|
Post by guigsysEstring on Jan 30, 2016 10:39:38 GMT -5
Funnily enough that's pretty much what Rolling Stone's 1997 Review said they had done, essentially making the same kind of album three times from DM-WTSMG-BHN. They still gave it four stars and a decent write up though I never understood how people could say those first 3 albums are the same. They are actually very different when you hear them now. DM - punkier, more raw, slightly unpolished feel to the songs, and a fairly slow, menacing tempo throughout the album. Liam was still discovering his most suitable range of vocals, while the lyrics also strongly hint at a band that had not yet made it. WTS - polished feel, the most commercially friendly sounding of all Oasis records, almost feels like a greatest hits album, and the one that crosses easiest over to the mainstream public, with songs like Wonderwall and Don't Look Back in Anger. You don't need to be an Oasis fan to like WTS. Even my Mum or Gran could listen to the majority of songs on that album. BHN - the most controversial album of all Oasis records, and the one that most often divides opinion. Either its too long, overblown and too loud, due to excess coke binges - or its epic, colossal, huge, Oasis finest hour, madferit, the soundtrack to driving extremely fast in your car, and partying extremely hard with your mates. The lyrics slap you in the face with their unashamed swaggering statements of being the biggest band in the world....and at that magical moment in time, they truly were! I can see where you are coming from but equally can also see it from Noel back in 1995 to the NME- Oasis Blogspot He said at the time before the release of Morning Glory that he saw Oasis as three albums and that was it, expanding on that by saying "There are only so many anthems you can write". I suppose what I mean is the albums do have individual sounds but as a trio they are three unashamed albums of anthems, before the more introspective and psychedelic influenced sounds came in. In that respect I can see Rolling Stone's point that they made the same album three times, albeit with different songs and production techniques
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Jan 30, 2016 11:16:16 GMT -5
Everything that's wrong with Be Here Now makes it perfect.
|
|
|
Post by Flatulence Panic on Jan 30, 2016 11:23:51 GMT -5
Everything that's wrong with Be Here Now makes it perfect. "true perfection has to be imperfect" ~ Noel Gallagher, 2002
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Jan 31, 2016 5:24:38 GMT -5
Their biggest mistake? Not giving up touring and becoming a studio only band. Touring eventually tore them apart. Unfortunately there are very few artists that works for- Manic Street Preachers and REM both made noises about it during their respective careers but carried on touring anyway. In the case of Oasis I think touring was simply worth too much money to stop, although you are correct in the assessment that that tore them apart.
|
|
|
Post by themanwithnoname on Feb 1, 2016 5:34:41 GMT -5
Have to agree with those saying it was bad choices which took their toll. Noel was in a bit of a rut when it came to Be Here Now but you can still put together a decent album from the songs from that era. And of course, the longer ones needed editing down. Something like this would almost certainly have enabled them to retain most of their fanbase and avoid the backlash: My Big Mouth D'You Know What I Mean? Stand By Me Stay Young Going Nowhere I Hope, I Think, I Know Don't Go Away Flashbax Be Here Now The Fame All Around The World Same for SOTSOG. Noel didn't have huge amounts of material kicking around but certainly there were 10 songs from that period that would have constituted a far superior album to the one he put out: F*ckin in the Bushes Go Let It Out Carnation Revolution Song Gas Panic Carry Us All Who Feels Love Let's All Make Believe Where Did It All Go Wrong? Roll It Over Carnation isn't an Oasis song, is it? No, it's a Jam cover, but it still works brilliantly as it has the same dark feel as SOTSOG and pisses over most of the other stuff they were producing at the time. I don't mind having a cover when it's as good as this one.
|
|
|
Post by AdidasNG72 on Feb 1, 2016 5:36:39 GMT -5
Carnation isn't an Oasis song, is it? No, it's a Jam cover, but it still works brilliantly as it has the same dark feel as SOTSOG and pisses over most of the other stuff they were producing at the time. I don't mind having a cover when it's as good as this one. Sorry mate, but that would be good enough for a B side only. Since when did Oasis start putting covers on their albums...? That's outrageous.
|
|
|
Post by Mean Mrs. Mustard on Feb 1, 2016 5:39:01 GMT -5
No, it's a Jam cover, but it still works brilliantly as it has the same dark feel as SOTSOG and pisses over most of the other stuff they were producing at the time. I don't mind having a cover when it's as good as this one. Sorry mate, but that would be good enough for a B side only. Since when did Oasis start putting covers on their albums...? That's outrageous. That would give critics even more reason to have a dig at them!
