Johnno's lost it... he's proper lost it...
Ian Brown- Interview On United
- Thread starter GIT Z RED
- Start date
Yes, but at the end of the day Shane, when it's all said and done, I'd rather than be an Aussie than a Scouser.....
Have some of that, Jimmy fecking Corkhill.
Snigger..
Johnno's Geography lets him down again...
Johnno's Geography lets him down again...
Stop calling me a snigger, I prefer Safro-Scarribbean
"Brown was born in Warrington in 1963. His father, George, was a joiner and his mother Jean worked in a paper factory. Brown's family moved when he was young and he grew up in Timperley, Greater Manchester, along with his brother and sister, as a karate-obsessed admirer of Muhammed Ali, George Best and Bruce Lee. He was educated at Altrincham Grammar School For Boys."
I've not lost my Manc accent, have you lost your Scouse accent or do you have to hide it when you go to Old Trafford?
Is it hard living a lie?
I compare thee to Hitler who struggled with his inner-demons in the knowledge he was of Jewish extract.
Johnno..
You're such a card..
With your Mancunian walk and cool hairstyle.. you're top lad, proper top...
So...
You are making a point that he wasn't born in Manchester?
You couldn't make it up... really.. you couldn't make it up...
Top one, nice one, get sorted.
Honestly, I'm so fecking mint me.
My accent is authentic though, I don't have to pretend like you.
Bloke from Australia drops abuse on blokes from surrounding towns of Manchester, because they don't come from there...
It's a belter.
It's a belter.
Did you grow up in Manchester, like myself or Mr Brown?
Nay, from what you state, you were in St Helens, blowing glass and Barry Grants cock.
Snigger..
Listen to yourself...
You make me laugh Johnno.. you're a fecking gluey.
Listen to yourself...
You make me laugh Johnno.. you're a fecking gluey.
Is that Scouse for sexy?
Sorry, don’t get the lingo soft-lad, go sup some Higsons to wash your Scouse down with, like, Boss.
Johnno.. just when I thought I had seen the foolish of the fools.. you came riding over the hill...
I love you man, you're a breath of fresh air.
I love you man, you're a breath of fresh air.
ffs, he doesn't have an Oasis haircut, he invented Oasis.
Liam is a poundland version of Ian Brown.
I'm here for you, always.
Nah mate; this is the haircut he had in the Roses -
This was Liam Gallagher when he came out -
This was/is Ian Brown currently;
Whilst I am not stating Oasis are a better band than the Stone Roses or whatever, the fact remains that they had a significantly bigger effect on the music scene than the Roses ever did in terms of fan base and records sold, and it has to be said that Liam Gallagher has been a far bigger fashion icon than Ian Brown was.
I do share your sentiment that Liam is Brown all over in terms of attitude and swagger, but as I say, Liam and Oasis became bigger regardless of this.
There are other debatable issues, such as Oasis ripping off the Beatles, the Roses copying Primal Scream etc.
One thing I know is that Tim Burgess and the Charlatans were a carbon copy of Ian Brown and the Stone Roses - check Burgess in 1990, he had exactly the same bowl-hair as Brown and style of singing, yet in 1997 when Tellin' Stories was released, Burgess was singing in the same style of Liam with the 'Sunshee-ine' manner and standing behind the microphone with his hand behind his back a la Liam - not very original that man.
The Second Coming is a class album
and I'd put their first one up against any oasis one
and I'd put their first one up against any oasis one
I don’t know about the Second Coming to be honest mate. Ten Storey Love Song is class, but that's about it in my opinion, and many others would probably share the same sentiment.
Put that against 'The Stone Roses', or The Complete which is a compilation which isn’t fair, these would piss on the Second Coming.
Also, I wouldn’t agree on ANY Oasis album; Def Maybe & Morning Glory were both top quality iconic albums. Those they have done from then on simply haven’t been up to scratch, so you can have them, but the first two, no way.
It's hard to compare The Second Coming and 'The Stone Roses', they're like chalk and chips... it's almost like they are two first albums. the second coming is definately an acquired taste I would admit that.
I've never been a big fan of Oasis tbf, I think they just filled the void of the Roses not recording for so long. I've seen both live 3 times, Spike Island, Alley Pally and NYC for the Roses... sound was crap at all 3 shows but it was still a bigger buzz than any Oasis show I've been to. I guess it's a generation thing... or that Liam's a total twat.
I've never been a big fan of Oasis tbf, I think they just filled the void of the Roses not recording for so long. I've seen both live 3 times, Spike Island, Alley Pally and NYC for the Roses... sound was crap at all 3 shows but it was still a bigger buzz than any Oasis show I've been to. I guess it's a generation thing... or that Liam's a total twat.
