We are back at Status Flow at Sensible Music, thanks to Maverick for letting us use the room again while we finish setting up the new space. This week’s FAQ Friday is all about practical decisions that come up constantly in sessions, drum spot mics, phase alignment, whether to attend mastering and why so many engineers obsess over overhead placement.

Why do we typically use dynamic mics as drum spot mics rather than condensers?

Most of the time it comes down to pattern control. Many dynamic mics have tighter, more controlled cardioid patterns which helps you aim at the drum and reject more of everything else around it. On a kit, “everything else” is a lot, hi hat bleeding into the snare mic, snare in the tom mics, cymbals everywhere plus whatever is happening in the room.

There is also the practical reality of durability and risk. You probably do not want to put a delicate vintage condenser inside a kick drum where air pressure and constant impact can be unforgiving. A dynamic mic is usually the safer friend in those high pressure high SPL positions.

That said it is always genre and goal dependent. If you want something more open and natural especially on jazz or sparse arrangements you might use fewer close mics and lean on a condenser outside the kick, a mono overhead or a clean stereo overhead approach then add just a touch of close snare if needed. You can also combine a dynamic and a condenser on snare taped together or with a purpose built dual option giving you two flavours to blend. If the condenser brings a bit too much spill the dynamic can be your controlled anchor and you can gate or shape around that.

The simple takeaway, dynamics for tighter directionality and control, condensers when you want more openness and detail and the arrangement and genre tell you which matters more.

When correcting phase on a drum kit should we align waveforms by eye or use sample delay and align by ear and why?

Use your eyes to get you close then use your ears to decide what is actually right for the song.

There is a real trap here, “perfect” on the screen is not always perfect in the speakers. A kick drum is not just the direct hit it is also the reflections and the room and the way that energy blooms over time. If you make everything mathematically identical you can accidentally make the kit smaller or less exciting because you have removed the natural time relationships that create depth.

A practical method that works well is to pick a reference often the overheads because they can be the most honest picture of the kit. Then use a time adjuster, sample delay or equivalent tool in your DAW to nudge close mics into a better relationship with that picture. You can measure the offset and move something by 100 samples and you might immediately hear the low end and body snap into place. However you still want to fine tune by ear because the “best” alignment is sometimes a happy middle not the most visually satisfying one.

A great cautionary story is when someone aligns a DI to a bass amp recording and suddenly there is loads more low end. It looks brilliant however the tone stops sounding like the record because the original sound was shaped by tape and compression and EQ on the way in. The point is not to manufacture the maximum low end it is to keep the character and intention intact.

Two rules that will keep you sane:

1. Fix what you can hear. Do not go hunting for problems you do not hear.
2. The order is always, does it sound good, then adjust if it is genuinely needed.

It is the same philosophy as tuning vocals. Wait until something is actually out of tune then tune it. If a performance feels expressive and right trust that first.

A useful tracking mindset here is spill management. There is an old school approach some engineers lived and died by, making sure a hit on one drum does not print too loudly into the other close mics. The less unwanted crossover you have the less “phase correction” becomes a rescue mission later and the more your EQ moves stay focused.

Is it important to sit in with your mastering engineer when possible?

It depends on budget and on what you are trying to get out of it.

An attended mastering session often costs more and that makes sense because you are turning a fast efficient process into a longer one. If you are sitting next to a great mastering engineer you will naturally ask questions and you should, that is part of the value. However time is time and attended sessions take more of it.

My preferred compromise is simple. Work with a mastering engineer you trust send the mixes then explicitly invite feedback when you deliver them. Something like, “If you hear anything I can improve please tell me.” Great mastering engineers will often send back a few notes, maybe one track has a build up in a particular area, maybe there is a little too much of something. That feedback makes you a better mixer without you needing to be in the room for the entire process.

Also professionals usually do not “tell you off”. Their job is to make it great and to make it translate across formats, streaming, vinyl, CD, radio, everything. If you ask for notes you are opening the door for constructive suggestions and most great mastering engineers are genuinely brilliant at that.

So yes attended can be valuable if you can afford it and you want the experience. However if you want the best value send it to someone you trust and ask for feedback in the hand off.

Why do many engineers place overheads equidistant from the snare and what happens if you do not?

Equidistant overheads are a quick reliable way to keep the snare centred and phase coherent in the stereo image. If both overhead mics are the same distance from the snare the snare arrives at both capsules at the same time and it sits firmly in the middle. That also makes it easier to align your close snare to the overheads if you choose to bringing back body and weight without weird smearing.

If you place overheads more generally meaning not measured to the snare the centre of the kit can shift. The snare might pull left or right and the phase relationship between overheads and close mics can get less predictable. Sometimes that is a problem and sometimes it is exactly the vibe you want especially if the arrangement is sparse and you want the kit to feel like a single instrument in a real space.

This is where you match the overhead approach to the production:

Spaced pair measured to the snare great for dense mixes. When you have heavy guitars, keys, synths and a busy arrangement a spaced pair gives width and energy and the controlled centre keeps the snare punchy.

XY or a stereo mic great when stereo accuracy is everything. If it is drums plus a small number of instruments and the overheads are basically “the sound of the kit” an XY or stereo mic approach can give you that locked phase solid image.

Mono overhead great for cohesion. A mono overhead can make the kit feel like one connected instrument. It can be perfect when you want the drums to sit naturally and avoid a wide hyped picture.

And if you are doing ultra dense metal sometimes the overhead job changes entirely. You might even spot mic cymbals and place them deliberately and build ambience with controlled reverbs on kick and snare rather than relying on natural room spill. None of this is right or wrong it is simply choosing the method that serves the song.

The thread that ties all of this together

Most of these questions sound technical and they are. However they all come back to the same priority. Use tools to support what you are hearing not to replace it. Tight patterns and dynamics help with control and phase tools help you get more body and focus and mastering feedback helps you translate and overhead placement choices are really arrangement choices in disguise.

If you have more FAQ Friday questions drop them below and as always have a marvellous time recording and mixing.