Quincy Jones has lost his mind

[moonpie23]

as a producer, you'd always like to have the very best musicians to work with. Weak links in a band are frustrating. If you CAN replace them, sometimes you do. Other times, you make the record that the band can make. many times, in some of those iconic bands, the creative SUM of the players made musical magic.

What's overlooked here, is that, the most important aspect of successful records (mostly) are: the singer, and the song....No one...NO ONE gives a crap about what that kick drum sounds like, except some drummer...or some OTHER drummer. No one hears that song that speaks to them and thinks "man, if the drummer had just gone to the high hat there, and not the ride, i would have LOVED this song"....

when you have the voice, and the song, moving other players around is easier.


quincy's work is off the chain, but right now....so is he...

[OldPhiKap]

I wonder if Quincy has any opinions about Woodrow Wilson while he’s riffing.

[Duke79UNLV77]

as a producer, you'd always like to have the very best musicians to work with. Weak links in a band are frustrating. If you CAN replace them, sometimes you do. Other times, you make the record that the band can make. many times, in some of those iconic bands, the creative SUM of the players made musical magic.

What's overlooked here, is that, the most important aspect of successful records (mostly) are: the singer, and the song...No one...NO ONE gives a crap about what that kick drum sounds like, except some drummer...or some OTHER drummer. No one hears that song that speaks to them and thinks "man, if the drummer had just gone to the high hat there, and not the ride, i would have LOVED this song"...

when you have the voice, and the song, moving other players around is easier.


quincy's work is off the chain, but right now...so is he...

I guess I must be NO ONE. Which is fine.

[OldPhiKap]

Keith Moon.
Carl Palmer.
Buddy Rich.
Levon Helm.
Art Blakey.
Nick Mason.
Gene Krupa.
Neil Pearl.
Topper Heaton.
Kreutzman/Hart.
John Bonham.
Max Weinberg.
Billy Cobham.

Gotta disagree.

[jimsumner]

Keith Moon.
Carl Palmer.
Buddy Rich.
Levon Helm.
Art Blakey.
Nick Mason.
Gene Krupa.
Neil Pearl.
Topper Heaton.
Kreutzman/Hart.
John Bonham.
Max Weinberg.
Billy Cobham.

Gotta disagree.

No love for Ginger Baker?

Or Charlie Watts?

[OldPhiKap]

No love for Ginger Baker?

Or Charlie Watts?

This may be unpopular, but Ginger Baker doesn’t do much for me. And the fact he is supposedly a major butt doesn’t help.

Love Charlie Watts. Straightforward rock and roll. You can tell from reading Keef’s book that Charlie is Keef’s favorite in the band. (Barely mentions Bill Wyman)..

[brevity]

Keith Moon.
Carl Palmer.
Buddy Rich.
Levon Helm.
Art Blakey.
Nick Mason.
Gene Krupa.
Neil Pearl.
Topper Heaton.
Kreutzman/Hart.
John Bonham.
Max Weinberg.
Billy Cobham.

Gotta disagree.

No love for Ginger Baker?

Or Charlie Watts?

No love for DBR history? The Greatest Drummer Thread

[Devilwin]

Listen to the drum and bass lines here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK5G8fPmWeA

[cspan37421]

Listen to the drum and bass lines here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK5G8fPmWeA

I see your Starr/McCartney and raise you a Moon/Entwistle

https://youtu.be/H2h1MY70uag

Of course, that was a band in which drums and bass were often played like lead instruments, with guitar as rhythm.

[Devilwin]

Close there. When guys are that good, it's a matter of opinion, wouldn't you say?

[OldPhiKap]

I heard an interview with Carl Palmer some years back. Th e interviewermade so e snarky comment about ari go. Carl stopped him, and said: “Ringo Starr was the perfect drummer for that band.”

Sometimes it’s the blend, not the individual ingredients. The Beatles were a revolutionary band in every way imaginable. The Fab Four had incredible chemistry for a stretch that created magic. Quincy Jones be damned.

[Duke79UNLV77]

Close there. When guys are that good, it's a matter of opinion, wouldn't you say?

If it’s which sound you like best, sure. If it’s instrumental chops between the rhythm sections of The Who and the Beatles, it’s as clear as a jumping contest between Dr. J and Larry Bird.

[Steven43]

I like the Beatles, though I don't think any of them are/were top-level instrumentalists. I agree with Quincy on Taylor Swift. From seeing her in years past, I also don't think that's her real, unaltered voice on her latest hit.

