Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2003 7:19:22 GMT -5
I see in the last thread the question was which album to buy between bhn and giants, and it got me thinking what a bad rap oasis got for BHN. Because they made 2 perfect abums on the trot BHN could never live up to the expectations. How many bands ever could make a lp with such great tunes as, do you know what i mean,stand by me, i hope i think i know, dont go away,all around the world, its gettin better man,,,and have the lp be considered rubbish ? most bands are lucky to have 1 break out tune on a lp but because of the brilliance of DM and morning glory, having 6 great tunes on a lp was considered a dud ! I find that as a testament to how great OASIS are,, they are held to a different standard when people review and listen to them . BLUR WOULD KILL TO HAVE 6 GREAT TUNES ON ANY LP ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by maketradefair on Dec 22, 2003 9:14:45 GMT -5
the reason oasis got stick was because the album was far too long and the songs were way over produced.
also the band were on alot of drink and drugs at the time aswell.
it wasnt a good time for oasis at that point.
|
|
|
|
Post by chocolate st*rfish on Dec 22, 2003 9:31:43 GMT -5
i, of course, agree but critics don't see the good moments they argue on whether song XY is too long, too loud etc.
no matter what kind of record BHN would have been instead, be it more like SOTSOG (experimental), WTSMG? (pop again) or whatever oasis would have never been able top the frenzy that was going on in '96.
it's just that everybody hoped that album would break the american market. but what kind of record by a foreign band (!) is appropriate (enough) to rock alternative-america?
and if you compare it to the beatles their 2nd album wasn't that successful, their fourth one was rubbish! nobody's perfect
|
|
|
|
Post by Columbia on Dec 22, 2003 10:29:10 GMT -5
sorry but i can see why be here now was slated. In the words of noel it should have been called "fuck it that'll do" or "the great rock n roll swindle". The tracks are too long its over produced and all the lyrics are shit. However he did write it in two weeks so i'll let him off.
sotsog is much better. Its a shame really because that album should have been the one that just summed up and defined what oasis had been about and what the 90's had been about in britain espescially. I beleive that if he'd have taken a year to write it or even just 6 months, it would have been what everyone had expected. There are some tracks on it i like dont go away and the girl in the dirty shirt espescially but the majority of the songs would have probably just made b sides or not even that in the definitely maybe or even morning glory days.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2003 11:23:17 GMT -5
fair enough,
being from america i can understand the hope that bhn would be the lp that opened up america but really they did crack america with morning glory it sold nearly 5 million copies here (billboard figures) coldplay have cracked and
their 2 lps combined have not sold 5 million (again billboard figures)
the reason they never advanced here is because they dont play the corprate game like coldplay (thank god) thus are not given airtime to build upon the fan base they already have here.
|
|
|
|
Post by LIVERPUDLIAN on Dec 22, 2003 11:33:24 GMT -5
I really like Be Here Now.
Sure, it's overproduced, but in terms of songs it's great.
Stand by Me
D'You Know what I mean
Don't Go Away
It's gettin Better Man
All Around the World
and I can't say I don't like Be Here Now, My Big Mouth, Girl in the Dirty Shirt and I hope I think I know either.
Not that keen on Fade in Out but that's 1 song on a whole album! Oh, and there's always the pointless reprise of AATW, anyway, it's a class album IMO!
|
|
|
|
Post by maketradefair on Dec 22, 2003 12:49:06 GMT -5
i think the album was good. the tour was shit i think, way too much distorion and feedback.
|
|
|
|
Post by chocolate st*rfish on Dec 22, 2003 14:35:39 GMT -5
hmm...thats exactly what i like so much about 97/98s tour..
yeah. besides the album not satisfying everyone's expectations oasis simply are too edgy and not enough keen on asskissing like others in order to get airplay.
again i'd like to make a reference to the fab four: brian epstein employed a quite simple trick to make them the biggest band in '64: he presented them as a nicey-nice boyband
|
|
|
|
Post by mape on Dec 22, 2003 21:09:19 GMT -5
It was too overhyped, and i think the stupid critics didn't feel as though it lived up to it. They can't expect everything to be as groundbreaking as DM and WTS. I think it suffered too much from subjective critisism instead of objective.
There's nothing wrong with the album besides the fact that its 20 minutes too long. The tunes are great, and i personally think the lyrics are alright.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toast960 on Dec 28, 2003 18:24:21 GMT -5
I think Oasis did a fine job on the album. Granted not as fantastic as Morning Glory or as energetic and fresh as "Definately Maybe" but it's a damn fine album compared to other albums released at that time. They just got attached with the mark that kills bands in America: The Next Beatles. Everyone thought they'd be the next Beatles and since they were just themselves, America lost interest. Everyone here in the states is either caught up in a pop-music world or an alternative-music world. Oasis really didn't stand a chance. And by the time "Be Here Now" was released, America was getting tired of them because "Wonderwall" was being overplayed to death as if it was the only song they'd ever done. D*** shame too. We American need Oasis in our music scene again Things are so pop-oreinted now it makes me sick. Hope their next album is a huge hit here.
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5