Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2017 19:55:48 GMT -5
Two people from an other forum I go to have heard the album and both said it was a total failure. No melodies and the production sounds just like a camouflage. They said it was nice to hear Noel trying something else but the songs were really mediocre. On an other forum, some guy said it was terrible. Don't know if he is a Oasis/NG fan though.
Still looking forward to it, hopefully it's gonna be good. Come on Noel, bring the music !
|
|
|
Post by matt on Sept 26, 2017 19:55:50 GMT -5
But thats what I mean and I believe that applies to Noel at his worst. Yes, it isn't anywhere bad like the manufactured crap in the charts, but his later attempts to write 'reach for the sky' euphoric choruses come off as cheap and gimmicky in an attempt to recreate old magic that he believes is what his fans want. When he's not thinking like that, he can be a bit more free and creative, and naturally, more authentic. I guess at least we ended up having a civic conversation. Thats good. Lets wait and see how this goes. Ill be buying liams album and borrowing noels. No problem, thanks. I will be buying both. I'm looking forward to Noel's more simply because he is my favourite songwriter, but I'm sure to enjoy Liam's tuneful album too. Traditional and vibrant sounding to me, the album is shaping up to be what I wished for from the first Beady Eye album. Its easy to forget amongst the debate and arguments but this is all new and different, whether it's a new solo career for Liam or a new sound for Noel. I'm loving it and it's been the most exciting time as an Oasis fan in years.
|
|
|
Post by unionpat on Sept 26, 2017 19:58:21 GMT -5
The deluxe versión has Dead on the water and the Japanese versión has God help us all(that from LDSMD dvd) and a DVD that no one knows what's in it. OH FUCK. THE DVD. I hope I think I know whats in there lads!!!!! What about the acoustic concert where he played WTSRTS and Riverman? There was cameras in there! If its the concert,im definitely buying that. or...maybe is just a making off lol. So officially we can say this is the first demo that we can hear from the album This song would be better done a la Johnny Cash.
|
|
|
Post by mystoryisgory on Sept 26, 2017 19:59:08 GMT -5
Can someone give me some examples of albums where a change in style resulted in a bad album or didn't do any favors to the band's legacy? Genuine question. Only Second Coming, SOTSOG, and BE come to mind, and I'd like to know some more examples.
|
|
|
Post by walterglass on Sept 26, 2017 20:03:17 GMT -5
Can someone give me some examples of albums where a change in style resulted in a bad album or didn't do any favors to the band's legacy? Genuine question. Only Second Coming, SOTSOG, and BE come to mind, and I'd like to know some more examples. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Their_Satanic_Majesties_Request
|
|
|
Post by oasis6 on Sept 26, 2017 20:04:02 GMT -5
This is a great time to do something different. The thing is, if Noel has been writing for his fans / keeping it safe, being on this board for a decade, I've learned that his fans just don't like his music like they did in the 90s. They consensus seems to dislike Liam even more (I think too much, but that is for another thread), and he has been the king of keeping it safe. So if his fans are complaining, which they have been since 1998, well if he wants to do something for them, he should change it up. I really look at some Chasing Yesterday elements (including the album title) and see or hear it as a call with Noel basically saying, as much as I want to be 90s, I can't anymore because times have change. You Know We Can't Go Back, the lyric "I was told, the streets were paved with gold and there'd be no time for getting old when we were young" all scream this. He can try as he may to be 90s Noel, but its too late. As he said, he's no longer a young man on the dole, he's a rich old man with a family. The tunes we long for just won't come naturally like that anymore. Time to change. Another example I'll use is George Harrison. Now I could be wrong, but going over his discography, All Things Must Pass and Living in the Material World were praised and they worked well with the times. Not too sure about Dark Horse but the vocals alone make it a different story. But by Extra Texture, it seemed like it was the same old George but the quality had dropped and musical tastes were also changing. His late 70s and early 80s albums were less heralded because of this, and it wasn't until Cloud Nine where he changed his sound to fit the times, even though he was probably mentally still stuck in the late 60s/early 70s, but it was a success. And when the Beatles Anthology came out, I think there was some disappointment over Free As a Bird and Real Love, with people probably expecting some I wanna Hold Your Hands. These were now 50 year old men in the 90s, not 20 year old boys in the 60s. An attempt at I wanna Hold Your Hand at that point would have been brutal. Noel is here now, even though deep down I still have this feel/hope that Liam and Noel could reunite for one more nostalgic album, I also know that if we haven't gotten it yet, it means it is too late and it will never happen. Change is good. I think its not a rule written in stone. Some bands and artists manage to bring the same but renueved with succes (foo fighters?) and others change their sound in new directions with succes like damon albarn Many had tryed new stuff and failed miserably and only got to shine again when they got back to their roots (the offspring?) And others are just fine by always doing the same. It's interesting you bring up the Foo Fighters because I feel like they are an outlier. Whenever Liam says "Oasis is the last true rock band", I can't always help think its the Foo Fighters. They are really the only 90s rock band who are still doing what they did and are largely successful. Most 90s rock band are basically dead at this point, or if they held high status like U2 or the Chili Peppers (who started in the 80s, but were still highly prominent in the 90s), even those 2 bands have changed their sound on and off and back and forth. Honestly am surprised Foo Fighters are doing so well in the times/environment we are in nowadays, but kudos to them. Can't think of another band from the 90s who really stayed the course, are still around and are still somewhat relevant and on the map.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2017 20:07:04 GMT -5
Can someone give me some examples of albums where a change in style resulted in a bad album or didn't do any favors to the band's legacy? Genuine question. Only Second Coming, SOTSOG, and BE come to mind, and I'd like to know some more examples. Belle and Sebastian - Write About Love (or even the album just before, "The Life Pursuit")
|
|
|
Post by PartlyCloudlike on Sept 26, 2017 20:10:45 GMT -5
Can someone give me some examples of albums where a change in style resulted in a bad album or didn't do any favors to the band's legacy? Genuine question. Only Second Coming, SOTSOG, and BE come to mind, and I'd like to know some more examples. The Killers - Sam's Town Although today the music press seem to be reappraising that album as better than early reviews indicate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2017 20:11:50 GMT -5
I think its not a rule written in stone. Some bands and artists manage to bring the same but renueved with succes (foo fighters?) and others change their sound in new directions with succes like damon albarn Many had tryed new stuff and failed miserably and only got to shine again when they got back to their roots (the offspring?) And others are just fine by always doing the same. It's interesting you bring up the Foo Fighters because I feel like they are an outlier. Whenever Liam says "Oasis is the last true rock band", I can't always help think its the Foo Fighters. They are really the only 90s rock band who are still doing what they did and are largely successful. Most 90s rock band are basically dead at this point, or if they held high status like U2 or the Chili Peppers (who started in the 80s, but were still highly prominent in the 90s), even those 2 bands have changed their sound on and off and back and forth. Honestly am surprised Foo Fighters are doing so well in the times/environment we are in nowadays, but kudos to them. Can't think of another band from the 90s who really stayed the course, are still around and are still somewhat relevant and on the map. I think oasis would be up there with foo fighters if they stayed together because both of them where in good shape in the late 00. I think greenday has stayed relevant but their sound changed a bit. Perhaps I would add Pearl Jam But yes. Most of the 90s bands that are still on the road just retreated to their hard core base and play it safe, like the offspring or metalica, and are not worldwide relevant anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Headmaster on Sept 26, 2017 20:15:32 GMT -5
The time is right for a change, on the past two albums Noel was trying to establish himself as a viable solo artist, and now that his solo career is a sucess, he can do anything with his music, now he is comfortable as a musician to experiment new sounds.