|
|
|
Post by themanwithnoname on Feb 1, 2016 5:40:11 GMT -5
No, it's a Jam cover, but it still works brilliantly as it has the same dark feel as SOTSOG and pisses over most of the other stuff they were producing at the time. I don't mind having a cover when it's as good as this one. Sorry mate, but that would be good enough for a B side only. Since when did Oasis start putting covers on their albums...? That's outrageous. No, they wouldn't have put a cover on an album, but then this is all a hypothetical discussion and I can only say what, in my opinion, could have made SOTSOG a better, more interesting listen.
|
|
|
Post by Mean Mrs. Mustard on Feb 1, 2016 6:13:28 GMT -5
Sorry mate, but that would be good enough for a B side only. Since when did Oasis start putting covers on their albums...? That's outrageous. No, they wouldn't have put a cover on an album, but then this is all a hypothetical discussion and I can only say what, in my opinion, could have made SOTSOG a better, more interesting listen. I don't think covers are interesting at all, but each to their own.
|
|
|
Post by GerryTheLeper on Feb 1, 2016 6:31:55 GMT -5
"Wasting" epic songs, and a third potential huge album on b-sides? I'd imagine that would be Noel's #1 answer if you asked him. Be Here Now is great to us fans, but it did essentially stop the Oasis power train.
|
|
|
Post by AdidasNG72 on Feb 1, 2016 9:29:47 GMT -5
"Wasting" epic songs, and a third potential huge album on b-sides? I'd imagine that would be Noel's #1 answer if you asked him. Be Here Now is great to us fans, but it did essentially stop the Oasis power train. Or another point of view is that Princess Diana stopped the Oasis power train, which I agree with. Had some of the more popular B sides like The Masterplan, Going Nowhere and Stay Young been saved for BHN, I don't think it would have made much difference to Oasis popularity, once Britpop came crashing in a Paris tunnel to a sudden halt.
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Feb 1, 2016 10:44:32 GMT -5
"Wasting" epic songs, and a third potential huge album on b-sides? I'd imagine that would be Noel's #1 answer if you asked him. Be Here Now is great to us fans, but it did essentially stop the Oasis power train. Or another point of view is that Princess Diana stopped the Oasis power train, which I agree with. Had some of the more popular B sides like The Masterplan, Going Nowhere and Stay Young been saved for BHN, I don't think it would have made much difference to Oasis popularity, once Britpop came crashing in a Paris tunnel to a sudden halt. The death of Diana changed the mood of the nation no question, but also looking more musically there were a number of different direction and high quality albums released earlier in 1997, which didn't help. The albums released before Be Here Now included:- Radiohead- OK Computer Spiritualized- Ladies & Gentlemen We Are Floating In Space Blur- Blur Supergrass- In It For The Money The Prodigy- The Fat Of the Land Primal Scream- Vanishing Pount & Echo Dek To name a few, and some of these bands, particularly Blur had been direct rivals of Oasis or in the case of Supergrass for example, released their debuts in the slipstream of Oasis's initial success. With these artists moving away from the sound of Britpop and the tag falling on the likes of Shed Seven and The Bluetones, who had perhaps the singles but certainly not IMO the albums, the onus fell back onto Oasis as being seen as the leading figureheads (rightly or wrongly) of the movement. Unfortunately the weight of expectation for an Oasis album after nearly two years against the changing musical landscape was already far too high due to their massive earlier success, and although certainly not helped by the British public's mood swing with Diana's death, the same cannot be applied outside the UK. Whereas other British artists such as Radiohead began receiving critical acclaim and excellent sales in the USA, with OK Computer outselling BHN over there, Oasis were struggling with dual criticisms of their attitudes and accusations of not moving forward over the course of three albums- The former point is perhaps unfair and the latter certainly debatable, but it didn't take away the impact of disapproval that halted their USA and overseas career in general somewhat. Although a fan of Be Here Now I do wonder what might have been if Noel had had a Graham Coxon type figure in his band or inner circle- Whereas after the nadir of 'The Great Escape' Damon had Graham to stand up to his self importance and push him away from music hall singalongs and IMO at least not only save Blur but also establish Damon's future path as a collaborator and innovator, Noel himself had no one to question any of the decisions regarding BHN- even Noel himself said to Q in 1999 that they got lazy and BHN wasn't as inspired next to the first two albums- Oasis Blogspot Q Feb 1999 . If Noel had someone he would have listened to telling him certain things were not exactly great on the record or because of the general chaos surrounding the recording sessions then it's very possible that not only would Oasis's third record sound very different, but also SOTSOG and HC may not have ever been written if the band had gone down a different direction. While as I said I am a fan of BHN it could have been the start of a great period of innovation from Oasis in a similar way if not sound to their erstwhile rivals Blur, which may have seen the band have a lasting legacy away from the first two albums outside the core fan base such as ourselves on the forum.
