Jump to content

Blur Vs Oasis


SammyD

Blur Vs Oasis  

83 members have voted

  1. 1. Blur Vs Oasis

    • Blur
      33
    • Oasis
      51


Recommended Posts

I did. The Album Definitely Maybe is better than anything Blur has done. It was an album that difined a generation in this country. It was an album people belived in, and Blur has never given us music like that. Just maybe poppy tunes.

Would you like to tell me what's wrong with so-calledPoppy Tunes? Pop music IS Oasis, Blur, Motown, Rock, New Wave etc. Any band who writes a great pop tune is achieving all there is to be achieved in terms of music.

I think way too much importance is placed on the album as a medium. If more bands/artists used their talents to write amazing pop tunes, we'd have a much more interesting musical climate.

Platty's bang on the money, Def Maybe's great but the rest is rock-oriented dross. The Gallaghers should expand their record collection, for starters (perhaps looking beyond a white, male, British tradition might help).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have the complete range of Oasis albums, you have the complete range of rationally acceptable music today, contrary to a common misconception that all of their tracks sound the same. Blur are good, yes, infact I cant stop my miss's from playing their damn greatest hits album in my car. However, load your CD Changer with the full compilation of definately maybe through to dont believe the truth and you have an epic journey.

For anyone who voted Oasis, i beg you to go onto ebay (sorry mods) and find a copy of when they played Oasis unplugged, for pure enjoyment factor it is as good as any of their albums, the version of live forever being one of the best songs ive ever heard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

If you have the complete range of Oasis albums, you have the complete range of rationally acceptable music today

From, err, 70's rock to 70's rock?

Another member of the "Oasis are a beetles tribute band" squad i see.

Very narrow minded approach. You can dismiss Oasis because you may not like their sound but do not dismiss them as a 70s rock band. They do not sound anything like anything out there at the present, hence they are commonly compared to music from the past that bears a small resemblance to themselves. They are modern Rock and Roll.

PlattysQuif, Name me another band out there that are in the same bracket as oasis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many many many bands knocking out epic singalong ladrock. Embrace etc.

You can't seriously believe that Oasis are unique? I used to be a very big fan (had all the singles up to D'You Know What I Mean) but they just became so repetitive and I got sick of Noel recycling old tunes...

As for them representing the "complete range of rationally acceptable music today" - crikey!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many many many bands knocking out epic singalong ladrock. Embrace etc.

Epic, Embrace?

Are we both talking about the same, virgin radio pleasing, embrace?

No. not epic, no more than the likes of keane and snow patrol.

You can't seriously believe that Oasis are unique? I used to be a very big fan (had all the singles up to D'You Know What I Mean) but they just became so repetitive and I got sick of Noel recycling old tunes...

In my opinion (a very biased one as you can imagine), they are unique, I have never heard anything like oasis, and doubt I ever will do. Yes they had their influences, but not solely the Beatles. Any band that takes influence from the stone roses can not be that bad at the end of the day.

The point you made about their songs being repetitive is a valid one. From where you stand anyway. The more recent albums are very different, very different indeed and I would strongly urgue you to get dont believe the truth, that will change your opinion of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't you think, for example, that it's more than a bit crap (and shortchanging the fans) that after 2 or 3 years away the best they can come up with is Street Fighting Man (Lyla)?

you're right about their influences not just being the Beatles as most detractors say. Slade in particular are a very strong (and excellent) one and I liked the way they picked up the baton from the Roses (although they will never have the breadth of scope) in '94. But they could never have come up with a Fools Gold, Bye Bye Badman or I Am The Resurrection...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Noel said he didn't want Lyla to be the first single off the album but the record company dictated that it should be. If you think thats thebest track off DBTT then you must be crazy! So to say the best they can come up with after 2 years off is Lyla is rubbish!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even releasing a single (irrespective of whether it is or isn't the worse thing on the album) that's such a clear rip off is pretty crap (if it had been a B-side it wouldn't have been quite so bad).- it is quite amazing that Noel's only had to credit other songwriters on a couple of other occasions...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like you, (assuming) I am a big fan of the roses, but to slate oasis because their songs sound the same is hypocritical when you consider the limited diversity of the Stone roses Tracks.

Lyla, I have come to the conclusion that, out of 12 tracks (I think) is probably amongst the 3 worst. It was only its radio appeal that got it released.

Which songs are rip offs then quif???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh crikey, where do I begin?

At the beginning!

Cigs & Alc - Get It On

Shakermaker - I'd Like To Teach The World To Sing

Whatever - All You Need Is Love

Morning Glory (song) - the One I Love

Don't Look back In Anger - Imagine

Hello - hello hello It's Good To Back (credited)

Step Out (I think it's called that - B side to Don't Look Back) - Uptight (credited - originally destined for Morning Glory album but pulled due to worries about paying Stevie Wonder et al)

Stand By Me - All The Young Dudes

I could go on...

As for "the limited diversity of the Stone roses Tracks", well, the day Oasis can take in the breadth of influences of the Roses (from Sly And The Family Stone, Cymande and Lee Perry to Byrds, Beatles and Led Zep) is the day I (probably) start buying their records again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't Look back In Anger - Imagine

They stole the opening few chords and made no secret of it, the rest of the song bore no resemblance.

Dont get me wrong, I am a massive fan of the Stone Roses, but they do not provide as wide a range of songs as Oasis do.

Its also true that many people consider the reputation of Oasis and possibly their fans before the quality of their music which is very very much the case here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Not forgetting Northern Soul, too! But I don't suppose any Oasis fans have room in their collection for Cymande or Sly ;)

:yawn:

I thought Risso was supposed to be the condescending music critic? :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a joke, I was merely commenting on the broad and all-encompassing tastes of Oasis fans ;)

In my defence, I think some of the Oasis fans on here are making rather too lofty a claim about their favourite band.

Another song they ripped off, btw - While My Guitar Gently Weeps (She's Electric) - George nearly sued over that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oasis ripped off a song called "How Sweet is it to be an idiot" for Whatever too. I think that's why it wasn't on any album.

Also, the chorus for Blur's MOR was stolen wholesale from Bowie's Boys Keep Swinging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Dont get me wrong, I am a massive fan of the Stone Roses, but they do not provide as wide a range of songs as Oasis do. "

Erm, have you ever ever ever heard any semblence of any other music in Oasis other than basically late 60's to mid 70's rock??? The only thing that distinguished them from say, O.C.S. (although they had better tunes!)was the compressed "Sex Pistols" production on the first album (which can be ascribed to Owen Morris who was doing the same thing with the early Ash stuff).

The Roses obviously listened to punk, funk, rock, pop, soul, hip hop, house, dub and reggae - that's what made them great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a load of rubbish - I'm a massive Oasis fan, quite like Blur but they're not in the same field, you seem to have forgotten that Bowies sued them, and if you think ripping off him & The Kinks instead of The Beatles & The Faces makes them a better band thats down to your personal taste, not one being better musically than the other.

By the way, my collection includes plenty of variety, from Lee 'Scratch' Perry to Curtis Mayfield, Motorhead to Sly & The Family Stone - if you really want a band that push musical boundaries it ain't Blue, check out the Super Furries, probably the best band at taking a melting pot of influences from folk to techno & making something original wihtout sounding liek they're trying too hard!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference is, like it or not (13 in particular - not a fave of mine), Blur moved on, experimented and took on other musical ideas. Oasis are basically the same band they were in '94 (without the tunes). So, yes, I would say Blur were better musically.

PS. I agree, SFA are ace!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â