Same for Liam, it's only his first album so he will keep the basic, over time he will grow as an artist and try new things with his songs.
|
|
|
Post by sfsorrow on Sept 26, 2017 20:35:27 GMT -5
It is pathetic, but then these people can't think for themselves and churn out what their heroes say without thinking twice (as evidenced by yer man above who didn't even know what 'beige' means). You see it everywhere in society today. Brexiteers, UKIPPERS, Daily Mail readers, Trump fans, Beliebers, etc. Mindless robots. you are doing exactly the same by calling and generalizing every group of diverse people you disagree with as mindless robots, as if you were the true keeper of some holly truth. I might not had chosen the best word as I told you Im not an enlish speaker. However, I know exactly what I tryed to mean. I dont like nor buy noels push to be modern and to "fit" in todays cool circles and high society. This was not the band I root for. They leaded and made their age, not followed what was trendy I might been a little to harsh in my opinion on noels record, but the reaction it triggered in you definitly is not what I would like for myself. Just leave me alone rooting for the sound I like. Don't mean to pile on but the bolded point above reminds me a lot of the kind of criticism that Bob Dylan faced when he went electric in 1965 before making Bringing It All Back Home, Highway 61, and Blonde and Blonde. He was accused by the folkies of selling out and embracing the pop music fad. Similarly, The Beatles were accused of trying to glom onto a new hip trend (by Frank Zappa, for one) by embracing psychedelia on Sgt. Pepper's. The fact is that in neither of those cases is the accusation warranted because, in reality, artists - especially the great ones - are always being influenced by what's going on around them. I'm not suggesting that Noel has made a Blonde on Blonde or a Sgt. Pepper, but I am skeptical of this critique being made against the new sound he's going for.
|
|
|
Post by sfsorrow on Sept 26, 2017 20:37:35 GMT -5
Can someone give me some examples of albums where a change in style resulted in a bad album or didn't do any favors to the band's legacy? Genuine question. Only Second Coming, SOTSOG, and BE come to mind, and I'd like to know some more examples. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Their_Satanic_Majesties_RequestThat's a great album, though. And far better than the album that preceded it. Also not sure it damaged the band's legacy in any way but all was forgotten when the released Beggars Banquet the year later anyway.
|
|
|
Post by losingmyhead on Sept 26, 2017 20:47:27 GMT -5
most of the rubbish that is being succesful today is unauthentic and being written for a target trendie audience. But thats what I mean and I believe that applies to Noel at his worst. Yes, it isn't anywhere bad like the manufactured crap in the charts, but his later attempts to write 'reach for the sky' euphoric choruses come off as cheap and gimmicky in an attempt to recreate old magic that he believes is what his fans want. When he's not thinking like that, he can be a bit more free and creative, and naturally, more authentic. I think this is too clever by half and paints much of Noel's output with a broad brush, divides too neatly between good and bad. Yes, the DM and MG (and to a lesser extent BHN) eras represent his best work, by quality and quantity, and those songs were essentially written when Noel was hungry and young and had no audience. But he's written many, many songs since-Stop Crying Your Heart Out, Shout It Out Loud, The Importance of Being Idle, Shock of The Lightning, Falling Down, The Death of You and Me, Riverman, You Know We Can't Go Back, etc-which you would aptly describe as something of a formulaic approach, a call back to previous glories--that hold up for me as unquestionably worthy additions to the great Noel Gallagher songbook. They were probably written in an attempt to write something with a big chorus that could be played next to DLBIA. And it worked. To me, Noel has never lost his touch, and his songs never ceased to touch me in similar ways to they did in the mid to late 90s. There have just been less of them. I get equally frustrated with Noel's inability to put his songs in the best context, his limitations as a lyricist, his poor song selection, his proclivity to piss away great melodies like The Girl With The X-Ray Eyes and Broken Arrow with terrible arrangements and bad production choices. But-other than a brief period in the early 2000s, I've never really felt like his songwriting skills were significantly diminished. I like it when Noel stretches himself. I think some of his most interesting, best work has come from taking (minor) challenges (note I said some--some of his greatest music comes straight out of inspiration/cribbing from the usual suspects in his record collection). And I am open to his new direction, I see a lot of promise in those 3 clips. I'm just hoping that the new music is does not draw the focus too far away from what makes NG music so special--his unbelievable talent for melody and song-building.
