Beat Off

[Smackie Chan]

think Bonzo and SRV think smackie is smokin' some good shit in regards to the white folks ain't got no rhythm take.

Wasn't my take.

[smackaholic]

think Bonzo and SRV think smackie is smokin' some good shit in regards to the white folks ain't got no rhythm take.

Wasn't my take.

Sorry about that, Smackie. It was 'spray.

I think I need to start smoking something.

[War Wagon]

Fair enough. I probably relate more easily to Moon's style because I'm only marginally more evolved than cavemen, if at all.

Fair enough? I beg to differ.

Enough with the false modesty. You're easily one of the sharpest mofos here. You know it, I know it, anybody here who pays the slightest bit of attention knows it.

Call it like you see it, let the chips fall where they may.

I believe Moon was every bit the drummer that Bonham was and don't give a flying fuck what arrogant, presumptuous twats like Van or Dins think about that.

[smackaholic]

Easy there wags. Moon is not Bonham. Nobody is. But he is a damn good drummer who had a big effect on rocking drumming in the mid-late sixties. Unfortunately some remember him as he was in the last year or so of his life, a loser junkie.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

that's my drummer...that's my drummer...

[War Wagon]

I may very well be a miserable cunt.

I didn't say that, you did. I would never speak to a lady in such a way.

I would hope you're not miserable but if you are, I hope you're taking steps to correct that.

[Dr_Phibes]

All the session men you never heard of, or never got the glory did all the work, before Bonham watched Joe Morello and had his imported epiphany. Brian Bennett, Tony Meehan, Sandy Nelson, they all had jazz backgrounds.



I remember reading Charlie Watts saying when he formed Charlie Watts Orchestra, 'Thank Christ I don't have to do that Stones thing anymore, Keith Moon saying he hated his limitations with The Who (all toms), Duane Eddy saying 'hot licks' were easy, but he'd lose power and his audience.

[Van]

IMO, Moon started rock & roll drumming. He may not have been the best, but he was the pioneer of it all. And before anybody says Ringo Starr or Charlie Watts, or any of those guys that played with Billy Haley or Elvis - yer wrong. Moon set the tone.

Moon didn't do anything Ginger Baker wasn't already doing much better.

Wags, since you clearly don't even know what 'presumptuous' means, stop using it. You just make yourself look stupid. And no one really gives a fuck what you think about any of this because you've also clearly proven time and again that your opinions on these things are based on nothing more than stamping your feet and braying, "I haven't a clue, but I'm making my claim and sticking to it come hell or high water!"

You do this every damn time. You say something utterly ignorant, someone beats you into mulch with basic facts about which you're completely unaware, and you respond with, "Ummm, I don't care! I said it, and that's what I think, so that's that! You're just ARROGANT!"

No, oatmeal lobes, you're just wrong. Pointing out the inadequacies of your silly takes requires neither effort nor arrogance. It merely requires the willingness to call a spade a spade. You make it so easy.

[smackaholic]

Spray gets it, well other than his take on Baker.

It all comes down to the fact that the Beatles, Stones, The Who are the holy fukking trinity of the british invasion. And 2 of the three had utterly forgettable drumers.

Does this make Moon better than anyone esle?

No.

It just means that he was the first rock drummer with a large audience that bothered to do anything other than tap the ride while alternating bass and snare beats. Perhaps Ginger was doing it ahead of him, but, his audience was a handful of beatniks in London. Moon was doing his thing on every 17 year old's AM radio in '65. Ginger did get some pop run a year or two later with Cream, but, nothing close to The Who's. 40+ years later if you ask the casual rock fan who was the brit invasion, the top answers will be The Beatles, Stones and The Who.

[Smackie Chan]

Call it like you see it, let the chips fall where they may.

I pretty much already did when saying that I prefer Moon's style over Bonzo's. Regarding drumming talent, I'm simply not adequately informed about what makes one drummer better than another, and I'll defer to those who can actually play music and understand its intricacies to provide explanations. Doesn't mean I'll believe what they say, but I'll read it anyway.

