The Stone Roses/Ian Brown

Genuinely perplexed by the Stone Roses love in on here, there seems to be more Pellegrini fans than non Roses fans on here. They do seem along with the likes of Nirvana and New Order to be sacred cows with the music press.

The first album isn't bad but is completely retro, part The Byrds, Buffalo Springfield with bits of Love and Sly and the Family Stone. The second album is like the worst excesses of 'cock rock' in parts and don't get me started on that new single..devoid of originality and cliche ridden, safe, bland Dad-Rock and as far removed from anything remotely left field. I'd class the Stone Roses as a more down and dirty Coldplay, file alongside Stereophonics and Kasabian.

Squire is a fine guitar player and Reni is a superb drummer but Ian Brown...if Pete Best is the unluckiest person in popular music then Ian Brown has to be the luckiest, seldom has anyone so devoid of talent been so lauded, a voice which if you described as being mediocre would be doing him a favour.

As I said can't figure out the attraction, they do seem to attract an audience who's loyalty to them is like football support, don't know if in many cases it is a case of wanting to fit in and belong coupled with more than a touch of nostalgia. I'm as it appears in here very much in the minority but I genuinely cannot see the attraction.
 
Genuinely perplexed by the Stone Roses love in on here, there seems to be more Pellegrini fans than non Roses fans on here. They do seem along with the likes of Nirvana and New Order to be sacred cows with the music press.

The first album isn't bad but is completely retro, part The Byrds, Buffalo Springfield with bits of Love and Sly and the Family Stone. The second album is like the worst excesses of 'cock rock' in parts and don't get me started on that new single..devoid of originality and cliche ridden, safe, bland Dad-Rock and as far removed from anything remotely left field. I'd class the Stone Roses as a more down and dirty Coldplay, file alongside Stereophonics and Kasabian.

Squire is a fine guitar player and Reni is a superb drummer but Ian Brown...if Pete Best is the unluckiest person in popular music then Ian Brown has to be the luckiest, seldom has anyone so devoid of talent been so lauded, a voice which if you described as being mediocre would be doing him a favour.

As I said can't figure out the attraction, they do seem to attract an audience who's loyalty to them is like football support, don't know if in many cases it is a case of wanting to fit in and belong coupled with more than a touch of nostalgia. I'm as it appears in here very much in the minority but I genuinely cannot see the attraction.

Ian Browns voice is the topic of many discussions and everyone knows he is not the greatest vocalist going. To call devoid of talent is ludicrous, he is a fantastic song writer and has wrote some absolutely stunning songs. He also taught himself how to play numerous instruments after the demise of The Roses.

You want the luckiest person in music then that title belongs to Mr Andy ' Fletch' Fletcher. He is probably far richer than all The Stone Roses yet can't really play any instruments nor has he ever written any songs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Fletcher_(musician)
 
Genuinely perplexed by the Stone Roses love in on here, there seems to be more Pellegrini fans than non Roses fans on here. They do seem along with the likes of Nirvana and New Order to be sacred cows with the music press.

The first album isn't bad but is completely retro, part The Byrds, Buffalo Springfield with bits of Love and Sly and the Family Stone. The second album is like the worst excesses of 'cock rock' in parts and don't get me started on that new single..devoid of originality and cliche ridden, safe, bland Dad-Rock and as far removed from anything remotely left field. I'd class the Stone Roses as a more down and dirty Coldplay, file alongside Stereophonics and Kasabian.

Squire is a fine guitar player and Reni is a superb drummer but Ian Brown...if Pete Best is the unluckiest person in popular music then Ian Brown has to be the luckiest, seldom has anyone so devoid of talent been so lauded, a voice which if you described as being mediocre would be doing him a favour.

As I said can't figure out the attraction, they do seem to attract an audience who's loyalty to them is like football support, don't know if in many cases it is a case of wanting to fit in and belong coupled with more than a touch of nostalgia. I'm as it appears in here very much in the minority but I genuinely cannot see the attraction.
It's all about the magic of the four of them.....if you don't feel it then you're wasting your time.
 
Ian Browns voice is the topic of many discussions and everyone knows he is not the greatest vocalist going. To call devoid of talent is ludicrous, he is a fantastic song writer and has wrote some absolutely stunning songs. He also taught himself how to play numerous instruments after the demise of The Roses.

