Ringo Starr or Charlie Watts???


Charlie is rock solid, like clockwork. Ringo has a flair, more musical. Any thoughts? I myself have to go Ringo.
dreadhead
The collapsing nostril is mighty entertaining not to mention how "cool" his stiffness is (Charlie)...I can't decide...it's like asking which is better: a Labrador or a Retriever, when really there "cut from the same cloth", you know?
I used to think Charlie was a basic drummer till I saw the Stones live years ago. It sounded like there were 2 drummers playing. That inked it for me. Chucks the guy.
Lokie, Keith Moon was the greatest rock drummer ever. Look at the video for "Who are you". We all know that.
Dr joe, I find Charlie to be somewhat predictable, almost robotic where as Ringo was never afraid to take chances.
Babyjdrums, cut from the same cloth indeed but different as night and day.
Dreadhead...I think that you answered your own question. Charlie Watts is a drumming timepiece...spot, dead on and correct me if I am wrong on this, but his background is / was in keeping time in big band jazz. I also thought I read once where Mick and keith went to him on the new songs arrangements and what tiempo the song would take. Ringo Starr is a whole different type of drummer and as important, type of band and music played. Ringo was the right drummer for that band...any other drummer, well who knows what path the Beatles would have taken and ended up on.....yes, he had flair and was a pretty good drummer as well in keeping time.

Baker, Bonham & Moon....again totally different drummers and music played. But, the thread is about Watts and Starr ....not about those guys.