JFS #103 The Bernard Purdie Interview....

tamadrm

Platinum Member
Did he play drum tracks on Beatles albums? Find out in this exclusive with the "hit-man!"
Wow...this has been hashed out on every drum forum,ad nausium.It's a lie,it has been proven a lie,over and over.He may be a great drummer,but a lousy liar.The story has changed over the years as to how many and cuts,which ones and where they were done,here or in the UK.

Mr Purdie never learned the the first rule of a lie.That is you have to remember it,exactly the same way you told it,the first time you told it....forever.

Secondly...if this B.S. were true,someone,anyone would have come foward by now to confirm this ruse as true or not.They also would have done so in their own Beatles tell all books,of which there have to be at least a hundred.

If Ringo was so terrible,then why did the keep him?If Ringo didn't cut it,he would have met the same fate as Pete Best.Just watch the live footage of Ringo's playing and tell me this guy wasn't a pro,who actually made much less mistakes then the other three Beatles.

Why didn't the Beatles keep Purdie,and chuck Ringo...like they did with Pete Best?

Remember...the Beatles recruited Ringo...they wanted him in the band,and not the other way around.

Lastly,if Ringo was a talentless as Mr.Purdie suggests,then why did Ringo play on Lennons first two solo albums,seven George Harrison albums,and four Macca albums.

Ringo also played on around 35 other artists studio albums including Peter Franpton,Jeff Lynn,Tom Petty,BB King and many others.

Seems the "he was only a good drummer for the Beatles" is just the classic argument from ignorance.Tell Steve Jordan,Steve Smith or Greg Bissonette Ringo is talentless and Purdie actually played on say, " She Loves You"(yeah yeah yeah as Purdie claims),and the'll to a man laugh in your face.

Put this nonsense to bed.The only story that will change will be Purdies....once again,who will talk about the B.S. to anybody who'll listen.:(

Steve B
 

DrumEatDrum

Platinum Member
Wow...this has been hashed out on every drum forum,ad nausium.It's a lie,it has been proven a lie,over and over.He may be a great drummer,but a lousy liar..

Secondly...if this B.S. were true,someone,anyone would have come foward by now to confirm this ruse as true or not.They also would have done so in their own Beatles tell all books,of which there have to be at least a hundred.
I do believe it was proven he was hired to over dub extra drum tacks onto 3 old Beatles demos made before Ringo joined the band, that were sold as bonus singles in the US without the bands knowledge during the early days of Beattle mania.

Although none of that changes that Purdie has extensively lied about how many tracks he played on and lied about his overall involvement with the Beatles.
 

Pocket-full-of-gold

Platinum Member
I actually believe him. It doesn't have anything to do with Ringo, just how good pretty purdie is......
Hey, that's cool mate.

My daughter actually believes in Santa Claus. It doesn't have anything to do with the impossible logistics behind one man filling a magical flying sleigh full of toys to be delivered completely unseen to every child in the world, all within a 24 hour period.......just how many presents he brings her. :)
 

BacteriumFendYoke

Platinum Member
Hey, that's cool mate.

My daughter actually believes in Santa Claus. It doesn't have anything to do with the impossible logistics behind one man filling a magical flying sleigh full of toys to be delivered completely unseen to every child in the world, all within a 24 hour period.......just how many presents he brings her. :)
And let's not even go into homeopathy...
 

DrumEatDrum

Platinum Member
Hey, that's cool mate.

My daughter actually believes in Santa Claus. It doesn't have anything to do with the impossible logistics behind one man filling a magical flying sleigh full of toys to be delivered completely unseen to every child in the world, all within a 24 hour period.......just how many presents he brings her. :)
Oh geez, everyone is the office is going to wonder why I'm laughing so hard!! haha.


Ok, back to topic, I listened to the whole interview.

He says "I don't want to talk about the Beatles" several times, then proceeds to talk about the Beatles. And then claims he fixed 21 tracks, which is 18 more than anyone has ever found evidence of.

