Roses Reunion Thread

[fastfuse]

I have come to a conclusion, rightly or wrongly that all the talk this week about the roses getting back together AGAIN, is all a ruse by John Squire.

The reason being the news broke of the so called reunion earlier this week. Next thing John Squire has managed to ready of piece of art saying basically theres no way it would ever happen and it was dated the day after the story broke Is this just co-incidence or did he want some extra promotion for his 'busy period' flogging his art.

He was on the BBC last saying the reunion would never happen, surly he didn't go on to news night just to say that?

Considering hes distanced himself from the whole thing, he seems to enjoy talking about the whole situation and if I remember rightly Mani was saying it was only Ian Brown that was yet to 'sign up'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On a another note, can any one clear up when the 'Turns To Stone' CD came out?

Second coming has always been classed as there second album did turns to stone come out after the second coming?

A far better album in my opinon than second coming. I liked second coming, but it just didnt sound like them.

If anyone could clear this up that would be most excellent!!

[mc18988]

I think second coming was after turns into stone

and I completely agree on the publicity thing, definately an attempt at extra promotion especially with what it said in the art!

[IrlamHillbilly]

Turns to Stone was released in 1992, 2 years prior to Second Coming.

Second Coming is the second album though. Turns to Stone is a compilation of singles and b-sides not featured on the debut.

[dontask]

the less i see of this the better, though they are probably one of the best from a genre im not really a fan of, dont think ian brown cud do anythin other than ruin abit of legacy.

[sirmavers]

Turns Into Stone is an immense album, I prefer it to the debut, everyone should have it.