Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Stone Roses!

Options
  • 23-06-2024 12:07am
    #1
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users Posts: 5,369 ✭✭✭


    I remember an old thread on here, once questioning were the Stone Roses over-rated. The general consensus of replies, was that their first album is arguably the greatest ever. Going to the Definitely Maybe anniversary gig tomorrow, where some Stone Roses classics will be played before hand.

    I've always said, the one album I always come back to is the Stone Roses. It doesn't have a weak moment. They hit a zenith, where even b-sides like Sally Cinamon, Mersey Paradise, Elephant Stone etc, would be the best songs on any other album, that's how strong it is. They didn't even make the cut for this album.

    I know music is subjective, but I can't really see how anyone who knows music, could say another album topped the Stone Roses. Even a regarded "weaker" song on it, Sugar Spun Sister, is magic. Post Beatles, this is surely the greatest contemporary album by a distance. It's a seminal album, and for a moment in time, everything just came together for a band, the way it never has before or since for another band. As I said, they hit a zenith.

    It's an album that stands alone, above everything else before or since. It's magic from start to finish!



«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    SimpleDimple
    Registered Users Posts: 211 ✭✭SimpleDimple


    Their early work was a little too new wave for my taste. But when Sports came out in '83, I think they really came into their own, commercially and artistically. The whole album has a clear, crisp sound, and a new sheen of consummate professionalism that really gives the songs a big boost. He's been compared to Elvis Costello, but I think Huey has a far more bitter, cynical sense of humor.

    In '87, Huey released this; Fore!, their most accomplished album. I think their undisputed masterpiece is "Hip To Be Square". A song so catchy, most people probably don't listen to the lyrics. But they should, because it's not just about the pleasures of conformity and the importance of trends. It's also a personal statement about the band itself. 



  • Options
    #3
    paddyisreal
    Registered Users Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭paddyisreal


    Yep up there with the best. My sister gave it to me when I was a teenager, changed my bloody life . 50 minutes of bliss. I stopped listening to it on purpose for a few years and absence definitely makes the heart grow fonder. It is without doubt a step above most other so called great albums. It's number one on my list anyway ! Could be that I'm a certain age with a distorted romantic view of that time growing up but I doubt it . it is pure prevailing unadulterated genius. Your knuckles whiten on the wheel ...



  • Options
    #4
    igCorcaigh
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 11,416 Mod ✭✭✭✭igCorcaigh


    Great band; spearheaded the whole Madchester zeitgeist, and was the soundtrack to my coming of age times. Enjoy the gig!



  • Options
    #5
    Charlo30
    Registered Users Posts: 91 ✭✭Charlo30


    An album that is 100% all killer and no filler. The only song I'm a bit conflicted about is I Am The Resurrection. On one level I can only admire the audacity of the band to end their debut album with a song like that. But that 5/6 minute guitar solo does smack a little bit of Squire's self indulgence that would plague The Second Coming



  • Options
    #6
    JupiterKid
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,750 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    It's a great album and represented a huge and badly needed change in musical style around 1989/90 when most pop and "rock" music was absolute rubbish - populated by Stock/Aitken/Waterman production line plastic shite and crap glam big hair "metal" bands.

    The Stone Roses helped shape 1990s music and was itself pretty influential on other music artists. That said, it is also overrated by many and there are many better albums in the history of rock music. Their follow-up, Second Coming, whilst okay was a disappointment - it was released too late and over 2 years overdue - probably because Ian Brown and his band mates were doing too many drugs to get the album done quickly.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Seneca the Stoic
    Registered Users Posts: 147 ✭✭Seneca the Stoic


    Always struck me as massively overrated.



  • Options
    #8
    BrianD3
    Registered Users Posts: 8,393 ✭✭✭BrianD3


    I think the debut is very good but I could name numerous albums from various genres that I'd listen to ahead of it. For a start ,I'd rate both Marquee Moon and Adventure by Television ahead of it.

    Also I think many Oasis songs are better albeit heavily influenced by the Stone Roses. The Oasis B-Side Cloudburst (which is great) is comically similar to a Roses song that I can't remember the name of. L. Gallagher at his peak was a much better singer than Brown at his peak. If N. Gallagher had put his best B sides and best album tracks on albums, he'd probably have had at least 2 albums better than The Stone Roses debut. IMO of course..



  • Options
    #9
    silliussoddius
    Registered Users Posts: 4,073 ✭✭✭silliussoddius


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122294852#Comment_122294852

    Yeah, some of the Oasis b-sides are great. With The Stone Roses you had a band composed of excellent musicians, and Ian Brown, I think that's what the original Oasis lacked a bit. Squire is an excellent guitarist (I really liked him and Nick McCabe from The Verve), someone mentioned I am the resurrection above" you could argue it was a bit of a sign of the future cocaine fest but it's just a great outro.