And, as noted, the claim of 21 tracks contradicts his earlier stories about having been on so many more songs.

I actually believe him. It doesn't have anything to do with Ringo, just how good pretty purdie is......
Well, it does, because Purdie has claimed Ringo didn't appear on the first three Beatles albums, and claimed he replaced Ringo in the studio.

I'm willing to agree to the story Purdie over dubbed over Pete Best on some early demos originally recorded in Germany that were later released in America to take advantage of Beatle mania.
I'm willing to believe Purdie didn't know he was replacing Pete and not Ringo.
But how he can take a story about 3 or 4 songs and turn that into 21, and then claim this somehow means Ringo wasn't anywhere on the first three albums doesn't add up.
 

tamadrm

Platinum Member
I actually believe him. It doesn't have anything to do with Ringo, just how good pretty purdie is......
Wow..then I have a bridge to sell you,along with some beachfront property in Arizona.

Which part do you believe?The part where he says Ringo didn't play on ANY of it?Watch any of Ringo's live playing with the Beatles,and tell me he wasn't up to the task,and make that music swing..

If you're the LEAST familiar with the recording techniques of the time,it was nearly impossible to isolate a drum track completely during a live recording,which is how the Beatles recorded their music.They added some overdub and multi-tracking later.

Before actually writing that statement in a public forum,you might want to do some back story fact checking,like a responsible interviewer would do,and not accept anything on face value.

His story has been factually disproven numerous times,which you would have seen had you checked the facts.You might want to talk to Greg Bissonette,Rich Pagano and Max Wienberg.

Purdie is a charming man,and a great drummer.He also adopted P.T.Barnums philosophy of "there's a sucker born every minute".

Refuse to examine the facts,and you're mearly engauging in both the argument of ,"that just makes sense to me,why would someone lie to me,he's so charming."...and the "argument out of ignorance".

As a former NYPD detective,If I conducted my investgations ,and made arrests based on sloppy work like that,I would have been indicted,and I would have deserved it.

So now it's just you and Purdie who believe the fairy tale.Ask him a year from about some of the "facts" of his malarkie,and a different story will emerge.

Steve B
 
Last edited:

eddypierce

Senior Member
Oh geez, everyone is the office is going to wonder why I'm laughing so hard!! haha.


Ok, back to topic, I listened to the whole interview.

He says "I don't want to talk about the Beatles" several times, then proceeds to talk about the Beatles. And then claims he fixed 21 tracks, which is 18 more than anyone has ever found evidence of.

And, as noted, the claim of 21 tracks contradicts his earlier stories about having been on so many more songs.


Well, it does, because Purdie has claimed Ringo didn't appear on the first three Beatles albums, and claimed he replaced Ringo in the studio.

I'm willing to agree to the story Purdie over dubbed over Pete Best on some early demos originally recorded in Germany that were later released in America to take advantage of Beatle mania.
I'm willing to believe Purdie didn't know he was replacing Pete and not Ringo.
But how he can take a story about 3 or 4 songs and turn that into 21, and then claim this somehow means Ringo wasn't anywhere on the first three albums doesn't add up.
If Purdie just claimed to have played on tracks that were actually done by Ringo that'd be one thing, but I've seen him lay claim to playing on all sorts of tunes that he didn't play on, like James Brown's "Cold Sweat" [actually Clyde Stubblefield] and "I Got You (I Feel Good)" [Melvin Parker], Percy Sledge's "When A Man Loves a Woman" [Roger Hawkins] and "Aja" [Steve Gadd]. When you know that these are fabrications, it makes the Ringo stories (at least in my eyes) even less likely to be true.

