Jeff Schmidt | Beautiful Bass Blog 2

To click or not to click – for many – it’s not even a question. It’s either NEVER – or ALWAYS.

Truth is – much of the commercial music recorded today is of the click, by the click, for the click. Does that fact make it inferior to previous “pop” music that were performed without a click?

That’s the implication of Revisiting The Click Track with a few graphics that show tempo deviation over time in popular music tracks. In the post they stack a Britney Spears track up against the Police.

Is the Police track a better song because it was performed live and had a fluid and dynamic tempo?

Sometimes – yes. Other times – machine like tempo IS part of the music.

For me – the key is not in creating another dogmatic ISM – CLICK IS EVIL / CLICK IS GOD. That’s useless to me. The key is knowing WHY you are using a click, what it’s going to do to the music – assess if that is actually something you want in the music.

A lot of music is recorded piece by piece – remotely. In those cases locking down a tempo map is helpful in getting separately recorded parts to match up. But again – I have to point out. What is the music’s intention?

If you’re playing the kind of music that is typically associated with live performance – and you’re locking it down to 110.5 bpm from beginning to end – it’s going to FEEL stiff particularly if you have NO instrument floating around the rigid tempo map to distract the listener from lock-step tempo. Much of Pop music is excellent at avoiding this while still kneeling at the alter of powerful rhythm.

That said – depending on the KIND of music we’re recording – the click doesn’t have to sit at a single value the entire composition. In every Digital Audio Workstation many composers are drawing fluid and dynamic tempos values into their click tracks to capture a more “live” feel. Or – basing their tempo maps off of freely recorded material. Making the machine – in essence – conform to the musician’s performance.

This certainly takes more time, planning and skill – but the results are far more effective in selling the “musicians are playing this” vibe.

On my album Outre for example – there’s lots of… well, let’s be kind and call it “rubato”. Lots of speed up and slow down. Lots of tacking an extra beat or 2 at the end of phrases – to subtracting a beat here or there. Or as it may appear to the casual listener – no click track.

I’ve heard other solo bass / solo instrumental recordings that most certainly used a click. Sometimes it totally worked (particularly if the piece is based on it’s steady rhythmic power) and other times it felt confined and stiff.

Which is better? I would have hated Outre with a click track. It wouldn’t feel right. To me. That was my aesthetic choice. And I’ll say the choice was not based on any variation of the question – will using a click make me sound like a better musician?

Click/no click is a decision for me – not a rule. It’s about feel.

Sometimes using a click gives a piece the feel it needs – other times it locks it in – confines it – makes it rigid and stiff. Let it also be said that playing to a click is a skill – one that has to be developed. Playing with feel over a click is possible and lots of people are doing it.

Almost everything I’ve done since Outre has been based on a click or a tempo map. If I return to solo material I will base my click/no click decision on the nature of the music.

I consider using ANY kind of rythmic guide as no different than “using a click”.

That means my solo piece Satori with it’s looped percussion parts is being played to click. Using delays to set a rhythmic value or tempo is using a click.  Recording loops that have a 1 –  is using a click.

Again thee’s nothing wrong with playing to a click. And that’s my point – most music today is played to some sort of rigid rythmic framework.

We might not have called it a click in the past – but it’s functionally the same.

Click or no click? Let the music answer the question.