Gestural Perception in Recorded Music

Southwest_Statistic · Post by **Southwest_Statistic** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 3:36 pm

When I first became aware of Steinberg Software's "Virtual Guitarist" program by means of this very message board, I downloaded the 30-Day Free Trial to give it my honest opinion. Based on the hype it had received, I was very disappointed that the sound of this overly expensive piece of software was so mechanical & emotionless.

Surprised that such an expensive piece of software would sound so genuinely bad, I decided to show a few of my friends what "Virtual Guitarist" sounded like. Much to my surprise, many of my friends who where not guitarists could not hear a difference between the VST instrument and my real guitar. However, my friends that where guitarists could hear the same difference that I could.

Another case: I only recently have had a real drum kit in the studio here. I have been using sequenced drum sounds for a long time in most of my recordings, constantly thinking how "real" I thought my drums sounded. Now that I have the real drum kit, I am appalled at my previous older recordings with sequenced drum tracks. Something psychological happened when I started playing real drums in here, and I don't know what to call it.

I think that when you know how to play an instrument, you pick up more information then just Tones and Rythim - otherwise I think the VST Guitarist would sound just fine.

When you come down on the guitar holding a chord, chances are not 100% of the strings are going to ring out perfectly. Your hand is probably going to be covering some, and they are going to rattle against your skin, be overly muted, and rattle against the fretboard. When your are playing/practicing your instrument, you end up learning to hear all kinds of little discrepancies that aren't part of "Tone" or "Rythim" in an effort to try and learn how to play better, with fewer unwanted nuances. Remember the first barre chord you held? How bad it sounded and then you had to figure out what to do to make it sound right?

I think that if you play guitar, you can end up picking up on that kind of thing in the recording. When you close your eyes you can almost see close-up the guitarists hand touching strings in places where he shouldn't be, or hitting strings he didn't intend to. I also think that a guitarist can hear where aproximately over the soundhole/pickups that the chord was strummed based on the volume & pitch of the strumming sound.

I don't think anyone else but other guitarists ever hears that stuff, hence why the programmers at Steinberg think their Vurtual Guitarist program is so wonderful, and the people who buy the product think it sounds very real and then give the VST Instrument such over-hyped reviews.

I now feel the same way about Drums, now that I have a real kit in the studio thanks to my drummer Ian. I can now pick up all kinds of things from the recorded drums, like the angle of the sticks and how tight the drummer was holding them. Where the stick came down on the crash, ride or hat, how tight the drummers foot was holding the hat down, how tight the drummers foot held the bass drum pedal against the bass drum after he hit it...

I'm not sure what to call this stuff though. I ran across an article that mentioned "Gestural Perception" in prerecorded music, and how a person who plays the instrument can hear things like hand positions, hand strength, etc.

PS: Since getting the drum kit in here I have started listening to drum stuff in more detail. I am completely appalled at how many times computer drums are used in rock and metal mixes. Often times it's real drums, but other times I can hear that it's sequenced. Sometimes theres a mixture of sequenced drums and real drums on the same album, and other times a bands first album will have real drums on it and then the second release is sequenced drums. What the freak is up with multimillion dollar recording studios with all of the most latest and greatest drum recording equipment doing with freaking sequenced rock drums?

Sober · Post by **Sober** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 4:50 pm

You said the word once in your post:

"Nuance"

And as for high-end studios using sequenced drums, I belive what they'll do that on parts of tracks simply for uniformity's sake. Can't have every bar of drumming be different, that might be distracting, now wouldn't it?

They do it with guitar, bass, vocals, everything. Just look at that screenshot of the NIN protools file Jack Shite posted.

Kamakura · Post by **Kamakura** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:11 pm

Southwest_Statistic wrote:What the freak is up with multimillion dollar recording studios with all of the most latest and greatest drum recording equipment doing with freaking sequenced rock drums?

Temperament.
Drum machines don't thow wobblies and trash studios.

Howerver, a really well programmed drum track is a far cry from most sequenced drums, and if you decide to change the songs tempo it's easier than having to re-record drums... All that being said, you're quite right. Nothing beats real drums.

Cool thread.

Mostess · Post by **Mostess** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:12 pm

A friend of mine did an experiment where musicians played simple melodies (Mary Had a Little Lamb and such) on guitar or on piano. Both instruments were MIDI. Then he played them back for people either with MIDI guitar sound or MIDI piano sound or MIDI generic synth sound and asked listeners to say whether it had been performed on a guitar or a piano.

Just as you're describing, non-musicians were only slightly better than chance, guitarists and keyboardists had no problem.

There is certainly something in your head from learning an instrument so you know the constraints of the instrument. That experiment used simple MIDI: no semi-muted strings, no half-pedalling, no pitch bends or sustain pedals, only velocity and time. That was all the information a musician needs to identify their own instrument (when you'd have to change strings or hand position or make an awkward move, so you'd expect a little timing hiccup or a slightly less controlled amplitude...)

My wife and I both believe strongly that perception and action share knowledge representations: traditional theories like to keep them seperate, as if seeing or hearing something has nothing to do with your behavioral skills. Obviously this is a case where that's not true: knowing how to play an instrument changes how you hear that instrument.

Fascinating topic.

jack · Post by **jack** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:34 pm

i think alot of it comes down to available resources, both in terms of time, money, and space. i used to own a fairly nice kit, a yamaha stage custom, had a blast playing it when i could, but it took up a fuckload of space in my flat for the amount of time it was used, and frankly wasn't worth having an $800 kit sitting around gathering dust most of the time. so i sold it and bought a drum machine. and now, i hardly use that as most of my drums come out of reason. because it's much easier, takes up NO space, and i can record and play drums on a moment's whim. i don't have to go out and buy a dozen mics to record it with.

mick fleetwood recorded a CD of drum samples, all recorded on expensive, acoustic kits with expensive condenser mics. i can get mick fleetwood to play drums for me for about $50. forever. and he'll never talk back or want to do things his way.

i wouldn't just write off sequenced drums so easily. go listen to some of our resident geniuses (hoblit and redmon come immediately to mind). it would be pretty hard to replicate that on a mediocre acoustic kit.

Southwest_Statistic · Post by **Southwest_Statistic** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 7:48 pm

The Sober Irishman wrote:Just look at that screenshot of the NIN protools file Jack Shite posted.

For the record, I don't think NIN is a good example of what I'm talking about. Most of what defines Trent's sound is electronic effects and loops. Thats more an issue of style then it is of processing.

jack wrote:i wouldn't just write off sequenced drums so easily. go listen to some of our resident geniuses (hoblit and redmon come immediately to mind). it would be pretty hard to replicate that on a mediocre acoustic kit.

I'm a huge fan of well-done electronic music. I also make a lot of it using a sequencer called Renoise. I use Renoise all the time for certain parts of my mixing, organic or electronic. Again, electronic music is not exactly what I was talking about.

<a href="http://www.brusscom.com/misc/sequenced_ ... l_rock.mp3" target="_blank">This is what I was talking about.</a> I hope the pathetic drum fill before the chorus makes you laugh as much as I did.

Dan-O from Five-O · Post by **Dan-O from Five-O** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 8:20 pm

I remember the first time I heard my voice on a recording, it was just on one of those little portable cassette recorders, and it didn't sound like me at all. Even in a group of people whose voices all sounded exactly like I perceived them to sound like, mine sounded vastly different. Over time, I have become used to how my voice sounds in a recording and now find no difference in the two.

I think that's part of what's going on, the ear tuning itself to hear things as our mind would have them perceive them. The other thing is that we always listen more intently to our own instrument. I'm more critical of a guitarist’s sounds than I am anything else in my reviews. Josh Woodward would lash out at badly recorded acoustic guitar, his thing, where I am more critical of electric guitar tone, which is my thing. You probably couldn't tell the difference between a trumpet and a coronet, but I bet someone who plays them could. I couldn't tell you if a sax player was on a tenor or soprano in most cases, but a good sax player could. In the end it's all relative. If you pick out a certain instrument to focus on, you will pick it apart and be more critical of how your ear perceives the sound.

I'm talking high quality sounds here, not cheap 80's digital drums or direct to your Portastudio with an MXR Distortion+ pedal, not that there's anything wrong with that. I'm learning tolerance of those tones from hanging out here, even if it's not what I would want to hear. You always have to leave room for the possibility that the artist achieved exactly the sound they were looking for.

Dan-O from Five-O · Post by **Dan-O from Five-O** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 8:37 pm

Southwest_Statistic wrote:Most of what defines Trent's sound is electronic effects and loops. Thats more an issue of style then it is of processing.

Uh...nope. Effects and loops are processing.

Southwest_Statistic wrote:<a href="http://www.brusscom.com/misc/sequenced_ ... l_rock.mp3" target="_blank">This is what I was talking about.</a> I hope the pathetic drum fill before the chorus makes you laugh as much as I did.

I can see where you're coming from, but I still feel like you're being a little too critical. Think about the level of musicianship you're dealing with. I don't know how they got signed, or for that matter really care. But I do know any serious label will give them as big of a leg up as they can on their recording.

Is the issue that they can't pull off that sound live? Why are you even worried about that? If you think they suck, then move on. If you like their music, but just not the way it's recorded, wait and see if it develops for the better. If it doesn't, move on. If it does, hang around.

I guess I just don't get what your gripe is.

Southwest_Statistic · Sat Jul 30, 2005 10:47 pm

Dan-O from Five-O wrote:
Southwest_Statistic wrote:Most of what defines Trent's sound is electronic effects and loops. Thats more an issue of style then it is of processing.
Uh...nope. Effects and loops are processing.

I badly worded that, but still don't know how to describe what I meant. Example: DJ Tiesto is not editing a live drumline because he is Trance/Techno. Trent Reznor is looping because he is Industrial Electronica.

Dan-O from Five-O wrote:I guess I just don't get what your gripe is.

My gripe is simple: The label they are signed to has state of the art drum-recording everything. Why opt for synth instead of real if you've got all the gear and the sound you are trying to achieve is "real drums" because it's a rock band?

Dan-O from Five-O · Post by **Dan-O from Five-O** » Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:48 pm

Fundamentally I agree with everything your saying, I would much prefer to hear real instruments over anything sequenced, looped, processed or otherwise created other than the instrument something sythesized is trying to emulate. But it is the reality we live with now. Technology has gotten advanced enough that the average ear won't catch the difference unless it is trained to. Being a musician, your ear has been trained to pick up on these things.

In the end, many musicians use these tools here to create music in a very short timeline, and I can see them being used as tools to that end. However, I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that maybe even labels are under compressed timelines as well and can't or simply won't wait for their "talent" to develop the ability to play their parts right.

Again, I agree with your concern in this regard, and on the pro level, it simply isn't acceptable. It's Ashlee Simpson "playing" drums.

sausage boy · Post by **sausage boy** » Sun Jul 31, 2005 9:25 pm

I think any instrument or program is useful in its own way. Sure, ou may not like the programmed guitar, but someone somewhere does and has probably made someting good from it.

I also understand your gripe about programmed sounds into, what is essentially meant to be, a 'band' setting. It does seem somewhat at odds with the old rock 'n roll lifestyle if you totally ditch the drummer, rather than weathering the drummer-personality-storm.

But, as I said, everything has its use. Why, there is a song called Rollercoaster by an aussie band Machine Gun Fellatio that includes a hair clipper solo. That is an excellent use of found object.

Hoblit · Post by **Hoblit** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 6:01 am

I've been asked how hard it is to learn to play the drums.

I don't play the drums.

and as far as the first post... I know what you are saying..but I also like that program. I don't think *I'd* use it as I play guitar and would rather. However, I'm familiar with the program and I don't mind it like ...most guitarist might. I think it's a fairly cool program myself. That review is from a guitarist.

stueym · Post by **stueym** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 7:43 am

Just wanted to add my 2 cents

If I was dropping $18 for an album I would be disappointed if the use of these kind of tools was obstrusive and obvious....but then that's cos I use these tools and can (sometimes) hear them if they're used. As pointed out above the vast majority of Joe public cannot and still enjoys the overall vibe they get from the music, hence why producers use samples and these tools.

I do agree with the point if you are a guitarist you appreciate a good guitarist and can spot a lousy technique or a programming/sequencing device when it is used. Can't comment regards other instrumewnts as I don't play them

. For example I used to really enjoy the dramatic cello piece at the beginning of the TV show Angel and was amazed to find out it was all recorded using Halion String edition....that tells you I have dubious taste in TV shows and no talent with regard to orchestral strings.

I use lots of Steinberg software (Virtual Guitarist, Groove Agent 2, just added Virtual Bassist and Halion String Edition, (well learning to use would be more accurate) and have bought them for a single purpose to support and encourage me to write, play and record music. I love making music, joining songfight has allowed me to find an impetus to stick to making/writing music regularly and a place to share that interest with my daughter.

I have a pretty hectic day job and travel 3-5 days a week across the US, which makes it hard for me to find the network of other musicians to interact with to get that band feeling, plus I moved 3,000 miles ti the UK so no long term music friends here to play with. Accordingly the virtual software tools allows me to have a band to play with and try and write some better stuff. Also it is teaching me more about the musical aspects of each of these instrument areas and their effect on the dynamic of a song

Those of you who have heard my stuff know that I am a fair guitar player, and a lousy but musically understanding keyboard player. The use of these tools at least allows me to experience producing songs Bjam and I have written with more character that just a simple Guy(Girl) with guitar week after week.

I have learned to now disregard the comments in reviews about how rigid and programmed my rythm section sounds, or that the bass is rigid or my strings sound programmed.......cos they are!

.

These software tools allow me after many years of feeling frustrated to let the muse flow...but if ever that recording contract comes my way (Yeah right!) be certain I will want to work with live musicians always.

blue · Post by **blue** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 10:08 am

i think those major-label albums you think have sequenced drums probably really have hand-edited and note-replaced drum tracks. they make heavy use of stuff like drumagog and resample individual hits in order to normalize the overall sound of the track.

also, a really really good drummer, as many studio-quality drummers are (think about soundgarden, for instance) will keep doing takes until the track is "just so."

jack · Post by **jack** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 10:39 am

blue makes a good point. i watched the metallica documentary "some kind of monster" (a fascinating movie even if you don't like metallica) and there's a scene of lars in the studio recording drums over a track. he seems to record 10-15 versions and then he and the producers/engioneers seem to pick the best shots and combine them into this big drum stew.

like i said, a pretty fascinating movie that gives alot of insight into the processes of recording a professional band in the studio. i also found it fascinating how they would develop lyrics. they would all sit in the engineers room and listen to the playback of the working instrumental track and sit there with scraps of paper writing whatever came into their head as they were listening.

blue · Post by **blue** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 1:16 pm

phil redmon and hoblit are both proof that the only thing keeping programmed drum tracks from being freakin' awesome is lack of attention to it. phil said he's happy to spend 5 hours on a drum track, and it shows.

john82 · Post by **john82** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:10 pm

i don't know what's so surprising about the fact that virtual instruments software is uncapable of mimicing a real instrument perfectly. as much as software designers try to "humanize" parameters, it's still a long way from sounding as it should in reality.
Johnny from guitars101

Sober · Post by **Sober** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:26 pm

Wow, I wish there was a way to punch you in the face over the internet. Seriously, John. Fuck off.

bz£ · Post by **bz£** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 4:05 pm

Man, I thought I was the only one that felt that way.

Post by **Spud** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 4:09 pm

Hey John, we try to run this board in REAL TIME.

Caravan Ray · Post by **Caravan Ray** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 4:23 pm

Sober wrote:Wow, I wish there was a way to punch you in the face over the internet. Seriously, John. Fuck off.

Thers's a great signature line!

roymond · Post by **roymond** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 7:31 pm

Record companies aren't worrying about whether they can hire a real drummer. I think they pretty much wonder how many millions of records they might sell and how few people they'll have to split the proceeds with. Looking at it that way, why would anyone use real drummers? Or guitarists, etc.? If the audience can't tell the difference why screw with the marketing machine? So I find I don't listen to much of that stuff.

I certainly can't have real drums (because of where I live and my personal situation). I don't worry too much about it. I wish I could spend hours and hours programming (I used to) and I definitely would love to have a nice drummer who would leave his drums at my studio and even play them for me. But I don't, so I use what I have and try to be creative and "compose" drums using the tools I have access to. The other option is not to have any drums in my music. I figure lots of people are in this situation, especially since we're part time dreamer musicians.

On the other hand, I wouldn't get some of the results I do with real drummers. It's not that a real drummer couldn't do something, but the way stuff comes together using these tools affects the result and contributes to what gets recorded in the end. A real drummer would contribute in different ways, but whether that's better or worse is sort of beside the point.

Professionals who use loops and programmed drums bring that sound to their product. You can always do a cover of their music, but that's what they do and that's how they sound. There are plenty examples on Bowie albums and others where I cringe at the drum programming, and others where it brings a beefiness and power that maybe only Terry Bozio could, but he'd make it into something else entirely.

I mean, Yeah!, what he said!

Gestural Perception in Recorded Music

Gestural Perception in Recorded Music

Re: Gestural Perception in Recorded Music

Using sequencing and tools for recording