The Paradiddler » Editorials

Leave That Snare Alone!

Omar — Sun, 08 Jan 2012 00:01:03 +0000

Editors note: This article was originally written a couple of years ago and contributed to a web site that is now defunct. I felt it a good time to re-post, with a few updates. Enjoy this primer on why the snare drum is so special to drummers.

When we think of the drum kit, we may conclude that all the drums are of the same brand and type. A drummer wants to make sure their drums have the same ‘timbre’ throughout, so that even though the sizes differ, the drums tonally match regardless which size is struck.

A similar case can be made for speakers. You could buy two different brands of speakers, similar in size, with identical specifications as far as watts per channel, impedance, sensitivity, etc. But when you set them up as a left and right speaker in a stereo setting, they sound different. Likewise if you mix and match brands of speakers in a surround sound environment, the sound difference can be quite pronounced between speakers. This has a lot to do with the design of the drivers within the cabinets, the placement of the drivers within the cabinets, the construction quality of the drivers and cabinets, and so on.

The same can be said about drums. If you have a 10” tom from brand A, say, Ludwig, and then another 10” tom from Tama, even if they have the same type of head and tuned similarly, they would tend to sound different. Sometimes even if they’re made of the same material, such as maple or birch, they may sound different due to the different manufacturing process of each, thickness of the shell, etc.

So due to the above, for good reasons, drummers tend to stay with one brand of drums for the whole kit. This doesn’t necessarily include specialty drums, however, such as mini timbales, Roto toms, or Tama’s famous Octobans. These have special sound properties (usually higher pitched) that give more options and melodic possibilities for drummers who want that flexibility. However, there’s one particular drum in the kit that, well, most drummers in the know would rather you ‘leave it alone’.^*

That drum would be the snare drum. Most drummers after they’ve played for a while may gravitate towards a particular sounding snare, and actually may never part with it. Others hold on to their first snare drum because they got used to that sound. The rest of the kit could come and go, but the snare stays.

For the longest time, Neil Peart of Rush used one of his original snares, the brand being Slingerland, way up until the Counterparts tour (circa 1993). He affectionately calls it his “Number One”. He went through some kit changes through the years, both configuration and brand. He went from Slingerland to Tama, then to Ludwig, and then for the last 15 years or so he’s been using Drum Workshop. But his ‘Number One’ he had been using up until the last brand with all the others prior.

The thing about the snare is that it is as individual as the drummers themselves. For those that can only afford one snare, they try to make it sound as much to their liking as possible, and stick with it. If they ever buy or trade their drum kit, sometimes they’ll think twice about parting with their snare.

Many times, though, drummers will have multiple snares for different types of music, or even for different room acoustics, and these they may keep no matter what brand kit they have. Because once you have the sound you want, you want to keep it with you.

This is why many drum companies not only will have kits with snare drum included, but will also have their own line of specialty snares to cater to the individuality of their customers. You can go to the web sites of Tama, Drum Workshop, and Pearl, for example, to see their extensive line of specialty snares to cater to those who are looking for specific features and sounds in a snare, that they may not be getting from the brand of kit they’re currently using.

Such is the specialty of snares that there are drum companies that make only snares. Two examples are Dunnett Classic Drums, and Longo Drums. As you examine the product line of these drum companies, you’ll notice the various materials used to make the snares, be it metals (titanium, brass, bronze, copper, and more) or woods (walnut, maple, cherry, oak, and more). There is such an assortment of sound from the abundance and availability of the snare drum that you’re bound to find one (or several!) that you’ll absolutely love, and never want to part with.

As an example of one of these snares, Drum Center of Portsmouth, NH has a video on YouTube demonstrating the sound of one of the Dunnett Classic snares, the Stainless Steel 6.5x14”. It would be a great exercise to listen to the different sounds of as many snares as possible, from as many companies as possible, to discover how versatile and varied this very important drum can sound.

Dunnett Classic Stainless Steel 6.5x14" Snare Drum

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EX2C3RiTyPI

I personally own two snare drums currently. I have a DW Pacific FS Series 5x14” birch snare (which is part of my 5pc kit of the same make and model), natural to charcoal finish. I also have a DW Pacific metal snare, 5x13”. The FS Series snare is adequate and sounds pretty good, but I’ve heard better sounding snares that I would rather have; I’m not that attached to it. My metal snare is my ‘Number One’, a gift from the Mrs. It has a higher pitch than the FS snare, which I like because it sounds somewhat like a piccolo snare. Please check out my cover of the Yes classic “Future Times/Rejoice”, where I use the 13” metal snare on my left for the higher pitched sections of the song, and the main FS snare the rest of the time. See if you notice the difference!

So as you can see, us drummers are very attached to our snares, so much so that there are drum companies dedicated to just that drum. As mentioned, taking a field trip to a music store, or a drum store if you’re lucky to have one close by, is a great idea so as to play around with all the different snares to get a feel for what sounds best to you. Eventually, you also will become so attached to your snare that you also will be saying, “leave that snare alone!”⁺
__________
^*The title of this article, “Leave That Snare Alone!”, is actually a play on words from an instrumental by Canadian rock power trio Rush called “Leave That Thing Alone!”

⁺For yet more coverage on our favorite drum, please read "Great Snares of Rock"

HD Radio – FM Radio’s Savior?

Omar — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 05:41:57 +0000

People listen to music for all sorts of reasons, which could be summed up under these three main motives:

emotion
inspiration
education

You could go crazy under each one of the above and break down even further what turns people on musically. Many times though, it’s a combination of the three.

From this drummer’s perspective (meaning me), I always have my ear out for music that makes me want to play it on the drums. So here’s how it happens:

I hear the song
The drumming catches my ear, for any number of reasons

incredible groove
superb technicality
finesse
nuance
speed
power

The playing is so good that my hands are tapping, and when the song’s over I’m moved to express, “Wow, what a great song!” (the emotion)
After going gaga over the song, I feel moved to try and figure out how the drummer played those drum parts (the inspiration)
I study the song (the education):

listening to the song (radio, mp3, Pandora, etc.)
watching the drummer play it (YouTube, DVD, etc.)
watching other drummers play the song (drum covers)

As far as the educational aspect goes, you may notice something missing from the list: sheet music. There’s no question that sheet music is an important tool in learning to play a song, and I by no means am diminishing its importance. Fortunately though, it’s not the only way to learn how to play. In my case, I depend on my eyes and ears.

I’ve learned to play the drums by eye and ear. Over the years, you learn how to listen to nuance, and then watch the drummer play the song, which will then tell you that you were right, or you had that drum part completely wrong (the latter happens mostly ). Making those adjustments, and then playing the song somewhat close, brings me a lot of satisfaction and joy. It’s sort of like reaching a goal: if you plan your work, then work your plan, eventually you’ll reach the end point, in this case, a decent sounding version of the original song.

But, to be able to eventually play the song reasonably close to the original, you have to be a good listener (and a good observer). I believe that some are better at those things than others, but I also believe that everyone can be a good listener – you may just have to work at it more. Since it’s all about sound, it behooves us all to strive to be great listeners, each and every day.

If we want to be able to hear all the details, however, what we listen to needs to be of high quality. If we’re hearing our music on AM radio, we can forget about hearing the details – it’s just not there. Of course, these days, in our digital world, most of our sound sources are of pretty good quality, even if a lot of it is compressed – our ears can’t always tell the difference (lossy vs. lossless, and the like).

But here’s where I want to start driving the point home about audio quality: what’s important to you? What do you want to hear in a recording? As for me, for example, I always want the best audio equipment (as much as I can afford!), so I can hear everything. If I want to play a drum cover, I want to hear and know all the details. If a drummer is playing double strokes on the bass drum, I want to hear it clearly and cleanly. If he (or she!) is feathering the bass drum, I want to hear that too. I don’t want to miss anything. So when someone sees my drum cover, hopefully they’ll ‘notice the nuance’, because they know it’s there too.

For example, as I was preparing to record my drum cover of Rush’s “The Analog Kid”, I noticed that at the 9^th bar, when Neil Peart goes to the hi-hat for the first time in the song, he plays it with fast 8^th notes (before this he was playing quarter notes on the ride). Then for the rest of the song, he plays quarter notes, both on the hi-hat and ride. I listened very closely to pick that up, but it was because of the quality of the audio source (CD) and some good headphones that this was possible. If the audio quality is not that good, then those hi-hats at the 9^th bar may sound like quarter notes, like the rest of the song.

