Jump to content

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, circus92 said:

Why would Emily choose the Chillis when the The 1975 are available and gagging to do it?  Just wouldn’t make sense at all.  I know many of you are not fans of The 1975, but they are way more relevant than the Chillis at the moment, are British, have served their time with two previous appearances, and from my perspective anyway are miles better than the Chillis.

The 1975 are currently at their peak whereas the Chillis are well past it - surely that’s an easy call?
 

Friday - The 1975

Saturday - Macca

Sunday - Gaga

 

That would really make up for losing this years headliners for me anyway

Sure, but it's all down to scheduling. RHCP are actively being added to festivals around Glastonbury as replacements for Taylor/Kendrick. I don't think for one second Emily would be grinning ear to ear when signing the contract with RHCP, but it may well be a The Who/The Killers type deal.

1 minute ago, nikkic said:

I was thinking about this the other day.

Looking through past line ups and you see your Coldplays, Oasis, Radiohead, Muse et al all playing lower slots before they hit the big time.

When you look at the line ups from the past decade it’s hard to see which guitar bands are going to step up to that level.

 

Royal Blood were probably on course but that seems to have majorly fizzled. Same for the "F" word as well. There seems to be something preventing them for breaking through to the top level.

'75 are the one, really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

When Lost Prophets man gets out of prison then yes, by all means he is legally entitled to make music and attempt to distribute and play it publicly. Of course it’s highly unlikely that he would be ab

Why? Are you in Widnes protection?

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, jparx said:

 

I have no interest in seeing them in 2021. They're a band that have aged incredibly poorly. There's too much exciting stuff at Glastonbury to spend 2 hours watching a band 25 years past their peak.

My sentiments exactly - for my first Glastonbury that would be a hugely disappointing booking. 
 

I am 46 so should In theory be loving the suggestion of the Chillis, but have zero interest whatsoever, so can’t imagine how badly this would go down with people in their 20’s and 30’s.  They are just so not relevant anymore

Edited by circus92
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nikkic said:

I was thinking about this the other day.

Looking through past line ups and you see your Coldplays, Oasis, Radiohead, Muse et al all playing lower slots before they hit the big time.

When you look at the line ups from the past decade it’s hard to see which guitar bands are going to step up to that level.

 

There are lots of cultural reasons for this shift though that aren’t just ‘bands aren’t big enough’.

Festivals make the bands big enough. Nowadays there is less reason to boost bands up when there’s a guaranteed seller with ten albums worth of hits and stadium credentials waiting in the wings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nikkic said:

I was thinking about this the other day.

Looking through past line ups and you see your Coldplays, Oasis, Radiohead, Muse et al all playing lower slots before they hit the big time.

When you look at the line ups from the past decade it’s hard to see which guitar bands are going to step up to that level.

 

The 1975 are the only one, and will be about next year.  It’s gonna happen 🤞

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who watched the chilli peppers headline Reading in 2007, will know their capacity to utterly fuck it up. 14 years later? No thanks. Those socks aren’t staying on without some serious chemical enhancement. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see Glastonbury try and reserve one headline spot each year for an act that's not quite big enough and give them a leg up. I don't think it would damage them at all, and in the long run it creates more future headliners anyway.

Just purely hypothetically speaking, what if you had:

Lana Del Rey / Macca / Arctic Monkeys

Obviously LDR may not be around, but she's a good example for this I think. She's a headliner at most other festivals and she's got the material for a full headline set. She's unlikely to get any bigger than she currently is just by releasing more records. Sure she would have a smaller crowd than your typical headliner, but does it really matter? And I think in some cases you would be surprised how many people turn up for it. I wouldn't make it a really strict rule or anything, but perhaps a loose goal for each festival. If you went that way, you open yourself up to so many headliner options and you can still throw in the "safe" bets like RHCP without the festival coming across as stale. It just makes the whole thing more interesting and exciting. You could have a list like this for potential headliners:

LDR

Foals

The XX

Lorde 

Dua Lipa

Tama Impala

Bon Iver

Sure, none of those are headliners by the usual standards, but pretty much all of them have headlined festivals all across Europe at this point so they have the chops to put on a big show. I really don't think you're losing anything by going that way. I'm sure people would spit out their dummies for the first few years of doing it, but so what? It's still going to sell out, and it benefits both the festival and the the artists in the long run.

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dentalplan said:

There are lots of cultural reasons for this shift though that aren’t just ‘bands aren’t big enough’.

Festivals make the bands big enough. Nowadays there is less reason to boost bands up when there’s a guaranteed seller with ten albums worth of hits and stadium credentials waiting in the wings.

Cultural reasons:

Is this due to the (welcome? Discuss) death of tribalism in music?

Ok. I know I’m getting old an’ all, but music - esp. for those critics that ‘report’ on it - seems to be incrementally more difficult to  pigeonhole...into a ‘movement’ or ‘label’ or under a ‘banner’; it seems less linked to fashion too, more disparate.

If that is the case, I’m all for it, personally.

I was a teenager / early 20s during the 90s and Lad Culture could do one as far as I’m concerned.  

There’s nothing wrong at all with finding your niche, your ‘thing’ or kindred spirits, finding yourself, etc, but crossover, blending, mashing up of influences to create summat new, acceptance and love of something new, outside your musical and socially accepted genre - whilst not new in music - is what keeps it exciting (in my book) and seems more prevalent today. I know I’m not saying anything new btw (I’m an old fart now).

Dental is right. Festivals can make bands these days. But Glastonbury - Emily E especially - has totally gone out on a risky limb more than once.

There’s some ways to go but the G is all the more healthy for it. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jparx said:

I'd like to see Glastonbury try and reserve one headline spot each year for an act that's not quite big enough and give them a leg up. I don't think it would damage them at all, and in the long run it creates more future headliners anyway.

Just purely hypothetically speaking, what if you had:

Lana Del Rey / Macca / Arctic Monkeys

Obviously LDR may not be around, but she's a good example for this I think. She's a headliner at most other festivals and she's got the material for a full headline set. She's unlikely to get any bigger than she currently is just by releasing more records. Sure she would have a smaller crowd than your typical headliner, but does it really matter? And I think in some cases you would be surprised how many people turn up for it. I wouldn't make it a really strict rule or anything, but perhaps a loose goal for each festival. If you went that way, you open yourself up to so many headliner options and you can still throw in the "safe" bets like RHCP without the festival coming across as stale. It just makes the whole thing more interesting and exciting. You could have a list like this for potential headliners:

LDR

Foals

The XX

Lorde 

Dua Lipa

Tama Impala

Bon Iver

Sure, none of those are headliners by the usual standards, but pretty much all of them have headlined festivals all across Europe at this point so they have the chops to put on a big show. I really don't think you're losing anything by going that way. I'm sure people would spit out their dummies for the first few years of doing it, but so what? It's still going to sell out, and it benefits both the festival and the the artists in the long run.

Articulated far better than my mindfart of a post, jparx. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Woffy said:

Cultural reasons:

Is this due to the (welcome? Discuss) death of tribalism in music?

Ok. I know I’m getting old an’ all, but music - esp. for those critics that ‘report’ on it - seems to be incrementally more difficult to  pigeonhole...into a ‘movement’ or ‘label’ or under a ‘banner’; it seems less linked to fashion too, more disparate.

If that is the case, I’m all for it, personally.

I was a teenager / early 20s during the 90s and Lad Culture could do one as far as I’m concerned.  

There’s nothing wrong at all with finding your niche, your ‘thing’ or kindred spirits, finding yourself, etc, but crossover, blending, mashing up of influences to create summat new, acceptance and love of something new, outside your musical and socially accepted genre - whilst not new in music - is what keeps it exciting (in my book) and seems more prevalent today. I know I’m not saying anything new btw (I’m an old fart now).

Dental is right. Festivals can make bands these days. But Glastonbury - Emily E especially - has totally gone out on a risky limb more than once.

There’s some ways to go but the G is all the more healthy for it. 

I guess the death of tribalism has a part to play in pop artists being widely accepted at festivals now, which in turn limits opportunities (but only to a relatively small extent).

But theres a mixture as to why the 90’s and 00’s new headliners were barely touching arenas and then you have acts that can’t make it to that level nowadays playing bigger venues and selling albums at the same rate.

