Comments on: The Stone Roses - Blood on the Turntables

The Stone Roses - Blood on the Turntables

Item — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:21:48 -0800

"November the 23rd, 1989, and possibly the most influential British guitar band of the last twenty years were making their debut on Top of the Pops. The group were Manchester's the Stone Roses. Having just released one of the most acclaimed debut albums of all time, they had the world at their feet. But then it all went horribly wrong. Within a few short years, the Stone Roses had split."

Sensational Stone Roses BBC documentary Blood on the Turntables in one two three four five six parts.

By: monkeyx-uk

monkeyx-uk — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:25:15 -0800

Thank you for this. I don't watch TV anymore and it would've been a shame to miss out on this. The Stone Roses got me out of my Nirvana funk. Love both still but there's only so much teenage angst I could put up with.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:27:04 -0800

possibly the most influential British guitar band of the last twenty years I really, really luurrved their debut record, but most influential British guitar band of the last 20 years? Really? I gotta go with the Cure, the Smiths, My Bloody Valentine, Ride, Radiohead and Blur over these guys.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:28:00 -0800

Nevertheless, I will very much enjoy watching this. Thanks for posting it.

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:29:17 -0800

What psmealey said. Not to detract from the Stone Roses, though. I mean if you just take that word..."influential"... The Cure or My Bloody Valentine have got to win there alone.

By: Item

Item — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:41:56 -0800

Yeah, I tend to agree with you guys on the 'influential' thing. I was only quoting the doc.

By: pompomtom

pompomtom — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:54:07 -0800

What Jimbob said... except I'll go with the Smiths.

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:54:53 -0800

I was recently told the whole stone roses hyperbole was an in-joke way of winding up people who take music too seriously. It seems to work every time.

By: sien

sien — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:58:36 -0800

Do The Smiths fit into the last 20 years? They broke up around August/September 20 years ago. We are about as far away from the Smiths as the break up of The Smiths was from the break up of The Beatles.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:03:18 -0800

That's great because in-jokes aimed at winding people up aren't tedious at all.

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:06:30 -0800

sien you make me depressed. I'm going to go listen to Joy Division now.

By: Item

Item — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:20:19 -0800

Listen to Warsaw and get angry instead.

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:23:37 -0800

I know that "your favourite band sucks" is de rigeur around here, so I'm gonna join the pile-on. The Stone Roses were a one-trick pony, almost a one-hit wonder. One good album, two great songs, nothing more. I'm not even sure who they are supposed to have influenced, other than maybe Oasis. Otherwise, what psmealey said, although there's one glaring omission: The Fall.

By: cazoo

cazoo — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:24:37 -0800

Is today Manchester day or something?

By: empath

empath — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:31:03 -0800

I was going to say that I thought the Stone Roses were a bit of a dead-end myself, but I don't know enough about them to be able to say it with any certainty. I can say that in America, they barely existed. I guess the Klaxons are kind of mining the same territory these days.

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:33:24 -0800

That's great because in-jokes aimed at winding people up aren't tedious at all. I knew when I posted this that you would be upset by it because metafilter is an injoke aimed at winding you up.

By: scblackman

scblackman — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:45:47 -0800

For what it's worth, your favorite band has a serious tribute band that is actively touring and putting out a DVD next week.

By: Keith Talent

Keith Talent — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:46:29 -0800

Opposite tack. The Stones Roses were the match that lit the Brit pop resurgence fuse, at least in North America. They signaled the end of overly costumed pop acts and reintroduced actual music as opposed to Depeche Mode-esque clicks and pops and drum machines. They opened the door for loads of guitar based bands that came after.

