Tracking drums a few bpm slower

[Joshua Wickman]

Just had an idea and curious if anyone has done this method. Track drums 5-10 bpm slower and then change the tempo back to normal when drum quantizing begins. So then you would not end up with gaps if the drummer rushed a part or something. Anyways whats your thoughts on this?

Please no "if the drummer cant play the right tempo he suck" or "make him do it right until he gets it" comments. I'm looking to make the best productions in a very limited amount of time and just curious if anyone has tried this before.

 

[AdamWathan]

This is actually a great trick and I know at least one guy who does it now and then. Your reasoning is exactly right, drummers rushing things is always a bitch because you can't pull the notes apart far enough without repeating a transient. So yeah, track drums a little slower and then when you edit everything you are making all the gaps smaller instead of bigger, and squishing things together is always WAY easier than pulling them apart. You just have to be really careful to edit every single transient (cymbals and everything) since now you have to put EVERYTHING that was played on the grid, since even if the high hat hits were played "on time" at the slower BPM, now everything is too slow. Still a great trick!

 

[drew_drummer]

Well... one way to see would be to get some old drumtracks... and if they were recorded at 155... make the tempo 160, and test your theory.

 

[C_F_H_13]

do it all the time. Even doing 2bpm is enough and with that amount the band doesn't notice.

5bpm or more is way too much IMO.

 

[Sinister Mephisto]

Yeah it works. I don't do it often, drummers don't like to admit they aren't playing perfectly.

 

[Genius Gone Insane]

I was planning to do this the other day, even though I'm totally against it. I had planned on slowing down everything for the drummer on this 2nd go around but he ended up playing somewhat decently (for a youngster). I'm going to have to edit the shit out of it but personally I'd rather go this route than having him slow the tape down. There's something really wrong to me about recording at a different speed than the final product will be.

 

[jangoux]

What daw you use? On some daws you dont even need to edit things...in Logic you can do that, in Cubendo too

 

[colonel kurtz]

There's something really wrong to me about recording at a different speed than the final product will be.

*shrug*

worked out ok for the beatles

 

[SentencedToBurn]

*shrug*

worked out ok for the beatles

yeah. i mean people used to do it a lot more with tape machines. used it for getting the right sound of an instrument. great for changing the dynamics and color of... say a tambourine.

 

[Sinister Mephisto]

There's something really wrong to me about recording at a different speed than the final product will be.

And editing the shit out of it IS okay? All editing is, is slowing down and speeding up in small segments.

 

[Aaron Smith]

Never tried this, but someday I may. I know the common/preferred way to quantize drums is to do the cymbals separate from the bottom of the kit (every 1/4 note or whatever is being played on the cymbals), but in this kind of situation, is it better to do the entire kit all together? It seems like it would be, especially if it involves a lot of double kicks or quick fills.

 

[nwright]

Seems like it would only really save time in the tracking stage, not in the editing stage. What advantage you'd gain by being able to manipulate the time easier IMO you'd lose in having to go over the tracks SO finely, beat by beat (unless you do that now).

 

[AudioGeekZine]

I've had to edit tracks where the guy wanted some songs up to 10 bpm slower. I don't think any of the songs for that album were tracked at the right tempo.

Quantize to original tempo, no fades, set all drum tracks to ticks mode, change project tempo, batch fade, set tracks to samples mode again. Check fades.

 

[C_F_H_13]

Seems like it would only really save time in the tracking stage, not in the editing stage. What advantage you'd gain by being able to manipulate the time easier IMO you'd lose in having to go over the tracks SO finely, beat by beat (unless you do that now).

For me. This whole idea is only used in one of two situations.

1- The drummer constantly rushes, but not consistently. the kicks are too close together, or theres alot of hi hat work that has to be perfect.

2- Drummers just terrible. Usually young kids or older kids who have no clue. If you HAVE to edit every hit of the performance, just do it a few BPM slower and it's drastically easier. You don't have to worry about pasting shit around to make it work.

And trust me it'll save you so much time in the editing stage.

 

[Genius Gone Insane]

And editing the shit out of it IS okay? All editing is, is slowing down and speeding up in small segments.

No you're right editing the shit out of it is not okay but again I'd rather go that route. I mean at least the guy tried to play it and got it somewhat close. Editing is more cleaning up, you know? Slowing down is like not even trying.

I'm not God, I'm just saying my opinion that I'd prefer to edit a realtime take than to slow down the song for someone.

*shrug*

worked out ok for the beatles

Well were the Beatles doing it for artistic purposes or because they couldn't play it?

 

[waltz mastering]

*shrug*

worked out ok for the beatles

Right? ...and for a heavier sound - record faster (vari speed) and then slow down (analog).

 

[[UEAK]Clowd]

Seems like it would only really save time in the tracking stage, not in the editing stage. What advantage you'd gain by being able to manipulate the time easier IMO you'd lose in having to go over the tracks SO finely, beat by beat (unless you do that now).

I do this anyway so it would be a nice little relief. I might try this for my next project.

 

[lolzgreg]

It will be too much of an ass pain to cut up the cymbals IMO. If you want the best results in the quickest amount of time, use real overheads with roland mesh heads as drums, have no real drums in the mix, but only cymbals, and bring the broots. If he hits the cymbals hard enough, you will barely be able to hear the e-drums, and if he plays the cymbals close enough to perfect time, you can do little to no editing, just quantize the midi tracked from the e-drums and wham, bam, thank you ma'am!

 

[drew_drummer]

It will be too much of an ass pain to cut up the cymbals IMO. If you want the best results in the quickest amount of time, use real overheads with roland mesh heads as drums, have no real drums in the mix, but only cymbals, and bring the broots. If he hits the cymbals hard enough, you will barely be able to hear the e-drums, and if he plays the cymbals close enough to perfect time, you can do little to no editing, just quantize the midi tracked from the e-drums and wham, bam, thank you ma'am!

Sure fire way to have those lovely robotic drums that everyone around here seems to get jizzy in the lower regions over.

 

[Genius Gone Insane]

Sure fire way to have those lovely robotic drums that everyone around here seems to get jizzy in the lower regions over.

Well that's what people want