I don't know if quantization and autotuning alone killed rock music, nor do I think it is completely dead outside of the mainstream. But I absolutely agree with Beato on drums that are 100% quantized feeling lifeless. I understand that a lot of bands don't have the budget to spend a lot of time in the studio, but quantizing (especially for drummers) has become a crutch. I say this as a millennial (mid-30's) drummer who has recorded both with and without quantization. About 10 years ago, I was playing with a band that recorded 2 EPs and a full-length album in about a 2-year span. The 2 EPs were recorded with a click, but were not quantized. If I listen back to those now, I cringe because my timing is really bad. I can hear myself dancing around the click, struggling to stay on time and especially being sloppy with my kick foot. I wasn't practicing enough, and simply wasn't a good enough drummer to be in a studio to be completely honest. So for the full-length, I decided to work with a producer who was specifically known for his skilled use of quantizing and mixing in recorded samples with drums to make them sound tighter and cleaner. The end result sounded "perfect" but it also didn’t sound like ME at all. Yes, they were my parts, but they didn’t feel anything like my playing. I loved the sound, but something felt off in an uncanny valley kind of way -- I just couldn't put my finger on it. Several years and a couple bands later, I finally progressed to a point where I was capable of being a reliable timekeeper in a studio setting. With no quantizing, my drums sounded better than ever before. They were alive, but tight. They grooved without varying tempo in erratic ways. Now, I can tell pretty much right away when a track has quantized drums, and while it doesn’t always kill the song for me, it really detracts from it. I just don’t get the same feeling from drums that don’t swing. Lately, I find myself seeking out music from the 60’s and 70’s that I haven’t listened to before, because I love the live band sound and the minimalist production compared to modern music. I’m not against technology at all, and there are modern albums that sound absolutely fantastic. But, more often than not, the technology used in modern recording studios kills the groove, feeling, and dynamics (too much compression is another issue) of the music, and songs recorded that way just don’t move me.
Recording "cheats" have been used for decades to obtain better recordings. I recently learned that Master of Puppets was recorded at a slower bpm with the instruments tuned down and then sped up so that the final mix wouldn't be a hot mess. Circle of Tone (I think) did a video on it recently, good stuff!
My band has recorded both fully quantised material and non-quantised and I've come to realise that using both techniques gets the best results. All depends on the groove/feel of what you're doing. We do some parts to a click and some without too and it sounds good as a whole yet has a similar feel to live performance overall.
I don't think Rick has a problem with using it to fix mistakes. It was using it for no reason, that I think he was talking about. So I don't really see the disagreement ? - aside from whether it was literally solely responsible for 'killing' rock music. And that's just a cickbait phrase more than anything else.
The problem is, using quantisation on a track that doesn’t need it wouldn’t necessarily sterilise it. At least from I’ve heard. If the track is mostly in time, then a slight shift in beats wouldn’t be much noticeable. Also, if you go back to the beginning of the video, he clearly says that people tend to dislike quantisation because they dislike overquantising or quantising when it’s not needed.
Nah he’s against it because it makes music steril. Yet if doesn’t. His argument is moot. And like he said time constraints and the fast paced industry these days forces you to use thr technology. Rick is scared of him and his era becoming irrelevant. So he wants to pull everyone back to his standard so he can be a “pro” again. Without his YT channel he’d be no one these days. He is not capable of producing a record selling piece of music like many artists who “cheat” in the studio. He could just start using the technology and thus adapt to the future rather than being such a contrarian because “his generation is better”.
I love your channel, as a DIY musician myself, it always felt like guys like Rick Beato (although well intentioned) really undervalue the innovation that has sprung forward because of the tools that make music more affordable and approachable to record. Your channel really counters this well.
Music is all too often steeped in tradition, even if that tradition is merely decades old. Hostility towards digital recording from those who grew up with analog, hostility towards modeling technology from tube amp aficionados, etc. This even extends to lutherie, where some repairmen insist that hot hide glue must be used whenever possible and that more modern adhesives are inferior. I think much of it is simply human nature and our tendency to do things for no other reason than 'that's the way it's always been done'.
The song sounds fine. The mistakes are what makes music human. Removing all the "mistakes" makes music suck. Miles Davis' early albums were mostly 1st or 2nd take. Not because they couldn't make it sound better, but because playing something as it was, carries weight, feel, and actually sounds good as long as the overall thing isn't a mess. If Miles Davis was alive during this generation, Blue in Green and the rest of Kind of Blue would have never happened. If it did, it would have sounded like fusion acid jazz garbage. Fact. Think about it. How does cool jazz sound today? Like quantized, overly compressed, shit. Why? Because it can. Because what perfectionists think sounds better, only does to a degree. Then it sounds worse. Worse is the new better. Now obviously, this isn't the only nail in the coffin that killed jazz and rock. But IT IS WHY, all the new jazz and rock that IS OUT THERE, sounds like poo poo.