I was fortunate enough to meet Purdie a year ago very briefly (despite all of the false claims by him, he's one of my absolute favorite drummers and influences, and I admire his abilities immensely); I was introduced to him by a saxophonist I know. At the time I was playing with the saxophonist in a band where we had been doing the Steely Dan tune "Black Cow," and my friend introduced Purdie to me by saying, "Guess what? Bernard played drums on the recording of 'Black Cow'!" I said to Bernard, "Really?", knowing that Paul Humphrey actually played on that tune, and Bernard nodded his head yes. I didn't call him on it, but I find it sad that he feels the need to spread these stories around. He certainly has enough actual credits to talk about without having to invent more of them (and take away from the drummers who actually did play on those tracks).
 

DrumEatDrum

Platinum Member
If Purdie just claimed to have played on tracks that were actually done by Ringo that'd be one thing, but I've seen him lay claim to playing on all sorts of tunes that he didn't play on, like James Brown's "Cold Sweat" [actually Clyde Stubblefield] and "I Got You (I Feel Good)" [Melvin Parker], Percy Sledge's "When A Man Loves a Woman" [Roger Hawkins] and "Aja" [Steve Gadd]. When you know that these are fabrications, it makes the Ringo stories (at least in my eyes) even less likely to be true.

I was fortunate enough to meet Purdie a year ago very briefly (despite all of the false claims by him, he's one of my absolute favorite drummers and influences, and I admire his abilities immensely); I was introduced to him by a saxophonist I know. At the time I was playing with the saxophonist in a band where we had been doing the Steely Dan tune "Black Cow," and my friend introduced Purdie to me by saying, "Guess what? Bernard played drums on the recording of 'Black Cow'!" I said to Bernard, "Really?", knowing that Paul Humphrey actually played on that tune, and Bernard nodded his head yes. I didn't call him on it, but I find it sad that he feels the need to spread these stories around. He certainly has enough actual credits to talk about without having to invent more of them (and take away from the drummers who actually did play on those tracks).
Well, Steely Dan was known for recording the same song with 3 or 4 different drummers and then mix and matching for the final record. So Purdie might have recorded a version of that song.

But otherwise, yeah, I know what you mean.
 

eddypierce

Senior Member
Well, Steely Dan was known for recording the same song with 3 or 4 different drummers and then mix and matching for the final record. So Purdie might have recorded a version of that song.

But otherwise, yeah, I know what you mean.
I thought of that when I was writing my post. But Purdie's sharp enough to know that when he says "I played on that record" virtually 100% of the people who hear that will take him to mean the version that actually got released and that people are familiar with. Otherwise he's being deliberately disingenuous.
 

tamadrm

Platinum Member
Oh geez, everyone is the office is going to wonder why I'm laughing so hard!! haha.


Ok, back to topic, I listened to the whole interview.

He says "I don't want to talk about the Beatles" several times, then proceeds to talk about the Beatles. And then claims he fixed 21 tracks, which is 18 more than anyone has ever found evidence of.

And, as noted, the claim of 21 tracks contradicts his earlier stories about having been on so many more songs.


Well, it does, because Purdie has claimed Ringo didn't appear on the first three Beatles albums, and claimed he replaced Ringo in the studio.

I'm willing to agree to the story Purdie over dubbed over Pete Best on some early demos originally recorded in Germany that were later released in America to take advantage of Beatle mania.
I'm willing to believe Purdie didn't know he was replacing Pete and not Ringo.
But how he can take a story about 3 or 4 songs and turn that into 21, and then claim this somehow means Ringo wasn't anywhere on the first three albums doesn't add up.
Just as another aside to Purdies claim that he replaced Ringo in the studio for the first three albums.

Firstly,he would have had to done this at Abbey Road ,and played live in the studio with the Beatles,because that's how they recorded

Secondly,There are 41 songs on the first three Beatle albums in total,not 21.Alan White played on the single version of "Love Me Do"Purdie is as bad at math,as he is at lying.

Lastly,listen to Ringo performance with the Beatles live.His time and fills are spot on.Speaking of fills,it's also obvious that they were played by Ringo both live and in the studio.

