Lineup 2014

[Andre91]

Cheers guys!

[mrtourette]

Just so you don't get too big-headed, it's shit.

[the wonderwhy]

Needs more Feeder

[Chief Scout]

london grammar have announced an exstensive uk tour next year. do you think theyll play next year? and if so how would you place them?

January:
28th - Cardiff Solus
29th - Manchester Academy...
31st - Nottingham Rock City

February:
1st - Cambridge Corn Exchange
3rd - Brighton Dome
4th - London Troxy
7th - Liverpool O2 Academy
8th - Sheffield O2 Academy
10th - Newcastle Northumbria Uni
11th - Glasgow ABC
12th - Leeds O2 Academy
15th - Bournemouth O2 Academy
16th - Birmingham O2 Academy
17th - Bristol O2 Academy

[dentalplan]

london grammar have announced an exstensive uk tour next year. do you think theyll play next year? and if so how would you place them?

Was going to mention them but forgot. They got the biggest crowd of the weekend at FN6 barring Chic and Manics.

I'm not sure where I would place them right now as they could have grown even bigger by March.

[Chief Scout]

Was going to mention them but forgot. They got the biggest crowd of the weekend at FN6 barring Chic and Manics.

I'm not sure where I would place them right now as they could have grown even bigger by March.

how was FN6? looking in to going there next year.

yeah, could be possible that disclosure headline NME and London Grammar sub?

[dentalplan]

how was FN6? looking in to going there next year.

yeah, could be possible that disclosure headline NME and London Grammar sub?

The music was really good and the setting was amazing but the weather was horrible and quite a few acts were cancelled because of it. Not much the organisers can do about that though I suppose. But yeah I'd definitely recommend it.

Also yeah I could see that placing going down really well. If hype dictated most of that tent this year I imagine they'll be pretty high up on NME.

Edited September 17, 2013 by dentalplan

[Andre91]

Just so you don't get too big-headed, it's shit.

Thanks man, I was on the verge of going full on Gaz.

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Have you watched the video where he squirts a syringe of blood over a camera and crew? That is not illness. That is a junkie c**t being a junkie c**t. He has all the money and privilege to sort himself out but chooses not to. That's right, he chooses to be that way. The best thing that could happen to him is to OD, die and stop being a high profile bad example to kids. I couldn't give a shit if your political correctness issues are ruffled over Doherty, most junkies do it because they have no way out and nothing to live for. He has everything and still chooses to adopt the worst traits as a lifestyle. They should take his money away and make him live on the streets with real junkies, bet the twat would change his ways then.

I don't dislike his music BTW and went to see him once, I walked out on the 4th song because of his posturing and antics. That's the only time it's ever happened and the most disappointed I have ever been at a live show. He will never get a penny of my cash again unless he really does sort his shit out.

Wow, what a reaction. I wasn't trying to wind you up, although some how it appears I managed to.

Unfortunately, your rant presents three schools of thought towards those suffering from addiction which are indicative of an anti-progressive and (I hope) dying view. The first is, "the best thing for 'junkies' to do is stop wasting our time, money and oxygen and crawl under a rock somewhere to die". Of course, the grand irony of this view is that addicts are addicts because they don't like themselves and everyone else calling them 'scum' and telling them to "OD and die" only creates a circular pattern of hurt and addiction.

The second school of thought is that anyone with money should be able to buy their way out of addiction...again this is a complete fallacy, I can't be bothered to explain why but if it isn't obvious to you then it, rather unfortunately, never will be.

The third is trickier, and that is the behaviour of people suffering from addiction. Is the behaviour of the majority of addicts acceptable? Of course not. Is it better to: a) call the junkie c**ts and make them live on the streets together; b. lock them in jail; c) do everything you can to try and help them against the cause of their behaviour i.e. their addiction. Personally I fall down on c) but I understand the hard-line view of b., even if I fundamentally don't agree with it. I fail to see the point in a).

