|
Post by Guitar on Aug 12, 2019 18:05:52 GMT -6
Hell why not go all the way and just bang on some trash cans and pots and pans?
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Aug 12, 2019 18:15:42 GMT -6
You guys are funny.
There's a disconnect going on. People aren't going for high and snappy country/metal/pop punk drums and ending up with the fat thumpies because they can't figure out how to get the high snappies. Believe it or not (and you may want to sit down for this) some of us love dry, fat, thumpy drums.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Aug 12, 2019 18:16:45 GMT -6
This one (off the same record) as actually even closer to the Beyer video.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Aug 12, 2019 18:24:58 GMT -6
Or some older versions of the dry thumps.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Aug 12, 2019 18:28:59 GMT -6
"The Dry Thumps" that's a good term for it, I'll try to remember that one.
I really think the Beatles truly owned it for a lot of their catalog.
One of my favorites:
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Aug 12, 2019 18:50:54 GMT -6
put me in the dry thump camp
Cheers
Wiz
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 23:10:21 GMT -6
...the 201 has a HUGE proximity effect (like the m88). It adds a lot more thickness when placed close to a snare than an sm57 does. It also has less high mid. If placed "wrong", you'll get too much "thud" as mentioned. Pull it back a bit and it picks up more snare wire, shell and highs. Place it an inch or so higher off the top head and pull it back where it's just outside of the rim off the snare.
I also use an i5 live for snare top and that's nice too.
201 is a nice vocal mic w/the included foam windscreen. I tried in once on my GS mini acoustic but it was kinda "meh". Sounds awesome on guitar amps. Have not tried on overheads yet but plan to.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 12, 2019 23:21:08 GMT -6
Yeah, the kit with all the mics might be servicable within a song, but it took a lot of damping of heads to get them sounding as good as he did. Cardboard boxes or paint pails might sound as good. There used to be (maybe still is) a street musician in SF who used to set up a "kit" consisting of maybe 20 5 gallon plastic buckets on which he would solo at great length. Oddly enough, he wasn't really bad, considering, and appeared to make money at it!
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Aug 13, 2019 1:52:01 GMT -6
i saw said dude back around 1990. long tme ago.
he was amazing and made those buckets sound like a kit playing jazz.
|
|
|
Post by jamiesego on Aug 13, 2019 8:23:12 GMT -6
Wasn’t there a Kacey Musgraves thread recently? Lots of dry thump on that record. I get asked for it all the time. In the right context it’s great.
|
|
|
Post by bigbone on Aug 13, 2019 9:12:44 GMT -6
I love dry "old school" drums sound, in the Beyer video what did bug me a bit was the "pingy'' Tom floor sound.I like the other tone of the drums. !!!!
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on Aug 13, 2019 12:02:22 GMT -6
I'll have to dig out my 201 again. I tried it on snare for a while but it just seemed dull and boxy to me at the time. I switched to a 57 with a Yellow Crimson Mod and that's been my go to on snare for a while--more open sounding and picks up more of the snare wire sound. As for the ATM25, it was the go to floor tom mic in a couple of big time NYC studios for a while. It does a thing, but it's a very modern, scooped thing, and that's not MY thing. I have one but it rarely gets used. I just looked up the Crimson Yellow mod. Judging from the description it sounds like everything I hate in "modern voiced" mics.
When are people going to get hip to the fact that boosted, hyped treble does not equal increased detail, "openness" and definition? That reminds me of the common fallacy that you can EQ a dynamic to sound like a condenser.
That being said, the stock Shure trannies pretty much suck.
