milton75 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I think Oasis are shite and I don't particularly care for heavy metal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I'd say throbber's entire post on that was pretty much spot on. Oh, going back to that "real music" thing. That's not something that's reserved for heavy metal fans. Hardcore and elitist fans of ANY genre of music are the ones who tend to be the worst for it. I suppose its because i am old/young enough to remember how things were then and how it compares now - remember when music started coming out online and it was a massive new thing and thats when Arctic Monkeys cashed in and they came at the end of these indie bands when indie music was still a thing and there was a divide between main stream and indie. That divide is no more, people don't define themselves by the music they listen to as they did in the first half of the 00's. Or maybe they do and I'm just an out of touch chav. The Spice Girls are another one - absolutely no talent but just got in at the right time and the country went insane, in all seriousness ASDA are 5 checkout girls short Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigmouth Strikes Again Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I agree with Gallagher, I couldn't tell you who was no.1 in the hit parade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Again, no one cares about the hit parade it means f**k all. I remember in the 90's the charts on Sunday was a major thing for people - number one used to be played around 6.40 IIRC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Indie, Britpop or Rock and Roll it's all pretty derived from the same thing. Good point about Oasis filling a void and being at the right place at the right time. There's no doubt that Noel has talent but they were totally overrated - even compared to the Beatles at one stage. If the Stone Roses didn't fall out with their label then who knows, doubt they would have made such an impact. It was no suprise to see Liam Gallaghers effort die on its arse after splitting from his brother, you could say he was ,,scrambling for relatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I hate the saying scrambling for relevance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamamafegan Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Noel Gallagher a prime example - desperately trying to be edgy and find feuds. http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/noel-gallagher-says-he-cannot-live-in-a-world-where-ed-sheeran-sells-out-wembley-stadium-9975662.html?cmpid=facebook-post Troll Gallagher. He's got some Ed Sheeran fans absolutely raging. As said previously, his new album it's coming out and this will get it some publicity. I think Noel is overlooked in modem day music, mostly only loved by Oasis fans. Maybe raging Ed Sheeran fans will give Noels music a try and realise how infinitely better he is than Sheeran. Long live the chief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YassinMoutaouakil Posted January 15, 2015 Author Share Posted January 15, 2015 Generalising of course, but Kasabian fans are subhuman scum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom McB Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 People generalising entire fanbases for one, and The King with his "people who don't know what rock music is" It's almost as if people don't quite understand objectivity. Best comment in thread. People are eclectic in music. e.g. I think Morrisey is a intemperate knobber but much of the Smith's work is excellent. Similar to the C&W is pish generalisation. Much of it is but Steve Earle's work is superb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Went off Oasis after the first two albums - they've been attacking others for ages. Blur was a great example, he slagged their music off but they've all done much more diverse and original work since while Oasis played the same shite for over a decade. Gorillaz pisses all over anything he's done since in terms of originality. Usually when someone attacks they're just projecting their own insecurities, he knows he's a total sellout hypocrite. The Oasis/Blur feud was the best thing that ever happened to both bands. Wouldn't be surprised if it was entirely fabricated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Malkmus Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 The Oasis/Blur feud was the best thing that ever happened to both bands. Wouldn't be surprised if it was entirely fabricated. I'm sure I read that Damon Albarn and the editor of the NME at the time conspired to make the feud happen as it would be beneficial to all parties. The low point had to be when Gallagher wished that Blur caught AIDS... I don't mind Oasis, but their musical legacy has been tainted by the wave of bands who have played off their whole outspoken working-class lad aesthetic (Kasabian, The Courteeners to an extent. There are plenty other examples) It's not that the music is bad necessarily, it just that the whole thing feels a bit played-out now imo. American guitar/indie music seems to be much more varied and generally held to a higher standard critically, hence why Britpop bands never really broke through there. I suppose the variation is not a surprise given the larger population, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boostin' Kev Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Out of that mid 90s Britpop era Blur and Pulp seemed to have aged the best. I saw Oasis live a week or 2 before Supersonic and bought every subsequent single up to Wonderwall (and the debut LP) on the day of release. For me when Morning Glory