Jump to content

Headliners 2016


thewayiam

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 15.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 minute ago, Will-2609 said:

Please stop saying "of all time ever". "Of all time" and "ever" both mean the same thing.

And she won't be looked back on the same as the Stones, regardless of how big she is. The Stones are one of most influential, critically acclaimed bands of all time; Adele is nothing of the sort.

How is Adele not influential?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Will-2609 said:

Show me the generations of artists influenced by Adele and I'll admit she's one of the most influential artists of all time.

You cannot compare Adele and artists like the Stones on whether they are or are not influential as only time will tell that.

Adele is, like it or not, currently probably the biggest/best selling act on the planet - and it is highly likely she will have a massive influence on many future artists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mezhyp1 said:

Who has she influenced? I couldn't argue against her being extremely talented, as much as I'm not into that kind of music, but she's definitely not influential yet

I don't think she'll ever be 'influential'. There's nothing new about anything she's doing to wield influence.

Whether or not she'll continue to be well regarded is another thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mattyc1965 said:

You cannot compare Adele and artists like the Stones on whether they are or are not influential as only time will tell that.

Adele is, like it or not, currently probably the biggest/best selling act on the planet - and it is highly likely she will have a massive influence on many future artists.

I know she is, and even if she does influence many future artists, at her time of headlining she won't be a hugely influential artist, so it won't be as much of an occasion at the Stones.

People may look back and say "Wow I can't believe they got Adele!' once she's influenced loads of artists in a few decades time, but the set itself wouldn't be looked back on as being as seminal as the Stones, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Well, that defo confirms what I'd been hearing, that it was what they were trying to do... it's now all down to whether Adele is willing to do it.

Hmmmm ... could this be an agent keeping a booking request hanging, because for all the while the option is still open there's still a chance of him getting a payday? It wouldn't be the first time if it was.

I'm still of the opinion that she's more likely to do it than not.

So if Emily was been truthful muse and coldplay have signed and Adele has verbally agreed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mattyc1965 said:

You cannot compare Adele and artists like the Stones on whether they are or are not influential as only time will tell that.

Adele is, like it or not, currently probably the biggest/best selling act on the planet - and it is highly likely she will have a massive influence on many future artists.

 

You're right. She will influence a whole generation of X-factor contestants.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LeeGalvin said:

I'm not convinced about Muse though. The way she's talking the headliners up, it'll have to be something a bit more special. Surely.

when have you ever heard a festival boss say "we've got some OK headliners plus one really great one this year"? :P

What you've got to remember is that all headliners (and bands) are fantastic, wonderful and lovely.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, fatyeti24 said:

of course Adele is influential.  all the record companies have tried to copy her success.  

without her there would be no Emeli Sande, no Sam Smith and no, er, Duffy.  and quite frankly that's not a world i'd want to live in.

Agreed on the first two but not Duffy. She was part of the parade of big voiced jazzy soul divas record companies wheeled out to cash in on Amy Winehouse's success and decline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, LeeGalvin said:

That's depressing.

And she's released fewer albums, so has a stronger batting average 

38 minutes ago, maelzoid said:

Those figures are quite suspicious when compared to total sales of each album...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rihanna_discography

Like that time when people were claiming Jacko had sold over a billion records, total album sales for an artist are often very loose estimates.

I obviously can't vouch for the figures, but the same caveats probably also apply to Queen's and the Stones' sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Winslow Leach said:

Agreed on the first two but not Duffy. She was part of the parade of big voiced jazzy soul divas record companies wheeled out to cash in on Amy Winehouse's success and decline.

ah, of course you're quite right.  still, the world is a darker place without her, i'm sure we all agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...