|
|
Post by GlastoEls on Nov 3, 2024 3:02:08 GMT -5
 Anyway, on the army, interesting video on why you need 3+ people on songwriting credits (think Wall of Glass here, the comeback single) and why artists get credited on songs they didnt write ; It does apply to Liam Gallagher is some aspects (especially the why he's credited on all songs despite not writing shit) I still don’t agree with your premise Andy if the end result justifies the means - if the song is good, and brings joy, I just don’t see how it matters. |
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Nov 3, 2024 3:21:36 GMT -5
Anyway, on the army, interesting video on why you need 3+ people on songwriting credits (think Wall of Glass here, the comeback single) and why artists get credited on songs they didnt write ; It does apply to Liam Gallagher is some aspects (especially the why he's credited on all songs despite not writing shit) I still don’t agree with your premise Andy if the end result justifies the means - if the song is good, and brings joy, I just don’t see how it matters. its a different view on music, i guess  But that video is still interesting on how modern songwriting credits work. Being credited dont mean you wrote shit. I think it's misleading a lot of people and its kinda cheating, because it create an imaginary world on what an artist is. Most people who are really into Liam here think he wrote or participated, when all the clues leads towards he did not. (Bar the 1st record, again, which to me is totally different) |
|
|
|
Post by Diamond in The Dark on Nov 3, 2024 4:58:41 GMT -5
Anyway, on the army, interesting video on why you need 3+ people on songwriting credits (think of the main singles from his records : Wall of Glass, Shockwave, one of us, Diamond in the Dark, Everything's Electric, Better Days...) and why artists get credited on songs they didnt write ; It does apply to Liam Gallagher is some aspects (especially the why he's credited on all songs despite not writing shit) If Liam was credited he definitely wrote something in those songs. I remember that in the first As You Were interviews he said that he had changed words or parts of the melody in some places of the songs in which he is credited. We all know what Liam is like. He doesn't like to reveal all aspects of what he does. John Squire also said that he was instrumental in making the songs on the album become what they became, with changes and brilliant ideas despite not appearing in the credits. Liam was born as a great frontman and also managed to write songs or work in a team at his best with great ideas. But he's very modest, and the only thing he wants is to do his best to continue being a great frontman. Noel is quite the opposite: he steals with great cunning and when he is in difficulty he calls on his "army": Marr, Weller, Holmes, Bono, Amorphous Androgynous etc etc". But you will never see him share the credits with that ego that owns. |
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Nov 3, 2024 5:13:34 GMT -5
Liam sold out knebworth on the strength and back of oasis tunes written by Noel, not his solo work. I love Liam but this is a fact. The overwhelmingly positive reception/reaction to his solo material was absolutely a factor in him being able to play Knebworth. 🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by GlastoEls on Nov 3, 2024 5:19:43 GMT -5
Liam’s interpretation of what a modern Oasis could be, PLUS the slick modern albums - whatever you think of them - PLUS the savvy PR got him back to Knebworth.
It wasn’t just that “he played Oasis songs live”.
|
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Nov 3, 2024 5:27:54 GMT -5
If Oasis releases an album in 2025 and that album is terrible, they’ll still be playing stadiums.
That doesn’t mean their career in 2025 is better than the career of some new, excellent band that releases a great new album in 2025.
Of course that Noel's solo career is much better than Liam's.
Liam could put his name out there, not release any albums, post a cool, short video as an announcement, and tens of thousands would still come to his concert.
Liam performed here in Serbia at the Exit Festival and the whole promotion was - Wonderwall.
He released three identical albums; the first was interesting because it was new, but the next two were already an insult to intelligence. It has that feeling - let's just release something so we can go on tour.
Back the Way We Came: Vol. 1 (2011–2021) is a far better album than some potential Liam’s best of. Far better, and it doesn’t even have songs from Council Skies on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Diamond in The Dark on Nov 3, 2024 6:19:43 GMT -5
This thread is becoming the festival of those who are angered by the fact that Liam objectively had a better solo career than Noel.
Another ridiculous element that a good part of Noel's fans have in common is that everything about Liam's works is analyzed and criticized inch by inch while Noel has cleverly reworked his songwriting focused on plagiarism (he himself admitted to having become a millionaire by plagiarizing from anyone) is recognized by his fans as a Mozart.
|
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Nov 3, 2024 7:36:10 GMT -5
Yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by mimmihopps on Nov 3, 2024 7:48:33 GMT -5
I guess it depends on your definition of success. To me success is producing work you’re proud of, that exemplifies your point of view, and challenges you as an artist. I don’t think Liam is under any illusions about the longevity or personal connection to the majority of his solo work, hence why he’s willing to leave it in the dust for oasis. Compare that to Noel, who even if you find his solo work boring, is obviously very connected to what he’s creating. Difference between an artist and a performer perhaps, which is why they are not really comparable but two halves that are better together. I completely agree. At the end of the day, both Noel and Liam know that they're the ones who most wanted Oasis back, more than fans (and of course Marcus Russel). |
|
|
|
Post by carlober on Nov 3, 2024 15:18:06 GMT -5
This thread is becoming the festival of those who are angered by the fact that Liam objectively had a better solo career than Noel. Another ridiculous element that a good part of Noel's fans have in common is that everything about Liam's works is analyzed and criticized inch by inch while Noel has cleverly reworked his songwriting focused on plagiarism (he himself admitted to having become a millionaire by plagiarizing from anyone) is recognized by his fans as a Mozart. Still acting as a drama queen in every thread, I see. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Nov 3, 2024 15:25:23 GMT -5
This thread is becoming the festival of those who are angered by the fact that Liam objectively had a better solo career than Noel. Another ridiculous element that a good part of Noel's fans have in common is that everything about Liam's works is analyzed and criticized inch by inch while Noel has cleverly reworked his songwriting focused on plagiarism (he himself admitted to having become a millionaire by plagiarizing from anyone) is recognized by his fans as a Mozart. Still acting as a drama queen in every thread, I see. It's beyond pathetic. |
|
|
|
Post by carlober on Nov 3, 2024 15:25:34 GMT -5
By the way, just to get back on topic.
If we're talking about the music, it has to be Noel - at least in my book. There are some truly great songs on the HFB albums: they might miss a magic spark (and we all know what it is, for the most part) but they still are among the best stuff post-BHN.
If we're talking about pretty much everything else, it has to be Liam. Stage persona, management & PR, setlists, nostalgia, success with casual listeners & younger fans.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Nov 3, 2024 16:35:49 GMT -5
By the way, just to get back on topic. If we're talking about the music, it has to be Noel - at least in my book. There are some truly great songs on the HFB albums: they might miss a magic spark (and we all know what it is, for the most part) but they still are among the best stuff post-BHN. If we're talking about pretty much everything else, it has to be Liam. Stage persona, management & PR, setlists, nostalgia, success with casual listeners & younger fans. Summed up perfectly. |
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Nov 4, 2024 2:01:20 GMT -5
By the way, just to get back on topic. If we're talking about the music, it has to be Noel - at least in my book. There are some truly great songs on the HFB albums: they might miss a magic spark (and we all know what it is, for the most part) but they still are among the best stuff post-BHN. If we're talking about pretty much everything else, it has to be Liam. Stage persona, management & PR, setlists, nostalgia, success with casual listeners & younger fans. About stage persona : noel had a strong stage persona at the beginning. I was surprised by the earlier gigs but he kinda lost it along the way. of course it cant rival Liam but its a different kind of aura. Its the aura of the geniuses. To sum up their solo career: brain versus face genuine versus fomo But: heart versus heart too |
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Nov 4, 2024 6:05:05 GMT -5
We first need to define what "better" means in order to answer the question.
For me, Noel is the undisputed winner.
Categories like PR and marketing don’t count in this competition.
Noel could have gone down that path too. He could have never recorded anything and just gone on tour playing Oasis songs.
And he wouldn’t even have to play or sing them - he could let the audience sing and he wouldn’t even need a stage persona.
Does that mean he would then have a better solo career?
Chris Martin can leave Coldplay, not release a single song or album, just go on tour and exclusively perform Coldplay songs. And everything would be sold out.
