Neil's drumming...what gives?

[Snyder80]

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

 

Yes, it is.

 

I have two daughters. Both of them are honor students. My oldest has to study her little ass off and her sister gets A's with barely a glance at the course work.

[savagegrace26]

So:

 

"fast learner" = Natural Ability

 

Neil Peart = "fast learner" with Drums (pretty much self-taught) = Natural Drummer (natural ability)

 

Natural Ability + Years of dedicated practice, playing, persistence, and patience = World Class Drummer (applied ability) [thanks to Snyder for the edit]

 

Thanks for the help Bathy :ebert:

Edited December 2, 2014 by savagegrace26

[Snyder80]

So:

 

"fast learner" = Natural Ability

 

Neil Peart = "fast learner" with Drums (pretty much self-taught) = Natural Drummer (natural ability)

 

Natural Ability + Years of dedicated playing, persistence, and practice = World Class Drummer (applied ability)

 

Thanks for the help Bathy :ebert:

 

You forgot patience. I think that is the virtue that truly separates the world class anything from the average anything.

[savagegrace26]

So:

 

"fast learner" = Natural Ability

 

Neil Peart = "fast learner" with Drums (pretty much self-taught) = Natural Drummer (natural ability)

 

Natural Ability + Years of dedicated playing, persistence, and practice = World Class Drummer (applied ability)

 

Thanks for the help Bathy :ebert:

 

You forgot patience. I think that is the virtue that truly separates the world class anything from the average anything.

 

Yes, of course. Something I sometimes lack.

 

I think "years of" implies patience but I edited accordingly.

Edited December 2, 2014 by savagegrace26

[bathory]

incomplete f**k-up comment, disregard Edited December 2, 2014 by bathory

[bathory]

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.

 

I had more typed but had to restart the computer

 

I should have used an emoticon with that first comment you quoted, same with the other shortcomings remark and the maestro comment. you tell me a ton of shit I already know. I don't actually think not being able to drum as good as neil is a shortcoming. I understand that it's not realistic to think I can be an astronaut or some shit. I don't think that. it's almost like you're deliberately misinterpreting some of my comments because you like to argue so much. I know people are often born with traits that make them more likely to succeed in a certain area, but I don't look at that as "natural talent." I always took "natural talent" to mean being, for example, a "born drummer" or something like that, and that just sounds silly to me. there are lots of people with rhythm who might suck at one instrument and kick ass on another.

 

I don't think being musically talented means you have to also be great at writing songs and great at creativity. if someone can play every single rush song but can't write tunes of his own, I'd still say he's talented. and there are plenty of talented musicians who play other people's parts.

 

and as for your age and autism, I thought you were early 20s (not sure why), and you told me that you were on the spectrum. if you were joking about it or if I misunderstood your post (even though I'm fairly certain you said you were on the spectrum), woops on my part. and I thought you were the one with a combative tone before I was, so I reacted with condescension and rudeness, but maybe I was wrong and shouldn't have.

[bathory]

disregard this Edited December 2, 2014 by bathory

[savagegrace26]

"you tell me a ton of shit I already know."

I can't read your mind. I don't even know if you have one ;)

 

"I don't actually think not being able to drum as good as neil is a shortcoming."

Yes, it is. Anyone who can't drum like Peart is an evolutionary failure ;)

 

"I understand that it's not realistic to think I can be an astronaut or some shit."

What you believe is what you are ;)

 

"it's almost like you're deliberately misinterpreting some of my comments because you like to argue so much."

Maybe you're just misrepresenting yourself ;)

 

"I always took "natural talent" to mean being, for example, a "born drummer" or something like that, and that just sounds silly to me. there are lots of people with rhythm who might suck at one instrument and kick ass on another."

I don't look at it that way and yes it is silly. No one is born knowing how to play the drums. Obviously that particular skill has to be learned but there's a certain natural aptitude necessary to do it very well and it's not limited to a sense of rhythm.

 

"I don't think being musically talented means you have to also be great at writing songs and great at creativity. If someone can play every single rush song but can't write tunes of his own, I'd still say he's talented. and there are plenty of talented musicians who play other people's parts."

