|
|
Post by MONO on Nov 21, 2017 5:05:56 GMT -5
Playing Oasis songs, especially Noel written ones, was always going to be a big misstep. I don't see why it is okay for Liam Gallgher solo to play them but not for BDI. Those are the songs most people know and want to listen to on concerts. See Pink Floyd without Roger Waters. They were far more successful than him between 1987 and 1995, despite the new albums were weaker than the old stuff and they played a lot of his songs. Waters only recovered in the last couple of years because the other three stopped touring under the Floyd brand and he's mainly playing old Floyd stuff and is basically marketed as the new Floyd whereas Gilmour is basically a solo artist who also plays Floyd stuff. So they basically changed roles. Same could have happened for BDI. Beady Eye is a lame name and unknown brand for the majority of music fans. Always gonna be a tough go. This! |
|
|
|
Post by mancraider on Nov 21, 2017 8:32:32 GMT -5
As far as the oasis songs thing goes I kind of think that they allowed themselves to be influenced and shunned the classic songs out of a misplaced sense of pride. They should have either carried on as Oasis (plenty of bands do it, see Pink Floyd above)or at least had Liam's name out front.
They basically became known as a band that were famous for being part of Oasis but didn't play any Oasis songs. Therefore old Oasis fans lost interest because they wouldn't hear any oasis songs and non oasis fans weren't interested because they used to be Oasis. A no win situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by syed on Nov 21, 2017 23:31:51 GMT -5
Beady Eye were great. way better than either of the first 2 Noel albums. FAR more exciting live as well
The biggest problem with Beady Eye was..........the shittest name ever. "Beady Eye"? If you never want to sell any records you name a band BEADY EYE.
lol
i agree with most others that As You Were is about on par with both BE albums.
|
|
|
|
Post by ricardogce on Nov 22, 2017 1:08:19 GMT -5
It's tempting to think they should have carried on as Oasis, since Liam legally owns half the name (and coined it in the first place). Noel's also said he wouldn't have opposed the idea.
But... I don't know. Oasis Mk II had already diluted the brand some with the revolving door membership. Throw in some questionable tunes (BTL, B&S) to tarnish the band's image some more ("look at what they're putting out without Noel enforcing quality control"), and what would Oasis look like in 2017? Assuming the membership had remained the same, would they have eventually acquiesced to bringing in outside songwriting help? Would the AYW songs be Oasis tunes? Would that really be Oasis?
If they'd kept the name, Oasis today would resemble the modern Beach Boys: A couple core members from the original incarnation of the band, and a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the work that made the band what it was. No, thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by mancraider on Nov 22, 2017 3:23:26 GMT -5
It's tempting to think they should have carried on as Oasis, since Liam legally owns half the name (and coined it in the first place). Noel's also said he wouldn't have opposed the idea. But... I don't know. Oasis Mk II had already diluted the brand some with the revolving door membership. Throw in some questionable tunes (BTL, B&S) to tarnish the band's image some more ("look at what they're putting out without Noel enforcing quality control"), and what would Oasis look like in 2017? Assuming the membership had remained the same, would they have eventually acquiesced to bringing in outside songwriting help? Would the AYW songs be Oasis tunes? Would that really be Oasis? If they'd kept the name, Oasis today would resemble the modern Beach Boys: A couple core members from the original incarnation of the band, and a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the work that made the band what it was. No, thank you. no doubt it would have been shit. Would have kept the audience though, by playing the classics rather then new music, and name recognition. Ideally what should have happened is Noel quit the live band but keep writing for them. 😃😃 |
|
|
|
Post by asdfgjhkl19 on Nov 22, 2017 22:46:31 GMT -5
liams success directly correlates with the quality of his hair cuts and clothes. and those were some dark years. so glad he stopped fucking about with the mod stuff. FUCK ME. gem and andy were a bad influence on liam
|
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Nov 26, 2017 5:43:09 GMT -5
AYW success is built only on the brand (Liam Gallagher), the marketing ("huge" trendy producers/songwriters), a vaguely familiar "i heard that before" single (Wall of Glass) and the media plan (social media frenzy). It's the same recipe Beyonce and the likes uses.