Meanwhile, other members could be releasing great new albums.
And then Chris would have a better solo career?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Chief on Nov 4, 2024 7:50:47 GMT -5
This thread is becoming the festival of those who are angered by the fact that Liam objectively had a better solo career than Noel. I find it funny that you of all people are trying to pretend like your opinion on this matter is objective  Anyway, I agree with shannee on this. For them, it depends on what they consider to be success. For us, it depends which careers we preferred. ...and yes, we all know who you prefer... Anyhow, for me it's Noel simply because I'm not a huge fan of Liam's records. Even in Oasis, I was always more of a Noel fan when it comes to songs. I didn't enjoy or buy "C'mon you know" or his record with John Squire or his 13184 live records. So musically, to me, it's Noel. Live, they're both equal in my eyes. I don't care about crowd size because I'm not Liam or Noel and therefore it doesn't matter to me. I do know I never ever paid to go see him live because of how unreliable he was in the past. With Oasis, Noel could step in if Liam had an issue and we'd still get a gig. But I wouldn't have risked paying to see Liam on his own. I've seen Noel every time he came where I live. |
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Nov 4, 2024 9:24:03 GMT -5
When did live performances and the number of attendees become so important here? Has anyone’s career ever been viewed like that? Sure, as one of the factors, but never as the defining one.
The Beatles stopped performing live halfway through their career and when they did perform in early days, it wasn’t anything special and was barely audible.
Yet, most of us still consider them the greatest band of all time with the most successful career.
Is that based on their albums or is it because of teenage girls screaming in the stadiums?
Plus, teenage girls screaming in the stadiums on Liam's concerts are screaming because of Oasis songs.
|
|
|
|
Post by GlastoEls on Nov 4, 2024 9:27:47 GMT -5
When did live performances and the number of attendees become so important here? Has anyone’s career ever been viewed like that? Sure, as one of the factors, but never as the defining one. The Beatles stopped performing live halfway through their career and when they did perform in early days, it wasn’t anything special and was barely audible. Yet, most of us still consider them the greatest band of all time with the most successful career. Is that based on their albums or is it because of teenage girls screaming in the stadiums? “We want to be the biggest band in the world” they said in 1994. “Has God played Knebworth recently?” etc. It’s always been like that. |
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Nov 4, 2024 9:33:29 GMT -5
When did live performances and the number of attendees become so important here? Has anyone’s career ever been viewed like that? Sure, as one of the factors, but never as the defining one. The Beatles stopped performing live halfway through their career and when they did perform in early days, it wasn’t anything special and was barely audible. Yet, most of us still consider them the greatest band of all time with the most successful career. Is that based on their albums or is it because of teenage girls screaming in the stadiums? “We want to be the biggest band in the world” they said in 1994. “Has God played Knebworth recently?” etc. It’s always been like that. Oasis played Knewborth because they had great and successfull career before Knewborth. They didn't became great and successfull because their Knewborth gig was great. Liam played Knewborth because he was performing Oasis songs. He did it well, I am proud of him and his solo career but it is not better than Noel's. At least I don't consider that more people at gigs means better solo career. Especially when most, if not all people are coming to those gigs because of Oasis, not because of your solo career. |
|
|
|
Post by artumlobov on Nov 4, 2024 11:16:53 GMT -5
“We want to be the biggest band in the world” they said in 1994. “Has God played Knebworth recently?” etc. It’s always been like that. Oasis played Knewborth because they had great and successfull career before Knewborth. They didn't became great and successfull because their Knewborth gig was great. Liam played Knewborth because he was performing Oasis songs. He did it well, I am proud of him and his solo career but it is not better than Noel's. At least I don't consider that more people at gigs means better solo career. Especially when most, if not all people are coming to those gigs because of Oasis, not because of your solo career. Still better than fans not coming to your gigs because of Oasis or your solo career lol. I think there was an element of Oasis fans using the size of the gigs to maintain they were a huge band as the album sales slowed down over the years and they stopped winning awards. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Nov 4, 2024 11:35:09 GMT -5
When did live performances and the number of attendees become so important here? Has anyone’s career ever been viewed like that? Sure, as one of the factors, but never as the defining one. The Beatles stopped performing live halfway through their career and when they did perform in early days, it wasn’t anything special and was barely audible. Yet, most of us still consider them the greatest band of all time with the most successful career. Is that based on their albums or is it because of teenage girls screaming in the stadiums? Plus, teenage girls screaming in the stadiums on Liam's concerts are screaming because of Oasis songs. I agree. Journey have dedicated fans and sell out their gigs, but general person on the street would struggle to believe they are still around. I wish more acts went down the route of The Beatles. Focusing on the recording aspect over live performances (certainly on those acts that can afford to do so in this music landscape). Live is a temporary quick fix but records are the legacy that will be how the act is judged on in the future. Lennon himself said he didn't care about live performances, only cared about the records and wasn't bothered about not seeing Elvis, as everything would be judged on the records. That's liberating for all because the records are there for all to access, unlike live performances. As an aside, I wish acts like The Beatles would focus on the artistry and craft of making an album, the effort in creating rich and textured soundscapes. I don't know of many acts that still push the boundaries of the recording studio. For alt rock bands, only Radiohead come to mind while all others water their music down for live consumption. None more criminal at doing so than Oasis, who's slew of mediocre, socially unambitious albums in the 2000s would only hinder their legacy, regardless of sold out tours. |
|
|
|
Post by GlastoEls on Nov 4, 2024 11:45:44 GMT -5
Can we not have BOTH - pushing the boundaries in records ( matt I agree about 2000s Oasis) AND celebrating the concert (and again, this was really where Liam excelled as it wasn’t just “playing Oasis” it was diverse set lists with deep cuts, format, venues, curation of DM30, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by shannee on Nov 4, 2024 11:53:57 GMT -5
Liam really did a fantastic job keeping the setlists fresh. Hopefully he can encourage Noel towards that because if we get the same gd set for 3 1/2 years again I’m gonna lose my mind 😆
|
|
|
|
Post by Sadie on Nov 4, 2024 12:00:20 GMT -5
This thread is becoming the festival of those who are angered by the fact that Liam objectively had a better solo career than Noel. I find it funny that you of all people are trying to pretend like your opinion on this matter is objective Anyway, I agree with shannee on this. For them, it depends on what they consider to be success. For us, it depends which careers we preferred. ...and yes, we all know who you prefer... Anyhow, for me it's Noel simply because I'm not a huge fan of Liam's records. Even in Oasis, I was always more of a Noel fan when it comes to songs. I didn't enjoy or buy "C'mon you know" or his record with John Squire or his 13184 live records. So musically, to me, it's Noel. Live, they're both equal in my eyes. I don't care about crowd size because I'm not Liam or Noel and therefore it doesn't matter to me. I do know I never ever paid to go see him live because of how unreliable he was in the past. With Oasis, Noel could step in if Liam had an issue and we'd still get a gig. But I wouldn't have risked paying to see Liam on his own. I've seen Noel every time he came where I live. Can confirm that Liam grew up a LOT and got his act together in the solo years. Ok he had a couple of instances where he left the stage but it happened like twice in 7 years, added to the fact that he got a whole lot better at managing his voice over extended periods of time |
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Nov 4, 2024 12:04:54 GMT -5
Can we not have BOTH - pushing the boundaries in records ( matt I agree about 2000s Oasis) AND celebrating the concert (and again, this was really where Liam excelled as it wasn’t just “playing Oasis” it was diverse set lists with deep cuts, format, venues, curation of DM30, etc. I appreciate both, and I'm glad that Liam did what he did and played his strongest cards. However, that’s still just marketing. We're discussing who has the better solo career. Great marketing, changes in setlists and big gigs are a bonus, but they’re not the core of a good career. What would any of you think if asked the same question about someone else? Lennon or McCartney? When comparing their solo careers, which one stands out as better? Most of us base our opinions on their albums. If Lennon were alive today, playing gigs for 20 people and singing Yoko's songs, while McCartney was performing in stadiums, I would still judge their solo careers primarily by their albums. If their albums were equally strong, then I’d consider factors like audience size and marketing. |
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5