|
|
|
Post by Headmaster on Feb 1, 2016 12:18:41 GMT -5
The problem with BHN wasn't their peers, Diana death or experimentation, the problem was the album itself.
BHN was a huge missed oportunity, Noel hates it much because of this, it was supposed to be the album which would put Oasis up there with U2 in popularity, but everyone knows that there is a masterpiece there somewhere, but it is buried underneath the overproduction and overlong lenght of those songs, it's also too loud and there isn't that much variation on the songs.
BHN is great, but it would have been so much better if Someone had the balls to tell Noel to edit the songs at the time.
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Feb 1, 2016 13:22:57 GMT -5
The problem with BHN wasn't their peers, Diana death or experimentation, the problem was the album itself.BHN was a huge missed oportunity, Noel hates it much because of this, it was supposed to be the album which would put Oasis up there with U2 in popularity, but everyone knows that there is a masterpiece there somewhere, but it is buried underneath the overproduction and overlong lenght of those songs, it's also too loud and there isn't that much variation on the songs. BHN is great, but it would have been so much better if Someone had the balls to tell Noel to edit the songs at the time. I'd go with a combination of the above to be fair, although yes the main issue is the overlong songs and lack of discretion in production.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Feb 1, 2016 21:06:44 GMT -5
Trick question.....They never made one. Right?
|
|
|
Post by mystoryisgory on Feb 1, 2016 22:50:21 GMT -5
Trick question.....They never made one. Right?
|
|
|
Post by AdidasNG72 on Feb 2, 2016 1:00:08 GMT -5
The problem with BHN wasn't their peers, Diana death or experimentation, the problem was the album itself. BHN was a huge missed oportunity, Noel hates it much because of this, it was supposed to be the album which would put Oasis up there with U2 in popularity, but everyone knows that there is a masterpiece there somewhere, but it is buried underneath the overproduction and overlong lenght of those songs, it's also too loud and there isn't that much variation on the songs. BHN is great, but it would have been so much better if Someone had the balls to tell Noel to edit the songs at the time. For the masses, to make this a crossover friendly album, yes I'd agree. It needed a less aggressive touch, toned down, some slower, softer numbers on there like Going Nowhere and Angel Child, and the song lengths shortening overall. But for me personally, as its my favourite album, I love the overblown, loud, long, epic feel to BHN, so I wouldn't want to change anything about it. Listening to BHN is like getting a cocaine fix without actually taking cocaine. It's one long pure adrenalin rush.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Bigglesworth on Feb 2, 2016 4:05:56 GMT -5
"Be here now" is my least favourite record by them. It reminds me of Michael Bay movies. Everything is loud, big, bright, constantly moving...exploding. Same as with a Michael Bay movie gers boring for me quite fast, altough the images are like described I feel the sane with Be here now. It was not a step forward after Morning Glory, more like loud stomping on the same spot, ruining the ground.
|
|
|
Post by AdidasNG72 on Feb 2, 2016 4:31:08 GMT -5
"Be here now" is my least favourite record by them. It reminds me of Michael Bay movies. Everything is loud, big, bright, constantly moving...exploding. Same as with a Michael Bay movie gers boring for me quite fast, altough the images are like described I feel the sane with Be here now. It was not a step forward after Morning Glory, more like loud stomping on the same spot, ruining the ground. Shame you didn't get BHN like I and many others do. I like your comparison with Michael Bay though, as I can see where you are coming from. I'd probably say BHN is more like an 80's Simpson/Bruckheimer/Tony Scott movie in that regard - Top Gun, Beverly Hills Cop II and Days of Thunder. Funny enough, those movies were made under the heavy influence of cocaine too from what I read, and all have the same adrenalin fuelled feel because of it. They are the visual equivalent to BHN. God, I love BHN even more now....
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Feb 2, 2016 21:11:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mystoryisgory on Feb 3, 2016 10:28:55 GMT -5
Replacing Chris Hutton with Liam.
|
|