Charlie Watts, Ringo Starr: Better than Bruford

[jamesmanzi]

So says Rolling Stone. Their list of the 100 best drummers.

http://consequenceofsound.net/2016/0...t-is-not-no-1/

[jamesmanzi]

The more you look at that list, the more amusing it gets. Starr and Watts are also ahead of Buddy Rich. I didn't notice it when I scrolled thru, but the commentors noted that Carl Palmer isn't on the list at all.

edit: nor Gavin Harrison

[dnieper]

Christian Vander gets in there at #100!

[Mikhael]

It's Rolling Stone. They generally have a collective IQ slightly less than Granite. They display that IQ properly here.

[StevegSr]

Gezz-us, did Rolling Stone confuse Bill Bruford with Wilford Brimely again?

[AncientChord]

[Obscured]

The more you look at that list, the more amusing it gets. Starr and Watts are also ahead of Buddy Rich. I didn't notice it when I scrolled thru, but the commentors noted that Carl Palmer isn't on the list at all.

edit: nor Gavin Harrison

No Nick Mason, Mike Portnoy, Marco Minneman, Chad Wackerman etc. etc. etc.

But Meg White made the list.

[Yves]

Peart at No 4 behind 3 of his idols. I'm sure he's OK with that. The list just suffers from lack of depth. There are people on there fully deserving to be there and then it's as if they only know 100 drummers so eventually everybody got on the list.

[JJ88]

Wow, what a turnaround in how Rolling Stone treat Rush.

[Paulrus]

I'm sure Dave Grohl is higher than them on that list too. Why is anyone still surprised by stuff like this?

[Dave (in MA)]

For some reason I've gotten 4 or 5 of the latest Rolling Stone in the mail. I've never subscribed to it. I don't even look at it; it goes under the parrot. I don't know why I get the thing. Is there a magazine equivalent of "slamming"?

[Baribrotzer]

Well, it's exactly what you'd expect from Rolling Stone - heavily weighted toward stars like John Bonham, punk or R&B trailblazers, and session legends who've played on dozens or hundreds of no. 1 hits. I'm surprised Jim Keltner isn't any higher, considering how many LA singer-songwriter albums he powered, and how RS still idolizes Jackson Browne and the like.

[StevegSr]

Well, it's exactly what you'd expect from Rolling Stone - heavily weighted toward stars like John Bonham, punk or R&B trailblazers, and session legends who've played on dozens or hundreds of no. 1 hits. I'm surprised Jim Keltner isn't any higher, considering how many LA singer-songwriter albums he powered, and how RS still idolizes Jackson Browne and the like.

The bizarre thing about this is that they know who these musicians are. They know that a drummer named Jim Keltner exists, but that's about the extent of it. Sad.

[yoyiceu]

No Furio Chirico?

[StevegSr]

No Furio Chirico?

Or Bun E. Carlos?

[Baribrotzer]

The bizarre thing about this is that they know who these musicians are. They know that a drummer named Jim Keltner exists, but that's about the extent of it. Sad.

I don't really see anything bizarre about it at all. Those guys know music at least as well as most of us do, they just have other tastes. The difference is that they often seem to act as if their own personal tastes constitute some objective measure of quality, rather than being simply personal tastes. Of course, I guess some people here do as well - but the difference is that they usually immediately get told they're full of it.

[jamesmanzi]

I'm sure Dave Grohl is higher than them on that list too. Why is anyone still surprised by stuff like this?

Who expressed surprise?

[StevegSr]

I don't really see anything bizarre about it at all. Those guys know music at least as well as most of us do, they just have other tastes. The difference is that they often seem to act as if their own personal tastes constitute some objective measure of quality, rather than being simply personal tastes. Of course, I guess some people here do as well - but the difference is that they usually immediately get told they're full of it.

Sorry old chap, but I don't buy that at all. How can anyone that knows "music as well as do most of us" consider Ringo to be a better drummer than Neil Peart or Charlie Watts to be better than John Bonham?

I think it helps to look at RS's readership. (If they can indeed read.)

[miamiscot]

Mike Portnoy failed to make the list. Go figure.

[JKL2000]

Rolling Stone has just stated that Meg White is a better drummer than you.




"Hey, at least I didn't marry my sister!"

[miamiscot]

And Bruford at #16 is a joke. Invalidates the whole thing in my book.

(But it is Rolling Stone so I guess I should be grateful he even made the list.)

[StevegSr]

Where did RS place Dave Clark? 3rd?

[moecurlythanu]

For some reason I've gotten 4 or 5 of the latest Rolling Stone in the mail. I've never subscribed to it. I don't even look at it; it goes under the parrot. I don't know why I get the thing. Is there a magazine equivalent of "slamming"?

No, silly. Isn't it obvious? The parrot has ordered a subscription.

[StevegSr]

No, silly. Isn't it obvious? The parrot has ordered a subscription.

That made my day! LOL. And with that, I'll wish a good day to all.

[JJ88]

Well, it's exactly what you'd expect from Rolling Stone - heavily weighted toward stars like John Bonham, punk or R&B trailblazers, and session legends who've played on dozens or hundreds of no. 1 hits. I'm surprised Jim Keltner isn't any higher, considering how many LA singer-songwriter albums he powered, and how RS still idolizes Jackson Browne and the like.

I have no problem with the R&B/funk players chosen, but I can't think of many punk drummers who belong on such a list. Topper Headon was very good, and of course Stewart Copeland who's highly placed, although of course there's always been debate over The Police being punk. Otherwise, I'd struggle.

I can't believe the Top 25 doesn't include Phil Collins- he's absurdly low, for a player that is so diverse. No doubt Rufus will add this to his list of 'drummers' polls'!