Most of you know Syd tha Kyd as one part of the ever controversial group Odd Future, but it's time for you to know more about her musical talent and overall badassery. Syd now comprises one half of The Internet where she provides silky smooth vocals that you would have never expected based on her work with the boys of Odd Future. Check out the interview that Noisey did the day after The Internet's album release party and some videos. 

The music world lost a legend on March 9, 1997. 
http://blogs.westword.com/backbeat/2011/03/the_twelve_most_impactful_deat.php

Last weekend I saw the Project X, the movie about a house party in Pasadena gone terribly awesome. While the movie was surprisingly funnier than I expected, what really stayed with me was the adrenaline pumping soundtrack. It's basically a compilation of the most enjoyable radio-friendly rap and hip hop from the past year or so. Here's a link so you can enjoy it as much as I did. https://watertowermusic.moontoast.com/estore/embed/838

Equalisation is one of the most powerful tools in your sonic toolkit and can be your greatest enemy or your greatest ally in the battle for the perfect sound. DAVID MELLOR gives advice on how and when best to use it.The next time you make a recording, as an experiment set all the EQ controls of your mixing console to their centre positions and leave them there until you have finished the final mix. Don't be satisfied with anything less than perfection, and don't give yourself the excuse that you can't get a good sound because you were not able to use the EQ.

EQ is a very powerful and effective item in your sonic toolkit, not unlike a circular saw in fact! But you wouldn't use your Bosch or Black & Decker for a fine carving, would you? No, you would use basic hand tools and, most importantly, your skill and judgement. As a recordist, it is your own abilities which are going to be most important to the degree of success of your recording, and you should always use the appropriate tool for the appropriate situation.

It is always best to ensure that you get as good a sound as possible from the microphone, synth or sampler coming into the mixing console. If you start off with good sounds, then a good result is almost inevitable. It is becoming increasingly popular to use microphones for recording, even when DI (direct injection) is possible, because of the wider variation of tonal qualities available. Even small variations in microphone position make vast differences to the sound picked up. It is a sign of an expert recording engineer that he or she will listen carefully to the sound from the mic and adjust its position and angle, and even try out several microphones, rather than pretend that it is always possible to get it right first time.

"Graphics are great for EQing an entire mix so that you can shape the sound as a whole, even after you have processed the individual elements."Once you have built up your skills in this area, then you can think about using EQ. I could spout all sorts of proverbs about the things you can't make silk purses out of and the things you ought not try to polish, and these proverbs apply especially to EQ. You should always aim to use EQ to improve an already wonderful sound. If the sound isn't good without EQ, then you will never end up with anything but second best. The only time you should ever use EQ to 'save' a sound is when you have been given a tape to work on that was recorded by a lazy engineer.

Just as there is an art to creating a brilliant sound, there is an art to bringing that sound to perfection, and also blending several sounds together to make the perfect mix. Van Gogh didn't learn to paint overnight, and no-one is born with the inbuilt ability to EQ. It's a skill that is learned by experience and a good deal of careful listening.

WHAT IS EQ?As a first step (although I know 99% of you have used EQ already!), let's see what EQ is and what it does. Then I'll move on to looking at the machinery and techniques.

Figure 1 shows one of the parameters you would expect any item of sound equipment to aspire to -- a flat frequency response. This, or at least a very close approximation, will be the frequency response of your mixing console with the EQ controls set to their centre positions, or with the EQ buttons switched off. Here, the balance of frequencies of the original signal is preserved in correct proportion at the output. In other words it is just as trebly, tinny, harsh, nasal, honky, bassy or boomy as it was when it left the microphone; or just as perfect perhaps.

Notice that the frequency response indicates what the EQ does to the sound. A cymbal will naturally have strong high frequencies, for example, and that emphasis towards HF will be preserved by a flat EQ setting. Likewise, a flat EQ will reproduce perfectly the boomy bottom end of an undamped bass drum.

If Figure 1 shows a flat response between about 20Hz and 20kHz, Figure 2 and Figure 3 show two of the curves you might expect to get from a mixing console EQ. Oddly enough, measuring the EQ and plotting the curve is something that only 0.001% of recording and sound engineers ever get around to doing at any stage in their creative careers, and only 0.0001% have their own equipment to do it to any reasonable accuracy. Even if it's hardly ever done, except on the test bench, it's a useful concept which you can carry around in your head without ever bringing to the forefront of your mind. So if a producer ever says to you, "Let's have a little more presence in the vocal", your subconscious mind will retrieve the bell-shaped curve of Figure 2 from your memory bank while your conscious mind adjusts the controls and judges the sound.

