I don't think Moon necessarily has to be higher than Baker, though to my eyes it does seem more intuitively 'right' to have Moon higher. Not that it's my list or anything, but I'd personally keep Moon above. This is one of those instances where the criteria doesn't perfectly model reality.



Sick top 5, basically perfect.



Uh oh.

I'll start by saying Bruford is by a good distance the greatest genius in the history of the drum kit in my opinion. He's not even really challenged if you take everything into account. Maybe I just haven't heard the right dude who happens to be better, but from everything I've heard, this much is clear.

But while Bruford did far more to progress the drumkit as an artistic tool to color music, Bonham's innovation was just so massively huge and influential and defining to the 'sound' of rock drums...

Bleh. This sucks. Bruford has a strong argument to be #1, he relentlessly pushed ahead artistically through his whole very long career and covered more genres, styles and musical/percussive colors than like most of the other great drummers put together over their careers. He is essentially THE exemplar of the 'artistic musician' in the drum world. He tried EVERYTHING, NEVER got complacent, and ALWAYS advanced artistically. He didn't give a shit about fame or fortune, and always pursued pushing drumming and trying new directions in it for art's sake. He is basically to drums over a career what da Vinci was to art (in all its forms) or Aristotle to general study of the world and thought and philosophy.

But Bonzo, who wasn't as talented as Bruford (great though Bonzo fuckin' is)...he IS rock drumming. Bleh.

My mind is fighting my heart here...or something.

Sorry if all of this sounds incredibly pretentious, lol.

I'll respond to all these in depth later, but I do believe Bohnam has a great argument for number 1, I just thought we agreed it was Bruford's. I could easily see Bohnam taking innovation. And how much does Peart take Baker in skill? Light years, well maybe not light years, but a huge nearly incomparable amount. Peart is at 24 on our most skilled list, I'd push him into the 30's, but not lower. Baker wouldn't make the list unfortunately. Peart is absurdly skilled.

Also on creativity, Moon was the most creative with his approach to the whole idea of 'drumming', but I remember being told by The Jew that creativity in this case was in the way they used the instrument. Moon was creative because of how he played, but he didn't really 'use' the drum set in any different way then most drummers at the time, it was his playing style that was completely unique. The most creative drummer by 'what you do with the kit' would definitely be Bozzio, and then arguably Bruford with the definition Jew gave me. Peart is quite high on this too, his approach to finding new sounds and tunings, designing new toms to get completely original sounds, many of which have become staples all around as well. And lets say Moon influenced every drummer since he was around (which I agree with), I'd honestly have to say with direct or indirect influence Peart has influenced NEARLY every drummer since he came around as well, it's much, much more closer than you think. Yeah I used to have beef with Peart getting so much praise, but Jew made me actually do more research on Peart, who on this thread I already knew I was being extremely bias against anyways. He's no where near what his bio describes, but being number one was not unreasonable, just not what I agreed with. Being top 3 is a staple. I move him out in that top 5 list because that's what I saw I wanted a long while back but after really looking into it objectively and the reasoning in this thread behind his previous placement, he cannot leave top 3. He just really beats everyone out except Bohnam and Bruford. Maybe Baker. I think you are seriously underestimating Peart's massive shadow on modern drumming, it's way more than just name dropping. Tons of equipment, hi hat grooves, and his interesting double bass approach to linear beats and displaced snares has become hugely popular and widely used in tons of modern drumming genres.

Peart has dabbled in nearly every genre I can think of, and is more competent in multiple fields than Baker is at Jazz and Rock. Peart has played jazz, though he's not great at it, but Baker's jazz isn't the best either, though it's more developed than Pearts. Peart has played world music with tons of exotic equipment, within rock has played beats ranging from straight up metal style, funk, and everything you'd find in prog. He's done latin groove before, though I"m not sure how totally adept he is at them. Peart really tried to reach out into as much as he could in drumming.

