Oasis

Thoughts on Dig Out Your Soul?

It really is that bad, isn't it?

Meh.

Not heard anything but Shock Of The Lightning, which is rubbish. Just the sort of crap Noel used to hate about five years ago.

They sound like they are copying themselves now.

Phil Collins got it spot on with this band - "not as talented as they think they are" - and into Room 101 they went.

Loutish, boorish and excruciatingly dull. This band are a perfect example of right place, right time. The comparisons to The Beatles are bewildering - The Beatles progressed from album to album; all Oasis have done is shamelessly steal from older, more successful bands and repeat the same winning formula from album to album.

Sorry, what was the question again?!

Like MagicalTrevor, I've only heard the opening single. Instantly forgettable - thank goodness - and I've no desire to hear the rest of what they have to offer.

To be fair, the first two albums were startlingly original, if derivative. But that derivation was genius.

Then they did the same thing over and over again, only blipping with "The Importance Of Being Idle", which is the best thing they ever did since "Slide Away"

MagicalTrevor wrote:

To be fair, the first two albums were startlingly original, if derivative. But that derivation was genius.

Then they did the same thing over and over again, only blipping with "The Importance Of Being Idle", which is the best thing they ever did since "Slide Away"

Same as he said!

Play either of the first two REALLY LOUD on a big stereo and they still sound great! Sadly now Noel is just a trendy celebrity mouthpiece with a bit of "attitude". Does occasionally say stuff that makes me smile, mind. Just occasionally.

oasis are shit

theyre the dogs bollocks...

Haha, the dog's bollocks is a good thing!!

I'm not a fan of Oasis, but I like What's the Story? and various other decent songs. I think they're good, I don't see why some love them so, and I don't see why some loathe them so. They're just an average rock band with some good tunes, to my ear.

theyre a bunch of pricks.

blur were farrrrrrrr better.

leo wrote:

blur were farrrrrrrr better.

Oooh, fight, fight. It's back to the Nineties time.

I suppose it is fair to say that Parklife, Definately Maybe and Different Class defined Britpop, and it did feel like quite an exciting time musically for a few months, Britain as the centre of the musical universe for a while (and me being from Manchester but living in Colchester meant I had split loyalties. Actually I preferred Pulp.)

It all went flat quite quickly, though.

I think it's hard to dispute that over time Mr Albarn and Mr Cocker have proven to be the more creative artists.

MagicalTrevor wrote:

They sound like they are copying themselves now.

They've been doing that since 1997 ("D'You Know What I Mean" was just the "Wonderwall" chords slowed down/transposed).

Definitely Maybe is still a great album though... and The Importance Of Being Idle is a great song (I also like Fuckin' In The Bushes, but enough about my private life)

exacttly. they repeat themselves with either the wonderwall chords or the status quo kindda riff.

Radiohead were the best band of the nineties... END OF!!

MagicalTrevor wrote:

To be fair, the first two albums were startlingly original, if derivative. But that derivation was genius.

Then they did the same thing over and over again, only blipping with "The Importance Of Being Idle", which is the best thing they ever did since "Slide Away"

First time I've ever seen stealing described as an act of genius

The Importance Of Being Idle? Oh, the one were they stole the riff from People Are Strange and everything else from The Kinks.

Right place, right time. There's no more to their success than that. That that success has continued over several albums is no shocker. People like what they know and Oasis have no surprises up their sleeves; they're just re-selling music that's been done before and better or simply re-plagiarising themselves. Oasis Quo....but the Quo rock harder and can handle their drugs better.

KingSwinger wrote:

MagicalTrevor wrote:

To be fair, the first two albums were startlingly original, if derivative. But that derivation was genius.

Then they did the same thing over and over again, only blipping with "The Importance Of Being Idle", which is the best thing they ever did since "Slide Away"

First time I've ever seen stealing described as an act of genius

The Importance Of Being Idle? Oh, the one were they stole the riff from People Are Strange and everything else from The Kinks.

Right place, right time. There's no more to their success than that. That that success has continued over several albums is no shocker. People like what they know and Oasis have no surprises up their sleeves; they're just re-selling music that's been done before and better or simply re-plagiarising themselves. Oasis Quo....but the Quo rock harder and can handle their drugs better.

Can't argue with any of that, spot on analysis of Importance of Being Idle especially.
In the video they even ripped off the Kink's original Dead End Street video, as if the musical steal wasn't enough. All bands plagiarise to a certain extent but that's just taking the piss and horrible arrogance in my view, a trait that oasis have shown throughout their career .
The new single made me laugh out loud the first time I heard it, by the way. Surely they're finished now?

I preferred Pulp and still do. Oasis had two good albums 'Definitely Maybe' and 'Whats the Story Morning Glory' and havnt managed to release anything half as good since. I am surprised thay are still going and think Noel would be better off writing songs for other people. Their latest offering sounds dated and doesnt bring anything new to the table. They were a truly great band in the 1990's whos live performances were outstanding. For me thay had a little too much of a 'football terrace' culture and provided a soundtrack for the dope smoking petty criminal. I liked 'Talk Tonight' and 'Half a World Away' but for me Pulp said more to me about my life.

i just think that they a. copied the beatles.

b. are a bunchof complete cockmunchers.

c. have little or no talent (not thats a bad thing for some bands/musicians)

and d. big them self up so much when theyre awfully terrible.

noel slaggs of radiohead calling them boring etc etc etc, but f he took his head out of his own fuc*ing arse for 5 minutes and actually listened to a radiohead song he'd realise it was pure unrivalled geniues; opposed to the manc wine and shitty solos of the gallagher bros.

Radiohead aren't to my taste but I'd never call them boring, because clearly they aren't. fact is, I haven't heard enough of their stuff to be confident in an informed criticism. And, like own own mr Garvey said, even shit artists can come up with the goods once in a while.

I don't hear The Beatles in oasis, though; never have, unless it's in a crude approximation (ie on the latest single, Liam whines something about a "magical mystery" - see, oasis aren't even clever enough to steal skillfully!

KingSwinger wrote:

I don't hear The Beatles in oasis, though; never have, unless it's in a crude approximation

Seriously? You can't hear that the start of "Don't Look Back In Anger" is the same as "Imagine" (OK, not a Beatles song, but as near as dammit)

And what about "Whatever"? You can't get much more George Martin than that!

true MT.

and the image.

and the way he sings

Oasis were absolutely brilliant when they arrived and sounded great compared to some of the crap knocking about. They were electric live. They were never going to mirror the success of the first two albums, the debut was still the best. The third album sold more than mere mortals can dream of, and was then panned all over the place - because the tracks were too long, over produced and poor by their standard (not the worst album i've ever heard by the way).

Fourth album wasn't great either, but the last two were better.

Their new album is not bad, (takes a couple of listens) and is obvioulsy influenced by certain parties (not just the beatles, a whole host of other bands creep in there too).
As i have said about some other bands on here - they have their place, they are not everyones cup of tea but they have made some great sounding music - even if the lyrics arent quite groundbreaking.

KingSwinger wrote:

MagicalTrevor wrote:

To be fair, the first two albums were startlingly original, if derivative. But that derivation was genius.

Then they did the same thing over and over again, only blipping with "The Importance Of Being Idle", which is the best thing they ever did since "Slide Away"

First time I've ever seen stealing described as an act of genius

First time I've ever seen the word "derivation" mistaken for "stealing".

MagicalTrevor wrote:

KingSwinger wrote:

MagicalTrevor wrote:

To be fair, the first two albums were startlingly original, if derivative. But that derivation was genius.

Then they did the same thing over and over again, only blipping with "The Importance Of Being Idle", which is the best thing they ever did since "Slide Away"

First time I've ever seen stealing described as an act of genius

First time I've ever seen the word "derivation" mistaken for "stealing".

Really? I'm sure it won't be the last.

As for Oasis sounding like The Beatles, based on the two tunes you mention, The Beatles are but one of many bands they've stolen...er, sorry, "derived" music from. Ergo, they are no more or less like The Beatles than they are The Kinks or Gary Glitter. To the best of my memory, The Beatles were not a band whose music was drenched in feedback and who repeated themselves album after album, so the comparisons twixt the two are inane.

I have to say, it's nice to hear someone fighting Oasis's corner. Someone who sounds like their head is screwed on properly enough to do so respectably!

As I said before, I like 'em. But I think they're harshly over-rated. And it's twisted them. Shame, cuz they've written some great songs in their time! Any stealing from the Beatles is, as KingSwinger says, not at the core of their big, crowd destroying sound. I'm with both you King and MT on the fact that it's an influence - their sound is derivitive.

But it's often pretty good, so I'm not complaining!

ChrissyBoy wrote:

Their new album is not bad, (takes a couple of listens)

I'd go along with that. I certainly prefer it now to when I started this thread!

Oasis will always have a huge place in my heart. They were the first band to get me into "alternative" music. Be Here Now will probably always be my favourite Oasis album for the same reason. I'll definitely be getting Wembley tickets next week.

Well, according to Noel these will be the biggest gigs of the decade.

When he comes out with comments like that, it's hard not to dislike him really.