Reformation of the Smiths or Stone Roses question

Interesting question arose yesterday while talking to Wangball and one of those non-Foot posters about what would generate the most excitement at the ticket office, the Smiths reforming, or the reunion of the Stone Roses. Leave aside personal preference if you can and think about who would be a bigger draw. Any other bands that could reform that would generate a lot of hype as well?

Personally I think the Stone Roses would as there has always been a feeling of unfinished buisness between the band and their fans. The Smiths have a large hardcore following, but I don't think they would still have the same mass appeal as a band that spawned Oasis, Kasabian, the Charlatans and other huge mainstream bands

I'd agree about the Roses probably having the more interest really but would prefer to see the Smiths reform:D

The stone roses are way more mainstream so i reckon they would generate the most hype.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gustavo

I'd agree about the Roses probably having the more interest really but would prefer to see the Smiths reform:D

---

Likewise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jebus

Personally I think the Stone Roses would as there has always been a feeling of unfinished buisness between the band and their fans. The Smiths have a large hardcore following, but I don't think they would still have the same mass appeal as a band that spawned Oasis, Kasabian, the Charlatans and other huge mainstream bands

---

Hmmm ...plenty I'd have issue with there. First off the rump of the "fans/fanbase" of both bands are in their mid to late thirties now and are no longer in the "key dem" when it comes to a record company asking who is going to buy a comeback record. ...though that demographic will be more likely to fork out over the odds prices for all seated concerts in the round with the worlds biggest ballpond outside for the kids. So I don't think there's much to seperate them there.

I'm not massively familar with Kasabian (actually I frequently confuse them with Razorlight and suspect they're actually one band with two names picking up a second cheque) but I would seriously contest whether or not The Stone Roses "spawned" or otherwise influenced the likes of Oasis (I'm just not making the connection sonically there at all) or The Charlatans -who, while sounding more like the Roses than Oasis do, were contemporaries of the Stone Roses and sounded as much like any number of fellow traveller, hammond organ renting, androgenous white boy floppy gits in need of a slap that were on the go as the 80's turned into the 90's. :confused:

Also I don't recall reading about any massive irreconcilable differences that had errupted in the Stone Roses camp. Merely disilusionment and probably lots of substance abuse.

The Smiths on the other hand was a bitter, tawdry, nasty split and the only thing that has brought Morrissey and Marr back together for any length of time since was the need to have their respective legal councels join forces to fend off litagation and subsequent royalty claims from Rourke and Joyce.

To that end I would contend The Smiths re-union would draw more interest and intrigue convertable into green.

Do I think it'll happen ...frankly I think there's a better chance of getting Kurt fixed up and back into Nirvana.

For the history between the band members and the worldwide appeal it would be The Smiths by a mile IMO.

Stone Roses helped the Charaltans out quite a lot with the exposure they gave to Northern bands of their ilk, and I think the majority of the bands of that day shaped their sound around Stone Roses' debut album, certainly their record labels would have been pushing them in that direction.

As for Oasis - Stone Roses comparisons, well aside from the obvious Ian Brown swagger that Liam ripped off there isn't much in fairness, bar the whole Northern thing I guess. I remember a lot of Oasis fans in 1994 cited Stone Roses as the band that really got them into music though, so Oasis can thank them for that at least :)

LR-

Think the roses seem massively popular amongst people who had never heard of them first time round. how else would you explain Ian Browns popularity?

Think Ian Brown is not on speaking terms with John Squire anyways.

Oasis I always thought sounded a lot like slade.

Think bands reforming is a bit pointless. If they had any creative impetus in them they would still be together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jebus

Stone Roses helped the Charaltans out quite a lot with the exposure they gave to Northern bands of their ilk, and I think the majority of the bands of that day shaped their sound around Stone Roses' debut album, certainly their record labels would have been pushing them in that direction.

---

I think it's fair to say the Charlatans developed their sound from there, unlike some of the others who fell by the wayside along the way.

