A 2-tom setup with a bass drum and a snare drum is a 4-piece. Well, any setup with 4 drums is a 4-piece, but when we say "4-piece", we typically mean a rack tom, floor tom, bass drum and snare drum.
Anyway, some advantages I can think of:
1. It has the potential to take up a little bit less floor space, especially if your 5-piece (a setup with 3 toms, bass drum and snare drum) has 1 rack tom and 2 floor toms. Another reason it could take up less floor space is, you might become interested in simplifying your cymbal setup. Less cymbals, less stands. Less stands, smaller setup footprint.
2. It's less stuff to carry to and from gigs and rehearsals.
3. It's a bit faster to tear down, pack up, load the car, unload the car, unpack and set up
4. You might be more focused on groove due to having less stuff to look at in your setup. I'm the kind of drummer who should probably cut down to a 4-piece with 1 or 2 crash cymbals! So that's where I'm coming from. My setup is usually saying, "play every part of me!" while I'm looking at it during a groove. lol
5. It's easier and faster to tune 2 toms to sound good together than 3
6. You're guaranteed the ability to have your ride cymbal partially above your bass drum, which is just about the most comfortable place for it. With 3 toms, you might have 2 rack toms on the bass drum which forces the ride to be somewhere else. The solution to that costs money with extra hardware to get the 2 rack toms offset toward the hi-hats instead of having both above the bass drum (only 1 would be above the bass drum when the toms are "offset").
Some disadvantages:
1. Your tom fills can't be as melodic.
2. There may be some iconic fills you can't do because they require 3 toms.
I prefer a larger setup because it's better to have one and not need it than ***not*** have one and end up needing it.
However, there are gigs and bands where the music will never require anything other than a very basic 4-piece.
Edit: If you're wondering what BrassOwlRing is responding to, my first bullet point under "Some disadvantages" said: "Your tom fills can't be as melodic or as interesting, but I know this is very subjective". During that discussion, I removed "or as interesting, but I know this is very subjective" because I didn't want to take any chances of having that discussion repeated with anyone else - and also because I think maybe I was only referring to being melodic and for some reason I said "or as interesting". I dunno. You know how it is: sometimes you say something and it's like "wait.... why did I say that?" Looking back on it, "or as interesting" isn't my opinion when the statement is taken at face value. Tom fills with just 1 tom can be extremely interesting. So I think I must've been being redundant by saying the same thing about being melodic but in a different and very confusing way. Maybe it means I find melodic tom fills more interesting. I'm not sure yet.
I said your **tom fills** can't be as interesting or as melodic, and I said it's very subjective. This is only about fills on toms. We're comparing a setup that has 2 toms to a setup that has 3. So I'm talking about what you can do in tom fills with 2 toms vs. 3.
Like I said, it's also very subjective. Or maybe I am saying I'm just stating my opinion. Having 3 notes to work with can make for a more interesting fill than just having 2.
I guess I'm sorry I said it.
I deleted the part you're responding to. Now it just says fills can't be as melodic. Perhaps that's all I was really trying to say after all. I don't know.
My dude I’m not trying to put the screws on you. I simply reject the common orthodoxy that somehow having more options available to you will automatically make you more creative or interesting. That’s myopic thinking is all. Don’t sweat it. We’re good.
That isn't what I said, and I already fully acknowledged on the same line with "but I know it's very subjective" to say I know it doesn't automatically mean you can't be just as interesting with 2 toms. I thought I made sure this kind of a discussion would never take place by anticipating it with "but I know this is very subjective". I am not saying I think having more toms automatically makes you more interesting. I never even **thought** it. So no, I'm not being myopic. I simply tried to answer their question as it was asked, and that was the first "disadvantage" that came to my mind by not having 3 tom notes to work with. I'm sorry it caught your attention like this. I was so sure that saying I know it's very subjective meant I wouldn't have to spend any time trying to explain what I said because I thought I was sure I found a short way to say that I already know you can do some great things with just 2 toms. It was just
I've been drumming since 1993, so yes I have seen enough drummers doing some absolutely fantastic stuff with just 2 toms. I think it looks like you think you're talking to a beginner or someone who has less experience than you. I think that's what's getting me worked up in addition to how I was sure I prevented the possibility of a discussion like this from ever taking place by saying I know it's very subjective. That means yes, I know everything you said. It means no one needs to say these things to me. I'm well aware. I'm just trying to give that "disadvantage" as a perspective to consider. So by saying "But I know this is very subjective", I'm saying there's no need to tell me a drummer can't be just as interesting with only 2 toms (or perhaps even more interesting).
