Stone Roses Remastered

[Dave Smith]

Standing Here was absolutely brilliant, and yes, you had to be 19-20 at the time.
Saw them at Preston in July 1989 and it was tremendous, no doubt, but there was something in the air that (and the previous) summer, the Stone Roses just defined it albeit for a brief moment

Spot on LF-us 'born in 1970' boys were saved that summer by something that we'll never experience again.Nothing wrong with flared jeans FC-you just need the right pair.But by Ally Pally it had just got too big,too quickly.Suffocated by morons shouting Manchester and thrust into playing the first album to 10,000 people.But ........to me,seeing them play Top of the Pops must have been the same as people in 1977 seeing the Pistols play Pretty Vacant.That exciting.

[Grumpy_Jimbo]

Well if you were there before the gigs got too big you would think differently.Not just the music,the whole vibe ,fashion,culture was majestic and lifted the whole music scene that was on a downer.The debut album is superb and I've been playing it for the last twenty years practically non-stop.

I have to agree to a degree smiffy, I remember seeing them in Nightmoves in Glasgow with a hundred or so people, you all felt you were part of something new and exciting...It was the same seeing them when they played Glasgow Green to 10,000 folks it still felt special.......

Unfortunately it all came crashing down at Reading, which still comes in my top five gig moments as it was so earth shattering awful...... For some reason the great vibes at the earlier shows made you immune to the fact that Ian Brown singing live sounded like a cat being castrated with a blunt knife.......

Where I do disagree with you is that when listening to the debut album now, I just think it's a average album with a couple of great tracks, I just don't think it's aged well...... Maybe I miss being young again and am a sixties child.......

[Scouser]

It was a great album at the time, but Im not sure its aged all that well as Jimbo says.

[tonywojo]

It was a great album at the time, but Im not sure its aged all that well as Jimbo says.

rip off

the nineties slipped me by

[fat cherry]

Spot on LF-us 'born in 1970' boys were saved that summer by something that we'll never experience again.Nothing wrong with flared jeans FC-you just need the right pair.

i'll accept anything but the flares I'm afraid. always hated them and the discovery of black skinny jeans was better than seeing the pistols on top of the pops. i was still wearing them (not the same ones obviously) by the end of the 80s and, still am which is great now they are back in fashion. I know i look a tit in board meetings when i should have my suit on but there you go. me and mrs cherry went to some 70s do the other week and most people seemed to be going for the disco/flares and afro wig look but i thought fuck that. i was ideally looking for a shirt like the one rotten wore on totp with the ultra long sleeves safety pinned up but alas couldn't find one so went for the traditional ripped shirt/safety pins and a smattering of bondage apparel. all in all i didn't have to try too hard though the other guests weren't to know that were they. and curiously the missus didn'yt have to be persuaded too much to adopt a soo catwoman/souiixsie look. good night in more ways than one (apart form the music obviously which never strayed from the obvious). sorry, stone roses, yeah, good band.

[Dave Smith]

Thanks FC.Now I'm hungover with the image of a women in a cat outfit stood next to a bloke in Max Wall's trousers.Back to the Roses.John Squire so heavily shaped my guitar playing that I cant really look at those tunes critically anymore.For someone whose played along to it about a thousand times we'll have to agree to disagree.

[fat cherry]

well now I'm an old fart i can readily accept someones talent without wanting to go out and buy it - though i did and if anyone read my mail i did say i liked some of it ( i know if i didn't go on and on and on etc). have you read mark radcliffe's memoir 'showbusiness: diary of a rock n roll nobody'- - which tells the tale of all the bands he's been in along with stuff about bands that influenced him along the way. of the roses he says they were rare in having had two genius members - squire & the drummer bloke. bass player gets the honourable mention and of brown he says he cant hold a tune but that merely makes him ideal as a front man (this is a constant theme through the book). And obviously us brits will know his shire horses band (name and one of their skits) was lifted from squire's other band.

Cheers,
Max.

[withahip]

Hittin' the bottle HARD.

[Dave Smith]

well now I'm an old fart i can readily accept someones talent without wanting to go out and buy it - though i did and if anyone read my mail i did say i liked some of it ( i know if i didn't go on and on and on etc). have you read mark radcliffe's memoir 'showbusiness: diary of a rock n roll nobody'- - which tells the tale of all the bands he's been in along with stuff about bands that influenced him along the way. of the roses he says they were rare in having had two genius members - squire & the drummer bloke. bass player gets the honourable mention and of brown he says he cant hold a tune but that merely makes him ideal as a front man (this is a constant theme through the book). And obviously us brits will know his shire horses band (name and one of their skits) was lifted from squire's other band.

