What's new
Drummerworld Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

unpopular opinion about modern recordings

I hate to ruin this for you too, but the majority of Collective Soul's first record (Hints, Allegations...) was a drum machine, as Ed Roland put it all together mostly by himself initially.

I don't mind songs like that, where it still grooves, despite being a drum machine. Dirty Laundry is like that for me too. So the next time you hear Shine, see if you can't unhear the drum machine.
I heard this band at a club once, they were only the guitar player and the bass/singer. but they had a drum machine. It was so well programmed that you swear you were listening to a real drummer, I even did double takes to see if there was anyone behind them playing. When their set was over I had to ask him how was he able to achieve such good drums out a machine. (They played covers so I knew the songs well), he told me that he literally started with say... only the snare, and will hit it following the original recording all the way through the song, then the bass drum and then the hats and so on with every other piece of the drums that was hit. He said it took a long time but from where I was standing, it definitely paid off, it was amazing. Maybe it was because he copied drums that were played by an actual drummer in the original recording so he actually had nuances and variations that you would not get with a machine alone.
 
It's very, very hard, never been harder. Most of the smaller venues have closed. There is no money in the lower levels, income for beginner musicians has dropped through the floor while costs have sky rocketed - fuel for the van, bus, eating out, hotels and motels, renewables like drum heads and drum sticks. The industry and actually a large part of the public has abandoned entry level scene and just wants to hear finished product and an artist/band with thousands of Youtube/Facebook and Tik-Tok followers.
True on all accounts, but this happened or basically became more pronounced during the inset of Covid.
Now I don't know how the live scene (for small gigs) is in England, but here in the states, there are a few local places bringing small acts back (because that was their bread and butter before Covid) and because without those bands they have much less business. Nobody wants to just dance to a DJ only, there is still an audience for live musicians.
Even in my small area of Augusta Georgia, there are a few places promoting shows almost daily so at least here the scene is back and doing well for small bands.
 
The music business has always worked in cycles - one artist gets big, then next thing you know there's 3,000 rip offs looking for a bit of the action. Then there's the journalistic shorthand, the new Beatles, the new Nirvana, the new Amy Winehouse... So it comes down to the common denominator of money, where you've less risk and hopefully some reward.

In the 80s there was no-one more overproduced than Def Leppard - drum machine and all - but I will hear no argument that Hysteria isn't a classic album. But there's a big difference between overproducing great music and polishing a turd!

But for me, modern music falls down with the vocals. It's either under-emoting, like Billy Eilish and followers, or over-emoting, and you can pick just about anybody new here. And you can hear this difference in the plethora of modern covers of classic songs, where the performers and producers skilfully manage to lose the melody of the original and squeeze the life out of the song. The hangover's too bad or I'd come up with examples, but here in the UK just about every advert has a terrible cover version as the soundtrack. Oftentimes I only recognise the song by the words.

And drum machines might not swing, but again, put them under a good tune and nobody cares about the lack of a drummer. Here's Marvin Gaye from 1982.

Def Leppard was overproduced but that was because they kept re-writing the parts until they were happy with them, basically unlimited studio time. Not many artists today get to have the budget to do that or even write their own songs. (and don't tell me that because they changed 2 words of a single line and got writing credits for that it automatically makes them "song writers") and I feel that any artist loses all credibility (IMO) when they use a formula to write and not what they would actually write if they had any talent.
 
I know this will rub some people the wrong way, but I genuinely can't stand how over produced and aligned to the grid most music is now, I used to be into metal as a kid and now I can't stand any modern recording, it's all very digital and synthetic it just sucks the fun out of it, I've seen some bands back in the days that sucked live, while on recording it sounded perfect, it's very disappointing and you feel somewhat scammed, anyone else feel this way too?
I think sometimes in the moment, or in this case the era, of something like music one may feel somewhat contemptuous for the current situation. Music that I thought sucked years ago when it was new now I look back on only to realize there was a lot of great music which at the time I just wasn't into.
On the other hand though I do concur that much of the music today seems to be over produced especially for the more serious listeners. For me I hear it mostly in Country Music. But I think the purists will win out in the end just like they did with "The Great Drum Machine Scare"😲 of the 1980s.
 
