|
|
Post by GIMH on Mar 14, 2012 15:56:27 GMT -5
So do we think this will lead to bigger venues in the UK? My five year old is desperate to see them but I would only really take her to a seated venue at this point
|
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Mar 14, 2012 16:10:31 GMT -5
Will you be playing any Oasis songs on the Beady Eye tour?LG and GA: [simultaneously] Nope. You won’t even slip an old favorite into the setlist?LG: I think it’d be schizophrenic, man. You know what I mean? Jumping from one to the other is fucking weird. It’s just fucking mental. Get over it. Oasis is yesterday. It’s fucking done. March 15, 201100:15-01:00 May 30, 2011He also said he'd consider playing Oasis songs in the future. Beady Eye currently don't play any of their songs in their set. "No that's the decision we've made. There's no backing down. We made a decision that it wasn't right," he said. "Maybe down the line we could do it. Certainly won't be doing it tonight or next week or in the next year. A couple of albums down I like to think we could bang out our songs. Not now man, they're not our songs they're Noel's." July 11, 2011“The time is right now, without a doubt. We were always going to do it, but we thought the album needed to stand on its own. We’ve done some good gigs, we’ve done some shit gigs. And it’s time to drop them in now. Everyone else is. I feel they’re just as much my songs as they are Noel’s. And if people don’t like it, go to the bar or **** off. If they do like it, jump up and down, let’s have a good time.” March 12, 2012 As much as Noel has contradicted himself over the years and people have gotten on him for that and have always praised Liam for sticking to his guns, speaking from the heart, not caring what others think, and not flip flopping. It amazes me how some are ignoring this post. Good post J-200. I personally have no opinion on the whole matter. But I thought it was interesting to point this out. Changing your mind isn't a bad thing and I don't think any massive amount of praise has been lavished on Liam for sticking to his guns. He does speak impulsively and I believe what he say's at the time he say's it. But things change. We all do it at one time or another. |
|
|
|
Post by lucahelvetica on Mar 14, 2012 16:17:20 GMT -5
I have no problem with them playing any song live, let alone ones that Liam is synonymous for singing. They were wrote for Liam to sing after all.
Lennon played McCartney songs solo, and McCartney played and still plays Lennon songs, Daltrey sings Townsend, Queen still play Mercury songs, Morrissey plays Smiths song even though the music is not his, I don't really understand where the idea that it is wrong is from.
What I wouldn't like is if the encore is completely made up of Oasis songs, as to me that shows a lack of faith in your own material.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Mar 14, 2012 16:22:06 GMT -5
I would be shocked if that is the case. TMS should be nailed on for any encore at the very least.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Mar 14, 2012 16:30:46 GMT -5
As much as Noel has contradicted himself over the years and people have gotten on him for that and have always praised Liam for sticking to his guns, speaking from the heart, not caring what others think, and not flip flopping. It amazes me how some are ignoring this post. Good post J-200. I personally have no opinion on the whole matter. But I thought it was interesting to point this out. Changing your mind isn't a bad thing and I don't think any massive amount of praise has been lavished on Liam for sticking to his guns. He does speak impulsively and I believe what he say's at the time he say's it. But things change. We all do it at one time or another. I've seen some lavish praise on Liam for sticking to his guns. These quotes by Liam weren't just in one interview that was randomly done a year ago. These quotes were from over a course of a year, or throughout a entire year. Some hold Noel to this standard and paint him as this person who contradicts himself from year to year, tour to tour, day to day. And also as someone who measures every step to somehow manipulate the situation. Yet when Liam changes his mind in the space of a year it's, "well he has a right to change his mind', and have some have said, it's not the same thing. I'm just wondering why the standards have changed and why some perpetuates the stereotype as Liam, the person who thinks with his heart, and Noel as the manipulative media savvy person who thinks with his head. Liam had a conviction for over a space of year that Oasis was dead, that he was moving on, that Beady Eye were a new entity that didn't need Oasis, yet he completely does a 180 on those convictions. I don't know. Had Noel done the same, I think many would be pulling back out the stereotype of Noel being the guy who goes back on his word, the person whose words you can't necessarily trust. |
|
|
|
Post by truefaith on Mar 14, 2012 16:51:42 GMT -5
Changing your mind isn't a bad thing and I don't think any massive amount of praise has been lavished on Liam for sticking to his guns. He does speak impulsively and I believe what he say's at the time he say's it. But things change. We all do it at one time or another. I've seen some lavish praise on Liam for sticking to his guns. These quotes by Liam weren't just in one interview that was randomly done a year ago. These quotes were from over a course of a year, or throughout a entire year. Some hold Noel to this standard and paint him as this person who contradicts himself from year to year, tour to tour, day to day. And also as someone who measures every step to somehow manipulate the situation. Yet when Liam changes his mind in the space of a year it's, "well he has a right to change his mind', and have some have said, it's not the same thing. I'm just wondering why the standards have changed and why some perpetuates the stereotype as Liam, the person who thinks with his heart, and Noel as the manipulative media savvy person who thinks with his head. Liam had a conviction for over a space of year that Oasis was dead, that he was moving on, that Beady Eye were a new entity that didn't need Oasis, yet he completely does a 180 on those convictions. I don't know. Had Noel done the same, I think many would be pulling back out the stereotype of Noel being the guy who goes back on his word, the person whose words you can't necessarily trust. But who's talking about Noel here? There always be two side, it's sad but there it is. I think Liam has a right to change his mind and he's impulsive, you think we're idiots defending Liam whatever he thinks. I have the same feeling when I see some idiots delighted that Noel plays with Chris Martin because it would sell 2 more albums and then those same people thinking it's wrong for Liam to sing Oasis song. I feel the same thing when some fan makes fun of pretty green ( brand made in UK, that Liam loves and invests time), and then are exited by adidas shoes custumized (just signed) by Noel made by a chinese kid. I feel the same when some guys have no problem with a drummer buchering Oasis song in HFB and then thinking it's weird to see actual former Oasis member play those song. There's two sides. (I wasn't talking about you on my example btw, just a lot of Noel's fans) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 16:52:25 GMT -5
This wouldn't be happening if Beady Eye were selling records and tickets. It's not "the right time", it's Liam seeing what Noel's got and wanting a piece of it.
That said, it could be pretty great if they played all the songs Noel never let them play. Liam's always said Be Here Now is his favourite Oasis album... If they just play Rock n' Roll Star and all the other songs Oasis played 500 times it's a waste of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Mar 14, 2012 16:57:26 GMT -5
I've seen some lavish praise on Liam for sticking to his guns. These quotes by Liam weren't just in one interview that was randomly done a year ago. These quotes were from over a course of a year, or throughout a entire year. Some hold Noel to this standard and paint him as this person who contradicts himself from year to year, tour to tour, day to day. And also as someone who measures every step to somehow manipulate the situation. Yet when Liam changes his mind in the space of a year it's, "well he has a right to change his mind', and have some have said, it's not the same thing. I'm just wondering why the standards have changed and why some perpetuates the stereotype as Liam, the person who thinks with his heart, and Noel as the manipulative media savvy person who thinks with his head. Liam had a conviction for over a space of year that Oasis was dead, that he was moving on, that Beady Eye were a new entity that didn't need Oasis, yet he completely does a 180 on those convictions. I don't know. Had Noel done the same, I think many would be pulling back out the stereotype of Noel being the guy who goes back on his word, the person whose words you can't necessarily trust. But who's talking about Noel here? There always be two side, it's sad but there it is. I think Liam has a right to change his mind and he's impulsive, you think we're idiots defending Liam whatever he thinks. I have the same feeling when I see some idiots delighted that Noel plays with Chris Martin because it would sell 2 more albums and then those same people thinking it's wrong for Liam to sing Oasis song. I feel the same thing when some fan makes fun of pretty green ( brand made in UK) and then are exited by adidas shoes custumized by Noel made by a chinese kid. I feel the same when some guys have no problem with a drummer buchering Oasis song in HFB and then thinking it's weird to see actual former Oasis member play those song. There's two sides. (I wasn't talking about you on my example btw, just a lot of Noel's fans) Whoa. Don't put words in my mouth please. Where did I say that anyone was an idiot? Also, I never said that Liam didn't have a right to change his mind. I'm just pointing out that it's interesting that it's not so much the act that has been committed, but the person that's commitinf that act that "seems" to matter. And unless I'm mistaken it seems that you agree. |
|
|
|
Post by truefaith on Mar 14, 2012 17:01:23 GMT -5
But who's talking about Noel here? There always be two side, it's sad but there it is. I think Liam has a right to change his mind and he's impulsive, you think we're idiots defending Liam whatever he thinks. I have the same feeling when I see some idiots delighted that Noel plays with Chris Martin because it would sell 2 more albums and then those same people thinking it's wrong for Liam to sing Oasis song. I feel the same thing when some fan makes fun of pretty green ( brand made in UK) and then are exited by adidas shoes custumized by Noel made by a chinese kid. I feel the same when some guys have no problem with a drummer buchering Oasis song in HFB and then thinking it's weird to see actual former Oasis member play those song. There's two sides. (I wasn't talking about you on my example btw, just a lot of Noel's fans) Whoa. Don't put words in my mouth please. Where did I say that anyone was an idiot? Also, I never said that Liam didn't have a right to change his mind. I'm just pointing out that it's interesting that it's not so much the act that has been committed, but the person that's commitinf that act that "seems" to matter. And unless I'm mistaken it seems that you agree. Sorry I don't understand what you mean. Language problem. |
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Mar 14, 2012 17:01:31 GMT -5
Great article. I agree wholeheartedly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 17:13:33 GMT -5
As long as they play 'The Morning Son' I'll see them with or without Oasis songs.. Would love to see them play GGTIA like  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 17:18:58 GMT -5
The simple reason . . .
