OK. Mitch Mitchell. Check out his drumming on the live Hendrix recording from the Isle of Wight, or his work on "Cry of Love" and "Rainbow bridge", both co-produced by Mitchell and Eddie Kramer after Hendirx died (and now both available as part of the 1997 release "First Rays of the New Rising Sun"). Mitchell is all over his kit in these later recordings, and just like Keith Moon, using the drum kit as another "lead" instrument. Too bad Mitchell didn't continue to have significant influence after Hendrix's death, except through his excellent work on the latter's headlined recordings...
As Charlie has said himself, "I'm not really a very good drummer. My favorite Stones drum parts are on songs where I didn't play!"
Ringo has said, "I can keep time but since I'm self taught (usually a not-so-good thing) I can never do the same fill twice."
I'm convinced Watts cannot play the high-hat and snare at the same time. Don't think I've ever seen him do it. And since we're branching out a little, how about Mitch Mitchell? That Brit could PLAY!!
I think we all should admit Ringo is the most influential drummer of the last 50 years. Bonham had said he took up drums because of Ringo. I know I did along with every other drummer of my generation.
Rpeluso, ridiculous,laughable,pathetic???? Comparing the drumming styles of arguably the two most influential drummers in the history of rock is a interesting if not a valid question. Based on the numerous responses this thread has generated I would think most of us agree. These forums are for the Audiogon community to express themselves. Next time you view a thread that you find pathetic I suggest you do what I do every day, jut pass on it. Obviously you have no sense of what these forums are about. Sharing ideas, knowledge and most importantly, having some fun.
Looks like this thread has been hijacked so I'll jump in with my off-topic comments. Saw the Who 11/06 with Zach and he was superb throughout the show. As Tvad mentioned, Pete put on a clinic. It had been 32 years since I'd seen them last and I was absolutely mesmerized by Pete's chops. Seemed like he played lead and rhythm simultaneously throughout the show..unfriggenbelieveable! And the light show - OMG. I've never seen anything like it. Icing on the cake one of my customers did the light and sound for the show.
We saw opening night for the current Mark Knopfler tour at Red Rocks Tuesday. Of course, everyone was blown away by Mark and his smokin' band. IMHO, the Who were at least one maybe two orders of magnitude better. Solid rock? Fugetaboutit!
I saw The Who in Boston in 1973 when Moon was still wailing away. I next saw them in 2007 with Ringo's son Zach on drums, and he was excellent. In both shows Pete and Roger were great. What amazed me was how good these guys were 34 years later. Impressive.
Tvad sounds like your timing was right for that show. Its been since the mid 70s when these ears heard the sounds of the Who live. Pete flying across the stage and Keith wailing on the drums. That show is in my top five of all time.
Will be seeing Ringo in concert this July 5th. This is going to be a real joy for me and the wife. As far as whos the best for me its a toss up love em both.
Thanks for the comments. I am trying to learn more about drumming (got a V drums set recently). I need to take Ringo seriously it would seem.
I need to get Thrust - good suggestion. I gave Head Hunters a lot of play time when I was heavily into Vinyl - during the early 80's and at a time when most music sounded so good (unlike today where it is almost all hyper-compressed crap - I blame the Steve Lillywhite loudness legacy that followed the wonderful work of David Lord, Trevor Horn, Hugh Padgham and Alan Parsons, Colin Thurston, Elliot Sheiner and many others)
Shadhorne - Dave Garibaldi w/ Tower of Power - yeah, that is some serious pushing of the beat. Funk/blues and swing are where you have some serious rubber-meeting-the-road, just in terms of pure technique for drummers...a fabulous pinnacle being Mike Clark on Herbie Hancock's Thrust...polyrhythms of amazing complexity, but right THERE. Charlie Watts could probably play funk. Ringo had some creative ideas, but when you put him up against some of the jazz-trained pro studio guys or the last 20 years like Vinnie Colaiuta or Mike Clark or Dave Garibaldi, he's just not got the technical equipment to do what they can do. Yet, they'd probably each credit him with "opening the door"--helping turn the drums into a musical instrument in its own right instead of a metronome. He wasn't a strong technician, and he wasn't rock solid, but he WAS creative and musical within his context, and it's worth hearing what he had to say.
"I really never noted the Beatles for drumming at all. Funny how some people get it and others don't - I certainly don't get it with Ringo - but I agree he is superb but is he remarkable? Melodies seems to stand out most in my mind coupled with rather simple back beats/fills. "
Shadorne, take another listen to the drumming on "Rain", "Tomorrow Never Knows" and countless other songs where Lennon is the singer. As Ringo stated in a recent interview, he was allowed to be creative on a John song whereas Paul would try to tell everyone what to play. It shows.
As for Charlie Watts, he's quite boring to me, both in manner and playing style.
Blaine played with Sinatra, Beach Boys, Simon and Garfunkel, Presley, Supremes, Jan and Dean, Neil Diamond, John Denver, Herb Alpert, Mamas and Papas, and dozens of others.
One of his most famous and perhaps unknown contributions is drums on The Byrds' "Mr. Tambourine Man".
