930 Forums
=> GENERAL DISCUSSION => Topic started by: TheREALHunter on April 07, 2011, 07:40:27 am
-
I'm considering the source since The Sun is the UK equivalent of the National Enquirer; still I'm curious as to whether there's any truth to it.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/music/3513586/Stone-Roses-resurrected.html
-
I might have to eat my words about never paying $500 for a show!!!! ;)
Seriously....I still wouldn't do it, just out of pure stubborness.
As for the Sun - it is a wrag alright but they do break some pretty incredible stories. If I ever want scoop on the English football scene I check the Sun first.
-
I hear Fugazi is playing Fort Reno this summer.
-
I might have to eat my words about never paying $500 for a show!!!! ;)
Seriously....I still wouldn't do it, just out of pure stubborness.
As for the Sun - it is a wrag alright but they do break some pretty incredible stories. If I ever want scoop on the English football scene I check the Sun first.
Your nostalgic memories (and the drugs you've taken) are clouding your ability to honestly judge.
Of course I never saw them but from all accounts, most of the time, they were pretty dire live. Like, "Hole"-at the-9:30-club-dire.
Have you listened to Spike Island recently? It's a mess. Even Noel Gallagher mentions a boot he heard in which they are playing "I Am The Resurrection" and each member is playing a completely different section of the song. Plus, there was the disasterous 96 Reading appearance.
The Stone Roses are almost a parallel to an American band with "Roses" in their name.
1. Fantastic debut.
2. Bloated follow-up (though underrated).
3. Shed original members.
4. Charismatic lead singer.
5. Live-wire guitarist.
6. Bassist joined contemporaries (Primal Scream, Jane's Addiction (briefly))
7. People losing their sh*t over a possible reunion.
So basically what I?m saying is, they sucked live. You?re a bigger fool to pay over $500 than the idiots paying to see Charlie Sheen. And if you DID think they were great live, then it was the drugs telling you that....a lot like Charlie Sheen.
Brian
-
saw them..at the 930 club before the 930 club.. coincidentally also saw hole there..
hole was great. the stone roses weren't very good..
-
i blame james iha
-
Disagree. There were some bad performances for sure, but I saw them twice. Once I thought it was GREAT, the second time Ian's vocals were horrible but the band played fairly well. When all is said and done, I'll give it a chance if Reni is on board because I've never seen them perform with him. The Empress Ballroom Blackpool concert they did is fantastic, that is worth watching. But if we're going for that era, the best of those bands hands down was Inspiral Carpets. And Carter U.S.M. Inspiral Carpets were criminally overlooked. I'd also throw Catherine Wheel into the mix.
-
Like the sucker that I am, I'd probably pay for this. But Ian Brown rivals Liam Gallagher as one of the worst live vocalists ever....
A little pitchy dawg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh1kaHVt-lA)
-
Aw crap....Brian won't let me go! ::)
-
You're forgetting EMF.
Disagree. There were some bad performances for sure, but I saw them twice. Once I thought it was GREAT, the second time Ian's vocals were horrible but the band played fairly well. When all is said and done, I'll give it a chance if Reni is on board because I've never seen them perform with him. The Empress Ballroom Blackpool concert they did is fantastic, that is worth watching. But if we're going for that era, the best of those bands hands down was Inspiral Carpets. And Carter U.S.M. Inspiral Carpets were criminally overlooked. I'd also throw Catherine Wheel into the mix.
-
LOL. I saw Carter USM and EMF together! :) Guess I wont see those 2 bands ever playing together again.
Would love to see the Inspirals and if Catherine Wheel came around again - Id jump all over that.
I figured the closest Id come to seeing The Roses was seeing John Squire in the Seahorses and Ian Brown as a solo artist. Would be quite awesome if they reformed. Its now up on NME about this possible reunion.
You're forgetting EMF.
Disagree. There were some bad performances for sure, but I saw them twice. Once I thought it was GREAT, the second time Ian's vocals were horrible but the band played fairly well. When all is said and done, I'll give it a chance if Reni is on board because I've never seen them perform with him. The Empress Ballroom Blackpool concert they did is fantastic, that is worth watching. But if we're going for that era, the best of those bands hands down was Inspiral Carpets. And Carter U.S.M. Inspiral Carpets were criminally overlooked. I'd also throw Catherine Wheel into the mix.
-
I stand by my tastes :) Carter wrote some witty and VERY clever tunes. Inspiral Carpets to this day put on the best concert that integrated visuals with their music...some of the sickest lighting, videos and projections I've ever seen. It was more like performance art than a rock show. But when the whole thing came together it was one of the craziest things I've ever seen in my life. My sister still talks about it too, and she's not a music geek like I am.
-
so is there any chance (however unlikely it may be) that the inspirals would reunite and play shows in the states? id imagine itd be slim to none (or maybe nyc).
Ive always wanted to see Neds again and I know on occasion they play shows in the UK. I need to go next time.
I stand by my tastes :) Carter wrote some witty and VERY clever tunes. Inspiral Carpets to this day put on the best concert that integrated visuals with their music...some of the sickest lighting, videos and projections I've ever seen. It was more like performance art than a rock show. But when the whole thing came together it was one of the craziest things I've ever seen in my life. My sister still talks about it too, and she's not a music geek like I am.
-
I honestly don't think there's enough Inspirals geeks like me to get them over here, which is sad because they were such a great band. They've done shows in Europe to moderate success though. Ned's, on the other hand, did well over here. They SHOULD tour. But none really had the buzz/hype that the Stone Roses did, although just a few years later Oasis was hyped the most, which I never quite understood. the Manchester dance stuff was infinitely more interesting to me, even though I dug the first couple Oasis LPs. And I know this is the most bizarre statement, but "Leisure" by Blur is still my favorite record of theirs. It's like saying "Pablo Honey" is your favorite Radiohead LP.