He's tired of crowds being smaller than the number of people he sees down at the pub.
|
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Mar 14, 2012 17:32:25 GMT -5
I have no problem with them playing any song live, let alone ones that Liam is synonymous for singing. They were wrote for Liam to sing after all. Lennon played McCartney songs solo, and McCartney played and still plays Lennon songs, Daltrey sings Townsend, Queen still play Mercury songs, Morrissey plays Smiths song even though the music is not his, I don't really understand where the idea that it is wrong is from. What I wouldn't like is if the encore is completely made up of Oasis songs, as to me that shows a lack of faith in your own material. Solo artist, solo artist, solo artist, same band that released those songs, solo artist. I don't think any of those instances involves those acts forming an new band that they wanted to be taken as it's own identity and then playing the old acts material less than 18 months after the new act had debuted. Why do people insist on justifying it because someone else did it? Particularly when none of the examples are the same as BDI. BDI is SUPPOSED to be a band in their own right. This is not Liam's solo vehicle. |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 14, 2012 17:33:26 GMT -5
I have no problem with them playing any song live, let alone ones that Liam is synonymous for singing. They were wrote for Liam to sing after all. Lennon played McCartney songs solo, and McCartney played and still plays Lennon songs, Daltrey sings Townsend, Queen still play Mercury songs, Morrissey plays Smiths song even though the music is not his, I don't really understand where the idea that it is wrong is from. What I wouldn't like is if the encore is completely made up of Oasis songs, as to me that shows a lack of faith in your own material. Wow...John Lennon played Paul McCartney songs as a solo artist? You really think he did? You are aware that John Lennon didn't tour as a solo artist and only ever played a handful of charity appearances over his 10 year solo career right? I believe his only full concert gig was at Madison Square Garden in 1972 and guess what? No McCartney songs. He only played 1 Beatles song to begin with (Come Together). The rest were his solo material and an Elvis cover. Also, when Paul McCartney plays Lennon songs solo he does it as a tribute to his friend who is no longer living. He didn't play those songs when John was still alive. Paul will also play Harrison songs as well to honor George. |
|
|
|
Post by truefaith on Mar 14, 2012 17:36:00 GMT -5
I have no problem with them playing any song live, let alone ones that Liam is synonymous for singing. They were wrote for Liam to sing after all. Lennon played McCartney songs solo, and McCartney played and still plays Lennon songs, Daltrey sings Townsend, Queen still play Mercury songs, Morrissey plays Smiths song even though the music is not his, I don't really understand where the idea that it is wrong is from. What I wouldn't like is if the encore is completely made up of Oasis songs, as to me that shows a lack of faith in your own material. Solo artist, solo artist, solo artist, same band that released those songs, solo artist. I don't think any of those instances involves those acts forming an new band that they wanted to be taken as it's own identity and then playing the old acts material less than 18 months after the new act had debuted. Why do people insist on justifying it because someone else did it? Particularly when none of the examples are the same as BDI. BDI is SUPPOSED to be a band in their own right. This is not Liam's solo vehicle. It's just a band name. It's not because you're doing a band with your former bandmate instead of abandoning them that you have to gave up on your back catalogue. It's a lazy escuse. When Bernard Sumner from New Order formed Bad Lieutenant (and the band included some NO members), he played some Joy division song, some NO songs, some solo song. Nobody in the audience had a problem with it. Now he has reformed New order but without Peter hook. Liam is old in music industry, he has a back catalogue that he wants to play, just because he has a new band name doesn't automatically forbid him to revisit it. Especially since the band is made of former Oasis member. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas09 on Mar 14, 2012 17:41:28 GMT -5
He was there from the SNL performance till the munich gig. I really think they will one day. If anything it will be scentless apprentice since the song originated from dave. It will happen one day, even if nobody sings Pat Smear was the Nirvana's Jay Mehler from Kasabian. Just a touring guitarist. Nothing more. well that's wildly inaccurate. While discussing the recording of you know you're right in an interview during the late 90's, Pat said he had spoke to cobain on the phone after the recording session and cobain had arranged time for pat to record his guitar part. nirvana was a four piece in the end, kurt said it. just look at the promo pics from 94 |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 14, 2012 17:42:06 GMT -5
