentially saying no instrument can groove if overdubbed.

It can groove if the person playing the shit can make each part sing. That's it.

DeeP_FRieD wrote:Saying a drummer can't overdub separate parts because it won't groove is essentially saying no instrument can groove if overdubbed.

Not at all. A drum set is an instrument. Laying down separate tracks, at different times, for parts of the same instrument which are normally played by one person in one pass, is extremely difficult. If the groove is a "machine-like" pattern, with no fills (or only half-note, Ringo type fills), it will probably be pretty easy, but try a groove like "My Secret Place" (Joni Mitchell) and see how that works out. And I don't think there's another instrument that you could draw an analogy with. Maybe congas? Try playing a conga pattern one drum at a time and make it groove.

I can see the allure, from an engineering standpoint; The separation and control offers you complete freedom with reverbs, effects, etc. I did a record once where I had to lay down the cymbals AFTER the drums. It came out okay, but I would never do it again.

DeeP_FRieD wrote:It's funny how people are saying this won't groove... How do people think percussion parts are laid down?!?

Luis Conte can string several parts on top of each other and make it sound sick.

That's a pretty weak analogy. Percussion instruments are separate instruments each of their own. No person can play congas, clave, timbale, surdo and shaker simultaneously.

Like DSOP said, it's pretty doubtful Louis could separate out conga patterns by drum, record them individually and it have the same feel as it would normally.

Josiah wrote:

DeeP_FRieD wrote:It's funny how people are saying this won't groove... How do people think percussion parts are laid down?!?

Luis Conte can string several parts on top of each other and make it sound sick.

That's a pretty weak analogy. Percussion instruments are separate instruments each of their own. No person can play congas, clave, timbale, surdo and shaker simultaneously.

Like DSOP said, it's pretty doubtful Louis could separate out conga patterns by drum, record them individually and it have the same feel as it would normally.

It is not a weak analogy, and most multiple drum parts in afro/cuban music are derived from single drum parts and put together.

The drum set was only assembled in the 20th century from what were originally separate instruments.

Bata grooves hard and it's three separate individuals playing parts that rely on the other to create the entire melody.