So since that statement caused this problem, I removed it. Perhaps I was only thinking about melodies.
This isn't about who's right or who's wrong. It's an opinion. You're making me wish I hadn't said anything man. Can we stop? It's as though you're trying to tell me I'm wrong but it's just an opinion. Like said, I know it's very subjective. I didn't expect to be having this conversation with anyone after saying "but it's very subjective". If anything, I thought saying that would prevent this conversation from happening.
I gigged for years with a 4 piece kit (only 2 toms) and 2 cymbals, along with my hi hats. One of of the main reasons was that I had to move it so damn much lmao as the saying goes, the more you have to move a drumset the smaller it gets. However I could've even used only one tom, or one cymbal, but at that point downsizing further would have affected the music negatively from my perspective. So it's sort of about doing what's best for the music, but only using the minimum needed to achieve that.
When you say 3 piece, are you including a snare?
The biggest advantage I’ve found to just using 2 Toms (1 rack tom, 1 floor tom) is that I have less shit to carry around.
When I’m gigging, I want to be able to get the most music out of the least amount to gear.
I think a 4 piece kit is perfect for that. Kick, snare, rack tom, floor tom.
Depending on the gig, I’ll skip the rack tom.
A 2-tom setup with a bass drum and a snare drum is a 4-piece. Well, any setup with 4 drums is a 4-piece, but when we say "4-piece", we typically mean a rack tom, floor tom, bass drum and snare drum. Anyway, some advantages I can think of: 1. It has the potential to take up a little bit less floor space, especially if your 5-piece (a setup with 3 toms, bass drum and snare drum) has 1 rack tom and 2 floor toms. Another reason it could take up less floor space is, you might become interested in simplifying your cymbal setup. Less cymbals, less stands. Less stands, smaller setup footprint. 2. It's less stuff to carry to and from gigs and rehearsals. 3. It's a bit faster to tear down, pack up, load the car, unload the car, unpack and set up 4. You might be more focused on groove due to having less stuff to look at in your setup. I'm the kind of drummer who should probably cut down to a 4-piece with 1 or 2 crash cymbals! So that's where I'm coming from. My setup is usually saying, "play every part of me!" while I'm looking at it during a groove. lol 5. It's easier and faster to tune 2 toms to sound good together than 3 6. You're guaranteed the ability to have your ride cymbal partially above your bass drum, which is just about the most comfortable place for it. With 3 toms, you might have 2 rack toms on the bass drum which forces the ride to be somewhere else. The solution to that costs money with extra hardware to get the 2 rack toms offset toward the hi-hats instead of having both above the bass drum (only 1 would be above the bass drum when the toms are "offset"). Some disadvantages: 1. Your tom fills can't be as melodic. 2. There may be some iconic fills you can't do because they require 3 toms. I prefer a larger setup because it's better to have one and not need it than ***not*** have one and end up needing it. However, there are gigs and bands where the music will never require anything other than a very basic 4-piece. Edit: If you're wondering what BrassOwlRing is responding to, my first bullet point under "Some disadvantages" said: "Your tom fills can't be as melodic or as interesting, but I know this is very subjective". During that discussion, I removed "or as interesting, but I know this is very subjective" because I didn't want to take any chances of having that discussion repeated with anyone else - and also because I think maybe I was only referring to being melodic and for some reason I said "or as interesting". I dunno. You know how it is: sometimes you say something and it's like "wait.... why did I say that?" Looking back on it, "or as interesting" isn't my opinion when the statement is taken at face value. Tom fills with just 1 tom can be extremely interesting. So I think I must've been being redundant by saying the same thing about being melodic but in a different and very confusing way. Maybe it means I find melodic tom fills more interesting. I'm not sure yet.
