Music opinion/question of the week...

[Dr. Medulla]

After the baffling popularity of “Wonderwall,” did Oasis maintain a sizeable fan base in the US or did the go back to being UK big only?

They had fans, but again, not massive like in the UK.

Argument over. US > UK.

[Heston]

So what did the Clash have that the Jam didn't to suceed in the US? I see them as being cut from similar cloth but the Americans must have seen something in the Clash that they liked more. I'd have the Jam down as the more commercial of the two.

[Heston]

After the baffling popularity of “Wonderwall,” did Oasis maintain a sizeable fan base in the US or did the go back to being UK big only?

They had fans, but again, not massive like in the UK.

Argument over. US > UK.

The Oasis-mania was unreal oer here in the mid-90s. I just never got them at all. Too whiny, too derivative, unlikeable people, lacking in stagecraft, too apolitical, the list goes on.

[JennyB]

Kind of a twist on the question, but Depeche Mode were huge everywhere BUT their home country.

[Wolter]

So what did the Clash have that the Jam didn't to suceed in the US? I see them as being cut from similar cloth but the Americans must have seen something in the Clash that they liked more. I'd have the Jam down as the more commercial of the two.

The Jam were catchy but not dangerous? I mean, you could argue the Clash weren’t dangerous either, but they seemed more so. And the mod movement was never big here in the first place.

Also: the Clash werent actually *that* big here either. A couple of radio hits. By the 90s they were basically “the stock the Casbah band” to all but a fringe of rock fans.

[Dr. Medulla]

So what did the Clash have that the Jam didn't to suceed in the US? I see them as being cut from similar cloth but the Americans must have seen something in the Clash that they liked more. I'd have the Jam down as the more commercial of the two.

It's hard for me to explain, probably due to a lack of musical vocabulary, but the Clash just sounded less obviously English. The Clash didn't sound like they were drawing from English experiences and were playing for English audiences. It might not make sense to you but I had friends who hated groups like that right away—The Smiths, for example—because they seemed too foreign. The Clash sounded international or universal or non-specific, something like that.

[Heston]

So what did the Clash have that the Jam didn't to suceed in the US? I see them as being cut from similar cloth but the Americans must have seen something in the Clash that they liked more. I'd have the Jam down as the more commercial of the two.

The Jam were catchy but not dangerous? I mean, you could argue the Clash weren’t dangerous either, but they seemed more so. And the mod movement was never big here in the first place.

Also: the Clash werent actually *that* big here either. A couple of radio hits. By the 90s they were basically “the stock the Casbah band” to all but a fringe of rock fans.

Yeah, they obviously weren't huge but respectable chart entries for the later albums (CR went platinum) and a couple of proper hits were more than the Jam could have dreamt of over there.

[Heston]

Kind of a twist on the question, but Depeche Mode were huge everywhere BUT their home country.

They are pretty big here I think. They no longer trouble the charts but they still sell out arenas. Did I ever mention I saw them live in 1984 when they were good?

[Low Down Low]

Cant say exactly how much difference it made but the Clash worked America, coast to coast several times over, while The Jam never really took to US tours with any great zeal. Not the whole story probably but a contributing factor. Weller obviously wanted US success but maybe just not badly enough. The Clash embraced it and made it happen.

[JennyB]

Kind of a twist on the question, but Depeche Mode were huge everywhere BUT their home country.

They are pretty big here I think. They no longer trouble the charts but they still sell out arenas. Did I ever mention I saw them live in 1984 when they were good?

Yes, you did! They were good then and now!

[Dr. Medulla]

Kind of a twist on the question, but Depeche Mode were huge everywhere BUT their home country.

They are pretty big here I think. They no longer trouble the charts but they still sell out arenas. Did I ever mention I saw them live in 1984 when they were good?

Uh oh …

[JennyB]

Kind of a twist on the question, but Depeche Mode were huge everywhere BUT their home country.

They are pretty big here I think. They no longer trouble the charts but they still sell out arenas. Did I ever mention I saw them live in 1984 when they were good?

Uh oh …

Directed at Heston, not Doc.

[Heston]

Kind of a twist on the question, but Depeche Mode were huge everywhere BUT their home country.

They are pretty big here I think. They no longer trouble the charts but they still sell out arenas. Did I ever mention I saw them live in 1984 when they were good?

Uh oh …

Directed at Heston, not Doc.

[WestwayKid]

After the baffling popularity of “Wonderwall,” did Oasis maintain a sizeable fan base in the US or did the go back to being UK big only?

They had fans, but again, not massive like in the UK.

Argument over. US > UK.

The Oasis-mania was unreal oer here in the mid-90s. I just never got them at all. Too whiny, too derivative, unlikeable people, lacking in stagecraft, too apolitical, the list goes on.

Funny thing is I saw them several times early one Definitely Maybe/What's the Story era and when I saw them towards the end of their career - they had become a far better live band. The early shows were not that great - more attitude than substance.

[Heston]

After the baffling popularity of “Wonderwall,” did Oasis maintain a sizeable fan base in the US or did the go back to being UK big only?

They had fans, but again, not massive like in the UK.

Argument over. US > UK.

The Oasis-mania was unreal oer here in the mid-90s. I just never got them at all. Too whiny, too derivative, unlikeable people, lacking in stagecraft, too apolitical, the list goes on.

Funny thing is I saw them several times early one Definitely Maybe/What's the Story era and when I saw them towards the end of their career - they had become a far better live band. The early shows were not that great - more attitude than substance.

Did they not become better because they kept sacking people and replacing them with muso-type identikit Noel and Liams? I thought their original drummer at least gave them some drive, they were just plodders after that.