Oasis beat Blur in the britpop war?

Dudess

whatawaster wrote: »

I can tell the person who said "Hey Jude is one of the most hated songs around" that they are wrong.

You can't if it's a fact.

whatawaster wrote: »

Explain. How could anyone not like such a beautiful song?

People have varying opinions - nobody has to like anything. I used to be horrified at anyone with a good taste in music not liking The Smiths - I used to think they were "wrong" etc. Now I realise... it's just their opinion which they can't help, there is no rule that says they have to like them.
Sure, I'm not happy about it and it baffles the life out of me... but some people with otherwise impeccable musical taste simply don't... like... The Smiths.

Hacks wrote: »

cant believe people still argue about this, Oasis win every battle

... in your opinion. And this debate is only of relevance to the two bands at the time. I think Morning Glory is a lot better than The Great Escape (although Roll With It is utterly woeful) but overall, I think Blur are the better band. I can't understand how a person, even if they genuinely preferred Blur at the time (again, which they can't help), are expected to change their mind and agree that Oasis were better - just because Oasis fans tell them to.

Hacks wrote: »

Only time will prove me right that Snow Patrol are also a better band than Blur.

How? Just because you think Snow Patrol are a better band than Blur (I couldn't disagree more but you're entitled to your opinion) doesn't mean you're the final word on who's good and who isn't.

And one last point, if and when Liam/Noel are off their head on coke they dont come on stage boasting about it - like 16 year olds taking drugs for the first time - looking for a cheer !!!

Oh my god, maybe not so much now but there was a time when Liam and Noel wouldn't shut up about what hardcore ****ers they were when it came to drugs and booze.

Red Sleeping Beauty

There was no "war". There's Oasis fans and Blur fans with little crossover. The only war you'll get is a singles/CD buying war which is a consumer war.

Hacks

Alan Rouge wrote: »

There was no "war". There's Oasis fans and Blur fans with little crossover. The only war you'll get is a singles/CD buying war which is a consumer war.

Ya there was no "war" but if i remember correctly there were a few choice words spouted to the press (& probably blown up by them) 10 yrs or so ago and i doubt the bands were best friends either

TRIPLEP

My opinion = the operative word in the thread is ''BLUE'' no just kidding its ''come back'' .. Oasis didn't need a comeback, never left, complete consistency in good music.

I love Liam Gallaghers voice, one of the most distinctive out there, other than Caleb Followill I guess..

But no harm in liking both bands just because they don't ''like eachother''

Red Sleeping Beauty

Hacks wrote: »

Ya there was no "war" but if i remember correctly there were a few choice words spouted to the press (& probably blown up by them) 10 yrs or so ago and i doubt the bands were best friends either

That was just Damon trollin' Oasis saying that he'd sell more records or somethin'

I think it was on the Live Forever documentary that one of the brothers tries desperately to articulate the disdain he had for Albarn and the band. He didn't come off the brightest though

PaulBrewer

homerun_homer wrote: »

Link to story
Back in the day I was Oasis all the way, so much so that I believed you couldn't like both bands at the same time - narrow minded youth that I was. But Oasis have been boring and irrelevant for too long and Blur's comeback and the work Damon Albarn has done in between has been more progressive and interesting than anything Oasis have done since they started down the slippery slop to tedium.

Ultimately regardless of what the stats may say I think Oasis won many battles originally but Blur & Co have come up trumps in the originality and musical side of things and in my mind have won the war.

What do ye think?

There's a raw excitement thing with Oasis that won't cross time in my opinion - very much 'Be Here Now'.

From a musical perspective Oasis use predictable 'components' in their songs , Noel's lead playing is very simple pentatonic riffing.
Lyrically there's no real depth and the vocals are often used as a vehicle for the (simple!) melody. Doctor, Helicopter anyone ?

For someone in 25 years time who didn't witness the 'Showbiz' elements now it probably won't be of much interest.

Blur, I think have many other elements of interest that will be relevant in 25 years time .

Whilst the drumming has always been just functional - there were musical , lyrical and sonic explorations that weren't an option for Oasis.

Blur covered a much broader range that will, when all the showbiz fuss has died down, give them a critical longevity that just won't be available to Oasis.

BornToRun88

First all I have to say I like both bands in an equal way, but if u were to ask who I prefer, I would say Oasis. Musically and lyrically they seem a notch above blur, don't look back in anger,wonderwall,the masterplan,live forever,slide away,supersonic,all around the world and the importance of being idle are songs of such great musical ability

Blur were a class band but they could never hold a candle to almighty greatness of oasis, the swagger, the confidence and all round brilllant tunes.
One thing I will say is that I saw blur and oasis within a month of each other, and being honest I thought blur were better at Oxegen then Oasis at Slane, the sound system was a bit poor and the crowd singing a long all the time ruined Slane.

And how can anyone mention a stupid and quite **** boyband like Blue in a topic about the two best british bands of the 90s. Shameful!

Dubhthamlacht

PaulBrewer wrote: »

There's a raw excitement thing with Oasis that won't cross time in my opinion - very much 'Be Here Now'.

From a musical perspective Oasis use predictable 'components' in their songs , Noel's lead playing is very simple pentatonic riffing.
Lyrically there's no real depth and the vocals are often used as a vehicle for the (simple!) melody. Doctor, Helicopter anyone ?

For someone in 25 years time who didn't witness the 'Showbiz' elements now it probably won't be of much interest.

Blur, I think have many other elements of interest that will be relevant in 25 years time .

Whilst the drumming has always been just functional - there were musical , lyrical and sonic explorations that weren't an option for Oasis.

Blur covered a much broader range that will, when all the showbiz fuss has died down, give them a critical longevity that just won't be available to Oasis.

Your post is spot on.
For me "Definetly Maybe" was vibrant, exciting, brash and full of great tunes. In my opinion Oasis never reached the heights of it again. I hated 'Morning Glory as an album. Everyting they did after it is forgetable.

Blur didn't start with the bang as Oasis did but over the course of their career they showed much more imagination, creativity and ability to change which Oasis were not capable of. In time history will be much kinder on Blur than Oasis.