By: Item

Item — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:49:59 -0800

Eh, I'm not here to defend the Roses. I understand perfectly why people can take or leave them. If they didn't play an important part in one's musical development, they could easily be just another Britpop band. I feel that way about Radiohead and Oasis. I'm still amazed with the production on the first album. It's always been one of those rare 'every motherfucking song is really good' LP's for me, sitting alongside The Modern Lovers, the first Raincoats album, and the Feelies' Crazy Rhythms. But that's just on my shelf, and it's my goddamn shelf. You people all have your own shelves, and I can absolutely argue to the death that a good chunk of your shelf's music absolutely sucks. That's my right to do so, as it's fun to argue about music just like it's fun to argue about politics and (so I hear) it's fun to argue about sports. I'll listen to - nay, hope - that you don't like something I hold dear and true and perfect, as it gives us a reason to engage each other and possibly even learn. I know a shitload about bands whose music I can't stand and I'm better off for it. Universal language, blah blah blah. But boy, your favorite band fucking sucks.

By: Item

Item — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:52:08 -0800

boy, that 'possibly even learn' line was hokey. sorry.

By: empath

empath — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:58:20 -0800

What a tremendous twat their manager was.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:58:21 -0800

Nah, it was all puppies and rainbows, item. I appreciated it.

By: fire&wings

fire&wings — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:59:35 -0800

Comparing the Klaxons to the Stone Roses, for fucks sake. "Two great songs," jesus. Fucking foreigners. The Stone Roses were as influential to Oasis as they were to the Arctic Monkeys, and had a say in everything inbetween. The "two great songs" were probably the ones on the compilation you bought. And I despise that fat, golf club owning bastard in this documentary, if it's the one I'm thinking of.

By: progosk

progosk — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:03:25 -0800

~~Sensational~~ Watchable Stone Roses BBC documentary [...] Fixed that for you.

By: Infinite Jest

Infinite Jest — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:03:50 -0800

I'm not even sure who they are supposed to have influenced, other than maybe Oasis. Off the top of my head (with some token assistance from Wikipedia and AllMusic): The Charlatans, The High, The Verve, Oasis, Blur, Travis, The Bluetones, Coldplay, Stereophonics, Arctic Monkeys. Plus the fact that pre-Roses, British alternative music was this small, quiet thing that hid in the corner and patted itself on the back if it made the top 20. The Roses (and the Mondays) helped break open that door, to the point where indie bands became mainstream. Whether one thinks that's a good thing or not, the Roses were hugely influential in that sense. psmealey: I can see your argument for Radiohead, MBV or the Smiths (although the Smiths, sadly, seem like a cul de sac, from where I'm standing, now; and I would've thought MBV's influence was important but narrow). But I can't really see why you name Ride or Blur or the Cure. Care to expand? (I like those bands, I just don't see any of 'em as being nearly as important as the Stone Roses). Oh, and thanks, item. Will enjoy watching this.

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:04:26 -0800

boy, that 'possibly even learn' line was hokey. sorry. Your favourite way of expressing yourself sucks.

By: Item

Item — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:06:17 -0800

progosk, I meant 'sensational' as in, gee, this documentary is breathlessly dramatic. It's sensational. Some words have more than one meaning. Gasp.

By: Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese

Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:11:40 -0800

Love the Roses, and I don't give a fuck how anybody else rates them. Thanks for the link.

By: Kattullus

Kattullus — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:23:30 -0800

I love the first Stone Roses album... and that ep they had with Fool's Gold on it. And sometimes I find myself liking The Second Coming. Breaking into Heaven and Love Spreads really push a lot of the right buttons for me. Hell, I like a lot of Ian Brown's solo stuff. I think a lot of the shoegaze stuff can be laid at The Stone Roses' door. That said, I find myself returning to The Happy Mondays a lot more. The Mondays seem to have been a dead end though. Can't think of a single good band that owes much influence to Shaun Ryder and co. Ah... my youth. Shaun Ryder... I have to quote this little exchange from 24 Hour Party People: Tony Wilson: You know, I think that Shaun Ryder is on a par with W.B. Yeats as a poet. Yvette: Really? Tony Wilson: Absolutely. Totally. Yvette: Well, that is amazing, considering everyone else thinks he's a fucking idiot.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:28:12 -0800

I can't really see why you name Ride or Blur or the Cure Ride (and to a lesser extent, Slowdive and Swervedriver) are probably less influential, as their followers haven't broken out in a big way yet, but from what I've seen in the London pub scene, there are tons of bands who are directly descended of them. Blur is a band that I put in a similar category as the Roses (rhythmically sharp, but danceable and slightly psychedelic guitar rock), but I would give them the nod simply because they were longer lasting, and substantially more successful. As for the Cure, I'm not sure what you're not seeing, but their influence is felt massively today, as it has been over the past 10 years. I can hear their influence in so-called "post rock" bands, to hipster bands like Arcade Fire, the Dears, the Rapture, OK GO and the list goes on. But more than anything, I think is that they can be held at least somewhat responsible as a progenitor of emo (a drunken uncle to it, as opposed to Fugazi's sober grandfather).