Not sure I'd really like to see either reform, although the Mondays did pull it off in their 99 tour (downhill from there though). I think the Roses would be the bigger draw, especially if Reni returned as well so it was the classic Roses line up. More recent and still name checked by current bands, whereas the Smiths are more there as an albeit brilliant band. Can't really see either happening, as the two lead singers are too successful in their own right. I think it was Ian Brown who said when asked about it do you reckon Squire would be so keen if he'd had as many solo hit records as him?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billsthoughts

Think the roses seem massively popular amongst people who had never heard of them first time round. how else would you explain Ian Browns popularity?

---

I think some of Brown's solo work stands up under it's own right, but Indie is now main stream whereas it wasn't when they were at their hieght. I mean Spike Island is still kinda the indie/ mainstream cross over moment, but that'd be a run of the mill size gig for a lot of the current lot of average "Indie" bands. It was before my time, but I don't think the Smiths played any gigs to the size of what would constitute an arena tour, compared to how popular they are now?

If you look at the two lead singers "Morrissey" and "Ian Brown".I would think that Morrissey would have the biggest fanbase.So for me i think that the smiths reforming would have the biggest draw.

Imagine a double headlining reunion tour with the joy division playing support

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by centre mid

Imagine a double headlining reunion tour with the joy division playing support

---

Who's gonna break the news about Curtis lads? :)

A reunion of the Divison is as likely as a Smiths reunion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

To that end I would contend The Smiths re-union would draw more interest and intrigue convertable into green.

Do I think it'll happen ...frankly I think there's a better chance of getting Kurt fixed up and back into Nirvana.

---

I agree on both points Lionel. A Smiths re-union would be massive (A far more important creative force than the Roses in my opinion.) But the Fallout between Morrissey/Marr and Rourke/Joyce was way too bitter for any prospect of a re-union. It'd probably be a bad idea anyway, given Morrisseys very dissapointing work (don't agree with the "return to form" spin of his last couple of albums - anything I heard from them sounded pretty poor) and also given the fact that Marr has done even less of any worth since the Smiths split.

Technically Marr & Morrisey wree the Smiths so Joyce & Rourke wouldn't be required on the journey.
I think there is a feeling of unfinished business with the Roses, the Smiths did it all and I would worry about them tarnishing the reputation if they came back.

Both bands before my time, and not even my type, but going on who has more influence on the tastes of my generation, I think The Smiths would be a bigger draw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by endabob1

Technically Marr & Morrisey wree the Smiths so Joyce & Rourke wouldn't be required on the journey.
I think there is a feeling of unfinished business with the Roses, the Smiths did it all and I would worry about them tarnishing the reputation if they came back.

---

By the same logic then "technically" John Squire is the Stone Roses.

While a re-union of Morrissey and Marr would be welcome and interesting I don't think they could market it as 'The Smiths' unless they'd at least a quorum of the classic line-up. Any stand in for Andy Rourke for example would still be playing Rourkes basslines note for note as they are integral to many Smiths songs.

Also, The Smiths could hardly be said to have "done it all". They did exactly two mainland European tours and two more in the US. They never got a chance to truly break out in either territory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

..........I would seriously contest whether or not The Stone Roses "spawned" or otherwise influenced the likes of Oasis (I'm just not making the connection sonically there at all)

Also I don't recall reading about any massive irreconcilable differences that had errupted in the Stone Roses camp. Merely disilusionment and probably lots of substance abuse.

---

Noel and Liam Gallagher have stated countless times the massive influence the Roses had in inspiring them to form a band. Noel Gallagher has stated in interviews that he was encouraged to write music as a direct result of the Roses. Manchester lads in a band not being afraid to be successful and getting somewhere was a revelation to Gallagher.

He summed it up by saying he adopted the view "If they can do it - I can do it".

While musically they have a different sound - the Roses attitude was aped wholesale.

Interestingly enough (or not) - The early track "Cloudburst" by Oasis is a rip off of [/I]"Standing Here" by the Roses - Same chords, same lyrical melody ;).

No irreconcilable differences in the Roses camp? :eek: Ian Brown and John Squire haven't spoken in over 13 years as a direct result of John Squire leaving the band. Brown holds Squire personally responsible for the break up of the band.

