|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Nov 27, 2010 11:42:52 GMT -5
After giving Sons of the Stage a fair share of listens, I think both tracks are absolutely rubbish and signs aren't looking good for the album. I'll be happy to be proven wrong, and I hope I am. Sorry. Commence the insults. I can understand why people hate BTL. I don't hate it, it's decent enough, but I can understand the negative sentiments with that one. But I don't understand how anyone can not like the SOTS cover? It has an excellent vibe, it's musically rocking, and there's some pretty clear vintage Oasis hallmarks in it. More of the same, please.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2010 11:49:43 GMT -5
Fair enough if it's a b-side and people like it, but to me it's just... well... BORING.
It doesn't sound like classic Oasis, it sounds like something rejected from DOYS.
|
|
|
Post by SOULDIGGER on Nov 27, 2010 11:53:02 GMT -5
At least we are talking about Gallagher music right. They couldve just shut it down and we would have waited for noels wife to say "ok noeln u can go and play a few gigs now" lmao
|
|
|
Post by worldsoutro on Nov 27, 2010 19:16:46 GMT -5
Well i had low expectations to begin with even before anything was announced. Then they called themself Beady Eye and I knew it was downhill from there....
|
|
|
Post by Marcos on Nov 28, 2010 3:25:53 GMT -5
Well i had low expectations to begin with even before anything was announced. Then they called themself Beady Eye and I knew it was downhill from there.... ? So if you judge a band by the name you would never have listened to The Beatles, right?
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Nov 28, 2010 3:39:03 GMT -5
Well i had low expectations to begin with even before anything was announced. Then they called themself Beady Eye and I knew it was downhill from there.... ? So if you judge a band by the name you would never have listened to The Beatles, right? I don't agree with judging by a name. But the Beatles isn't that bad. Not epic by any standards. But not cringe-worthy. It's banal and a corny pun @ worst. But Beady Eye? Sounds pretty bad. Brings to mind someone with Graves disease or something...no offence intended to those w/ Graves disease.
|
|
|
Post by Marcos on Nov 28, 2010 3:55:30 GMT -5
I don't think Beady Eye sound bad at all. The pronounciation is really cool.
|
|
|
Post by oneeye on Nov 28, 2010 4:18:01 GMT -5
? So if you judge a band by the name you would never have listened to The Beatles, right? I don't agree with judging by a name. But the Beatles isn't that bad. Not epic by any standards. But not cringe-worthy. It's banal and a corny pun @ worst. But Beady Eye? Sounds pretty bad. Brings to mind someone with Graves disease or something...no offence intended to those w/ Graves disease. back in the 60's - the press slated them for having a name like THE BEATLES They took flack also because everyone thought "well the are called the Beatles but it's even spelled wrong" ;D ;D ;D That soon all changed
|
|
|
Post by psj3809 on Nov 28, 2010 4:31:38 GMT -5
What is the matter with some of you lot ? Its like Boyzone fans moaning about the name of a song or something.
Again: When the Beatles came out their name was slated, when Oasis came out people mocked their name.
What about the Arctic Monkeys ? What a stupid name that is. A great album later no one cares.
Liam could call his band '3 inch penis' but as long as the songs were great i wouldnt care (Granted might be embarassing wearing a t shirt with their logo on).
I mean, christ - Beady Eye isnt the worst. Again i'm not fussed by the band name, i just want a good album. What is it with some people ? Getting into stupid discussions about 'i dont like the band name so i wont like them...' (Said in a silly girlie voice).
Come on !
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Nov 28, 2010 11:20:36 GMT -5
I don't agree with judging by a name. But the Beatles isn't that bad. Not epic by any standards. But not cringe-worthy. It's banal and a corny pun @ worst. But Beady Eye? Sounds pretty bad. Brings to mind someone with Graves disease or something...no offence intended to those w/ Graves disease. back in the 60's - the press slated them for having a name like THE BEATLES They took flack also because everyone thought "well the are called the Beatles but it's even spelled wrong" ;D ;D ;D That soon all changed
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Nov 28, 2010 11:24:50 GMT -5
What is the matter with some of you lot ? Its like Boyzone fans moaning about the name of a song or something. Again: When the Beatles came out their name was slated, when Oasis came out people mocked their name. What about the Arctic Monkeys ? What a stupid name that is. A great album later no one cares. Liam could call his band '3 inch penis' but as long as the songs were great i wouldnt care (Granted might be embarassing wearing a t shirt with their logo on). I mean, christ - Beady Eye isnt the worst. Again i'm not fussed by the band name, i just want a good album. What is it with some people ? Getting into stupid discussions about 'i dont like the band name so i wont like them...' (Said in a silly girlie voice). Come on ! I suppose you guys are right to an extent. Although I still like Beady Eye worse than all of those. But the missing element that we are relying upon is that all those bands went on to release @ least 1 incredible album. I am hoping for a decent album from Beady Eye. However...I doubt highly that they are going to release something truly iconic.
