Parklife or Definitely Maybe?

[Zoots]

you're so 1996

yes I am

I guess you and the majority of this thread weren't polled in this "general consensus"

It's my general opinion that Morning Glory is better.

 

[xaviMF22]

It's my general opinion that Morning Glory is better.

I agree with Zootles

 

[Muldfeld]

Parklife because, even if I'm not a huge fan of Blue, I absolutely hate everything about Oasis, except Wonderwall.

The real question should include Pulp's This Is Hardcore, which beats them all.

And, about Blur, I'd recomend 13 too

Yeah, that song Trimm Trabb on that album is awesome!

 

[intedomine]

Probably Def Maybe cause I do prefer Oasis over Blur, but both are filthy good.

And Morning Glory (the album) shits all over Definitely Maybe.

How could anyone dislike the song Parklife? It's the greatest.

"You should cut down on yer parklife mate, get some exercise!"

Both bands are legendary. Music has been worse off since the BritPop era ended, even though Blur and Oasis have remained brilliant since the collapse of the scene.

I'm still tied to the 90's.

 

[StoneRoses]

I'd say they really didn't start to suck until 2000 (and rebounded nicely in 2002 though they were no longer in contention for U2 like status).

In England id say Oasis are bigger than U2 so they don't need to be in contention for U2 like status because they are much more famous.

Having said that on a worldwide scale U2 are a bigger more famous band, Oasis have just never really made it on a worldwide stage, and im not sure why, maybe some of the people here who live in the USA can say why Oasis have never made it in america??

My vote goes to Definiteley Maybe because it IS the best Oasis album. You can't compare Oasis with Blur because blur have never really been a great band anywhere. the debate here should be Oasis Vs U2

 

[XHendrix24]

Parklife, no question at all.

Though a Pulp album would probably beat both of them with relative ease.

 

[Snowlock]

In England id say Oasis are bigger than U2 so they don't need to be in contention for U2 like status because they are much more famous

Having said that on a worldwide scale U2 are a bigger more famous band, Oasis have just never really made it on a worldwide stage, and im not sure why, maybe some of the people here who live in the USA can say why Oasis have never made it in america??

They were going to blow the US wide open and then they released Be Here Now and that was the end of them. They've never really followed up on Wonderwall and Don't Look Back In Anger. For better or worse the US is all about the next big thing, and they never did anything bigger than those two songs.

Bono summed it up pretty well when he said (paraphrasing) "two crap albums in a row and you're done." Be Here Now & especially Standing On The Shoulders Of Giants fit that bill.

Noel himself said: "There was a two- or three-year period where everything I wrote was just fantastic.", related Noel in a recent interview. "And, of course, if all the B-sides for the singles off Morning Glory would’ve been what became the Be Here Now album, I think we would’ve gone on to be possibly one of the biggest bands of all time. Not that we’re not anyway. But I think we would’ve been as big as U2..."


I would be shocked to find Oasis is bigger than U2 in Manchester alone, much less all of England.

Based on Noel's comments, Be Here Now could have been excellent:

1. D'You Know What I Mean (edited to around 5 minutes)
2. Underneath the Sky
3. Acquiesce
4. The Masterplan
5. Don't Go Away
6. Stand By Me
7. Rockin' Chair
8. Stay Young
9. Step Out
10. I Hope I Think I know
11. Round Are Way
12. Half The World Away

Still no follow up to Wonderwall or DLBIA, but this tracklist probably wouldn't have tanked them they way the real BHN did.

 

[gareth brown]

Parklife most likely for me though I really enjoy Definitely Maybe!

I disagree with the first post's statement that Parklife is perhaps Blur's best! I think that's Modern Life is Rubbish personally. Plus the US and Japanese (re-release) versions got Pop Scene which is perhaps one of the best songs ever, certainly by Blur and they just refused to put it on the album since everyone ignored it when it was first released...

 

[phanan]

Pop Scene should have also made it onto the Best Of.

 

[gareth brown]

troo dat!

 

[LMP]

1. D'You Know What I Mean (edited to around 5 minutes)
2. Underneath the Sky
3. Acquiesce
4. The Masterplan
5. Don't Go Away
6. Stand By Me
7. Rockin' Chair
8. Stay Young
9. Step Out
10. I Hope I Think I know
11. Round Are Way
12. Half The World Away

Still no follow up to Wonderwall or DLBIA, but this tracklist probably wouldn't have tanked them they way the real BHN did.

No All Around the World? Shorten it about 3 minutes, but it's still a great track. Some of those are Definitely Maybe/Morning Glory b-sides, and Going Nowhere is nowhere to be found, ironically. I still like the tracklist regardless, though.