On another occasion, my Progressive Rock station in Pandora played Genesis’ “Dancing With the Moonlit Knight”. Before this the only Genesis I knew of was mainly from the Abacab record forward. This was a major revelation to me as far as musicality and musicianship. Genesis immediately became one of my top favorite bands, next to Rush and Yes. “Dancing With the Moonlit Knight” is a great song, so much so that I decided that one day, when I’m daring, I’ll cover it (hasn’t happened yet, but it will [hopefully]!). I decided to buy the song so I could hear it whenever I liked.

When I heard this high quality version of the song, I was blown away. Phil Collins was a technical animal! There’s so much ghost-noting going on, very fast single stroke rolls, incredible use of dynamics, confusing time signature changes, and on and on. If I want to cover this song, I have a lot of work to do! But again, because of the high quality of the audio that I downloaded, and listening on good speakers, I was able to pick up on all those nuances, which I did not hear with Pandora (which, by the way, I mostly listen to with my smartphone and earphones).

The bottom line is, to enjoy our music to the fullest, and especially if you’re going to cover any of these songs, it’s best to hear them as closely as possible to the audio quality of the original. Then you can decide either to play note-for-note as best you can, or change it up. But those will be decisions based on knowledge of the song, not ignorance of it. And it’s best to hear these songs with the highest quality sources and players that we can get our hands on.

I was already convinced of this, but the point was further driven home to me when I recently upgraded the radio in my car to a JVC HD Radio. The factory radio had a cassette player(!), and the right channel was blown out. So there was no way I was going to hear anything of high quality in my car. Plus the factory speakers don’t sound very good either.

Being that the radio had no CD player, I was relegated to hear whatever was on AM/FM. In the article “Pandora Killed the Radio Star (again)”, I go into great detail as to my falling out of love with FM radio. The gist of the article pointed out that FM radio music stations (particularly Rock stations) tend to play the same songs over and over again. This bored me out of my mind, so I was done with it. Enter Pandora, where songs are played based on my specific tastes, and it was over for FM (at least for me).

There’s another strike against FM, particularly for audio enthusiasts. For high quality music, FM was never a great choice to begin with either. Because a lot of FM music is heard in the car, with competing road noise and what not, a form of volume normalizing is used to ensure all the music is heard. So for low passages, the ‘volume’ is raised, and for high passages, the volume is lowered. Because of this, the dynamics of the original song cannot be appreciated. FM’s frequency response is also significantly less than its digital counterparts (40-15,000Hz for FM vs. 5-20,000Hz for CD typically). This is not a good source to play a drum cover to.

But hold on! It seems that all is not lost for FM. Even though the aforementioned FM stations suffer from the “top tracks” mentality (thank you Donna Halper for explaining that concept to me!), many listeners love hearing those songs (they do request them). And even though FM is not necessarily a good source recording to play a drum cover to, a new technology is giving it new life: HD Radio. I won’t go into all of the details regarding how HD Radio works, but I’ll mention what matters most from the listening perspective, and how FM may have found its savior:

20-20,000Hz frequency response – FM stations transmitting in HD Radio now have CD-quality sound. There’s somewhat of a romanticism about hearing a song you like played by someone else, and hearing it played on FM, and the song playing in CD quality – you just may fall in love all over again.

HD2/HD3 channels – Adjacent to the main station are one or two other digitally transmitted ‘channels’ which provide more content, be it a different genre of music or talk radio. So with your HD Radio, you’re actually getting more stations, which means more variety – all in digital sound. In my listening area one of the adjacent channels is a Classic Hip-Hop station. Run D.M.C, Salt-N-Pepa, and LL Cool J are back!

iTunes^® Tagging – You iTunes freaks are going to like this. If you like a song you’re hearing that you may want to purchase later via iTunes, you simply ‘tag’ the song. In your iTunes personal account, a list of your ‘Tagged Songs’ will be listed.

AM sounds like FM – If there are stations in AM that you still listen to, they’ll sound like FM.

Oh, and did I mention HD Radio is free? It’s not subscription-based, like Sirius satellite radio. However, you do need an HD Radio. Fortunately, they are pretty much the same price as any other radio you may buy, so if you’re going to upgrade, you may consider an HD Radio.

I feel that HD Radio has the potential to save FM. I don’t know why it doesn’t get more press, but it should. For several reasons that are beyond the scope of this article, HD Radio has not been fully adapted by radio stations, but it looks like the list is growing. It is also most likely that not all of the FM (and AM) stations in your listening area have adopted the HD Radio technology yet, but I’m certain that enough have already for you to justify getting a radio that has the HD Radio feature.

HD Radio sounds great, and more stations will be available on your digital dial than with a normal radio. The sense of community could be recaptured with the addition of the extra channels. Whereas the main station can continue to keep their ‘top track’ mentality, they can use the other channels they have available to play those other great songs that they wouldn’t normally play (for example, they could play Jimi Hendrix’s “If 6 Was 9” instead of the staple “Foxy Lady”). There’s no question in my mind that the listening audience would appreciate hearing such songs.

So coming back full circle, for those who play drums (or any other instrument for that matter), HD Radio (that is, glorified FM) can be used as yet another source for inspiration. Or emotion. Or education. Because the music you like hearing on the radio sounds better, that may inspire you to play them. Or you may hear nuances that you may have missed before. Or you may hear songs that you haven’t heard in forever, and they sound great, and now you may want to play them.

I’m all for any source that inspires me to try new things, to play better, and to expand my listening tastes. Just like Pandora did that for me, HD Radio is breathing new life into FM, and now I’m finding it interesting again. So I’ll gladly use it as ‘source material’, to inspire me to play even more songs, and play them well (I’ll still hear talk radio though ).

So Ms. Halper, there’s hope for FM radio! Hopefully the bigwigs in Radio-dom can see the potential in HD Radio technology, and maximize it. In the meantime, I’ll enjoy my FM radio (again).

Pandora Killed the Radio Star (again)

Omar — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 02:56:49 +0000

Just a few short years ago, I moved to the western suburbs (or boonies, actually) of Atlanta. I then started to scan the FM stations looking for who was playing the music of my choice (mostly of the ‘classic rock’ genre). Since my job required commuting, I wanted to be listening to music that would keep me somewhat sane during the long drives.

I found three stations that were close to what I was looking for. One station played a lot of the classic ‘pop rock’ songs that were so commonly played mostly during the 70’s. The other had a more hard rock modern edge. Both stations were on the fringes of what I could stand listening to – when I was in the mood for it.

The third station was the one Goldilocks may have liked (‘just right!’). It played more of the songs from the bands I enjoyed growing up, such as Yes, Rush, Van Halen, Def Leppard, Aerosmith, Led Zeppelin, The Who, etc. Since this listening experience was new to me in my new area of residence, I felt compelled to call the evening DJ and compliment them on their song selection. He was very friendly, and we spent a few minutes talking about our similar tastes and why he liked working for that station. He mentioned that this station was more flexible in their repertoire, not like some other stations whose song selection was more limited due to ‘management decisions’ and what not. I concurred.

I’m not sure what it is about hearing a song you like on the radio that makes you want to listen, even though you have the CD (or mp3) and you can play it any time you like. My theory is that when a radio station selects a song you like, you know that potentially thousands upon thousands of other listeners are sharing that song with you, sort of like saying to all those other listeners, “Yup, that’s right, they’re playing my song!” It gives some sort of satisfaction knowing that someone else is playing your song, and everyone else has to listen to it!

Anyway, since this station catered to my musical sensibilities, I on occasion would call in a request, like many listeners do. My favorite band is Rush, so I decided to request a song that I knew was released as a hit from their latest recording. I believe Vapor Trails was Rush’s latest release at the time, so I requested what I knew was released as a single (per the news outlets, web sites in the know, etc.). I requested “One Little Victory” or “Ceiling Unlimited” (I don’t remember which, but they were released to radio stations). As I was then listening to the station for when my request would be played, I’d hear a song like “Tom Sawyer” (from Moving Pictures, 1981). Yes, it’s a great song, but that’s not what I requested!

