Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › THE BEATLES ARE OVERRATED
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

THE BEATLES ARE OVERRATED - Page 3

post #31 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post

Another idiotic Beatles discussion.
I think I just dropped 5 IQ points.
I'll try to write a slack jawed response.

Most of the Beatles comtemporary rock and pop musicians were in awe of their songwriting and production.
Difficult to find the bands who sounds like The Beatles before the Beatles when you get to albums like Help and Rubber Soul.
Show me the drummer who sounded like Ringo before Ringo came on the scene.
That guy doesn't exist..
The ugly truth is, stylistically, he may be the most imitated drummer of all time.
His parts MAY sound simple, a lot of them are not. Many of his recorded performances are masterpieces of economy, taste and subtlety. The art of pop drumming (well, most drumming) is supporting the song, the singer, the soloists.

Flame suit on, fire away!

 

Agreed. 

post #32 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post

Another idiotic Beatles discussion.
I think I just dropped 5 IQ points.
I'll try to write a slack jawed response.

Most of the Beatles comtemporary rock and pop musicians were in awe of their songwriting and production.
Difficult to find the bands who sounds like The Beatles before the Beatles when you get to albums like Help and Rubber Soul.
Show me the drummer who sounded like Ringo before Ringo came on the scene.
That guy doesn't exist..
The ugly truth is, stylistically, he may be the most imitated drummer of all time.
His parts MAY sound simple, a lot of them are not. Many of his recorded performances are masterpieces of economy, taste and subtlety. The art of pop drumming (well, most drumming) is supporting the song, the singer, the soloists.

Flame suit on, fire away!

 

Really? Ringo set the stage? I'm sorry but that is horribly incorrect. He was a good drummer, but not great. Yes, many imitate him, but imitation does not mean it was the best, but rather it could be imitated. Most drummers I know don't idolize Ringo, they idolize Neil Peart, Kieth Moon, Ginger Baker, and John Bonham (If they are going after rock). Ringo popularized off-beat drumming in rock and pop music, which did in fact catch on with many people, but that is like saying that Les Paul popularized the solid body electric guitar (while many falsely believe he invented it). Off beat drumming was very popular btw before Starr, it has been used in music much before him. Did those drummers sound like Starr? Not really, but they used the same techniques to sound unique themselves.

 

EDIT: Even Starr himself said in an interview (according to Wiki) "Whenever I hear another drummer I know I'm no good. I'm no good on the technical things ... I'm your basic offbeat drummer with funny fills. The fills were funny because I'm really left-handed playing a right-handed kit. I can't roll around the drums because of that."

 

But you know what? If you really want to talk drummers there is a saying among those who play drums. Anyone can play rock, but it takes talent to play jazz. If you want to see who almost every drummer truly idolizes look no further than Buddy Rich. Though I also love Joe Morello. But seriously, no one touches Buddy Rich in terms of pure talent, finesse, style, rhythm, energy, or practically anything else you can think of when it comes to drumming. Those four rock drummers I mentioned before? All great, and yet I doubt that they could match Rich at anything in his prime, or even later in his career probably. And there is a reason why some of the best drummers in the world still come together to hold memorial concerts for Buddy Rich (I believe Dave Weckl and Ginger Baker among others played at the last one I believe in the UK last year for the 25th anniversary of his passing).


Edited by kyuuketsuki - 6/25/13 at 10:43am
post #33 of 98

Yea, I don't know any musicians who looked to The Beatles for technical inspiration, myself included. They wrote catchy songs while being open minded and rational about the world, that was their charm. 

post #34 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Origin89 View Post


Your point might be better received if you gave it with a bit of class... instead of insulting people. I'm guessing that everything you discuss is of the utmost importance since you would make such a remarkable statement... This is an easy-going forum, dude. Lighten up a little.

Easy going threads don't usually start with THE BEATLES ARE OVERRATED!