I'm not sure how this all fits in of your view of me trying to be 'politically correct' but I don't think trying to change views and opinions on addiction counts as being PC. My preference would be for more people to have a greater understanding of addiction and all that it brings, rather than spouting the rhetoric similar to your above rant. I hope I've given you a quick understanding and you'll look a bit more into it now but really that's your choice.

Apologies for the long post....back to Reading 2014!

Edited September 17, 2013 by Hubert Cumberdale

[Mouseboy11]

Our very own http://www..com/interviews/the-guy-behind-the-fake-reading-and-leeds-posters/

[kev1664]

Wow, what a reaction. I wasn't trying to wind you up, although some how it appears I managed to.

Unfortunately, your rant presents three schools of thought towards those suffering from addiction which are indicative of an anti-progressive and (I hope) dying view. The first is, "the best thing for 'junkies' to do is stop wasting our time, money and oxygen and crawl under a rock somewhere to die". Of course, the grand irony of this view is that addicts are addicts because they don't like themselves and everyone else calling them 'scum' and telling them to "OD and die" only creates a circular pattern of hurt and addiction.

The second school of thought is that anyone with money should be able to buy their way out of addiction...again this is a complete fallacy, I can't be bothered to explain why but if it isn't obvious to you then it, rather unfortunately, never will be.

The third is trickier, and that is the behaviour of people suffering from addiction. Is the behaviour of the majority of addicts acceptable? Of course not. Is it better to: a) call the junkie c**ts and make them live on the streets together; b. lock them in jail; c) do everything you can to try and help them against the cause of their behaviour i.e. their addiction. Personally I fall down on c) but I understand the hard-line view of b., even if I fundamentally don't agree with it. I fail to see the point in a).

I'm not sure how this all fits in of your view of me trying to be 'politically correct' but I don't think trying to change views and opinions on addiction counts as being PC. My preference would be for more people to have a greater understanding of addiction and all that it brings, rather than spouting the rhetoric similar to your above rant. I hope I've given you a quick understanding and you'll look a bit more into it now but really that's your choice.

Apologies for the long post....back to Reading 2014!

This part is not true for all addicts and probably not true for the most of all drug addicts.

'the grand irony of this view is that addicts are addicts because they don't like themselves'

I bet a fair few have slipped into becoming addicts off the back of trying something.

While it is true in some cases that addicts don't like themselves and this is why they turn to this that and the other, it is simply not the case for all addicts.

[Hubert Cumberdale]

This part is not true for all addicts and probably not true for the most of all drug addicts.

'the grand irony of this view is that addicts are addicts because they don't like themselves'

I bet a fair few have slipped into becoming addicts off the back of trying something.

While it is true in some cases that addicts don't like themselves and this is why they turn to this that and the other, it is simply not the case for all addicts.

True and a fair point. I probably should have put 'many addicts' as I shouldn't have generalised.

My main point was that a large number of addicts use substances as a means of escapism and that usually comes from a feeling of displeasure with their lives or, more commonly the case, past (the number of addicts in rehab who have been abused as children is huge). Slipping onto harder drugs is usually a product of seeking a harder/longer/more instantaneous route to escape reality.

Edited September 17, 2013 by Hubert Cumberdale

[Dead throne]

MAIN: Paramore/ 30 Seconds To Mars/ You Me At Six/ The Gaslight Anthem/ Limp Bizkit/ A Day To Remember/ Sum 41/ Asking Alexandria/ Four Year Strong.

NME: The 1975/ Friendly Fires/ Of Monsters And Men/ Savages/ Lucy Rose.

FESTIVAL REPUBLIC: Alabama Shakes.

LOCK UP: Rancid.

DANCE: Hadouken!

1XTRA: Professor Green.

MAIN: Arctic Monkeys/ Queens Of The Stone Age/ Vampire Weekend/ Bastille/ Brand New/ Miles Kane/ City And Colour/ Tribes/ Drenge.

NME: Crystal Castles/ Don Broco/ Band Of Skulls/ Pure Love/ Crossfaith.