This discussion boils down to individual tastes anyway. If I say I like Moon better, and Van says he likes Bonzo better, does that make one of us right and the other wrong? If I concede that Bonzo had more technical skill, a greater sense of musicianship, and better timing than Moon, I can still like Moon better and consider him a "better" rock & roll drummer, because what constitutes "good" or "better" is not quantifiable. Rock music "quality" is not solely defined by the skill of the musicians making it. It's determined in large part by attitude, image, and feel. Chuck Berry, George Thorogood, and The Ramones all play(ed) music that requires relatively little technical skill or musical ability. The music of Rush, Frank Zappa, and The Aristocrats requires far more skill and ability. Does the degree of difficulty correlate to the quality of the music? To some, it might. To me, it doesn't. Some of the best r&r songs are 3-chord ditties with simple drumbeats and crappy singing, while some of the greatest musicians produce songs to which I wouldn't give a second listen. The Ramones didn't even learn how to play their instruments until after they decided to become a band. The Aristocrats are three highly accomplished musicians. Guess which one will still be talked about in 30 yrs, and which one will barely be a footnote. I know, comparing their music isn't really fair since one is punk rock while the other is closer to jazz, but the point is that what most individual music fans consider to be "good" has little to do with how difficult it is to make the music, and everything to do with how the music makes one feel. I've seldom if ever heard anyone say, "That song is GREAT because it's so hard to play!"

Despite the tragic similarities between Moon & Bonham regarding their personal demons, the images they projected were considerably different. Bonham worked hard & played hard, while coming off as a consummate professional. Moon worked hard and played hard, while coming off as a perpetual frat boy. The frat boy image is more in line with what is expected from rockers, and provides for greater entertainment. I have no problem considering Moon a better rock & roller, and Bonzo a better drummer.

On a side note, during Zep's '77 US tour, they did six shows at the (then) Fabulous Forum in Inglewood. I went to the fourth show. Reportedly, during the third show, a HIGHLY inebriated Keith Moon walked onstage and started slurring about how Bonzo was the greatest fucking drummer ever. Wish I woulda been there.

[smackaholic]

IMO, Moon started rock & roll drumming. He may not have been the best, but he was the pioneer of it all. And before anybody says Ringo Starr or Charlie Watts, or any of those guys that played with Billy Haley or Elvis - yer wrong. Moon set the tone.

Moon didn't do anything Ginger Baker wasn't already doing much better.

Wags, since you clearly don't even know what 'presumptuous' means, stop using it. You just make yourself look stupid. And no one really gives a fuck what you think about any of this because you've also clearly proven time and again that your opinions on these things are based on nothing more than stamping your feet and braying, "I haven't a clue, but I'm making my claim and sticking to it come hell or high water!"

You do this every damn time. You say something utterly ignorant, someone beats you into mulch with basic facts about which you're completely unaware, and you respond with, "Ummm, I don't care! I said it, and that's what I think, so that's that! You're just ARROGANT!"

No, oatmeal lobes, you're just wrong. Pointing out the inadequacies of your silly takes requires neither effort nor arrogance. It merely requires the willingness to call a spade a spade. You make it so easy.

youch.



mvscal, be a dear and give van, his pword back, willya? I think you made your point.

[smackaholic]

Call it like you see it, let the chips fall where they may.

I pretty much already did when saying that I prefer Moon's style over Bonzo's. Regarding drumming talent, I'm simply not adequately informed about what makes one drummer better than another, and I'll defer to those who can actually play music and understand its intricacies to provide explanations. Doesn't mean I'll believe what they say, but I'll read it anyway.

This discussion boils down to individual tastes anyway. If I say I like Moon better, and Van says he likes Bonzo better, does that make one of us right and the other wrong? If I concede that Bonzo had more technical skill, a greater sense of musicianship, and better timing than Moon, I can still like Moon better and consider him a "better" rock & roll drummer, because what constitutes "good" or "better" is not quantifiable. Rock music "quality" is not solely defined by the skill of the musicians making it. It's determined in large part by attitude, image, and feel. Chuck Berry, George Thorogood, and The Ramones all play(ed) music that requires relatively little technical skill or musical ability. The music of Rush, Frank Zappa, and The Aristocrats requires far more skill and ability. Does the degree of difficulty correlate to the quality of the music? To some, it might. To me, it doesn't. Some of the best r&r songs are 3-chord ditties with simple drumbeats and crappy singing, while some of the greatest musicians produce songs to which I wouldn't give a second listen. The Ramones didn't even learn how to play their instruments until after they decided to become a band. The Aristocrats are three highly accomplished musicians. Guess which one will still be talked about in 30 yrs, and which one will barely be a footnote. I know, comparing their music isn't really fair since one is punk rock while the other is closer to jazz, but the point is that what most individual music fans consider to be "good" has little to do with how difficult it is to make the music, and everything to do with how the music makes one feel. I've seldom if ever heard anyone say, "That song is GREAT because it's so hard to play!"