A very classy title!!
post #35 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyuuketsuki View Post

Really? Ringo set the stage? I'm sorry but that is horribly incorrect. He was a good drummer, but not great. Yes, many imitate him, but imitation does not mean it was the best, but rather it could be imitated. Most drummers I know don't idolize Ringo, they idolize Neil Peart, Kieth Moon, Ginger Baker, and John Bonham (If they are going after rock). Ringo popularized off-beat drumming in rock and pop music, which did in fact catch on with many people, but that is like saying that Les Paul popularized the solid body electric guitar (while many falsely believe he invented it). Off beat drumming was very popular btw before Starr, it has been used in music much before him. Did those drummers sound like Starr? Not really, but they used the same techniques to sound unique themselves.

EDIT: Even Starr himself said in an interview (according to Wiki) "Whenever I hear another drummer I know I'm no good. I'm no good on the technical things ... I'm your basic offbeat drummer with funny fills. The fills were funny because I'm really left-handed playing a right-handed kit. I can't roll around the drums because of that."


But you know what? If you really want to talk drummers there is a saying among those who play drums. Anyone can play rock, but it takes talent to play jazz. If you want to see who almost every drummer truly idolizes look no further than Buddy Rich. Though I also love Joe Morello. But seriously, no one touches Buddy Rich in terms of pure talent, finesse, style, rhythm, energy, or practically anything else you can think of when it comes to drumming. Those four rock drummers I mentioned before? All great, and yet I doubt that they could match Rich at anything in his prime, or even later in his career probably. And there is a reason why some of the best drummers in the world still come together to hold memorial concerts for Buddy Rich (I believe Dave Weckl and Ginger Baker among others played at the last one I believe in the UK last year for the 25th anniversary of his passing).

I play drums myself.
Off beat drumming, technically, makes no sense.
I assume you mean syncopation?
Sure, Ringo didn't invent syncopation. This concept is extremely old.
Buddy Rich is the jazz drummer that rock drummers admire.
He is not the jazz drummer that jazz drummers admire. He was a big band drummer.
Jazz drummers will name guys like Tony Williams, Jack DeJohnnette, Max Roach, Elvin Jones, Joe Morello, Brian Blade, etc.
There are many drummers who admire Ringo, for example, Phil Collins, who is an outstanding drummer.
Ringo is probably the most imitated drummer in all of Pop and Rock drumming.
Rock drummers love Peart ( as do I) but his playing has no influence in most rock and pop music.
Technically one could argue that Ringo is a better drummer than Moon. Moon never played in any time signature other than 4/4.
For example:
Ringo played in many odd time signatures.
Ringo could play many different styles.
It's about supporting the song, not blowing everyone away with your technique. Making the song sound good.
Not anyone can play rock drums.
Ask any session drummer.

And if you're going to imitate someone, imitate the best, for example: Ringo.
Why do you think producers used to tell session drummers in the late sixties and early seventies to play like Ringo? Not play simple, play like Ringo.
Edited by Chris J - 6/26/13 at 5:13am
post #36 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post


I play drums myself.
Off beat drumming, technically, makes no sense.
I assume you mean syncopation?
Sure, Ringo didn't invent syncopation. This concept is extremely old.
Buddy Rich is the jazz drummer that rock drummers admire.
He is not the jazz drummer that jazz drummers admire. He was a big band drummer.
Jazz drummers will name guys like Tony Williams, Jack DeJohnnette, Max Roach, Elvin Jones, Joe Morello, Brian Blade, etc.
There are many drummers who admire Ringo, for example, Phil Collins, who is an outstanding drummer.
Ringo is probably the most imitated drummer in all of Pop and Rock drumming.
Rock drummers love Peart ( as do I) but his playing has no influence in most rock and pop music.
Technically one could argue that Ringo is a better drummer than Moon. Moon never played in any time signature other than 4/4.
For example:
Ringo played in many odd time signatures.
Ringo could play many different styles.
It's about supporting the song, not blowing everyone away with your technique. Making the song sound good.
Not anyone can play rock drums.
Ask any session drummer.