You want the luckiest person in music then that title belongs to Mr Andy ' Fletch' Fletcher. He is probably far richer than all The Stone Roses yet can't really play any instruments nor has he ever written any songs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Fletcher_(musician)

Fletch sounds like Depeche Mode's Wilfreid Bony. You are probably right about his wealth as DM are huge esp in The States and dwarf the Roses and quite possibly Oasis over there.
Ian Browns voice is the topic of many discussions and everyone knows he is not the greatest vocalist going. To call devoid of talent is ludicrous, he is a fantastic song writer and has wrote some absolutely stunning songs. He also taught himself how to play numerous instruments after the demise of The Roses.

You want the luckiest person in music then that title belongs to Mr Andy ' Fletch' Fletcher. He is probably far richer than all The Stone Roses yet can't really play any instruments nor has he ever written any songs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Fletcher_(musician)

I think I'd disagree calling him a fantastic songwriter, I'm a bit of a music obsessive, hooked on listening to at least 3 albums a day pottering about via Apple Music usually to bands complete discographies and I've given the Brown solo stuff a whirl and it did nothing for me, it doesn't go against the grain and is a million miles away from WIred territory and just feels like a bit of a compromise to me. I also am left scratching my head re New Order, love JD and the first NO album I enjoy but the rest just seems a bit vacuous.
 
It's all about the magic of the four of them.....if you don't feel it then you're wasting your time.

I think I am to be honest, I have a mixed opinion of Manchester bands, don't get the Roses, The Monday's, Oasis, New Order but love the Smiths, Joy Division, Magazine, Barry Adamson and The Fall when push comes to shove I prefer the so called Sheffield scene.

I'm obviously in the minority in this City judging by the interest in here and the interest in the gigs and the new single but as they say different strokes for different folks.
 
The single is so-so.
Should have stayed 'retired'.I was as big a fan as anyone in the day but I just cant take them that seriously anymore.
 
True to form and just like every song they have ever done total shite

One of the most overated groups of all time
Popular just because it became trendy to say you liked them just like the Artic Monkeys in that respect

Personally I like a lot of stuff the Arctic Monkeys have done and they're usually a good turn live apart from their November 2009 gig in town where for some strange reason they were flat as fuck, made worse by the fact that Kasabian lifted the roof off the same venue the previous night.

As for The Stone Roses, well their first album was absolute quality IMO and I played it to death. Their second wasn't anywhere near as good but is a little underrated in parts but my 2 biggest issues with them are the fact that they're pretty poor live and it's the crowd that often bail Brown out by singing over him. Secondly, their output - they were together from 1983 until the mid-1990's and churned out a sum total of 2 albums and a couple of singles - Fools Gold and One Love. Even accounting for their protracted legal wrangle with Silvertone that's piss poor. Now they've been back together for nearly 4 years and they've released one single.

As for that single, I'm underwhelmed. Take out the shitty, cheesy lyrics and vocals and you're left with what sounds like a decent riff. But then a riff that is a rip-off from a Beatles track from 50 years ago ought to be decent.
 
He's far from a fantastic songwriter.
Ian Browns voice is the topic of many discussions and everyone knows he is not the greatest vocalist going. To call devoid of talent is ludicrous, he is a fantastic song writer and has wrote some absolutely stunning songs. He also taught himself how to play numerous instruments after the demise of The Roses.

You want the luckiest person in music then that title belongs to Mr Andy ' Fletch' Fletcher. He is probably far richer than all The Stone Roses yet can't really play any instruments nor has he ever written any songs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Fletcher_(musician)
 
They could have released an album full of goat herding songs and I'd still be ecstatic.
It's just the power of the four of them recording together.
Can't wait for the album. .......BAAAAAAAAA!!!
 
They can't win really, they are never going to remaster what they did but I was pleasantly surprised, especially with Squires guitar work but the lyrics and chorus line is cheesy
 
I could do with one of these to liven up the front room, where could i buy such a painting?
There you go :)
52c52a10d574a21c28e3968536aa7e81.jpg
 
Heard the new single this morning. Bang average but the pissheads who don't mind paying £100 to sway about at the back of some enormadome will lap it up.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top