My Beatles theory is that Pete Best sucked at drumming so bad, the other three Beatles got used to making songs without including the drummer in the creative process. So when they gave Pete the boot and hired Ringo, it didn’t matter how good he was. They already had a process without a drummer. And that’s why most of their songs have terrible beats, it’s because they didn’t rely on their drummer. They’re tacking drums onto songs that don’t need any drums, so the drums are just trying to be mild and inoffensive and not disturb the mix.
Now Queen, that’s a band that knows how to use their drummer. Have a listen to Stone Cold Crazy, that’s a song with a good beat and some GREAT fills. A good fill connects different sections together, which makes songs sound more dynamic. They can change as they go on. The Beatles are slow and boring because they don’t use their drummer to do that. They find a decent melody and they just do that for 3 minutes. Queen can fit three different melodies into the same three minutes because of their drummer.
I dont really care all that much, I’m not a super fan, but I really don’t think the drumming on the Beatles is even remotely bad, it’s just in a particular style.
I don’t think Roger Taylor would agree with you that he has been “used” by Queen. He has written some of their biggest songs and is a great singer too! I have so much respect for Queen even if I don’t like all their music, just 4 guys banging out classics all day long, no backing tracks or hidden young people filling out the sound. Late 80s stadium Queen is just so powerful - strongly recommend watching their live in Montreal concert film, it’s so impressive.
I agree the Beatles are overrated though, I’ve never understood the sheer number of people even today who think they’re peak. They’ve got some good tunes but yeah… snooze!
My Beatles theory is that Pete Best sucked at drumming so bad, the other three Beatles got used to making songs without including the drummer in the creative process. So when they gave Pete the boot and hired Ringo, it didn’t matter how good he was. They already had a process without a drummer. And that’s why most of their songs have terrible beats, it’s because they didn’t rely on their drummer. They’re tacking drums onto songs that don’t need any drums, so the drums are just trying to be mild and inoffensive and not disturb the mix.
Now Queen, that’s a band that knows how to use their drummer. Have a listen to Stone Cold Crazy, that’s a song with a good beat and some GREAT fills. A good fill connects different sections together, which makes songs sound more dynamic. They can change as they go on. The Beatles are slow and boring because they don’t use their drummer to do that. They find a decent melody and they just do that for 3 minutes. Queen can fit three different melodies into the same three minutes because of their drummer.
I dont really care all that much, I’m not a super fan, but I really don’t think the drumming on the Beatles is even remotely bad, it’s just in a particular style.
It’s actually really good, just not flashing. Just what WA needed for the tracks.
I don’t think Roger Taylor would agree with you that he has been “used” by Queen. He has written some of their biggest songs and is a great singer too! I have so much respect for Queen even if I don’t like all their music, just 4 guys banging out classics all day long, no backing tracks or hidden young people filling out the sound. Late 80s stadium Queen is just so powerful - strongly recommend watching their live in Montreal concert film, it’s so impressive.
I agree the Beatles are overrated though, I’ve never understood the sheer number of people even today who think they’re peak. They’ve got some good tunes but yeah… snooze!