26 replies · 480 views
Not that I'm a big Beatles fan or anything, but this is downright scary:
Oasis better than the Beatles?
The end must really be nigh...
Of course, being American, I probably shouldn't talk. In an equivalent poll of the masses here, I wouldn't be at all suprised if some stupid boy band won.
Matt
#1 AND #5??!! 
Oasis suck! And I thought Americans had lousy music polls. Oh well, at least some good albums did make the top 10.
Well aside from my heartfelt belief that the Beatles were a boy band (yes, because all those crotch-soaked teenyboppers were dead into ringo's parradiddle technique..NOT)...the first thing that strikes me about this is.......
Oasis are a bad Beatles tribute band, their songs all sounded better back when Lennon and Macartney wrote em.
What's next? "re-order and Digital beat NO in poll" LOL (not that I am implying that those guys are heathen chav scum who should be gently roasted in hot salt like Oasis)
In fairness, at least Re: Order play the songs slightly more competently than NO do. So do Digital, probably.
it's especially crap because what's the story morning glory is a better album than definitely maybe
but it's like comparing eating solid poo to diarrhea really
Doctor? wrote:
(not that I am implying that those guys are heathen chav scum who should be gently roasted in hot salt like Oasis)
At least they support City over United.
hrm
ChrissMari wrote:
At least they support City over United.
aye,
and Hooky & Barney are Red.
dont need to say much more than that.
I never really could see anything special about Oasis. I found it entertaining to watch those two brothers fight though.
They WERE a breath of fresh air at the beginning though - but like most "next big things" they simply got stale very very quickly. Words cannot express how much I hate the sound of that song "Wonderwall" right now..... Like with everything, overfamiliarity can often breed contempt.
Last good single of theirs was "Don't Look Back In Anger" I'd say.... everything since then has just been the same tired formula repeated over and over again. I mean the biggest irony is that the Beatles actually evolved over their 11 albums - whilst Oasis have stayed exactly the same and even funnier, they've even lasted longer than the Beatles now relatively speaking - 12 years to the Beatles 8 years ! 
yeh but its just like saying drinking a pint of piss is better than eating a turd.
Neither is particularly favourable.
To most people anyway.
it's especially crap because what's the story morning glory is a better album than definitely maybe
You've got that right, Chriss.
To be fair,Definitely Maybe is a good album. And theses polls always place albums that are relevant today-The Beatles were great,but it was 40 years ago. Im sure even they would agree better albums have been made since then.
OK Computer should be top though,cos it is without a doubt,su-fuckin-perb!
Awww... come on... Definitely Maybe is a fine debut album, one of the best, no doubt.
Bag o' shite since though.
I still think they have obvious nods to the Beatles, but are morphing more into Status Quo as each year passes, basically using the same old tired cliches and riffs etc. I expect them to release a song called the 'Anniversary Waltz Part 3' in 2010, and opening Band Aid 2035.
Uncle Liam wrote: In fairness, at least Re: Order play the songs slightly more competently than NO do. So do Digital, probably.
Maybe.Dunno.I'd go see if they played nearby.
The genius is in the creation though
I am a big fan of the Libertines but how the fuck did their debut album make it to No 15. It is a great album but to reach No 15 :\ohwell:
Wow...talk about a bunch of people who can't appreciate things for the past... I'm not that interested in rock music in general, but even I understand that The Beatles have more significance in music history than Oasis. What's next? Morons saying that some random rapper is more significant than Miles Davis or John Coltrane?
Boatraceface wrote:
Uncle Liam wrote: In fairness, at least Re: Order play the songs slightly more competently than NO do. So do Digital, probably.
Maybe.Dunno.I'd go see if they played nearby. The genius is in the creation though
Aye,the genius is certainly in the creation. Competence is not something I've ever expected or required from NO.
As for this poll thingy.Oh Dear!
give it another 2o yrs and another poll,oasis wont be in it and the beatles still will. docs right though the fab4 where a boy band,a good un mind.
I'm still waiting for Noel Gallagher to write his first original song...
That said, at the time they were great. But it all went downhill with Be Here Now, that was a load of crap if I ever heard one. I think I tried to listen to it recently...and had to fling it out of the CD player for fear my ears would start bleeding, dogs would be attracted by the high pitch of Liam's whine, and the apocalypse would draw near my doorstep. 
Or was that when I listened to The Best of the Bee-Gees? (seeing as we're shredding Beatles soundalike bands) :p
leather_girl wrote: Wow...talk about a bunch of people who can't appreciate things for the past... I'm not that interested in rock music in general, but even I understand that The Beatles have more significance in music history than Oasis. What's next? Morons saying that some random rapper is more significant than Miles Davis or John Coltrane?
My thoughts exactly.
JHC
:p
