Bonham and Baker have more influence relevant to this day than Ringo does, I think.

And note, just because the Beatles have sole more records does not directly correlate to more influence. I enjoy the Beatles occasionally and am a drummer myself, but when I listen to them it doesn't automatically mean that Ringo influences my playing.

[QUOTE=Eliminator Jr.]Who are the Beatles?[/QUOTE]
bunch of old guys who did drugs and sang about walruses.

no big deal, really.

[QUOTE=Lunch]Bonham and Baker have more influence relevant to this day than Ringo does, I think.

And note, just because the Beatles have sole more records does not directly correlate to more influence. I enjoy the Beatles occasionally and am a drummer myself, but when I listen to them it doesn't automatically mean that Ringo influences my playing.[/QUOTE]

How so? I haven't heard a drum solo in ages, which was basically Bonham's claim to fame. Besides the drum solos I don't think there's anything that Bonham can do that Ringo can't. In the context of the song's Ringo's on the same playing field. I'm listening to Dazed and Confused and the beginning's drums remind of ringo's and the filles are reminiscent of Come Together. Name a modern band that sounds more like one of those two people rather than Ringo.

Interesting you should compare the drumming on Dazed and Confused to that of Come Together, when you should consider Dazed and Confused was recorded in late 1968 and released in January 1969, while Abbey Road wasn't released until September that year.

Have you ever listened to Led Zeppelin? If you think all Bonham was known for was Moby Dick, it appears as though you haven't. Bonhan is known primarily for his unbelievable power, thunderous performance, groove, but also his touch and the other dimension of his playing that he developed as Led Zeppelin grew and progressed together as a group (compare Bonham's drumming on No Quarter to his early blues bursts on LZ I). Also, I'd like to see Ringo play Bonham signatures like Achilles Last Stand or In My Time of Dying, or hell, even When the Levee Breaks.

Ringo had influence because he was the first to usher in the new age of drumming in rock, not because he is better than all the drummers who came after him. His influence is trackable to an extent, but it eventually becomes obvious that Bonham (and Baker before him) were there to take drumming to the next level and improve on what Ringo did. Bonham and Baker became the leaders in ushering in almost all heavy rock and metal drumming after their time and are both superior in ability (at least from what we can tell from the recordings of the era).

While it is true that many simple drummers of today would possibily site Ringo as an influence, I don't think his influence is any more widespread than all the drummers today who still look back to what Bonham did with his great dynamics, rhythm, and power. Also, Bonham is still recognized for being a relatively simple drummer, more concerned with touch and groove than showing off (much like Ringo) although more drummers would site Bonham as more an influence because he had more dimensions and was ultimately a better player than Ringo.

[QUOTE=sr800bkBassist]bunch of old guys who did drugs and sang about walruses.

no big deal, really.[/QUOTE]

No big deal? ha wow its not like in the
United Kingdom alone they have released more
than forty different singles, albums and EPs that
have reached number one.

sorry, just had to say

He was being sarcastic.

[QUOTE=El_Goodo]How did they influence more people? Ringo has no influence? Then what drummer are the 25+million people who bought The Beatles #1's cd in 2000 listening to? The Beatles have sold more records than all those drummer's bands, and therefore more people have heard them. I haven't heard any drummer today that sounds like Moon, Bonham, or Baker. Most band's seem to prefer the tight knit style of Ringo (althoug minus alot of the fills that Ringo did).

[/QUOTE]

I am a drummer, I own more Beatles records than I do Who or Zeppelin records, yet I find my playing FAR more influenced by Bonham and Moon than Ringo. Album sales does not necessarily mean influence. I'll agree that The Beatles have probably influenced more bands than the Who or Zeppelin, but there is no way in hell Ringo has influenced more drummers than Moon or Bonham.

[QUOTE=Diabolus in Musica]He was being sarcastic.[/QUOTE]

shut up,:o I'm not that smart

[QUOTE=El_Goodo]How did they influence more people? Ringo has no influence? Then what drummer are the 25+million people who bought The Beatles #1's cd in 2000 listening to? The Beatles have sold more records than all those drummer's bands, and therefore more people have heard them. I haven't heard any drummer today that sounds like Moon, Bonham, or Baker. Most band's seem to prefer the tight knit style of Ringo (althoug minus alot of the fills that Ringo did).

