Oasis Vs U2

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

blastman

The Interweb article linked in the previous post wrote:

However, it is possible that both bands will miss out with several other big name artists rumoured to be releasing new albums on the very same day including Guns n' Roses and Jay-Z although with Oasis currently at number 36 in www.amazon.co.uk's pre-release chart U2 are already playing catch up.

You what now?

Basq

The Oasis 'Best Of' is pants..

... where's 'Whatever'? :eek:

MrJoeSoap

The Scientist wrote:

On Monday the 20th Oasis and U2 release their greatest hits albums respectively.
Read about it Here.
I have a €20 bet with my mate that U2 will reach the UK #1 spot after first week of sales. He is adamant that Oasis will win.

What do ye reckon?


T.Sc.

Given that the U2 "Greatest Hits" is essentially a rehashing of previous releases, I would certainly expect Oasis to beat them. That said, if people are prepared to queue overnight for three nights for the U2 CD, you just never know.

BTW - Anyone hear The Edge said "Thank You Sydney!" onstage in Melbourne? Oops!

funktastic

Well seeing as it's Ireland U2 will more than likely get to number 1. The U2 best of is a bit of a joke seeing as there was one out with almost the exact same tracks a few years ago. Who are they targetting? I mean all of their fans must have these songs by now. all the same, some mad ****ers will still buy it and it'll get to no 1

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

Basq

I think he's highlighting that they don't have a new album out on that date!

MrJoeSoap

The Scientist wrote:

Are you highlighting guns n roses meaning that they will beat the 2 bands in question?

I assume he meant "What Guns'n'Roses CD?"

gustavo

basquille wrote:

The Oasis 'Best Of' is pants..

... where's 'Whatever'? :eek:

I think its a great collection of songs whilst it doesnt reflect their work entierly , any collection of 18 of their songs would leave out some classics , I would also say that Hindu Times and Rockin Chair should be in there.

BaZmO*

MrJoeSoap wrote:

BTW - Anyone hear The Edge said "Thank You Sydney!" onstage in Melbourne? Oops!

He was thanking his sound engineer called Sidney. Apparently he was having a problem with his monitor for most of the gig and Sidney eventually sorted it so he was just showing his appreciation at the end of the show.

Anyway, moving on. I reckon Oasis will beat U2 in sales of their greatest hits especially considering that it's their first GH compilation. It's funny though, I was only saying recently that it was strange that they had never released a greatest hits and low and behold!! I must be fizzic!!

MrJoeSoap

BaZmO* wrote:

He was thanking his sound engineer called Sidney. Apparently he was having a problem with his monitor for most of the gig and Sidney eventually sorted it so he was just showing his appreciation at the end of the show.

No sarcastic smiley, you can't actually be serious! He did go on to "make up" for his blunder with...

"What I meant was, thank you Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne . . . but most of all Melbourne."

Although, U2 technical problems are well documented.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EDuK46ZqFM

:D:D

BaZmO*

Of course I was joking :rolleyes: ........

lodgepole

The U2 collection will be a pretty big stocking filler. The Oasis one is pretty weak, given that the bulk of the tracks are from their first two albums and a handful of really key music isn't on it. Since U2 have had a considerably longer career and the only other hits collections they have is either 2 or 4 CDs depending on whether you have the remix and b-sides, I can see why a single album collection would be appealing to both the consumer and the record label.

Collections like these aren't geared towards fans of their entire catalogue, they're for people who like the bands but don't want to buy five or ten CDs to have the music they want to listen to. Oasis and U2 are perfect collection bands because of the longevity of their popularity and the strength of their singles.

Mossy Monk

The Beatles will get number 1 imo

Basq

Mossy Monk wrote:

The Beatles will get number 1 imo

And deservedly so..!

BaZmO*

gustavo wrote:

I think its a great collection of songs whilst it doesnt reflect their work entierly , any collection of 18 of their songs would leave out some classics , I would also say that Hindu Times and Rockin Chair should be in there.

The problem with not having "Whatever" on it is that it's never been available on any of their albums, it was only released as a single.

Jonny Arson

Mossy Monk wrote:

The Beatles will get number 1 imo

Only 200 copies ahead of Oasis I hear

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

gustavo

BaZmO* wrote:

The problem with not having "Whatever" on it is that it's never been available on any of their albums, it was only released as a single.

