Mitchell should be higher than Dunbar, maybe Powell. Otherwise, I'm inclined to agree.

Also if you haven't listened to Dancing with the Moonlit Knight, The Cinema Show, etc. you're missing out on some of the best music out there IMO (assuming you like prog). His solo stuff is meh, but after hearing some of early genesis' stuff I was blown away.

Mitchell/Powell is an interesting case, imo. You're probably right, I think the only wins for Powell are skill and versatility, Mitchell would probably take everything else, although neither really innovated anything that I'm aware of.



Do I like prog?
You might as well be asking if bears like fish.

As I thought, so why then do I take it you haven't listened to some of the seminal works of prog rock? Or maybe you have

Well I am absolutely in love with King Crimson, Yes, Rush, Pink Floyd, Tull, and others, but I just somehow never really got into Genesis.

I will definitely check out the ones you mentioned though, I've actually been meaning to for a while.

I never listened Genesis and listened to all those other bands until fairly recently. I thought it was time I got off my ass and listened to early genesis. At first I didn't see what the big deal was, then they grew on me, then I understood WTF they were doing. Now they are my 7th favorite band of all time. Their Peter Gabriel era works are some of the finest music I've ever heard. Also Steve Hackett is a god.

Just popping in to say: Collins owns Port in creativity.

That said Port probably beats - probably - Collins in influence (it's debatable), and presumably beats him maybe in innovation. Also I don't see how Collins wins originality.

And on another note, not to dredge up an old corpse but I can't help but feel the Copeland > Appice decision was made really hastily, and I'm not seeing exactly why Copeland obviously deserves higher. To be more specific, there is no question whatever Appice wins influence, and he does so handily; he also wins innovation; tie or close in creativity and versatility, and aren't they reasonably/SOMEWHAT close in skill?

This goes to a broader issue that has occurred to me. It's been made clear that in the case of ties one starts looking at tie breaking criteria. But what about in the case of like, two criteria both of which are losses for drummer A but only small losses? Shouldn't that be overcome by big wins elsewhere? I propose Appice takes Copeland this way, and - controversy - Lombardo takes Carey (if that discussion is locked and I'm not aware I apologize).

Was there ever a Benjamin/Ward breakdown?

I don't think either are innovative, but I don't know how Portnoy could possibly have the edge. Influence is debatable, though I think Collins influence is larger than we give him credit for. But yeah I could see Portnoy winning Influence and Skill, but that's about it. Maybe innovation, then it's Portnoy's win. Still, not saying much. Portnoy's a fantastic drummer and easily one of my all time favs, but he just doesn't do awesome in this criteria

I edited and expanded that post.

Port was THE prog metal drummer, the groundbreaking dude everyone else listened to and took after since then. Isn't that innovation of a sort? He also - if this counts - combined Bonzo & Peart's style into a sort of combo style that still sounded fresh and that no one had done before to my knowledge.

As far as influence goes I think it's tough. Collins automatically gets big points for being one of the big 4 groundwork/foundation prog style drummers with Bruford, Palmer, Giles. These guys all had a similar style that was IMMENSELY influential in drums and they did it all together at roughly the same time, invented and cemented that style as a big deal in rock. All four were and are heavily, heavily listened to as being a 'school' of drumming kinda. All four deserve co-credit in my book.

Come to think of it that whole paragraph applies equally to innovation, and spells out why Collins honestly deserves a lot of points there too: he co innovated prog drumming and helped cement the style which had a very specific sound and feel and touch

But as an individual influence I think Collins is the weakest of those 4 early prog drummers, and Port's very influential. It could go either way between these two on influence (and maybe innovation) in my book, fwiw

When you say Port's awesome but 'just doesn't do great by this criteria'...hmm. Do you think that there's something 'missing' from the criteria?

Appice is definitely more influential, however I think Copeland takes every other criteria, bar maybe originality.

Influence: Appice

Originality: Tied (Appice was not the first hard rock drummer, Keith Moon was. So he does get HUGE points for originality, but Copeland's reggae-ish beats and hi-hat work were immensely original for a rock drummer in the mainstream)

Creativity: Copeland (Appice basically just works within the 'powerhouse' stylistic framework and doesn't really show much in the way of creativity, imo. Again I have to go to Copeland's hi-hat work, he is clearly one case where originality and creativity can co-exist.)

Innovation: Appice in a very small win (since I guess he was Bonham a little before Bonham)

Skill: Copeland in a small win

Versatility - Copeland



Influence: Tied (both are considered the godfathers of their respective styles)

Originality: Benjamin (Ward was largely building on the foundation of Bonham and Baker)

Creativity: Benjamin (much more unique style)

Innovation: I wanna say Benjamin, but neither really innovated much.

Skill: Ward

Versatility: Tied

All that Portnoy stuff counts for influence. Him taking two other DRUMMERS styles and combining them goes to show the other drummers influence on a drummer. Innovation would be taking genres of music and doing things with music never done before. Taking two drummers styles, one of which was built off the other anyways, and building on it more doesn't necessarily give innovation credit. Prog metal drummer everyone copies is influence, and that's what he has going for him other than skill. I think I did a good explanation of innovation a while back.

Appice vs. Copeland is tough and as far as I'm concerned can go either way. I'm far more familiar with Copeland than Appice, and I'd give Appice Influence and Originality, and tie them in creativity (which I think I did before anyways). And then they end up tying and Appice wins due to influence. I did that breakdown before in Appice's favor, however I said I didn't know enough about Appice over all to make a fair decision, and asked for opinions. I got 3 members who decided Copeland should get Creativity and are close in originality. With that I said Copeland > Appice, but it's still open for debate and can go either way. Carey's wins over Lombardo in skill and originality are large enough to cover any gap Lombardo has with his two wins. Yes he's vastly more influential, but you need more than one mega gap to cover. As in if the gap in their creativity was far smaller, and same with originality, I'd be inclined to consider a Lombardo victory. As is, I don't see it.

No one did a benjamin ward breakdown, it was never requested and I really don't care about how we switch those two's positions unless there's a complaint. I found it fine with Benjamin > Ward. I'd give Ward influence and originality, then probably Benjamin takes everything else but skill. They may tie in originality and then Ward takes Innovation. Or Ward takes Innovation, Originality, and Influence and thus wins. Which sounds best to you guys?

What's 'missing' from the criteria is really nothing, it's the question of what you consider greatness. Take the greatest rock artists thread, the list I will never care about because what suits the criteria's positions goes completely against everything I believe in regarding music. Example, I think The Doors are greater artists in every sense of the word than Modanna, but due to criteria, she's way, and reasonably ahead. I think the Allman Brothers are a far greater band than Nirvana in every sense of the word, and yet they are more than 50 spaces apart. Does that mean that something's wrong with the criteria? No, it means that the list defines greatness according to overall attributes. Portnoy is fantastic at what he does, and I think he's easily a fantastic drummer that's up there with anyone in the top 10-40 range in terms of drumming. And really out of all the drummers there are, the gap between 30 and 10 is insignificant. However overall Portnoy is not as great as some of these other drummers, and does poorly in areas where other drummers are far more well rounded. This doesn't mean that as a drummer with his merits, many wouldn't consider him as good a drummer. It gets down to opinion at that point. I like Portnoy a lot, that's my opinion. I think he's a fantastic drummer, that's my opinion. I think he is far more skilled and talented than most drummers in the genre, that's nearly a fact. I also say he's not as well rounded as all the drummers above him. That, as for what we're going for, should be fact.

I can agree with both of these. See, both pairs of drummers are far too close, for example completely reasonable arguments can be made for originality, creativity, and innovation to go either way between Appice and Copeland. Ward and Benjamin isn't as close, but whose more original, innovative, or influential is debatable as well (though I think Benjamin gets Innovation by more than all these other close calls)

Agreed it's very close for both comparisons.



But his win in innovation is also huge. And you yourself have stated that these are the two most important criteria.

And Carey is not THAT much more original than Lombardo. It wasn't necessarily just his double bass that was original, but as Ariel said, his whole style was pretty radical. He was largely the foundation for an entire STYLE of drumming, and you really can't say that about Carey (brilliant as he is).
You can point to Ulrich and Aldridge all you want, but Lars was very tentative with double bass at first, and Aldridge wasn't using anywhere near the same crazy tempos.
Les Binks? I think he used double bass on a grand total of two or three songs. So it's obvious that Lombardo innovated the style that virtually every extreme metal drummer who followed would adapt into their repertoire - reckless but in control, lightning fast tempos and double pedals.
If anything I think originality should be tied.

I've said it before and I'll stick with it, having one or two aspects of your playing that are entirely original compared to a playing where nearly everything about it is drastically different from the norm or what's come before is very different, even if the playing is not entirely original. And I think the latter is far more original (ie one drummer makes one or two techniques completely original to him and uses them to found his style which has those two original things and nothing else really original, then you have someone's whose techniques may not be original, but uses them in ways that were never used before to create something that is all around different and original).

I still think the margin of Carey's wins aren't all that big, but I see what you're saying.

So...26-30?