So I can't say Noel Gallagher despite writing two of the most iconic albums of all time and the most internationally recognisable and timeless songs of our era but it's alright for you to say Thom Yorke. Strange one.
Of course you can. I disagree but it's acceptable. The problem is the way you seem to think your opinion are facts - it was you who, from the start, told me "not to mention Thom Yorke", like if there was no debate, and only one possible answer.
As for THE most recognizable song of our era, it's totally debatable. Not only that, but also being recognizable don't really mean much, actually. There's a lot of crap songs that nearly the entire world would recognize in a second and it don't make them great anyway.
I mean Radiohead from the past 10 years? You calling that music with melody in abundance? I mean when Bono and Paul McCartney (the finest of them all) start praising Noel Gallagher for being a great melodist then there's obviously an argument there.
Didn't you say the last 20 years, so that includes Radiohead best albums, particularly the first 3, my favorites - which includes OK Computer, one of the most influential albums in recent times. It's not like if all Oasis albums are great either.
And what's your problem with Chris Martin?
It's a comparison, because I find it odd how you can make such comments about other song-writers and still think "Coldplay are the only good band in the charts" and have so much praise for Chris Martin. It does not require much brilliance to sound exactly like the often forgotten Travis, who are an older band than Coldplay.
And the last time I checked, Radiohead, Blur and Pulp were mainstream acts. Also The Beatles, you see. There has not been one single 'underground' band mentioned in this debate to direct to such a conclusion of an 'anti-mainstream' bias.
Logged
