Was Oasis the biggest band in the world?

Were they ever the biggest band in the USA? Probably not. Did they crack America? Absolutely.

I saw a particularly good sold out show at the Blossom Music Center in Ohio during the Don’t Believe The Truth tour, that ended with a stage invasion. Good times.

 

They weren't even the best band in their day.

 

I don't think that the U.S. element matters. I think other factors do-like the other bands around. The bands that made it in the U.S. made it everywhere else. On top of that, some like R.E.M. and U2 had over a decade under their belt while Oasis was still a new thing which helped and hindered. But the problem lay in that both those bands were enormous everywhere including the U.S.

The other issue is you are quoting 70 million which spans the years 1994-2017. How many did they sell in those 3 years? By quoting 70 million, you are trying to include their entire career and almost 100% of posters here do not think Oasis was the biggest band in the world from 1994-2009. Add in the fact that their competitors were enormous for longer in all countries Oasis was (whichever countries those were), plus the U.S. makes it difficult to argue they have been the biggest band in the last 25 years. No matter how many countries Oasis was/is big in, without enormous success in the U.S., other bands that were a success for longer, and in all countries including the U.S. like u2, make it difficult to claim they were the biggest rock band for longer than those 3 years.

But really, do you feel that you need to have Oasis as the "biggest" when biggest doesn't necessarily equal best? Their lack of innovation is always going to be a major flaw for the band when comparing them to others that followed their own path further. At their best, they still felt like the were in debt to The Beatles musically, lyrically and in interviews. Again, I have every track they ever recorded and I love the band but I don't feel the need to present them as bigger and better, meanwhile, I'm not as huge a fan of U2 though I think they were great too.

Why does it matter so much that they were the "biggest"?

 

It's not that the band has to be the biggest in the U.S.

It's that the bands that made it big in the U.S. pretty much automatically made it big everywhere else.

 

From that period, I could say the same for The Smashing Pumpkins just coming off of Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness and Siamese Dream. They were huge everywhere and may have been the biggest from 1995-1997 because Pearl Jam decided to go against the grain in '96 with No Code.

It could even be a tossup between the Smashing Pumpkins and Oasis, but I'll give Oasis fans the benefit of the doubt for that era. But that being tops in those 3 years might not be enough. 1995 for sure belonged to Pearl Jam once Kurt Cobain passed on. No doubt after 3 ginormous albums and massive hype and success all over the planet. 1996 and 1997-okay I'll give it to Oasis if that's what their fans want. There's a solid argument for those 2 years but the legend wasn't built by 1995 while Pearl Jam had been around for 4 years and 3 mega successful albums.

 

I thought Beatles fans were among the most fervent and blindly loyal around, but some of the replies on here have got me thinking we have a new champion.

Yes, Oasis were huge for a time, but after a promising debut album they became a dull parody of themselves very quickly.

They can be the biggest band for all I care, has no relation to whether the best band or not (and I know that this is not initially what the thread was about), you only have to look at the stratospheric sales of some of Robbie Williams albums to see that people bought any old nonsense back in the CD buying heyday.

 

Amazing how few people read the OP:

 

Let's stop This thread before someone thinks they were the biggest band in the World

 

Do not disagree with a lot of what you say.No one is suggesting that Oasis were the biggest group in the world throughout their entire career up until 2009.Or that they were the biggest band of all time (and yes,not being massive in America does hinder any claim to that.)

The title of this thread is 'Was Oasis the biggest band in the world?' and i was simply saying that between 1994-1998 they were the biggest rock band in the world with regard to record sales .A period where a good proportion of their 70 million sales took place.

 

Take your point about R.Williams..Although Oasis's second album was a bigger masterpiece than even their first album.The quality dropped a bit from the third album onwards.

 

Would be a pleasure.
Liams voice during the first two albums was very good indeed.Majestic even..His vocal range deteriorated dramatically from about the fourth album onwards.Noel is a very good technical guitarist and getting better all the time.Yes the rest of the bands playing ability wasn't the best as they were just local mates really.