Steve B
 

opentune

Platinum Member
You all just wait for the Chuck Rainey interview....these are not claims this is reality. Weather he played on 2 tracks or 21 tracks get off your balls and deal with it.
lol, hilarious. what is this, the kids sandbox at the park?

hmmm, how to prove a reality? Some schizophrenics might think their dad is Elvis. Likely untrue, but thats their reality.

I like Purdie, but am not buying any of this. I'll ascribe him to a great drummer who can count out time impeccably, but cannot count out his overdubs.
 

tamadrm

Platinum Member
You all just wait for the Chuck Rainey interview....these are not claims this is reality. Weather he played on 2 tracks or 21 tracks get off your balls and deal with it.
"Get off your balls".

What does that even mean?I assume it's an insult in retaliation for our well placed sceptisism,and total disbelief in the preposterous.

Two tracks or twentyone?What does it matter.?

Now you're back pedaling.So then 2 or any number up to 21 is ok right?

His claim was that he replaced Ringo,in the studio, on at least the first three Beatle albums,and Ringo didn't play on any of it.That still adds up to 41 Beatle tracks.

So then I guess if his math is wrong,and we accept this ridicilous premise,somebody else replaced him also....didn't they?The numbers don't lie.Most if not all of these recording deals were done by written contract.Lets see the paperwork.Oh...that's right,the only paperwork involved here dosn't have writing on it,and comes in a roll.

I don't care if Chuck Rainey,The Pope or a player and some cash to be named later interview him....BS is still BS.

Just reasonally explain two things to me,and I'll for the hundreth time,re-examine that facts.Just tell me why the story has changed SO much over the years,and how it's even remotely possible that Ringo , as he has claimed many times,"didn't play on any of it".

If it's really true,then lets get Ringo,Macca and George Martin to interview him.Or Geoff Emerick.

This isn't a personal attack on you or Purdie.I'm a trained investigator,and just call them like I see them and this just stinks of bull.I may say that the two German tracks with Tony Sheridan of him replacing Pete best, could be possible.Possible,but no proven to be true.PROVEN.But Pete was bitter for many years,so why didn't he say anything either.

Just way too many holes,and no solid evidence to back it up.Just because you tell a lie over and over,dosen't ever make it true.

Steve B
 

Pocket-full-of-gold

Platinum Member
....these are not claims this is reality. Weather he played on 2 tracks or 21 tracks get off your balls and deal with it.
And using my very same analogy as before......to my five year old daughter, Santa Claus is a reality. He gave her presents last December.....I mean, she's playing with them now......doesn't get any more "real" than that does it? Perception doesn't always equal reality, my friend.

You're calling yourself the journo here......how about you "get off your balls" and do some journalism? The real kind......the old fashioned kind. You know, where you research the facts and provide some evidence, instead of taking someone's word purely because of "just how good" he is.

Oh sorry, I forgot....this is the internet. The new age. Facts no longer count for squat......things no longer need to be proven. At least, not now that anyone who can type to a basic grade three level can sit on a computer and spout opinions, do they?

Come on dude........go to work, get something tangible, convince me I'm wrong. Show me some concrete evidence to back the claims. Who knows, you may just make a legitimate name for yourself in doing so. Blow open one of rock's greatest conspiracies. Beat Chuck Rainey to the punch. What say you? Up to the challenge?
 
Last edited:

BacteriumFendYoke

Platinum Member
It's ok. I played on the first three Beatles albums. All the tracks. You can take my word - I'm a really good drummer. The fact that I wasn't born until 1988 and I'm five glasses of wine, a whisky, rum and a couple of gin and tonics the worse doesn't stop me from playing on those albums.
 

drumdevil9

Platinum Member
Purdie is a great player but he's full of itshay. The evidence is overwhelming that Ringo played on the records. This stupidity has to stop.
 
Top