oasis aren't the best band ever. they aren't what the press

Discuss the music of Oasis

oasis aren't the best band ever. they aren't what the press

Postby Guest » 04 Jan 2009, 16:11

the cage wrote:
lucy in the sky with gems! wrote:
the cage wrote:
lucy in the sky with gems! wrote:your right in the fact of how different peoples opinions are on here, some of the die hard fans hate doys. but i think its good oasis experimented with different sounds and there's only a couple of weak songs on the album, after it their album and should embrace the music they love and it has pleased alot of people and they will always get criticism from someone but thats gud too cos they gotta have feedback whatever. as for comparing them to radiohead thats s**t man

:)


and they still at at it :lol:

yeah, what's wrong with these people :)


its a fair argument tho to say they like discussing music,we all know that but some comparisons just make me laugh and i mean:lol: big time
Guest
Bigger Than The Beatles
 
Posts: 49427
Joined: 05 Aug 2008, 18:14

oasis aren't the best band ever. they aren't what the press

Postby rawkstarr101 » 04 Jan 2009, 17:28

disconnected1976 wrote:
the cage wrote:
paamcaat wrote:
John Martin Marr wrote:
the cage wrote:
reality wrote:anyway, the big difference is that KID A is vastly superior, far more impressive record. That's why people loved it.

Why the comparison? Only Ryan Adams would think DOYS is Oasis' Kid A. f**k Kid A, what is Radiohead's The Masterplan (album) anyway?


:shock:


I think that's a valid question seeing how comparisons are being made. Where is Radiohead's The Masterplan? Radiohead has made some great tunes, Creep being one of my favorites, but they don't come close to Oasis in creating great tunes.

thank you. that's what i always ask radiohead fans when they compare with oasis unfavourably. if radiohead could compile a better b-sides collection than that then i might consider them as a superior band than oasis. 8)
plus, why would oasis do a Kid A? it's not their bag. but if we're talking about challenging fans and critics, oasis did it in 1997, BE HERE NOW! until now, fans are divided with that record. even Noel and Liam have differing opinions regarding that record. and it's my favourite oasis album btw - it's a classic! 8)


They could make a really good one with the Bends/OK Computer era b sides. They didn't make one because I think nearly all of their singles were released overseas. You have to remember The Masterplan's original goal was to provide a B side compilation for the countries where they had never released singles. It shouldn't have even come out in the UK and Europe.

Be Here Now is definitely different from Kid A. It didn't challenge critics and fans because it was different, it challenged them because it was completely f***ed up and no one dared to tell them. Still a lot of people love it, and that's their right. But there's absolutely no experimentation going on on Be Here Now, just arrogance and self indulgence. That's where the difference is. To me Kid A says "let's try to push things forward", while Be Here Now said "let's just put five solos on here, we can do that because we're Oasis and people will buy it anyway". Their Kid A, if there's one, was SOTSOG. SOTSOG was the one where Noel tried to redefine the sound of Oasis. And he almost succeeded, if he had been even more radical, he might have come up with 10 Go Let It Out or Gas Panic.


There's something so enjoyable about the self-indulgence and arrogance of the solos and production of BHN though. It's rock n roll music played by rock n roll stars; it should be arrogant! Personally, I think that album totally works in all of its overblown glory.

I also agree that while discussing music is great, its a pointless neverending cycle to compare Radiohead and Oasis. They're both great bands but yea, they have a totally different sound with totally different goals.
rawkstarr101
Headshrinker
 
Posts: 1899
Joined: 28 Dec 2008, 06:13

oasis aren't the best band ever. they aren't what the press

Postby the cage » 05 Jan 2009, 09:36

Here Is No Why wrote:it's not fair to compare Radiohead to Oasis. Two completley different bands and sounds. Two completley different directions.

that's about it, yeah. people should stop thinking that DOYS is Oasis' Kid A. f**k that. as if R'head would release a Morning Glory or something :lol:
the cage
Bonehead
 
Posts: 128
Joined: 13 Aug 2008, 10:59

oasis aren't the best band ever. they aren't what the press

Postby max misc » 05 Jan 2009, 17:49

Dig out your soul in my opinion is one of the best albums ever,but I understand that some people needs more time to think this,it happened to me with standing in the shoulders of giants,first I though that it was crap ,but now is my favourite,so,let´s give some time to dig out your soul,and maybe in two or three years we all love the album
max misc
Bonehead
 
Posts: 71
Joined: 13 Aug 2008, 10:59

oasis aren't the best band ever. they aren't what the press

Postby wastra » 05 Jan 2009, 18:17

I don't know. I understand a lot of the criticism about Oasis and DOYS. I love the album (well, I love about 6 songs on it anyway), but I recognize the deficiencies. IMO, DOYS is a very good album that could have been a great album, but for a few issues that seriously hold it back. Noel should:

-Stop letting the rest of the band write material...or limit it to one or two songs per album tops. The mish-mash of people writing completely different songs destroys any cohesiveness of the albums and just seems very "cobbled together." You can tell on DOYS that Noel was in a very different midset than the other guys, and the varying moods really aren't blended together well. There are some "decent" songs by the bandmates on DOYS, but all of them don't warrant inclusion on the album. At the very least, he just needs to be more selective on which ones make the cut. If they're decent songs, but have no relation to the rest of the album, can them and save them for a future project or compilation of unreleased tunes. either that, or choose his OWN songs better that fit the mood of the group. They are lacking consistancy between what he's writign and what they write.

-take more care writing his own lyrics. It's not the seemingly nonsensical things that annoy me because that's sort of his style, it's the repetition. Too often, it's 1 verse and a chorus, with the verse repeated two or three times. that's a little lazy. Heck- ask for the other guys to help him write additional verses if they feel the need for creative input and he's out of inspiration for lyrics, or let them write a solo or two, but let's end the lazy 1-verse-repeated songs. It becomes predicatble and formulaic after a time.

-Do a better job picking the singles.

-And for the love of god, put guitar solos in songs that NEED guitar solos.





As far as radiohead vs. oasis- that's a weird comparison. I wouldn't ever say Oasis pushses the envelope liek radiohead does, and they don't really try. Other than both being british, I really don't think they're comparable. Oasis generally tries to be a classic rock band in the vein of the stones. That means they want to be loud, rude, made-for-arena sing-alongs, and generally "simple" music that sounds like it could be played on a classic rock station. Radiohead isn't even what I'd call a "rock" band so much as just a "band." They really experiment with their music far more than oasis beause there is just a different "intent" to the band's very existance. It's like comparing the Rolling Stones to Elton John. Completely different styles, goals, and intent.
wastra
Bonehead
 
Posts: 56
Joined: 13 Aug 2008, 10:59

oasis aren't the best band ever. they aren't what the press

Postby jenks » 06 Jan 2009, 15:13

Hmmm

well oasis should of given up a long time ago...

They did 3 GREAT albums (DM,MG and MP)

all the other albums had good songs on but never were up to scratch in my opinion..if oasis had given up it 1998 before they got s**t..they would be legendary and very well respected within the music press.

That's the truth..

For example..you say to someone I'm a fan of oasis people tunr their nose up coz of what they did after morning glory..nobody cares anymore...noel sold out for the money/liam.

Don't believe me..ok

Direct quotes from melody maker interview in 1996

Can you keep the quality up?
"The Smiths and The Jam didn't split up early. The Smiths did five albums, high quality, same line-up. That's impressive. Their timing was good in terms of quitting."

Can you last five albums though?
"I always said it would be three. Like the Jam, they never waited around long enough to be s**t. I'd say realistically it will be five. I'd rather it was three."

Noel really got greedy.
jenks
Bonehead
 
Posts: 51
Joined: 13 Aug 2008, 10:10

oasis aren't the best band ever. they aren't what the press

Postby Flagga » 06 Jan 2009, 18:24

No, DOYS isn't the greatest album ever, it isn't even Oasis' greatest album. It's just a good album, much better than s**te like Heathen Chemistry but not as good as Definitely Maybe. All in all, it's a good album with more good songs than s**t ones - Bag It Up, The Shock Of The Lightning, The Turning and Falling Down are all up there with the best work Oasis has done for 10 years, whilst songs like Ain't Got Nothin' and High Horse Lady are a waste of space and time
Flagga
Rock 'n' Roll Star
 
Posts: 2569
Joined: 13 Aug 2008, 10:59

Previous

Return to The Music

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron