The sadness of wasted bits

[Willem]

However, as the readout says, this is average level.

 

[mhardy6647]

Drums especially high hats and cymbals are not anywhere real on recordings. Keyboards are vibrant and pulsating and the bass has feeling and emotion. Not as much on recordings. That's one of the reasons I crank the PEQ so much.
View attachment 320832

Not quite a smiley, but close.
Might want to check the patient for other signs of a stroke.

Stroke Symptoms and Warning Signs

By learning and sharing the B.E. F.A.S.T. and R.Á.P.I.D.O. warning signs, you just might save a life from stroke. Plus, other symptoms. Prepare yourself and loved ones!

www.stroke.org

 

[MattHooper]

Ever since I started attending symphonies I was fascinated, not just with the music but with the quality of the sound. For good portions of the performance I would often close my eyes and drink and sort of analyze the nature of the sound, how it’s different from a stereo system. (we had a great stereo system at that time already my dad was an audiophile).

That tendency to analyze, live sound in terms of how it differs from reproduce sound has stayed with me ever since.

Of course a lot of it depends on exactly what type of life sound when is talking about? But when it comes to live on amplified sound - someone speaking, singing, the sound of an acoustic guitar, saxophone, trombone, drums or whatever - My impressions have always been:

Live sound sources sound larger, heavier, more substantial in size and acoustic power, and overall rounder and richer, then their counterpart in reproduced sound (on the average audiophile system).

There’s a sort of effortless level of detail, presence and clarity, yet with a sort of natural relaxed warmth - I infer that some of this is due to hearing all the relevant frequencies and harmonics cast by a voice or instrument, all of which doesn’t necessarily make it through the process of recording, mixing and squeezed out of woofers and tweeters.

Most sound reproduction sounds artificial and mechanical in comparison, which is why the term “ organic” always springs to my mind when thinking about the qualities of a live voice or instrument versus reproduced.

Then, of course, as people keep mentioning: dynamics. When I close my eyes and the presence of somebody playing acoustic guitar there’s just this obvious “ liveness” and Lifeforce to the sound that seems blunted and most reproduced sound at home. That goes for the dynamics, large and small (macro, and micro, to use common audiophile terms). Even when the guitarist is not playing loudly, there is a level of variation in the dynamics of his fingerpicking that just says “ live musician” unequivocally, in a way the same type of passages do not through most systems.

So I’ve carried around this picture of live sound, and I have noticed that the closer sound systems come to replicating some of those characteristics - especially for me that tonal richness and warmth - the more I enjoy listening. And so I have put together gear over the years that to my ears bring some of those characteristics.

I’m not expecting total realism, but if I can get some level of facsimile to the real thing, especially in certain characteristics, I’m a happy guy.

 

[Willem]

I mostly agree with all this. In practical terms, for me this has meant first that I wanted and hence added more and cleaner bass. Digital sources for the first time have allowed a clean signal at the lowest frequencies, and we are only just beginning to appreciate the importance of deep bass. It implies subwoofers, and dsp room eq to deal with the limitations of small rooms (and here, all rooms are small). The second is the need for realistic dynamic range. This requires big amplifier power, such as is now available for a relatively modest outlay, and with - again - subwoofers. Finally, it requires a quiet listening environment. We all know how listening late at night reveals more detail and realism. This may be hard to achieve at some urban locations, and in existing homes, but in a quiet suburb and a new home with, e.g., triple glazing and a silent heating system a big dynamic range can be reproduced without turning up the wick too much.
Finally, however, we have to remain realistic: nothing beats a live symphonic orchestra. Where I do not agree with Mat is about the warmth of live sound. In my experience a live orchestra or choir can just as easily be shrill at times.

 

[SIY]

Re; metal vs. jazz, I know quite a few jazz drummers and every one of them is in awe of people like Mike Portnoy or Danny Carey. I'd suggest the opposite of what was asserted: it would be easier for them to slide over to jazz than a jazz drummer to play their kind of music.

We used to have these debates about rock vs jazz drumming. And having heard the absolutely leaden efforts of people like Charlie Watts when they tried changing genres, I had some sympathy with the notion that rock drummers can't do jazz. Then Ginger Baker's superb work with Charlie Haden and Bill Frissell pretty much devastated THAT argument.

 

[CapMan]

I'd suggest the opposite of what was asserted: it would be easier for them to slide over to jazz than a jazz drummer to play their kind of music.

Listen to Neil Peart murder Cotton Tail with the Buddy Rich big band and any notion that one genre is easier to slide into than another is clearly nonsense. He had buckets of technique , but no feel for swing or playing the tune..

Many rock and metal drummers have unbelievable speed and technique, but that doesn't always make them as musical, as good at listening or with the great feel / sense of time of the best jazzers.

 

[SIY]

Listen to Neil Peart murder Cotton Tail with the Buddy Rich big band and any notion that one genre is easier to slide into than another is clearly nonsense. He had buckets of technique , but no feel for swing or playing the tune..

Many rock and metal drummers have unbelievable speed and technique, but that doesn't always make them as musical, as good at listening or with the great feel / sense of time of the best jazzers.

Although I appreciate Peart's work, I wouldn't put him in the same category as Carey or Baker or Portnoy.

 

[Andreas007]

Isn't if kind of "normal" that a recording doesn't sound like live? I mean, what do you expect coming out from two speakers? Stereo recording and also playback are limited.
If you want more maybe wave field synthesis is something for you? Besides that I don't think most people wouldn't/couldn't tolerate recordings which have full dynamic range.

 

[MattHooper]

Although I appreciate Peart's work, I wouldn't put him in the same category as Carey or Baker or Portnoy.

Canuck here, and longtime Rush fan.

Them’s fighting’ words!

Peart has to be at or near the top of most influential drummers of all time. And perhaps even more important than sheer technical virtuosity, I’d argue he produced more memorable drum parts than any other drummer, which is itself an amazing achievement in terms of what it says about creativity, hooky quality and the individuality in his playing (it’s why practically every rush knows almost every film and drum part).

 

[CapMan]

I’d argue he produced more memorable drum parts than any other drummer, which is itself an amazing achievement

That would be a very silly argument indeed ..

Let's start with Hal Blaine - here is his list of credits.

List of song recordings featuring Hal Blaine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

We could add Bernard Purdie, Steve Gadd, Earl Palmer and on and on, lots of memorable and famous drum parts

 

[MattHooper]

Let's start with Hal Blaine - here is his list of credits.

That misses the point. The issue isn’t whether somebody played on many memorable songs, but whether their drum parts are particularly memorable and known by a huge number of people.

If you named all those songs to somebody who would be able to say “ yeah I know every drum part and fill and all those songs?”

This reminds me of when we used to play in bands back in the late 70s and 80s, and some of my musician friends had gotten deeply into “ jazz fusion” and technical playing. I remember them dissing people like Madonna because “ her songs are so simple, anyone can play that or come up with that stuff.”

And yet, when these guys tried to come up with commercial sounding songs, they were just awful. Cringe inducing. And certainly not memorable. They really didn’t understand that being able to come up with hooky and memorable songs that strike a card with the public is a very difficult thing to do.

I’m applying this same phenomenon to drumming. There are countless drummers who can play a great role and supporting the rest of the music. But what stood out about Neil Peart was a rare combination of technical chops, with a very distinct individual style, an enormous sense of creativity, and a gift for coming up with “ earworm” rhythms and drum fills, that were pronounced and memorable.

This is why Rush is notoriously an “ air drumming” band, where virtually every fan knows all of Neil’s drum parts and fills, and why you see so many of the fans, air drumming along to Peart at the concerts, and why so many other drummers have lots of Peart’s parts burned into their brain. And also why Peart is seen as one of the most influential dramas ever. It’s why you can still see so many drummers young and old playing his parts on YouTube.

This is the aspect that many people don’t appreciate when they start comparing drummers. It’s not just about “ who is better technically or who plays with more taste.”

Certainly, some of the drummers you mentioned had some memorable drum parts.

However, the pronounced level of individuality, and how pronounced his drum parts were in the music, and the memorable number of “ drum hooks” Peart produced his hard to match.

Rush fans often joke “ just imagine how much brain power we might’ve had if so much of our memory wasn’t taking up with Neil Peart’s drum parts”. His stuff sticks to the memory for a reason.

 

[CapMan]

That misses the point. The issue isn’t whether somebody played on many memorable songs, but whether their drum parts are particularly memorable and known by a huge number of people.

Counterpoints and facts always seem to miss your points, be it speakers or drummers (and I am a drummer) so I guess I will leave you humming along to YYZ and ignoring the rest of the drumming canon of the last 100 years..

 

[SIY]

If you named all those songs to somebody who would be able to say “ yeah I know every drum part and fill and all those songs?”