|
|
|
Post by neila83 on Sept 26, 2017 21:03:03 GMT -5
The work of a great artist is someone who doesn't think about the fanbase. Noel wrote a large bulk of the classic Oasis songs prior to being famous, and didn't yet have an audience so there's no way he was writing for anyone but himself at that time. The minute Noel started giving a fuck, that's when he started writing shit songs - I.e. songs that people wanted him to write. right. I forgot people are stupid (trump voters, breixters and your name called random groups you dont agree). In order not to write shitty songs noel should not give a fuck to what "people" want (I dont even think theres such a thing as "people") and insted he should listen to what the educated fan elite you have the luck to belong to wants! Seriously, I don't know if I've ever read such bollocks as in your recent posts. Do you think David Bowie and the Beatles sat around worrying about what the fanbase want? I guess the beatles should never have progressed beyond songs about holding hands and you despise most of Bowie's work. I guess anyone in their 30s would, it's just sooooo uncomfortable. Laughable. Maybe Noel should make the music he wants to make, and let the people decide if they like it? Do you think you have some ownership over him or something? For christ's sake you haven't even heard the album. I don't get this whole thing about Liam releasing a 'crowd pleasing album' either. Which crowd is being pleased? What if the songs don't sound very good? You'll prefer it on principle just because it's 2 guitars, bass and drums, and anything else automatically makes it worse? You're blowing my mind, honestly. I can't believe there are people in 2017, who broadley belong in the category of people who like the Beatles, who are saying experimentation is bad and is only being done to be 'trendy'. It's not remotely trendy, as others have said, it's all been done for years, and most artists get round to it long before Noel has. Open your minds, you don't have to like it, but seriously, at least have a decent reason not to other than 'it's not wonderwall'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2017 21:08:44 GMT -5
right. I forgot people are stupid (trump voters, breixters and your name called random groups you dont agree). In order not to write shitty songs noel should not give a fuck to what "people" want (I dont even think theres such a thing as "people") and insted he should listen to what the educated fan elite you have the luck to belong to wants! You'll prefer it on principle just because it's 2 guitars, bass and drums Yep.
|
|
|
Post by LSF on Sept 26, 2017 21:33:06 GMT -5
Can someone give me some examples of albums where a change in style resulted in a bad album or didn't do any favors to the band's legacy? Genuine question. Only Second Coming, SOTSOG, and BE come to mind, and I'd like to know some more examples. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rattle_and_Hum#Release_and_reception
|
|
|
Post by World71R on Sept 26, 2017 21:48:37 GMT -5
Can someone give me some examples of albums where a change in style resulted in a bad album or didn't do any favors to the band's legacy? Genuine question. Only Second Coming, SOTSOG, and BE come to mind, and I'd like to know some more examples. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rattle_and_Hum#Release_and_receptionThat's one album that should've never been released. They would've been better off doing an EP of some of the studio songs that made it onto R&H, which was effectively a love letter to the U.S.
|
|
|
Post by walterglass on Sept 26, 2017 21:48:47 GMT -5
That's a great album, though. And far better than the album that preceded it. Also not sure it damaged the band's legacy in any way but all was forgotten when the released Beggars Banquet the year later anyway. No. Possibly. Did them no favours. And definitely.
|
|
|
Post by sfsorrow on Sept 26, 2017 22:01:50 GMT -5
That's a great album, though. And far better than the album that preceded it. Also not sure it damaged the band's legacy in any way but all was forgotten when the released Beggars Banquet the year later anyway. No. Possibly. Did them no favours. And definitely. Say what you will but I think most bands would be happy to have an album that contains Sing This All Together, Citadel, 2000 Man, She's a Rainbow, The Lantern, and 2000 Light Years from Home on it.
