|
|
Post by gastritispanic on Apr 1, 2005 19:03:17 GMT -5
Let me just make this short and sweet. No band has ever matched oasis since they began. Name one band, just one.
SOTSOG, we are talking Go let it out, Gas panic, and Fucking in the bushes. There wasn't anything to even halfway challenge it that year. Heathen chemistry, and I don't even have to name the tunes. Tell me what bands even came close to HC. oooohhh but the sales figures...
I KNOW, but the sales figures would have you believe that Kylie Fucking Minogue is the dogs bollocks too!!!!
I'm just thankfull they are around. Nothing more, nothing less. That has been my way of looking at it since I heard
oasis the first time. Sure SOTSOG and HC may not be have B-sides like Acquiesce and The Master Plan. However this just underlines the fact that they are great. I mean, not even the "weak" have been challenged.
Who are the "challengers" anyway?
U2? YOU KNOW IT
Radiohead? YOU SHOW IT
Keane? NOW THE TIME HAS
COME TO SHOOT YOU DOWN!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Clint on Apr 1, 2005 19:08:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Noel's Barmy Army on Apr 1, 2005 19:13:08 GMT -5
im quite like radiohead actually. i hated amnesiac and kid a but I was brought back into the fold wiv Hail to the chief.
question is, will radiohead go along the lines of HTTT wiv the next album or carry on experimenting an exploring?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gifford on Apr 1, 2005 19:22:39 GMT -5
lotta new users now eh?
|
|
|
|
Post by SlideAway on Apr 1, 2005 20:45:15 GMT -5
This is silly.
The Beatles easily outranked Oasis on this scale - and the mark of strength isn't sales figures but quality. I'm an Oasis fan b/c they produced some of the best music of the '90s (and some great music in the '00s so far as well) - not b/c they sold the most records in England.
The Beatles were consistently good and groundbreaking and the most influential group.
The Stones, The Who, The Clash, Led Zeppelin, Bowie in the '70s - all were great, huge, AND influential.
Oasis definitely falls into a first-tier category - DM and MG alone qualify them for that. But to ridicule other bands and say that no other band has had the impact or strength of Oasis is ridiculous.
And what's with the U2-bashing? Outside of this site, there's a lot of overlap between fanbases and personally I love U2, although I do prefer Oasis. U2's been very big and had some great records - The Joshua Tree, Unforgettable Fire, War, Boy - all fantastic and Achtung Baby, HTDaAB and All that You Can't Leave Behind were pretty good as well.
Now, if you're not a U2 fan, fine - that's your right. I just never quite understood the whole U2-hatred on this board.
|
|
|
|
Post by cigsandbooze on Apr 1, 2005 20:49:18 GMT -5
This is silly. The Beatles easily outranked Oasis on this scale - and the mark of strength isn't sales figures but quality. I'm an Oasis fan b/c they produced some of the best music of the '90s (and some great music in the '00s so far as well) - not b/c they sold the most records in England. The Beatles were consistently good and groundbreaking and the most influential group. The Stones, The Who, The Clash, Led Zeppelin, Bowie in the '70s - all were great, huge, AND influential. Oasis definitely falls into a first-tier category - DM and MG alone qualify them for that. But to ridicule other bands and say that no other band has had the impact or strength of Oasis is ridiculous. And what's with the U2-bashing? Outside of this site, there's a lot of overlap between fanbases and personally I love U2, although I do prefer Oasis. U2's been very big and had some great records - The Joshua Tree, Unforgettable Fire, War, Boy - all fantastic and Achtung Baby, HTDaAB and All that You Can't Leave Behind were pretty good as well. Now, if you're not a U2 fan, fine - that's your right. I just never quite understood the whole U2-hatred on this board. Yeah, I agree with much of what you said. I like U2's music but I can't stand Bono. Just as some people love Oasis's music but can't stand Liam (don't worry y'all, I love Liam and his antics). Oasis and The Beatles are still my favorite bands. |
|
STOMKO
Madferrit Fan
Posts: 69
|
Post by STOMKO on Apr 1, 2005 20:58:28 GMT -5
Agreed. I proudly spent a good chunk of my salary this year on both Oasis and U2 tickets. I firmly believe they are similar in a lot of ways. They have mass appeal, they're fans of eachother and they both write solid meaningful music. No one will ever touch Oasis as my favourite band and U2 won't be touched as my second favourite.
|
|
|
|
Post by Noel's Barmy Army on Apr 1, 2005 21:04:25 GMT -5
its bono  he's such a bag of horse shit |
|
|
|
Post by calioasis on Apr 1, 2005 21:38:49 GMT -5
This is silly.
The Beatles easily outranked Oasis on this scale - and the mark of strength isn't sales figures but quality. I'm an Oasis fan b/c they produced some of the best music of the '90s (and some great music in the '00s so far as well) - not b/c they sold the most records in England.
The Beatles were consistently good and groundbreaking and the most influential group.
The Stones, The Who, The Clash, Led Zeppelin, Bowie in the '70s - all were great, huge, AND influential.
Oasis definitely falls into a first-tier category - DM and MG alone qualify them for that. But to ridicule other bands and say that no other band has had the impact or strength of Oasis is ridiculous.
And what's with the U2-bashing? Outside of this site, there's a lot of overlap between fanbases and personally I love U2, although I do prefer Oasis. U2's been very big and had some great records - The Joshua Tree, Unforgettable Fire, War, Boy - all fantastic and Achtung Baby, HTDaAB and All that You Can't Leave Behind were pretty good as well.
Now, if you're not a U2 fan, fine - that's your right. I just never quite understood the whole U2-hatred on this board.
I could be wrong here buddy, but I think his post says AFTER Oasis came about. The Beatles started and ended BEFORE Oasis. So it seems as if you're debating yourself.
|
|
|
|
Post by nyr401994 on Apr 1, 2005 22:39:35 GMT -5
This is silly. And what's with the U2-bashing? Outside of this site, there's a lot of overlap between fanbases and personally I love U2, although I do prefer Oasis. U2's been very big and had some great records - The Joshua Tree, Unforgettable Fire, War, Boy - all fantastic and Achtung Baby, HTDaAB and All that You Can't Leave Behind were pretty good as well. Now, if you're not a U2 fan, fine - that's your right. I just never quite understood the whole U2-hatred on this board. i competely agree. they're class. |
|
|
|
Post by lyla on Apr 2, 2005 7:09:19 GMT -5
i quite like bono. i know that a lot of people dont like musicians getting nvolved with politics and social issues or whatever, but i respect him for it. my opinion anyway. if you have a voice then use it for something that counts.
and yes.....i agree with slideaway...all those bands mentioned are frickin amazing but yeah, i think the thread was referrign to post oasis-debut bands.
but when we are talkign about bands, i think we are all referring to rock. whether we like it or not there are bigger stars than oasis who have doen better commercially.......but in rock n roll realms, oasis are top.
only other band that i think that can possibly contest it is U2
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5