I didn’t think much of it at the time. The next time I felt like calling in a request, I selected a song that I knew was a release from Rush’s latest CD again (by this time it was Snakes & Arrows [2007]), “Far Cry”. When my Rush song came up, it was not what I requested, but “Subdivisions” from their Signals record (1982). Ok, really, what’s going on here?

At this point I decided to try a little test. I would hear the station as much as I could, and see what Rush songs would be played over time. After doing this for a while, I discovered that the same songs were played over and over again, and nothing played after the aforementioned Signals record. Not only that, but for all the bands I liked, it was the same songs over and over again. After I confirmed this tendency, I decided to try something else.

I requested Rush songs that were not too new, but were singles released from their records. For example, I requested “Force Ten” from Hold Your Fire (1987), “The Big Money” from Power Windows (1985), and “Distant Early Warning” from Grace Under Pressure (1984) – all songs I knew were released for radio at the time of the record’s release. Frustratingly, every time I made such a request, the typical Rush song would be played – nothing later than 1982, and always those same songs. At least I never heard them play anything else.

I had somewhat of an epiphany at this time. I’m sure many knew that that’s how radio stations play their songs, but it didn’t hit me until this moment. Radio stations don’t necessarily play what you want to hear, but they’ll play songs they know you like, so you’ll at least hear the commercials. I don’t blame any business for trying to attract customers, but as for me, I became a non-fan of radio right then and there. I wasn’t playing that game anymore.

But still, the allure of having someone else play music you like was still very appealing to me. How nice of someone to play my type of music! But as much as I love Rush, I can’t hear the same songs over and over again. Why can’t a station play songs like “The Analog Kid”, “Double Agent”, or “Driven”? (Admittedly, these songs may not have been ‘released’ for radio play, but even the ones that were, were not being played! Also admittedly, I’m not privy to the criteria or regulations that radio stations need to abide by to play certain songs over the airwaves.) You the reader (or listener) have your favorite bands as well. I’m sure you would love to hear a song played on the radio that would make you exclaim with glee, “I’ve never heard them play that song before!” Alas, that was not going to happen on the radio.

Enter Pandora

At this time I was now searching for a way to listen to the music I wanted to hear, when I wanted to hear it. Of course, iPod’s abounded, but to me, that was just too much work! Going through all my music on CD, ripping the songs from them to create mp3’s, setting up playlists, copying to the iPod (or any mp3 player, for that matter), was just too much hassle. I had found, some time before the above-mentioned experiment, RushRadio.org, which plays all music that Rush has produced throughout their entire career, including their solo projects. But it was just Rush music, and I wanted variety. Eventually, however, I stumbled upon Pandora – what a revelation!

Pandora is the best of both worlds – songs you like, played for you by someone else! For those of you not in the know, here’s the gist of how Pandora works:

Pandora allows you to set up ‘stations’ where you can have them play only the type of music you like, from the artists you like (and some artists and songs you may have never heard before!). For example, my favorite genre of music is ‘progressive rock’. You set up the new station by selecting either the band you like (in my case I selected Rush), or a particular song you like in that genre. From that point forward, Pandora selects, from a vast database of music, songs that are similar to the song or band you set up initially. So instead of playing the same songs from your favorite band over and over again, it will play many more songs from that band that are not played on the radio, plus all sorts of other songs in the same genre. Pandora bases its choices on your choices^*, instead of some executive’s choices who’s only worrying about their bottom line (again, nothing wrong with that, but that results in music you get tired of hearing). What is the result of hearing music this way?

A whole new world of music opens up to you! You are exposed to songs you’ve never heard before, great songs, making you wonder where you’ve been all your life. In my case, I’ve always known that there was a ‘classic’ Genesis, but I never really had the desire to expand my taste in progressive rock past Rush and Yes, at least as far as an investment in time. Of course I’d heard songs from many other bands of that genre: King Crimson, Emerson Lake and Palmer, Jethro Tull, Kansas, etc., but not to the point where I would spend time and money listening to their entire catalog. However, one day listening to my Progressive Rock station Pandora selected Genesis’ “The Fountain of Salmacis” from their record Nursery Cryme (1971), and I was blown away. This was fantastic music! Why hadn’t I heard this before? Because radio would never play something like that. The music wasn’t ‘radio friendly’, so you’d never hear it.

And there’s the rub, as they say. I think radio stations are very much afraid of straying from the ‘mainstream’ of music. If they play something they perceive to be too ‘out there’, they will not play it, hence negatively affecting their listening audience numbers, and by extension their revenue. That may or may not be true – I’m not savvy in that market. But I know this for sure: if radio stations played songs like “The Fountain of Salmacis”, I’d be listening to them right now.

Pandora has other features that make it even more of a pleasurable listening experience. If you don’t like the song selected, you can just click the ‘thumbs down’ icon, and that song will never be played again. However, if you really, really, really like the song selected, you can click the ‘thumbs up’ icon, and not only will it be more likely that you’ll hear that song again, but Pandora continues to tailor your station to your likes. Be careful with the ‘thumbs down’, though. If you thumb down the same artist twice, you’ll not hear that artist again. However, if you just don’t want to hear the song currently selected, you can ‘skip forward’ to the next song. The free version of Pandora allows six skips per hour and up to 25 stations (and includes commercials, but they are few and far enough between not to bother much; and they’re short). The paid version ($36/yr) permits unlimited skips, no commercials, higher quality audio, and more.

As far as music goes, I see Pandora as a better service than, say, SiriusXM^TM, because even though SiriusXM has many music stations that are genre specific and they’ll play more songs not typically played on traditional radio, their playlist is still selected by someone else. Pandora will over time tailor the music it plays for you based on your choices. Plus the fact that you can play your Pandora stations on a slew of home devices and on the go, well, it’s really one of the best ways to listen to your music, bar none.

Pandora opens ‘musical doors’, if you will, in another way. If you’re an amateur musician, such as one who likes to record drum covers, Pandora can give you a whole host of ideas on musical direction that you might not have been exposed to before. I’ve created a list of songs I’d like to cover that most likely I would never have heard if not for Pandora. If you tend to play by ear especially, you’ll hear songs you’ll never hear on the radio, and it just may inspire you to try out music from other musicians that are just as good, or even better, than the ones you’ve been accustomed to hearing.

Now, I don’t want this article to sound like an advertisement for Pandora – it actually is not. Pandora just happens to be an extremely useful tool that I’ve found for discovering great music that otherwise would not be found via traditional streams of music. Don’t just check out Pandora though – do a Google search on, say, ‘Pandora alternative’, and see what other services there are similar to Pandora that may be right for you. Spotify may be one service that you might want to check out.

For those who remember, MTV’s maiden voyage video way back in August of 1981 was “Video Killed the Radio Star”, by The Buggles. Many thought that video would indeed spell the end of songs being played on the radio, but obviously that was overreaching a bit. Radio stuck around, and it does to this day. But video did kill the radio star in this sense: we no longer needed to depend on radio to play for us the music we wanted – other sources were available, and even more interesting and engaging at that!

But you can’t drive and watch video (well, you can, but you shouldn’t), so at least as far that goes, maybe video didn’t kill the radio star, just injured it. Ah, but now we have the likes of Pandora, where you can hear the music you want to hear wherever you are: at work, at home, and in the car, on a plethora of devices including your cell/smartphone – and that you can take with you anywhere.

Once in a while, just for kicks, I go back to FM radio, to the station mentioned in this article, to see if I hear anything different. I kid you not, every time it’s a song I’ve heard a million times already. I try to give it the benefit of the doubt (no really, I do!), but that tired and worn out radio set list borders on insulting to my intelligence. Radio stations: stop sitting on the sidelines – get up and dance! Instead of playing Genesis’ “Land of Confusion”, play “Dance on a Volcano”! Or instead of playing Rush’s “Closer to the Heart”, play “Nocturne”! Those will surely get your audience’s attention.

So, ‘video killed the radio star’, and Pandora killed the radio star (again). What’s the use of FM radio then? I almost dismissed FM radio entirely, until the local news and talk AM radio station started transmitting their programming on FM. So I’ll be using my FM radio for now, but not for music. Will Pandora or similar services begin transmitting local news stations too? If that happens, FM radio’s days indeed are numbered.

__________
^*For a little more background as to how this process is set up, see The Music Genome Project, the seed of Pandora).

Notes From an Aspiring Drummer

Gerald Arnolds — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 03:19:50 +0000

Gerald Arnolds is a guest blogger for My Dog Ate My Blog and a writer on online colleges for the Guide to Online Schools.

I played the piano for six years before I ever touched a drum. I was eleven years old, in the sixth grade, and trying my best to deal with the mandatory music class I had to take in middle school (where, for the first time, I couldn't play the piano to get out of the situation.) Middle school bands don't need pianos, obviously; they deal in winds, horns, and drums. So I got talked into being a percussionist. I was promptly given a mountain of paperwork to fill out to rent a snare drum and a pair of sticks (which I assume were mine to keep since I still have them somewhere).

Having just a single instrument capable of making what I thought at the time was a single note was the must humbling experience of my young life as a musician. I didn't understand how to express something when I didn't have total control over the low end, the high end, or an ability to sustain sounds, but simply existed as part of a (regularly off-beat, off-time, and punishingly inaccurate) machine. I didn't understand it at all as a means of expression. I could hit notes, and they made sense, but that's as far as I could get. At some point I had to do a drum roll, but instead of successfully rolling on the snare, the resulting sound fell flat. This is probably why I was not asked to move into intermediate band and promptly went back to playing the piano full-time for the next five years.

During lunch breaks and when people were feeling especially tolerant of my ineptitude, however, I'd sit down at the broken-down, beaten-up drum kit in the corner of the band room, trying my hardest to figure out how the thing worked. I can't remember how I sounded (and I can't imagine how I would have tried to play it—I can safely assume the answer is "quite badly”), but I do remember feeling an inexplicable draw to the instrument, practically the opposite of how I felt playing only the snare.

Then, a few years later, I discovered that rock music was actually pretty interesting. As a consequence, I heard drummers I liked on both the light and heavy ends of the spectrum. First it was Jim White, whose work with Nina Nastasia, Dirty Three, and countless others made me believe that drumming could be as free and melodic as any other instrument. Then Janet Weiss, from Sleater-Kinney and Quasi, who plays so hard but fills space so beautifully that it's hard not to simply stand in awe of her talent every time I hear her. Then Mimi Parker from Low, whose approach to negative space, partially a consequence of her kit (just two ride cymbals, a floor tom, and a snare), yields so much more tension from the notes that go unplayed than the notes she does play; a technique that is both vital and hypnotic.

I then played in a band with someone who knew how to play his kit well. Despite the fact that no one else in our band could play music together, a friend of ours with extensive experience playing in school bands and in area metal bands accompanied us when we played our unlistenable music in public. I would inevitably stand behind my keyboard in awe of the range of sound he could create from just a floor tom and a snare, or just his snare, or the way he simply didn't drop notes. It made playing drums look both completely impossible and undeniably appealing, and I was both inspired and intimidated.

And so, many years later, when I was twenty, I sat down to play a drum kit again. I'd spent too much time in my life playing Japanese rhythm games, but something suddenly happened—something "clicked"—and I found myself able to keep time. I couldn't do it well, obviously, but the kick no longer felt utterly foreign to me. Within a few months of constant practice I suddenly discovered how to roll on a snare so broken it practically sounded like another tom, and then suddenly I was comfortable playing an instrument I'd always been intimidated by.

I am not a good drummer. I still drop things constantly, I'm not dynamic or expressive enough on the hi-hat, some people think I fill too much (I've also been told that my fills are vitally melodic to the songs they exist within). I've only been given a handful of semi-lessons from friends who actually know how to play, and each one has helped me hugely. But within the last year I've finally learned at least a little about how drums "work," and I have to admit one thing: they're kind of fantastic. If I were playing just a snare now, I wouldn't be so disinterested in it; you can do a lot with just a snare.

Passion for Our Favorite Drummer

Omar — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 07:21:39 +0000

My, how we love our drummers of choice.

At different stages in our lives, we cling to our favorites for different reasons. When we were really young, say, five or six, we might have really liked the drummer of our big brother’s (or sister’s) favorite band. As we got a little older, we made up our own minds and either stayed with that one, or started liking someone else. This time, though, we might like the drummer because of the actual drumming, not because of the band as a whole.

For example, when I was very young, my favorite drummer was Peter Criss. Was he a great drummer? I think it instead more likely that he fit (perfectly!) what Kiss needed him to be more than that he was a great drummer. There were other drummers around that time (we’re talking the ‘70’s in this case) that could run circles around Mr. Criss as far as technique goes, such as Billy Cobham, Steve Gadd, and of course, Buddy Rich. But that didn’t matter to me – Peter Criss was ‘the best’! And I was passionate about it, even at a young age.

Fast forward a few years and I was introduced to Neil Peart, and he became to me what I now call my ‘reference drummer’: my base, my foundation, my main inspiration. That remains the case to this day, even though I am greatly inspired by many other drummers, for diverse reasons.

And so it is that through the years, we change, and so do our preferences. As far as our favorite drummers go, there are as many reasons to have a favorite drummer as there are drummers. I’ve seen, however, that some take their passion a little too far.

Ok, I’m not talking violence. It’s a lot of fun to banter about who our favorite drummer is, or who we think is ‘the best’ (even though I think there’s no such thing). That kind of debate is rampant in sports, and it’s never-ending. I’ve been to several drum forums where threads have been opened such as ‘Who’s the best drummer?’, or threads that are started about specific drummers. In the latter, you see all kinds of posts. Typical are:

debates comparing the drummer in question to another drummer
why the drummer in question isn’t good at all
why the drummer in question is the best

The ‘end is listless’. You might be able to guess the age of some of the posters. If you see really short posts saying things like “Mike Portnoy is no doubt the best drummer on the planet!”, you may assume that that’s a younger poster (hm, ‘no doubt’?). Sometimes others will go into long spiels extolling why this drummer is better than that one, and even have polls comparing, say, Mike Portnoy vs. Danny Carey, or Dave Weckl vs. Vinnie Colaiuta, etc. Pretty interesting to say the least, because those who’ve followed these drummers closely get very specific as to the technique of these players, and the result is an education on the drummers in question that we may not see elsewhere.

I personally consider any ‘vs.’ debate to be futile. There are just too many variables to consider when comparing drummers. I think of all musicians, drummers are the most different from each other. It is very unlikely that two drummers will have the exact same influences, so in addition to their innate ability, they’ll adapt their unique ability to try to imitate what their favorite drummer plays. What results is a completely unique drummer, shaped by their aforementioned ‘reference’ (or references), their musical taste, their talent, and their drive to reach whatever musical goals they have.

Not only that, but the drum kit is the most configurable of all instruments. Consider some of the variables:

number of shells
snare preference
tom positioning
cymbal placement
throne height

And that’s only the beginning! How many stick sizes are there, head thicknesses and materials, pedal configurations – gads, my head’s spinning (think I’ll stop now). The point is, even if two people are the same age, go to the same music classes, and listen to the same music – they’ll still be two different drummers.

So really, how comparable are drummers? There are certainly ones that can do certain things better than others, but that does not necessarily mean that one is better than the other in a general sense.

Let’s take a case in point. This is my opinion; you’ll have yours, but this is how I see it. I have a short list of favorite drummers. On it are Neil Peart (if you’ve followed my blog that’s obvious) and Thomas Lang. I’m very familiar with Neil’s work (as evidenced, for example, by my rating of his solos), but only recently (relatively speaking) have I been exposed to Thomas’ playing. But I’ve seen enough of his playing that, well, he’s at least one of the best drummers in the world. (If you’re subscribed to The Paradiddler’s newsletter, you would have received a sample of this. )

These two drummers couldn’t be more different. To me, Neil Peart is about composition; Thomas Lang is about technique. Does Neil have technique? Of course, but Thomas has more. Can Thomas compose a good drum piece? Certainly, but I think Neil is more creative that way.

As far as composing drum parts, Neil is a master. If you haven’t already, I recommend spending a few hours watching Neil’s DVD “A Work In Progress”, where he breaks down in verbose detail how he composed the drum parts to every song on Rush’s Test for Echo. Sure there’s technicality explained and demonstrated (even some exploration solo footage), but this is textbook Neil: drumming to suit the song, not the drummer. To me, that’s what makes a drummer shine.

As far as technique goes, Thomas Lang’s best selling “Creative Control” and “Creative Coordination” DVDs demonstrate Thomas’ absolute mastery of the kit. His drumming is so fluid and effortless, hands and feet. I watch in awe every time I see this guy play.

So I don’t consider either of these drummers better than the other. They both have tremendous talents to display, and no matter what genre of music we prefer, they certainly can give us a lesson or two on how to play.

Sometimes a great drummer (even a legendary one!) will get criticized when compared to someone’s favorite. I’ve read on certain posts that Neil is a boring drummer, with not much technicality, and that the solos are boring. When I read posts like that, I tend to think that the poster is missing the point. Sometimes the drummer simply won’t display certain technical chops because the solo or song doesn’t call for it. It’s very likely that when he practices, he’ll play certain rudiments and patterns for practicing’s sake. If something interesting comes up that he can use in a song or solo, it’s in. If the pataflafla doesn’t fit in the solo or song, it’s out, even if he knows how to play it.

Sometimes (actually, almost every time), it’s in the eye (or ear) of the beholder. What are you looking for in a drummer? What excites you? Many drummers cite Tré Cool (Green Day) and Travis Barker (Blink 182) as their favorite drummer, and sometimes passionately exclaim that they are the best. Like I said, the best doesn’t exist, so don’t bother! They are the ‘best’, though, because they personify what the beholder expects to see and hear in a drummer. In some way, these drummers inspire their drumming fans in a specific way, hence the adulations.

Sometimes the age of the drummer (meaning the pro drummer) is a factor too, and at what developmental stage they are in their career that inspires certain fans. When you’re young, who you thought was the best may stick with you as you get older, even though you may consider others just as good later on. I started to notice Neil Peart when he was a young drummer and he became my favorite, so the same thing may happen to any youngster who notices a drummer when they’re young. A young person can have the same passion for the drumming of a young Neil Peart just the same as a young person towards a young Tré Cool or Travis Barker.

Drummers of the caliber of a Neil Peart, Steve Smith, and others, tend to not stay with the same style throughout their career. These drummers evolve, one reason being is that they get restless when they take a certain style to it’s limit based on their ability, or just being bored playing the same style, and wanting to move on to something else. Neil Peart’s current style of play may not appeal to a generation used to speeds as exhibited by Thomas Lang, Marco Minnemann and others, even though they may recognize him as a drumming legend. I strongly recommend watching Rush’s live DVD Grace Under Pressure Tour, which was recorded in 1984. There you will see Neil display an incredible amount of speed, power, creativity, and limb independence (check out particularly “The Weapon” – the ‘Professor on the drum kit’ indeed!).

Drummers like Neil and Steve Smith move on. As good as Neil was in 1984, it might be boring if he still played like that. Steve Smith ‘scratched that itch’ when he finished playing rock with Journey, to go back to his more jazzy roots. Even as good as he is in this genre, he’s been messing with Indian rhythms as of late, just to challenge himself. These are the types of drummers that appeal to me.

At the opposite side of the spectrum, you have drummers that tend to sound and play the same throughout their career, such as Joey Kramer (Aerosmith) and Tico Torres (Bon Jovi). To me, these drummers sound the same throughout the tenure of the band they play in. That’s not to say that they’re bad drummers. It’s even possible that some cite them as favorites. They play what’s required for the music they play, and ultimately, especially if you play in a band, that is what’s most important.

So what’s the bottom line? This: ‘best’ is in the eye of the beholder. If you think Travis Barker is the best drummer in the world, and he inspires you, then more power to you. If you think that Phil Rudd is the best drummer because he lays down a fat four and gets out of the way, then more power to you too. If you think “Gadd is in the details”, then good for you too!

As for me, I’m staying out of the ‘this drummer vs. that drummer’ debate. They all have something to offer. Fortunately, drummers don’t mind having their ideas stolen (for the most part). So let’s study our favorites, forget about who’s best, and just enjoy the performances and individuality of these great drummers.

Cheering Them On

Omar — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 21:49:59 +0000

In all different types of industries, awards are presented to the ones who excel in their field. ‘Salesman of the Year’, ‘Woman of the Year’, Pulitzer Prize winner, Grammy award winner, “and the Oscar goes to”, etc. How do you feel, personally, when you see these people (or hear them) accept their awards?

Unfortunately, some people feel very jealous of these achievers. Some would call them overachievers. Some will scowl and fret, espousing on all of the dirty things these people had to do to get to where they are, to get the success they are being acknowledged for. Others will say that these did not really work hard to obtain these awards. ‘It’s all about knowing the right people’, or ‘they’re so lucky’, or, ‘they were in the right place at the right time’, etc.

In many cases, these reactions are a commentary on the critics’ personal life. They may not have for themselves discovered what they truly like, and pursue it. Or they know what they like, but they succumb to fear of the unknown and never truly take the necessary steps to accomplish their dreams. They become comfortable in the daily routine because it gets them by (barely), secretly yearning, though, for the ‘what if’. Maybe at times they start putting in that little extra effort towards their dreams, but when they realize how much hard work it really takes, and when they see they’re not getting the ‘lucky breaks’, they stop way too short. As time goes on, as they never get acknowledged for the things they do, because they don’t do them whole-heartedly, they become more and more bitter over time at the successes of others.

This reminds of a few lines from one of my favorite songs by Rush, “Losing It”:

Some are born to move the world -
To live their fantasies
But most of us just dream about
The things we'd like to be

Sadder still to watch it die
Than never to have known it
For you - the blind who once could see -
The bell tolls for thee...

Tragic, hauntingly beautiful words. Some in the world, in whatever field they’ve chosen, have excelled. Regardless if it’s a famous field (Hollywood, for example) or not (mechanical engineering, for example), these have either received awards in recognition for their achievements, or have affected those surrounding them in such a way that they enjoy an internal satisfaction that drives them to continue to excel, not to rest on their laurels.

Yet others never pursue what interests them. Yes, they may be content with what they’re doing, but not fully satisfied. And it doesn’t necessarily mean being rich and famous, no. It means that they’re not happy with their course of life, and instead of doing everything possible to achieve their dreams, they not only abandon them, but criticize those who do achieve theirs. They make excuses for why the successful are, and why they are not. ‘The bell tolls for thee’ indeed!

I have to admit that at one time, I was like that. I would be jealous of those who seemingly attracted success, while I seemingly was not. Those in my field would get recognition for their hard work, while I did not. This gets very tiring after a while, and in the end, totally counterproductive. There is something else that can be done with all that negative energy.

Years ago, my wife and I decided that there would be two specific events in the year that we would watch together: the Super Bowl (for me), and the Academy Awards (for her). We both get to see the shows we like, no fussing, and with our favorite person! After a while, not only watching those events, but others where high achievers were rewarded, I started to come around regarding the rewarded. I started to realize (even though I knew it already) that these people work extremely hard to reach that level of professionalism and success. Every Super Bowl winning team deserved to win, and deserved all the accolades that came with winning. You’d be especially proud if the underdog won, like when the New England Patriots beat the St. Louis Rams in Super Bowl XXXVI, or when the New York Giants beat the Patriots in Super Bowl XLII.

The above examples can be more easily measured, because there’s a winner, and a loser. In the case of the Oscars, the results may be more subjective. Who knows all of the criteria that goes into selecting the winner of “Best Actor in a Leading Role” or “Best Actress in a Supporting Role”? Many times there’s controversy regarding the winner. In any case, there is no question that for all of the nominees, the common denominator was hard work. Yes, some of these actors make millions of dollars. But the market will pay it, so if the money’s there, guess who gets the lion’s share? Those who work the hardest, who sacrifice the most. There’s no question that there is some luck involved, that at times it’s who you know, not what you know. And yes, many, if not most, of these actors and actresses were ‘at the right place at the right time’ to be discovered. But in every case, without exception, again, what’s common with all these cases is hard work.

So now I find myself happy for those who achieve excellence in their chosen field. I certainly am not jealous anymore. Now when I watch the award shows, I find myself cheering my favorites on, hoping they win. I like watching the acceptance speeches, and I find myself congratulating them (from afar, of course! ). Now I channel the previous negative energy to inspire me to excel in everything that I do.

That doesn’t mean I’m always excelling! I get frustrated many times, especially with drumming. As much as I love the drums, and everything about them, I find myself at times wanting to throw the sticks through the walls. Some do have a lot more ability than others, and I applaud them. But me – I have to practice a lot to achieve any level of satisfaction in my playing! And I don’t practice nearly as much as I should! Whoa, double whammy there.

I’m not saying, though, that I’m eternally mad at those better than me. If that were the case, I’d be eternally mad because there would always be someone better than me! Now I cheer them all on, and I watch in awe as I also try to glean what I can from them, so when I’m back behind the kit, I can make it more exciting for myself. I call that ‘exquisite torture’. I may never be as good as the drummers I admire, but I’ll sure have fun watching and listening! It will only make me better.

Year after year, magazines like Drum! and Modern Drummer have awards in various categories for drummers that have achieved a high level of proficiency in their craft. I admire these drummers’ dedication to the instrument I love most, and I thank them for inspiring me to play better, learn more, and for unselfishly showing us their secrets. I know I’ll never play like those whose skills I admire the most: Neil Peart, Steve Smith, Thomas Lang, and the like – but that’s not the point! The point is learning from those who inspire us, congratulate them for their successes, and channel that positive energy into improving our lives, whatever it is we choose to do.

So I’ll watch the award shows, the concerts, the drum clinics, the DVDs, and the like. I’ll be cheering on my favorites along the way, and hopefully that will make me better at what I do. Hopefully that will make you better at what you do too!

Brute Force Learning

Omar — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:02:55 +0000

Those of us who are X-Men fans may recall a particular scene in "The Last Stand" where there was a competition of opposites. On the one, you had Shadowcat. She had the mutant ability to phase or move through solid objects. Very graceful in execution, seamless. On the other, you had Juggernaut. He had the mutant ability of super-human strength and invulnerability, in addition to possessing a helmet which protected him from psychic attacks. Pure brute strength. Although opposite, they at one point had a single goal: to reach Leech, the mutant that could neutralize any mutant's ability that got near him. This was the mutant who's DNA was used for the 'mutant cure.' In any case, one mutant wanted to reach him to destroy him, the other to protect him.

Their methods to reach Leech were polar opposites. While Shadowcat whisked through the walls, leaving nary a trace of her passage, Juggernaut bulldozed his way through the walls, leaving ample traces of his passage! Eventually, both reached their destination. Shadowcat was first. She finessed her way through the walls, making the necessary adjustments to be able to reach Leech first. Juggernaut was just bumbling his way through, although he did eventually get there.

So how does the above relate to drumming? Yes, I know you were wondering! Some of us may have had an interest in drums, and at a young age (or even not so young) we had older ones who saw the advantage of providing structured lessons for us. With someone monitoring our progress directly, they could see whatever bad habits we may have been developing, and corrected them on the spot. They could also steer us towards proper technique, practice routines, and the like. If we continued with this structured learning, it would be possible to learn to play with some type of, well, finesse. Some of the nuances that our mentors mastered would be passed on to us. They would possibly even teach us to read sheet music, so potentially we could play a song after maybe hearing it once, then looking at the sheet music, and then pretty much know how to play it based on the music as it is written. Shadowcat.

And then there's another group of drummers (we'll keep this at the amateur level for both examples) who either never took lessons, or started later in their lives to hit the skins (or both!). They may have been a fan of the instrument and of certain people who played them, and watched them in awe. It's possible that they were very into air drumming (see "The Emergence of Air Drumming"). Eventually, they get a drum set of their own. With all these favorite songs in their head, they start playing, and discover that, well, drumming is hard! The pro drummers, many times, either took some type of formal lessons, or went to a musical college, or the like. So they play with finesse. But this amateur may think he (or she) knows how to play, but they discover they don't know more than they do know. But they have a good idea how to play, so they try out some songs. After playing a few times, it doesn't sound bad at all! They get through the songs, beginning to end, and maybe even with good timing. It may not be totally pretty, but the job gets done. Juggernaut.

In both cases, the drummers can play the songs (the goal). But they get there via different methods. Neither one is bad; it just depends what you want to do with what you know. If you want to be worldly famous, you may want to take the route of the Shadowcat-type drummer, because that type of drummer will know better how to play certain styles, even heavy rock if necessary. The Juggernaut-type drummer may also play the same music, but they may take longer to get there. And on the way (and even when they arrive), it may not look pretty. But they get it done.

I've been scrutinizing my style of playing lately, and I've come to the realization that my style is more Juggernaut-like. I learned to play via a term I call brute force learning. Without taking any lessons, I grabbed a kit and started playing away, without any concern for reading music, rudiment knowledge, etc. Don't get me wrong: drumming is downright fun ('even if it sounds bad')! I could get to the end of songs, but only because I know what it sounds like. I may miss a few nuances, but I'll get there, and it can turn out to be a pretty good performance, if I do say so myself! But ultimately, I'm missing the nuances of Shadowcat.

We'll continue to use myself as an example. If you take a look at my YouTube channel, you'll notice several types of videos that I've produced over time. There are some promotional videos, how-to's (i.e. 'Rudiments In Action'), and drum covers.^* You're encouraged to watch them all if you like, but for the moment we'll focus on the drum covers. My first drum cover was "Crawl Away", by Tool. It's my favorite Tool song, and I had heard it several times already. I was testing out a video camera I was considering purchasing, so I decided, without practicing, to play to the song. I had never played it before, but I had heard it enough times that I thought I could play it. Plus, I had finally put my kit together, and I wanted to test it out! All in all, not bad for a first time playing a song through to the end. I was also testing the headphones, of which I determined quite hastily that I needed drummer-quality headphones (I got the Vic Firth headphones which you see in subsequent videos; they are excellent).⁺

Anyways, I was very rough around the edges. It was proof that air-drumming is not enough to play good drums - you actually have to play them to get any good! I was aware of that, of course, but this video session was what I needed to start growing as a drummer. It exposed my weaknesses, and showed me what I had to work on. It was invaluable in that sense, and I encourage anyone who has the equipment to record yourselves playing with a video camera. That way you can watch yourself play and notice what you do wrong (and right!), and turn around and just listen as well; sometimes the eyes can deceive you.

Fast-forward to my latest drum cover, "Girl Gone Bad" by Van Halen (well, after you've seen the other ones!), and there's noticeable improvement. I'm hitting the drums a little harder, I'm playing with more authority, I'm better aware of the placement of each piece of my kit - it just looks like I'm playing with more confidence. Of that I am proud, because it does show that if you play enough, you'll come around! I'm constantly trying to develop an ear for music, because I like the satisfaction of knowing that I can play a song just by hearing it a few times. But all of these videos have taught me something - I need more.

Way back when, I wrote an article called "Rudimentary, My Dear", where I talked about the importance of the drum rudiments. These drumming sessions have made me realize that I need to take a step back and start focusing on the vocabulary of drumming, the rudiments. Sure, I could play any song if I hear it enough times, and I'd be playing rudiments without even knowing it. But it's more satisfying if you know the language, the 'vocabulary', so to speak. So I've taken a somewhat drastic measure and broke down my kit (as in 'I took it apart'). The only thing I have set up currently is the practice pad on the snare stand. I want to scrutinize every aspect of my playing and how I can better it. I'll be examining my posture, how I relax, my stick technique - really fundamental stuff. Then, when I've done this for a little while, I'll start putting the kit back together little by little, at each step ensuring that I only progress, and not regress.

This move is not unprecedented. Many professional drummers, after many years of playing a certain way, take a step back and examine their style and see how they can improve. One noticeable example is Neil Peart, who after the Counterparts tour in the mid '90's determined that he took his style of play as far as he could take it, and basically re-invented himself, with the assistance of Freddie Gruber (you can read more about this in the article "Neil Peart Solo Number Two - Counterparts, 1994"). Even as recently as within this past year, Neil, under the tutelage of Peter Erskine, only played his hi-hat for a couple of months to work on his hi-hat technique. Steve Smith went through similar changes (although not as drastic, methinks). Take a look at the kit he used in the 80's vs. now - very different, but I think now he's a much better drummer.

Now am I putting myself on the same level as these drumming greats? Heck yes! Ahem, I mean, no. I'm just saying that sometimes you may need to take a step back and determine what it is you need to work on, and focus on it. Taking my kit apart was the only way I was going to focus on my fundamental play. Does this mean that if the situation comes up where my kit is needed that I won't put it together? No! Maybe I'll come to the conclusion that I really can play that song that I thought I couldn't play before, and I'll set it up again and play it (and record it!). But it just won't be the focus for now.

I'm using a couple of instructional materials to aid me in my 'rudimental discovery' section of my training. "Stick Technique", by Jim McCarthy, is an excellent book that covers the essentials of gripping your sticks properly, effective practicing methods, etc. You can read my review of the book - I highly recommend it. Another tool I'm using is Mike Michalkow's "Drumming System". This is a DVD/CD collection that is chock-full of tips and guidelines for better drumming, from hand and foot exercises and practice schedules, to sheet music lessons and learning different styles of beats, from Jazz to Rock to Latin. An absolute plethora of information that I'm still combing through. (For a review of the "Drumming System", click here).

Till now, my method of learning (and playing, actually) has been by brute force. I bulldozed my way through the songs. I may have not known exactly how the drummer played the original, but dang it, I'm getting to the end! Even if I had to knock down some walls. Does it work? Yes. Is it pretty? Not always. But maybe I'm the only one who's noticing. The crowd may still love it! But in the end, I neither want to be Shadowcat nor Juggernaut. My goal? Easy: I want to be Wolverine.
________
^*One of my drum covers, "Future Times/Rejoice" by Yes, is not on YouTube due copyright issues with YouTube. You can read about it (and view it) via this link.

⁺For more on this experience, check out "Education of The Paradiddler"

“Exquisite Torture”

Omar — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 00:05:18 +0000

Do you remember the first time you were absolutely blown away by the ability of a drummer? Maybe you were a wee little lad (like me) who saw Peter Criss' monstrous kit (at least to me it was) and watched how seemingly gracefully he handled the whole thing. Or maybe you heard a song for the first time on the radio who's drumming sounded just amazing, really fast hands, great technique, who made you beg the question, "Who the heck was that?!" Or maybe you watched Buddy Rich vs. Animal on "The Muppet Show", and after picking your jaw up off the floor you exclaimed, "No way! How can anyone be better than Animal?" (Ok, this was also me ).

Of course, this type of experience is not limited to drums. My alter-ego favorite instrument, the piano (no I can't play it - yet) has on several occasions made me just watch in awe as the keyboardist painted a most wondrous story. Rick Wakeman is my favorite keyboardist, as he not only has just 'sick' chops, but as I hear his playing I not only see (or hear) his technical ability, but I also hear how he crafts and phrases the notes and chords, and how he interplays between the different keyboards - an absolute master.

We can go on and on! We may have read story after story about how, when seeing certain guitarists for the first time, the observer immediately wanted to play the instrument. Seeing or hearing Eric Clapton, Stevie Ray Vaughan, and Eddie Van Halen, among others, influenced entire generations of artists with their wizardry of the strings.

So we see our favorite drummer, or keyboardist, or guitarist, and what do we do? We air-play, of course! We want to imitate our favorite musician. Next, if we're so fortunate, our parents afford us our instruments of choice (or we work for it, which is even sweeter). So we go about learning to play, either via lessons from someone else, or self-teaching ourselves with CDs, DVDs, or other self-instruction media. We're so excited as we embark on our journey towards becoming 'monsters' of our instruments, just like our 'idols'.

Well what happens? For many of us, we never achieve Neil Peart or Eddie Van Halen status. Some lose interest, and others, because of more pressing obligations, stop lessons entirely. Still others, if their goal was to play in a band and become rich and famous, are for the most part disillusioned with the competition and the cruel reality that the music industry can be. Some of these, still for the love of the music, end up playing in local bands ("not that there's anything wrong with that!"), hoping maybe one day to be discovered.

During all of this time, we may go back and revisit our first jaw-dropping experience. We may even have been fortunate enough to see these players live. We may also have picked up on other favorites, and tried to learn their style of play. Alas, but we just can't do it! These players make it seem so easy, so fluid, so effortless. And after much effort ourselves, we come to the realization that we just can't play like these guys (or gals, a la Sheila E.)!

But all in all, these scenarios aren't necessarily bad. We may delight in the virtuosity of our favorite players, and be content with that. I've discovered a wonderful phrase that captures the essence of our amazement of these players: 'exquisite torture'.

I'd like to say that I came up with that phrase, but it was not I. It came from one of the special features on the DVD "Nights In Rodanthe", a fantastic movie adapted from the novel of the same name by Nicholas Sparks. Some of us may know of Mr. Sparks' penchant for writing stories of romantic tragedies (i.e. "A Walk to Remember", "The Notebook", etc.). Drumming aside, this is a movie that should be watched with a loved one, so you can appreciate what you have while you have it, because you never know when that special someone won't be there anymore. I haven't given anything away because Mr. Sparks' novels follow this theme for the most part.

In the movie, one of the main characters is actually the house where most of the movie takes place. It's a spectacularly beautiful house on the beach, a survivor of many natural disasters. In this house there is a particular room that has many mystical artifacts: statues, pictures, and the like. In one of the special features of the DVD, Diane Lane, who plays one of the main characters, states that her character goes to this room and sees all of these artifacts, and it reminds the character of something (or things) that are elusive to her, as if the things she wants to embrace are within reach, but she just can't quite reach them. To the character, it's like 'exquisite torture'. There is beauty, there is elegance, and she's always drawn there, knowing that these items represent to her things that are just beyond reach - 'exquisite torture'.

When she used that term, a light switch went off in my head. This is exactly what happens to us admirers of specially gifted players! We love what we see, we want to play like them, we practice long hours, but it's just quite not reachable. We cover our favorite drummer, or guitarist, but as many times as we play it, something's always just barely missing. We know the notes, we know the groove, but it's just not the same. But we keep watching! But we keep listening! Why? Because we're masochists! We'll watch these players over and over again, knowing we'll never play like that! Oh but we just love it anyway!

So really, 'exquisite torture' is more of a positive thing. Some of us actually attain a level of play that is very satisfying, and if we play in local bands and the crowd reacts in a positive way, that may be good enough for us. Many of us continue to wish we played like our favorites, but we're content with either just watching (or listening), or playing to a level that we're at peace with.

Of course, there's another extreme. In the article "The Emergence of Air Drumming", I wrote about those who may never even own a kit, but they sure feel like they can play! If you watch some of these air drummers, it looks like they would know what to do when placed behind a kit. But if they were to play for real, they'd soon realize they've been had! Let's just call that being tortured in an exquisite way, so to speak. I do believe air drumming is a good teaching tool, however.

But seriously, do we really need to play like our favorites to enjoy playing? Of course not! Everyone is different - we each have something to offer. We're all unique, and even though we may never achieve Thomas Lang or Mike Portnoy status, we'll sure have fun trying! 'Exquisite torture' - hmm, I think I can live with that!

The Emergence of Air Drumming

Omar — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 23:07:41 +0000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-aP8Pxhv-s

If we look around in the drumming landscape, we'll notice that air drumming is garnering a little bit of attention lately.

For example, the movie "Adventures of Power" glorifies wannabe drummers and shine the spotlight on the guilty pleasure of thinking we know what the real drummer is doing! Recently as well, DrumChannel.com hosted an air drumming contest with Chad Smith (Red Hot Chili Peppers, Chickenfoot) where you could submit via video your air drumming prowess in hopes of winning a prize for the most views.

So what's the deal? Is air drumming for real? Are those who are pretty accurate in their renditions able to seamlessly transfer their skill to the drum kit? Transfer, yes! Seamlessly, well, no. But it's a great place to start.

Much can be said about the power of visualization. There have been studies conducted that have shown that if you visualize a specific task repeatedly, you are more likely to execute it successfully (notice I said more likely - I didn't say definitely; but visualization helps!).

Here's something you can try to test for yourself if you like (or you can take my word for it and not try it, but it works!). Now, this is an example - it could be any activity you want, but this is simple enough. Say you absolutely stink at shooting free throws (if you don't know what a free throw is, then you really stink! ). Or maybe you just want to shoot a higher percentage of them to impress others on the court.

As you go to sleep at night, picture yourself (that's a moving picture) shooting free throws. Don't picture yourself missing. Picture yourself making the shot every time. Remember yourself standing at the free throw line, you're bouncing the ball, you look up at the hoop. You figure out more or less how far the hoop is. You process that you have to toss the ball at a certain arc so that it's not shot like a bullet, so that it doesn't ram the front or back of the rim. You then bring the ball up, properly holding it, so you push up and forward at the arc required for the ball to travel the allotted distance, and then swoosh!