I totally agree Peart at number 1 was the greatest travesty this site has had, it really was the undeserving 1, it either belonged to Bohnam (which it really does) or Bruford (who this criteria greatly favors for the same reasons it favored Peart). I'd love for Moon to be 2 or 3, but this criteria doesn't fit it, and I really don't have an issue with the current criteria because as much as it takes influence and originality, it emphasis skill, dexterity, and versatility with the instrument, and because drums are not melodic, technique becomes just as, if not more important, than creative and emotional playing on other instruments. You can't make a simple guitar song with notes that go together in different ways than anyone else with a different tone that explains all the reasons people like Harrison and Berry are terrific guitarists in every right. On drums most drummers really do just play straight rock beats, look at Barker. The more skilled you are at drums, the more you can express your originality and creativity with the instrument, things that with piano and guitar, you can have without skill. Moon was way more skilled than we give him credit, though not truly techically gifted, was the anomaly on the kit (and the exception to this explanation), and that's why he's so respected. But for everyone else skill on the kit is very important in developing a style. I think Ringo was very skilled because he could do that. With such limited objects to use for notes, and how every place you hit a cymbal or tom you get a different tone and sound, knowing exactly what you want to hear in your head, and expressing it vividly on the set while keeping it original and complex requires independence, groove, and efficiency. And of course to still keep a beat while going outside the box. That's hard. Ringo could do that, and Peart does it exquisitely. A drumming list I believe has to emphasize skill more than other lists because of that, and it's included in the innovation, creativity, and versatility criteria, all have skill as part of them, along with originality. That's why Peart ends up so high on this list.

This is all subject to change, Peart can be 5 if we have enough arguments. Right now it's you and me, I'll go message more people. But so many people were fighting for Peart and now I understand him much better. That does not mean I think he is a better drummer than Bohnam, Bruford, or maybe even Moon and Ringo. But he deserves more credit than I ever gave him before. Now that I'm a mod I'm going to try really hard not to just put my opinion as the placements on the list and try even harder to be objective and understand the criteria. If we want creativity and innovation to mean something different, we should establish exactly what they mean.

Creativity: Heavily involves originality on how one uses the kit. Meaning using different styles, techniques, beats, grooves, tones, and trying to achieve different sounds to go beyond what was the norm. Drums are an extremely easy instrument to fall into repetitive and uninventive beats that have been used since the beginning of time. These are for the drummers who have gone above and beyond the normal styles that have been replicated over and over. Exemplifies more than uniqueness, a creative approach to playing drums.

Innovation: Literally developing or popularizing something new or bringing it to new heights with anything involving the kit or playing. Popularizing a groove or beat, inventing a new stylistic groove or beat. Developing or popularizing new equipment or playing styles. Bozzio gets innovation for all the exotic equipment and unique groove approaches that he uniquely developed and popularized, similar for Peart popularizing beats that have now become extremely popular and common place and equipment like the roto toms and unique cymbals, Ringo for popularizing match grip and the beats that he forever cemented in the history of rock (most were actually his originals), and Bruford's electronic development and polyrhythm popularization.


This is what I was told (or thought?) the criteria meant. In which case what did Moon innovate? He popularized the double bass image, but that can be credited to Baker as well, still won't take it from Moon. But as someone who knows all of the Who's songs, and all their drum lines (you all know I'm a huge Moon fan) I have to say nearly all his beats were there before him, and just put together in his own way, but I can't say that long snare rolls with eight note bass pedals were invented by him, and that was always his favorite thing to do. His style, his energy he brought to the kit, his feeling, that's what made him so great, but not his actual drumming ability or use of the kit. The goldfish drums were cool though. Moon is the oddman out, the guy who without any real special talent for the instrument, took it to new heights and reaches in his own way, the 'normal' person who was so abnormal and so creative and unbounded inside he defied all the rules and traditions set before him. That's why he's so great, so influential, and yes, so creative. But this criteria does not favor him unfortunately, but his massive influence and creativity land him an undeniable top 4 placement. But not 1, 2, 3 because this criteria favors Peart better. If you would like to change these definitions, I'm totally down for that.


