Winter Driving Best Books of the Month Valentine's Day Shop Learn more nav_sap_SWP_6M_fly_beacon St Lucia Bose SoundLink AE All-New Amazon Fire TV Luxury Beauty Valentine's Day Cards Create an Amazon Wedding Registry Amazon Gift Card Offer chiraq chiraq chiraq  Amazon Echo All-New Fire Kindle Paperwhite Prime Exclusive Savings in Video Games Shop Now SnS
Customer Discussions > Music forum

Ringo or Charlie?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-50 of 53 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 10:46:13 PM PDT
Hinch says:
Robert

I agree with what you said about Charlie, except I aways say if you want to know how good Charlie is, just listen to SOME GIRLS(the album).

I've notice the cymbal thing with Ringo too. I love his playing on "I Want You(She's So Heavy)".

Keith was in a class all his own.

Posted on Aug 4, 2012 9:45:26 AM PDT
rainman says:
charlie watts!!!!

Posted on Aug 4, 2012 11:57:54 AM PDT
K. Carter says:
Hinch -

I agree wholeheartedly. Charlie's playing on that album is some of the best rock and roll drumming ever recorded, imo. But I'm not a huge fan of some of his later work - seems like he is tuning the snare much differently, giving it a "hollow" sound. Has anyone else noticed this?

Posted on Aug 4, 2012 12:43:36 PM PDT
ronct says:
I like them both, but I give the edge to Ringo as he was more creative and melodic in his drumming. Ringo just didn't keep a beat he intertwined the drums into the instrument mix. One only has to listen to 'Rain' to understand the drumming is pure genius without all the bells and whistles other drummers so often need. 'Ticket to Ride' is another fine example of the genius of Ringo's drumming.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 4, 2012 3:39:13 PM PDT
Dee Zee says:
Ringo's percussion is also outstanding in A Day In A Life, Strawberry Fields Forever, Come Together, Long Long Long, among many others.

Posted on Aug 4, 2012 6:39:09 PM PDT
Ringo - way out in front. His drumming was so seamless that there were times when you knew there was a beat - but Ringo would just work his magic. There are several clips(from different recording sessions)with Ringo in discussion with one of the others. It was always cordial and Ringo would just simply want to know how they were approaching the song so as he would put it "thanks, I just want to know and you'll get it". Drummers today are surrounded by so much equipment and just seem to want to hit those two sticks as hard as they can and as loud as they can. Look back at what Ringo worked with and how utterly unpretenscious he was. Ringo is #1 in my book.

Posted on Aug 4, 2012 11:33:32 PM PDT
Cool comparison both really similar in style. Ringo has his signature fills but Charlie's stecato groove is also a signature. Both really not to flashy but have a distinct style. Members of the band, glad to be there, and totally in the pocket. There is no way to choose for me, both rock.

Posted on Oct 12, 2012 2:19:18 PM PDT
Ringo is so good but, Charlie has that jazz groove down and there is much more swing in his playing style.

Posted on Oct 12, 2012 3:48:01 PM PDT
Mod Rocker says:
Party wiff Ringo... jam wiff Chawlie... :-)

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 12, 2012 3:57:55 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 12, 2012 3:59:04 PM PDT
DKPete says:
An age old question which, when it comes to Rock and Roll BANDS is a moot point one way or the other.

Ringo was perfect for The Beatles and Charlie was perfect for The Stones. I can make the argument that I liked the SOUND of Ringo's drums better but I can't really say how much of that was Ringo and how much of it was production.

While we're on the "sound" aspect, I have to say that Charlie's drums-the snare in particular, had it's own identity from album to album...again...as much production as Charlie..?? But from Mixed Emotions onwards, it could be any drummer playing on the same set, same tuning, etc...and for THAT, I credit the very generic sounding production values of the last twenty years or so.

Posted on Oct 12, 2012 4:45:03 PM PDT
Ringo. He never got in the way or stepped on any other musician's toes. He never repeated himself. A lot of people dismiss Ringo because they can forget he's there. That's the reason I like him: he melted into and combined with the total sound. It's a very subtle thing.

Charlie is more rigidly scripted without even the tiniest chance of going "off the map" and doing something spontaneous. When Charlie started to repeat the identical pattern more than 4 bars in the 1970's and 1980's it drove me up the wall.