In Figure 2 we are adding an EQ boost, and there are three parameters that we would like to be able to control (if the EQ has knobs for all three). First and foremost is the frequency: this boost could be centred on any frequency according to the instrument and according to which characteristics you want to accentuate. Second is the gain, which is the degree of boost and can be measured in decibels (dB) at the centre frequency. Some mixing consoles even calibrate this control in dB, and a good thing too! You might like to have a range of up to 12 or 15dB as a maximum. Gain can also be negative, producing an EQ cut, which would be written as a gain of -6dB (or whatever) at the centre frequency, so the curve would dip downwards. EQ cut, by the way, is a vastly underused resource on many consoles, but more on this later...

The third parameter is Q, which is only occasionally offered on mixing console EQ. As well as being the star of the last ever episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation (or so my crystal ball informs me), Q is a measure of the width of the bell-shaped curve -- the bandwidth as some might say. A low Q -- 0.3 is low -- will allow the EQ to cover a wide range of frequencies, while a higher Q -- 5 is high -- will allow you to home in on a particular feature of the sound.

The bell-shaped curve of Figure 2 is often referred to as 'peaking' EQ, and applies to all mid frequency range EQ sections and a good proportion of high and low frequency EQ sections too. Figure 3 shows a 'shelving' EQ, where the boost (or cut) extends from the chosen EQ frequency all the way to the extreme end of the range. I have shown a low frequency shelving EQ in boost mode, but it could have been a high frequency cut with a similarly shaped but differently orientated curve. It isn't possible to say which type of curve is better, for it depends on what you want to achieve, but some consoles have a button to allow you to choose.

OUTBOARD EQMixing console EQ is getting better and better, particularly in the low-to-mid price range. There was a stage where I was sure that the designers were inventing their EQs with the aid of a pointed finger and a pocket calculator rather than a keen pair of ears and advice from practising recording engineers, but this is no longer true of most console EQs. Nevertheless, no matter how good the EQ on your mixing console, there will come a time when you need to use an external or 'outboard' unit. This might be because you need a facility not available from your console EQ, or you might prefer to use an EQ unit for some subtle characteristic sheen it gives to the overall sound.

"You should always aim to use EQ to improve an already wonderful sound. If the sound isn't good without EQ, then you will never end up with anything but second best."Outboard EQs come in two basic flavours: graphic and parametric. A good graphic equaliser typically has 30 or so slider controls for frequency bands nominally covering a third of an octave each. You would use two for stereo. The basic idea of a graphic is that as you set the slider controls to achieve the sound you want, the levels of the sliders 'draw' the EQ curve, as if you had measured and plotted it the long way. Unfortunately, graphic equalisers are somewhat economical with the truth and only give a rough idea of the actual curve. This is because each band does not cover only a third of an octave; its effects are felt most there but the slider will actually affect frequencies belonging to two or three bands either side of it to a distinctly noticeable extent.

Whatever deficiencies graphic equalisers may have under the Trades Descriptions Act, they are still very useful tools to have around. Mixing consoles can handle basic EQ tasks better and more quickly, but there are certain applications where graphic EQs have the edge. More on this shortly.

The alternative to a graphic outboard EQ unit is the parametric EQ. This is so called because it offers control over all three EQ parameters I mentioned earlier -- frequency, Q, and gain. A good parametric EQ unit may offer five bands, which cover the entire frequency range, or you might find three fully parametric bands with dedicated low and high frequency bands too.

USING EQSuccessful equalisation requires good equipment and a thoughtful approach from the engineer. Experienced engineers EQ by instinct and their fingers operate the controls as fluently as a jazz pianist tickles the ivories. But this fluency doesn't come automatically, it can only be won by experience. Anyone can grab the low frequency knob and wind up the bass to the maximum, but if you are serious about your recording then you will realise that it isn't just yourself you have to please; you have to consider what other listeners like and what systems they may be playing the recording on.

There is also a good technical reason why you should think before adding a lot of bass: for a given level of input, any small or medium size loudspeaker will produce much more sound at mid frequencies than at low, and if you boost the low frequencies too much then the overall level the speaker can achieve without significant distortion is less -- sometimes much less. It's a matter of compromise: the more bass you add, the lower the overall level can be. This also applies to other frequencies in the mixing console itself.

Adding EQ adds level, and it is very easy to boost the signal so much in the EQ section of the console that you run into clipping and distortion. Since the fader comes after the EQ, lowering the fader will do nothing to solve this. The answer is to reduce the gain, to allow the signal a little more headroom if necessary. One further technical point: changing the EQ of a signal nearly always changes the level, so each time you adjust the EQ you will have to consider moving the fader to compensate. It's something that will come automatically after a time, but newcomers to recording often concentrate more on the change in the sound itself and don't notice that it has suddenly become more or less prominent in the mix.

