What's DM? Blur are a groovy little band.
Music Where has all the music gone?
- Thread starter Scoreboard Red
- Start date
What's DM? Blur are a groovy little band.
Definately Maybe
Thanks, WP. Good record, that one, but not as good as WTSMG.
Jonno's point is that modern life is rubbish then?
They are indeed, went to see them on their Think Tank tour at the Manc Apollo, I still rate it as one of my top 5 favorite gigs attended, they were fecking awesome as were the crowd, we both fed of each other.
Love nights like that.
Disagree with this, I think they peaked with DM personally, still decent album though.
I lol'd.
lucky git.
They played the Oxegen festival this year, best band there by a long way.
I saw Blur at Reading festival on the Think Tank tour and was thoroughly impressed. And I was never really into britpop so they must have been decent. I've seen Oasis live a couple of times and they've always been underwhelming; he just can't sing and they are so bland.
still waiting for Mockney to get back to me
They don't interact with the crowd at all. "This is a song for you, or whatever." is pretty much all you're going to get from them.
fecking hell, do you want every band to do a Bono or his little apprentice Chris Martin for 30mins between songs about starving Ethiopians with AIDs or how George Bush is a terrorist?
Yes, obviously. Wicked.
No, but standing and scowling whilst looking like a prat isn't a stage presence. Just give it something, a little excitement, anything so the audience isn't bored off their tits.
Even the so called 'misserable' Thom Yorke interacts with the crowd.
Every Oasis concert I attended, the crowd were thriving mate, I dont know about you but you were clearly in the minority.
What did he do, swap orange hair dye tips and nominate convenient suicide methods?
Yeah, that's it.
Oh come on Nome, dont go crying. You insulted my idol, Liam first, it really hurt me too
I ain't crying, just too stoned for what is essentially a pointless side argument to the main debate.
There's no debate. It's just Johnno whinging about there not being enough Oasis tribute acts nowadays.
Shut it you, is you from Longsight, innit, wiv me 23-inch rims and me double bass Kenwoods an ***
Fair point.
where is Mockney, I anticipated a vicious counter-attack but it's yet to forthcome...
Oh really?...Everyone else seemed to be doing it for me so I didn't see the point, but fine....It was incredibly hard to read by the way John....Basically you don't have a point. You waft on about how amazing Oasis were but when you have to take in someone elses view point on another band, or something outside of your cultural view you react like this...
Basically....Like a twat.
Now I realize it's all in jehst mate, but it still isn't an argument. Someone else says
"well Johnno, here are other bands who were better than Oasis, and here's why"
..and you just reply "fecking cnuty wank stained jezzabelle cnut flap twat monkey cocks they were"
Genius! that really is a well thought out and reasonable argument for why Oasis are so much better than them...It shows you don't have a point. It's the first refuge of someone lost in their own argument...to just lash out. You're good at talking up Oasis, but you just don't even bother talking about other bands, you just insult them...probably because you don't accept the merits of things you don't like
And since you didn't respond to certain parts of my diatribe (like why you failed to recognize the New Romantics cultural impact for example) I'll cherry pick what to reply to from yours...which wasn't that hard actually as you rambled randomly off topic several times anyway
Shitting on your granny is unique, it doesn't make it cool or good. Your argument for Oasis being a bigger and better band and a greater influence than anyone since falls down at this because hardly any top bands now-a-days imitate Liams style of singing (which was basically, not being able to sing)..In fact the Zeitgeist has turned away from it and embraced the Muses of this world who can, all be it rather OTT, sing. Same is true in mainstream music with the popularity of X Factor winners and the Amy Winehouse and Adele's dominating the charts. People like it when people can sing...Which sort of shows, in evolutionary terms, that Liam was shit, and not all that significant....and as for being a great front man, well meh, sort of, still light years out of Jaggers league....but anyone who saw him and thought he was shit is obviously a devious lying southern poof who doesn't understand how earth shatteringly important it was to be Johnno in 1997
The whole reason I wanted you to reply to the New Romantic thing in particular is because it shows that something that captures a moment or influences the style of the time, isn't always great by that sheer definition...Sometimes it fecking crap and the test of it is if it's carried through to later generations. Oasis' style in both fashion and song writing hasn't been carried on, it's been disregarded for the most part and left in the cultural dust bin of history.
Kasabian's front man does imitate Gallagher....but their music sytle is actually very different. Dependant on riffs and not chords. And now they've even evolved away from their fashion beginings and are dressing and presenting themselves differently.
Yes I did it on purpose, to take the piss....Just because it's in the cultural lexicon doesn't make it good. Heil Hitler is in the cultural lexicon.
Yes. I didn't claim their early work was seminal. My point was that everyone wrote songs about love in those days (hence why I talked about the machinations of 60s pop) and that when The Beatles broke away from that, it was a big deal.
Not by you maybe, but it is by a lot of people. In fact their early stuff is not regarded as being nearly as seminal by the vast majority as their later stuff. Hence why Sgt Peppers is the album always regarded as the focal one when talking about The Beatles....Ask anyone their favorite Beatles album and how many say Please Please Me, or With The Beatles or even Help for that matter?...hardly any. They may have been popular in those days, but their real cultural significance and musical legacy happened after 66
That post 66 period is what changed The Beatles from the most popular band in the world to the most significant band in the world. Comparatively, Oasis never emerged from the early period. They never evolved the way The Beatles did and they never attempted to. The Beatles helped to change what it was acceptable for commercial songs to be written about....Oasis just benefited from it, and wrote waffle. The comparison is a ridiculous one.
No I did a course on Music which included studying lyrics...a small part of that was analysing how the Beatles changed lyric writing....There oddly wasn't a bit on Oasis. Why's that Johnno?...and well done for again covering your lack of a point by simply being insulting and attempting to ridicule.
It's a good song yes, but feck me John, it wasn't Mozarts Requiem. It didn't "blow everyone away"....your propensity to exaggerate to the upper limits is hilarious.
Everyone now....Which shows just how little you know, or care, about music outside of what you like.
Also you're completely willfull disregard of Radiohead (OK Computer has been voted the best album of the 90s in countless publications, online polls and even by musicians, odd you've never noticed it) and Nirvana (2 songs of note?...Nothing after Nevermind?...
) Just shows how unwilling you are to even acknowledge let along begin to accept, anyone elses view point, even if they've lived it and you haven't.And saying "well I met loads of people at gigs in Manchester or at the footy who weren't manc and loved Oasis" doesn't really mean diddly squat, as that is still in YOUR arena of cultural likiness.. They liked what you like, they came to you, so to speak...I'm not saying they weren't big John, but they weren't nearly as big as you think, as the vast majority of replies in this thread show (at least 2 people have outright told you they weren't affected by Oasis or saw their influence where they were, to which you just reply "feck off I met some people who were so there cockface!!")...it doesn't account for everyone, just the people you met, which, in the entire population of the UK, is still a tiny amount.
You just need to accept John, that you aren't the center of the known universe.
^ I rate this post.
Which sort of shows, in evolutionary terms, that Liam was shit, and not all that significant....and as for being a great front man, well meh, sort of, still light years out of Jaggers league....but anyone who saw him and thought he was shit is obviously a devious lying southern poof who doesn't understand how earth shatteringly important it was to be Johnno in 1997
Which sort of shows, in evolutionary terms, that Liam was shit, and not all that significant....and as for being a great front man, well meh, sort of, still light years out of Jaggers league....but anyone who saw him and thought he was shit is obviously a devious lying southern poof who doesn't understand how earth shatteringly important it was to be Johnno in 1997
^ I rate this post.
Which sort of shows, in evolutionary terms, that Liam was shit, and not all that significant....and as for being a great front man, well meh, sort of, still light years out of Jaggers league....but anyone who saw him and thought he was shit is obviously a devious lying southern poof who doesn't understand how earth shatteringly important it was to be Johnno in 1997
You probably like the Hilltop Hoods, you miff
You think Oasis are the genius Johnno, you don't get to take the piss
Where, oh where, have I proclaimed them genius, my Mexican friend?
I have said they were a top band, I have also said I realsie they're not as good as they were and some songs don't sound too good these days and Liam is a dick, what I have also said is they made a massive cultural impact on the youth of Britain in the 90s, but you and your bumchums have started chatting shite and got it in your heads Radiohead are a mint group.
Meet me on Sydney Road in Brunswick by the fish and chip shop there, I'm gonna stick my dick in your ear and shag some sense into you....
Yes Ive heard it - cant say it ever grabbed me but perhaps I never gave it enough of a chance to I might revisit it due to your high praise - but your musical rep is on line here so you better not be diappointing me!
I rate it very highly Rood, it's one of those that you pull out every now and again and are reminded of how fecking good it is each time. I think alot of people are put off by the lack of Coxon tbh, but I would say this is their strongest album by a mile so far and leaves me slightly concerned about what direction they will take on their next one with him back on board.
Damon Alburn is a talented feck, big fan of Gorillaz too.
Damon Alburn is a talented feck, big fan of Gorillaz too.
Well we're getting somewhere then.
Thing is, I don't disagree with that. I just disagree that they had the level of influence and cultural significance you think they did. That's all. Your original post was just one labelling every band since Oasis shit...and so everyone replied with what utter nonsense that was....That's all really John. I don't actually hate Oasis or deny their importance at all. They were a big deal at the time. Just not the deal.
...but you can't stop yourself. Radiohead are a mint group. They've had far more influence in the music world than Oasis have, if not in the fashion, culture world. Even if you hate them, you sort of have to accept that. I don't like any number of things that I realize are important or influential.
I still love you by the way John
I don't think many who know me will be too surprised to here me say that in my opinion, Radiohead are THE most important band of our generation, and will be remembered in decades to come, up there with the likes of The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Led Zep etc, and also being discovered by future generations to come, influencing all number bands in the process.
Oasis will not be any where near that group in terms of importance to music, and neither will Blur come to mention it, seeing as they have been discussed in this thread quite a bit.
Oasis will not be any where near that group in terms of importance to music, and neither will Blur come to mention it, seeing as they have been discussed in this thread quite a bit.
Oasis
First album was good, mind.
Their significance ended upon the release of their third album.
Everyone knows that.
First album was good, mind.
Their significance ended upon the release of their third album.
Everyone knows that.
Weird that, I hear half a dozen bands in the Arctics, but never Oasis.
what annoys me at the moment is how little choice there is on the radios at the moment. it seems that most of the main radio stations have ~10 songs that comprise 90% of their playlist, with the other 10% being a selection from everything else.
heartbreaker
fight for this love
russian roulette
bad boys
havent met you yet
that new lily allen song with a chorus melody completely ripped off from a take that song which is isnt even that old
cry me out
the X factor finalists (ugh)
tonight is gonna be a good night
everybody in love
thats pretty much it, isnt it?
heartbreaker
fight for this love
russian roulette
bad boys
havent met you yet
that new lily allen song with a chorus melody completely ripped off from a take that song which is isnt even that old
cry me out
the X factor finalists (ugh)
tonight is gonna be a good night
everybody in love
thats pretty much it, isnt it?
That's why you should listen to pirate radio.
Arrrrr!
Arrrrr!
Any Mancs remember Stu Allen on Key 103 in the mid-Nineties, all the lads at school raved about him with his dance mixes and everything was introduced as 'a very, very large tune indeed'....
This thread is great to read again after all this time.