Oh man, you must be kidding. Everything I’m going to say from this point is not my opinion but is the consensus opinion of long-time music historians as well as musicians:

Paul McCartney is widely considered to be one of the greatest, most innovative bass guitarists in rock history. Additionally, he is also considered to be one of the best rock vocalists AND songwriters ever. And believe it or not, he might not even be the most talented Beatle.

That designation might well belong to Mr. John Lennon. First of all, he may have the single most recognizable voice in popular music history, and is thought of by many as rock’s quintessential lead vocalist. His guitar style is creative and distinctive (just listen to ‘Revolution’). But it is as a songwriter that Lennon truly shines. His catalog of songs is possibly the most varied and high-quality that exists in all of popular music. The only somgwriters who even rival him are Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen and his very own bandmate, Paul McCartney.

George Harrison is thought of as a technically excellent guitarist who wrote some of the most well-known and loved guitar riffs and solos of all time. Not only that, but like his ultra-famous bandmates, Lennon and McCartney, George is also considered to be one of popular music’s best songwriters. Songs such as ‘Something’, ‘Here Comes the Sun’, and ‘While My Guitar Gently Weeps’ are just a few examples of his greatness. It is truly insane that these three gentlemen happened to be in a band together.

Last but not least is Ringo Starr. Ringo was the glue that held the band together. He was the steady rock that the others relied on to consistently provide the backbeat (along with Paul’s bass) to the music. Ringo never missed a beat and could be relied upon to always play at his best. Countless drummers of fame and distinction list Ringo as one of their major influences. He was the perfect compliment to the playing of John, Paul, and George. And beyond his drumming ability, He had a personality that allowed any of his three mates to feel comfortable and at ease when they might be feeling down or perhaps having a conflict with one of the others.

All in all, The Beatles were far and away the crown jewel of music history. The greatest band that ever existed. There is no close second. Their music will still be played centuries after all of us are long gone.

[Duke79UNLV77]

Oh man, you must be kidding. Everything I’m going to say from this point is not my opinion but is the consensus opinion of long-time music historians as well as musicians:

Paul McCartney is widely considered to be one of the greatest, most innovative bass guitarists in rock history. Additionally, he is also considered to be one of the best rock vocalists AND songwriters ever. And believe it or not, he might not even be the most talented Beatle.

That designation might well belong to Mr. John Lennon. First of all, he may have the single most recognizable voice in popular music history, and is thought of by many as rock’s quintessential lead vocalist. His guitar style is creative and distinctive (just listen to ‘Revolution’). But it is as a songwriter that Lennon truly shines. His catalog of songs is possibly the most varied and high-quality that exists in all of popular music. The only somgwriters who even rival him are Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Bruce Springsteen and his very own bandmate, Paul McCartney.

George Harrison is thought of as a technically excellent guitarist who wrote some of the most well-known and loved guitar riffs and solos of all time. Not only that, but like his ultra-famous bandmates, Lennon and McCartney, George is also considered to be one of popular music’s best songwriters. Songs such as ‘Something’, ‘Here Comes the Sun’, and ‘While My Guitar Gently Weeps’ are just a few examples of his greatness. It is truly insane that these three gentlemen happened to be in a band together.

Last but not least is Ringo Starr. Ringo was the glue that held the band together. He was the steady rock that the others relied on to consistently provide the backbeat (along with Paul’s bass) to the music. Ringo never missed a beat and could be relied upon to always play at his best. Countless drummers of fame and distinction list Ringo as one of their major influences. He was the perfect compliment to the playing of John, Paul, and George. And beyond his drumming ability, He had a personality that allowed any of his three mates to feel comfortable and at ease when they might be feeling down or perhaps having a conflict with one of the others.

All in all, The Beatles were far and away the crown jewel of music history. The greatest band that ever existed. There is no close second. Their music will still be played centuries after all of us are long gone.

I wasn't talking about their songwriting, their personalities/personas, or their voices, though, admittedly, the voice is an instrument. Again, I like the Beatles, but I don't worship them. From their era, for example, I like the Who and Paul Simon (with or without Garfunkel) better. Focusing on technical chops on their instruments, I just don't find them exceptional. Harrison's probably the best, but there are many more technically skilled rock guitarists. When I see arguments that Ringo Starr was a great drummer, I just think Beatlemania can see no wrong. I can easily believe that Ringo was one of the lower level technical drummers with whom Quincy Jones has worked. Quincy may be bitter and taking swipes, but I think there is some truth in what he's saying.