FESTIVAL REPUBLIC: Cage The Elephant.

LOCK UP: Flag.

DANCE: Metronomy.

1XTRA: DMX

MAIN: Metallica/ The Prodigy/ Weezer/ Rise Against/ Killswitch Engage/ The Hives/ Architects/ Pierce The Veil/ Hacktivist.

NME: Disclosure/ Kendrick Lamar/ The Weeknd/ The Strypes/ Chvrches.

FESTIVAL REPUBLIC: Frightened Rabbit.

ROCK STAGE: Young Guns.

DANCE: Hot Chip.

1XTRA: Roll Deep.

[devilman]

Wow, what a reaction. I wasn't trying to wind you up, although some how it appears I managed to.

Unfortunately, your rant presents three schools of thought towards those suffering from addiction which are indicative of an anti-progressive and (I hope) dying view. The first is, "the best thing for 'junkies' to do is stop wasting our time, money and oxygen and crawl under a rock somewhere to die". Of course, the grand irony of this view is that addicts are addicts because they don't like themselves and everyone else calling them 'scum' and telling them to "OD and die" only creates a circular pattern of hurt and addiction.

The second school of thought is that anyone with money should be able to buy their way out of addiction...again this is a complete fallacy, I can't be bothered to explain why but if it isn't obvious to you then it, rather unfortunately, never will be.

The third is trickier, and that is the behaviour of people suffering from addiction. Is the behaviour of the majority of addicts acceptable? Of course not. Is it better to: a) call the junkie c**ts and make them live on the streets together; b. lock them in jail; c) do everything you can to try and help them against the cause of their behaviour i.e. their addiction. Personally I fall down on c) but I understand the hard-line view of b., even if I fundamentally don't agree with it. I fail to see the point in a).

I'm not sure how this all fits in of your view of me trying to be 'politically correct' but I don't think trying to change views and opinions on addiction counts as being PC. My preference would be for more people to have a greater understanding of addiction and all that it brings, rather than spouting the rhetoric similar to your above rant. I hope I've given you a quick understanding and you'll look a bit more into it now but really that's your choice.

Apologies for the long post....back to Reading 2014!

Well if you are surprised by my reaction I hate to think what you would think if I was actually wound up. I have no time for junkies but classing Doherty as one of them and putting his behavioural problems down to that is wrong. He doesn't act like he does because he is a junkie, it's merely a symptom of the maggot infested dog turd of a personality that he has. I do actually think the world would be a much better place if all junkies were wiped out with some super strength strain of what ever shit they are on. Yes I realise that not all of them chose to take their path but try explaining that to the victims of their robberies, muggings, infections or mess. In Doherty's case however, I'd quite happily buy him a double dose myself just to make sure the fucker got enough.

[Muppetmark]

Id really like that. also love the retro poster

MAIN: Paramore/ 30 Seconds To Mars/ You Me At Six/ The Gaslight Anthem/ Limp Bizkit/ A Day To Remember/ Sum 41/ Asking Alexandria/ Four Year Strong.

NME: The 1975/ Friendly Fires/ Of Monsters And Men/ Savages/ Lucy Rose.

FESTIVAL REPUBLIC: Alabama Shakes.

LOCK UP: Rancid.

DANCE: Hadouken!

1XTRA: Professor Green.

MAIN: Arctic Monkeys/ Queens Of The Stone Age/ Vampire Weekend/ Bastille/ Brand New/ Miles Kane/ City And Colour/ Tribes/ Drenge.

NME: Crystal Castles/ Don Broco/ Band Of Skulls/ Pure Love/ Crossfaith.

FESTIVAL REPUBLIC: Cage The Elephant.

LOCK UP: Flag.

DANCE: Metronomy.

1XTRA: DMX

MAIN: Metallica/ The Prodigy/ Weezer/ Rise Against/ Killswitch Engage/ The Hives/ Architects/ Pierce The Veil/ Hacktivist.

