Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Oasis

Options
1246789

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    ball ox wrote: »
    Again, you sound like one of these Muppets harping on about how many times Utd. won the league.... popularity does not equate to greatness. If that were the case we should all revere Duck Sauce to be genius' right now.

    But the thing is he claimed Oasis were the most successful rock act in the UK of the last 20 years. You called that deluded. He showed incontestable proof that what he said was true. You started talking about football. Who is the deluded one again? You're talking nonsense pal.


  • Options
    #93
    ball ox
    Registered Users Posts: 699 ✭✭✭ball ox


    Live4Ever wrote: »
    They are cocky and loud mouthed, but musical geniuses and the absolute definition of rock stars.

    Live forever!

    Can I ask, what in your opinion are the criteria a musician must meet to be dubbed a "musical genius"?


  • Options
    #94
    ball ox
    Registered Users Posts: 699 ✭✭✭ball ox


    strobe wrote: »
    But the thing is he claimed Oasis were the most successful rock act in the UK of the last 20 years. You called that deluded. He showed incontestable proof that what he said was true. You started talking about football. Who is the deluded one again? You're talking nonsense pal.

    That was already addressed, I acknowledged my mistake. Read the thread, pal.


  • Options
    #95
    Kold
    Registered Users Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭Kold


    I can't see how they'd be regarded as musical genii at all.


  • Options
    #96
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    Kold wrote: »
    I can't see how they'd be regarded as musical genii at all.

    +1 They are on of the best pop acts of the last 20 years though.

    Aside: Is genii not the plural of genie? I always thought it was geniuses?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Kold
    Registered Users Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭Kold


    lordgoat wrote: »
    +1 They are on of the best pop acts of the last 20 years though.

    Aside: Is genii not the plural of genie? I always thought it was geniuses?

    When the f*ck have you ever seen 2 genies?


  • Options
    #98
    d.anthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 424 ✭✭d.anthony


    lordgoat wrote: »
    +1 They are on of the best pop acts of the last 20 years though.

    Aside: Is genii not the plural of genie? I always thought it was geniuses?

    They're not 'pop', Cheryl Cole and Westlife and the like are pop.


  • Options
    #99
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    d.anthony wrote: »
    They're not 'pop', Cheryl Cole and Westlife and the like are pop.

    Did you not refer to them as a pop culture phenomenon? Which pretty much describes any successful pop band. And as so many fans have pointed out oasis, much like Cheryl Cole and Westlife have sold a lot of records.

    So yip, they're pop. Nothing to get upset over. Beatles were the pop of their day if that helps you sleep a little easier.

    @Kold - do you mean when have i seen two genii?


  • Options
    #100
    Kold
    Registered Users Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭Kold


    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/genii

    No. And you aint ever seen 2 genies.


  • Options
    #101
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    Kold wrote: »
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/genii

    No. And you aint ever seen 2 genies.

    I'll stick with this one.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/geniuses


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    Now your taking out your use of the word intelligent thus rendering the whole discussion on intelligent pointless.

    Because you were equating the word intelligent with the word pretentious I thought it better to use the word interesting as I thought it's meaning might not be so loaded for you.
    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    "You see, I have listened to their back catalogue... Again, I never claimed to have listened to every Oasis song." Which is it there fella? I'm sure you can now see why I feel there is a gap in your story!

    I have heard a fair bit of their first two albums, heard a sprinking of songs after that and I bought the last album. I gave them more time than I would normally give to a lot of bands because I was trying to figure out what people saw in them.
    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    Again, I would have to seriously question the logic of someone who claims that Oasis have "one or two okay songs" in the previous 14 years and yet you would go out and buy their new album based on another "decent" song in The Shock of the Lightning!

