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

  • Replies 912
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

For what it's worth I missed him at Glastonbury, and saw Tindersticks, Stanton Warriors, Stereo MCs and a bit of Baaba Maal whilst he was on. It was a great night.

I watched the BBC coverage of Bruce when I got home, and quite enjoyed it in my armchair on a quiet night in. Would have hated it with 80000 others in the Pyramid, and would have been bored. I didn't feel the need to watch 5 minutes to decide this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is my knowledge of Springsteen just that five minues, or do I have thirty+ years exposure to his blandness, and so know enough to know it would be more of the same? ;)

I went to see him on the basis that he's a claimed fantastic performer, and because of that I'd hoped that live there was more to him than there is on record. Five minutes was plenty for me to realise that there isn't.

(And, a few online listen backs of parts I didn't see have further confirmed this for me).

Not everyone likes Bruce. Get used to it. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what is ignorant is people suggesting that I said the whole set was boring, rather than what I actually said. :)

But the fact remains: I'd have been bored out of my skull if I'd stayed. I don't need to sit thru the whole set of an act I find extremely bland to realise that.

But hey, I bet you buy tickets all of the time to go see acts you detest, and stay till the very last note every single time. ;):lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
nah, I actually go for the 1st song, maybe just half of it and then make my mind up from that. No need to watch the rest of it I might get bored. Its alwasy pretty obvious what the encore will be like after watching the opening song.

If you consider an act to be shite, then you're out of there. :)

Do grow up eh? Or would you like your wish granted? I'll buy those Nolan tickets for you if you like. ;):lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is my knowledge of Springsteen just that five minues, or do I have thirty+ years exposure to his blandness, and so know enough to know it would be more of the same? :O

I went to see him on the basis that he's a claimed fantastic performer, and because of that I'd hoped that live there was more to him than there is on record. Five minutes was plenty for me to realise that there isn't.

(And, a few online listen backs of parts I didn't see have further confirmed this for me).

Not everyone likes Bruce. Get used to it. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im afraid mate that that statement has already been proved to be bollox - 3 times!! :D

but im glad to see youve at least accepted that one of the very best headliners glasto has ever seen will be there next year :O

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tuggsy how can a man with such good taste be such a die hard 'Head fan?

Now if it was Talk Talk you were eulogising... then we wouldnt have an issue. But Radiohead? Its like sticking up for Take That.

BTW i think Take That will play next year. Just a hunch.

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...