Last edited:
I think "over-production" can certainly play into this. The design/workflow/cookie-cutter approach of DAWs can easily allow for derivative music and extreme "polish" in production. I tend to think that recordings have gotten WORSE over the past decade or so. It's almost as if every aspect of sound is massaged/tweaked into a chromium amorphous glob of digital audio perfection. Almost as if the goal is to eliminate any evidence of a human being involved in the process.
As an example, you could have a great singer, Nancy Wilson singing These Dreams. During the recording sessions she had a bad cold, and you can hear it in the rawness of her voice. She offered to re-record it but the producer (actually a good call) decided that they should just leave it because it actually sounded better than if she had sang the parts cleaner. Now with autotune and manual pitch correct PLUS effects, even I can sound like a great singer. You can actually move my out of key singing to be within the proper key and then I would sound awesome, but how the hell am I going to be able to replicate that live? not to mention, dubbing harmonies (with the same singer singing over in a slightly lower or higher pitch) then pitch perfecting those.
Yes it can sound good, but you can hear that is not natural (or achievable by a human being) and that to me sours the final product. A lot of great recordings were made live (the whole band in the studio playing at the same time) and got very little extra takes if any but they are raw and authentic and that is what makes them great.
 
I absolutely agree that most modern heavy rock has zero distinctive sounds or production, and yes, it's the same drum samples snapped to the grid. As much flavor as tap water.


Dan
 
Don't find this to be the case with my current favorites: M.J. Lenderman, Alcest, Waxahatchee, St. Paul and the Broken Bones, Gojira, Oceans of Slumber, Wednesday, Green Lung and Marcus King.

Perhaps, you're focusing on the wrong music?

agreed...you just have to look "below the mainstream"....sort of like it has always been...

Most modern popular music are boring to death. Rhythm being the same from beginning to end, no melody or just one repeated 50 times, no real bass line... I have hard time grasping the musicality on them. Not even talking about RnB, where all the artists could be interchangeable. No soul, just robotic stuff.
I know I sound old fart but that's why most radio here (France) play 80's 90's music mostly.

I will proudly wave the old man flag and say that ALL popular music has been boring...ever since I can remember...which is back to around 1973ish...pop music was never meant to have substance, because it was always meant to be background. One memorable melody, some mediocre lyrics meant to take take you back to some part of your life that gives you warm fuzzies. Disposable. On to the next....
 
... You can actually move my out of key singing to be within the proper key and then I would sound awesome, but how the hell am I going to be able to replicate that live? not to mention, dubbing harmonies (with the same singer singing over in a slightly lower or higher pitch) then pitch perfecting those.
Yes it can sound good, but you can hear that is not natural (or achievable by a human being) and that to me sours the final product. A lot of great recordings were made live (the whole band in the studio playing at the same time) and got very little extra takes if any but they are raw and authentic and that is what makes them great.
I don't mind some double-tracked harmonies - you can tell when it's the same voice. But If you're going to pull it off live, you'd best have another body with a mic on stage, otherwise it leaves a hole in the live version that folks will miss.

Well... some folks. And would I really care if I was paying audience? Probably not, but it would sour things a bit for me. I saw Three Dog Night shortly after Chuck Negron was let go in the mid-80's - the show was great - but I still remember them as "Two Dog Night."
 
There is a live performance version of Auto-Tune. Also.people perform with backing tracks which can include a lead vocal to back up the live vocal.
 
I've always preferred recordings of studio performances (1960s Beatles, Stones, Tijuana Brass, etc.). I'll take that any day over music that's been assembled from multiple tracks & takes. It's one reason I enjoy Snarky Puppy so much (Larnell & Nikki are other reasons).
 
