Jump to content

Why was Peart Fascinated with Swing? Post Your Reasons Here


Recommended Posts

Oscar Peterson could be one reason. Incredible.

 

 

I watched a breakdown of the first performance on Rick Beato’s YouTube channel.

You too?

 

Just did. Too much Beato. LOL He breaks up the flow but I did dig the line, "who needs a drummer when you swing that hard. "

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because 2 of his favorites, Buddy Rich and Gene Krupa were Swing drummers?

 

No doubt, but Peart was certainly not. Never got the swing of it IMO. He was always just a bit too angular for it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because...

It don't mean a thing

if it ain't got that swing

 

I've always thought that what makes jazz 'swing' is the beat being slightly variated along with the dynamics. (volume) So the louder section is a bit faster. Now it's the feel that makes music art IMO, but you can't deny the science and math involved. Just stumbled onto this little treatise.

 

Swing feel in jazz music: The role of temporal fluctuations -- ScienceDaily

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because 2 of his favorites, Buddy Rich and Gene Krupa were Swing drummers?

 

No doubt, but Peart was certainly not. Never got the swing of it IMO. He was always just a bit too angular for it.

:goodone:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember an interview in Modern Drummer at some point in the 80s where he said he didn't like jazz - that he appreciated it as a live form, but that he didn't enjoy listening to it. And then he seemed to be all about swing drummers in the 90s. I didn't read every interview with him...but I don't recall any early ones where he talked about Buddy Rich. I always thought it was odd that he started talking like swing had always been a huge influence on him. Anyway...his playing never swung. He should have listened to a wider range of jazz players.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember an interview in Modern Drummer at some point in the 80s where he said he didn't like jazz - that he appreciated it as a live form, but that he didn't enjoy listening to it. And then he seemed to be all about swing drummers in the 90s. I didn't read every interview with him...but I don't recall any early ones where he talked about Buddy Rich. I always thought it was odd that he started talking like swing had always been a huge influence on him. Anyway...his playing never swung. He should have listened to a wider range of jazz players.

 

When Keith Moon is your first influence, swing may not be fully attainable. LOL I just think he was trying to broaden his abilities and Peart was certainly not short on ambition. I think that swing appealed to him because it is less free form. It offered him the structure he needed with some degree of improvisation possible.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without reading the reasons here, my 1st thought was 'Because most drummers love/admire Buddy Rich'. Was it as simple as that?

 

Someone's going to tell me Buddy Rich was not a Swing drummer now but played a different vein of jazz....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember an interview in Modern Drummer at some point in the 80s where he said he didn't like jazz - that he appreciated it as a live form, but that he didn't enjoy listening to it. And then he seemed to be all about swing drummers in the 90s. I didn't read every interview with him...but I don't recall any early ones where he talked about Buddy Rich. I always thought it was odd that he started talking like swing had always been a huge influence on him. Anyway...his playing never swung. He should have listened to a wider range of jazz players.

 

When Keith Moon is your first influence, swing may not be fully attainable. LOL I just think he was trying to broaden his abilities and Peart was certainly not short on ambition. I think that swing appealed to him because it is less free form. It offered him the structure he needed with some degree of improvisation possible.

 

This response is packed with wisdom. 100% agree - although, in his mad, mad way...Moon had a kind of rock&roll swing to him. Even Baba O'Riley, played to a sequence, has a kind swagger and feel to it that Peart's playing didn't have. I love Neil's playing, so I'm not tying to be a jerk, but even the proggy players he seemed to be influenced by, Collins and Bruford for instance, had a looser, swingy-er feel to them, I think.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without reading the reasons here, my 1st thought was 'Because most drummers love/admire Buddy Rich'. Was it as simple as that?

 

I really think so. Neil had become a rock drumming god, but Buddy was the drummer that drummers all knelt before, so I think Neil felt compelled to pay homage. The Burning for Buddy project was a perfect way to do that, as well as a way for him to grow as a drummer at a point where he may have been becoming a little bored.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he was fascinated by swing and liked the challenge it presented.

 

I think Freddie Gruber deserves some credit pointing him in the right direction but I don’t think I saw real progress in his playing, and achievement of pocket, until he was studying with Peter Erskine.

 

The task of “learning” pocket is nothing short of Herculean - you typically either have it or you don’t. I don’t - and it’s been a struggle for me personally. Peart is phenomenal because he is the ultimate student - and was able to embrace a new approach and put in the time to make it work.

 

Who has pocket?

Bonham

Ringo

Bruford

Max Roach

Meg White

Tommy Ramone

Phill Rudd

 

Who doesn’t?

Stewart Copeland

Herb Alexander

Danny Carey

Hal Blaine

Roger Taylor

 

 

It’s not really a judgement on ability - it’s essentially a talent like any other. You can still be a killer drummer without substantial pocket.

