The Fans Speak Out


In which direction will the new album (Be Here Now) take Oasis? And how does it compare with the previous two albums?


Click here and speak out!
Don't forget to include your name and e-mail address!
Be Here Now is significant and vital to Oasis because of all that has happened in between WTSMG? and BHN: many people will be on the look out and say "I wonder what the Gallagher's can get up to when not fighting?" Also, Oasis must face up the greater success of it's second album. Of course, the creation of the WTSMG? was important and vital, but for BHN, it must soar above the even greater hits of Wonderwall et al, and many people will judge BHN on that level: could it be better than Wonderwalletc. BHN, according to many, including Noel himself, is the end of a musical trilogy. This would of course signify a new change to the next batch of songs that noel will produce, it would aim to be different from the first three albums of pub rock. but which way would they go. the great chemical brothers influence will of course make an appearance, but this can not happen to oasis: oasis is about rock & roll, not tripsy dipsy dance. oasis can not enter the electronic world of music, it is more safe to stay with their current rock. in a recent interview, noel has said the next album will head towards the likes of Fade in/out and It's Getting better (man!!) with all reviews, it has been hinted that the previous is a shite number, but the latter has many hinting as the best way to head for oasis (check chemical brothers)

- Sickboy

"I would have to say that this album is collectively a wonderful piece of work. WTSMG was a little better....slightly. And DM would be just slightly below Be Here Now. It plays longer than both previous albums and includes more memorable tracks. The direction after this album will lean closer to fance (funk and dance) with the inclusion of the Chemical Brothers (as Noel has stated he would like to work with). Another sure sign of this trend is the loop of the drumbeat on D'you know what I mean. It's something like "Straight out of Compton" by NWA, I think. But this fact makes me believe that more songs will be a little more funky and also continue to grow in intelligence and thought."

- Ben Turner

"Be Here Now is a GREAT album. It is another Morning Glory and is much more diverse than Definitely Maybe. I dont know what everyone else will think though. Whats the Story Morning Glory? did so well in the US because they had the pop hit Wonderwall and then topped it off with a truly cool song "Champagne Supernova". It caught the top 40 listeners with Wonderwall and the more cultured music lovers with the latter. So far DYou Know What I Mean? hasnt made a huge impact although it is a great song. With Dont Go Away I think Oasis are either going to make it or break it. All Around the World is good, but is really too lengthy-- hopefully the video will be as cool as it sounds it will be. Over here in the USA oasis will fade in or fade out depending on the promise of Dont Go Away."

- Jack

Be Here Now is the best Oasis album so far. It shows that the band has grown to be more mature and displays the band's musical skills better than DM and WTSMG. Definitely Maybe was a loud album, the "traditional" Oasis. It had heavy rock classics like "Rock 'N' Roll Star" and "Bring It On Down", and yet songs like "Slide Away" and "Married With Children" which were quieter. That's the type of songs I like. Then Morning Glory had a pretty big turn on the band. It seems that their quieter side grew and songs like "Wonderwall" and "Don't Look Back In Anger" were better liked than the louder "Morning Glory" and "Roll With It". In my opinion, WTSMG is better than DM. Now as Be Here Now came out I expected it to be similar to WTSMG, and it was. Although loud songs like "I Hope, I Think, I Know" and "It's Getting Better (Man!!)" still survived, the huge hits are still songs like "Stand By Me" and "Don't Go Away". So we see this patter of time in which the band gets quieter and quieter, lighter and lighter, but still maintains it's loud rock image. That's the magic of Oasis, and that's Oasis. They are not going to have an electronic future. They are rock, not dance. Like Sickboy said, Oasis can not enter the electronic world of music. They're the best band in the world right now, why would anyone cut the branch he's sitting on?

- Amos

In a series of threes, the third part is usually the least of the three, the second is the best, and the first is the second best. This applies to Oasis' series of three albums, DM, WTSMG, & BHN. I just can't seem to catch on to BHN like I was blown away by DM & WTSMG. The b-sides of the BHN singles are far better than some of the album tracks and I don't know why they weren't placed there instead of the annoying "My Big Mouth," or the dragging "Fade In-Out." It definately would've improved the listening experience and made the album more legendary and unforgettable, like its two predecessors.