    Why do you have to seriously question it? I'll let you in on a little secret. CDs aren't very expensive. I bought an album on a whim because I thought a song sounded half decent and I was willing to give the album a try. I didn't like it. Seriously, what is hard to figure out about that?
    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    Your interest in Oasis is quite bizarre; I don't like Westlife and as such I don't sit "on the bog" reading articles about them. If you think Oasis' music is a pile of "old tat" then maybe you should stop listening to them! Quite simple really!!

    This is a discussion about why Oasis are the best. I'm taking the opposing viewpoint. If people said 'Oasis are my favourite band' instead of the usual 'Oasis are the best band in the world' I'd have less of a problem with that. Like I'll usually read an article on music that's lying around the house and when I was buying the likes of Uncut or Mojo I'd usually read them cover to cover - great bog reading.


  • Options
    #103
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    You can "be ****"? What the fudge does that even mean? Surely whether an artist makes good or bad music (in the sense that it is nice to listen to) is down to each individual listener and not down to you, Lord Android?!

    I know you have a bit of inferiority complex but there's no need to call me Lord. It makes me feel a wee bit uncomfortable, that sort of hero worship.

    Obviously it is based on taste in music. All of this argument is based on musical taste. I never said you shouldn't like Oasis did I? If that's what floats your boat that's great. What galls me is the greatest band in the world ever schtick that a lot of Oasis fans use.
    Oasis_Dublin wrote: »
    I more listen to music for the actual music as opposed the lyrics. "River cool's where I belong... we'll set sail again, we're heading for he Spanish main... cut the kids in half." Hardly awe inspiring lyrics but still 3 of my favourite songs. Anyone can find meaning in lyrics if they want, even if Noel didn't intend their to be any meaning in them!

    You see I like a song to have the overall package. Good music and good lyrics and I'm in heaven.

    BTW, River cool is a play on Liverpool so I think that's a nice lyrical twist. Can't see anything wrong about setting sail to the Spanish mainland and the Radiohead song is about divorce, that's what the cut the kids in half is a reference to.


  • Options
    #104
    Live4Ever
    Registered Users Posts: 539 ✭✭✭Live4Ever


    Android 666 wrote: »
    I have heard a fair bit of their first two albums, heard a sprinking of songs after that and I bought the last album. I gave them more time than I would normally give to a lot of bands because I was trying to figure out what people saw in them.

    Yes, you are taking the opposing side, and no-one has a problem with that, its the whole ethos of debate. Especially with Oasis, as I said earlier you eithe love 'em or hate 'em. You hate 'em. :D

    For the record, did you like what you heard on the first two albums?

    You see, you havent listened to the back catalogue barr a 'sprinkling" of tunes.

    As far as Oasis being a pop group goes: I listened to an audiobook with LG last night. "We're not part of a scene. We don't want to be in a scene and we are not pop. We're just a group of normal lads from Manchester in a band playing rock music."


  • Options
    #105
    Kold
    Registered Users Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭Kold


    Live4Ever wrote: »
    Yes, you are taking the opposing side, and no-one has a problem with that, its the whole ethos of debate. Especially with Oasis, as I said earlier you eithe love 'em or hate 'em. You hate 'em. :D

    3rd side reporting in, I'm fairly indifferent to them.


  • Options
    #106
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    Live4Ever wrote: »

    As far as Oasis being a pop group goes: I listened to an audiobook with LG last night. "We're not part of a scene. We don't want to be in a scene and we are not pop. We're just a group of normal lads from Manchester in a band playing rock music."


    No no, they are definitely not playing rock music. There is nothing rock about them. They are pop, good pop? arguably but pop no doubt about it, sales and charts back that up - which is what has always defined and will always define pop music. And they were def part of a scene, i believe you may have heard of it, britpop.

    As i said there's nothing wrong with this.


  • Options
    #107
    Live4Ever
    Registered Users Posts: 539 ✭✭✭Live4Ever


    lordgoat wrote: »
    No no, they are definitely not playing rock music. There is nothing rock about them. They are pop, good pop? arguably but pop no doubt about it, sales and charts back that up - which is what has always defined and will always define pop music. And they were def part of a scene, i believe you may have heard of it, britpop.

