Jump to content

Rolling Stones Vs. The Beatles! I'm So Hot For Him He's So Cold! CHARLIE WATTS V. RINGO STARR!


RUSHHEAD666
 Share

Charlie Watts Verses Ringo Star! Get In The Ring Motherfukkers!   

28 members have voted

  1. 1. Which Famous, Awesome Yet Laid Back Drummer Do You Love The Most?

    • Charlie Watts, Rolling Stones
      14
    • Ringo Starr, The Beatles
      12
    • Neutral Vote! Neither! These Two Drummers Suck Just Like The Bands!
      2


Recommended Posts

If you believe the common perception that Ringo played in the studio then you probably don't believe Neil E. Peart used to read scriptures out of the bible before every show. No one talks about that, yet I know a guy (formerly with Polygram) who saw it with his own two eyes many times in the 80's. Not everything that happens behind the scenes becomes public knowledge. You can't rely on the internet for the truth in some cases. Some things are not documented.

Idiocy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you believe the common perception that Ringo played in the studio then you probably don't believe Neil E. Peart used to read scriptures out of the bible before every show. No one talks about that, yet I know a guy (formerly with Polygram) who saw it with his own two eyes many times in the 80's. Not everything that happens behind the scenes becomes public knowledge. You can't rely on the internet for the truth in some cases. Some things are not documented.

Idiocy.

Is who actually played in the studio something that is not documented? Or is the only thing this circle of engineers knows is that Ringo didn't play in the studio? Did the actual drummer have to wear a paper bag over his (or her) head? Was it Hal Blaine? Or did Bernard Purdie do most of the playing? Or Paul? Wait, Paul is dead. Did the other Beatles call these mystery drummers "Ringo" during the recordings to throw, us, the unsuspecting fans off track? Hmmm.... I guess it makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, guys... Ringo was not the only rock drummer who was given performance credit on albums he didn't play on. This is a common practice and has been going on since the advent of the multi-track recorder, and here's why, for anyone who doesn't know how it works:

Back when the Beatles were recording music, they didn't have pro tools or any type of editing equipment besides a splicing block, a pair of scissors, a rll of tape, and that's it. What this means is, in order to record a song, the drum part must be played perfectly, with all the subtle nuances that a pro recording demands before any other work gets done. Period. Since most drummers cannot play perfectly every time, they get session players in there so they can knock out the drums, get on with layering of the rest of the instruments, vocals, mixdown, then mastering. And there were TIGHT time restraints on top of it. Another big thing is, studio time is very, very expensive, not including the producer's time, engineer's time, etc. And then there was the cost of the tape, and only about 30 minutes of recording was possible on one reel. That's another cost... This means that, unless the drummer can NAIL drum parts in one or two takes, it makes much more sense to bring in a session player who can lay down all the drums tracks in like a day or two, then make it look like the drummer in the band played on the album because people are in love with the idea of the band being a tight-knit group who would never hire someone from the outside to play on records. People don't care about "who really played in the studio" anyway. That's why no one really talks about it besides engineers that heard it thru the grapevine. I, personally believe he didn't play on a lot of the stuff because there's no motivation to make up stories like that. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

I can site another example like this: In the 80's right thru to a few years ago everyone believed that Ozzy Osbourne's bassist and drummer for his first two solo albums were the guys pictured on the albums that were listed as the drummer and bassist. NOT TRUE. Daisley and Kerslake from Uriah Heap played on those albums and no one knew about it but those behind the scenes. This was kept a secret for decades. And the name of the band was "Blizzard of Ozz". It was not meant to be a SOLO Ozzy record at all The music biz makes these decisions in order to market the band in the name of profits. Just sayin...