Marilyn Manson first told me that Rock was deader than dead in ‘99 on the Matrix soundtrack. But I didn’t give it much credence considering I was just discovering him, the pumpkins, NIN, etc. And then just a couple years later I was hearing the White Stripes and QOTSA on the radio. Nowadays you just gotta do your own searching, but it’s there. Idles, King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard, the stoner metal scene, the 4-track cassette resurgence, some great stuff out there.
Best part about the death of rock/metal? Bar and tiny club shows are way more fun and personal than arena shows with tens of thousands of attendees. I'll take a 50 person bar show with a rock band I've never heard of over a sold out Iron Maiden show.
I think the "drum track" was really a choice of drum fills rather than a timing issue. Akin to guitar player's choice of notes or "mashing" in a guitar solo. Great video so far!
I feel like quantizing is a form of musical dishonesty. If you can't play a part perfectly in time, that's ok and that's part of what makes music human (not to say we shouldn't try to minimize mistakes by practicing). I'd rather hear the mistake and know that the recording is accurately depicting what was actually being played.
@@LordsoftheTrident I'd be ok with the mistake detracting from the song. I figure the band did its best in the actual takes to sound good and it's unfair to expect more than that.
@@LordsoftheTrident Before the advent of digital editing and quantizing producers of rock bands often discovered that many drummers in rock bands did not keep time well enough to make a good recording since the backbone of many songs if the drumbeat so they would bringing in better studio drummers to do the record. Now like you said it's much easier and cheaper to quantize or pitch correct for the melodic elements. If you look at New Wave from the 80s and Hip Hop a lot of synths and sample looping came in so and drum machines kept perfect time. Out of this came pro tools and DAWs and the music mapped out on grids. Rick didn't like the perfection of that and it's true that a John Bonham drum track has a more human feel and a lot of programmed drum tracks don't. One thing that occurs with a human drummer is minute changes in dynamics and certain drum hits on the kit go slightly off the grid. These things might bring more attention to the drums, because this is slight variation and if the drummer is good the variation is done in a fairly consistent way AND in a way that may be influenced by changes in the music, how it's composed They might strike louder in dramatic parts of the composition or delay a strike somewhere in a song for emphasis. But the things is today is not the 80s era of drum machines. You can analyze all those human nuance and imitate them in the drum programming such as moving snare hits a hair ahead or behind the grid. However a lot of pop music doesn't bother with this because a lot of people are used to perfect on the grid stuff and like it. Unlike Rick Beato they grew up on perfect drum beats and sequencer patterns. As for a lot of metal drums most of it today is not like John Bonham who had some funk swing elements. Instead it's a lot of fast technical stuff, tempo changes, double bass patterns, a lot of this stuff is also programmed and if not there is also a lot of textural stuff in the production, often "swing feel" and "groove" slower drumbeats are not part of the composition. Is there something missing with all the editing and production work, the modern process as compared to having a competent band play live with each other in the same room and respond to each other as humans would? Yes It depends on the style of music. Making on grid music is actually a type of style element. But the thing is making off grid music is not dependent on using a human drummer. Drums can be entirely programmed and the programmer can go in move elements of it off grid to sound human And at a certain point putting in such micro variation can be put into the music on it's own basis, subtle variations made for their own sake, not to imitate humans. In fact more of these variations than a human would do but random things, micro-nuances, each one done for a reason or intended effect.
As a former guitarist and a video gamer, I see quantization as being similar to aimbots in shooter games. There are limits to human dexterity and 'feel' that are easy to pick up on where in music or video games. If you've ever ran across an aimbotter in a video game you'll quickly realize how it can be applied to music. If a song feels automated, it probably is. But this debate goes way, way back to when things like drum machines, MIDI and loopers showed up. Is it a cheat? Depends on how you use it. If you use it to do all the work, like an aimbot, that's cheating. If you use it to enhance your playing, that's valid. But then, in a music studio "time is money" and in the rush to get stuff recorded I can see where a lot of copy/paste and splits/splicing takes place in order to bring about a finished product. My advice? You can't rush perfection. ;-) There have been movies about this, people. Cherry 3000, look it up. Dude has a "perfect" girlfriend because he had her built. She was an android. She eventually broke down, part needed was far across a dangerous wasteland and that's where Cherry comes in. Without spoiling anything, dude finds out a real woman is perfection while the android is just a cheap (cheat?) copy.
I agree. It should be used to fix things that ruin the track but thats it. What rick was talking about was the lifeless feeling it adds to the music. Everything is getting quantized. And you can hear it. It shouldn't be done to a track thats a good recording. And its just weird doing it to live instruments recorded live cause it makes it electronic and robotic. I see nothing wrong with doing it to virtual instruments and electronic aspects of music and even some samples. But things that use a real drummer like boom bap. I personally think you should play along to the drums rythem.
Many things are being quantised because certain elements of modern music composition is electronic anyway. This is where quantisation works well. In terms of Beato’s criticism regarding modern pop music. As far as acoustic drumming, if the drum groove is mostly in time as it is, then I doubt quantising it will make a significant impact, since much of the track won’t need adjusting. So, the question is how are those using it setting the parameters of the plug-in? At least when I’ve quantised a track, although midi based acoustic drums, that was mostly in time, I didn’t notice a major difference, a few beats shifted slightly and that was it. The only time it made a difference was when I used it on a groove where the beats fell in a particular place, and I didn’t set the parameters properly to account for that. So, I just left it as it was, without quantisation.
Hello! not hating on the video by any means, just really want to discuss some of your statements: "But what if you are a band who doesn't have the luxury of paying for unlimited time in the studio?" -you go to the studio with enough practice to make it right (enough). 1 or 2 bars off it's not a problem and Beato's video actually show how playing off the beat sometimes sounds better, makes it groovy. Beato was clearly talking about fixing the whole take with quantizing and make it sound "perfect" (grid-wise). And doing so, actually makes the sound worst. About the example, not every "out of grid" drum fill is there to let the song breathe...sound like an overreaction to Beato's statement. Also, you said using Quantizing would've helped the song, but should't the drummer be able to play it right enough without any aid? Isn't that the right way to "help the song"? You repeat a lot that that when you dont have time or budget, you use technical aids to make up for it and that's ok. I don't believe that to be the formula. Good singers sing good enough every time, they dont need 10 takes and if they are off, it's not by a lot, it will sound good without technical aids. Same with good drummers. Even with low budget and small time in the studio if the musicians are good enough to make music, they should be able to make at least one good take (obviously not a grid-perfect or pitch-perfect take but beato's point is exacly that, you dont need to be grid-perfect to sound good). The time in the studio doens't have to be replaced with technical aids, it should be replaced with time spent practising. Cheers!
I agree. This video's message seems to be that it's okay if you haven't practiced your instrument enough. It's okay if you're not very talented. It's okay if you don't actually care that much about the music itself, and ultimately you should only care about whether your music will sell millions. He even made it sound like rehearsing with your band isn't worth it - but that's how you learn to play in time with each other. If a band doesn't rehearse together, it's no wonder they need to grid their music. All that time spent digitally "fixing" your music would be better spent practicing.
You sound so dense. That’s like the people who complain about electronic helpers in cars saying “just gotta learn how to drive right”. We have the technically today so we use to to make our lives easier. If you want to record a record today but don’t have the studio skills today why not use technology to put out the art you envision in your mind and put it out while practicing in the background for live shows to march what you recorded? Also, artists have been cheating since the dawn of time. Metallica famously recorded at a slower bpm and sped it up after so they wouldn’t have to record it at the intended speed and possibly fuck up. No one ever cared. You guys are just incapable of going with the times.
I agree that it is very unlikely quantinization was a key factor in killing rock music. But, and not that you didn't say this, for some music it's absolutely essential to not quantize it to a grid. Most jazz is a good example of this including the more modern styles like neo-soul and jazz funk. Bebop for instance is very similar to a language not only for the harmony and melodic note choices but for phrasing those notes, or the groove/swing how it's usually called. There's a very specific way of doing this and if it isn't done by someone that is "fluent" in playing it it's going to sound bad. In the same way if you tried to quantize a native English speakers phrasing. You might then ask, how is it supposed to be played then if it isn't strictly on beat? Well there's no easy answer to that. For the solo instruments a lot of it is played with a laid back groove, or a bit behind the beat. The "pocket" or the size of space where you can play for a particular groove can be a loose or tight pocket. That pocket can change quite drastically throughout a single song. The only way to make it sound good is by listening to that music so much and practicing it that you know what's going to work and what isn't. So if you quantize any of that you no longer have that style of music. Try to quantize someone like Bill Evans, especially his solo playing and you no longer have Bill Evans.
Real musicians don't need things "fixed". I agree with Rick, computers have changed music, and not for the better. Lesser musicians NEED things to be fixed after recording, because they aren't as good as "they" think they are. You're just wrong bro. Some of the GREATEST music ever made was made without computers! Raw music, vocals, and drums will inherently be superior to computer generated music. I've wasted my time listening to you ramble about your (and others) lack of talent and skill.
I haven’t seen any decline in rock music. I always have new stuff to listen to every year that I’m absolutely crazy about and I know there’s a lot more out there that I’ll miss because I don’t have the time to check it all out. That being said, I feel like MySpace played a major part in the flooding of the world with low-quality music. Just having a MySpace band page made any project seem somewhat legit. All of a sudden there were a thousand “bands” to search through before you were able to find something truly great. And it all seemed very generic. The mid-late 2000’s was the era of “mall core” and similar music that was clearly going to be more of a fad than the likes of “true metal”. So yeah, that was what became mainstream rock at the time and it declined for good reason. But the real quality has been thriving just under the surface the whole time. Same with the grunge and disco eras. If anything, technology has improved music because it has allowed symphonic metal(one of my favorite styles) to thrive. The ability to sequence realistic sounding orchestral arrangements and perform it live with backing tracks is always getting better. That might be a whole other debate but I would rather hear a band with backing tracks and kick triggers than one with a singer who cups the mic and generally doesn’t care about their sound quality. I’ve seen enough Pantera protégés in dive bars and my money is better spent at a real venue with a real sound system and a real show.
Musician: "Dude, that section sucked! We need another thirty takes!" Filmmaker: "Nah, don't worry, we'll fix it in post." Btw, regarding rock being dead, I might just be the only metal head in Zimbabwe but I love the uniqueness of it! Like I know a secret that no one else does!
After seeing Beato's video, I had a discussion with a drummer about this. He's in a band that had recorded 10 or so albums and they existed before pro tools. His exact words were "quantizing killed the soul in our music".
2:20 'Norwegian death metal'. Actually, Norway is famous for black metal. They have different production styles. Also, Rick did not state that correcting a few bars is bad. He spoke about making everything sound like a drum machine
What you say is mostly accurate, however, I personally think music sounds better with all the little glitches left in. It's all subjective and dependant on the end listener. Being overly sloppy isn't good either.
This is a good click bait. You not talking about what Rick talks about. You talking about a bit of use, while he showed Nickelback who put everything dead on the beat. While taking about money, you tell you have your own home studio wich I have as well. Drum is problematic but paying for a home studio is not that expensive. You not even mentioned the main topics, like groove, and the human part of the music. You made it as a click bait or missed the whole topic
Beat detective and autotune is what turns myself off of modern music. It sounds fake and robotic. Give me the old school music of rock, metal, blues, folk, celtic folk, country & western, jazz etc from real musicians then computer software making it sound not human. This guys opinion is what is wrong with music today. His excuse is just an excuse to be lazy. Having imperfections is being human and I will take these imperfections any day over this computer software shit with this so called pitch correction technology crap. Rick Beato said it correctly with this all about being lazy. I don't have the time and resources is an excuse which is much more about being lazy in reality. Totally disagree with the other guys opinion as well that he linked in this video.
5: 00- I'm not hearing it. I hear a drum sound with not enough definition to make speed fills work, but nothing so heinously out of time to make me pull a 'Lars Ulrich' and run screaming to the Pro Tools. If I'm paying by the hour, I'm likely going to spend more time getting sounds and tones with all of those high dollar microphones, preamps, and outboard gear in that billion dollar studio that I'm paying for rather than days of tracking. And in that situation sure; use the timing tools available to tighten up your best takes if necessary. And if you can take those high dollar tones you tracked home, even better. Do your "math homework" at the house. If however your credo is "no high dollar prime time studios unless the label is buying" or if you simply prefer to work at home, then get yourself a click-track precious, and learn how to play and TRACK with the motherfucker already. You want to see an engineers jaw drop? Demonstrate in 30 minutes or less that you can tune your drums, get them set, place the mics at the commonly used and accepted starting points, and request a click in your cans set to the tempo of the song you're about to record. And rock isn't so much dead as it is underexposed at this time. And we don't live in a "rock culture" these days. The fads and social engineering trends of the day are anything BUT rock and roll. In fact, they are quite the opposite. And extremely nauseating in my humble opinion.
I dunno man... I actually don't. I have no dog in this race. There's no reason for me to even comment on this except to see if it's actually true that you don't read the "Read more" comments. I could be posting a recipe for baked ziti and it would be far more of a contribution than anything I'd have to say about quantizing (I word I totally knew before this... totally...) Sadly I don't know how to make Baked Ziti, so this won't be that. Did you know that gravitational acceleration is 9.80 m/s^2? I think that's pretty cool. That ends up being 32.2 ft/s^2 in the American system, because the Metric system is the tool of the devil.
Yes, we just don't want to be like Randy in South Park, who is actually Lorde...that would be abusing the technology th-cam.com/video/AkMJ5GSC37g/w-d-xo.html
I don't know if quantization and autotuning alone killed rock music, nor do I think it is completely dead outside of the mainstream. But I absolutely agree with Beato on drums that are 100% quantized feeling lifeless. I understand that a lot of bands don't have the budget to spend a lot of time in the studio, but quantizing (especially for drummers) has become a crutch. I say this as a millennial (mid-30's) drummer who has recorded both with and without quantization.
About 10 years ago, I was playing with a band that recorded 2 EPs and a full-length album in about a 2-year span. The 2 EPs were recorded with a click, but were not quantized. If I listen back to those now, I cringe because my timing is really bad. I can hear myself dancing around the click, struggling to stay on time and especially being sloppy with my kick foot. I wasn't practicing enough, and simply wasn't a good enough drummer to be in a studio to be completely honest.
So for the full-length, I decided to work with a producer who was specifically known for his skilled use of quantizing and mixing in recorded samples with drums to make them sound tighter and cleaner. The end result sounded "perfect" but it also didn’t sound like ME at all. Yes, they were my parts, but they didn’t feel anything like my playing. I loved the sound, but something felt off in an uncanny valley kind of way -- I just couldn't put my finger on it.
Several years and a couple bands later, I finally progressed to a point where I was capable of being a reliable timekeeper in a studio setting. With no quantizing, my drums sounded better than ever before. They were alive, but tight. They grooved without varying tempo in erratic ways.
Now, I can tell pretty much right away when a track has quantized drums, and while it doesn’t always kill the song for me, it really detracts from it. I just don’t get the same feeling from drums that don’t swing. Lately, I find myself seeking out music from the 60’s and 70’s that I haven’t listened to before, because I love the live band sound and the minimalist production compared to modern music. I’m not against technology at all, and there are modern albums that sound absolutely fantastic. But, more often than not, the technology used in modern recording studios kills the groove, feeling, and dynamics (too much compression is another issue) of the music, and songs recorded that way just don’t move me.
Recording "cheats" have been used for decades to obtain better recordings. I recently learned that Master of Puppets was recorded at a slower bpm with the instruments tuned down and then sped up so that the final mix wouldn't be a hot mess. Circle of Tone (I think) did a video on it recently, good stuff!
But according to boomers that's fine since, well, it's good old Metallica 😑
My band has recorded both fully quantised material and non-quantised and I've come to realise that using both techniques gets the best results. All depends on the groove/feel of what you're doing. We do some parts to a click and some without too and it sounds good as a whole yet has a similar feel to live performance overall.
I don't think Rick has a problem with using it to fix mistakes. It was using it for no reason, that I think he was talking about.
So I don't really see the disagreement ? - aside from whether it was literally solely responsible for 'killing' rock music. And that's just a cickbait phrase more than anything else.
Totally agree, using it to sterilise every track is the issue not fixing a few mistakes here and there.
The problem is, using quantisation on a track that doesn’t need it wouldn’t necessarily sterilise it. At least from I’ve heard. If the track is mostly in time, then a slight shift in beats wouldn’t be much noticeable.
Also, if you go back to the beginning of the video, he clearly says that people tend to dislike quantisation because they dislike overquantising or quantising when it’s not needed.
Nah he’s against it because it makes music steril. Yet if doesn’t. His argument is moot. And like he said time constraints and the fast paced industry these days forces you to use thr technology. Rick is scared of him and his era becoming irrelevant. So he wants to pull everyone back to his standard so he can be a “pro” again. Without his YT channel he’d be no one these days. He is not capable of producing a record selling piece of music like many artists who “cheat” in the studio. He could just start using the technology and thus adapt to the future rather than being such a contrarian because “his generation is better”.
I love your channel, as a DIY musician myself, it always felt like guys like Rick Beato (although well intentioned) really undervalue the innovation that has sprung forward because of the tools that make music more affordable and approachable to record. Your channel really counters this well.
Music is all too often steeped in tradition, even if that tradition is merely decades old. Hostility towards digital recording from those who grew up with analog, hostility towards modeling technology from tube amp aficionados, etc. This even extends to lutherie, where some repairmen insist that hot hide glue must be used whenever possible and that more modern adhesives are inferior. I think much of it is simply human nature and our tendency to do things for no other reason than 'that's the way it's always been done'.
The song sounds fine. The mistakes are what makes music human. Removing all the "mistakes" makes music suck. Miles Davis' early albums were mostly 1st or 2nd take. Not because they couldn't make it sound better, but because playing something as it was, carries weight, feel, and actually sounds good as long as the overall thing isn't a mess. If Miles Davis was alive during this generation, Blue in Green and the rest of Kind of Blue would have never happened. If it did, it would have sounded like fusion acid jazz garbage. Fact.
Think about it. How does cool jazz sound today? Like quantized, overly compressed, shit. Why? Because it can. Because what perfectionists think sounds better, only does to a degree. Then it sounds worse. Worse is the new better.
Now obviously, this isn't the only nail in the coffin that killed jazz and rock. But IT IS WHY, all the new jazz and rock that IS OUT THERE, sounds like poo poo.
Marilyn Manson first told me that Rock was deader than dead in ‘99 on the Matrix soundtrack. But I didn’t give it much credence considering I was just discovering him, the pumpkins, NIN, etc. And then just a couple years later I was hearing the White Stripes and QOTSA on the radio.
Nowadays you just gotta do your own searching, but it’s there. Idles, King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard, the stoner metal scene, the 4-track cassette resurgence, some great stuff out there.
Best part about the death of rock/metal? Bar and tiny club shows are way more fun and personal than arena shows with tens of thousands of attendees. I'll take a 50 person bar show with a rock band I've never heard of over a sold out Iron Maiden show.
Truth!
We recently saw michael angelo in a dive bar with about 10 people total. As cool as that was for us, i felt bad for him.
I think the "drum track" was really a choice of drum fills rather than a timing issue. Akin to guitar player's choice of notes or "mashing" in a guitar solo. Great video so far!
Alternative title:
How to Strawman Rick Beato
How is it a strawman?
I feel like quantizing is a form of musical dishonesty. If you can't play a part perfectly in time, that's ok and that's part of what makes music human (not to say we shouldn't try to minimize mistakes by practicing). I'd rather hear the mistake and know that the recording is accurately depicting what was actually being played.
Where do you draw the line, though? Would you keep a mistake in that detracts from the song?
@@LordsoftheTrident I'd be ok with the mistake detracting from the song. I figure the band did its best in the actual takes to sound good and it's unfair to expect more than that.
@@LordsoftheTrident Before the advent of digital editing and quantizing producers of rock bands often discovered that many drummers in rock bands did not keep time well enough to make a good recording since the backbone of many songs if the drumbeat so they would bringing in better studio drummers to do the record.
Now like you said it's much easier and cheaper to quantize or pitch correct for the melodic elements.
If you look at New Wave from the 80s and Hip Hop a lot of synths and sample looping came in so and drum machines kept perfect time.
Out of this came pro tools and DAWs and the music mapped out on grids.
Rick didn't like the perfection of that and it's true that a John Bonham drum track has a more human feel and a lot of programmed drum tracks don't.
One thing that occurs with a human drummer is minute changes in dynamics and certain drum hits on the kit go slightly off the grid. These things might bring more attention to the drums, because this is slight variation and if the drummer is good the variation is done in a fairly consistent way AND in a way that may be influenced by changes in the music, how it's composed They might strike louder in dramatic parts of the composition or delay a strike somewhere in a song for emphasis.
But the things is today is not the 80s era of drum machines. You can analyze all those human nuance and imitate them in the drum programming such as moving snare hits a hair ahead or behind the grid.
However a lot of pop music doesn't bother with this because a lot of people are used to perfect on the grid stuff and like it. Unlike Rick Beato they grew up on perfect drum beats and sequencer patterns.
As for a lot of metal drums most of it today is not like John Bonham who had some funk swing elements. Instead it's a lot of fast technical stuff, tempo changes, double bass patterns, a lot of this stuff is also programmed and if not there is also a lot of textural stuff in the production, often "swing feel" and "groove" slower drumbeats are not part of the composition.
Is there something missing with all the editing and production work, the modern process as compared to having a competent band play live with each other in the same room and respond to each other as humans would? Yes
It depends on the style of music.
Making on grid music is actually a type of style element.
But the thing is making off grid music is not dependent on using a human drummer.
Drums can be entirely programmed and the programmer can go in move elements of it off grid to sound human
And at a certain point putting in such micro variation can be put into the music on it's own basis, subtle variations made for their own sake, not to imitate humans.
In fact more of these variations than a human would do but random things, micro-nuances, each one done for a reason or intended effect.
Rick Beato is my musical step father so leave him alone. Jk great video.
And a very nice man.
Another tasty video!
Rock n roll will never die..
I feed quantizing is helpful when some thing distracting or take you off from the song..
As a former guitarist and a video gamer, I see quantization as being similar to aimbots in shooter games. There are limits to human dexterity and 'feel' that are easy to pick up on where in music or video games. If you've ever ran across an aimbotter in a video game you'll quickly realize how it can be applied to music. If a song feels automated, it probably is. But this debate goes way, way back to when things like drum machines, MIDI and loopers showed up. Is it a cheat? Depends on how you use it. If you use it to do all the work, like an aimbot, that's cheating. If you use it to enhance your playing, that's valid. But then, in a music studio "time is money" and in the rush to get stuff recorded I can see where a lot of copy/paste and splits/splicing takes place in order to bring about a finished product. My advice? You can't rush perfection. ;-) There have been movies about this, people. Cherry 3000, look it up. Dude has a "perfect" girlfriend because he had her built. She was an android. She eventually broke down, part needed was far across a dangerous wasteland and that's where Cherry comes in. Without spoiling anything, dude finds out a real woman is perfection while the android is just a cheap (cheat?) copy.
We all have opinions.
I’ve used quantisation in rough demos, but in a final mix, nope!
Great points. I love those arcade machines.
What hesitation in the drum part of battlefield queen ?
the drum fill are fine, the drum kick not so much.
I agree. It should be used to fix things that ruin the track but thats it. What rick was talking about was the lifeless feeling it adds to the music. Everything is getting quantized. And you can hear it. It shouldn't be done to a track thats a good recording.
And its just weird doing it to live instruments recorded live cause it makes it electronic and robotic. I see nothing wrong with doing it to virtual instruments and electronic aspects of music and even some samples. But things that use a real drummer like boom bap. I personally think you should play along to the drums rythem.
Many things are being quantised because certain elements of modern music composition is electronic anyway. This is where quantisation works well. In terms of Beato’s criticism regarding modern pop music.
As far as acoustic drumming, if the drum groove is mostly in time as it is, then I doubt quantising it will make a significant impact, since much of the track won’t need adjusting. So, the question is how are those using it setting the parameters of the plug-in? At least when I’ve quantised a track, although midi based acoustic drums, that was mostly in time, I didn’t notice a major difference, a few beats shifted slightly and that was it. The only time it made a difference was when I used it on a groove where the beats fell in a particular place, and I didn’t set the parameters properly to account for that. So, I just left it as it was, without quantisation.
You deserve more views
Hello! not hating on the video by any means, just really want to discuss some of your statements:
"But what if you are a band who doesn't have the luxury of paying for unlimited time in the studio?" -you go to the studio with enough practice to make it right (enough). 1 or 2 bars off it's not a problem and Beato's video actually show how playing off the beat sometimes sounds better, makes it groovy. Beato was clearly talking about fixing the whole take with quantizing and make it sound "perfect" (grid-wise). And doing so, actually makes the sound worst.
About the example, not every "out of grid" drum fill is there to let the song breathe...sound like an overreaction to Beato's statement. Also, you said using Quantizing would've helped the song, but should't the drummer be able to play it right enough without any aid? Isn't that the right way to "help the song"?
You repeat a lot that that when you dont have time or budget, you use technical aids to make up for it and that's ok. I don't believe that to be the formula. Good singers sing good enough every time, they dont need 10 takes and if they are off, it's not by a lot, it will sound good without technical aids. Same with good drummers. Even with low budget and small time in the studio if the musicians are good enough to make music, they should be able to make at least one good take (obviously not a grid-perfect or pitch-perfect take but beato's point is exacly that, you dont need to be grid-perfect to sound good). The time in the studio doens't have to be replaced with technical aids, it should be replaced with time spent practising. Cheers!
I agree. This video's message seems to be that it's okay if you haven't practiced your instrument enough. It's okay if you're not very talented. It's okay if you don't actually care that much about the music itself, and ultimately you should only care about whether your music will sell millions.
He even made it sound like rehearsing with your band isn't worth it - but that's how you learn to play in time with each other. If a band doesn't rehearse together, it's no wonder they need to grid their music.
All that time spent digitally "fixing" your music would be better spent practicing.
You sound so dense. That’s like the people who complain about electronic helpers in cars saying “just gotta learn how to drive right”. We have the technically today so we use to to make our lives easier. If you want to record a record today but don’t have the studio skills today why not use technology to put out the art you envision in your mind and put it out while practicing in the background for live shows to march what you recorded? Also, artists have been cheating since the dawn of time. Metallica famously recorded at a slower bpm and sped it up after so they wouldn’t have to record it at the intended speed and possibly fuck up. No one ever cared. You guys are just incapable of going with the times.
I agree that it is very unlikely quantinization was a key factor in killing rock music. But, and not that you didn't say this, for some music it's absolutely essential to not quantize it to a grid. Most jazz is a good example of this including the more modern styles like neo-soul and jazz funk. Bebop for instance is very similar to a language not only for the harmony and melodic note choices but for phrasing those notes, or the groove/swing how it's usually called. There's a very specific way of doing this and if it isn't done by someone that is "fluent" in playing it it's going to sound bad. In the same way if you tried to quantize a native English speakers phrasing. You might then ask, how is it supposed to be played then if it isn't strictly on beat? Well there's no easy answer to that. For the solo instruments a lot of it is played with a laid back groove, or a bit behind the beat. The "pocket" or the size of space where you can play for a particular groove can be a loose or tight pocket. That pocket can change quite drastically throughout a single song. The only way to make it sound good is by listening to that music so much and practicing it that you know what's going to work and what isn't.
So if you quantize any of that you no longer have that style of music. Try to quantize someone like Bill Evans, especially his solo playing and you no longer have Bill Evans.
Real musicians don't need things "fixed". I agree with Rick, computers have changed music, and not for the better. Lesser musicians NEED things to be fixed after recording, because they aren't as good as "they" think they are. You're just wrong bro. Some of the GREATEST music ever made was made without computers! Raw music, vocals, and drums will inherently be superior to computer generated music. I've wasted my time listening to you ramble about your (and others) lack of talent and skill.
Exactly!
I haven’t seen any decline in rock music. I always have new stuff to listen to every year that I’m absolutely crazy about and I know there’s a lot more out there that I’ll miss because I don’t have the time to check it all out.
That being said, I feel like MySpace played a major part in the flooding of the world with low-quality music. Just having a MySpace band page made any project seem somewhat legit. All of a sudden there were a thousand “bands” to search through before you were able to find something truly great. And it all seemed very generic. The mid-late 2000’s was the era of “mall core” and similar music that was clearly going to be more of a fad than the likes of “true metal”. So yeah, that was what became mainstream rock at the time and it declined for good reason. But the real quality has been thriving just under the surface the whole time. Same with the grunge and disco eras. If anything, technology has improved music because it has allowed symphonic metal(one of my favorite styles) to thrive. The ability to sequence realistic sounding orchestral arrangements and perform it live with backing tracks is always getting better. That might be a whole other debate but I would rather hear a band with backing tracks and kick triggers than one with a singer who cups the mic and generally doesn’t care about their sound quality. I’ve seen enough Pantera protégés in dive bars and my money is better spent at a real venue with a real sound system and a real show.
Musician: "Dude, that section sucked! We need another thirty takes!"
Filmmaker: "Nah, don't worry, we'll fix it in post."
Btw, regarding rock being dead, I might just be the only metal head in Zimbabwe but I love the uniqueness of it! Like I know a secret that no one else does!
a bad filmmaker might say that
I support anything that swings at Visigoth
After seeing Beato's video, I had a discussion with a drummer about this. He's in a band that had recorded 10 or so albums and they existed before pro tools. His exact words were "quantizing killed the soul in our music".
ok
You are wrong.Quantized music sounds dead
Nah
2:20 'Norwegian death metal'. Actually, Norway is famous for black metal. They have different production styles.
Also, Rick did not state that correcting a few bars is bad. He spoke about making everything sound like a drum machine
He clearly says that people tend to dislike quantising from the context of overquantising or quantising when it’s not needed.
Rick also mentioned that new bands have gotten away from the blues! You left stuff out just saying
What you say is mostly accurate, however, I personally think music sounds better with all the little glitches left in. It's all subjective and dependant on the end listener. Being overly sloppy isn't good either.
This is a good click bait. You not talking about what Rick talks about. You talking about a bit of use, while he showed Nickelback who put everything dead on the beat.
While taking about money, you tell you have your own home studio wich I have as well. Drum is problematic but paying for a home studio is not that expensive.
You not even mentioned the main topics, like groove, and the human part of the music.
You made it as a click bait or missed the whole topic
Rick makes vapid content, no one should take it seriously in the first place.
No you are wrong!
no u
Cleary this guy didnt understand the argument.
Beato is 100% correct.
Nah
Beat detective and autotune is what turns myself off of modern music. It sounds fake and robotic. Give me the old school music of rock, metal, blues, folk, celtic folk, country & western, jazz etc from real musicians then computer software making it sound not human. This guys opinion is what is wrong with music today. His excuse is just an excuse to be lazy. Having imperfections is being human and I will take these imperfections any day over this computer software shit with this so called pitch correction technology crap. Rick Beato said it correctly with this all about being lazy. I don't have the time and resources is an excuse which is much more about being lazy in reality. Totally disagree with the other guys opinion as well that he linked in this video.
All hip hop is not quantised. Insane statement.
5: 00- I'm not hearing it. I hear a drum sound with not enough definition to make speed fills work, but nothing so heinously out of time to make me pull a 'Lars Ulrich' and run screaming to the Pro Tools. If I'm paying by the hour, I'm likely going to spend more time getting sounds and tones with all of those high dollar microphones, preamps, and outboard gear in that billion dollar studio that I'm paying for rather than days of tracking. And in that situation sure; use the timing tools available to tighten up your best takes if necessary. And if you can take those high dollar tones you tracked home, even better. Do your "math homework" at the house.
If however your credo is "no high dollar prime time studios unless the label is buying" or if you simply prefer to work at home, then get yourself a click-track precious, and learn how to play and TRACK with the motherfucker already. You want to see an engineers jaw drop? Demonstrate in 30 minutes or less that you can tune your drums, get them set, place the mics at the commonly used and accepted starting points, and request a click in your cans set to the tempo of the song you're about to record.
And rock isn't so much dead as it is underexposed at this time. And we don't live in a "rock culture" these days. The fads and social engineering trends of the day are anything BUT rock and roll. In fact, they are quite the opposite. And extremely nauseating in my humble opinion.
Opinions are like assholes, everybody's got one.
I dunno man...
I actually don't. I have no dog in this race. There's no reason for me to even comment on this except to see if it's actually true that you don't read the "Read more" comments. I could be posting a recipe for baked ziti and it would be far more of a contribution than anything I'd have to say about quantizing (I word I totally knew before this... totally...) Sadly I don't know how to make Baked Ziti, so this won't be that.
Did you know that gravitational acceleration is 9.80 m/s^2? I think that's pretty cool. That ends up being 32.2 ft/s^2 in the American system, because the Metric system is the tool of the devil.
Didn’t read it
Yes, we just don't want to be like Randy in South Park, who is actually Lorde...that would be abusing the technology
th-cam.com/video/AkMJ5GSC37g/w-d-xo.html
The human uses the computer. So in essence, the computer ruined it. Also, if you need auto tune to fix your vocals, you need to learn how to sing.
Exactly!