Ringo.

 

[MattHooper]

Counterpoints and facts always seem to miss your points, be it speakers or drummers (and I am a drummer) so I guess I will leave you humming along to YYZ and ignoring the rest of the drumming canon of the last 100 years..

No need for the snark. This is just fun, along the lines of defending ones sports team, or other subjective discussions. (many of us have played in bands. I also played drums along with other instruments, but I don’t think “ I play drums” how amount too much in this discussion).

Still, I would stand behind my argument that Neil stood out in terms of producing memorable drum parts. Again, it’s not that other drummers didn’t produce some memorable drum parts or rhythms or weren’t influential. I’m talking about the particularly prodigious amount of memorable drum parts Peart produced.

And waving towards “ the drum Canon of the last 100 years” doesn’t really answer to what I wrote.

For instance, YouTube is filled with analysis of Neil Peart’s drumming and covering his drum parts. Bernard Purdie? Not so much.

This isn’t surprising given Rush continued to play for 40 years with an avid fan base, Neil building his reputation through that whole period. And again, most rush fans know most or a lot of Neil Peart’s drum parts. How many fans are there who know virtually all of Bernard Purdie‘s drum parts and fills? Sure there is the influential “Purdie shuffle” but I don’t see evidence that he produced as many memorable drum hooks and parts as Neil. And that’s the point I’m making. The sheer fecundity of distinct and memorable drum parts is hard to match in terms of Neil’s output.

Which facts have I missed this time ?

 

[SIY]

Which facts have I missed this time ?

Ringo.

 

[MattHooper]

Ringo.

Well, that’s obviously heavy competition for sure.

But I’m still not persuaded. Like most people I know pretty much all the Beatles songs.
But I don’t remotely recall all Ringo’s drum parts.

But I know most of Neil Peart’s drum parts, (At least on their albums until around 1982 or so ) his fills, his kick, snare and symbols were doing through the songs. And that’s pretty typical for a rush fan. (I also grew up listening to other pro rock bands, and while there were some memorable drum parts, not nearly as many stuck with me).

Sure, Ringo had his famous and individual style of playing. But I don’t think that amounts to the drum parts themselves standing out to as memorable a degree.

I’m not aware that it is typical for Beatles fans to know all Ringos drum parts. I could be wrong. But I’ve never heard of that phenomenon with regard to the Beatles.

 

[SIY]

But I don’t think that amounts to the drum parts themselves standing out to as memorable a degree.

Which is exactly why he was arguably the finest drummer in the history of pop/rock. He honored the song, not himself.

 

[MattHooper]

Which is exactly why he was arguably the finest drummer in the history of pop/rock. He honored the song, not himself.

Well, I can’t argue with that. I think “ greatest drummer” is even more subjective than
“ most influential drummer.”

I’ve seen lots of analysis on Ringo’s drumming, and I certainly admire his contribution to the Beatles.

And there is going to be a difference in how we should evaluate the playing of a musician in one style of music versus another.

I mean from a pop music standpoint, “ Pat Metheny plays too many notes, and puts himself out in front of the tune too much.”

Neil was a busy player, but that suited the genre.

 

[CapMan]

For instance, YouTube is filled with analysis of Neil Peart’s drumming and covering his drum parts. Bernard Purdie? Not so much.

I think you're just showing your lack of breadth and understanding.

Purdie is one of the most recorded drummers in history, he was Aretha's drummer and MD for 5 years and played for James Brown. As for memorable parts - he invented the Purdie Shuffle (Steely Dan, Aja - Home At Last) which has been copied many times, most notably by Jeff Porcaro for Toto's Rosanna - is that memorable enough?

No beef with Neal - I had a Rush phase in my 20s, but the world is so much bigger.

Kenny Clarke invented be-bop drumming - he rarely features in any top tens, enough said .

 

[SIY]

I think you're just showing your lack of breadth and understanding.

Purdie is one of the most recorded drummers in history, he was Aretha's drummer and MD for 5 years and played for James Brown. As for memorable parts - he invented the Purdie Shuffle (Steely Dan, Aja - Home At Last) which has been copied many times, most notably by Jeff Porcaro for Toto's Rosanna - is that memorable enough?

No beef with Neal - I had a Rush phase in my 20s, but the world is so much bigger.

The thing about Purdie is that he could play ANYTHING, any style, any genre, and do it perfectly. And actually did.