All the members of the beatles were a crucial part! John Lennon and Paul probably would have either pissed of Keith Moon till the point that he would have quit, or they would have got rid of him because he could not play what they wanted. Ringo's personality also probably helped keep the band together a little longer. And we can't forget his great vocal performances, With A Little Help From My Friends, and Yellow Submarine wouldn't have sounded the same with anyone else. And Octopus Garden is a great song, and Don't Pass Me By to a lesser extent.[/QUOTE]


I said he almost has no influence now, what drummer that lives today puts on a Beatle track to hear their incredible drummer, well none.
Well I'm a drummer too I get most of my inspiration from Moon and I love Baker andBonham's drumming, simply because it is amazing.
And you don't hear drummers that play like Moon, Bonham or Baker because al most no one can match them in skills ... Ringo is easy to play you hear drummers like him because that beats are the basic too drumming(and don't say he made those beats ;) because that isn't true)

Anybody else see those commercials with All You Need is Love and Got To Get You Into My Life?

Dam[size=2]n[/size] Michael Jackson.

I hate the thought of beatles songs in commercials...

[QUOTE=clown_phobia]I hate the thought of beatles songs in commercials...[/QUOTE]

yeah. it just kinda ruins the song a bit

I don't think it ruins them at all. Songs like All You Need Is Love and Got To Get You Into My Life were more or less made for commercials...except for the fact that Paul wrote GTGYIML about weed haha.

I thought Paul wrote GTGYIML about LSD. I could be wrong, but I think I've heard that before.

He wrote Got To Get You Into My Life about marijuana, as he stated in the Anthology book. And I'm on the fence about Beatles songs on commercials. What was worse was when Paul did the halftime show. Two days later, I started seeing commercials of Destiny's Child singing a crap version of Drive My Car.

Haha, that's unfortunate. He put on the best half-time show I've ever seen though. Infinitely better than that N'Sync-Aerosmith piece of shi[I]t[/I] show the year before.

seeing Beatles songs in commercials really bothers me.

it's like somebody taking a classic painting and using it to advertise gum.

The worst part is that All You Need is Love is so anti-commercial. It's being used to advertise credit cards, for christ's sake. The song basically says "hey, you don't need all this crap!" We should surprise Chase with a flood of angry letters. Or explosives. No, letters. Definately letters.

123

The worst offense ever was when some stock company or something like E-Trade or whatever used Volunteer's by Jefferson Airplane in their commercial. That was a travesty.

yeah I hate Beatles songs in commercial. When Nike put Revolution in their ads from the late 80s, that really riled Paul up.

Back on the topic of Ringo....

the reason why I said hes been more influential then everybody else combined is for one reason: 2-9-64. Over 70 million people in the US saw their debut American performance. Everybody saw Ringo....he was towering over the band, and he played Ludwigs. During that next year or two, Ludwig was hard pressed to pump out units fast enough, because everyone wanted one....because Ringo played one! Everybody started playing matched grip, because Ringo was the first one to do it (in the 20th century at least).

Those 2 years in itself are enough to topple everybody else.

Do others influence me? Hell yeah. Moon, Mitchell, and Paice are my three big influences right now. Of course, Paice started playing drums because of Ringo, as with me. Imagine that.

[QUOTE=Seafroggys]yeah I hate Beatles songs in commercial. When Nike put Revolution in their ads from the late 80s, that really riled Paul up.

Back on the topic of Ringo....

the reason why I said hes been more influential then everybody else combined is for one reason: 2-9-64. Over 70 million people in the US saw their debut American performance. Everybody saw Ringo....he was towering over the band, and he played Ludwigs. During that next year or two, Ludwig was hard pressed to pump out units fast enough, because everyone wanted one....because Ringo played one! Everybody started playing matched grip, because Ringo was the first one to do it (in the 20th century at least).

Those 2 years in itself are enough to topple everybody else.

Do others influence me? Hell yeah. Moon, Mitchell, and Paice are my three big influences right now. Of course, Paice started playing drums because of Ringo, as with me. Imagine that.[/QUOTE]
i also heard he was the first to use a drum rise.

