Blur vs. Oasis

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Blur vs. Oasis

    Any opinions, or just meh...?

    Not talking about the tabloid media-fueled scrum in the mid-90s, but more a comparison/contrast between the two bands and their styles of rock.

    Both bands are credited to the Brit Pop movement, were two of the biggest Brit bands of the 90s (before Radiohead passed them both), and showed obvious influence to two of the biggest 60s Brit bands: the Kinks and Beatles respectively (with Blur adopting mod styles of The Who and Oasis showing a bit of Stones swagger).

    I like both bands, but while I used to prefer Oasis, I've since found Blur's catalog to be full of interesting quirks and hidden gems.  It also seems that Blur has found a bigger influence among indie rock/pop bands and demonstrated a little more innovation in their career.  For their part, Oasis made some stone cold classic tunes and kept the guitars (and recklessness) of rock more prominent.

    (One of my favorite bands - Gomez - is a pretty good mash-up of the two.)

    I usually give Parklife the edge over Morning Glory and Definitely, Maybe over Modern Life Is Rubbish, but your mileage may vary.  Yet, "Wonderwall" is a nearly flawless tune, but both Be Here Now and 13 are underrated, IMO.

     

     

     

     

     

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    I know absolute zero about Blur.

    I like a lot of Oasis songs.  Their Beatle-esqueness is pretty obvious, but they're not cheap imitators; they carve out a respectable niche of their own.  They have produced some finely melodic stuff.  I think they have a twofold image problem consisting of the Beatles thing and the arrogant jerk thing.  I've lost track of them, frankly, because they haven't had much on the radio in recent years.      

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Klaas. Show Klaas's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    Hfxsoxnut. I'm sure you must of heard Song 2 by Blur. I agree that Oasis is Beatlesque, but I find them to be more a 2nd generation Beatle offshoot. I would say they are more a 1st generation offshoot of Cheap Trick (very similar sound).

    I agree with Matty in Blur being more innovative ... they're more than just a one trick pony. Their catalogue is all over the place and I find them to be the more interesting band as a result. From one spectrum they are very Beatlesque in songs such as Beetlebum, to being very catchy with songs such as Girls And Boys, Coffee and TV, and finally to being very electronica with songs such as Bugman. It's hard to put a label on this band.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    In response to Klaas' comment: 

    Hfxsoxnut. I'm sure you must of heard Song 2 by Blur. I agree that Oasis is Beatlesque, but I find them to be more a 2nd generation Beatle offshoot. I would say Oasis is more a 1st generation offshoot of Cheap Trick (very similar sound).

    I agree with Matty in Blur being more innovative ... they're more than just a one trick pony. Their catalogue is all over the place and I find them to be the more interesting band as a result. From one spectrum they are very Beatlesque in songs such as Beetlebum, to catchy songs such as Girls And Boys, Coffee and TV, and finally to very electronica songs such as Bugman. It's hard to put a label on this band.

     

    Excellent post Klass. I like both, but what truly sets these bands apart imo is predictabilty. For two bands that have been so closely linked over the years, neither sounds like the other. Oasis wins the popularity contest hands down with their many radio friendly hits like Wonderwall, but they have stuck with the same old melody driven, big guitar formula for too long, and as a result, their albums all sound pretty much the same. 

    Blur is far more experimental, and has had to reinvent themselves several times over, and therefore, far less predictable. Graham Coxon is a very underrated and creative guitar player. And Damon Albarn's diversity as an artist and songwriter, with both with Blur and his many side projects, most notably Gorillaz, sets him apart. Both are featured prominetly on Blur's sublime ode to England, This is a Low http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otzdBww47XQ

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    I'll have to check me out some Blur then.  Sounds like I would like them. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    Yes, I have certainly heard Song 2 - just didn't realize who it was.

    The album 'Parklife' gets a glowing review on Allmusic.com.  The reviewer does make some comparisons to the Kinks.  That looks like it might be a good entry point for me.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    I would argue this isn't even close. Blur was a great band in my opinion. One of the best of the 90's. Never really had a bad album, though the first one is spotty at times. Oasis on the other hand had 2 good records and a couple of good B sides and one great one (Acquiesce). There is a good book about Britpop called Cool Britannia And The Spectacular Demise Of English Rock by a British writer called John Harris. It's very critical of the movement and it's quick demise into blatant formulas. It goes into pretty good detail about the fueds, hypocrisy and the rampant substance abuse of many involved.  

    In my opinion the 5 best Britpop albums are (in this order):

    1 Suede - Dog Man Star

    2 Elastica - Elastica

    3 Blur - Blur (their least Britpop sounding album)

    4 Blur - Parklife

    5 Suede - Suede

    Radiohead is not Britpop in my opinion. Not even close, even though they had big hits during the era. I can't imagine Radiohead partying with super models or rewriting their favorite "classic rock" songs into modern rock hits. Radiohead were more influenced by American alt rock bands like REM and the Talking Heads or German bands like Can than they were the Britpop classic rock canon (The Who, The Beatles, The Kinks the Small Faces). Britpop, despite some terrific albums was really a singles driven genre. These bands cared about their B sides and they produced massive cd single sales in the UK during this period because of them. The first CD of Suede's B side collection Sci Fi Lullabies is probably better than their self titled album I have listed as #5 above. Radiohead was more of an album band than singles band in my opinion which is another reason I can't consider them as Britpop.