When you think now about how long festival headliners have been around, that seems barmy by older festival standards. But it’s probably because bands didn’t have to tour as much in the old days because CD’s used to actually make money and they would sell while the artists sat by the pool. So if it were like this in the 90’s then the likes of Pulp, Radiohead, The Prodigy - basically anyone but Blur and Oasis - would be kept down by repeat headline slots from Depeche Mode, New Order and house band U2.

Edited by dentalplan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bands just aren’t as popular with younger people these days so you won’t get the same push behind a group of lads with guitars as say Arctic Monkeys enjoyed (and they were probably the last real band to enjoy that sort of phenomenal rise).

I’d say there were a few reasons around this:

The rise of high quality pop music in the last decade.

A shift in interest towards individuals and big personalities than groups - Internet culture and fandom have evolved to worship the likes of Swift, Gaga, the K-Pop bands, etc.

The way music is consumed and distributed has changed hugely - Spotify et al has made music a lot more disposable and the quick, instant gratification of certain genres is easier than getting into a band.

There’s a generation raised in reality TV who have watched the X Factor, etc who think that pop singing is the only medium.

Bands just aren’t that cool anymore.

(I sound like a proper old fart writing all this)

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jparx said:

I'd like to see Glastonbury try and reserve one headline spot each year for an act that's not quite big enough and give them a leg up. I don't think it would damage them at all, and in the long run it creates more future headliners anyway.

Just purely hypothetically speaking, what if you had:

Lana Del Rey / Macca / Arctic Monkeys

Obviously LDR may not be around, but she's a good example for this I think. She's a headliner at most other festivals and she's got the material for a full headline set. She's unlikely to get any bigger than she currently is just by releasing more records. Sure she would have a smaller crowd than your typical headliner, but does it really matter? And I think in some cases you would be surprised how many people turn up for it. I wouldn't make it a really strict rule or anything, but perhaps a loose goal for each festival. If you went that way, you open yourself up to so many headliner options and you can still throw in the "safe" bets like RHCP without the festival coming across as stale. It just makes the whole thing more interesting and exciting. You could have a list like this for potential headliners:

LDR

Foals

The XX

Lorde 

Dua Lipa

Tama Impala

Bon Iver

Sure, none of those are headliners by the usual standards, but pretty much all of them have headlined festivals all across Europe at this point so they have the chops to put on a big show. I really don't think you're losing anything by going that way. I'm sure people would spit out their dummies for the first few years of doing it, but so what? It's still going to sell out, and it benefits both the festival and the the artists in the long run.

I get the idea, but ultimately I think I disagree. I think headliners should be just that - they are the headline acts. The biggest acts of the festival. If you have a Pyramid headliner on par with say an OS headliner, then you sorta lose the purpose of the Pyramid headliner slot. 

Also, how are acts going to feel about obviously being the 'leg-up' headliner. I mean, maybe i'm wrong here, but it's not going to have quite the same appeal is it?

There are plenty of stages for all sorts of acts at Glastonbury, and I think a major appeal of it is that they are unique. If you start blurring the lines for what makes a headliner of each stage it's going to detract from the uniqueness of it. 

I dunno, might be chatting out my bum here. Coffee gone to my head.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Freddyflintstonree said:

I get the idea, but ultimately I think I disagree. I think headliners should be just that - they are the headline acts. The biggest acts of the festival. If you have a Pyramid headliner on par with say an OS headliner, then you sorta lose the purpose of the Pyramid headliner slot. 

Also, how are acts going to feel about obviously being the 'leg-up' headliner. I mean, maybe i'm wrong here, but it's not going to have quite the same appeal is it?

There are plenty of stages for all sorts of acts at Glastonbury, and I think a major appeal of it is that they are unique. If you start blurring the lines for what makes a headliner of each stage it's going to detract from the uniqueness of it. 

I dunno, might be chatting out my bum here. Coffee gone to my head.

I don’t think he’s saying that those acts would essentially be competition winners, just that the festival should be more liberal with its choice of headliners. Can’t see how people would disagree with that.

We don’t know what headliners are until we see them - Stormzy wasn’t a headliner until he got the gig. Once upon a time, neither were Radiohead. Can’t be protective over what a headliner is if the festival is ultimately the arbiter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

I don’t think he’s saying that those acts would essentially be competition winners, just that the festival should be more liberal with its choice of headliners. Can’t see how people would disagree with that.

