|
|
Post by fiordiligi on Jan 22, 2018 6:39:09 GMT -5
Without a great comeback album that made him, and then Oasis, extremely popular again, Liam would have never sold Finsbury Park. AYW played a big role on why Liam’s tour is so successful. I’m really tired of people who belittle anything Liam does Liam Gallagher's comeback did not make Oasis popular again. Oasis' popularity was growing and growing over the last few years. It peaked last year with Liam then coming back on top of that (not because of it). Just like when they were massive the first time around, it's all about timing. The timing this time is a 'youth' that haven't got one or two bands that they idolise. They have had to go back 20 years for it. And it just so happens that the icon from 1995 is just as loutish, outspoken and just as much of a rock n roll star as he was back then. The difference is now it's on Twitter instead of the tabloids. Timing is everything and it's a combination of things that have led to Liam's sell-out tour and huge relative success. I'm chuffed for him, but overall AYW is just a small part of it. I don't understand, do you think Liam could have sold out Finsbury Park without a new album? AYW is what brought Liam back to music and show the world he could do it without Noel, without this album he would still be sunbathing in Spain. It is a combination of things, exactly! And if it's a combination of things, to which we all agree, then AYW is as important as everything else. There are also people like me that'll go to Finsbury to hear his new songs alongside Oasis classics. |
|
|
|
Post by Let It🩸 on Jan 22, 2018 7:02:13 GMT -5
I was 18 years old when (What's the Story) Morning Glory? was releaesd, I wouldn't trade that time for the world.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gas Panic on Jan 22, 2018 7:12:33 GMT -5
I was 18 years old when (What's the Story) Morning Glory? was releaesd, I wouldn't trade that time for the world. Thanks. I was 18 years old when DOYS was released, and still 18 when I saw Oasis live for the first time one week later. God bless. |
|
|
|
Post by Let It🩸 on Jan 22, 2018 7:14:36 GMT -5
I was 18 years old when (What's the Story) Morning Glory? was releaesd, I wouldn't trade that time for the world. Thanks. I was 18 years old when DOYS was released, and still 18 when I saw Oasis live for the first time one week later. God bless. Yeah, well, hopefully you don't eat Tide pods.... Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by bt95 on Jan 22, 2018 7:17:07 GMT -5
Liam Gallagher's comeback did not make Oasis popular again. Oasis' popularity was growing and growing over the last few years. It peaked last year with Liam then coming back on top of that (not because of it). Just like when they were massive the first time around, it's all about timing. The timing this time is a 'youth' that haven't got one or two bands that they idolise. They have had to go back 20 years for it. And it just so happens that the icon from 1995 is just as loutish, outspoken and just as much of a rock n roll star as he was back then. The difference is now it's on Twitter instead of the tabloids. Timing is everything and it's a combination of things that have led to Liam's sell-out tour and huge relative success. I'm chuffed for him, but overall AYW is just a small part of it. I don't understand, do you think Liam could have sold out Finsbury Park without a new album? AYW is what brought Liam back to music and show the world he could do it without Noel, without this album he would still be sunbathing in Spain. It is a combination of things, exactly! And if it's a combination of things, to which we all agree, then AYW is as important as everything else. There are also people like me that'll go to Finsbury to hear his new songs alongside Oasis classics. No, not at all. But he hasn't sold out Finsbury solely because of AYW either. The only reason he's on tour is because of AYW, obviously. And because AYW had so much success, he was confident in announcing those massive gigs - but I bet if you asked people going to those gigs what they are most looking forward to seeing him play, I'd be willing to wager that the majority would say the Oasis songs. Maybe that's a better way of putting my point across? I'm off Finsbury myself and while I'm looking forward to the new songs, I'm much more looking forward to hear him play Oasis songs. |
|
|
|
Post by sfsorrow on Jan 22, 2018 9:12:42 GMT -5
I never said AYW was rubbish. I haven't heard it and can't comment on it. My only point was that it is genuinely impossible to say that the reason he's selling out shows is because of the strength of his album. Bringing up Noel Gallagher doesn't quite make sense. Some artists like Paul McCartney and Elton John can sell out shows, not based on new material but based on their name and the money that goes into advertising their shows, while others can't. I doubt Ringo could sell out venues the way McCartney does, despite the fact that both were in the same greatest band of all time, and I think that would still be true even if in 2018 Ringo puts out an album that's better than one that McCartney puts out, which at this point is actually a possibility for reasons similar to the Liam/Noel issue. You think Noel Gallagher is the Oasis equivalent of Ringo? Hmmmm... I think he is equivalent to a member of a famous band. That was the analogy. |
|
|
|
Post by fiordiligi on Jan 22, 2018 9:30:58 GMT -5