Solo artist, solo artist, solo artist, same band that released those songs, solo artist. I don't think any of those instances involves those acts forming an new band that they wanted to be taken as it's own identity and then playing the old acts material less than 18 months after the new act had debuted. Why do people insist on justifying it because someone else did it? Particularly when none of the examples are the same as BDI. BDI is SUPPOSED to be a band in their own right. This is not Liam's solo vehicle. It's just a band name. It's not because you're doing a band with your former bandmate instead of abandoning them that you have to gave up on your back catalogue. It's a lazy escuse. When Bernard Sumner from New Order formed Bad Lieutenant (and the band included some NO members), he played some Joy division song, some NO songs, some solo song. Nobody in the audience had a problem with it. Now he has reformed New order but without Peter hook. Liam is old in music industry, he has a back catalogue that he wants to play, just because he has a new band name doesn't automatically forbid him to revisit it. Especially since the band is made of former Oasis member. Yeah but Ian Curtis didn't quit the band and tell his bandmates to fuck off, he died and the New Order songs he played are the ones he wrote for New Order. |
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Mar 14, 2012 17:43:29 GMT -5
Whoa. Don't put words in my mouth please. Where did I say that anyone was an idiot? Also, I never said that Liam didn't have a right to change his mind. I'm just pointing out that it's interesting that it's not so much the act that has been committed, but the person that's commitinf that act that "seems" to matter. And unless I'm mistaken it seems that you agree. Sorry I don't understand what you mean. Language problem. No problem. I'm just saying that it seems as if the person doing the act matters more than the actual act itself. |
|
|
|
Post by lucahelvetica on Mar 14, 2012 17:46:20 GMT -5
I have no problem with them playing any song live, let alone ones that Liam is synonymous for singing. They were wrote for Liam to sing after all. Lennon played McCartney songs solo, and McCartney played and still plays Lennon songs, Daltrey sings Townsend, Queen still play Mercury songs, Morrissey plays Smiths song even though the music is not his, I don't really understand where the idea that it is wrong is from. What I wouldn't like is if the encore is completely made up of Oasis songs, as to me that shows a lack of faith in your own material. Wow...John Lennon played Paul McCartney songs as a solo artist? You really think he did? You are aware that John Lennon didn't tour as a solo artist and only ever played a handful of charity appearances over his 10 year solo career right? I believe his only full concert gig was at Madison Square Garden in 1972 and guess what? No McCartney songs. He only played 1 Beatles song to begin with (Come Together). The rest were his solo material and an Elvis cover. Also, when Paul McCartney plays Lennon songs solo he does it as a tribute to his friend who is no longer living. He didn't play those songs when John was still alive. Paul will also play Harrison songs as well to honor George. I believe Lennon played "I Saw Her Standing There" with Elton John live, he even introduced it as " a song by my estranged fiancee Paul" |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 14, 2012 17:46:35 GMT -5
Pat Smear was the Nirvana's Jay Mehler from Kasabian. Just a touring guitarist. Nothing more. well that's wildly inaccurate. While discussing the recording of you know you're right in an interview during the late 90's, Pat said he had spoke to cobain on the phone after the recording session and cobain had arranged time for pat to record his guitar part. nirvana was a four piece in the end, kurt said it. just look at the promo pics from 94 I love how you chopped off the first few lines of my previous statement. Wildly inaccurate? Let me ask you this. How many Nirvana records did Pat Smear play on? The answer is zero (please don't count the MTV unplugged album). He toured with them for In Utero before Cobain killed himself and the band ended. Could he have played on future albums? Perhaps but history will never show that. It does show that he was a touring second guitarist. You said earlier I was wrong and Pat played with Nirvana from that SNL show tell the Munich gig. You are aware that is within the 6-7 months I said he was touring with the band right? |
|
retrolego
Oasis Roadie
Walking to the sound of my favorite tune
Posts: 279
|
Post by retrolego on Mar 14, 2012 17:47:13 GMT -5
For some of the strange people who for have a problem with this for whatever reason just think of beady eye as Liam Gem and Andys Beady Eyes. This will make everything OK.
