Oasis had five platinum albums when they were together.

The Beatles had none.

Score one for Oasis.

Score a billion or so for the Beatles.

Then you'll see people talking about them in the UK and on MTV News.

Name one time that Ringo has gotten in trouble with the police in the last ten years. I don't think he has.

n/t

Do not talk about Fight Club.

That's the short answer.

Sgt. Pepper didn't go platinum? The other day on an oldies station I heard the dj go on and on about how people wore them out listening to it, and went out and bought another copy.

But the Beatles were still better all around. Other than the brothers Gallagher, particularly Noel, who the hell is even in Oasis? Does their presence add anything besides warm bodies for Noel to yell at?

I'm not even sure if it did ever, if they award it for albums released before they came out with platinum status. Platinum status was created in 1976.

http://www.riaa.com/gp/history/default.asp

Certainly not in the US.
Of course, Duran Duran had more. Does that make them better than the Beatles too? Or Wham!? Or Phil Collins?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/shropshire/music/2003/01/oasis.shtml

Under "facts" in the purple sidebar it says that Heathen Chemistry was their fifth multi-platinum album.

And god, I'm totally gonna hate myself for saying this.....I kinda like Oasis.

Oh god, I feel dirty now.

The Beatles however, totally and unequivocally rule.

The Beatles are right there with Floyd and Zepplin...


(well... not quite in FLOYD's class... but close)

One of my all time favorites.

Your point is moot.

http://www.riaa.com/gp/default.asp

But since Oasis are the world's worst Beatles clones (makes me almost miss Badfinger), it does not matter.

That makes the Eagles the greatest band of all time, since their Greatest Hits album is the all-time #1 seller.

I have no major beef against Oasis, other than they are interminable bores and, well, lame.

Besides that you've gotta give a lot of credit to Oasis. They were very eclectic in their influences. They listened to everybody from Paul McCartney to John Lennon.

And to a lesser extent, George Harrison. :evilgrin:

Poor Ringo! :evilfrown:

"Got to pay your dues if you wanna play the blues and you know it don't come easy."

Oasis is one band that has paid its dues.

You do not take into account that the popularity of Oasis is strong and consistent throughout their five album releases, or the possibility of bulk orders in the fashion that conservative books sometimes see and as is noted on the New York Times bestseller list.

Maybe it should be Greatest Hits 1971-1975(+) for bulk orders.

just hearing one (very lame) song does not mean that all Oasis songs are lame. Right up their with Don't Let Me Down and Don't Think Twice It's Alright in my lists of fav songs is Slide Away by Oasis

Baby Blue is pure genius!

Guess I got what I deserved
Kept you waiting there
Too long my love
All that time without a word
Didn't know you'd think,
That I'd forget
Or I'd regret
The special love I had for you
My baby blue

RL

and ask them to name three (or more) titles of songs from...

The Beatles

and

Oasis

Which band will have more commonly recognized songs? Sorry but there really is no comparison between these two groups.

It is because Oasis had longer names for their songs.

do not know a single name for an Oasis song. But know that Norwegian Wood - actually is a clever way of getting around the censors... the words intentionally sound like "knowing she would" (which actually make the song make sense).

Not a talking point - but something about the pure plethora of songs - and the duration of eras in which they have been played, resulting in many more generations being familiar with the songs.

Heck, I would bet that more people could name the title of more Bowie songs than those of Oasis... again - due to the plethora of songs that have had a lot of air play (on different formats) over a much longer period of time.

I think younger people have no idea without considering the context of the times, just how profoundly the Beatles not only changed music, but the culture - long hair on men was NOT acceptable until after, that's right, 1964.

With Dylan's help, of course. Not just lyrically, but the drug influence. He turned them on to weed, and the rest is history.

When I taught high school in the early/mid-90's, kids into Oasis were kind of endearing in the way they thought they were onto something new or exciting. I can't begrudge an adolescent their musical excitement. To THEM, it was new, and 'better than the Beatles', which is too ironic for comment.

Hopefully, they learned later. :-)

themselves to the beatles (and their fans at the time agreed) include:

Whitney Houston

and

Millie Vanillie (oh yes they did!)

and

Oasis... what great company *snicker*

In terms of shifting music trends I might give some leeway for those who might claim Nirvana of having as big an impact (I wouldn't agree - but Nirvana was a big part of moving grunge - and to an extent the old new wave/progressive - into the main stream)

kick ass over both of them, and I don't know if they ever went platinum....

You want to compare five years of output. The Beatles set the bar. Name a band that could put out five years worth of music to match the Beatles output from 1965 to 1969.

Rubber Soul -- 1965
Revolver -- 1966
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band -- 1967
The Beatles (White Album) -- 1968
Abbey Road -- 1969

Throw in these singles of songs that didn't appear on albums (excluding compilations):

Day Tripper/We Can Work it Out -- 1965
Paperback Writer/Rain -- 1966
Strawberry Fields Forever/Penny Lane -- 1967
Lady Madonna/The Inner Light -- 1968
Hey Jude/Revolution -- 1968
The Ballad of John and Yoko/Old Brown Shoe -- 1969


Here are the RIAA top selling albums. The Beatles have sold more than 166 million copies in the USA with the White Album being their top seller with around 19 million copies sold. I love Oasis but where are they on this list?:

http://www.riaa.com/gp/bestsellers/topalbums.asp

Give it fourty years and you may see Oasis exceed those Beatles numbers.

snorf! :D

best laugh i've had all day!

That is not meant literally.

yeah, you like oasis, i understand

but like them or not, i don't think anyone can deny the influence that the beatles had, beyond just music - they are and were completely their own thing, invented countless production techniques and sounds and styles and basically were light years ahead of their time

and this is coming from a 19 year old oasis fan

I'm just calling for some perspective on this.

I am a HUGE fan of both Oasis and the Beatles. And when I say huge I mean HUUUUUGE (Im wearing an Oasis shirt right now!) However to compare the two is asinine. Noel Gallagher will be the first to admit that his biggest influence is the Beatles and Liam WISHES he was John Lennon and he will be the first to admit it.

And and for all the folks who are saying that Oasis are hasbeens: BULLFUCKINGSHIT!! Their last album came out in '02 and it was in the top 10 selling records in the world that year. Something like number 4. For a band that has been around for a decade that is saying something.

Mojo, which is probably the most widely respected music mag in the industry, ranked Oasis' debut album as one of their "must-have" albums of all time. It's an amazing debut and one of (if not the best) album of the 90s.

Two great bands I don't see why the hell they need to be compared.