I don't understand, do you think Liam could have sold out Finsbury Park without a new album? AYW is what brought Liam back to music and show the world he could do it without Noel, without this album he would still be sunbathing in Spain. It is a combination of things, exactly! And if it's a combination of things, to which we all agree, then AYW is as important as everything else. There are also people like me that'll go to Finsbury to hear his new songs alongside Oasis classics. No, not at all. But he hasn't sold out Finsbury solely because of AYW either. The only reason he's on tour is because of AYW, obviously. And because AYW had so much success, he was confident in announcing those massive gigs - but I bet if you asked people going to those gigs what they are most looking forward to seeing him play, I'd be willing to wager that the majority would say the Oasis songs. Maybe that's a better way of putting my point across? I'm off Finsbury myself and while I'm looking forward to the new songs, I'm much more looking forward to hear him play Oasis songs. Oh really, why not? Quoting you, people wanted Oasis songs and Oasis' popularity was growing and growing over the last few years. So why do you agree that he couldn’t do it? No one said that! You, on the other hand, said that AYW is just a small part of his tour being a success. YES EXACTLY!!! how can you say that and at the same time not realize the impact that AYW had? If Liam felt brave enough to announce a gig like this, it’s because of how well perceived AYW has been. I mean, Liam said he was going to retire if this album failed. No one here is saying that the songs from As You Were are the only reason for people to see him at Finsbury, but the fact that AYW was released is one of the main reason that triggered Liam’s success, which ended with him playing at Finsbury. If we are at the point where Liam can play in front of 40000 people is because 1) he made an album that was well perceived and made it all possible and 2) because he’ll do Oasis classics. They are both equally important factors. Oh whatever, never mind, we can go on like this forever. It’s like arguing on what came first, the egg or the chicken. Peace. |
|
|
|
Post by sfsorrow on Jan 22, 2018 9:44:25 GMT -5
Hate to repeat but simple question: when Paul McCartney or Elton John release a new album and then play to a crowd of, say, 60,000 people, is a significant part of the reason why they have crowds that big the strength of their latest album?
|
|
|
|
Post by bt95 on Jan 22, 2018 10:30:04 GMT -5
No, not at all. But he hasn't sold out Finsbury solely because of AYW either. The only reason he's on tour is because of AYW, obviously. And because AYW had so much success, he was confident in announcing those massive gigs - but I bet if you asked people going to those gigs what they are most looking forward to seeing him play, I'd be willing to wager that the majority would say the Oasis songs. Maybe that's a better way of putting my point across? I'm off Finsbury myself and while I'm looking forward to the new songs, I'm much more looking forward to hear him play Oasis songs. Quoting you, people wanted Oasis songs and Oasis' popularity was growing and growing over the last few years. So why do you agree that he couldn’t do it? No one said that! You, on the other hand, said that AYW is just a small part of his tour being a success. YES EXACTLY!!! how can you say that and at the same time not realize the impact that AYW had? If Liam felt brave enough to announce a gig like this, it’s because of how well perceived AYW has been. I mean, Liam said he was going to retire if this album failed. No one here is saying that the songs from As You Were are the only reason for people to see him at Finsbury, but the fact that AYW was released is one of the main reason that triggered Liam’s success, which ended with him playing at Finsbury. If we are at the point where Liam can play in front of 40000 people is because 1) he made an album that was well perceived and made it all possible and 2) because he’ll do Oasis classics. They are both equally important factors. Oh whatever, never mind, we can go on like this forever. It’s like arguing on what came first, the egg or the chicken. Peace. First point, again it's my bad, but I meant that I agreed with your point that Liam wouldn't be able to sell out Finsbury without AYW. However, I don't think that AYW's success is the key factor in Liam's success. What it has done is put him back in the focus and because the songs are strong that is even better so all power to it. We're agreeing, in the general sense. I just don't think AYW is the defining factor  |
|
|
|
Post by bt95 on Jan 22, 2018 10:30:40 GMT -5
Hate to repeat but simple question: when Paul McCartney or Elton John release a new album and then play to a crowd of, say, 60,000 people, is a significant part of the reason why they have crowds that big the strength of their latest album? No |
|
janelr
Madferrit Fan
Posts: 93 
|
Post by janelr on Jan 22, 2018 11:49:21 GMT -5
Hate to repeat but simple question: when Paul McCartney or Elton John release a new album and then play to a crowd of, say, 60,000 people, is a significant part of the reason why they have crowds that big the strength of their latest album? But were they ever in the position of having being written off for dead like Liam? "As You Were" and all that came with it essentially made it OK (for the masses) to like and support Liam Gallagher again in my opinion. It gave him new life. That's the significance of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by sfsorrow on Jan 22, 2018 12:33:24 GMT -5
Hate to repeat but simple question: when Paul McCartney or Elton John release a new album and then play to a crowd of, say, 60,000 people, is a significant part of the reason why they have crowds that big the strength of their latest album? But were they ever in the position of having being written off for dead like Liam? "As You Were" and all that came with it essentially made it OK (for the masses) to like and support Liam Gallagher again in my opinion. It gave him new life. That's the significance of it.
Yes, I'd say so. I think that McCartney, certainly in the years between Press to Play in 1986 and the Flowers in the Dirt tour in 1989, is a pretty comparable example, except the Flowers in the Dirt tour was more massive in comparison to what Liam is doing but that's not surprising. |
|
janelr
Madferrit Fan
Posts: 93
|
Post by janelr on Jan 22, 2018 13:08:56 GMT -5
But were they ever in the position of having being written off for dead like Liam? "As You Were" and all that came with it essentially made it OK (for the masses) to like and support Liam Gallagher again in my opinion. It gave him new life. That's the significance of it.
Yes, I'd say so. I think that McCartney, certainly in the years between Press to Play in 1986 and the Flowers in the Dirt tour in 1989, is a pretty comparable example, except the Flowers in the Dirt tour was more massive in comparison to what Liam is doing but that's not surprising.
I guess I'll have to take your word for it. I'm too young to remember if Sir Paul McCartney's reputation ever sunk to the point that everyone thought he was finished in the business and became the butt of jokes. I think that's where Liam rose from and that the success of AYW is what's given him a new lease on life in the business. Had the album not been received well and Liam's reputation not been revived, I don't think he'd sell out big shows even with the Oasis songs. I think a big part of the hype is the overall narrative of his comeback.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Jan 22, 2018 13:21:31 GMT -5
You think Noel Gallagher is the Oasis equivalent of Ringo? Hmmmm... I think he is equivalent to a member of a famous band. That was the analogy. But Ringo isn’t equivalent to the other members of the famous band he was in? |
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Jan 22, 2018 13:28:36 GMT -5
Hate to repeat but simple question: when Paul McCartney or Elton John release a new album and then play to a crowd of, say, 60,000 people, is a significant part of the reason why they have crowds that big the strength of their latest album? One of there many solo albums or there debut effort? |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Jan 22, 2018 13:37:05 GMT -5
Like it or not, Liam and Noel are legacy acts. Part of one of the most famous bands in British history. They will always be a drawing card. Some of that is for new material but a lot of it is playing the classics. Nothing wrong with that. They are both solo artists on the wrong side of 40. All the power to them. Let’s have fun.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2018 13:59:04 GMT -5
Being on Warner would make some difference. However Liam's album & PR is far stronger than Noel's at the moment. I believe Noel's tour not selling out is partly down to Liam being back so people can get their Oasis fix there rather than Noel. That's true for me. Many of us don't have deep pockets of disposable income and lord knows I've spent all of mine on Liam already.
Also Liam seems to have really widened his audience more than Noel. There's been a noticeable change in how he's perceived probably from around the time since Supersonic was released and the good will has grown with every interview he's given. I've seen loads of kids at Liam's shows who probably weren't even born yet during Oasis' heyday. They think he's cool. And real. And flawed. Plus the album's good too.
Sorry I'm still reading the first page but I wanted reply to this... Anyway, that's also true for me. I've never seen either of the Gallaghers live and I finally got some income from my job (I was on the dole earlier) so I decided I HAVE TO to get my Oasis fix somewhere and if it wasn't for Liam's solo career I would've gone to Noel's concert. But Liam announced his European tour, bought tickets and flights to Amsterdam and now I'm going there. Then came the Finsbury announced, got tickets coz mad fer it and now I don't really have money to see Noel anymore  |
|
|
|
Post by dennizz on Jan 22, 2018 14:02:52 GMT -5
i think part of Liam's succes is the way he's been presenting himself. PLaying the Manchester thing, and the interviews have showed a lot people a different side to the Liam Gallagher they thought they knew. Even in an Oasis hostile country like Holland he's been doing pretty good
|
|
|
|
Post by sfsorrow on Jan 22, 2018 14:30:09 GMT -5
Yes, I'd say so. I think that McCartney, certainly in the years between Press to Play in 1986 and the Flowers in the Dirt tour in 1989, is a pretty comparable example, except the Flowers in the Dirt tour was more massive in comparison to what Liam is doing but that's not surprising.
