Contest

shemp said:

You cannot know the difficulty if you cannot play it....or the intricacies. Do not try to debate because you fall drastically short on all occasions. I'm certain you cannot play the stuff....thus you cannot truly understand the details, and you don't...

Click to expand...

Do you know how to read music?

BacteriumFendYoke said:

Nice fallacy there, Shemp. Really nice indeed.

This discussion isn't about whether or not we can play the pieces in question.

What makes your friend's opinion objective? Are we into objective ranking now? Well news, mate, there's no such thing in musical terms. There is objectivity in music but not when it comes to preferences.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Like I said last time, Shemp... there is no such thing as "objective" musical rating unless there are hard facts and figures to back it up. Not an "expert opinion", not an "educated thought"... data. Hell, even doctors call it medical opinion, and human bodies are an actual empirical subject.

Duncan is reacting rationally to the situation at hand, and I wish that you would as well.

shemp said:

Then how valid is it to say someone can't swing? How do you quantify it? Is it subjective? Do you see the conundrum there?

Click to expand...

At least that much is true, though at least he's not hiding behind a facade of logic- which opens the floor for competing opinion-based arguments ("Lacking dynamic contrast" is quantifiable, at least). He didn't say "can't swing", just things that many people would likely say are indicators of a displeasing swing.

By the way... how do YOU quantify it?

Wow such ... pontification (as it was said earlier). The OP simply asked for opinion, not validation of said opinion. Then half the responders didn't even answer the question - but questioned others' responses. Since all newer, younger drummers (musicians in general) learn from the example set before them, the newer always benefit from the example of their predecessors.

Hence:

Rich wins - he had the least equipment and did the most with it. He also had very few examples to learn from and certainly no dvd, internet or even radio/tv to glean examples from. Had rock and roll been around when he was in his prime (young), he would have dominated that as well. He had/has no equal.
Bonham comes in second as he was as capable as he was insane.
Neil Peart, who I think is obviously a great drummer, loses. He's out looking for more kit while the other two are rocking. IMO of course.

okay kids, enough from you. Closed... for now.