|
|
Post by masterplan2011 on Mar 21, 2011 18:56:11 GMT -5
I'm interested to see what everybody thinks but I think if DGSS was released about six or seven years ago or longer it would have done a lot better than it has done in today's farcical charts. Maybe I should have put this on the Oasis section but if Oasis emerged tomorrow as a new band, do you think DM would have the success it did back in the 90's? I don't think they would have been able to break this shite mould that has been cast, top 10 definitely but I really doubt if it would get to no.1. As Andy said they are a dying breed.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Mar 21, 2011 19:05:50 GMT -5
DGSS would not have gotten #1 or maybe even Top 10. There were better bands, better artists in 90's. The main reason BDI charted so high was because of weak competition. If you were to put them in Oasis' era, they would not have done well.
Though if we talk financially, then yes. Because of course more albums were sold, so of course you will make more money. But I don't think that would have truly equated to success. In my eyes, if they had come out with DGSS in the 90's, they would have been the equivalent of Ride.
DM on the other hand, is a different story. I still think that the album would have went Top 3, if released today. It has those singles like Live Forever, Supersonic, and C&A which really succeed in any decade.
|
|
|
|
Post by Silence Dogood on Mar 21, 2011 19:31:21 GMT -5
lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 21, 2011 20:05:27 GMT -5
What if DGSS followed WTSMG.....it's more similar in vein to WTSMG than BHN, and it's more focused and tight.
Don't get me wrong, I much prefer BHN, but my question is: would Oasis have had such a backlash? DGSS would have probably sold just as many as BHN due to the hype that was building, but would it have cost Oasis as much in terms of credibility after the fact?
|
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Mar 21, 2011 21:01:14 GMT -5
DGSS would not have gotten #1 or maybe even Top 10. There were better bands, better artists in 90's. The main reason BDI charted so high was because of weak competition. If you were to put them in Oasis' era, they would not have done well. Though if we talk financially, then yes. Because of course more albums were sold, so of course you will make more money. But I don't think that would have truly equated to success. In my eyes, if they had come out with DGSS in the 90's, they would have been the equivalent of Ride. DM on the other hand, is a different story. I still think that the album would have went Top 3, if released today. It has those singles like Live Forever, Supersonic, and C&A which really succeed in any decade. You really are freaking me out. LOL. My first thought was that if this album came out as a debut album in the 90's they would probably be about as big as Ride...then I read your comment and had to laugh. Anyways, as we keep saying, the state of pop music today is a big reason that many are rating it as highly as they do. But in the 90's, when this actually would have been mainstream, it would have paled in comparison to most of the rock music circulating @ the time. If this had been released as a debut album by a band they would have been firmly second tier Britpop or less. With this album they wouldn't have been a defining band of the era like Oasis was. Now thinking about if this album had been released by Oasis in a weird alternate universe where that was possible (considering the only common link is Liam and Liam didn't write songs in the 90's) like NL4E proposed. If it had been released by Oasis after DM it would have been a good follow-up to a amazing debut. It would have gone to #1 and Oasis would have been somewhere in the first tier of Britpop bands...DM would have assured that...but DGSS would have been viewed as a step back....and without WTSMG they wouldn't have been as pivotal in the Britpop scene. I think Oasis would have followed the same pattern as most Britpop bands where they just faded away as the public forgot about them in favor of the new crop of popstars. If this had been released after WTSMG it probably still would have been a let down...but without the excuse of cocaine driven lunacy masking decent songs. Let's be honest. It's not just lack of hype that makes me think there are no hit singles off this album. To maintain the level that Oasis were @ post-MG...you need hit singles...anything else would have been a step back. It wouldn't have been as spectacular a fall from grace as BHN though. It probably would have caused less backlash...but the story wouldn't be nearly so interesting. If it had been released after BHN...it would have been subjected to the same Oasis backlash as SOTSOG was. It would have been dismissed as derivative and blah. If it had been released instead of HC...the Oasis back-to-form appraisal according to the press would have kicked off one album sooner than DBTT. DBTT would probably have been the more successful album though because of the singles though. As for Definitely Maybe...if it were released today it would probably get great reviews...but it wouldn't have sold as much. Probably wouldn't have gotten to #1...and Oasis would never have gotten as high a profile as they seemed to in the 90's. They'd be just another really good rock band in a pop driven era. IMO... |
|
|
|
Post by forestfan on Mar 22, 2011 5:56:56 GMT -5
Imagine if Oasis stopped after Knebworth
Imagine their status...big if not bigger than any band in history
( but then I would of never got Little James)
yes I am drinking
|
|
|
|
Post by oasisfanboy on Mar 22, 2011 7:14:22 GMT -5
^^ Yeah, but everyone would just say "what a shame, imagine the records they could have made... what a waste".
|
|
|
|
Post by BlueJay on Mar 22, 2011 8:26:50 GMT -5
^^^They shouldve stopped after Be Here Now imo.
