Will The Stone Roses ever reform?

as for the stone roses? who cares. post-break up albums always suck.

Unclean, unclean!

That being the case, I'd prefer that the Roses waited a few more years before doing it, just to make it a bit more special.

(xposts)

fuck this.

A) Deaf
B) Retarded
C) Both

the small group of ilxors stand behind nick, glowing eyes, going: 'oooooooo'.

Begging the question: what would such a tour be named?

feel bad for peter hook having to listen to these groaning nostalzheimers cases, he could use some younger company to cheer him up

Even Ian Huntley isn't jealous of John Robb

Never told my husband that when my friends and I first spotted him over ten years ago, at the time, he was a dead ringer for Ian Brown. Guess he'll know that now.

I found this piece quite interesting, if a little idealistic. I certainly imbued The Stone Roses with way too much importance and potential in my mind as a teenager, and by and large consider them failures now.

http://thequietus.com/articles/08921-stone-roses-britpop

Now, as the Roses reformation is finally upon us, we can expect more of the same. Initial reactions to the reunion gigs have been positive; but the old grumbles – the accusations of musical conservatism, the gripes about “laddism”, the compulsion to find new animal-metaphors for Ian Brown’s voice – are surely only a clock-tick away.

some of us have been doing this since 1989 fuck yr ladrock apologism

There's a handful of tracks on the debut album and a handful more around it - Fools Gold, Standing Here, Something's Burning, Where Angels Play - plus maybe Begging You on 2nd Coming, that actually do what I wanted this band to do. But that's all.

this isn't kneejerk "lol bloggers" but that quietus piece is insane bullshit imo. interesting to see what some bores can project onto these wasters tho.

i feel like i shd take my revulsion onto a new thread so i'm sorry and i'll try to shut up. on the other hand fuck dedicating any thread to these lumps.

I find your complete hatred of them quite endearing, actually.

Fuck, hadn't seen that awful Robb / Ellesse / Hacienda / Hooky picture above before. That's fucking awful.

the worst thing about my hatred is that it's informed by a MONDAYS 4 LIFE ethos from back in the day. but i still maintain that the wrong band "won"

revile away Mr NV! The self titled album along with NWA's debut is pretty much all I listened to during my first year at university. I still pretty much love that whole record + 'What The World Is Waiting For' and 'Fool's Gold'.

also i think i was peeved from reading big hype reviews talking about THE FUTURE and then hearing an album that sounded like a C86 band with glossier production.

will always rep for "Tunes Splits the Atom" tho tbf. And "Fools Gold" was obv a worthwhile record.

^ steady on with the spoilers there!

Obviously Fools Gold is their great moment and if I just focus on that I could maybe go along with the cobblers you read about them, but I shared NV's reaction to hearing them at the time - it just sounded so limp, like cobbled-together bits of the saggy arse-end of 80s indie dressed up in new togs. Annoying too to read all the stuff about Squire being some sort of maverick guitar visionary when just the year before you'd obviously had a shitload of great guitar albums from Sonic Youth, MBV, Dinosaur Jr, House of Love, Butthole Surfers, Thin White Rope, AR Kane etc. Okay, he might have been a revelation compared to the Inspiral Carpets or James or whatever, but just compare Squire's wah wah playing with someone like J Mascis and it just sounds like tentative tinkering to me. Even a few of the second division C86-ish UK indie bands like the Wolfhounds had upped their game hugely and were putting out much more adventurous, ferocious music than the neo-Byrdsian backwash singalongs of the Stone Roses.

the stone roses were alright imo but it doesn't make the realguitarmusicLAD nonsense around them and their predictable pension fund topup any more risible

cool article. still love listening to the first album b-sides.

I was never a big fan, although I liked the 1st album OK. But I was into jangly C86 stuff a lot back in the early-mid 90s, and I remember once one of my friends who was more of an Oasis/Roses/Beatles type of guy (amongst other things, I'm kinda selling his eclecticism short a bit here) moaning about the wimpy indie shit I was playing on the stereo, when it was She Bangs The Drums, by a band which was supposedly one of his favourites. How he didn't recognise the song I don't know, but it fits in pretty well with what people are saying here about what the Stone Roses actually sounded like vs the mythology about them.

'my vibrant and diverse music taste stretches from the majestic peaks of oasis to the verdant valleys of embrace and the balmy shores of starsailor'

Stone Roses were a fantastic rhythm section chained to turgid and mediocre leads who had the chutzpah to think they were the whole show.

Yes I loved them for the first album and the string of 12"s after but the magic there was John Leckie sifting a lovely psychedelic spray over a tight rhythm section.

Anyway, enough challops. I quite liked their "classic" period but I'm sick to the back teeth of the semi-mystical legends (both on the Dadrock side and the "rave music w rickenbackers" brigade) that have spun up around them.

In 89 my brother was a Roses fan and I was a Mondays fan. After months of nagging I finally listened to their debut album around the time of "Fools gold" and was mightily unimpressed It sounded like feeble Byrds recycling to me, and this supposed dance crossover, which was only "Resurrection" anyway, was being done far better (and earlier) by A Certain Ratio. John Leckie's production is fine (and he was picked due to the Dukes of Stratosfear album), but I never saw anything radical in them. The change into trad rock on "Second coming" made sense in the context of Oasis energing and Primal Scream's "dance traitor" moves in 94. I never saw them as political, they could have picked up all the 1968 references from all the articles in the media in 88 (there's even one in "Blissed out", advising people to look forward and not back). Sorry, I digress..

WCC otm Mani and Reni did deserve better than to be behind those other two bell-ends

There's so little "dance" music in there; it's just Reni's drumming and Begging You.

Oh there was Mani in there too. No coincidence that Primal Scream stopped being dance traitors when he joined, either.

It's my impression that people who grew up in England can't give an evaluation of the Stone Roses that isn't clouded by some assessment of the late 80s scene, which it seems many Brits feel was vaguely embarrassing. As an American, I don't have that baggage. Maybe not coincidentally, I find the Stone Roses far more timeless and singular (at least before Second Coming) than my British counterparts, who are comfortable lumping them in with a bunch of other bands.

^^^ OTM. So much is said about their failure to break into America but if you were listening to alternative radio stateside in the late 80's and were too young to remember the Smiths in their heyday, the Roses seemed like the most interesting British rock group to come around in ages.

The NME Top Ten singles of 1989 goes to show you how overrated they were in the UK:

1. She Bangs The Drums - The Stone Roses
2. Fools Gold - The Stone Roses
3. Can't Be Sure - The Sundays
4. Made Of Stone - The Stone Roses
5. Pacific State - 808 State
6. Fight The Power - Public Enemy
7. The Third Time We Opened The Capsule - Kitchens Of Distinctions
8. Back To Life - Soul II Soul
9. Last Of The Famous International Playboys - Morrissey
10. All Around The World - Lisa Stansfield

This was the year btw of those three great singles off 3 Feet High & Rising, Happy Mondays' WFL, NWA's Express Yourself, Like A Prayer, Buffalo Stance, Ride On Time, 3AM Eternal, French Kiss, god knows what else...

Should probably have Chime in there too

every one of those Stone Roses songs is better than Buffalo Stance.

Now don't you get fresh with me

Poliopolice - what is he like, anyway?

Amongst all this I'm surprised "WFL" by the Mondays wasn't a huge smash - IMO that's the tune that embodies everything great about what was going on in Manchester

First LP by the Roses is always going to be a classic but I feel like 20 years from now the kids will dig it a lot but wonder at the same time "why the hell were so many people talking about this"

probably sound like a damned fool saying this but wfl might be my favourite hannett production

if just for that guitar bit

Probably wasn't because it came out a number of times and ended up selling loads but over a long period of time.

it was like the Velvet Underground, not many bands bought WFL but all the ones that did went out and got a terrible indie-dance remix

.. GROUP!

http://www.nme.com/news/the-stone-roses/64288

so, is mani going to have to hand over that 2 million quid he found in his bank account back ?

looks like he already done the lot
http://www.thestoolpigeon.co.uk/admin/wp-content/uploads/mani.jpg

the droomer is a coont

I find the Roses sort of fascinating for many of the reasons illustrated above. As an American, I heard the hype, first, then I heard the music, and the music ... it's pretty conservative. Mildly psychedelic, not exactly pedestrian but surely not radical, and their loose affiliation with any sort of dance scene baffled me. Just seemed like a solid, '60s-referencing group. I can totally see them as ground zero for Oasis, though.

so, will we get to see photos then of the gigs this weekend ?

i don't mean the thousands of mobile snaps cos you know, that would be just wrong.

?

big old contractual dispute going on between the origanisers and professional photographers.

apparently there is a bit of a stannd off.

from my limited insight, i think the original contract insisted that any photos taken would be owned by the stone roses as opposed to the photographer.

hence the stand off.

has rattled around facebook all week.

ian tilton is pushing for a boycott .. and having just checked on facecrook, it appears to be on ..

proper detail :

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/06/28/photogs-boycotting-concerts-after-band-asks-to-pay-only-1-for-all-photo-rights/

Simple fix. If you're a photographer wanting to go so you can take pictures that you then sell of for loads of money, don't go. Not sure why there's drama. Sounds like they don't really want photogs there anyway. If you looked like Ian and John, you prob. wouldn't want fancy pics of you sweating on stage either.

I think they've signed an exclusive deal with the Men Who Look Like Old Lesbians thread

My 23-year-old brother is off to Manchester today and is stoked for the gig. Bit weird having him go see a band I was listening to when he was born.

this is really shitty
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-18644630

on the way to the phoenix park iirc

watch out for hurled containers of piss. Not like i need to tell you

just standard issue on the northside iirc. We're considering stoneybatter now btw, tho herself is taken to wearin a nosepeg while surfin daft.