- Joined
- Feb 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,844
Haha he's magic
Storey
Haha he's magic
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2015
- Messages
- 7,872
Just whilst we are thinking of songs for him could we please avoid using Stone Roses’ Songs as some poster always tries to sneak in there.
They weren’t cool back in the day and they most certainly ain’t cool now, so let’s agree to stop
They weren’t cool back in the day and they most certainly ain’t cool now, so let’s agree to stop
Agreed, we should pass a few Stone Roses songs to the lass on percussion in the town end, you know her? She bangs the drums
Let’s face it we aren’t going to spend any of Trevs Money. No chance of using any of that fools gold.
That poster would be myself.
Oasis are shite cha. The Roses are piss all over them on every single level. Had The Roses not been embroiled in a 5 year dispute with Silvertone, then there would have been no gap in the scene for Oasis to exploit.
It's nothing about being "cool", it is about the music. When Oasis finally come up with something (guffaw) to rival "I Wanna Be Adored" or "I Am The Resurrection", then I might acknowledge your PoV.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2015
- Messages
- 7,872
The Stone Roses are better than Oasis in everything bar the lead singer, clearly a much better band.
But if you take say 1989-1995 as the point when the Roses were popular, and compare their work to some of the stuff released at the same time you begin to understand why their popularity has waned certainly outside of the middle aged Manc crowd.
In that period Nirvana released Nevermind, Metallica had the Black Album, Rage against the machine, Green Day, Dream Theater etc were all beginning to blow open their respective genres with truly excellent albums. They all achieved far greater international success than the Stone Roses, and greater domestic success in a lot of cases as well.
The Roses don’t stand up technically, creatively or in longevity to most of those mentioned above, so when people say they have the all time greatest album it’s comoletely false.
Rant over
The Roses piss all over Oasis - Songs, Image, Fashion, Cultural Identity, The Spawning of a Generation.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2004
- Messages
- 28,474
Oasis took the sound and made pop music out of it. Radio friendly stuff that let blokes enjoy catchy pop music without feeling like they were sacrificing masculinity.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2015
- Messages
- 7,872
Read my first line, If we were arguing Roses vs Oasis then yes, you would be quite correct.
But if we used being better than Oasis as the yard stick for a band being good, 90% of bands would be considered ‘good’
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2015
- Messages
- 574
Baffles me this Roses v Oasis argument always crops up, especially when there's a perfectly simple answer... Oasis far superior
They're both a bit mediocre to be honest
Never understood this love-in with Green Day. IMO, one of the most overreacted bands ever.
Dookie was a very good album and American Idiot had some brilliant tracks but other than that they've been very average imo.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2004
- Messages
- 28,474
Would argue the other way round- Nimrod and Warning were fantastic albums whilst Dookie was unpolished, and American Idiot poor.
Depends on what you liked about them really. American Idiot is widely regarded as their best work, but was a departure from the pop punk that they made their name with.
Nimrod I'll agree is solid but I'm afraid I disagree with dookie being unpolished. If anything it was too polished as it was designed to be radio friendly and lacked the edge of their earlier work.
Dookie is a great album. Just wish it opened with Welcome To Paradise
As an album it's a very close 2nd to Smash as the top albums of that ilk
I much prefer Kerplunk and 39/Smooth.
I'd rather shit in my hands and clap than listen to Stone Roses. Opinions