Spot on, I think a compilation of the two.. and i think Johnno missed the boat and was a tad too young to absorb the scene when it happened, so I can't knock him for speaking for his sub standard era.
If you're going with that 'fan base and records sold' argument, then you'd pretty much be a take that fan then?
The Roses were musically so far beyond what oasis could summon up, they weren't even playing the same sport - never mind being in the same league.
The Stone Roses excert a worldwide influence that goes beyond easy talismanic copycat twattery that oasis went after.
Anyone who can compare 'Roll with It' favouribly with 'Waterfall', 'She Bangs the Drums' and especially 'I am the Ressurrection' deserces to be a lifelong oasis fan - constantly listening to their entire collection of songs.
Nah mate; this is the haircut he had in the Roses -
This was Liam Gallagher when he came out -
no no no, your way out on several counts. For a start you've found yourself a few different pictures and put them in the wrong eras. But i'll come to that - first the music.
Oasis may have sold a larger amount of records but their influence has not not been wide spread in music. They took a watered down version of alternative rock to the masses, in that respect they were more U2 than Stone Roses. The bands they begat were the likes of Hurricane #1, Northern Uproar and so on. Oasis had a bigger effect on the way that townies and chavs dressed in the mid-ninties, their effect on the music scene was pretty damaging I think. They essentially opened the door to the drab anthem rock of shite like Coldplay.
As for The Roses copying Primal Scream, I think you're a fair bit out there too - Primal Scream had been around for years, producing a couple of average albums (Sonic flower Groove and Primal Scream). Those were in a very different style to the album that finally broke them which was of course Screamadelica. And yes you could say this one had similarities in atmosphere and influence to the debut from the Stone Roses - but it came out 2 years later in 1991. This was a pattern that several bands in the north west took including the Stone Roses (their initial sound almost had goth leanings). other bands taking a similar route were James, Soup Dragons, The Farm and The Mock Turtles. They all undertook changed in style and influence, brought a groove to their music and became more successful.
One thing I will agree with you on is that Tim Burgess is a proper musical magpie, but I liked what he did with The Charlatans right up to and including Wonderland.
Those hair cuts you've pulled out there then.
You are right with the top image, that's Ian Brown circa Stone Roses first album (it's not a bowl cut by the way), but then the picture of Liam you've got there is not from 1994 when he arrived on the scene, the hair cut Liam had then was reminicent of... you've guessed it, Ian Brown circa The Stone Roses The Stone Roses
After the first Stone Roses album Ian Brown's hair grew longer into a similar style to how it is these days, this was around the time of Fools Gold and One Love - a good 4-5 years before Liam grew his locks. If you're actually interested in the history of Ian Brown's hair, he then shaved it off just before the released Second Coming - again, something the Liam Gallagher did several years later around the time they released the utterly shit third album.
If you want to take in some really good information regarding the music that has come out of the north west, where the influences have come from and how it all fitted together then I can highly recommend 'Machester, England' by Dave Haslam. It's a brilliant read and you'll even learn about the history of vimto
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Manchester-...bs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205813116&sr=8-1
Most of that was tedious, but I like the point about oasis leading to coldplay, i'd never noticed before - but you're right.
Behave for feck's sake, I again state categorically I did not profess anywhere oasis are/were better than the Roses, I am arguing they were bigger and more influential to the proceeding generation of bands; Kasabian, Artic Monkeys, Kaiser Chiefs, even Coldplay (none of which I have very much time for one bit, I hasten to add) are all out because of Oasis.
The Stone Roses were certainly influential, but Oasis were the only obvious choice of proceeding generation band who carried that influence, therefore Oasis's influence on music, style and attitude since 1994 has been far greater than the Roses.
Read it again, you gorp, where have I said I am a fan of Oasis because they had the better sales or whatever?
You're also using a pretty unfavourable example to be fair on oasis, it's perfectly obvious Roll With It isn’t one of their best, to have done them justice you could/should have used Champagne Supernova, Live Forever, The Masterplan, Stop Crying Your Heart Out etc as a comparison, and whilst none of these might not be as good as these Roses tunes you have listed, they'd give them a run for their money.
totally agree, but I can't stand it when someone is trying to prove a point and just drags out a load of info that is just incorrect.
I think it's too late for me to be concise!
no no no, your way out on several counts. For a start you've found yourself a few different pictures and put them in the wrong eras. But i'll come to that - first the music.
Oasis may have sold a larger amount of records but their influence has not not been wide spread in music. They took a watered down version of alternative rock to the masses, in that respect they were more U2 than Stone Roses. The bands they begat were the likes of Hurricane #1, Northern Uproar and so on. Oasis had a bigger effect on the way that townies and chavs dressed in the mid-ninties, their effect on the music scene was pretty damaging I think. They essentially opened the door to the drab anthem rock of shite like Coldplay.
As for The Roses copying Primal Scream, I think you're a fair bit out there too - Primal Scream had been around for years, producing a couple of average albums (Sonic flower Groove and Primal Scream). Those were in a very different style to the album that finally broke them which was of course Screamadelica. And yes you could say this one had similarities in atmosphere and influence to the debut from the Stone Roses - but it came out 2 years later in 1991. This was a pattern that several bands in the north west took including the Stone Roses (their initial sound almost had goth leanings). other bands taking a similar route were James, Soup Dragons, The Farm and The Mock Turtles. They all undertook changed in style and influence, brought a groove to their music and became more successful.
One thing I will agree with you on is that Tim Burgess is a proper musical magpie, but I liked what he did with The Charlatans right up to and including Wonderland.
Those hair cuts you've pulled out there then.
You are right with the top image, that's Ian Brown circa Stone Roses first album (it's not a bowl cut by the way), but then the picture of Liam you've got there is not from 1994 when he arrived on the scene, the hair cut Liam had then was reminicent of... you've guessed it, Ian Brown circa The Stone Roses The Stone Roses
After the first Stone Roses album Ian Brown's hair grew longer into a similar style to how it is these days, this was around the time of Fools Gold and One Love - a good 4-5 years before Liam grew his locks. If you're actually interested in the history of Ian Brown's hair, he then shaved it off just before the released Second Coming - again, something the Liam Gallagher did several years later around the time they released the utterly shit third album.
If you want to take in some really good information regarding the music that has come out of the north west, where the influences have come from and how it all fitted together then I can highly recommend 'Machester, England' by Dave Haslam. It's a brilliant read and you'll even learn about the history of vimto
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Manchester-...bs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205813116&sr=8-1
Mate, Brown's hair I've given as an example here is much more refined and styled al la Liam than from the Fools Gold era where it was just basically plastered to his noggin. I agree, you noticed that Liam one was from a different era and probably in the last few years to be honest, it's a fir cop, but the Liam haircut of 1994-96 was Beatles influenced from the mid-sixties, it was never Ian Brown influenced. His swagger and attitude are obviously very reminiscent, but the hair is Rubber Soul album cover mate, not like Brown's.
All the lads in the late eighties, probably right up until 1991 or even 1992 who went for the MAdchester scene got the Joe Bloggs gear with a bowl cut and a Reni sailor hat, a total mish-mash of style whereas the kids in 1995-97 copied Liam's style of the hair, the trainers, jeans, and an Adidas jacket or rain coat which was solely copying Liam without trying to hybrid this style with another performer.
Liam then grew his hair longer after Morning Glory with the beard and that, then the sunglasses and everything else came after with the more formalised style of dress he then wore. And Liam never shaved his head as such, it was more cropped as it was in 1997 when I saw them at the G-MEX, after they released that shit album you speak of, which I agree it was, as have the rest of them to date.
The book by Dave Haslam is excellent, yes, I've read it several times in the seven or eight years I've had a copy.
No.
Regardless of album/song categories, the Roses were a bigger influence on the bands you mention than oasis.
And if I have to quote you again 'they had a significantly bigger effect on the music scene than the Roses ever did in terms of fan base and records sold, and it has to be said that Liam Gallagher has been a far bigger fashion icon than Ian Brown was.'
Your words, not mine.
And, up to a point, those words are true.
Only in terms of fan base and records sold though. I'd have a fairly safe bet that kasabien, artic monkeys etc owe more to Roses than to oasis, if they owe anything to either.
I get your point about oasis capturing the mood of the moment, but the fact that they were retrogressive in every respect only goes to highlight how good the roses were, they had lines and styles that had never been seen in combination before, oasis were just playing at music in comparison.
You know what, show me where I said Oasis were better, because I haven't.
The Roses never won any awards of note which means the industry and public haven't taken them in as much as Oasis, so if you read what I am actually saying, not what you want to hear, you will realise I am not slagging off the Roses, whom I would arguably prefer over Oasis most of the time, but merely pointing out Oasis have done more.
It's honestly like you saying, okay The Beatles sold more and were far more mainstream and accepted but The Rolling Stones did a few more different avenues of sound, so therefore they were better.
