Kylie

[eFestivals]

.....maybe even AC/DC.

the chances seem to get further and further away.

[Martin Ashford]

I went to see her on her last tour and I thoroughly enjoyed it but Taylor Swift is my main target. Kylie could well get an Other headline slot like the Pet Shop Boys did a fee years ago

[Gnomicide]

God I hate the Petshop Boys.

[FloorFiller]

I went to see her on her last tour and I thoroughly enjoyed it but Taylor Swift is my main target. Kylie could well get an Other headline slot like the Pet Shop Boys did a fee years ago

nah she's Pyramid bait if i've ever seen it. what with Taylor looking likely i'd say that's Kylie out of the running - i can't see both of them being there in prominent Pyramid positions (although would very much be up for it)

[DJL]

I have to say I don't get this whole indifference to the role the people performing the music had in creating it. Are you seriously saying that when you see Neil Young, or David Bowie, or Kate Bush or Damon Albarn singing the words they wrote to the music they composed is means nothing to you?

We can all point to performers such as Elvis Presley or Johnny Cash as examples of people who didn't write their songs,

but they are worth watching because were really that good and despite the fact that they didn't write the songs. And at their best, they managed to inhabit the songs they sang and make it their own. So many of Kylie's songs could easily have been sung by someone else with much the same result.

When you watch a good artist performing you get the feeling that you're experiencing something special, something singular. Does that really not mean anything to you? You might as well watch X-Fucking-Factor then. Some of the songs on there are pretty good apparently.

Sure, it's not the be all and end all, but it is a factor. It does matter. When you hear John Lennon sing 'Jealous Guy' and you know the background to the song, it means so much more than when an arsehole like Bryan Ferry does a karaoke version. He wrote those words, he lived those words.

Look, I saw The Backbeat Beatles in 2005 in the Acoustic Tent. I enjoyed it very much, but the previous year, I saw Paul

McCartney who in many ways gave poorer renditions of some Beatles classics. But the fact that it was Paul McCartney,

the composer up there and the fact that I knew it was the guy who wrote the songs gave the experience something extra. It's like seeing an original painting rather than a print. I know a lot of bullshit is spouted in the name of 'authenticity',

but it is a real thing. It does matter, and to me it makes a performance more vital.

As for Kylie headlining? Whatever, it's a big site. I'll be elsewhere.

I don't think i've ever agreed with a post more.

[ICGenie]

I have to say I don't get this whole indifference to the role the people performing the music had in creating it. Are you seriously saying that when you see Neil Young, or David Bowie, or Kate Bush or Damon Albarn singing the words they wrote to the music they composed is means nothing to you?

Nope, genuinely doesn't bother me. A good song is a good song, a good vocal is a good vocal and a good performance is a good performance. Whether all are done by the same person is irrelevant.

It's not just a case of there being "one or two" exceptions of people who are mysteriously allowed to have not written their own material. There's hundreds of them. And that's before we get into classical music - would you refuse to listen to Aida because Verdi's not singing it? Of course not, it's an absurd idea.

There are some really amazing songwriters who don't want to sing. Should they be banned from writing songs on the basis that other people shouldn't be singing them? Of course not, that would be ridiculous.

So why do we persist in the "singer/songwriter" myth?

[russycarps]

Nope, genuinely doesn't bother me. A good song is a good song, a good vocal is a good vocal and a good performance is a good performance. Whether all are done by the same person is irrelevant.

It's not just a case of there being "one or two" exceptions of people who are mysteriously allowed to have not written their own material. There's hundreds of them. And that's before we get into classical music - would you refuse to listen to Aida because Verdi's not singing it? Of course not, it's an absurd idea.

There are some really amazing songwriters who don't want to sing. Should they be banned from writing songs on the basis that other people shouldn't be singing them? Of course not, that would be ridiculous.

So why do we persist in the "singer/songwriter" myth?

So you're happy to have xfactor winners headlining?

Cool.

[CaledonianGonzo]

That's not what he's saying, though, is it?

I'm prepared to say that there are some instances where it makes a difference, but in the entire history of recorded sound they're in the minority by far, and especially irrelevant in this time where we stream everything.

The context of a song is interesting, sure, but sometimes that's all it is. It's....gossip, really.

[russycarps]

That's not what he's saying, though, is it?

I'm prepared to say that there are some instances where it makes a difference, but in the entire history of recorded sound they're in the minority by far, and especially irrelevant in this time where we stream everything.

The context of a song is interesting, sure, but sometimes that's all it is. It's....gossip, really.

He's saying it's all about the technical performance, just like classical and opera.

So why not a gifted xfactor winner?

I feel sorry for people who don't appreciate where the music has come from and the emotions behind it, but it's not my problem.

Luckily the festival organisers agree with me, hence why we don't have covers bands in prominent positions on the line up.