Edited by the masked drummer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, guys... Ringo was not the only rock drummer who was given performance credit on albums he didn't play on. This is a common practice and has been going on since the advent of the multi-track recorder, and here's why, for anyone who doesn't know how it works:

Back when the Beatles were recording music, they didn't have pro tools or any type of editing equipment besides a splicing block, a pair of scissors, a rll of tape, and that's it. What this means is, in order to record a song, the drum part must be played perfectly, with all the subtle nuances that a pro recording demands. Since most drummers cannot play perfectly every time, they get session players in there so they can get on with layering of the rest of the instruments, vocals, mixdown, then mastering. And there were TIGHT time restraints on top of it. Another big thing is, studio time is very, very expensive, not including the producer's time, engineer's time, etc. And then there was the cost of the tape, and only about 30 minutes of recording was possible on one reel. That's another cost... This means that, unless the drummer can NAIL drum parts in one or two takes, it makes more sense to bring in a session player who can lay down all the drums tracks in like a day or two, then make it look like the drummer in the band played on the album because people are in love with the idea of the band being a tight-knit group who would never hire someone from the outside to play on records. People don't care about that shit anyway. That's why no one really talks about it besides engineers that heard it thru the grapevine. I, personally believe he didn't play on a lot of the stuff because there's no motivation to make up stories like that. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

I can site another example like this: In the 80's right thru to a few years ago everyone believed that Ozzy Osbourne's bassist and drummer for his first two solo albums were the guys pictured on the albums that were listed as the drummer and bassist. NOT TRUE. Daisley and Kerslake from Uriah Heap played on those albums and no one knew about it but those behind the scenes. This was kept a secret for decades. Just sayin...

It seems you haven't researched how the Beatles recorded and how EMI rewarded their success. One of Ringo's strengths as a musician was that he played like a click track. Every take he played, pretty much the same tempo, so, the Beatles and their engineers could edit together different takes with much ease. Ringo played in the studio. It's absurd to thing otherwise. There is too much evidence documented, on record, on tape, on film, in photographs to think otherwise. Believe your "engineers" and their "grapevine". I'll take the top notch and legendary engineers (Norman Smith, Geoff Emerick, Ken Scott, Ken Townsend, Chris Thomas, Alan Parsons, Glyn Johns) that worked with the Beatles, who make no mention or no hint of what your supposed engineers claim. This "debate" is embarrassing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say "debate" as if your opinion is 100% correct, i must chuckle. The mere fact that those insiders you mentioned did not go on record spilling the beans doesnt validate or dismiss the notion. Any producer or engineer on retainer for the hugest bandbin the world has an assumed responsibility not to blab about anything which would adversely affect the bands reputation. Although theres no proof for my side, no one really knows but those insiders. Lets not be pretentuous here...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, guys... Ringo was not the only rock drummer who was given performance credit on albums he didn't play on. This is a common practice and has been going on since the advent of the multi-track recorder, and here's why, for anyone who doesn't know how it works:

Back when the Beatles were recording music, they didn't have pro tools or any type of editing equipment besides a splicing block, a pair of scissors, a rll of tape, and that's it. What this means is, in order to record a song, the drum part must be played perfectly, with all the subtle nuances that a pro recording demands before any other work gets done. Period. Since most drummers cannot play perfectly every time, they get session players in there so they can knock out the drums, get on with layering of the rest of the instruments, vocals, mixdown, then mastering. And there were TIGHT time restraints on top of it. Another big thing is, studio time is very, very expensive, not including the producer's time, engineer's time, etc. And then there was the cost of the tape, and only about 30 minutes of recording was possible on one reel. That's another cost... This means that, unless the drummer can NAIL drum parts in one or two takes, it makes much more sense to bring in a session player who can lay down all the drums tracks in like a day or two, then make it look like the drummer in the band played on the album because people are in love with the idea of the band being a tight-knit group who would never hire someone from the outside to play on records. People don't care about "who really played in the studio" anyway. That's why no one really talks about it besides engineers that heard it thru the grapevine. I, personally believe he didn't play on a lot of the stuff because there's no motivation to make up stories like that. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

I can site another example like this: In the 80's right thru to a few years ago everyone believed that Ozzy Osbourne's bassist and drummer for his first two solo albums were the guys pictured on the albums that were listed as the drummer and bassist. NOT TRUE. Daisley and Kerslake from Uriah Heap played on those albums and no one knew about it but those behind the scenes. This was kept a secret for decades. And the name of the band was "Blizzard of Ozz". It was not meant to be a SOLO Ozzy record at all The music biz makes these decisions in order to market the band in the name of profits. Just sayin...