Despite the tragic similarities between Moon & Bonham regarding their personal demons, the images they projected were considerably different. Bonham worked hard & played hard, while coming off as a consummate professional. Moon worked hard and played hard, while coming off as a perpetual frat boy. The frat boy image is more in line with what is expected from rockers, and provides for greater entertainment. I have no problem considering Moon a better rock & roller, and Bonzo a better drummer.

On a side note, during Zep's '77 US tour, they did six shows at the (then) Fabulous Forum in Inglewood. I went to the fourth show. Reportedly, during the third show, a HIGHLY inebriated Keith Moon walked onstage and started slurring about how Bonzo was the greatest fucking drummer ever. Wish I woulda been there.

^^^^^^smartest mofo on the interwebs

he's the bizarro wags.

[smackaholic]

Are wag's frontal lobes old fashioned whole or 1 minute?

[Terry in Crapchester]

Wow, 60-odd posts in this thread (including 3 or 4 by Dins), and yet not one of you mentioned this?

The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.

Unless Wags was trying to channel Marcus Allen, this board is slipping, big-time. Pure. Sig. Gold. Right. There.

[Smackie Chan]

Let's not forget (despite its having no bearing on this discussion) that Moon is responsible for Led Zeppelin's name.

[Smackie Chan]

On a side note, during Zep's '77 US tour, they did six shows at the (then) Fabulous Forum in Inglewood. I went to the fourth show. Reportedly, during the third show, a HIGHLY inebriated Keith Moon walked onstage and started slurring about how Bonzo was the greatest fucking drummer ever. Wish I woulda been there.

OK, it may not have gone down quite the way I had initially heard. Moon appears at about the 5:32 mark.

[lovebuzz]

I didn't say that, you did. I would never speak to a lady in such a way.

I know ya didn't. You referenced the miserable cunt factor around here is all.

I would hope you're not miserable but if you are, I hope you're taking steps to correct that.

I'm not. I fully recognize that happiness (for the most part) lies in our own hands and perception.

[Van]

Let's not forget (despite its having no bearing on this discussion) that Moon is responsible for Led Zeppelin's name.

Depends on which story you believe. A lot of people attribute it to Entwistle.

In any case, Page's new band didn't exactly go down like a lead balloon, did it?

[Smackie Chan]

Let's not forget (despite its having no bearing on this discussion) that Moon is responsible for Led Zeppelin's name.

Depends on which story you believe. A lot of people attribute it to Entwistle.

Fwiw...

Moon inspired the name for the band "Led Zeppelin" . According to Oxford lexicographer Susie Dent, Moon, Entwistle, and Page were talking about forming a supergroup. Moon remarked that a particular suggestion had gone down like a "lead zeppelin" (i.e. "lead balloon"). Although the supergroup was never formed, Page remembered Moon's odd expression and later adopted it as the name of a new band. However, band manager Peter Grant spelled "lead" as "led" so that it would not be mispronounced

In any case, Page's new band didn't exactly go down like a lead balloon, did it?

Hardly. But the wiki citation seems to indicate that the proposed supergroup to whom the name would be applied was something other than the band that eventually adopted it. Sounds like Page, Moon, & Ox were going to be in the band, and a singer would need to be found. Hadn't heard that before, if I'm interpreting this correctly.

[Van]

On a side note, during Zep's '77 US tour, they did six shows at the (then) Fabulous Forum in Inglewood. I went to the fourth show. Reportedly, during the third show, a HIGHLY inebriated Keith Moon walked onstage and started slurring about how Bonzo was the greatest fucking drummer ever. Wish I woulda been there.

OK, it may not have gone down quite the way I had initially heard. Moon appears at about the 5:32 mark.

Check out Plant going into full-on Chuck Barris Mode with the Gong Show buzzer and "Get the fuck off my stage!" vaudeville hook on Moonie's dumb ass.

I was at the sixth and final '77 Forum show. Unfortunately I don't recall any embarrassing Keith Moon moments from that one.

[Derron]

This discussion boils down to individual tastes anyway. If I say I like Moon better, and Van says he likes Bonzo better, does that make one of us right and the other wrong? If I concede that Bonzo had more technical skill, a greater sense of musicianship, and better timing than Moon, I can still like Moon better and consider him a "better" rock & roll drummer, because what constitutes "good" or "better" is not quantifiable. Rock music "quality" is not solely defined by the skill of the musicians making it. It's determined in large part by attitude, image, and feel.