We don’t know what headliners are until we see them - Stormzy wasn’t a headliner until he got the gig. Once upon a time, neither were Radiohead. Can’t be protective over what a headliner is if the festival is ultimately the arbiter.

Fair point, though I think the suggestion was for there to be one act designated as a leg-up headliner. I'm all for a broader choice of headliners, but I think they must be roughly on par with each other. If that means shifting what fundamentally constitutes a Pyramid headliner then okay, that may be a good idea. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cutting down on my posting, but couldn’t resist logging back in.

All I’m going to say is I’m starting to get a little bit worried about it being George Ezra now. Especially if Taylor, Kendrick, and Billie are not around (following that NOS info).

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Matt42 said:

Cutting down on my posting, but couldn’t resist logging back in.

All I’m going to say is I’m starting to get a little bit worried about it being George Ezra now. Especially if Taylor, Kendrick, and Billie are not around (following that NOS info).

Welcome back pal.

Hope you’re OK. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, Matt42 said:

Cutting down on my posting, but couldn’t resist logging back in.

All I’m going to say is I’m starting to get a little bit worried about it being George Ezra now. Especially if Taylor, Kendrick, and Billie are not around (following that NOS info).

I'm glad you came back :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Cutting down on my posting, but couldn’t resist logging back in.

All I’m going to say is I’m starting to get a little bit worried about it being George Ezra now. Especially if Taylor, Kendrick, and Billie are not around (following that NOS info).

THREE DAYS!!!!

Told y’all.

Nice to have you back Matthew.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - just wanna move on with it.

I felt like Ezra was at the back of the queue because there were a lot of names in front of him. 
 

If Kendrick, Taylor, Billie, AM aren’t showing any signs of being on the table at all it looks to me like he’s not as far down in priority as I initially thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, jparx said:

I'd like to see Glastonbury try and reserve one headline spot each year for an act that's not quite big enough and give them a leg up. I don't think it would damage them at all, and in the long run it creates more future headliners anyway.

Just purely hypothetically speaking, what if you had:

Lana Del Rey / Macca / Arctic Monkeys

Obviously LDR may not be around, but she's a good example for this I think. She's a headliner at most other festivals and she's got the material for a full headline set. She's unlikely to get any bigger than she currently is just by releasing more records. Sure she would have a smaller crowd than your typical headliner, but does it really matter? And I think in some cases you would be surprised how many people turn up for it. I wouldn't make it a really strict rule or anything, but perhaps a loose goal for each festival. If you went that way, you open yourself up to so many headliner options and you can still throw in the "safe" bets like RHCP without the festival coming across as stale. It just makes the whole thing more interesting and exciting. You could have a list like this for potential headliners:

LDR

Foals

The XX

Lorde 

Dua Lipa

Tama Impala

Bon Iver

Sure, none of those are headliners by the usual standards, but pretty much all of them have headlined festivals all across Europe at this point so they have the chops to put on a big show. I really don't think you're losing anything by going that way. I'm sure people would spit out their dummies for the first few years of doing it, but so what? It's still going to sell out, and it benefits both the festival and the the artists in the long run.

Gets a vote from me. 

I’d much rather the festival take a punt (if you can even call it that) than have Muse clogging things up again. 
 

Plus, we may get to the point where they have no choice.


There are very few genuine mega stars of the old guard who haven’t done it yet, so you have to begin to look elsewhere. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Cutting down on my posting, but couldn’t resist logging back in.

All I’m going to say is I’m starting to get a little bit worried about it being George Ezra now. Especially if Taylor, Kendrick, and Billie are not around (following that NOS info).

What was the NOS info?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FloorFiller said:

What was the NOS info?

Didn’t that guy say that NOS are still looking for a headliner and they’ve already replaced Swift with Chili’s? Sounds to me like they have lost Billie too.

It looks to me like the managers of the AAA american pop/rap stars (for the most) are not letting them commit to festival headline tours because there’s a chance they might not go ahead in 2021? I don’t know much but is it easier to take the financial hit if the reschedule is your own show?

Link to post
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
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...