John Lennon himself thought Yoko Ono was better than the Beatles.

[LoZoccolo]

If he didn't, he wouldn't have left them in the dust to move on to better things.

Score one for Oasis; assist from Yoko Ono.

[idgiehkt]

1. this is too delicious not to kick

apparently she is a very talented sculptoress

[Alexander]

2. Oasis sucks. Period.

I don't care how many people buy their records. They are talentless hacks.

I see when you're not constantly plugging Oasis, you're defending the Bush Twins. A great way to endear yourself to others on a message board like this.

:rofl:

[everythingsxen]

3. I have to agree...

Oasis does suck. Their music is pretty much utter crap. If you like em, good for you but, but I think they suck.

And The Beatles > Yoko Ono

Honestly the Beatles as a group were better than John Lennon after he left them.

[mduffy31]

5. Yes Paul was the Alpha-Male in the Beatles

[grizmaster]

9. ummm... the Beatles never did anything after John left

[Bassic]

11. No, but John did.

And that was not as good as what he did with the Beatles.

[JVS]

24. Every Beatle went on to do mediocre stuff

[grizmaster]

27. I was responding to this

"Honestly the Beatles as a group were better than John Lennon after he left them."

My point is there Beatles did not exist after the greakup, period. There is no "Beatles as a group" after the divorce.

[Bassic]

10. I agree. While Lennon did record some good material,

He was better as a member of the Beatles.

[Nicole]

4. Noel, Is that you?

[ProfessorGAC]

6. Don't You Have Something Better To Do?

Geez, give it a rest.
The Professor

[PVnRT]

7. You REALLY need to get laid

Oasis = steaming pile of dogshit = Yoko Ono

[ironflange]

8. Love is blind

Here a story I have to tell. Long long ago, early 70's, my big sister was a Yoko fan. She had a Plastic Ono Band record that she played a lot, and there was one song on it where Yoko did a particularly good set of yowls and screeches. Every damn time it was played the cat would appear, walking slightly sideways, and look around the room for the source. He'd finally fixate on the stereo (a nice wooden console!) and sit and glare at it for the rest of the "song." It would end, and he'd leave, looking pissed. He never showed up for, say, Janis Joplin, but Yoko always did it.

[-..__...]

12. LSD does funny things to a persons mind.

[grizmaster]

14. yeah, ain't it great

oh, you mean it's a bad thing.... never mind



Poem for National LSD Week

Mind
How you go

[blogslut]

13. You know absolutely nothing about The Beatles

n/t

[NashVegas]

15. Watch It, You're Pissing on Lennon's Grave

I love how some Beatles fanatics sound like Pat Robertson on the subject of gay porn when it comes to Oasis.

[Alexander]

16. Only because Oasis sucks.

If the Beatles never existed, Oasis would still suck. This isn't so much a defense of everything Beatles as it is a declaration of Oasis's utter worthlessness.

I know talentless garbage when I hear it. If the Gallaghers think that fighting and whining all the time is a good way to get publicity, they are sadly mistaken.

There's a thousand other contemporaneous bands that are both more enjoyable and more talented than Oasis.

Lennon's post-Beatles career wasn't nearly as good as his Beatles career. Same for all of them, although George's "All Things Must Pass" is quite excellent.

LoZoccolo would do well to let people decide what they like for themselves, instead of pushing his favorite band on others all the time.

[NashVegas]

21. Pot. Kettle. Black.

LoZoccolo would do well to let people decide what they like for themselves, instead of pushing his favorite band on others all the time.

The difference between trying to convince someone that what you like is best and convince someone that what you hate is worst, is ... ?

I like Oasis. I don't love them. I don't spend much time thinking about them, but when I do, I think they give a right fine live show.

And I know you don't give a damn what I think, and that's just fine, but the odds are 98% in favor that my album collection and concert-going experiences are far greater than your own in number and diversity.

[cwydro]

26. Great response Crisco

and ditto (on everything except the concert experiences (hate crowds.):hi:

[Alexander]

29. The OP has had countless posts & threads pushing Oasis on us.

A simple glance through the Lounge would reveal that LoZoccolo's prime goal seems to be bashing the Beatles and propping up Oasis.

Regardless of what you think of the band, they aren't nearly influential enough to deserve that kind of support, particularly when compared with a band as influential as the Beatles.

Did I ever say the Beatles were my favorite band? No. Are they? No. There's plenty of music I like out there. The Beatles are a small part of it.

"And I know you don't give a damn what I think, and that's just fine, but the odds are 98% in favor that my album collection and concert-going experiences are far greater than your own in number and diversity."

:rofl:

I admire your ability to assume facts that you clearly don't know.