 

Take what I’m saying with a grain of salt - of course any drummer with skill will play with an element of danceability and groove.

Edited by chemistry1973
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he was fascinated by swing and liked the challenge it presented.

 

I think Freddie Gruber deserves some credit pointing him in the right direction but I don’t think I saw real progress in his playing, and achievement of pocket, until he was studying with Peter Erskine.

 

The task of “learning” pocket is nothing short of Herculean - you typically either have it or you don’t. I don’t - and it’s been a struggle for me personally. Peart is phenomenal because he is the ultimate student - and was able to embrace a new approach and put in the time to make it work.

 

Who has pocket?

Bonham

Ringo

Bruford

Max Roach

Meg White

Tommy Ramone

Phill Rudd

 

Who doesn’t?

Stewart Copeland

 

Surprised to see him mentioned.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he was fascinated by swing and liked the challenge it presented.

 

I think Freddie Gruber deserves some credit pointing him in the right direction but I don’t think I saw real progress in his playing, and achievement of pocket, until he was studying with Peter Erskine.

 

The task of “learning” pocket is nothing short of Herculean - you typically either have it or you don’t. I don’t - and it’s been a struggle for me personally. Peart is phenomenal because he is the ultimate student - and was able to embrace a new approach and put in the time to make it work.

 

Who has pocket?

Bonham

Ringo

Bruford

Max Roach

Meg White

Tommy Ramone

Phill Rudd

 

Who doesn’t?

Stewart Copeland

 

Surprised to see him mentioned.

 

I’m one of his biggest fans. However - he plays on top of or ahead of the beat quite a bit. He pushes the beat more than settles into it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he was fascinated by swing and liked the challenge it presented.

 

I think Freddie Gruber deserves some credit pointing him in the right direction but I don’t think I saw real progress in his playing, and achievement of pocket, until he was studying with Peter Erskine.

 

The task of “learning” pocket is nothing short of Herculean - you typically either have it or you don’t. I don’t - and it’s been a struggle for me personally. Peart is phenomenal because he is the ultimate student - and was able to embrace a new approach and put in the time to make it work.

 

Who has pocket?

Bonham

Ringo

Bruford

Max Roach

Meg White

Tommy Ramone

Phill Rudd

 

Who doesn’t?

Stewart Copeland

 

Surprised to see him mentioned.

 

I’m one of his biggest fans. However - he plays on top of or ahead of the beat quite a bit. He pushes the beat more than settles into it.

True. I love the footage of Andy screaming at him to slow down!

 

He sometimes nails it, though, on tracks like Murder By Numbers or Bring On The Night. Great call on the seldom-mentioned Phil Rudd.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the drummers in one of the bands I was in (Dave) had a background in jazz, but was a huge Peart fan nonetheless. I remember us listening to Burning For Buddy, and Dave said, "Peart swings like a rusty gate".

 

But year, I think Neil liked the allure of being a swing drummer and approaching the kit with a different mindset, emphasizing feel and improvisation and finesse over a his usual approach in Rush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he was fascinated by swing and liked the challenge it presented.

 

I think Freddie Gruber deserves some credit pointing him in the right direction but I don’t think I saw real progress in his playing, and achievement of pocket, until he was studying with Peter Erskine.

 

The task of “learning” pocket is nothing short of Herculean - you typically either have it or you don’t. I don’t - and it’s been a struggle for me personally. Peart is phenomenal because he is the ultimate student - and was able to embrace a new approach and put in the time to make it work.

 

Who has pocket?

Bonham

Ringo

Bruford

Max Roach

Meg White

Tommy Ramone

Phill Rudd

 

Who doesn’t?

Stewart Copeland

 

Surprised to see him mentioned.

 

I’m one of his biggest fans. However - he plays on top of or ahead of the beat quite a bit. He pushes the beat more than settles into it.

True. I love the footage of Andy screaming at him to slow down!

 

He sometimes nails it, though, on tracks like Murder By Numbers or Bring On The Night. Great call on the seldom-mentioned Phil Rudd.

 

Bring on the Night is a great example of how awesome he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should also add that Oscar Peterson was a fellow Canadian like Neil Peart.

 

Both Peart and Peterson were initially nominated for The Polaris Music Prize.

 

The Polaris Music Prize is a not-for-profit organization that annually honours and rewards artists who produce Canadian music albums of distinction. A select panel of music critics judge and award the Prize without regard to musical genre or commercial popularity.

 

Both 2112 and Moving Pictures were winners of The Polaris Music Prize as noted here and here.

 

Night Train by Oscar Peterson was a winner of The Polaris Music Prize as noted here.

Edited by RushFanForever
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the world of drumming, swing is king , and if you can’t swing and play with groove, you may be looked at as a hack. Peart was clinical and compositional in his approach. The burning for buddy project really showed how glaringly bad he was at swing. Will Calhoun handed him his ass in a drum off.
  • Like 1
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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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