2. music
  3. 1242408822

Overshadowed by bandmates

I was listening to "Real Time" a live CD by Richard LLoyd, the "other" guitarist to Tom Verlaine in Television. It occurred to me that, while I like Verlaine's style, I ultimately prefer Lloyd's playing. I just didn't really appreciate it till he left the band and crawled out from Verlaine's shadow. This got me thinking. Until he left to start World Party, Karl Wallinger was obscured by Mike Scott while they were bandmates in The Waterboys. Now, I'll take Wallinger over Scott.

Some would say George Harrison suffered this fate, too. I think he was overshadowed by Lennon/Macca for many fans until "All Things Must Pass" and "Bangladesh". Any others come to mind?
martykl

Showing 6 responses by audiofeil

audiofeil
4,011 posts
 
Richie Furay- Buffalo Springfield
Chris Hillman- Byrds
Mike Pinder- Moody Blues
Jim Capaldi- Traffic
Ian Paice- Deep Purple
Bernie Leadon- Eagles
Jorma Kaukonen- Jefferson Airplane
John Entwhistle- Who
audiofeil
4,011 posts
 
>>05-17-09: Gawdbless
A band is only as good as its drummer<<

Ringo Starr
Charlie Watts

Stick a fork in that assertion.
audiofeil
4,011 posts
 
Sorry I am not wrong.

The quote was "A band is only as good as its drummer".

I'm not diminishing the role of a drummer but it's quite clear both the Stones and Beatles would have done just fine without Watts and Starr respectively. The Stones would not have been as good with Gawdbless as their drummer as he says but then again he's probably not a professional musician. Or understands music for that matter but there were plenty of competent drummers in England at that time. Some bands like the Who and Zeppelin were more dependent on their drummer. Not the case for the Stones and Beatles. I hope you understand better now.

Some posters don't have a forking clue.
audiofeil
4,011 posts
 
>>Charlie Watts is tremendous. Don't underestimate the man<<

I agree but perhaps you too missed my point. That is, he is not the most talented or most creative or most important member of the Stones. Ditto Ringo Starr.

IMO that is indisputable.

Keep in mind this mini-discussion concerns the assertion "A band is only as good as its drummer". If that were the case the Beatles would only be as good as Ringo and the Stones as good as Watts.

We know that's not the case.
audiofeil
4,011 posts
 
>>05-18-09: Gawdbless
My simple point (seems to have also missed by some) is every band depends on its drummer to keep an accurate (as humanly possible) beat<<

Well then you should have stated that more succinctly as your original quote is "A band is only as good as its drummer".

Your simple point (as you state) and the original quote address separate issues.

Don't blame the readership for your own inconsistencies.
audiofeil
4,011 posts
 
>>but there is no guarantee that a Watt-less Rolling Stones would have achieved greatness.<<

No guarantee, I agree.

Nonetheless, a very safe bet.

I don't recall many songs, music and/or lyrics, attributed to Charlie Watts.

Do you?
More to discover