Carl Palmer as a drummer?

richardh wrote: All very interesting.Some years ago he was asked who is favourite drummers were especially those in the jazz rock field and he admitted he wasn't that interested in that genre or type of drumming.I think he also said that in his mind energy could make up for lack of technique and gave an example (although despite racking my brain I can't remember who it was ...not Keith Moon though). I tend to put drummers into 2 different categories.The rock drummers who put energy first: Bonham Palmer Moon White ...are three classic examples   those that are more technique based: Bruford Peart Hiseman Collins etc   Most prog drummers will naturally fall into the second category but Carl (and Alan White) provide good examples of out and out rock drummers who strayed into the prog arena..almost by accident.Of course Palmer has great technique in some areas..especially the snare..but he was a rock drummer first and foremost and that makes him more interesting to me.

fuxi wrote: Sasquamo wrote: I don't think Palmer really belongs in a list with Bonham and Moon, who, while loud and energetic, had an obvious lack of skill.  Not so with Palmer. Sorry, folks. Although Moon may have lacked technical skill, I'd rather listen to him than to anything by dear old Carl 'Let me take my shirt off' Palmer.

I like Moons drumming, but it seems a bit aimless to me sometimes. Do I mean aimless? I don't know, but for me Carl is The KING!

richardh wrote: Never realised that Bonham and Moon 'lacked skill'.Also I was not suggesting that Carl lacked skill just that he was an energetic who was prepared to sacrifice perfect timing when he was 'going for it'.Thats the essence of a true rock drummer IMO. Also Collins is actually a much better drummer than people seem willing to admit for some reason (anti- Collins bias because of the direction he lead Genesis in maybe ?!).

Sasquamo wrote: Yes, Bonham and Moon were lacking in technichal ability.

Here we go again...that statement is not only bizarre it is just false. If it were a matter of opinion that Bonham lacked skill I might let it go, but it isn't; to this day Bonzo is probably the single finest, most astute drummer in rock history. I'm not talking prog or fusion but even then he is equal or even superior in most areas. In addition, the fact that Zeppelin's music was not always technically focused does not indicate a lack of musical skill, and thank goodness they didn't do what Yes and Rush were doing or we wouldn't have had their marvelous brand of musicianship mixed with sheer rock energy.

Sorry to go off topic but that one really bothers me, absolute hogwash.



    
    
    

Edited by Atavachron - December 31 2006 at 20:19

the same stuff as when they praise Ringo Starr.. Beatles music could never tell me how skilled the players really were (unless I knew them personally)... therefore I'm more biased toward jazz fusion drummers.

Proof? The same 'proof' you have of your claims, THEIR MUSIC. It is akin to saying David Gilmour is not highly skilled because he doesn't play with the same speed or 'dexterity' of Joe Satriani. But this is far from the truth and from what is really important in music. Gilmour has been one of the most sought-after players in the world for his work outside Floyd, and without Satriani's sensitivity and appreciation of a single perfect note or phrase he would surely just be a speed-hack. If you give a fine chef a choice between eating a complex dish with many exotic ingredients or a leg of lamb slowly cooked with just some wine and herbs, more often than not he'll take the sublime purity of the lamb, and know that it took no less skill or knowledge than the fancy dish.   Less is indeed more and the fact that you don't see with that is O.K.

    
    
    

Edited by Atavachron - December 31 2006 at 21:16

Yes, Gilmour has said this and thank all that is good he 'couldn't play fast'. Skill does *not* mean having enough dexterity to play as many styles as possible: "the ability to do something well, usually gained through experience and training."   More; "competent excellence in performance-- proficiency, deftness."

Greatness of any kind requires levels of skill and refinement barely shown by most players, and in fact it is what the greats do not show you that speaks volumes. Besides, I would not have prefered Satch as Floyd's guitarist and I would wager that Satriani wishes for the extraordinary gift of impact and phrasing Gilmour has. Take notice.



    
    
    

Edited by Atavachron - December 31 2006 at 21:58

You could 'play like Gilmour' ?   I think you mean you could play some of the same notes or riffs. Well, OK, I've been playing for twenty-five years, became quite good and couldn't play some of the things he does with the same aplomb (but I can play lightning fast licks, all manner of scales, sweeps, arpeggios) and I suspect that is also true of most other guitarists. Have you ever really tried to *play* Gilmour's solos with the same finesse and subtlety? I very much doubt it. The deep skills, instincts, blues mastery, timing, taste, breadth of knowledge and rock flair...

Further, if your definition of skill as multi-styled applies, then Gilmour wins again, as he outshines Satrinai in both blues and acoustic guitar.

No, no, reality calls.



    
    
    
    
    
    

Edited by Atavachron - January 01 2007 at 00:03

I'm firmly on the side of Atavachron and Andu here. My thirteen-year old daughter can play a Mozart piano sonata (i.e. she can play all the notes), but she could never play them with the same finesse as Mitsuko Uchida or other classical greats. I'm sure the same is true about electric guitar playing. Any half-decent guitarist might be able to reproduce the solos in 'Shine on you Crazy Diamond', but few will sound as refined as Dave Gilmour, who makes the best possible use of his (limited) abilities. As for Ringo Starr, I've always thought his drumming was a joke, but sometimes he gets things exactly right, and I admire him for that. Take the point where 'Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band' segues into 'With a little help from my friends'. After the words 'Billy Shears!' you get a little drum figure that always takes my breath away - perhaps because it's so beautifully recorded.

John Bonham may not have been able to play with the same subtlety or intricacy as jazz or fusion drummers, but if you listen to the way he plays on 'Achilles' Last Stand', for example, or better still, if you watch him play the piece live on the Led Zep DVD, it's clear that he is doing exactly what needs to be done, in perfect time, and with the right amount of energy. You could say that his playing is exactly right for Zeppelin music. But of course the truth goes further than that: Bonham's style of drumming actually helped CREATE Zeppelin's music. (And when all is said and done, I find Led Zep's back catalogue artistically far superior to ELP's, in spite of all of Carl Palmer's supposed technical skills.)

You occasionally hear jazz freaks say that Jimi Hendrix 'couldn't really play'. I'm no guitarist, but it's probably safe to say that Jimi never mastered the same technique as John McLaughlin - or even George Benson. Nevertheless, Jimi has been admired by Miles Davis, Larry Coryell, Bill Frisell and I don't know how many others because of the extraordinary SONORITIES he developed, and because of the poetical character of his playing. Technique really isn't be-all and end-all in music. The main question is: does an artist have ideas (or emotions) worth expressing, and can they express them convincingly?
    
    

Edited by fuxi - January 01 2007 at 08:19

Sasquamo wrote: Referring to andu's writing example, the more vocabulary you have command of, the better you can make the paragraph.