Enough of the technical stuff, recording is an artistic occupation so let's consider the subjective facets of EQ. If we consider individual sounds first, let's assume that the signal coming from the microphone is already as perfect as can be, being the result of careful positioning and angling. Each instrument has certain bands of frequencies that are strong and some that are weaker. The human voice, for example, is very strong around the 3 to 4kHz region, no matter whether male or female, or what note is being sung. When using EQ, you will be considering which characteristics of the sound you want to accentuate, or which you want to reduce. One way to consider this might be to imagine an instrument which was an 'average' of all real instruments, where the characteristics of normal instruments were smoothed out into something that had a neutral sound. When EQing a real instrument, you will either want to exaggerate its individual characteristics and make it more distinctive, or reduce its individuality and make it more like this hypothetical 'average' instrument.

This is quite simple to do, and we can make use of the standard sweep mid range control that is found on most mixing consoles, with controls for frequency and gain. A fully parametric equaliser with a Q control can offer even more precision.

First set the gain control to a medium amount of boost -- the three o'clock position of the knob is usually okay. Now sweep the frequency control up and down to the limits of its range and listen for the frequencies at which the effect is strongest. These are the frequencies in which the instrument is rich. Boosting the instrument's strong frequencies will enhance its individual characteristics and, for example, make a clarinet even more dissimilar to an oboe or any other instrument. In effect, you are making the clarinet even more clarinet-like.

When you have found the instrument's strongest frequency band, set the amount of boost according to taste and always compare what you are doing with the flat setting. If you have EQ sections to spare, you may be able to cut down on frequencies which don't enhance the sound of the instrument. Some instruments which are not known as bassy instruments nevertheless have a high low frequency content; cymbals for instance. On many occasions it will be well worth cutting down on frequencies which you don't consider to be any use to the instrument, freeing up a space in the frequency spectrum for another instrument to use.

Enhancing the sounds of individual instruments in this way is useful, but watch out when mixing that you are not boosting the same frequencies on each instrument. It is a trap for the unwary to boost every instrument at around 3kHz to help it cut through at a frequency where the ears are very sensitive. This will produce a mix that is very tiring to listen to.

The opposite of the enhancement technique is where you lessen the individuality of each instrument and make it more like our hypothetical 'average' instrument. To do this, find the instrument's strong frequencies with the mid EQ set to boost as before, but then cut these frequencies, by as much as you feel appropriate. This won't make the instrument sound better in isolation, but it will help it blend in with the other instruments in the mix.

Many aspiring engineers do not appreciate how useful EQ cut can be, but the expert will skilfully share the frequency spectrum among all the instruments so that each has its own space and doesn't have to fight with the others for attention. Using EQ in this way can result in a powerful and full sound from a small number of tracks.

Mixing consoles differ in the usefulness of their high and low frequency EQs, and it is often necessary to bring in an outboard EQ that can do the job better. I would say that it is the purpose of the low frequency control to add 'weight' to the sound without making it 'boomy'. These are subjective terms I know, but I think we can all appreciate the difference between a sound which is firm and solid in the bottom end, and one which has plenty of bass but gives the impression of being out of control. In the other direction, the low frequency control should cut low frequencies that are not contributing anything useful to the sound, while retaining the depth and body of the low mid. At the high frequency end, you should be able to cut any 'fizz' from the sound while still leaving it clear and incisive, and you should be able to make the sound brighter without the extreme top becoming aggressive. If you can't achieve all this with your console's EQ, you may have to spend a thousand pounds or more on an outboard unit that can.

When you have explored all the possibilities your console's EQ can afford and you have visited your local hire company for outboard units that perform the same function only better, you'll be keen to get your hands on a graphic equaliser. This is a rather different animal which appears at first to offer the ultimate in flexibility: just raise or lower the frequency bands you are interested in for quick and precise control. Unfortunately, you will find that precision is lacking because each individual band alters frequencies over quite a wide range on either side of its nominal centre frequency.

This doesn't mean that graphics are useless -- far from it. Graphics are great for EQing an entire mix so that you can shape the sound as a whole, even after you have processed the individual elements. If you know your way around, you can do this by taking a couple of outputs from the mixing console back into two channels and using the console's EQ again, but you'll only be applying more of the same, and doing it the graphic way really is much more satisfying. Graphics are also great for adding bite to a sound: just raise one or two sliders somewhere in the upper frequency region and you will make the sound more cutting without lifting the whole of the high frequency range. Experiment at your leisure.