We both got it slightly incorrect. According to the book "The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions" it was Andy White who played on at least one early Beatles song. This book is really interesting in an acedemic sort of way. It lists each Beatles' recording session and as accurately as possible (as can be determined) which Beatle played which instruments and which outside musicians or friends played on which songs.
I really never noted the Beatles for drumming at all. Funny how some people get it and others don't - I certainly don't get it with Ringo - but I agree he is superb but is he remarkable? Melodies seems to stand out most in my mind coupled with rather simple back beats/fills.
The Stones, however, that is a for sure rhythmical blues/funky stuff. Charlie does a great job, IMHO. I reckon funk/blues and swing is real tricky on timing - just listen to David Garibaldi the "groovemaster" on Tower of Power, Wesley Finley of Rebelution, Keith Harris Black Eyed Peas, Steve Jordan or Steve Ferrone. To me each of these drummers give the music a lively "light" feel or touch - an ability that contrasts with heavily technical drummers like Neil Peart/Buddy Rich/Keith moon which seem to pound thinsg out metronomically...just two cents.
Ringo Starr was considered the best drummer in England when he left Rory Storm and the Hurricanes to join The Beatles. I believe that Charlie Watts lived in England at the time and he was never considered as formidable as Ringo. Different styles for different bands. I think that I wouldn't mind having either one in my band.
Two versions were recorded. On the first Ringo played drums. George Martin wanted a different sound and recorded a second with on White drums and Ringo playing tambourine.
i've heard lots of guys try to play like ringo or charlie....not as easy as it sounds. try 'come together' ticket to ride' 'street fighting man' or 'paint it black'
If you put Ringo in the Stones and Charlie in the Beatles both bands would suffer for it. IMHO, the tasks they were executing were different enough to make this type of judgement irrelevent.
Blkadr, I have to agree with you. Charlie Watts could have never done what Ringo has accomplished. Can you imagine if Charlie played on side 2 of Abby Road? Then again I wonder what Ringo would have come up with for Honky Tonk Women or Start Me Up.
Underselling Ringo is kinda sad, like the way many dismiss George's profound contribution to the most influential band in modern history. Watts is great but face it, he seldom had to stretch playing with the Stones like Ringo did with the Beatles. Ringo is a very proficient drummer with a very singular style and a wonderful creative spirit. Two very accomplished musicians each with an important place in modern music history. "thunder rolled over the hills like Jean Krupa with glasspacks"
Ringo seems like a really nice guy who was scrambling to keep up with his peers, and never really succeeded. As most people have noted, Watts was/is noticeably more rock solid. That Watts is far more serious about the art of drumming is reflected in the fact that he's still very active, and stretching out into other arenas. (I'm under the impression, btw, though I could be wrong, that Paul McCartney did a certain amount of the drumming on Abbey Road.)
I don't think either would qualify as "great" drummers, frankly, but Watts would be closest. Whoever mentioned John Bonham...now he left his mark. Another hugely under-rated drummer was Clive Bunker, who was with Jethro Tull through Aqualung (I think). One of the most creative AND rock solid drummers in rock 'n roll.
you really have to have seen them both to understand just how good they are. charlie is the best of the two, but hey...no one else is ringo starr......side two of abbey road has some of best rock drumming ever put to record
I am not to fond of the Beatles, and even less fond of the Rolling and a stones, so I will pass on that although Ringo's voice was good on 'Thomas the Tank Engine'.
Charlie Watts by a mile! He's a subtle drummer but he's rock solid. I figured out how good he was when I was in a band in college. We were covering Honkey Tonk Women and our drummer kept on slipping the downbeat into the wrong part of the melody. He could hear where it was supposed to be on the record, but he kept on winding up about a beat off. Of course there was a lot of beer involved....
If you haven't heard Charlie as a band leader with his jazz orchestra you haven't heard his true range as a musician. His recording from 2001, "Watts at Scotts" really put a new light on him for me. Like Keith, I think he's often under appreciated because he's not an overt, showy virtuoso. No one is going to put him on the same technical plane as Ginger Baker (truly great,) but he has his own unique strengths.
Listen to "Slave" from 'Tattoo You' - great beat, never overwhelming. All the instruments dance in and out and can be heard - Charlie never takes the spotlight. Love some of the sax riffs on that one.
Dreadhead...I think that you answered your own question. Charlie Watts is a drumming timepiece...spot, dead on and correct me if I am wrong on this, but his background is / was in keeping time in big band jazz. I also thought I read once where Mick and keith went to him on the new songs arrangements and what tiempo the song would take. Ringo Starr is a whole different type of drummer and as important, type of band and music played. Ringo was the right drummer for that band...any other drummer, well who knows what path the Beatles would have taken and ended up on.....yes, he had flair and was a pretty good drummer as well in keeping time.
Baker, Bonham & Moon....again totally different drummers and music played. But, the thread is about Watts and Starr ....not about those guys.
Lokie, Keith Moon was the greatest rock drummer ever. Look at the video for "Who are you". We all know that. Dr joe, I find Charlie to be somewhat predictable, almost robotic where as Ringo was never afraid to take chances. Babyjdrums, cut from the same cloth indeed but different as night and day.
I used to think Charlie was a basic drummer till I saw the Stones live years ago. It sounded like there were 2 drummers playing. That inked it for me. Chucks the guy.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
