Ringo Starr or Charlie Watts???

Ringo seems like a really nice guy who was scrambling to keep up with his peers, and never really succeeded. As most people have noted, Watts was/is noticeably more rock solid. That Watts is far more serious about the art of drumming is reflected in the fact that he's still very active, and stretching out into other arenas. (I'm under the impression, btw, though I could be wrong, that Paul McCartney did a certain amount of the drumming on Abbey Road.)

I don't think either would qualify as "great" drummers, frankly, but Watts would be closest. Whoever mentioned John Bonham...now he left his mark. Another hugely under-rated drummer was Clive Bunker, who was with Jethro Tull through Aqualung (I think). One of the most creative AND rock solid drummers in rock 'n roll.

Shadhorne - Dave Garibaldi w/ Tower of Power - yeah, that is some serious pushing of the beat. Funk/blues and swing are where you have some serious rubber-meeting-the-road, just in terms of pure technique for drummers...a fabulous pinnacle being Mike Clark on Herbie Hancock's Thrust...polyrhythms of amazing complexity, but right THERE. Charlie Watts could probably play funk. Ringo had some creative ideas, but when you put him up against some of the jazz-trained pro studio guys or the last 20 years like Vinnie Colaiuta or Mike Clark or Dave Garibaldi, he's just not got the technical equipment to do what they can do. Yet, they'd probably each credit him with "opening the door"--helping turn the drums into a musical instrument in its own right instead of a metronome. He wasn't a strong technician, and he wasn't rock solid, but he WAS creative and musical within his context, and it's worth hearing what he had to say.