And if you're going to imitate someone, imitate the best, for example: Ringo.
Why do you think producers used to tell session drummers in the late sixties and early seventies to play like Ringo? Not play simple, play like Ringo.

 

Yes, offbeat is syncopation, the term is used because the beats that are being accented are the "offbeats" or "weak beats."

 

Being able to play in many different time signatures, even odd ones, or styles doesn't mean he was technically proficient at them. I'm not denying that Ringo didn't make an impact, because he did, however he was not a technically talented drummer. Even he knew this himself. He is imitated because his style was not technically oriented say like Peart's was, which makes it easier to imitate. Learning to play a syncopated style in several time signatures is easier than trying to emulate drummers like Keith Moon or Neil Peart who are very technical in their style. You can copy style of play, but it is infinitely harder than copying technical ability. 

 

Perhaps Starr was the best at supporting the song, but he was severely technically lacking.

 

And I've met many jazz drummers who love Buddy Rich. But I'm not going to get into who people idolize, I was speaking of who drummers I know personally idolize not the drum community as a whole. I really don't know who they idolize anymore, I haven't been a part of it for ages. 

 

And as for the producers telling session drummers to play like Ringo, it was probably like saying "Support the song." I'm sure they could have said play like Ginger Baker, because he also was able to support the song, but his style was often far more flamboyant.


Edited by kyuuketsuki - 6/26/13 at 7:47am
post #37 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post


Easy going threads don't usually start with THE BEATLES ARE OVERRATED!

A very classy title!!

 

Ah, touche'.

post #38 of 98

I thought this was a joke thread but I guess it was supposed to be serious?

 

The Beatles without formal training as musicians or proper instruments and musical education absorbed American music from the 50's and created their own sound.  They credited the African American musicians and Country artists that influenced their style as opposed to the White American musicians (Pat Boone et al) that basically stole the music without homage or credit.

 

They wrote their own hits, they were a cultural influence of immense proportions, in America and around the world.  They changed hairstyles, clothing, and art. They evolved over time with their writing and music that created a template other musicians honed for. 

 

They influenced countless musicians in style and sound including their contemporaries (Stones and Dylan).

 

Rolling Stone has Sgt. Pepper as the No. 1 album of all time. The rest of the Beatles albums are all over the top twenty out of the top 500 albums of all time. VH1 in a vote of contemporary musicians on the most important bands of the modern era has The Beatles #1 followed by Michael Jackson and Elvis.

 

McCartney and Lennon alone wrote more #1 hits than any other song writers in history and not just for themselves but for others (ex. Peter and Gordon).

 

They created the Apple brand that would influence people as important as Steve Jobs who took their symbol and created his own company (he also adored The Beatles).  

 

McCartney, Harrison and Lennon as solo artists were significant on their own. 

 

Sit down and watch The Beatles Anthology on Youtube or buy the DVD set and you will scratch the surface of their legacy.  They predate me, but I'm a fan.

 

I could wax on but their are hundreds of books on them.  "Can't Buy Me Love" is detailed and well written about the social influence of The Beatles.

post #39 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Origin89 View Post

Yea, I don't know any musicians who looked to The Beatles for technical inspiration, myself included. They wrote catchy songs while being open minded and rational about the world, that was their charm. 


Ummmmm..........Jeff Beck? Eric Clapton? Jimi Hendrix?



Max Weinberg wrote a book called The Big Beat about the great Rock and Roll drummers.
Guess who was in the book?
you are correct: Ringo.
Max also wanted John Bonham and Keith Moon in the book, but they had already passed away by then.
post #40 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyuuketsuki View Post

Yes, offbeat is syncopation, the term is used because the beats that are being accented are the "offbeats" or "weak beats."

Being able to play in many different time signatures, even odd ones, or styles doesn't mean he was technically proficient at them. I'm not denying that Ringo didn't make an impact, because he did, however he was not a technically talented drummer. Even he knew this himself. He is imitated because his style was not technically oriented say like Peart's was, which makes it easier to imitate. Learning to play a syncopated style in several time signatures is easier than trying to emulate drummers like Keith Moon or Neil Peart who are very technical in their style. You can copy style of play, but it is infinitely harder than copying technical ability. 

