- Thread starter
- #41
You're right. I wouldn't describe them as second only to The Beatles.Now I’d consider myself I fairly big fan of Oasis circa 1994-2000, having managed to see them 4 times, from the colossal Knebworth to a small gig at the Hard Rock Hotel in Vegas. BUT never would I describe them as second only to the Beatles musically. They were your quintessential zeitgeist band, tapping into the right mood 94-96, however musically, fairly basic stuff, which don’t get me wrong is absolutely great, but there is a reason anyone who picks up a guitar for the first time can end up playing an Oasis song within a couple of days.
When you think since the Beatles, musically at least you have Led Zepplin, Pink Floyd, The Clash, Bowie, Radiohead, The Smiths, Roxy Music...It’s hard to see how Oasis get ahead of them ‘musically’. In terms of just being a great band, maybe they do and it’s all personal taste.[emoji106]
Because The Beatles were shite and there are loads of better bands than them or Oasis.