Feed-The-Goat
Well-Known Member
Roses.
Feed-The-Goat said:Roses.
You mean five albums.Mad Eyed Screamer said:Both had excellent debut albums - though The Roses win on that one.
I'd say the Roses win it, in terms of also turning people onto a different kind of music and being part of a scene that changed Manchester in a matter of months.
Oasis made great tunes and maybe were better live, but didn't do anything creative or groundbreaking - and lasted maybe 2 (or more??) albums too long...
From an Oasis fan.<br /><br />-- June 24th, 2012, 11:54 am --<br /><br />Manchester_lalala said:Oasis. Never really liked the roses, not saying there shit but I can't listen to there album and not think this sounds all the same.
From an Oasis fan.Manchester_lalala said:Oasis. Never really liked the roses, not saying there shit but I can't listen to there album and not think this sounds all the same.
Better get your tin hat for that Blur comment. I think they're better than Oasis too, but Oasis are sacred cows round these parts.Vagivoovoo said:Stone Roses songs are clearly for the more sophisticated music fan. Oasis are OK if you like 'takeaway' music.
Neither are as talented as The Charlatans, Shed Seven, James or even Blur.
I like Blur's music but Damon is a twat.MCFC BOB said:Better get your tin hat for that Blur comment. I think they're better than Oasis too, but Oasis are sacred cows round these parts.Vagivoovoo said:Stone Roses songs are clearly for the more sophisticated music fan. Oasis are OK if you like 'takeaway' music.
Neither are as talented as The Charlatans, Shed Seven, James or even Blur.