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

1 minute ago, sisco said:

Would you like me to agree? Say ok they’ll defo be late, the BBC will cut the feed, the crowd will just disappear?  Or go with the much more realistic…. They’ll be on time?

What an odd post, they have a track record of being late, they were late twice for their last UK gigs only 6 months ago. Nobody is saying they will be late, just that there is a chance of it, and that it’s bizarre to suggest they don’t mind upset their paying, repeat customers, but they’ll somehow treat a festival of people who haven’t directly paid to see them differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen Guns 3 times (2 with old incarnation, 1 with Slash and Duff) and 2/3 times they've came out on time.

Download 2006: I think they were early even by 5-10 min

Wembley Arena 2006/7/8 can't remember: came out at around 10:30pm I think and played a full set still but I remember the crowd getting very ag whilst waiting, mexican waves, etc. as the article says 

Olympic Stadium 2017 I think: came out early/on time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jose Pose said:

What an odd post, they have a track record of being late, they were late twice for their last UK gigs only 6 months ago. Nobody is saying they will be late, just that there is a chance of it, and that it’s bizarre to suggest they don’t mind upset their paying, repeat customers, but they’ll somehow treat a festival of people who haven’t directly paid to see them differently.

Yes…. They will. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Well they won't be doing the gig for the money either, so if they have that attitude the question is more why they are playing in the first place.

They’re doing BST the next weekend, they’re in the UK already with all of their kit, just because Glasto pay less, it’s still an easy payday which requires no more effort than turning up. It’s not like they’re going out of their way to come over to do it. You could argue the lower fee will make them care even less, if they lose it then so what?

Edited by Jose Pose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arctic Monkeys - 95%: They've never fully wowed me live but hard to turn down one of my favourite bands on the Pyramid. Something spectacular elsewhere could sway me but I'll most likely be here.

Guns N' Roses - 0%: Very few bands I have less interest in seeing. 

Elton John - 90%: Not as dead set on seeing him as I was with Macca but it would take something big to keep me away from him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AM: 0% Frankly, they bore me to tears.

GNR: 80% I’m still a big fan but have seen them plenty including last year. If I thought there might be surprises in the setlist I’d be more enthused but they’ve pretty much been playing the same set since I first saw them in 92. That said, I’d need a good alternative to swerve them, and given the current line up rumours / possibilities, that seems less likely. Porcupine Tree in the JP for instance would do it. 

REG: 100% for a multitude of reasons, this is unmissable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jose Pose said:

Amazing that the 1% of Glasto obsessives think a group of American multi millionaire rock musicians who must’ve played 1000+ gigs in their life view a festival in Somerset the same way they do. 

Thanks 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arctic Monkeys: 90% Their debut album is one of my favourite albums of all time, and I've never seen them live before. Although I've not been into their music since then.

Guns n Roses: 10% Not my cup of tea whatsoever.

Elton John: 60% Not my cup of tea for the most part, yet, if there's no one on another stage I'm really into, it feels like something special I shouldn't miss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Little Andy said:

Elton John: 60% Not my cup of tea for the most part, yet, if there's no one on another stage I'm really into, it feels like something special I shouldn't miss.

Definitely in a minority here, but I felt exactly the same about Paul McCartney, that I 'shouldn't miss it' and ended up leaving half way through and regretting it. If it's not your thing, it's not your thing, imho. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Hugh Jass II said:

GnR are one of the most successful rock bands of all time.

You don't like them, which is fine, but that doesn't make them a joke.

if guns are selling out stadiums fifty years into their career i'll be amazed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking back to Emily’s comments about there being dream headliners across both 2022/23, which I was hoping referred to Swifty, I think she must have been referring to Guns and Roses. They feel like quite a personal booking for her. Maybe she’s a big fan and just wants them because she likes them. Fair enough, it’s her festival after all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Hugh Jass II said:

GnR are one of the most successful rock bands of all time.

You don't like them, which is fine, but that doesn't make them a joke.

if guns ever have a seminal live album, i'll be amazed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Jose Pose said:

They’re doing BST the next weekend, they’re in the UK already with all of their kit, just because Glasto pay less, it’s still an easy payday which requires no more effort than turning up. It’s not like they’re going out of their way to come over to do it. You could argue the lower fee will make them care even less, if they lose it then so what?

Depends if BST has sold out by then or not. It's possible they're doing Glasto at a cheaper fee as they know the coverage on TV works as promo for that gig. Which falls apart if they're on late because *that* then becomes the story and people don't both booking BST ("How will I get home if they run late and the tubes aren't running?") and people who are trying to watch live will give up after waiting five minutes.

Don't get me wrong, I agree they don't give a shit about the festival itself or indeed the people in the field, but it going out live on national TV, with their biggest gig with tickets available in the country the following weekend, it's a different picture.

I mean, we'll know if you're right as they'll probably decline the TV footage if they're just doing it for the payday, as the money for that won't be worth the risk if anything goes wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chazwwe said:

This is getting seriously old now. You're pissing people off. 

a bad booking is a bad booking, you'd have no problem slagging off what you thought was bad.

i bet hyde park has to give away guns tickets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arctic monkeys 0%- I can’t stand this band, I’d rather spend my time at work than at one of their shows

gnr 20% - only for slash who has still got it, axl is awful and I don’t like that many of their songs anyway. Would be good to see November rain solo live but I’ll be very easily swayed elsewhere

elton 99% - unless there’s a pink Floyd reunion or mj is reincarnated on other I’ll be at Elton 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Neil said:

a bad booking is a bad booking, you'd have no problem slagging off what you thought was bad.

i bet hyde park has to give away guns tickets.

I'm pretty sure you've posted every other day about how much you think its a bad booking, how stupid the festival is for booking them and how insane people are to even believe they would be booked since November. If you're going to do this until June then I'm out as its boring and derails most conversations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, kalifire said:

Thinking back to Emily’s comments about there being dream headliners across both 2022/23, which I was hoping referred to Swifty, I think she must have been referring to Guns and Roses. They feel like quite a personal booking for her. Maybe she’s a big fan and just wants them because she likes them. Fair enough, it’s her festival after all. 

Yeah, I do think they were trying for Swift but given Emily was talking about them a couple of years ago, I do think Guns have been lined up for a while. To be honest, given Elton was due to play Paris on the Sunday and that was only rearranged in June, I reckon he's who they went for once Taylor became unavailable and Guns have been there all along.

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...