I don't think a leslies would sound even near a real cymbal, we are just going far away from the real sound.
Probably dispersion of a real cymbal vs. one that has been recorded and processed coming out a speaker with HF dispersion that's nothing like a real cymbal but does still tend to sound good .
And if they have control, and good ears for pitch accuracy and tone.
Drummers with good ears and drum and cymbal control, will tend to lean towards larger drums and larger cymbals.
The initial attack will have better pitch accuracy, and the ring decay more tone.
Its rather common in lower level Jazz, situations.
Drummers will use smaller kits, heavy ply heads and dampen the ring of the drums with numerous techniques.
The also tend to use smaller cymbals, and they can tend to have a thicker cut towards the edges.
No decay quality, and annoying high pitch attack.
All of that is compensation, for not having control or a ear for pitch accuracy.
Smaller drums with multiply heads , small thick cymbals have horrible tone and higher pitch.
Big trade off for loudness control.
When you see drummers, such as what you posted maintaining levels with.
Large drums and more open tuned coated heads, and not afraid to use larger thin edge cymbals.
Better pitch accuracy, better drum overtones.
Problem is most drummers couldn't control it, or have a ear for pitch accuracy.
Tri Mic setup or overheads is classic for basic good stereo image, and not overload mics with cymbal dynamics.
Problem is for more accurate sound of cymbals, and picky drummers that want good recordings of expensive cymbals.
Will tend to want the pitch accuracy of a closer mic. Problem is with hard attack you have overloading issues.
Would be a rather lengthy thread to cover technique, for pitch accuracy of attack and ring of a cymbal.
Since numerous methods and gating and limiting is involved.
The pitch accuracy of a cymbal has a lot to do with the size and the cut.
How piercing the tone of attack or ring is the mix of the metals used.
Most assume from recordings it is a " high pitch" sound.
For the most part the decay is. In real life their is a much more notable low pitch.
And that is very noticed in the initial attack. And notable when being played
for a smooth ring for a ride type cymbal.
The initial splash or attack can be incredible annoying and far far out of key.
With typical cheaper cymbals and drummers that cant control a ring or soft or hard attack.
Use thick small turds.
The sound of many cymbals is, sharp out of key annoying attack and no good ring.
Combination of the cut towards the bell and the cut towards the edge.
And cheaper metal.
Many drummers will lean towards heavy cut, small annoying cymbals.
They lack control and a ear for pitch.
For pitch accuracy and a nice hard attack that will be pleasant to hear in dynamics.
Larger cymbals will tend to have a smoother and more pitch accurate sound.
Problem is they can be louder and have a ring that junk drummers cant control.
Very nice larger cymbals, with very good attack and ring.
Will not only have a more expensive metal mix, They will also be cut
very thin towards the edges for nice decay. And also not annoying attack.
They are incredibly expensive, and will also crack from such a thin cut.
Huge tradeoff and rather painful to accept in cost.
A drummer bragging about, waiting for a large thin cymbal to crack.
Is a secret message to bragging about control , pitch accuracy and sound quality.
As mentioned for decay and ring, usually a planar or ribbon.
For low level mixing
Actual pitch accuracy for lower spectrum, can actually be a paper tweet, small mid.
And often not a foam or rubber edge. More M roll type, paper/ cloth edge.
The noted quote of live sound speakers, having a more realistic " live sound"
Well known in the studio. Having multiple playback speakers is essential.
Tend to mix with smaller speakers and low low levels for most the mix.
For artist "approval" and a final yes on the mix.
They tend to be played back at louder levels, with more live sound type monitors.
M roll woofer and usually typical large/med horn for mids and highs.
Pretty typical 2 way or 3 way for live sound, being played back at of course "monitor" levels
not concert levels in the playback room. Which is loud regardless but has a typical more live
sound. Regardless of "opinions" getting a yes on a mix from the artist or musicians is usually
achieved with those types of monitors.
But if your actually mixing for 4 to 8 hrs you would want nothing to do with the big monitors
for such a extended period.
For low level mixing
Actual pitch accuracy for lower spectrum, can actually be a paper tweet, small mid.
And often not a foam or rubber edge. More M roll type, paper/ cloth edge.
The noted quote of live sound speakers, having a more realistic " live sound"
Well known in the studio. Having multiple playback speakers is essential.
Tend to mix with smaller speakers and low low levels for most the mix.
For artist "approval" and a final yes on the mix.