PROBLEM SOLVINGIf you are working on a tape made by another engineer who isn't quite as fastidious as you, then you may find yourself faced with problems that EQ can help rectify. Unwanted sounds have a knack of finding their way onto recordings, particularly live recordings. If you have a 50Hz mains hum, for example, then a graphic will be able to help at only a little loss to the musical sounds on the recording. You can also use a parametric equaliser set to a high Q to home in on the unwanted frequency. Some equalisers have special notch filters to cope with precisely these situations. 50Hz hum may be removed to a reasonable extent, but the buzz caused by lighting dimmers may be impossible to get rid of. If the buzz isn't too harsh then you can try cutting the 50Hz fundamental and its harmonics at 100Hz, 150Hz, 200Hz etc. I can't promise anything, but it may make the recording just listenable.

Apart from hum or dimmer noise, if a recording is too noisy then very often the noise is most noticeable at high frequencies. Here you can use your EQ to strike the best compromise between cutting as much of the offending component of the noise as possible while still retaining some brightness in the sound. You may be able to apply a little boost at high mid frequencies, although the result will remain a compromise.

Even if the recording has no hum, buzz or noise, it may previously have been over-EQ'd. It is quite difficult to ameliorate the results of over-zealous EQing, particularly if some frequencies have been cut to a large extent. Trying to boost these frequencies back up again may result in an unacceptable amount of noise becoming apparent. Once again, compromise is necessary, although if you were dealing with one instrument from a multitrack mix you may be able to patch in a noise gate to help in this instance.

THE FUTURE OF EQThere is no doubt that the designers of EQ both in mixing consoles and outboard units are going to pay far more attention to the sound of the EQ rather than the technical specs. Some manufacturers have started to drop the conventional 'low', 'mid' and 'high' labels and describe their controls with names such as 'bottom', 'sheen' and 'glow'. I don't think this is a bad idea, since it will focus our energies less on the technicalities and more on the sound the EQ produces. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see EQ being combined -- not just in series within the same box, but fully integrated -- with compression or distortion far more often than it has been up to now.

Whatever the future may offer, EQ will always be one of the most powerful tools in your recording toolkit, so make the most of it.

EQ WITH BOLDNESSWhen adjusting the amount of EQ to apply (ie. the EQ gain), it's tempting to adjust it very carefully and change the setting in small increments. The problems with this method are: (a) that if the EQ setting isn't right then it is wrong and thus needs total reconsideration; (b) that the ear quickly grows used to changes in the frequency balance of a sound.

It may not always be appropriate, but the next time you want to change the EQ level of a sound, grab the control firmly, twist it all the way up and all the way down and quickly settle on a new position which will hopefully be just right.

 EQ TERMINOLOGYCUTOFF FREQUENCY The frequency at which a high or low frequency EQ section starts to take effect. Also referred to as turnover frequency.

SLOPE The rate at which a high or low frequency EQ section reduces the level above or below the cutoff frequency. Usually 6, 12, 18 or 24dB/octave.

PASS BAND The frequency range that is allowed through.

STOP BAND The frequency range that is attenuated.

FILTER An EQ section of the following types:

HIGH PASS FILTER A filter section that reduces low frequencies.

LOW PASS FILTER A filter section that reduces high frequencies.

BAND PASS FILTER A filter section that reduces both high and low frequencies.

NOTCH FILTER A filter that cuts out a very narrow range of frequencies.

GAIN The amount of boost or cut applied by the equaliser.

Q How broad or narrow the range of frequencies that is affected.

SWEEP MID A middle frequency EQ section with controls for frequency and gain.

PARAMETRIC EQ An EQ section with controls for frequency, gain and Q.

GRAPHIC EQ An equaliser with a number of slider controls set on octave or third octave frequency centres.

BELL An EQ with a peak in its response.

SHELF A high or low frequency EQ where the response extends from the set or selected frequency to the highest or lowest frequency in the audio range.

HF High frequencies

LF Low frequencies

MID Midrange frequencies

TREBLE Hi-fi enthusiasts' word for HF.

EQ OFF BUTTON The sign of a good mixing console!

 EQ HINTS & TIPS• If your mix sounds 'muddy', boost the main frequency range of each of the principal instruments. Boost 'decorative' sounds even more and pull the faders right down.

• If you can't get your tracks to blend together in the mix, cut the main frequency range of the principal instruments.

• To make vocals stand out in the mix, boost at around 3kHz.

• For extra clarity, cut the bass element of instruments which are not meant to be bass instruments.

• Adding EQ boost often adds noise. Listen carefully to arrive at the best compromise.

• Changing the EQ changes the level. Always consider re-adjusting the level after you EQ.

• If you add a lot of EQ boost, you may run into clipping and distortion. Reduce the channel's gain to eliminate this.

• If you use EQ to reduce feedback in live work, take care not to take too much level out over too wide a range of important frequencies, particularly the vocal 'presence' range around 3kHz.

• If your mixing console has an EQ Off button, use it frequently to check that you really are improving the sound.