You have no idea about the albums and songs I own or the concerts I've attended. So you'd rather make up your own ideas, based on one post I made.

If you'd like to know about my music collection/concert attendance, not to mention my own musical performance history, I'd gladly tell you. But I have a hunch you're not interested in the truth as much as you are bomb-throwing and silly assumptions. Why, of course I don't know anything about music, because I don't agree with you! Right? :eyes:

And BTW, I'm only 23, so unless you are my age, any pissing-contest comparison about concerts attended and albums owned is pure apples and oranges. Perfectly easy for you to say if you're 40 or 50 or something.

[NashVegas]

35. Okies, Here's Your Chance

There's a thousand other contemporaneous bands that are both more enjoyable and more talented than Oasis.

Name them, oh great arbitrary decider of what sucks.


I admire your ability to assume facts that you clearly don't know.

I stand by my above statement, am plenty comfortable those odds would have stood even when I was 23. (Assuming we aren't including illegal downloads/copies.)


PS - you still haven't told me how insisting that what you dislike sucks is any different from plugging something you do like and insisting everyone agree.

[Alexander]

36. You asked for it...

"Name them, oh great arbitrary decider of what sucks."

For starters, Blur.

Nirvana.
The Pixies.
Radiohead.
The Flaming Lips.
Quintron.
Pulp.
The Stone Temple Pilots.
The Red Hot Chili Peppers.
Pearl Jam.
Franz Ferdinand.
The Mars Volta.
The Goo Goo Dolls.
The Smashing Pumpkins.
Tenacious D.
Suede.
Lush.
Primus.
Erykah Badu.
The Verve.
The Brian Jonestown Massacre.

Is 20 enough, or are you going to take what I said completely literally, and ask for a thousand? I'm sure given a few hours, I'd rifle through my collection and find 1,000 bands, but I simply can't be bothered right now.

In my opinion, both as a listener and as a musician, these bands are more talented and more enjoyable than Oasis. I never claimed my opinion was fact, and was responding to LoZoccolo's absurd statement that Lennon running off with Yoko and the Beatles breaking up somehow makes Oasis a better band. He has made points like this constantly, coming up with album sales, airplay, money received, and now remarks like these to "prove" his point. In my opinion (as if it really needs to be said that we are dealing with opinions here) Oasis will still suck even if they surpass the Beatles in popularity some day (yeah, right).

As for my "musician" credentials, I've played piano for about 17 years, sang for about the same time, played bass and guitar for about 8 years, organ for about 10, been accepted to the Interlochen Arts Camp at the age of 10, taken several years worth of voice lessons, piano lessons and music theory and history classes (at various colleges, starting when I was 6). It doesn't automatically make me right, but it does mean I have a pretty good idea of what I'm talking about when I say the word "talented". How about you, oh sarcastic one?

"I stand by my above statement, am plenty comfortable those odds would have stood even when I was 23."

Obviously you don't know jack shit about me and don't care to, as my collection of vinyls, CDs, iTunes mp3s, cassette tapes and music videos is nothing to sneeze at. Nor were the concerts I've been attending (and playing in) since I was about 6, ranging from classical to jazz to hip-hop to rock to....just about any genre you can think of. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good argument, oh arrogant one. I disagree with you, so I must know nothing about music, and must have a narrow view of the music I like.

Your arrogance is astounding. Are you really a lot older than 23? You might want to start acting like it. :eyes:

"(Assuming we aren't including illegal downloads/copies.)"

Easy cop-out. While I'm not big on illegal downloads, copies and burned CDs are how music is passed around these days, and they are perfectly legal. Yeah, just because you might not have had that luxury at 23 means it doesn't count for me either, I guess. Nice double-standard. That's why this is a mindless, apples-and-oranges pissing contest.

"PS - you still haven't told me how insisting that what you dislike sucks is any different from plugging something you do like and insisting everyone agree."

Because I don't say things like "Liam and Noel fight all the time and sit around snorting coke, therefore they must hate Oasis, and the Beatles must be better. Score one for the Beatles", as LoZoccolo did with his OP. I don't pretend to know what the musicians in question are thinking and I am in no way qualified to say things like "Liam thinks Oasis sucks" as LoZoccolo said "John Lennon himself thought Yoko Ono was better than the Beatles." I base my opinion on the merits of the music, not the behavior of the musicians. And in my musical opinion, Oasis sucks; it is neither a talented nor enjoyable band to listen to. And Lennon's post-Beatles music, while enjoyable, was less so than that of the Beatles, or for that matter George Harrison's post-Beatles music. In my opinion.

If you can't figure out the difference by now, I'm afraid there is little I can do to help you.

[NashVegas]

42. Yeah, I Think I Will

Is 20 enough, or are you going to take what I said completely literally, and ask for a thousand?

You're the one who said you could so, yeah, go for it.


I never claimed my opinion was fact.

You made a normative statement. You didn't present it as opinion, you presented it as fact.

and was responding to LoZoccolo's absurd statement that Lennon running off with Yoko and the Beatles breaking up somehow makes Oasis a better band.

You were responding to my post.

He has made points like this constantly, coming up with album sales, airplay, money received, and now remarks like these to "prove" his point.

So what? See above.

As for my "musician" credentials,

Congratulations on your achievements, that's great. I'm serious. But they still doesn't make you the judge and jury of what sucks. If anything, it makes you look a little like a frustrated jazz musician dissing someone else's success.

How about you, oh sarcastic one?

I've been in radio (AOR, Classic Rock, Alternative, AAA) for 25 years, occasionally in programming. Occasional rock critic (but no more; the money's nice but music's more fun to enjoy nowadays than intellectualize) / journalist for a regional rag.

I disagree with you, so I must know nothing about music, and must have a narrow view of the music I like.

You certainly seem to take a narrow view about what you don't like. The insults say less about about the band and more about you. In this particular case, we're talking about an active band that has a highly devoted following. Are you really claiming they're all wrong?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

17. Coldplay > Both and U2

:bounce: :hide: :yoiks: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm::sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[NashVegas]

18. Bzzzzt - Nope!

Coldplay = Catherine Wheel + Radiohead.

[LoZoccolo]

19. That is a good rock formula.

I came up with my own rock mathematical proof:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x2522757

[NashVegas]

23. But You Left Out Sam Cooke

Minus 2 points.

[LoZoccolo]

25. Doh!

:o

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

33. Coldplay = used diaper.

How's that for a formula for you?

The other 3 aforementioned artists don't get much more than that.

[Alexander]

20. Wow. Coldplay's just as bad as Oasis.

No-talent ass-clowns who think throwing in the occasional catchy riff, singing pseudo-profound songs and hitting notes that are way too high for them constitutes "talent".

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

22. I think you missed these...

:sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm:

[Alexander]

30. Yeah, I did. Sorry.

But there is a grain of truth in what you said. I'm not a big U2 fan either.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

32. They all rather suck.

I give the Beatles some credit for being something of pioneers, and U2 even less credit for their earlier, more political days. But to Oasis (who tries very hard to mimic the Beatles) and Coldplay (whom I can't even distinguish from U2's newer, putrid music) I give nothing.

[ghostsofgiants]

28. These threads never fail to please.

Comedy gold.

[xmas74]

41. Free entertainment

and all I have to do is click.

[carlydenise]

31. John Lennon had not met ME yet,

Actually I think Yoko is o.k., only thing that made me upset is he married her instead of me......oh well.......
Carly

[Zavulon]

34. Oasis sucks, as did Lennon, as does Yoko, as did the Beatles.

The Beatles were the ultimate right-place-at-the-right-time group of talentless hacks. Oasis is worse. John Lennon's solo stuff blew goat, and Yoko's stuff blows rabid goat.

Go ahead and flame me. With the kind of day I'm having, you can't bother me.

[Little Wing]

37. So THAT'S why Yoko was always foaming at the mouth

[tigereye]

39. I'm waiting to see who makes the grade for ya....

curious.

[Zavulon]

43. Nothing that close to pop.

From that era I prefer stuff like Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Rolling Stones, etc. Overall I prefer guitar-based blues. Poppy shit like The Beatles subjected us to is just not for me, and Oasis / Yoko / Lennon were just as bad. Just my opinion, of course. I know Lennon and the Beatles had a ton of fans, but although I mourned Lennon's death because of its senselessness, I did not feel a loss in my view of the music world at all.

[Blue-Jay]

38. I'm really torn on the Oasis stuff.

Either:

A) You're doing it as a goof, in which case its brilliant. Or...

B) You're serious, in which case its unspeakably sad and slightly scary.

[tigereye]

40. ah, it's tres amusante

Where would we be without LZ to guide us?

[Throd]

44. Oasis: Billy Squier for the 90's

Dude, stick a fork in that corpse, Oasis is yesterday's bad news.

[LoZoccolo]

45. The video for "Champagne Supernova" was the "Rock Me Tonight" of the 90s.

If you'll recall, "Rock Me Tonight" was the best rock video of all time at that point.

[idgiehkt]

48. Billy Squier Rocked!

Stroke me, stroke me!


:woohoo:

[martymar64]

46. If you want a better Pseudo-Beatles band, go with ELO

They were much more fun than Oasis. Oasis just seems really derivative, nay I say, tired?

[LoZoccolo]

47. There is a John Lennon ripoff guy with a mullet going around.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=5703892