Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

Spiringsteen


Guest Iain333

Recommended Posts

  • Admin
Who were these 100 people? When did you ask? I dont believe that you asked 100 random people who had seen Bruce play, and found that the majority all said he was bland.

Or did you just ask people who were near the back wearing "i hate springsteen" t-shirts and packing up their chairs to go back to their campsite after a "boring" song that Springsteen learnt and played especially for the glasto crowd on his way down to the festival.

(yet again. Why is that no Bruce fans seem to be able to read?) :lol:

They were 100-ish random people, who were asked randomly at various places around the site (wherever I happened to be at the time) over the next two days after Bruce had played.

As i've already posted, they were on the less rocky side of the site, and so from that it's a pretty fair assumption that had I asked the same thing on the more rocky side of the site, I'd have probably got very different answers.

No, none were wearing "I hate Springsteen" t-shirts. :D

The negative comments ranged from (essentially) "as bad as it gets" to "I didn't think it was very good". Of the people I asked just one thought him fantastic - but he happened to be a guy I'd spoken to on the Friday, when he'd banged on about how excited he was to be seeing him.

I've said the survey wasn't scientific; I've said that I wouldn't expect the results I got to be replicated thru the whole crowd. All I've taken from those results is that clearly there were thousands who didn't think him fantastic, and the polls done on this site bare that out.

But it's nice to be called a liar yet again, so thanks for that. You Bruce fans really are something special. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 912
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Seriously Neil. If this was anyone elses argument, you would of closed the thread by now.

Come on do the decent thing, and put us all out of our misery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
Seriously Neil. If this was anyone elses argument, you would of closed the thread by now.

Come on do the decent thing, and put us all out of our misery.

I doubt I would have. There's plenty of similar here (including plenty without a single post from me).

I'll continue to stand behind my opinion thanks. The more the morons call me a liar or say my opinion is worthless, the longer it goes on. They get to choose when it dies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I would say that there are plenty of people that have been called liars on here, or that their opinion isnt worth anything.

I think you should rise above, move on and get over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my one and only post here....I was with Neil when he did his 'unscientific' survey, yes the whole time. We may have asked 100 people we quite possibly asked more than 100 people. We asked every random person we happened to sit next to, stand next to at bars, in crowds, in loos....wherever, over the following days....we were genuinely interested in how Springsteen had 'gone down', as we were quite surprised in just how underwhelmed we were.

I remember one person saying he thought it was fantastic.....the others were very ambivalent.....we were genuinely surprised about this as we were led to believe it would be a 'defining Glastonbury moment' by Springsteen fans.....that's all really..... :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was actually really quite looking forward to him, and I'm familiar with his classics. Unfortunately, all he seemed to play were new songs I'd never heard before, so after 45 minutes or so I gave up and went over to Jarvis. I'm sure he played some classics as the night went on, but really, given the occasion (headlining at Glastonbury) I expected more. I just got bored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I skipped from page 4 to here but here's my take on it...

Some people expected it to be shit/tedious/bland/etc and discovered it was.

Some people expected it to be great/awesome/etc and discovered it was.

Some people expected it to be shit/tedious/bland/etc and discovered it was great/awesome/etc

Some people expected it to be great/awesome/etc and discovered it was a bit less than that

Now f**k off the lot of ye and go and do something less boring instead you pile of c**ts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was questioning you, i wasnt calling you a liar.

It would be nice if the person running the largest festival website could have a better grasp of english.

I just found it surprising. Everyone i met followed the pattern of, "i like him before, i loved his live set" or "i didnt like him before, i hated his live set".

Of course i also heard someone complaining that he didnt play secret garden, which depressed me. Theres not liking bruce springsteen, thats fair enough, but then theres thinking his best song is the drivel that is secret garden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I came on here to say that I wasn't a big fan, but I enjoyed it. But, seriously!

If Springsteen had come on and called his fans arseholes and morons, then pissed all over them, they would have probably thrown things for a while then walked off and never seen him again.

I hope the analogy isn't lost.

