Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2015 12:00:38 GMT -5
Be Here Now doesn't have any standout tracks? D'You Know What I Mean just knocked on the door and said hello. your not getting my point, Im not talking about us fans, Im on about the public, DYKWIM isnt the same light hearted oasisy song that the previous albums bigger songs offered up is it. is roll with it a better song? no probably not to most fans but its more radio friendly and generally more catchy to the general public, I'm sure if you asked a more casual fan, they would name roll with it before DYKWIM. BHN has standout tracks to the fanbase but they arnt the same quality as WTSMG or DM and that would be more prevalent to casual fans and therefore BHN probably comes across as fairly generic in comparison. thats why I'm saying songs like acquiesce would've offered up those tunes that are easier to listen to and catch on better because that type of song is more what people expected from oasis at the time, stay young probably would've been the best lead single imo from the BHN cycle because of that reason.
|
|
|
Post by Manualex on Nov 18, 2015 12:04:20 GMT -5
Be Here Now doesn't have any standout tracks? D'You Know What I Mean just knocked on the door and said hello. your not getting my point, Im not talking about us fans, Im on about the public, DYKWIM isnt the same light hearted oasisy song that the previous albums bigger songs offered up is it. is roll with it a better song? no probably not to most fans but its more radio friendly and generally more catchy to the general public, I'm sure if you asked a more casual fan, they would name roll with it before DYKWIM. BHN has standout tracks to the fanbase but they arnt the same quality as WTSMG or DM and that would be more prevalent to casual fans and therefore BHN probably comes across as fairly generic in comparison. thats why I'm saying songs like acquiesce would've offered up those tunes that are easier to listen to and catch on better because that type of song is more what people expected from oasis at the time, stay young probably would've been the best lead single imo from the BHN cycle because of that reason. I think Dont Go Away and I hope I Think I know would've been better lead singles but then the album would've had a lot of changes to make that happen.
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Nov 18, 2015 14:35:24 GMT -5
your not getting my point, Im not talking about us fans, Im on about the public, DYKWIM isnt the same light hearted oasisy song that the previous albums bigger songs offered up is it. is roll with it a better song? no probably not to most fans but its more radio friendly and generally more catchy to the general public, I'm sure if you asked a more casual fan, they would name roll with it before DYKWIM. BHN has standout tracks to the fanbase but they arnt the same quality as WTSMG or DM and that would be more prevalent to casual fans and therefore BHN probably comes across as fairly generic in comparison. thats why I'm saying songs like acquiesce would've offered up those tunes that are easier to listen to and catch on better because that type of song is more what people expected from oasis at the time, stay young probably would've been the best lead single imo from the BHN cycle because of that reason. I think Dont Go Away and I hope I Think I know would've been better lead singles but then the album would've had a lot of changes to make that happen. America definitely needed a different lead single. Using "Don't Go Away" would have been a great choice. Americans wanted another Wonderwall. Sure we had a lot of hoopla for the premier of DYKWIM on MTV and vh1 but after that, the video vanishes from televisions in the USA. A 6+ min video? Gimme a break.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2015 14:42:08 GMT -5
I think Dont Go Away and I hope I Think I know would've been better lead singles but then the album would've had a lot of changes to make that happen. America definitely needed a different lead single. Using "Don't Go Away" would have been a great choice. Americans wanted another Wonderwall. Sure we had a lot of hoopla for the premier of DYKWIM on MTV and vh1 but after that, the video vanishes from televisions in the USA. A 6+ min video? Gimme a break. thats what I mean really, DYKWIM is a great song but as a lead single? its just too damn long for that imo. I still dont get why dont go away wasnt pushed harder, I know it got played on quite a few shows etc but from my perspective its the highest quality song on the album, the lyrics and the melody are just perfect, I wouldve liked to have seen it played live for a longer period of time but maybe Liam simply couldnt handle it after a while. think I wouldve preferred over stand by me on the SOTSOG tour.
|
|
|
Post by World71R on Nov 18, 2015 20:01:10 GMT -5
Be Here Now doesn't have any standout tracks? D'You Know What I Mean just knocked on the door and said hello. ...with Don't Go Away waiting in anticipation behind it, while Stand By Me and All Around the World bring the car around
|
|
|
Post by beentherenow on Nov 19, 2015 4:12:06 GMT -5
I believe Stand By Me was intended to be the big anthem of the album but other things dictated that it didn't quite hit the anticipated heights.
