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 😎

Headliners 2023


Crazyfool01

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, addicted2noise said:

Eminem should've headlined 20 years ago but there was still a bit of a weird stigma against hip-hop then I think. Him headlining now would feel like a bit of a step back from Kendrick last year but it would definitely be popular.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-63490691  Or maybe closer to 2010 based on this, though using that I'd say Arctic Monkeys peaked nearly 20 years ago too (and they have headlined twice).  Grasping for objective measures and definitely I don't think a headliner should be based on one song.

Is a new album justification for AM?  If so Eminem's had three albums in the last 5 years all of which have been at the top of the charts (again, looking for something objective, but absolutely doesn't stop someone being shit).  I've not listened to any of them, but if he were a headliner I'd definitely give them a listen.

Re a step backwards from Kendrick, that's just bollocks.  Is KL the peak of a genre and we can't have anything similar until a new peak comes along?  After Travis in 2000 why did Coldplay happen the festival after that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can say is thank christ the people booking for the festival have a modicum of taste.

That is why the Spice Girls, Take That, Westlife, RHCP and Britney Spears amongst others, have never been anywhere close to the Pyramid.

 

And hopefully that means Eminem wouldn't be anywhere near either.

 

 

 

Edited by ericlered
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, p.pete said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-63490691  Or maybe closer to 2010 based on this, though using that I'd say Arctic Monkeys peaked nearly 20 years ago too (and they have headlined twice).  Grasping for objective measures and definitely I don't think a headliner should be based on one song.

Is a new album justification for AM?  If so Eminem's had three albums in the last 5 years all of which have been at the top of the charts (again, looking for something objective, but absolutely doesn't stop someone being shit).  I've not listened to any of them, but if he were a headliner I'd definitely give them a listen.

Re a step backwards from Kendrick, that's just bollocks.  Is KL the peak of a genre and we can't have anything similar until a new peak comes along?  After Travis in 2000 why did Coldplay happen the festival after that?

Lets be honest big factors fror Glasto are .... Are they touring at the moment? And will they do it for a lot less money than other festivals? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Alvoram said:

That's a tough one for multiple reasons! 

I would say in the UK, at the time, yes, Spice Girls had an insane amount of success, popularity, and also made a huge cultural impact. But it was short lived. 

Globally and more long term, it's much harder to call. On the surface, beyonce has the higher number of hits globally, indicating more success. But Spice Girls had the kind of cultural impact around the world that some might say ultimately paved the way for Destiny's Child and thus Beyonce... 

Really is a tough one, but I'm going to stick to my original criteria, and say that Beyonce is bigger, due to her sheer number of No 1 hit albums and singles around the world, spanning multiple decades. 

That was a very good question. 

 

It's also tricky as cultural impact was very different in the 90s. Unless you were a posho with Sky it was 5 channels and no internet. Acts like The Spice Girls and Take That were very much inescapable. If you wanted music you hadn't bought, it was the radio and they'd be on there. They'd be on TV as well. And as mentioned, all over the newspapers.

The flip side of this is that live music was much smaller, and gigs and festivals far less popular. All live events were less popular to be fair. The Spice Girls would be far less well known and popular if they returned now, but would sell far more tickets than they ever did in the 90s. It's exactly what happened with Take That.

(I remember in the 90s, going to see Bill Bailey at Wolverhampton Civic. The guy had his own TV show on Channel 4 at that point. We were waiting around for our lift home when he and his single roadie came out carrying his stuff and we got our tickets signed. These days he has a 12 person crew and a huge tour bus and sells out arenas. Still can't get his own TV show.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, addicted2noise said:

Eminem should've headlined 20 years ago but there was still a bit of a weird stigma against hip-hop then I think. Him headlining now would feel like a bit of a step back from Kendrick last year but it would definitely be popular.

There's a bit of a myth about no hiphop at Glastonbury, created by Noel Gallagher.

Lets have a look:

1994 Beastie Boys

2000 Cypress Hill

So no stigma 20+ years ago and I guess if I could be bothered digging deeper there would be more on smaller stages.

Obviously there's been more since:

2008 Jay Z

2010 Snoop

2013 Public Enemy

2015 Kayne West

2017 Stormzy

2019 Stormzy

2022 Kendrick

Wu Tang Clan, Jurassic 5, De La Soul and others in various years

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Havors said:

Lets be honest big factors fror Glasto are .... Are they touring at the moment? And will they do it for a lot less money than other festivals? 

He's not at the moment, but also he's not not touring next Summer - a lot of tours just getting announced at the moment.  Good question whether he'd do it for less money - I know bugger all about the guy.  Seems like Glastonbury can have an allure for some people, especially when they've done lots of other things already with their career.

Guns n Roses tour dates stop in December, so they are currently touring (and are not not touring next Summer).  Does that make them more or less likely?  Are they more or less likely to drop their fees?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

There's a bit of a myth about no hiphop at Glastonbury, created by Noel Gallagher.

Lets have a look:

1994 Beastie Boys

2000 Cypress Hill

So no stigma 20+ years ago and I guess if I could be bothered digging deeper there would be more on smaller stages.

Obviously there's been more since:

2008 Jay Z

2010 Snoop

2013 Public Enemy

2015 Kayne West

2017 Stormzy

2019 Stormzy

2022 Kendrick

Wu Tang Clan, Jurassic 5, De La Soul and others in various years

 

94 also has RATM and Tool which is insane by today's standards 

Id be surprised if they did another hip hop act so soon after having Kendrick and Stormzy. Stormzy from what I've seen was well received despite being a marmite act. Kanye and Kendrick didn't get as much buzz afterwards 

I think we are equally likely to have a hard rock headliner like GNR if they want to stay diverse and cater for everyone 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, p.pete said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-63490691  Or maybe closer to 2010 based on this, though using that I'd say Arctic Monkeys peaked nearly 20 years ago too (and they have headlined twice).  Grasping for objective measures and definitely I don't think a headliner should be based on one song.

Is a new album justification for AM?  If so Eminem's had three albums in the last 5 years all of which have been at the top of the charts (again, looking for something objective, but absolutely doesn't stop someone being shit).  I've not listened to any of them, but if he were a headliner I'd definitely give them a listen.

Re a step backwards from Kendrick, that's just bollocks.  Is KL the peak of a genre and we can't have anything similar until a new peak comes along?  After Travis in 2000 why did Coldplay happen the festival after that?

AM peaked with AM, less than 10 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, ericlered said:

All I can say is thank christ the people booking for the festival have a modicum of taste.

That is why the Spice Girls, Take That, Westlife, RHCP and Britney Spears amongst others, have never been anywhere close to the Pyramid.

 

And hopefully that means Eminem wouldn't be anywhere near either.

 

 

 

It is ridiculous to put Britney Spears and RHCP in the same bracket as Spice Girls and Take That.

Britney could absolutely have headlined and if her mental health was better could still do.

RHCP we’re actually booked to headline pyramid, so you’re hilariously wrong on that one. They’d also have been back if they hadn’t of pissed off Michael.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MaxPower said:

It is ridiculous to put Britney Spears and RHCP in the same bracket as Spice Girls and Take That.

Britney could absolutely have headlined and if her mental health was better could still do.

RHCP we’re actually booked to headline pyramid, so you’re hilariously wrong on that one. They’d also have been back if they hadn’t of pissed off Michael.

I know they the RHCP story. Thank god they pulled out, thus ruining their chances forever more.

Edited by ericlered
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Festival Liam said:

All the arguments back and forth about Eminem, and nobody ever seems to counter the "he's shit live" point. Is that just universally agreed upon?

I say it as a fan, but the three times I've seen him "live" (2004, 2010, 2013) have been underwhelming at best. But not every artist/genre translates to the live stage. I wouldn't be giving him a fourth chance, not at Glastonbury, where time is precious

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Pr0paneNightm4re said:

What conclusion did we come to about Silk Sonic? Their setlist contains Bruno Mars and Anderson Paak solo stuff to help carry it.

I know the name isn’t a household name as much as Bruno Mars by himself but could be a great wildcard headliner 

Ive been banging this drum for a while. The Pyramid going off to Uptown Funk would be a thing. 

I do believe...that this...is a...

BANGER.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Pr0paneNightm4re said:

What conclusion did we come to about Silk Sonic? Their setlist contains Bruno Mars and Anderson Paak solo stuff to help carry it.

I know the name isn’t a household name as much as Bruno Mars by himself but could be a great wildcard headliner 

I need Silk Sonic next year, I'll be pissed if they don't tour.

 

I don't want Bruno or Anderson solo sets. Keep getting fed up of them announcing the Vegas shows

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...