Oasis is better than the Beatles. Even the Brits agree.

1…456810

Comments

  • fanch75
    fanch75 Posts: 3,734
    soulsinging wrote:
    take a look around? the mars volta have like 15 threads a day here. but unless you hang out with lots of people who listen to indie rock, 99% of the world is not going to even know their name. my talk of record sales is not becos i think they're important, but becos they seem to be VERY important to most indie fans in a backwards way. if your album goes gold or something, they will write the band off as either sellouts or no talent shitheads writing crap for the masses. it's bogus. they'll rail on oasis and talk about the mars volta and the day a mars volta album goes platinum they'll turn on them and say they sold out and suck now and only their old stuff is any good. THEY are the ones using album sales as some sort of quality predictor.

    That may be the best post in the history of the internet.
    Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
  • InstantKarma
    InstantKarma Posts: 45
    catefrances wrote:
    of course. i nearly choked on bile when i heard they named their recent australian tour 'for all the right reasons'. then i stopped laughing.
    I don't really follow the news much, entertainment or otherwise, so you'll have to explain this one to me.... please, if you wouldn't mind.

    I get bits of news here and there when my boyfriend finds something of interest and sends me the link.
    "and he still gives his love, he just gives it away and the love he receives is the love that is saved,..."
  • Pearl Jam and toast
    Pearl Jam and toast Posts: 4,475
    karma defect wrote:
    And you said this in reference to me because? I had said nothing about Radiohead, nor have I said anything that fits into your explanation. You just made clear that you said it because Radiohead fans are snobbish and don't want to try out stuff they think they don't like. I in fact did listen to Oasis so the whole Radiohead thing seems a bit weird to me. They were mentioned but that doesn't seem like a reason to reply with it to me. I mean I am snobbish but I hadn’t been on this thread when you implied that I was.
    Oh well nevermind.
    a bit late but i just wanted to clear this up ;)

    I didn't imply your snobbishness.

    you said something about pumpkins' fans, and being one i stood up for them.

    Radiohead snobbishness is legendary man, i just thought i'd pull them in for the hell of it ;)
    Come on pilgrim you know he loves you..

    http://www.wishlistfoundation.org

    Oh my, they dropped the leash.



    Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!

    "Make our day"
  • analogueaddict72
    analogueaddict72 Posts: 307
    I've posted in this thread before and have been shot down in flames for criticising Oasis but it seems it's ok to criticise Radiohead, no not all Radiohead fans are snobbish in if you mean they expect more from their music and some sense of originality, I understand people like Oasis but it's the very simpilicity of their music that puts me off.

    Someone pulled me up for taking potshots at them and said they couldn't slag off a band on this thread just they didn't like them, well I've had some time to think their comments over.


    If bands continue to recycle everything that is past without injecting themselves into it, then we are just going to get loads of Oasis, Jet, Wolfmother clones, because generations later will be influenced by bands with no vision or individuality.

    And yes I'll say it again Radiohead are a shining beacon in a fog of retro sludge. Yes they might experiment with other genre's.

    Kid A & Amnesiac are great records. Radiohead don't make records to lose fans or alienate them, they choose not to repeat themselves and offer something new, whether they make techno rock records or not.

    U2 when they were still challenging and hungry produced 2 of the most refreshing albums of the 90's. (Achtung Baby & Zooropa)

    It's only when they sacrificed that experimentmental edge for unit shifting that they became epic pompous and unchallenging. (All you can't leave behind & How to dismatle an atomic bomb)

    Achtung Baby will go down as one of the most important albums of the 90's the noughties equivillants won't.

    It seems all a lot of people want is comfortable music which dosn't try to be any different to the next band and if that's the music you like. Then your welcome to it!
  • Pearl Jam and toast
    Pearl Jam and toast Posts: 4,475
    analogueaddict72 wrote:
    I've posted in this thread before and have been shot down in flames for criticising Oasis but it seems it's ok to criticise Radiohead, no not all Radiohead fans are snobbish in if you mean they expect more from their music and some sense of originality, I understand people like Oasis but it's the very simpilicity of their music that puts me off.

    Someone pulled me up for taking potshots at them and said they couldn't slag off a band on this thread just they didn't like them, well I've had some time to think their comments over.


    If bands continue to recycle everything that is past without injecting themselves into it, then we are just going to get loads of Oasis, Jet, Wolfmother clones, because generations later will be influenced by bands with no vision or individuality.

    And yes I'll say it again Radiohead are a shining beacon in a fog of retro sludge. Yes they might experiment with other genre's.

    Kid A & Amnesiac are great records. Radiohead don't make records to lose fans or alienate them, they choose not to repeat themselves and offer something new, whether they make techno rock records or not.

    U2 when they were still challenging and hungry produced 2 of the most refreshing albums of the 90's. (Achtung Baby & Zooropa)

    It's only when they sacrificed that experimentmental edge for unit shifting that they became epic pompous and unchallenging. (All you can't leave behind & How to dismatle an atomic bomb)

    Achtung Baby will go down as one of the most important albums of the 90's the noughties equivillants won't.

    It seems all a lot of people want is comfortable music which dosn't try to be any different to the next band and if that's the music you like. Then your welcome to it!
    oh don't get me wrong, Radiohead might just be the best band in existence, i was just making a crack at myself for being one of those people who expects more from artists.

    i agree with everything you've said (though i can''t back up anything about U2 except that their best work is far behind them because they've lost the spirit).
    Come on pilgrim you know he loves you..

    http://www.wishlistfoundation.org

    Oh my, they dropped the leash.



    Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!

    "Make our day"
  • analogueaddict72
    analogueaddict72 Posts: 307
    Pearl Jam and toast wrote:
    oh don't get me wrong, Radiohead might just be the best band in existence, i was just making a crack at myself for being one of those people who expects more from artists.

    i agree with everything you've said (though i can''t back up anything about U2 except that their best work is far behind them because they've lost the spirit).

    I wasn't really taking a pop at you, it's good to have somebody agreeing with my comments for once, I was beginning to wonder if I'd accidently logged on to an Oasis website the amount of praise they were getting, as for comparing them to the Beatles whether you like them or not, you can't dispute their impact on music and compared to some retro act from manchester, I think the answer to that question is obvious.
  • karma defect
    karma defect Posts: 5,483
    soulsinging wrote:
    oasis is not white trash. kid rock, creed... those guys are white trash. oasis has better pop sensibility in their little fingers than most bands will have in a lifetime. their songs are catchy as hell and noel's quite a songwriter. their lyrics aren't necessarily the deepest in rock, but ill take that over some band straining to sound poetic with lyrics that really dont make any sense any day.

    take a look around? the mars volta have like 15 threads a day here. but unless you hang out with lots of people who listen to indie rock, 99% of the world is not going to even know their name. my talk of record sales is not becos i think they're important, but becos they seem to be VERY important to most indie fans in a backwards way. if your album goes gold or something, they will write the band off as either sellouts or no talent shitheads writing crap for the masses. it's bogus. they'll rail on oasis and talk about the mars volta and the day a mars volta album goes platinum they'll turn on them and say they sold out and suck now and only their old stuff is any good. THEY are the ones using album sales as some sort of quality predictor.


    I don't care for "they". "They" have nothing to do with me and you are using they're behaviour to tell me Oasis is better than The Beatles, Mars volta, Sonic youth and other skilled musicians. I don't really see how posting this is a logical reaction. You think Oasis has good tunes fine by me but it is just plain weird to say they are better than The Beatles. Especially with the arguments you used for liking them.


    You say the act like assholes for the show of it. I don't like them because they act like assholes. I think they are white trash and if you think that is a bad reason to not like them then be my guest, it still is the reason why I ditched them back then.
    « One man's glory is another man's hell.
    You’re on the outside, never bound by such a spell.
    Together in the darkness, alone in the light.
    I took it upon me to be yours, Timmy,
    I’ll lead your angels and demons at play tonight......»
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    InstantKarma wrote:
    I don't really follow the news much, entertainment or otherwise, so you'll have to explain this one to me.... please, if you wouldn't mind.

    I get bits of news here and there when my boyfriend finds something of interest and sends me the link.

    nickelback were just down here and my guess is they named the tour after their most recent album. i'm not a fan of nickelback and being a cynical bitch, had to laugh at the possible meaning behind the album title.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • karma defect
    karma defect Posts: 5,483
    Pearl Jam and toast wrote:
    a bit late but i just wanted to clear this up ;)

    I didn't imply your snobbishness.

    you said something about pumpkins' fans, and being one i stood up for them.

    Radiohead snobbishness is legendary man, i just thought i'd pull them in for the hell of it ;)


    Hahaha. No no no no, I wasn't talking about Pumpkin fans. I was talking about Billy. I can't hear the Smashing Pumpkins without thinking he is an asshole. I like a few songs, but I can never really get into them. I don't know, the hairs in my neck stand up straight when I see or hear him, hence their music is not enjoyable for me. The same goes for Oasis that is why I dragged The Pumpkins into the story. :D
    « One man's glory is another man's hell.
    You’re on the outside, never bound by such a spell.
    Together in the darkness, alone in the light.
    I took it upon me to be yours, Timmy,
    I’ll lead your angels and demons at play tonight......»
  • brhf9
    brhf9 Posts: 1,475
    karma defect wrote:
    Hahaha. No no no no, I wasn't talking about Pumpkin fans. I was talking about Billy. I can't hear the Smashing Pumpkins without thinking he is an asshole. I like a few songs, but I can never really get into them. I don't know, the hairs in my neck stand up straight when I see or hear him, hence their music is not enjoyable for me. The same goes for Oasis that is why I dragged The Pumpkins into the story. :D

    what' s the problem towards billy corgan? funny thing, i am not the big pumpkins fan but i think he is cool. way too magalomaniac, but cool. maybe is his bald head that makes for his coolness...
    'Go easy, step lightly, stay free!'

    You have been banned for the following reason:
    inappropriate post.

    'Too many people on this earth. We need a new plague.' - Dwight Schrute
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    karma defect wrote:
    I don't care for "they". "They" have nothing to do with me and you are using they're behaviour to tell me Oasis is better than The Beatles, Mars volta, Sonic youth and other skilled musicians. I don't really see how posting this is a logical reaction. You think Oasis has good tunes fine by me but it is just plain weird to say they are better than The Beatles. Especially with the arguments you used for liking them.


    You say the act like assholes for the show of it. I don't like them because they act like assholes. I think they are white trash and if you think that is a bad reason to not like them then be my guest, it still is the reason why I ditched them back then.

    i never said oasis was better than the beatles. i just said it was stupid to dismiss them just becos their music isnt as "cutting edge" or whatever as radiohead. they're a great band that writes great tunes and their influence on at least the british music scene of the last 10-15 years is undeniable. they pretty much kicked off the whole britpop scene. just becos they're a classicist rock band doesn't mean they're the spawn of satan. by the same logic, the black crowes have to be the shittiest band in america.

    all im saying is doing something new is not always automatically doing something better. i think radiohead's best work is also behind them. i like the last tow u2 records. sure they're not groundbreaking, but they're solid albums full of great songs by one of the greatest bands we've ever seen. i don't think there's anything wrong with that. just becos they havent made another achtung baby doesn't mean they can't turn out strong albums. likewise, just becos oasis hasn't made a sgt pepper's doesnt mean they're a shit band. it just means they're not the beatles.
  • InstantKarma
    InstantKarma Posts: 45
    catefrances wrote:
    nickelback were just down here and my guess is they named the tour after their most recent album. i'm not a fan of nickelback and being a cynical bitch, had to laugh at the possible meaning behind the album title.
    :D LMAO! Now I get it.

    So, you're a cynical bitch, too? That's awesome! Let's form a sisterhood! :p
    "and he still gives his love, he just gives it away and the love he receives is the love that is saved,..."
  • karma defect
    karma defect Posts: 5,483
    brhf9 wrote:
    what' s the problem towards billy corgan? funny thing, i am not the big pumpkins fan but i think he is cool. way too magalomaniac, but cool. maybe is his bald head that makes for his coolness...


    Maybe it's the fact that he knows he's cool, or at least thinks he is.
    « One man's glory is another man's hell.
    You’re on the outside, never bound by such a spell.
    Together in the darkness, alone in the light.
    I took it upon me to be yours, Timmy,
    I’ll lead your angels and demons at play tonight......»
  • karma defect
    karma defect Posts: 5,483
    soulsinging wrote:
    i never said oasis was better than the beatles. i just said it was stupid to dismiss them just becos their music isnt as "cutting edge" or whatever as radiohead. they're a great band that writes great tunes and their influence on at least the british music scene of the last 10-15 years is undeniable. they pretty much kicked off the whole britpop scene. just becos they're a classicist rock band doesn't mean they're the spawn of satan. by the same logic, the black crowes have to be the shittiest band in america.

    all im saying is doing something new is not always automatically doing something better. i think radiohead's best work is also behind them. i like the last tow u2 records. sure they're not groundbreaking, but they're solid albums full of great songs by one of the greatest bands we've ever seen. i don't think there's anything wrong with that. just becos they havent made another achtung baby doesn't mean they can't turn out strong albums. likewise, just becos oasis hasn't made a sgt pepper's doesnt mean they're a shit band. it just means they're not the beatles.

    Really there is no argument on whether you can enjoy a band or not. I never said music has to be groundbreaking. You said my reason for disliking Oasis was a bad one, that's what I reacted on.

    On a different note I would like to point out that I am not a Radiohead fan, I like them sure, but there is no need to keep directing Radiohead linked remarks my way.
    « One man's glory is another man's hell.
    You’re on the outside, never bound by such a spell.
    Together in the darkness, alone in the light.
    I took it upon me to be yours, Timmy,
    I’ll lead your angels and demons at play tonight......»
  • Pearl Jam and toast
    Pearl Jam and toast Posts: 4,475
    karma defect wrote:
    Hahaha. No no no no, I wasn't talking about Pumpkin fans. I was talking about Billy. I can't hear the Smashing Pumpkins without thinking he is an asshole. I like a few songs, but I can never really get into them. I don't know, the hairs in my neck stand up straight when I see or hear him, hence their music is not enjoyable for me. The same goes for Oasis that is why I dragged The Pumpkins into the story. :D
    i love that whiny, skinny, tall, bald little dude.

    but i understand why you dont ;)
    Come on pilgrim you know he loves you..

    http://www.wishlistfoundation.org

    Oh my, they dropped the leash.



    Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!

    "Make our day"
  • Pearl Jam and toast
    Pearl Jam and toast Posts: 4,475
    karma defect wrote:
    Maybe it's the fact that he knows he's cool, or at least thinks he is.
    ...but i do have to defend him here.

    Billy's a really honest person.. very down to earth.

    he's a genious and an exceptionally good musician which comes off as pretentious a lot.

    People just enjoy seeing him that way (people who aren't pumpkins fans ;) ).. like the way some people like to see Ed as pompus.
    Come on pilgrim you know he loves you..

    http://www.wishlistfoundation.org

    Oh my, they dropped the leash.



    Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!

    "Make our day"
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    karma defect wrote:
    Really there is no argument on whether you can enjoy a band or not. I never said music has to be groundbreaking. You said my reason for disliking Oasis was a bad one, that's what I reacted on.

    On a different note I would like to point out that I am not a Radiohead fan, I like them sure, but there is no need to keep directing Radiohead linked remarks my way.

    i only keep bringing them up becos i think radiohead's a good example that i feel gets way more credit than they deserve, esp their last few albums. i feel like they're resting on the laurels of past work and people give them huge props just for being radiohead. i feel like if any other band had released any of their last 3 albums they would have received lukewarm reviews at best.

    and fair enough on oasis. i just think music should be judged on its merits, not the personalities behind it. hell, john lennon was known for being kind of a pretentious prick at times. to think liam gallagher is a twat is one thing, but to say they're a shit band becos you're not a fan of their sound is another. there's a lot of bands i dont care for but understand what people see in them. and oasis is not some flash-in-the-pan. it's not like we're talking about creed or nickelback here ;) there are many other bands deserving the loathing some around here seem to have for oasis, so i dont know why some people detest them so much.
  • Echoes
    Echoes Posts: 1,279
    soulsinging wrote:
    ok computer might, but i rather doubt ANY of their last 3 albums will be heard in 30-40 years.

    Okay I just caught this now but this is a pretty laughable statement
    printf("shiver in eternal darkness\n");
  • Cropduster84
    Cropduster84 Posts: 1,283
    Oasis are ths shittest band out there.

    Music made by monkeys for monkeys.

    There's no intelligence, wit or emotion to their songs.

    I can understand people say bands like the Smiths and Radiohead being as good as the Beatles...but OASIS?!?! Pub rock for dads with beer bellies.
    'The more I studied religions the more I am convinced that man never worshipped anything but himself.' - Sir Richard Francis Burton
  • cellophanehand
    cellophanehand Posts: 34
    remember folks, we're talking readers of NME here. not exactly the pinnacle of music objectivity or knowledge are they? hardly to be taken too seriously.
    how anyone with a pair of ears could even put any oasis album in the top10, let alone number one, is beyond me, considering - by their own admission - they rip off the beatles. if only they had even a smidge of the talent or originality.....

    if anyone gives a crap about oasis in ten years let alone 30 or 40 i'd be amazed.
    http://www.myspace.com/cellophanehand
    free your mind... and your ass will follow...

Categories