WeasteDevil
New Member
Yeah, but Slash embodied G'N'R, imo. It would be like Oasis without Noel.
They both needed each other to make GnR, it's as simple as that.
Yeah, but Slash embodied G'N'R, imo. It would be like Oasis without Noel.
They both needed each other to make GnR, it's as simple as that.
Yeah. Hence the Oasis reference. Imagine Oasis without Liam or Noel.
Yeah. Hence the Oasis reference. Imagine Oasis without Liam or Noel.
Oasis? Oasis would have done fine without Liam Gallagher who did feck all apart from scream down the mic and get high. He's a talentless shite.
You only have to look/listen at/to The Masterplan to see that Liam was not required at all.
Yeah, they`d just be another shitty indie outfit like Snow Patrol. Big fecking loss.
nearly anybody could fill in for Liam, to be honest.
nearly anybody could fill in for Liam, to be honest.
Bollocks.
Critics are right to cite Liam's voice as shite these days, the drug and alcohol abuse has taken its toll; but up until probably '99 his voice was one of (if not THE) the best of his generation - setting Oasis apart from other bands. Primarily, Oasis are nothing without Noel - but Liam in their early years was almost as important to the band as his elder brother.
Are you really saying that Liam Gallagher HAD a good singing voice?
Are you really saying that Liam Gallagher has a good singing voice?
Bollocks.
but up until probably '99 his voice was one of (if not THE) the best of his generation
I saw Oasis before they were even known, but Liam has never had a good singing voice ever. Yes, it fits their style, but it's nothing that Noel could not have done himself. What started this argument is that you said that Liam and Noel were as necessary to Oasis as Rose and Slash were to GnR. It's a silly thing to say.
When you say "generation", what sort of time period are we talking about?
And another thing, why does every fecking music thread on this forum turn into an Oasis debate...?
Bollocks.
Critics are right to cite Liam's voice as shite these days, the drug and alcohol abuse has taken its toll; but up until probably '99 his voice was one of (if not THE) the best of his generation - setting Oasis apart from other bands. Primarily, Oasis are nothing without Noel - but Liam in their early years was almost as important to the band as his elder brother.
Oasis? Oasis would have done fine without Liam Gallagher who did feck all apart from scream down the mic and get high. He's a talentless shite.
This is one of the most ignorant posts i've read in a while. Maybe Liam isn't the best singer technically but he has done a shit load for Oasis in many respects, do you honestly think Oasis would be as big if Liam wasn't there generating publicty & making the papers every other week (especially in the 90's). In 2006, Q Magazine voted Liam the 11th best singer of all time. Now i don't personally agree with this but you'd be an idiot to think that he was a talentless shite.
One of the most frustrating things for me is people who are ignorant about music, everyone is entitled to their opinion but some people sound like they don't really know what they are talking about half the time.
I'm not ignorant about music, I've studied "music" quite extensively.
He's a talentless shite because he brought nothing to any of their compositions. Even his singing, if Noel had done it himself, they would not have been any less successful. In fact, Noel has a better voice.
No Liam:
My point is that Noel could have sung that. He wrote the bloody thing. It would have been slightly different, yes, but would not have distracted from what it is.
Wouldn't have been as good, fact.
lol...who works at Q? Bowie, Al Green,Mercury,James brown,axel rose, etc.didnt even make the list.Q Magazine voted Liam the 11th best singer of all time.
lol...who works at Q? Bowie, Al Green,Mercury,James brown,axel rose, etc.didnt even make the list.
Q magazine needs to get its head out of Oasis's Arse.
It's not a fact at all. And the brilliant thing is, you wouldn't have even known any different.