Glastonburyfrom the sofa

Alain Quay

Thoughts?
I reckon if you are going to be in a massive crowd, the best music to see
is a band that is young, truly world class and at its best. Tinny pop
(Ting t ngs, lady gaga, etc) or former greats coming back (Neil Young,
Bruce Springsteen) will never have the same impact.

Stewie Griffin

Was at my mates on Saturday who was getting carried away by Crosby, Stills & Nash, fabulous having a schmoke music, which we werent. Suffered that then made him watch Pendulum with me, wish I was there just for that. All that mud is the reason I wouldnt ever think about going. I dont ride an MTB :roll: .

robthehungrymonkey

I've been to loads of big festivals and stadium gigs in the past... But I much prefer the smaller venues and stages at festivals.

To play on the main stage, or in a stadium you can't just be the biggest name IMO, someone like Bruce Springstein works, the Rolling Stones work, Metallica, Iron Maiden they both work. But some of the newer acts don't seem to get the crowd going or "know" how to fill the space.
Last time I went to Reading, I didn't go near the main stage until the 2nd to last act.

Just my 2p.

Special K

Ahhh festivals

It's the reason behind the invention of

a) the CD player

b) Canesten

teagar

Seems Glastonbury is turning into the geriatric's festival.

Average age of the frontmen on the pyramid stage this year was 44 apparantly.


So dull.

Why not try and get some artists who are at their peak? Rather than those who are trying to get themselves out of their mid/late-life crisis.

*yawn*

alfablue

Maybe there are not so many artists at their peak that show the class of these oldies...

What would be your ideal line-up?

That said, I was a bit underwhelmed by the line-up, unlike previous years I did not have any conflicts as to which stage to go to at any given time, the highlight was The Prodigy for me, as far as Springsteen is concerned, I don't really understand what he is for. I was looking forward to The Specials, but they weren't that special, all a bit flat.

Best ever I have seen there is I think Muse and Radiohead.

teagar

I'm not fussed really. Like you I only really enjoyed Muse and Radiohead a few years back.

I was hoping to christen the new HD TV with some quality shots.

Instead all I got was every single wrinkle in HD...

It'd be worth setting up some nostalgic stage and keep the pyramid stage for the biggest *current* stars and bands. It defeats the point of glastonbury if it's full of 40-50 somethings trying to re-live their twenties, and 17yr olds who are only there 'cos dad wants to go with them....

Edit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNPD0Fuan-k

robthehungrymonkey

alfablue wrote:

Best ever I have seen there is I think Muse and Radiohead.

Both Awesome... Muse are probably the best surprise act i've seen. Not really much of a fan, but I saw them on the main stage at reading a while ago and they blew me away!

I know a lot of people dont, but I love some of the old chessy stuff, but it is a novelty, and I think one novelty act is fine, but building the whole line up around them isn't that great IMO.
Older acts will always have more of a fanbase, music in the last 20 years has diversified hugely, and there are few acts that can maintain a fanbase like they used to. Fashions and trends come into it more now than ever. With many more people being into smaller bands than before.

Is Glastonbury really a "festival" as it used to be known? Or is it just middle class people attempting to relive their youth by going to see their old favourites?

softlad

Balaam and the Angel, followed by Killing Joke - headlining on Friday evening at Reading back in the early 80s - those were the days...

Le Commentateur

It's Camden Lock market in the country.

edhornby

I wouldn't go to glasto now, simply because everyone takes those bl00dy flags ! you can see that the cameramen struggle to film let alone the punters who aren't right at the front...

robthehungrymonkey

edhornby wrote:

I wouldn't go to glasto now, simply because everyone takes those bl00dy flags ! you can see that the cameramen struggle to film let alone the punters who aren't right at the front...

Yeah! Why is that!?

mingmong

robthehungrymonkey wrote:

I've been to loads of big festivals and stadium gigs in the past... But I much prefer the smaller venues and stages at festivals.

To play on the main stage, or in a stadium you can't just be the biggest name IMO, someone like Bruce Springstein works, the Rolling Stones work, Metallica, Iron Maiden they both work. But some of the newer acts don't seem to get the crowd going or "know" how to fill the space.
Last time I went to Reading, I didn't go near the main stage until the 2nd to last act.

Just my 2p.

Dizzie Rascal seemed to 'get the crowd going'

afx237vi

From what I saw, most of the headliners looked pretty grim. I felt vaguely embarrassed watching the Specials and Neil Young... sure, the music is still good, but they just look so frickin' old. Like watching your dad dancing.

Dizzee Rascal was good. The Yeah Yeah Yeahs were good, although I do worry about Karen O. I expect she's still laying in a darkened room somewhere.

Pendelum were good for a festival, although I wouldn't really listen to that kind of stuff in any other circumstances.

Other than that... er, can't say much else caught my attention. But you don't really go to Glastonbury for the headliners, do you? Or even for the music.

teagar

afx237vi wrote:

From what I saw, most of the headliners looked pretty grim. I felt vaguely embarrassed watching the Specials and Neil Young... sure, the music is still good, but they just look so frickin' old. Like watching your dad dancing.

Dizzee Rascal was good. The Yeah Yeah Yeahs were good, although I do worry about Karen O. I expect she's still laying in a darkened room somewhere.

Pendelum were good for a festival, although I wouldn't really listen to that kind of stuff in any other circumstances.

Other than that... er, can't say much else caught my attention. But you don't really go to Glastonbury for the headliners, do you? Or even for the music.

What do you go for then? :?

pb21

teagar wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

From what I saw, most of the headliners looked pretty grim. I felt vaguely embarrassed watching the Specials and Neil Young... sure, the music is still good, but they just look so frickin' old. Like watching your dad dancing.

Dizzee Rascal was good. The Yeah Yeah Yeahs were good, although I do worry about Karen O. I expect she's still laying in a darkened room somewhere.

Pendelum were good for a festival, although I wouldn't really listen to that kind of stuff in any other circumstances.

Other than that... er, can't say much else caught my attention. But you don't really go to Glastonbury for the headliners, do you? Or even for the music.

What do you go for then? :?

Drugs & Atmosphere

teagar

pb21 wrote:

teagar wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Other than that... er, can't say much else caught my attention. But you don't really go to Glastonbury for the headliners, do you? Or even for the music.

What do you go for then? :?

Drugs & Atmosphere

Better off at global gathering then!

http://www.globalgathering.co.uk/

afx237vi

teagar wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

From what I saw, most of the headliners looked pretty grim. I felt vaguely embarrassed watching the Specials and Neil Young... sure, the music is still good, but they just look so frickin' old. Like watching your dad dancing.

Dizzee Rascal was good. The Yeah Yeah Yeahs were good, although I do worry about Karen O. I expect she's still laying in a darkened room somewhere.

Pendelum were good for a festival, although I wouldn't really listen to that kind of stuff in any other circumstances.

Other than that... er, can't say much else caught my attention. But you don't really go to Glastonbury for the headliners, do you? Or even for the music.

What do you go for then? :?

Not necessarily the drugs, but definitely the atmosphere. I think if you're a fan of a particular band and really want to see them live, you're better off waiting until they go on tour and seeing them at a proper venue.

At a festival, most of the crowd aren't interested in the current band playing or are waiting for the next band on. For me, festivals (and especially Glastonbury) are more about the camping, meeting new people, seeing weird shit and stuff like that.

robthehungrymonkey

afx237vi wrote:

teagar wrote:

What do you go for then? :?

Not necessarily the drugs, but definitely the atmosphere. I think if you're a fan of a particular band and really want to see them live, you're better off waiting until they go on tour and seeing them at a proper venue.

At a festival, most of the crowd aren't interested in the current band playing or are waiting for the next band on. For me, festivals (and especially Glastonbury) are more about the camping, meeting new people, seeing weird shoot and stuff like that.

That's fine if you weren't paying such a huge ammount for the tickets..

afx237vi

robthehungrymonkey wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

teagar wrote:

What do you go for then? :?

Not necessarily the drugs, but definitely the atmosphere. I think if you're a fan of a particular band and really want to see them live, you're better off waiting until they go on tour and seeing them at a proper venue.

At a festival, most of the crowd aren't interested in the current band playing or are waiting for the next band on. For me, festivals (and especially Glastonbury) are more about the camping, meeting new people, seeing weird shoot and stuff like that.

That's fine if you weren't paying such a huge ammount for the tickets..

Well okay, there's 4 days of camping, meeting new people, seeing weird sh!t (stupid censor) and three days of every type of music imaginable. The music does play a part as well. I can think of worse ways to spend £180.

robthehungrymonkey

afx237vi wrote:

Well okay, there's 4 days of camping, meeting new people, seeing weird sh!t (stupid censor) and three days of every type of music imaginable. The music does play a part as well. I can think of worse ways to spend £180.

They were £105 5 years ago!

Sorry (realised i've ranted a lot on here!), I can see the attraction, and I probably would go if i could afford it at the moment, but I think £180 is too much for a festival ticket. This is probably the root cause to all the other things we've moaned about in this thread, "festival folk" being priced out of going leads to middle aged housewife going leads to the type of acts that they're likely to splash out on seeing.

afx237vi

You could apply that to anything, though. How much is it to go a top flight football match these days? £50 minimum? How much are they paying to get into Wimbledon? How much were they paying for Michael Jackson tickets!

Glastonbury is still cheap compared to all the other over-commercialised shite that people used to be able to afford.

teagar

At least watching cycling's still free.


Apart from paying to have sodding Eurosport...

I think I'm getting a day ticket to global gathering to celebrate since it's only 3 days after my graduation ceremony 8)

robthehungrymonkey

afx237vi wrote:

You could apply that to anything, though. How much is it to go a top flight football match these days? £50 minimum? How much are they paying to get into Wimbledon? How much were they paying for Michael Jackson tickets!

Glastonbury is still cheap compared to all the other over-commercialised shite that people used to be able to afford.

I agree to an extent. Football matches are ludicrously priced (but even tehy haven't gone up anywhere near that much in that time). WImbledon center court tickets were available for £35, which I think is reasonable, and it is only a 15,000 seat stadium.

MJ tickets... don't get me started! What they announced today IMO was outrageous! To let people choose between a full refund or to allow them to have a special edition ticket instead! Receiving £75 and not having to put on a show! Brilliant business move (preying on distraught MJ fans has to be profitable), but surely a bit wrong!

I think the thing that winds me up about Glasto is the way it's portrayed and the way they hold themselves out to be less commecial, less profit driven than others (e.g. CARLING reading festival, or VIRGIN V festival). When in reality, it's the same as everything else.
Some of the small festivals offer much better value for money, and better atmosphere, and for much, much less.
I just struggle to allocate that kind of money now, it's been great in the past (I met my girlfriend 7 years ago in the main stage crowd!).
Last year we went to Truck, and it was awesome! A great atmosphere and got me back it enjoying it properly... all for £49 weekend ticket

afx237vi

I get what you mean, but I still think Glastonbury is better than most other festival.

I was thinking about going to the Green Man Festival next month, but even that's £105:

http://www.thegreenmanfestival.co.uk

Speaking of the Truck Festival, you just made me Google to see whether the Rock of Travolta are still together (I'm none the wiser). I saw them when they supported Radiohead in their big Oxford homecoming gig in 2001 and they were amazing. They don't seem to have released anything for a couple of years.

stfc1

alfablue wrote:

as far as Springsteen is concerned, I don't really understand what he is for

:evil:

Porgy

afx237vi wrote:

From what I saw, most of the headliners looked pretty grim. I felt vaguely embarrassed watching the Specials and Neil Young... sure, the music is still good, but they just look so frickin' old. Like watching your dad dancing..

how terrible!!

Fact - the best musicians since the embryonic beginnings of rock n roll back in the 30s and 40s have been old...they're the ones who know how to truly play.

Noone criticised the blues greats for getting old - and I don;t understand why the music can't be allowed to speak for itself.

The greatest myth ever - that rock n roll is just for young people. Pop is for young people -plastic, commerical, catering for those with tiny attention spans, ultimately cannibalistic, empty, and disposable, doomed to repeat itself in an ever decreasing circle of futile rebellion...

The best hope that any pop star has is that one day they grow up to be a musician.

Having said that I've been to Glasto twice and enjoyed the mixture of old and new - and I've no doubt that this is Glasto's great strength - nothing to be ashamed of.

alfablue

I am lucky to get there for free, but I would still pay the asking price, as afx says, there's so much more to it than the main stage bands, indeed the most entertainment can be had elsewhere.

I agree about the flags, bloody infuriating. Unless you want to mix it up the front you see nothing unless you go round to the side.

pedylan

Porgy wrote:

Noone criticised the blues greats for getting old -

Noone? Peter Noone? He had a cheek, Herman's Hermits weren't fit to lace Muddy's Boots

iainf72

I've done most of the festivals at one time or another. Glastonbury was good but this year I thought the line up was fairly average.

Best festivals by a country mile are All Tomorrows Parties. Always held in a Butlins or Pontins, crowd who are really feeling the music and just a generally ace time. They tend to be more for people who actually care about music rather than those who think liking the latest floppy fringed bed wetters indie hit makes them edgy and interesting.

http://www.atpfestival.com/NewsView/0906261221.php

takethehighroad

iainf72 wrote:

They tend to be more for people who actually care about music rather than those who think liking the latest floppy fringed bed wetters indie hit makes them edgy and interesting.

I bet you HATED V then? Can't get move for 'em there!