Neil's drumming...what gives?

[hammerofthor]

That's an excerpt from a Nov. 96 interview with Modern Drummer. Of course Neil is overstating things here, he is obviously naturally talented, but it shows that he is not God, so to speak. He cant just effortlessly play anything. I remember not liking him saying that back then. Lol

[bathory]

people are only born with natural powers in comic books and fantasy novels. neil's a good drummer because he been trying to be one since the mid 60s

[EagleMoon]

people are only born with natural powers in comic books and fantasy novels. neil's a good drummer because he been trying to be one since the mid 60s

 

I think that's true to an extent, but people have to have some natural talent as well as the inclination. Not everyone has a good sense of rhythm, even if they try hard.

[Lorraine]

people are only born with natural powers in comic books and fantasy novels. neil's a good drummer because he been trying to be one since the mid 60s

 

I think that's true to an extent, but people have to have some natural talent as well as the inclination. Not everyone has a good sense of rhythm, even if they try hard.

Definitely. If he didn't have a natural talent, no amount of training and practice could have made him what he is.

[savagegrace26]

Does this kid have natural talent? Was Neil able to do something like this at this age?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jruU4ctnX70

 

Mozart certainly had natural talent.

 

You can't necessarily become good at something through practice and perseverance alone (not saying it's impossible) but there is some initial skill or feel (not to mention drive) necessary to build on.

 

Yes, you can learn to draw better than you currently do, but that doesn't mean you're going to be a fantastic artist no matter how much time you put into it.

 

Same with all arts. Some people have a certain knack for some things while others don't.

 

I had some interest in the drums once until I sat behind a drum kit. I felt completely lost and out of place, nothing felt right at all when I tried to play. I haven't looked back since.

 

To say Neil is not a natural drummer is absurd. One can't reach those levels (one of the best drummers in the world) without some kind of innate ability, especially when learning on your own like he did without any formal training.

Edited December 1, 2014 by savagegrace26

[Snyder80]

Typically I stay away from the bashing type threads and if I do venture within, it's usually in defense of the band or band member. In this case however I have to agree with the author.

 

Beyond Animate or the title track for T4E I haven't heard any of Neil's once kinetic and explosive and tastefully unpredictable drumming. Personally-and I'm no musician-I attribute this to his obsession with wanting to be more sporadic and loose instead of having to keep time or "count" as he refers to it. If you listen to songs like Subdivisions or Marathon or Vital Signs it seems like he had a real knack for knowing when the sit back a bit and when to erupt. I think the fact that he's moved away from compositional parts in favor of a more improvisational approach he has lost some of his creativity. The other explanation could be that after their hiatus he just was never able to rekindle that old joy for the instrument. He seems to love playing live but the man is really more of a lyricist than a drummer anymore. That's a pretty harsh statement and I worship the man's abilities but he isn't the 28 year old writing the drum part to Tom Sawyer or Digital Man anymore.

 

His playing represents much more of a reflective attitude instead of an aggressive attitude. At least that's what I think.

Edited December 2, 2014 by Snyder80

[savagegrace26]

Vapor Trail, Freeze, Armor & Sword, and Earthshine are pretty damn intricate percussion-wise. I don't think you can describe any of those as "loose". Maybe he has become more subtle but much of his post Gruber work has been very impressive.

[savagegrace26]

This is really one of his more interesting compositions right here:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljy4p_h6ZIU

 

Even this guy's descriptions reinforces this:

 

This is a beautiful song from the "Vapor Trails" album. This one has it all: snare work, hi-hat accents, various tom beats, complex fills, weird cymbal stuff, traditional grip, etc. It was very hard for me to nail that one and it's far from being perfect. This is the kind of songs asking for a lot of concentration, and I screwed it up many many times before this take.

Edited December 2, 2014 by savagegrace26

[Snyder80]

Vapor Trail, Freeze, Armor & Sword, and Earthshine are pretty damn intricate percussion-wise. I don't think you can describe any of those as "loose". Maybe he has become more subtle but much of his post Gruber work has been very impressive.

 

Love every one of the songs you mentioned. And again I'll state that I'm not musician but they don't seem to carry to musical weight of much of his previous work.

[toymaker]

This is really one of his more interesting compositions right here:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljy4p_h6ZIU

 

Even this guy's descriptions reinforces this:

 

This is a beautiful song from the "Vapor Trails" album. This one has it all: snare work, hi-hat accents, various tom beats, complex fills, weird cymbal stuff, traditional grip, etc. It was very hard for me to nail that one and it's far from being perfect. This is the kind of songs asking for a lot of concentration, and I screwed it up many many times before this take.

 

Maybe for some folks it's a "less is more" sort of thing? I think the stuff he's playing these days is more intricate, as well, but maybe some of those things are subtle to some ears - they don't "stand out" like the big muscular tom fills from the older tunes. Or, maybe the newer parts seem too busy or fussy, whereas a more sparse approach would make the big moments, when they happen, seem bigger. Just a thought a thought or two, a penny apiece.

