A treasury and a place to meet people of all ages with various interests from all over the World
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?  (Read 5180 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Walrus

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 75
  • Here come old flat top.
    • Octopus's Beatles Forum
Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« on: July 21, 2011, 05:58:52 PM »

Just a thought, what was Ringo's actually purpose in the band? Paul was the heart, John was the brains, and George was the... something. It seems to me that the rest of the group could have replaced Ringo like no big deal. And I'm sure they could've done without songs like Don't Pass Me By and Octopus's Garden.
Logged
"There's nothing you can say, but you can learn how to play the game."
GEMM is your best source for impossible-to-find !

Hello Goodbye

  • Global Moderator
  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11004
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2011, 06:13:54 PM »

4:01

A Hard Day's Night - Part 6
Logged
I can stay till it's time to go

Hombre_de_ningun_lugar

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1509
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2011, 08:17:31 PM »

In my opinion John was more the heart and Paul was more the brain, since I think that John was a "master of the spirit" and Paul was a "master of the form".
Logged
"And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make."

Joost

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 5059
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2011, 10:41:26 PM »

I have absolutely nothing against Ringo, but I do think that The Beatles could've been just as big with any other competent drummer. He was not an essential part of the band.
Logged

Mr Mustard

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 298
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2011, 10:58:13 PM »

Apart from the fact that Ringo is still criminally underrated as a drummer, he had that certain magical ingredient (charisma?) which put the icing on the cake... he was so steady at the back, never missed a beat and in many ways underpinned the whole down to earth charm and appeal which helped to make the group so magnetic and, even in their wilder/weirder moments - kept their feet endearingly on the ground.

Who but Ringo, nervous of spicy foreign food, would take a suitcase filled with tins of baked beans with him to a retreat in India and describe the Maharishi's ashram as "A bit like Butlins"?  ha2ha

Wasn't it John who said (in reference to the sacking of Pete Best) "Pete was a great drummer - but Ringo was a great Beatle..."

I think it was in the film "Birth Of The Beatles" when John was described as the mind of The Beatles, Paul as the heart, George as the spirit.... and Ringo as the flesh and blood.
Logged

tkitna

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6899
  • I'm a Moondog,,,,,are you?
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #5 on: July 22, 2011, 01:45:52 AM »

Damn, I posted here earlier and I guess I didnt hit the post button. Regardless, I still think George was the one that could have been replaced if anybody. Ringo was the personality and glue of the group. He seemed to be able to cope with the egos and bickering better than the others (and he even left), but barring that, he had the name RINGO STARR. What a great moniker. That name alone would cause people to take notice. Besides all that hoopla, Ringo was a stud drummer that brought a style to the band. They could have done much worse.

In My Life

  • Global Moderator
  • A Thousand Pages
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 4141
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2011, 02:26:01 AM »

Yep, he was a steady presence.
Logged
Kelley

In my life I've loved them all

Bobber

  • Administrator
  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13530
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2011, 09:34:21 AM »

never missed a beat

Listen to I'm Looking Through You! One complete miss and one or two on the rim. But then, maybe it's Paul drumming there. ;D
Logged

Gary910

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 595
  • Beatles Collector
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2011, 01:39:42 PM »

Apart from the fact that Ringo is still criminally underrated as a drummer, he had that certain magical ingredient (charisma?) which put the icing on the cake... he was so steady at the back, never missed a beat and in many ways underpinned the whole down to earth charm and appeal which helped to make the group so magnetic and, even in their wilder/weirder moments - kept their feet endearingly on the ground.


Well Said...

Regardless, I still think George was the one that could have been replaced if anybody.

I don't think you could take any of them out. I think it was just the chemistry that they had that made it what it was. It is all speculation on our parts as to who did what. But, truth be told, the only way you would be able to tell how they felt about each other would be to be one of them. They loved each other like brothers, maybe more. They were soul mates on a level that only they could understand. I don't think that Pete Best is a bad drummer, but he didn't fit into the group like Ringo did. Would they have played much of the same songs, had the success they had without Ringo, maybe, but it would have a different feel, because it wouldn't be John, Paul, George and Ringo (or JohnPaulGeorgeRingo).
Logged
And now you've changed your mind, I see no reason to change mine --Lennon/McCartney

TomMo

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 224
  • You Can't Do That
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #9 on: June 11, 2012, 10:16:51 PM »

Oh, dear. Stop thinking of the Beatles as just a band. They were a freaking phenomenon beyond the music.