It is a shame that their output coincided with the Brickwall phenomenon of the 90's..Yes the albums are compressed and cranked up heavily.If one bands sound suits that style of mastering then it is Oasis.But i agree its a shame that they were not better recorded.But virtually no one was in the 90's.And the albums do sound huge..I don't agree that the albums are harder to listen to than the vast majority of recordings made at the time or since.Its a modern style of engineering and mastering that is endemic in most current recordings.

 

It is very arrogant of you to dismiss the fans of an artist with stratospheric sales as buying nonsense, just because you don't like them.

 

Sorry, I've never been able to consider Robbie as anything other than a quasi comedy, novelty act, just my opinion for the little that it's worth. I didn't mean to dismiss Oasis as nonsense (just a touch dull), I can see how my posts reads like I may have been implying that.

 

I really liked their first album, but just thought there was no progression after that. I should give the second album a listen as not heard it in many many years, see if I change my opintion.

Had tickets for their concert at Edinburgh Ingliston just after they broke it big. It was such a hot ticket, but neither me or my missus could be bothered as I think I was already tiring of them, so gave them to my brother in law and mate. Maybe if I'd gone I'd be a devout fan now.

 

I've jumped in periodically and pointed out the same thing a number of times. It never matters.

 

Including 1994 and most of 1995 again pits them against Pearl Jam and is there anyone who is going to deny Pearl Jam were not the biggest after Cobain passed? Pearl Jam's name was absolutely enormous - especially off of the Vitalogy release in Dec. 1994 - first on vinyl - possibly the record that helped vinyl sales shoot up for the last 25 years and once it came out on CD, the anticipation and enigma that they were without music videos had the world captivated. The packaging was in the form of an old book with crazy facts from yesteryear. People were intrigued in a way that Oasis never really had. Why release it on vinyl 1st? Why have it old book artwork? Why go against the monster Ticketmaster? How were Pearl Jam going to respond to Cobain's passing? All these elements were past sales figures that Oasis did not have. You can't use just sales figures to gauge popularity. Check the sales figures:

The album was first released on vinyl, followed by a release on CD and cassette two weeks later on December 6, 1994. The LP sold 34,000 copies in its first week of release, and until Jack White's 2014 album Lazaretto it held the record for most vinyl sales in one week since SoundScan began tracking sales in 1991.[1] Upon its CD release, Vitalogy became the second-fastest selling album in history, only behind the band's previous release Vs., selling 877,000 copies in its first week and went multi-platinum quickly.
---------------
Otherwise, once Pearl Jam willingly gave up fans, one could say Oasis was bigger.

One more great great thing about Oasis is that their B-sides were absolutely fantastic and when they came together for The Masterplan in 1998, it played like another great Oasis album.

 

Pearl Jam were bigger in the US in 94-95..Oasis were bigger in the UK and Europe..Who is too say who had the best albums or had the biggest impact in their respective parts of the world.We could argue all day who were the best band for each decade.Or the best band ever.The facts are that Oasis outsold everyone (including Pearl Jam|) in the time period we are discussing.

 

Were The Cranberries The Biggest Band in The World?
Were Ned's Atomic Dustbin The Biggest Band in Bristol?
Is My Dad Bigger Than Your Dad?

 

No, despite the tanks and bombs and bombs and guns.
I don't know but I still think "God Fodder" is a good album.
Probably. My father's pretty short.

 

It's probably been said here before, but Oasis was nothing in the massive U. S. of A. They were a non-entity here really.

 

they even were not the greatest Manchester band!

 

Oh, for god's sake. They were playing Madison Square Garden in 2009, almost 15 years after their pop hits. They did fine.

This thread is like running in a circle while being repeatedly punched in the face.

 

Again, I have no issue with Oasis, but you've got to get the sales figures right because they did not sell every copy of their first 2 albums in those 3 years. So it's not a majority of 70 million or even close. Try to find the sales figures for those 2 albums during those years only.

Biggest and most sales again don't mean best. They are two different subjects.

 

According to this List of best-selling albums in Brazil - Wikipedia (yeah yeah, Wikipedia I know), The Beatles can hardly claimed to have cracked Brazil either then.

 

quite the summary, well done.