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Nov 28, 2010 11:34:24 GMT -5
Whatever the band, whatever the style they do, if the music is good i couldn't give two shits what they're called.
And Gd, how often is an iconic album realeased? Its definately a long shot for them to release anything 'truly iconic'. Something decent would do me.
|
|
|
Post by ToneBender on Nov 28, 2010 12:30:10 GMT -5
I dig TBWTL, ABWR, Songbird, TUTS, ET, KTDA and Soldier On. IMHO, seven tracks of that quality and four more of HIABP/NOR quality would be more than okay!
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Nov 28, 2010 13:55:24 GMT -5
Whatever the band, whatever the style they do, if the music is good i couldn't give two shits what they're called. And Gd, how often is an iconic album realeased? Its definately a long shot for them to release anything 'truly iconic'. Something decent would do me. Exactly my point.
|
|
|
Post by psj3809 on Nov 28, 2010 15:23:56 GMT -5
I dig TBWTL, ABWR, Songbird, TUTS, ET, KTDA and Soldier On. IMHO, seven tracks of that quality and four more of HIABP/NOR quality would be more than okay! Same here, the famous Oasis songs like Wonderwall/DLBIA are classics but as i've heard them so many times i like listening to some of the 'lesser' not so famous ones, eg Hey Now, Be Here Now, TBWTL, Soldier on like you say etc. If Beady Eye can do tracks equal to these 'filler' type tracks i'll be happy as hell. I'm not expecting Definiately Maybe Mk II or that, i just want an album full of new tunes which are half decent, that'll keep me happy.
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Nov 28, 2010 18:46:18 GMT -5
Whatever the band, whatever the style they do, if the music is good i couldn't give two shits what they're called. And Gd, how often is an iconic album realeased? Its definately a long shot for them to release anything 'truly iconic'. Something decent would do me. Exactly my point. hahaha We appear to be in agreement again. Is this gonna cost me a chrismas present or something?
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Nov 28, 2010 20:48:31 GMT -5
I don't care about the band name. I just want good music. I like that Liam and co. are doing something and not just shutting it down, but I'm not willing to say that its a fair trade off if we get a bad or only decent album. That is the very definition of being a fan boy. I personally dont take bad albums and then say that I'm grateful that I at least got some music, that's not the way I'm built. I didnt like it when Oasis only made decent albums, I'm not going to like it if BDI makes a bad or decent album. I like and want good music. (I'm not saying that the album will be bad)
For me, I pretty much know that they'll probably come out with something that's barely above average and I'll probably be happy with that because I wasnt expecting much from them. Even with all that though, I'm always hopeful that I'll be proven wrong. And when I listen to their album, I will listen to it with a clear mind. Also, all I want is good music I couldn't give a shit for a band name.
Oneeye, I have to admit that you should've known that this thread was not going to be about uplifting BDI. The title thread does kinda spell it out and shouldn't have been a surprise.
What really worries me personally, is the fact that almost everytime someone tries to either critisize or have a debate on their music, some jump on the people having the debate with some hurtful language. I don't see why anyone has to tell anyone to "fuck off" because they're stating a valid opinion. It just seems that they're alot of itchy trigger fingers when it comes to discussing BDI's music.
I just dont see why there cant be a valid discussion without someone saying "we/you shouldn't be judging the band", "you have no right to judge what they're doing", "if you don't like it then fuck off". Both sides have been spewing this, and both sides are at fault. But to me, it always seems as if this always comes up when someone offers a point of critisism about BDI (whether fair or unfair).
The forum is for discussion. Why are some (on both sides) trying to shut discussion down?
|
|
|
Post by ToneBender on Nov 28, 2010 21:21:34 GMT -5
I suppose the reason that it's hard to have a valid discussion is because people are doing their best to write them off after two tracks have been released (one of which is a cover). I mean, that seems kind of silly, doesn't it? If memory serves, wasn't the first Oasis song to get any airplay Columbia (the White Label version) and the song that they closed all of their live sets with a cover? I'm not saying that people aren't entitled to their opinions but I'm going to have to go with Alan McGee here. There's way too much talent in this group of individuals to put out something as bad as many on here are predicting.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Nov 28, 2010 22:41:20 GMT -5
^^I think some have written off, but that doesnt mean that everyone who tries to have a discussion on them is writing them off.
