Has to be between Oasis Radiohead & The Strokes I reckon.

Oasis win this I think. I see their influence as nothing but malign, their rise as nothing short of a crime of silent cowardice on behalf of the music press, and their continuing ability to prise the comment 'yeah, but there's no denying there's some good songs there' from people you might otherwise consider acquantances, all equally infuriating and depressing. From Embrace to Starsailor, Kasabian to The Enemy they've contributed nothing but shit to the world.

I almost entirely blame Radiohead for Coldplay, James Blunt and all their ilk: y'know that little vocal tic, that horrible altarboy swoop that Blunt does - he got it from Martin who got it from Yorke (who I guess got it from Jeff Buckley - and there's another over-rated pile of cunt as well) . 'kin corduroy choirboys. Here I'll admit there are some 'good' songs but the legion of po-faced cack that's come since from all kinds of wankers wouldn't be quite as earnestly nauseating without Yorke's cheerless vaguery as it's spiritual crutch, the faux-profundity of all those Qmag-friendly cunts with acoustics can be traced directly back to 'The Bends' & 'OK Computer' I think. And Ratboy out of Muse.

You can blame alot of shit drainpiped bands on the Strokes being so fucking ace I think for that first album and a fair chunk of the second n'all. Not their fault really. And out of all the above's recorded output, Radiohead included, I think 'Is This It' is the only thing I still would wanna listen to.

The reason I ask is cos, isn't it about time Oasis started getting called out & slagged IN PUBLIC, in the press, on the radio, everywhere for how shit they've always been ? They've been getting away with this bollocks for fucking ages.

Quite liked The Strokes until I saw them live and Julian Casablancas said (without irony) to the crowd: "Whoh, you guys sure know how to rock!" Is that was passes for "cool" in New York?

Radiohead strike me as avant-garde tourists and Thom Yorke is just another Roger Waters; not because of his proggy leanings (well, a bit...) but because of his pompous, ivory-tower misanthropy. Who's the bigger twat: him or Bono?

Oasis actually remind me of The Sex Pistols. Not the Sex Pistols of 1977 but The Sex Pistols now: a bunch of tiresome, playing-to-the-gallery cabaret artists. They've got a few alright tunes though (ha ha).

A guy says something vaguely banal and you stop liking his band? You're setting high standards.

If one elects to view Coldplay and their clones as something "damaging" (and I am not arguing that they aren't), then Radiohead have to carry the can for that.

I'm not sure whether Oasis have much influence anymore. But I suppose that the ilk of Arctic Monkeys are an outgrowth of Britpop culture. In which case I suppose someone should invent a timemachine and drown Britpop at birth. So that's the Happy Mondays out of the way.

Far more damaging than Coldplay and even Arctic fucking Monkeys has been the corporate R&B and Hop Hop scene. At least the Coldplay gang write and play their own music. Rock will survive them. But soul isn't going to rise again, not from the sustained gangrape it has suffered over the past decade. The last good year in R&B was 1999. Since then, almost exclusively forgettable shit.

Oh my fucking god Pan Tau, you've got to be kidding. Are you Robert Elms or summat?

QUOTE:
the corporate R&B and Hop Hop scene

rabbit music?

my answer to this question depends entirely on what kind of scope we're discussing.. at least on a local level, playing in a band i heard enough shite that could have avoided a painful birth if people hadn't listened to so much oasis.

or as chris morris commented on "tracy jacks" - 'imagine what pub rock is going to sound like in a few years thanks to that.' it's not the imitators that make it that are the worst thing...

Too many kids see Oasis as something akin to Gods - untouchable, inarguably great - when I suggested to one of my classes that they were in fact shite it was greeted with a genuine gasp, like I was uttering some kind of heresy. Couldn't believe it. If someone can tell me one good thing about Oasis it might help. I mean, seriously. Name one good song they've ever done, name one song you hear in a club by them that doesn't make you wanna kill people. They're the musical equivalent of those Carling 'Belong' ads. Just utterly loathsome on every level.

Surely Oasis have just been critical whipping boys for more than a decade though? Most of Neil Kulkarni's complaints are pretty much received opinion in any kind of vaguely credible press or message board. Even Chris Evans gave up on them after Be Here Now. It's just fish in a barrel.

There aren't any critical whipping boys anymore. Oasis stopped all that.

I've been consistently "calling out" Oasis (or whatever the phrase was) since the 90s, so I hope I'm spared Neil's disappointment. I do think they're the most evil force in music (at least, in British rock music), and have been since they first made it big.

The Strokes were actually a force for good. It's hard to grasp now - especially in light of how quickly their aura faded, and how, when it had faded, they were left high and dry, looking like the posh boys with nothing to say about anything that they'd always been - just how exciting hearing "Last Nite" for the first time on the early vinyl pressings of "The Modern Age EP" felt, and how seeing those carefully calculated B&W photos felt: a return to sharpness, a return to the concept of 'cool' (even if I'm sure we would all disagree wildly over the precise definition of cool). Suddenly, kids were wearing shirts and ties and jackets again, and actually putting some thought into what they wore, instead of just slouching about in beige t-shirts. In this respect, sartorially as well as musically, The Strokes were a reaction against Radioheadism, and in a way they kicked down the doors for things like electroclash (which they had fuck all to do with musically).

Radioheadism, by the way, is indeed as evil and as far-reaching as Neil says it is. I'll stand up for one exception, though. Muse are fucking brilliant.

Neil Kulkarni wrote:

QUOTE:
There aren't any critical whipping boys anymore. Oasis stopped all that.

Aye. Exactly. Balance of power shifted, and it's never shifted back.

Coldplay on the front of the NME this week. Fucking COLDPLAY!

No, I'm serious. They've hardly had a decent review outside of say Q (which a quick Google shows listed at least one of their albums in a 50 worst albums ever list) since Be Here Now and even Morning Glory before had famously mixed reviews.

I'd say this, from OTF favourite and supposed Oasis/Weller apologist John Harris is pretty typical:
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/music/2007/08/cocaine_supernova_oasis_be_her.html

I saw Muse in a German ballroom once and they were fucking amazing. Went to the dressing room afterwards and the two other ones had to stand in the corridor because Matt Bellamy's practice synth was so massive. They didn't look pleased.

Oasis clearly put a fair bit of thought into what they were wearing too, it's just not to your taste.

Nico Rijnders wrote:

QUOTE:
No, I'm serious. They've hardly had a decent review outside of say Q (which a quick Google shows listed at least one of their albums in a 50 worst albums ever list) since Be Here Now and even Morning Glory before had famously mixed reviews.

I'd say this, from OTF favourite and supposed Oasis/Weller apologist John Harris is pretty typical:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/music/2007/08/cocaine_supernova_oasis_be_her.html

Do you read the NME, Nico? I mean, I wouldn't blame you if the answer was 'no', but trust me that according to that comedy rag, Oasis have been seamless Godlike Geniuses, unchallenged kings of everything that is cool and right and true, everything that every band should aspire to be like, from '94 thru '08.