Edited December 2, 2014 by toymaker

[bathory]

Does this kid have natural talent? Was Neil able to do something like this at this age?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jruU4ctnX70

 

Mozart certainly had natural talent.

 

You can't necessarily become good at something through practice and perseverance alone (not saying it's impossible) but there is some initial skill or feel (not to mention drive) necessary to build on.

 

Yes, you can learn to draw better than you currently do, but that doesn't mean you're going to be a fantastic artist no matter how much time you put into it.

 

Same with all arts. Some people have a certain knack for some things while others don't.

 

I had some interest in the drums once until I sat behind a drum kit. I felt completely lost and out of place, nothing felt right at all when I tried to play. I haven't looked back since.

 

To say Neil is not a natural drummer is absurd. One can't reach those levels (one of the best drummers in the world) without some kind of innate ability, especially when learning on your own like he did without any formal training.

 

some folks pick up on things better than others, yes. and some folks start off something a little better than others do. thank you for informing us all that some people are fast learners.

 

I don't buy that people are born with abilities, sorry. neil got where he is today through practicing. I think the "he's a natural!" stuff takes away from people's actual accomplishments. and it's also a great way of making yourself feel better if you CAN'T do something that a skilled person is doing.

[savagegrace26]

Whether they're literally born with it or not is irrelrvant. But just because someone can learn something quickly doesn't mean they can learn whatever they want to quickly hence "natural" ability. I've always been able to draw pretty well but never had the desire to develop it further. People do have some abilities that others don't. I don't know why that's a problem. It doesn't come down to just being a "fast learner". There's plenty of things I could never do no matter how much I applied myself and the same goes for you. People have their own strengths and weaknesses. It's called being a human being. Edited December 2, 2014 by savagegrace26

[savagegrace26]

And having a "natural" ability doesn't mean you don't have to work or apply yourself to be better at it.

[savagegrace26]

And I understand that youre youngish and want to believe that there's nothing you can't do if you really apply yourself but you'll eventually stumble upon something called reality.

[savagegrace26]

If you want to look at as "fast learning" then some people can learn certain particular things faster than others.

[bathory]

what are you even arguing with me about, savage? yes, turd, I am well aware that human beings have different abilities. it is not a "problem" to me that neil peart can drum better than I can, or that some sports dick can throw a ball better than I can, or that you have a knack for making bad threads beyond my abilities. I'm just saying that people aren't born with abilities. and no, I'm pretty sure that if you practice an instrument as much as the guys in rush have, you will be as technically good as them, if not better.

 

some people have better rhythm, some people are tone deaf, some people are genetically predisposed to be athletic, but that doesn't mean that if folks practice they won't eventually get good at it. don't try to excuse your own shortcomings with, "hey, he's a natural! I could NEVER do that!"

[bathory]

And I understand that youre youngish and want to believe that there's nothing you can't do if you really apply yourself but you'll eventually stumble upon something called reality.

 

I never said there's nothing I can't do, and dude, aren't you like, 3 or 4 years older than me? you act like a 14 year-old with better vocab.

 

and I also never said that "naturally talented" people don't have to practice. is there a reason you're such a prick to everyone? I know you're on the spectrum, but I don't know any other autistic person who uses it as an excuse to be a dicksucker.

[bathory]

your pathetic debating style is worse than reb's. you argue against a guy that isn't there, and you type countless posts and paragraphs trying to prove imaginary people's opinions wrong.

 

okay, basement manchild, you wanna talk about reality? the guy saying that neil's a naturally born prog rock maestro is wanting to tell ME about reality? I'm not the one talking out my ass.

 

now please argue against some more things I didn't actually say...

Edited December 2, 2014 by bathory

[bathory]

and man, I know I'm pretty argumentative sometimes, and a lot of what I say to people is taken as a putdown or wanting to start a fight or something, but I really f***ing hope I don't come off as a savagegrace-type. I can't think of anyone so forceful and dickheaded about opinions.

 

I remember this one time, you said "rush might not be the band" for me because I made a remark about rock n roll not needing to be up its own ass with technicality and showing off chops to be good. I also said something about the guys in rush not partying, I'm not sure what I even said, but you took offense to it.

[Union 5-3992]

http://i.imgur.com/HTeW40n.gif

[Union 5-3992]

Double post, whoops.

 

I think his modern drumming is still quite interesting compared to other drummers. And though he doesn't shine throughout whole albums, there are still quite a few post Counterparts songs that are very creative.

Edited December 2, 2014 by Union 5-3992

[bathory]

I'm already regretting saying anything. savage, if you see this, STOP TYPING.

[savagegrace26]

Here we go...