|
|
|
Post by walterglass on Sept 26, 2017 22:07:26 GMT -5
No. Possibly. Did them no favours. And definitely. Say what you will but I think most bands would be happy to have an album that contains Sing This All Together, Citadel, 2000 Man, She's a Rainbow, The Lantern, and 2000 Light Years from Home on it. Ah well. Horses for courses.
|
|
|
Post by mystoryisgory on Sept 26, 2017 22:11:46 GMT -5
Can someone give me some examples of albums where a change in style resulted in a bad album or didn't do any favors to the band's legacy? Genuine question. Only Second Coming, SOTSOG, and BE come to mind, and I'd like to know some more examples. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rattle_and_Hum#Release_and_receptionWouldn't call that one a change in style really, it's a logical progression from the American themes of The Joshua Tree. Not even close to the complete reinvention of Achtung Baby. Though I agree, it's a pretty awful album.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Sept 26, 2017 22:22:32 GMT -5
Couldn't put it better myself. And from what the odd objectors are saying, it's as if he's hired David fucking Guetta to produce his album. By the way, if Lennon & McCartney were around today as 20 something year olds, they'd be making electronic records. The problem (at least for me) with electronic music in general is when heavy sound effects and production are used to cover a poor melody. We've seen enough popular rock/pop bands take that approach lately. I'm very happy if Noel writes to his standard and takes a fresh approach to sound - 2 out of the 3 songs we've heard in the trailer sound like that's what's happening. The song that's supposed to be the single sounds like a 2010s Coldplay song though which is the one thing I want Noel to avoid. And honestly, I hate how many fans of Noel's new sound act so utterly arrogant - as if their taste elevates them above the mindless masses who like the classic Oasis sound. People shouldn't hate the new stuff just because it's new but ridiculing dissidents is just as bad.Agree. Well said! I love that Noel is taking a chance. But I can see if someone would like him to stay with his old sound. It's not like he was churning out crap material with that sound. And not everyone likes every form of music. You can dislike certain forms, and it not make you an idiot. Because I don't like country does that say anything about my personal tastes? No, it just means that I don't like country. If some people aren't for Noel experimenting, then that's fine. Noel is for it, and others are too. And while some people have proclaimed it as shit before hearing it (which also is a problem), some people have legitimate reservations, which is fair. The rhetoric needs to be scaled back.
|
|
|
Post by Mean Mrs. Mustard on Sept 26, 2017 22:31:45 GMT -5
Uhh, I get that people would like Noel to make music that's more in the vein of Oasis, but I also think it's kind of ridiculous to draw conclusions from a 20 seconds long snippet and say you'll hate it.
|
|
|
Post by neila83 on Sept 26, 2017 22:32:27 GMT -5
You'll prefer it on principle just because it's 2 guitars, bass and drums Yep. Ok, thanks for confirming. You don't actually care if the songs are good or not. Interesting. But I was like that once, when I was 15 and trying to maintain an image. You don't get it do you, you accuse Noel of being fake by doing this. It's the opposite, he's being fake when he tries to write like a 27 year old on the dole. There's no pride in not progressing in your job. Go and listen to chasing yesterday, he told you he can't be that guy anymore. It's not very subtle. Why do you want him to force him to be something he isn't anymore. That's not authentic. He has a lifetime of experience in the music industry. You don't think maybe he's learned something and could perhaps use that? But Liam has got you hook, line and sinker, if you believe there is anything 'real' or rock n roll about his album, well he's relying on people gullible enough to believe all that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2017 22:42:51 GMT -5
But Liam has got you hook, line and sinker, if you believe there is anything 'real' or rock n roll about his album, well he's relying on people gullible enough to believe all that. ok
|
|