Carter : Better Than The Roses
Paulo Di Canio
Well, at least they're still together.
Look at my criteria...
Carter have never released more than 3 singles off one album. The Stone
Roses released virtually every song off their debut...laziness I think
so.
Carter have had the same number of UK number one albums as the Stone
Roses...1 (I think that's correct)...despite far less media attention.
Carter are sound blokes. The Stone Roses are drug-addled floozys from a
lock-up in Croydon (probably)
Carter's drummer left too. But he was a drum machine so it didn't
matter.
Carter have not hired session musicians to their band...they've got Salv
out of S*M*A*S*H playing bass for them...and he's cooler than Aziz,
Nigel and Maddix put together. (Also he hasn't left to join Primal
Scream (who are one of my fave bands...git!))
They do correspond with their fans. The Stone Roses can't even write.
"Love Spreads" : their biggest hit was nicked off Jimi Hendrix's "Voodoo
Chile" while Carter's biggest hit, "The Only Living Boy In New Cross",
is completely original.
DISCLAIMER : I do not only think this...so does my pet gerbil Maurice.
Neil Harris
On Thu, 21 Nov 1996, Paulo Di Canio wrote:
> Well, at least they're still together.
>
> Look at my criteria...
>
Carter better than the Stone Roses- well thats a novel idea. Before you
slag the Roses off you should get your facts right. "Made of Stone" and
"She Bangs the Drums" were the only singles properly released (i.e. with
the bands permission) from the debut album. The others such as the
"Waterfall" remix from a few years ago were released by Silvertone to try
and recoup some cash during/after the bands split with the label. As for
Carter being original isn't that song title just nicked from "The Only
Living Boy in New York". Don't get me wrong I used to like Carter but I
think they should have had the good sense, like the Stone Roses finally
have, to quit once they'd gone past their peak.
David Creber
On Thu, 21 Nov 1996, Paulo Di Canio wrote:
> Well, at least they're still together.
>
> Look at my criteria...
>
> Carter have never released more than 3 singles off one album. The Stone
> Roses released virtually every song off their debut...laziness I think
> so.
why does the fact that the roses were lazy make carter the unstoppable
shite machine better than them? if anything it shows that the roses were
so much better that they could sit around on their asses and still do just
as well as carter (see your next point). the thing is, the roses
eponymous album was so good that every track was a possible single, there
is not a bad track on it.
>
> Carter have had the same number of UK number one albums as the Stone
> Roses...1 (I think that's correct)...despite far less media attention.
>
> Carter are sound blokes. The Stone Roses are drug-addled floozys from a
> lock-up in Croydon (probably)
>
what the feck does this have to do with which are a better band? i would
have thought it would be more important to discuss musical style rather
than where you come from and what you do in your spare time..
> Carter's drummer left too. But he was a drum machine so it didn't
> matter.
>
but this is irrelevant. When the stone roses were john, ian, mani and
reni, they were better than carter ever were - could carter write a song
like fools gold? i think not. and would it sound good with an eighties
disco beat casio shite machine rather than a real drummer? i think not.
the fact that reni knew when it was time to split is not in anyway proof
that carter are better than the roses were in their prime, if anything the
fact that they have called it a day and left 'two classic albums
untainted' is a point in their favour; they haven't just trudged on like
some bands i could mention (what was carter's last succesful single?
something about psychotic grannies a couple of years ago, i think,
although i don't think you could call it succesful (it had that bloke
from 'on the buses' in the video.)).
> Carter have not hired session musicians to their band...they've got Salv
> out of S*M*A*S*H playing bass for them...and he's cooler than Aziz,
> Nigel and Maddix put together.
i'll take your word for it, but is he cooler than mani? very unlikely.
(although i can't say, cos i haven't got a clue who he is, smash are shit
though)
(Also he hasn't left to join Primal
> Scream (who are one of my fave bands...git!))
but, once again, this doesn't mean that carter are better. it just means
that Mani is so cool that Bobby Gillespie wants him to play for him.
>
> They do correspond with their fans. The Stone Roses can't even write.