-
A few days ago I rewatched the Stone Roses at Blackpool from August 1989 on youtube. Its frickin great and the genius of Reni and the brilliance the band when everything meshed really shines through. . .as does the capturing lightning in a bottle quality of their 1989/90 run. Reni's last show was at Glasgow Green all the way back in June 1990. I don't know if Reni would/could come back and the old chemistry somehow recaptured, but a return in the diminished 1995 form would be a disappointment.
-
I saw Catherine Wheel years ago at Slims. It wasnt at the height of their career - but mid/late 90s. I cant imagine a lot of these bands coming back here and playing bigger venues which is a bit sad. Then again - Chapterhouse played The Bell House and that was packed!
Guess its wishful thinking. Itd be awesome tho if Neds came around.
And I *love* Leisure. That is a brilliant album. Its actually my 2nd favorite tho behind MLIR.
I honestly don't think there's enough Inspirals geeks like me to get them over here, which is sad because they were such a great band. They've done shows in Europe to moderate success though. Ned's, on the other hand, did well over here. They SHOULD tour. But none really had the buzz/hype that the Stone Roses did, although just a few years later Oasis was hyped the most, which I never quite understood. the Manchester dance stuff was infinitely more interesting to me, even though I dug the first couple Oasis LPs. And I know this is the most bizarre statement, but "Leisure" by Blur is still my favorite record of theirs. It's like saying "Pablo Honey" is your favorite Radiohead LP.
-
I saw Catherine Wheel as a support band years ago. I thought they were shit even though I had bought and enjoyed an album of there's prior.
-
I actually broke out Ned's Are You Normal a couple of weeks ago and was really enjoying it. I saw them on that last U.S. tour back in May 1995. I would love another U.S. tour and while we are at it, a Scream Screamadelica show in the U.S. would be nice.
-
Mani pisses in the punch bowl:
http://www.nme.com/news/the-stone-roses/55977
-
I never thought this would happen.. when you see a British tabloid say this you know they're just making it up.
-
If it was an American tabloid wolfboy would be joining them on tour. ;D
The Sun was actually correct in their story, Mani put the kaibosh (sp?) on it.
hmmmmm. maybe wolfboy can take Mani's place?
-
If it was an American tabloid wolfboy would be joining them on tour. ;D
The Sun was actually correct in their story, Mani put the kaibosh (sp?) on it.
hmmmmm. maybe wolfboy can take Mani's place?
Gallagher, pardon me for being blunt but as usual you are full of shit.
The sun story read:
THE STONE ROSES are getting back together after IAN BROWN and JOHN SQUIRE buried the hatchet on one of the most bitter feuds in rock 'n' roll history.
The former best pals hadn't spoken for the best part of 15 years after falling out in a war of words when the band imploded back in 1996.
But, last month the pair established contact again and a megabucks reunion is now being lined up to happen later in the year.
-------------
How the fuck was that correct?
Oh, nevermind dude, keep on making shit up.
-
Mani is a great bassist and a major part of what made the Roses great, but they could easily pull off a reunion without him. All they need is Ian and John, even Renni is optional (though his absence would cause more consternation than Mani's).
-
Mani is a great bassist and a major part of what made the Roses great, but they could easily pull off a reunion without him. All they need is Ian and John, even Renni is optional (though his absence would cause more consternation than Mani's).
BINGO!!!!!!
Ian Brown controls the reunion....they don't need Mani, bass players are ten a penny.
No Ian Brown - no Stone Roses
No Mani - Whatever.....
-
actually, my friend who was with me at the stone roses show at WUST (before it became 930) was convinced mani messed up the bass line to his favorite song... he was real bummed about it and i don't think he was wrong cause he knew his stone roses stuff...
i hardly recall anything bout that show (pre digital camera etc.)... i know it started EARLY and we missed a few songs..
-
Mani is a great bassist and a major part of what made the Roses great, but they could easily pull off a reunion without him. All they need is Ian and John, even Renni is optional (though his absence would cause more consternation than Mani's).
Is this a joke?
-
Yeah, ha ha
HA HA HA
-
Didn't they have their own version of Bez? A guy who didn't play an instrument but was there for "vibes?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPdUKy7_aqM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPdUKy7_aqM)
Brian
-
And I know this is the most bizarre statement, but "Leisure" by Blur is still my favorite record of theirs. It's like saying "Pablo Honey" is your favorite Radiohead LP.
http://www.nme.com/blog/index.php?blog=140&p=10060&album_aaamp_e_blur_leisure&more=1&c=1 (http://www.nme.com/blog/index.php?blog=140&p=10060&album_aaamp_e_blur_leisure&more=1&c=1)
-
stone roses reforming
-
"We are going to rule the world again. It's happening."
Ian Brown
-
Is this the filthy lucre because the bitch bled me dry tour?
the bigger issue will if ian and co. and can tour the us or not...
-
its always about the benjamins... in any case according to NME at the press conference:
So it's official: there will be two shows at Manchester's Heaton Park on June 29th and 30th, followed by a world tour. And the best bit? The Stone Roses will be playing NEW SONGS!
-
I don't actually think I know anybody who is a Stones Roses fan, but I always imagine their fans must be pretty douchey themselves to put up with this band of douchebags. Am I totally wrong? Or am I confusing them with Oasis?
-
Douchey? I'm a Roses fan. I'm as fresh as a daisy, but no douche use here. But thanks very much for caring enough to ask.
-
i'm a stone roses fan, if douche means owning several versions of their first album, then so be it...
-
Another Roses fan who's also fresh as a summers eve.
Not sure I need them to reunite though....could be a complete train wreck, and ruin the whole 'Roses thing' for me. Besides, Stone Roses are Ian Brown and some musicians. Ian Browns 'solo' stuff is just as good.
-
I'm looking forward to this SO much! It could be the most hilariously awful thing ever! A band with ONE good album that sounds more dated and overrated with every passing second? A "singer" who REALLY can't sing? Comically dated fashion ("Reni bucket hat!") 20+ years of swearing they'd NEVER reform the original line-up? I'm just looking forward to how Ian Brown can deny it's not about the money. I never thought in my lifetime I'd see a more pathetic reunion, but I was wrong Sex Pistols. I was WRONG!
Brian
-
well for me their john squire, a crack rhythm section and a brilliant producer who managed to capture a mediocre singer in tune once in awhile :)
-
I'm looking forward to this SO much! It could be the most hilariously awful thing ever! A band with ONE good album that sounds more dated and overrated with every passing second? A "singer" who REALLY can't sing? Comically dated fashion ("Reni bucket hat!") 20+ years of swearing they'd NEVER reform the original line-up? I'm just looking forward to how Ian Brown can deny it's not about the money. I never thought in my lifetime I'd see a more pathetic reunion, but I was wrong Sex Pistols. I was WRONG!
Brian
Sorry kids. I tried to catch Mr. Fussy Pants before he could post. Somebody is going to be mowing my lawn when he comes by the house. If he keeps it up I'll be heading right back to Hot Topic to return his birthday presents.
Papa
-
Thanks B_W for proving JF's point that roses fans are douches.... IMHO that album is as fresh as both Frank and Bearman combined.
BTW, I'll bet you opined that a James reunion was pathetic, and they of course came back and destroyed
and for the record, that second record also stands the test of time, it was certainly years before every other British rock band got infatuated with Led Zep. Of course it was a disappoint for all us douche roses fans when it was released, but it's definitely worth the revisit.
-
Reni and Gary are indeed a solid rhythm section. Incredible musicians. John Squire was the Jimmy Page of the mid-90's that most people never had a chance to see in person, but I did and I can attest to his incredible talent and craft. Ian Brown is hit or miss and the one wild card in this reunion. But I'll bet they'll do a great job. I'm A-OK with all of this.
-
"Second Coming" isn't a disaster. It would be so much better respected if the band had a chance to release a couple more LP's. That nonsense with Silvertone Records really took the wind out of their sails (and sales). There's still a slew of great singles and b-sides they did too.
-
Where's that clip from "Shaun of the Dead?"
Brian
-
This is awesome news! I remember seeing John Squire with the Seahorses and thinking that was pretty awesome (as I figured a Roses reunion was never happening). Ive always liked him much better than Ian Brown who Ive seen a few times.
I still think those albums hold the test of time - and the intro on breaking into heaven. its still as great as the first time i heard it.
Kasabian did make a whole career using the same exact sound. It seemd to work out quite well for them. Lets hope the Stone Roses still sound as great.
-
"Second Coming" isn't a disaster. It would be so much better respected if the band had a chance to release a couple more LP's. That nonsense with Silvertone Records really took the wind out of their sales. There's still a slew of great singles and b-sides they did too.
I know when it came out "Second Coming" made me see red, but now I'd kinda like to hear a deluxe/expanded version of that room. I suspect lots ended up on the cutting room floor for that one, didn't they work with several producers for it?
-
Where's that clip from "Shaun of the Dead?"
Brian
Ed: 'Purple Rain'?
Shaun: No.
Ed: 'Sign o' the Times'?
Shaun: Definitely not.
Ed: The 'Batman' soundtrack?
Shaun: Throw it.
Ed: 'Dire Straits'?
Shaun: Throw it.
Ed: Ooh, 'Stone Roses'.
Shaun: Um, No.
Ed: 'Second Coming'.
Shaun: I like it!
Ed: Ahhh! 'Sade'.
Shaun: Yeah, but that's Liz's!
Ed: Yeah, but she did dump you.
Shaun: Oh!
-
Where's that clip from "Shaun of the Dead?"
Brian
Ed: 'Purple Rain'?
Shaun: No.
Ed: 'Sign o' the Times'?
Shaun: Definitely not.
Ed: The 'Batman' soundtrack?
Shaun: Throw it.
Ed: 'Dire Straits'?
Shaun: Throw it.
Ed: Ooh, 'Stone Roses'.
Shaun: Um, No.
Ed: 'Second Coming'.
Shaun: I like it!
Ed: Ahhh! 'Sade'.
Shaun: Yeah, but that's Liz's!
Ed: Yeah, but she did dump you.
Shaun: Oh!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sxb5Tr1DybA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sxb5Tr1DybA)
Brian
-
Kasabian did make a whole career using the same exact hair.
there you go.
-
Has Vegas posted any action on this?
Odds it will be the four original members?
Odds that Noel Gallagher will be on the support bill for the Manchester shows? Kasabian? Beady Eye? The Happy Mondays?
Brian
-
Just look at those trousers!
(http://static.nme.com/images/magazine/NMECover181011.jpg)
Brian
-
I like the second album too.. not great but good..
The first album is one of the greatest records ever cut...
To me Stone Roses is what Oasis always tried to be.
Not sure I can agree that Ian Brown's solo records are as good as Stones Roses.. wish it were so!
-
With Reni in the mix and everyone on the same page I like the odds that they can produce a reasonable facsimile of the transcendent lighting in a bottle they created once upon a time.
Of course that magic proved to be extremely fragile and died back in June '90 when Reni played his last show (he never played a single show in the US!). Second Coming has some value but has the labored and fractious feel of a band operating with the magic gone.
But if MBV could do it . . .
-
Sure, Second Coming isn't as good as their debut release, but I still like it. Not as good isn't necessarily the same as bad.
Good news in my book. Of course, looking forward to early reviews. As we all know, there's no guarantee how this will work out. Some do a great job reuniting while others would have been better off resting in their graves.
