Neil Before or After Freddie Gruber's Teaching?

[shail]

hemispheres, permanent waves, power windows, signals, grace under pressure and hold your fire. kick ass drumming!!!

 

test for shmecko, vapor smells and snakes & darts. not such kick ass drumming.

 

i wish neil ever heard of freddy. he ruined him. put the double bass drums back and the tom toms. kick ass drum set back in the days. now it's all arty and farty. stop coloring the dam kit and just have one solid color for the love of god. enough.

 

he's great no matter what he plays really. just be nice if he stayed 30 the rest of his life. he was so aggressive and going for it back in his hay day. good thing freddy wasn't around to ruin him back then

[MMCXII]

there's two issues here and only one (arguably) that has anything to do with Gruber. Freddy only taught him what to do "between the beats", posture, technique, holding the stick etc.. but it's not like Freddy told him what to write... although the grip change probably influenced what he wrote to some extent...

 

that being said I really like the clean kickass drum sounds on counterparts. I believe this was just before the Grubster but I'm still glad he "saved" our Neil! lol

[Ancient Ways]

not a drummer. I thought there was more rhythmic variety before not after. I can't speak intelligently about grips, posture, or technique; even on the internetz where everyone is usually an expert. Edited June 16, 2011 by Ancient Ways

[trenken]

QUOTE (MMCXII @ Jun 16 2011, 05:21 PM)

there's two issues here and only one (arguably) that has anything to do with Gruber. Freddy only taught him what to do "between the beats", posture, technique, holding the stick etc..  but it's not like Freddy told him what to write...  although the grip change probably influenced what he wrote to some extent... that being said I really like the clean kickass drum sounds on counterparts. I believe this was just before the Grubster but I'm still glad he "saved" our Neil! lol

That's true, but we're just using it as sort of a landmark moment when he started to calm down a lot. Fills went from like nothing noone had ever heard, or at least not very often in popular rock bands, to just kind of doing more standard issue stock beats and fills.

 

Maybe what he learned from that guy made playing easier for him as he got older, and noone can fault anyone for trying to learn something new after so many years, but I would actually listen to the drums in older rush albums, and now they're just kind of there because they have to be. They rarely shine anymore.

 

I can still remember specific fills he did in certain songs I havent even heard in a long time, I cant remember a single drumming piece that stood out to me in anything he's done in a very long time. Even when I see him live now, he just seems kind of dead back there. Nothing like he was when I saw him in the 80s.

Edited June 16, 2011 by trenken

[Pound of Obscure]

I refer to it as the Gruber Debacle.

 

Freddie Gruber is the devil. Turned the greatest drummer of our time into the guy who "would never think of being so bold".

 

 

Edited June 16, 2011 by Pound of Obscure

[ioc]

QUOTE (theredtamasrule @ Jun 16 2011, 11:05 AM)

Neil kinda sounds like lots of other drummers today.

Though I can't help but wonder if that's partly because so many have Neil as an influence...in essence they sound like him rather than the reverse.

[Pags]

[Todem]

Edited June 17, 2011 by Todem

[New World Kid]

After. I've answered this question like 4 times in my TRF career, lol. I usually say something like:

 

As a drummer, I find it's very easy to create complicated parts in songs that will really make people notice you and go "wow." I think it takes significantly more creative to find a beat, rhythm, fill, etc. that isn't going to make people notice you, but the song, and still go "wow." It's one of the reasons I like Gavin Harrison so much.

 

I feel like that's where Neil, After Gruber, is going. More for the song, not for the drummer.

[An Enemy Without]

QUOTE (Nate1647 @ Jun 16 2011, 11:59 AM)

After. For reasons far too complex for most people to understand. zomg i wush h3 wud ply fster!

Too complex to understand? Or too complex to explain?

 

 

Most of us on here are pretty smart, you know.

[launchpad67a]

He's much more musical, controlled, expressive and "in the pocket" now than he ever was.

[RUSHHEAD666]

Nothing compares to before! 31-13 says it all.

[Todem]

QUOTE (New World Kid @ Jun 16 2011, 10:39 PM)

After. I've answered this question like 4 times in my TRF career, lol. I usually say something like: As a drummer, I find it's very easy to create complicated parts in songs that will really make people notice you and go "wow." I think it takes significantly more creative to find a beat, rhythm, fill, etc. that isn't going to make people notice you, but the song, and still go "wow." It's one of the reasons I like Gavin Harrison so much. I feel like that's where Neil, After Gruber, is going. More for the song, not for the drummer.

Gavin Harrison is insane....and he has ridiculous fills and rim shot work and cymbal work all over Porcupine Trees stuff. A Neil Peart descendent.