But first, let's start with the music. Ringo was the only drummer the Beatles could ever have wanted. Period. Listen to their earliest records. Ringo drove the band. Besides the obvious hits like "She Loves You" and "I Want To Hold Your Hand", listen to him play on "Long Tall Sally". Who else was available in 1962? Would you have kept Pete Best? Who else? Tommy Moore? Johnny Hutchinson? Andy White? Or maybe Jimmy Nicol?

On to personalities. John has been quoted as saying, "Pete Best was a drummer; Ringo was a Beatle." Ringo fit right in with the others, Liverpool humor and all. As Sir George predicted, the Beatles would be known as much for their personalities as their music. Those of you not around in their heyday have no clue about the effect of the Beatles' personalities on their success.

Ringo was subordinate and compliant. He was a team player. He played what he was told to play. John's first instructions to Ringo upon his joining the band: Comb your hair forward, shave the beard, but you can keep the sidies (sideburns). Can't say Pete Best ever did that. Ringo had little in the way of big ego. He deferred to John and Paul without acting like a prima donna.

Then there's the movies. Ringo was the focus of both AHDN and Help. He stole the show in both cases. You have to appreciate how both films kept Beatlemania alive in '64 and '65. Who but "our poor, little Richard" could have played the hapless fellow in those movies? Pete Best? (Laughing up my sleeve - "Ho, Ho!")

At the height of Beatlemania, Ringo's fan mail outweighed the others. He was a fan favorite in a way far different from the others.

Ringo did some wonderful fills on records from their middle period. Even some of the best drummers can't quite reproduce them, including the great Hal Blaine. Imitate, yes. Reproduce, no.

You've got to understand, the Beatles' success was based on chemistry among the members, of which the music was only one ingredient. In his own way, Ringo was an equal to the others.

As always, in the words of Dr. Winston O' Boogie: "You should've been there."
Logged
"Beware of soft shoe shufflers"

nimrod

  • Global Moderator
  • A Thousand Pages
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3194
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #10 on: June 12, 2012, 12:07:01 AM »

I agree with TomMo Ringo's tyle fit perfectly

I still dont like him singing though LOL
Logged
"I have always thought in the back of my mind.... cheese & onion...."

Dcazz

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1791
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #11 on: June 12, 2012, 02:09:43 AM »

Could you imagine all four of them competing for time and space. Somebody had to be regular! Good ole Ringo!
Logged
Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or imbeciles who really mean it!
Mark Twain

Hello Goodbye

  • Global Moderator
  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11004
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #12 on: June 12, 2012, 02:16:50 AM »

The Beatles had a regular drummer for two years until Ringo replaced him.  I've always felt that Pete Best contributed a lot to The Beatles' early history and without him, music history might have been different.
Logged
I can stay till it's time to go

nimrod

  • Global Moderator
  • A Thousand Pages
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3194
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #13 on: June 12, 2012, 02:30:44 AM »

The Beatles had a regular drummer for two years until Ringo replaced him.  I've always felt that Pete Best contributed a lot to The Beatles' early history and without him, music history might have been different.

isnt there a film about that haha
Logged
"I have always thought in the back of my mind.... cheese & onion...."

TomMo

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 224
  • You Can't Do That
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #14 on: June 12, 2012, 05:43:41 AM »


I still dont like him singing though LOL

Hey! Even Ringo didn't like himself singing.
Logged
"Beware of soft shoe shufflers"

real01

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 259
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #15 on: September 21, 2012, 07:11:00 PM »

Apart from the fact that Ringo is still criminally underrated as a drummer, he had that certain magical ingredient (charisma?) which put the icing on the cake...

At the Larry King Show (with Paul and Ringo), Larry said: So, Ringo, before you came to the band, the Beatles were...
Ringo: They were nothing.
(Both Paul and Ringo laugh.)
So, without Ringo, the other three probably would never become The Band. Maybe they would be little known trio.
Quote
Phil Collins, the drummer for Genesis, who was himself influenced by Starr, said:
Starr is vastly underrated. The drum fills on the song "A Day in the Life" are very complex things. You could take a great drummer today and say, 'I want it like that.' He wouldn't know what to do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringo_Starr

I would just add that I adore Ringo's drum fills on George's song Long, Long, Long from The White Album.
It just adds something to the song!

Quote
When he arrived at EMI Studios for the second time on 11 September, Starr was surprised to find session drummer Andy White there, having been commissioned by producer George Martin. Using sessions drummers familiar with studio techniques was a regular procedure for studio recordings in those days. Starr's view at the time was that Andy White was brought in because he thought George Martin viewed him as crazy. Of the 4 September rehearsal session, Starr stated, "He [George Martin] thought I was crazy and couldn't play. Because when we were doing 'Please Please Me', I was actually playing the kit and in one hand I had a tambourine and a maracas in the other, because I was trying to play the percussion and the drums at the same time, because we were just a four piece band". Starr also stated, "I thought, 'That's the end, they're doing a Pete Best on me.'"
(from the same source)


Notice the expression 'doing a Pete Best on me'. I think that the expression 'doing a Pete Best on somebody' should enter slang dictionary meaning 'leaving someone who spent certain time with you because you found someone better.'

Ringo about his drumming:
Quote
Whenever I hear another drummer I know I'm no good. I'm no good on the technical things [...] I'm your basic offbeat drummer with funny fills. The fills were funny because I'm really left-handed playing a right-handed kit. I can't roll around the drums because of that.
(same source)
« Last Edit: September 21, 2012, 07:20:05 PM by real01 »
Logged

nimrod

  • Global Moderator
  • A Thousand Pages
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3194
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #16 on: September 21, 2012, 11:14:58 PM »

Quote
At the Larry King Show (with Paul and Ringo), Larry said: So, Ringo, before you came to the band, the Beatles were...
Ringo: They were nothing.
(Both Paul and Ringo laugh.)

On that interview Paul also says something like
'we saw Ringo in Rory Storm and we thought he was great, the best drummer we'd seen, so we wanted him in the band'

Petes days were numbered obviously, theyd already decided he wasnt good enough.
Logged
"I have always thought in the back of my mind.... cheese & onion...."

real01

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 259
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #17 on: September 22, 2012, 06:35:57 PM »

I have absolutely nothing against Ringo, but I do think that The Beatles could've been just as big with any other competent drummer. He was not an essential part of the band.
Well, when Ringo came, they stopped changing or searching for drummers, right?
It's like saying: Oh, well, they could be equally successful with another producer or manager than George Martin or Brian.
I remember that someone on Anthology said: Well, when the Brian died, then the problems came.
Did they found better manager than him? No, they didn't because he was the one of the kind, their best manager.
Better to say this:
Yep, he was a steady presence.
I think that we can trust George when he said: Well, when Ringo came to our group, everything melted together perfectly!

A Hard Day's Night is not Ringo's song, but he came up with the title.
Tomorrow Never Knows is also Ringo's title.

John said that Ringo came with a lot of malapropisms of that sort - but John didn't reject that expressions or tried to correct Ringo - he used
Ringo's expressions.

Of course, Paul or somebody was joking about that Ringo isn't even the best drummer in the Beatles (because Paul was drummer on some of the songs on White album).
Also, during that sessions, when Ringo left the bend for a while, he received telegram from John: You're the best rock drummer, please come back home!
« Last Edit: September 22, 2012, 06:40:10 PM by real01 »
Logged

real01

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 259
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #18 on: September 22, 2012, 06:46:01 PM »

In my opinion John was more the heart and Paul was more the brain, since I think that John was a "master of the spirit" and Paul was a "master of the form".
G. Martin said that J&P were always competing: Paul could more easily came out with a melody - and John could easier come up with lyrics.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2012, 06:57:05 PM by real01 »
Logged

Yeshelloitsmehereagain

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 291
Re: Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?
« Reply #19 on: September 22, 2012, 09:16:59 PM »

You can have exeptional eveything else but if the drummer is sh*t the band is sh*t.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
 

Page created in 0.939 seconds with 26 queries.