As far as i know they werent allowed to release it on any album due to some court ruling hence its non inclusion.

shane86

*Bets 20 quid that in a few months Noel or Liam, in one of their classic locked out of it interviews with Q magazine, will brand all those who bought the Greatest Hits as **** and tell them to go back to listening to Britney and such*

grumpytrousers

gustavo wrote:

As far as i know they werent allowed to release it on any album due to some court ruling hence its non inclusion.

ah yes, great ironies of our time #371

(i've a notion this is the reason, any anorak who knows any better is more than welcome to set me straight)

There was, back in the deep mists of time, around the late sixties, a band called the Bonzo doo dog-dah band, led by a chap called vivian stanshall, and among the members a bloke called Neil Innes. They were quite closely associated with the Monty Python team, and Eric Idle in particular. Anyway, Idle and Neil Innes, in the early 70's put together a mickey take act called 'The Rutles.' There was a movie called 'All You Need is Cash' and which included a song called 'How Sweet it is to be an Idiot'. Innes possessed a peculiar knack for producing very good Beatles pastiche pieces - so much so that at one point in the early 70's John Lennon is reported to have contacted him to state that 'you might want to be careful with *some song*, it might be a bit too close'. The sad thing is that Northern Songs did, at one point, manage to sue him...

It was the opening of this song that Noel Gallagher is claimed to have stolen and been sued for by Innes.

In other words, the band that claims to be the next best thing to the beatles has been successfully sued by a beatles piss-take band.

now *that's* entertainment...

BaZmO*

Is that true? Mad if it is.

It's on WIKI but I wouldn't take that as Gospel.

grumpytrousers

BaZmO* wrote:

Is that true? Mad if it is.

It's on WIKI but I wouldn't take that as Gospel.

Yeah - it's true. Back in the day when Q magazine was worth reading, Neil Innes was one of their 'untouchables'...and i particuarly remember before the rise of les freres Gallagher there was something about him having done all this great beatley-pop and getting no money and a reader was so hacked off, he wrote a cheque for fifty quid to Innes, c/o Q mag. They showed the cheque in the letters page!

as for the sueing oasis over whatever, that's deffo true. they also got done by Stevie Wonder for 'Step out'

BaZmO*

grumpytrousers wrote:

Yeah - it's true.

Mad, and quite funny too. A mate of mine would love to hear that they got done for copying a tribute band (of sorts).

grumpytrousers wrote:

...and a reader was so hacked off, he wrote a cheque for fifty quid to Innes, c/o Q mag. They showed the cheque in the letters page!...

Haha, class.

grumpytrousers wrote:

they also got done by Stevie Wonder for 'Step out'

And by "The New Seekers" also.

noby

If you ever watch Monty Python live at the Hollywood Bowl, the song is sang by a bloke with a piano (presumabally by Innes) in a sort of interval. It's spot on 'Whatever'. Noel Gallagher claimed he never heard the song. Also, if I recall correctly, Bowie wanted co-writing credits, because of th Mott the Hoople outro. Not putting it on an album meant less cash for David.

As an aside, I first heard/saw this song on MTV with just an acoustic guitar and organ, and thought it was fantastic. The single version is truely awful. Way over-produced - orchestra, electric guitars, distorted vocals - it's like they were sitting in the studio trying to think what else they could throw in the mix.

grumpytrousers

noby wrote:

As an aside, I first heard/saw this song on MTV with just an acoustic guitar and organ, and thought it was fantastic. The single version is truely awful. Way over-produced - orchestra, electric guitars, distorted vocals - it's like they were sitting in the studio trying to think what else they could throw in the mix.

You might be right about the overproduction...each to their own - but it had come on foot of 4 distorted guitar tunes which were the calling card of Def Maybe, so there might have been a desire to go a bit more 'mid period' beatley...the wisdom of that, I shall leave to others.

finally - here's a spot of rutlology for y'all...realise i've taken this thread way OT, but for gods sakes, it has it all...Monty Python, The Beatles, Lawsuits and a parallel universe where a band of hateful scousers released songs like 'Your Mother should Go, The Fool on the Pill, Shabbey Road...'

http://www.neilinnes.org/articles/RutQ96.htm - fave quote "At their final business meeting, 134 legal advisors and accountants entered an eight-by-ten foot room. Only 87 came out alive. "

BaZmO*

grumpytrousers wrote:

http://www.neilinnes.org/articles/RutQ96.htm

I knew I recognised Neil Innes face when I saw the pictures, then I read...

