|
|
Post by Derrick on Jun 26, 2017 13:16:22 GMT -5
IF Ian Brown's words actually meant they split again (as this was the last gig of the tour, he might also have referred to the tour being over, not the band itself), maybe the recording sessions yielded nothing worth, or it didn't go well within the band for personal reasons &/or musical direction (if Ian wanted to go more electronic for example) & the sessions were aborted when they saw they wouldn't get anywhere.
Let's not forget they reformed for the money initially (at least that's what I read at the time, correct me if I'm wrong).
|
|
|
|
Post by glider on Jun 26, 2017 14:15:55 GMT -5
"We're gonna shake up the world. This ain't a stroll down memory lane." - Ian Brown, October 2011.
🤔
|
|
|
|
Post by glider on Jun 26, 2017 14:22:23 GMT -5
Can't say I'm surprised... or sad. This reunion was a total farce. They've been milking the fans for five years now... and all they managed to do in the meantime was recording TWO songs, one of which is an embarrassing piece of shit. From what I've heard, most of the gigs weren't particularly special either. They shouldn't have bothered reforming. Some legacies are best kept untouched. Only thing that bothers me is the unnecessary silence. I knew months ago the band wasn't really together anymore and called it clear as day, especially how their social media is dead and no one saying anything. It's lame that it came down to another Reni-Ian scuffle but at least John and Ian's rekindled friendship remained intact. Forget AFO, the real legacy tarnishing here is their lack of communicating to fans in the age of instantaneous telecommunication. It isn't 1989. When all lines are dead and not even the power of The web can get to the bottom of a current situation, you might as well announce it's over. |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Jun 26, 2017 14:27:23 GMT -5
All For One!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by glider on Jun 26, 2017 14:32:38 GMT -5
If we all join hands, we'll make...an album? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 15:19:51 GMT -5
The bizarre thing is surely an album must have been recorded as I doubt they would go into the studio just to record two songs. If so why not release it? They can't be that worried about tarnishing their reputation if they are prepared to release All For One. To be fair All For One isn't that bad, the guitar solo is pretty good. I wouldn't say it's anywhere near the standards of their first two albums though. Squire's guitar is the only reason why I like that song  Well, not really like but I can listen to it. I was actually holding my guitar and had amp modelling software opened when I read yer post. Decided to play the main riff and it sounded fucking great  Hadn't played it in a long time so I barely remembered it. |
|
|
|
Post by My Big Name on Jun 26, 2017 16:03:19 GMT -5
To be fair All For One isn't that bad, the guitar solo is pretty good. I wouldn't say it's anywhere near the standards of their first two albums though. Squire's guitar is the only reason why I like that song Well, not really like but I can listen to it. I was actually holding my guitar and had amp modelling software opened when I read yer post. Decided to play the main riff and it sounded fucking great Hadn't played it in a long time so I barely remembered it. The first 30 seconds are pretty great, the song just doesn't really go anywhere after that apart from the short but great guitar solo. I agree that the riff is really good and sounds like a cross between the Second Coming era and STR era of the band which is I think what everyone wanted. The lyrics are cringey af but I can look past that if the song stands up on its own. You should play it more often . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 16:12:36 GMT -5
Squire's guitar is the only reason why I like that song Well, not really like but I can listen to it. I was actually holding my guitar and had amp modelling software opened when I read yer post. Decided to play the main riff and it sounded fucking great Hadn't played it in a long time so I barely remembered it. The first 30 seconds are pretty great, the song just doesn't really go anywhere after that apart from the short but great guitar solo. I agree that the riff is really good and sounds like a cross between the Second Coming era and STR era of the band which is I think what everyone wanted. The lyrics are cringey af but I can look past that if the song stands up on its own. You should play it more often . Squire ripped off The Fall with the riff though. |
|
|
|
Post by My Big Name on Jun 26, 2017 16:39:32 GMT -5
The first 30 seconds are pretty great, the song just doesn't really go anywhere after that apart from the short but great guitar solo. I agree that the riff is really good and sounds like a cross between the Second Coming era and STR era of the band which is I think what everyone wanted. The lyrics are cringey af but I can look past that if the song stands up on its own. You should play it more often . Squire ripped off The Fall with the riff though. Ahhhh This is an Oasis forum we're surely all willing to accept a bit of borrowing every once in a while, right? (Trying to ignore the fact that this is a blatant rip off and John Squire barely wrote this riff, one of the only good aspects of the song) |
|
|
|
Post by cdw1987 on Jun 27, 2017 14:32:30 GMT -5
Even if they have... Like Brownie said, be happy that it actually happened! People take for granted now, the fact that they've been able to go an watch them live for the past 5 years. For a whole decade and a half before that, the possibility of that happening looked about as likely as all four Beatles reforming. The hostility between Squire and Brown was so prominent, that I certainly thought the chances of that particular band reforming, were nearly zero!! I mean seriously ZERO!! The Libertines were ALWAYS going to get back together... Even Oasis probably will... But with the Roses, it seemed foolish to even hope. And yet there they were! They did it, and it was amazing! It was worthwhile for all the fans who never got to see them the first time around. People are asking what the point of it was? Well... They've plaid to MILLIONS over the past
5 years, and everybody who saw one of their favourite band smash their sets, knows exactly what the point in it was! It was a band, a lot of people thought they'd never see, playing amazing well. What's everyone moaning about? They didn't owe anybody anything? They were dead, finished, written off... And then they came back. That was enough!! They came back more able too as live musicians! I read a comment on here, someone saying, they preferred not to see them this time, so as not to taint their 90s impression of them. When the reality is, anyone who's ever watched YouTube clips, or read reviews of the gigs during The Second Coming era knows, they were often shocking poor playing live. Their live set was notoriously bad around that time, and if anything, THAT was an unfortunate not to end on. Bad gigs, and Ian and Mani touring under the name "The Stone Roses," with a group of random black fellas, instead of John and Reni? Terrible end!!!! This way, they came back, bigger then ever, played better then ever, and the whole thing was an amazing success! And IF they released a new album, it would be doomed to get slagged off regardless. If it was "classic" Roses, people would knock it for being too "retro," and trying to cash in what's "expected of them." On the other hand, if the album strayed too far away from what people find familiar, people would moan "Aw, this doesn't sound anything like the old stuff, what are they trying to do?" People are generally moaning b*stards, as this thread clearly shows!
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jun 27, 2017 14:55:54 GMT -5
Even if they have... Like Brownie said, be happy that it actually happened! People take for granted now, the fact that they've been able to go an watch them live for the past 5 years. For a whole decade and a half before that, the possibility of that happening looked about as likely as all four Beatles reforming. The hostility between Squire and Brown was so prominent, that I certainly thought the chances of that particular band reforming, were nearly zero!! I mean seriously ZERO!! The Libertines were ALWAYS going to get back together... Even Oasis probably will... But with the Roses, it seemed foolish to even hope. And yet there they were! They did it, and it was amazing! It was worthwhile for all the fans who never got to see them the first time around. People are asking what the point of it was? Well... They've plaid to MILLIONS over the past 5 years, and everybody who saw one of their favourite band smash their sets, knows exactly what the point in it was! It was a band, a lot of people thought they'd never see, playing amazing well. What's everyone moaning about? They didn't owe anybody anything? They were dead, finished, written off... And then they came back. That was enough!! They came back more able too as live musicians! I read a comment on here, someone saying, they preferred not to see them this time, so as not to taint their 90s impression of them. When the reality is, anyone who's ever watched YouTube clips, or read reviews of the gigs during The Second Coming era knows, they were often shocking poor playing live. Their live set was notoriously bad around that time, and if anything, THAT was an unfortunate not to end on. Bad gigs, and Ian and Mani touring under the name "The Stone Roses," with a group of random black fellas, instead of John and Reni? Terrible end!!!! This way, they came back, bigger then ever, played better then ever, and the whole thing was an amazing success! And IF they released a new album, it would be doomed to get slagged off regardless. If it was "classic" Roses, people would knock it for being too "retro," and trying to cash in what's "expected of them." On the other hand, if the album strayed too far away from what people find familiar, people would moan "Aw, this doesn't sound anything like the old stuff, what are they trying to do?" People are generally moaning b*stards, as this thread clearly shows! Not really sure why their race is important in this. |
|
|
|
Post by mimmihopps on Jun 27, 2017 14:55:56 GMT -5