 

He has very complicated parts in many songs. I disagree with you that he is lower key. He is very much in the fore front of Porcupine Trees lush sound landscape.

 

Especially live. He goes off like a bull in a china shop.

 

Most drummers don't have the talent to place (and more importantly write) fills like Neil and Gavin and some others. Yeah maybe some musicians feel "whats better for the song" is to be more in the pocket and not so "self indulgent" for lack of a better term.

 

But part of the allure of Rush and also Porcupine Trees stuff with Gavin is that brash "I can play any beat, fill and place it anywhere I like and make it sound amazing" approach. I mean so many times listening to Rush back in the 80's I was like "did he just do that?" Amazing stuff. Legendary stuff.

 

Music is totally subjective. So I will not say anyones thoughts are right or wrong. But do you really feel Neil is playing and writing better drum parts on T4E and Snakes and Arrows than say:

 

Moving Pictures?

Signals?

Hemispheres?

 

Come on people. If he had that Freddy approach on those albums....I seriously think the band would not even sniff the success they have right now.

 

Neil Peart's vision on the drums for most of his life and before Freddy defined Rush's sound.

 

What's the first thing casual fan's say about Rush? "Wow they have the best drummer man.".You think that's from post freddy Neil?

 

He did not get that reputation playing "in the pocket" like every regular Joe.

 

What about Stuart Copeland? Another guy who had precision fills and great off timed beats that define the Polices best work.

 

No doubt Neil needed to seek a new challenge. He was getting very bored and creatively he sounded (in the Work in Progress Video/DVD) spent. He took his signature style as far as he could. So he pulled back and became more in the pocket. He still has signature fills, snare hits and that distinctive ride bell run. He is just not as flamboyant. And yeah it is serving the songs that Rush write today. BUt IMO that approach would not have served their classic signature stuff. It would be so unRush.

 

Just my 2 cents.

Edited June 17, 2011 by Todem

[Drummerrobin]

QUOTE (New World Kid @ Jun 16 2011, 10:39 PM)

After. I've answered this question like 4 times in my TRF career, lol. I usually say something like: As a drummer, I find it's very easy to create complicated parts in songs that will really make people notice you and go "wow." I think it takes significantly more creative to find a beat, rhythm, fill, etc. that isn't going to make people notice you, but the song, and still go "wow." It's one of the reasons I like Gavin Harrison so much. I feel like that's where Neil, After Gruber, is going. More for the song, not for the drummer.

Yes, that's exactly how I feel. I am also a huge Gavin Harrison fan for the same reason. I think he sums up the issue very well here:

 

It's very interesting that it generally seems to be drummers (like me) who prefer his playing after the change, which is the outcome I suspected. Maybe it's because his playing gained in subtleties (more ghost notes, more pocket, etc) that drummers can identify with but non-drummers can't so much. The main attractions to non-drummers are the more obvious traits - speed, aggression etc which are more evident in his playing before.

And what's also weird is that all my favourite rush albums are before the change and obviously I can't deny that his input was a big part of it. Yet from a drumming point of view I find TFE onwards to be far more satisfying. Makes me wonder what the younger Neil would have sounded like if he'd had lessons earlier on than he did. Guess we'll never know!

[hammerofthor]

I much prefer "on the beat" Neil to "behind the beat" Neil. It suits Rush much better, and there are boatloads of drummers who play that style better than Neil. I never thought he was overly flashy to begin with, everything was tasteful and placed perfectly, so when he holds back it doesn't suit him or the band and I think the material suffers for it.

[Todem]

QUOTE (Drummerrobin @ Jun 17 2011, 06:45 AM)

QUOTE (New World Kid @ Jun 16 2011, 10:39 PM) After. I've answered this question like 4 times in my TRF career, lol. I usually say something like: As a drummer, I find it's very easy to create complicated parts in songs that will really make people notice you and go "wow." I think it takes significantly more creative to find a beat, rhythm, fill, etc. that isn't going to make people notice you, but the song, and still go "wow." It's one of the reasons I like Gavin Harrison so much. I feel like that's where Neil, After Gruber, is going. More for the song, not for the drummer. Yes, that's exactly how I feel. I am also a huge Gavin Harrison fan for the same reason. I think he sums up the issue very well here:   It's very interesting that it generally seems to be drummers (like me) who prefer his playing after the change, which is the outcome I suspected. Maybe it's because his playing gained in subtleties (more ghost notes, more pocket, etc) that drummers can identify with but non-drummers can't so much. The main attractions to non-drummers are the more obvious traits - speed, aggression etc which are more evident in his playing before. And what's also weird is that all my favourite rush albums are before the change and obviously I can't deny that his input was a big part of it. Yet from a drumming point of view I find TFE onwards to be far more satisfying. Makes me wonder what the younger Neil would have sounded like if he'd had lessons earlier on than he did. Guess we'll never know! I am a guitarist but I also play the drums for some fun (have a V-Kit in the house).   I am not one who thinks this. And I know plenty of Drummers who prefer before than now. Not even close actually.

