Jump to content

Do I Need this Kind of Negativity in My Life?

JohnRogers

By JohnRogers,
in Rush

 Share

Recommended Posts

J2112YYZ

J2112YYZ

Posted
Posted

If you enjoy the physical activity of drumming, yeah, it's better to play an easier, more relaxed timekeeper style. You can do it more years.

If you want respect of your peers, then it's better to challenge yourself.

We guitarists don't have to make that choice.

 

Watts doesn't have the respect of his peers?

maybe I should've said "if you want the adulation of your peers".

Happy?

 

Oh, so now Watts doesn't have the adulation of his peers?

He's a damn timekeeper, man.

Let's say you're a professional drummer. You really gonna cheer for someone who spent 50 years doing a style of drumming you learned in 6 months?

No, you're gonna roll your eyes and say, "Yeah, hey, what can I say, he's a perfect fit for the band he's in."

That's not adulation.

 

I don't know man. It seems to me that Watts has all respect, adulation or whatever you want to call from both his peers and fans that he can handle. Ever seen The Rolling Stones live? Watts gets a huge standing ovation from the crowd when Mick introduces the band. It's always an ovation that is louder and goes longer than anyone would expect.

 

Yeah, he's a timekeeper but every drummer is. If the drummer is out of time, the song falls apart and the band needs to start it over again. No in time drummer, no band.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

J2112YYZ
J2112YYZ

I don't see the problem. It's not like what they're saying is wrong. One of the reasons Neil retired is that it was becoming too hard on his body to play like he did. Watts is like 80 and still tours.

Principled Man
Principled Man

Give him this reply:   What would you choose: 60 years of drumming mediocrity or 50 years of drumming greatness?

JohnnyBlaze
JohnnyBlaze

Right. I think it’s in the way someone interprets that.   One way, the defensive way, is that Watts was the better drummer and Peart was boring.   The other way, the way I actually think it was intend

laughedatbytime

laughedatbytime

Posted
Posted

As seen from a friend on Fakebook.

 

If you're going to be a drummer your whole life, it's probably better to be Charlies Watt than Neil Peart. No one can get too old for the stuff Charlie does.

 

Should I cut this person out of my life? He did officiate my wedding.

There's only one reason to cut someone out of your life, that's not it, but you know what it is.

 

Blackhawks fan? :P

Cowboys fan

Oh, God no. I'd rather eat what New Yorkers refer to as pizza (with enough liquid to swallow it without having to taste it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
goose

goose

Posted
Posted

I read this purely as Watts` drumming is something you can play into your vintage, whereas Neil`s just too physically demanding.

In other words, you read it for what it said. :P

 

 

Me, too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
New World Kid

New World Kid

Posted
Posted

As seen from a friend on Fakebook.

 

If you're going to be a drummer your whole life, it's probably better to be Charlies Watt than Neil Peart. No one can get too old for the stuff Charlie does.

 

Should I cut this person out of my life? He did officiate my wedding.

There's only one reason to cut someone out of your life, that's not it, but you know what it is.

 

Blackhawks fan? :P

Cowboys fan

Oh, God no. I'd rather eat what New Yorkers refer to as pizza (with enough liquid to swallow it without having to taste it.)

 

What if I like New York and Chicago style?

 

But St. Louis is obviously better than both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lorraine

Lorraine

Posted
Posted

John Rogers, are you sorry you asked yet?

 

:popcorn:

Never! We’re on page three already.

Bring your friend here then and we will put him on the hot seat for interrogation.

 

I have a better idea!!!

 

Bring him here and we will lock him in a room with Treeduck, JB and Earl for three hours.

 

:Neil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bahamas

Bahamas

Posted
Posted

It is just interesting, in a way, to compare the two: It was Neil, after all, who said something like "This drummer's body is exhausted! I could play Charlie Watts drumming when I am 70, but I can't play Neil's drumming when I am 70".