The flailing bunch of grade school girls here with the my drummer is better than your drummer smack are amusing. The thing about music morons, is that individual people lend their own spin to the music being played. If they all played the same way, the same style, with the same technical moves, how boring that would be. When a guitarist picks up the guitar and hits a note or chord in his particular style, you instantly know who that is.

When they were trying to find the best NASCAR dives, they put them all in identical IROC Cameros and tried to keep them from cheating and see who was the best driver in duplicate rides. Boring, and it did not last.

There are drummers who are much better than others. All the good ones have very similar methodology. Moon and Bonham are some of the best no doubt. But there are some others, who are equally talented IN THEIR OWN style. Ginger Baker was mentioned and to me is one of the best technical drummers there is, with an impeccable sense of time. Neil Peart is a very talented drummer. Mick Fleetwood can beat the drums pretty good while very high on cocaine.

But there is one who sticks out to me, who while with a very different style and sound, but has kept the back beat for one of rock musics true super groups with ONE FUCKING ARM, and certainly deserves a mention.....Rick Allen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shh2rXs0wLg

Some drummers who were mentioned who could not be compared to any of the good ones, Ringo Starr. Again, a some what talented drummer who was in the right place at the right time, and really none of the Beatles music lent itself to the level of drumming that The Who, Zep and some of the others had. You could add Phil Collins and Don Hendley to that group as well. Super groups, sold huge amounts of albums, but only minor talents at the drummer position.

[Van]

If I concede that Bonzo had more technical skill, a greater sense of musicianship, and better timing than Moon, I can still like Moon better and consider him a "better" rock & roll drummer, because what constitutes "good" or "better" is not quantifiable.

Having "more technical skill, a greater sense of musicianship, and better timing" would certainly go a long way towards constituting the very definition of what makes one drummer "better" than another, and Bonzo possessed all those attributes when compared to Keith Moon. He was also far more creative, with a much deeper in-the-pocket groove.

Basically, Drumming 101.

So, yeah, that makes him "better," especially where timing is concerned. That particular attribute cannot be minimized, not when we're talking about drummers: the timekeepers of the band.

Are we required to prefer the better musician? Of course not, and that's all you're really saying, that you still prefer the lesser drummer. That's fine, but make no mistake, Bonzo was definitely the superior drummer. It is quantifiable.

[Van]

"Su...su...ssodio!"

[Dinsdale]

"Su...su...ssodio!"

I always had a problem with that title... since all that clown did was change the lyrics to Prince's 1999, a more apt title would have been "Sue, Sue, Sue The Dildo."

[campinfool]

Since this thread has evolved into a drumming love fest I have to admit that I don't know much about what makes one drummer better than the other. I just don't really care for antics and needless showboating solos by a man sitting in the back with 42 piece drum set. My favorite drummer I have ever seen live is my home town hero Aaron Fox. So much noise being pelted out of a very minimalist setup, bass drum, snare, 1 floor tom, a high hat, and 1 cymbal that is cracked on the top. Fewer pieces mean quicker set changes between bands which means more rocking the fuck out.

[Dr_Phibes]

Having "more technical skill, a greater sense of musicianship, and better timing" would certainly go a long way towards constituting the very definition of what makes one drummer "better" than another, and Bonzo possessed all those attributes when compared to Keith Moon. .

[dialectic] So don't view it as a pissing contest, one compliments the other, they're both intertwined [/dialectic]

[Dinsdale]

I have to admit that I don't know much about what makes one drummer better than the other.

Despite my board persona, the only criterion that means a thing is... "Do you enjoy listening to him?"

If so... he must be a good drummer.

The rest is just messageboard fodder.[/reality]

[Dinsdale]

I refuse to act human until a thread reaches 3 pages.

[Dr_Phibes]

, the only criterion that means a thing is... "Do you enjoy listening to him?"

If so... he must be a good drummer.

^^^ ayup,

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

, the only criterion that means a thing is... "Do you enjoy listening to him?"

If so... he must be a good drummer.

^^^ ayup,

"RACK!"



Sincerely,

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

I have to admit that I don't know much about what makes one drummer better than the other.

Despite my board persona, the only criterion that means a thing is... "Do you enjoy listening to him?"

If so... he must be a good drummer.

The rest is just messageboard fodder.[/reality]

Van won't be happy about this. Music is a mathematical formula, not a subjective art form.

[Dinsdale]

Fuck Van

[Smackie Chan]

I'll enter as evidence Love Ain't For Keeping. Nice, pretty melody -- that Moon insisted on smashing every stroke on, like he was beating LTS's head in after yet another bad take.

Very familiar with the song, never noticed any over-the-top drumming in it before. Listened to it again, and Moon seems rather restrained in it. Can kinda hear where you're coming from - Bonham or any other drummer likely woulda done it differently - but I certainly don't hear Moon "smashing every stroke." It should be noted, though, that the song was originally a hard rocker that was reworked with acoustic guitars. However, it retained its hard edge on stage and was used to open The Who's concert act during that period. Perhaps Moon's drumming was an intentional remnant of the song's original hard edge. Or, as you noted, simply evidence of his drumming barbarism. Sounds fine to me, though.

[Smackie Chan]

Are we required to prefer the better musician? Of course not, and that's all you're really saying, that you still prefer the lesser drummer. That's fine, but make no mistake, Bonzo was definitely the superior drummer. It is quantifiable.

I wouldn't consider it quantifiable, but I won't argue that point. For now, at least. If we switch the discussion to guitarists (as if that subject hasn't been given the dead horse treatment), you've mentioned on a number of occasions that Page is one of your favorites despite being notoriously sloppy. I would consider "sloppiness" (which may be an adjective that could be applied to Moon's drumming) to be a sign of inferior musicianship. Would you? If so, you're saying you prefer a lesser guitarist over others who are, um, "neater," meaning that despite his technical shortcomings, you prefer the sounds he's able to make with his instrument over those produced by guitarists who make fewer mistakes and may be better musicians," which is pretty much all I'm saying as it relates to Bonzo vs Moon. It's an issue of style over pure musical ability.

Judging music, art, or anything creative doesn't lend itself to quantifiable measurements to determine merit. There's nothing wrong with saying "Moon is better than Bonham" or "Page is better than Govan," despite unquantifiable evidence to the contrary. It's a matter of taste, which is different than making a claim like, "Tyson Gay is a better sprinter than Usain Bolt." This is an argument that can be quantified and is not a matter of taste. You can certainly like Gay (:softball:) better than Bolt as a person, but there's ample quantifiable data to prove that Bolt is a better sprinter, since there is a numeric goal that can be objectively measured. There is no such goal in music.

[smackaholic]

I would consider "sloppiness" (which may be an adjective that could be applied to Moon's drumming) to be a sign of inferior musicianship.

Nahhh, I'd say it was more a sign of having an insatiable appetite for heroin.

As to Page's level of talent, I would score him an 8 out of 10 when it comes to guitar chops. But, if the topic is ability to put together an awesome sounding song, he is pretty much in a class by himself. OK, maybe John Lennon is in that class as well and his guitar skills were more like a 4 on a scale of 10.

[Dr_Phibes]

S Also, as smackaholic already alluded to, Bonham did things with just one bass drum that most drummers can't manage with two. That's what Page is referencing in "Good Times, Bad Times."

There's usually something to it, Sandy Nelson used to get accused of over-dubbing. When he had a free hand, he'd drop it down to the bass drum and beat along with his pedal, no-one saw him doing it.

[Dee Snutz]

Nobody should confuse being an artist w a musician. As someone stated earlier, music is a high degree of math. Not completely, but innate understanding of meter is a fundamental component of music. I can put a metronome against two drummers and prove conclusively one drummer's superiority to another. Beyond that, it's all subjective. And every musician has the same 12 notes to work with. Someone else pointed out, John Lennon is not regarded as a stellar guitarist. But Lennon also once said "I'm an artist. And if you give me a Tuba and I'll bring you something out of it". Art is impossibly subjective. If you were to base your opinion on general consensus, Mariah Carey is the greatest recording artist of all time.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

But Lennon also once said "I'm an artist. And if you give me a Tuba and I'll bring you something out of it".

I'm willing to bet Lennon's English wasn't nearly as clumsy as your posting.

[Dee Snutz]

I'm willing to bet Lennon's English wasn't nearly as clumsy as your posting.

Well, I'm not here because I got bored polishing all my Pulitzers.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

I figured you were here because you got bored polishing all of your Grammys, what, with your "None of you know music but I do because I'm a fucking genius" take, which you smartly edited into something a tad less obnoxious. :wink: