I'm quite confident that Rush would have been nothing without Peart. The Police's uniqueness would have been lost without Copeland as well. Both drummers were irreplaceable North Stars.
My belief is that all drummers lead the bands they join. Control of the rhythm section means control of the music. A drummer's authority is unmatched.
I agree about Copland and the Police...but I think that whoever replaced Rutsey in Rush would have had to have some competence given the songwriting ideas of Lee and Lifeson. And Neil is one of my personal gods, so I am not slighting him at all.
Funny, too, that for me, Lifeson is really who gives Rush their distinct sound. I think he is the most underrated guitarist from that era, in every aspect. He blew everyone away from the 70's in my book. Writing. Chording. Soloing...unmatched.
this is sooo true, and a great perspective for sure
Yeah, Lifeson has often been unfairly overlooked. Lee and Peart seemed to take all the attention in that trio. Just too much talent on a single stage.
In a sense, I feel the same about Andy Summers. He was groundbreaking in some ways, but Sting and Copeland absorbed most of the spotlight.
One could argue his ability and/or lack of talent all day long, but I feel Lars Ulrich should be mentioned here as well. Without him, I'd doubt Metallica would be as known as they are today (or even exist, he came up with the name and got in touch with James to start it all off), he was the guy with the contacts in the early days of Metallica, he pulled basically all the strings to get the band known worldwide, did most of the song arrangements, despite of his drumming capabilities (personally, I feel he did a great job for them all the way until the early 2000's). I'm pretty sure the other guys in Metallica would have done great in other bands as well, but as for Metallica as a band, Lars is, and was, mainly the leader/spokesperson.
I think Ulrich's creative importance is overated. We all know how mouthy he is. Im sure James Hetfield is the real leader of Metallica
No, because a band manager is usually not playing in the band... Joking aside though, I still feel Lars could classify as the band's leader (which the thread is about), at least in terms of being the main driving force and the one who pulled most of the threads in the 80's. I've seen quite a few interviews and documentaries to still feel this is the truth. Of course, when the band started to gain fame and fortune, he didn't have to do that much to keep the train going, but if someone in that band deserves to be named a "leader", it should be Lars in my opinion. Yes, James is the frontman and comes up with most of the riffs/vocals. Still, in most of the interviews, Lars is the one who does the talking, has the vision and future planning for the band at hand. Usually, in most of the interviews you only see/hear Lars. He stalked on Venom, Diamond Head, Raven etc. to get the first tours going, he even dragged the band back to his motherland Denmark to record what many would say are their greatest records. That, plus doing a lot of the song arrangements, is enough in my book. One could of course argue how much of a "leader" he is today though.If doing the business side makes you a bandleader does a band manager qualify as bandleader too?
It's easy to run the show from the driver's seat, which is critical for the live TV shows. It seems like it was more popular in the past, especially big bands.