Recording drums for the first time.

[AndyHutchinson]

Hi,
From what I can tell, from the video you referenced, I would start with some dynamics, close mic'd. Dynamics will give you some proximity effect and will give you a full and close sound, especially on the kick and snare. As far as HH is concerned, I've had the best luck with ribbons. I love a Beyer M500 on HH. Since ribbons are dynamic mics with just a more exaggerated mid and a rolled-off high end, I think that might work, because it would give you the detail of a condenser, but without the harshness often associated with condensers on OH's. I would start by close-mic'ing the HH, but don't be afraid to back off, as long as you don't get too much bleed from the other mic's. If you have a figure of eight ribbon, you can place the null pointed at the snare. Also, I know that a lot of people tend to place the mic above the HH, but I usually place it underneath so that it's pointing toward the ceiling; I find that I get less bleed that way. As some earlier posters mentioned, I can't say enough good things about the Senn 441; it's one of my favorite mics. Talk about a swiss army knife. I've used it on HH and ride before with great success. Overall, I prefer a simpler setup; usually kick, snare and one or two overheads for rock/pop projects, adding a HH, ride and, maybe, though not often, a tom mic for jazz/acoustic projects. Anyway, sorry for my long-winded post, and I wish you luck. Let us know how it goes. Cheers

[mogazi!]

Hi again, and thanks for the interesting suggestions.

I think separate recoding of the hi-hat would definitely produce the best results in terms of sound and clarity. In this particular situation though, I'm not sure it would be the easiest solution as it would result in each song taking twice as long to be recorded. Plus our drummer has never had any sort of "real recording" experience and this would be a rather unusual place to start. That being said, I'm not a drummer so I don't know if it's something that can be done very easily (the "air drumming" while only playing certain parts of the kit) so I'll propose it and see what reaction I get before deciding one way or the other.

Also very interesting is be the ribbon fig-0f-8 idea with the "deaf" section aimed in direction of the snare. Like you said, it might be mostly effective if used from underneath the HH.

Generally I wouldn't bother too much with tom mics either but we have 2 songs that make heavy use of them (rack & floor) so i think I'll close mic them just in case. Do you think i should use a ride mic as well? I'm planning to go with 2 overheads.

[jgimbel]

I have to say I'm surprised to hear all the hi hat mic talk, as on most threads I see, a mic just for the hi hat is ridiculed! I've never miced a hi hat myself except when I was micing a drum kit to be EQ'd radically to sound like a weird electric drumset (for those hihats that sound like hi "chk" and that's it). So I don't have too much in the way of suggestions there.

But about tom mics, when I'm going for that kind of commercial sound, I definitely use tom mics. In general I don't like to mic toms. For most of what I'm recording, I don't mind losing a small bit of low end in the toms and just having them picked up in the OHs, so it's got a nice mid range. But most of my stuff is relatively sparse (sometimes kept sparse specifically so that drum sound works, I'm a sucker for it). But when I've recorded things that are more commercial style, tom mics are important for me. These kind of mixes are generally pretty dense, so toms that are just picked up in the overheads can easily be lost and can sound like hitting a piece of paper when all other faders are pulled up. Though at the same time, I find it's incredibly easy to get a "good" tom sound, but takes some work to get a "great" tom sound. But personally I'd be paying more attention to tom mics than to hi hat mics. The only issue I've ever had with hihats is having too much.

[elan]

hi hat is very important in at genre.
the rhythmic isn't complex, but every elements need to be heard perfectly and separated.

honestly i like the drum with less mic, and probably we'll use only some mix, but hi hat is probably the most important element in that genre.

[jgimbel]

hi hat is very important in at genre.
the rhythmic isn't complex, but every elements need to be heard perfectly and separated.

honestly i like the drum with less mic, and probably we'll use only some mix, but hi hat is probably the most important element in that genre.

Hm I don't know that I agree that hihat is the most important element in the genre, though it's important in time keeping especially. I don't think I think it's more important than snare. We don't have to agree on that though.

But I repeat, I've never had any issue not getting enough hihat, only getting too much, still without a hihat mic, so whether or not it's most important doesn't change that.

[Ian]

I've never had any issue not getting enough hihat, only getting too much, still without a hihat mic,

That's usually the case for me as well...fookin hi hat gets in everything!

[chris harris]

But I repeat, I've never had any issue not getting enough hihat, only getting too much, still without a hihat mic, so whether or not it's most important doesn't change that.

There's definitely a time and a place for close mic'ed hihat. Did you actually watch the video that he linked to? Do you think that it's even possible to get a hihat sound like that with just overheads and room mics? it's not.

[inasilentway]

If it's your first time, I would suggest skipping outside kick and snare bottom. It's just more tracks to balance. Start small and grow your technique as you do more recording. I see people mic bottom snare without checking phase and the snare sound ends up sounding odd as a result. Don't bother with overdubbing hi-hat, your drummer will be bummed out and you'll get a worse performance. Just take a little bit of extra time to move mics around.