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:29:42 -0800

A couple of my friends (all of us expat wanderers) were getting way into British music around the time of the Happy Mondays and the Stone Roses et al in the early 90s I guess it was, at the same time as I was way more into Replacements and Tom Waits and Fugazi territory. It was all good though, and I have fond memories of some of that music, even if it wasn't precisely my cup of tea. Music's always been as much about a time in my life (at least in retrospect) as anything else for me, and even if my tastes from decades past sometimes make me cringe a bit, I still love it all.

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:37:30 -0800

Stone Roses == hippie rock Not that there's anything wrong with that.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:38:40 -0800

although there's one glaring omission: The Fall. posted by UbuRoivas Ubu, I'm thinking we're cousins or something...

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:41:59 -0800

The Happy Mondays owed a great deal of their sound to producers Martin Hannett and Paul Oakenfold. Hannett died soon after Bummed and Oakenfold refused to work with the Mondays after Pills n Thrills. Otherwise, those guys could barely play their instruments or come up with interesting ideas without ingesting gobs of drugs.

By: koeselitz

koeselitz — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:54:24 -0800

"... and possibly the most influential British guitar band of the last twenty years..." ... because, of course, one can't forget the tremendous impact that British ocarina and accordion bands have had recently.

By: Rangeboy

Rangeboy — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:58:43 -0800

Has there ever been an album so thoroughly crushed by the weight of its own reputation as the Roses' first album? Upon discovering it about six years after its release, all I could think was, "eh, it's good, but it's not that good." ***Although as Infinite Jest and others have pointed out, the Roses' real importance has more to do with the later bands they influenced.***

By: humannaire

humannaire — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:02:51 -0800

What? No mention of former Stone Roses' lead singer Ian Brown's solo work, ferchrissakes? I mean, speaking of great singles. F.E.A.R.? Golden Gaze? Love Like A Fountain? And the new track, Illegal Attacks (featuring Sinead O'Conner) is also a small joy. Plus, he's scrappy scrappy.

By: biscotti

biscotti — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:16:15 -0800

Wow, thanks for this.

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:24:49 -0800

Ubu, I'm thinking we're cousins or something... Master & disciple, Burhanistan

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:34:11 -0800

The Stone Roses were as influential to Oasis as they were to the Arctic Monkeys Meh - the Arctic Monkeys owe a fuckton more to the Wedding Present than they do to the popped-up Simon & Garfunkel sounds of the Stone Roses. And the less said about Oasis, the better.

By: samh23

samh23 — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:44:24 -0800

Music nerds interested in the influence (or lack thereof) of the Stone Roses should check out the excellent Britpop!: Cool Britannia and the Spectacular Demise of English Rock. Influence being what it is, it's pretty well documented in the book.

By: Kattullus

Kattullus — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:50:54 -0800

the less said about Oasis, the better Now, now... Oasis may have morphed into awfulness with dissying speed, but Definitely Maybe and b-sides collection The Masterplan are damn fine albums. But yes... if there's ever a poster-band for the law of diminishing returns, it's Oasis. What? No mention of former Stone Roses' lead singer Ian Brown's solo work, ferchrissakes? I did :) And I love Blur. In fact pretty much anything Damon Albarn has done. But I don't really hear their influence today. They introduced the idea of britpop, but any of their myriad sounds haven't lived on. Perhaps that's the fate of any band that jumps from sound to sound like Blur did. But as an idea, britpop was massively influential.

By: Item

Item — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:51:23 -0800

although there's one glaring omission: The Fall. posted by UbuRoivas Ubu, I'm thinking we're cousins or something... You guys should look at my userpage.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:02:28 -0800

Har. The question deepens but never clarifies but is always easily answerable with just a bit of cosmic help.

By: howfar

howfar — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:07:03 -0800

Problem with that is that if you start talking about The Fall as an influential band of the last twenty years, you're going to have to mention XTC and then the whole discussion is fucked. But it's not like I care.

By: scody

scody — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:08:02 -0800

I will proudly join up with the side of those who consider the Stone Roses' debut one of the great all-time albums -- 20 years on (o my youth! where hast thou gone?) and I still love every blissful note. If that record's a one-trick pony, then what a fucking trick it was.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:08:56 -0800

the fall being influential was not so much the tangent we were on, rather the shared interests that surface.

By: scody

scody — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:09:05 -0800

er, NEARLY 20 years on. O my basic math skills! Where hast thou gone, as well?)

By: AwkwardPause

AwkwardPause — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:19:11 -0800

Cool, thanks! I actually watched the whole thing, a rare feat these days.

By: timsteil

timsteil — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:20:33 -0800

Really? I mean....a truly lame song....with probaby the worst lip synching I have ever seen? Either this is one of those rare gems of discs I just missed by chance....or there is a reason they never even came close to my radar to begin with that moptop haircut thing....I think that has been done before too. sorry....way unimpressed here oh wait...a wah wah pedal....ok...I guess that makes it hip

By: howfar

howfar — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:20:40 -0800

Burhanistan. I'm not so bothered. I'd rather it was just you and me and the guy from Sparks, hanging out with Howard Marks. Some music is significant. Some music is beautiful. Some music is both. I don't know how I'd go about unpicking influences. I'm not really sure that I know what anyone means by influential. But yeah, the Roses were pretty good, back in the day.

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:23:50 -0800

heh - I'm into MeeFee...

By: Adam_S

Adam_S — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:24:20 -0800

The manager is clearly an artistic antichrist, but I'm surprised they didn't mention Squire's descent into cokehead-dom as being a factor in their downfall. I'm willing to accept the hit to my street cred, but I really like Second Coming. It's some of the best masturbatory guitar work this side of metal.

By: Item

Item — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:28:21 -0800

Tim Steel - what a great porno name - you perchance noticed that they have more than one song in their catalog, no? And that, if you're gonna argue the suckiness of a band, you can do it in a semi-nonretarded manner? I noticed this. Fuck, my blind mother would've noticed this. You, though, noticed a fucking wah-wah pedal and tried to run with it, but tripped and ended up with a mouthful of pie.

By: The Card Cheat

The Card Cheat — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:40:11 -0800

"Begging You," "Love Spreads" and "Driving South" are all great songs on Second Coming. The rest of the album...well, cocaine is a hell of a drug, or so I've heard.

By: empath

empath — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:53:03 -0800

A good interview on from filter magazine.

By: timsteil

timsteil — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:00:07 -0800

Item... actually...it's pronounced "style"....which might actually make it a better porno name..I'm not really sure, but I'm willing to set up subscription web site just to see how many chumps are willing to pay 30 bucks a month to find out Like I said....might be a great disc that just never hit my desk....but regardless.....that video clip made me yawn. Plus it just kills be that whatever techie folks can spend years trying to make a drum machine sound like a funky drummer, and the next wave comes along trying to sound exactly like the drum machine that sounds like a funky drummer. Then again....somewhere in the basement I have a Flock of Seagulls album. So I'll just shuttup now.

By: Infinite Jest

Infinite Jest — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:07:50 -0800

Rangeboy: I'd actually rate their own work as more important than the bands they influenced, some of whom had their moments, but none that I'd rate even close to the Roses. [Incidentally, at the time a lot of the reviews of the debut were quite lukewarm; it took a while for people to rate it so highly] psmealey: I've got to admit I'm not too familiar with those bands (except Arcade Fire). I always saw the Cure as being more influenced (by say Joy Division) than influencing, but point taken. (And your favourite bands don't suck). howfar: room for me? And Sian Lloyd? Going back to the Fall, anyone heard their rather good "diss" of all things Madchester, 'Idiot Joy Showland'?