Lurked for years. But f**k...This is a man going down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't see any of his set so will form my opinion entirely on the one song of his showing on BBC2 RIGHT NOW. This opinion will then be set in stone and nobody (nobody!) will be allowed to disagree with it. The song is 'Born to Run', but what will the opinion be?

[Three minutes later]

He was ok. There were too many flags though.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't see any of his set so will form my opinion entirely on the one song of his showing on BBC2 RIGHT NOW. This opinion will then be set in stone and nobody (nobody!) will be allowed to disagree with it. The song is 'Born to Run', but what will the opinion be?

[Three minutes later]

He was ok. There were too many flags though.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say from his build up i was expecting more from his performance!

In a way i now wish i had left early but i was at the back of the front barrier area so it would of been pointless trying to get out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The overriding theme of this thread is that everyones opinions on music are equal.

BUT THEY ARE NOT.

Sorry, as much as you (Neil mainly) would like to think they are, they pretty much aren't.

Back when I was 13, U2 were my favourite band. Now I think they are boring. Why? Because I've spent time listening to more music, and realised that there are bands I like a lot better.

If I meet someone who says Coldplay and The Killers are their favourite bands. I don't think 'Fair enough, you have my tastes, I have mine', I think 'You need to listen to some more music that isn't top of the charts'.

I'm not as stupid as to think I have a 'good music taste' as there are millions of bands and types of music I haven't listened to, and many bands that I have listened to but haven't properly appreciated. In ten years time I'm sure I will look back and think I had crap music taste.

I expect everyone agrees with this theory even if they don't immediately think it. Neil, earlier in this thread you mentioned some granny who knew nothing about music and a westlife fan. Examples of people you obviously thought needed some musical education. How many people think they have a better music taste than their kids or their grandparents? A lot I expect.

I personally find Bruce Springsteen a bit boring and bland. Now either the people who like him haven't listened to enough non-bland music to see he's bland or they haven't listened to him well enough to realise he's bland or I haven't listened to Bruce Springsteen well enough to appreciate it properly. That's the way I see it.

There is always going individual/personal differences in music taste and a whole host of reasons why people dislike and like music, but I think that unless there is such thing as good music and bad music then it loses all artistic value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I meet someone who says Coldplay and The Killers are their favourite bands. I don't think 'Fair enough, you have my tastes, I have mine', I think 'You need to listen to some more music that isn't top of the charts'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. Not at all.

I used to think like this - gosh, these people think they like this music, but if only they listened to [insert 'better' music here], they'd become enlightened.

But then I realised - who the hell am I to tell someone whether they're enjoying something or not?

If someone tells me that the The Vengaboys' Party Album, makes them feel better than any other piece of music, who the hell am I; who the hell are you; to tell them 'no it doesn't'.

For some reason neither Neil nor I understand, Bruce Springsteen's songs - with their conventional chord progressions and their well-worn orchestration - speak to certain people. We can't tell those people it doesn't. Nor can they tell us we should keep listening until it speaks to us too.

Edited by pedmills
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myself and half of our group of 20 camped together, went to Arcadia early on to see Alex Metric, Freeland and Evil nine. This was one of the best things of the weekend and topped off a perfect Saturday (Although STK in the bladerunner tunnels that night was also incredible).

The other half of our group went to see springsteen and joined us at 1.30am with forlorn looks on their faces.

When asked "Was Springsteen good then?" they all replied "He was dull, went on for hours, and caused us to miss this. We're now so drained we can't even enjoy the rest of this properly"

I never like to say I told you so but I did. Several times. For the rest of the festival :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
The overriding theme of this thread is that everyones opinions on music are equal.

BUT THEY ARE NOT.

<snip>

I personally find Bruce Springsteen a bit boring and bland. Now either the people who like him haven't listened to enough non-bland music to see he's bland or they haven't listened to him well enough to realise he's bland or I haven't listened to Bruce Springsteen well enough to appreciate it properly. That's the way I see it.

nah. If things worked like that then there'd be no space for anyone to be able to say "I dislike this music" for any piece of competently composed music. And that's plainly bonkers.

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.

  • Latest Activity

    • Is anything said we need to be aware of?
    • Just listened to the new Madonna album, it would be a catastrophe if that isn't played on the pyramid!
    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...