Was in Amsterdam for both Macca concerts. First night I saw the sound check and was front of stage for the full concert, wow. As great as he is I've had my fill seeing him 2 nights in a row. Anybody else was there?

Quote
stonehearted
<<in the drumming department, I'd pick Charlie over Ringo any day of the week>>

However, Charlie is a jazz drummer who plays rock drums the way he thinks they should be played, while Ringo is a rock drummer who plays rock drums the way he feels they should be played.

Yep, that's one reason why I much prefer Ringo. He was way more innovative. A much more interesting drummer in terms of what he played, while with the Beatles and post-Beatles. Ringo's wide variety of styles was much larger than Charlie's. People like to say Charlie is a heavy drummer, but Ringo was muuuuch heavier back in the early days. Check out footage of the Beatles first shows in America and his kit is shaking. He utilized the crash cymbal as a ride, which you see many punk and heavier drummers do (Dave Grohl, for instance). While I don't doubt Charlie's skill as a drummer, Ringo has him beat (no pun intended), in my opinion.

Quote
Boognish

Quote
stonehearted
<<in the drumming department, I'd pick Charlie over Ringo any day of the week>>

However, Charlie is a jazz drummer who plays rock drums the way he thinks they should be played, while Ringo is a rock drummer who plays rock drums the way he feels they should be played.

Yep, that's one reason why I much prefer Ringo. He was way more innovative. A much more interesting drummer in terms of what he played, while with the Beatles and post-Beatles. Ringo's wide variety of styles was much larger than Charlie's. People like to say Charlie is a heavy drummer, but Ringo was muuuuch heavier back in the early days. Check out footage of the Beatles first shows in America and his kit is shaking. He utilized the crash cymbal as a ride, which you see many punk and heavier drummers do (Dave Grohl, for instance). While I don't doubt Charlie's skill as a drummer, Ringo has him beat (no pun intended), in my opinion.

I'd like to be diplomatic and say that both have great skills as drummers.
But honestly Ringo 'swings' a great deal more. Charlie's playing is stiff in rock terms, which is great for The Stones' unique sound, but not a lot else.
Ringo's playing on songs like 'Rain', 'She Said She Said' and 'Something' is extremely innovative for rock drumming. I have never heard people claim Charlie was 'innovative' as a drummer, but more like that The Stones couldn't have got a better man for the job, because he was unique in his contribution to their sound.

Totally agree with the above. And as we all say, its nothing against Charlie. The man can hold time until he's dead. Ringo just seems like a more "fun" drummer, and more importantly the innovations as has been mentioned really top him out. And its not even that he's doing stuff no one's ever done. Its just that he's doing what works for him, and in turn I think it makes him more versatile. Charlie's coming from a very different place and it works perfectly for the Stones, but its definitely Ringo's "swing" that separates him. Just one of extremely many examples, I JUST heard Hey Bulldog the other day and the drumming in the beginning is something I think Ringo can do, or at least thing to do, and Charlie wouldn't. Thats one of those moments where Ringo is just Ringo. You have less of those with Charlie. He's just always reliably there.

Quote
Blueranger
Charlie's playing is stiff in rock terms, which is great for The Stones' unique sound, but not a lot else.

Even in blues terms, Charlie is stiff, which is why I hope they don't make a blues album, which some had seemed to want.

Quote
Blueranger

Quote
Boognish

Quote
stonehearted
<<in the drumming department, I'd pick Charlie over Ringo any day of the week>>

However, Charlie is a jazz drummer who plays rock drums the way he thinks they should be played, while Ringo is a rock drummer who plays rock drums the way he feels they should be played.

Yep, that's one reason why I much prefer Ringo. He was way more innovative. A much more interesting drummer in terms of what he played, while with the Beatles and post-Beatles. Ringo's wide variety of styles was much larger than Charlie's. People like to say Charlie is a heavy drummer, but Ringo was muuuuch heavier back in the early days. Check out footage of the Beatles first shows in America and his kit is shaking. He utilized the crash cymbal as a ride, which you see many punk and heavier drummers do (Dave Grohl, for instance). While I don't doubt Charlie's skill as a drummer, Ringo has him beat (no pun intended), in my opinion.

I'd like to be diplomatic and say that both have great skills as drummers.
But honestly Ringo 'swings' a great deal more. Charlie's playing is stiff in rock terms, which is great for The Stones' unique sound, but not a lot else.
Ringo's playing on songs like 'Rain', 'She Said She Said' and 'Something' is extremely innovative for rock drumming. I have never heard people claim Charlie was 'innovative' as a drummer, but more like that The Stones couldn't have got a better man for the job, because he was unique in his contribution to their sound.

totally agree - about both of them.

Quote
Blueranger

Quote
Boognish

Quote
stonehearted
<<in the drumming department, I'd pick Charlie over Ringo any day of the week>>

However, Charlie is a jazz drummer who plays rock drums the way he thinks they should be played, while Ringo is a rock drummer who plays rock drums the way he feels they should be played.

Yep, that's one reason why I much prefer Ringo. He was way more innovative. A much more interesting drummer in terms of what he played, while with the Beatles and post-Beatles. Ringo's wide variety of styles was much larger than Charlie's. People like to say Charlie is a heavy drummer, but Ringo was muuuuch heavier back in the early days. Check out footage of the Beatles first shows in America and his kit is shaking. He utilized the crash cymbal as a ride, which you see many punk and heavier drummers do (Dave Grohl, for instance). While I don't doubt Charlie's skill as a drummer, Ringo has him beat (no pun intended), in my opinion.

I'd like to be diplomatic and say that both have great skills as drummers.
But honestly Ringo 'swings' a great deal more. Charlie's playing is stiff in rock terms, which is great for The Stones' unique sound, but not a lot else.
Ringo's playing on songs like 'Rain', 'She Said She Said' and 'Something' is extremely innovative for rock drumming. I have never heard people claim Charlie was 'innovative' as a drummer, but more like that The Stones couldn't have got a better man for the job, because he was unique in his contribution to their sound.

Well said and I agree completely. I think it's a good thing Charlie's playing is so stiff in the Stones.... everyone else except perhaps Bill is/was so loose it would tend to get a bit messy without his reliable and less innovative style. Imagine someone like Mitch Mitchell drumming for the Stones!

peace

Quote
jahisnotdead
Wow, I was worried when I clicked on this thread. I seem to recall looking at a McCartney thread on a Stones forum somewhere a few years back and it being REALLY negative. So, I'm very surprised and happy to see a positive thread here.

I love Paul McCartney. He may be my single favorite musical artist, and I'm not even that big a Beatles fan. I love McCartney's crazy, weird stuff the most. B sides and deeper cuts. When he gets experimental or when he finds a simple, dirty groove and just works the hell out of it. And his last few solo albums have been really good and very interesting. "New", "Memory Almost Full", and "Flaming Pie" are all quite rewarding. And his drummer is awesome!

McCartney's a lot like the Stones in that they genuinely enjoy performing in front of a crowd. Music and performing music are really a wellspring of happiness and energy for them.

...of course....Abe is a product of Hamilton High School in Los Angeles, as is Bermuda Schwartz, Howard Leese and BluzDude....among others....