Wandering Pixie and Chrxtopher.
It was cool to meet them. I have had a few online conversations with them prior to the show, and the meeting was very cool. Good people.
Why Neil Peart is the best rock drummer alive, a more nuanced view
chrxtopher
The Drum awards thread got me thinking about this notion we often hear that Neil is the best drummer, or not. Here, at great length, is why I feel Neil Peart is the best rock drummer alive.
You hear Rush fans say all the time that Neil Peart is ?the best drummer in the world.? At this point it has almost become dogma. But what does that mean, ?best drummer?? I think to most people it means most virtuosic, which amounts to: the furthest degree away from what the amateur can play, technically?the faster the playing, the more beats crammed into a fill, the more double-kick flourishes, the more polyrhythmic meters. But this misses the point. Technical virtuosity is hardly the best, or only, means to judge a drummer, anymore than vocabulary or multi-syllabic words are good means for judging a writer. When looking at technical virtuosity, Neil has many peers, if not superiors. If you bring up Neil?s name to a non-Rush-loving drum enthusiast, you?ll often be beaten back by a litany of names that include Steve Smith, Dave Weckl, Billy Cobham, Steve Gadd, Terry Bozzio, and Bill Bruford. You might also hear Mike Portnoy and Gavin Harrison these days. And I have a feeling that if you had a drumming version of the game of HORSE between Neil and any of those guys (?I can do this, can you??), Neil might well lose. This is missing the point.
Why do so many Rush fans claim Neil is the greatest? Well, he is certainly a virtuoso, and early Rush music (when Neil built his repuation) was chock full of odd signatures and roundhouse fills. Plus he would play those solos in concert. But what most don?t realize is that his solos, while virtuosic, are not beyond the capabilities of mortal drummers. What made (and still make) them great is the musicality and structure that Neil composed and executed them with. I think most Rush fans are wrong in their understanding of Neil?s greatness.
Here is why I feel Neil Peart is the best rock drummer alive today (Bonham and Moon are saints beyond compare). Neil is excellent in so many aspects of drumming, in composition, orchestration, articulation and execution.
Composition ? Anybody who has watched Neil?s video, A Work In Progress, will recall him talking about ?serving the song.? Neil is known as a busy player, and yet he?s not nearly as busy and complicated as many progressive rock drummers. Nor does he get in the way of the song as much as some. What grabs me, and holds my interest most in Neil?s playing is not the complexity or virtuosity, but the simple things that are so effective. He creates these rhythmic features, phrases, and accents that I wait for and am compelled by. For example, in Limelight there are two measures just before the second verse where the riff is restated, and in the second measure Neil does a sort of reversal with kick and snare. It?s not difficult, any decent amateur could play it without problem, But the composition of that moment is absolutely brilliant, and that?s a talent (maybe an art) that most fail to appreciate. Another example from the same record would be Red Barchetta. In the outro (5:54) there is a simple fill of three beats, like quarter notes that begin with a slightly offset one on the snare. Any drummer could play it, but no drummer could think of it. I?m constantly trying to compose something with the simplicity and elegance of that fill. Just one more ? the flam/kick pattern at 17:42 in 2112 (Blat-da-dum Blat-da-dum, Bash Bash ? BOUZJE!!). Simple, and yet so compelling. To use the analogy of writing, it?s like the poet who uses a few simple words, but conveys an image that sticks in the reader?s mind and draws them in for a second pass.
Orchestration ? Many drummers play over the music, in addition to the music, or in spite of the music. Neil plays in a way that his parts are incorporated into the music. His playing brings out more of the other instruments rather than hiding them. He gives space where it?s needed, adds propulsion when called for. He can be the thunder, but also the light spring rain. And many times his accents are to highlight guitar (and bass) phrases, as if he?s pointing them out for the listener.
Another kind of orchestration is the way Neil hears, and plays time. Most pop music, most rock is in 4/4 time, and occasionally 3/4. Those are danceable, accessible meters for the average listener. One of the most challenging meters for the casual listener is 7/4 or 7/8. The dropped beat means that your head is suddenly bobbing up, instead of down, on the beat. So it is quite amazing to realize that most of Rush?s most played songs on the radio involve passages of seven: Tom Sawyer, Limelight, Freewill, Subdivisions, The Spirit of Radio, Closer to the Heart, and Distant Early Warning. Why is that the general public can rock out to Tom Sawyer, much of which is in 7/8? Because of Neil?s creativity with meter and understanding of pulse and the measure. He divides the measure, or combines measures, in ways that make the oddest signatures feel natural. Tom Sawyer?s middle section is a graduate course in how many ways to consider the 7/8 measure. You can almost hear Neil saying, ?now let?s try it this way.? And yet every one is adding appropriate accents that amplify the other players rather than overshadow them. Furthermore, the way Neil transitions between different signatures is a work of subtlety, underappreciated by most. If you take apart Limelight metrically, you?ll find that just in the first minute of the song the signature changes from 4/4 to 7/4 to 3/4 to 4/4 and back to 7/4, and this is one of Rush?s most popular songs, played daily on rock radio.
And yet another orchestration is in the vocabulary of sounds Neil exercises. And I don?t mean that he simply has a lot of different drums to hit. Even within a fill using the snare/toms/cymbals you hear much more than the conventional roll moving from snare to tom to tom to floor. A fill might begin on a tom, move to the snare, hit a cymbal, and finish with a kick triplet. And again, it all fits well with the music. Like the writer who avoids returning to a clich?, but instead finds a new interesting way to express an idea.
Articulation ? A short one to explain, but often overlooked. Neil?s fundamentals are very strong and sharp. He can play a big, fast, roundhouse fill (example: Red Barchetta 3:41) and cleanly strike every beat so that it is clear from the others. Furthermore the spacing between the hits is perfect and even, and that adds a nearly subliminal musicality to the playing. You don?t even realize why it sounds so good. The equivalent in writing might be a poet who reads aloud with very clear diction and good pacing, as opposed to one who mumbles and slurs, or reads too fast.
Execution ? Neil writes very challenging parts to play, complicated, rarely repeating, and physically demanding. And when he tours, night after night, he repeats everything pretty much note-for-note. If the fill is a one measure roll of 1/16 notes across the toms, beginning with a triplet, that?s what you?re going to hear live, every show. And you?ll hear it clearly. He strikes each note hard and clean, making the drum speak with its full voice. And of course, there?s the solo. For some, it?s a bathroom break, but not for me. Particularly on the S&A tour where the first section was improvised night-to-night, it was a fascinating few minutes. And just to watch the man play a double stroke roll on the snare with such fluidity in that traditional grip, it?s a treasure to behold.
So, we can debate about drummers with more speed, more technique, more pizzazz. But, for me Neil is the best rock drummer alive. And if you think there?s somebody ?better,? put on their best work and see if it moves you (not just impresses you) as much as Red Barchetta.