In this month's nail-biting instalment of The Rhythm Method, we're going to investigate various techniques for making programmed patterns sound more 'human', as well as looking at some short cuts to generating rhythm tracks with an apparently improvised feel. While the focus of our attention will be jazz patterns, the subtext is all about injecting the milk of human kindness into beat boxes in general. So even if you think that jazz is something musicians only do when they get too old to play music that people actually want to listen to, stay tuned.

On the face of it, jazz drum programming appears to be a contradiction in terms. Jazz music is supposed to be all about the spontaneous expression of heart and soul, while drum machines and sequencers are soulless machines, the very opposites of spontaneity, creativity and having a good laugh down the boozer after the gig. That was certainly true 10 years ago, when drum machines simply didn't have the technical facilities to compete with humans on a jazz tip. First, the sounds themselves were often not realistic enough to be appropriate for jazz (though, to be fair, this was more an attitude of mind than a valid technical issue). Second, and more importantly, early drum machines just didn't offer 

"...thanks to cut and paste, you can quickly generate drum tracks which have an apparently improvised feel."the necessary control over dynamics and quantisation which are necessary if you want to emulate the subtle nuances of a live drummer in full flow.

These days, there are no excuses. Armed with the most basic GM module/workstation and the humblest of computer sequencers, you can produce jazz patterns that not only sound convincing, but swing with the best of them. The only real limit to your creativity is your time. Sequencers and drum machines only put out what you put in. If you want to create a rhythm track based around the idea that each bar is different from the next, then you'll have to be prepared to program every single variation yourself. From my own experience, I know it can take many hours to recreate the kind of spontaneous-sounding jazz track that any drummer worth their salt could lay down in a single take. Be prepared.

TO ERR IS HUMAN
One question which is perhaps worth spending a few lines considering is what exactly differentiates a rhythm played by a human from one created by a machine. Setting aside the issue of sounds and ambience for the moment, can most people actually tell the difference between a recording featuring a real drummer and one driven by a beat box? It was probably easier to distinguish in the early days, when a combination of lazy programming and a lack of onboard memory meant that drum machines gave themselves away by undue repetition. The lack of control over dynamics also meant that drum machines really did sound like metronomes -- not so much because of the regularity of timing, but because of the total consistency of the sounds. What makes music 'human', on the other hand, is the minor inconsistencies in the playing, in terms of timing, dynamics and the variations inherent in acoustic instruments. There's also this ephemeral notion of 'interpretation' -- which can, perhaps, be defined as an ability to creatively bend the rules to enhance the emotional pleasure of the music. Or to put it another way, if it ain't got that swing, it don't mean a thing.

DYNAMIC DUELS

As I mentioned last month, dynamics (the relative MIDI velocity levels of the different instruments) are crucial to creating a sense of movement within any style of drum pattern. Creating convincing jazz patterns requires even more attention to detail in this matter. Obviously, the easiest way to achieve a human feel is simply to program your rhythms in real time, using a velocity-sensitive MIDI keyboard, drum pads or drum machine buttons. I'd recommend this as your standard approach with cymbal parts, which often provide the fluidity of movement within a rhythm. (In jazz, it's the ride cymbal which is the dominant time-keeping instrument, as opposed to the hi-hats). Most sequencers offer a mixture of pattern-based and linear recording, so it's easy enough to build up a basic track from a series of step-time created patterns, then go back and record a new 'live' cymbal line over the entire track. Try also setting the quantise function to a very fine resolution, or turning it off altogether. You can normally go back and correct any really wayward beats after the event, using the over-quantise function.

TIME, GENTLEMEN, TIME

What originally really used to get up people's noses about drum machines was the fact that they kept 'inhumanly' strict tempo -- a charge which is still levelled at sequenced music per se. There are two issues here. One is about variations in tempo across the whole track -- in other words, the fact that people naturally speed up and slow down during different bits of a song. There's no reason why sequenced music shouldn't also speed up and slow down, and thanks to the wonder of sequencer tempo maps it's very easy to build this kind of variation into a song. In fact, whatever the style of music, one trick is to nudge the tempo up by a couple of beats when you hit the chorus or playout, and take it down a few notches in the bridge from the introduction to the first verse, or the bridge from the middle eight to the next verse, and so on.

The second issue concerns the minuscule variations in timing that occur within a pattern. Here we're touching on a human foible known in drumming circles as playing behind or in front of the beat. The fact is that the majority of human drummers (and, for that matter, most other musicians) rarely hit the notes right on the button. Some will have a natural inclination to play slightly early, others will play slightly late; some can go back and forth as the music demands. Playing behind the beat will drag the song back and make the track sound slightly slower than it actually is. You notice this in a lot of slow blues and funk numbers, where often the whole band hits everything slightly late. Playing ahead of the beat gives the song real urgency, making it sound faster even though the tempo hasn't actually changed. Again, this is easily replicated on most sequencers (and some drum machines), which allow you to shift patterns or entire drum tracks by a specified number of MIDI ticks. It's worth experimenting with this function, particularly on the snare when you've got a regular beat on the two and the four. But don't overdo it, or your drummer will just sound out of time.