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:21:13 -0800

nyone heard their rather good "diss" of all things Madchester, 'Idiot Joy Showland'? Heh. I used some lyrics from that one as a title to this post.

By: lalex

lalex — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:26:45 -0800

I'll sidestep the influential-ness (influentiality? languagehat?) debate, and just thank item for posting this - fantastic!

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:29:40 -0800

Influence is fine.

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:35:25 -0800

And I have been influenced to put on Shift-Work & skip straight to Idiot Joy Showland. I have also been influenced by Planet Unicorn, in the delivery of the line above.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:40:34 -0800

Microcosms come and go, and it's amazing what they show.

By: kandinski

kandinski — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:48:35 -0800

Your favourite band does not suck, but I find the omission of The Jesus and Mary Chain and Primal Scream a couple of serious oversights.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:51:35 -0800

There are a dozen or so Primal Scream tracks that I really enjoy, but it's really hard to take them seriously.

By: Infinite Jest

Infinite Jest — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:08:30 -0800

kandinski: if we're talking past 20 years you have to ignore the JaMC, who otherwise rate as one of the most important UK bands ever (IMHO, etc). Let's throw some Spiritualized in with your Primal Scream (though someone said guitar bands, above, originally) and I think we're good to go. (Incidentally, at one point Primal Scream had ex-members of the Stone Roses, My Bloody Valentine and the Jesus and Mary Chain in their lineup; how's that for a super-group?).

By: kandinski

kandinski — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:10:02 -0800

Burhhanistan: You haven't played Quake II until you have replayed it on a weekend non-stop binge, with Xterminator on your computer's CD drive. Kill All Hippies! No hippies were killed in the writing of this post, nor in the anecdote leading up to it. The only drug I took at the time was caffeine, I swear to bunny rabbits, but boy did I use to abuse the espressos and coca-cola.

By: kandinski

kandinski — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:18:27 -0800

Infinite Jest, I am showing my age. Technically I guess one could say the JaMC got together in '84 and disbanded in '99, so they have been together for 12 of the past 20 years. Except they haven't, and in truth you are right: Psychocandy and Darklands were both published more than 20 years ago, and even if some people kept buying their later records, it would be a big stretch to call them "influential" (people usually find their own way into decline, without need for external influence).

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:19:06 -0800

Idiot groups with no shape or form Out of their heads on a quid of blow The shapeless kecks* flapping on the storm Look at what they are: a pack of worms Idiot Joy Showland *Northern English slang for trousers Let's throw some Spiritualized in Spaceman 3 & Spectrum, yes, but not that bastard offshoot Spiritualized, which clearly demonstrated that Sonic Boom was the talented one in Spaceman 3, in spite of his ridiculous monicker.

By: simra

simra — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:21:26 -0800

Ok, gotta chime in here with a bunch of random thoughts... not sure I agree the Roses had much influence on Blur- unless you think Parklife was Blur's first album, they were more or less contemporaries. Besides, blur 'sold out' early in the game while the roses were too busy imploding. No doubt the Manchester scene and the shoegazers had a big influence on Oasis, who turned it all into stadium rock. As far as influence goes, I think you'd have to be crazy to suggest that anyone other than Radiohead is the most influential British group of the last 20 years. Say what you will, I think of all these bands their body of work will still be listened to 20 years from now and beyond. I liked the Roses a lot- there are a handful of cd's I have owned that truly struck me with a weird sense of deja-vu every time I listened, like I'd been carrying this music around in my head all my life. On the other hand, maybe I ought not to listen to that sense because Zooropa's on that list too.. I agree, the weight of hype about the first album, along with a very long dispute with their label pretty much guaranteed anything the Roses did after that would be doomed. I had this disc stolen from me at least three times. Each time I replaced it it got harder to find a copy with I am the Resurrection and Fool's Gold- later re-issues, for some reason most likely related to their legal troubles, left the last two songs out. My all time favourite song of theirs was What the World is Waiting For, from the same-titled EP. Junk the psychedelics and go with raw power-pop. That was an awesome EP. Second Coming was too Americanized for my taste (see Oasis, above). They lost their unique sound in favour of bluesing it up.

