slate drums vs recording acoustic drums

[JohnRick]

This debate is much like the war between analog vs digital, where the analog type refuses to see the benefits with the modern world - even if tape machines has it's advantages.
That said - samples will sound better, presuming they're played. If they're programmed, forget it.

[lcressy]

I know the OP started with acoustic vs. slate, but personally I prefer Superior Drummer 2.0 for more of an acoustic sound/feel as opposed to the slate. The slate samples are very good and solid, but the engine in SD 2.0 is much more realistic as compared to an acoustic kit. I am not a drummer, but have a Roland TD 12 in my studio that I use. I have not had 1 drummer complaint about it ( my best friend has been playing drums for over 40 years and is quite accomplished). There are adjustments that need to be accounted for, much like using someone else's instrument. The key is really tweaking the sensitivity and mapping and getting the daw, software and ekit working well, but once you do, I believe the pros outweigh the cons - in a home studio situation. And of course, this all is genre specific. For any kind of jazz, acoustic all the way, except perhaps the new TD 30 from Roland as mentioned earlier - that's insane!, but for hard Rock I think Slate is excellent. If you are looking for the nuances of an acoustic in an edrum, I think Roland/Superior Drummer is about the best you can get. my .02 cents.

[drummerGlyn]

Originally Posted by lcressy

I know the OP started with acoustic vs. slate, but personally I prefer Superior Drummer 2.0 for more of an acoustic sound/feel as opposed to the slate........If you are looking for the nuances of an acoustic in an edrum, I think Roland/Superior Drummer is about the best you can get. my .02 cents.

I've been very happy with Superior Drummer 2.0 for my projects as well, but I just picked up Slate 4 Platinum for $150. I'm looking forward to comparing the two

Originally Posted by JohnRick

This debate is much like the war between analog vs digital, where the analog type refuses to see the benefits with the modern world - even if tape machines has it's advantages.
That said - samples will sound better, presuming they're played. If they're programmed, forget it.

Absolutely spot on. I think there's still a lot of people basing their judgements on drums that have been programmed with a mouse. That's always going to sound terrible. Once you get a drummer playing an e-kit, that's a whole different ball game, especially once the drums are in the mix.

[dkelley]

Originally Posted by duff mcshark

Why not record drums in a nice studio and do everything else yourself?

money, remember?

[dkelley]

the thing is, you said that you need to learn how to tune drums yourself (assuming you're NOT the drummer here)? so your drummer doesn't know how to make his acoustic drums sound great by himself? that is NOT a good sign.

you will be hooped with real drums unless you can get an outstanding sound acoustically before even worrying about recording them. of course in some studios you can just play their drums and it's all good, but if going that far he may want to use his own drums, and tuning any drums is important and sometimes tuning should be altered for a style of music, etc.

And since a real studio costs money, you had better practice with your drummer playing his real kit but not recording with the rest of the band (he could play along with a guitarist or with the band of course, but that's more work fo rthe real studio to setup just to record the drums, and will cost more, at which point you start thinking, why not just record the whole band in a real studio?)

Yes use real cymbals if his cymbals sound really good and you are confident you can get a great sound out of them, but of course with real drums as the triggers you'll pick them up like crazy so drum replacements suddenly get complicated. I record with my roland kit ALL the time and most of my musician clients are none the wiser, even if I use midi cymbals, because they sound SO GOOD these days.

I also record with the real thing, but it might be surprising to you how often, after looking into the project plan that I've been hired to play on, the smartest move for me to make is recording on the midi kit to provide the quickest turnaround of different sounding drum kits to the client who may be unsure of him/herself.

....rather than recording acoustically and then having to work out all of the drum replacements, ensure there are no bleed false triggers, extract the cymbals without too much real drum sound remaining in the overheads to conflict with the replaced drum sounds in the other tracks (or ensure they blend well at least), and of course deal with the fact that with any real miked parts (overheads for real cymbals, for example) I can no longer edit the midi with abandon without worrying about having any leftover conflicting evidence of the pre-edited parts in the miked tracks.

It doesn't FEEL the same, but it can sound damn good. It's much easier afterwards, and much easier if the artist paying me isn't sure of a few things and wants full flexibility.

Also, of course, recording fully midi parts including cymbals allows full portability and full editing afterwards, groovetracks, changes in feel, all of that stuff which is sometimes sort of possible with true audio but mostly more complicated.

Cheers
Don

[Jonathanvl]

I've been using EZDrummer for a long time now, along with some expansion packs. My drummer made a selection from all the kits, choosing the hardware that fits his style and taste.

I told him that if he'd want, we could always go to a studio and track his drums, but when he hears my EZdrummer-tracks he says it's not worth the money to track it in a studio. Only thing he does is adjust some of the tracks i write, i'm not a drummer, so i'm not as original with drumlines..