Here's how I'd do it:

1. D'You Know What I Mean?
2. My Big Mouth
3. Stand by Me
4. Magic Pie
5. Don't Go Away
6. The Fame
7. (I Got) the Fever
8. I Hope, I Think, I Know
9. Fade Away (Warchild Version)
10. Going Nowhere
11. All Around the World

Be Here Now is easily Oasis's X&Y, it was built up to be amazing but was ultimately meh, with few great songs and a few good ones wrapped in a big mess of pretension with outstanding b-sides.

 

[Zoomerang96]

ridiculous.

i can't believe how few of you know anything about blur. what is it about oasis that makes them so popular around here?

any album with to the end and this is a low is better than anything oasis has ever, i repeat ever done for those two songs alone.

parklife takes a big dump all over definitely maybe in my not-at-all-humble opinion.

 

[intedomine]

Be Here Now is fine as it is, if you just replaced Fade In/Out with Going Nowhere.

D'You KNow What I Mean and All Around The World just wouldn't be the same if they didn't go on forever. Love it....


This Is A Low is a bit of a bore, as is To The End. Blur are better when they have songs that have a bit more energy to them. Charmless Man, For Tomorrow, COuntry House, MOR.

 

[LemonMelon]

Pop Scene should have also made it onto the Best Of.

Certainly...remove Music Is My Radar, use the album version of For Tomorrow, and then add Popscene and Chemical World. Yeah. That would have been something.

 

[Muldfeld]

In England id say Oasis are bigger than U2 so they don't need to be in contention for U2 like status because they are much more famous.

Having said that on a worldwide scale U2 are a bigger more famous band, Oasis have just never really made it on a worldwide stage, and im not sure why, maybe some of the people here who live in the USA can say why Oasis have never made it in america??

My vote goes to Definiteley Maybe because it IS the best Oasis album. You can't compare Oasis with Blur because blur have never really been a great band anywhere. the debate here should be Oasis Vs U2

I can't think of a bigger Britpop band in North America than Oasis was in 1995-96. The media here gave them quite a chance, but the decline in the quality of their music inevitably led to their decline in popularity. However, I never thought they deserved it. Blur and especially Pulp are much better.

 

[Muldfeld]

ridiculous.

i can't believe how few of you know anything about blur. what is it about oasis that makes them so popular around here?

I can answer that. Americans love traditional pop, and Oasis just updates typical Beatlesish pop. Blue and Pulp use British accents and that's less popular, less Americana. It's why The Edge recently said he wished he'd written "Wonderwall". It's the same problem with U2 nowadays -- trying to be like The Beatles and have their mass legacy instead of being themselves.

 

[Snowlock]

No All Around the World? Shorten it about 3 minutes, but it's still a great track. Some of those are Definitely Maybe/Morning Glory b-sides, and Going Nowhere is nowhere to be found, ironically. I still like the tracklist regardless, though.

No, no All Around The World... It's not a bad song or anything, but it just a little too over the top for me. They should've released that track on a soundtrack.

They're all Morning Glory B-Sides (those not directly from BHN anyway). Reason why is because Noel said that if they hadn't released those songs as B-Sides and instead saved them for BHN, that album would've been much better.

 

[DevilsShoes]

I do like Oasis quite a bit actually, but like other people have said BHN is very overblown, Dyou Know What I mean, Magic Pie, Stand by Me, Getting Better Man and All Around The World are all way, way too long, the album is basically one continous peice of noise, theres hardly any gaps between the tracks. Early Oasis are very repetitive, I like Morning Glory, Roll With It, Rock and Roll Star but after they've repeated the chorus line more than 5 times I get bored. That said Liams voice is great on BHN, My Big Mouth, Fade In Out and Don't Go Away are all great IMO.

I think the problem with Oasis ever since BHN is that they've never really tried to change or develop their sound, they're not into experimentation like the Beatles were, as a result people feel that if you've heard one Oasis song you've heard them all. They are treading water a bit and the last few albums haven't been awful, but they haven't been great either. Song bird, Better Man and Importance of being Idle are good songs but fairly standard fare for Oasis.

That said I'd probably vote for DM over Parklife.

BTW if you want to find a lost Oasis classic get the Go Let It Out single, the B side is Lets All Make Believe, which is one of their very best.

 

[StoneRoses]

They were going to blow the US wide open and then they released Be Here Now and that was the end of them.

So had Oasis released an excellent 3rd album as their first two were do you think that they'd have been as big in America as U2 are?

When you think about it if U2 hadn't released the Joshua Tree when they did and released a poor album maybe they would never have made it on a worldwide scale either??

It seems to me Oasis' songs are maybe just to British, where as U2's albums are much more exceptable to a wider audience.

 

[BVS]

So had Oasis released an excellent 3rd album as their first two were do you think that they'd have been as big in America as U2 are?

It seems to me Oasis' songs are maybe just to British, where as U2's albums are much more exceptable to a wider audience.

As big as U2? No, but they would have been much bigger than they are...that album, even though I like it, sunk them here.

I don't think it has anything to do with being "too British"...

 

[LemonMelon]

I don't think it has anything to do with being "too British"...

I don't think so either. Besides, Oasis weren't nearly as overtly British as their contemporaries.

 

[BVS]

I don't think so either. Besides, Oasis weren't nearly as overtly British as their contemporaries.

True, plus Oasis were actively reaching out to the US audience whereas their contemporaries weren't...

 

[Snowlock]

So had Oasis released an excellent 3rd album as their first two were do you think that they'd have been as big in America as U2 are?

When you think about it if U2 hadn't released the Joshua Tree when they did and released a poor album maybe they would never have made it on a worldwide scale either??

It seems to me Oasis' songs are maybe just to British, where as U2's albums are much more exceptable to a wider audience.

I don't know if they'd have been as big... Bands like U2 or the Beatles or Elvis or whoever are once in a generation type things. Especially in modern terms where Rock N Roll is all but dead commercially.. But they certainly would have been more than the footnote that they are now. I think they could have reached Red Hot Chilli Peppers or Pearl Jam levels in the rock n roll history book.

U2 were already on a world wide scale thanks to War and Live Aid, but had Josh Tree been an equivalent to BHN, yeah, we probably wouldn't even be here talking about them today. Keep in mind up till the Josh Tree, they were a pretty hit and miss group. October had failed, War did well but contemporarily speaking didn't set the world on fire (outside of MTV anyway), The Unforgettable Fire didn't do well other than Pride. If the Joshua Tree was crap, or inaccessable or however you want to term it, then yeah, there wouldn't have been a Rattle & Hum and probably not an Achtung Baby for that matter.

As to being too British, the Beatles songs are very British but they're even more widely accepted...

 

[LMP]

No, no All Around The World... It's not a bad song or anything, but it just a little too over the top for me. They should've released that track on a soundtrack.

They're all Morning Glory B-Sides (those not directly from BHN anyway). Reason why is because Noel said that if they hadn't released those songs as B-Sides and instead saved them for BHN, that album would've been much better.

He's definitely right

 

[phanan]

I love the Morning Glory B-sides.

Add those to the best cuts from Be Here Now - what an album that could have been.

 

[U2One]

Definitely Maybe is easily better. Brilliant fucking album. The best debut record of all time, in my opinion

 

[Zoots]

Americans love traditional pop, and Oasis just updates typical Beatlesish pop. Blue and Pulp use British accents and that's less popular, less Americana. It's why The Edge recently said he wished he'd written "Wonderwall". It's the same problem with U2 nowadays -- trying to be like The Beatles and have their mass legacy instead of being themselves.

Yeah, I think I agree with you! Blur and Pulp sound overtly british and never bothered to disguise their accents like Oasis and esp. U2 did! Correct me if I'm wrong but I think Americans in general cannot relate all that much to a very very British sounding song like Parklife. I know I'm making a generalization but

 

[vaz02]

PARK LIFE

LAst year me and my best mate in my group kept singing lines from that song lmao.

 

[BVS]

Yeah, I think I agree with you! Blur and Pulp sound overtly british and never bothered to disguise their accents like Oasis and esp. U2 did!

I think it's the other way around. I think Damon and Jarvis do alot of talk singing where their accents are exagerated due to over enunciating, but when they actually sing sing, they lose their accents. Most do. You can't even understand the dudes in Oasis until they sing, same with Ozzy. Same with Radiohead.

 

[TheQuiet1]

Early Oasis are very repetitive

I think that's why, although I like Definitely Maybe, I don't love it like some do. You have a brilliant opener with Rock 'n' Roll Star then it's a bunch of songs that, while great, do sound very similiar in style ( I think DM is as much a wall of noise as BHN is). The only breaks from this would be Digsy's Dinner and Married With Children (plus the brilliant Sad Song if you're including it). Slide Away is completely ruined by the way it's a ballad in pub rock clothing. The music completely overpowers what Liam is singing and they don't fit comfortably together at all IMHO.