 

Daisley and Kerslake are on the back of Blizzard. And Daisley had song writing credits on Diary. No one who cares ever thought Sarzo and Aldridge played on those albums.

 

And Sharon is the one who changed the cover, to promote Ozzy. But you're right that Rhoads, Daisley and Kerslake thought they joined a band.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say "debate" as if your opinion is 100% correct, i must chuckle. The mere fact that those insiders you mentioned did not go on record spilling the beans doesnt validate or dismiss the notion. Any producer or engineer on retainer for the hugest bandbin the world has an assumed responsibility not to blab about anything which would adversely affect the bands reputation. Although theres no proof for my side, no one really knows but those insiders. Lets not be pretentuous here...

The Beatles are probably the most documented band in history. How many books, articles, documentaries have been produced? Numerous, probably too many. Many of the books were written by the engineers and producers I listed. There is no hint or mention of the possibility that Ringo didn't drum in the studio. None. Anyway, the Beatles never hid the fact that certain people, instead of them, played on their albums. Eric Clapton being the most obvious. Hell, George Harrison isn't responsible for some of the best guitar solos the Beatles recorded. It was never intentionly hidden from the public.

 

And people "embellish" their experiences all the time. In fact, examples are in the news right now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know bupkis about drums so I won't vote for a drummer over another, but I'll vote for The Beatles. I love early Stones (before Her Majesty's mostly), but any band who recorded Tomorrow Never Knows in 1966 is untouchable, and that's the tip of the iceberg. Take 1 is my favorite; only thing nearly comparable from that era I'm aware of is Venus in Furs. Pretty lofty company.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaF4GGAvf3I

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

p.s. I can confirm that Ringo didn't play drums in the studio, he was brought into the band for his looks, being much better looking than Pete Best. I can also confirm that Paul is indeed dead, we faked the moon landing, our political and economic elites are in actuality shape-shifting reptilian aliens from Betelgeuse who happen to be pulling the strings of The Pentaverate, made up as everyone knows of The Queen, the Getty's, the Rothschilds, the Vatican & Colonel Sanders before he went tits up. Mark Lewisohn and others who have meticulously documented the day by day Beatles recording sessions were paid handsomely in quatloos and Orion slave women to perpetrate the myth that Ringo played drums for The Beatles' recording. Wake up sheeple! :o
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

p.s. I can confirm that Ringo didn't play drums in the studio, he was brought into the band for his looks, being much better looking than Pete Best. I can also confirm that Paul is indeed dead, we faked the moon landing, our political and economic elites are in actuality shape-shifting reptilian aliens from Betelgeuse who happen to be pulling the strings of The Pentaverate, made up as everyone knows of The Queen, the Getty's, the Rothschilds, the Vatican & Colonel Sanders before he went tits up. Mark Lewisohn and others who have meticulously documented the day by day Beatles recording sessions were paid handsomely in quatloos and Orion slave women to perpetrate the myth that Ringo played drums for The Beatles' recording. Wake up sheeple! :o

 

HOLY SHEEP SHIT! IT'S ALL TRUE!!! The moon landings were fake! Lyndon B. Johnson KILLED JFK!!!!!! THE CIA KILLED NORMA JEAN!!!!

 

JOLTING JOE DIED FROM A BROKEN HEART!

 

ELVIS IS STILL ALIVE!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, guys... Ringo was not the only rock drummer who was given performance credit on albums he didn't play on. This is a common practice and has been going on since the advent of the multi-track recorder, and here's why, for anyone who doesn't know how it works:

Back when the Beatles were recording music, they didn't have pro tools or any type of editing equipment besides a splicing block, a pair of scissors, a rll of tape, and that's it. What this means is, in order to record a song, the drum part must be played perfectly, with all the subtle nuances that a pro recording demands before any other work gets done. Period. Since most drummers cannot play perfectly every time, they get session players in there so they can knock out the drums, get on with layering of the rest of the instruments, vocals, mixdown, then mastering. And there were TIGHT time restraints on top of it. Another big thing is, studio time is very, very expensive, not including the producer's time, engineer's time, etc. And then there was the cost of the tape, and only about 30 minutes of recording was possible on one reel. That's another cost... This means that, unless the drummer can NAIL drum parts in one or two takes, it makes much more sense to bring in a session player who can lay down all the drums tracks in like a day or two, then make it look like the drummer in the band played on the album because people are in love with the idea of the band being a tight-knit group who would never hire someone from the outside to play on records. People don't care about "who really played in the studio" anyway. That's why no one really talks about it besides engineers that heard it thru the grapevine. I, personally believe he didn't play on a lot of the stuff because there's no motivation to make up stories like that. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

I can site another example like this: In the 80's right thru to a few years ago everyone believed that Ozzy Osbourne's bassist and drummer for his first two solo albums were the guys pictured on the albums that were listed as the drummer and bassist. NOT TRUE. Daisley and Kerslake from Uriah Heap played on those albums and no one knew about it but those behind the scenes. This was kept a secret for decades. And the name of the band was "Blizzard of Ozz". It was not meant to be a SOLO Ozzy record at all The music biz makes these decisions in order to market the band in the name of profits. Just sayin...

 

Daisley and Kerslake are on the back of Blizzard. And Daisley had song writing credits on Diary. No one who cares ever thought Sarzo and Aldridge played on those albums.

 

And Sharon is the one who changed the cover, to promote Ozzy. But you're right that Rhoads, Daisley and Kerslake thought they joined a band.

 

False. Kerslake and Daisley were NOT credited on the original cassettes and records. Word was on the street in the 80's that Rudy and Tommy were the musicians on the first two records and they weren't.

And, in my final analysis my research indicates that Bernard Purdie played on over 20 beatles songs. Somewhere lies the truth, but we weren't there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the masked dildo has spoken, folks. ringo was not in the beatles at all.

 

a friend of a friend of an engineering major told me.

Hey, at least I actually know a couple insiders where I get my info on Neil and the band. One guy was a close friend of the family's, a promoter for Polygram, and I also worked with Skip Gildersleeve's classmate from Lincoln Park, Mich. I guess you're more informed because you know how to use a search engine, though. I've very proud of you and your wordly opinions that you get off yer mom's LCD screen. Well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, guys... Ringo was not the only rock drummer who was given performance credit on albums he didn't play on. This is a common practice and has been going on since the advent of the multi-track recorder, and here's why, for anyone who doesn't know how it works:

Back when the Beatles were recording music, they didn't have pro tools or any type of editing equipment besides a splicing block, a pair of scissors, a rll of tape, and that's it. What this means is, in order to record a song, the drum part must be played perfectly, with all the subtle nuances that a pro recording demands before any other work gets done. Period. Since most drummers cannot play perfectly every time, they get session players in there so they can knock out the drums, get on with layering of the rest of the instruments, vocals, mixdown, then mastering. And there were TIGHT time restraints on top of it. Another big thing is, studio time is very, very expensive, not including the producer's time, engineer's time, etc. And then there was the cost of the tape, and only about 30 minutes of recording was possible on one reel. That's another cost... This means that, unless the drummer can NAIL drum parts in one or two takes, it makes much more sense to bring in a session player who can lay down all the drums tracks in like a day or two, then make it look like the drummer in the band played on the album because people are in love with the idea of the band being a tight-knit group who would never hire someone from the outside to play on records. People don't care about "who really played in the studio" anyway. That's why no one really talks about it besides engineers that heard it thru the grapevine. I, personally believe he didn't play on a lot of the stuff because there's no motivation to make up stories like that. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

I can site another example like this: In the 80's right thru to a few years ago everyone believed that Ozzy Osbourne's bassist and drummer for his first two solo albums were the guys pictured on the albums that were listed as the drummer and bassist. NOT TRUE. Daisley and Kerslake from Uriah Heap played on those albums and no one knew about it but those behind the scenes. This was kept a secret for decades. And the name of the band was "Blizzard of Ozz". It was not meant to be a SOLO Ozzy record at all The music biz makes these decisions in order to market the band in the name of profits. Just sayin...

