Shrinking Drum Kit Syndrome

May 5, 2006 7:59 AM

Why are most drummers using such small kits these days?

It seems just about every rock drummer is using a very basic acoustic kit these days consisting of a snare, bass drum, one tom tom, one floor tom, a hi hat, and a few cymbals. This is basically the kit used by Ringo Starr and Charlie Watts during the 60's. During the 70's and particularly 80's, drum kits grew rediculously large, especially among heavy metal/hard rock drummers such as Eddie Van Halen, Neil Peart, and Simon Phillips. I realize very large kits (especially those with two bass drums) are viewed as outdated vestiges of hair metal and occupy the same place as extended noodling guitar solos, so perhaps they're seen as an embarrassment, but why do modern drummers have such basic kits? It seems that adding at least one more tom tom and floor tom and a couple of cymbals would provide them with more versatility. But I'm just speculating as I'm not a drummer.

Anyone have any ideas why kits have become so small, and is a small kit indeed a hinderance?

posted by Devils Slide to Media & Arts (27 answers total)

Best answer: From my experience, you usually don't need more than a small kit; a lot of the pizazz in drumming comes from the rhythm/pattern you use to hit the drums, not how many drum surfaces you have to hit. And, when playing live, odds are good that the acoustics will be muddy enough that the subtle differences between, say, two toms won't be all that apparent.

Also, the smaller the drum kit, the less there is to haul and set up. And if you're jamming econo, that matters a lot.
posted by COBRA! at 8:08 AM on May 5, 2006

On preview: Cobra! nailed it 100%.

I'd also add that you 'embarrassment' theory holds true in certain circles, but not in others. Depends on what kind of bands you're seeing.
posted by adamkempa at 8:10 AM on May 5, 2006

Response by poster: Thanks COBRA! But what about cymbals? There are so many different varieties that one would think it would make a difference live.

And that should have said Alex Van Halen
posted by Devils Slide at 8:17 AM on May 5, 2006

Ahem....that's Alex Van Halen, not Eddie with the massive kit...
posted by toastchee at 8:19 AM on May 5, 2006

the new pornographers drummer uses the set up mentioned (hi-hat, snare, bass drum, one tom, one floor) and only uses one cymbal for everything (ride/crash). he's incredible by the way.

also, you can do so much with said set up. no need for neil peart. extraneous. you're a good drummer if you can really add to the band's sound with minimal set up because u know how to use what you have so freaking well IMO.
posted by jadanzzy at 8:28 AM on May 5, 2006

Our drummer uses a pared down kit for our type of music (country) and uses a ride, high-hat and crash cymbal. That's all that really required for that style of music. If he were to go to one of his jazz gigs, he may add some other cymbals for coloring; to accomodate the type of music being played.

I think part of why you see pared down kits these days is that it's considered somewhat passe' to show up at Tony's Pub and Wing Shack with a kit that would make Neil Peart blush. And I've know many a drummer who, no matter what show, no matter what style of music, would bring every drum they ever owned.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 8:29 AM on May 5, 2006

A lot of it is a matter of style. I know a death metal drummer who plays ridiculously fast and only has a 4-piece drumkit. He has tons of cymbals, but only 4 drums. It works for him. I play a 5-piece kit with 5 cymbals; it's easier to make rolls sound better with an extra tom. (I don't play death metal ... yet.)

I don't think there's anything embarassing about a drum kit, unless it's poorly maintained or something. If anything, the cost of drum hardware is the larger factor in the "shrinking drumkit" phenomena. My ride cymbal was something like $1,600 CDN.
posted by Dark Messiah at 8:32 AM on May 5, 2006

Yep, COBRA! is right on. Most of what you do as a drummer is between the snare, hi-hat and bass with crash and rides for accent. If you rarely touch the toms, why have more than three? The only place where I can see more as being "useful" is if you play "lead" drums like Neil Peart, and that does tend to be a heavy metal thing, so not currently prevalent.
I can definitely see where in pop music you might want alternative percussion sounds (congas, wood blocks, shakers, etc) but those are usually played by a percussionist rather than the drummer. I have seen drummers with congas in their sets, but they play them with sticks, so it doesn't get the full range of conga sounds. Elvis Costello's drummer in the Attractions uses some kind of african drums in his set up, but again, played with sticks.
This also ignores the whole field of electronic percussion which may or may not be played "live" by anyone. I play entirely electronic sounds or samples on a 24 pad midi drum interface (a Zendrum). The deciding factors for me were, lots of sounds, easy to move, i can practice without driving my neighbors crazy and I don't have to devote an entire room of my (very small) house to a drum set. I also like that I can play with people at a lower sound level, so no earplugs required when jamming.
posted by doctor_negative at 8:37 AM on May 5, 2006

My theory is that drummers have always looked enviously at their rhythmic cousins the percussionists who - at the last moment - can stroll from bar to stage armed only with a cowbell and a big grin. By contrast the kit drummer has to be able to have a large room given over to practicing and a car packed out with tom-toms. He must carry in and laboriously assemble each tom tom while the percussionist - who promised to help - chats up girls.
posted by rongorongo at 8:38 AM on May 5, 2006

Also, the smaller the drum kit, the less there is to haul and set up. And if you're jamming econo, that matters a lot.

That's what I was going to say. If the band in question are mega-stars, this probably isn't much of an issue. For everyone else though, it is.
posted by ludwig_van at 9:36 AM on May 5, 2006

I recently saw Aloha. The drummer had a pretty minimal set of drums, but absolutely gave the best performance I have ever seen. Likewise, when I saw Jim White of Dirty Three play drums for Smog. It was astounding he could do so much with such a tiny little drum kit. It must be the skillz that pay the billz, not 800 cymbals and 34 toms.
posted by rabbitsnake at 9:51 AM on May 5, 2006

I second-or-third the load-in / load-out issue.

Every time I load in and load out of a gig, I kick myself for not learning a different instrument. Like harmonica.
posted by ImJustRick at 9:53 AM on May 5, 2006

It's stylistic, too -- you say drummers today ape a Beatles/Stones kit; well, how many bands today ape a Beatles/Stones sound?

For what it's worth, I think the small kit phenomenon is biggest in the indie scene, where it can get ridiculous (Demolition Doll Rods: A bass drum, a snare, and a cymbal, constructed Mo Tucker-style). Sure, indie bands are poor and lazy, but a lot of it at this point is probably copying the originals. Compare with the early 90s' Jazzmaster fad -- they were cheap, then they became fashionable.
posted by electric_counterpoint at 10:05 AM on May 5, 2006

As a bass player, I played many gigs with a drumer who would experiment with pared-down setups, and most of those ended up being just kick, snare, and high-hat, the basic trap kit (short for contraption, according to wikipedia).

A good drummer can get an amazing number of textures out of the same drum or cymbal, so this setup never posed any problems. Actually, I loved it, sparse and funky.
posted by SNACKeR at 10:33 AM on May 5, 2006

I was one of those "big-hair" drummers of the eighties. I had three bass drums, 3 sets of toms, 2 sets of roto-toms, three floors, two snares, two high-hats, and a crap-load of cymbals.

I used about 2 of them.

In the eighties, it just seemed part of the package deal - get a band together and try to have the most obscenely huge stage presence you could possible put together.
For me, the pivotal moment in drum down-sizing was Dave Grohl's tiny set on the "Smells like Teen Spirit" video....

I hate to say that Nirvana was responsible for ONE MORE DAMN INFLUENCE, but yeah.... at least for me, that was the moment that I realized that my huge gigantic extension of my penis I was sitting behind was stupid.
posted by bradth27 at 10:42 AM on May 5, 2006 [1 favorite]

I'm guessing that it starts as a load-in/out thing, but then you just get used to a certain setup and stick with it because that's what they're used to.

Anecdotally: Back in college when I was playing a lot of shows with different bands, I used a paired down kit because it was easy to move around. Now I pretty much only play in my house, so it wouldn't be a big deal to get a bigger kit, since it almost never moves. But I'm used to what I have, and I don't really know what I'd do with a whole bunch of extra drums anyhow. So why change?
posted by dseaton at 10:44 AM on May 5, 2006

They're Stray Cats fans.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:51 AM on May 5, 2006

Can I add a semi-related question to this? We played with a band a couple weeks ago whose drummer used a kick drum that was very shallow-- maybe a foot and a half deep at the most. What's the purpose of that? I would think a deeper bass drum would give a fuller sound. I got distracted by beer and didn't get a chance to ask him...
posted by InfidelZombie at 11:06 AM on May 5, 2006

I'm so glad to see this thread. I've wanted to roll up to gigs with a Yamaha Manu Katche HipGig for awhile now. Two rolls under my arm and a cymbal bag over my shoulder.
posted by bryanzera at 11:16 AM on May 5, 2006

I want to add that I've seen dudes play with just a snare and brushes and it sounded nice.
posted by ludwig_van at 11:16 AM on May 5, 2006

bryanzera: Morris Windsor played one of those on the gigs The Soft Boys did back in 2001 and 2002. It sounded great.

Anyway, I believe one reason kits have become smaller is that it's now possible to get more good sound out of fewer drums. Witness Neil Peart's switch to DW hardware -- his kit certainly got smaller after that (but it may have to do with his relearning how to play). Other new hardware, such as remote hi-hats and double-bass pedals, can make for a smaller kit.

Granted, some of the best drummers I've ever seen or heard (Paul Loven, Robert Wyatt, the guy from Victim's Family) used minimal kits, but then again, what Alex Van Halen did with those 413,000 drums and cymbals on the 1982 Van Halen tour was quite something, too.
posted by the matching mole at 12:05 PM on May 5, 2006

I don't have much insight into the question at hand, but if you're curious about drummers who put ginormous kits to good use, check out these videos (especially the second and third).
posted by epimorph at 1:46 PM on May 5, 2006

Less is more. But I think the big kit thing was about trying to push the limits of skill. Drummers today (thank God) are more interested in actually making music as opposed to what crazy 10 minute solo they can crank out (thanks alot for THAT Jon Bonham). The last drummer that I played with had an incredibly small kit and it was small for two reasons: he had no money AND he had to travel with a wife and two babies with his kit. I don't know how he did it, but when he arrived he could play anything. Jazz, funk, speedcore whatever, he was good with what he had.
posted by snsranch at 4:44 PM on May 5, 2006

The earliest "tiny-kit" resurgence innovator I can remember is Russel Simins, from the Jon Spencer Blues Explosion...
posted by sluggo at 7:17 PM on May 5, 2006

Response by poster: Thanks for all your input and responses guys. As some of you have pointed out, finances are no doubt a contributing factor to the resurgence of smaller drum kits, although perhaps not so much for established successful bands/drummers.

And I agree that Dave Grohl has something to do with the phenomenon, as he did so much with his basic kit and undoubtedly influenced many drummers.
posted by Devils Slide at 6:27 AM on May 6, 2006

Boils down to four things:

* In terms of producing good rhythms and sound, there is no NEED for lots of drums, as COBRA explained.
* The days of seventies and eighties stadium and theatrical rock have passed. People had big kits because that obviously made them look more important and impressive.
* In tandem, DIY culture has exploded. These days, so many more people pay £4 to see five bands in the local pub, rather than £15 to see some famous band in a big venue. Generally, bands that play the former type of gigs do it as a hobby and therefore probably cannot afford particularly posh/extensive equipment.
* Even further with DIY gigs, people with expensive gear can be looked down upon as not keeping it real or trying to compensate for a weak band with posh equipment. It's supposed to be all about the music and the message.
posted by pollystark at 3:35 AM on May 8, 2006

Just to provide some contrast, here's the set that Carter Beauford of Dave Matthews Band uses.
posted by danb at 9:37 AM on May 8, 2006