 

"it is not a "problem" to me that neil peart can drum better than I can" -> you said: "and it's also a great way of making yourself feel better if you CAN'T do something that a skilled person is doing."

Sounded like you perceived it as a problem right there. Could have been me misinterpreting it or you misstating it. Your pick.

 

"aren't you like, 3 or 4 years older than me?"

I'm 39

 

"your pathetic debating style is worse than reb's"

I'm not debating. Just telling what I think straight and uncensored.

 

"and I also never said that "naturally talented" people don't have to practice."

All that I typed about practicing was in response to this: "neil got where he is today through practicing. I think the "he's a natural!" stuff takes away from people's actual accomplishments. and it's also a great way of making yourself feel better if you CAN'T do something that a skilled person is doing. ---> I was telling you that highly skilled and successful people still do have to practice and apply themselves so saying someone's a "natural" doesn't necessarily have to take away from anyone's accomplishments. A "natural" ability is pretty much a starting point for potentially greater things, but practice and dedication are largely necessary,

 

"I'm pretty sure that if you practice an instrument as much as the guys in rush have, you will be as technically good as them, if not better"

No, probably not. Maybe you would be able to emulate their playing to a degree, but they are also gifted creatively as in songwriting, composition, etc. Years of practice enhances and aids that, it doesn't mean anyone can do what they do with practice alone. Musical talent is not limited to practice alone. Perhaps you could play like them but you wouldn't create like them because that's all based on who and where you are in life. Those things can't be emulated or repeated so this is hypothetically nonsensical.

 

"don't try to excuse your own shortcomings with, "hey, he's a natural! I could NEVER do that!"

I don't think many people use that as an "excuse". There's quite a few things I'm gifted at but I have no problem saying that I could never have been a great drummer, or a pro football player or an astronaut. I don't perceive those as shortcomings, those just aren't things I ever had the abilities or drive to pursue. There's nothing wrong with not being able to or not having the desire to do something. There's such a thing as being realistic. I am confident enough in the abilities that I do have and what I wish to accomplish with them, and that is more than enough for me.

 

"the guy saying that neil's a naturally born prog rock maestro is wanting to tell ME about reality?"

I never ever said that. He had to play and practice for years to get where he is as does anyone with a "natural" ability. Reread my posts.

 

(Edit) I reread for you:

 

me: "And having a "natural" ability doesn't mean you don't have to work or apply yourself to be better at it."

me: "You can't necessarily become good at something through practice and perseverance alone (not saying it's impossible) but there is some initial skill or feel (not to mention drive) necessary to build on.

 

"now please argue against some more things I didn't actually say."

Likewise.

 

"is there a reason you're such a prick to everyone?"

Not everyone. Just those who desire it or wish to perceive it that way.

 

"I know you're on the spectrum"

No, you don't know that.

 

"but I don't know any other autistic person who uses it as an excuse to be a dicksucker"

No, I don't need to make any excuses to be a dicksucker, I openly let it be known that I enjoy it.

 

"and man, I know I'm pretty argumentative sometimes, and a lot of what I say to people is taken as a putdown or wanting to start a fight or something, but I really f***ing hope I don't come off as a savagegrace-type. I can't think of anyone so forceful and dickheaded about opinions."

Well, you started that tone with your condescending "thank you for informing us all that some people are fast learners." Perhaps check yourself to realize why you got the response that you did?

 

"I remember this one time, you said "rush might not be the band" for me because I made a remark about rock n roll not needing to be up its own ass with technicality and showing off chops to be good."

If I did say that it was definitely laced with sarcasm.

 

"I also said something about the guys in rush not partying, I'm not sure what I even said, but you took offense to it."

Really? What? I don't even know what this means...

 

"STOP TYPING."

Too late.

Edited December 2, 2014 by savagegrace26

[Snyder80]

what are you even arguing with me about, savage? yes, turd, I am well aware that human beings have different abilities. it is not a "problem" to me that neil peart can drum better than I can, or that some sports dick can throw a ball better than I can, or that you have a knack for making bad threads beyond my abilities. I'm just saying that people aren't born with abilities. and no, I'm pretty sure that if you practice an instrument as much as the guys in rush have, you will be as technically good as them, if not better.

 

some people have better rhythm, some people are tone deaf, some people are genetically predisposed to be athletic, but that doesn't mean that if folks practice they won't eventually get good at it. don't try to excuse your own shortcomings with, "hey, he's a natural! I could NEVER do that!"

 

Plenty of people are completely natural at things. Do you think if you practice running fast every day that someday you'll wake up and be able to run the 40 yard dash in 4.3 seconds? No, you won't. However the NFL is full of guys who can and do run that fast every day and have been since they were sixteen or seventeen years old.

 

Nickelback practices a lot, are they as technically proficient as the guys in Rush?

[savagegrace26]

So what makes someone become a "fast learner"? Wouldn't that be a natural ability?