Site New Answers Search Boards ILE ILM Answers New Question New Questions New Poll Blog View Register Login

Is the Stone Roses debut really as good as is claimed?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (636 of them)
View Previous Page...
??!!??!!??!! Geir I think you need to take yr copy of Second Coming back to Olav's Records.

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Thursday, 29 January 2004 15:16 (twenty years ago) link

It pisses me off when people stop with The Stone Roses. For me they were just the start.

― Llahtuos Kcin (Nick Southall), Thursday, 29 January 2004 15:26 (twenty years ago) link


WRT to all that stuff upthread, whatever happened to BURNWEED? Last thing I heard he had jacked in all that worshipping Ian Brown stuff and was
attempting to become a professional golfer. Now he really *is* insane.

Haha! A well deserved fate.

They were cool as all hell, and it does not surprise me Ned
doesn't like them.

Hm...

I had the advantage of not actually hearing the darn thing until the middle of 1992, at which point we were all grunge (weren't we?). Anyway, I had
recently discovered the Chameleons before that, and while the connection isn't exact, I heard the Stone Roses through that particular filter and thought,
"Hm, semi-dreamy semi-gothy stuff, sounds good to me!" I barely knew any Byrds at the time, of course, but now that I do -- well, I still feel more apt
to pull out the Stone Roses anyway, when I do.

Yes, I clearly hate them.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 29 January 2004 16:35 (twenty years ago) link

Yes, but this is C-Man's world, Ned, where time froze in 1995 and you are Beelzebub.

― Llahtuos Kcin (Nick Southall), Thursday, 29 January 2004 16:39 (twenty years ago) link

Oh right, carry on.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 29 January 2004 16:40 (twenty years ago) link

Bbbbbut I thought Ned was a stripper that turned into Golem! Now I find out he's really Beelzebub!

you lied to me!!!

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Thursday, 29 January 2004 17:36 (twenty years ago) link

Sorry, I blame my lawyer.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 29 January 2004 17:41 (twenty years ago) link

the Ned one....he liiiiess! And he never dances on poooor Smiegel's lapses!

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Thursday, 29 January 2004 18:04 (twenty years ago) link

ARE YOU WORTH IT?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 29 January 2004 18:19 (twenty years ago) link

two months pass...
You are all gay gnat-fuckers. My mate Terence says Ned Raggett fucks disabled goats. WORD.

― Spastic Cock Shit, Thursday, 1 April 2004 22:15 (twenty years ago) link

hello calum wadell

― *, Thursday, 1 April 2004 22:18 (twenty years ago) link

Is the Stone Roses debut really as good as is claimed?

No.

― noodle vague (noodle vague), Thursday, 1 April 2004 22:18 (twenty years ago) link

Is the Stone Roses debut really as good as is claimed?

YES YES MOTHERFUCKING YES!!!!!!

The Stone Roses is the greatest album of all time.

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Thursday, 1 April 2004 23:37 (twenty years ago) link

wow who would of figured there would have been so much dissention in the ranks.

I thought the album was damn good when i bought it in the early 90s sometime. Liked the Mondays too. Never got most of the other bands charlatans ect. Loved Ride though.

― hector (hector), Friday, 2 April 2004 02:07 (twenty years ago) link

A strange revive.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 2 April 2004 02:11 (twenty years ago) link

So brits hate it and americans love it, right? That's what I got out of this.

― mike h. (mike h.), Friday, 2 April 2004 04:26 (twenty years ago) link

Yes, that's correct. Because Brits when they think of a band they think of the cultural, social, and aesthetic meaning. Like, when they think of Pulp, they think of Jarvis Cocker at the 1996 Brit Awards. Or when they think of Oasis, they think of the charmingly arrogant Gallagher brothers yelling at each other. And when they think of the Roses they think of "being there" with the whole Spike Island thing and the clothes and the idea of rock-concert-as-transcendental-and-spiritual-gathering or whatever it was that guy in the NME said in their Second Coming review. We Americans, of course, we weren't there, so we just concentrate on simply the music.

Of course, it goes both ways, and that's why tons of Americans worshipped the Grateful Dead and their whole "transcendtal rock concert" thing, but nobody outside of America cared fuck-all about them.

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Friday, 2 April 2004 05:06 (twenty years ago) link

three years pass...
More love for "Don't Stop", please. Regardless of the flaws ("This is the One", "Bye Bye Badman") of the rest of the album, the reversed adaptation of "Waterfall" is timeless. The barely there cowbell hits after "Don't Stop...isn't it funny how you shine?" are perfect! Ian Brown's drunken half-ass vocals actually fit for once, too.

― Z S, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 03:16 (seventeen years ago) link

I love both albums.

― Brigadier Lethbridge-Pfunkboy, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 03:22 (seventeen years ago) link

MMMHMMM Don't Stop is the one, man. Word. That and Waterfall were really the ones that killed me the most on the album when I first heard it.

― Bimble, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 03:32 (seventeen years ago) link

"this is the one" and "bye bye badman" are flaws??

― J.D., Wednesday, 16 May 2007 04:06 (seventeen years ago) link

mmmhmm. Well, I think so, at least, especially "This is the One". The guitar punches announcing the impending chorus bring to mind images of fist-pumping and europeans clapping above their heads in unison. The production is particularly dated on that one, as well.

"Bye Bye Badman" isn't so bad, really, but I wouldn't really call it a standout track, either.

― Z S, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 04:10 (seventeen years ago) link

weird thing is, this lps stock has actually been pretty low for...ages!

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:03 (seventeen years ago) link

I like this album and this band less and less as the years roll by, and I think that most (or at least a sizeable part) of this sea change in my attitude is down to the slavish, fascistic, "if you don't get it you're a wanker and just wrong attitude that a lot of Roses fans aggressively push outwards. I think they wrote some magical pieces of music, but they also wrote some utter, utter dross, and there are all sorts of issues with production and performance and quality control and simple lack of material that stop them being half the band that acolytes make them out to be. Paucity of material does not make you some kind of inspired genius.

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 08:07 (seventeen years ago) link

This thread has prompted me to put this on after not listening to it for a good 10 years. I've got to Made of Stone and I'm bored now. SBTD+Waterfall are great back-to-back partypop "anthems", but it all falls over from there on in. The snare drum sound all over the record is annoying me, it sounds like he's hitting plasterboard.

― The Wayward Johnny B, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 08:16 (seventeen years ago) link

i like this album the less i hear it. i haven't listened to it in about two years. i think i'd rather it remains a good memory.

― acrobat, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 08:38 (seventeen years ago) link

I can't think of any issues with production, performance and quality control. All are fine by me. The slightly vintagey-thinness stops the more epic sounding trax from straying into bombastic territory, which could have ruined the likes of TTIW and SBTD. By the time they get to TTIW and Resurrection you get the sense of a band really going for it, driven along by their confidence and the greatness of the material. The 'production as separate from performance and the material itself' debate is always redundant and irritating, especially so here. And we have to find some better ways to criticise this than 'their fans irritate me' or 'the snare sound is crap'.

The Second Coming is better though.

― Dr.C, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 08:51 (seventeen years ago) link

i dunno, i have a feeling if i put this on id really like it now (bye bye badman and dont stop were always good esp)

they always make me think of football highlights music. dunno if this is good or not

second coming is rubbish

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 08:59 (seventeen years ago) link

the slavish, fascistic, "if you don't get it you're a wanker and just wrong attitude that a lot of Roses fans aggressively push outwards.

are there many of these people left, though?

― That one guy that quit, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:08 (seventeen years ago) link

yea i dont think that describes today at all. even up north no one really talks about it anymore

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:10 (seventeen years ago) link

It was a real shame, as you know after "One Love" that they were in the process of blowing it bigtime. You could have even gone up to them and say "Hey, don't blow it!" and they'd have said " Don't worry" and then continued on that path towards blowing it.

My theory: They really should have recorded a second album really quickly, patchy and orrible it may have been, Then recorded "the second coming" and everyone would have loved it.

― Mark G, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:12 (seventeen years ago) link

weird thing is, this lps stock has actually been pretty low for...ages!

This is right - it was higher when DG started the thread but with hindsight in decline even then. The cycle of british pop-rock that it started came to an end.

You don't get bands being "Yeah we're going to conquer the world man" Roses-ish much any more either.

― Groke, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:13 (seventeen years ago) link

this thread was started in the year of "strokesmania" and they're comparable bands in a way: "mythic", "epochal" debut album, low sales, inevitable disappointent, very influential. i think i'd rather listen to 'the stone roses'. now they're not the dads of dadrock, but just another band from the '80s it's easier to like them. but not 'the second coming', that's still shit.