Wow lots of writing and posts apologize.

Bill Bruford number one? What the fuck is going on here?!

Can we please just scrap creativity altogether? It's completely subjective and if it doesn't relate to specific innovations it's pretty worthless anyway.

Anyway... I'd personally prefer having Bonham at #1 but I'll let you guys finish.

We've been talking about this for a long time, even with The Jew. Next to Bohnam (who I do agree should be number 1) there is no drummer more deserving of the placement that I can think of. Bruford is the embodiment of the drummer as a musician more than anyone else on this list. Still, I agree for Bohnam at one.

The criteria can definitely use re-working and then we can re do the list as we see fit, sound good? I agree with scrapping creativity, but what should go in it's place? Originality/Uniqueness? Which we'd then have to specify as different from innovation.

It's like putting Robert Fripp number one on the guitarist list. Bill Bruford is a spectacular drummer in many ways, but there's no way he can be number one on a greatest rock drummer list.

If creativity gets scrapped I leave this subforum. That's not intended as a douchey threat or anything; it's just that creativity is one of the bedrocks of being a truly great musician in rock's history, and disregarding/ignoring it as a criteria essentially makes the list irrelevant and incapable of reaching its purpose. Creativity has been a fixture of every major list on DDD since the site's inception. And I call bullshit on the 'subjective' thing -- if someone tells me Phil Rudd is more creative than Bruford, they're just WRONG. Opinions can and are often wrong and it annoys me greatly that people seem so unwilling to admit this.

Georgi methinks you need to study up on s'more Bruford. Also having very rigid views is damaging to these lists methinks. Who's to say Bruford can't be #1 or #2...the criteria certainly support it strongly and there's a lot to be said for being the greatest 'drummer as artist' ever, that's VERY significant and you could make a pretty convincing argument that he deserves #1 outright on a 'greatest' list just because of that

Bonham is literally required to be #1 I think. Bruford is the clear #2 based on the criteria. We're doin' good now.

And speaking of creativity...

CRJ you have a sadly restricted view of what the term means in the context of the DDD lists. Creativity as a criteria actually was imported into the drum forum from the bass forum back just after this forum opened in 2005 (I was there) and intended to mirror what it meant for the bass lists: creativity as a musician relative to playing your instrument. That can include feel, note choice, phrasing, etc. It's broader than you're taking it to be. Keith Moon is EXTREMELY creative and the way in which he is creative as you call it absolutely 'counts' as creativity under the criteria. Creativity - instrumental creativity - is broad. It's like: does x player have a distinctive 'sound' or 'style'? Is he 'often imitated, never replicated'? Can you tell it's him within 5 seconds of hearing the opening to an unfamiliar song he plays on? Are his note choices, feel, phrasing unusual for rock players on the instrument? Etc

If that's the case, I'd still see him at maybe 4. Let's check it out.

Moon vs. Peart

Influence: The really, really hard one. I'll give it to Moon comfortably unless someone steps in later
Innovation: Peart
Creativity: Mooney my boy
Skill: Peart
Versatility: Peart

3 vs. 3.5 for Peart. Peart still wins, unless Influence and Innovation count for less than 2 and 1.5 respectively, which even though you don't 'number' per se, I agree that those should be the most important two in that order for placing these drummers, as those are what would define a drummers effect on drum history, since the other 3 reflect how they play and not their effect on the drum world.

Baker vs. Peart

Influence: Unless Baker is as influential as Moon, Tie, I'll give it to Baker
Innovation: Tie, not changing this. Baker is extremely innovative, but as much as Peart. Can't see this any other way
Creativity: Tie, if anything Peart, Peart is still extremely creative, even in the face of a monster like Baker. Baker's biggest importance is not about how he played the instrument as much as it was his effect on drumming history, essential being the first really technical rock drummer and bringing jazz over to rock, and his massive influence, direct or indirect. He was the first to do it, but compared to all others after, the way he played was not particularly god territory, though I'd give him master.
Skill: Peart by a good amount
Versatility: Peart

Baker beats Peart if I give Baker influence and innovation, otherwise it's in Peart's favor. I'll leave it this way and have my original top 5. Until further discussion I'll have top 5 as:

1. Bohnam
2. Bruford
3. Peart
4. Moon
5. Baker

Sound good for now? I'm also thinking of changing Peart's bio and some others, especially since Peart's is extremely bias and pretentious and a good amount of the information if not highly over exaggerated is just false (groove of #1 man Steve Gadd? Steve Gadd is not one of his primary influences and Peart's grooving is a grain of sand to Gadd's terra of groove)

Robert Fripp for Guitar is not even comparable to what Bruford's done for drums. It's more like Jeff Beck, who publically doesn't get the credit he deserves, we give him it here. Actually, Bruford to drums is like Jeff Beck if Beck were also the most skilled guitarist in rock history (I'd nearly tie Bruford and Bozzio as the most skilled drummers to touch the face of rock drumming, no one even comes close; not counting Colaiuta since he's really a jazz drummer that gained so much skill and experience every genre became accessible and master-able where Bruford and Bozzio were almost primarily rock till further exploration. Bruford also happens to be the most competent jazz drummer in rock, beyond competent actually he's a really good jazz drummer and very traditional as well).

Someone even comparing Rudd and Bruford to begin with is completely unfair... that's obviously an extreme case that has nothing to do with any kind of comparisons that will ever be made on this list, or at least I hope not.

Virtually every drummer on this list manages his own sound, or style even within groups... Bostaph and Lombardo, Phillips and Moon, Bozzio and Vinnie, etc... None of those guys are really comparable unless you have a very simplistic analysis of what they're doing for their band. I guess it shouldn't be scrapped, per se... but there are going to be plenty of instances (more often than not, I assure you) where the drummers in question are going to do everything you've just mentioned, everyone in the top 50 at least... So most every comparison made between those drummers (Unless they're incredibly far off... like say rudd and bruford) probably WILL end up boiling down to preference.

So, no... it probably shouldn't be scrapped... it could however be divided into versatility, innovation, writing ability, etc... or simply defined.

I agree with the current top two, I guess... I do however believe Pearts getting thrown down the list way too casually. How is Peart less creative than Moon anyway, though? Unlike Moon, he will actually ATTEMPT genres outside rock, even if he isn't that great at them... and unlike Moon he'll do alternative forms of percussion ie roto toms, playing on his hybrid kit... etc... and Moon is decent at soloing if you'll call Young Man Blues or WGFA or something a solo but really he doesn't have a Toad, or YYZ, or Moby Dick, or anything like that under his belt, either.

The top two is definitely solid, though... not sure about the next 3 but we're going to have to move off them eventually...

Lastly, what do you guys think about this?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B92DK5zoH8[/youtube]

I think Peart being a 3 is the right choice by this criteria, what I think is correct is this:

1. Bohnam 2. Bruford 3. Peart 4. Moon 5. Baker

however so far it's only been Ariel on here and until more Peart supporters for a vote I'm just leaving him where he is. I agree with you, and since I"m the mod I guess I should put him where I believe he should be. Ariel is really cutting him short. I'll leave him at 3 and make absolutely no more changes to the list until further discussion.

I'd have John Bonham as number 1 and Bruford as 2 if I were to just whip up the list myself, but I could see Moon ahead of Bruford as well (and he should probably be there), but I think we're at least moving in the right direction. The notion that Peart is the #1 rock drummer by default that reigned supreme here for years was outrageous and based on the most mechanical and bland criteria (a drum magazine ranked him well year after year, and his skillz were crazy - surely his playing and influence has resonated in rock since, but I don't think quite as much as prior defenders gave him credit for). I think Bruford being #1 tentatively at least refocuses the discussion considerably.

I'd also say Baker could stand to drop a little too. His drumwork is important and influential, but it's most often cited from a very short period of work compared to other drummers here. I'd actually like to see Hal Blaine in a position that Baker currently holds.