Some sequencers and drum machines take this a stage further, with intelligent quantise functions which alter the MIDI velocity of certain beats, while also shifting the timing of certain beats by tiny amounts. But whereas early applications of this function imposed the changes randomly, it's now based on more careful analysis of the rhythmic pulse of particular styles of music. Personally, I think these functions work best when they're applied sparingly -- for example, to a fill or particular drum phrase rather than across the entire track. (See the examples box for further discussion of this.) Otherwise the drumming just sounds wrong rather than 'human'.

TIMBRE LAND

As most people are aware, an acoustic drum doesn't just get louder when it's struck harder, it also changes timbre, rising in pitch and exhibiting more pitch-bend. Cymbals will also change timbre according to where they are struck on their surface, and also how rapidly they are played. Some drum machines and sound modules simulate this through multi-sampled voices which will change according to MIDI velocity. If a sampler is the source of your drum voices, you can also easily set up velocity-sensitive cross-fades between different pitches of the same sound or, indeed, different sounds.

A similar effect can be achieved with more humble equipment. For example, the standard GM kit offers a choice of two ride cymbals, plus a more 'clangy'-sounding ride 'bell'. As a matter of course, I would use at least two of these sounds within a jazz ride pattern, if not all three. It really does make a difference. Similarly, when programming two bass drum notes in quick succession, try using a softer, more rounded one for the first beat and a sharper, heavier sound for the second.

RANDOMISATION

So far, so good. But while technology may be on our side in terms of making individual patterns sound more human, I appreciate that not everyone has the time and patience to laboriously trawl through a drum track beat by beat, instrument by instrument, tinkering about with individual velocities, timing values and so on. However, thanks to the power of cut and paste, you can quickly generate drum tracks which have an apparently improvised feel.

The process starts with the creation of a 1- or 2-bar 'master' pattern. With a jazz track it might be the archetypal jazz cymbal rhythm, underpinned by a basic bass and snare figure. This is then copied to several pattern locations -- an easy enough job whether you're using a stand-alone drum machine or a computer-based seque 

"Dynamics are crucial to creating a sense of movement within any drum pattern."ncer. You then call up one of these copies and start deleting, adding or moving a couple of cymbal beats here, a couple of snares or basses there. Maybe just delete every fifth cymbal note -- whatever. The trick is not to think too hard about what you're doing, and for this reason I often work in step time, because then it's hard to second-guess the end result. What you should end up with is a family of 1-bar patterns, all based around the master rhythm, yet each one slightly different. When chaining these together to form the song, simply assemble them in a random order. Hence the first verse might consist of patterns 1/2/3/4, but the second would be 2/4/2/3, and so on. Again, don't try to second-guess the result. When played end to end, the finished rhythm track might sound a bit iffy, but once you've got the rest of the instruments in place the result should sound more coherent.

With a sequencer, applying this technique is even easier. For example, in the edit page of a program like Cubase you can easily sub-divide your master and variation patterns into smaller sections -- half-bars, or even quarter-bars, for instance, and then use these smaller building blocks to build up the complete drum track.

Once the other parts are in place, it's worth going back to the drum edit page and tweaking the patterns to better fit the structure of the track. For example, there might be places where the insertion of a crash cymbal would provide an accent or mark the division of a bar.

Et voila! What you now have is a rhythm track with a large element of unpredictability about it -- almost as good as a having a machine with its own mind!

Music mythology has it that real drummers are illiterate, beer-swilling
louts with about as much musicality as a dead dog. Nevertheless, it
can be hard to find an acceptable substitute. Sam Inglis offers a
few pointers.

Many SOS readers would rightly argue that the great advantage of sequenced,
electronic drums is that they don't force you to use 'realistic' drum patterns or
sounds. Much dance music, for instance, is built around incredibly fast, precise
patterns and sounds which bear only the loosest relation to anything you can
actually produce by hitting a stretched skin with a wooden stick. The ability to
produce rhythms through programming, layer by layer and step by step,
certainly offers great scope for the imagination and freedom from the technical
and sonic limitations imposed by having to play and record real drumming.

Nevertheless, it's often the case that the sound and feel of a real drum part is
required, and circumstances - time, space, lack of facilities or lack of a
drummer - force people who don't play the drums themselves to knock
something up on a sequencer. And though a sequenced part will never be a perfect imitation, there are a
number of things you can do to make it sound more convincing.