I'd have to disagree with Kasabian, they have been in cahoots with Oasis for ages and have a distinctly more similar sound to Oasis than to the Roses. But that's my opinion, you're entitled to yours and all it seems to be is that we're arguing over an unwinnable argument.
You might not agree, but as a footnote, I agree with your analysis the Roses were doing thigs people hadn't heard before, or not for some time anyway, yet with Second Coming, Squire got too egotistical and threw in too many guitar solos rather than some bass and/or vocals to fill in the gaps of the way-too long tracks. The Beatles and Oasis have a winning formula that sells; simple, catchy lyrics with simple, catchy riffs. If you're a muso, you tend to start with the experimental bollocks, the simple consumer who buys the CD simply wants to hear a good tune. Not rocket science.
The weird thing is that you're still doing it.
What I've been saying is that oasis are a pop band with 'a winning formula that sells; simple, catchy lyrics with simple, catchy riffs'.
Completely agree.
Utterly simple. I just think that the Roses have had a greater influence on the music that I like.
It's all subjective.
Your kasabian theory is well off, stole all they know from primal scream.
Nah mate; this is the haircut he had in the Roses -
This was Liam Gallagher when he came out -
This was/is Ian Brown currently;
Whilst I am not stating Oasis are a better band than the Stone Roses or whatever, the fact remains that they had a significantly bigger effect on the music scene than the Roses ever did in terms of fan base and records sold, and it has to be said that Liam Gallagher has been a far bigger fashion icon than Ian Brown was.
I do share your sentiment that Liam is Brown all over in terms of attitude and swagger, but as I say, Liam and Oasis became bigger regardless of this.
There are other debatable issues, such as Oasis ripping off the Beatles, the Roses copying Primal Scream etc.
One thing I know is that Tim Burgess and the Charlatans were a carbon copy of Ian Brown and the Stone Roses - check Burgess in 1990, he had exactly the same bowl-hair as Brown and style of singing, yet in 1997 when Tellin' Stories was released, Burgess was singing in the same style of Liam with the 'Sunshee-ine' manner and standing behind the microphone with his hand behind his back a la Liam - not very original that man.
You're totally missing the point mate. Firstly - Oasis would not have existed if it weren't for the Roses - this is a fact ! Liam Gallagher has been a bigger fashion icon ? WTF is all that about and why does that matter ? Oasis and the Gallaghers' timing was immaculate ! They took the baggy style, haircuts, "fashion" and swaggering arrogance of the Roses and brought it to the table just as the whole "Britpop" thing went crazy. They got lucky - had they been a few years earlier they would not have been good enough to compete with the Roses, had they been a few years later they'd have been laughed out of record studios for being too "yesterday". Liam Gallagher was more popular with the mainstream because he was in the f*cking newspaper every day thanks to the media's obsession with the Oasis v Blur thing !! It's amazing how media can influence people's views on music - absolutely amazing. Ask either of the Gallaghers who their influences are and Ian Brown is right up there !
As for The Stone Roses copying Primal Scream ? Sorry, but that is the biggest pile of gash I've ever heard. Examples please ? For what it's worth Stone Roses and The Charlatans are far superior bands to Oasis in my opinion, but I do agree with you that Tim copied Browner's style way back when alright 89-90.
Now I've heard it all.
On top of the bloke born in Australia calling somebody a plastic manc for being born in Warrignton, surely this thread has one foot in the classics!
Now I've heard it all.
On top of the bloke born in Australia calling somebody a plastic manc for being born in Warrignton, surely this thread has one foot in the classics!
Pretty incredible stuff alright ! Quite baffling
Time for a short story....
My cousin used to work on the doors at the Hacienda, having come across a young lad with all the attitude in the world - he took him around the corner and gave him a good kicking.
The Stone Roses are my all time favorite band, but if you look at what's happened in music since the mid 90s Def Maybe was, is and will forever be the most important album of it's decade. Not even Nevermind can match it's influence. And to claim songs like Live Forever, Supersonic and Slide Away are inferior to The Roses or anything else is rubbish. I prefer The Stone Roses because I'm more into their vibe, but Oasis made - pop-cultuarlly - a much bigger splash.
Possibly true - "The Stone Roses" came out in the 80s.
Ah, I take back what I said - Nevermind had way more influence globally. Grunge was bigger and more long-lasting than brit-pop, whatever the other relative merits of teh two scenes.
No it's not - they're great songs, but not as good as pretty much anything on that first Roses album
They sold more records... they didn't change how people think about music to the same degree (apart from Johnno and his 15 year old Aussie mates). Hence why you don't find them in this sort of list.