Its nice if you can hear a cymbal and the sound of its reverberation and decays in the recording room. IME it takes very low correlated noise to hear that low level stuff accurately. If the room is well treated and the speakers are good (and jitter is low enough) then it can also be possible to hear precisely where in the reproduced sound stage the cymbal is physically located. However, as was probably mentioned before in another thread, surprisingly small differences in room damping and diffraction adjustments can have fairly substantial effects on localization cue reproduction precision. This has been my experience anyway.
Last edited:
You don't need or want a speaker to recreate the directivity of an instrument. Reproduction is based on ambient information being on the recording, and you don't need the same space to exist in the listening room. Reproduction should be able to ignore the room and project beyond it's physical boundaries without them being noticed.
I would say, that the recording process itself is the biggest hurdle in producing a convincing recorded drum (or anything else) sound.
Most drums are recorded with multiple microphones like stereo overheads, snare, tom, kickdrum and room mics.
This obviously messes with the phase and spatial information of the individual instruments in the drum kit, since each instrument reaches multiple microphones at different times and that is in a bad case very perceptible in a very negative way.
Good sound engineers work around this problem pretty successfully, but they cannot eliminate it.
Not many drums are recorded with only two microphones in a great room these days (if ever). Impact seems more important than realism and since rockbands on larger stages are heard through PAs anyway, an artificial sounding drum kit is sounding real for most people.
Most drums are recorded with multiple microphones like stereo overheads, snare, tom, kickdrum and room mics.
This obviously messes with the phase and spatial information of the individual instruments in the drum kit, since each instrument reaches multiple microphones at different times and that is in a bad case very perceptible in a very negative way.
Good sound engineers work around this problem pretty successfully, but they cannot eliminate it.
Not many drums are recorded with only two microphones in a great room these days (if ever). Impact seems more important than realism and since rockbands on larger stages are heard through PAs anyway, an artificial sounding drum kit is sounding real for most people.
I only know a bit about church pipe organs and my ancient frequency chart lists a ~141 Hz 'sub' harmonic pipe, then ~288- 900 Hz pipes, ~900-16,000 Hz pipes with + 40 dB crescendos (dynamic headroom) above reference in the ~1200-2200 Hz BW.
That said, from dim memory without rereading it, it takes one full channel of Dick Burwen's system to reproduce a loud played drum kit.
AUDIO magazine article
That said, from dim memory without rereading it, it takes one full channel of Dick Burwen's system to reproduce a loud played drum kit.
AUDIO magazine article
I like Martin Denny Hawaii LP. Dot records. Recorded decades before most processing, and likely with a 2 mike setup.
I use cymbal and tinkly bell as qualifiers for speakers. Also Steinway grand piano. I ended up with 15" + CD speakers. As JBL does not sell in my tiny metroplex of 2000000, I have never heard an M2. I ended up with Peavey SP2(2004).
I agree tremendous power is necessary for cymbal, also piano, especially Bosendorfer. I listen at 1/8 w (pp passages) but have 70 w/ch available. I have a Sohmer console to compare the piano sounds to. Cymbal, I have to remember my high school days where I marched with a pair of 14" Zildjians. Ta-Ra-Ra-Boom-Dieh started with a solo cymbal crash. My senior year I managed to invert one. It was capable of being popped back.
I check bass drum hits on candidate speakers with ZZTop Afterburner LP or CD. Should sound like the twin 30" drums my H.S. band marched with.
Last edited:
Don't forget, a cymbal is a 20" tweeter! 😀
This was made very clear to me a few years ago at the first Capital Audio Fest outside Washington DC. In the evening there a was a live jazz band in a room that was used all day for Hi-Fi gear demos. The difference is cymbal sound between live and reproduced was "striking."
This was made very clear to me a few years ago at the first Capital Audio Fest outside Washington DC. In the evening there a was a live jazz band in a room that was used all day for Hi-Fi gear demos. The difference is cymbal sound between live and reproduced was "striking."
It has more to do with how the drummer hits the cymbals than anything else. Some drummers bash them, some finesse them. Bashing is terrible and doesn't sound good, but it happens more often than not. John Bonham knew how to hit a cymbal.