Even if they have... Like Brownie said, be happy that it actually happened! People take for granted now, the fact that they've been able to go an watch them live for the past 5 years. For a whole decade and a half before that, the possibility of that happening looked about as likely as all four Beatles reforming. The hostility between Squire and Brown was so prominent, that I certainly thought the chances of that particular band reforming, were nearly zero!! I mean seriously ZERO!! The Libertines were ALWAYS going to get back together... Even Oasis probably will... But with the Roses, it seemed foolish to even hope. And yet there they were! They did it, and it was amazing! It was worthwhile for all the fans who never got to see them the first time around. People are asking what the point of it was? Well... They've plaid to MILLIONS over the past 5 years, and everybody who saw one of their favourite band smash their sets, knows exactly what the point in it was! It was a band, a lot of people thought they'd never see, playing amazing well. What's everyone moaning about? They didn't owe anybody anything? They were dead, finished, written off... And then they came back. That was enough!! They came back more able too as live musicians! I read a comment on here, someone saying, they preferred not to see them this time, so as not to taint their 90s impression of them. When the reality is, anyone who's ever watched YouTube clips, or read reviews of the gigs during The Second Coming era knows, they were often shocking poor playing live. Their live set was notoriously bad around that time, and if anything, THAT was an unfortunate not to end on. Bad gigs, and Ian and Mani touring under the name "The Stone Roses," with a group of random black fellas, instead of John and Reni? Terrible end!!!! This way, they came back, bigger then ever, played better then ever, and the whole thing was an amazing success! And IF they released a new album, it would be doomed to get slagged off regardless. If it was "classic" Roses, people would knock it for being too "retro," and trying to cash in what's "expected of them." On the other hand, if the album strayed too far away from what people find familiar, people would moan "Aw, this doesn't sound anything like the old stuff, what are they trying to do?" People are generally moaning b*stards, as this thread clearly shows! Jesus, calm down. I've seen them twice on their reunion tour in 2012 and 2013. The second time I even saw them in Japan, not that I only flew over there to see them, but I happened to be there for holiday. You can call us moaning bastards, but they could have reduce their tickets price and tried to release new materials, couldn't they? I still love the Roses, but those "reunion" stadium tour after 5 years made me think that they seem to sold their soul to a big cash. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jun 27, 2017 15:03:01 GMT -5
'We've come to save the world from U2' was what Ian Brown initially announced with The Stone Roses in the late 80s. Christ, even as the big swindling money grabbers they are, U2 haven't ever been that blatant in their efforts to milk fans. The Roses became exactly what they initially set out NOT to be. And at least with U2, I can be guaranteed more than one album worth of great material and a band that can actually perform live with a singer who can, you know, actually sing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Jun 27, 2017 15:13:29 GMT -5
........................and one for all!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick on Jun 28, 2017 13:35:17 GMT -5
It's lame that it came down to another Reni-Ian scuffle but at least John and Ian's rekindled friendship remained intact. What happened between Ian & Reni? I hadn't heard about this so I thought the tensions were likely between Ian & John. |
|
|
|
Post by Bellboy on Jun 28, 2017 18:17:55 GMT -5
thank fuck for that roll on brownies next solo album Totally agree! News is he's been in the studio. I love most his solo albums. |
|
|
|
Post by powerage09 on Jun 29, 2017 5:51:36 GMT -5
Saw them at Finsbury Park in 2013 and Wembley Stadium the other weekend.
Hope it's not true, the gigs were biblical.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Jun 29, 2017 14:41:38 GMT -5
Even if they have... Like Brownie said, be happy that it actually happened! People take for granted now, the fact that they've been able to go an watch them live for the past 5 years. For a whole decade and a half before that, the possibility of that happening looked about as likely as all four Beatles reforming. The hostility between Squire and Brown was so prominent, that I certainly thought the chances of that particular band reforming, were nearly zero!! I mean seriously ZERO!! The Libertines were ALWAYS going to get back together... Even Oasis probably will... But with the Roses, it seemed foolish to even hope. And yet there they were! They did it, and it was amazing! It was worthwhile for all the fans who never got to see them the first time around. People are asking what the point of it was? Well... They've plaid to MILLIONS over the past 5 years, and everybody who saw one of their favourite band smash their sets, knows exactly what the point in it was! It was a band, a lot of people thought they'd never see, playing amazing well. What's everyone moaning about? They didn't owe anybody anything? They were dead, finished, written off... And then they came back. That was enough!! They came back more able too as live musicians! I read a comment on here, someone saying, they preferred not to see them this time, so as not to taint their 90s impression of them. When the reality is, anyone who's ever watched YouTube clips, or read reviews of the gigs during The Second Coming era knows, they were often shocking poor playing live. Their live set was notoriously bad around that time, and if anything, THAT was an unfortunate not to end on. Bad gigs, and Ian and Mani touring under the name "The Stone Roses," with