Matched Gripper
Active Member
All of the above, and more!
The Grand Master Buddy Rich
- Thread starter magand
- Start date
Stroman
Diamond Member
When I saw Buddy live, he had a towel laying on the second floor tom. He wiped his face with it now and then. But he didn't play the second floor tom that night.
What he DID have, that I've never seen in any clips, was a pair of concert toms off to the left. He played those a bit, but mostly just the four piece. I was in about the fourth row at a beautiful opera house. I was 18 and an eager student. His power, speed, and (to me) his complexity were mind blowing. I've often thought his drum sound was pretty crappy in video clips, but live it was very solid and powerful.
So, I vote for both complex and fast, although the complexity was from a more innocent era.
What he DID have, that I've never seen in any clips, was a pair of concert toms off to the left. He played those a bit, but mostly just the four piece. I was in about the fourth row at a beautiful opera house. I was 18 and an eager student. His power, speed, and (to me) his complexity were mind blowing. I've often thought his drum sound was pretty crappy in video clips, but live it was very solid and powerful.
So, I vote for both complex and fast, although the complexity was from a more innocent era.
Benthedrummer
Silver Member
So, going by these examples on the video it seems that he played relatively basic stickings but orchestrated them around the kit a lot as alluded to by Todd Bishop...... with a ton of speed.
So the first part of my question has become clear.
But other responses indicate that he also could do complex arrangements too.... with a ton of speed.
So ultimately he was a pure and simple behemoth of a beast behind the kit.
jda
Diamond Member
one of my " deep thoughts" about Buddy is..
Around 66 or 67 he chose to dissemble his big band- which at the time- had members 'his age" peers.
He said something somewhere to the effect
"They could read the flysht on the paper... but (they) seemed more interested in getting out to the golf course....."
To me when he played "with his peers" / Dizzy/ Charlie Parker and then the whatever early era 60s/ big band.
He sounded better playing with his peers to me..Maybe it was more an equal playing field.
and I think- if he would have kept on that direction- he would have sold more albums
but he chose the out of college green players- which were the best- a few ringers (Gregory Hopkins an instructor of mine) - but still
that maturity if he could hold have held that together (probably the mature player would not put up with him +/-
He may have had a different late 60s 70s and 80s.
he spited himself; had to push and holler, Guess he had to have a "young" band, to afford it and still be the leader..
(but) some of those 70s albums aren't worth more- but could have been more- than a once or twice listen
Around 66 or 67 he chose to dissemble his big band- which at the time- had members 'his age" peers.
He said something somewhere to the effect
"They could read the flysht on the paper... but (they) seemed more interested in getting out to the golf course....."
To me when he played "with his peers" / Dizzy/ Charlie Parker and then the whatever early era 60s/ big band.
He sounded better playing with his peers to me..Maybe it was more an equal playing field.
and I think- if he would have kept on that direction- he would have sold more albums
but he chose the out of college green players- which were the best- a few ringers (Gregory Hopkins an instructor of mine) - but still
that maturity if he could hold have held that together (probably the mature player would not put up with him +/-
He may have had a different late 60s 70s and 80s.
he spited himself; had to push and holler, Guess he had to have a "young" band, to afford it and still be the leader..
(but) some of those 70s albums aren't worth more- but could have been more- than a once or twice listen
Last edited:
Frank Godiva
Active Member
Snippet from a great article
“Philly Joe Jones, “loved Buddy Rich,” says drummer Mike Clark, who sought out his drum heroes as a young player in the 1960s, sussing out whether they were in the mood for conversation. “He wanted to be able to play what Buddy played and was frustrated that he couldn’t. Buddy made up combinations of things between hands and feet that nobody was doing in the 1940s. But in a small group, Philly would be my guy; I like Philly Joe’s poetry more than Buddy Rich’s poetry.”
jazztimes.com
“Philly Joe Jones, “loved Buddy Rich,” says drummer Mike Clark, who sought out his drum heroes as a young player in the 1960s, sussing out whether they were in the mood for conversation. “He wanted to be able to play what Buddy played and was frustrated that he couldn’t. Buddy made up combinations of things between hands and feet that nobody was doing in the 1940s. But in a small group, Philly would be my guy; I like Philly Joe’s poetry more than Buddy Rich’s poetry.”
JazzTimes
jazztimes.com
jda
Diamond Member
" In 1951, he (Philly Joe) joined the Buddy Rich band as second drummer. Rich was one of his idols. He was proud to have been hired, and happy that the drum icon liked his playing. Rich made that unmistakable. He picked Jones up every night on the way to work - a rather uncommon thing for the super-drummer to do."
jazzprofiles.blogspot.com
another episode with those two is in that article
"The Wonder" of Philly Joe Jones - Part 2
A blog about Jazz featuring CD,and book reviews and postings about the music and its makers.
jazzprofiles.blogspot.com
another episode with those two is in that article
dcrigger
Senior Member
I find it interesting that anyone would feel the need to make such a distinction - particular now, in 2019. I can't imagine anyone from the 60's forward naming Buddy as their favorite small group player. The only important thing comparing Buddy and Philly Joe is that Buddy did influence Philly Joe - certainly along with many others, but he clearly did. IMO 'nuff said...Snippet from a great article
“Philly Joe Jones, “loved Buddy Rich,” says drummer Mike Clark, who sought out his drum heroes as a young player in the 1960s, sussing out whether they were in the mood for conversation. “He wanted to be able to play what Buddy played and was frustrated that he couldn’t. Buddy made up combinations of things between hands and feet that nobody was doing in the 1940s. But in a small group, Philly would be my guy; I like Philly Joe’s poetry more than Buddy Rich’s poetry.”