My drummer is a professional conservatory jazz drummer, owns a few kits (Gretsch, vintage Ludwig, handbuilt custom drums, Slingerland,..), and is very happy with the result of 200$ worth of software.

But ofcourse he's always happy to play his drums live :p

[Subprime]

Not sure why tuning is an issue. Your drummers should be tuned even if youre not going to be recording them.

[T'Mershi Duween]

Originally Posted by psycho_monkey

whether or not you like the sound of samples drums is irrelevant.

I never said I don't like samples or the sound of them, just the prevalent use of the same samples for drums and using short-cuts instead of skill to get a decent result. It makes for lazy musicians who will never be able to actually play, tune or get good sounds on their own drum kit and lazy engineers who phone that shit in instead of capturing the individuality of the drummer, kit and room that it is in. Uninspiring and contrived is the word I would use to describe this method.

I just think it's funny (and sad) that everyone is doing the same f'ing thing with sample replaced drums. It sounds same-y and boring. Plus it will drastically date your music to this regrettable time period. Add in the fact that you will never, ever learn how to record drums if you don't even try.

I hear so much new music that is using the same tired, re-cycled sounds. I'd rather encourage people to use microphones and rooms/spaces and real instruments rather than replicating a processed Cheez Whiz version of them.

I just got a cd of a local band who are actually pretty good. They are touring and getting some recognition. Their demo sounded really great with energy and style. They have strong songs and can actually play. They went to a known Atlanta producer who re-recorded their album to make it more "polished" and "modern". Now it sounds so generic and meh. He sample replaced all the drums and they suffer for it. I hear the same snare and bass drum samples that everyone is using and wonder why people are so damn lazy when it comes to being creative.

But if that's what you're into, that trendy, cookie cutter stuff, go ahead. It does very little to help people become better audio engineers though by using prepackaged sounds that someone else has already recorded.

It's like paint-by-numbers.

[decocco]

I would stick with acoustic drums if the drummer is good and actually plays his kit more than just beating the shit out of the snare on 2 and 4.

Go with E-drums if the drummer is either not so good or if you value "huge macho drum sound" over "played by a human".

Also, if your band is a Kraftwerk tribute band then acoustic drums aren't gonna cut it.

[decocco]

Originally Posted by T'Mershi Duween

I just think it's funny (and sad) that everyone is doing the same f'ing thing with sample replaced drums. It sounds same-y and boring. Plus it will drastically date your music to this regrettable time period. Add in the fact that you will never, ever learn how to record drums if you don't even try.

+1

[Musiclab]

I started with electronic drums they were NEVER the same as recording a kit, not to mention when you buy Slate drums you now have the same sounds as EVERYONE else who bought them

[Beat Poet]

It's probably all been said by now, but I'd make recording acoustic drums your priority, but then if it's just not working or you can't afford to spend months training yourself to record/mix acoustic drums, then start looking at samples. Obviously I'm a purist though, I record acoustic drums with no samples.

[shaka]

The drummer and the room are the big deciders in this. I captured some very good acoustic drums in my unfinished basement using the Glyn Johns method. However I also have of the Alesis USB e-kits and feel that, if using a good drummer, you can capture some very realistic performances with it using Addictive Drums or STeven Slate.

[frostit]

this is what an old school musician said: you don't have to have great equipment to make great sounding recordings, you have to be a genius with the equipment you have, if you listen to some of the old records from back in the day they sound great, thats because they were geniuses with the stuff they had and made it work.
he than went on to say the best thing would be acoustic drums, but recording great sounding acoustic drums is not something you can do overnight.
so I'm going to start researching drum tuning and mic-ing techniques
if theres post blogs youtube or books that have great tips please post them

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by T'Mershi Duween

I never said I don't like samples or the sound of them, just the prevalent use of the same samples for drums and using short-cuts instead of skill to get a decent result. It makes for lazy musicians who will never be able to actually play, tune or get good sounds on their own drum kit and lazy engineers who phone that shit in instead of capturing the individuality of the drummer, kit and room that it is in. Uninspiring and contrived is the word I would use to describe this method.

I just think it's funny (and sad) that everyone is doing the same f'ing thing with sample replaced drums. It sounds same-y and boring. Plus it will drastically date your music to this regrettable time period. Add in the fact that you will never, ever learn how to record drums if you don't even try.

I hear so much new music that is using the same tired, re-cycled sounds. I'd rather encourage people to use microphones and rooms/spaces and real instruments rather than replicating a processed Cheez Whiz version of them.

I just got a cd of a local band who are actually pretty good. They are touring and getting some recognition. Their demo sounded really great with energy and style. They have strong songs and can actually play. They went to a known Atlanta producer who re-recorded their album to make it more "polished" and "modern". Now it sounds so generic and meh. He sample replaced all the drums and they suffer for it. I hear the same snare and bass drum samples that everyone is using and wonder why people are so damn lazy when it comes to being creative.

But if that's what you're into, that trendy, cookie cutter stuff, go ahead. It does very little to help people become better audio engineers though by using prepackaged sounds that someone else has already recorded.

It's like paint-by-numbers.

I don't know if you realise it, but you said, "no, it's not taste at all"....and then went on a big rant about how you don't like sampled drums, ie what your personal taste is. Using words like "lazy", "cookie cutter", "paint by numbers", "generic and meh"....hardly an unbiased opinion is it? Maybe the OP LIKES that sound? Maybe they're going to be sample replacing however they record? Maybe our friends in the local band think their record now sounds more commercial, and the fact you don't like a commercial sound is the reason you don't like their record? Maybe it was just badly done - even the top guys have off days.

At the end of the day, if the OP wants live sounding, raw to "real" style drums, he's going to struggle to get it easily with a purely electronic kit. If he's into modern pop rock drums that are heavily sampled anyway, unless you've got the facility to record a good sounding kit already, he's probably just as well off using pads for the drums, and live cymbals for the top kit. I'd rather do it that way than record a poor kit, have to sample replace and then be fighting the sound of crap drums in the overheads/room.

I agree with you that it's much better to record your own sounds - if I do sample replacing on the stuff I record, it's usually for consistency and with samples I recorded on the session, so no cookie cutter there - but I'd rather have a good if slightly generic polished sound for my polished rock record, than the weak drum sound that gives away many demo recordings.

Of course, a crap drum sound might be exactly what the record needs..but that's personal taste, right?!

[dkelley]

Originally Posted by T'Mershi Duween

But if that's what you're into, that trendy, cookie cutter stuff, go ahead. It does very little to help people become better audio engineers though by using prepackaged sounds that someone else has already recorded.

It's like paint-by-numbers.

there's nothing cookie cutter about how I play drums. I'm sure this is true of many professionals, whether they are making acoustic sound or triggering samples. Great keyboardists are no less legitimate if they play sample-playback synthesizers or romplers than if they play acoustic piano.

I play a kit of midi triggers and playback the sounds through ezdrummer. the finess and tone is excellent, it's very responsive, but the touch control is of course not nearly as variable as in a real kit. Still, it's real playing by a real drummer - EVERY sound has already been recorded.

It's a drum. If you hit it a certain way with a certain weight and certain stick on a certain part, it sounds a certain way. Nothing you can do about that.

Which is why sample pianos have also come so far. Both sampled pianos and sample drums are both SO advanced that in a mix it's sometimes impossible to tell if it's real or sampled, assuming it's played by a real musician rather than programmed of course.

oh, and there is nothing dated about my sampled drum sound. They sound like a professionally miked large acoustic Ludwig kit. I mean, it sounds EXACTLY like a real acoustic kit on a recording.

You very likely aren't aware of just how often you're hearing drum replacement samples in the music you listen to... and I don't mean 80s or kraftwerk or anything similar. I mean rock n roll, country, ballad, commercial, instrumental, and even orchestral music where drum samples get used all the time in soundtracks and the like. Nobody is the wiser unless you work in the industry and see how often it's done.

[cavern]

With the new SSD 4.0 you can layer and tweak drums in such a way that after they are printed to audio tracks and effected,i think it is real enough to fool anyone.No two kits sound alike.(provided they are played by a drummer and not programmed to the grid).
I play to a click but never quantize the tracks whether its my acoust. kit or the digital kit.
Frankly,i rarely use my acoustic kit lately.

[Quadrophonic73]

Basically if you like the way your drummer plays and sounds, you're going to have to record him playing a real kit to get the same thing.

I agree with what the others are saying: track his drums in a nice(r) studio and do the rest as you see fit. I did my last album this way, tracking guitars, vox, and everything else in my own studio and then taking the tracks into a local studio and letting the guy there engineer the drum recordings. They were 1000 times better than anything I would have recorded in my own space. And the album overall is way better off for it.

[Aaron Miller]

Originally Posted by frostit

I dont want to start a war here but I need to buy some drum mic's and learn how to tune and mic an acoustic drum kit, or buy some roland V drums and the new slate software.
the drummer in my band hates anything electronic, and every time he says, (we need to go to a real studio and record with real drums), I want to punch him in the face, and I always end up telling him if he pays for it we will go to a studio and record, any thoughts would be great

If he's a good drummer you should go to a studio. I think it would be cheaper than buying V-drums + Slate and the results would be better. Why think of paying only as his responsibility? I mean, it's you band's product. Is he going to buy the V-drums and Slate too?