Perhaps Starr was the best at supporting the song, but he was severely technically lacking.

And I've met many jazz drummers who love Buddy Rich. But I'm not going to get into who people idolize, I was speaking of who drummers I know personally idolize not the drum community as a whole. I really don't know who they idolize anymore, I haven't been a part of it for ages. 

And as for the producers telling session drummers to play like Ringo, it was probably like saying "Support the song." I'm sure they could have said play like Ginger Baker, because he also was able to support the song, but his style was often far more flamboyant.

You're seriously missing the point.
Play like Ringo.........i.e. don't overplay, don't underplay, don't dominate the song, play something with style and taste, in other words, play like Ringo.
Stop making this about technique.
It's about style.
It's about taste, a sense of melody.
Don't mistake "easy to imitate" with creativity.
Ringo created those parts, this is what makes the great drummers great.
No one truly sounds like Baker or Ringo or Bonham or Watts or Densmore.
Those guys were very creative stylists.
If you do want to talk about technique, then that great technocal drummer is not Rich.

BTW, I once heard it said that Rich may be better than Moon, but Moon was the right drummer for The Who. The Who would not sound the same, or as good with Buddy Rich.
Charlie Watts is the perfect drummer for The Stones.
And Ringo was the perfect drummer for The Beatles.
Have you heard Pete Best's playing with The Beatles in The Anthology? Very simplistic and very average, no style, almost amatuerish.
post #41 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kyuuketsuki View Post

Yes, offbeat is syncopation, the term is used because the beats that are being accented are the "offbeats" or "weak beats."

Being able to play in many different time signatures, even odd ones, or styles doesn't mean he was technically proficient at them. I'm not denying that Ringo didn't make an impact, because he did, however he was not a technically talented drummer. Even he knew this himself. He is imitated because his style was not technically oriented say like Peart's was, which makes it easier to imitate. Learning to play a syncopated style in several time signatures is easier than trying to emulate drummers like Keith Moon or Neil Peart who are very technical in their style. You can copy style of play, but it is infinitely harder than copying technical ability. 

Perhaps Starr was the best at supporting the song, but he was severely technically lacking.

And I've met many jazz drummers who love Buddy Rich. But I'm not going to get into who people idolize, I was speaking of who drummers I know personally idolize not the drum community as a whole. I really don't know who they idolize anymore, I haven't been a part of it for ages. 

And as for the producers telling session drummers to play like Ringo, it was probably like saying "Support the song." I'm sure they could have said play like Ginger Baker, because he also was able to support the song, but his style was often far more flamboyant.

You're seriously missing the point.
Play like Ringo.........i.e. don't overplay, don't underplay, don't dominate the song, play something with style and taste, in other words, play like Ringo.
Stop making this about technique.
It's about style.
It's about taste, a sense of melody.
Don't mistake "easy to imitate" with creativity.
Ringo created those parts, this is what makes the great drummers great.
No one truly sounds like Baker or Ringo or Bonham or Watts or Densmore.
Those guys were very creative stylists.
If you do want to talk about technique, then that great technocal drummer is not Rich.

BTW, I once heard it said that Rich may be better than Moon, but Moon was the right drummer for The Who. The Who would not sound the same, or as good with Buddy Rich.
Charlie Watts is the perfect drummer for The Stones.
And Ringo was the perfect drummer for The Beatles.
Have you heard Pete Best's playing with The Beatles in The Anthology? Very simplistic and very average, no style, almost amatuerish.

Yeah... Pete Best was a weak drummer. I see what you are saying now. Makes sense.
post #42 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post


Ummmmm..........Jeff Beck? Eric Clapton? Jimi Hendrix?



Max Weinberg wrote a book called The Big Beat about the great Rock and Roll drummers.
Guess who was in the book?
you are correct: Ringo.
Max also wanted John Bonham and Keith Moon in the book, but they had already passed away by then.

