Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Music to Your Ears' started by BeatlesAreMyJam, Jan 3, 2018.
...who would have sung this iconic masterpiece?
But he didn't suck.
I can't imagine the Beatles without Ringo.
He also has written a tribute to George and his Allstars bands have been good. The Beatles were that rare combination where all were extremely talented.
Pete Best? Stu? Maybe Klaus
No ringo no beatles. John called him the best drummer in the world (may that hack comic who misquoted John and slandered ringo burn in hell). John used him on his albums. George used him in his albums. Paul has used him
Keith Moon, Charlie Watts, Paul Hester, Stewart Copeland, Topper Headon, Rick Buckler, Kenney Jones, Neil Peart, John Bonham, Travis Barker, Tre Cool, Mick Avory, Mitch Mitchell, Dave Clark, etc...each has his style and has given us a body of work that can be enjoyed.
You mean Sir Ringo.
Ooooo, more boyband talk.
C’mon, it’s what you live for.
They used to sell memorabilia, one of the examples I read about was pin on buttons. The Ringo button far outsold all the rest of the Beatles.
That's because, as Ringo himself explained back in the day, although he lagged behind the other three in the number of fans who considered him their 'favourite Beatle', he massively outstripped them all in being the 'second-favourite Beatle'.
Such acute perception of mass behavioural phenomenon gets you a knighthood.
A lot of people underestimated Ringo Starr, don't be one of those people. He has an amazing sense of time and the ability to not only be part of the music but to be the core of the music. To me, being able to make things sound simple (even when it's not) is an art unto it self that more of us should strive for.
He played the right stuff at the right time. There are a lot of players, some great and others not so great that don't do that.
Ringo may be the most underrated Beatle, at least in some clrcles. Always liked him and his music.
Paul and John would never have collaborated on the classic songs they wrote together.
Each of them would never have written the timeless songs that they wrote individually if Ringo hadn't been in the band.
There really isn't any other drummer in the entire world who could have joined and made all that happen.
Just by his presence.
Do you see how those statements might sound just a little bit ridiculous ?
Just being reasonable, try this statement : "The Beatles would have certainly been different if Ringo wasn't the drummer". Or : "It's hard to imagine The Beatles without Ringo".
But, reasonable rarely goes along with hardcore Beatle fandom.
It's usually more along the lines of "so and so should burn in hell !"
It's been 5 years or so since my thread entitled "Yes The Beatles were geniuses, but I never need to hear them again" devolved/was misconstrued by zealots so that by the second page what I said was twisted into "The Beatles suck and everyone who listens to them is an imbecile !"
I was simply stating that Beatle-fatigue had worn their songs down to aural wallpaper - for ME.
You can't say that.
I found that out.
Eventually the death threats and profane private messages stopped but, it took awhile.
Ringo uber alles !
Well, it does have a trollish ring to it.
He didn’t suck...get over it. Both he and Sir Paul, easily formed one of the most iconic rhythm sections in the history of music & just remember who put the BEAT, in The Beatles. Hater’s gonna hate
What's the point of a comment like that? Nobody made you read the post. If you don't like the Beatles, fine, that's your prerogative, but jumping on someone's thread about the band to snipe with some crass "boyband" comparison frankly makes you look like a spiteful jerk.