1) The Oasis backlash had already begun upon its release 2) Like all of BHN it is 2 mins too long. People always go on about DYKWIM and AATW's length but SBM is almost 6 minutes as well. 3) I know this subject has been covered before but Princess Diana's death cannot be understated. The UK changed beyond all recognition. Never before has there been this National state of mourning and with it being in the digital age it made it all the more prevalent. The public didn't want to listen to large, life affirming anthem's anymore; they wanted sombre, retrospective, insular tunes (see Drugs Don't Work) to wallow in their grief.
Oasis- despite being the soundtrack to the country for the previous 3 years and the biggest band in the world- instantly sounded outdated and out-of-touch because of a single incident.
Seems odd to see the correlation between an albums success and the death of a public figure but this was no ordinary time
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Nov 19, 2015 4:23:39 GMT -5
I believe Stand By Me was intended to be the big anthem of the album but other things dictated that it didn't quite hit the anticipated heights. 1) The Oasis backlash had already begun upon its release 2) Like all of BHN it is 2 mins too long. People always go on about DYKWIM and AATW's length but SBM is almost 6 minutes as well. 3) I know this subject has been covered before but Princess Diana's death cannot be understated. The UK changed beyond all recognition. Never before has there been this National state of mourning and with it being in the digital age it made it all the more prevalent. The public didn't want to listen to large, life affirming anthem's anymore; they wanted sombre, retrospective, insular tunes (see Drugs Don't Work) to wallow in their grief. Oasis- despite being the soundtrack to the country for the previous 3 years and the biggest band in the world- instantly sounded outdated and out-of-touch because of a single incident. Seems odd to see the correlation between an albums success and the death of a public figure but this was no ordinary time Plus album is shit.
|
|
|
Post by defmaybe00 on Nov 19, 2015 7:40:10 GMT -5
Despite not being the anthem it was meant to be at the time I think Stand By Me is one of the most well known Oasis tunes, here at least It still gets played on the radio from time to time (that's how I got into Oasis actually)
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Nov 19, 2015 7:55:16 GMT -5
The Masterplan doesn't work as an album, the sounds are too different from one song to another.
It's the greatest bside compilation ever made by anyone though.
But i never listen to it. I usually play each record followed by their own bsides or include bsides in the running order of the record. Much much better experience since the songs were recorded at the same time. It just makes more sense.
I don't like compilations overall, they often sound a bit weird. The Beatles red and blue being the exception
|
|
|
Post by rekrelf on Nov 19, 2015 9:46:09 GMT -5
When TMP came out, I didn't have any regular internet access but just happened to be lucky enough to see a tv ad for it when it was released so I knew it was out there. I picked it up at Best Buy and took it home to listen to it thinking it was a whole new album. Then I read the liner notes and found out it was a b-side compilation. I'm not sure I even knew what a b-side was at the time, but that's when I started taking every chance I had to get on AOL and find places to order all the CD singles. Of course then I started learning that there was a backlash after Be Here Now and that was why it was hard to find Oasis on tv anymore. I wondered how TMP would have been received if the songs weren't previously released and it had been released as its own album, either replacing BHN/SOTSOG or as an in-between. I'm not sure what songs I would take out or add. I guess you wouldn't want IATW on there, and Listen Up and Fade Away took a while for me to warm up to, but overall it flows like a normal album. I doubt it would have preserved their phenomenon status, but they'd have been remembered more favorably. Hahahaha, same was for me mate!!! I saw in 98 the Acquiese video and it did say that it was from "The Masterplan" in the underline. I thought "WHAAAAAT, a new record that fast???" and went the next day to the record shop. They told me "Yes, it's out in one week" or so... So I bought it then. Loved it from the first second. The only thing, which confused me was, that there was stay young on it and I had that song already on my DYKWIM? single. Then I looked inside the booklet and thought "WTF, all these great songs are B-Sides???... Oh man, fucking good old days!!!!!!! And now we get fucking "candle- or lord-songs" from Noel... SAD SAD SAD!!!!
|
|
|
Post by gemarcher1 on Nov 19, 2015 10:57:22 GMT -5
I believe Stand By Me was intended to be the big anthem of the album but other things dictated that it didn't quite hit the anticipated heights. 1) The Oasis backlash had already begun upon its release 2) Like all of BHN it is 2 mins too long. People always go on about DYKWIM and AATW's length but SBM is almost 6 minutes as well. 3) I know this subject has been covered before but Princess Diana's death cannot be understated. The UK changed beyond all recognition. Never before has there been this National state of mourning and with it being in the digital age it made it all the more prevalent. The public didn't want to listen to large, life affirming anthem's anymore; they wanted sombre, retrospective, insular tunes (see Drugs Don't Work) to wallow in their grief. Oasis- despite being the soundtrack to the country for the previous 3 years and the biggest band in the world- instantly sounded outdated and out-of-touch because of a single incident. Seems odd to see the correlation between an albums success and the death of a public figure but this was no ordinary time I agree. Diana's death was the end for Cool Britannia.