Add to that the fact that a new generation wanted to experience Liam, and it worked.
Re-release DGSS and BE under Liam Gallagher and it will sell. Beady Eye was a really, really shit name.
|
|
|
|
Post by GlastoEls on Dec 1, 2017 5:52:45 GMT -5
AYW success is built only on the brand (Liam Gallagher), the marketing ("huge" trendy producers/songwriters), a vaguely familiar "i heard that before" single (Wall of Glass) and the media plan (social media frenzy). It's the same recipe Beyonce and the likes uses. Add to that the fact that a new generation wanted to experience Liam, and it worked. Re-release DGSS and BE under Liam Gallagher and it will sell. Beady Eye was a really, really shit name. Can't agree with this. DGSS and BE aren't a pitch on AYW (added to everything in your first paragraph). Not even close. |
|
|
|
Post by mape on Dec 1, 2017 11:36:15 GMT -5
One of the problems with Beady Eye, like with the last few Oasis albums was that there were too many guys writing songs on the ablums. They just felt disjointed with all the different sounds, and quite frankly some of the stuff Andy and Gem put out wasn't that great. If maybe they took a few years off after Oasis split, and chose a better name then maybe people would have accepted them as a new band rather than Oasis 2.0. AYW success is built only on the brand (Liam Gallagher), the marketing ("huge" trendy producers/songwriters), a vaguely familiar "i heard that before" single (Wall of Glass) and the media plan (social media frenzy). It's the same recipe Beyonce and the likes uses. Or you know maybe the songs actually sound good and people enjoy listening to them? You can promote the living shit out of a crap album and it will still be crap. I can buy the fact that Liam is a brand, but the rest are just excuses to take away from the success of the album. |
|
|
|
Post by philko87 on Dec 4, 2017 21:06:07 GMT -5
I actually think if BE had been the first album, people would have been suitably intrigued to hear more. Nowhere near as successful as AYW, but I think the reviews would’ve been kinder and it may have had more legs sales-wise. But DGSS was so embarrassing that it left a bad stink over Beady Eye as a whole.
|
|
|
|
Post by Binary Sunset on Dec 4, 2017 23:13:50 GMT -5
I don't think we can overestimate just how terrible a name Beady Eye is when you have the name recognition of Liam Gallagher in the band.
|
|
|
|
Post by warewolf95 on Dec 5, 2017 14:08:05 GMT -5
One of the problems with Beady Eye, like with the last few Oasis albums was that there were too many guys writing songs on the ablums. They just felt disjointed with all the different sounds, and quite frankly some of the stuff Andy and Gem put out wasn't that great. If maybe they took a few years off after Oasis split, and chose a better name then maybe people would have accepted them as a new band rather than Oasis 2.0. AYW success is built only on the brand (Liam Gallagher), the marketing ("huge" trendy producers/songwriters), a vaguely familiar "i heard that before" single (Wall of Glass) and the media plan (social media frenzy). It's the same recipe Beyonce and the likes uses. Or you know maybe the songs actually sound good and people enjoy listening to them? You can promote the living shit out of a crap album and it will still be crap. I can buy the fact that Liam is a brand, but the rest are just excuses to take away from the success of the album. Hit the nail on the head about the songs, bro. I love both Noel and Liam/BDI, but what makes those first 3 Oasis albums and the singles and b-sides all so fantastic is Noel's songwriting. It's no knock against anyone else's songwriting, but Noel just has that "X Factor" ability to write those incredibly catchy anthems and ballads we fell in love with whereas the others, while still fine songwriters, don't really have that special factor, imo. And I say that as someone who thinks DGSS was one of the best Oasis-related albums. |
|
|
|
Post by Oskarr on Jan 4, 2018 8:00:14 GMT -5
Beady Eye were a lot better NGHFB will ever be..
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5