Brit pop ?

Blacksword wrote: Certif1ed wrote: I liked the Manics (are they still going?) - I think that 1997 was a fantastic year for guitar driven rock, as there were so many good bands, like the Seahorses, Manson, Garbage, Radiohead, the Eels etc - and even the "2nd Division" bands like Supergrass were very entertaining (sorry Blackie - I've seen them a few times, and was disappointed...). I like Oasis' music, and I think that some of it probably is almost as classic as the Beatles - but not as much as the hype would have you believe, hence the widespread incredulity. Pulp were fantastic, and Divine Comedy are the great overlooked in my book. Another band whose 1st album really struck me was the Fun Lovin' Criminals - their later stuff was more of the same unfortunately, but I still spin the debut from time to time. Then there was Kula Shaker... Well, I liked them, even if they were derivative to the max! None of it prog, of course - but I don't restrict my listening pleasures  Kula Shaker derivative? Well, I wont argue, but surely Oasis are worse, Cert?? They've even admitted they've tried to write songs that sound like the Beatles. I've never understood the hype about Oasis. There's a few anthems in their catalogue (Roll with It, Cigarettes & Alcohol, Champagne Supernova etc) but they write mostly crap IMO. I always felt that Pulp and Supergrass were the less derivative of the Brit pop bands.

KS were a brilliant re-interpretation of late 1960s psychedelic rock, with everything in there from early Deep Purple to early Pink Floyd to the Small Faces, Kaleidoscope, the Zombies - the lot really. But with better production and a harder edge.

I'm not sure about Oasis being "worse" - yes, a lot of their stuff has the Beatles' style stamped all over it - but you'd always recognise Oasis against the Beatles, so that's another piece of hype IMO - probably fanned by Oasis in a bid to sell more records. Compare any Oasis album against any Beatles album between 1965 and 1969 and there's not much legitimate comparison - Oasis are more of a stadium rock band, while the fab four deliver stuff right across the spectrum.

I won't get into a debate over Supergrass - but every time I've seen them live it's like a carbon copy of the CD, with little atmosphere except amont the fans at the front. Their "standout" material is catchy and likeable enough, but not really anthem material, IMO. The acid test is simply to make a compilation and see which stand out the most on repeated plays - not forgetting to add in Ocean Colour Scene.

That's mainly down to taste, of course!

I love blur

They are my favorite band! And I have all the albums, They don't sound the same at all, the way Oasis does.  Each album sounds different to the next. Well except maybe Leisure and Modern Life is Rubbish