|
|
|
|
Post by truefaith on Mar 14, 2012 17:48:24 GMT -5
It's just a band name. It's not because you're doing a band with your former bandmate instead of abandoning them that you have to gave up on your back catalogue. It's a lazy escuse. When Bernard Sumner from New Order formed Bad Lieutenant (and the band included some NO members), he played some Joy division song, some NO songs, some solo song. Nobody in the audience had a problem with it. Now he has reformed New order but without Peter hook. Liam is old in music industry, he has a back catalogue that he wants to play, just because he has a new band name doesn't automatically forbid him to revisit it. Especially since the band is made of former Oasis member. Yeah but Ian Curtis didn't quit the band and tell his bandmates to fuck off, he died and the New Order songs he played are the ones he wrote for New Order. GD was saying "you cant' play songs from you former band when you're in a new one". My answer is why? Bernard Sumner did it for example. The question of playing stuff you've wrote or not is another debate. Liam didn't wrote the song but performed them. They're part of his catalogue, he has every right to play them. Same as Morrissey has the right to play Smiths song even if he didn't wrote the music or NO can play JD songs even if Ian is dead and Hooky isn't here anymore, because it's their back catalogue, and so on. People don't have a vey high value of what performer means. But a singer is not a drummer, it's something that defines the song, that makes the song what it is. Liam, Elvis, Morrissey, Jagger, these are great performers that are entitled to perform their song even if they haven't wrote them. |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 14, 2012 17:50:54 GMT -5
Wow...John Lennon played Paul McCartney songs as a solo artist? You really think he did? You are aware that John Lennon didn't tour as a solo artist and only ever played a handful of charity appearances over his 10 year solo career right? I believe his only full concert gig was at Madison Square Garden in 1972 and guess what? No McCartney songs. He only played 1 Beatles song to begin with (Come Together). The rest were his solo material and an Elvis cover. Also, when Paul McCartney plays Lennon songs solo he does it as a tribute to his friend who is no longer living. He didn't play those songs when John was still alive. Paul will also play Harrison songs as well to honor George. I believe Lennon played "I Saw Her Standing There" with Elton John live, he even introduced it as " a song by my estranged fiancee Paul" Touche....but that was an Elton John gig with Lennon coming on as a especial guest. In a flat out Lennon performance, he never did. |
|
|
|
Post by lucahelvetica on Mar 14, 2012 17:52:33 GMT -5
I have no problem with them playing any song live, let alone ones that Liam is synonymous for singing. They were wrote for Liam to sing after all. Lennon played McCartney songs solo, and McCartney played and still plays Lennon songs, Daltrey sings Townsend, Queen still play Mercury songs, Morrissey plays Smiths song even though the music is not his, I don't really understand where the idea that it is wrong is from. What I wouldn't like is if the encore is completely made up of Oasis songs, as to me that shows a lack of faith in your own material. Solo artist, solo artist, solo artist, same band that released those songs, solo artist. I don't think any of those instances involves those acts forming an new band that they wanted to be taken as it's own identity and then playing the old acts material less than 18 months after the new act had debuted. Why do people insist on justifying it because someone else did it? Particularly when none of the examples are the same as BDI. BDI is SUPPOSED to be a band in their own right. This is not Liam's solo vehicle. So if they had kept the name Oasis, which they could have done as Noel quit, it would then be ok? And why does it matter if it is solo or a band? As someone else mentioned New Order played Joy Division songs, Audioslave played Soundgarden and Rage against the machine covers. I am sure there are lots more examples. Singers have always sung songs from their back catalogue that are synonymous with them, regardless of who wrote them. |
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Mar 14, 2012 17:57:02 GMT -5
Yeah but Ian Curtis didn't quit the band and tell his bandmates to fuck off, he died and the New Order songs he played are the ones he wrote for New Order. GD was saying "you cant' play songs from you former band when you're in a new one". My answer is why? Bernard Sumner did it for example. The question of playing stuff you've wrote or not is another debate. Liam didn't wrote the song but performed them. They're part of his catalogue, he has every right to play them. Same as Morrissey has the right to play Smiths song even if he didn't wrote the music or NO can play JD songs even if Ian is dead and Hooky isn't here anymore and so on. People don't have a vey high value of what performer means. But a singer is not a drummer, it's something that defines the song, that makes the song what it is. Liam, Elvis, Morrissey, Jagger, these are great performers that are entitled to perform their song even if they haven't wrote them. I did NOT say they COULDN'T play the songs. Don't put words in my mouth. I am of the personal opinion that I wish they wouldn't. I said why do people pick dissimilar situations as some sort of proof? You instance was much more apropos...hope people use it instead of the tiring chants of Macca and Morrissey. Also...for the last time! Morrissey didn't play a Smiths song for like a decade AND he is a solo artist. |
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5