|
Post by thomaslivesforever on Mar 5, 2017 13:48:54 GMT -5
As you were means "how you used to be* Strictly speaking you're right although Liam has mostly used it in his tweets as "carry on". That might be an English thing.
|
|
|
Post by Rolo on Mar 5, 2017 13:54:47 GMT -5
As you were means "how you used to be* Strictly speaking you're right although Liam has mostly used it in his tweets as "carry on". That might be an English thing. This. I like it.
|
|
|
Post by britpopunionoasis on Mar 5, 2017 14:05:22 GMT -5
What would the wrong answer be. I don't know much about drums but always felt like Whitey was apart of the band. With look and is longevity. I prefer latter day Oasis as a band - Gem,Andy, Liam , Noel, and whoever. Just always looks more natural and like a band. Early days was just Liam and Noel, whilst the others are mere foot notes (no disrespect I love Bonehead). Chris seemed to fit in just as good. Zak was kinda the odd ball out. Latter day Oasis maybe looked cooler (I don't share this view) but it's kinda like a tease. Those guys Gem, Andy and the Spinal Tap drummers have literally nothing to do with classic era Oasis. The reason Oasis was still getting huge headline spots and global tours. They were basically actors playing a part. That's why I enjoyed "Supersonic" so much. I felt like my old band was back. I was reliving that awesome journey 1994-1998. I haven't felt anything like that with Oasis since Bonehead and Guigs split in 1999. I didn't become an Oasis fan till 2006 (9th grade high school). I've been a fan ever since. I grew up with the latter day Oasis and to me that's my band. I could find someone from the older days finding the other guys meaning more. Just seemed like Gem and Andy had personalities in the band. More interviews, tracks on the album (weather good or bad I thought was a good thing) It made Oasis more of a topic like you could tell a Liam Andy ,or Gem track. Gave them some variety. Plus I think Liam and And (Gem not so much - Love his personality) had great material to put forth in the band. Maybe Noel didn't like the lime light not on his tracks. I agree with the Spinal Tap Drummers part. To me Oasis is Liam, Noel, Andy, Gem (with Alan or Chris behind the kit). If they ever got back together the Beady Eye lineup with Noel is what I'd want. Or if I'm being crazy cause I don't hate the other members - Liam, Noel, Bonehead,Gem, Andy (Can't see him wanting to be there), and Chris (Alan would never reunite, can't see it). When I think Oasis these two videos come to mind
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Mar 5, 2017 14:07:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by theyknowwhatimean on Mar 5, 2017 14:11:57 GMT -5
"my fab new record" They should put that on the adverts. Love it. People don't say "fab" enough these days...
|
|
|
Post by matt on Mar 5, 2017 14:12:41 GMT -5
What would the wrong answer be. I don't know much about drums but always felt like Whitey was apart of the band. With look and is longevity. I prefer latter day Oasis as a band - Gem,Andy, Liam , Noel, and whoever. Just always looks more natural and like a band. Early days was just Liam and Noel, whilst the others are mere foot notes (no disrespect I love Bonehead). Chris seemed to fit in just as good. Zak was kinda the odd ball out. Latter day Oasis maybe looked cooler (I don't share this view) but it's kinda like a tease. Those guys Gem, Andy and the Spinal Tap drummers have literally nothing to do with classic era Oasis. The reason Oasis was still getting huge headline spots and global tours. They were basically actors playing a part. That's why I enjoyed "Supersonic" so much. I felt like my old band was back. I was reliving that awesome journey 1994-1998. I haven't felt anything like that with Oasis since Bonehead and Guigs split in 1999. The general public dont know and don't care about Andy and Gem. They are merely a footnote in the history of Oasis, like their post-90s output. Give the general public Noel and Liam live performing the classics with session musicians and they wouldn't give a toss whose alongside them - everyone would still lap it up and love it. In fact, the reality is they wouldn't be able to tell the difference if they were there or not. The hardcore would prefer to see Bonehead and Guigsy as it would be symbolic - they are the original and authentic lads from Burnage coming off the same streets as the Gallaghers, so it makes Andy and Gem somewhat redundant.
|
|
|
Post by mossy on Mar 5, 2017 17:06:56 GMT -5
As you were means "how you used to be* Strictly speaking you're right although Liam has mostly used it in his tweets as "carry on". That might be an English thing. Liam is a actually massive Beauty and the Beast fan...
|
|
|
Post by themightyeye on Mar 5, 2017 17:12:57 GMT -5
Strictly speaking you're right although Liam has mostly used it in his tweets as "carry on". That might be an English thing. Liam is a actually massive Beauty and the Beast fan... He's got a duel meaning for it. "As you were" as in keep doing what you were doing" But if directed at Noel it's "as you were" like " how u used to be". Up for interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by mossy on Mar 5, 2017 17:54:39 GMT -5
Liam is a actually massive Beauty and the Beast fan... He's got a duel meaning for it. "As you were" as in keep doing what you were doing" But if directed at Noel it's "as you were" like " how u used to be". Up for interpretation. No, You're reading too much into it. Liam is just a huge Disney fan. ✌️
|
|
|
Post by Frank Lee Vulgar on Mar 5, 2017 18:02:09 GMT -5
That's because both Gallagher brothers think it's 1965 and you have to behave in that manner. The traditional album release strategy has been dead for over a decade now. The mindset of the fans has changed. The way we consume music has evolved. Oasis and the bros seem like dinosaurs in this regard. Some people here say that a lot, but here's the thing - Noel has had two #1 albums, sold out tours, good critical reception. "The way we consume music has evolved"? Either you buy it or you don't, either it's good or it isn't. Noel knows his fans will buy it, and many casual fans will buy it if it's good. What exactly could Noel gain from a different release strategy? The respect of hardcore fans who already buy everything he releases anyway?
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 5, 2017 20:09:08 GMT -5
Latter day Oasis maybe looked cooler (I don't share this view) but it's kinda like a tease. Those guys Gem, Andy and the Spinal Tap drummers have literally nothing to do with classic era Oasis. The reason Oasis was still getting huge headline spots and global tours. They were basically actors playing a part. That's why I enjoyed "Supersonic" so much. I felt like my old band was back. I was reliving that awesome journey 1994-1998. I haven't felt anything like that with Oasis since Bonehead and Guigs split in 1999. Tony hardly said anything, Alan hardly ever said anything. They never had a Keith Moon. I always judge Oasis drummers on their ability and I think Sharrock is far ahead of the rest. He made Rock n Roll Star sound like ti always should have. Yes and Chris was around for the last great Oasis fart wind. The DOYS tour. No studio material. Just the death of a dream.
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 5, 2017 20:10:21 GMT -5
That's because both Gallagher brothers think it's 1965 and you have to behave in that manner. The traditional album release strategy has been dead for over a decade now. The mindset of the fans has changed. The way we consume music has evolved. Oasis and the bros seem like dinosaurs in this regard. Some people here say that a lot, but here's the thing - Noel has had two #1 albums, sold out tours, good critical reception. "The way we consume music has evolved"? Either you buy it or you don't, either it's good or it isn't. Noel knows his fans will buy it, and many casual fans will buy it if it's good. What exactly could Noel gain from a different release strategy? The respect of hardcore fans who already buy everything he releases anyway? He could probably still go #1 without the slow drip and 5 month lead up. Plenty of current rock examples have thrived with quick release strategies.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Mar 5, 2017 20:23:08 GMT -5
Some people here say that a lot, but here's the thing - Noel has had two #1 albums, sold out tours, good critical reception. "The way we consume music has evolved"? Either you buy it or you don't, either it's good or it isn't. Noel knows his fans will buy it, and many casual fans will buy it if it's good. What exactly could Noel gain from a different release strategy? The respect of hardcore fans who already buy everything he releases anyway? He could probably still go #1 without the slow drip and 5 month lead up. Plenty of current rock examples have thrived with quick release strategies. Maybe. But I would agree with the prior post. There's nothing in his sales of either gigs or albums that say that Noel should change his strategy. In the end, he's already thriving in the markets he should be. Like will a quick release strategy really make that much of a difference for him? Probably not. It's not automatically going to give him say a top 10 album in the US. A hit single would. But his name is enough that people will decide to play it or not. He's not an up and coming band, and his career hasn't gone off the rails. So I struggle to see how a quick release strategy will be any better for him than his current one. At the moment, Noel's sales numbers have settled where they're going to be, and he's in no need of a quick or new strategy.
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 5, 2017 20:49:47 GMT -5
He could probably still go #1 without the slow drip and 5 month lead up. Plenty of current rock examples have thrived with quick release strategies. Maybe. But I would agree with the prior post. There's nothing in his sales of either gigs or albums that say that Noel should change his strategy. In the end, he's already thriving in the markets he should be. Like will a quick release strategy really make that much of a difference for him? Probably not. It's not automatically going to give him say a top 10 album in the US. A hit single would. But his name is enough that people will decide to play it or not. He's not an up and coming band, and his career hasn't gone off the rails. So I struggle to see how a quick release strategy will be any better for him than his current one. At the moment, Noel's sales numbers have settled where they're going to be, and he's in no need of a quick or new strategy. I think my deeper point overall just wasng Gallagher related. It costs a lot of money to do things the way Noel and beady eye did them. They had a brand so it could be done. Sometimes those releases don't pan out and money is lost. Listen music is going more the way I described than what Noel is doing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2017 5:56:01 GMT -5
Do you believe that nothing is in place at the current time? No idea - if Liam has handed over the master tapes some firm plans may well be in place.
|
|
|
Post by mossy on Mar 6, 2017 12:18:57 GMT -5
Why was this thread not deleted back at page 9?
|
|
|
Post by themightyeye on Mar 8, 2017 9:20:22 GMT -5
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|
|
|
Post by morning_rain on Mar 8, 2017 12:08:42 GMT -5
With all respect, but why is this thread still open? This belongs to the playpen.
|
|
|
Post by underneaththesky on Mar 9, 2017 19:58:28 GMT -5
let it me be
|
|
|
Post by Jgrp on Jun 13, 2017 12:31:10 GMT -5
Wait, does this mean he's talking about the Kasabian support beng nonsense and not the amazon leak? If it is I'm sad, GET A DECENT ALBUM COVER LAIM. Come on bro, sort your graphic design out. 'Being nonsense'
|
|