 

And there it is - like a lump in the throat, Neil isn't playing Neil's drumming ever again :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Syrinx

Syrinx

Posted
Posted
I just don’t get the lack of respect for Charlie Watts. You could not replace him with a drum machine and he is more than a timekeeper. He is the heart and soul of the Stones. Absolutely perfect for one of the greatest rock bands ever. I find drummers have way more respect and admiration for Charlie and Ringo than non drummers.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weatherman

Weatherman

Posted
Posted

I just don’t get the lack of respect for Charlie Watts. You could not replace him with a drum machine and he is more than a timekeeper. He is the heart and soul of the Stones. Absolutely perfect for one of the greatest rock bands ever. I find drummers have way more respect and admiration for Charlie and Ringo than non drummers.

1) He is respected. That is different from adulation.

2) True, he could not be replaced with a drum machine.

3) He is a timekeeper, at times marginally more.

4) Mick and Keef are the heart and soul of the Stones.

5) Many other people could do Charlie's job. Nobody else could do Neil's job.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Syrinx

Syrinx

Posted
Posted

I just don’t get the lack of respect for Charlie Watts. You could not replace him with a drum machine and he is more than a timekeeper. He is the heart and soul of the Stones. Absolutely perfect for one of the greatest rock bands ever. I find drummers have way more respect and admiration for Charlie and Ringo than non drummers.

1) He is respected. That is different from adulation.

2) True, he could not be replaced with a drum machine.

3) He is a timekeeper, at times marginally more.

4) Mick and Keef are the heart and soul of the Stones.

5) Many other people could do Charlie's job. Nobody else could do Neil's job.

I don't necessarily agree with everything you say but I understand your points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JohnRogers

JohnRogers

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If the Stones replaced Charlie Watts with Bun E Carlos would anyone notice? Would anyone care?

 

Any talk of replacing Neil with ANYONE would spark raging debate, the hurling of insults. Friendships have ended during such discussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Syrinx

Syrinx

Posted
Posted

If the Stones replaced Charlie Watts with Bun E Carlos would anyone notice? Would anyone care?

 

Any talk of replacing Neil with ANYONE would spark raging debate, the hurling of insults. Friendships have ended during such discussions.

Again I disagree. Keith would be the first one to care. Charlie is better than most give credit for. But that is just my opinion. I don't think Neil could replace Charlie. He would play too complicated for the music. Don't get me wrong Neil is my favourite drummer of all time. But he also couldn't do what Buddy Rich did. If we keep following this line of thought, we could eliminate most drummers from the conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JARG

JARG

Posted
Posted

Jumpin' Jack Flash probably sounds a little different if you try to play it like La Villa Strangiato. Not in a good way.

 

Peart would ruin the Stones.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
goose

goose

Posted
Posted

Jumpin' Jack Flash probably sounds a little different if you try to play it like La Villa Strangiato. Not in a good way.

Even though I loved the All The World's A Stage version as a freshman, when i listen now it seems that Working Man wasn't necessarily improved when Neil was overplaying, either.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weatherman

Weatherman

Posted
Posted

If the Stones replaced Charlie Watts with Bun E Carlos would anyone notice? Would anyone care?

 

Any talk of replacing Neil with ANYONE would spark raging debate, the hurling of insults. Friendships have ended during such discussions.

I used to get into arguments with my first guitar teacher about who we'd rather have backing us up on drums.

I said Neil; he said Bonzo.

We never resolved the disagreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lerxt1990

lerxt1990

Posted
Posted

Jumpin' Jack Flash probably sounds a little different if you try to play it like La Villa Strangiato. Not in a good way.

Even though I loved the All The World's A Stage version as a freshman, when i listen now it seems that Working Man wasn't necessarily improved when Neil was overplaying, either.

 

This is actually quite true now that I think about it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JARG

JARG

Posted
Posted

Jumpin' Jack Flash probably sounds a little different if you try to play it like La Villa Strangiato. Not in a good way.

Even though I loved the All The World's A Stage version as a freshman, when i listen now it seems that Working Man wasn't necessarily improved when Neil was overplaying, either.

 

This is actually quite true now that I think about it....

 

I agree. That said, I love the 16ths on the partially open high-hat he does on the verse after they come back from the medley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...