    As i said there's nothing wrong with this.

    I guess my view of pop music would be Robbie Williams, Kylie, Cheryl Cole, Westlfe etc.

    I would have Oasis and Blur who were the pioneers of britpop as rock bands?? Maybe i am taking the the "pop" in Britpop too literally...


  • Options
    #108
    Live4Ever
    Registered Users Posts: 539 ✭✭✭Live4Ever


    Kold wrote: »
    3rd side reporting in, I'm fairly indifferent to them.

    Would it be fair to say you're in the "I like Wonderwall, Dont Look Back in Anger, She's Electric, Champagne Supernova, and Live Forever but after that I couldn't be arsed" category?


  • Options
    #109
    Kold
    Registered Users Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭Kold


    Live4Ever wrote: »
    Would it be fair to say you're in the "I like Wonderwall, Dont Look Back in Anger, She's Electric, Champagne Supernova, and Live Forever but after that I couldn't be arsed" category?

    No, F*cking in the bushes is probably my favourite track.


  • Options
    #110
    lordgoat
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    Live4Ever wrote: »
    I guess my view of pop music would be Robbie Williams, Kylie, Cheryl Cole, Westlfe etc.

    I would have Oasis and Blur who were the pioneers of britpop as rock bands?? Maybe i am the the "pop" in Britpop too literally...

    Yep they would be pop. Pop music is what's on top of the pops, what's in the charts on the radio, popular music. Now there are some crossovers but artists that consistently chart well in the singles in my eyes are pop acts. I'd file KOL as pop too for that reason.

    I wasn't talking about the pop in britpop, i was merely saying britpop was a scene that oasis were part of.


  • Options
    #111
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,321 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    Live4Ever wrote: »
    The Oasis cover of I am the Walrus and Helter Skelter are equal to The Beatles versions.

    Ah get the boat. I know you're a massive fan and what-not, but you're talking absolute rubbish there.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Hannibal
    Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭Hannibal


    this thread shows that there's people that love Oasis and there's people that hate them. They divide opinion unlike say Coldplay and U2 who most people just think are alright but very few people love them. Oasis are the biggest band around since their arrival in 1994, and on the back of their success countless guitar bands followed on their crest and they inspired people to pick up a guitar and made playing a guitar cool again. What no one can deny is the impact they made from their debut album on, and last summer (2009) they sold 1.5m tickets for gigs in Ireland and the UK and they were a top draw act and couldve easily became a modern day Rolling Stones selling out stadiums the world over for how long as they want. Of course there's musical snobs on here that suggest Radiohead can hold a torch to them, its ridiculous to even suggest it.


  • Options
    #113
    ball ox
    Registered Users Posts: 699 ✭✭✭ball ox


    Dotsey wrote: »
    this thread shows that there's people that love Oasis and there's people that hate them.

    I don't think anyone on here has said they hate Oasis. I certainly don't hate them. It's their fans and the "best band in the world mentality" that a lot of them seem to push that is the problem. Look at the thread title for Christs sake....
    In fairness, anyone who claims something as subjective as a type of music to be "the best in the world" is an idiot.


  • Options
    #114
    Live4Ever
    Registered Users Posts: 539 ✭✭✭Live4Ever


    super_furry wrote: »
    Ah get the boat. I know you're a massive fan and what-not, but you're talking absolute rubbish there.

    Okay okay. Maybe not equal BUT they did do it justice. When you hear other covers, or even the x factor at the weekend you cringe. The Oasis cover of both tunes is mega. If you are unfamiliar with them, YouTube it!


  • Options
    #115
    Live4Ever
    Registered Users Posts: 539 ✭✭✭Live4Ever


    ball ox wrote: »
    I don't think anyone on here has said they hate Oasis. I certainly don't hate them. It's their fans and the "best band in the world mentality" that a lot of them seem to push that is the problem. Look at the thread title for Christs sake....
    In fairness, anyone who claims something as subjective as a type of music to be "the best in the world" is an idiot.

    Well maybe when someone hears a song / or the work of a band or artist and sit back and say "wow that was unreal" they are entitled to believe and proclaim that said tune or band are the best in the world. Oasis are the best, in my opinion. Who do you think is the best band in the world???


  • Options
    #116
    ball ox
    Registered Users Posts: 699 ✭✭✭ball ox


    I like plenty of bands but I would not proclaim any of them to be the best in the world. Music is subjective, you can't rank it. And if you do that's only your own opinion, which you are of course entitled to.


  • Options
    #117
    JerryHandbag
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,543 ✭✭✭JerryHandbag


    Kold wrote: »
    No, F*cking in the bushes is probably my favourite track.

    Love that track. That was probably Oasis at their most experimental and I wish we saw more of that.


  • Options
    #118
    Kold
    Registered Users Posts: 12,778 ✭✭✭✭Kold


    Dotsey wrote: »
    Of course there's musical snobs on here that suggest Radiohead can hold a torch to them, its ridiculous to even suggest it.

    *twitch*


  • Options
    #119
    Oasis_Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭Oasis_Dublin


    Android 666 wrote: »
    Because you were equating the word intelligent with the word pretentious I thought it better to use the word interesting as I thought it's meaning might not be so loaded for you.



    I have heard a fair bit of their first two albums, heard a sprinking of songs after that and I bought the last album. I gave them more time than I would normally give to a lot of bands because I was trying to figure out what people saw in them.



    Why do you have to seriously question it? I'll let you in on a little secret. CDs aren't very expensive. I bought an album on a whim because I thought a song sounded half decent and I was willing to give the album a try. I didn't like it. Seriously, what is hard to figure out about that?



    This is a discussion about why Oasis are the best. I'm taking the opposing viewpoint. If people said 'Oasis are my favourite band' instead of the usual 'Oasis are the best band in the world' I'd have less of a problem with that. Like I'll usually read an article on music that's lying around the house and when I was buying the likes of Uncut or Mojo I'd usually read them cover to cover - great bog reading.

    Haha, oh dear Lord! Don't attempt to lump intelligent and interesting together and brush them aside as though they have the same meaning! Come on, I know it's an internet forum, but let's at least try to have some sort of coherence about our discussion! To describe music as intelligent is pretentious, there are no two ways about it. I don't necessarily mean that in a bad light. I'd be the first to admit that I don't give many groups (ie people who dress in suits, who don't write their own music and generally attract screaming 8 year old girls into their fanbase) much of a chance because I feel music written by bands is of a far better quality or that it is likely to be far more important to me.

    That isn't really listening "to their back catalogue" now is it. Granted, it's more of a chance than some might give them but it doesn't really give you a right to claim that you've listened to their back catalogue.

    I can't really break it down further than this, "it's pretty stupid to buy music if you don't like the music you have heard from the band." It's the main reason why Greenday and My Chemical Romance don't appear in my CD collection.

    Let's just agree that I like Oasis and you don't like them and call it a night there.


  • Options
    #120
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    super_furry wrote: »
    Ah get the boat. I know you're a massive fan and what-not, but you're talking absolute rubbish there.

    whatever about helter skelter, meh. but the cover of I am the Walrus off the top of my head is probably my favourite ever cover and I would even go as far to say I prefer it to the original.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,215 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    I liked Oasis up to 1997 (and still like a lot of their earlier songs) - then I went off them as they started to sound samey.
    It gets on my fucking tits when it's said people dislike Oasis because they're successful and it's only because of musical snobbery. Or when people demand that those who don't like them write a song/form a successful band. Oasis fans in particular really seem to propagate that kind of tripe, whatever it is about that band. How about... some people just don't like their music? In the same way that I'm sure Oasis fans dislike certain acts - but that's ok of course.

    Oh and successful isn't always = good.


Advertisement