was released they started to sound like one trick ponies and I think it was Don't Look Back that was the beginning of the end for me. Like you mentioned there were a lot more interesting US bands around at that time which I preferred. Out of all the early 90s UK groups Stereolab are the ones I listen to the most these days by far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Read that in a Peter Griffin voice. They insist upon themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Best comment in thread. People are eclectic in music. e.g. I think Morrisey is a intemperate knobber but much of the Smith's work is excellent. Similar to the C&W is pish generalisation. Much of it is but Steve Earle's work is superb. Of course it's all subjective, and people are entitled to their opinions and choices,,,but if someone is going to say Oasis are one of the greatest rock bands ever, or Paul Potts is one of the greatest Tenors ever, there is nothing wrong with saying , sorry but you don't know what you're talking about, because clearly these people holding these opinions don't know anything about Rock music or Classical. If you grew up listening to and seeing live the likes of Deep Purple, Zeppelin, Motorhead, ZZtop, ACDC, you'd understand the feeling of emptiness when listening to some 20something tell you Oasis is Rock music and Noel is an amazing guitarist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullywee Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Most of those bands sound absolutely ridiculous for most of the time. I like that Deep Purple one though. Do do do do do do do do do do do do. Proper rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milton75 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Troll Gallagher. He's got some Ed Sheeran fans absolutely raging. As said previously, his new album it's coming out and this will get it some publicity. I think Noel is overlooked in modem day music, mostly only loved by Oasis fans. Maybe raging Ed Sheeran fans will give Noels music a try and realise how infinitely better he is than Sheeran. Long live the chief. Noel Gallagher and Ed Sheerin are quite alike, imo. Both have that squashed-face goblin look about them. And both are shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
throbber Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Noel Gallagher and Ed Sheerin are quite alike, imo. Both have that squashed-face goblin look about them. And both are shite. What a bold statement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Malkmus Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Of course it's all subjective, and people are entitled to their opinions and choices,,,but if someone is going to say Oasis are one of the greatest rock bands ever, or Paul Potts is one of the greatest Tenors ever, there is nothing wrong with saying , sorry but you don't know what you're talking about, because clearly these people holding these opinions don't know anything about Rock music or Classical. What if someone was a massive classical music nerd but heaven forbid, lost their virginity or something while listening to a Paul Potts record? In their opinion Paul Potts may be elevated above the rest of their favourite classical artists because of that emotional attachment to his music. They may even go as far as saying Paul Potts is the "best artist ever". Which wouldn't be true objectively speaking, as the quality of music can't be judged in that way, but there may be no artist they value above him due to that emotional bond. Music is far more about the emotions it elicits in someone than it is about technical proficiency or record sales. You can't say Pavarotti is better than Paul Potts and hold it up as a fact just as you can't say the opposite. It's completely subjective (as you said). Which is why someone saying "x artist is shite" is a completely worthless statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milton75 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 What if someone was a massive classical music nerd but heaven forbid, lost their virginity or something while listening to a Paul Potts record? In their opinion Paul Potts may be elevated above the rest of their favourite classical artists because of that emotional attachment to his music. They may even go as far as saying Paul Potts is the "best artist ever". Which wouldn't be true objectively speaking, as the quality of music can't be judged in that way, but there may be no artist they value above him due to that emotional bond. Music is far more about the emotions it elicits in someone than it is about technical proficiency or record sales. You can't say Pavarotti is better than Paul Potts and hold it up as a fact just as you can't say the opposite. It's completely subjective (as you said). Which is why someone saying "x artist is shite" is a completely worthless statement. Disagree. There's such a thing as being able to make a critical distinction and argue the case for it. All of what you just said can be applied to everything, not just music. Someone could tell you that The Daily Record is the best newspaper, that Fosters is the best beer, or that Sex and the City 2 is the best film. They might truly believe any of these things, but they'd still be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Could well be an example of keyboard bravado but shit scared it in a face to face situation. Scared to say it to My Chemical Romance. My Chemical Romance. No one favourite, but bands like Zeppelin, ACDC, The Who, The Faces. Some nerve slagging off Oasis when AC/DC have been releasing the same song for 30 odd years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.