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

36 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

You can take it as read that people's opinions are just that.  People don't need to conclude every single post with "imho"

No very true, 'imo' would do... 😉

But in all seriousness, you're right, you could take it as read, but there are people out there who genuinely think their opinions are a matter of fact. Lazy writing makes it very difficult to tell the two apart. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, EamerRed said:

Who was the guy obsessed with Bad Bunny? I've set you up here buddy 🤣.

Disclaimer: I'd never even heard of Bad Bunny until this thread!

Not sure obsessed is the word, more completely wrong about Bad Bunny's size in the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alvoram said:

I think there's a way of doing it that is more palatable though..

1) "xxx is absolute garbage"

2) "I'm not into xxx"

You see the difference. It's subjective, and the first example is presented as objective. That's what pisses people off. It never bothers me anymore to be fair, I just think it makes that person look like a complete idiot. Live and let live. 

 

 

Totally agree with this. I think it gets a bit unnecessary at times, especially when labels get attached. Like if you’re into (indie band) you’re a dark fruits moron, or (cool pop act) a stupid kid etc. Sometimes the line gets crossed where it’s not criticising the act that’s happening, it’s mocking the people who like that act and their subjective taste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s not being into a band and then calling them shit, when quite clearly, they are not. Again I’ll take AM as an example, the biggest UK rock band of the last 10/20 years, up there with Coldplay. Sell out stadiums every time they tour and despite moving away from their bread and butter sound are still hitting the heights in the charts.
If you like guitar music and you’re still calling them shit, you either don’t know what you’re talking about, you’re being a snob or you’re trolling. 
Music is subjective but you can respect an act for what they’ve done in their genre.

Edited by Justcalledtosay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So looking at what we have rumoured and who is popping up around glastonbury - looks like we have a good idea of at least a handful of bigger names.

Arctic Monkeys, Guns N’ Roses, Elton John, Lizzo, Queens of the Stone Age, The Prodigy, Sam Smith, Fred Again, Rosalia some safe names to predict.

No sign of yet but I think there’s a strong chance of Doja, Lana, Lil Nas X being thrown in if they are around. Reckon they may bring in a special name like BLACKPINK to generate some headlines.

I think what’s missing is a big modern hip hop name… but I guess Doja could be that. Also imagine Aitch, Central Cee, D-Bloc Europe types will appear throughout. Maybe we could get SZA if the Glasto gods are nice to us.

Edited by Matt42
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 minutes ago, Justcalledtosay said:

There’s not being into a band and then calling them shit, when quite clearly, they are not. Again I’ll take AM as an example, the biggest UK rock band of the last 10/20 years, up there with Coldplay. Sell out stadiums every time they tour and despite moving away from their bread and butter sound are still hitting the heights in the charts.
If you like guitar music and you’re still calling them shit, you either don’t know what you’re talking about, you’re being a snob or you’re trolling. 
Music is subjective but you can respect an act for what they’ve done in their genre.

You forgot to add "in my opinion"

Edited by CaledonianGonzo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Justcalledtosay said:

There’s not being into a band and then calling them shit, when quite clearly, they are not. Again I’ll take AM as an example, the biggest UK rock band of the last 10/20 years, up there with Coldplay. Sell out stadiums every time they tour and despite moving away from their bread and butter sound are still hitting the heights in the charts.
If you like guitar music and you’re still calling them shit, you either don’t know what you’re talking about, you’re being a snob or you’re trolling. 
Music is subjective but you can respect an act for what they’ve done in their genre.

Tbh I find it just as weird going the other way and asserting that something is objectively not shit, based on  x characteristic. 

If one of you gits thinks that an act is shit, why do I care? 

On the other hand I care if you personally slate a person, or go into a thread about an act merely to stir up agro. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Crazyfool01 said:

Only ever said Ed Sheeran and George Ezra are shit … the rest I just leave them be if they aren’t for me … am I excused ? 

Everything’s relative. If I saw Ed Sheehan performing at the top of an escalator on the London Underground, I’d think he was fantastically talented. Just not on the Pyramid.