|
|
jcl80
Madferrit Fan
Posts: 69
|
Post by jcl80 on Mar 22, 2011 11:03:48 GMT -5
Time cant change shit..... It would be just as bad...
|
|
|
|
Post by manualex on Mar 22, 2011 11:06:18 GMT -5
See heavy stereo...
|
|
|
|
Post by shoes222 on Mar 22, 2011 12:34:38 GMT -5
I think if DGSS came out in the '90s, I would like it even LESS than I do today. The '90s was more of a time for loud anthemic rock as opposed to this decade, and at least for me it would have been ignored compared to all of the far superior songs and artists that had hits in that decade. If DGSS was an OASIS album that was released in the '90s instead of either DM, WTSMG or BHN...Oasis wouldn't even be one of my favorite bands.
|
|
|
|
Post by forestfan on Mar 22, 2011 23:08:07 GMT -5
^^^They shouldve stopped after Be Here Now imo. hmm there was talk of a name change when Mr Arthurs and Guigs left the band |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2011 23:29:56 GMT -5
DGSS lacks the one thing that made Oasis albums massive . . . the hits!
|
|
|
|
Post by space75gr on Mar 25, 2011 4:06:55 GMT -5
i m not really sure about the age of most people here!
no offence to anyone but as a 90s man & a hardcore britpop fan i have to remind you a few things.
if you beliebe that DGSS is a shit album:
definitely a million seller in the 90s.ocean colour scene, cast,bluetones,reef to name a few didnt have problems selling a lot of records in uk n having big hits.almost every brit pop band could make it with their debut album.so why not a shit album like DGSS with shit songs such as "the beat goes on" , "for anyone" , "four letter word" or "millionaire" and a shit singer like Liam Gallagher?a few covers in NME, MM, SELECT or Q as the "next big thing" in a matter of a month or two could make them the favorite new band and actually the big thing.
!!!
if you believe that DGSS is a good/very good/great album:
definitely a million seller in the 90s and also big sales in us.it could make it like "definitely maybe" in terms of sales.(quality and importance is another thing).almost every single could be a big hit.it could hit #1 for at least 3-4 weeks in albums charts.tracks such as "the beat goes on" could give them a #1 anthem in uk , "for anyone" #2 , "four letter word" #9 and "the roller" #31 (and then re-entry in #4 and 12 weeks in top 10...)
critics and people will consider it as one of the greatest debuts of the 90s and would be mad4the 2nd album , their massive seller no matter if that was a good or a bad one.
BE's music style was huge in the 90s.in their case is less noisy than oasis and that fact could give them even bigger sales in pop fanbase.american college radio would play nonstop most of these tracks (for anyone, millionaire, the grungy 4LW, epic K4AD etc)
anyway, you probably think i m from space... with all these comments but it happens to come from the 90s.i lived in the 90s and i think i know better.
after all its only my opinion...
|
|
|
|
Post by wonderplan on Mar 25, 2011 10:00:58 GMT -5
i m not really sure about the age of most people here!no offence to anyone but as a 90s man & a hardcore britpop fan i have to remind you a few things. if you beliebe that DGSS is a shit album:definitely a million seller in the 90s.ocean colour scene, cast,bluetones,reef to name a few didnt have problems selling a lot of records in uk n having big hits.almost every brit pop band could make it with their debut album.so why not a shit album like DGSS with shit songs such as "the beat goes on" , "for anyone" , "four letter word" or "millionaire" and a shit singer like Liam Gallagher?a few covers in NME, MM, SELECT or Q as the "next big thing" in a matter of a month or two could make them the favorite new band and actually the big thing. !!! if you believe that DGSS is a good/very good/great album:definitely a million seller in the 90s and also big sales in us.it could make it like "definitely maybe" in terms of sales.(quality and importance is another thing).almost every single could be a big hit.it could hit #1 for at least 3-4 weeks in albums charts.tracks such as "the beat goes on" could give them a #1 anthem in uk , "for anyone" #2 , "four letter word" #9 and "the roller" #31 (and then re-entry in #4 and 12 weeks in top 10...) critics and people will consider it as one of the greatest debuts of the 90s and would be mad4the 2nd album , their massive seller no matter if that was a good or a bad one. BE's music style was huge in the 90s.in their case is less noisy than oasis and that fact could give them even bigger sales in pop fanbase.american college radio would play nonstop most of these tracks (for anyone, millionaire, the grungy 4LW, epic K4AD etc) anyway, you probably think i m from space... with all these comments but it happens to come from the 90s.i lived in the 90s and i think i know better. after all its only my opinion... This. Anybody who thinks this album would be ignored in the 90's needs to have their head checked. Any way you slice it for a debut album DGSS is damn impressive, this also coming from an alternative 90's kid. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2011 13:12:56 GMT -5
i m not really sure about the age of most people here!no offence to anyone but as a 90s man & a hardcore britpop fan i have to remind you a few things. if you beliebe that DGSS is a shit album:definitely a million seller in the 90s.ocean colour scene, cast,bluetones,reef to name a few didnt have problems selling a lot of records in uk n having big hits.almost every brit pop band could make it with their debut album.so why not a shit album like DGSS with shit songs such as "the beat goes on" , "for anyone" , "four letter word" or "millionaire" and a shit singer like Liam Gallagher?a few covers in NME, MM, SELECT or Q as the "next big thing" in a matter of a month or two could make them the favorite new band and actually the big thing. !!! if you believe that DGSS is a good/very good/great album:definitely a million seller in the 90s and also big sales in us.it could make it like "definitely maybe" in terms of sales.(quality and importance is another thing).almost every single could be a big hit.it could hit #1 for at least 3-4 weeks in albums charts.tracks such as "the beat goes on" could give them a #1 anthem in uk , "for anyone" #2 , "four letter word" #9 and "the roller" #31 (and then re-entry in #4 and 12 weeks in top 10...) critics and people will consider it as one of the greatest debuts of the 90s and would be mad4the 2nd album , their massive seller no matter if that was a good or a bad one. BE's music style was huge in the 90s.in their case is less noisy than oasis and that fact could give them even bigger sales in pop fanbase.american college radio would play nonstop most of these tracks (for anyone, millionaire, the grungy 4LW, epic K4AD etc) anyway, you probably think i m from space... with all these comments but it happens to come from the 90s.i lived in the 90s and i think i know better. after all its only my opinion... This. Anybody who thinks this album would be ignored in the 90's needs to have their head checked. Any way you slice it for a debut album DGSS is damn impressive, this also coming from an alternative 90's kid. I think both of you are missing the point here. In the mid 90's this album would be just white noise amongst many other superior records. This album has no point to speak to, whereas DM spoke to a generation of people about life in England at the time. BDI would never get any recognition as a group of 40 somethings releasing a debut record if they hadn't already been a phenomenon once before. Additionally, the Noel/Liam dichotomy of the group is what fueled the "next big thing" talk, and BDI are a group of relatively subdued, boring musicians. The two time periods, now and then, have no relevance to each other in anyway. In short, DGSS would have gotten even less props back then, then it did today regardless of how people feel towards the album. |
|
|
|
Post by wonderplan on Mar 25, 2011 13:30:33 GMT -5
This. Anybody who thinks this album would be ignored in the 90's needs to have their head checked. Any way you slice it for a debut album DGSS is damn impressive, this also coming from an alternative 90's kid. I think both of you are missing the point here. In the mid 90's this album would be just white noise amongst many other superior records. This album has no point to speak to, whereas DM spoke to a generation of people about life in England at the time. BDI would never get any recognition as a group of 40 somethings releasing a debut record if they hadn't already been a phenomenon once before. Additionally, the Noel/Liam dichotomy of the group is what fueled the "next big thing" talk, and BDI are a group of relatively subdued, boring musicians. The two time periods, now and then, have no relevance to each other in anyway. In short, DGSS would have gotten even less props back then, then it did today regardless of how people feel towards the album. but you are comparing it to Oasis & DM. no of course BDI & DGSS wouldn't have been as big but they certainly wouldn't be ignored when so many acts found success in that era. & for the record they weren't 40 somethings in the 90's & Liam still isn't even 40 |
|
|
|
Post by beadyeyeunofficial on Mar 25, 2011 15:07:35 GMT -5
It would have been as big - if not bigger than Definitely Maybe.
|
|
|
|
Post by MacaRonic on Mar 25, 2011 15:37:31 GMT -5
Seriously this album is great, people who think it wouldn't of done well in the 90s are off their f#cking tits. I grew up in the nineties and there wasn't that many great albums. Oasis' first two were definitely the two best of the entire decade. Nevermind, Achtung Baby, The Bends, Ok Computer, Urban Hymns and a few more can't think off me head. I think Different Gear, Still Speeding wouldn't be far behind any of those.
|
|
|
|
Post by space75gr on Mar 26, 2011 5:22:18 GMT -5
old men know better.cheers to all brit pop guys here who believe (including myself).
succesful?
in terms of sales as i v said it could be a big seller.its exctly the style of a bif seller on the mid 90s.
on terms of quality , critics will consider it as one ofd the greatest debuts of the 90s.
it doesnt have to be better than "different class","definitely maybe","parklife" ,"dog man star" or "ok computer".can you really mention many albums better than these?
we are not talking here about the best album of the 90s but for a succesful one.
as for our decade the fact that Beady Eye is Oasis minus Noel, gave them a lot of hype but on the other hand its the reason than critics and oasis haters will never bring it to a top of the year list even if it has a place imo.its the reason they are not gonna have airplay or promo cause they are not actually a new thing , even if they are imo.
btw,can you really mention a bettter RNR album so far this year?
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5