The recording process is important but you can't fix a poorly hit cymbal no matter how good the engineering is.
Often times, there is a lot of compression on the mix and master, which can make cymbals sound unnatural if done improperly.
The recording process is important but you can't fix a poorly hit cymbal no matter how good the engineering is.
Often times, there is a lot of compression on the mix and master, which can make cymbals sound unnatural if done improperly.
It seems the current fashion in mixing is to have the cymbals at a low level rather than a 'realistic' level. Either that or my hf hearing is worse than I thought..
Ditto the bass drum, for at least 60 years. They fill them with cushions, so that all you get is a little ‘pat’. Nothing like the real sound whatsoever.
Because live cymbal does not obey harman kardon downward fr response for boring sound 🙂
2 cents ...
The very start is the studio microphones + the micing techniques >
Just imagine a Giant Dome placed over & around a drum kit, and then ALL the places a microphone can be 😕
Overhead stereo condenser mic's seem to be an adopted situation as a means to a start > but other mic's interplay with this.
Miking a single cymbal alone, could probably create the greatest fidelity when it comes to recording.
The very start is the studio microphones + the micing techniques >
Just imagine a Giant Dome placed over & around a drum kit, and then ALL the places a microphone can be 😕
Overhead stereo condenser mic's seem to be an adopted situation as a means to a start > but other mic's interplay with this.
Miking a single cymbal alone, could probably create the greatest fidelity when it comes to recording.
See recordings having a crest factor of 17 (dB) or greater sound pretty much like the real thing
Not very many commercially available recordings have crest factors of 17 or more. Most people have apparently accommodated to the sound of compressed dynamics in recordings used over many decades of music production (all genres).
I've found empirically the most recordings having any kind of cymbals have at least 6 dB of dynamics compression applied to the cymbal/percussion track, and have a resulting track crest factor of less than 12 dB (older recordings originally recorded and produced before 1991), and since the early 2000s have crest factors below 8 dB (after compression AND limiting).
There is no way that most commercial recordings will reproduce anything like the sound of real cymbals--even though the systems playing them back can easily reproduce the original uncompressed recording straight from the microphone without any in-line compressors used.
I've found that mild levels of dynamic range expansion can be achieved using an upwards expander like FabFilter Pro-MB or Pro-Q4, but nothing like 6 or 12 dB of expansion needed to offset these music production practices. These plugins work very well in real time when used with a music player.
This is the "crime of the century" as far as modern hi-fi is concerned, and few people seem to be very upset about it. I'm still appalled by what I see and hear by these music production practices. My system does not need it and the recording formats I use don't need compression or limiting.
Chris
Last edited:
Yeah most recordings just didn't capture it well, or was mixed to highlight something else. I do recording as hobby and all the rehearsal spaces I mostly record cymbals are hardest thing to get nice sound for multiple reasons. There is need to close mike as everything leaks into every mic, the drummer might not have good balance on their playing, the room acoustics sounds quite bad, can't infinitely adjust positioning as it kills the vibe and so on, the end result can be huge compromise.
I bet top studios have mastered this, so look for recordings out of studios with great recording space, songs with sparse / acoustic instrumentation and artists that likely got nice amount of funds and attitude for it so they took the time to make it special nice. I don't have any list of references, but in general jazz stuff sounds just great, those that was made with only few mics.
Dynamic range is another. Being also hobby musician and live sound guy most bar PA just don't cut it, acoustic drums are so loud that it's tough to get singer loud enough to compete. So, big speakers that don't compress at comfortable loud listening level and a good recording gets close. For example, I've listened two monkey coffins, yamaha ns1000 and JBL L112, three ways with dome tweeter and 12" bass and these didn't give such impression. Perhaps some modern speaker with similar set of drivers can do it. Minimum system I've had dynamics that give smile on the face has 15" bass and compression driver in it.
I bet top studios have mastered this, so look for recordings out of studios with great recording space, songs with sparse / acoustic instrumentation and artists that likely got nice amount of funds and attitude for it so they took the time to make it special nice. I don't have any list of references, but in general jazz stuff sounds just great, those that was made with only few mics.
Dynamic range is another. Being also hobby musician and live sound guy most bar PA just don't cut it, acoustic drums are so loud that it's tough to get singer loud enough to compete. So, big speakers that don't compress at comfortable loud listening level and a good recording gets close. For example, I've listened two monkey coffins, yamaha ns1000 and JBL L112, three ways with dome tweeter and 12" bass and these didn't give such impression. Perhaps some modern speaker with similar set of drivers can do it. Minimum system I've had dynamics that give smile on the face has 15" bass and compression driver in it.
Last edited:
Compression in recorindgs is not necesairly a bad thing, it's needed to tame dynamics in a lot of ways to fit the medium. Dynamic range of analog media is limited, and in old days they used tape compression (driving the tape a bit harder than needed) to get that. If you don't compress at all you may have (digital) overshoots, what means distrtion, and not of the good kind.
What is a problem is the overuse of compression on acoustic instruments and on the master, that kills all dynamic range. For electronic instruments that can be apart of the sound, but squashed acosutic drums don't sound natural (could be a wanted effect). Vinyl records have (depending on the way it's pressed) a dynamic range of about 60 to 80dB, cd and 16bit digital audio about 95dB and modern digital files about 140dB. But modern music is way harder compressed than back in the days. If you got a 10dB dynamic range in modern (pop & co) recording you may call yourself lucky. In jazz that is less an issue, and classical certainly not (there there is no or invisible compression when done right).
And no, yo ucan hear all that dynamic range, our ears have a less resolution than a cd, and the general noise in your space already eats 20dB or more. But a bit more dynamics in music would not be bad.
What is a problem is the overuse of compression on acoustic instruments and on the master, that kills all dynamic range. For electronic instruments that can be apart of the sound, but squashed acosutic drums don't sound natural (could be a wanted effect). Vinyl records have (depending on the way it's pressed) a dynamic range of about 60 to 80dB, cd and 16bit digital audio about 95dB and modern digital files about 140dB. But modern music is way harder compressed than back in the days. If you got a 10dB dynamic range in modern (pop & co) recording you may call yourself lucky. In jazz that is less an issue, and classical certainly not (there there is no or invisible compression when done right).
And no, yo ucan hear all that dynamic range, our ears have a less resolution than a cd, and the general noise in your space already eats 20dB or more. But a bit more dynamics in music would not be bad.
You're right...It's a tragedy. Especially in light of the fact that it's not needed at all by real hi-fi systems nowadays.
Compression should occur not on the recordings, but rather at playback on systems not able to handle the dynamics.
Chris
Last edited:
So the producer’s idea of balance is more important than the drummer’s?
Eww, good drummers have nice balanced sound and controlled dynamics with their kit, while rookies don't. What I mean is dynamics of the playing is on whole another level with a good drummer, natural sounding and fit for the context. Rookies bash on the symbals and wimp on the tomtoms, no dynamics with the beat to really make it groove, and in general play way louder than rest of the band mostly because it's a loud instrument which easily overpowers everyone else in the room, unless the drummer has good control over it, knows how loud or soft any one of the hits need be. When balance is bad, one likely puts more mics to have some control over it later on, but the leakage sounds just bad and end result is overprocessed mess, and it started from the situation in general, or from skill of the drummer.
If producer has better idea, it's likely with the rookie and in general to benefit the song. A good drummer understands how important the kit balance is, also how important the whole band balance is, it's the end result, the song, combination of all, the feel and vibe. Just like any musician with their instrument should.
If producer has better idea, it's likely with the rookie and in general to benefit the song. A good drummer understands how important the kit balance is, also how important the whole band balance is, it's the end result, the song, combination of all, the feel and vibe. Just like any musician with their instrument should.
Last edited:
I don't agree. I have experience with recording, and in many styles and without a form of compression, pop music would sound like ****. It's a part of the sound. But it should be used way less, only where it's needed, not overlimiting all to sound louder, or to fix bad recordings or playing. And today most pop music is smahed to death, with almost no dynamic range left. In the 1960's and 1970's they used it sparsly on the right places, and those recording do sound a lot better than modern, even with way more primitive equipment than now. There they did have the right balance between dynamics and taming them. If we can have that dynamic range back with modern low noise equipment, that would be what we need.