How or why on earth were these guys ever compared to The Beatles? They hadn't a fraction of the songwriting sophistication, chord knowledge, technical acumen and stylistic variety the Beatles had. Whether you love or hate the Beatles, you have to admit comparing Oasis to them is just fucking absurd. Which limey cuntface came up with that stupid idea?
>>130362515>They hadn't a fraction of the songwriting sophistication, chord knowledge, technical acumen and stylistic variety the Beatles had
>>130362547>one of their first singles released while they were barely 20 years oldyou're cute
OASIS SUCKS!>>130362515>How or why on earth were these guys ever compared to The Beatles?Marketing and their own inflated egos.
>>130362515People caught up in the hype because they were ugly and had bad haircuts, they were an extremely English band
>>130362754>they were an extremely English bandwhat a cunning way to insult the English people
>>130362754They were literally all Irish.
>>130362547Noel would hate you for hating the Beatles as much as you do
>>130362547Now post A Day In the Life
>>130362515It was a comparison they themselves made constantly due to being inspired so much by them that after a while it sort of caught on more widely
>>130362515The Beatles wish they could write anthems like Oasis.
>>130362515Biblical m8
>>130362515They both made British pop music not hard to see the comparison.
Forced nu-British Invasion was a total failure.
>>130364012>McDonald's sells billions of shitbiscuits a year therefore it is objectively the best quality foodtard/10
>>130364012You do realize 6 is a larger number than 1, right?
>>130365138A bird flies in the air, a worm crawls on the ground. True, both are animals. Apart from that fact, all comparisons stop. Why is this so hard?
>>130362862English/Irish is like India/Pakistan, nobody else really sees a difference
Where do I start with Ogaysis?
>>130362515what's wrong with their faces?
>>130362515You stink. LGx
>>130362515>Which limey cuntface came up with that stupid idea?It came directly from Liam himself, his whole shtick is LARPing as Lennon. That's where he got the idea to wear these stupid round glasses from.
>>130362515Well if you actually listened to them you'd understand why.
>>130362515https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQONUdzwfC4This is the only decent thing they ever did
Stop the Clocks [BMG, 2006]One of the many things I never understood about this band is just where the Beatles were. The ebuillence, the wit, the harmonies, God, the singing, uh...the songwriting? Cotton Mather made me understand that when Oasis says they love they really mean the post-Help!, pre-Sgt. Pepper Beatles but that excuse doesn't fly 'cos A. I fuckin' love the Beatles from start to finish and B. That stretch includes Revolver and Rubber Soul so Beatle comparisons are only valid when you write songs at least as good as, uh, "We Can Work It Out"? Instead, Oasis, meaning loudmouth bro Noel Gallagher, writes songs that resemble the Revolver-era Beatles in momentum and thickened texture but not in depth, wit, or charm, and then proceeds to add arena swagger in the size of the drums and bigged-up vocals. This band-selected eighteen song best-of documents their sonic moment as fully as anyone needs. My only complaint is that they left off the first album's opener "Rock 'n' Roll Star." If there's one song that sums up these bigheads' message to the world, it's that. B
>>130362515Nobody compared them to the Beatles, outside of women's magazines. Care to explain why you were reading women's trash talk, you filthy butt muncher?
>>130368043Go be homophobic somewhere else. /mu/ is a safe space
Unpopular opinion I guess, but the Beatles were never exceptional in their songwriting sophistication, chord knowledge, or technical acumen. The stylistic variety was due to their variety in writers. They primarily had the influence they had (which their influence is undeniable) because they were the first to do many things, and were primarily the first label-driven pop band marketing counterculture as a culture. I can find dozens of garage bands with equivalent sophistication, and even more large bands that exceed them in technical skill. They weren’t bad by any stretch and were undeniably pioneers of many things within the industry - but I’ve always found it odd that they’re still referred to with such reverence.
>>130368055>> /mu/ is a safe space>> safe space>> 4chanWhat a fag
>>130362515I've only ever heard people compare Oasis to The Beatles in sound, not quality. I love the first Oasis album, but nobody ever said they were as good as the Beatles, though I do think Oasis themselves said they aspired to be as big as them. Oasis were obsessed with The Beatles and Liam sang like Lennon. That's it. I actually think the Beatles comparisons only hurt Oasis anyway, though, because now people talk about them like they were practically a Beatles cover band when in reality they had a lot of indie in their DNA, with influences like The La's, Inspiral Carpets, The Stone Roses, The Smiths, The Real People, and Slade.People said Oasis were like The Beatles in the same way they compared Suede to Bowie and the Smiths, or Blur to the Kinks. Britpop was generally retrospective to earlier British acts. The only reason those comparisons didn't follow grunge and the garage rock revival is because their influences were slightly less known - fewer people noticed Nirvana's similarities to the Wipers or The White Stripes' similarities to The Gun Club.
no but seriously: what is wrong with their fucking faces???
>>130368043Nice projection, queer