Substance abuse certainly contributed heavily to the Roses extended periods of apathy and lack of focus but the complete breakdown in the friendship between Brown and Squire finished the Roses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

Noel and Liam Gallagher have stated countless times the massive influence the Roses had in inspiring them to form a band. Noel Gallagher has stated in interviews that he was encouraged to write music as a direct result of the Roses. .

---

Noel Gallagher is at least the same age as the Roses boys and was probably writing songs as long as them. I suspect, possibly while being admirably gracious and complimentary, he was overegging the pudding somewhat regarding how huge an impact they had on him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

While musically they have a different sound - the Roses attitude was aped wholesale.

---

Attitude? you'd swear they were the first band ever to have a mad for it cheeky monkey attitude. They don't just have a different sound ...there are likely more points of cross-comparability between an Oasis record and a Status Quo record than between an Oasis record and a Stone Roses one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

Interestingly enough (or not) - The early track "Cloudburst" by Oasis is a rip off of [/I]"Standing Here" by the Roses - Same chords, same lyrical melody ;).

---

Oasis Rip Off Song

..there's tomorrows headline already. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

No irreconcilable differences in the Roses camp? :eek: Ian Brown and John Squire haven't spoken in over 13 years as a direct result of John Squire leaving the band. Brown holds Squire personally responsible for the break up of the band.

Substance abuse certainly contributed heavily to the Roses extended periods of apathy and lack of focus but the complete breakdown in the friendship between Brown and Squire finished the Roses.

---

Given. I probably shouldn't have played down the ill-feeling between Brown and Squire. Though I will say it appears to just mirror the situation with the Smiths whereby Morrissey doesn't rule out working with Marr again but Marr isn't having a barre of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

Noel Gallagher is at least the same age as the Roses boys and was probably writing songs as long as them. I suspect, possibly while being admirably gracious and complimentary, he was overegging the pudding somewhat regarding how huge an impact they had on him.

Attitude? you'd swear they were the first band ever to have a mad for it cheeky monkey attitude. They don't just have a different sound ...there are likely more points of cross-comparability between an Oasis record and a Status Quo record than between an Oasis record and a Stone Roses one.

Oasis Rip Off Song

..there's tomorrows headline already. :D

Given. I probably shouldn't have played down the ill-feeling between Brown and Squire. Though I will say it appears to just mirror the situation with the Smiths whereby Morrissey doesn't rule out working with Marr again but Marr isn't having a barre of it.

---

"No Stone Roses, No Oasis" - Noel Gallagher's words not mine. He's stated it repeatedly and with conviction.

Noel Gallagher is 5 years younger than Brown and Squire. Admittedly, not a massive gap but their achievements made up Gallaghers mind he could also make the grade.

In 1994 - before Oasis broke - there wasn't a hell of a lot to get excited about. Suede were the NME's latest hope. Oasis "attitude" and great tunes were a breath of fresh air. I never claimed the attitude was an original tack -but it livened things up in 1994.

Being a bit disingenuous on the rip off bit, Lionel!

Didn't you mention you couldn't make the connection between the Roses and Oasis sonically at all. I merely pointed out, light heartedly, that Oasis had gone so far as to plagiarise a Roses song. I'd consider that quite a sonic connection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

"No Stone Roses, No Oasis" - Noel Gallagher's words not mine. He's stated it repeatedly and with conviction.
.

---

He might actually be right -though that's not the same as saying there is a major trail of influence to be found leading from a Stone Roses record to an Oasis one. (I stand over the assertion that soundwise Oasis have more in common with Status Quo). Back in the late 80's indie guitar roack was fairly maligned, peripheral and the door to the mainstream was tightly enough shut. It may be the case that the Roses and others picked the lock a bit before the Oasis' and Blurs kicked it open a few years later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

Noel Gallagher is 5 years younger than Brown and Squire. Admittedly, not a massive gap but their achievements made up Gallaghers mind he could also make the grade.

---

Did not know that -wouldn't have thunk it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

In 1994 - before Oasis broke - there wasn't a hell of a lot to get excited about. Suede were the NME's latest hope. Oasis "attitude" and great tunes were a breath of fresh air. I never claimed the attitude was an original tack -but it livened things up in 1994.