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:30:08 -0800

Stereolab must count as a guitar band. Just sayin'.

By: Infinite Jest

Infinite Jest — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:43:46 -0800

kandinski: they're back together again, of course. But probably rubbish. I saw them in about 1998 and they were a drunken embarrassment. Sadly. And yeah, you got my point which was that the first two albums are all you really need (scattered gems on the latter albums notwithstanding). simra: I think there's definitely a baggy Manchester influence on early Blur - look at something like 'There's No Other Way'. I assume you're not in the USA? Those tracks were standard on the American release, I thought (and, much as I love them, I'm not sure they really belong on the album - Fool's Gold is just too different from everything that went before; the album should end with Resurrection).

By: simra

simra — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 22:33:18 -0800

Infinite Jest: In Canada- we had the same release as the US, afaik. I guess the copies I came across later were imports. I'll have to check it out the next time I'm at HMV. sure, blur briefly had the 'manc' sound, but my sense was that they were contemporaries to the Roses and unlikely to have been heavily influenced by them. I guess I should check my dates... for the record I hated Parklife. I don't think it had any lingering elements of the manchester scene. just a lot of wanking. ... ok here's the dates: Blur- Leisure - 1991. Stone Roses - self-titled 1989, so maybe I'm wrong on this count.

By: sien

sien — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 22:48:16 -0800

Personally, I think you're all radically downplaying the importance of the Spice Girls.

By: brautigan

brautigan — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 03:20:21 -0800

Loved the Roses. Dunno about Ian Brown nowadays tho: Illegal Attacks (YouTube).

By: brautigan

brautigan — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 03:21:44 -0800

Dang, Humannaire...

By: soundofsuburbia

soundofsuburbia — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 06:43:51 -0800

Personally I think The Boo Radleys are really rather underrated, nowadays. "Giant Steps" is still a mighty fine album and although it was hailed as a masterpiece back in 1993, it's since fallen off the musical map somewhat. Or maybe I'm just reading the wrong magazines? Still, my favourite band rules. And the band My Favorite rules as well! Anyway, I'm looking forward to watching this documentary! Speaking of managers and documentaries, I seem to recall a really rather good TV special focusing on LTJ Bukem/Good Looking. I wonder if it's on YouTube? As soon as I get YouTube to work I'll have to go look.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:26:08 -0800

Eh, they were no Starz, that's for damned sure.

By: Sparx

Sparx — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:28:54 -0800

Does 'influenced' actually mean anything besides 'sounds a bit like sometimes'? Can anyone actually prove that when the Artic Monkeys list their influences they're saying anything more than "fuck, not this question again! What was that damn song I heard at that party when some groupie was bobbing for bobo?". Really - sometimes musicheads remind me of my not-too-with-it brother who thought that when Coppola's Dracula hung upside-down it was a homage to Burton's Batman. Dude, it's just bats. But I digress. Stone Roses had potential and did nothing with it because of drugs, thus influencing, inter alia, Kurt Cobain, the preternaturally alert looking guy down at the video store, and the wrinkled lady I stepped over at the tube station yesterday.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:59:22 -0800

How about April Wine? Anybody remember them? They were great.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:15:45 -0800

I put them right up there with the very aptly named Average White Band.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:39:23 -0800

Actually, AWB were pretty good. and April Wine (who were a better than average bar-rock band at best) were still better than the Cure, the Smiths, My Bloody Valentine, Ride, Radiohead and Blur, who are already as embarassingly pretentious and dated as It's A Beautiful Day, ELP and Yes.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:41:44 -0800

So, now that you've established your tastes as having nothing to do with any of this why did you bother to wade in here?

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:45:58 -0800

To make mockery of all the tespet in a teapot debate surrounding the subject, and to kill time before I have to go to the laundromat.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:47:46 -0800

rock on

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:55:15 -0800

thank you, sir. as a bonus, please enjoy the most bizarrely named bodice-buster novel ever. I shelved it the other day.

By: kirkaracha

kirkaracha — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:35:38 -0800

The shit has hit the fan.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:51:12 -0800

Someone is way out of their limpdick boring American classic rock genre lovin' league here. On to the laundry with it, sir.

By: Grangousier

Grangousier — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:32:15 -0800

Good lord, this teapot has a tespet in it. So that's what a tespet is. I wondered.

By: saladin

saladin — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:16:04 -0800

The first two minutes of Yes's "Heart of the Sunrise" are better than the entire collected works of April Wine and AWB. Your favorite laundromat sucks.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:02:17 -0800

Yes is music for people who don't like music.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:26:49 -0800

Also, Yes (except for Rick Wakeman) were non-drinking vegetarians which explains why they wouldn't know rock and roll if it bit them on their anemic asses. Wakeman, a relaxed beer-drinking meat-eater played on David Bowie's 'Oh You Pretty Things,' which shows that he does know what rock and roll is. Yes suck. Sorry.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:41:37 -0800

Nobody cares about Yes around here, ya putz.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:44:47 -0800

Saladin does. and Radiohead, the Smiths, and the Stone Roses are the 'modern' equivalent of Yes et al. *cranks up the Brandos and the Fastbacks*

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:45:40 -0800

You're a jackass and your musical taste is prole rubbish. Go fold yer laudry.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:01:06 -0800

your musical taste is prole rubbish. rock and roll is prole rubbish by definition.

By: scody

scody — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:05:43 -0800

the Stone Roses are the 'modern' equivalent of Yes et al. Dude, you know enough about music to understand why the much-maligned Hanson and the Bay City Rollers were actually great pop bands, so assigning such a facile and shallow analogy to the Stone Roses (presumably because two of their songs were really long?) is really surprising. *cranks up the Brandos and the Fastbacks* Interestingly, I listened to the Fastbacks and the Stone Roses back-to-back on the old iPod shuffle this morning. Even more interestingly, I enjoyed them both. Funny old world. rock and roll is prole rubbish by definition Oh that's right, there's never been a good middle-class musician or band ever. It's a categorical impossibility.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:34:52 -0800

scody, that was a smack at burhanistan's comment. I'm just less than impressed by all the bands being trotted out as royalty here is all.

By: scody

scody — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 17:53:38 -0800

Ah, well then. But forget anyone trotting around names like music royalty -- do you like the Roses? Because attitude-wise, they had the kind of masterful swagger that I imagine you enjoy in a band, and musically, they put out some damn wonderful guitar pop. Seriously, "Elephant Stone," "She Bangs the Drums," and "Made of Stone" -- I would have always assumed those songs alone would be right up your alley.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:11:32 -0800

But forget anyone trotting around names like music royalty -- do you like the Roses? Eh. What I've heard didn't blow me away. You know me, I like my anthem rock.

By: scody

scody — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:21:58 -0800

Anyone who understands the merits of Hanson likes a lot more than anthem rock. ;)

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:26:12 -0800

Hanson is anthem rock.

By: scody

scody — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:41:57 -0800

And so's a great deal of the Stone Roses catalog.

By: killy willy

killy willy — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 21:57:50 -0800

did Ricky Gervais base his Office character on that manager? he comes off as completely self-important and delusional.

By: Sparx

Sparx — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:16:15 -0800

Anyone who understands the merits of Hanson likes a lot more than anthem rock. ;) posted by scody at 2:21 AM on August 28 [+] [!] Hanson is anthem rock. posted by jonmc at 2:26 AM on August 28 [+] [!] There's only one way to settle this. TEEN BEAT pin-ups at dawn. I'll bring the tacks. May the best flicker still stand at the end.

By: UbuRoivas

UbuRoivas — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:44:57 -0800

rock and roll is prole rubbish by definition We have a bit of now revealed a problem here to be M.I.9. Get out the pink press threat file! New prole art threat the subject. It's safehouse, safehouse time!

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:46:18 -0800

Everyone hears a hum at 3AM, but at the safehouse it's not around.