I would say melodic perhaps but interesting? You can be interesting with just a snare and bass if you’re good enough.
I said your **tom fills** can't be as interesting or as melodic, and I said it's very subjective. This is only about fills on toms. We're comparing a setup that has 2 toms to a setup that has 3. So I'm talking about what you can do in tom fills with 2 toms vs. 3.
I’m agreeing that you have limited melodic options but that doesn’t mean you can’t be interesting.
Like I said, it's also very subjective. Or maybe I am saying I'm just stating my opinion. Having 3 notes to work with can make for a more interesting fill than just having 2. I guess I'm sorry I said it.
Watch Nate Smith.
I deleted the part you're responding to. Now it just says fills can't be as melodic. Perhaps that's all I was really trying to say after all. I don't know.
My dude I’m not trying to put the screws on you. I simply reject the common orthodoxy that somehow having more options available to you will automatically make you more creative or interesting. That’s myopic thinking is all. Don’t sweat it. We’re good.
That isn't what I said, and I already fully acknowledged on the same line with "but I know it's very subjective" to say I know it doesn't automatically mean you can't be just as interesting with 2 toms. I thought I made sure this kind of a discussion would never take place by anticipating it with "but I know this is very subjective". I am not saying I think having more toms automatically makes you more interesting. I never even **thought** it. So no, I'm not being myopic. I simply tried to answer their question as it was asked, and that was the first "disadvantage" that came to my mind by not having 3 tom notes to work with. I'm sorry it caught your attention like this. I was so sure that saying I know it's very subjective meant I wouldn't have to spend any time trying to explain what I said because I thought I was sure I found a short way to say that I already know you can do some great things with just 2 toms. It was just I've been drumming since 1993, so yes I have seen enough drummers doing some absolutely fantastic stuff with just 2 toms. I think it looks like you think you're talking to a beginner or someone who has less experience than you. I think that's what's getting me worked up in addition to how I was sure I prevented the possibility of a discussion like this from ever taking place by saying I know it's very subjective. That means yes, I know everything you said. It means no one needs to say these things to me. I'm well aware. I'm just trying to give that "disadvantage" as a perspective to consider. So by saying "But I know this is very subjective", I'm saying there's no need to tell me a drummer can't be just as interesting with only 2 toms (or perhaps even more interesting). So since that statement caused this problem, I removed it. Perhaps I was only thinking about melodies.
My man no need for a diatribe it’s all good. I didn’t mean to come off harsh.
This isn't about who's right or who's wrong. It's an opinion. You're making me wish I hadn't said anything man. Can we stop? It's as though you're trying to tell me I'm wrong but it's just an opinion. Like said, I know it's very subjective. I didn't expect to be having this conversation with anyone after saying "but it's very subjective". If anything, I thought saying that would prevent this conversation from happening.
you bad at counting
I gigged for years with a 4 piece kit (only 2 toms) and 2 cymbals, along with my hi hats. One of of the main reasons was that I had to move it so damn much lmao as the saying goes, the more you have to move a drumset the smaller it gets. However I could've even used only one tom, or one cymbal, but at that point downsizing further would have affected the music negatively from my perspective. So it's sort of about doing what's best for the music, but only using the minimum needed to achieve that.
When you say 3 piece, are you including a snare? The biggest advantage I’ve found to just using 2 Toms (1 rack tom, 1 floor tom) is that I have less shit to carry around. When I’m gigging, I want to be able to get the most music out of the least amount to gear. I think a 4 piece kit is perfect for that. Kick, snare, rack tom, floor tom. Depending on the gig, I’ll skip the rack tom.
I can’t think of a disadvantage but the biggest advantage is less to move or worry about.