- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Which Beatles Were The Most And Least Replaceable?
Posted on 3/28/26 at 7:24 am
Posted on 3/28/26 at 7:24 am
A friend of mine was rewatching "Anthology" and brought up drummer Jimmie Nicol who replaced Ringo for a few days when touring in Denmark and Australia. This started a discussion of if The Beatles would have been The Beatles without Ringo. Could Pete Best have created anything close to some of the iconic drumming patterns Starr did on songs like "Tommorow Never Knows" and "Come Together".
This ultimately led to which Beatle was the most and least replaceable.
Even though he's my favorite Bealte, I voted George as more easily replaceable than Ringo since I can't think of many iconic leads he had vs. Ringo's drumming. I view Paul as the least replaceable since he had the best sense of melody and was the driving force in getting albums made. I also think a case could be made both John and George were more influential or impactful than Paul with their social conscious and concerns over humanity. It's an interesting topic.
All four made their imprint on the band, but which do you feel were the most and least essential?
This ultimately led to which Beatle was the most and least replaceable.
Even though he's my favorite Bealte, I voted George as more easily replaceable than Ringo since I can't think of many iconic leads he had vs. Ringo's drumming. I view Paul as the least replaceable since he had the best sense of melody and was the driving force in getting albums made. I also think a case could be made both John and George were more influential or impactful than Paul with their social conscious and concerns over humanity. It's an interesting topic.
All four made their imprint on the band, but which do you feel were the most and least essential?
12
Posted on 3/28/26 at 8:27 am to Mizz-SEC
Wouldn't Pete Best be the most replaceable?
Posted on 3/28/26 at 8:38 am to Saint Alfonzo
John was obviously the least replaceable. He's a generational talent and started the group. Great musician, songwriter and pioneer of modern day music and culture. Ringo was the most replaceable. Although he was also an important piece of the puzzle.
However, I think they were all very integral. Paul's later contributions are unmatched and he actually became their driving force.
George became a fantastic guitarist and his contributions also can't be overlooked.
Basically, they were all very important.
However, I think they were all very integral. Paul's later contributions are unmatched and he actually became their driving force.
George became a fantastic guitarist and his contributions also can't be overlooked.
Basically, they were all very important.
This post was edited on 3/28/26 at 9:29 am
Posted on 3/28/26 at 9:15 am to Mizz-SEC
They were all equally essential. The Beatles wouldn't be the Beatles without all of them in the band.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 9:46 am to hogcard1964
quote:
Basically, they were all very important.
Agree. Ringo's drum playing often gets overlooked, but he composed and played very important drum parts to a lot of great songs. If you have to list them i would agree with you essentially that Lennon>McCartney>Harrison>Ringo, and i wouldn't argue with anyone that swaps Lennon/McCartney.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 10:02 am to Mizz-SEC
Ringo wasn't even the best drummer in The Beatles. He is also the luckiest human on the planet.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 10:31 am to Dawglovertoo
quote:
They were all equally essential. The Beatles wouldn't be the Beatles without all of them in the band.
¥
This
Posted on 3/28/26 at 11:13 am to Mizz-SEC
If I had to pick one for each:
Most: Ringo
Least: John
Most: Ringo
Least: John
Posted on 3/28/26 at 1:40 pm to Mizz-SEC
Feel like the fairly obvious answer is Ringo. While I think he's somewhat underappreciated amongst legendary drummers, I feel like someone else could've done just as good as a job.
There was no replacing Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison
There was no replacing Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison
Posted on 3/28/26 at 1:48 pm to Bodie
George really came into his own near their end. Imo, he had the two top songs on Abbey Road.
Posted on 3/28/26 at 3:07 pm to Mizz-SEC
I don't think this is a logical question.
Everything with the Beatles had to happen exactly how it did.
Lightning in a bottle.
Accept the greatness of what it was, because it was a sum greater than all of it's parts.
Everything with the Beatles had to happen exactly how it did.
Lightning in a bottle.
Accept the greatness of what it was, because it was a sum greater than all of it's parts.
Posted on 3/29/26 at 9:20 am to auggie
Paul was the major creative musical force behind the Beatles. He had the music theory chops to take ideas John had and develop them into something special. John was no doubt very creative himself but we saw what happened when John Lennon ventured out on his own. He had no one to tell him, no this needs to be changed etc.
Posted on 3/29/26 at 2:26 pm to monsterballads
quote:
we saw what happened when John Lennon ventured out on his own
Kind of confused. His first two solo albums were fantastic. Sometime in New York City sucked, but Walls and Bridges was solid and Mindgames was pretty decent.
Posted on 3/29/26 at 3:00 pm to Mizz-SEC
quote:
Even though he's my favorite Bealte, I voted George as more easily replaceable than Ringo since I can't think of many iconic leads he had vs. Ringo's drumming.
As for songwriting, Ringo contributed the least, George 3rd most (agree he was coming on strong at the end), John a close 2nd to Paul (who wins on volume and commercial success if nothing else).
As far as instrumentalists - while George was probably the most singularly talented "musician", Paul and John were competent lead players, at least for Beatles music. Plus, Paul and John could play a halfway decent part on any of the core rock instruments.
But, at the end of the day "The Beatles" aren't "The Beatles" without the (Fab) four of them. The public image, the multimedia empire, the sound, the vibe, the production - the whole was greater than the sum of the parts and they had the right parts.
This post was edited on 3/29/26 at 3:01 pm
Posted on 3/29/26 at 4:18 pm to Mizz-SEC
You must of missed...
.... and so obviously the most replaceable.
RIP
.... and so obviously the most replaceable.
RIP
Posted on 3/29/26 at 8:02 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:This is a massive understatement, at least for Paul. There's a good chance he's the greatest pop/rock guitarist of all time. He is certainly the best bass player.
Paul and John were competent lead players, at least for Beatles music. Plus, Paul and John could play a halfway decent part on any of the core rock instruments.
Posted on 3/29/26 at 8:04 pm to Mizz-SEC
quote:
Which Beatles Were The Most And Least Replaceable?
It's an inherently flawed question. It wouldn't have happened - at least not in the same massive size - without the exact configuration they had. Yes, Ringo included. John himself affirmed that on more than one occasion.
And absolutely nothing ever happens without the sheer will and force of Lennon. It was HIS band until at least early 1965.
Posted on 3/29/26 at 8:06 pm to monsterballads
quote:
we saw what happened when John Lennon ventured out on his own
And what was that, exactly? He wrote the best post Beatles songs. (Imagine being an obvious example.)
Posted on 3/29/26 at 8:43 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:"There would never have been Beatlemania without Ringo" - JL
It wouldn't have happened - at least not in the same massive size - without the exact configuration they had. Yes, Ringo included. John himself affirmed that on more than one occasion.
Posted on 3/30/26 at 10:43 am to Mizz-SEC
Most replaceable, Clarence Walker.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News