in terms of the argument, and refering to commonly accepted views:
stone roses - 1 good album. (the first one)
ride - are you serious?
charlatans - initial momentun is indeed good.
oasis: 1 very good album, one absolute classic. a multitude of b-sides worthy of note.
blur - 2 classic albums (parklife & blur)
the backlash toward britpop / oasis et al. yes menswear / sleeper etc were terrible, the scene became overbloated and imploded rather spectacularly - but there were some great moments. Damon Albarn may well be a contemptable shit, but blur were instrumental in creating a music scene that provided the backdrop for the next few years worth of British music.
Blur were consistenly greater over a longer period of time than any of the other bands mentioned.
I was a fan of Charlatans and the Stone Roses, but the first never produced a great album and the latter only made one (admittedly great) album and couldn't pull it off live.
Ride bore me.
I was never a fan of Oasis, but even I can see they wrote more great songs than either Ride or Charlatans (though maybe not the Roses).
Would that be Ispiral Carpets then? I love that name. With a name like that you know it's got to be good. I don't believe in the live detraction. People are always saying how great Klaxons are but they suck live. How can that be? Live is live. It is what it is. I saw Klaxons on Jules and they were great. Same with Editors; people say they suck live. I saw them in Salt Lake City and they absolutely rocked. I don't subtract points cause a live performance doesn't live up to my experience of the recorded music. Seeing any band live is an honor and a privilege- we are merely allowed to be witnesses.
I too like a lot of parts of the second coming.
as a record on its own its very good
as a stone roses record measured against their first (and against Turns into stone) its not up there.
- Ride produced two excellent albums, but with Tarantula they tried to move on, and instead fell to bits; they allowed themselves to become divided and they split
- The Charlatans - I quite like their stuff, i have all their albums, they are consistent - but rarely get beyong 6/10 IMHO
- Oasis produced one of the best records ever and won an Ivor Novello award - and I like Noel Gallagher
- Blur I liked them for about one week; not my thing at all
Even up until recently with Think Tank they were head and shoulders above Oasis, The Charlatans (a very mediocre band) and Ride.
The Stone Roses were great and I actually really like the second album. I'll honestly say though that Britpop was a low point for me. I loved Nirvana and grunge and sought refuge in dance music for much of the mid to late 90's.
Too bad. I have just noticed how coming back to bands like Ride, Stone Roses and "Some Friendly" and then holding them up to Blur and Oasis (who got all the recognition) I am struck by some kind of deficiency of appreciation. I am trying to correct that.
but Blur piss on them all from a great height. It seriously was shite though Britpop, it really glorified the worst aspects of the British male, just lunkheads playing 'proper' music. The more interesting stuff around this time was Massive Attack, Portishead, Prodigy, Underworld, Orbital and the emergence of Drum and Bass.
Collins began to record keyboard and organ parts for the Charlatans 5th album Tellin' Stories but was killed in a car crash on a country road in Wales on July 22, 1996 just before sessions were completed. An investigation into the accident showed that Collins had consumed a sizable amount of alcohol and was not wearing a seatbelt. He died from head injuries on the roadside shortly after the accident having been thrown through the windscreen. Investigators concluded that he probably would not have died had he worn a seatbelt.
The music industry and his colleagues were greatly shocked by his sudden loss. Collins' death occurred a week before the Charlatans' biggest concert to date - supporting Oasis at Knebworth.
He was an "unwitting" getaway driver in the hold up of an off license. According to his side of the story, his mate asked him to stop off there, then when he jumped back in he told him he'd just robbed the place and they had to get away.
He was an interesting character, Collins.
His backing vocals on the early Charlatans stuff were really good aswell. I remember Tim Burgess praising him in an interview saying that he's not afraid to sing like a girl, which is what you need sometimes for backing vocals, or something like that. That was back when Tim Burgess was fairly cool, now he's off the drink and drugs and has turned out to be a fucking embarassment of a man.
i seem to remember that he got caught up with some dodgy amtes as they did a robbery and they used him as the getaway driver although he claimed not to know too much about it. still got sent down fr a bit though
have been easily more consistently great than Oasis, Ride or the Roses. The Roses had 1 great album (2 if you count 'Turns Into Stone'), Oasis had 3 and Ride had 2. Every Blur album from 'Modern Life' to '13' is a masterpiece in its own way, and The Charlatans' output has been fairly astonishing - they didn't really put a foot wrong until 'Up At The Lake', 8 albums in (not including Best Of, b-sides and a live album). Which means Charlatans WIN. Hooray!
All of the albums before Up At The Like are decent at the very least, they were so consistent in the 90s. A lot of people knock that by saying they were never great and always average but I disagree, there were a few different UK music climates during that 10 year period and they managed to do well all the way through.
Between 10th and 11th is my favourite. Overproduced by Flood but it gives it an odd appeal and makes it the most slow-burning of all their albums.
Between 10th and 11th is probably my favourite too
lovely dense atmosphere
although up to our hips is pretty much just as good
also have a soft spot for number 6 - Us and Us Only
and obviously Charlatans - Charlatans is pretty much all good too, but in a much more britpop way than the earlier ones.
My scores:
Some Friendly 8/10
Between 10th and 11th 9/10
Up TO Our Hips 8/10
Charlatans 8/10
Tellin Stories 7/10
Us and Us Only 8/10
Wonderland 7/10
Up at the Lake 6/10
Simpatico 6.5/10
You Cross My Path 6/10
also don't forget non albums tracks such as Over Rising and me In Time. a whole host of fantastic b sides out there.(Happen To Die)
I stopped buying them after the first four, because I didn't really enjoy the s/t that much, it's the only one I have on CD which is a bit annoying.
In total agreement regarding the non album tracks, pop genius!
The Charlatans at the Birmingham Hummingbird on the night of the General Election in March 1992 was my one hundredth gig, fact fans! I stopped counting after that.
Between 10th and 11th was definitely the best; a brilliant record. It's also interesting to note that at that point Tim was writing some pretty interesting, articulate lyrics, something he sadly abandoned once the abysmal Oasis arrived on the scene and the Charlatans started rocking out a bit more.
he was royally slagged off in the press for his lyrics, but I much prefer his earlier lyrics as well, even though (or perhaps because) they're fairly nonsensical. My first reaction when I saw Oasis was that Liam desperately wanted to be Tim Burgess, and the lyrics were poor knock-offs of his style (and to be fair, especially if you listen to early Oasis b-sides, they were).
I'm really glad I'm not the only '10th and 11th' lover left alive. :-D
I actually have a soft spot for all of the bands you mentioned and probably own most of their best records. Of all them only Oasis and The Charlatans have desecended into utter mediocrity as the others broke up or in the case of Blur remained good (although I think they are a lesser band with out Graham Coxon). I defy anyone to not rock their head to Definitely Maybe and Whats The Story Morning Glory cranked up.
Stone Roses alone -- including the slightly weaker second album -- easily shit all over Oasis (who are just plain boring). The first four from the Charlatans also shit all over Oasis. And everything up to and including Going Blank Again from Ride shit all over Oasis.
Blur did have Modern Life is Rubbish, though, and a tonne of cracking singles. But, yeah, if [ush came to shove, I'd still pick any of the preceding three over Blur.
All Stone Roses shit on Oasis. 4 Charlatans shit on Oasis. And 2 Rides shit on Oasis. Blur not shit on Oasis, but do get to let off a little tommy squeaker in the corner.
i think blur are undervalued though - they did start a movement, and more than the roses or oasis - grew as a band, getting better with each album. (lets just brush over the great escape for now, and ignore everything 13 after).
I can never work out why people rate 13 - soupy, wanky pro-tooled rubbish. Everything else they did though, emphatically including Think Tank, was incredible. Easily the best band of the 90s.
Ride - Amazing for two albums, sounded like no one else then, great live too, even up to the end of their live days. Saw them loads.
Stone Roses - One amazing, almost perfect album, one very good album, one near perfect as a a proper album compilation of B-sides. Only saw them in the later incarnations but the first time (maddix era) was superb, although I suspect duff compared to the proper line up with Reni.
Charlatans - Pretty good but always going to be on the fringes. Really need to go away now. Or ten years ago.
Oasis - Always liked them being around but never any good live. saw them every stage from a pub gig the week Supersonic came out, to the first Glastonbury headline show and all the steps inbetween. never that good really. No dynamics. Still like them being around but basically a dull band.
Blur - i always felt with tem like I was part of someting very exciting. Saw them a ton of times between Popscene and 13 and they always, always delivered. Little club shows, festival headline shows were always great. i have lost interest a bit since, but I would certainly pin, in terms of excitement and consistency, over a huge body of work, them as a very important band in my life.
a huge part of this is that i was pretty much exactly the right age to be a blur fan and sort of grew up with them. I doubt they would feel so improtant if i was 37 when Modern Life is Rubbish came out.
very cool to hear from a fan of all the bands I mentioned and a fan whose seen "Ride loads"-that must have been sooooooo cool. Seeing Ride at the beginning (when they were what, teenagers?) would have been tantamount to seeing like Television (circa 1977) - kind of AMAZING kind of HISTORY kind of WUNDERKIND. I saw Beck when he was a tadpole- amazing.
You have no soul if you don't rate the Stone Roses debut and if you haven't heard the likes of Ride's Going Blank Again and Chelsea Girl, then try again. Perhapsyou should tap up limewire or whatever it is you use to get your music.
this has become a brit pop debate since we mentioned blur / oasis - so we have to mention pulp because they were fantastic. go get his n hers if you dont have it, you wont regret it.
for Britpop? I am very much looking forward to this....
Suede were def an important part of that movement albeit not exactly the sound that you associate with that period. But def a major player in the uprising of indie for white middle 15-23 yeard olds, in the early nineties.
But the problem with them is that unlike Blur or Pulp, they got very bad very quickly, so went from being utterly awesome in '92 to a bit daft in '94 to dreadful in '96. It was the drugs.
There was briefly a moment though when the first records by Suede, Auteurs and the likes of MLIR by Blur and His N Hers by Pulp all emerged and it seemed there was going to a genuinely intelligent flowering of amazing pop music. Then Oasis came along.
even though it was refreshing at the time, Terribly Arch British Music would have become quite tiresome quite quickly anyway, whether Oasis had come along or not. But you're right - there was a moment in 1993 when everyone started thinking "Hang on a minute - what's going
Ride - good
Stone Roses - brilliant initially, but that second album stinks of shit
Charlatans - good
Blur - zzzz
Oasis - brilliant initially, and currently not as awful as the Stone Roses became
Liar.
twisty assessment- but pretty brilliant
not liar
Blur outwieght all of these
They dont have a single bad album, and they progressed musically well beyond anything of the above bands!
The only 'bad' things Oasis have done
are in relation to the 'amazing' things they have also done.
Every Oasis album is good, at least.
Blur were a novelty band with all that mockney wank.
tee hee
wrightylew still lives in 1995
1965
haha
'Every Oasis album is good, at least'.
No.
oasis vs blur again ? nostalgia....
...
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
but yes, I agree about Oasis.
RIDE
seriously?
in terms of the argument, and refering to commonly accepted views:
stone roses - 1 good album. (the first one)
ride - are you serious?
charlatans - initial momentun is indeed good.
oasis: 1 very good album, one absolute classic. a multitude of b-sides worthy of note.
blur - 2 classic albums (parklife & blur)
i make that 3-2 in oasis / blur favour.
Modern Life is Rubbish is also a classic.
"Some Friendly" had really honest white boy grooves- which is rare
Ride's music is courageous and glorious as fuck.
Stone Roses were the Simon and Garfunkle of Britain- true genius
oasis and blur are simian money makers and stoopid booty shakers.
i dont get
the backlash toward britpop / oasis et al. yes menswear / sleeper etc were terrible, the scene became overbloated and imploded rather spectacularly - but there were some great moments. Damon Albarn may well be a contemptable shit, but blur were instrumental in creating a music scene that provided the backdrop for the next few years worth of British music.
It started great but Blur and Oasis got all the credit and money.
You are right though- there were some great moments.
Oh dear.
Blur were consistenly greater over a longer period of time than any of the other bands mentioned.
I was a fan of Charlatans and the Stone Roses, but the first never produced a great album and the latter only made one (admittedly great) album and couldn't pull it off live.
Ride bore me.
I was never a fan of Oasis, but even I can see they wrote more great songs than either Ride or Charlatans (though maybe not the Roses).
What about the Inspirals, eh?
*closing parentheses should have come after admittedly
one (admittedly) great
Ride bores you?
Would that be Ispiral Carpets then? I love that name. With a name like that you know it's got to be good. I don't believe in the live detraction. People are always saying how great Klaxons are but they suck live. How can that be? Live is live. It is what it is. I saw Klaxons on Jules and they were great. Same with Editors; people say they suck live. I saw them in Salt Lake City and they absolutely rocked. I don't subtract points cause a live performance doesn't live up to my experience of the recorded music. Seeing any band live is an honor and a privilege- we are merely allowed to be witnesses.
Honor and a Privilege unless the band are tossers- like Bikini Kill
or Sonic Youth
So you don't think there's such a thing as a 'bad' live performance?
Yes but if it's honest it remains an honor and a privilege.
If it is bad because the "artists" are posers than it's truly bad.
*then it's truly bad
I'm in agreement
Give me Ride and the Stone Roses over the others any day of the week.
and over The Others.
The Charlatans had
Some Friendly and Tellin' Stories.
Oasis first 2 are up there with anything, and half of the b-sides from '94 to '00 could've made a third.
Blur's cockney shite was a joke and sounds dated. 13 and Think Tank were shit hot tho.
The Roses had the debut but fuck all else, they gotta be overrated -can a band be great by having just one brilliant record?
personally, I think the Second Coming
though bloated, self-indulgent and a bit of a mess, has some fantastic moments on it... Tears, Love Spreads.
what about turns into stone
I too like a lot of parts of the second coming.
as a record on its own its very good
as a stone roses record measured against their first (and against Turns into stone) its not up there.
Stone Roses
yu-Hawwwwwwwwn
to be quite honest I've divided views here
- Ride produced two excellent albums, but with Tarantula they tried to move on, and instead fell to bits; they allowed themselves to become divided and they split
- The Charlatans - I quite like their stuff, i have all their albums, they are consistent - but rarely get beyong 6/10 IMHO
- Oasis produced one of the best records ever and won an Ivor Novello award - and I like Noel Gallagher
- Blur I liked them for about one week; not my thing at all
and Stone Roses were Gods
until I heard the tape of the Spike Island gig, and I realised that a lot of their greatness was due to the producers
i once played one of the vinyls at the wrong speed and began to wonder was it all a trick
Blur were consistently the best band out of that lot.
Even up until recently with Think Tank they were head and shoulders above Oasis, The Charlatans (a very mediocre band) and Ride.
The Stone Roses were great and I actually really like the second album. I'll honestly say though that Britpop was a low point for me. I loved Nirvana and grunge and sought refuge in dance music for much of the mid to late 90's.
Saint Etienne
now there's a band of consistent worth and merit
hmm- are we talking Milli Vanilli?
Too bad. I have just noticed how coming back to bands like Ride, Stone Roses and "Some Friendly" and then holding them up to Blur and Oasis (who got all the recognition) I am struck by some kind of deficiency of appreciation. I am trying to correct that.
Ride were pretty massive
didn't they headline Glastonbury one year - i could be wrong?
I think you've got a point compared to Oasis
but Blur piss on them all from a great height. It seriously was shite though Britpop, it really glorified the worst aspects of the British male, just lunkheads playing 'proper' music. The more interesting stuff around this time was Massive Attack, Portishead, Prodigy, Underworld, Orbital and the emergence of Drum and Bass.
Good tunes man!
Pushing no boundaries but I loved it!
You've got Ride.
Okay, you've also got The Stone Roses.
You definately haven't got The Charlatans - it doesn't matter though, you're still in, you're still in.........
Nah, sorry dude. You forgot that blur were around way before Oasis. And were far cooler than all of them put together (in the beginning).
The Charlatans
They were a great band until Rob Collins died. He was a fantastic organ/keyboard player. They've got progreesively worse since then.
oh bummer
I always wondered about the dissapearance of the great organ groove and backgrounds they had on "Some Friendly". Too bad, what happened? Drugs?
car or motorbike accident
very sad
Didn't he get done for armed robbery as well?
It was a car crash I'm fairly sure
Yes, he served four months for it, but here is the final irony in this thread
Collins began to record keyboard and organ parts for the Charlatans 5th album Tellin' Stories but was killed in a car crash on a country road in Wales on July 22, 1996 just before sessions were completed. An investigation into the accident showed that Collins had consumed a sizable amount of alcohol and was not wearing a seatbelt. He died from head injuries on the roadside shortly after the accident having been thrown through the windscreen. Investigators concluded that he probably would not have died had he worn a seatbelt.
The music industry and his colleagues were greatly shocked by his sudden loss. Collins' death occurred a week before the Charlatans' biggest concert to date - supporting Oasis at Knebworth.
ahh
tragic
What about the armed robbery thing?
Was Collins a highwayman / organist?
IIRC
He was an "unwitting" getaway driver in the hold up of an off license. According to his side of the story, his mate asked him to stop off there, then when he jumped back in he told him he'd just robbed the place and they had to get away.
He was an interesting character, Collins.
His backing vocals on the early Charlatans stuff were really good aswell. I remember Tim Burgess praising him in an interview saying that he's not afraid to sing like a girl, which is what you need sometimes for backing vocals, or something like that. That was back when Tim Burgess was fairly cool, now he's off the drink and drugs and has turned out to be a fucking embarassment of a man.
Ha Ha good stories
I am not afraid to sing like a girl- hope it pays off someday.
charlatans curse
i seem to remember that he got caught up with some dodgy amtes as they did a robbery and they used him as the getaway driver although he claimed not to know too much about it. still got sent down fr a bit though
Anthony from m83 seems to have been checking out our thread!
see his mixtape!
huh
?
Like this
http://drownedinsound.com/in_depth/4135478
Dreams Burn Down -Ride
Blur have been patchy in parts
but the overall merit of their work (some of it outstanding), considering the length of their career, far outweighs the other four bands.
I like Gorillaz too
maybe more than Blur. Blur more than Oasis, no wait that is a tough call for me.
the
stone roses can fuck right off.
well... they did already
if they'd never bothered forming in the first place that would have been great.
Nowhere is one of the most boring albums I've ever heard
What is one of the most un-boring you've ever heard
?
The Charlatans and Blur
have been easily more consistently great than Oasis, Ride or the Roses. The Roses had 1 great album (2 if you count 'Turns Into Stone'), Oasis had 3 and Ride had 2. Every Blur album from 'Modern Life' to '13' is a masterpiece in its own way, and The Charlatans' output has been fairly astonishing - they didn't really put a foot wrong until 'Up At The Lake', 8 albums in (not including Best Of, b-sides and a live album). Which means Charlatans WIN. Hooray!
Hooray!
Cool, there is not much love for Charlatans later albums. I had no idea they have so many.
Totally agree with sonicmidwife
All of the albums before Up At The Like are decent at the very least, they were so consistent in the 90s. A lot of people knock that by saying they were never great and always average but I disagree, there were a few different UK music climates during that 10 year period and they managed to do well all the way through.
Between 10th and 11th is my favourite. Overproduced by Flood but it gives it an odd appeal and makes it the most slow-burning of all their albums.
I saw a new Charlatans awhile back but I passed on it.
I will catch up some
banana
This is also my favourite
lovely dense atmosphere
yes yes yes
Between 10th and 11th is probably my favourite too
lovely dense atmosphere
although up to our hips is pretty much just as good
also have a soft spot for number 6 - Us and Us Only
and obviously Charlatans - Charlatans is pretty much all good too, but in a much more britpop way than the earlier ones.
My scores:
Some Friendly 8/10
Between 10th and 11th 9/10
Up TO Our Hips 8/10
Charlatans 8/10
Tellin Stories 7/10
Us and Us Only 8/10
Wonderland 7/10
Up at the Lake 6/10
Simpatico 6.5/10
You Cross My Path 6/10
also don't forget non albums tracks such as Over Rising and me In Time. a whole host of fantastic b sides out there.(Happen To Die)
i've also just discovered i'm a charlatans geek
Charlageek^^
I stopped buying them after the first four, because I didn't really enjoy the s/t that much, it's the only one I have on CD which is a bit annoying.
In total agreement regarding the non album tracks, pop genius!
The Charlatans at the Birmingham Hummingbird on the night of the General Election in March 1992 was my one hundredth gig, fact fans! I stopped counting after that.
agreed
Between 10th and 11th was definitely the best; a brilliant record. It's also interesting to note that at that point Tim was writing some pretty interesting, articulate lyrics, something he sadly abandoned once the abysmal Oasis arrived on the scene and the Charlatans started rocking out a bit more.
At the time,
he was royally slagged off in the press for his lyrics, but I much prefer his earlier lyrics as well, even though (or perhaps because) they're fairly nonsensical. My first reaction when I saw Oasis was that Liam desperately wanted to be Tim Burgess, and the lyrics were poor knock-offs of his style (and to be fair, especially if you listen to early Oasis b-sides, they were).
I'm really glad I'm not the only '10th and 11th' lover left alive. :-D
Yep, Between 10th and 11th
is the pick, though Up to Our Hips is a very tight second.
the last 3 blur albums are better than any of that other stuff
except for nowhere by ride, that album is amazing
Ride were the best British band of the 90s FACT.
MBV is only half Brit huh
But still, I love so much what Ride was doing till they melted down.
Yeah. Half Brit/half Irish....I've never liked MBV though.
Honourable mention to JAMC.
SO F***ING WRONG!
Blur and Oasis were the best bands on the 90's. FULL STOP.
Ok the charlatans are pretty good, but not as good...
...
Blur are the only real band in that list. The rest are one-dimensional anachronisms who are entirely unworthy of comment.
:)
unworthy of comment but you did anyway
: )
...
I would have thought the concept of knowing something is pointless, but doing it anyway was something that you were well au fait with.
^ not au fait with the meaning of this
I read it a dozen times and can't get my head around it.
sorry
I grew up with all five bands
I actually have a soft spot for all of the bands you mentioned and probably own most of their best records. Of all them only Oasis and The Charlatans have desecended into utter mediocrity as the others broke up or in the case of Blur remained good (although I think they are a lesser band with out Graham Coxon). I defy anyone to not rock their head to Definitely Maybe and Whats The Story Morning Glory cranked up.
Ride
by far the best of the lot of the bands aforementioned
I'm in nine-tenths agreement
Stone Roses alone -- including the slightly weaker second album -- easily shit all over Oasis (who are just plain boring). The first four from the Charlatans also shit all over Oasis. And everything up to and including Going Blank Again from Ride shit all over Oasis.
Blur did have Modern Life is Rubbish, though, and a tonne of cracking singles. But, yeah, if [ush came to shove, I'd still pick any of the preceding three over Blur.
So, to recap:
All Stone Roses shit on Oasis. 4 Charlatans shit on Oasis. And 2 Rides shit on Oasis. Blur not shit on Oasis, but do get to let off a little tommy squeaker in the corner.
nah
blur rightly shit on Oasis too.
Oasis shit in Oasis' pants
ne-ne-ne-ne-nehhhhh-ne
He's right though. And Oasis are a little inept at being cool too- especially Liam. He needs cool lessons.
Ride FTW.
Conversation over.
all personal taste innit
i think blur are undervalued though - they did start a movement, and more than the roses or oasis - grew as a band, getting better with each album. (lets just brush over the great escape for now, and ignore everything 13 after).
Are you going blind?
Ride were excellent, least ye not forget without Ride you got no Hurricane #1 and no Oasis.
Swervedriver, Lush, Echo Belly, Chapter House, even sleeper were all good 90's bands
+ curve, elastica
You did yourself no favours by bringing Hurricane #1 into
the argument.
hmm
I can never work out why people rate 13 - soupy, wanky pro-tooled rubbish. Everything else they did though, emphatically including Think Tank, was incredible. Easily the best band of the 90s.
Here we go
Ride - Amazing for two albums, sounded like no one else then, great live too, even up to the end of their live days. Saw them loads.
Stone Roses - One amazing, almost perfect album, one very good album, one near perfect as a a proper album compilation of B-sides. Only saw them in the later incarnations but the first time (maddix era) was superb, although I suspect duff compared to the proper line up with Reni.
Charlatans - Pretty good but always going to be on the fringes. Really need to go away now. Or ten years ago.
Oasis - Always liked them being around but never any good live. saw them every stage from a pub gig the week Supersonic came out, to the first Glastonbury headline show and all the steps inbetween. never that good really. No dynamics. Still like them being around but basically a dull band.
Blur - i always felt with tem like I was part of someting very exciting. Saw them a ton of times between Popscene and 13 and they always, always delivered. Little club shows, festival headline shows were always great. i have lost interest a bit since, but I would certainly pin, in terms of excitement and consistency, over a huge body of work, them as a very important band in my life.
to add to this ^
a huge part of this is that i was pretty much exactly the right age to be a blur fan and sort of grew up with them. I doubt they would feel so improtant if i was 37 when Modern Life is Rubbish came out.
seen Blur a few times over the years
and always with Graham Coxon in the line up and i have to say they are one helluva live act.
JimmyHuntspill
very cool to hear from a fan of all the bands I mentioned and a fan whose seen "Ride loads"-that must have been sooooooo cool. Seeing Ride at the beginning (when they were what, teenagers?) would have been tantamount to seeing like Television (circa 1977) - kind of AMAZING kind of HISTORY kind of WUNDERKIND. I saw Beck when he was a tadpole- amazing.
Thanks
In all honesty i first saw Ride
n the Leave them All Behind tour (supported by a then mental Mercury Rev) so missed the Nowhere and earlier shows. But yes, very cool.
Hello 90's
how ya doin
Ride - Don't remember them being that good
Stone Roses - Always been a bit shit
Charlatans - ok-ish
Oasis - The shit on the bottom of my shoe
Blur - ok but boring as hell
always been a bit shit?
except when they released their brilliant debut album?
Nah, didn't see what all the fuss was about to be honest
well, you were probably only 2 or something when it came out
so I wouldn't have expected you to see what all the fuss was about.
faulty memory Frank
RIDE good
GalacticEruption or whatever yer name is
You have no soul if you don't rate the Stone Roses debut and if you haven't heard the likes of Ride's Going Blank Again and Chelsea Girl, then try again. Perhapsyou should tap up limewire or whatever it is you use to get your music.
Pulp
Were better than them all. Fact.
this is 100% correct ^^
but only during the song Babies.
Yeah I forgot about Pulp
I am not at all familiar with them though. Where do they figure in this argument?
you ARE missing out
as ever
this has become a brit pop debate since we mentioned blur / oasis - so we have to mention pulp because they were fantastic. go get his n hers if you dont have it, you wont regret it.
ok
pulp it is.
BTW- I had the first Suede album and I remember liking the shit out of it- what about Suede? Is Suede considered Brit Pop?
suede were a bit of an anomoly
then again, neither the charlatans nor blur quite fit the standard lines of classification, so let's say they were part of the Britpop scene.
Blur don't fit the standard lines of classification
for Britpop? I am very much looking forward to this....
Suede were def an important part of that movement albeit not exactly the sound that you associate with that period. But def a major player in the uprising of indie for white middle 15-23 yeard olds, in the early nineties.
middle class*
soz
Thanks
must get Suede
first two Suede singles were astonishing
But the problem with them is that unlike Blur or Pulp, they got very bad very quickly, so went from being utterly awesome in '92 to a bit daft in '94 to dreadful in '96. It was the drugs.
There was briefly a moment though when the first records by Suede, Auteurs and the likes of MLIR by Blur and His N Hers by Pulp all emerged and it seemed there was going to a genuinely intelligent flowering of amazing pop music. Then Oasis came along.
To be fair though,
even though it was refreshing at the time, Terribly Arch British Music would have become quite tiresome quite quickly anyway, whether Oasis had come along or not. But you're right - there was a moment in 1993 when everyone started thinking "Hang on a minute - what's going