Cheers,
Max.

My mates just read that book on holiday and raved about it.Will have to read.

[withahip]

John Leckie gets major props for making Brown's voice sound good on the record.

http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_john_leckie_music/

Didn't you work with the Stone Roses again?

Leckie - We did go in to record the follow-up album, but the band only had one song called “One Love.” We spent a lot of time on this, then I went off and did The Posies while they mixed “One Love.” When I had finished The Posies album, they were still mixing this track. They had spent six weeks on this, and I came back and mixed the track in six hours! It was only ever released as a single. They never completed the album; instead, they changed record companies in 1992-93. It took them two years to get back into the studio.

[withahip]

More Leckie:
The Stone Roses never had a CD release, originally. The main thing was that when it was done for vinyl — and later it was always a copy of a copy — a lot of the bass was cut out, there wasn't much low end. To squeeze sound onto the groove of the vinyl very often you do things like turning the last track down due to distortion created by the increasing tangent of the arm of the record player against the record. You can maintain the overall volume and eliminate that distortion if you reduce your level on the higher frequency and turn the whole thing up.


Young bands these days lack vision

There's this funny thing nowadays where you get really young bands, fifteen year-olds who have been together for a year, who are expecting to be of the same calibre as the Stone Roses — who at the time were in their mid-twenties and had been playing continuously for five or six years before they made their first album. There's not many bands today that I could compare The Stone Roses or to The Verve. The calibre — the quality of the playing and the quality of the vision of the band is not there. The reason for it is that the hunger's gone. In times past there was so much hunger for music: we never had CD players, or mobiles phones or any of these access points for music, so records became very precious. If you owned a record it was like your clothing — your possession. With music now considered to be free, and so freely available . . . there's so much of it that young people learning to play become saturated and don't really want to excel themselves. They're not focussed on what they want to do, like 'all I'm going to do for the next three years is play guitar, twenty-four-hours a day'.

http://thequietus.com/articles/02579-st ... these-days

[withahip]

I am a hypocrite in my dismissal of Pitchfork. Hate the mag - but always read it - here you go:

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/134 ... one-roses/

Here is all you need to read:

Leckie teamed up with Brown to remaster the LP, which, produced at the tail-end of the vinyl era, lacked some range at the low end and suffered from its tin-timbred late-80s drum sound, among other issues. Now, the infamous bassline that opens "I Wanna Be Adored" has an even more thrilling anticipatory deep-earth rumble; instead of slaps, "She Bangs the Drums"' beats pack actual punches; and the originally muddy textures of a song like "Made of Stone" are brighter and broader-spectrumed, with crisp chiming guitars and lustrous basslines. The record industry has whipped itself into a frenzy of last-ditch, cash-grabbing CD reissues lately, but the original Stone Roses actually merited a sound overhaul. And the results are brilliant, further supporting the case for classic album status-- if support's needed.

Largely lacking the funk that snuck into the studio, the demos are still a phenomenal bunch of tunes (including some that didn't make final cut) that should finally put to rest rumors that the Roses were nobodies who came out of nowhere. The demos also officially confirm that, left to his own devices, Brown sings about as well as you do on a shit-faced midnight karaoke dare. But hey, he cleans up nicely. In fact, Brown's brooding, beautiful self-harmonies on the album may be one of producer John Leckie's finest achievements.

[withahip]

If you are a fan, it is a must. The difference is subtle but enveloping.

The kick drum stands out the most. As it was Reni's band and he sang back up, the kick actually flows with the rhythm of the vocals. It really stands out.

The bass has extra punch.

Other than that, the sound surrounds where the original cd release did not.

If you never bought a copy and like the band, it is worth it.
Otherwise, there is not enough there to justify a repurchase.

I could not bring myself to shell out the 30 bucks for the demos, live and videos.
Why ruin perfection.

[withahip]

WTF!?!?!? It took be a few rotations to realize this - Elephant Stone is not on the reissue.
WTF?!?!?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfzQLZtCZSY[/youtube]

[tonywojo]

WTF!?!?!? It took be a few rotations to realize this - Elephant Stone is not on the reissue.
WTF?!?!?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfzQLZtCZSY[/youtube]

speaking to yerself again ...