---

Hmmm ...Livened things up for the NME maybe. Y'see I'm just not sure I accept the scene you're setting (and NME do love their Scenes) that there wasn't much happening. It sounds a bit VH1 to be honest. ...I don't even have to go outside the artists this thread is dealing with to find an album, Vauxhall & I by Morrissey, released in 1994 and argueably the finest record he has ever made. I may be wrong but I'm fairly sure even the NME were raving about it. I'm sure there's many more but we'll see more of them in the iminent Best Album of 1994 thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

Being a bit disingenuous on the rip off bit, Lionel!

Didn't you mention you couldn't make the connection between the Roses and Oasis sonically at all. I merely pointed out, light heartedly, that Oasis had gone so far as to plagiarise a Roses song. I'd consider that quite a sonic connection.

---

Oasis sail close to the wind with several artists. Where's the news? Open a thread called something like 'Match the Oasis song to the song they lifted wholesale sections from for it' (we can work on a catchier title;) ) and I suspect it'll run longer than the Totty thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

Hmmm ...Livened things up for the NME maybe. Y'see I'm just not sure I accept the scene you're setting (and NME do love their Scenes) that there wasn't much happening. It sounds a bit VH1 to be honest. ...I don't even have to go outside the artists this thread is dealing with to find an album, Vauxhall & I by Morrissey, released in 1994 and argueably the finest record he has ever made. I may be wrong but I'm fairly sure even the NME were raving about it. I'm sure there's many more but we'll see more of them in the iminent Best Album of 1994 thread.

Oasis sail close to the wind with several artists. Where's the news? Open a thread called something like 'Match the Oasis song to the song they lifted wholesale sections from for it' (we can work on a catchier title;) ) and I suspect it'll run longer than the Totty thread.

---

I take the point the many "scenes" are press created and engineered for their own ends. The dreaded "Britpop" scene is a prime example.

That said, I think Oasis has more of an impact in 94 than just releasing a good record. They were household names for a couple of years albeit usually for reasons other than music. They were as much part of British (trash?) culture as the music scene. My point is that they had a massive impact - regardless as to whether it was aided by the press or not.

Absolutely no news whatsoever in stating that Oasis pilfered songs. Never claimed there was any revelation in stating it. The Beatles, Stevie Wonder, the Velvet Underground, the Who, David Bowie, Neil Young..........................

I suppose if your going to steal, its good to be a tasteful thief.

Do you also get the impression noone else is interested in this debate, Lionel? :D :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

I take the point the many "scenes" are press created and engineered for their own ends. The dreaded "Britpop" scene is a prime example.

That said, I think Oasis has more of an impact in 94 than just releasing a good record. They were household names for a couple of years albeit usually for reasons other than music. They were as much part of British (trash?) culture as the music scene. My point is that they had a massive impact - regardless as to whether it was aided by the press or not.

Absolutely no news whatsoever in stating that Oasis pilfered songs. Never claimed there was any revelation in stating it. The Beatles, Stevie Wonder, the Velvet Underground, the Who, David Bowie, Neil Young..........................

I suppose if your going to steal, its good to be a tasteful thief.

---

Nothing to disagree with there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

Do you also get the impression noone else is interested in this debate, Lionel? :D :D

---

Nor there.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

I suppose if your going to steal, its good to be a tasteful thief.

---

Add Neil Innes to that list so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noby

Add Neil Innes to that list so.

---

aka Ron Nasty?

Amongst others, yes.

If I remember correctly, Mani said on Soccer AM that The Stone Roses would reform the day after Man City win the champions league

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DonalE

If I remember correctly, Mani said on Soccer AM that The Stone Roses would reform the day after Man City win the champions league

---

Sad to see Mani finally throwing in the towel on a Roses re-union. :(

Might be of interest to someone - The Complete Stone Roses play the Dublin Academy on Friday 26th Sept.

seems they are all up for it except Brown

http://www.nme.com/news/the-stone-roses/38162

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfie

Sad to see Mani finally throwing in the towel on a Roses re-union. :(

Might be of interest to someone - The Complete Stone Roses play the Dublin Academy on Friday 26th Sept.

---

Its certainly of interest to me!