We'll I guess it's debatable over his technicl skill, but what's not debatable is that he had/has a great influence on drummers like SeaFroggy's said. And he was the template for what a rock drummer was, he didn't count bars, he played the song. And on the opening track of Sgt. Pepper he played drums the way that he believed modern drumming was headed.

[QUOTE=Wikipedia]Ringo Starr's drumming was tasteful, precise, and imaginative. Ringo also changed the traditional way of holding drum sticks. Before Ringo, nearly all drummers held drum sticks with the "traditional" grip, with the left hand stick held like a chopstick.

'Before Ringo, drum stars were measured by their soloing ability and virtuosity,' says drummer Steve Smith. 'Ringo's popularity brought forth a new paradigm in how the public saw drummers. We started to see the drummer as an equal participant in the compositional aspect. One of Ringo's great qualities was that he composed unique, stylistic drum parts for The Beatles songs. His parts are so signature to the songs that you can listen to a Ringo drum part without the rest of the music, and still identify the song.'

Starr is left-handed yet plays a right-handed kit; his tendency to lead with his left hand contributes to his distinctive drumming style.

Starr is also notable for having advanced various modern drumming techniques (for playing and recording) such as the matched grip, placing the drums on high risers for visibility as part of the band, tuning the drums lower, and using muffling devices on tonal rings, along with his general contributions to The Beatles as a whole.
[/QUOTE]

Well I guess he did have little influence, no one plays with his style of grip anymore do they, and everyone's seem to gone back to viewing drummers as non-important members to the band /sarcasm

And on a final note I don't think Bonham or Moon ever really had to play the drums and sing, or wrote any songs for their band. Although I believe Moon had a [I]succesful[/I] solo cd...

While I concur with everything you've said, Bonham did make songwriting contributions to Led Zeppelin in songs like Kashmir and The Ocean. Other than that you're spot on.

[QUOTE=Bron-Yr-Aur]While I concur with everything you've said, Bonham did make songwriting contributions to Led Zeppelin in songs like Kashmir and The Ocean. Other than that you're spot on.[/QUOTE]

Was that honesty or is their some sarcasm? I can't tell.

Ringo's contributions to the Beatles song writing is laughable. I can't believe anyone is trying to argue Starr over Moon or even Bonham. I'm no drummer but this is like trying to say that John was a superb guitarist. Its just not true.
Influence isn't everything.

Actually, Moon sang on a few Who tracks, most notably Bell Boy. Not that it matters though. If I want someone who can do both I'll go to Levon Helm (of the Band), who destroys Ringo in both categories.

An when looking at Sgt. Pepper's to try and see Ringo's influence, don't forget that Moon and Baker already had recordings released the previous year that showed maybe just a little bit more about where rock drumming was headed than Ringo did on Sgt. Pepper's.

Or better yet that Canadian dude from Death From Above 1979.

As for writing Peart writes far more songs and is far superior technically.

[quote]While I concur with everything you've said, Bonham did make songwriting contributions to Led Zeppelin in songs like Kashmir and The Ocean. Other than that you're spot on.[/quote]

Complete and utter honesty.

[QUOTE=Jacaranda]Ringo's contributions to the Beatles song writing is laughable. I can't believe anyone is trying to argue Starr over Moon or even Bonham. I'm no drummer but this is like trying to say that John was a superb guitarist. Its just not true.
Influence isn't everything.[/QUOTE]

Octopus Garden is a classic, and all the song's Ringo sing's Paul and John wrote especially for him to song, I doubt Paul or John would have sang a song like With A Little Help From My Friends, or Yellow Submarine. And one night after work in the studio Ringo mixed two phrases together and ended up saying "It's been a hard days night," guess what song John wrote after that? And Ringo's easy-going personality helped the band through alot of tough times.

Speaking of John why is that most people sooner pick on Ringo for not performing 30 minute drum solo's at the end of every track, rather than John for not playing like Jimi Hendrix.

And I think we can all agree that The Beatles had a big influence at least on the who (listen to the kids are alright, more of a blatant beatles rip-off than anything Oasis ever did), and to a certain extent on Led Zeppelin (Fool In The Rain?).