I don't know if I ever read the Crimson sales pitch. I, like yourself, am not too crazy about a 57 on snare or amps so I thought I'd try an alternative. I've worked with engineers on drum sessions where they've used an 84 or 414 on snare, but I don't really dig that much top end unless I'm going for a swishy brush thing. The Crimson yellow mod sort of split the difference for me, so RIGHT NOW I'm digging it. I'm a drummer, and to my ears a 57 never sounded like a snare drum--not what MY ears hear anyway. I'm not an expert, but I'm not sure I would call the Crimson mod a "voiced" mic. They're using different transformers that open up different frequencies of 57s or 58s. I'm a baritone, and on live gigs I also use a 58 Orange mod because it brings out the lows more than a typical 58. Live engineers dig it when I use it. If I sound like a Crimson employee, I'm not. I just like the idea of for the cost of $65 bucks and soldering two wires I can get more use out of mics that were sitting dormant in a closet. I will try my 201 again, but my first impression was not love at first sight.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 13, 2019 13:15:57 GMT -6
I just looked up the Crimson Yellow mod. Judging from the description it sounds like everything I hate in "modern voiced" mics.
When are people going to get hip to the fact that boosted, hyped treble does not equal increased detail, "openness" and definition? That reminds me of the common fallacy that you can EQ a dynamic to sound like a condenser.
That being said, the stock Shure trannies pretty much suck.
I don't know if I ever read the Crimson sales pitch. I, like yourself, am not too crazy about a 57 on snare or amps so I thought I'd try an alternative. I've worked with engineers on drum sessions where they've used an 84 or 414 on snare, but I don't really dig that much top end unless I'm going for a swishy brush thing. The Crimson yellow mod sort of split the difference for me, so RIGHT NOW I'm digging it. I'm a drummer, and to my ears a 57 never sounded like a snare drum--not what MY ears hear anyway. I'm not an expert, but I'm not sure I would call the Crimson mod a "voiced" mic. They're using different transformers that open up different frequencies of 57s or 58s. I'm a baritone, and on live gigs I also use a 58 Orange mod because it brings out the lows more than a typical 58. Live engineers dig it when I use it. If I sound like a Crimson employee, I'm not. I just like the idea of for the cost of $65 bucks and soldering two wires I can get more use out of mics that were sitting dormant in a closet. I will try my 201 again, but my first impression was not love at first sight. try pulling it back an inch or two from where you'd put a 57.
Something else to try is micing the side of the shell instead of the top head, being careful to avoid the vent hole. You can adjust balance between top head and snare with the position of the mic, height-wise. Yeah, it sounds like a weird idea, but give it a try - that's what I generally do with my KM84 or C451EB.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Aug 13, 2019 15:37:29 GMT -6
Something that's been mentioned here and there is that the 57 really sounds better when loaded down.
Try a 600 ohm pad of some small value like 3dB between the 57 and mic pre and it really tames some of the shrill.
|
|
|
Post by donr on Aug 13, 2019 16:38:45 GMT -6
Mic'ing the shell of a snare drum instead of the head really works. It sounds like a snare drum, too. And the drummer isn't going to whack the mic.
Corky Stasiak at the Record Plant NY taught me that method.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 13, 2019 16:50:57 GMT -6
Mic'ing the shell of a snare drum instead of the head really works. It sounds like a snare drum, too. And the drummer isn't going to whack the mic. Corky Stasiak at the Record Plant NY taught me that method. I remember Corky - Sandy brought him in for some sessions at The Automatt in SF. Cool dude, great engineer!
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Aug 13, 2019 20:24:41 GMT -6
...the 201 has a HUGE proximity effect (like the m88). It adds a lot more thickness when placed close to a snare than an sm57 does. It also has less high mid. If placed "wrong", you'll get too much "thud" as mentioned. Pull it back a bit and it picks up more snare wire, shell and highs. Place it an inch or so higher off the top head and pull it back where it's just outside of the rim off the snare. I also use an i5 live for snare top and that's nice too. 201 is a nice vocal mic w/the included foam windscreen. I tried in once on my GS mini acoustic but it was kinda "meh". Sounds awesome on guitar amps. Have not tried on overheads yet but plan to. I've been experimenting with using an all EV lineup (RE15, RE10, RE20) on drums, except for the OHs and room mics, and then using eq, Kush Electras specifically (but other eqs too), to eq in (or out) what I want. Yes, these EV mics don't get the typical proximity effect because of their design, but the benefit is that they can be optimally placed anywhere without proximity effect ever being a problem (which it can), and the off axis response is never a problem, also because of the design of the EV mics. The Electras are a great eq for using to then make each of the mics sound however you want. I like the idea of the flexibility and not being boxed in by the need to compromise between proximity effect, physical limitations, and off axis response.
|
|
|
Beyer 201
Aug 13, 2019 20:34:59 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by drsax on Aug 13, 2019 20:34:59 GMT -6
I love great dry drum sounds... if they sound great dry, they typical sound great wet. I often mix drier direct tones with a Coles OH pair and a live stereo mic’ed drum room with a good amount of compression on the room which makes for a real vibey drum sound. Best of both worlds. The 201 hasn’t left the snare position for a couple years.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Aug 14, 2019 6:53:55 GMT -6
Flubby drum tones are the percussion version of hand claps of today. Used everywhere because it's used everywhere. Just because someone asks for it and it's "in vogue" doesn't mean it's cool.
|
|
|
Post by jamiesego on Aug 14, 2019 9:07:06 GMT -6
Flubby drum tones are the percussion version of hand claps of today. Used everywhere because it's used everywhere. Just because someone asks for it and it's "in vogue" doesn't mean it's cool. I like a big, slamming rock kit in a big studio live room, or a Motown drum sound pumped into an echo chamber, or a pristine and natural sounding jazz drum sound, or a trashy garage rock basement sound, sometimes even a big gated reverb or sample replaced drum sound. It can all be cool. Dry, thumpy drums have been a valid artistic choice for decades. It’ll age just fine. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Aug 14, 2019 9:12:43 GMT -6
Flubby drum tones are the percussion version of hand claps of today. Used everywhere because it's used everywhere. Just because someone asks for it and it's "in vogue" doesn't mean it's cool. That’s an awful lot of rhetorical framing work you’re putting in to avoid the simpler and less presumptive possible solution, ie that we just like ‘em. Personally, I didn’t like high, snappy thin drums even when they were en vogue and I’ll still like dry, fat drums when they fall out of fashion.
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Aug 14, 2019 9:50:08 GMT -6
Flubby drum tones are the percussion version of hand claps of today. Used everywhere because it's used everywhere. Just because someone asks for it and it's "in vogue" doesn't mean it's cool. That’s an awful lot of rhetorical framing work you’re putting in to avoid the simpler and less presumptive possible solution, ie that we just like ‘em. Personally, I didn’t like high, snappy thin drums even when they were en vogue and I’ll still like dry, fat drums when they fall out of fashion. I’m with ragan here... and just because they’re dry and fat doesn’t mean they are “Flubby”. They can still be tight It’s subjective, as is music... we are definitely in the land of personal taste - no right or wrong way to do it, 57 or 201 or otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Aug 14, 2019 9:55:12 GMT -6
I prefer the term "Rubenesque". Chris
|
|
|
Post by svart on Aug 14, 2019 10:40:39 GMT -6
That’s an awful lot of rhetorical framing work you’re putting in to avoid the simpler and less presumptive possible solution, ie that we just like ‘em. Personally, I didn’t like high, snappy thin drums even when they were en vogue and I’ll still like dry, fat drums when they fall out of fashion. I’m with ragan here... and just because they’re dry and fat doesn’t mean they are “Flubby”. They can still be tight It’s subjective, as is music... we are definitely in the land of personal taste - no right or wrong way to do it, 57 or 201 or otherwise. Nah those are pretty flubby. Anyway, I don't care for 'em. People can do as they wish though... Even if they're wrong! You guys need to work on sarcasm a bit though..
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 14, 2019 15:10:20 GMT -6
I prefer the term "Rubenesque". Chris I'm not entirely sure if "Rubenesque" and "dry" go together....?
|
|