Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2018 7:43:18 GMT
Wasn't he just an ok drummer? I tend to think so, in other words nowhere near as great as he's made out to be. Isn't the rush drummer way better? I could be totally wrong, but isn't Peart way better in every way? I mean don't get me wrong I like the Who's music and all, but keith moon is just adequate to me as a drummer. |
|
|
|
Post by Sulla on Mar 4, 2018 14:30:50 GMT
Neil Peart consistently places highly on 'best Rock drummer' polls. And I have to agree with that, in his prime anyway. But he's getting older like all of us. I've seen Rush live four times and he lives up to his reputation.
I consider Keith Moon an average drummer, maybe slightly better, but I'm not really qualified to judge. But the thing is, it fascinates me to watch him perform. He has an animated style which makes him fun to watch. I don't know, maybe he was usually on acid or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by cypher on Mar 4, 2018 16:32:33 GMT
There's technical, and then there's natural style of drumming.
Peart is technical (orthodox), and Moon is natural (unorthodox).
I think Keith Moon admitted he wasn't particularly good. He never practiced, and I believe that towards the end of his life, when he was in the grip of his addictions, he lost a lot of his ability, and he had to learn how to play again.
He was naturally gifted, who had the 'feel', but did not have the gift of 'time'.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Mar 5, 2018 3:52:34 GMT
There's no doubting Peart is technically superior, but if music was just about technicality then Michael Angelo Batio would be considered a better guitarist than Jimi Hendrix. Moon practically invented his own manic style of drumming that was massively influential, where it was more about kinetic, dynamic energy and feel than skill. It worked within the context of an explosive band like The Who. It wouldn't have worked in the context of a prog band like Rush.
|
|
|
|
Post by sublime92 on Mar 5, 2018 5:45:08 GMT
Moon's drums were poorly mic'd and recorded on the studio albums. They lacked the punch and clarity of his live performances. It's a shame.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2018 18:58:25 GMT
There's technical, and then there's natural style of drumming. Peart is technical (orthodox), and Moon is natural (unorthodox). I think Keith Moon admitted he wasn't particularly good. He never practiced, and I believe that towards the end of his life, when he was in the grip of his addictions, he lost a lot of his ability, and he had to learn how to play again. He was naturally gifted, who had the 'feel', but did not have the gift of 'time'. You happen to know where he might have said he wasn't very good, or know what interview that was from? |
|
|
|
Post by cypher on Mar 9, 2018 2:08:59 GMT
There's technical, and then there's natural style of drumming. Peart is technical (orthodox), and Moon is natural (unorthodox). I think Keith Moon admitted he wasn't particularly good. He never practiced, and I believe that towards the end of his life, when he was in the grip of his addictions, he lost a lot of his ability, and he had to learn how to play again. He was naturally gifted, who had the 'feel', but did not have the gift of 'time'. You happen to know where he might have said he wasn't very good, or know what interview that was from? "I suppose as a drummer I'm adequate." ~ Disc Magazine (Sept '70) "I've got no real aspirations to be a great drummer. I don't want to channel all my energy into drumming or to be a Buddy Rich." ~ Melody Maker ('72) "I'm not used to being told to play a certain way. I'm a lousy session player." ~Melody Maker ('75) |
|
|
|
Post by dougb on Mar 9, 2018 11:08:19 GMT
I agree with Towneshend who said "he's not a drummer, I don't know what he is, but he's not a drummer". This was meant as a massive compliment. He was a one off who broke all the rules but sounded perfect for that particular band. It's like Mo Tucker with the VU.
|
|