The drummers that might actually inspire me to learn the instrument one day are early Phil Collins, Jack DeJohnette, Tony Williams, Ernest Carter, and Peter Erskine.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 13, 2012 9:18:27 AM PDT
mr.vritic

Ringo. This wonderful man never, ever tried to place the spotlight on himself. As you say, he never got in the way. He would listen to the other 3 , tap out some rhythm on whatever was closest to him, nodded his head and from within he knew instinctly what to do. I've always thought Ringo was partially responsible for the tightness of the group's music. Today's drummers drive me insane. They are all over the place, pounding, trying to hit a multitude of drums etc...not our Ringo. Just a nice kit and he never let anything get out of hand, didn't flail his arms. He just did it right.
I don't have an opinion of Charlie as I don't follow the Stones. Now I find them irritating.
Thanks
Bonnie

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 13, 2012 9:58:11 AM PDT
DKPete says:
Bonnie and critic, with every drop of due respect to Charlie Watts, great summations on Ringo's essence as the perfect drummer for the songs created by John, Paul and sometimes, George.

Posted on Oct 13, 2012 10:18:38 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 13, 2012 11:56:28 AM PDT
Johnny Bee says:
Best apocryphal tale about Watts:

One night after a concert Jagger was very drunk and was calling for his "little drummer boy". Watts took a leisurely shower, shaved, dressed with his usual sartorial elegance, and knocked on Jagger's hotel door. When Mick answered, Watts punched him out and said "I'm not your drummer, you're my f***** singer!" - class.

They were both the perfect drummers for their respective bands.

Posted on Oct 13, 2012 11:35:34 AM PDT
D. Mok says:
I suspect Charlie Watts can play Ringo Starr, but Ringo Starr can't play Charlie Watts.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 13, 2012 12:41:35 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Oct 13, 2012 12:42:40 PM PDT
DKPete says:
It's no secret that Charlie has jazz capabilities so I won't go there with Ringo; but where the Stones stuff is concerned there is NO doubt in my mind that Ringo could have done ANYTHING Charlie did.

Would you like to discuss any specific Stones tracks in which Charlie blatantly outshines Ringo? I'd be more than happy to oblige and compare.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 13, 2012 1:02:05 PM PDT
A customer says:
You realize no correct answer is on there, right? Joseph Swan invented the light bulb.

Ringo.

Posted on Oct 13, 2012 1:02:19 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Oct 13, 2012 1:02:36 PM PDT]

Posted on Oct 13, 2012 11:12:09 PM PDT
Bernard J. says:
Neither were the extroverts that Ginger Baker or Keith Moon were.
No long drum solos, and so on. (Though I did see a drum solo from Watts on You Tube once.)
John Steel from The Animals and Mick Avory of The Kinks weren't the attention seeking types either, just kept to a steady beat.

Posted on Nov 4, 2012 1:06:13 AM PST
Ringo or Charlie?

Jessie Robbins.

Those who know, know what i mean.

Posted on Nov 4, 2012 5:54:46 AM PST
When it concerns drumming most people like the power drummers like John Bonham and Keith Moon. I hear both Ringo and Charlie take their fair share of abuse. A lot of people I know think they were boring drummers and not very good which amazes me. I love both their styles of drumming. If I had to choose one though, I would take Ringo. But really, these two drummers are as good as any power drummer. They just were not flashy and totally played for the song not themselves.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 4, 2012 6:36:12 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 4, 2012 6:39:49 AM PST
club 7 says:
i think ringo has a more distinct sound and his fills as heard on songs like "i saw her standing there" and "please please please" were just perfectly judged and played and so in the pocket.
i also love the distinct sound and shuffle he's got going on songs like "i am the walrus" and i here people talking about how charlie swings but how about ringo on walrus.
certain songs truly display a musical and artful way like "a day in the life".
to me that is drumming of the utmost poetic majestic eloquence.
and man can he cook on songs like "paperback writer" and "day tripper" but always avoiding excess and with perfect fills that sound so right as if it coudln't have been done any other way.
charlie is fantastic too consistantly solid as a rock with a tendency to add a bit more of a swing aspect to his drumming and with great fills.
it's true that "whip comes down" cooks but how about that shuffle going on in "tumbling dice" and in "monkey man".
look they're both great and to me are even.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 4, 2012 8:42:52 AM PST
ronct says:
Roll Up! :-)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 4, 2012 9:47:50 AM PST
Tumblin Dice and Monkey Man aren't shuffles.

How many people on this thread actually play the instrument?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 4, 2012 9:48:57 AM PST
ronct, I assume you saw that bonus clip :)

Even Ringo was amazed.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Music forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  32
Total posts:  53
Initial post:  Jul 31, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 5, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions