That's Enough For Me
Member
The clue is in the title.
JM’s contribution was probably more but, Morrissey is the Smiths.It’s fascinating that the debate of who was the main man in the smiths still rages on and on.
For me it was Morrissey his voice, his vocal delivery and of course the words, for which I’d never heard the like..
Then I realised that Johnnys contribution to the project was just as important and impressive.
I think that if your a musician playing whatever, then I would imagine that Johnny would have sucked you in, as like Morrissey, he was special, marr was and still is a special guitarist ...
That’s because he’s the front man Janice...JM’s contribution was probably more but, Morrissey is the Smiths.
That’s not to reduce or take away JM’s legacy with the band, it’s just how the public perceive the Smiths.
First thing anyone would think upon hearing the Smiths mentioned would be Morrissey 99/100
I’ve heard that story before, was there a journalist at the front who had been giving moz some bad press and moz knew he was watching??Always liked Moz's version of Trash, just cause of how loose it is.
It's not like ya gonna do a better version than the Dolls, but they
did still kinda catch the same energy.
Pretty sure there was a story where one time Moz did Trash live
and the drummer Spencer played a completely different song.
I’ve heard that story before, was there a journalist at the front who had been giving moz some bad press and moz knew he was watching??
You said most were there for what Moz brought to the collaboration, I say I think most were there for what both Moz and Marr brought. Equal measures.I agree. For as I already stated in my post ...
‘their musicianship was nothing less than magical, but most were there for what Morrissey brought to that collaboration.’
Honestly I'd rather he played this, once or twice:
You said most were there for what Moz brought to the collaboration, I say I think most were there for what both Moz and Marr brought. Equal measures.
If the words were shit, they would have been successful anyway, but they wouldn’t have been as mythical or legendary as they are now and forever will be.
And if the words were great and the music shit, Moz would’ve been deemed a cult figure, but there wouldn’t have been any success. That’s what I think.
Where the lyrics have been great and the music not so great? Not sure. Is it important for this hypothetical situation? Mostly there is a marriage between the two, or the lyrics take a backseat to the music. But I don’t think the Smiths would have been successful if the music and melodies weren’t as good as they were.I think that depends on how much the label would have backed them, how much money they would have poured into them.
Any other bands as examples you can give ?
Exactly!Ah ok. yes well, all opinions here.
Just wondering if there was an example you could point to.Where the lyrics have been great and the music not so great? Not sure. Is it important for this hypothetical situation?
Mostly there is a marriage between the two, or the lyrics take a backseat to the music. But I don’t think the Smiths would have been successful if the music and melodies weren’t as good as they were.
I’m sure there are examples, but it’s much easier to find bands with shit lyrics and great music.Just wondering if there was an example you could point to.
Yeah maybe. Depends on how one defines success. I take it you mean, not as successful as they became.
But I don’t think the Smiths would have been successful if the music and melodies weren’t as good as they were.
Some did, most still wanted MJ, Madonna, Culture Club, Prince, Wham!, etc. But yeah, there was definitely a gap to be filled, and bands like the Smiths and the Cure filled that gap. I still think, however, that the music of the Smiths was exceptional and that it would probably have resonated with people no matter the era.But I’d like to add ...
besides Marr’s skills and the chemistry of the band as a whole, they were in the the right place at the right time. The sound
was what people wanted at that time
in contrast to what was popular.
It was because of them, in a way, that The Smiths are who or what they are, so in a sense, Morrissey and Marr should be thanking them. LolSome did, most still wanted MJ, Madonna, Culture Club, Prince, Wham!, etc. But yeah, there was definitely a gap to be filled, and bands like the Smiths and the Cure filled that gap.
I still think, however, that the music of the Smiths was exceptional and that it would probably have resonated with people no matter the era.
True!It was because of them, in a way, that The Smiths are who or what they are, so in a sense, Morrissey and Marr should be thanking them. Lol
Being the ‘mozbot’ that I’m labeled as, I guess one would think I’d agree
with that, but I’m not entirely sure if that would be the case. That’s not to say that there wouldn’t be anyone to like them in a different era, but the the influential impact and level of success would of course be different.
Indeed, it's mentioned in autobiog:Always liked Moz's version of Trash, just cause of how loose it is.
It's not like ya gonna do a better version than the Dolls, but they
did still kinda catch the same energy.
Pretty sure there was a story where one time Moz did Trash live
and the drummer Spencer played a completely different song.