It appears Ringo was the least influential and it has been said most of the cool drum parts were Pauls ideas...who knows?
Ringo
was the least influential, partly because he was the drummer, partly because he wasn't really a songwriter and mainly because the Beatles
was not his band.
When he joined the other three had been together for around 4 years and had been together as musical mates for even longer than that. Paul and George had been schoolboy mates at the same school talking about guitars before Paul had even met John. George got into the band because of Paul. But the Beatles already had a contract with Parlophone before Ringo joined. The other 3 had been on the same musical trajectory for years, dreaming the same dream in the same place with the intention of making it together. When they were rejected, they were rejected together. When they got STDs, they got them together. When friends and family members died, they were together or in some combination together. They knew each others parents, guardians and households. They were introduced to drugs together. So much existed between them before Ringo joined and he only joined them because they were paying £5 a week more than Kingsize Taylor who wanted him to join his band, the Dominoes.
When I say that Ringo
was the least influential, partly because he was the drummer, partly because he wasn't really a songwriter
that's not a dig or a cuss but a fact. I love Ringo as a drummer, singer, interpreter, personality......but he just wanted to play the drums in the late 50s and early 60s. And as such, was in demand in the summer of '62 because he could play the drums, no other reason. Simple fact was that the Beatles had had trouble with a decent permanent drummer from the moment they had come together as teenagers. That's no offence to Pete Best or Colin Hanton, but all the drummers they ever had were there because they had drum kits rather than because their drumming was what McCartney, Harrison and Lennon actively wanted. They actually used to say, when their drummerless status was commented on, "the rhythm's in the guitars." Ringo was the first drummer that they actually sought out that they got so they weren't looking for someone to contribute musical ideas as such. They had them in abundance.
Now, that is not to say that he was just a 'lovable nose' that sat there and did whatever Paul told him to do. In fact Paul is on record, as was George Martin, commenting on the special feel and timing that Ringo brought to the songs of the Beatles. Martin felt that Ringo seemed to instinctively know what the songs needed. And yes, on occasion, the Beatles gave him direction on how they wanted the drums to go in their song. Which songwriter or arranger doesn't do that ? It's no secret that Paul was the one that suggested the drum patterns to "Ticket to ride" and "Tomorrow never knows." What isn't often commented on is that the drums for the latter {and for that matter, Paul's bass part} were looped continuously throughout the song. They only play one or two measures ! And listening to the only other take of the song on "Anthology 2", the version we know and love was the right way to take the song. The drum pattern on that first take is a pile of fish excrement {in my opinion} ~ indeed the entire take is pretty shitty. Mark Lewisohn's description in "The Beatles' recording sessions" makes it sound like the most wonderful thing any man, God or beast ever came up with.
It really isn't.
Ringo himself in 1967 told Hunter Davies that the others in the band often directed what patterns they wanted him to play and that when people commended him on his great drum parts, in his heart he knew that it was the other Beatles that suggested what he play. He also later said that they would suggest parts that no one person could play and he'd point this out and when they'd say "well, such and such a drummer played
this on
that record" he'd show them how the part was overdubbed because it wasn't possible to play the part with 4 limbs.
But Ringo Starr was absolutely essential for the music of the Beatles. First of all, regardless of what anyone suggests you play, that drummer still has to play it and bring their unique feel and set of fills {if there are any} to the song. I'm not a drummer. Before recording, I'll play mouth drums or laps to give whoever may be drumming an idea of what I want for that song or a particular part of the song. But I don't play it. They play it. So their contribution is at least as important as mine because no one pays money or spends time with a song just to hear ideas. We want execution. We lionize the 'great' classical composers but say nothing about the instrumentalists that actually give their compositions life. That's one reason why I always get short when people look at a piece of music that's been recorded and they say "anyone could play or sing that." Yes, anyone could play or sing that but it simply would not be the same as the final version that we hear and love. Tribute bands and cover versions do not sound exactly like the original. I remember back in the early 2000s buying albums that were supposed to be original TV theme tunes and when I'd listen to them, straight away I could see these were not the original theme tunes that used to accompany the shows. I wrote to one of the labels once, I was so angry {
} and I told them, why advertise these pieces as the original themes by the original orchestras when they clearly are not ? I pointed out to them that people weren't stupid ~ that if they'd been watching a show for 5, 10, 20 years, the theme music would be lodged in their psyche as firmly as language and therefore any nuance missing would be picked up on. Sometimes, one doesn't quite know why something doesn't sound right but one knows it doesn't.
It's the same with Ringo's drumming. With the possible exception of Charlie Watts, I've yet to come across a drummer that I think could have drummed for the Beatles. And while I love the Beatle songs Paul {or in one instance, him with George & John} drummed on {all 4 of them !}, there is a Ringo~ness about the vast, vast majority of the Beatles' output when it comes to the drums. Along with Nick Mason and Ginger Baker {not Keith Moon and Mitch Mitchell}, he helped take drumming into psychedelia which, when fused with jazzier drumming, took progressive rock drumming on leaps and bounds.
Two last things about Ringo; when Yoko Ono appeared on the scene and thought the Beatles' rhythms were kind of samey, John was really embarrassed as he wanted the Beatles to be seen as musically vital. And it is noticeable that the drums on his songs were quite complex on the White album, which led on from John getting together with Yoko. John's drum patterns rubbed off on Paul and although Ringo had a lapse of confidence and left the band during the sessions {Back in the USSR}, generally speaking he rose to the challenge and his drumming in the White album songs hits a level that is quite astonishing for Ringo Starr.
The second thing about Ringo and his influence ~ the Beatles didn't even think about replacing him when he left. Unlike when he first joined, they weren't going to be struggling for a drummer. They could have had almost anyone. Unlike when George left and John talked about getting in Eric Clapton, there was no such consideration when Ringo left. And they only recorded 2 songs in his absence, thinking the time could be taken to do other white album stuff while trying to get him to return.
Ringo was the least influential ~ but that's almost moot when one considers the large influence he did have.
} and after "John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band" he came to the realization that commerciality wasn't a dirty word, that most people, even if they love off the wall stuff don't just want Yoko wailing, dying babies heartbeats and feedback guitars with backward tapes {stuff he only listened to for a short while} but some semblance of a song and by "Imagine" concluded that chocolate coating {ie, commercial appeal} made for better digestible songs and he went back to writing songs.
