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