Well it's the clip! So, I did it!

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
I don't see it that Charlie swings more since he started omitting that hi-hat hit. Quite the opposite. what came with it was more of a sense of mechanical playing.
What I so love about Charlie's drumming right around '69 e.g is the extra contact the snare gets from the military grip; that bouncing, stuttering in between the major beats - that swings. This is one thing metal drummers do not fathom. It's implied.

x2

He doesn't pull off in the TD clip. Look at 1.45 forward, standard hi hat playing.

Quote
Bärs
The first video proof I've seen of Charlie playing like today is from 1975. I also think that his playing became really loud on LYL. During 1972-73 he basically played like LQ 1969.

I think indeed 75 it starts to really show. On B&B Hot Stuff has it, Slave has it profoundly as well. With the Monterux clip it doesn't show, but he does something else -he opens his hi-hat slightly on the four.

Mathijs

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
I don't see it that Charlie swings more since he started omitting that hi-hat hit. Quite the opposite. what came with it was more of a sense of mechanical playing.
What I so love about Charlie's drumming right around '69 e.g is the extra contact the snare gets from the military grip; that bouncing, stuttering in between the major beats - that swings. This is one thing metal drummers do not fathom. It's implied.

Exactly, that's it. Omitting the hi-hat has nothing to do with the increased swing.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Bärs
The first video proof I've seen of Charlie playing like today is from 1975. I also think that his playing became really loud on LYL. During 1972-73 he basically played like LQ 1969.

I think indeed 75 it starts to really show. On B&B Hot Stuff has it, Slave has it profoundly as well. With the Monterux clip it doesn't show, but he does something else -he opens his hi-hat slightly on the four.

Mathijs

This frequent opening of the hi-hat during the "MT-era" seems to be somewhat of a transition period and might have something to with him changing to military grip.

This is the oldest clip I've seen where the modern system is fully developed (0:43 forward):





Perhaps one can say that there is BJ-era with matched grip, the MT-era with military grip and with hi-hat opening with not so loud playing, and the RW-era with miltary grip and loud playing with hi-hat pull off.

Quote
Koen

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
I don't see it that Charlie swings more since he started omitting that hi-hat hit. Quite the opposite. what came with it was more of a sense of mechanical playing.
What I so love about Charlie's drumming right around '69 e.g is the extra contact the snare gets from the military grip; that bouncing, stuttering in between the major beats - that swings. This is one thing metal drummers do not fathom. It's implied.

Exactly, that's it. Omitting the hi-hat has nothing to do with the increased swing.

Anyone playing the drums know it has everything to with swing. In fact, the 4 to the floor pattern with 3/4 hi-hat is so standard in disco, pop and dance music these days that it almost cliché. Further, with Charlie you can see that lifting his hand on the 4 slowly changed his way of drumming. He became much looser and improvisational; adding fills and crashes on places where nobody would do it. '75 and '78 is the best examples to me -focus on Charlie during a 75 gig and see what magic he does. He doesn't play a straight pattern for more than four bars, constantly correcting himself, changing patterns, lagging behind and then a correction with a fill.

Compare his playing in say Let it Bleed or Jigsaw Puzzle with his playing on the 75 tour. It's a different drummer really.

Mathijs

I agree regarding his 75/76 drumming. On the other hand this tour was soundwise very 'spicy' and 'funky'. There was a percussionist, Preston's keyboards were very prominent etc.But it's true what you said Mathijs.His drumming in 75'76 gigs was maybe the one with the least 'metronome' feel compared to past and future (for example 81/82).

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Koen

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
I don't see it that Charlie swings more since he started omitting that hi-hat hit. Quite the opposite. what came with it was more of a sense of mechanical playing.
What I so love about Charlie's drumming right around '69 e.g is the extra contact the snare gets from the military grip; that bouncing, stuttering in between the major beats - that swings. This is one thing metal drummers do not fathom. It's implied.

Exactly, that's it. Omitting the hi-hat has nothing to do with the increased swing.

Anyone playing the drums know it has everything to with swing. In fact, the 4 to the floor pattern with 3/4 hi-hat is so standard in disco, pop and dance music these days that it almost cliché. Further, with Charlie you can see that lifting his hand on the 4 slowly changed his way of drumming. He became much looser and improvisational; adding fills and crashes on places where nobody would do it. '75 and '78 is the best examples to me -focus on Charlie during a 75 gig and see what magic he does. He doesn't play a straight pattern for more than four bars, constantly correcting himself, changing patterns, lagging behind and then a correction with a fill.

Compare his playing in say Let it Bleed or Jigsaw Puzzle with his playing on the 75 tour. It's a different drummer really.

Mathijs

Well, nowadays people dance on music based on a computerbeats (mechanical)...I agreed it can be funky, as is Charlie's drums circa 75/76, but 'swing' is something different Matthijs! Charlie doesn't swing because he does some fills now and then...
Listen to some tracks on Oscar Peterson's Night Train album. His drummer could swing for ages, without any fills or crashes...

Charlie's drumming is not of any more importance to the evolution of the Stones unique sound than Keith's guitar playing. I've always felt that the classic sound evolved from Keith's exploration of the Nashville tuning coiniciding with Charlie's change in technique. They hit upon a groove and a sound that has served them so well.

Charlie is first and foremost a Jazz drummer and he adapts to the demands of rock n roll. He keeps it simple.

Quote
Sacke

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Koen

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
I don't see it that Charlie swings more since he started omitting that hi-hat hit. Quite the opposite. what came with it was more of a sense of mechanical playing.
What I so love about Charlie's drumming right around '69 e.g is the extra contact the snare gets from the military grip; that bouncing, stuttering in between the major beats - that swings. This is one thing metal drummers do not fathom. It's implied.

Exactly, that's it. Omitting the hi-hat has nothing to do with the increased swing.

Anyone playing the drums know it has everything to with swing. In fact, the 4 to the floor pattern with 3/4 hi-hat is so standard in disco, pop and dance music these days that it almost cliché. Further, with Charlie you can see that lifting his hand on the 4 slowly changed his way of drumming. He became much looser and improvisational; adding fills and crashes on places where nobody would do it. '75 and '78 is the best examples to me -focus on Charlie during a 75 gig and see what magic he does. He doesn't play a straight pattern for more than four bars, constantly correcting himself, changing patterns, lagging behind and then a correction with a fill.

Compare his playing in say Let it Bleed or Jigsaw Puzzle with his playing on the 75 tour. It's a different drummer really.

Mathijs

Well, nowadays people dance on music based on a computerbeats (mechanical)...I agreed it can be funky, as is Charlie's drums circa 75/76, but 'swing' is something different Matthijs! Charlie doesn't swing because he does some fills now and then...
Listen to some tracks on Oscar Peterson's Night Train album. His drummer could swing for ages, without any fills or crashes...

Yes, IAW Sacke on this. When I first posted it was loosely in reply to Mathij's post, but even then I wanted to say that maybe people's definition of 'swing' is different. Because I agree with everything M. is saying about Charlie's 75, 78 drumming - the extra fills, and another thing I LOVE about Charlie's latter era drumming: his whole body fills; where he throws his whole body into a fill, literally raising up from the throne. I just don't call that swinging.
Anyone I know playing drums would not call that swing either. Ya-Ya's IMO has some of Charlie's most swinging drums on it. And like many other drummers I hear some of his best, swinging drums on the earlier takes. The final takes have the "proper" drumming; often losing the earlier magic.

Man, I had written a whole chapter here on Charlie's drumming, and deleted it because it is wandering off point. But it's such an interesting subject.

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
Sacke

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Koen

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
I don't see it that Charlie swings more since he started omitting that hi-hat hit. Quite the opposite. what came with it was more of a sense of mechanical playing.
What I so love about Charlie's drumming right around '69 e.g is the extra contact the snare gets from the military grip; that bouncing, stuttering in between the major beats - that swings. This is one thing metal drummers do not fathom. It's implied.

Exactly, that's it. Omitting the hi-hat has nothing to do with the increased swing.

Anyone playing the drums know it has everything to with swing. In fact, the 4 to the floor pattern with 3/4 hi-hat is so standard in disco, pop and dance music these days that it almost cliché. Further, with Charlie you can see that lifting his hand on the 4 slowly changed his way of drumming. He became much looser and improvisational; adding fills and crashes on places where nobody would do it. '75 and '78 is the best examples to me -focus on Charlie during a 75 gig and see what magic he does. He doesn't play a straight pattern for more than four bars, constantly correcting himself, changing patterns, lagging behind and then a correction with a fill.

Compare his playing in say Let it Bleed or Jigsaw Puzzle with his playing on the 75 tour. It's a different drummer really.

