Um no, they weren't. Not even close, not even in the same universe. Listen to any decent classic rock radio station, Oasis barely gets a mention. The Beatles on the other hand, always pure legendary status.

Christ it's mindbogglingly retarded to even be talking about these two bands in the same paragraph.



Coldplay has only just begun, career wise. I can give them a few more years to see what they come up with.

"Americans want grungy people, stabbing themselves in the head on stage. They get a bright bunch like us, with deodorant on, they don't get it."

- Liam Gallagher from Oasis

Of course they won't get played on classic rock radio station, because they are not fucking classic rock, they are still around and only formed in the early 90's.

In 1997 Definitely Maybe was named the 14th greatest album of all time in a 'Music of the Millennium' poll conducted by HMV, Channel 4, The Guardian and Classic FM. In 2005 Channel 4's '100 Greatest Albums' countdown placed the album at number 6. In 2006, NME placed the album third in a list of the greatest British albums ever, behind The Stone Roses and The Smiths' The Queen Is Dead. In a recent British poll, run by NME and the book of British Hit Singles and Albums, Definitely Maybe was voted the best album of all time with The Beatles' Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band finishing second and Revolver third. Q magazine readers placed it at five on their greatest albums of all time list in 2006 and in that same year NME hailed it as the greatest album of all time. In a 2008 poll by Q and HMV in 2008, Definitely Maybe was ranked first on a list of the greatest British album of all time.

You kids and your goofy silly notions. :D

Oasis hasn't even scratched the surface of what the Beatles are, and were. Period.

And they never will be.

Mudhoney didn't ever make it big on a national scale or worldwide for that matter. Nirvana did hence the reason they changed to scope of music.

Just like there were guys singing Rock & Roll before Elvis but he is the one who hit big and changed things.

Mudhoney spearheaded the scene that made Nirvana possible. How exactly did Nirvana change the scope of music? Cobain's songwriting was highly derivative of the Beatles and he played the soft verse/loud chorus thing to death. They are legends because Cobain blew his brains out at the top of his game. It was a good career move.

I think you are missing the forest because you don't see the trees. No one is arguing that mudhoney wasn't first. The point is Mudhoney didn't make it on a national level. Nirvana is what opened up the Seattle scene for the world to see and brought what was coined grunge rock to the forefront at that time.

No one out side Seattle would have heard of Mudhoney on a remotely large scale if it wasn't for Nirvana bringing the light to the seattle scene. MudHoney sure didn't bring that light to it, so it doesn't matter if they were first.

It's like saying Elvis made no impact and was overrated because Hank Williams, Roy Brown and Jimmy Preston sang Rock & Roll before he did. Elvis did essentially the same thing as Nirvana he brought it to the general public which greatly impacted that music scene.

I'm not denying their influence, just saying they're overrated and did not "change music." I think we're arguing different points. Influence doesn't necessarily mean a band is great. Nirvana wasn't the band that brought the Seattle scene to a national level, it was a collective effort and would have happened without Nirvana.

I think if Billy Corrigan or Eddy Vedder had committed suicide the Smashing Pumpkins or Pearl Jam would be the legendary 90's band. Both of them are better songwriters IMO

You know how I know you're gay?


You listen to coldplay...

This is just people who personally dont like the band and dont get their music so they feel the need to say idiotic stuff stuff like that. I think its some kind of hate against all the people who do get the music. They somehow feel theyre missing something but are too simple to stupid to understand what. So they get angry.

These are the same people who turn up the volume if 50cent is on the radio.

So that makes them overrated?

There is this Dutch tv channel for the kids, they play all these teenybopper music. They have all stuff where you can rate songs through text messages. You can rate 1 to 10 and when you look at those ratings they either rate it 1 or 10. The kid likes the song or hates the song, theres nothing inbetween. A kid can not look further than i like them or not. They cant think like well i dont like them but its not a bad song really, just not for me. Anyway, thats how kids are...and most of the idiots on gfy.

Coldplay just begun? As a band they've been around since 1997, and as a recording artist since 2000. "Yellow" their first single is now eight years old! Hard to believe. Bands like The Police, The Animals and The Beatles had already disbanded by this time in their career. And look at them, they're all legendary. How many albums does it qualify for a band to made a mark? Jimi Hendrix only recorded three studio albums. He's forever legendary. Harper Lee only wrote one book. And she's forever legendary for it too.

The first time I saw the video for One Step Closer I definitely thought they would be a one hit wonder band ...I was quite wrong heh.

My favorite song by them is probably My December, but I like almost all their tracks and don't think they are overrated. We'll see in a few more albums though if they can keep the songs from becoming rehashed/repetitive.

This is a good definition but it also requires that people know rock history. People who think Oasis are somehow comparable to the Beatles are clearly unaware of what the Beatles did during the 50's and 60's and what the music scene was like at that time. This is why there is so much confusion in this thread. The Beatles were before my time, but I've read enough about them and watched enough documentaries to understand their impact. I also happen to really enjoy their music but that is just personal taste. The cultural influence of the Beatles is virtually undeniable, but somebody who is unfamiliar with history won't understand this.

If Nirvana didn't exist to break Seattle onto the national stage, we may never have heard about the Smashing Pumpkins or Pearl Jam and their lead singers.

People only know about Mother Love Bone because its members created new bands like Pearl Jam after the lead singer, Andrew Wood, died of a heroine overdose. Andrew Wood is an unknown name. If Nirvana broke into the mainstream earlier and people jumped on the Mother Love Bone recordings, Andrew Wood might be a household name today.

But I agree that if Vedder or Corrigan committed suicide in the 90's after they reached their fame, they would be heralded as the legends and not Nirvana/Cobain even with Cobain's suicide.

Yeah I pretty much touched this recently, I agree the cult of Nirvana is definitely closely binded with Cobain's faith.

They were a band that definitely had a huge / massive impact on the scene of the first half of the 90's and what was played in the radio, but the feel of a prodigy that was ahead of their time and couldn't realize its potential definitely makes its mark.

In many cases it's totally justified (Jeff Buckley, Jaco Pastorius, Jimi Hendrix, John Coltrane, Robert Johnson for example) but in many mainstream well known cases it's clearly resonating with the maniacal / extreme type of fans or psychically unbalanced teenagers that are in need of fulfilling their existence idolizing ONE band or one artist, where their adoration in many times reaches extreme levels.

I would say they were way under-rated..I still listen to them because they werent played to death

Most bands today suck.. most are hype and very little talent.

8-10 years is nothing.

so yes, they've just begun. If they have any longevity they'll have many years to come out with more stuff.

Nobody I know even heard of them before 2 years ago. They are NEW on the scene, still.

Haha, first band that popped into my head as soon as I saw the thread title.

You're just proving my point. For one, I know of nothing Coldplay has come out with so far that comes close to ranking them with the bands you mentioned.

- The beatles were together longer than 8 years or even 10 yeas. They spent time playing in Liverpool clubs as unknowns before their recording years. And how many legendary albums. I can't name even one album of "coldplay's"... why? Not because I'm not tuned into music I can tell you that. No one listens to as much rock radio as I do. No, it's because they aren't fit to even be meantioned in the same breath as the Beatles, that's why.

- The Police? I'm sorry but the ONLY thing coldplay has on the police IS longevity. :1orglaugh

- The animals? See above.

- Their music is no Hendrix either. Again, if not for his untimely death one wonders just how many years and how many other great works of art Jimmi would have come up with.


I don't know why you guys even argue this crap with me. Coldplay? Please. They have more work to do, as in lots, if they truly want to be ranked and remembered among the greats. They need to come out with some less gay shit. :D

It's hard for me to have perspective on the national level when talking about grunge because it was a local scene to me and I don't know who made the biggest noise outside of Seattle first but I'm pretty sure bands like Pearl Jam and Soundgarden would have become known even if Nirvana had never existed.

Green River is the band that deserves a lot of the credit for pioneering the Seattle scene, more than Mudhoney now that I think about it. When they broke up Stone and Jeff formed Mother Love Bone/Pearl Jam and Mark went on to form Mudhoney. Wonder what might have been if they had stayed together?

Agree 100%, all points.

Correct. :thumbsup

Exactly. :thumbsup

KISS,
aerosmith
robert plant (not zepplin mind you)
U2

Fucking moron. Please stfu about thing you dont have a clue about. You know, there's a world outside Canada and its pretty fucking big. You sound like a dumb American right now.

Amen brother, glad there's still some people around that get it :1orglaugh

I'm amazed at some of the responses in this thread... The Stones? Kiss? Rush? Zeppelin?

WTF... all awesome classic bands.

For me off the top of my head:

Social Distortion
Sublime
Korn
Guns & Roses

Franck listens to coldplay! :1orglaugh

Now I know you're gay.

I dont listen to them you fucking moron. Funny how you completely ignore the subject because you know how stupid you sound.

Why do you sound like an angry 14 yr old in most of your posts franck? :D

Very true, and that is a big problem with this thread, people are missing the point and listing bands they plain don't like or get.

Keep ignoring the subject you simpleton.

i've already stated my position on "the subject".

Why would I want to address your non-points when you have not a shred of a clue as to how to engage in a civil discussion?

Keep trying, you'll get it right eventually. :D

Well you totally misunderstood me. I was actually agreeing with you for the most part. I know everything there is to know about The Beatles, thank you very much. Coldplay as I said has been around since 1997. So if you add in those years before they began recording, it is pretty close to how long The Beatles were together as a band. So my analogy was correct.

I was also not comparing Coldplay to the likes of The Police or The Beatles. I was just trying to make a point that do they really need to go on and make more albums to not gain respect? As I said earlier, those songs like "The Scientist," "Clocks" and "Fix You" are some of the best pop/rock songs I have heard this entire decade quality wise. Chris Martin is an incredibly gifted pianist and songwriter. Their music is not disposable like 90% of the rest of pop music you hear. It's quite refreshing to hear such a talented band.

It's true, that they haven't made a lot of albums. And to be honest, I wasn't a huge fan of their 2005 album X&Y. But it did contain the classic "Fix You." Didn't care much for "Speed of Sound" but "Talk" was okay. We'll see how their brand new album is. So far I like the first single, and the second single I'm not sure yet.

So.. Please don't compare me to the rest of the morons in this thread... we were actually on the same thinking level! You just misunderstood what I said.

I don't know, have what they've already done earned them any? I can think of only one of thier songs I've heard that I can safely say I like. As in like, not am freaked out over it, it's that good or anything. If they did basically nothing in their first 3 or 5 years then do those years count? I don't know. Maybe we should ask Franck.

As I said, I listen to a lot of radio, not just classic rock stations but others that play newer stuff, and yet I can't recognize any of those songs from their titles. Now, either I'm a "moron" as Franck says OR.. or those songs just never caught my attention enough for me to want to hear them again. However, I will look up those songs and give them another listen.

The one song I've heard of theirs that I remember and actually like is called "Let's talk" (I think)

Well, to be clear here I wasn't one of the ones saying they are overrated.

There you go agreeing with me again. "We'll see how their brand new album is"... that's all I'm saying, they have more to do yet to make the kind of lasting impact that the classic greats you mentioned have made. That's all.

The comment at the tail end of my post you quoted was directed mainly to the general masses, not at you in particular, but my apologies for the confusion.

Fact is the first time I ever heard of them or a song by them was just a little under two years ago. I'm not at all surprised they've been around longer than that, because it does usually take a few years for UK music to make it's way over here. The first time I ever heard them mentioned anywhere was the movie "the 40 year old virgin" during the "You know how I know you're gay" scene. lol

And I'm 45, it takes a lot for a new band to impress me to the point of me actually wanting their music in my playlist. Too many of them are pure crap these days.

the thing about the beatles is they were arguably the most 'important' band in modern rock... while black sabbath is arguably the most 'influential' band. the second black sabbath album changed the world for guitar players. jimmy page is accredited with heavy drums and the 'riff', until that point there were no real 'drum heavy' mixes around.

then we have the motorhead and the ramons.... totally changed music.

Your list sucks dick, queer.

I would like to punch your mother in the face for not having an abortion.