 

Daisley and Kerslake are on the back of Blizzard. And Daisley had song writing credits on Diary. No one who cares ever thought Sarzo and Aldridge played on those albums.

 

And Sharon is the one who changed the cover, to promote Ozzy. But you're right that Rhoads, Daisley and Kerslake thought they joined a band.

 

False. Kerslake and Daisley were NOT credited on the original cassettes and records. Word was on the street in the 80's that Rudy and Tommy were the musicians on the first two records and they weren't.

And, in my final analysis my research indicates that Bernard Purdie played on over 20 beatles songs. Somewhere lies the truth, but we weren't there...

 

I'm talking about the vinyl record that had a picture of the band performing. Daisley and Kerslake are on it. Daisley also wrote all the lyrics, and he and Kerslake sued Ozzy years later because they weren't paid what they thought were sufficient royalties. I don't know how old you are, but I'm 47. No one I knew thought Sarzo and Aldridge played on the first two albums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pay close attention to Ringo's world-class drumming. I couldn't find anything from the studio sessions, so here you go...

 

Dear Lord, Ringo is an alcoholic! Seriously, one of my disappointments as a Beatles fan is that after the Beatles broke-up Ringo basically stopped being a musician and focused on being a "song and dance man".

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxmP9UDkoGw

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya87u5SfK2w

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, guys... Ringo was not the only rock drummer who was given performance credit on albums he didn't play on. This is a common practice and has been going on since the advent of the multi-track recorder, and here's why, for anyone who doesn't know how it works:

Back when the Beatles were recording music, they didn't have pro tools or any type of editing equipment besides a splicing block, a pair of scissors, a rll of tape, and that's it. What this means is, in order to record a song, the drum part must be played perfectly, with all the subtle nuances that a pro recording demands before any other work gets done. Period. Since most drummers cannot play perfectly every time, they get session players in there so they can knock out the drums, get on with layering of the rest of the instruments, vocals, mixdown, then mastering. And there were TIGHT time restraints on top of it. Another big thing is, studio time is very, very expensive, not including the producer's time, engineer's time, etc. And then there was the cost of the tape, and only about 30 minutes of recording was possible on one reel. That's another cost... This means that, unless the drummer can NAIL drum parts in one or two takes, it makes much more sense to bring in a session player who can lay down all the drums tracks in like a day or two, then make it look like the drummer in the band played on the album because people are in love with the idea of the band being a tight-knit group who would never hire someone from the outside to play on records. People don't care about "who really played in the studio" anyway. That's why no one really talks about it besides engineers that heard it thru the grapevine. I, personally believe he didn't play on a lot of the stuff because there's no motivation to make up stories like that. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

I can site another example like this: In the 80's right thru to a few years ago everyone believed that Ozzy Osbourne's bassist and drummer for his first two solo albums were the guys pictured on the albums that were listed as the drummer and bassist. NOT TRUE. Daisley and Kerslake from Uriah Heap played on those albums and no one knew about it but those behind the scenes. This was kept a secret for decades. And the name of the band was "Blizzard of Ozz". It was not meant to be a SOLO Ozzy record at all The music biz makes these decisions in order to market the band in the name of profits. Just sayin...

 

Daisley and Kerslake are on the back of Blizzard. And Daisley had song writing credits on Diary. No one who cares ever thought Sarzo and Aldridge played on those albums.

 

And Sharon is the one who changed the cover, to promote Ozzy. But you're right that Rhoads, Daisley and Kerslake thought they joined a band.

 

False. Kerslake and Daisley were NOT credited on the original cassettes and records. Word was on the street in the 80's that Rudy and Tommy were the musicians on the first two records and they weren't.

And, in my final analysis my research indicates that Bernard Purdie played on over 20 beatles songs. Somewhere lies the truth, but we weren't there...

 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mFDrl2ldC9A/UL0h7oKNEII/AAAAAAAAE04/026xmXCfvAA/s1600/Ozzy_Osbourne-Blizzard_Of_Ozz-Trasera.jpg

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...