JazzTimes
And then there's the issue that Swinging New Band is a few years shy of 60 years old... I love Buddy's playing. I learned a lot from Buddy's playing. And I love big band/large ensemble jazz music.... would I pick Buddy as my favorite big band drummer? Historically? Probably. But currently in 2023? Of course not... because I'm look for so much more in a player now.... again, it's been decades.
And for me, jazz is not classical music.... it is not a museum piece.... but a living breathing current art form... with the best it has to offer being played now.... not 50, 60, 80 years ago. Many great players have stood on the shoulders of the great players of the past. I believe the jazz of today is built upon that same tradition.
Overall a nice article - my one gripe.... this statement... "It’s particularly galling that so much of Rich’s notoriety outside of jazz stems from the infamous bus tapes" My only guess is that the author is just too young to know (or do the research to find out) just how much fame and notoriety outside of jazz Buddy had long, long, long before the "Bus Tapes" became a sophomoric joke. When I was a kid (during the 60's) the world at large knew who Gene Krupa was - if only for no other reason than that Hollywood had made a movie about him. the world knew who Ringo was because well, The Beatles (and not just music fans, but literally everyone - like how everyone knew the name "Babe Ruth") and the world at large knew Buddy Rich - one Johnny Carson's most frequent guests on the Tonight Show, plus regularly appeared on every other national talk/variety shows, guest star cameos in movies, on The Lucy Show and others - these would be cameos, because the assumption always was that the audience already knew who he was).
Truth is "The Buddy Tapes" though quite the viral sensation were not/are not universal - where Buddy's earlier fame/notoriety was. His name was ubiquitous - for the majority of lay people, literally synonymous with the word, drummer.
By comparison, the "Seinfeld" was ubiquitous - few can found that haven't at least heard of it, even if they never watched it. "The Buddy Tapes" fall far below that benchmark. Simply put, attributing "so much of Rich's notoriety outside of jazz" to "The Buddy Tapes" is simply ludicrous.
IMO
fobz
Active Member
This 100%. He was (extremely) fast and complex for the age he played in. Speed and complexity in drumming have developed in different ways and directions since his time, often building on what he did...
Benthedrummer
Silver Member
I love this post.
I'm starting to get it now......I think
There also appears to be a bit of an in-house "2nd floor tom" topic for the Buddy-Philes...... seems quite intriguing.
There's a lot about this gentleman that I know absolutely nothing about.
Last edited:
HumbleSkins
New Member
In a discussion here on DW forum, someone mentioned his 2nd floor was his gig "table". Rarely was the head even tuned.
Benthedrummer
Silver Member
Yeah, I've heard about that too.
But jeez, you'd think the guy would bang out some singles or doubles or something on a pillow or a practice pad floating around in his house every now and then.
But I suppose he played so much that he didn't need to........I dunno really.
To me his level is just so unobtainable that I don't know what the heck I could learn from him or even imitate him in some way.
He's so intimidating to watch.
Push pull stroke
Platinum Member
The licks are all learnable. Even the vibe is probably learnable, just like doing an impression of someone. But the specialness of him is that he did it so long ago, so well. He was a showman and an actor as well as a technically brilliant drummer. I still don’t think anyone can play such long exciting solos like he did. VERY few players can play an interesting drum solo that holds your interest for more than 60 seconds or so. Even people with greater speed and chops than Buddy ever showed us.
wraub
Gold Member
I remember seeing him on The Tonight Show even though I must have been very young. He definitely made an impression, those appearances are probably where the beginning of an inkling of the idea of playing drums began for me. I watch him now and I can see how good he was, even if other drummers may have replaced him as being inspirational.
Complex, or just fast, he was really good at what he did.
Complex, or just fast, he was really good at what he did.
Drummerrobin
Member
I would say by today's standards, he was moderately complex and very fast. There were many other factors other than those things that made him great though - his amazing listening ability, control, swing feel, phrasing, use of dynamics, overall musicality etc. There are a lot of reasons why he's considered by many to be the greatest of all time - I think his technical ability and speed just happen to be the most obvious ones.
DrummerJustLikeDad
Active Member
I have to imagine that being a good businessman as much as a good drummer, that Buddy didn't necessarily bring his technical best to his audiences because that's not what people were paying for.
In that sense, his career ended no differently than, say, Phil Collins on that point.
As a more contemporary and familiar reference, Collins too is reputed for amazing technique, but only by certain drummers. However, did audiences know or care, or pay to see that in the last 40 years of his career? They could have cared less.
But Phil and Buddy, both, were very good at giving audiences what they wanted, which had precious little to do with their jaw dropping technique that sets them apart for the drum geeks. By a certain point of their careers (call it professionalism, call it surviving the market), they realized their people-pleasing showmanship was what sold the tickets.
In that sense, his career ended no differently than, say, Phil Collins on that point.
As a more contemporary and familiar reference, Collins too is reputed for amazing technique, but only by certain drummers. However, did audiences know or care, or pay to see that in the last 40 years of his career? They could have cared less.
But Phil and Buddy, both, were very good at giving audiences what they wanted, which had precious little to do with their jaw dropping technique that sets them apart for the drum geeks. By a certain point of their careers (call it professionalism, call it surviving the market), they realized their people-pleasing showmanship was what sold the tickets.
Benthedrummer
Silver Member
That's a really succinct good answer to my question........thank you very much.
So I guess in a way he was the total package.
He was lean, strong, looked pretty sharp in a suit, had a full head of thick black hair, toothy grin, had a showmanship that was intriguing to the masses, blistering technique and speed with fluidity to match.
Sounds a lot like me really........bwah ha ha haaaah.
Push pull stroke
Platinum Member
I think a lot of his showmanship came from growing up doing Vaudeville. Just a theory
