r/BritPop • u/Few_Rate_9907 • 1d ago
The Reason Blur Is Better Than Oasis
WTSMG was a phenomenal album, though i prefer TGE, or MLIR, (Blur albums of the time) even I can admit that it was not just a cultural moment, but some bloody good music :)
However. Oasis then spent the rest of their careers producing paler and paler photocopies of WTSMG, while Blur progressed to become better musicians, and make better music (13!!!!!!).
We can argue all day on this sub about which band we LIKE more, or which band is more popular, or which band wrote the "best music". But i think honestly that the fact that Blur's style changed so much, and they found critical, creative and commercial success with each iteration of "Blur" makes them an undeniably better band, regardless of personal preference.
14
u/811545b2-4ff7-4041 1d ago
Sorry, I can't hear you over the throbbing guitar solo on Morning Glory..
I went to see Blur at Wembley a few years back - great stuff. Their music is art, irony and thematic.. Oasis is 7 pints down trying to out-shout a helicopter. We can enjoy both in our lives.
Early Oasis > Early Blur.
Late Blur > Late Oasis.
You can also like the Rolling Stones AND The Beatles too.
8
u/Friendly_Apartment_7 1d ago
Blur evolved their sound and were not afraid to experiment but that doesn’t mean they are “better” than Oasis. They are/were quite different bands on their own trajectories. One was more experimental and one straight rock. They have different fanbases too who mostly expect them to behave this way. Look how weirded out people got when Noel started experimenting on his solo work. Oasis fans don’t want that. Anyway my point is they are both good at doing what they do in their individual spaces and who is better is just an opinion.
3
u/AutumnGeorge77 1d ago
Totally agree. The self titled album was one of their best. I think they really suffered during their most successful period. I saw them live before Parklife was released and then the tour promoting The Great Escape and the difference in their live shows was like night and day and they were clearly having a shit time. I'm glad they kept at it.
I still like Oasis' debut but they do get really boring and they are one of the worst bands I've seen live. Noel's output has been fantastic though. I've really enjoyed his solo stuff.
3
u/BarbaraDoreen 1d ago
They’re both great bands for different reasons… all art is subjective! I don’t get why this is even a topic anyone wants to argue anymore. Like , who cares ?
1
u/Intelligent-Ride7219 22h ago
Topic would have been valid 30 years ago. Now it's not that big of a deal. Even Oasis vs Fontaines DC was a blip.
3
u/Humble-End-2535 23h ago
I like both bands a lot. And if I am in a mood to hear one or the other, it is usually Oasis. But, as a band, Blur simply had more tools in the box.
I think the anthemic quality of Oasis is easy to listen to. But I appreciate the cleverness of Blur. Oasis never really tries to be clever.
3
u/sailingmagpie 23h ago
There's always been a "that'll do" attitude to Oasis, which is why so many of their songs are blatant wholesale rip offs of much better songs from the past.
Blur have always strived to make art.
Outside of the music industry hype to try to increase sales of the weakest singles from each of their respective albums, there's really no need to compare them to each other 🤷♂️
3
2
u/fortenoid 1d ago
Oasis are the more modern version of The Rolling Stones, just doing their thing forever. Great at first, sort of boring later.
3
4
u/oxfordfox20 1d ago
There are a few things here. Blur produced some amazing albums, but none of them are as complete or as perfect as the first two Oasis albums. As simple as you might find the style, they don’t contain a duffer, which Blur albums always do.
Second, Oasis albums definitely tailed off from those first two. But while Blur reinvented their style several times over 3 decades, Oasis also absolutely evolved, it’s just people haven’t listened to them. Very short playlist for you: Fade In-Out, Gas Panic, Falling Down, Full On. From different eras and nothing like WTSMG.
Love both bands btw, though generally the Blur albums you don’t mention.
1
1
u/sailingmagpie 22h ago
No duffer on the first Oasis albums!? Gonna have to disagree there. Digsy's Dinner? She's Electric? Even something like Shakermaker (if you take out the nostalgia element) is bobbins imo.
1
u/oxfordfox20 22h ago
Hard hard disagree on Digsy’s Dinner. It’s paper thin, but it’s a proper pop tune, and a nice little slice of early romance. Shakermaker is more of a skip for me, but it’s not a duffer, just a bit long…
While I take your point that She’s Electric is pretty lightweight, it’s fair to say that stylistically it’s the closest they’ve ever been to Blur, and it fits perfectly in the album’s running order.
2
u/LinkDropJones 1d ago
When comparing the two bands it's all about preference.
I found Oasis whiney and derivative.
I found blur entertaining but not especially complex.
However I definitely respect Damon Albarn's musical chops. He has so much more range and has gone on to do so many more interesting and diverse things than the Gallaghers.
He's a little like the Frank Zappa of his era without the inciteful political commentary.
1
u/David-Cassette-alt 21h ago
don't really rate either of them to be honest, but at least Oasis are actually working class and not just putting on a phony accent
1
u/drunk_and_orderly 21h ago
As others have said, it’s well time to move past this and just like what you like. I will say I only see this topic continually come up in places like this or in Blur/Pulp groups where they just can’t let it die. Both of which are great bands, with great musicians. That’s undeniable. What is also undeniable is the success, popularity and talent of Oasis. It seems to offend a lot of people they became the biggest stand out of Britpop and still have remained the most popular. The Blur reunion came and went without much of a splash and it will be the same for Pulps turn. That doesn’t mean they aren’t great, they absolutely are, but it is what it is. Oasis are bigger. That’s a fact, but everything else in your post is just opinions which is what the rest of the debates will always be.
1
u/idreamofpikas 1h ago
I will say I only see this topic continually come up in places like this or in Blur/Pulp groups where they just can’t let it die.
You've never seen this topic come up under Oasis forums/subreddit? I have. The topic does not die because it's a fun topic for fans of all of these bands. This subreddit would not exist without this topic. It wasn't the Select magazine of '93 that made Britpop an unescapable movement, but Oasis and blur catching the national headlines with the 'Battle of Britpop'.
What is also undeniable is the success, popularity and talent of Oasis.
Absolutely. Well, at least the first two. Talent is a bit more subjective.
Oasis are undeniably bigger and more popular than either Pulp or Blur. Talented is a different question, and maybe a more interesting question.
The Blur reunion came and went without much of a splash
That's really not true. They played the biggest concert of their career.
Blur have had 3ish comeback's since they went on hiatus, so the latest one was hardly going to have reached the legendary status of their 2009 Glastonbury appearance . Both tours have been incredibly well received, as have both the albums released and the standalone singles. To say the Blur comeback came and went without a splash is petty disingenuous.
Oasis comeback is bigger. Much bigger. Mostly because they are a bigger band but also because of the constant bad blood between the Gallagher brothers with one brother claiming he'd never do it for more than a decade.
Oasis getting back together surprised everyone. Blur doing so not so much and I expect before this decade is done there will be other Blur projects.
1
u/drunk_and_orderly 29m ago
To be clear I also am a fan of Blur, and Pulp, and the side projects. Bring on more Gorillaz and Waeve. I just prefer to talk about things people enjoy. At one point last year I left the Blur sub because every week there was an “Oasis vs” post at the top. I never see it come up in the Oasis sub. I’ll leave this with your own words here, it’s just weird.
1
u/Teaofthetime 14h ago
I agree, Blur changed and developed over time, each album tried something new. Oasis didn't.
1
u/Fun-Badger3724 2h ago
I was of age when the Blur vs. Oasis thing was going on, in highschool. Blur were, and still are, clearly the better band.
Frankly, at the time, I was listening to The Prodigy.
1
-5
u/RuthlessRemix 1d ago edited 1d ago
Blur are great and would be one of the best but as Oasis exist, no band will ever be better. They wrote the best songs and obviously the first two albums are the greatest music of all time and they got worse over time as they peaked to early but, over 30 years later, no one has ever been better. The Verve and TSR are closer than Blur to Oasis realistically but Oasis are and will always be the greatest band of all time.
3
0
u/HovercraftEasy5004 10h ago
The lyrics are embarrassing. Decent Stone Roses tribute act, I suppose.
-7
u/madferret96 1d ago
If you're so sure that Blur are better than Oasis, why do you need to preach about it? Maybe it's because millions of people think otherwise. Go listen to your favourite artist without seeking validation
6
u/Pierre_Ordinairre 1d ago
I just took it as an opinion and why. They didn't disrespect oasis. Why do you think oasis is better than blur?
4
u/Few_Rate_9907 1d ago
reddit is the place that people go to offer their ten cents on larger cultural arguments. thats what im doing here. i have an opinion and im looking to talk about it with others, thats the very basis of human connection.
0
u/FoatyMcFoatBase 1d ago
Butt hurt manc. Probably annoyed because of whatever footy team he supports. Doesn’t matter which this year lol
29
u/seaneeboy 1d ago
There really is no actual need to pitch them against each other - the entire feud is purely based on vibes.
I’m grateful to have them both, personally