Yes, but you said better than Rush. To be better than Rush involves creating and crafting great music (as well as songs such as Neurotica and The Speed of Love) in addition to great playing and let's not forget that the members of Rush crafted their own styles of playing over the years in addition to just playing extremely well. As someone else said, Nickelback practices a lot (as do most musicians/bands that have made it) but are they more talented than Rush? Well, that's all subjective. Are the members of Nickelback "natural" musicians? I have no f*cking clue.

 

"I thought you were early 20s (not sure why)"

I take that as a compliment I guess because most people here think I'm 13. But I've stated my age a few times. I'm almost 40. Mentally 9.

 

"and you told me that you were on the spectrum"

Told you? Yeah, well I joke about stuff. But I have researched Asperger's/Autism pretty heavily. I have never been diagnosed with it (nor have I ever been tested to see) but it's highly likely I'm on the spectrum, whatever that even means anymore. I think most people are on the spectrum to a degree (have you ever seen the list of traits?), but I really think it's also an over-diagnosed "disorder" and people generally just have different personalities. Let's just say I'm not "typical". We're in an era where there has to be a label for everyone so I think a lot of it is b*llshit. I am an artist to a degree and I think creative people in general are more likely to be on the spectrum. I may have it or I may not. I've discussed this with many people and have reflected on my life, so if you want to think I have it fine. I may or may not. You can just call me "eccentric". It doesn't matter what word you use. Officially I have never been tested for it. But I am who I am. I'm well aware of what I do and say here. If possibly having a form of Autism is an excuse to be "dicksucker"...well I'm very well aware of what I do here and how I present myself and how I respond. No excuses are necessary. Everything I say is intentional. If a trait of Autism is lacking self-awareness...well I'm very self-aware.

Edited December 2, 2014 by savagegrace26

[fraroc]

"you tell me a ton of shit I already know."

I can't read your mind. I don't even know if you have one ;)

 

"I don't actually think not being able to drum as good as neil is a shortcoming."

Yes, it is. Anyone who can't drum like Peart is an evolutionary failure ;)

 

"I understand that it's not realistic to think I can be an astronaut or some shit."

What you believe is what you are ;)

 

"it's almost like you're deliberately misinterpreting some of my comments because you like to argue so much."

Maybe you're just misrepresenting yourself ;)

 

"I always took "natural talent" to mean being, for example, a "born drummer" or something like that, and that just sounds silly to me. there are lots of people with rhythm who might suck at one instrument and kick ass on another."

I don't look at it that way and yes it is silly. No one is born knowing how to play the drums. Obviously that particular skill has to be learned but there's a certain natural aptitude necessary to do it very well and it's not limited to a sense of rhythm.

 

"I don't think being musically talented means you have to also be great at writing songs and great at creativity. If someone can play every single rush song but can't write tunes of his own, I'd still say he's talented. and there are plenty of talented musicians who play other people's parts."

Yes, but you said better than Rush. To be better than Rush involves creating and crafting great music (as well as songs such as Neurotica and The Speed of Love) in addition to great playing and let's not forget that the members of Rush crafted their own styles of playing over the years in addition to just playing extremely well. As someone else said, Nickelback practices a lot (as do most musicians/bands that have made it) but are they more talented than Rush? Well, that's all subjective. Are the members of Nickelback "natural" musicians? I have no f*cking clue.

 

"I thought you were early 20s (not sure why)"

I take that as a compliment I guess because most people here think I'm 13. But I've stated my age a few times. I'm almost 40. Mentally 9.

 

"and you told me that you were on the spectrum"

Told you? Yeah, well I joke about stuff. But I have researched Asperger's/Autism pretty heavily. I have never been diagnosed with it (nor have I ever been tested to see) but it's highly likely I'm on the spectrum, whatever that even means anymore. I think most people are on the spectrum to a degree (have you ever seen the list of traits?), but I really think it's also an over-diagnosed "disorder" and people generally just have different personalities. Let's just say I'm not "typical". We're in an era where there has to be a label for everyone so I think a lot of it is b*llshit. I am an artist to a degree and I think creative people in general are more likely to be on the spectrum. I may have it or I may not. I've discussed this with many people and have reflected on my life, so if you want to think I have it fine. I may or may not. You can just call me "eccentric". It doesn't matter what word you use. Officially I have never been tested for it. But I am who I am. I'm well aware of what I do and say here. If possibly having a form of Autism is an excuse to be "dicksucker"...well I'm very well aware of what I do here and how I present myself and how I respond. No excuses are necessary. Everything I say is intentional. If a trait of Autism is lacking self-awareness...well I'm very self-aware.

