Oasis

chalad07

Just wondering what the general consensus is out there on Oasis? They've a new album coming out in the next few months and it just got me wondering are they considered past it?

I personally love Oasis (i'm not IN love with them though), and i'm very excited about the new album. What's everyone else's feeling?

Compared to most of the rock bands around today Oasis are a cut above. Bands like Razorlight, Kaiser Chiefs, and all those other bands that are fashionable for 2 minutes seem to release an album, are lauded by the music press but ultimately fade away to nothing,

So - any fans still out there?

Affable

I love the first two albums they are classics no doubt. Since then they have lost their aura of excitement. Would have loved if they started out recording/got signed even earlier, have heard some early demos and Noel songs, some real interesting stuff.

But they have their place in history. Songs like Slide Away, Some Might Say and many others are classics, they seemed to just perfectly capture the spirit of Britain at the time and still do.

stovelid

I think they were of their time really. They sounded great when they came out as that sound was exactly what was needed at the time. I still love the first two albums, but I think they've run out of inspiration and songs a long time ago. Especially when you see the journey that someone like Damon Albarn has made in the same time period.

Would still think of them fondly as legends though, but more in a retrospective way.

Xavi6

Still love them, looking forward to the new album.

Nolanger

Always thought they sounded like those Wombles songs from the '70s.

darrenh

any of the bands that have came out in the last 10 years have not had the same impact as oasis. if today it was announced that oasis were doing a tour of the uk and ireland, it would sell out faster than any other band that is currently out there. they are legends and no band in the last 10 years has yet reached the heights they did. i cant remember, but how many singles they had in the top 30 at one time in the 90's? i think it was at least 6 or 7 if not more. again that hasnt been done since then!

CSC

I really like Oasis but I'm not too excited about the new album. I'll buy it and no doubt it will be OK but it will be nothing in comparison to their earlier work.

ntlbell

I think most of there best work was always the B Sides..

Songs like

Dyer want to be a space man
Fade Away
half the world away
Acquiesce (probably there best song)

and of course masterplan

I think all round they chose a lot of the wrong songs to go on the albums

from a technical point of view the band are awful lyrically they're awful...

liam's vocals are awful...

but sometimes all that awfulness together rocks...

CSC

I have to disagree about Liam's vocals - I think they are brilliant and one of the reason the band have been so successful. His singing on Defintely Maybe is class.

I haven't bought any singles in a long while but their B sides were great. The Masterplan b-sides album is brilliant. I was dissapointed when they released it and Acquiesce as singles.

nc13

The thing that made Oasis so great is their dont give a s*$t ways of doing things. The music industry now are less tolerant and more PC so other bands are not as creative due to pressure to fit their image. Oasis music will always sound amasing.

Rigsby

ntlbell wrote: »

liam's vocals are awful...

I agree, but I'm not a fan of the band anyway.

chalad07

I definitely agree that some of their best materials didnt make it onto the albums. Most bands now would kill for an album like the Masterplan, and this is completely comprised of B-Sides.

Liam's vocal may not be technically the greatest, but he brings something else to the table. For a rock singer, attitude and charisma are just as important. Bob Dylan is a **** singer, but his music is still amazing,

I still think when you hold the newer Oasis albums up to the some of the crap that's released today, it compares very favorably. I'm hoping for big things with their new album. I hope it's a step forward, but even if it is more of the same, there's nothing wrong with that! If it aint broke.....

nc13

I think Noel has the better voice but some of the songs need Liam's rawness.

red_ice

chalad07 wrote: »

Compared to most of teh rock bands around today Oasis are a cut above. Bands like Razorlight, Kaiser Chiefs, and all those other bands that are fashionable for 2 minutes seem to release an album, are lauded by the music press but ultimately fade away to nothing,

So - any fans still out there?

Their first album was good, the rest were pants imo. As for the comment above - just because they arent getting played on fm104 every 2 minutes and actaully take time to write music, not speil out tune after tune doesnt mean a band is 'fashonable' or 'faded'. It simply means they are taking the time and not giving into pressure to release a record right away like most bands do. A good example would be The Futureheads.

ntlbell wrote: »

liam's vocals are awful...

+1, not to mention that stupid stance he takes when he 'sings'.

From what i've written you can take it that i dont really care much for them, the album will get played over and over on crappy radio stations and people will say its great because its oasis, thats all!