Mathijs

Well, nowadays people dance on music based on a computerbeats (mechanical)...I agreed it can be funky, as is Charlie's drums circa 75/76, but 'swing' is something different Matthijs! Charlie doesn't swing because he does some fills now and then...
Listen to some tracks on Oscar Peterson's Night Train album. His drummer could swing for ages, without any fills or crashes...

Yes, IAW Sacke on this. When I first posted it was loosely in reply to Mathij's post, but even then I wanted to say that maybe people's definition of 'swing' is different. Because I agree with everything M. is saying about Charlie's 75, 78 drumming - the extra fills, and another thing I LOVE about Charlie's latter era drumming: his whole body fills; where he throws his whole body into a fill, literally raising up from the throne. I just don't call that swinging.
Anyone I know playing drums would not call that swing either. Ya-Ya's IMO has some of Charlie's most swinging drums on it. And like many other drummers I hear some of his best, swinging drums on the earlier takes. The final takes have the "proper" drumming; often losing the earlier magic.

Man, I had written a whole chapter here on Charlie's drumming, and deleted it because it is wandering off point. But it's such an interesting subject.

My favourite Charlie track is Jumping Jack Flash from the Gimme Shelter movie, so much 'drive'. Maybe 'swing' isn't the correct word, maybe I prefer 'groove'.

Since drumming is a matter of precis timing my favorite piece of it is found in 'Uncer my thumb' from 'Still Life'...

2 1 2 0

I learnt so much about Charlie's drumming when I went to see him with the ABCD. Seeing him up close like at the Duc des Lombards where I could reach out and mute his crash cymbal, and also at the New Morning... Hearing so much of the drums direct, with no effect at all... I have heard him only once play direct,without a PA with the Stones, in Dublin when they were rehearsing Dead Flowers and All Down The Line in the tent next to the Rattlesnake Inn. It was really a wonderful gift.

It's true that Charlie hits the snare really hard, my ears were ringing from it at the Duc des Lombards...

I'm a drummer for 27 years and a huge Stones fan. I always thought that Charlie is way overrated as a drummer. Of course he was essential for the Stones sound, but all of the original members were essential, just because that was the sound those members were capable do create. But that doesn't mean that they wouldn't sound better with another drummer, guitarist, etc. To me, Charlie always sounded a bit stiff and it became worse in the 80s and 90s. It also looks stiff when he is playing. By god I can't hear a swing in his playing, He is far from a virtuoso (and it isn't necessary being one in The Stones) but Charlie sometimes isn't capable of playing basic chops. From very early on Charlie had timing problems or his fills didn't ended right. Sometimes he failed for very easy basic stuff, just as in I'm Free, or Start Me Up. Funny enough they left those mistakes on the final recording. There is that homemade myth about Charlie, that there couldn't be The Stones without Charlie, Charlie is the Rolling Stones and other crap Keith (and a few others) repeat endlessly. But this is bullshit and we all know that. He is a very average drummer who was replaced several times in the studio cause he couldn't even nail the easiest tracks.

Another thing I find very strange is, that he stopped playing a couple of times in the middle of Sympathy For The Devil on the BB tour. I witnessed it myself. I read that he did it during other songs as well. Not sure. Whatever, he skipped a few bars, even stood up and left his kit just to come back a few seconds later and continued playing. Sometimes with playing very off beat to the drum sample. I think that is a totally NO-GO. You cannot stop playing in the middle of a song. Esp. not as a drummer while you're performing in front of 40,000 people.

Charlie Watts = Overrated.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-01 14:38 by Bimmelzerbott.

WOW! Any good rock-drummers out there?

2 1 2 0

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Koen

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
I don't see it that Charlie swings more since he started omitting that hi-hat hit. Quite the opposite. what came with it was more of a sense of mechanical playing.
What I so love about Charlie's drumming right around '69 e.g is the extra contact the snare gets from the military grip; that bouncing, stuttering in between the major beats - that swings. This is one thing metal drummers do not fathom. It's implied.

Exactly, that's it. Omitting the hi-hat has nothing to do with the increased swing.

Anyone playing the drums know it has everything to with swing. In fact, the 4 to the floor pattern with 3/4 hi-hat is so standard in disco, pop and dance music these days that it almost cliché. Further, with Charlie you can see that lifting his hand on the 4 slowly changed his way of drumming. He became much looser and improvisational; adding fills and crashes on places where nobody would do it. '75 and '78 is the best examples to me -focus on Charlie during a 75 gig and see what magic he does. He doesn't play a straight pattern for more than four bars, constantly correcting himself, changing patterns, lagging behind and then a correction with a fill.