I mean if I made a thread out of the blue that said "what can be fixed with the BTL and SOTS". That thread will get some responses asking "why do you have to critsize the band", "you have no right to question what they're doing". And the same can be said about people writing them off. That same thread will get people who will say "they're just shit and always will be".
The problem is that there are some who make valid points about the music and then get slagged off for for it. What's up with that? There are some on the forum who have not pre-judged BDI, and yet when they make an opinion they get tossed into groups like "oh, you're team Noel" or "You just want the Oasis sound". There probably are some that are team Noel or do want the Oasis sounds, but that doesnt mean everyone does.
And it just seems to me that many who arent trying to pick sides, who are just trying to judge the music are being pushed into a box whenever they try to make a comment. I mean I think someone asking whether BTL is a good sign or bad sign is a fair thread, I think questioning the production is a good thread, I think questiong whether BDI is making the right decisions is a good thread. Questioning music is what usually makes music great. And to tell the truth for me, if being a fan of someone means not questioning what they put out or do, then count me out. Cause in the end fans question. Whether in sports, music, literature, fans question.
|
|
|
Post by psj3809 on Nov 29, 2010 3:14:30 GMT -5
Basically dont take anything that seriously. Those who think the band is doomed because of the first free download or (this is laughable) the name are funny. Those that think Liam and co will write a masterpiece are just as bad. Lets just wait about 2 more months or so to hear the album for the first time. Then we can finally give a decent opinion. I mean seriously... Well i had low expectations to begin with even before anything was announced. Then they called themself Beady Eye and I knew it was downhill from there.... Just stupid. Perhaps if they called themselves 'the best band ever' would that then give you high expectations ? Ridiculous
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Nov 29, 2010 4:15:59 GMT -5
Just to be clear. I still think the name is naff. I am not judging or writing off the band because of the name...or @ all @ this point.
To judge a band by it's name is stupid...but there is nothing wrong with not liking the name.
And here here spaneli...thank God for you. =P Been saying it for weeks myself...how many times do you think that we can post the same point before it starts sinking in?
The board has calmed down a bit though thankfully...until next single. =S
|
|
|
Post by ToneBender on Nov 29, 2010 7:37:04 GMT -5
Hey I'm all for constructive criticism but when people say that the production of Sons Of The Stage sounds like a second generation cassette (?!?!) or has magnetic drop outs I really have to scratch my head. Does that poster know what a second generation cassette with drop outs sounds like? Take a listen to the Chicago 96 bootleg that circulates and you'll hear what it sounds like (whether the cassette rip or the VHS rip). There's a difference between constructive criticism and making a factually incorrect statement, wouldn't you agree?
Noel once made a statement likening being an Oasis fan with being a fan of a particular sports team and I tend to think that many on these boards took that to heart a little too much.
|
|
|
Post by oneeye on Nov 29, 2010 8:48:22 GMT -5
Hey I'm all for constructive criticism but when people say that the production of Sons Of The Stage sounds like a second generation cassette (?!?!) or has magnetic drop outs I really have to scratch my head. Does that poster know what a second generation cassette with drop outs sounds like? Take a listen to the Chicago 96 bootleg that circulates and you'll hear what it sounds like (whether the cassette rip or the VHS rip). There's a difference between constructive criticism and making a factually incorrect statement, wouldn't you agree? Noel once made a statement likening being an Oasis fan with being a fan of a particular sports team and I tend to think that many on these boards took that to heart a little too much. It is like supporting your team. I have the same passion for Oasis like I do for Newcastle United!!!!!!!! Other bands just don't have that with their fans.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Nov 29, 2010 11:59:12 GMT -5
Hey I'm all for constructive criticism but when people say that the production of Sons Of The Stage sounds like a second generation cassette (?!?!) or has magnetic drop outs I really have to scratch my head. Does that poster know what a second generation cassette with drop outs sounds like? Take a listen to the Chicago 96 bootleg that circulates and you'll hear what it sounds like (whether the cassette rip or the VHS rip). There's a difference between constructive criticism and making a factually incorrect statement, wouldn't you agree? Noel once made a statement likening being an Oasis fan with being a fan of a particular sports team and I tend to think that many on these boards took that to heart a little too much. It is like supporting your team. I have the same passion for Oasis like I do for Newcastle United!!!!!!!! Other bands just don't have that with their fans. This. (But replace Arsenal with Newcastle )
|
|
|
Post by beadyeyeunofficial on Nov 29, 2010 12:00:59 GMT -5
It is like supporting your team. I have the same passion for Oasis like I do for Newcastle United!!!!!!!! Other bands just don't have that with their fans. This. (But replace Arsenal with Newcastle ) Jeez, not another glory supporter. *rolls eyes*
|
|