>
'correspond with fans'? you mean shouting 'you fat bastard' at the top of
their voices at every gig? i have a friend who chatted with squire for
about 2 hours after their UEA gig a couple of years ago.
> "Love Spreads" : their biggest hit was nicked off Jimi Hendrix's "Voodoo
> Chile" while Carter's biggest hit, "The Only Living Boy In New Cross",
> is completely original.
>
you what!??!?! voodoo chile? hmm. how's fool's gold for original then?
or i am the ressurection? you are talking about a band who started the
entire madchester scene, the first fucking pioneering band since the
smiths, and you say they weren't original? and just a minute, even the
fucking title of 'the only living boy in new cross' isn't original (simon
and garfunkels 'only living boy in new york'), all music has to draw on
some kind of previous work, or we would never have had the beatles, the
stones, hendrix or carter.
> DISCLAIMER : I do not only think this...so does my pet gerbil Maurice.
>
>
DISCLAIMER : I do not only think this...so do a lot of other people
(although i could be wrong)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| D J Creber 56 Farndale Street |
| English and Linguistics Fulford |
| 2nd Year York |
| djc...@york.ac.uk Y01 4BP |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
mark reynolds
Paulo Di Canio wrote:
>
> Well, at least they're still together.
>
> Look at my criteria...
>
> Carter have never released more than 3 singles off one album. The Stone
> Roses released virtually every song off their debut...laziness I think
> so.
>
the roses released she bangs the drums and made of stone from the
first album. after they left, the record company then put out adored,
waterfall, resurection, nothing the roses could do.
carter have always put their singles on the albums (except watershed
for legal reasons) laziness, i think so!
the roses have recorded 5 singles which do not appear on the 2 proper
albums
> Carter have had the same number of UK number one albums as the Stone
> Roses...1 (I think that's correct)...despite far less media attention.
>
carter were never out of nme/select in the early 90s
count the number of select covers they had
> Carter are sound blokes. The Stone Roses are drug-addled floozys from a
> lock-up in Croydon (probably)
carter were dodgy chirpy cockernee chancers, with poor haircuts
and bad shorts. the roses are sound blokes, mani, john and robbie at
least, ok ian's a space cadet, but hey...
>
> Carter's drummer left too. But he was a drum machine so it didn't
> matter.
>
> Carter have not hired session musicians to their band...they've got Salv
> out of S*M*A*S*H playing bass for them...and he's cooler than Aziz,
> Nigel and Maddix put together. (Also he hasn't left to join Primal
> Scream (who are one of my fave bands...git!))
>
warning: this man likes smash! carter's drummer is surely a session man
> They do correspond with their fans. The Stone Roses can't even write.
>
i have autographs and messages to deny this!
> "Love Spreads" : their biggest hit was nicked off Jimi Hendrix's "Voodoo
> Chile" while Carter's biggest hit, "The Only Living Boy In New Cross",
> is completely original.
>
this is just hilarious, virtually all carters lyrics are puns nicked
from other songs/films/pop culture, where do you think the title of
olbinc comes from? how come a good third of carters recorded output is
covers, the roses have never had to cover anything
even the roses art is more accomplished and painted by the guitarist,
carter's is irredeemably poor
> DISCLAIMER : I do not only think this...so does my pet gerbil Maurice.
the only way to judge bands is if they make great music, carter made
good music loved by several and inspiring bis
the roses made superb music influencing millions of fans and a
generation of bands. do you trust these or a bloke who openly admits to
liking bis and smash??
--
***Ask for my long list of very CHEAP/RARE cds, vinyl and tapes***
***SEND me your priced WANTLISTS (especially uk cds)*****
KRC. Sumner
David Creber (djc...@york.ac.uk) wrote:
: On Thu, 21 Nov 1996, Paulo Di Canio wrote:
:
: > Well, at least they're still together.
: > Look at my criteria...
: >
: > Carter have never released more than 3 singles off one album. The Stone
: > Roses released virtually every song off their debut...laziness I think
: > so.
: why does the fact that the roses were lazy make carter the unstoppable
: shite machine better than them? if anything it shows that the roses were
: so much better that they could sit around on their asses and still do just
: as well as carter (see your next point). the thing is, the roses
: eponymous album was so good that every track was a possible single, there
: is not a bad track on it.
: >
: > Carter have had the same number of UK number one albums as the Stone
: > Roses...1 (I think that's correct)...despite far less media attention.
: > Carter are sound blokes. The Stone Roses are drug-addled floozys from a
: > lock-up in Croydon (probably)
: >
:
: what the feck does this have to do with which are a better band? i would
: have thought it would be more important to discuss musical style rather
: than where you come from and what you do in your spare time..
: > Carter's drummer left too. But he was a drum machine so it didn't
: > matter.
: >
:
: but this is irrelevant. When the stone roses were john, ian, mani and
: reni, they were better than carter ever were - could carter write a song
: like fools gold? i think not. and would it sound good with an eighties
: disco beat casio shite machine rather than a real drummer? i think not.
: the fact that reni knew when it was time to split is not in anyway proof
: that carter are better than the roses were in their prime, if anything the
: fact that they have called it a day and left 'two classic albums
: untainted' is a point in their favour; they haven't just trudged on like
: some bands i could mention (what was carter's last succesful single?
: something about psychotic grannies a couple of years ago, i think,
: although i don't think you could call it succesful (it had that bloke
: from 'on the buses' in the video.)).
It was nothing to do with psychotic grannies, it was called "The Young
Offender's Mum" perhaps if you had heard then you could pass judgement on
it. It was a top 40 hit ( not a massive hit but then again when idiots who
read the music press and follow the views that the NME/MM have at that
moment stop liking a band for fashion reasons of course a band does worse
) while I'm on the subject of the NME they wrote Live reviews of Carter
gigs that were so untrue that it was clear that they hadn't bothered to go
to the gig but wrote about about it anyway.
And did the roses ever manage to get the acting talents of the bloke off
on the buses? No they didn't even after numerous requests so that is a
measure of how brilliant carter are and how much they are loved by has
been actors :-)
:
: > Carter have not hired session musicians to their band...they've got Salv
: > out of S*M*A*S*H playing bass for them...and he's cooler than Aziz,
: > Nigel and Maddix put together.
:
: i'll take your word for it, but is he cooler than mani? very unlikely.
: (although i can't say, cos i haven't got a clue who he is, smash are shit
: though)
:
: (Also he hasn't left to join Primal
: > Scream (who are one of my fave bands...git!))
:
: but, once again, this doesn't mean that carter are better. it just means
: that Mani is so cool that Bobby Gillespie wants him to play for him.
:
: >
: > They do correspond with their fans. The Stone Roses can't even write.
: >
:
: 'correspond with fans'? you mean shouting 'you fat bastard' at the top of
: their voices at every gig? i have a friend who chatted with squire for
: about 2 hours after their UEA gig a couple of years ago.
:
: > "Love Spreads" : their biggest hit was nicked off Jimi Hendrix's "Voodoo
: > Chile" while Carter's biggest hit, "The Only Living Boy In New Cross",
: > is completely original.
: >
:
: you what!??!?! voodoo chile? hmm. how's fool's gold for original then?
: or i am the ressurection? you are talking about a band who started the
: entire madchester scene, the first fucking pioneering band since the
: smiths, and you say they weren't original? and just a minute, even the
: fucking title of 'the only living boy in new cross' isn't original (simon
: and garfunkels 'only living boy in new york'), all music has to draw on
: some kind of previous work, or we would never have had the beatles, the
: stones, hendrix or carter.
:
:
And the true test of who is better, HAVE THE ROSES EVER BEATEN UP PHILLIP
SCHOFIELD???????
No I didn't think so - surely this is enough reason for liking Carter :-)
--
______________________________________________________________________________
_ __ _ *Where are the songs about boozers and
| |/ /___ _ __ | |_ ___ _ __ *buildings, banning the bomb and abusing
| ' // _ \ '_ \| __/ _ \| '_ \ *the children? Sheriff Fatman started out
| . \ __/ | | | || (_) | | | | *in business the granny farmer, he was
|_|\_\___|_| |_|\__\___/|_| |_| *infamous for 15 minutes and he appeared
*on Panorama. You've got to give him credit
ks4...@bristol.ac.uk *the poor man's Norman Tebbit.
______________________________________________________________________________
mark reynolds
carter would not have made it in the first place without the nme!
bigger targets, they took on the whole of the bbc and were original
enough to wreak paint revenge on those who riled them!
cheers
mark
> No I didn't think so - surely this is enough reason for liking Carter :-)
>
> --
were carter responsible for the re-cooling of an item of clothing
no
hence the roses win!
KRC. Sumner
: > out of S*M*A*S*H playing bass for them...and he's cooler than Aziz,
: > Nigel and Maddix put together.
:
: i'll take your word for it, but is he cooler than mani? very unlikely.
: (although i can't say, cos i haven't got a clue who he is, smash are shit
: though)
:
: (Also he hasn't left to join Primal
: > Scream (who are one of my fave bands...git!))
:
: but, once again, this doesn't mean that carter are better. it just means
: that Mani is so cool that Bobby Gillespie wants him to play for him.
:
: >
: > They do correspond with their fans. The Stone Roses can't even write.
: >
:
: 'correspond with fans'? you mean shouting 'you fat bastard' at the top of
: their voices at every gig? i have a friend who chatted with squire for
: about 2 hours after their UEA gig a couple of years ago.
:
: > "Love Spreads" : their biggest hit was nicked off Jimi Hendrix's "Voodoo
: > Chile" while Carter's biggest hit, "The Only Living Boy In New Cross",
: > is completely original.
: >
:
: you what!??!?! voodoo chile? hmm. how's fool's gold for original then?
: or i am the ressurection? you are talking about a band who started the
: entire madchester scene, the first fucking pioneering band since the
: smiths, and you say they weren't original? and just a minute, even the
: fucking title of 'the only living boy in new cross' isn't original (simon
: and garfunkels 'only living boy in new york')
Yeah the title isn't original but the rest of the song is, so saying "Even
the fucking title of TOLBINC isn't original" is wrong! You should be
saying the title isn't original but the rest of the song is ( and pisses
on whatever the Roses have to offer ( but that's just because of it's
bladder problem ))
KRC. Sumner
mark reynolds (bmb...@gps.leeds.ac.uk) wrote:
: KRC. Sumner wrote:
: >
: > Offender's Mum" perhaps if you had heard then you could pass judgement on
: > it. It was a top 40 hit ( not a massive hit but then again when idiots who
: > read the music press and follow the views that the NME/MM have at that
: > moment stop liking a band for fashion reasons of course a band does worse
:
: carter would not have made it in the first place without the nme!
:
: > ) while I'm on the subject of the NME they wrote Live reviews of Carter
: > gigs that were so untrue that it was clear that they hadn't bothered to go
: > to the gig but wrote about about it anyway.
: >
: > And did the roses ever manage to get the acting talents of the bloke off
: > on the buses? No they didn't even after numerous requests so that is a
: > measure of how brilliant carter are and how much they are loved by has
: > been actors :-)
: >
: > : > Carter have not hired session musicians to their band...they've got Salv
: > : > out of S*M*A*S*H playing bass for them...and he's cooler than Aziz,
: > : > Nigel and Maddix put together.
: > :
: > : i'll take your word for it, but is he cooler than mani? very unlikely.
: > : (although i can't say, cos i haven't got a clue who he is, smash are shit
: > : though)
: > :
: > : (Also he hasn't left to join Primal
: > : > Scream (who are one of my fave bands...git!))
: > :
: > : but, once again, this doesn't mean that carter are better. it just means
: > : that Mani is so cool that Bobby Gillespie wants him to play for him.
: > :
: > : >
: > : > They do correspond with their fans. The Stone Roses can't even write.
: > : >
: > :
: > : 'correspond with fans'? you mean shouting 'you fat bastard' at the top of
: > : their voices at every gig? i have a friend who chatted with squire for
: > : about 2 hours after their UEA gig a couple of years ago.
: > :
: > : > "Love Spreads" : their biggest hit was nicked off Jimi Hendrix's "Voodoo
: > : > Chile" while Carter's biggest hit, "The Only Living Boy In New Cross",
: > : > is completely original.
: > : >
: > :
: > : you what!??!?! voodoo chile? hmm. how's fool's gold for original then?
: > : or i am the ressurection? you are talking about a band who started the
: > : entire madchester scene, the first fucking pioneering band since the
: > : smiths, and you say they weren't original? and just a minute, even the
: > : fucking title of 'the only living boy in new cross' isn't original (simon
: > : some kind of previous work, or we would never have had the beatles, the
: > : stones, hendrix or carter.
: > :
: > :
: > And the true test of who is better, HAVE THE ROSES EVER BEATEN UP PHILLIP
: > SCHOFIELD???????
: >
: bigger targets, they took on the whole of the bbc and were original
: enough to wreak paint revenge on those who riled them!
: cheers
: mark
Eh? Wreak paint revenge? I'm sorry you've lost me there
: > No I didn't think so - surely this is enough reason for liking Carter :-)
: >
: > --
: were carter responsible for the re-cooling of an item of clothing
: no
: hence the roses win!
Re-cooling of an item of clothing ( did they put it back in the fridge or
something? ) isn't the issue. Thousands of people wanted to give P
Schofeild a slap and Carter did it, therefore public heroes.
I think this thread is kinda getting out of control though, I mean I
like/liked the roses a bit but I prefer Carter and the 2 bands have never
really been enemies so it's a bit silly to try and argue it out really.
NOW, the Rolling Stones, they really ARE cunts
All done, bye bye.
Ian Coombs-Lewis
Some long posts in this thread, but all I want to say is...
** RAGING BULLFROG ** - Better than the lot of them! Shame they split
up several years ago...
--
Ian.
mark reynolds
Paulo Di Canio wrote:
>
> Now you see this is great! To be honest, I don't really hate the Roses
> that much...but I do think they get too much credit for too little work.
> My original posting was to spark up a bit of fire on an otherwise boring
> as hell newsgroup. But a couple of points :
>
> Carter's cover artwork is not a pile of crap (or however mr bloke
> described it) : Admittedly some of it looks a bit dodgy...The luminous
> cover of Let's Get Tattoos or the impressionism gone wrong piccy of the
> Queen Mum on the "Young Offender's Mum" cover which had nothing to do
> with psychotic grannies (unless you listen to it backwards...which would
> be silly)...but The Impossible Dream and Do Re Me by Vincent Woodcock
> are great.
a bit OTT for me
> John Squire may be hailed by many as a modern day Rembrandt
> but, honestly...squiggle, squiggle, squiggle. That's what half the
> covers are. My three year old brother did a "painting" which was a
> replica of the "made of stone" cover the other day.
see fools gold, love spreads, second coming, begging you, one love,
waterfall, for a good range of variety and quality
> And about their heroic bid for freedom from Silvertone...were they not
> sued for that incident? And then they joined Geffen the most corporate
> big-business-full-of-wankers-hello Guns 'N' Roses-company in the
> world...who also signed Nirvana one of my favourite bands (whoops)
> Ok...carry on this argument then lads.
they fleeced geffen for a large amount of money
carter left rough trade under a cloud to join chrysalis (?)
> By the way, which piece of
> clothing did they salvage...the Reni hat??? Well, that's being used by
> Ocean Colour Scene now...so thanks a lot for nothing.
and boyzone are now wearing carter's shorts!
>
> RICH.
>
> P.S. You said that Carter paving the way for Bis was bad...at least they
> didn't pave the way for trash like Ocean Colour Scene and Shed Seven.
ocs=eric clapton influence, shed 7 are much more like the smiths
i remember the charlatans, oasis, bluetones, run dmc amongst others
trying to take up the roses baton
has anyone heard garage flower, is it any good? i have my doubts...
cheers
mark
Paulo Di Canio
Now you see this is great! To be honest, I don't really hate the Roses
that much...but I do think they get too much credit for too little work.
My original posting was to spark up a bit of fire on an otherwise boring
as hell newsgroup. But a couple of points :
Carter's cover artwork is not a pile of crap (or however mr bloke
described it) : Admittedly some of it looks a bit dodgy...The luminous
cover of Let's Get Tattoos or the impressionism gone wrong piccy of the
Queen Mum on the "Young Offender's Mum" cover which had nothing to do
with psychotic grannies (unless you listen to it backwards...which would
be silly)...but The Impossible Dream and Do Re Me by Vincent Woodcock
are great. John Squire may be hailed by many as a modern day Rembrandt
but, honestly...squiggle, squiggle, squiggle. That's what half the
covers are. My three year old brother did a "painting" which was a
replica of the "made of stone" cover the other day.
And about their heroic bid for freedom from Silvertone...were they not
sued for that incident? And then they joined Geffen the most corporate
big-business-full-of-wankers-hello Guns 'N' Roses-company in the
world...who also signed Nirvana one of my favourite bands (whoops)
Ok...carry on this argument then lads. By the way, which piece of
clothing did they salvage...the Reni hat??? Well, that's being used by
Ocean Colour Scene now...so thanks a lot for nothing.
shepp...@cf.ac.uk
David Creber <djc...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Nov 1996, Paulo Di Canio wrote:
>
>> Well, at least they're still together.
>>
>> Look at my criteria...
>>
>> Carter have never released more than 3 singles off one album. The >> Stone Roses released virtually every song off their debut...laziness I >> think so.
>
>why does the fact that the roses were lazy make carter the unstoppable
>shite machine better than them? if anything it shows that the roses were
>so much better that they could sit around on their asses and still do >just as well as carter (see your next point). the thing is, the roses
>eponymous album was so good that every track was a possible single, >there is not a bad track on it.
Does this mean that the Roses owned several donkeys and spent all day
sitting on them, or were you meant to say arses?
David Creber
On Mon, 25 Nov 1996, Paulo Di Canio wrote:
> Now you see this is great! To be honest, I don't really hate the Roses
> that much...but I do think they get too much credit for too little work.
> My original posting was to spark up a bit of fire on an otherwise boring
> as hell newsgroup. But a couple of points :
this is a good point ^^ i love this thread. it's sort of obscure, yet
simple.
> Carter's cover artwork is not a pile of crap (or however mr bloke
> described it) : Admittedly some of it looks a bit dodgy...The luminous
> cover of Let's Get Tattoos or the impressionism gone wrong piccy of the
> Queen Mum on the "Young Offender's Mum" cover which had nothing to do
> with psychotic grannies (unless you listen to it backwards...which would
all i could think of was the single cover, i knew it was about crime and
relatives of some sort.
> be silly)...but The Impossible Dream and Do Re Me by Vincent Woodcock
> are great. John Squire may be hailed by many as a modern day Rembrandt
> but, honestly...squiggle, squiggle, squiggle. That's what half the
> covers are.
you're joking! look at the fucking help album cover, look at the fucking
originality of his artwork.
My three year old brother did a "painting" which was a
> replica of the "made of stone" cover the other day.
> And about their heroic bid for freedom from Silvertone...were they not
> sued for that incident?
yeah, but it's better than just hitting a loser like phillip schofield.
And then they joined Geffen the most corporate
> big-business-full-of-wankers-hello Guns 'N' Roses-company in the
> world...who also signed Nirvana one of my favourite bands (whoops)
so they know how to strike a good deal.
> Ok...carry on this argument then lads. By the way, which piece of
> clothing did they salvage...the Reni hat???
uh huh. but ocean colour scene have been round for ages, they just
started wearing hats because they were in at the time and they are caught
in a time trap.
Well, that's being used by
> Ocean Colour Scene now...so thanks a lot for nothing.
>
> RICH.
>
> P.S. You said that Carter paving the way for Bis was bad...at least they
> didn't pave the way for trash like Ocean Colour Scene
see above.
and Shed Seven.
>
i'd rather listen to shed 7 than bis. musical differences.