NME: Disclosure/ Kendrick Lamar/ The Weeknd/ The Strypes/ Chvrches.

FESTIVAL REPUBLIC: Frightened Rabbit.

ROCK STAGE: Young Guns.

DANCE: Hot Chip.

1XTRA: Roll Deep.

i'd actually love that.

[Gucci Piggy]

Something like this for the NME?

The 1975

London Grammar

Crystal Castles

Rudimental

Disclosure

Kendrick Lamar

[Andre91]

I had no idea that London Grammar were so big? Until this past fortnight I'd never heard of them.

NME looks very realistic though, Will.

[dart]

Well if you are surprised by my reaction I hate to think what you would think if I was actually wound up. I have no time for junkies but classing Doherty as one of them and putting his behavioural problems down to that is wrong. He doesn't act like he does because he is a junkie, it's merely a symptom of the maggot infested dog turd of a personality that he has. I do actually think the world would be a much better place if all junkies were wiped out with some super strength strain of what ever shit they are on. Yes I realise that not all of them chose to take their path but try explaining that to the victims of their robberies, muggings, infections or mess. In Doherty's case however, I'd quite happily buy him a double dose myself just to make sure the fucker got enough.

you're a complete wrong'un mate that's vile

[dentalplan]

Something like this for the NME?

The 1975

London Grammar

Crystal Castles

Rudimental

Disclosure

Kendrick Lamar

I think Friendly Fires or Foster the People or something of that ilk instead of The 1975 and then one of The 1975 or London Grammar where Kendrick is, then that's pretty legit.

[Gucci Piggy]

I think Friendly Fires or Foster the People or something of that ilk instead of The 1975 and then one of The 1975 or London Grammar where Kendrick is, then that's pretty legit.

Ah I forgot about Foster the People. Was trying to think of someone to replace The 1975 as I don't think they're big enough really (a Mercury nomination would have helped). I've got Friendly Fires down as 3rd on main, although I think 4th would be more realistic. Struggling to think of acts to play third down with Enter Shikari and TDCC likely ruled out.

[devilman]

I had no idea that London Grammar were so big? Until this past fortnight I'd never heard of them.

Me neither. More listening to do.

you're a complete wrong'un mate that's vile

Seen to many good people suffer or not make it. I could show you what I think is vile but I think it would be too much for you.

[Com Truise]

Ah I forgot about Foster the People. Was trying to think of someone to replace The 1975 as I don't think they're big enough really (a Mercury nomination would have helped). I've got Friendly Fires down as 3rd on main, although I think 4th would be more realistic. Struggling to think of acts to play third down with Enter Shikari and TDCC likely ruled out.

Was wondering if they'd actually put themselves forward for the Mercury Prize. I never realised that you have to pay to enter - although I don't know how much. And I didn't realise they didn't allow any albums released on independent labels - mbv wasn't allowed to be entered

[Andre91]

Ah I forgot about Foster the People. Was trying to think of someone to replace The 1975 as I don't think they're big enough really (a Mercury nomination would have helped). I've got Friendly Fires down as 3rd on main, although I think 4th would be more realistic. Struggling to think of acts to play third down with Enter Shikari and TDCC likely ruled out.

You Me At Six, Vampire Weekend, Weezer (would be the dream), Bullet For My Valentine, The Maccabees? I think all of those would play 3rd down if they were to play

*edit* The Offspring too I guess, if they wanted them back.

Edited September 17, 2013 by Andre91

[Com Truise]

Bloc Party? How long are they meant to be out for??

[Gucci Piggy]

Was wondering if they'd actually put themselves forward for the Mercury Prize. I never realised that you have to pay to enter - although I don't know how much. And I didn't realise they didn't allow any albums released on independent labels - mbv wasn't allowed to be entered

£204 I think.

I read that about mbv, but Neil's not sure that's the case. Don't wanna go into the details cause I'll get confused and misquote him but he thinks they may still have been considered (I think).