a group of random black fellas, instead of John and Reni? Terrible end!!!! This way, they came back, bigger then ever, played better then ever, and the whole thing was an amazing success! And IF they released a new album, it would be doomed to get slagged off regardless. If it was "classic" Roses, people would knock it for being too "retro," and trying to cash in what's "expected of them." On the other hand, if the album strayed too far away from what people find familiar, people would moan "Aw, this doesn't sound anything like the old stuff, what are they trying to do?" People are generally moaning b*stards, as this thread clearly shows! I'm happy I saw them a few times live they were great but its pathetic that they haven't even been able to get themselves together enough to put out an EP let alone an LP. I would respect them a lot more had they got to work and given it a go but just like before Second Coming they get a load of money and then do fuck all. What they said in there press conference was bullshit. They've become a nostalgia act off the back of one great album. Its sad, they were capable of so much more. |
|
|
|
Post by carlober on Jul 3, 2017 10:27:56 GMT -5
They're wankers. These supposed principled men, who couldn't even be bothered to say anything to there hardcore fans about whether they might bother to put out anything new, and they probably won't say anything official about a split leaving the fans hanging who have bought them there new homes and cars. No doubt they want to squeeze a few more quid off merch before the fans are sure its over. Pricks. Looks like you were right  |
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Jul 5, 2017 15:42:35 GMT -5
They're wankers. These supposed principled men, who couldn't even be bothered to say anything to there hardcore fans about whether they might bother to put out anything new, and they probably won't say anything official about a split leaving the fans hanging who have bought them there new homes and cars. No doubt they want to squeeze a few more quid off merch before the fans are sure its over. Pricks. Looks like you were right Utterly embarrassing. I hope it say's on the back of them "Thanks for your money. Now fuck off." |
|
|
|
Post by glider on Jul 5, 2017 17:12:46 GMT -5
They're wankers. These supposed principled men, who couldn't even be bothered to say anything to there hardcore fans about whether they might bother to put out anything new, and they probably won't say anything official about a split leaving the fans hanging who have bought them there new homes and cars. No doubt they want to squeeze a few more quid off merch before the fans are sure its over. Pricks. Looks like you were right Unbelievable. |
|
|
|
Post by megyesitomate on Jul 7, 2021 6:24:28 GMT -5
I've got into them a couple of weeks ago and honestly, I quite like the 2 "new" singles. All for One, as much as everyone seems to hate it, has some shit lyrics but the sound and the melody are pretty good.
|
|
robg1979
Oasis Roadie
Posts: 301
Member is Online
|
Post by robg1979 on Jul 7, 2021 11:53:53 GMT -5
This still gets polarized views, whether they should have got back together or not. All I can say is that I saw them once soon after they reformed and it was a belter of a night. Noel was on the bill as well, V-Festival I believe it was.
What is clear for the most part is that it's still an absolute crying shame that they didn't release the third album, tour it and then go out on a high, instead of the way they just quietly disbanded again.
It all made little sense to me, the slow build up of a few new concerts, the release of two tracks which I both think are great in their own way. Things seemed to be cooking up nicely, so for things to fizzle out they way they did is so sad.
I personally think album 3 was finished, but the muted reception to the singles plus another possible argument finished them off for good. I guess we'll never know.
'We're gonna ride it till the wheels fall off' - Ian Brown, October 2011.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Jul 7, 2021 17:44:13 GMT -5
This still gets polarized views, whether they should have got back together or not. All I can say is that I saw them once soon after they reformed and it was a belter of a night. Noel was on the bill as well, V-Festival I believe it was. What is clear for the most part is that it's still an absolute crying shame that they didn't release the third album, tour it and then go out on a high, instead of the way they just quietly disbanded again. It all made little sense to me, the slow build up of a few new concerts, the release of two tracks which I both think are great in their own way. Things seemed to be cooking up nicely, so for things to fizzle out they way they did is so sad. I personally think album 3 was finished, but the muted reception to the singles plus another possible argument finished them off for good. I guess we'll never know. 'We're gonna ride it till the wheels fall off' - Ian Brown, October 2011. What Ian actually meant was 'We're gonna ride it till we've squeezed our fans for all they've got' The more I look back on it the more it feels like they became the con they felt the record company had pulled on them. |
|
|
|
Post by Elie De Beaufour 🐴 on Jul 9, 2021 8:09:41 GMT -5
But they'll have John Farnham (ironically listening to said artist) syndrome shortly and your again.
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5