Excellent work!Reading some of the comments in this (and other similar) thread and looking back over the years I have probably been fortunate to have always worked with reliable drummers. At the same time, I've auditioned plenty that are as you describe, and it drives me nuts.
Right now, I don't have a drummer in my current band, and to be honest I've no intention of having one. I produce backing tracks for the 95% of songs that need drums and percussion and additional sequenced stuff like strings and orchestral arrangements, extra synth layers, special effects etc.
Just before lockdown we decided to 'test the water' and audition a drummer. Local guy with a Roland electronic kit. Said he knew many of the songs we play. I thought this would be great as we would be able to play through stuff straight away and at reasonable volume. Not a chance! Rather than play through the PA he insisted on using a Roland PM-200 facing the room from in front of the kick pad. We decided to start with a track running then fade it out as he caught the tempo, feel and dynamics. He lasted about 4 bars before drifting off and losing the feel. Sometimes early, sometimes late, rarely in the middle. Not only that, he played so loud that he buried everything else.
Needless to say I am still making tracks! I think I've become quite adept at getting a good human feel into these tracks but it does take time...
Interesting. Some of the songs we play were obviously recorded originally to strict clicks in the studio, so it is easy to create tracks that fit those. Some of the songs pre-date widespread use of those studio techniques and they just don't work with tight quanitisation. And some of them go way beyond ±2 BPM.
For example, Talk of the Town, by The Pretenders varies anywhere between 132 and 135.8. It doesn't sound like much but without the ebb and flow the song feels rushed.
View attachment 4445344
Erma Franklin's 'Piece of My Heart' goes from 77 to 84 and back again a couple of times. The changes are more integral to the song than the Pretenders song, and it fails miserably when done at constant tempo, IMHO.
View attachment 4445356
Supertramp's Logical Song starts at a leisurely 112 and hits a (temporary) high of 125 before closing at 122:
View attachment 4445368
Mick Fleetwood is one of the hardest to emulate, but he is very deliberate and I'm really starting to get a feel for what he is all about. We now have 4 Fleetwood Mac songs in the set list - 3 of which have backing tracks - and they all disintegrate if you attempt to quantise them. To the casual listener, 'Dreams' sounds almost metronomic, but in truth it flows between 117 and 121. Here's just one section:
View attachment 4445370
Patti Smith's 'Because the Night' just keeps pushing forwards - starts at 110 and ends at 128!
View attachment 4445372
I guess what I'm trying to say is that ±2 is more than enough to affect the feel of something and therefore, at face value, you are not being intolerant. But it also seems to me that ±2 (or more) is the sort of fluctuation that can actually contribute positive things provided it is deliberate and 'musical', which in turn makes it predictable. If the fluctuations are random, rapid and unrelated to the needs of the music then I fully understand your frustration and I too would probably feel the need to complain.
YMMV
Just for fun, I’ve been using a metronome app to tap along and find tempos while listening to the classic rock station.
I’ve realized something I didn’t know until I did this experiment: ALL our favorite classics have tempo variations.