  • Options
    #10
    PTH2009
    Registered Users Posts: 38,380 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    Seen them live in Manchester a few years back. Occasion was amazing but vocals from Brown were shite



  • Options
    #11
    Hangdogroad
    Registered Users Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭Hangdogroad


    Saw them at Feile 1995, were minus Renni. Gave a so so performance. They broke up a year or so later.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    standardg60
    Registered Users Posts: 4,699 ✭✭✭standardg60


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122295089#Comment_122295089

    He never could sing. It was a seminal album but maybe more due to the zeitgeist that madchester exemplified. Second coming was such a disappointment it ended up heightening the legacy of the first album. Not the first to do that.

    For me the Charlatans, Ride, James and the vastly underestimated Shed Seven far exceeded ST in longevity and quality and would have the albums I would listen to more frequently.



  • Options
    #13
    John_Rambo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,677 ✭✭✭John_Rambo


    What an album. Consistently listed in all time great albums.



  • Options
    #14
    nice bit of green
    Registered Users Posts: 246 ✭✭nice bit of green


    Great band. Have a vibe and groove like no one else. 2 very different albums but equally as good. Never saw them live but from what I have heard, they are perhaps best heard on a recording than in concert.



  • Options
    #15
    retalivity
    Registered Users Posts: 14,297 ✭✭✭✭retalivity


    Second coming doesn't deserve the hate it gets. It's not as good as the debut, but its a solid album with a few bangers - Driving South, Breaking into Heaven, Love Spreads



  • Options
    #16
    dirtyden
    Registered Users Posts: 1,734 ✭✭✭dirtyden


    It’s a great album, I would have Pearl Jam Ten ahead, but it’s all down to personal taste.



  • Options
    #17
    Rothko
    Registered Users Posts: 12,888 ✭✭✭✭Rothko


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122295254#Comment_122295254

    Shed Seven better than the Stone Roses?



  • Options
    #18
    Rothko
    Registered Users Posts: 12,888 ✭✭✭✭Rothko


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122294852#Comment_122294852

    Standing Here is the one you're thinking of.



  • Options
    #19
    Cosholky
    Registered Users Posts: 6 ✭Cosholky


    The Stone Roses remains my favourite album of all time. No fillers. I love each and every track.



  • Options
    #20
    PGE1970
    Registered Users Posts: 1,341 ✭✭✭PGE1970


    Best album in my collection.

    IB is a terrible singer. I've seen him several times and the only time that I can recall being passable was the "My Way" gig in The Olympia.

    But a great frontman of a great band.

    When they launched into "I wanna be adored" in the Phoenix Park in 2012, it was emotional.



  • Options
    #21
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users Posts: 5,369 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122294852#Comment_122294852

    Oasis, Blur and a few others in the mid 90's, went through a phase of putting out really strong B-Sides, Oasis in particular. Made an album out of them.

    But as good as they were, still weren't as strong as the Stone Roses B-Sides. Fools Gold is a household song, arguably the biggest B-Side ever. And in terms of quality, Sally Ciinnamon probably is the greatest b-side ever. Elephant stone, Mersey paradise etc, the Stone Roses B-Sides were on a completely different level to Oasis b-sides imo.

    Stone Roses for a short moment in time, had possibly the greatest output of music we've ever seen. All gold. I've never seen it done before or since. Every song they produced, including b-sides, was top tier. They never recaptured that, but I don't think any band has ever hit that height, or ever will again



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    The Golden Miller
    Registered Users Posts: 5,369 ✭✭✭The Golden Miller


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122294852#Comment_122294852

    And I think Liam and Noel would be the first to admit, they never reached that level in quality. Stone Roses their favourite band. One could argue they're just deferring to their mates, because they became bigger, but you'll see in alot of behind the scenes stuff, they actually love it and play their stuff alot for fun



  • Options
    #23
    suvigirl
    Registered Users Posts: 8,116 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    Saw them when they got back together in Phoenix Park and Belfast. Amazing.

    Dunno how anyone thinks they're overrated.



  • Options
    #24
    purplepanda
    Registered Users Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭purplepanda


    The Prisoners laid the foundation for the Manchester & later Britpop sounds With their 4 albums from 1983-86

    Many of the Manchester band musicians have admitted as much from Tim Burgess & The Charlatans The Inspiral Carpets & Noel Gallagher

    The Prisoners just released a new LP. First 38 years and played a sold out gig at Camden Roundhouse London with Inspiral Carpets as support.

    Plus Prisoners vocalist Graham Day sings like Steve Marriott whilst Hammond organ maestro James Taylor went on to form JTQ

    As Tim Burgess says best two bands of the 1980s are New Order & The Prisoners.



  • Options
    #25
    ZV Yoda
    Registered Users Posts: 1,451 ✭✭✭ZV Yoda


    Subjectivity is one thing, but to suggest the Roses “at their peak” 🤦‍♂️ were the best band of all time, or that their debut is the best album of all time? Nah - they are completely over rated.

