Relayer71
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2006
- Posts
- 284
- Likes
- 2
Quote:
Wow, I can't disagree with this MORE. This IS ego talking.
An excellent drummer DOES add to the overall sound of any band, more so than any lead guitarist can. Sure, there are a lot of mediocre sounding drummers and with this I agree, but you can't say a lead guitarist is more important.
I would rather listen to an album with excellent drumming and mediocre guitar playing than vice versa, any day. Lead guitar playing doesn't carry an entire song.
As for Smashing Pumpkins, Chamberlain (can't remember his first name atm) was in the 5% of very good drummers. His playing on Siamese Dream is fluid, dynamic, energetic and distinctive and made Billy's songs sound more interesting than they really were. He's no Bill Bruford or Neil Peart but he's far from being just average.
As for lead guitar, wasn't it Billy Corgan that played all the solos?
But I do agree that sometimes there is ONE component of a band that when taken away makes the band far less interesting, but I wouldn't say drummers or bassists are automatically it. It usually depends on the band. Can you imagine RUSH with Mike Mills from R.E.M. on bass or TOOL with that drummer from Def Leopard?
Nothing against R.E.M though, they're great (Lifes Rich Pageant on my top 10 of all time!). They're just not the most technically proficient musicians.
Originally Posted by megawzrd I doubt it will compare to any original sp stuff if it ever materializes. 95% of drummers are a dime a dozen to a band. A bassists' change doesn't hurt to much either...but you mess with the lead guitarist and the signature tone is usually gone. I don't expect much from this. Maybe thats my lead guitarist ego tallking...but I know that any band with the guitarist change is likely doomed. Only super hardcore fans will follow the band into obscurity. |
Wow, I can't disagree with this MORE. This IS ego talking.
An excellent drummer DOES add to the overall sound of any band, more so than any lead guitarist can. Sure, there are a lot of mediocre sounding drummers and with this I agree, but you can't say a lead guitarist is more important.
I would rather listen to an album with excellent drumming and mediocre guitar playing than vice versa, any day. Lead guitar playing doesn't carry an entire song.
As for Smashing Pumpkins, Chamberlain (can't remember his first name atm) was in the 5% of very good drummers. His playing on Siamese Dream is fluid, dynamic, energetic and distinctive and made Billy's songs sound more interesting than they really were. He's no Bill Bruford or Neil Peart but he's far from being just average.
As for lead guitar, wasn't it Billy Corgan that played all the solos?
But I do agree that sometimes there is ONE component of a band that when taken away makes the band far less interesting, but I wouldn't say drummers or bassists are automatically it. It usually depends on the band. Can you imagine RUSH with Mike Mills from R.E.M. on bass or TOOL with that drummer from Def Leopard?
Nothing against R.E.M though, they're great (Lifes Rich Pageant on my top 10 of all time!). They're just not the most technically proficient musicians.