George Ezra is shit though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tranquility of Solitude said:

Everything’s relative. If I saw Ed Sheehan performing at the top of an escalator on the London Underground, I’d think he was fantastically talented. Just not on the Pyramid.

George Ezra is shit though. 

Yeah that’s fair .. not seen him at the top of an escalator and at least there’s a fast exit route planned 😀the only 2 acts to make me cringe … it’s just weird 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised to see all the hate for Ed Sheeran on here. He's a mainstream pop singer that constantly gets played on Capital FM and performs the most uninspiring radio friendly music - so he's right up the street of a lot of people on this board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding people declaring acts are shit. That information is only potentially interesting if you know that persons music taste. If someone declared they think the clash is shit, I don't know why anyone else would care but if we knew they love punk and like the sex pistols, Ramones and the dammed but not the clash then that could lead to a conversation. The trouble is we don't know most people's music taste on here so those comments here are usually pointless 

And what's even more pointless is negative comments about an act from a person who doesn't like the genre that act is in. It's not interesting in any way that someone who doesn't like any hip hop declare Kendrick Lamar is shit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Phoenix Girl said:

Posting on this forum can be a bit scary at times (for some people) because there are a few quite knowledgeable and/or opinionated people on here, so saying “imho” can be used as a tool to deflect or tone down a comment.

Thats very fair and quite a few lurkers ive bumped into say they are afraid to post 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Justcalledtosay said:

There’s not being into a band and then calling them shit, when quite clearly, they are not. Again I’ll take AM as an example, the biggest UK rock band of the last 10/20 years, up there with Coldplay. Sell out stadiums every time they tour and despite moving away from their bread and butter sound are still hitting the heights in the charts.
If you like guitar music and you’re still calling them shit, you either don’t know what you’re talking about, you’re being a snob or you’re trolling. 
Music is subjective but you can respect an act for what they’ve done in their genre.

I agree, though also it just tells you people are different. The trend on here is to label them as shit live, whereas to some going to see a band they like play songs they like and play them well is exactly what they want. Others want dancers and lasers and lots of chat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Phoenix Girl said:

Posting on this forum can be a bit scary at times (for some people) because there are a few quite knowledgeable and/or opinionated people on here, so saying “imho” can be used as a tool to deflect or tone down a comment.

I think it’s just polite at times. 
 

But then I’m 45. I used to say I thought acts were ‘shit’ or similar back in the day but it’s been a long time since I used anything other than e.g. ‘oh I’m not into them’ or ‘not for me’

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Phoenix Girl said:

Posting on this forum can be a bit scary at times (for some people) because there are a few quite knowledgeable and/or opinionated people on here, so saying “imho” can be used as a tool to deflect or tone down a comment.

Honestly, there's no one to fear in this forum. Being true to yourself is all anyone can do. Your taste in music is as relevant as anyone else's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve a broad taste in music and even if something doesn’t really resonate with me, I wouldn’t immediately declare it to be shit and can often find something in there to at least see why others might love it.  It’s subjective and I get that. However there are a small number of acts who I can find absolutely no merit in whatsoever and find almost unlistenable.  It genuinely surprises me when people declare love for them and I do question it when they do. It’s not me trying push my opinion, rather trying to understand what I’m missing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I try to go the Austen Powers route...

image.thumb.png.e6b1f53b4ff6e30f30194a9de2cf1dff.png

I try to take the high ground when someone says something I like is shit (rather than it's simply not for them), but when somebody actually quotes me in a reply and says the artist is no good, especially when you know they've barely actually listened to them (which I admit is an assumption) my hackles can get raised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, 4AssedMonkey said:

I’ve a broad taste in music and even if something doesn’t really resonate with me, I wouldn’t immediately declare it to be shit and can often find something in there to at least see why others might love it.  It’s subjective and I get that. However there are a small number of acts who I can find absolutely no merit in whatsoever and find almost unlistenable.  It genuinely surprises me when people declare love for them and I do question it when they do. It’s not me trying push my opinion, rather trying to understand what I’m missing. 

Ah, on this board people don't denounce artists as shit because of their music, they denounce them because of them being men.

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...