[joninc]

if the amount of tracks are not an issue and you don't have to buss inside/outsite kit or top/btm snare mics together - i would say DEFINITELY record outside kick (that's where a lot of the low end is) and btm snare (for a more natural snare sound).

you can mess with phase and stuff later as long as they are on their own tracks.

you can always mute later - but you can't add what's not there unless you want to get into samples ... yuck.

i'd say just keep it simple - don't get into any compression or eq or filtering - just get your distances right and keep your levels conservative. then you'll have plenty to
work with later.

[jgimbel]

But I repeat, I've never had any issue not getting enough hihat, only getting too much, still without a hihat mic, so whether or not it's most important doesn't change that.

There's definitely a time and a place for close mic'ed hihat. Did you actually watch the video that he linked to? Do you think that it's even possible to get a hihat sound like that with just overheads and room mics? it's not.

I'm not sure why I'm sensing animosity here..yes, since I read each post I watched the video when he posted it. All I'm saying, before, and again, is when I've done recordings with sounds in that style, I haven't needed to mic the hihat. As shown by the fact that I'm saying nothing offensive, I'm not trying to offended anyone, just stating my own experience. I guess saying "YMMV" would have made this less offensive?

[chris harris]

it's not offensive... and, I don't mean to be either. but, that advice is just not in line with what he's trying to achieve. I don't often use/need a close mic'ed hihat track either. But, just like with every instrument, a hihat sounds completely different when mic'ed at a distance, compared to when it's mic'ed up close. And, sometimes, as in the case of the band he referenced, the close mic works for the mix.

[elan]

okay men, i understand your points. but:

hh needs its own mic, not because there could be not enough hi hat in terms of volume, but because it needs a lot of definition and isn't the most important part of the drum kit in that genre because is the loudest element (a lot of times yes) but because is the one which more characterize the style of the band (in some way), i mean if you get a very detailed hh you can work a lot better in the mix with that element and you can find way (effects, comp, automations, etc) to make it personal and characteristic.

i would like to have no bleed from the close micing (snare, kick, hh) and i will filter all the hh i can from the kick and the snare.

but i need a lot of detail from the hh close mic and possibly no snare bleed, no lows/mid lows.

so, we've asked for suggestions about that.

then i thought about two 441 as OH because they are very detailed, but also very "solid sounding" and they can make the drum a lot wider and spread more the HH frequencies and cymbals in general, and to take the attack of the snare, toms, etc.

than i thought a re20 as room mic to have a homogeneous, natural, drum sound, to smash it and have a bit of "wood" sound to blend it with the other (most defined) mic, to get a more aggressive sound, using even distortions or something like that.

so, all the close mics and OH need to be very detailed, clean, separated and punchy, while the re20 will be very dynamic (apparent), aggressive, wood sounding.

what i wish to know are tricks to achieve separation and detail and in general to get that kind of drum sound.

or better, not tricks, but knowledge

[chris harris]

don't bang your head against the wall trying to achieve "separation".. You'll have some bleed. There's no avoiding it. When you're mixing together several drum mics, that bleed will help make it all sound cohesive.

[elan]

ok, but considering the bleed is unavoidable, i think is better if i can reduce it as much as i can.

i know that the bleed helps to sound cohesive, but depends a lot to the room.

if i'm in the abbey studios.. well i would mic with only 5 mic and no close micing except for kick and snare (but even distant), but if the room isn't so good and if i don't know it, and if i need punch, detail, etc, i think reducing the bleed is part of the game..

no?

[chris harris]

if i'm in the abbey studios.. well i would mic with only 5 mic and no close micing except for kick and snare (but even distant), but if the room isn't so good and if i don't know it, and if i need punch, detail, etc, i think reducing the bleed is part of the game..

no?

No. I'm not sure where this whole, "if the room sounds good, you only need a few mics" thing comes from. Sure, IF IT'S A ROOM SOUND THAT YOU'RE GOING FOR, then you would surely benefit from a better sounding room. But, even in the best sounding room in the world, if you want a tight, close-mic'ed sound, you won't get it from distant micing.

Just because a room sounds magical, doesn't mean that you should automatically pull your mics back, unless that's specifically the sound that you're after. You wouldn't mic a vocalist from 10 feet away, just because the room sounded nice, if a close, intimate sound was what you were going for. It's the same with the drums.

And, no.. it doesn't take complete separation to get a close-mic'ed drum kit to sound punchy. From what I've seen and experienced, a quest for complete isolation of all of the drum parts, invariably leads to drum replacing and/or layering in samples. This is just ridiculous if you ask me.

Don't worry about completely eliminating the bleed. Worry about making sure that the bleed sounds good. Make sure that the bleed isn't causing any phase issues (you should be able to hear if it is), and start recording some drum tracks.