Oasis or The Roses?

[Stoned Rose]

As a live band oasis were and are head and shoulders above the roses.oasis have miles more quality songs and have played some of the biggest gigs this country has seen.so oasis for me

Give us a list of these 'quality songs' mate.

Also size of gigs has nothing to do with this debate.

You can't judge the brilliance of music by it's sales or how big a crowd they pull at gigs. If we used your logic we'd be saying the spice girls are better than oasis.

 

[Blue Is the Opposite of Blue]

Oasis had more good albums (2) but The Stone Roses' debut trumps Oasis' entire discography.

 

[carlos tevez is a blue]

As a live band oasis were and are head and shoulders above the roses.oasis have miles more quality songs and have played some of the biggest gigs this country has seen.so oasis for me

Give us a list of these 'quality songs' mate.

Gas Panic
Songbird
Married With Children
Don't Go Away
Supersonic
D'ya Know What I mean
Stand By Me
Stop Crying Your Heart Out

Basically any Oasis song was class.

 

[dannyboy29]

Bit like saying who is better, Yaya or Kolo.

Roses not even in the same league as Oasis in every department.

 

[liamctid]

I grew up with Oasis, and got more into the Roses in my late teens.

The Roses are a great band, but I don't think I can truly appreciate them because I wasn't old enough to be around at the time when they had all their momentum.

Whereas Oasis I remember it all. I went to Knebworth as a 9 year old. And as much as them being City fans shouldn't matter, I definitely associate going to Maine Road as a kid with listening to their first two albums - so it's hard for me to be impartial.

Having said that, for me The Smiths are the greatest band from Manchester. They divide opinion, but if you 'get' them then you understand that there is nothing weak about their work. No underwhelming second album, no overbloated self indulgent albums, and nothing to say they were trying to clearly rip off other bands.

It's a shame for the kids these days that Manchester had some great years, where the baton was passed from one of these bands to another (and the great Joy Division before them). The youngens cling to the dirge from The Courteeners now like they're something special. They wouldn't have broken through a decade a go when the British music industry thought they'd give those playing the guitar a run at the top. And the most successful of these bands were not Mancunian's, which again is unfortunate.

And whoever said that Arctic Monkey's a shit - no chance. Saw them twice at Finsbury Park in May, they were that good that I'm off to Dublin next month to see them again.

As a smiths fan I can't think of a single song that would displace any proper song off the roses first LP.

I don't include Don't Stop or ELizabeth my Dear in that as they clearly aren't 'proper' songs.

Each to their own mate, the majority of the 'proper' songs are very good, if not classic, but I could think of about 30 songs by The Smiths off the top of my head that I'd rather listen to right now than Sugar Spun Sister and Shoot You Down. And This is The One is TAINTED.

 

[carlos tevez is a blue]

This is the one is different class.

 

[Nightmare Walking]

If they were playing live Oasis could probably do 3 different sets and not reduce the quality, the Roses only have one set. Plus Oasis were far better live than the Roses.
So Manchester's best band is still...........................................................................New Order

 

[BlueMoonRisin’]

Seen both bands and it's all about personal preference. I think Stone roses have a more unique sound than Oasis who were heavily influenced by the Beatles. I also think that John Squire is a better guitarist than Noel Gallagher. Both bands have done good stuff but it's Stone Roses for me.

 

[My mate]

No one is ever impartial in any debate about music as we all have our own intrinsic taste. Therefore my opinion is as valid as anyone else's.

Lyrically the majority of oasis' stuff is very basic, almost nursery rhyme-ish, shallow and also quite sameish. Lots of 'sun' and 'finding a better day' type simplicity. They basically used words that rhyme.

The roses on the other hand wrote about love, religion, culture, history, psychedelia, greed, revenge, royalty and hatred and framed this with clever imagery, thought provoking lyrics and mystery.

Musically oasis are also basic and make as a musician friend called it 'meat and potatoes music'. The roses are much more musically sophisticated and complex. Oasis could never create something as interesting as RIde On, ELephant Stone or Shoot You Down. The likes of Shakermaker, DIgsys DInner and Married with Children just sound plain pathetic in comparison.

Meat and potato music??? Has you're musician friend achieved anything like the success Noel Gallagher has??

Actually yes he has.

Has he really?

 

[The Fat el Hombre]

Oasis. What's the story and Definitely Maybe can both stand toe to toe with the roses debut album, and oasis have just done a lot more great tunes, it's that simple