[hammerofthor]

Gavin's toolbox is about 10 times the size of Neil's.

[lerxt1990]

QUOTE (hammerofthor @ Jun 17 2011, 07:54 AM)

Gavin's toolbox is about 10 times the size of Neil's.

Thats what she said...

[Drummerrobin]

QUOTE (Todem @ Jun 17 2011, 06:52 AM)

QUOTE (Drummerrobin @ Jun 17 2011, 06:45 AM) QUOTE (New World Kid @ Jun 16 2011, 10:39 PM) After. I've answered this question like 4 times in my TRF career, lol. I usually say something like: As a drummer, I find it's very easy to create complicated parts in songs that will really make people notice you and go "wow." I think it takes significantly more creative to find a beat, rhythm, fill, etc. that isn't going to make people notice you, but the song, and still go "wow." It's one of the reasons I like Gavin Harrison so much. I feel like that's where Neil, After Gruber, is going. More for the song, not for the drummer. Yes, that's exactly how I feel. I am also a huge Gavin Harrison fan for the same reason. I think he sums up the issue very well here:   It's very interesting that it generally seems to be drummers (like me) who prefer his playing after the change, which is the outcome I suspected. Maybe it's because his playing gained in subtleties (more ghost notes, more pocket, etc) that drummers can identify with but non-drummers can't so much. The main attractions to non-drummers are the more obvious traits - speed, aggression etc which are more evident in his playing before. And what's also weird is that all my favourite rush albums are before the change and obviously I can't deny that his input was a big part of it. Yet from a drumming point of view I find TFE onwards to be far more satisfying. Makes me wonder what the younger Neil would have sounded like if he'd had lessons earlier on than he did. Guess we'll never know! I am a guitarist but I also play the drums for some fun (have a V-Kit in the house).   I am not one who thinks this. And I know plenty of Drummers who prefer before than now. Not even close actually. That's cool. I'm not trying to make any hard and fast rules here - it was only an observation of the thread so far. I could be completely wrong!

[tangy]

I think musicians are more like flowers than a bottle of fine wine.........

[Atomic]

Why is everyone blaming Gruber for what they percieve as a change in drumming from Neil and ONLY because of Gruber?

 

NEP is aging. Do you really think Gruber had that much of an affect on a guy who's been playing drums for maybe 40 years before visiting Gruber?

 

I have trouble believing that.

 

If there's a perceived change in Neil's drumming, I wouldn't put it down to being tutored by Gruber but rather a combination of aging (the body can't be thrashed for as long the way it used to), 'so why not write drum parts that are more playable for a guy my age so when I play the oldies, I can hammer it' sort of idea.

 

And there's also musical maturity. It's not how many notes I can cram into a time signature, it's how I make those notes work. I find Neil a much more disciplined drummer now. He still kicks ass and I find when he now plays old stuff, he's throwing in fills where there never were, and it sounds freakin' great!

 

And really, splitting hairs on whether Neil was better before Gruber or as good after is moot. He's still the same guy, still drumming and being recognized for his drumming skills and influencing muscians the world over. He's likely in the autumn of his musical career... and still rocking hard!

 

[MMCXII]

QUOTE (tangy @ Jun 17 2011, 06:23 AM)

I think musicians are more like flowers than a bottle of fine wine.........

aerosmith is a bottle of fine wine.

 

rush is a flower

[tangy]

QUOTE (MMCXII @ Jun 17 2011, 08:20 AM)

QUOTE (tangy @ Jun 17 2011, 06:23 AM) I think musicians are more like flowers than a bottle of fine wine......... aerosmith is a bottle of fine wine.   rush is a flower Aerosmith is more like a box of wine sold only at Walmart.   I really don't think aerosmith has improved with time and they are good example of a flower who bloomed then faded fast.   Rush is indeed a long lived flower and really that is what separates them from most other groups. quality and longevity.

[Nate1647]

I suppose I'll have to write a much detailed response a bit later.

 

 

But for those of you saying he just doesn't write fills like he used to, you obviously haven't seen the Time Machine tour then. If you look at almost all the songs, Neil has re-written a MAJORITY of the big drum fills, into completely brand new ones. Take Marathon for example, the fill out of the last chorus into the rideout (Key Change from C# back down to is simply ridiculous. More all out than even the fill on the record.

[circumstantial tree]

He needs to simplify his drum kit. So I'd say before Freddie Gruber. I usually skip that section of the documentary because it has nothing to do with the band itself.