Xavi6

red_ice wrote: »

+1, not to mention that stupid stance he takes when he 'sings'.

From what i've written you can take it that i dont really care much for them, the album will get played over and over on crappy radio stations and people will say its great because its oasis, thats all!

Lol anyone who uses a singer's stance as a reason to hate a band is really clutching at straws.

Nailz

I'm not a huge fan, but I like 'em (despite them being bitters).

And Xavi is right using the vocals as an excuse is really just knit-picking. Even the most iconic of musicians were bad singers. Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain, Neil Young, Shaun Ryder, and Ian Brown can't sing for shìte live! So going that low is just petty.

JerryHandbag

Always look forward to a new Oasis album, one thing is always common is they write good, rocking, singalong songs, who cares if the lyrics are messy or if Liam can be a bit of a knob at times, bless him. The track "Stop The Clocks" that was knockin around isnt on the new album!? Great song, maybe theyve given it a different name on the tracklisting???

red_ice

Xavi6 wrote: »

Lol anyone who uses a singer's stance as a reason to hate a band is really clutching at straws.

Not really.. its just something he does that makes me want to become an assassin of sorts. Hes just continually trying to look cool imo
.........

Nailz wrote: »

And Xavi is right using the vocals as an excuse is really just knit-picking.

What? Thats a terrible argument and far from the truth. Liam is in key most of the time, but his vocal tone and word pronunciation is absolutely sh1te, not to mention the lyrics which are just there because they rhyme, they dont make sense at all most of the time. People are allowed to be put off by a vocal as much as they are a genre or annoying guitar hook.. The worst trait to have is a terrible vocal hook.. Vocals are 60% of a song, the other 40% can sorta be recreated by anyone.. but a voice is hard to come by.

Noel on the other hand is a genius with a fantastic voice. I dislike oasis, but noel is a fantastic musician.

Nailz wrote: »

Even the most iconic of musicians were bad singers. Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain, Neil Young, Shaun Ryder, and Ian Brown can't sing for shìte live! So going that low is just petty.

Are you fking serious? Comparing liam to bob dylan, jimi hendrix and neil young? Ian brown is crap and excuse my ignorance but i dont know Shaun Ryder. <edit> I looked him up, i know him, dont like him either</edit>

Bob Dylan and neil young told stories they did what their songs needed. Jimi had a fantastic voice, he did what his songs needed. Another thing that kinda gives him that right is that hes singing and playing guitar like that at the same time!

The fact that you are using those people as comparisons to liam is laughable! But, alas ill bring it back to vocal styling, lyrics and performance. Which is what i think ntbell is angling at also. ITS HORRID!

gustavo

Xavi6 wrote: »

Still love them, looking forward to the new album.

+1

Maybe it's because they were the first band I was in to , and it was my teenage years but I'll always have a place in my heart for them

Dudess

Words cannot express how much I hate Oasis. When they first arrived I was baffled by the hype: Shakermaker, Supersonic, Whatever, Cigarettes and Alcohol - a load of turgid, generic pub rock. I first saw them around 1993 on The Word (Channel 4 trashy late night chat show with a cult following) and going by the gear they wore and the "swagger" etc, I just presumed they were poor Stone Roses rip-offs. Never thought they'd amount to anything. But then for a while, I was converted: I loved Live Forever and began to appreciate the other tracks as just good old-fashioned rock 'n' roll. And I was impressed with anything I heard off (What's The Story) Morning Glory? I simply adored the title track, Some Might Say, Champagne Supernova, Cast No Shadow and Wonderwall. In fact I bought the latter on single, as well as Don't Look Back In Anger, which I always thought was awful, but I loved their cover of Slade's Come On Feel The Noize (on the B side). And The Masterplan is great - not as astounding as people say it is, but yes, very good. Both Liam and Noel have very good, distinctive voices.
I even backed Oasis in the Oasis v Blur chart battle - while I always thought Roll With It was absolute cack, I didn't like what Blur were doing at the time one bit.
But after that, nothing. Any creative juices they had, in my opinion, ran dry in 1995. They have done nothing noteworthy since Morning Glory. That's 13 years of dreary, monotonous sludge. They did their most worthwhile stuff between 1993 and 1995 - they really don't deserve any of the acclaim since.

Hardrain

JerryHandbag wrote: »

Always look forward to a new Oasis album, one thing is always common is they write good, rocking, singalong songs, who cares if the lyrics are messy or if Liam can be a bit of a knob at times, bless him. The track "Stop The Clocks" that was knockin around isnt on the new album!? Great song, maybe theyve given it a different name on the tracklisting???

There's rumors of it being a hidden track but it's doubtful. 'I Wanna Live A Dream In My Record Machine' is a better tune imo,

Confirmed stuff

irst single: The Shock Of The Lightning
Release date: 29th September 2008
Radio airplay from: 15th August 2008 (earliest confirmed date by edge102)
B-Sides: Falling Down (Chemical Brothers Remix) (confirmed by Jo Whiley)

Album: Dig Out Your Soul
Release Date: 6th October 2008

1. Bag It Up
Written by: Noel
Comments: "Kasabian's Serge played me Baron Saturday by the Pretty Things one night and the minutes I heard it I was like ****ing hell, I'm writing a song like that ****ing tomorrow." I went home, got the guitar and that was it" - Noel, MOJO interview
2. The Turning
3. Waiting For The Rapture
4. The Shock Of The Lightning
Written by: Noel
Sung by: Liam
Comments: "If ‘The Shock Of The Lightning’ sounds instant and compelling to you, it’s because it was written dead fast. And recorded dead fast. ‘The Shock of The Lightning’ basically is the demo. And it has retained its energy. And there’s a lot to be said for that, I think. The first time you record something is always the best.” - Noel, Press Release
5. I’m Outta Time
Written by: Liam
Comments:"obligatory ****ing lighter-in-the-air, John Lennon moment" - Noel, MOJO interview
6. (Get Off Your) High Horse Lady
7. Falling Down
Remixed by Chemical Brothers. Remix sung by Noel. Remix a b-side to Shock Of The Lightning.
8. To Be Where There’s Life
9. Ain’t Got Nothin’
10. The Nature of Reality
11. Soldier On
Written by: Liam
Comments: "We'd started gathering together tunes that had a certain feeling to them. I was doing the Electric Proms with The Coral, who'd recorded their album at my studio, and it turns out they'd come across a hard drive in the Pro Tools that said New Oasis Stuff, and they'd a sneaky listen... So [Coral singer] James Skelly, a bit sheepish, asks me "Are you gonna do that tune Soldier On?" Now I don't remember it, Gem doesn't remember it, Liam certainly doesn't remember it, but the other lads in The Coral are going " You've gotta record this tune, its ****ing boss!" So I ransack this hard drive, can't find a track called Soldier On. So we get to Abbey Road and we're chatting away and Andy Bell goes "Soldier On? Brilliant! I've got a CD of it my bag." Turns out he recorded it with Liam, but Liam still doesn't remember it. "Well" says Andy "you were pretty ****ing pissed" So we stick it on. Like all Liam's songs its got one verse and one chorus just repeated, but its ended up being the last track on the album. It reminds me of a guy walking through sand carrying a big ****ing block on his back, and it just goes on for ages. It goes quite dubby at the end, and I play melodica on it, in the reverb chamber that The Beatles used!" - Noel, MOJO interview

Track times: Unconfirmed
Songwriters: Unconfirmed unless stated

overexcitedaj

They seem to be a very underated band. For what they have acheived since they hit the scene is astounding. Noel is a very underated guitar player to

SEPT 23 1989

first two albums were classics,the rest i dont rate like most bands when they get very rich from their success they loose their hunger,edge and writing ability

when i do hear one of the old songs come on the radio it does remind me of my glorious mis spent youth:):)

Dudess

overexcitedaj wrote: »

They seem to be a very underated band.

Wow, do you not remember the hype?!
Edit: I've just seen you're 18. Of course you don't remember the hype. Between 1994 and 1997 Oasis were everywhere. Then the hype died down, and deservedly so, because of the most unremarkable and tedious Be Here Now, an album that marked their downturn.

For what they have acheived since they hit the scene is astounding. Noel is a very underated guitar player to

I'd take a different position to you - I think they've achieved shag-all in the bones of 15 years. Two noteworthy albums (which may have had hits, but plenty of misses too) and that's it. Not exactly prolific.

bohsmug

Definitely looking forward to the new Oasis album and the tour that will follow.

Some things posted on this thread so far have been complete nonsense. Vocals make up 60% of the sound and the musicians 40%, what are you on about? What scientific theory did you use to figure that out? Complete nonsense. If (and I'm by no means going to attempt to do it) percentages where figured out as to what makes up the sound of a record/song it would be seriously complicated. Temperature, mics used, what you had for breakfast (and not just the vocalist!) etc,. Don't know why that stupid remark pissed me off so much but it just stank of "Ooh I'll put a pointless made up percentage somewhere and that makes my point somehow valid". Complete BS.

Oasis are a great band. Noel isn't a great guitarist by any means but he has this knack of putting exactly the fill/solo that a particular song needs time after time. Some of the great guitar technicians seriously lack the "right place, right time" playing. I could go on forever about this band and what makes them so appealing to their fans.

ntlbell

overexcitedaj wrote: »

Noel is a very underated guitar player to

how would you know? he's only ever used about 3 chords

fitz0

red_ice wrote: »

What? Thats a terrible argument and far from the truth. Liam is in key most of the time, but his vocal tone and word pronunciation is absolutely sh1te, not to mention the lyrics which are just there because they rhyme, they dont make sense at all most of the time. People are allowed to be put off by a vocal as much as they are a genre or annoying guitar hook.. The worst trait to have is a terrible vocal hook.. Vocals are 60% of a song, the other 40% can sorta be recreated by anyone.. but a voice is hard to come by.

What about REM? In their early days it was near impossible to make sense of their songs. Michael Stipe even came out and said the lyrics didnt really mean anything! And Bob Dylan, genius though he is, is a bad singer. I still listen to him and love his music but he isnt the best singer in the world.

That said I dont like Oasis at all. Maybe Im just used to hearing bands that copied their style or something but I find their music generic and boring.

Affable

Slight diversion, but when Neil Young is mentioned.....

I have to say he's the most overrated person I've heard. The guy's music is teeth-grindingly dull.

humberklog

Dudess wrote: »

When they first arrived I was baffled by the hype: Shakermaker, Supersonic, Whatever, Cigarettes and Alcohol - a load of turgid, generic pub rock. I first saw them around 1993 on The Word (Channel 4 trashy late night chat show with a cult following) and going by the gear they wore and the "swagger" etc, I just presumed they were poor Stone Roses rip-offs. Never thought they'd amount to anything. But then for a while, I was converted: I loved Live Forever and began to appreciate the other tracks as just good old-fashioned rock 'n' roll. And I was impressed with anything I heard off (What's The Story) Morning Glory? I simply adored the title track, Some Might Say, Champagne Supernova, Cast No Shadow and Wonderwall. In fact I bought the latter on single, as well as Don't Look Back In Anger, which I always thought was awful, but I loved their cover of Slade's Come On Feel The Noize. And The Masterplan is great - not as astounding as people say it is, but yes, very good.
I even backed Oasis in the Oasis v Blur chart battle - while I always thought Roll With It was absolute cack, I didn't like what Blur were doing at the time one bit.

Isn't it so handy that with just a bit of deleting someone has said exactly how I feel and what I would've said. Like a curling, looping spot kick into the back of the net.
If Noel Gallagher was a Boardsie this is how he'd compile them!(Plagererise, (nice spelling)).
Mind you they were a good kick up the arse in the pop world when it needed it.
To the poster that said 'under-rated'. Boyz-oh-boy. I nearly dropped my donut.
(Noel Gallagher singing Liveforver on the Late Late Show after a Dublin gig was brilliant).

bohsmug

ntlbell wrote: »

how would you know? he's only ever used about 3 chords

I call BS on that one. What three chords are they then? Seriously the Oasis bashers embarrass themselves with silly arguments like that. If you want to criticise a band come up with a decent argument or at the very least something with at least a hint of truth to it.

humberklog

bohsmug wrote: »

I call BS on that one. What three chords are they then? Seriously the Oasis bashers embarrass themselves with silly arguments like that. If you want to criticise a band come up with a decent argument or at the very least something with at least a hint of truth to it.

Bravo well said. Once again a post i need to add to in order to get the required feeling and sound. Another Noel Gallagher style post.
(You are bang on though boh. Always irks me when peop[le come out with this 3chord nonsense. And by the by some of my fav tunes are on3 chords. But there not Oasis songs. Ol' Noel doesn't mind a few slippery chord cahangecd here and there even though that's pretty irrelevant)