― That one guy that quit, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:13 (seventeen years ago) link

Second Coming I thought and still think is better than the first one.

"Fools Gold" now rather overdone but as part of the Manchester triumvirate which gatecrashed the Top 20 at the end of '89 - in a world of Jason Donovan, Aaron Neville featuring Linda Ronstadt and Jive Bastard Bunny, let us not forget - it made perfect and vital sense.

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:14 (seventeen years ago) link

thing is, it seemed like the cycle was never ever going to end, dragging on and on. and then suddenly, not only had it gone, but it seemed like it had been gone for ages

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:16 (seventeen years ago) link

I've just realised that there's a bit of IATR that sounds like the rockabilly riff in Girls Aloud's "Love Machine". And I'll never hear "Fools Gold" the same way after catching up with Ege Bamyasi a couple of years ago.

Never cared much for "I Wanna Be Adored", but it quickly improves.

― mike t-diva, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:17 (seventeen years ago) link

I still come across plenty of people who think this is the greatest record ever, and it still always nestles very high in "greatest 100 albums ever" lists. Maybe I move in the wrong circles?

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:18 (seventeen years ago) link

i was thinking about the byrds the other day, and how their stock/place/relevance rises and falls. yes theyre in the canon, of course, but the byrds seem particularly susceptible to rises and falls in their standing

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:20 (seventeen years ago) link

How could this possibly be the greatest album ever? Nothing by the Beatles was better? No? Or is that not hip enough? Actually I've noticed that you Northern English are fiercely loyal to your local bands - how much can someone love Black Grape. Eh? Eh? To the point of psychosis, apparently, from my experience.

― humansuit, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:21 (seventeen years ago) link

"you Northern English" lolz

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:22 (seventeen years ago) link

i dont see anyone here saying its the greatest album ever. though granted my eyesight is blocked by a crane (theyre doing some building work next door)

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:23 (seventeen years ago) link

I think it'll take a while to slip down the rankings of those lists Nick, and I think it'll settle in the 20s, maybe 30s, around the same place as "The Queen Is Dead", but a little higher because it had a longer innings as a touchstone record.

― Groke, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:23 (seventeen years ago) link

and i think im the only northern english here

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:23 (seventeen years ago) link

also dont forget, the fewer albums an artist makes, the higher it will place in polls (the byrds really suffer for this! no one knows which is the best)

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:24 (seventeen years ago) link

No one's saying it's the greatest record in the world ever today, but onyl cos Mr Snrub and Bimble are asleep.

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:25 (seventeen years ago) link

Nick is right up there. Lumpen aging baggies - starting with Ian Brown himself - have totally crucified any of the fragile charm and beauty this ablum might once have had.

― Noodle Vague, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:27 (seventeen years ago) link

I wonder where OK Computer and The Bends will eventually settle? They seem to be still very high in most polls. I guess OKC was 7 or 8 years later than The Stone Roses debut. I'd guess OKC will not fall much lower than top 10 - which is kind of dispiriting. Everyone seems to prefer English gloominess to a bit of bile and attitude, it seems.

― Dr.C, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:29 (seventeen years ago) link

Why aye man, Maximo Park like!

(xpost noah!)

― Mark G, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:29 (seventeen years ago) link

the fewer albums an artist makes, the higher it will place in polls

The Beach Boys made a few! But everyone seems to agree that Holland Pet Sounds is the one.

― Dr.C, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:30 (seventeen years ago) link

Current critical stock, ranked - 60s rock canon only.

1. Rolling Stones - rising.
2. Beatles - falling quite sharply.
3. Hendrix - rising sharply, could overtake Beatles soon.
4. Dylan - rising, would have been much lower a decade ago
5. Beach Boys - falling fast
6. Kinks - still high following 90s peak
7. Velvet Underground - undervalued, due a revival
8. Byrds - currently low, good longer-term investment
9. Doors - no hope of recovery

Market well down overall, compared to rival exchanges (70s especially).

― Groke, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 09:31 (seventeen years ago) link

Skipping 536 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.
Site New Answers Search Boards ILE ILM Answers New Question New Questions New Poll Blog View Register Login