Compare his playing in say Let it Bleed or Jigsaw Puzzle with his playing on the 75 tour. It's a different drummer really.

Mathijs

I was referring to the skipping of the hi-hat to allow a harder hit on the snare. By itself that doesn't increase the swing. All the other elements as you and Palace Revolution 2000 mention above of course do.

Quote
Bimmelzerbott
I'm a drummer for 27 years and a huge Stones fan. I always thought that Charlie is way overrated as a drummer. Of course he was essential for the Stones sound, but all of the original members were essential, just because that was the sound those members were capable do create. But that doesn't mean that they wouldn't sound better with another drummer, guitarist, etc. To me, Charlie always sounded a bit stiff and it became worse in the 80s and 90s. It also looks stiff when he is playing. By god I can't hear a swing in his playing, He is far from a virtuoso (and it isn't necessary being one in The Stones) but Charlie sometimes isn't capable of playing basic chops. From very early on Charlie had timing problems or his fills didn't ended right. Sometimes he failed for very easy basic stuff, just as in I'm Free, or Start Me Up. Funny enough they left those mistakes on the final recording. There is that homemade myth about Charlie, that there couldn't be The Stones without Charlie, Charlie is the Rolling Stones and other crap Keith (and a few others) repeat endlessly. But this is bullshit and we all know that. He is a very average drummer who was replaced several times in the studio cause he couldn't even nail the easiest tracks.

Another thing I find very strange is, that he stopped playing a couple of times in the middle of Sympathy For The Devil on the BB tour. I witnessed it myself. I read that he did it during other songs as well. Not sure. Whatever, he skipped a few bars, even stood up and left his kit just to come back a few seconds later and continued playing. Sometimes with playing very off beat to the drum sample. I think that is a totally NO-GO. You cannot stop playing in the middle of a song. Esp. not as a drummer while you're performing in front of 40,000 people.

Charlie Watts = Overrated.

If you've been playing for 27 years yourself, you'll know that the more often you gig, things like this are bound to happen sometimes. Technical problems will occur, or a screw will loosen in the drumriser.

Charlie has played 665 gigs with the Stones, counting since 1989. How many times have this happened to him? You call him overrated? Really?

To bash Charlie for the SFTD-incident is childish, imo.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-01 15:15 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
Koen

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Koen

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
I don't see it that Charlie swings more since he started omitting that hi-hat hit. Quite the opposite. what came with it was more of a sense of mechanical playing.
What I so love about Charlie's drumming right around '69 e.g is the extra contact the snare gets from the military grip; that bouncing, stuttering in between the major beats - that swings. This is one thing metal drummers do not fathom. It's implied.

Exactly, that's it. Omitting the hi-hat has nothing to do with the increased swing.

Anyone playing the drums know it has everything to with swing. In fact, the 4 to the floor pattern with 3/4 hi-hat is so standard in disco, pop and dance music these days that it almost cliché. Further, with Charlie you can see that lifting his hand on the 4 slowly changed his way of drumming. He became much looser and improvisational; adding fills and crashes on places where nobody would do it. '75 and '78 is the best examples to me -focus on Charlie during a 75 gig and see what magic he does. He doesn't play a straight pattern for more than four bars, constantly correcting himself, changing patterns, lagging behind and then a correction with a fill.

Compare his playing in say Let it Bleed or Jigsaw Puzzle with his playing on the 75 tour. It's a different drummer really.

Mathijs

I was referring to the skipping of the hi-hat to allow a harder hit on the snare. By itself that doesn't increase the swing. All the other elements as you and Palace Revolution 2000 mention above of course do.

That skipping gives air for the music to breathe. The other things happen as a result of that, so technically I think the skipping makes the MUSIC swing more.

There is essentially his 'heavy' years, which for me started with We Love You/Dandelion and Goats Head Soup was the end of that era. Something changed starting with IORR and Black And Blue, some kind of more open playing but towards that style that's prominent with Some Girls and onward. Listen to Fingerprint File.

His style changed severely with Some Girls, which was perfected on Emotional Rescue and Undercover and had become quite antiseptic with Steel Wheels.