 

Insult Neil Peart and you'll sound just like PastaBoy :)

[Captain Avatar]

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.

 

I'll assume by your post that you are a drummer and know this for a fact. Assuming that it's true, to my ears they don't sound nearly as intricate as what he played before...and certainly not nearly as interesting or exciting. I remember Neil saying that the songs on Vapor Trails had a "veiled complexity" to them. Perhaps so, but to me they just sound, for the most part, dull. The double bass beginning to One Little Victory sounds pretty cool, but then he just goes into a splashy, normal sounding drum beat, which isn't what I want to hear from Neil.

 

I'm not a drummer, so for all I know guys like Phil Rudd or Charlie Watts are amazing drummers and better than Neil, but I don't' buy albums based on someone's ability, but rather because of what they put on record. Neil used to put drumming masterpieces on record, and it made him famous. For my money...I don't want Neil sounding like Phil Rudd or Charlie Watts...or even Steve Gadd. I want him sounding like the Neil Peart that made everyone sit up and take notice.

 

And, for the record, that doesn't mean that I don't want him to make changes or evolve. He made constant changes from Fly by Night to Counterparts and I always thought he sounded "like Neil." It was only after studying with Freddie Gruber that I thought his drumming got boring.

[toymaker]

His drum palette is too large. Too many electronic things that go doink. I like tom-toms. Lots of tom-toms.

[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.

 

I'll assume by your post that you are a drummer and know this for a fact.

 

You don't have to be a drummer to appreciate or understand drumming.

 

Here we go again....

 

Do you have to be a woman to appreciate or understand women? Maybe...

[bathory]

thank you for including emoticons, as we both seemed to be taking each other too seriously. I know you can't read my mind, the way you were responding to some of what I said was like if I said I was sick of the rain in my town and you were like "what, so you hate crops? you think we don't need water, huh? you realize we need water to live, right? when you're a little older you might understand"

 

and when I said "technically better" than rush, I'm talking about technical ability alone, which I consider one of the many talents. you can be a talented lyricist and suck at actually constructing a song or playing an instrument, you can be a talented bassist (as in, you can play anything adequately) but maybe you suck at coming up with your own parts so you just follow the guitarist. when I said that if anyone practiced enough he could be technically better than rush, I meant that he could play anything alex can play as well as shit alex can't play (I know, I know, alex can play anything, but I don't know if he could successfully imitate hendrix's tone, holdsworth, zappa, probably couldn't imitate malmsteen either but who the f**k would want to?).

 

as for the autism thing, well, you told me you were autistic and I took it seriously. my bad. I've never encountered anyone going, "I'm autistic! LOL," so I guess I misinterpreted. and yes, everyone has symptoms to an extent.

 

anyway, I think we've got this heap of shit resolved. :)

[CygnusX-1Bk2]

Let me step in and offer a few things:

 

Freddie Gruber: When Neil started studying with Freddie it was more of how he played not what he played. It was a different technical approach to the drums: pulling the sound out versus driving the stick through the drum. It was about smoothing out his mechanics. Ultimately he is the same person he was prior to studying with Freddie but with a slightly different technique but not a different style. To expect Neil Peart to not play like Neil Peart is not realistic. This was more about trying to improve upon what he was already doing to refine it, not redefine it. Granted, Neil has an appreciation for swing jazz. Listening to Neil play jazz is like listening to Buddy Rich trying to play rock. Just don't.

 

Peter Erskine: Peter is a great jazz guy and a real nice guy too. I went to one of his clinics in the late 80's and he was great to talk drums and technique with. He played at the Hammerstein Ballroom for the Buddy Rich tribute and along with Tommy Igoe were the best jazz players of the evening. Neil being Neil he wants to play like that. He cannot. He swings like a rusty gate but he is not satisfied being the guy that all these people want to worship. Good for him, bad for fans of jazz.