There is a live performance version of Auto-Tune. Also.people perform with backing tracks which can include a lead vocal to back up the live vocal.
There is an entire pedal designed for vocalists, with harmonies and effects as well as autotune, but that only works well if you (the singer) is already very close to the correct pitch otherwise is going to be really obvious because of the actual delay and the abrupt pitch change. (kind of like Cher's Life after Love song).


 
I've always preferred recordings of studio performances (1960s Beatles, Stones, Tijuana Brass, etc.). I'll take that any day over music that's been assembled from multiple tracks & takes. It's one reason I enjoy Snarky Puppy so much (Larnell & Nikki are other reasons).

this reminds me to mention that processing and overdubbing to fix mistakes has been happening since the 1930's and 40's at least...it is not a phenomenon of just the past 30 years...a lot of the "classic performances" we all know a nd love were probably a mish-mash of individual takes and overdubs, and EQ fixes, and additions of reverb etc
 
this reminds me to mention that processing and overdubbing to fix mistakes has been happening since the 1930's and 40's at least...it is not a phenomenon of just the past 30 years...a lot of the "classic performances" we all know a nd love were probably a mish-mash of individual takes and overdubs, and EQ fixes, and additions of reverb etc
yes this is true although was less common than today, way less common, today even when I produce something myself it's a mash of different takes all glued together while before they would punch in the odd line here and there
 
overdubbing
For years I thought overdubbing was used only when a band wanted a result like in Harry Nilsson recordings.

it's a mash of different takes all glued together
In 2015 I took a Sweetwater studio class on drum recording. The instructor had Kenny Aronoff make six consecutive takes then took the "best" of each take to make a "performance that never happened". It floored me. I was the only guy (and only drummer) in the class who was surprised.

When I make a video of my drumming (it's been a long while) I use one take to show it's not an assembly of takes. But when I record for a friend, it's virtually always a performance that never happened. w00t!
 
Last edited:
this reminds me to mention that processing and overdubbing to fix mistakes has been happening since the 1930's and 40's at least...it is not a phenomenon of just the past 30 years...a lot of the "classic performances" we all know a nd love were probably a mish-mash of individual takes and overdubs, and EQ fixes, and additions of reverb etc
Even I did copy paste with actual cassette tapes were we cut the tape, and re-tape it to the correct part. it was tedious but it got the job done. Now anybody can do that in seconds with most DAWs. And yes the Old recordings were not one takes as most would like you to believe.
 
For years I thought overdubbing was used only when a band wanted a result like in Harry Nilsson recordings.


In 2017 I took a Sweetwater studio class on drum recording. The instructor had Kenny Aronoff make six consecutive takes then took the "best" of each take to make a "performance that never happened". It floored me. I was the only guy (and only drummer) in the class who was surprised.

When I make a video of my drumming (it's been a long while) I use one take to show it's not an assembly of takes. But when I record for a friend, it's virtually always a performance that never happened. w00t!
All my currently posted videos are just on take even if I used multiple cameras (which is only one of them so far) but of course I would love to have a perfect take, but I am just too lazy to edit all the mistakes out and do multiple takes. I rather learn the song well enough to play it correctly.
 
Even I did copy paste with actual cassette tapes were we cut the tape, and re-tape it to the correct part. it was tedious but it got the job done. Now anybody can do that in seconds with most DAWs. And yes the Old recordings were not one takes as most would like you to believe.

yep...one of my first experiences in a studio - in 1982ish - was helping the engineers splice tapes....mostly cleaning up the mess afterwards bc I was pretty young, but it taught me a lot about how "the magic" happened....
 
yep...one of my first experiences in a studio - in 1982ish - was helping the engineers splice tapes....mostly cleaning up the mess afterwards bc I was pretty young, but it taught me a lot about how "the magic" happened....
I just spliced my own tapes but yes it was not fun.
 
I just spliced my own tapes but yes it was not fun.

by the time I gained enough "wisdom" to be at the tape splicing level, the very first version of Pro Tools came out, and we spent more time learning/working with that...
 
Top