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Nov 19, 2015 11:21:23 GMT -5
I believe Stand By Me was intended to be the big anthem of the album but other things dictated that it didn't quite hit the anticipated heights. 1) The Oasis backlash had already begun upon its release 2) Like all of BHN it is 2 mins too long. People always go on about DYKWIM and AATW's length but SBM is almost 6 minutes as well. 3) I know this subject has been covered before but Princess Diana's death cannot be understated. The UK changed beyond all recognition. Never before has there been this National state of mourning and with it being in the digital age it made it all the more prevalent. The public didn't want to listen to large, life affirming anthem's anymore; they wanted sombre, retrospective, insular tunes (see Drugs Don't Work) to wallow in their grief. Oasis- despite being the soundtrack to the country for the previous 3 years and the biggest band in the world- instantly sounded outdated and out-of-touch because of a single incident. Seems odd to see the correlation between an albums success and the death of a public figure but this was no ordinary time Exac...No I've ranted before too much on that- but you are 100% correct
|
|
|
Post by beentherenow on Nov 19, 2015 11:29:19 GMT -5
^^ Yep
It wasn't just Oasis who suffered, a lot of 'Brit-pop' bands were effected,
Bands like Ocean Colour Scene were selling out 3 nights at Sterling Castle in 97, had number 1 albums and 6 consecutive top 10 singles yet a few years later their singles couldn't even break the top 40. Their quality wasn't any worse (or that much worse) but the audience had moved on.
You either had to adapt; like Travis or Manics whose post 1997 albums were very different to their earlier work or you faltered. Even Blur who did try to adapt found commercial success hard to come by especially compared with their pre-97 success
'Indie' shifted from Oasis, Pulp and Blur to Coldplay and Travis. To be loud, brash and egotistical wasn't seen to be endearing and refreshing like it was in 1995. Sing along, pub jukebox anthems were replaced with bedroom headphone music.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2015 13:11:31 GMT -5
to be fair really, oasis couldnt of stayed at those DM / WTSMG heights for much longer anyhow, most big bands etc have about 3-5 years on top, you look at one direction now and the shine has worn off of them, they arnt such a big deal, I think the the whole diana thing probably didnt help oasis but it doesnt change the fact that their music quality decreased, had SOTSOG been as good as WTSMG and still did poorly then you could pretty much blame outside influences but I guess it was more a combination of people moving on and oasis simply not putting good enough music to bring them back.
|
|
|
Post by Greedy's Mighty Sigh on Nov 19, 2015 14:13:46 GMT -5
I think ill give this a listen tonight..
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Nov 19, 2015 14:59:38 GMT -5
to be fair really, oasis couldnt of stayed at those DM / WTSMG heights for much longer anyhow, most big bands etc have about 3-5 years on top, you look at one direction now and the shine has worn off of them, they arnt such a big deal, I think the the whole diana thing probably didnt help oasis but it doesnt change the fact that their music quality decreased, had SOTSOG been as good as WTSMG and still did poorly then you could pretty much blame outside influences but I guess it was more a combination of people moving on and oasis simply not putting good enough music to bring them back. I think you're right but people (and by that i mean the casual listener, which made Oasis big) moved on because the medias told them to. Not because the music was bad. At the time, before its release, BHN wad hyped as the biggest album of the millenium... it was really a big, big BIG deal. It was gonna save the world from hunger and wars. But people didn't like it because the press destroyed it few days/months after it came out. Other bands were praised (Radiohead, Travis, The Verve) and people moved on. I dont think the quality of the record has anything to do with it. It never does. Good bands make it, bad bands too, and it's because of promotion, because there is one guy at a record label that says one day "i"m putting my money on those guys". Oasis is no exception, let's be honest.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2015 15:58:35 GMT -5
to be fair really, oasis couldnt of stayed at those DM / WTSMG heights for much longer anyhow, most big bands etc have about 3-5 years on top, you look at one direction now and the shine has worn off of them, they arnt such a big deal, I think the the whole diana thing probably didnt help oasis but it doesnt change the fact that their music quality decreased, had SOTSOG been as good as WTSMG and still did poorly then you could pretty much blame outside influences but I guess it was more a combination of people moving on and oasis simply not putting good enough music to bring them back. I think you're right but people (and by that i mean the casual listener, which made Oasis big) moved on because the medias told them to. Not because the music was bad. At the time, before its release, BHN wad hyped as the biggest album of the millenium... it was really a big, big BIG deal. It was gonna save the world from hunger and wars. But people didn't like it because the press destroyed it few days/months after it came out. Other bands were praised (Radiohead, Travis, The Verve) and people moved on. I dont think the quality of the record has anything to do with it. It never does. Good bands make it, bad bands too, and it's because of promotion, because there is one guy at a record label that says one day "i"m putting my money on those guys". Oasis is no exception, let's be honest. Im not sure, as much as I like BHN, it mustve been abit of a let down at the time, the amount of hype surrounding it probably just made it worse, I kind of see it happening with adeles next record, theres so much hype for it that its likely not going to live up to it, its just one of those things that whatever oasis had put out it likely wouldnt of lived up to the hype, people moved on because BHN simply wasnt another DM or WTSMG, it just didnt contain enough big hits like wonderwall etc, with other bands coming on to the scene, like any other situation, oasis was pushed aside for new things, they had already had their big moment with the previous 2 albums, most bands have 1 or 2 big albums then it goes down. all Im saying is I can see why people moved on as BHN simply didnt offer what people were expecting, had it been the best or 2nd best album they put out I would question as to why people didnt eat it up, but BHN was quite flawed, the expectation just set it up for a bigger fall. had the song quality been higher it likely still wouldve grabbed peoples interest but like Noel explained its pretty much the leftovers from the first 2 albums, theres just a lack of really big songs on BHN like live forever or some might say, theres a lot of good songs on there but abit pale compared to the stuff we got from the first albums.
|
|
|
Post by The Crimson Rambler on Nov 19, 2015 18:10:20 GMT -5
After 2 classic albums, some of the best ever b-sides, Beatles comparisons and the media hype-machine fanning the flames, Be Here Now must've been a huge letdown for many and it clearly was. With the amount of classics found on Definitely Maybe, (WTS)MG? and thrown away B-sides, people must have had considerable faith and genuinely expected something special, and ultimately got, well, nothing*.
I don't like theorising The Masterplan as a studio album as it so clearly a compilation album, but had it been one, I'm sure it'd have been better received. Putting to one side the fact it's an inconsistent mish-mash of songs, ultimately the ballads are better, the rockers are better and the pop songs are better. You can have all the attitude and ambition you want but in terms of songwriting The Masterplan takes it. Fuck the media. If you've got the songs** nothing else matters.
*D'You Know What I Mean? is a great song, but I'm talking about 'classics' and outside of a select community it really isn't one. ** THE songs. Special songs. Songs by bands/artists with a wide appeal, nothing neiche. All the additional rubbish was pretty much in the bag anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Aman on Nov 19, 2015 19:05:43 GMT -5
I was only 8 in 1997, so my memory is vague. Nor was I aware of much.
But I'd think beyond anything else, musically on the first listen BHN would've been a shock to most listeners.
|
|
|
Post by andymorris on Nov 20, 2015 4:28:21 GMT -5
I was only 8 in 1997, so my memory is vague. Nor was I aware of much. But I'd think beyond anything else, musically on the first listen BHN would've been a shock to most listeners. Yeah maybe it shocked people. I was 17 at the time, and believe me, it was a slap in the face (in a good way). To this this day, BHN is stil a very solid record, maybe not what the majority expected, but back then, it was the soundtrack to my last year in high school. Not other record could touch it, except Pulp's This is Hardcore and maybe Blur self titled. I've had love hate relationship with this record, didn't listen to it for years, but it stands the test of time. A huge fuck you i'll do what i want record. The songs are there, they're quality, too long probably. Maybe people who liked Wonderwall didnt like it, but it's still miles, miles better than most records released that year and even the years after that. Noel could do an acoustic set with only BHN songs and bsides and it would blow everyone's mind.
|
|