Quote
Bimmelzerbott
I'm a drummer for 27 years and a huge Stones fan. I always thought that Charlie is way overrated as a drummer. Of course he was essential for the Stones sound, but all of the original members were essential, just because that was the sound those members were capable do create. But that doesn't mean that they wouldn't sound better with another drummer, guitarist, etc. To me, Charlie always sounded a bit stiff and it became worse in the 80s and 90s. It also looks stiff when he is playing. By god I can't hear a swing in his playing, He is far from a virtuoso (and it isn't necessary being one in The Stones) but Charlie sometimes isn't capable of playing basic chops. From very early on Charlie had timing problems or his fills didn't ended right. Sometimes he failed for very easy basic stuff, just as in I'm Free, or Start Me Up. Funny enough they left those mistakes on the final recording. There is that homemade myth about Charlie, that there couldn't be The Stones without Charlie, Charlie is the Rolling Stones and other crap Keith (and a few others) repeat endlessly. But this is bullshit and we all know that. He is a very average drummer who was replaced several times in the studio cause he couldn't even nail the easiest tracks.

Another thing I find very strange is, that he stopped playing a couple of times in the middle of Sympathy For The Devil on the BB tour. I witnessed it myself. I read that he did it during other songs as well. Not sure. Whatever, he skipped a few bars, even stood up and left his kit just to come back a few seconds later and continued playing. Sometimes with playing very off beat to the drum sample. I think that is a totally NO-GO. You cannot stop playing in the middle of a song. Esp. not as a drummer while you're performing in front of 40,000 people.

Charlie Watts = Overrated.

I think you get to a point where you watch something just to enjoy it. I don't think it's really done so that you're supposed to feel, "Oh, he's the most wonderful drummer." I think the whole lot is what's more enjoyable.
(Charlie Watts said that, not me)

Quote
Bimmelzerbott
From very early on Charlie had timing problems or his fills didn't ended right. Sometimes he failed for very easy basic stuff, just as in I'm Free, or Start Me Up. Funny enough they left those mistakes on the final recording.

Strange arguments. First of all there is nothing wrong with SMU. It's one the best rock drum tracks there is. I'm Free sounds terrible in itself and shouldn't have been released in that state. You are supposed to make mistakes when you practice and try out different patterns in the studio, so it doesn't count as an argument against Charlie. The principle of valuing someone based on their worst output is mean spirited.

I think it's about fitting in with the band. Most folks think Ringo wasn't a very good drummer but he fit the Beatles. Same with Charlie.

Imagine Keith Moon or John Bonham playing with the Stones of Beatles.
IMO it just wouldn't fit.

Marv

Marv Peck

Y'all remember that rubber legged boy

Quote
Bimmelzerbott
Another thing I find very strange is, that he stopped playing a couple of times in the middle of Sympathy For The Devil on the BB tour. I witnessed it myself. I read that he did it during other songs as well. Not sure. Whatever, he skipped a few bars, even stood up and left his kit just to come back a few seconds later and continued playing. Sometimes with playing very off beat to the drum sample. I think that is a totally NO-GO. You cannot stop playing in the middle of a song. Esp. not as a drummer while you're performing in front of 40,000 people.

I thought the story was that he ran backstage after Keith to prevent him from killing a tech guy. He did it more than once? That's weird.

[Charlie Watts = Overrated.[/quote]


Charlie Watts overrated.....Mmmm in your opinion maybe.

He has absolutely nothing to prove, its all there in the Stones back catalogue.

Not as unique as maybe Moonie or John Bonham, but he has a sound that is all his own and is instantly recognisable.

Minimal kit and massive sound, there is no mistaking it, hes a fine drummer

Quote
Sacke

Well, nowadays people dance on music based on a computerbeats (mechanical)...I agreed it can be funky, as is Charlie's drums circa 75/76, but 'swing' is something different Matthijs! Charlie doesn't swing because he does some fills now and then...

Take a drum computer. Do a 4 to the floor with the kick, and 16th pattern on the hi-hat. What do we have? Static '80's Kraftwerk. Take out the last beat of each bar from the hi-hat. What do we have?

Miss You by the Stones.

Mathijs

Mathijs................ from now on I quote you as "Le Professor"

__________________________

Charlie definitely has lost his touch, in my opinion. i know a lot of you like to use the fact that Charlie "swings" as an example of his greatness. he doesn't seem to swing all that much anymore. for example:
this swings:



on the hi-hat he is stiff. no feel whatsoever. the lifting of the arm doesn't seem to work with the blues. as a fellow drummer, i admire Charlie. but the man cannot play the blues, in my opinion:

The man knows how to swing right?

The truth is, Charlie is unique.

The only guy that comes close to him is Levon Helm.

I LOVE CHARLIE WATTS