I guess I'll have to take your word for it. I'm too young to remember if Sir Paul McCartney's reputation ever sunk to the point that everyone thought he was finished in the business and became the butt of jokes. I think that's where Liam rose from and that the success of AYW is what's given him a new lease on life in the business. Had the album not been received well and Liam's reputation not been revived, I don't think he'd sell out big shows even with the Oasis songs. I think a big part of the hype is the overall narrative of his comeback.
If you are interested, I'd highly recommend looking at the Press to Play to Flowers in the Dirt era. The more I think of it, the more comparable the two scenarios are. Actually go back a bit further to the Give My Regards to Broadstreet movie that McCartney made in 1984. The movie was widely derided by critics. It was an enormous failure both critically and commercially. The most generous reviews typically saw it as being the product of a former trend-setter now being out of step with the times. The next step was his infamous performance at Live Aid in 1985. By this time, McCartney had done very little live performing in quite some time - his last tour had been in 1979. Whereas now McCartney seems always on tour - this was actually quite a rare live outing from any Beatle. It was a disaster. The sound kept going in and out and McCartney's vocal was notoriously off. His next album Press to Play was his worst selling album yet and failed to go gold. McCartney had had now multiple years of consistent flops and he was essentially written off as another relic who didn't have it in him at the time. McCartney then waited three years to put out another album of new material - by and large disappeared from the scene during that time. He hired a new manager to re-think his career trajectory and worked with a collaborator - Elvis Costello - on a new album. He then set up a new world tour - his first in over a decade and first tour at all in 10 years. It was a significant tour because it was the first that was dominated by Beatles songs rather than solo songs. And, significantly, it was the first time he was touring as Paul McCartney - rather than as with The Beatles or Wings. The album behind all this - Flowers in the Dirt - was seen as a return to form and it went to #1 in the British charts. But it was hardly the reason why people were going to see McCartney tour again. And if you listen to the album today you'd probably think what most of the critics back then thought too - that it's fine but could never be the significant factor in McCartney selling out Wembley or MSG, etc. The album today does not particularly stand out as a McCartney classic. Rather, it was merely part of a highly orchestrated comeback and the endeavour was quite successful. |
|
|
|
Post by sfsorrow on Jan 22, 2018 14:31:07 GMT -5
I think he is equivalent to a member of a famous band. That was the analogy. But Ringo isn’t equivalent to the other members of the famous band he was in? That doesn't matter but if you don't like the example just replace Ringo with Keith Richards and McCartney with Mick Jagger. |
|
|
|
Post by Mean Mrs. Mustard on Jan 22, 2018 14:41:53 GMT -5
i think part of Liam's succes is the way he's been presenting himself. PLaying the Manchester thing, and the interviews have showed a lot people a different side to the Liam Gallagher they thought they knew. Even in an Oasis hostile country like Holland he's been doing pretty good We're not Oasis hostile. More Oasis indifferent. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2018 14:46:33 GMT -5
Gotta be an all-of-the-above situation, no? Good lead single, good live shows, good press, and a good album.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mean Mrs. Mustard on Jan 22, 2018 14:47:17 GMT -5
But Ringo isn’t equivalent to the other members of the famous band he was in? That doesn't matter but if you don't like the example just replace Ringo with Keith Richards and McCartney with Mick Jagger. Not really. Mick and Keith are still in the Stones, to begin with. |
|
|
|
Post by sfsorrow on Jan 22, 2018 14:55:04 GMT -5
That doesn't matter but if you don't like the example just replace Ringo with Keith Richards and McCartney with Mick Jagger. Not really. Mick and Keith are still in the Stones, to begin with.  The nature of an analogy means that the two examples are not identically the same. |
|
|
|
Post by batfink30 on Jan 22, 2018 17:23:04 GMT -5
Gotta be an all-of-the-above situation, no? Good lead single, good live shows, good press, and a good album. Nah, the album is bang avarage. |
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5