You are funny

The main trouble with Belly was that Tanya Donelley couldn't hit a single note. What I would have given to have heard her singing a duet wit Ian Brown.

Speaking of Ian Brown...
Stone Roses - Mersey Paradise
And I swear even that sounds better than the version I've just heard of Vintage TV.

Just because he's not releasing records does not mean his career has 'stalled'. He and his band are always very busy, constantly doing world tours; recently playing sold-out gigs in the US, Japan, Hong Kong, Jakarta (last night), and are doing gigs this week in Singapore and Thailand, before heading to Australia and back to the US next month.

I really liked Morrissey's last album, staircase at the university is one of his best songs

Will never happen too much bad blood between Morrissey and Andy Rouke/Mike Joyce.

As a huge fan who never got to see them originally they can 'milk it' all they like if it means I get to see them live again. 2013 at Finsbury Park they were a bit sloppy and the sound was dreadful, but this year at the Etihad was one of the best nights of my life They put in a tremendous effort and the setlist was a dream for me - hearing the whole of the first album, the best of the second, and singles and B-sides was as immense as the performance.

I Am the Resurrection from Madison Square Gardens on Youtube (the close up one) shows just how tight and disciplined they've become.

I now cannot wait to see them again at Wembley next year

I'm seemingly one of the few who doesn't seem to want them to release anymore music. All For One was cracking live and Beautiful Thing playing afterwards with the fireworks made sense and finished off the night perfectly. But even that far superior second single isn't classic Roses. It's like Ian Brown backed by the Roses, and very derivative (a tribute as he's mentioned in the lyrics?) of John Lennon's Bloody Sunday.

Ian said he's got three album's worth of material up his sleeve, and apparantly tensions in the band have been largely whether or not to do new stuff. As they're playing new dates I guess Brown and Mani won out and they'll release an album - but however good it is I'd rather hear the old stuff at the next gig.


Loads of real fans got stuck with extra tickets, it always happens. It's happened to me a few times when people dropped out or I bought an extra rather than being caught short. Luckily most of the time I've managed to sell them on (for face value to other fans).


I can't remember how it went as my friend got us tickets last time, but they should have announced the first three dates if they only announced two. Adding a fourth/one extra (having taken out the option with the venue if the first ones sold out) is pretty standard practice. It's not great, but otherwise they wouldn't sell out the worst seats for the first few dates (which is not great either). But the blame lies with the promoter not the band. They do go the extra mile compared to other bands with the venue negotiations (London 2013 was the most laid back 'search' I've ever had, and at the Etihad there was no problem with smoking).

If they only announced the first two dates then that does suck, and with the number of empty seats and touts stuck with tickets for our Etihad date I think they did one date too many.

I suspect that was mainly down to people wanting to hear what the first Stone Roses song in over 20 years sounded like...

Then giving it a second, third and fourth chance to convince themselves that it wasn't the generically so-so track (at best) or utter embarrassment (at worst) it seemed before realising that, yes, it was that poor.

I don't get the impression that many people- even past fans- ultimately thought it was that good. Most purchases (do people still "buy" singles- even in download form- any more?) were probably down to fan loyalty and buying in advance.

I didn't say it was good I said it was a big seller, I agree it was just alright but it was good enough for me having them back, the 2nd single was much better.

My fella got Glastonbury tickets and would sell a kidney if it meant they played there next year. If the demand is still there, why shouldn't they 'milk' it?

Absolutely.

We have a drummer who (Daltrey -?) tried to nick at their first ever gig with the rest of the band, saying he was the best he'd seen since Keith Moon. And he's only got better! You then have a bassist who was far more than decent at the time and is pretty much perfect now, one of the best living British guitar players and songwriters we've had (even if his masterworks are behind him). A singer who's also a great writer, and thanks to giving up smoking, a lot more effort and less attitude than 2012/13, and some (welcome imo) tuning effects on his mic sounds as good as - if not better than - ever.