In between his Rutling stints, Innes worked quite happily in children's TV

It was Puddle Lane, he played the Wizzard. Now there's a flashback!!

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

grumpytrousers

how nice - your sig and your main post intrinsically related....

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

grumpytrousers

The Scientist wrote:

and your taking what medication?

westloaf at number 1. 5hit happening

two completely related sentiments - no medication needed, per se...

Steve_o

U2 will beat Oasis in nearly every conceivable scenario!!!

J.R.HARTLEY

except acting the twat

Steve_o

lol, Agreed!!!

Killaqueen!!!

U2, obviously.

Creamy Goodness

neither because they are only famous for other reasons than their music.

padi89

Cremo wrote:

neither because they are only famous for other reasons than their music.

Mmmmm i beg to differ, both bands have made some pretty good albums.

Killaqueen!!!

Cremo wrote:

neither because they are only famous for other reasons than their music.

That's the stupidest thing I have heard all week.

U2 have nothing but good albums and the albums I have of Oasis are amazing.

It's so easy to take a shot at U2 these days :rolleyes: yet if you stopped slagging Bono for one minute and actually listened to their music you would be surprised at how good they are.

Creamy Goodness

erm i've listened to all u2 and oasis and i can quite honestly say if i got 10 tracks from both their catalogues combined i'd just about get an album. there'd be filler there though too.

i can see this becoming a "omgz liekz hw cnt u liek teh bands i luv dere mst b sumthing wrong wit u!!!!11" type thread....

my opinon was that both bands are famous for things other than their music, it may not be right but that's the weird and wonderful world of opinons, now strangely enough your opinon differs than mine which makes it an opinon. See how opinons can differ from person to person? Strange huh?

Savman

Cremo wrote:

i can see this becoming a "omgz liekz hw cnt u liek teh bands i luv dere mst b sumthing wrong wit u!!!!11" type thread...

I guess what you're implicating there is that us Oasis fans have no grasp of the English language or are so small minded that we use "txtspk".
If you're willing to open your eyes just a little, you will see that the vast majority of Oasis fans are not lager louts looking for a handy punch up.

Most of us buy the albums, go to the gigs and follow the band. If there's something wrong with that, sue me.

To say that both Oasis and U2 are only known for their off stage activities is nonsense and has no basis in fact. We can argue til the cows come home about how much the bands' antics gained them noteriety but at the end of the day there are millions of people worldwide who are buying these CD's.

Wikipedia wrote:

At the height of their fame, their 1997 third album Be Here Now reached #1 in the UK charts and also became the fastest-selling album in chart history, with almost half a million copies sold on the first day alone. Oasis have sold more than 60 million records (including singles) worldwide. Having survived the loss of founding members and sustaining support from their loyal fan base, Oasis have managed to outlast many of their Britpop contemporaries. In 2005, the Guinness Book of World Records declared Oasis the "Most Successful Act of the Last Decade in the UK.

There's a little more to it than tabloid theatre. As far as I'm concerned, it's your loss

padi89

Cremo wrote:

erm i've listened to all u2 and oasis and i can quite honestly say if i got 10 tracks from both their catalogues combined i'd just about get an album. there'd be filler there though too.

i can see this becoming a "omgz liekz hw cnt u liek teh bands i luv dere mst b sumthing wrong wit u!!!!11" type thread....

my opinon was that both bands are famous for things other than their music, it may not be right but that's the weird and wonderful world of opinons, now strangely enough your opinon differs than mine which makes it an opinon. See how opinons can differ from person to person? Strange huh?

If you dont like their music thats fair enough but it certainly has no baring on your statement "neither because they are only famous for other reasons than their music" because thats just sh1te talk.

Creamy Goodness

look it's not ****e talk, it's my opinon like or lump it, i didn't come here saying "how can you like these bands your opinon means ****" i came here gave my opinon on a discussion board and that was it.

I guess what you're implicating there is that us Oasis fans have no grasp of the English language or are so small minded that we use "txtspk".
If you're willing to open your eyes just a little, you will see that the vast majority of Oasis fans are not lager louts looking for a handy punch up.

Most of us buy the albums, go to the gigs and follow the band. If there's something wrong with that, sue me.

To say that both Oasis and U2 are only known for their off stage activities is nonsense and has no basis in fact. We can argue til the cows come home about how much the bands' antics gained them noteriety but at the end of the day there are millions of people worldwide who are buying these CD's.

jesus ****ing christ get a grip.

first of all i was not suggesting that oasis fans or any other fans for that matter cannot speak - or type in this case - the english language, far from it in fact.

i've have so many similar threads here that have one person come along and disagree with the main topic of the thread and end up in a stupid argument that resembles the quote i gave!

i also know that oasis fans are not larger louts i'm not a ****ing tool, i don't think all goths drink blood, all emo's slit their wrists or that all black people love fried chicken, i'm not a ****ing stupid stereotypical prick.


fair enough you buy the albums, go to gigs and follow the band, fair play. doesn't mean there aren't people out there that don't like the band.

to quote wikipedia i find is hilarious, "if it's on wikipedia, it has to be true" :rolleyes:

they've sold 60 millon (including singles) --- fair play to the marketers

Most Successful Act of the Last Decade in the UK. ---- opinon of the guiness book of records, it HAS to be true.

=====================================

i've drawn a line above, i want this thread to go back to it's orignal topic ie. who's going to win the battle of the - sigh - charts.

i won't be posting here again as you's obiviously can't accept a conflicting opinon.

Savman

i also know that oasis fans are not larger louts i'm not a ****ing tool, i don't think all goths drink blood, all emo's slit their wrists or that all black people love fried chicken, i'm not a ****ing stupid stereotypical prick

Whoah, for someone who dislikes Oasis you like your expletives...

to quote wikipedia i find is hilarious, "if it's on wikipedia, it has to be true"

Who said this? We all know Wikipedia isn't the factual source of all life's information, but it's a handy resource. I dunno how accurate them figures are but it paints a picture which I still think is relative to the context of the thread. Your exact quote was: they are only famous for other reasons than their music.That's opinion, not fact, and I think it's fair to say that such sweeping statements are open to correction.

they've sold 60 millon (including singles) --- fair play to the marketers

So the Marketing & PR people recorded the album? Wow.

Most Successful Act of the Last Decade in the UK. ---- opinon of the guiness book of records, it HAS to be true

So first Wikipedia, now Guinness. Do you really think this is a global conspiracy and that everyone is lying?

I'm sure if I was really arsed I could find an "official" record detailing chart sales but I doubt that'd satisfy you. I'm sure it's just easier for you to post random thoughtless garbage.

Anyway back on thread, I believe the bet was cancelled so that's about it really. How Westlife escaped negative comment thus far amazes me.

Killaqueen!!!

Cremo wrote:

my opinon was that both bands are famous for things other than their music, it may not be right but that's the weird and wonderful world of opinons, now strangely enough your opinon differs than mine which makes it an opinon. See how opinons can differ from person to person? Strange huh?

No sh1t, people have different opinions. Wow. I could have an opinion that all music is pointless. Or that the guy from Stormbreaker is the best actor in the world. Maybe I'll say that Hitler is the most anti-racist guy in the world. And if you challenge it, I'll just get defensive and write a load of crap about opinions. Opinions can be wrong. And where exactly are you getting the d4 txtspeak bollix from???

I like U2. I like Oasis. That is how I feel. If you don't like they're music, fine - you have a strange taste IMO but it's your opinion. I don't know where you're coming from with the statement that both bands are famous for reasons other than they're music. Could you back that up or give an example?

In fact, if I understand you correctly you are implying that U2 are famous for they're charity work, or because of Bono's "ego" (everyone takes a shot at that, why not jump on the bandwagon). I know loads of U2 fans who love U2 DESPITE of that. Then again, I know people like myself. Who actually have all they're albums and love all they're music because they are GOOD songs.

lodgepole

Cremo wrote:

erm i've listened to all u2 and oasis and i can quite honestly say if i got 10 tracks from both their catalogues combined i'd just about get an album. there'd be filler there though too.

That's your opinion.

my opinon was that both bands are famous for things other than their music, it may not be right but that's the weird and wonderful world of opinons

That is something that you are stating as fact which can be proved incorrect quite easily, particularly in U2's case since they only began their other activities when their music based fame gave them the oppurtunity to.

Your opinion is that you don't like either band, but don't let that convince you of other things that just aren't true.

Cremo wrote:

Most Successful Act of the Last Decade in the UK. ---- opinon of the guiness book of records, it HAS to be true.

Again, the Guinness Book of Records doesn't base anything on opinion, if it says that a band are the most successful act of the last decade in the UK it will back that up with tour receipt figures.