|
|
Post by music89 on Feb 12, 2008 14:46:27 GMT -5
Oasis
Zeppelin
Pink Floyd
Beatles
The Who
|
|
|
|
Post by inthesunshhiiiiine on Feb 12, 2008 16:05:33 GMT -5
Its an incredibly hard thing to seeing as most of 60s folk who experienced beatlemania can't get into Oasis, and vice versa for many 90s Oasis fans, I never experienced either but while I enjoy Oasis' music 43 million times more, I still enjoy some beatles songs and can respect them and see what they did for music in there time, but my list is going to include more of a range, not just old bands because i wasnt around at the time, dyou know what i mean?
So hear goes, it's not strictly ranked but anyways...
Oasis
The Beatles
Led Zeppelin
Queen
The Who
David Bowie
Rolling Stones
The Clash
Pink Floyd
Stereophonics
Muse - will lead rock into the next generation for years to come IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by nyr401994 on Feb 12, 2008 16:26:57 GMT -5
I'd like to start by saying I'm just as big an Oasis fan as anyone else on here... that being said... There is NO WAY that anyone can rank Oasis above: -the beatles -the rolling stones -led zeppelin -the who -pink floyd ...You just can't do it. Sorry. I'd put em after those lot with the Kinks.... Oh, and anyone that puts the Stone Roses in that group must be injecting smack into their arses.... couldn't agree more. |
|
|
|
Post by Mogly on Feb 12, 2008 19:03:38 GMT -5
I'll change my list, I just can't keep Radiohead off the top 5
Beatles
Led Zepppelin
Pink Floyd
Radiohead
Oasis
and if I include solo artists too then oasis would be in danger of dropping out of this list cos Bowie is just too much of a genius
|
|
|
|
Post by inthesunshhiiiiine on Feb 12, 2008 19:08:48 GMT -5
Bowie is a genius, I just couldnt keep him out, he's got all the componants of a bloody band anyway, it's not like a through ole' Robbie in there lol, now that may stir upon some
|
|
|
|
Post by Mogly on Feb 12, 2008 19:53:24 GMT -5
^^^^^
Agreed. Bowie is a genius and is up there with lennon and dylan as the greatest genius of the past century
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2008 20:13:33 GMT -5
solo artists are better than bands FACT ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Idol on Feb 12, 2008 21:30:39 GMT -5
I know this is all a matter of personal taste and all...but I'd like to know why do people always like to include bands such as The Sex Pistols, The Stone Roses and The La's? I mean, The Sex Pistols and The La's only released one album each, and The Stone Roses only 2! sure all their debuts are classics but that's all! only one great album! is that enough to certify a band as one of the greatest ever? I can see their importance but I don't think that justifies their status. At all. Cos it isn't just about how long you stick around for or how many albums you release, it's about how special and important the band is while they're around. Plenty of bands can stick around for years and be total shit. In The Roses and Pistols case especially, they released amazing albums, inspired countless new bands, and changed music for the better. That counts for a lot IMO. In fact, I often think more of a band who comes along, blows everyone out of the water, and then fucks off before anyone else can catch up. Well, obviously I wasn't refering to bands that just happen to stay around for a long time. I meant that there are many bands that have more than one great album. History has shown us that anybody can be lucky and get it all together and for whatever reason they happen to release a great album. I'm not saying those bands were lucky, but everything they did (as a band or solo artists)after was vastly inferior. And I couldn't care less about how many bands a band inspires, most of those bands turn out to be shit copycats and never as good as their influences. I'd like to start by saying I'm just as big an Oasis fan as anyone else on here... that being said... There is NO WAY that anyone can rank Oasis above: -the beatles -the rolling stones -led zeppelin -the who -pink floyd ...You just can't do it. Sorry. I'd put em after those lot with the Kinks.... Oh, and anyone that puts the Stone Roses in that group must be injecting smack into their arses.... Well put. |
|
|
|
Post by holdonecho on Feb 13, 2008 0:57:20 GMT -5
This is a fun post that is open to a lot of debate.
Emotionally, to me, Oasis and the Beatles are far superior to anyone else.
BUt I would like to attempt and place Oasis in a historical context by comparing them to the other 'best' bands by amount of classic albums that they have produced...
(and of course this is completely subjective...but I will try anyway...)
In my mind Oasis have produced 5 amazing, A+ albums so far...them being
DM, WTSMG?, BHN, The Masterplan (and yes I feel inclined to count that one!!) and DBTT.
Off the top of my head (which is as it should be for classic albums, this is how some of the other bands rate)
the Beatles: Hard Days Night, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt Pepper, White Album, Abbey Road, MMT (for at least 7)
the Stones: Sticky Fingers, Exile, Let It Bleed, Beggers Banquet, Decembers Children (for at least 5)
the Who: Whos Next, Who Sell Out, Quadraphenia, Tommy (4)
Led Zep: 1, 2, Untitled, Phys Graf (4)
Travis: The man who, Invisible band (2)
U2: War, Joshua Tree, Achtung Baby (3)
Kinks: Something Else, Village Green (2)
Floyd: Pied Piper, Wish you were here, wall, dark side (4)
Clash: Clash, London Calling (2).
Supertramp: Crime of the Cent, Breakfast in Amer (2)
T Rex: Electric Warrior, Slider (2)
the Jam: Sound Effects, All Mod Cons (2)
Pulp, the Zombies, Blur, Libertines, Radiohead, Buzzcocks, Supergrass, the Smiths, Coldplay have all put out one amazing album and, in some cases, a number of other albums that I would rate as very good but not quite essential.
Clapton has made some amazing albums (Blues Breakers, Layla, 461 Ocean Blvd, Fresh, Desreali) with a bunch of different sidemen.
Kasabian and Arrctic Monkeys have each made two amazing but not quite essential albums.
I, being the beatle lover that i am, would also suggest that Paul (Band on the run, tug of war, chaos and creation, ram and mccartney) and John (Plastic Ono Band, Imagine, Walls and Bridges) have on their own put out some classic albums.
I'm sure I missed a couple of obvious ones.
And yeah I know that it is all my opinion and that it has gone on for far too long...
niaT
|
|
Panda
Oasis Roadie
yeah... i'm wearing a pink thong
Posts: 112
|
Post by Panda on Feb 13, 2008 1:03:58 GMT -5
Oasis X 4
Beatles X 1
|
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker74 on Feb 13, 2008 12:44:59 GMT -5
In keeping with the tread:
Top 5 UKs
Beatles
Pink Floyd
Led Zep
Rolling Stones
U2
|
|
|
|
Post by boywiththeshoes on Feb 13, 2008 12:51:43 GMT -5
In keeping with the tread: Top 5 UKs Beatles Pink Floyd Led Zep Rolling Stones U2Good list...apart from the fact U2 are Irish...though The Edge was born in London....but I still think they are Irish.  |
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker74 on Feb 13, 2008 13:02:06 GMT -5
Good list...apart from the fact U2 are Irish...though The Edge was born in London....but I still think they are Irish. [/quote] i had wondered why they hadn't had a mention, can i swap a u2 for the Who |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2008 22:21:50 GMT -5
I'd like to start by saying I'm just as big an Oasis fan as anyone else on here... that being said... There is NO WAY that anyone can rank Oasis above: It depends if you're looking at the list as a personal list or in the grand scope of things. |
|
|
|
Post by NowhereLad on Feb 14, 2008 3:25:39 GMT -5
Anyone who doesn't put the stone roses in their list must be injecting smack into their arses.
|
|
|
|
Post by liamdafookinlad on Feb 14, 2008 8:40:43 GMT -5
1. The Beatles (the biggest and most important band ever)
2. Oasis (my favourite band and the most exciting band of the 90's)
3. The Kinks (my favourite 60's band)
4. Pink Floyd (my first passion in music)
5. The Stone Roses (a short but very intense career)
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5