    Oasis first 2 albums are good but neither are great in my opinion. The Verve's third album Urban Hymns is Britpop in my opinion but it's first two albums which are closer to shoegaze are better. Like Ride they sort of split the differance. 

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    Nice post, ccnsd!

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    In response to ccnsd's comment:

    I would argue this isn't even close. Blur was a great band in my opinion. One of the best of the 90's. Never really had a bad album, though the first one is spotty at times. Oasis on the other hand had 2 good records and a couple of good B sides and one great one (Acquiesce). There is a good book about Britpop called Cool Britannia And The Spectacular Demise Of English Rock by a British writer called John Harris. It's very critical of the movement and it's quick demise into blatant formulas. It goes into pretty good detail about the fueds, hypocrisy and the rampant substance abuse of many involved.  

    In my opinion the 5 best Britpop albums are (in this order):

    1 Suede - Dog Man Star

    2 Elastica - Elastica

    3 Blur - Blur (their least Britpop sounding album)

    4 Blur - Parklife

    5 Suede - Suede

    Radiohead is not Britpop in my opinion. Not even close, even though they had big hits during the era. I can't imagine Radiohead partying with super models or rewriting their favorite "classic rock" songs into modern rock hits. Radiohead were more influenced by American alt rock bands like REM and the Talking Heads or German bands like Can than they were the Britpop classic rock canon (The Who, The Beatles, The Kinks the Small Faces). Britpop, despite some terrific albums was really a singles driven genre. These bands cared about their B sides and they produced massive cd single sales in the UK during this period because of them. The first CD of Suede's B side collection Sci Fi Lullabies is probably better than their self titled album I have listed as #5 above. Radiohead was more of an album band than singles band in my opinion which is another reason I can't consider them as Britpop.

    Oasis first 2 albums are good but neither are great in my opinion. The Verve's third album Urban Hymns is Britpop in my opinion but it's first two albums which are closer to shoegaze are better. Like Ride they sort of split the differance. 

     



    Great post.  You obviously have done some research on the topic, so I'll defer.

    To me, the first Stone Roses LP was the inception of the genre (sons of B.A.D...?), which was then followed by Primal Scream and Happy Mondays, among others mentioned here.  Perhaps you see it differently.

    As you say, if the movement was more singles-based, then would the overall quality of the albums be more incidental?  I never really thought of it as a "sound", per se, but more of a stylistic thing.  (I wouldn't class Radiohead as Britpop, either...just mentioned them in terms of popularity during the 90s.)

    In the end, I agree Blur takes this particular cake given the two bands' overall output and influence, but I'll submit that Oasis is probably the most recognizable gateway to most people exploring the genre (neither here nor there really).

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts....

     

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I would argue this isn't even close. Blur was a great band in my opinion. One of the best of the 90's. Never really had a bad album, though the first one is spotty at times. Oasis on the other hand had 2 good records and a couple of good B sides and one great one (Acquiesce). There is a good book about Britpop called Cool Britannia And The Spectacular Demise Of English Rock by a British writer called John Harris. It's very critical of the movement and it's quick demise into blatant formulas. It goes into pretty good detail about the fueds, hypocrisy and the rampant substance abuse of many involved.  

    In my opinion the 5 best Britpop albums are (in this order):

    1 Suede - Dog Man Star

    2 Elastica - Elastica

    3 Blur - Blur (their least Britpop sounding album)

    4 Blur - Parklife

    5 Suede - Suede

    Radiohead is not Britpop in my opinion. Not even close, even though they had big hits during the era. I can't imagine Radiohead partying with super models or rewriting their favorite "classic rock" songs into modern rock hits. Radiohead were more influenced by American alt rock bands like REM and the Talking Heads or German bands like Can than they were the Britpop classic rock canon (The Who, The Beatles, The Kinks the Small Faces). Britpop, despite some terrific albums was really a singles driven genre. These bands cared about their B sides and they produced massive cd single sales in the UK during this period because of them. The first CD of Suede's B side collection Sci Fi Lullabies is probably better than their self titled album I have listed as #5 above. Radiohead was more of an album band than singles band in my opinion which is another reason I can't consider them as Britpop.

    Oasis first 2 albums are good but neither are great in my opinion. The Verve's third album Urban Hymns is Britpop in my opinion but it's first two albums which are closer to shoegaze are better. Like Ride they sort of split the differance. 

     

     



    Great post.  You obviously have done some research on the topic, so I'll defer.

     

    To me, the first Stone Roses LP was the inception of the genre (sons of B.A.D...?), which was then followed by Primal Scream and Happy Mondays, among others mentioned here.  Perhaps you see it differently.

    As you say, if the movement was more singles-based, then would the overall quality of the albums be more incidental?  I never really thought of it as a "sound", per se, but more of a stylistic thing.  (I wouldn't class Radiohead as Britpop, either...just mentioned them in terms of popularity during the 90s.)

    In the end, I agree Blur takes this particular cake given the two bands' overall output and influence, but I'll submit that Oasis is probably the most recognizable gateway to most people exploring the genre (neither here nor there really).

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts....

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I like Primal Scream and the Happy Mondays a lot but neither are really Britpop in my opinion. Happy Mondays was a baggy/Madchester band (the British genre's are so confusing at times, remember the "Grebo" genre of the early 90's) who undoubtedly influenced Blur's first album as well as some of the boorish behavior of the Britpop bands. The Happy Mondays clearly moved British alternative rock away from the fey jangling politically correct 80's to a much more hedonistic 90's that clearly influenced the britpop bands that followed. I think Pills, Thrills and Bellyaches is a great album but the band was done in by drugs and never lived up to it's potentiel.

    I love Primal Scream, one of my favorite all time bands, who had some serious drug issues of their own. They were too ugly (look at some pictures) and stylistically wishy washy to be Britpop in my opinion. Their main influences were the Detroit bands of the late 60's as well as the "altamount' era Stones. Primal Scream went from MC5/Stooges rip off (Primal Scream - okay with a couple good songs) to acid house rock (Screamadelica, which is great) to southern boogie rock (Give Out but Don't Give Up, which is awful) on to something I will call Trip Hop punk (Vanishing Point - which may be my favorite album of the 90's). They may be the most underrated rock band of the last 20 years but when they are bad (Give Out but Don't Give Up or Riot City Blues) they are truly awful.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from gerbs. Show gerbs's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    What about newer bands such as Arctic Monkeys and Kaiser Chiefs?  I think of them as "Brit Pop" but maybe it's not the right label for them Smile

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ccnsd. Show ccnsd's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    In response to gerbs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What about newer bands such as Arctic Monkeys and Kaiser Chiefs?  I think of them as "Brit Pop" but maybe it's not the right label for them Smile

    [/QUOTE]


    Britpop is sort of an era. While those bands are British pop bands who were undoubtedly influenced by the "real" Britpop bands (the quotation marks are because there is no true agreement on who qualifies. Travis or Coldplay anyone). When did Britpop end, who knows. The collapse of Creation records? Blur breaking up? The Spice Girls outselling them all? The Strokes and White Stripes becoming the next big thing for the UK media? When did grunge die? I mean Pearl Jam still sells out arenas without having a hit in years.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    Emmm....I have at least one Blur album, and I think the first two Oasis albums.  I think both were really good at what they did.  Oasis are hardly original, but who is?  They wrote a number of great, anthemic songs.  Blur?  I have a predjudice against "art school bands" (I'm looking at you, Talking Heads) as I think they are generally as rock'n'roll as Billy Joel. DEVO having been the exception that proved the (my) rule.

    IMO, Blur did a lot of good stuff and tried to stretch themselves...too far, too often, IMO, but a quality band and quality people.

    But it's their PR people that deserve the credit....Blur vs. Oasis is hardly Stones/Beatles, is it?  ;-)

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    In response to ccnsd's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to gerbs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What about newer bands such as Arctic Monkeys and Kaiser Chiefs?  I think of them as "Brit Pop" but maybe it's not the right label for them Smile

    [/QUOTE]


    Britpop is sort of an era. While those bands are British pop bands who were undoubtedly influenced by the "real" Britpop bands (the quotation marks are because there is no true agreement on who qualifies. Travis or Coldplay anyone). When did Britpop end, who knows. The collapse of Creation records? Blur breaking up? The Spice Girls outselling them all? The Strokes and White Stripes becoming the next big thing for the UK media? When did grunge die? I mean Pearl Jam still sells out arenas without having a hit in years.

    [/QUOTE]

    Almost exactly right IMO, but I'd replace "is sort of" with "was"....which was largely defined by PR and the media.  Blur/Oasis?  Same age, same era...but little else in common, IMO.  Their South/North silliness was no different than East Coast / West Coast rappers.  

    Primal Scream?  0% Britpop IMO, though I love them.  Happy Mondays & Stone Roses? 0% Britpop IMO though I never rated either (although I loved Black Grapes' debut LP).

    Feel free to disagree....but Coldplay (despise them), Kaiser Chiefs (zzzzz) and Arctic Monkey (first LP great, since zzzzz) are not Britpop.  It's dead, gone, buried and never really existed anyway. x

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Klaas. Show Klaas's posts

    Re: Blur vs. Oasis

    Coldplay is definitely not Britpop. They're too mainstream.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share