What's so great about Charlie Watts, after all?

Which would explain why 69/70 feature some of his best live drumming, since it's one of the least "rushed" tours in the sense of playing too fast. The pieces are all fitting together

 

Sounds good here.

 

He has that swing...just like Phil Rudd. You don't consciously notice the drums, it's almost always understated. However, you "feel" it and would really miss it if it weren't there.

 

My problem is almost the opposite - his drumming feels stiff and gets in the way of the songs. Listen to All Down the Line from the Fort Worth '78 gig, that's what I'm talking about. Weird fills and struggling to keep the beat in what's honestly a simple song

 

well he managed to hang onto his job for half a century so he can't be too bad

 

Charlie has the tight but loose style that fits the band perfectly. I’ll admit to not giving him too much thought for years as his playing doesn’t really draw attention to itself. He’s certainly playing as an integrated part of the rhythm section.

I guess the ultimate compliment comes from Ginger Baker. Charlie is one of the few drummers besides Blakey, Roach, Elvin Jones or Phil Seaman that Ginger complimented. I’m sure it’s Charlie’s jazz background that played a part in that.

That being said, most of my rock drummer friends can’t figure out what Charlie’s doing when he plays. The high hat pull off as he’s hitting the snare throws them off.

 

But that was Stones trying to be punk rock. I hear what you're saying, but I always thought he was the glue that kept them together live, regardless of Keith running the show.

 

He puts all the parts in the right place, without flash or glitz. He keeps incredible time and for a band that is dominated by rhythm he's a perfect fit. Listen to Start Me Up and how he drives that song forward. Yeah, everyone knows the riff but without Charlie's momentum it wouldn't be what it is.

I could be mistaken but when you say Charlie is struggling to keep up, I don't get it. Charlie sets the pace, the band keeps up with him.

Also see Jumpin' Jack Flash, Brown Sugar, the entire Some Girls album for how he's pushing everything forward.

 

Don't you think he could have had a bad day ? Also he did some struggling with drugs too, but I dont know if it was in the late 70s.
I think he's perfectly fine live, his pulse is great and its much more difficult than it seems to play Stones live, because it has to be so tight and precise, never letting the energy drop.

 

Once more, his studio playing is more than adequate and pretty good. I just can't stand his live playing. The way he "chokes" on the beat is what puts me off, if that makes sense

 

Even Keith is dancing to the beat in the darkness just to the side of Charlie @3:30

It's the groooooooove….man...

 

well that is one of the faster songs.....I mean if he only struggles with a few fast songs, post 1971 while playing live, its not a mark on his status (imo)

 

He sounds pretty good on that one, closer to how he sounds in the studio. And the band isn't rushing or anything, which substantiates to the claim that the band rushing too much is what hinders his playing

 

Watts could hold down the groove. He wasn’t a virtuoso, versatile player and never tried to be. He had a great feel.

 

Charlie's great. He always plays it cool and looks like he never wants to be there. No flash. Just sits there and plays the groove required. I can't think of any other drummer that can play a unique rhythm like "Street Fighting Man" and make it sound lived-in like Charlie does. Charlie pushes the beat forward over riding it or driving it. He simply moves it forward.

 

Could it be that the live performances that you’re not liking are suffering due to poor monitoring? Nothing kills performance timing more than when you can’t hear the rest of the band. Maybe the band can’t hear him.

 

You might be onto something here! But how good was monitor technology in the mid and late 70's? Could they already hear themselves onstage by this point?

 

I wouldn’t call Watts a “great” drummer on his own. Like if you solo out his tracks, you won’t be amazed at them. But he’s the foundation of the Stones’ sound. He’s a jazz drummer that has adapted to blues, r&b, & soul in the early days, & funk, disco & punk later on, & helped create rock drumming as we know it. He’s a consistent team player that provides exactly what those songs need, never overplaying.

Oh, & he’s put up with the enormous Jagger/Richards egos for over 50 years. And apparently punched Jagger at least once in the mid-80s. All of that adds up to “great drummer” status for me.

 

He deserves sainthood for that alone. Forget his playing

 

Not always. There was a lot of bad monitoring back then.

 

Also, the live drum sound might be part of what you’re not digging. No Glyn Johns drum recording techniques going on.

 

alright lets hear it from the experts.... ? yay or nay

 

Good enough to be with the Stones for 50+ years.nuff said.

 

Not really, the drum sound itself is great - his crash cymbal sounds like an explosion!

And I think the way his drums were recorded were much more work of Jimmy Miller (a drummer himself), than Glyn Johns. It sounds more similar to Traffic's first two records than anything Glynnis produced