Rush – Caravan: Drum Charting Question
- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
First things first. This is part of the songs that myself and ejthedj are creating. I have gotten permission from the admins to release this song as well, on the grounds that the Harmonix version is technically a “single” version, while mine is the “album” version. Anyways…
I am in the process of charting out the Drums for Rush’s Caravan. The chart remains somewhat similar to the Harmonix chart aside: from the intro, some fill changes, a little cymbal movement, and the big tom section being rearanged. Also, the addition of double bass is here as well.
However, I’ve run into a charting dilemma. This is something that I am likely over thinking, but I would actually like the opinion of the public to help decide how to chart this.
The section in question start around 4:15:
I also have a screen shot showcasing my options:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/0zdt4hgd4 … estion.png
In this section, Peart is actually alternating between a small’ish splash cymbal and the ride cymbal. Towards the end of this snapshot, he is playing on tiny cymbals represented by the 2 sets of 4 green gems. My question is how I should represent this in my chart.
Harmonix Chart:
This is how the initial release was charted, and I’m personally against this. The hand flow is technically reverse from a true set, which to a real drummer feels off when playing.
Option #1:
This would be a more close representation of how it’s truly played. My only problem with this is that the “small” cymbals have to go on the yellow which, even though it is relativity correct, will likely seem weird to others. Also, in the other parts of this section, there are a few crash hits, which will either have to chart as Y+G, or Y.
Option #2:
Personally, I’m favoring this right now. Chart the “open hi-hat” sounding splash on the yellow, ignore the ride which you almost cannot hear anyways due to the studio mixing, and put the cymbals on green. This will likely “sound” the best to most players, but drummers who know the true chart might feel cheated.
Option #3:
This basically just reverses Harmonix’s charting, and puts the hand motion how it should be. It flows better, but many people will wonder why a splash was blue, and why a “very soft” ride is yellow. Also, Yellow/Blue alternating patterns are not always fun to play in Rock Band. Especially with Pro Drums now, many people have more spaced Yellow/Blue cymbals, making this even less fun and awkward.
I know this should not be a huge deal, but it’s honestly bothering me. Enough to put the effort in to ask for opinions.
was the chart that bad?The intro has a backing hi-hat rhythm which Harmonix avoided charting in the single version. Technically (IIRC), the hi-hat and the big toms that go there are two separate takes (as the hi-hat is playing behind the toms) mixed together [unless the hi-hat during the toms is just a pedal]. Regardless, it bothers me how strong you can hear the hi-hat and it wasn’t charted, so I am.
Like Farottone mentioned, you cannot hear a certain parts due to the album mixing. Thus, some of the fills are “missing” sounds so to speak. Sadly, if I cannot hear them, I’d prefer not to chart them. It’s awkward to be hitting notes that do not audibly seem to be there.
Cymbal movement is just trying to better depict the cymbal movement on a real set. Harmonix liked to put the cymbals all on G with a double on G+Y. I just moved and put a G/G/G/YG to a G/Y/G/YG or G/G/Y/YG (or something like that). If it sounds like multiple cymbals, I wanted to try and use multiple cymbals (as long as it made sense on the RB kit at the time).
The Big Tom section is really played across 4 toms; we only have 3. Harmonix sort of “wrapped” around, which leads to a higher pitch tom being played for lower notes. As a drummer, I notice this as very off. I’m just unwrapping it, and fudging them a little to maintain the general progression down and up consistently.
No, it really wasn’t too* bad. The basic rhythm is charted very well. It was the small nuances that needed a bit of tweaking. The mixing sort of threw off some of the track, and I’m just correcting that. 85%-90% of the song can pretty much remain unchanged.
I’m not familiar with his kit, is the splash in question to the right of the ride? If that is true and the smaller cymbals are to the left then I’d make them yellow and go with Option #1.
Do not go with Option #2. It does not matter if you can’t hear it in the mix, you know it exists and is played that way. Never underchart.
first to all if i were you i wont chart it again, the single version is almost the same thing, knowing harmonix has vault versions of some songs.
about the question, go to option #1. you have to try to chart what the drumer is really playing (unless there is two or more drums studio takes, i usually dont merge them) what happens there is that it is a tiny (i think almost a ghost note) ride after the opened hi hat, the mix of the song makes hard to hear well the drums, and some of the sound of the opened hi hat is covering the tiny ride.
i could listen some of this ride canceling the voice in realtek sound hd and playing it in a 50% playback rate. so the ride cymbal becomes hearable.
you should look for the multitrack audio off caravan After all thats what harmonix did, i think a normal charter would have missed it
.think if all of we had a multitrack machine (like orangeharrison), the charting would ve flawless.PD: i would chart it like harmonix did (as seen in eof)
Do not go with Option #2. It does not matter if you can’t hear it in the mix, you know it exists and is played that way. Never underchart.This is extremely wrong in a number of ways.
1) Authoring rules. “Be aware that details that can be heard when listening to a soloed drum mix don’t always translate well when playing with the rest of the band. A common example of this is when you can hear the drummer lightly tapping a crash, ride or hihat cymbal in between the more heavily emphasized downbeats. When playing such a drum part in-game, the extra 8th notes may be detracting from an intended quarter note groove. Again, the author should listen to the groove as represented in the full mix so that the authored part doesn’t feel overcrowded with seemingly arbitrary gems”, from RBN docs.
2) Gameplay. Perception is king: you need to have a connection between what you see and hear and what you do. Once you lose the connection, you are just hitting some pads while a soundtrack is playing.
3) Weights. Visually you always see gems of the same “weight”: they are all “hits”. However, if you author very loud notes and incredibly light notes alike, visually you have, again, a disconnect.
4) With all that said, you can’t hear those notes in the final mix, so for all intents and purposes those notes are not there. You’re authoring something the play can’t hear, that is called overcharting, something FoF charts are filled with and, also, one of the main ways you can spot a good chart from a not so good chart.
Do not go with Option #2. It does not matter if you can’t hear it in the mix, you know it exists and is played that way. Never underchart.This is extremely wrong in a number of ways.
1) Authoring rules. “Be aware that details that can be heard when listening to a soloed drum mix don’t always translate well when playing with the rest of the band. A common example of this is when you can hear the drummer lightly tapping a crash, ride or hihat cymbal in between the more heavily emphasized downbeats. When playing such a drum part in-game, the extra 8th notes may be detracting from an intended quarter note groove. Again, the author should listen to the groove as represented in the full mix so that the authored part doesn’t feel overcrowded with seemingly arbitrary gems”, from RBN docs.
2) Gameplay. Perception is king: you need to have a connection between what you see and hear and what you do. Once you lose the connection, you are just hitting some pads while a soundtrack is playing.
3) Weights. Visually you always see gems of the same “weight”: they are all “hits”. However, if you author very loud notes and incredibly light notes alike, visually you have, again, a disconnect.
4) With all that said, you can’t hear those notes in the final mix, so for all intents and purposes those notes are not there. You’re authoring something the play can’t hear, that is called overcharting, something FoF charts are filled with and, also, one of the main ways you can spot a good chart from a not so good chart.
“You’re authoring something the player can’t hear, that is called overcharting”
Completely wrong. Overcharting by definition is making a part harder then it actually is, adding notes that don’t exist just for sheer difficulty. By charting ghost notes you may be going against authoring recommendation but it is in no way overcharting.
“one of the main ways you can spot a good chart from a not so good chart”
And this just irritates me. How does charting everything exactly as it is make it a bad chart on that basis alone? Sure, it’s less party friendly, but honestly, it’s a more accurate (albeit more difficult) chart. I completely invest myself into making sure every one of my charts are dead on. Perfect sync, a perfect note for note transcription. And to be told my charts might be “not so good” because I went for complete realism is unfair.
I am a drummer, and play at the high end of the skill spectrum. So I personally feel that instruments should be fully represented exactly as they were played. I understand that you chart with a party atmosphere, and cleanliness in mind. But one does not make the other wrong. They are different schools of charting.
Harmonix have laid down very good guidelines for authoring, but that does not make them infallible. And the absolute end all be all of what you should do. Take the drum chart for Toto’s “Rosanna” for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_aDQ036vnM.
A very famous half-time shuffle beat, that completely relies on the ghost notes for the groove. But by following protocol, they are removed, killing the central point of the beat, making it awkward and noticeable as a result.
Sorry for getting a little long-winded, but I just don’t think charting something exactly as it was played should be automatically considered wrong, just because Harmonix’s documents said otherwise.
“You’re authoring something the player can’t hear, that is called overcharting”Completely wrong. Overcharting by definition is making a part harder then it actually is, adding notes that don’t exist just for sheer difficulty. By charting ghost notes you may be going against authoring recommendation but it is in no way overcharting.
If you want to play semantics, you can make the case that overcharting is solely “adding notes that don’t exist”. I’d argue that it goes a little beyond it, with that being the primary occurrence (charting echos, merging multiple parts into one chart). I would certainly argue that charting notes that are not audible in a full mix solely on the basis of them being audible in an isolated track definitely fits the criteria. I’ve only ever considered it in RB:HP, and usually only on vocals/keys when the part may have been audible in the original but not in the RB mix, because those are easier to ‘process’ mentally.
If you’re really averse to the term “overcharting” in this context, then let’s go with the other favourite charting buzzword and call it “hyperaccurate charting”.
“one of the main ways you can spot a good chart from a not so good chart”And this just irritates me. How does charting everything exactly as it is make it a bad chart on that basis alone? Sure, it’s less party friendly, but honestly, it’s a more accurate (albeit more difficult) chart. I completely invest myself into making sure every one of my charts are dead on. Perfect sync, a perfect note for note transcription. And to be told my charts might be “not so good” because I went for complete realism is unfair.
Speaking generally, the game is an abstraction, and authored parts have to take the mix into account. Besides, he said “good chart” from “not so good chart”, which doesn’t necessarily mean “bad”. A hypercharted chart can still be a good chart, but most of the time (as he mentions in his post), it’s a sign of a bad chart, and it IS one of the main ways you can immediately flag a chart for a more thorough scrubbing.
To cite things I have personally encountered (mostly prior to C3, from people asking me for help/feedback), I would likely not pass a vocal chart that had very slight/fast fluctuations at the start or end of a lyric charted, and I certainly wouldn’t pass one that tried to author ‘realistic vibrato’, but both of those have turned up before.
As for Rosanna, I won’t profess to be a drums expert, but the chart as charted matches with what I’m hearing, though you’re right in that the flow is awkward. I can’t say the same for the presented section of Caravan. My inclination would have been Option #2, prior to this conversation, on that basis alone. If we’re trying to keep it closer to the HMX chart, I’d personally be mapping to whatever arrangement fits the traditional RB layout for similar sounds (versus trying to mirror the actual kit or an e-drums setup), which I assume would be Option #1? I don’t like Option #3 for the “how the RB kit is” concern, too.
That being said, if you want hypercharted, mapped-to-channel-Peart’s-kit-layout drums, that’s always the author’s prerogative.
” src=”/wp-content/uploads/invision_emoticons/default_SA_smile.gif”>“You’re authoring something the player can’t hear, that is called overcharting”
Completely wrong. Overcharting by definition is making a part harder then it actually is, adding notes that don’t exist just for sheer difficulty. By charting ghost notes you may be going against authoring recommendation but it is in no way overcharting.
No, overcharting is adding notes, THUS making the song more difficult. Those notes are not there to the ear of the player, hence you’re overcharting. If you can’t hear the notes, why would you author them? Have you ever listened to separated stems for any loose played drum track? There’s almost a hit for every 1/16th of every measure between light hi hat taps, ghost notes on snare, taps on the bass drum with the foot, etc. By that logic, the chart should be a constant stream of 1/16th notes on almost all kit parts with no differentiation between them, which would obviously destroy any semblance of the original groove. That’s why you author the rhythm, not every light tap that you can’t even hear in the full mix.
“one of the main ways you can spot a good chart from a not so good chart”
And this just irritates me. How does charting everything exactly as it is make it a bad chart on that basis alone? Sure, it’s less party friendly, but honestly, it’s a more accurate (albeit more difficult) chart. I completely invest myself into making sure every one of my charts are dead on. Perfect sync, a perfect note for note transcription. And to be told my charts might be “not so good” because I went for complete realism is unfair.
It’s actually the very opposite. It’s unrealistic. And party has nothing to do with that. You want to transcribe random or inaudible hits, that’s the opposite of realism, as stated before. But in any case, it’s also the opposite of what the guidelines for 5,000+ songs for the game we author for here state and the opposite of what the game has built upon. Now, YOU can like a different style of authoring, something that makes sense outside the world of Rock Band, and that’s of course perfectly fine, but that makes for a bad to not-so-good Rock Band chart. In example, you can also think that for vocals you need to author each and every single millisecond of trail in a note, but Rock Band doesn’t work like that. And since here we made it a point to author as close as we can to the real deal, meaning the game we’ve played for years, those guidelines are what we adhere too. And again, you can disagree with those guidelines, but you need to make sure that people understand that you’re proposing a wrong way of authoring *in Rock Band*, albeit a right way to transcribe a song for gaming purposes in your opinion.
Harmonix have laid down very good guidelines for authoring, but that does not make them infallible. And the absolute end all be all of what you should do. Take the drum chart for Toto’s “Rosanna” for example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_aDQ036vnM.
A very famous half-time shuffle beat, that completely relies on the ghost notes for the groove. But by following protocol, they are removed, killing the central point of the beat, making it awkward and noticeable as a result.
It’s true that the guidelines are not infallible, but it’s very much true that one of the founding principles of the game is: author intention. By your logic, we should also author guitar to a 1/128th grid, because right now we rely mainly on a 1/16th grid which is never going to have bass, guitar, keys and drums exactly on the very same beat. That’s not the logic of the game. The logic of the game is making a connection between what you see on screen, what you hear and what you do. This is key: when ghost notes are part of the main rhythm, they need to stay there; when they distract visually from the rhythm, they need to go. Otherwise, as you see in plenty of FoF charts, you literally cannot see the rhythm on screen, just a series of snare notes all weighing the same on screen, while your ears tell you differently. Now, did Harmonix mess up a few songs? Probably. But that’s exactly what they did: mess up a few songs. For the rest of the 5,000+, that’s what we shoot for.
I can understand if you prefer your charts to be hard to play, but it’s not how Rock Band works. You can do that in FoF, or you can even do it in Rock Band for your own customs, but if you tell people to do that for their Rock Band customs that will played by a Rock Band community used to play the game that relies on the logic I explained, you need to say “Hey, I don’t follow Rock Band rules for drums, so just know that my suggestion will make your song less Rock Band-friendly, but I like a challenge so I do this and that”. If you say “Never underchart”, that makes a user thinks the correct way to approach the chart is to author hits you can’t hear, and that’s just wrong for Rock Band authoring.
“You’re authoring something the player can’t hear, that is called overcharting”Completely wrong. Overcharting by definition is making a part harder then it actually is, adding notes that don’t exist just for sheer difficulty. By charting ghost notes you may be going against authoring recommendation but it is in no way overcharting.
If you want to play semantics, you can make the case that overcharting is solely “adding notes that don’t exist”. I’d argue that it goes a little beyond it, with that being the primary occurrence (charting echos, merging multiple parts into one chart). I would certainly argue that charting notes that are not audible in a full mix solely on the basis of them being audible in an isolated track definitely fits the criteria. I’ve only ever considered it in RB:HP, and usually only on vocals/keys when the part may have been audible in the original but not in the RB mix, because those are easier to ‘process’ mentally.
If you’re really averse to the term “overcharting” in this context, then let’s go with the other favourite charting buzzword and call it “hyperaccurate charting”.
Okay, I can agree with that definition of overcharting. Charting echo/delay, making everything primarily 3 chords, charting sound effects into insane 64th note sweeps, etc. I’m also fine with hyper-accurate charting, as that makes the distinction between ultra-realism versus charting non-existent things/artificially inflating difficulty.
And Farottone, you’re right. I shouldn’t have said it so matter of factly. Everyone is free to choose how they think it should be interpreted, and Rock Band has always ignored ghost notes historically. I would never overchart vocals in the way espher described, nor would I chart barely audible notes in guitar or whatever instrument. So I guess now, thinking about those examples, I understand how you guys feel about hyper-accurate charting.
I play insane free jazz and mathcore customs. And me and my friends, being in the Top 100 of Expert Drum players during Rock Band’s heyday, always look for the most difficult songs possible. So I’m just heavily inclined to making ultra-realistic charts. It just comes naturally to me, and I prefer ridiculous difficulty. I guess I just felt every other drum chart should adhere to the same criteria, and even looked down on them when I could hear uncharted ghosts. Which is wrong, I realize. You’re just following in Harmonix’s steps.
But, I do disagree heavily with this:
It’s actually the very opposite. It’s unrealistic. You want to transcribe random or inaudible hits, that’s the opposite of realism, as stated before.I do not chart anything I’m not dead sure is there. After playing and charting so many insane customs, you get a feel for how beats are structured. You know when ghost notes are there. When they shouldn’t be. I go over sections for an hour at a time sometimes just to make sure I’m getting every note being played, and that every note IS being played. So believe, everything is there.
I also don’t understand how you think charting in-audible notes is unrealistic? Ghost notes literally exist. It’s not like I’m making them up because the song is boring. And they are most certainly not random. The drummer played them for a reason. They augment the groove.
It’s in no shape or form “the opposite of realism”, if the notes being played exist. It’s just “hyper-accurate”, as espher stated.
I do think though, when the song itself is intense enough, it should warrant the ghost notes being charted. Scatterbrain off of GH5 is a perfect example. A crazy jazz song, that sounds absolutely insane on drums. I remember the first time I played it (not being very good at the time) being so underwhelmed at what hit me, compared to what the song sounded like and what I was expecting. Many other people felt the same. An example of this done well would be C3’s release of Oblivion. That contained inaudible ghost notes and was a fine chart, and was the kind of song you would expect difficulty going into.
But I understand your stance now.
the problem is that tiny ride really exists and apparently is well charted by harmonix, following that you should go for option 1 FOR NOW, the only thing i can say is that we as a normal drum charters without a multitrack machine or someting like that would have missed that ride and charted only the hi hat. due to the drum mixing of the song (and the whole clockwork angels album).
i dont know but when i hear this with voice cancelled i hear some rides even in the same place with the yellow hi hat (Y+
and in the snares after the crash i can hear the same thing (where is K+R/R/K+G i hear K+R+B/R/K+G) so i think maybe that part has two studio drum takes and harmonix merged it, thing that i dont like to do (for example black magic woman by santana almost all the chart percussion and drums are merged which i think is wrong) but this can be a one studio track due to Peart God Drumingabout the ghost notes, i think they should’ve charted even if the player doesnt hear it, thats not overcharting cause the note really exists, i think narutostarwars did and excelent job charting every ghost note of Fool In The Rain which is a great example of ghost notes charting, neversoft missed ghost notes, an example: Woman From Tokyo, you can hear well the ghost notes and doesnt charting it is a total mistake, at least to drumers)
somebody has the multitrack of caravan rb3?
In all honesty, I’m the least inclined to do Option 3 at this time. It would be weird to chart a hi-hat/splash sounding cymbal to the blue, and then represent a ride with the yellow. As much as I prefer the correct movement, that one is out.
Next, I’d like to avoid the Harmonix one if possible. My main reason is that for a right handed drummer, left to right as he on beat off beat rhythm feels weird. Also, as I stated, most kits with Pro Drums will have a larger and obnoxious gap to travel between cymbals. The Y/B/Y/B pattern on a standard kit also tends to feel weird as well at anything over 120-130bpm in my opinion. If it comes down to having to maintain the Harmonix chart I guess I have to, but I’d prefer* not this.
Option 1 and Option 2 are what I’m between now.
Option 1 is the most correct, and it also plays smoother than Option 3 as the B/G cymbals and pads are usually* close together (similar to how this song is played on a real kit, since Peart’s splash for this song is RIGHT next to his ride). The big downsides here are (1) many players will not hear the Blue note, and feel it’s charting for the sake of charting, and (
I’ll have to do some fudging with the cymbals as in any Green heavy section (not helping that I”m using up Blues too). The small cymbals are fine for the yellow pad, but later might take some tweaking.Option 2 “sounds” the best. You hear the heavy splash hit (which can be confused with an open hi-hat to a novice player), so a straight yellow can be a way to go. It will open up the crashes, and in my opinion (once the double bass kicks in after this picture) produces the best groove for the player (as some off beat snares start as well). Real drummers will likely be upset (I play drums as well and this does bother me a bit), but I feel it’s a good option for Rock Band* and what we have.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC8wKgGNVqc
There is the link to the single version that Harmonix used. The drums are mixed MUCH higher up in this, and you can hear a lot of stronger Drum/Bass sections. That being said, you can hear that ride cymbal somewhat better in this if you REALLY listen (and output your speakers with some EQ). Also, let’s remember that as Harmonix had the stems, it likely sounded a lot stronger to them and worth charting. I feel that any non-drummer (and some decent drummers) could miss those notes if they only heard the final mixed versions and never watched Peart play this.
finally i’ve got the drum multitrack http://www.mediafire.com/listen/z71a4vc … /drums.ogg (starts at 4:10) even with this, the ride is low to hear
finally i’ve got the drum multitrack http://www.mediafire.com/listen/z71a4vc … /drums.ogg (starts at 4:10) even with this, the ride is low to hearOh, nice. That sounds like the “single version” I think, however. Just curious if you know which it is. I was making a guess by the tom sounds.
On topic;
I see what you mean, even on a multitrack like that you can almost not hear it. I feel like it is one of those things where it takes a drummer and/or someone who actually KNOWS it’s there to even hear it. Someone might hear it and just think it’s a soft hi-hat pedal also.
I honestly think it was put in the drum part for time keeping. I think Peart uses that more-so as an off-beat to help keep time easier once he start throwing in the double bass and off rhythm snare hits. Thus, why it is not mixed to high even in the multi (or it’s actually just hit soft and just acts as a “time keeping rhythm hit” since Peart did not want another splash hit there, but still wanted the 8th beat on the right hand.
So either the player is made a hit notes that are literally ALMOST not there which can lead to awkward charting in Rock Band, or the player doesn’t play notes that, technically, are there.
A lot of the C3 rules such as “chart what is heard and avoid ghost notes that are not strongly there (I know this isn’t exactly the same) make me want to just go with the straight quarters on Yellow or Green… but the drummer in me who wanted to accurately (as I could on R:cool: chart the album for drums wants the Green/Blue pattern ha
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.