 

 

I simply said that I don't know anyone who is inspired technically by The Beatles. I agree that they where a huge cultural influence who started an intense movement, but they're really not "technically inspiring" as instrumentalists... at least not today. But it's not the separation of time that's the cause, because I can look back at artist like Debussy and Ravel who where both technically and culturally inspiring. I like The Beatles quite a bit, but they certainly weren't masters of their instrument. Maybe you can squeeze an idea like that in strictly for Rock music, as it's a pretty limited genre, but mastery of music as a whole... no. 


Edited by Origin89 - 6/27/13 at 12:15pm
post #43 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Origin89 View Post

 

 

I simply said that I don't know anyone who is inspired technically by The Beatles. I agree that they where a huge cultural influence who started an intense movement, but they're really not "technically inspiring" as instrumentalists... at least not today. And it's not the separation of time that's the cause, because I can look back at artist like Debussy and Ravel who where both technically and culturally inspiring. I like The Beatles quite a bit, but they certainly weren't masters of their instrument. Stop saying that. Maybe you can squeeze an idea like that in strictly for Rock music, as it's a pretty limited genre, but mastery of music as a whole... no. 

The best musician, hands down, in The Beatles was McCartney.  He changed the way bass was utilized in rock music, before Entwhistle would take it to another level.  McCartney put bass at the forefront of songs, before that bass provided little more than background rhythm.  At #3 on the list of all time greatest Bass players per Rolling Stone Magazine.  McCartney's bass line on "Come Together," is particularly memorable.  Because his 4 octave vocal presence was always so notable his musicianship tends to get over looked.

 

On the more difficult guitar solos it was McCartney who often took  the lead,  The guitar solo in Taxman was McCartney.  Harrison even liked the fact that McCartney did it with a little Indian flair. (Crawdaddy ''77)

 

Exceptional piano player and subbed for Starr on drums in his absence.

 

One aspect to his unique ability he could record songs and even albums on his own as he often did on the White album with The Beatles and later on his early solo albums.

post #44 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUMAY408 View Post

The best musician, hands down, in The Beatles was McCartney.  He changed the way bass was utilized in rock music, before Entwhistle would take it to another level.  McCartney put bass at the forefront of songs, before that bass provided little more than background rhythm.  At #3 on the list of all time greatest Bass players per Rolling Stone Magazine.  McCartney's bass line on "Come Together," is particularly memorable.  Because his 4 octave vocal presence was always so notable his musicianship tends to get over looked.

 

On the more difficult guitar solos it was McCartney who often took  the lead,  The guitar solo in Taxman was McCartney.  Harrison even liked the fact that McCartney did it with a little Indian flair. (Crawdaddy ''77)

 

Exceptional piano player and subbed for Starr on drums in his absence.

 

One aspect to his unique ability he could record songs and even albums on his own as he often did on the White album with The Beatles and later on his early solo albums.

 

Haha, I never said they were talentless. They did what they needed to do very efficiently. Good info, by the way.

 

I'm just saying, go to Classical or Jazz if you really want to be blown away by technical and musical inspiration. 

post #45 of 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Origin89 View Post

 

Haha, I never said they were talentless. They did what they needed to do very efficiently. Good info, by the way.

 

I'm just saying, go to Classical or Jazz if you really want to be blown away by technical and musical inspiration. 

I agree McCartney wasn't out front doing long extended bass solos ex. Les Claypool, but he was very influential to other bass players.  On SER Geddy Lee said he was one of his most important influences, "not ostentatious," "but very important" "He added melody with the bass" when others before played a steady cyclical cadence as a back beat.  Check out The Beatles "Something."  I personally thought he was much better on The Beatle songs when he wasn't the primary vocalist.

 

McCartney's biggest influence was James Jamerson who played on several of the old Motown hits ex. Marvin Gaye "What's Going On."

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › THE BEATLES ARE OVERRATED