You can visualize layups, shooting from three-point range, whatever. But the point is you make a strong visualization of success. What happens after a while? You've visualized successful free throws so much in your head that when you actually get to the free throw line, you're better prepared! Will you make the shot every time? Of course not! Not even the pros can do that. But your likelihood of success will increase because you've familiarized yourself with the process.

Back to air drumming (finally!). What has the air drummer been doing all that time? They've visualized the drum set, where the hi-hat is, snare, bass drum, cymbals - the whole kit. They most likely have watched, at least in video, their favorite drummer, what the kit looks like, and how the drummer plays. What happens when you sit that air drummer behind a real kit?

Ok, they won't be as good as the original (obviously!), but at least they have a good frame of reference. Air drumming - actually, visualization - will have been a valuable tool in learning how to play. This does not negate the fact that, if you want to play well, you have to practice. Regular practice is what will make you a better player (or a better anything). Air drumming is just a tool you can use to improve your playing, especially since you may not always have access to the real thing. Of course, if all you want to do is air drum and nothing else, then by all means, just do that, and have fun!

In my case, for many years I did not have access to a kit. So my method of learning was almost exclusively air drumming. I did other things too, like watching videos of drummers (especially my favorite ones) when I could, observing them, then just copying them. I'd then, when I had drum sticks, just bang on pillows trying to see how fast I could drum roll. Yes, I did get access to a kit for a very short time when I was a teenager, and actually, I was pretty good right off the bat! I didn't have time to develop the real skills until later, though.

The hugest disadvantage of air drumming in regards to transferring your skills to the kit is that, obviously, you're not learning a sense of feel, or rebounding. You're just bouncing off the air. You're not really hitting that tom in exactly the same area every time. There's no way to practice dynamics with air drumming. That can only be learned when you're actually hitting something! This was (and is!) one of my biggest challenges as I now do have access to a kit. Dynamics are one of the tools that makes your drumming not only about timekeeping, but about being musical. You could say that, the shells and skins are the beat, the cymbals are the voice, but the dynamics are the music.

In any case, I'm a huge fan of air drumming (the jury's out on the "Adventures of Power" movie). It was one of the biggest tools of mine to learning how to play. In addition to watching instructional videos, going to concerts, listening to drummers, practicing rudiments, etc., air drumming can be one of the tools to use to help visualize what you will be doing at the real kit.

All that being said, air drumming can be just for goofing off! This article has more of a serious slant, extolling the virtues of air drumming and how it could be used as a practice tool. But it's loads of fun. What's more fun that air drumming a song from Rush, Van Halen, or Metallica? Maybe nothing! So air drum on, drumming fans! Don't let anyone take our fun away! And after our sister, Mom, Dad, or wife (or husband!) tells us how crazy we are, we just say "Yup, you're right - ridiculous! Who air drums? Please!", we close the door, and we just keep on air drumming!

Drum on.

A Perspective on Drum Covers

Omar — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 02:12:45 +0000

Drum Covers - A Perspective

How many times have we heard a great song and thought, "Man, if I could play like that!" This not only applies to the drums, of which this web site gives the most emphasis, but to guitars, bass, piano/keyboards - the 'end is listless'. I for one favor the drums (although piano/keyboards are my 1b favorite instruments).

As I was growing up and through my adult years, my appreciation for drummers grew and grew. Many times I thought that they were under-appreciated, though now I know better. Drummers are crucial to the sound of their band, and percussion in general can create many landscapes in all forms of music (see the article "Beyond the Drum Kit"). There were several drummers that if one day I had my own kit, I would play their songs.

It would be well into my adulthood that I would finally be able to play these great songs, but it's a dream come true. I absolutely love playing, and you know what I say: even if it sounds bad, just have fun! I was sounding pretty bad at first since I was so rusty. But with practice comes accomplishment, and I've posted several of these covers on my YouTube channel, with more to come.

There are many approaches one can take when playing a drum cover. Some take a song and make it completely their own, adding extra fills, or changing the ones in the song, to the point where the original drummer is somewhat drowned out. Others try to play exactly, note for note (or strike for strike), what the original drummer played. To me, both of these are extremes and somewhat unnecessary.

I have a great respect for drummers and the role they play in music. And although many people think that it is easy to play drums, just ask any of them to play even as simple a beat as a song from Creedence Clearwater Revival (no disrespect to CCR - more on that later), and just watch them fall flat on their face! It is no simple task to be the backbone of a band. The drummer keeps the song moving in a familiar direction, maintaining control of the groove while every other musician can do whatever they want. Now before the other musicians start throwing tomatoes, guitar strings, and amplifiers at me, I want to make clear that I'm not degrading any role that everyone in a band plays towards maintaining the beat of a song. Everyone has a role; everyone counts (i.e. 1-2-3-4), but it's the drummer's role to maintain that beat, that groove, and many times just get out of the way and let the rest of the musicians do their thing. Phil Rudd of AC/DC is a classic example of this. One of the greatest rock bands ever, and Phil lays down the heavy beat, no frills, and lets the rest of the band shine. It works for them!

For a very long time, I would be frustrated when listening to a drummer such as CCR's Doug "Cosmo" Clifford. To me he just did nothing for the band. He could have added at least a fill or two to many of the songs he played. But that was not his role. It's all about the song, and although we may not remember CCR for their drumming, we most definitely remember them for their songs, which in the end is the most important thing.

So back to the extremes. Although making a song completely your own may have its place, it's not the way I would cover a song. I'm more of a 'copier' than an original. I can hear pretty much what the drummer is playing, and I'll play to that. I like to show the drummer I'm covering respect for deciding how best that song should be played, and for the most part, I'll stick to that. That's right, I said for the most part (more on that later).

At the other end, we have the drum covers that try to play note for note what the drummer is playing. This is almost impossible, so I tend not to do it this way either. Heck, even the original drummer plays their songs differently every time! Even if the original could play exactly the same, they most likely won't because it becomes boring very quickly.

However, I tend to lean toward the latter extreme, but not all the way. Out of respect for the drummer, I will try to play just like they did. They know better than I do how best the song sounds, after who knows how many iterations. I may add something to the song, but only if I think that's how the drummer would play it themselves. Basically, it becomes a guessing game, but a fun one at that!

Here are a few examples for you. When I covered System of a Down's "Toxicity", I wanted to make sure that I played the ghost notes as closely as possible. They are so a key part of the drumming that I couldn't ignore them without sounding too different. I practiced quite a bit, and even after my finished version, there still could be improvement. But I wanted to catch at least the essence of that technique, since John Dolmayan plays it so well. However, at the end of the song when the lead singer belts out the final scream, I added an extra snare strike (double-snaring, if you will). I added it because, for one, I like how it sounded! And two, it sounds like something John would do, so it didn't bother me to add it in.

Now when I cover a Rush song, I pretty much leave it alone (yeah, I 'leave that thing alone'!). There really isn't anything to improve upon, since each note seems to be meticulously selected. The last Rush song I covered was "Dreamline", the live version from the Snakes and Arrows tour. This is one of my favorite versions, and I wanted to cover a version that hasn't been out for too long. There are minor differences between my playing and Neil's, purposely so. But the differences would be how Neil would play, say, on another night of the tour. At least I'd like to think so!

On one of my covers I took a few liberties and added a fill or two extra. U2's "I Will Follow" was a request from a fellow Twitter user who said he might want to see me play what could be Twitter's theme song, so I decided to cover it. Larry Mullen is not my favorite drummer, but again, it's all about serving the song, and his style fits perfectly what U2 is all about. I always want my drum cover, regardless of how much (or how little) I change it, to seem like how the original drummer would play it as well.

Of course, there's no hard rule. It's all about having fun, and it also depends on your audience. So go out there and have some fun playing to the songs you love! Even better, record yourself as much as possible, so you can see steady progress, which will serve as encouragement to continue. And whatever your goal may be, you'll be able to show others that you can play some of the best drumming songs of all. Now go impress!
__________
For an introduction on what it takes to record great drum covers with inexpensive hardware and software, see "Record Yourself Playing Drums", the first in a four-article series