[Steven43]

Let’s just assume he’s right and declare victory for the Stones in the Beatles vs. Stones thread .

There is no debate for best band of all time. It’s The Beatles and then everybody else. The only legitimate debate is whether Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones is second-best. Either way they are a distant second.

Personally, I think the Stones just edge out Zeppelin for second place. Less well-known but brilliant songs such as ‘Moonlight Mile’, ‘Country Honk’, ‘Sister Morphine’, ‘Sweet Virginia’, ‘Dear Doctor’, and ‘Sweet Black Angel’ (just to name a few), give them the edge over Zeppelin. But as good as the Stones were they can’t touch The Beatles.

[OldPhiKap]

I'll say this as a guitar player -- Beatles songs are tough to play once they evolved past the "yeah, yeah, yeah" stage. It's not simple stuff from a technical point of view.

[devildeac]

Some folks just can't get no satisfaction...

[OldPhiKap]

Some folks just can't get no satisfaction...

And I ain't looking for no sympathy.

(Yes, that's a double--negative with multiple other grammatical problems. Once you start me up, i'll never stop. never stop. never never never stop.)

[Mal]

Since this thread has devolved into "Discuss the merits of the Beatles as musicians, collectively and individually" I'll jump in (the rest of Jones' comments being bizarre and/or possibly intentionally yanking his interviewer's chain).

I will never understand the Beatles superfan inability to accept some level of criticism of anyone in the band as something other than an indictment of the whole endeavor, or a claim that they're overrated or something. They were great. They revolutionized popular music and the recording of it. They wrote and recorded songs that stand the test of time. But they weren't perfect. They weren't the only band in existence in the 1960's. They weren't the only ones influencing other artists. They were not hothouse flowers evolved completely devoid of the influence of others upon them or sprung fully formed in Platonic perfection. They weren't each individually the greatest of all time at everything they did. Is it so hard to accept the unlikelihood that the four most amazing instrumentalists a higher power ever put on Earth were all born around the same time in the same English city and then met and formed a band? Over time, the conventional wisdom has become "The Beatles were the greatest band of all time" and as that mythologizing of them has aged, it's come with (a) occasional overstatements of their greatness presented as indisputable truth (looking your way Steven43 ), which inevitably leads to (b) pushback, which can itself go too far, of course. The "the Beatles weren't very good players of instruments" is a common form of (b), and Quincy Jones just provided a particularly blunt and ridiculous example of it.

So, with that said, Lennon was a phenomenal songwriter, and a good but nowhere near Pantheon level guitarist/instrumentalist. Having a few signature moves and unique tendencies that make one distinctive is not the same thing as being "great."

And saying that Ringo Starr was the perfect drummer for the Beatles or a steady hand who never lost the beat is like saying Ringo Starr was perfectly adequate but probably could have been replaced by a thousand others. I give him credit for managing to keep up where a few predecessors apparently couldn't, but that doesn't make him a great drummer or amazing musician. He wrote very few songs as a Beatle, wrote a bunch of what could charitably be described as bad songs thereafter, and was at best a subpar singer. I really like his drumming work on "Dear Prudence" and "Tomorrow Never Knows" but beyond that he was mostly just there, and occasionally came across as a bit clunky and methodical, without a whole lot of creativity or chops.

Which is all fine. It's likely the Beatles wouldn't have worked as well with someone like John Bonham hogging all the attention, and the songwriting might have gotten lost with a more angular or syncopated drummer like Stewart Copeland. That doesn't make Ringo a genius. Jordan and Pippen needed Rodman to do the dirty work, but that doesn't mean Dennis Rodman's one of the best basketball players of all time. And being an all-star off the court, while immeasurably valuable to the band, is not what we're talking about here. That's searching for ways to elevate him that aren't necessary. Maybe our lives are all the better for the fact that Ringo Starr was a good but not transcendent drummer.

I thought the conventional wisdom has swung the pendulum the other way on Harrison, to a general consensus that he was exceptional despite being largely lost in the hype of the moment while the band was recording, and everyone now loving on his good taste and economy. And I don't recall many people ever saying with a straight face that McCartney was anything less than a great bass player whose skill on a number of other instruments elevated him to a very high status.

[CameronBornAndBred]

It is truly insane that these three gentlemen happened to be in a band together.

They were also aided by having an amazing producer in George Martin. I wonder what Quincy has to say about that guy.