 

Neil's evolution of drumming while in Rush: With every release until today all three have been driven to improve in some capacity. That said after 40 years of experience the plateaus are flatter and the notable marks of upward improvement are fewer and further between, much less dramatic and more visible to the performer himself rather than a general observer. Neil's drumming has gotten more disciplined over the past 20 years. You wouldn't expect a 60 year old Neil to have the same approach as a 30 year old Neil given the years and recordings along the way. While the later recordings may not seem as dextrous by all three as the 70's era material they are no less intricate, but their motivations are completely different and they don't have as much to prove. What they play now is more about proving that they still can which is way different from proving that they are good which is what originally motivated them. There are things that Neil creates these days that require far more concentration and limb discipline than say Tom Sawyer which takes a certain amount of concentration but way more physicality. His focus is much more sticking and emphasis of certain phrases. It is subtle but for drummers, especially those close to the Rush catalog it is obvious. At least it is to me. For Geddy it's about song structure and how parts go together and song arrangements as opposed to bass parts. Alex is always about experimentation. I think he is still the most expressive these days.

 

As for tones: These guys have been touring musicians for the past 40 years, many of which were spent standing in front of extremely loud amps and speakers night after night. Everything started to get brighter sonically around the late 80's and has gotten worse as time has gone on. Their collective hearing is pretty sketchy at best. I am sure to them it sounds fine, but to those of us who still possess our ears it doesn't. They have gotten into a sameness since Counterparts as far as writing goes. Everything since has had a similar flavor. I didn't think it was possible for them to have a worse sounding album than Vapor Trails until Clockwork Angels was released. It sounds bad and the writing is less inspired than pretty much anything in their catalog aside from HYF. At least HYF has Force Ten and Time Stand Still. I will now include Mission after recent tours. Caravan is no Force Ten.

[savagegrace26]

thank you for including emoticons, as we both seemed to be taking each other too seriously. I know you can't read my mind, the way you were responding to some of what I said was like if I said I was sick of the rain in my town and you were like "what, so you hate crops? you think we don't need water, huh? you realize we need water to live, right? when you're a little older you might understand"

 

and when I said "technically better" than rush, I'm talking about technical ability alone, which I consider one of the many talents. you can be a talented lyricist and suck at actually constructing a song or playing an instrument, you can be a talented bassist (as in, you can play anything adequately) but maybe you suck at coming up with your own parts so you just follow the guitarist. when I said that if anyone practiced enough he could be technically better than rush, I meant that he could play anything alex can play as well as shit alex can't play (I know, I know, alex can play anything, but I don't know if he could successfully imitate hendrix's tone, holdsworth, zappa, probably couldn't imitate malmsteen either but who the f**k would want to?).

 

as for the autism thing, well, you told me you were autistic and I took it seriously. my bad. I've never encountered anyone going, "I'm autistic! LOL," so I guess I misinterpreted. and yes, everyone has symptoms to an extent.

 

anyway, I think we've got this heap of shit resolved. :)

 

I have definite autistic traits, I've just more aware of them now.

 

I think you have some too...

[Snyder80]

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.

 

Material as technical as the stuff Neil plays didn't exist to my knowledge when he was seven. I'm not gonna delve too much into this because it's the one topic that can get a me a little fired up but Neil Peart reinvented how people played the drums. Period. I respect and enjoy the works of Jon Bonham and Keith Moon and I accept that there are guys out there in jazz fusion that are beyond Neil's technical abilities but at the end of the day it's pretty much like this: When Van Halen released their debut and Eruption was heard for the first time it sent every teenage kid running to his parents for a guitar, the same thing happened the first time Tom Sawyer was heard, only it was drums they now begged for.

 

The other thing I'll say about this is that writing something is much more difficult than copying something. I know a thousand guys who can play the solo to Mr. Crowley but they sure as hell couldn't have written it if you put a gun to their head.

[Tombstone Mountain]

I didn't think it was possible for them to have a worse sounding album than Vapor Trails until Clockwork Angels was released. It sounds bad and the writing is less inspired than pretty much anything in their catalog aside from HYF.

I appreciate this piece, though I disagree with you opinion on CA. Your take on each player is spot on. Well put

 

IMO the band's best work is not found exclusively in the 70's or early 80's. Now, I'm familiar with your experience as a recording musician, you've shared you're "expertise" on several occasions.

 

CA is still kicking my arse. How you're not moved by it perplexes me because it's full of "new" things and scenery. Having said that, I enjoyed your perspective.

[savagegrace26]

I didn't think it was possible for them to have a worse sounding album than Vapor Trails until Clockwork Angels was released. It sounds bad and the writing is less inspired than pretty much anything in their catalog aside from HYF.

I appreciate this piece, though I disagree with you opinion on CA. Your take on each player is spot on. Well put

 

IMO the band's best work is not found exclusively in the 70's or early 80's. Now, I'm familiar with your experience as a recording musician, you've shared you're "expertise" on several occasions.

 

CA is still kicking my arse. How you're not moved by it perplexes me because it's full of "new" things and scenery. Having said that, I enjoyed your perspective.

 

Presto is still kicking my arse. How you're not moved by it perplexes me because it's full of "new" things and scenery. :P

[Tombstone Mountain]

I didn't think it was possible for them to have a worse sounding album than Vapor Trails until Clockwork Angels was released. It sounds bad and the writing is less inspired than pretty much anything in their catalog aside from HYF.

I appreciate this piece, though I disagree with you opinion on CA. Your take on each player is spot on. Well put

 

IMO the band's best work is not found exclusively in the 70's or early 80's. Now, I'm familiar with your experience as a recording musician, you've shared you're "expertise" on several occasions.

 

CA is still kicking my arse. How you're not moved by it perplexes me because it's full of "new" things and scenery. Having said that, I enjoyed your perspective.

 

Presto is still kicking my arse. How you're not moved by it perplexes me because it's full of "new" things and scenery. :P

Presto is yours to enjoy. Keep rocking. Do you wear a Devo hat when you listen to it?

[antiquark]

We should let google tell us.

 

Lets google for "greatest drummer of all time..."

 

 

Well that settles it!

[savagegrace26]

I didn't think it was possible for them to have a worse sounding album than Vapor Trails until Clockwork Angels was released. It sounds bad and the writing is less inspired than pretty much anything in their catalog aside from HYF.

I appreciate this piece, though I disagree with you opinion on CA. Your take on each player is spot on. Well put

 

IMO the band's best work is not found exclusively in the 70's or early 80's. Now, I'm familiar with your experience as a recording musician, you've shared you're "expertise" on several occasions.

 

CA is still kicking my arse. How you're not moved by it perplexes me because it's full of "new" things and scenery. Having said that, I enjoyed your perspective.

 

Presto is still kicking my arse. How you're not moved by it perplexes me because it's full of "new" things and scenery. :P

Presto is yours to enjoy. Keep rocking. Do you wear a Devo hat when you listen to it?

 

I don't know what Devo is but I'm assuming it's someting that doesn't have testicles because you have a very unhealthy fixation with male anatomy.

Edited December 3, 2014 by savagegrace26

[CygnusX-1Bk2]

Devo is awesome. Presto is a great record, especially considering what came just before it. The problem with Presto is the production (and Anagram, Red Tide and Available Light). Show Don't Tell is one of their best songs ever. Great album.

 

CA sounds like Old Guy Rush wanting to sound like Young Guy Rush because their producer is a fan boy. S&A is a masterpiece and I hear a perceptible drop in intensity where the writing is concerned. They came up with a conceptual idea then tried to suit it rather than writing things that come out naturally. There are some moments but they are few and far between. We are at a funny time in their career when they are seemingly more popular than at any time previously. The lack of objectivity where their work is concerned is at an all time high. The sucking sounds when any of them enter a room is deafening.

 

If my evaluation of the players is spot on then so must my evaluation of the material be as well. :) Good is good and their standard is high. CA is well below their standard.

[CygnusX-1Bk2]

We should let google tell us.

 

Lets google for "greatest drummer of all time..."

 

 

Well that settles it!

Google is wrong. The only answer to that question is Buddy Rich. Don't even get me started about John Bonham...

[savagegrace26]

Red Tide and Available Light are both excellent.

[antiquark]

If you don't know this song, you're missing out on a crucial moment in musical history!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIEVqFB4WUo