1. Remember the physical limitations to which real drummers are subject. Obviously, individual
drummers have only two arms and two legs, and are therefore only 'four-note polyphonic' in
synth-speak - but there are also other restrictions on what is physically possible. Many typical rock
and pop rhythms incorporate a steady eight- or 16-to-the-bar hi-hat or cymbal rhythm. Above a
certain tempo, this will necessarily involve using both hands, usually playing alternate notes, so it's
important to think about which hand is doing what; you can't hit the hi-hat at the same time as the
snare or crash cymbal, for instance, if you're using both hands to keep up a steady rhythm on the
hi-hat - see example 1, on page 70.

2. For the same reason, there are certain sounds which can't be combined realistically in the same pattern. You
can't switch instantaneously between brushes and sticks, for instance, or between using a normal hi-hat and
one with a tambourine clipped to the top. Sticks can be used to produce rimshots, but brushes and beaters
can't, so it would be unusual to mix rimshots and brushed snare. Nor is it common to combine hi-hat and ride
cymbal in the same pattern - they're usually set up on opposite sides of a drum kit. You wouldn't usually do loud
crashes on the same cymbal in quick succession, either; if you want successive crashes, use two different
cymbal sounds. 

3. Bear in mind that the force with which drums are struck will not be constant. To a certain extent,
there will be random variation in the velocity of each hit, but there will also be more predictable
variations. In pop and rock drumming, for instance, the first beat of the bar is often emphasised,
while reggae rhythms are characterised by a heavier third beat. There are also physical limitations on
how hard you can strike a drum: beats played in quick succession will tend to be quiet, since you
can't raise the sticks as high, or get so much travel with the bass drum pedal, between hits.

4. Also, don't ignore dynamics within the song. In dance music, the drums are often compressed to the point
where they are totally even in volume throughout, and any dynamic changes are effected by simply dropping out
parts of the rhythm. Real drummers, however, use crescendos and other dynamic effects to add feel to a track;
often, for instance, they will build up the volume going into a chorus.

                                       5. Use sounds which are appropriate to the dynamic level of
                                       a particular drum sequence. Some percussion instruments,
                                       like crash cymbals, are virtually impossible to play quietly,
                                       while others, like rimshots, bongos and handclaps, are
                                       inevitably relatively quiet. A sequenced full-on drum assault
                                       will thus sound a little false if it is based around huge,
                                       reverberating rimshots or triangles.

                                       6. Use only percussion instruments which are appropriate to the
                                       style of music you're trying to emulate, and remember that most
                                       real drumkits actually contain a very limited number of drums. Not
                                       many rock drummers would have wind chimes, timbales, tablas or
                                       claves in their standard kit; similarly, if you're aiming for a '60s pop
feel, that 808 snare probably won't be a help. Few drumkits feature all of the huge range of toms found in many
synth drum sets - it's often best to choose two or three and use only those. Also, be careful when reproducing
drum parts played on brushes: some synths' so-called 'brush' sets actually replace only the snare samples with
brushed sounds, and don't bother to provide brushed samples of cymbals or toms.

7. It's one thing to have the feel of a pattern in your mind: however, it's much harder to analyse the
slight timing variations that produce that feel. The best way to capture 'feel', therefore, is to play the
parts into your sequencer, from a keyboard or other controller, in real time. Start with the two most
important - usually the bass drum and snare - in a single pass. Playing the drums well is, like most
instruments, difficult, and requires a lot of learning. However, it's not hard to use two fingers to bash
out a basic rhythm, and doing so makes it much easier to capture the elusive 'feel' of a real drum
part. And the beauty of sequencing is that you can correct any mistakes afterwards.

8. If you're not sure what sort of feel your drum part should have, or you can't seem to get it right by just recording
to a click track, remember that you don't have to record the drums first. If your song centres around a particular
piano or bass riff, for instance, you could try recording that into your sequencer first and add the drums later.
Being able to hear the important instrumental parts is very useful for deciding what kind of rhythm will or won't
work.

9. If you do need to edit the patterns you've entered, avoid snap to grid or similar functions. It's all too
easy to end up not only correcting mistakes, but also the timing variations that are responsible for
the 'feel' of the part.

10. Though editing can be used to remedy mistakes or really sloppy timing, there's
little point in painstakingly bashing out your rhythms in real time if you're then going
to quantise away all the variations. If you must quantise, leave a fairly wide margin
so that only really late or early beats are corrected.

11. Bear in mind that a lot of real drumming styles actually depend on
consistent deviations from theoretically accurate timing. Sometimes this is
quite obvious, as in the case of heavy syncopation or 'swing', which
imposes a triplet feel on a four-beat rhythm, but it can be much more subtle.
For instance, playing slightly ahead of the beat, particularly on the first and
third beats of a four-beat bar, is a common device used to add urgency to a
rhythm, and is characteristic of much disco, pop and country drumming. In
other genres like the blues, by contrast, drummers sometimes deliberately delay the 'off' beats to
create a laid-back feel.

12. Don't simply record a one- or two-bar sequence and then repeat it throughout the entire song. Even if you
want to have the same drum pattern all the way through, record it several times and mix the different versions
up. Each version you record will have slightly different dynamics and timing variations, and the variety will help to
reproduce the looser feel of a real drum track and implement some of the dynamic changes I've already
mentioned.

13. Keep it simple. With today's sequencers and multitimbral sound sources, it's easy to over-egg the
rhythmical pudding, either by adding improbable numbers of virtual tambourine, shaker and triangle
players, or by programming intricate rhythms and fills where most real drummers would exercise 
self-restraint (or lack of ambition!).

14. Listen to drumming on records to pick up the sort of patterns and fills that get used in a particular musical
style. Careful listening can make you realise that your assumed ideas about a particular style of drumming are
actually quite wide of the mark. For instance, it's very easy to get into the habit of automatically plonking a heavy
kick drum on the first beat of every bar - but there are a number of styles, notably reggae and jazz, in which the
bass drum is often not played at all on the first beat (see example 2, on page 70).

                                           15. Learn to read drum notation (if you already read
                                           music, it's dead easy - see box opposite) and look at
                                           transcriptions in drumming magazines and books; the
                                           more you know about playing the drums, the more
                                           accurately you'll be able to program realistic drum
                                           patterns.

                                           16. Synth and drum machine sounds are usually made using
                                           samples of each instrument in isolation. Recording a real
                                           drumkit is a different matter, however; overhead or room
                                           mics are always used (usually in conjunction with close mics
                                           on individual drums) to pick up not only cymbals and toms,
                                           but the sound of the whole kit, along with a certain amount of
                                           room ambience. Programmed drum parts in their raw state
                                           can sound sterile and disjointed by comparison, because
                                           they lack this element. You can avoid this to a certain extent
                                           by taking care with panning - don't pan anything too hard left
                                           or right, and keep the bass drum in the centre of the field. You
                                           can also experiment with putting a room reverb on the drums
                                           to make them sound more coherent.

                                           17. Beware, however, that synth programmers have a
                                           tendency to swathe every drum sound in a blanket of
reverb. This may sound impressive when you're trying the instrument out in a music shop, but again,
doesn't always represent the pinnacle of realism. Massive reverb does suit some styles of drumming
(Def Leppard anyone?) but by no means all - and where it is used to excess on real drums, its effect
is often to make them sound more artificial. Experiment with different depths and styles of reverb
until you find something that sounds right.

18. Standard drum kit sound sets, particularly
those conforming to the General MIDI drum
map, suffer certain persistent problems.
Perhaps the most obvious of these is the use
of only three different hi-hat sounds - open,
closed and pedal - when real drumming
makes use of a continuous range of sounds
from quiet to soft, from tight closed to open. A
common device for creating effective build-ups
into loud sections, for instance, is to open the
hi-hat gradually over a bar or two, moving from a tight 'tsk' to a looser, splashy sound - which progression can't
really be reproduced using only single open and closed sounds. There are also noticeable sonic differences
between a hi-hat struck with the tip of the stick and with the shaft; real drummers do both, often alternately.
Getting hold of a more comprehensive set of hi-hat samples, then, is an effective way to improve the authenticity
of your sequenced drumming. You could even consider miking up and playing a real hi-hat over your sequenced
kick and snare pattern.

19. Another problem with many sampled sound sets is that they do not reflect the ways in which the
sound of real percussion instruments varies depending on the force with which they're struck.
Giving a hi-hat or a cymbal a heavy bash produces a sound which is not only louder than a gentle
tap, but quite different in timbre; the same is true of snares and other drums. If your sound set merely
responds to velocity by making the sounds louder or quieter, you need to be careful how you use
them (for instance, avoid trying to reproduce quiet cymbal washes if you only have samples of loud
crashes).

20. Don't be afraid of changes in tempo. Real drummers speed up and slow down - sometimes deliberately,
sometimes not - and these tempo changes can help to give a track a more organic sound. Some tempo
changes are very obvious, such as rallentando (slowing down towards the end of a song) and segues between
slow and fast sections of a song. Others, however, are more subtle: it's quite common for drummers to speed
up slightly going into a chorus, for instance. Some classic recordings even feature a gradual increase in tempo
over entire sections or, in extremes, over the entire song - a well-known recent example is Pulp's 'Common
People'. It may take a little extra sequencing to implement tempo changes in mid-song, but the results can be
very effective.