They tend to be played back at louder levels, with more live sound type monitors.
M roll woofer and usually typical large/med horn for mids and highs.
Pretty typical 2 way or 3 way for live sound, being played back at of course "monitor" levels
not concert levels in the playback room. Which is loud regardless but has a typical more live
sound. Regardless of "opinions" getting a yes on a mix from the artist or musicians is usually
achieved with those types of monitors.
But if your actually mixing for 4 to 8 hrs you would want nothing to do with the big monitors
for such a extended period.
Here's a crappy lil' 8" driver Karlson type playing a weak /distorted on the top analog recording of John French. The tweeter was a now discontinued Dayton CD with polyamide diaphragm - K-tube = Transylvania Power Company
A good recording would fare much better.
A good recording would fare much better.
Last edited:
Because it has mentioned by numerous people in the thread, your up against the actual recording, the recording method
Then the speaker.
Depending on genre the player and the instrument.
The so called artifact from numerous processing that is being pushed as " bad"
Is actually rather valid to getting a recording anywhere close to "real"
The generic attack and decay of a cymbal can be described.
But in reality there is Hundreds of different hits and cymbal types.
And numerous recording methods to make it " fit" in the mix, or actually sound " real"
So regardless of some magic speaker driver that could be deemed as perfect.
Almost nonsense, goes no farther than the recording.
Get tired of the compression myths. A real sounding recording would be full of Gating, limiters and compression.
Not a easy thing to record. And as noted a vast amount of generic cymbals and players are not even worth the effort regardless.
They sound " fake" in recordings for many reasons
Last edited:
What make the cymbal sound real?
Accurate production and reproduction in attack time and decay time.
Accurate production and reproduction in attack time and decay time.
Good cymbal are very costly to make and time consuming with the emboss done by hand. It is indeed a low frequency impulse which all audio systems smears.
Thanks for all replies. I see compression being mentioned a lot. That is unfortunate, as we -speaker builders- cannot do anything about it, other than listening to other music. I was hoping we could 'fix' te speaker somehow. I guess we have to accept that recorded cymbals do not sound real.
The surface area of the radiating driver makes a big difference. 1" domes obviously have very small surface area. It's not super obvious that a compression horn effectively has the surface area of the entire mouth of the horn, not just the small diaphragm.
Cymbals reproduced on a 15" coax with a compression horn driver sound more realistic, and I think it's because they effectively are a 12" diameter pulsating sphere which is in the range of the size of a real cymbal.
Cymbals reproduced on a 15" coax with a compression horn driver sound more realistic, and I think it's because they effectively are a 12" diameter pulsating sphere which is in the range of the size of a real cymbal.
The impulse, and the room resonance,
The initial impulse forget it, audio systems compress much much and oversimplify everything.
Some tweeters are pointed backward to recreate that high frequency room ambiance, you might look for it as well as dipole open baffles.
Traditional closed box are mostly oriented in reducing THD and damping transients, the rise impulse is slower
The initial impulse forget it, audio systems compress much much and oversimplify everything.
Some tweeters are pointed backward to recreate that high frequency room ambiance, you might look for it as well as dipole open baffles.
Traditional closed box are mostly oriented in reducing THD and damping transients, the rise impulse is slower
Nobody cares about live dB levels. With recorded music it is about faithfully reproducing the audio signal. All of the levels for all instruments were adjusted and processed ,compressed, when recorded. Reproducing live cymbals requires a mike placed nearby and the sound recorded without clipping.
Then play that into your system.
Then play that into your system.
By far the most realistic cymbal reproduction ime is from ESLs. Large surface area and very fast. I don't think it gets better than that.
Except maybe the original poster who specifically wanted to talk about why live cymbals sound different than recorded ones. But hey, do what you like . . . 6 pages later.
^Often a lot less than most people may think. Many people are shocked if they ever find out how much information is really recorded on a CD.
In terms of the role of hardware it starts with the dac and ends with the speakers and room. If anything isn't a good as it should be then a lot can get lost.
How can that be? IMHO and IME, its because of over reliance on standard measurements. There is more to it than just SINAD, FR, and jitter that shows up well on J-Test.
In terms of the role of hardware it starts with the dac and ends with the speakers and room. If anything isn't a good as it should be then a lot can get lost.
How can that be? IMHO and IME, its because of over reliance on standard measurements. There is more to it than just SINAD, FR, and jitter that shows up well on J-Test.
Last edited: