11 years late to the conversation, but I am eager to reply to your thread of "insightful" comments regarding Keith Moon's musicianship. Where to begin? I will start by addressing what you seem to think makes you an authority on this subject - "Someone who's been drumming since 1968." It is remarkable that, as a percussionist of over 50 years and apparently better than one of the most celebrated rock drummers of all time (based off your comments that it would only take "three or four" minutes to learn anything he played after 1970), no one has ever heard of you. Life must have dealt you a truly unfortunate hand, that someone of your ability has gone unnoticed for decades, outside of a Led Zeppelin forum. All I can say is, as a jazz drummer in NYC, I have seen many grey-haired drummers at jam sessions whose abilities are laughable - and not because their age has contributed to any decline in technical facility. You assert that a drummer such as Ginger Baker's technical facility surpasses Keith Moon's in his prime, and instruct anyone impressed with Moon's playing to check out players like Tony Williams - who himself described Moon's playing as "beautiful and totally free." Elvin Jones, one of the greatest percussionists of all time (anyone you listed would second that), took part in a blind listening test in the early 70s - two of the subjects were Baker and Moon (unbeknownst to Jones). He summarized Baker''s playing as "delusions of grandeur with no grounds," stating that Cream should "make him an astronaut and lose his ass." Upon hearing a recording of Tommy, he stated, "See there, where the tempo started to die, how he picked it up! The man is a drummer. Everything they play, he contains it." You repeatedly bring up the notion of "chops." Since when has technical facility, or "chops," ever been a marker of high musicianship, or a good drummer? Technical facility serves as a means to expressing one's musical ideas, but certainly does not make a great musician in and of itself. Technical ability without musical application is as impressive as stringing together large words which carry no meaning in their greater context. As Elvin attested, Moon's drumming was highly musical and supportive, and that is the role of a drummer. Your idea that Moon was merely playing "licks," which you you could easily learn in three minutes (you probably could, seeing as the purpose of Moon's drumming was not to showcase his technical prowess, but to support the music, which does not often require technically complex fills), displays a rather immature view of the role of a drummer, and a lack of comprehension of what Moon did in the Who, at all stages of his career. Of course, while it may be slight hyperbole on your part, if learning a Bonham "lick" would take you years, perhaps there is a reason no one has heard of you throughout your 52 year career. You did acknowledge you're "Not a great drummer or anything," so I needn't harp on that point. For someone making all these seemingly "informed" remarks about Moon, you are conspicuously ignorant. Your claim that "Before 'Who's Next' was recorded Moon didn't even play a hi-hat," can be dismissed upon hearing Side 1 Track 1 of Tommy - "Overture." Keith Moon uses hi-hat heavily on this track as well as throughout the album. He may also use hi-hat on earlier records, I'm simply using Tommy as a quick and effective example to refute your point. It's true he didn't play hi-hats on stage until 1973, but your assertion that Moon did not use a hi-hat at all prior to recording Who's Next is so easily disproven that it calls into question your authority on anything Moon-related. Saying Moon's drumming is only "a bit" better than Ringo's elicits a nice holiday chuckle from me on this Christmas afternoon, so I thank you. These posts were from 2009 and perhaps you've reformed your views, but I felt compelled to explain why your disparaging remarks towards Moon's drumming don't hold water, neither in the views of musicians like Elvin Jones and Tony Williams, nor in the recorded history of the Who's music.