Stone Roses - Stone Roses: C/D?

Fool's Gold!

John Leckie on what happened to their chemistry during the long layoff:

"I worked on the second album (The Second Coming) for over a year and for various reasons I didn't finish it with them. I left of my own choosing so it's not a case of would I have liked to have finished it — no I wouldn't; they'd changed from being a unit. That bond didn't exist between them."

(From a good interview in the Quietus, which may be linked elsewhere in this thread but here it is: http://thequietus.com/articles/02579-stone-roses-radiohead-producer-john-leckie-on-that-album-the-trouble-with-kids-these-days)

The thing is, about half of Second Coming blows this track out of the water. It's been amazing to see the mixed reaction to this... it seems that most people that were arsed about it consider it a disappointment, and the rest are being comically angry about the negative reaction. I'm reading a lot of "What's with the negativity? This is the STONE FUCKING ROSES, and you're not, so shut the fuck up! This track will age like a fine wine!"

im kinda bored by it already. its a decent song but not amazing yet it couldve been so much worse. Im hoping the album version is longer and better

On a stereo at proper volume, sounds like the Who. Rock n roll. Swings plenty for me!

hi

Yeah, if he sings about being a wall a hundred more times and they throw in three more solos the song will really take off. Fingers crossed for that longer version.

Haha, Sleaford Mods dude is having it: "They wangled it I'm a victim" https://twitter.com/sleafordmods

I'm guessing this will go top ten in the 'nowadays meaningless' UK singles chart this Friday?

Played the debut album and a handful of the b-sides and singles surrounding it last night at record club. Given that there are two 40-something Mancunians in the party now it's baffling that we've never really spoken about them before.

Number 17

seeing a lot of "let's see you do better" type defences of the song online. I thought Roses fans would be above that

did you really? ha

actually can't think of a fanbase more likely to swallow any old load of turgid shit and get agro with detractors than roses obsessives

oasis

ocean colour scene

most bands

plenty of oasis fans accept that later oasis is crap, probably partly because of the fact that noel is quite outspoken with how bad he thinks a lot of that material is.

stone roses have a mythical quality that oasis and ocs (lol, just not a relevant band at all) can't touch.

I'm more than happy to defend the first two Oasis albums and their assorted B-sides. They would have been thought of a lot more fondly in the long term if they'd split up after Knebworth, I think. I'll never be able to find it in me to defend Ocean Colour Scene, though.

Likewise, I'm more than happy to defend the first Stone Roses album, quite a lot of Second Coming and the B-sides. I can't defend the new track at all.

Still, I was listening to Turns Into Stone recently, and even though it's a compilation of non-LP singles, B-sides and assorted stuff, I actually think it's their best album - better than the debut, even. The thing is, all this stuff probably took them less time to write and record than anything else they've done, which says it all.

the roses should have split after they released 'fool's gold' tbh

group suicide pact would have cemented their legacy

Dumpy's Rusty Nuts made the same mistake, they just keep chasing that magic.

DRN more relevant and enjoyable in 2016 tho tbf

It was pretty disrespectful of me to bring them up on this thread. I unreservedly apologise to all fans and members of DRN for doing so.

Fools Gold is so boring.

that chart placing seems really low but stone roses fandom probably heavily intersects with the commercially unreliable 'vacant, distracted middle aged men who don't know what day of the week it is' demographic

middle aged men don't buy individual tracks on itunes in any great number compared with you know, whoever buys Bieber or Drake this week. you can't get this on a CD single either (i'm guessing?). i'm not even sure if you *can* get it on a CD that it still then 'counts' toward the charts. it's also the reason rock is dead in the uk charts, it's the 'wait for the album to come out and buy it then' gang, while The Kids if they get it at all will get the album 'on vinyl'. i mean it even sounds weird; indie being bought as individual tracks on iTunes. i mean i wonder who does that?

