DM's Beatles forums
Solo forums => Ringo Starr => Topic started by: eroz0 on November 07, 2009, 09:55:19 AM
-
http://www.examiner.com/x-2082-Beatles-Examiner~y2009m11d6-Black-Crowes-Steve-Gorman-has-high-praise-for-Ringo-Starr?cid=examiner-email (http://www.examiner.com/x-2082-Beatles-Examiner~y2009m11d6-Black-Crowes-Steve-Gorman-has-high-praise-for-Ringo-Starr?cid=examiner-email)
Q) Was his playing “pretty simple and connected to the songs”?
A) If by “pretty simple”, you mean “pretty perfect” and if by “connected to the songs”, you mean, “integral to the execution of these rock n’ roll masterpieces”, then the answer is a resounding YES.
Q) Was Ringo “less intuitive” than a lot of subsequent rock drummers?
A) Absolutely not. Few if any drummers in rock history have been more intuitive. Ringo understood exactly what every song needed to have, and bear in mind he was working with not one, but three songwriters.
Q) Any thoughts?
A) Yes. Don’t argue with me about this. I know what I know.
I love John Bonham, Charlie Watts, Phil Rudd, and the nutjob from Wilco (and about a million other drummers) as much as anyone could. They are all perfect for their bands. They are all irreplaceable. But Ringo was in THE BEATLES.
Check the scoreboard.
Ringo wins.
I couldn't agree more with him! ;D
-
Way to go, Ringo!