• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Is it time to re-evaluate Ringo Starr?

#41
We are such a great crowd here on TB... Lol...I saw this thread and thought how is that we can leave almost no person or topic untouched

Ringo by his own account played crap at times...

Personally I liked his bop style in the early sixties , the drum roll lead in on she loves you is surely timeless

His venture into almost dead tone snare on the later albums was at least innovative

And I think his work on revolver was pretty good too...a great thing about Ringo was that he played to the situation and the way I see it, the Beatles was a hell of a situation and he was more than a drummer, he was and is Ringo....

History has it that he was the drummer for the Beatles from early on... Surely that says enough...:)

Possibly we should now move onto Charlie Watts !!! Lol. :)
 
#42
I see the same kind of comments over and over again by instrumentalists who don't get what being a musician is about. The Song, dummies. Thats what Ringo got, and he nailed it every time. Consider the whining about Sting or Kim Deal or any other "simple" bassists and recognise the same lame arguments about technique being the measure of a player. It's only ever part of the story.
 
#43
Richland123 said:
Is it time to re-evaluate Ringo Starr?

http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20131212-starr-quality?utm_source=DGM&utm_campaign=Affiliate
Click to expand...

Talk about revisionist history ...

OldDog52 said:


No need to re-evaluate! :)
Click to expand...


No need indeed - that's some pretty fancy drumming going on there. Give me a couple minutes ...

Seriously, there are thousands of drummers in hobby bands that could smoke Ringo, but they don't have anywhere near the luck, so they're neither rich nor famous. He's not a great drummer and he's not even a good singer.

I won't argue that his drumming didn't fit the Beatles style of music, though. Their early stuff relied simple messages and catchy hooks - Lennon and McCartney excelled at writing that stuff. They didn't need any flashy drumming. By the later years, Ringo had learned a few fills, but the drum parts were still fairly simple. Bottom line, his drumming style worked for the Beatles, but it never was anything to marvel over.
 
#44
Munjibunga said:
Talk about revisionist history ...



No need indeed - that's some pretty fancy drumming going on there. Give me a couple minutes ...

Seriously, there are thousands of drummers in hobby bands that could smoke Ringo, but they don't have anywhere near the luck, so they're neither rich nor famous. He's not a great drummer and he's not even a good singer.

I won't argue that his drumming didn't fit the Beatles style of music, though. Their early stuff relied simple messages and catchy hooks - Lennon and McCartney excelled at writing that stuff. They didn't need any flashy drumming. By the later years, Ringo had learned a few fills, but the drum parts were still fairly simple. Bottom line, his drumming style worked for the Beatles, but it never was anything to marvel over.
Click to expand...
I disagree entirely. I have never once in my life heard a drummer come anywhere close to properly copping his feel. He had a style that is totally untouchable, in exactly the same way Moon and Bonham did.
 
#46
Munjibunga said:
Talk about revisionist history ...



No need indeed - that's some pretty fancy drumming going on there. Give me a couple minutes ...

Seriously, there are thousands of drummers in hobby bands that could smoke Ringo, but they don't have anywhere near the luck, so they're neither rich nor famous. He's not a great drummer and he's not even a good singer.

I won't argue that his drumming didn't fit the Beatles style of music, though. Their early stuff relied simple messages and catchy hooks - Lennon and McCartney excelled at writing that stuff. They didn't need any flashy drumming. By the later years, Ringo had learned a few fills, but the drum parts were still fairly simple. Bottom line, his drumming style worked for the Beatles, but it never was anything to marvel over.
Click to expand...

I have heard very few drummers that could even come close to "smoking" Mr. Starr.

I am saddened that you know this little about playing drums.
 
#47
If the Beatles wrote the kind of music that required "more" from a drummer they might have looked elsewhere. Ringo's playing was a perfect fit for their music. He played what the songs needed, no more or no less.
 
#53
Let's see...

Ringo had great time and good feel.

He played for the songs and didn't step on the vocals.

He played a lot of instantly recognizable beats that defined the songs.

I've always appreciated Ringo and what he did. Playing busy is absolutely not what was called for.
 
#54
I've never read an unkind word from any professional about Ringo's playing. A Jim Keltner inteview in Drummers world comes to mind. Maybe Jim Keltner could have been a good drummer for the beatles come to think of it. He was a particular favorite of George's, then again, so was Ringo right through all of his solo work. If the ex-Beatles kept going to him when they could have literally had anybody play for them, who else's opinion is worth a hill of beans?
 
#57
While I have never been a big fan of Ringo's drumming, it is truly hard to imagine Beatles song without him.
Like Charlie Watts, he imparted a feel that let everybody else excel.
I have played with both good and great drummers, often the good drummers were easier and more interesting to play with, as they understood playing in service of the song first and foremost.

As a human being, I am a huge fan of Ringo.

"Peace and Love, Peace and Love"!

Invalid Link Removed
 
#59
drummer5359 said:
Let's see...

Ringo had great time and good feel.

He played for the songs and didn't step on the vocals.

He played a lot of instantly recognizable beats that defined the songs.

I've always appreciated Ringo and what he did. Playing busy is absolutely not what was called for.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Ringo himself said, "I'm not a busy drummer." He's not a busy drummer for the same reason I don't play slap - I'm not very good at it.
 
#60
Munjibunga said:
Well, I'm going to say I side with John Lennon, a purported musical genius.
Click to expand...

[SIZE=+2]"R[/SIZE]ingo's a damn good drummer. He was always a good drummer. He's not technically good, but I think Ringo's drumming is underrated the same way Paul's base-playing is underrated. Paul and Ringo stand up anywhere with any of the rock musicians." John used two drummers on his early albums; Alan White, and Ringo.

I would say John's opinion was, Ringo was a great drummer.His famous, "he's not even the best drummer in the Beatles" remark was meant as a joke.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back