    The Roses were a good band, but definitely of their time. It’s easy to look back with, er, Rose tinted glasses because most fans love them simply because they remind them of their youth. Nothing wrong with that, it just doesn’t mean they’re the greatest thing since the Beatles. They weren’t even the greatest thing since The Smiths.


    There’s no doubt that the Roses led the crossover between indie and rave music, but I’d argue that they happened to be in the right place at the right time. They looked great, had the right attitude, produced a cracking debut album... and rode the wave of the indie/rave scene better than any of their peers.

    I listened to them a lot back in the day, I bought their albums… plus a couple of IB albums too. I saw them play in the Phoenix Park, and have seen IB live 3 or 4 times (he really is incapable of singing in tune). In fact, he is arguably one of the luckiest singers of all time. To end up in a band with Mani, Reni and Squire? Jammy git. He could have farted over the music on the first album and it would have sounded good. It’d probably be more in tune than his live performances too.

    The unsung hero of the Roses was their producer John Leckie. He’s responsible for how the album sounds. To give an idea of his genius, he produced albums for Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, Pink Floyd, XTC, Simple Minds, Human League, The Fall… and that’s even before he worked with the Roses. Since then he produced bands like Radiohead, Muse.. the list goes on.

    I wouldn’t class myself as an Oasis mega fan, but Noel is, by any measure, one of the best songwriters of his (or any other) generation. Even Liam’s voice has grown on me over time. I really liked the Squire / Gallagher album. Gives an indication as to what the Roses could have sounded like with a half decent singer.



  • Options
    #26
    Rothko
    Registered Users Posts: 12,888 ✭✭✭✭Rothko


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122374176#Comment_122374176

    John Leckie didn't produce anything by the Beatles or Pink Floyd. He did, however, work as an engineer at Abbey Road when they recorded there.



  • Options
    #27
    paddyisreal
    Registered Users Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭paddyisreal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122374176#Comment_122374176

    All of the best roses stuff was done with Brown at the front, to say he was lucky is ridiculous. Most lyrics on the stone roses, stone roses are written by Ian brown. Made of stone lyrics for example are pure genius. Just look at all their solo careers also and brown was by far the most successfully. Unfinished is still a great album, just listen to the fountaines starbuster it's practically an Ian brown song !. The second coming which was mostly squire was piss poor. Ian brown is totally underrated imo and the others were probably lucky they got him. Roses would be nothing without Brown



  • Options
    #28
    fatbhoy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,015 ✭✭✭fatbhoy


    1989, as someone said earlier, music was at quite a low ebb, what with Stock-Atkin-Waterman crap and all that. Enter The Stone Roses, Ride, Inspiral Carpets. Summer of love, flares, hoodies…exciting times if you were a teen or twenty-something (like I was). Then rave came along a blew everything out of the water, for better or worse. That was another exciting time, the rave scene (especially the early part). New, exciting, edgy, a new dawn of love. Great times. What's it like now to be young? Seems awful, if the Glastonbury lineup this year was anything to go by.



  • Options
    #29
    ZV Yoda
    Registered Users Posts: 1,451 ✭✭✭ZV Yoda


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122374680#Comment_122374680

    I never he said he produced the Beatles. Everyone knows George Martin produced them.



  • Options
    #30
    whippet
    Registered Users Posts: 7,686 ✭✭✭whippet


    I absolutely love that album and it is for a mix of the tunes and where I was in life at the time when I was listening to it most … leaving cert, starting off in college .. it was almost like a sound track of my youth.
    the 2012 concert was epic as I went to it with a load of my college mates.

    I still put it on the turn table the odd time to listen to it with the kids .. they really don't get it and my daughter who is a great vocalist in her own right just can't get past how someone with such a poor voice can have such a legendary album. But for me it wasn't about the quality of his voice .. it was his presence, attitude.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    ZV Yoda
    Registered Users Posts: 1,451 ✭✭✭ZV Yoda


    I like the Stone Roses. I’m just saying they’re overrated. 35 years ago, they had one good album that arrived in the right place at the right time. That’s all.

    They captured lightening in a bottle with that album. The fact that none of them have had huge careers since then really highlights that point.

    Mani, Reni and Squire all went on to other projects, with mixed fortunes, so saying Brown had the most successful solo career of the Roses isn’t exactly setting a high bar. I like Unfinished Monkey Business and Music of the Spheres… but they are 3 out of 5 at best.

    On the 3 or 4 occasions I saw Brown live, he really was shite. In the Olympia, he started one song 3 times, blaming the band for being out of key 🙄

    The Roses had a few good years off the back of a great debut album. That’s it. If Brown or any of the other members were still releasing great music today, things might be different but they aren’t.



Advertisement