Solo forums > Ringo Starr

Where Would The Beatles Be Without Ringo?

<< < (5/14) > >>

Kangaroo Kev:

--- Quote from: TomMo 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."

--- End quote ---

I just re-read this tomMo, its a great post mate, I agree with you on what you say......Ringo was a team player, whenever I watch Let It Be, Ringo just sits at his drums waiting for the others to start playing something (listening to the bullsh*t bickering) and then doing his best to join in, he mustve had the patience of a saint......and we all know how many days he sat around during Pepper ......Months !!
can you imagine John or Paul putting up with that day in day out :D

Hello Goodbye:
Ringo Wants to Sing More (Music Video)




;)

oldbrownshoe:
Chemistry among the members is, of course, vital, but I'm pretty sure Beatlemania would have happened with Pete as the drummer.

The far more vital ingredient was timing.

No 1960s = no Beatles.
For me it's 99% of the equation.

Kevin:

--- Quote from: oldbrownshoe on October 12, 2014, 06:58:30 AM ---Chemistry among the members is, of course, vital, but I'm pretty sure Beatlemania would have happened with Pete as the drummer.

The far more vital ingredient was timing.

No 1960s = no Beatles.
For me it's 99% of the equation.

--- End quote ---

Agree with this, and the proof is in the pudding. Replace him with Jimmy Nichol and the Bandwagon rolled on, screaming concerts and laughing interviews included. No one really seemed to notice or care. The world just wanted its cheeky grinning singing Moptops.
I like Beatle Ringo, he as IMO genuinely the funniest and his down to earthiness was very endearing. He and George were definitely dispensable

tkitna:

--- Quote from: Kevin on October 12, 2014, 05:49:35 PM ---Agree with this, and the proof is in the pudding. Replace him with Jimmy Nichol and the Bandwagon rolled on, screaming concerts and laughing interviews included. No one really seemed to notice or care. The world just wanted its cheeky grinning singing Moptops.
I like Beatle Ringo, he as IMO genuinely the funniest and his down to earthiness was very endearing. He and George were definitely dispensable

--- End quote ---

I think this is an unfair comparison.  The band was already established at this point and the biggest thing in the world.  Those people would have gone no matter which Beatle was absent.  Beatlemania would have still happened to some extent because the band had Paul and John.  Those two were going to make it no matter who you put with them.  Ringo played his part though as the warmest, most accessible member and he was flat out a better drummer than Pete period.  How would Pete's inferior skill and brooding demeanor work?  Not sure.

I hear the 60's thing all the time too.  Why didn't any of the other bands like the Kinks, Who, and Stones reach the height of the Beatles?  Had to be more to it then just the era.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version