**** me, if other folk aren't interested or demand new stuff, or accuse them of milking it when Reni spent years as a labourer because the music industry screwed them over for over fifteen years, then stop whinging. Live with your happy memories, and let the rest of us get on with the party!

All For One - too try hard imo and trite in the recording, doubt I'll listen to it much again (apart from the Etihad bootleg). Live it was an unexpected blast, it absolutely made sense.

I just don't understand. If Oasis got back together do the fans want the classics dropped to hear some new, rather average, new material instead? Because that's what I fear we'll get with this new Roses dynamic of Brown demanding new songs he's written that the guitarist and drummer aren't that keen on. That's why (with situations somewhat reversed) they split up in the first place!

It's like if all The Beatles were still with us and instead of Strawberry Fields or While My Guitar Gently Weeps you get some some half-arsed effort that McCartney's ego demand the rest play. See The Smiths reformed (as if!) and they drop How Soon Is Now or Bigmouth for some ego-stroking effort from Morrissey that Marr politely plays along to to indulge him?!!

In the two gigs I've since since they reformed I've seen the likes of Where Angels Play, Standing Here, Mersey Paradise. All B-Sides. Reimagined, reinvigorated, and reworked beyond belief. Absolutely spine-tingling stuff. All could have been A-sides from most bands since the 60s, they're sublime. And most of them were only ever heard live by a minority 'back in the day' if they made the setlist at all (that's not to mention half the first album itself, and now they're playing the lot)! The best of The Second Coming stuff? Only a few performances at the time before the guitarist (and writer) and drummer left. This is stuff that should have all been played by the whole band for the fifteen plus years they weren't together! We were robbed.

Tldr; I will be having a ball at Wembley next year. I hope there's not too much new stuff, and in a sense I expect to be disappointed, because the Etihad seemed like a love letter to the best of the back catalogue, and the only reason I think they're still going is Brown is calling (too many of) the shots. But if any new stuff invigorates as much as All For One (live, not the single) then it'll still be the best place on Earth to be that night

<edit> As long as Adored and Resurrection take their places and Made of Stone appears. If not expect fisticuffs in the crowd!

It's an OK song, it isn't 'that poor'. It's just not up with their back catalogue, nowhere near. But as I've written a few times now, it's a stormer live. And there's more to it than just the music - it's a statement of intent, and a much needed one right now, just as the message of All You Need Is Love is more important than the simple singalong it is musically.

I bought two copies of Beautiful Thing on vinyl. One to keep pristine and wrapped and the other to play (though I've got to get a turntable first). I think the last 'rock' single I bought was One Love, so it fits. Yes, people love vinyl again now. My £8 12"s are going for up to fifty quid (no I won't sell). And the track was unleashed before the sale, so fans knew exactly what they were buying.

....& The Stone Roses were formed in 1983 well before 2008 (8 years ago).If you have any knowledge of which bands the NME 'strongly' favoured you will know The Stone Roses most definitely came into that category.
They were at the forefront of the 'baggy' rock/dance scene which popularity but soon wavered, hence the change of sound on their second album.Their popularity is most definately based on their 1989 debut album.They only released one more album (Second Coming) in 1994 which even the NME only rated 6/10, which was a run of the mill retro 'pop' blues album.
My point about The Stone Roses is they were a relevant 'pop' rock band in the late '80's / early 90's (although even then heavily reliant on a British Invasion '60's type sound).People who followed them during that time & still like listening to them in a nostalgic type of way, fare enough to them it was part of 'their time & place'.
Today The Stone Roses are no longer a relevant band though & had very limited output.Why do so many younger fans, who were not part of the baggy scene follow them now though - my only conclusion is the NME factor, which had the Stone Roses album constantly on top of their 'boring' & excessive amount of polls they had.
I can understand the resentment the OP feels.The pure nostalgic element the band could command has been spoiled, by too many people jumping on the bandwagon (internally & externally).

Their second single from their return is a corker!

Beautiful Thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCk34IVVgcc

Wow - like stepping back into the 1990s! Cool track! I love the bass drum sound of The Stone Roses. Very distinctive.