[Wooderson]

Whether it's Sinatra or Aretha - best male and female vocalists ever... or Stevie weeping whilst trying to get the melody to "Human Nature" through a harmonica or Shakey maniacally bellowing out the refrain to "A Day In The Life" or Pav's "Nessun Dorma" or fucking "Let it Go"... it's the singer not the song baby.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Because X Factor turns out a certain type of talent and aren't representative of any sort of prowess beyond a certain sanded down, mainstream definition.

No need to feel sorry for me, bud. I'm enjoying a whole heap of music that you've dismissed because it's not performed by the people that wrote it. At the minute it's Etta James' Tell Mama album. You should check it out.

[Wooderson]

Personally I feel sorry for anyone who puts their enjoyment of music through any filter, be that the credits in the liner notes or otherwise. Not for me fanks.

[russycarps]

Because X Factor turns out a certain type of talent and aren't representative of any sort of prowess beyond a certain sanded down, mainstream definition.

Congratulations, you've just described Kylie

[CaledonianGonzo]

Congratulations, you've just described Kylie

Beyond liking a couple of her singles, I'm no fan of Kylie and think that she'd be an especially weak headliner. For the most part her "iconic status is undeserved and I actually don't think she'd be a technically competent enough singer to get anywhere in X Factor.

But as a show before the headliner, I'd have no beef with it. It'd probably be fun.

[russycarps]

Beyond liking a couple of her singles, I'm no fan of Kylie and think that she'd be an especially weak headliner. For the most part her "iconic status is undeserved and I actually don't think she'd be a technically competent enough singer to get anywhere in X Factor.

But as a show before the headliner, I'd have no beef with it. It'd probably be fun.

And that's the sort of people who don't write their own songs I have a problem with.

You had better be fucking good if you aren't writing your own stuff, as the likes of cash/Elvis etc were. Of course I enjoy listening to them

The likes of Kylie are not.

But if you aren't writing AND performing, you'll never be the very best in my mind. I need the full package

[CaledonianGonzo]

Personally I feel sorry for anyone who puts their enjoyment of music through any filter, be that the credits in the liner notes or otherwise. Not for me fanks.

Nine out of ten times, how would you even know? It's something that you need to have researched. I agree that seeing, say, a Beatle performing one of their own songs is special, but I'm aware that I'm being manipulated less by the quality of the performance than by the surrounding soap opera. It's a thing that exists alongside the music, but it isn't intrinsic to it.

[FuzzyDunlop]

Beyond liking a couple of her singles, I'm no fan of Kylie and think that she'd be an especially weak headliner. For the most part her "iconic status is undeserved and I actually don't think she'd be a technically competent enough singer to get anywhere in X Factor.

But as a show before the headliner, I'd have no beef with it. It'd probably be fun.

This. I'm not a fan of pop music, but as pop music goes, I find Kylie's tunes ok.

The Chemical Brothers remix of Slow would sound fantastic on the Pyramid.

Id never pay to see her, she is certainly no headliner, but I'd happily watch her 2nd or 3rd down the bill if nothing else catches my eye at the time. Not like thinking "shit I'm standing through the 1975".

#teamkylie.......? Er no, that's too far.

Edited January 28, 2015 by FuzzyDunlop

[CaledonianGonzo]

I need the full package

[DJL]

. it's the singer not the song baby.

Sometimes it is. Sometimes it's the song not the singer (the macca example). Ideally though (for me anyway) it's both.

[Wooderson]

Sometimes it is. Sometimes it's the song not the singer (the macca example). Ideally though (for me anyway) it's both.

Why ideally? If it makes you feel good why the need to have that bolstered by a songwriting credit?

[Wooderson]

I won't even open the can of worms that is opera/classical on your collective asses.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Wooderson

[CaledonianGonzo]

Or forms of music that eschew "songs" entirely. ...

[Guest]

[DJL]

I'm enjoying a whole heap of music that you've dismissed because it's not performed by the people that wrote it..

That's just it - I don't think most on here would dismiss music because it's not written by the performer... but it is part of what i'm considering when i list to music for the reasons people have stated.

When i see an act i want to be entertained but i also see want to see something i couldn't ever do myself - i want to be impressed, i want to be in awe. I can sing, play the guitar and dj fairly (in)competently (all of which can be learned by many fairly easily) but i can't write songs so that is one of the things that impresses me most.

I wouldn't write an artist off that didn't write music but they probably need to be bloody good at whatever else they do... as those legends others have listed here generally are.

[FuzzyDunlop]

Music means different things to different people.

To me every song is different. Would people want to hear tears in heaven sang by clapton or by some talent show "star"?

But when I hear Johnny Cash or Elvis, I think about performance - not who wrote it.

In saying that, lots of covers bands are excellent, but I'd rather watch the original acts, even if their performance is not technically as "good".

Edited January 28, 2015 by FuzzyDunlop