-
The Primal Scream do "Screamadelica" shows never hit America did they?
OR the Suede reunion
OR the Blur reunion.
What kind of venues could the Stone Roses play if they played over here?
Slightly less than the Pixies, right?
Brian
-
^ Do I sense a wave of excitement from Brian? ;D
I'd be thinking that there might be some hope for the old boy's musical taste yet... except for that Roxy Music dig. You can diss The Beatles, The Stones, Pink Floyd and other older greats but don't diss Roxy Music without getting a swipe from me. (Snarrrrr Hiss)
-
No. I'm just fascinated by the "Weren't ever POPULAR popular but give it a few years and CRITICAL popularity can have you sell out mid-size venues" phenomenon or "The Pixies Effect." But it's only a certain few. A band reuniting and getting more popular just because Kurt Cobain or Noel Gallagher cite them as a major influence. Honestly, if Noel Gallagher never mentioned The Stone Roses do you think there would be this much excitement? No one's ever going to care about a Fountains of Wayne reunion in fifteen years if they never breakup. And I think people are going to misjudge how certain an R.E.M. reunion is, too.
But the Stone Roses are going to headline the last night at Coachella 2012 now aren't they? It's fait accompli?
Brian
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15359644
Rite mait....sor'tid...top drawer that is man.
-
You know Brian, for some of us, it's just about the music. Some of us couldn't give a crap what Kurt or any of the Gallegher's (except Frank) have said. Don't care what the NME, Spin, Pitchfork or Rolling Stone are pushing. Hey, my musical tastes pretty much prove that since most of what I listen to is ignored by them. It's just the music.
-
You know Brian, for some of us, it's just about the music. Some of us couldn't give a crap what Kurt or any of the Gallegher's (except Frank) have said. Don't care what the NME, Spin, Pitchfork or Rolling Stone are pushing. Hey, my musical tastes pretty much prove that since most of what I listen to is ignored by them. It's just the music.
I call bullshit on this. Where did you first hear of The Stone Roses? How about the Pixies? MTV? HFS? All the hits they had?
Brian
-
The Primal Scream do "Screamadelica" shows never hit America did they?
OR the Suede reunion
OR the Blur reunion.
What kind of venues could the Stone Roses play if they played over here?
Slightly less than the Pixies, right?
Brian
Suede played Coachella. It was a pretty good show.
-
You know Brian, for some of us, it's just about the music. Some of us couldn't give a crap what Kurt or any of the Gallegher's (except Frank) have said. Don't care what the NME, Spin, Pitchfork or Rolling Stone are pushing. Hey, my musical tastes pretty much prove that since most of what I listen to is ignored by them. It's just the music.
I call bullshit on this. Where did you first hear of The Stone Roses? How about the Pixies? MTV? HFS? All the hits they had?
Brian
Probably HFS, WCVT or WJHU. Definitely not any of the rags I listed.
Where did you hear of Fall Out Boy?
-
You know Brian, for some of us, it's just about the music. Some of us couldn't give a crap what Kurt or any of the Gallegher's (except Frank) have said. Don't care what the NME, Spin, Pitchfork or Rolling Stone are pushing. Hey, my musical tastes pretty much prove that since most of what I listen to is ignored by them. It's just the music.
I call bullshit on this. Where did you first hear of The Stone Roses? How about the Pixies? MTV? HFS? All the hits they had?
Brian
Probably HFS, WCVT or WJHU. Definitely not any of the rags I listed.
Where did you hear of Fall Out Boy?
Underground mix tapes and word of mouth! Duh!
Brian
-
^ Yeah, those are all cool and helpful but all of those people get their info from elsewhere too and sometimes it's from places that Papa may venture into.
Besides, back then, college and alternative (note the lower case 'a') was actually worth listening to. Nothing like the over commercially controlled crap of today. Go back just a little further and you would often actually hear true underground cuts. WGTB (from Georgetown University) use to be incredible at airing such music before the hierarchy took them down.
-
^^^
You forgot "Kids! Get off my lawn!"
Brian
-
I'm guessing Brian has not only never got laid, he's never even had a stinky pinky, never mind a female tongue in his mouth......
-
I'm guessing Brian has not only never got laid, he's never even had a stinky pinky, never mind a female tongue in his mouth......
I find that very revealing. Never experienced coitus? Maybe. Never been romantically kissed? Possibly. It's the one in the middle that you're so eager to tell me I've never experienced..... I'm sure that was a regular part of your childhood in the council estates and at boys school.
Brian
-
^^^
You forgot "Kids! Get off my lawn!"
Brian
I never tell anyone to stay off the grass. Maybe you should try some. Chill out a bit. Your extreme ageism is showing and it's very ugly and even a bit psychotic. Sociopathic.
One of these days, if you live that long, I bet anything that you'll grow into one of those old curmudgeons who have utter and complete contempt for the younger generations. It's sort of like a leopard not changing its spots except that it only involves an ever so slight adjustment of which generations you hate.
-
Everyone in America learned about the Stone Roses the same way. They got the cassette from a friend that was always cooler than them. . . .then listened to it repeatedly, perhaps to the point of obsession, often wondering how something could be so effortless yet impossibly amazing. If they were lucky they caught the Fools Gold video late night on 120 Minutes and wondered if it was a dream or if the coolest future imaginable was already happening in Engerland.
Nothing similar happened with Suede, Blur, Manic Street Preachers, etc . . .
-
So who else put on the debut album at work today?
-
i stole tape from the gift shop at my college early 90... i think i thought it was a heavy metal band
fell in love with it instantly..
live they were always hit and miss..
i'd like to hear the debut but my lps are a mess right now..maybe i dig it out.. i do have a hankering for it..
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15359644
Rite mait....sor'tid...top drawer that is man.
this made it feel real, felt a little giddy after watching it... I'm thinking Merriweather late fall 2012 and maybe Seth and company will turn into a mini festival with some old school acid/techno/house djs digging out the vinyl
-
What about The Seahorses? ;D
-
Everyone in America learned about the Stone Roses the same way. They got the cassette from a friend that was always cooler than them. . . .then listened to it repeatedly, perhaps to the point of obsession, often wondering how something could be so effortless yet impossibly amazing. If they were lucky they caught the Fools Gold video late night on 120 Minutes and wondered if it was a dream or if the coolest future imaginable was already happening in Engerland.
Nothing similar happened with Suede, Blur, Manic Street Preachers, etc . . .
That album's NOT THAT GOOD! You're looking at it through the rose-coloured glasses of nostalgia. "Bye Bye Badman" is ok but the "Scarborough Fair" one? The one that's just another song backwards? Puh-leeze. And the elephant in the room is that they pretty much, by all accounts, sucked live. Have you LISTENED to the Spike Island show? Noel Gallagher claims he's heard a version of "I am the Resurrection" they did in which each member is playing a completely different portion of the song.
This isn't because you people are losing your jobs and have a lot of student loans to pay for is it? So sad! I really feel for you.....
They were the first big U.K. "Next Big Thing" who fizzled out. The Libertines have a more solid foundation for British bands that were hyped and lost it. The Stone Roses are built on sand. You'll see next summer.
Brian
-
I'm going to have to say that in terms of being pathetic and worthless the Hole and Smashing Pumpkins "reunions" top this one by a mile. As I recall one Brian_Wallace attended a couple of those Hole "reunion" shows.
But whatever, it must be more important to go out and support bands offering fake nostalgia and playing dress-up. See Semi Precious Weapons
(http://www.hauteliving.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Semi-Precious-Weapons_L.jpg)
-
What I'm finding amazing is how much Brian degrades any sort of mainstream appearance by a band as being a mark of worthlessness while also using some sort of mainstream success of a band's reunion as an indicator of its value.
Can't have it both ways, Brian. Just chill out and enjoy the music for how it makes you feel and don't worry about whether or not the mainstream has caught on to them or not. If you want to groove out to train wreck Courtney or little boys Fall Out Boy, all while perving over photos of Scarlet, than so be it. But please stop insisting that any given band isn't any good just because they have a few years on them. There are plenty of great recordings, films and books that were created while you were still shitting your diapers. Lots were created even before any of us were even born. Most of us appreciate art for what it is; not shit all over it because it pre-dates our last birthday.
-
Just to clarify, Brian is the one who looks at music through the glasses of 'nostalgia'. I'm talking about what I thought at a time in relation to actual experience. Everyone else is to. Its not nostalgia. Its appreciation. If you have a good time at your high school reunion catching up, it doesn't mean you are still living inthe past or want to actually be in high school.
-
You're missing the point. They had one overrated album and a disaster that took longer than the Smiths entire career. But put it in the oven, bake for fifteen years and ALL IS WELL! They were AWESOME! Popular (rock) music is supposed to be an active, vital thing. Not something that you look at it in a museum. Pavement, Smashing Pumpkins, Stone Roses, etc. There are bands out there NOW who are just as fresh as they WERE. And yet it's too SCARY to take a chance on new bands! Let's just listen to the same music from 15, 20, 40 years ago because it's been VETTED. It's SAFE. I honestly don't care if people criticize my love for Lady Gaga, etc. because it's NOW. It's CURRENT. It's 2011. The kids understand. When your kids (?) ask you what you listened to in 2011 you'll say "The Stone Roses" and they'll be confused. My reaction is similar to Jay Cutler's six words at the end of the first quarter on Sunday. Apparently, I am the only one who is disgusted by this pathetic embrace of nostalgia. Hey, listen to "I Am The Resurrection" all you want and harken back to a day when life was less scary and you still had potential. I'll be over here living my life.
Brian
-
You're missing the point. They had one overrated album and a disaster that took longer than the Smiths entire career. But put it in the oven, bake for fifteen years and ALL IS WELL! They were AWESOME! Popular (rock) music is supposed to be an active, vital thing. Not something that you look at it in a museum. Pavement, Smashing Pumpkins, Stone Roses, etc. There are bands out there NOW who are just as fresh as they WERE. And yet it's too SCARY to take a chance on new bands! Let's just listen to the same music from 15, 20, 40 years ago because it's been VETTED. It's SAFE. I honestly don't care if people criticize my love for Lady Gaga, etc. because it's NOW. It's CURRENT. It's 2011. The kids understand. When your kids (?) ask you what you listened to in 2011 you'll say "The Stone Roses" and they'll be confused. My reaction is similar to Jay Cutler's six words at the end of the first quarter on Sunday. Apparently, I am the only one who is disgusted by this pathetic embrace of nostalgia. Hey, listen to "I Am The Resurrection" all you want and harken back to a day when life was less scary and you still had potential. I'll be over here living my life.
Brian
yawn..
dude, you're getting really annoying.. cluttering every thread.. if you're not into something live and let live...
don't oversimplify things man: people can live their lives in the now and still listen to an old record.. i mean wtf?
seriously dude, tone it down or you are on your way out of this forum.
-
The Stone Roses were awesome. Then and now, in hindsight. It's a pleasure to pull that disc out for a spin every now and then because of its awesomeness even though MOST OF US HAVE moved onto other music.
You're definitely barking on the wrong board if you truly believe that we only listen to music from our early 'good old days' collections. We may not all like the same bands but we all do like keeping up with what's new and coming around.
-
You're missing the point. They had one overrated album and a disaster that took longer than the Smiths entire career. But put it in the oven, bake for fifteen years and ALL IS WELL! They were AWESOME! Popular (rock) music is supposed to be an active, vital thing. Not something that you look at it in a museum. Pavement, Smashing Pumpkins, Stone Roses, etc. There are bands out there NOW who are just as fresh as they WERE. And yet it's too SCARY to take a chance on new bands! Let's just listen to the same music from 15, 20, 40 years ago because it's been VETTED. It's SAFE. I honestly don't care if people criticize my love for Lady Gaga, etc. because it's NOW. It's CURRENT. It's 2011. The kids understand. When your kids (?) ask you what you listened to in 2011 you'll say "The Stone Roses" and they'll be confused. My reaction is similar to Jay Cutler's six words at the end of the first quarter on Sunday. Apparently, I am the only one who is disgusted by this pathetic embrace of nostalgia. Hey, listen to "I Am The Resurrection" all you want and harken back to a day when life was less scary and you still had potential. I'll be over here living my life.
Brian
yawn..
dude, you're getting really annoying.. cluttering every thread.. if you're not into something live and let live...
don't oversimplify things man: people can live their lives in the now and still listen to an old record.. i mean wtf?
seriously dude, tone it down or you are on your way out of this forum.
You're exactly right. I'm sorry for bleating on for pages and pages about Hispanic shows in the DC Metro area and how much of a patriot Michael Moore is.
Brian
-
You're missing the point. They had one overrated album and a disaster that took longer than the Smiths entire career. But put it in the oven, bake for fifteen years and ALL IS WELL! They were AWESOME! Popular (rock) music is supposed to be an active, vital thing. Not something that you look at it in a museum. Pavement, Smashing Pumpkins, Stone Roses, etc. There are bands out there NOW who are just as fresh as they WERE. And yet it's too SCARY to take a chance on new bands! Let's just listen to the same music from 15, 20, 40 years ago because it's been VETTED. It's SAFE. I honestly don't care if people criticize my love for Lady Gaga, etc. because it's NOW. It's CURRENT. It's 2011. The kids understand. When your kids (?) ask you what you listened to in 2011 you'll say "The Stone Roses" and they'll be confused. My reaction is similar to Jay Cutler's six words at the end of the first quarter on Sunday. Apparently, I am the only one who is disgusted by this pathetic embrace of nostalgia. Hey, listen to "I Am The Resurrection" all you want and harken back to a day when life was less scary and you still had potential. I'll be over here living my life.
Brian
yawn..
dude, you're getting really annoying.. cluttering every thread.. if you're not into something live and let live...
don't oversimplify things man: people can live their lives in the now and still listen to an old record.. i mean wtf?
seriously dude, tone it down or you are on your way out of this forum.
You're exactly right. I'm sorry for bleating on for pages and pages about Hispanic shows in the DC Metro area and how much of a patriot Michael Moore is.
Brian
Dude, every music thread has you coming in and saying how the music sucks?
WHats up with that?
Every thread seems to be.. someone posts some music news.. a few people get excited and you come in and start trashing everyone.. WTF?
-
Funny. I think that Brian LOVES the attention he's getting. He loves that people are listening to what he has to say. But unlike Steve Albini, who stirs the pot and has intelligent and witty things to say even if you don't agree, Brian just wants to make everyone feel like shit. So I repeat what I've said before. Just ignore. The easiest way to deal with drama is to remove yourself from the equation. You can't change people. They can only change themselves if they want to. And if they want to be miserable and unhappy instigators, then that's exactly who they will be. But I agree to the cluttering up of the board. Very annoying.
I saw the Stone Roses twice. One night they were incredible. Then the other time they sucked. But realistically they were never really a major touring band and by the time I saw them they were REALLY into the white powder(s). So with that in mind, I still say I'll give them another chance. Expectations are high. If they don't bring it, their tour will tank and that'll be it.
Oh, and FYI, most "current" stuff that the "kids" are into (and the kids are NOT alright, they're idiots) just fucking sucks because they haven't done their homework, haven't learned to play their instruments, and don't have a clue who came before them. Just sayin'. And trust me, I'm trying REALLY hard to find the stuff that I can dig.
-
I had not remembered that when I saw them in 95 reni was not in band.. i wonder if i even knew that at the time as it was pre-internet..
-
Brian, for what it's worth, I do get what you are saying about the nostalgia thing, though I see it a bit differently. To me, it's not so much about the music itself, as you seem to believe, but instead, about the various types of individuals.
I tend to place those types into two categories:
1) Those who tend to only want to hear what was popular back when they were in high school or when they were out clubbing. Once they moved on, the music pretty much stopped for them. They are the ones that stop in here on an odd occasion looking for a password or maybe a show date for a rare night out to see a band. Totally irrelevant in this forum and not worth the rant.
2) Essentially the same sort but for some reason have their hands involved in booking shows, music programming or any other sort of power or control with what gets offered to the public. Usually not a part of this board but worth a beef or two. Exactly the very same sort that I see at work who book shows and don't seem to have a clue that there are more than maybe three genres out there. Also, only book shows for old people (my age and older); which means music from their heydays; or kiddie music (for kids even younger than you), which means Disney crap. Sometimes I sound like you when I privately lament that they book or play something from this millenium that isn't Country or Disney!
The point is, recognize the difference between those who just happen to like older music mixed in with their newer selections as opposed to those truly stuck in the past.
-
Look, obviously Brian wants to stir things up here. Personally, I think it's better than listening to people go on and on about the same bands and same opinions, even if I don't agree, but I get it can be tedious.
But your statement below sounds exactly like every parent has said to every kid since the dawn of time. Homework shouldn't be a prerequisite to music being good. And from someone that loves the Germs, you should know that technical prowess doesn't equal quality tunes ;)
Oh, and FYI, most "current" stuff that the "kids" are into (and the kids are NOT alright, they're idiots) just fucking sucks because they haven't done their homework, haven't learned to play their instruments, and don't have a clue who came before them. Just sayin'. And trust me, I'm trying REALLY hard to find the stuff that I can dig.
-
Good points, and my old parent tone isn't lost on me. I threw in the Who reference precisely because I was aware of the irony. But I've always gravitated towards music of a certain era. Even in the 90's when I was digging on Jawbreaker, I was getting hooked even harder on the Buzzcocks. In the 80's when I was discovering the Sugarcubes, I was also discovering the Ramones and enjoying them even more. I know I'm behind the curve, but I just got the first Runaways record and that STILL sounds more immediate than most things my friends tell me I should listen to. I think my ear is drawn to a certain production that is more stripped. A lot of newer records are produced in a manner that (to me) makes it sound instantly dated. Kind of like when I heard disco as a kid. I hated disco. "Heart of Glass", as good a tune as it is, sounded dated to me from the get-go. And that's why I can't listen to it even now. God, when a buddy played me MIA I wanted to take a gun to the speakers.
-
And in fairness to nkotb, sometimes the "kids" develop a new way of playing (i.e. The Ramones) that sounds like hogwash, but in reality they're technically FAR more proficient than people will give them credit for. So I get it. But I'm still not hearing that these days. Maybe I need some suggestions. I'm open to them.
-
Funny. I think that Brian LOVES the attention he's getting. He loves that people are listening to what he has to say. But unlike Steve Albini, who stirs the pot and has intelligent and witty things to say even if you don't agree, Brian just wants to make everyone feel like shit. So I repeat what I've said before. Just ignore. The easiest way to deal with drama is to remove yourself from the equation. You can't change people. They can only change themselves if they want to. And if they want to be miserable and unhappy instigators, then that's exactly who they will be. But I agree to the cluttering up of the board. Very annoying.
(http://zanypickle.com/wp-content/gallery//2010/05/zanypickle_05121054-550x687.jpg)
-
Popular (rock) music is supposed to be an active, vital thing. Not something that you look at it in a museum.
Brian
Absolutely, but one's relationship to popular (rock) music probably should evolve just like one's relationship to 18 year old girls probably should evolve (Wooderson and some member of the forum excluded). I consider it a positive that my grandparents stuck with Sinatra and didn't move on to the Beatles and Pink Floyd. And that my dad wasn't borrowing my Replacements tapes. Likewise, if you have kids they will probably consider it a positive if daddy managed to avoid an awkward Little Monster phase in his 30's (though appreciating what's happening is always good).
Also, a Smiths fan might appreciate the Johnny Marr-ness of John Squire's playing throughout The Stone Roses and leave it at that (if Marr were playing while scoring goals in the Cup final on a Harley Electroglide dressed as Spiderman).
-
Marr is GOD!
I have always considered the Stone Roses as a great band who self destructed too soon. These days though, their album stays in my Jeep because they seem to have morphed into just a drive-to band for me.
Plus...Ian Brown wore the COOLEST T-shirt ever...Did you hear me? EVER!
;D
-
For Brian:
(http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/msi/lowres/msin150l.jpg)
Jaguar
-
Popular (rock) music is supposed to be an active, vital thing. Not something that you look at it in a museum.
Brian
I'm sorry but since lots of "popular" music is auto-tuned crapola i.e. Patrick Stump "Soul Punk" or as chosen by the taste makers of "Grey's Anatomy" it's little wonder why there are listeners still actively listening to records from their past.
-
I'm 23 years old. I listen to stuff from the 60s, the 70s, 80s, 90s, and today. Stuff that was made well before my time, and stuff last year. I listen to multiple genres.
I care less about when it was made as opposed to what kind of music it is. If I've never heard it before, its new to me. Simple as that.
(seems simple, right?)
-
I'm 23 years old. I listen to stuff from the 60s, the 70s, 80s, 90s, and today. Stuff that was made well before my time, and stuff last year. I listen to multiple genres.
I care less about when it was made as opposed to what kind of music it is. If I've never heard it before, its new to me. Simple as that.
(seems simple, right?)
you've got it all wrong. if others have ruined the music because of their interpretations of it, you're not allowed to enjoy it. it's not about the inherent value of the music, it's what others think of you for listening to it. pink floyd and the beatles have never produced a single, solitary piece of musical output that you are allowed to enjoy - just ask brian!
(seems moronic, right?)
-
I'm sorry but since lots of "popular" music is auto-tuned crapola i.e. Patrick Stump "Soul Punk" or as chosen by the taste makers of "Grey's Anatomy" it's little wonder why there are listeners still actively listening to records from their past.
Never apologize for having enough refined taste and being discriminating enough to be able to discern the difference between 'art' and 'artificial'.
-
Never apologize for having enough refined taste and being discriminating enough to be able to discern the difference between 'art' and 'artificial'.
or "truth" and "lizard people"
:o
-
^ Fuck You!!!
And, yes, I DO mean it, asshole.
-
:'(
-
Never apologize for having enough refined taste and being discriminating enough to be able to discern the difference between 'art' and 'artificial'.
or "truth" and "lizard people"
:o
I don't know about actual 'lizards' but there's plenty of reptiles on this board alone...
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15399917
(http://www.infobarrel.com/media/image/40810.gif)
(http://img.mediaspanonline.com/5893/4564979.jpg)
Seperated at birth??????
:o
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15399917 :o
"In total, fans snapped up 220,000 tickets, priced at £55, within 68 minutes of booking lines opening."
that's almost $20 million in ticket sales, or $6.5m/show. that kind of money might be enough to get oasis back together...
-
Oasis did a wonderful thing by breaking up. When they come back in 8 years, 90's nostalgia will be at peak. They can celebrate 25 years of "Definitely Maybe". Mark my words...
-
Oasis did a wonderful thing by breaking up. When they come back in 8 years, 90's nostalgia will be at peak. They can celebrate 25 years of "Definitely Maybe". Mark my words...
I'm sure Oasis will get back together and cash in..
The difference for me is that I admire, enjoy and like the Stone Roses.. whereas Oasis for me always seems to be a band with a handful of good songs and like 5 crap albums- at least- in a row now...I'm not sure how people can keep cutting them slack just because of Definitely Maybe and Whats the story..
-
If the Stone Roses came to the D.C. area (ideally, to the 9:30 Club), I'd see them.
I didn't get a chance to see them back in the day, as they didn't come to North Carolina.
-
I'd say the chances of them playing the 930 club are zero
From what I understand they sold 220,000 tickets at 77 pounds apiece to their three Manchester shows..in a few hours..
-
I'd say the chances of them playing the 930 club are zero
From what I understand they sold 220,000 tickets at 77 pounds apiece to their three Manchester shows..in a few hours..
That's the UK, though.
A fair number of UK acts who've played at the 9:30 Club typically play at much, much bigger venues in the UK.
Demand to see them in the U.S. is probably greater now than it was in the early 1990s. (My Bloody Valentine were certainly playing bigger venues on their reunion tour than they were when touring for "Loveless.") But I don't think demand for the Stone Roses in the U.S. has grown to the point where they'd be playing enormous venues here, just good-sized ones.
-
I think if they play in this area it will be one night at DAR or two nights at 930. If they skip this area all together and play one night at MSG I wouldn't be surprised.
-
Oasis did a wonderful thing by breaking up. When they come back in 8 years, 90's nostalgia will be at peak. They can celebrate 25 years of "Definitely Maybe". Mark my words...
I'm sure Oasis will get back together and cash in..
The difference for me is that I admire, enjoy and like the Stone Roses.. whereas Oasis for me always seems to be a band with a handful of good songs and like 5 crap albums- at least- in a row now...I'm not sure how people can keep cutting them slack just because of Definitely Maybe and Whats the story..
There's a short interview with Noel in the newest Details and from what he was saying he seems to think the 1st two albums are the only ones of note as well haha
-
Most people are thinking it'd be Hammerstein up here. I dont think The Roses are that big in the States to play MSG. Maybe back in the day - but Hammerstein or Roseland would be more than likely.
I think if they play in this area it will be one night at DAR or two nights at 930. If they skip this area all together and play one night at MSG I wouldn't be surprised.
-
Most people are thinking it'd be Hammerstein up here. I dont think The Roses are that big in the States to play MSG. Maybe back in the day - but Hammerstein or Roseland would be more than likely.
I think if they play in this area it will be one night at DAR or two nights at 930. If they skip this area all together and play one night at MSG I wouldn't be surprised.
i'd put my money on T5, or the MSG theater.
-
Didn't Oasis play MSG? Wasn't there another UK band recently who played there too and got a fantastic turnout? Don't forget how many expatriates are in the NYC area. They will play relatively large venues in certain cities, and MSG is not that huge a venue considering the population of the NY metro region. Many people never got to see the Roses. They'll play pretty decent size venues. If they don't get sucked into some festival type thing here, I could see them doing the Patriot Center. I'll bet good money they'd sell out 2 nights at Constitution Hall in a flash.
-
If I were betting I'd guess something like Coachella, Lolla, Bonaroo and a night at MSG\
if PHoenix and LCD can do MSG so can the Stone Roses
They are not going to do theaters.. come on... they sold 225000 tickets in 50 minutes... gross of over 12 million pounds! if the market is not there in the US they'll just play Manchester again..this reunion is all about money pretty much as they all are.
-
I think you guys are kidding yourselves if you think the Roses are that big here. Those 225,000 tickets were in their home territory that knows them like the back of their hand. Now fly across the pond to the states, sure they have their following here, but drop their name here infront of your indie hipsters here and I'll bet the number of blank stares will greatly outnumber the excited responses.
The britpop scene here is too small for an MSG gig. I mean, at Coachella, Suede played to a barely half empty tent. I know the Roses are a bigger name than them, but not by THAT much.
in NYC, they'd play Roseland or Beacon. That's my guess.
-
What's with all the debbie downers here, some of us are positive patties that are hoping that The Stones Roses are more popular than overhyped putzs Mumford and Sons and Vampire Weekend
-
Couldnt have said it better myself. I thought Verve was quite huge, and even they only played The Theater at MSG. Although Happy Mondays did play Roseland and I would have thought Verve was bigger. Either way - I dont really see the Roses playing MSG.
And the LCD comment is too funny. Its the bands hometown and it was their last show EVEr (until they need $$/reform). Brooklyn loves their LCD SS along with the rest of the city. The hype alone on that was insane.
I think you guys are kidding yourselves if you think the Roses are that big here. Those 225,000 tickets were in their home territory that knows them like the back of their hand. Now fly across the pond to the states, sure they have their following here, but drop their name here infront of your indie hipsters here and I'll bet the number of blank stares will greatly outnumber the excited responses.
The britpop scene here is too small for an MSG gig. I mean, at Coachella, Suede played to a barely half empty tent. I know the Roses are a bigger name than them, but not by THAT much.
in NYC, they'd play Roseland or Beacon. That's my guess.
-
What's with all the debbie downers here, some of us are positive patties that are hoping that The Stones Roses are more popular than overhyped putzs Mumford and Sons and Vampire Weekend
I don't mind if they're more popular than I think they are, but I don't want them to be so popular that I'd have to see them in a huge, cavernous venue.
I don't think the Oasis/Stone Roses comparisons are apt. Oasis were HUGE back in the day, whereas the Stone Roses were big only in college radio/underground-type circles.
I think venue sizes for the Stone Roses if they were to come to the States now would be roughly on par with those for My Bloody Valentine 2-3 years ago... bigger than the venues they played back in the day, but not Madison Square Garden-sized.