No one because they can get it free on youtube

That's why. Also, the CD single is out next month.

actually can't think of a fanbase more likely to swallow any old load of turgid shit and get agro with detractors than roses obsessives

― the unbearable jimmy smits (jim in glasgow)

I would have said Oasis would be the only competition but after seeing some of the deluded defenses for All For One and how some of their fans have taken the criticism so personally, I'd say this OTM. Someone who names them as his favourite band ever actually told me that he wasn't willing to argue with me as I had made my mind up about the song before I heard it which is one of the most hypocritical things anyone has ever said to me.

I can think of quite a few bands other than The Stone Roses and Oasis whose fans would go into total "wahhhhhhh!" mode if you even dared to criticise their stuff. Critically acclaimed bands, too.

most bands

It seems so much more intense with The Stone Roses though and some of the reactions I've seen to this particular single show people are kind of deluded. Cosmic Slop, I saw what you said on Facebook about people on here slagging off the song before they'd even heard it (which just wasn't true) and how you knew everyone on here would hate it, despite there being lots of people on here who really love them and wanted the song to be good. I just don't think it's fair to say things like that at all.

I don't mean to suggest you're as deluded as some of the people I've seen on Facebook but that was a really weird reaction to me.

xxpost:

Yeah, but it's especially true of long-running bands that have been around for a couple of decades and are long out of their "classic" period, I think. Although, to be fair, some long-running bands weather their post-"classic" years well and you'll always have fans of long-running bands who are aware that the "classic" period is over, yet are still happy to see their favourite band recording and touring, even if they're not the force they once were and hardly anyone outside the hardcore (sizeable or otherwise) gives a shit.

Occasionally, though, you'll meet fans of long-running bands who are long past their prime who'll get really upset at the idea that their favourite artist or band has entered a period of royally sucking, and get even more upset if someone even dares to point it out. Whether it's because they realise deep down that it's the case and refuse to acknowledge it because they can't bear the thought of the party being over, or whether they've climbed so far down the hardcore fan rabbit-hole to the point where everything said artist does sounds amazing to them, no matter how mediocre, is anyone's guess. I definitely think we're seeing that here, but I've seen it elsewhere for other bands too. Recently, too.

As for me, I like The Stone Roses and have quite a lot of time for them. I rate The Stone Roses, Turns Into Stone and quite a great deal of Second Coming. I didn't have any idea what 'All For One' was going to be like, and gave it a fair listen, and didn't like it. I would have liked to have heard a great new Stone Roses track, but 'All For One' isn't one, and I'm actually kinda appalled at how weak it is.

I'll still be giving the album a listen, though, if there is one.

Recently, too.

Turrican… are you still angry at people liking 'Music Complete'?

Ha, I'd forgotten about Music Complete! Nah, if I recall I warmed a little to that LP on my last go-round, mostly on the electronic stuff on the record and 'Academic' (a song that didn't make any impression on the first listen) came into its own a little. I'm not convinced that it's as great as, say, Technique or the first Electronic record, and I think the highlights of Get Ready and Waiting For The Sirens' Call are stronger, but it's got some decent stuff on it.

Besides, does anyone really think New Order are still the force they once were in the '80s?

Definitely not but that album was so much better than most people were expecting.

Also, I'm guessing you're directing some of that towards Super Furry Animals.

that chart placing seems really low but stone roses fandom probably heavily intersects with the commercially unreliable 'vacant, distracted middle aged men who don't know what day of the week it is' demographic

It's because the noisy, mythologising part of the Stone Roses fanbase doesn't actually want *new* music from them, it wants them to play a load of gigs that lean heavily on the first album it can pretend it's the summer of 1990 forever.

Also I had no idea that this film existed and holy fucking shit. I might do a double bill of Spike Island and One Night In Istanbul to see which is worse.

For some reason I thought Shane Meadows was responsible for that atrocity, an easy enough mistake to make when you take all his previous crimes into account.

guy who made Spike Island has an Oasis doc in the pipeline, sounds like a proper renaissance man

Was thinking about crowdfunding a Knebworth film starring James Nesbitt, Simon Pegg and Danny Dyer.

john simm

Ooh good one.