- Josh

First of all, I have to say that Be Here Now was in no way a let down. It was exactly what they promised, It was pure, unadulterated Oasis. However, I was disappointed, though not surprised, at the lack~luster sales, considering the crap effort put forth by Sony in marketing the album. I wont get into it cuz I'll likely end up puting in a few choice four letter expletives and I dont want to do that. I will say this. Among a plethora of things Sony should have done but didnt, they should have cleared up the tour situation. Oasis actually only cancelled a few tour dates, something like three shows. Anyway, all the bad press over Oasis cancelling "the whole tour" plus the dismall sales, mostly attributed to the poor marketing strategy by the way, undoubtedly spilled over into the album reviews, some even daring to brand THE BAND as one hit wonders, and other labels of that sort. Heres where those choice words would pop up by the way. Anyway, it certainly wasnt the quality of the music that caused the slow sales. Be Here Now is simply a great album. Each song is what it is. Exactly what true fans expected from our boys. Pure. Genius. Damn good. Rock'n'Roll. Live Forever.

- Ann

"We have sold more records than The Beatles. We've played bigger gigs than The Beatles. I will say, yeah, we are bigger than The Beatles, man. But you've got to look at it this way, right? If the roles were reversed and Oasis formed in 1964, we'd have been them at their level. And if The Beatles had formed in 1991 and started off with Rubber Soul or summat, they'd be bigger than us now. They had better songs than us."

Do you agree or disagree with what Noel said?

"I think the whole theme that Oasis has given THEMSELVES as being better than the beatles is bullshit!!! The beatles were popular nation wide while Oasis's fans are mostly centered in England! North Americans(a large chunk or the world) loved the beatles and respected them yet over here people hate Oasis cause of the media shit they seem to put themselves into! It's not about the number of records sold because I know MANY people who have bought Oasis records and have shot them out or don't even listen to them.I feel the beatles have long been remembered because they were RESPECTED, to which I can say Oasis isn't in the eyes of many! It's not to say I don't like Oasis because in actuality I love their music but until they learn to respect the public and their fans they have no chance of ever resembling what the beatles had and still have! As a last thought it wasn't until the beatles compared themselves to God, saying they were more popular, that their fame disintegrated slightly. At that time many people began actual ceremonies where album and pictures etc. of the Beatles were burned!(I have witnesses to this)This just proves that music lovers can't seem to tolerate musicians that make statements just for contraversy and attention(like Oasis is doing right now)so if Oasis feel that the media is the way to go music wise they have another thing coming!"

- Courtney

"Well, I think Noel is right, in a matter of speaking. I think The Beatles were more world-wide especially in America. He is also wrong, in my opinion, I think he writes better songs, but maybe that's just because I didn't grow up hearing The Beatles...I'm growing up listening to Oasis. So if you ever see me in a band, when I'm 29 or whatever, I'll be sayin' the same thing about Noel. Yes, I'm an American Fan (There are some out there)"

- Kira LaRose

"I definitely agree with what Noel said and I think it's true. Oasis rocks, but the question is will they live on just like the Beatles have."

- Alyshia

"I totally agree with Noel. Oasis aren't just famous in the U.K. they are also pretty big in the States. That's why there websites like these in the U.S. which prove they have tons of fans in America. Also, their attitudes toward how well they are doing are just confidence because they are a great band and they've proved it by creating two of the greatest albums and more to come. Personnally I think their music is great and you've just got to have a good sense of humor to hear or read about their arrogance. Who knows they could just be doing this for attention. I think you like a band for their music and good sounds because that'ts what bands are formed to do. If you're always paying attention to anything but their music then you're not judging the band, you're judging their personalities and if you don't like their personalities stop paying attention to their speeches. Have an open mind and listen to their music."

- Tolam Nguyen

"I think that what Noel Gallagher said is probably true, but since The Beatles did come first, I don't think any one will ever be bigger than them. As far as The Beatles being famous world-wide and Oasis only in certain parts I think you just have to give them more time. I live in Mexico and I love Oasis. I also have lots of fiends that do to. Just look at list of their websites. There are about three in spanish and one I think in portuguese. Besides they've only released two albums, lets wait till the fourth or fith to see how far they can get. Oh just in case one of the members of the group reads this i`d just lik to ask if you were thinking of coming to Mexico before your inevitable break up(ha ha). There are lots of people waiting to see you!!"

- Godoy Cortes Cristobal Isreal

"What the Beatles did could be matched? They paved they way for bands such as Oasis. When the Beatles first started out rock n roll was a youngester, now it's middle aged. It has learnt a lot of lessons down its rocky path, it's now become a business, where when the Beatles started it was about music. They could never rival, 5 singles in the US all in the top 10 at the same time. They were popular not only in their homeland, but in America, Australia, Japan etc, selling millions of records and concerts were a sell out. There was nothing like the screaming, hysteria, and frenzy (I was a baby at the time Beatlemania started and I remember as a young child watching it grow on the t.v - it certainly left it's mark in my mind). I am an obsessive Oasis fan, I love their music, I think it is almost as good as the Beatles (then again Oasis don't have John Lennon do they?) I think Oasis have unsurpassed talent. There is no band as brilliant as them playing today. However if the Beatles were around today, John Lennon would kick their butts."

- Julie

"Well, I'm not old or anything (I'm 21), but I started listening to the Beatles a good few years ago, when I was about 16 or 17. And a lot of fads came and went over the years: The Stone Roses/Manchester scene, Ride/shoegazing, Nirvana/pearl Jam, Suede/Auteurs. But the only 'new fad' (for want of a better term) that generated real excitement (and I mean genuine public craziness) was Oasis. I read a lot on the Beatles, and the best comparison we have today for the initial mania the Beatles caused is Oasis. I mean, they're in the papers nearly everyday (Liam gets a haircut and it makes front pages!), everyone has heard of them, most people know what they look like, and most people could name at least one of they're songs. Try asking your Dad to name a Soundgarden song. And Oasis have passed the "second album" litmus test: their second album is bigger than the first! They've not only survived the last 4 years, but have re-defined how 90's r'n'r is to be viewed. Nirvana could never have done that; they were always too negative; Suede were too camp for everyone to like them, and shoegazing was too obscure (although Ride were quite good).
As for the Beatles, I don't think Oasis should be compared musically to them. Pop was only a toddler when the Bealtes hit the scene; these days it's a grumpy old man with so many personalities. To get from the Beatles to Oasis you have to go through prog rock, glam, disco, and punk of the 70's, new wave, synth pop, and house of the 80's, and baggy, grunge and techno of the 90's. These forms of music didn't exist in the 60s. So I believe it is better to compare the attitude and appeal of Oasis with the Beatles', rather than directly compare their music.
Having said that, Take That were pretty big too, right? :-)
BTW, Underneath The Sky is a brilliant site!"

- Robert Crosbie

"What Noel is saying here, isn't that they're better than the Beatles, simply that they are BIGGER.. And he's right. You can't get better than the Beatles - they were the greatest band ever and will continue to be so until the end of time. Do Oasis come close? Hell, no.. They're a good band. A great band. A BRILLIANT band, even, but by no means do the surpass the Beatles... Someone mentioned that Oasis needs to be more respectful - well, that's bullshit. It's about time that we've got a band that isn't afraid to make a stir, cause a bit of trouble.. get the tongues of the media-hounds wagging... The whole Oasis thing is about the music anyhow, not their attitudes, not their actions, not their words, but the music first and foremost above ALL else....
I think it's great that they don't cow-tow to the masses... at least they're being themselves and not trying to be something they're not. Yes, they're complete arses most of the time. Yes, they're arrogant as hell. Yes, they get into a lot more trouble than they should. But there's nothing wrong with any of that.. I'd be disappointed if they were anything else Okay, this didn't really have much at all to do with Noel's comment, I realise that, but hey.. does it REALLY matter."

- Jenn

"I totally think Noel's right. They have fans all over the world, for God's sake!!! Besides, you can't find a Beatle-maniac(But there's Mark David Chapman) as much often as you find an Oasis-maniac. If they were all playing music before the Beatles, they would have been leyends, and Lennon would have been inspired in Noel's writing and music."

- Rabeika

"I think Oasis have the potential to be bigger than the Beatles, but they aren't there yet. I'm not talking about personal opinions here, because, damn it, if it were up to me Oasis would be the kings of the fookin' world. But I'm so sick & tired of peoples responses to me when I say I love Oasis. As far as I'm concernec the rest of the world can bugger off! I think if Oasis WANT to be bigger than JPG&R, (which we ALL know they do) They need to stop trying. Try to be bigger than yourself, not somebody else. But it'll happen, sure as I'm writing this it will...."

- Sarah

"I agree with what Noel said except that the Beatles had better songs. I think Noel's songs are just as good."

- Elsa

"I'm sorry, but Noel Gallagher has it all wrong. First of all, get your facts straight! The Beatles have sold more than 1 billion singles/albums(listed in the Guiness Book of World Records). Their three anthology double cd sets sold over 40 million copies, and they have grossed around 1.6 billion dollars since the anthology hoopla began. With out the Beatles there never would have been Oasis! Noel is right when he says that they wrote better songs, but it is wrong of him to claim that Oasis is bigger than the Beatles. Maybe once you've sold over a billion cd's, had 18 #1 albums and 20 #1 singles(in the US) you can claim that title, Mr Gallagher. Paul Mccartney was on a US morning radio programme recently and was asked about who he thought is/would have been the "next Beatles". Oasis? Nope, sorry! Macca said that he thought it would have been Nirvana, but Kobain went and offed himself. I think Oasis would have a larger following outside the UK if they would get their own identity and detach themselves from the Beatles."

- J

"No I don't agree. Oasis is great. I think musically all around oasis beats the beatles. I mean come on , Alan compared to ringo, there's no contest. But when it comes down to it oasis will never be as big of a phenomenon as the beatles were. Oasis would'nt have been popular until the 70's. Their music would have been too controvercial. Think about it, Adults thought "she loves you" and "all my lovin'" was was noisy and senseless.
And I have no Idea what Noel's talking about saying oasis has sold more records. The beatles had 12 albums and all of them went platinum.
I just think that the beatles fit the 60's and oasis fits the 90's. And that's all there is to it."

- Randy

"I totally agree with noel.. That Oasis now are bigger then the Beatles.. Like someone said.. Im growing up with Oasis now so I think Oasis are the biggest thing in the world and no one can compare but If I was growing up with the Beatles I would think totally opposite that the Beatles are the best .. Back then the Beatles were Top and so were the tunes but music has changed.. Beatles were the past.. Oasis is the future.."

- Alicia

"I think Oasis has about 30 years of musical background to fall back on and to expand on from where the Beatles left off. If the Beatles were around today in their prime as they were around when Rubber Soul came out they would be as ahead of their time today as they were then, but its all about the hunger to be the best and perhaps a Beatles vs. Oasis rivalry today would make both bands much better as they both would try desperately to better each other. Oasis being the bad boys and the Beatles being the good guys.....sound familiar? I personaly think the Beatles would be better today cus of their great knowledge of music, but Oasis would be much more fun to watch. It would be the greatest music rivalry ever without a doubt."

- Jae

"I disagree with them. Oasis will never ever ever be Bigger than The Beatles. In fact nobody ever will be bigger than them. I don't see where they sold more records than The Beatles. The Beatles are way better than Oasis. Their egos are just too big for their bodies. Yeah I like Oasis, and yes I listen to their music, but when they make stupid comments like that it makes me sick. It makes me want to throw out everything I own of theirs. They should think before they speak. Next time they should say they are bigger than someone like Michael Jackson. If they think they are better than The Beatles then why do they have to record their songs."

- Nina

"i think noel is wrong. Courtney is correct when she says that oasis isnt as big as the beatles world wide. oasis is maybe a fifth as big as the beatles are world wide. oasis really isnt a household name in the u.s. right now, although they deserve to be. The beatles are without a doubt the greatest band there ever will be, they would piss all over oasis if they started out at the same time, but oasis is the best band right now."

- Dana

Alright, me again. This ones a bit shorter than the last one. I promise. Anyway, in response to one of Noel Gallagher's several Beatles statements, Ill have to disagree. But in all fairness. It all has to do with the timing. For whatever reason, be it a combination of talent and luck, the Beatles experienced a much more extreme following. Beatles fans, lets face it, bordered on nuts. Today, I think, people are a lot less willing to throw themselves into a mass hysteria. Also, the press was a whole lot nicer back in the day. I mean, today, theyre freaking vultures. They were tame, and from what I've seen via the Anthology and what not, they actually respected the celebreties. I think, it would be the other way around. If the Beatles were today, and Oasis yesterday, Oasis would be the legends, cuz there'd be no one the press would say they ripped off. Honestly, the Beatles would be written off in much the same fashion Oasis were. Simply because thats what they do. They're the press. No wonder Liam does that V-thing so much.

- Ann

Back to Underneath The Sky