Why did they eat shit so hard after this album?

Oasis came along and stole their thunder

>>69698490
There were like 5 years between TSR and Oasis' first album. While Oasis definitely rode the waves that this album caused, the Stone Roses already started sucking on their own.

Second Coming is underrated and gets shit upon unfairly

Then all conflict that went down their label and management and I guess they called it quits.
Mani and Reni were the backbone of the group.

>>69698468
Second Coming's pretty good desu, just not as good as the debut.

I think a lot of the drop in quality comes down to the fact that they had to spend a few years getting out of a dodgy contract their manager gotthem into and during that time they couldn't record or anything, which must have seriously took the wind out of their sails.

This is a complete guess that I just came up with this moment, but...

When the first Stone Roses album came out they became the biggest indie band of the time, but they still hadn't broken into the mainstream, plus they were virtually unknown outside of the UK. But then, around the time their second album came out the musical landscape shifted because suddenly the American mainstream was paying attention to "alternative" music for the first time, with bands like Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, and Jane's Addiction. But most of the alternative bands that were breaking through were also hard rock bands, or had a heavier, bigger sound. So, the Stone Roses started listening to Led Zeppelin to try to make a dishonest appeal to a mass audience through heavier music.

Theory #2: the same thing happened to them that happened to Television. They'd been playing for a while to underground audiences, and through all that experience playing to those audiences, they'd gradually developed a really solid repertoire. So when they did their first album, they just used that honed repertoire. Then, when it was time to do a second album they didn't really have any of those honed songs left, so they threw together some new ones that they'd never actually tested on audiences, or fully thought through.

Another observation: between the late 80s and early 90s one of the Stone Roses' most successful contemporaries, The Wedding Present, shifted from a jangly sound to a really heavy one. I wonder if that could have influenced them. Unfortunately, the Weddos became a way better band when they got heavy, but the opposite happened to the Stone Roses. It could've also been a response to the fact that the Stone Roses' sound is really tame compared to that of the Happy Mondays, which may have bothered them, even though the Stone Roses were always a way better band.

Stone Roses' ST > any Britpop album from any britpop band

>>69698468
Fucked over by the music industry.

>>69698682
Except Pulp.

>>69698658
recommendations for good heavy wedding present?

I only know George Best

>>69698710
nah. Not even Suede stands up to Stone Roses

>>69698682
But stone roses were Madchester not britpop.

>>69698716
Seamonsters is the best, definitely listen to that first. If you like it, move on to Hit Parade, and then Bizarro

>>69698738
and imho its not even the best madchester album that'll have to go to one of the first 3 Happy Mondays albums or 808 state's Ninety

>>69698733
I would honestly go His N' Hers > The Stone Roses > Dog Man Star

>>69698738
I know, but I'm just saying that their debut was better than any Britpop album I've listened to and I listened to pretty much all Britpop stuff worth listening to.

Besides, I think it's fair to say that a lot of britpop was influenced by the madchester scene.

>>69698765
>>69698733
here's a song for evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPGepgWupTw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dr39zrViwRI

>>69698774
Oh yeah i'd probably agree with you there

>>69698468
This is one of the few albums i can enjoy listening to from start to end

>>69698758
CALL THE COPS

File: Oasis_-_(What's_The_Story)_Morning_Glory_album_cover.jpg (32KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 300x300px

>>69698774
i wouldnt say flat out better

>>69698900
no kys

even Definitely Maybe is better the Morning Glory, and that's not saying much

>>69698892
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLAKJiHQcTo

People forget that this album is a 10/10.
Not a single weak track. Every track perfect.

Oasis couldn't beat it.

>>69698992
nor could any britpop band that came thereafter

bands dream of having mani and reni as their rhythm section

Oasis are ridiculously over-rated. Probably the most over-rated band in history

Britpop is hardly a genre, all the bigger bands are completely different in sound

>>69699038
Nah, this title belongs to Guns 'n Roses

>>69699015
Yep, no band... except Pulp, Suede, Manic Street Preachers, arguably Elastica, and that one Britpop band that had a one hit wonder with a faux-grunge song, until a couple years later when they moved onto bigger and better things... what was that band called? Does anyone remember? Oh yeah - Radiohead.

>>69699038
What a unique take, you're blowing my mind right now!

>John Squire will never be your pal

>>69699068
>except Pulp, Suede, Manic Street Preachers, arguably Elastica
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
*wipes off tear*
heh

>Radiohead
>britpop, ever
I hope this is a joke post

>>69699138
>radiohead
>britpop

Well, this is such a loose genre, just look at all these bands, they don't sound that similar, especially if we also take the Manics into that group. Considering this, The Bends could definitely be labeled as britpop

>>69699015
>bands dream of having mani and reni as their rhythm section
I came.

>>69699170
especially Pablo Honey. If that was the only album they'd ever released, there's no doubt in my mind they'd be considered Britpop

>>69699138
it appears you're trying to cover up asspain

>>69699138
If this isn't britpop then britpop doesn't exist
https://youtu.be/QuCY7ldETM8

>>69699185
>>69699209
>>69699263
Radiohead during their """grunge""" phase were at most alt-rock

They were never britpop, and so weren't the fucking Manic Street Preachers. With all this redrawing of the lines, you might as well call any indie/alt rock band from Britain in the 90s "britpop"

yes i'm mad
REEEEEE

They were under pressure to top it without sounding the same. Same thing that happened to Kevin, Jeff, Brian etc

>>69699324
One of the bands that inspired them were Suede.
Pablo Honey was just as Britpop as anything: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PECnzN8P6KQ

They had the sound, they had the look, and they were in the scene. They definitely evolved past it, but Pablo Honey is just as Britpop as anything by Suede or Pulp.

And for the record, every Britpop band hated the label. The term was invented by journalists. Suede in particular hated being inserted in front of British flags - they didn't just want to be known for being British.

>>69698468
Their singles/B-sides after this album until TSC were good though.

>>69699068
Suede yes. Manics arguably. Pulp and Elastica, not even fucking close.

http://thequietus.com/articles/16886-stone-roses-second-coming-review

File: shaun_of_the_dead_4.jpg (316KB, 1188x669px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 1188x669px

>>69698468
I liked Second Coming

It's a pretty great pleb filter

>>69699611
IMO Pulp is the best of the lot

>>69698468
Happy Mondays > Stone Roses

>>69699663
Shaun of the dead had GOAT taste
>electro
>that Smiths song on the telly
>Second Coming
>The Specials' Ghost Town

>>69699715
Happy Mondays was good, but any of their albums being better than SR's self-titled?
*leans into mic*
no

>>69699606
Turns into Stone?

>>69699761
The Second Coming

>>69699735
>The Specials' Ghost Town
That song seems to be in lot of movies like Snatch or Natural Born Killers

How pretentious do you have to be to call your sophomore album Second Coming

>>69699785
How pretentious do you have to be to same your song "I Am The Resurrection"?

>>69699715
How about The Charlatans or Inspiral Carpets? Both mad underrated bands

I'm kind of glad that even Second Coming sold 1 million copies in the UK

at least there's virtue in this world

Ian Brown had some good solo stuff though, especially the song FEAR

>>69699324
So what is britpop then? how would you define it

>>69699992
Basically 90's Alternative rock from Britain
Name one 90's British alt rock band that wasn't considered britpop

>>69699699
na

>>69700019
you're right, even fucking Placebo were labeled as britpop back in the day

>>69700019
This
At least grunge bands sounded somewhat similar to each other but britpop is just made up label

>>69700019
Primal Scream?

>>69700019
Bush weren't Britpop.

And that's an important point. The theory behind Britpop, and again, this is the theory of the journalists that created the term, is that Britpop was a backlash against the major rock sounds of the early 90s, which were madchester, shoegaze, and grunge. They wanted to make true rock and pop songs, not the dance jams of the madchester scene, or drifting noisescapes of shoegaze. And they didn't want to make this very American-sounding, mopey hard rock of grunge. So a bunch of bands just started playing very distinctly British-sounding rock music again, and that was Britpop.

>>69700078
nah, with grunge it's the same, all the bigger names have their own sound but it's the lesser-known bands and copycats who sound more similar

>>69700078
>>69700127
Grunge was more of a specific scene

Why has there been such a huge amount of britpop and grunge threads recently?

>>69700144
true, but Nirvana, Soundgarden, Alice in Chains and Pearl Jam don't sound that much alike.
Same with blur, oasis, Pulp and Suede

>>69700166
Idk, maybe there will be grunge and britpop revival soon. It's about time. All other 90s trends have been played to death by revival bands

>>69700127
the copycats, yes, but even the underground was divided between punk bands like Mudhoney, Seaweed, Hazel, and Babes in Toyland, trad hard rock groups like Love Battery and Screaming Trees, and metal bands like Tad and Gruntruck.

The term grunge basically just generalized the Pacific Northwest's vibrant, diverse underground scene, and then copycats from other places modeled themselves after the dumbed down stereotype, which became post-grunge.

>>69700195
Well considering post-britpop was pretty meh apart from few bands and post-grunge was godawful I hope not

>>69700195
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_wF7EUyMYU

as for Britpop, I'm not totally convinced it ever died... the British side of the garage rock revival (good stuff like The Libertines and Arctic Monkeys, crap like The View and The Kooks) all sound pretty Britpop to me

>>69700301
And also ladrock shit like Kasabian and Kaiser chiefs

>second coming is bad

nice meme

>>69700301
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_wF7EUyMYU [Remove]


they're guitar sound is so pleasing


Yeah I totally forgot about that 2000s NME Indie was basically the britpop revival

>>69700105
at the same time (1995) there was a big change in the uk chart inclusion rules. it meant that any band on a major who had independent distro could be included in the uk indie chart, even if they were on a major label.
so within a week there were like 7 oasis singles in the uk indie chart, making the chart basically irrelevant, because they were all being released by sony

it was a mass corporate takeover, because dance music had invaded the indie chart and 'indie' had started to mean something different, and that had to be stopped

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_5dZGXatFI

desu this one of the best hidden tracks ever

>>69700525
all the britpop bands were on majors but they're still called indie by some

>>69699735
aphex twin poster on the wall in the house, too

>>69700705
Suede were not

>>69698468

First album came at a historical sweet spot, never to be repeated, where indie kids used to guitar bands started dropping e. Bands like SR weren't exactly doing anything new, but they were at least exploring neglected traditions such as Krautrock, looking for a beat that better suited the new drug.
By the mid-90s, people had chosen between the subcultures: either dance music in all its forms or a fairly conservative guitar rock tradition (which was weirdly nationalistic).
SR weren't ready to drop the guitars, so they only had one way to go.

>>69702154
madchester in general was a shitstorm, and even may go as far as being stereotypically appropriating if not just ignorant.

the only reason the stone roses have any modern importance is because american indie bands were on the precipice of a revolution when punk in england put the last nails in its coffin.

>>69703225
Idiot.

>>69703517
not an argument

>>69703660
He's right though

>>69703783
why

>>69700105
>Bush
Well that's because they literally tried to copy Nirvana and didn't sound British at all, also they were much more successful in US than the UK, more than all britpop bands.

>>69698468
this album is a snooze