Glastonbury 2017

Gambit said:
Royal Blood and Clean Bandits for me. I wasn't expecting anything from them and ended up loving their sets.
Click to expand...

Heh. Didn't you say your daughter introduced you to Clean Bandits? Mine is a massive fan of Royal Blood. She'd play Loose Change from their first album all day every day, given half a chance. The fact I still like them despite this over-exposure shows how good they are. Probably my most satisfying musical discovery of the last 10 years.

Never heard of Clean Bandits. Will give them a listen.
 
Kag said:
If Ed Sheeran were to have glamourised his simple man act for the big stage he would be roundly criticised for that, too. I don't think he can win either way. Personally, I think he'd look like a bit of prat dancing around while somebody else rattles through a drum and guitar solo. Though what would have worked, in fairness, would have been bringing on Rudimental for Bloodstream.

Ultimately, a lot of people dislike what Sheeran represents. He's at the top of chart music and not being "part of the masses" is what far too many people consider to be cool, or edgy, or different. Thankfully, you can appreciate both sides of the coin, as I find, whether it be Sheeran, Foo Fighters or Radiohead.
Click to expand...

I doubt he'd get criticised for that since it's what pretty much every other musician does whether they are a solo artist tor a group act.

Sheeran isn't really a pop star. He doesn't come out and dance around or put on some kind of visual spectacle as you've said. He'd never pull something like that off.

He is about the music, and while I hate it personally, the music really isn't that bad and a lot (I mean really a bafflingly large amount) of people seem to like it.

There aren't very many musicians out there though who can play to and entertain a world audience just by playing an acoustic guitar for two hours, and Sheeran definitely isn't one of them. You really have to be an extraordinarily unique talent to be able to pull something like that off. Sheeran probably isn't even in the 50 most uniquely talented musicians, who were at Glastonbury.

It just comes across to me like he's almost scared of letting anyone else on stage with him, in case it means people aren't playing attention to him, or because he thinks it would demean him in some way. It would actually do the opposite. He has plenty of songs where he CAN get away with just having his guitar and foot pedal, and he has plenty where backing musicians would make it infinitely less bland.

Just look at the three headliners this weekend. You have two who put on a show which everyone seemed to love everything about. Then you have one where it's kind of "meh" or "what was that about?"

It's not about him not being able to win or people not liking what he represents. It's about the fact his live act is boring to a significant number of people. Which as headliner at a festival isn't the best thing.
 
noodlehair said:
I doubt he'd get criticised for that since it's what pretty much every other musician does whether they are a solo artist tor a group act.

Sheeran isn't really a pop star. He doesn't come out and dance around or put on some kind of visual spectacle as you've said. He'd never pull something like that off.

He is about the music, and while I hate it personally, the music really isn't that bad and a lot (I mean really a bafflingly large amount) of people seem to like it.

There aren't very many musicians out there though who can play to and entertain a world audience just by playing an acoustic guitar for two hours, and Sheeran definitely isn't one of them. You really have to be an extraordinarily unique talent to be able to pull something like that off. Sheeran probably isn't even in the 50 most uniquely talented musicians, who were at Glastonbury.

It just comes across to me like he's almost scared of letting anyone else on stage with him, in case it means people aren't playing attention to him, or because he thinks it would demean him in some way. It would actually do the opposite. He has plenty of songs where he CAN get away with just having his guitar and foot pedal, and he has plenty where backing musicians would make it infinitely less bland.

Just look at the three headliners this weekend. You have two who put on a show which everyone seemed to love everything about. Then you have one where it's kind of "meh" or "what was that about?"

It's not about him not being able to win or people not liking what he represents. It's about the fact his live act is boring to a significant number of people. Which as headliner at a festival isn't the best thing.
Click to expand...

With you on all of that.

Throw him in a pub and he's giving you one of the best nights of the year.

His show just isn't big enough for large crowds though.

He's a thoroughly decent chap, but an artist needs to evolve their act as their audience size grows. He's not even tried.

As a measure of how an act can evolve, I urge people to listen to these two tracks below. (Same song, different spin)

The Correspondents are fabulous. I saw them at a festival where they played Friday and Saturday.

One was a small intimate tent. They played a lot of electro funk stuff. Volume controlled, an example being this;



The following night they played the main stage. Perhaps 10-20 times the crowd size. EVERYTHING got bigger. It had to. Lights, energy, plus a new twist in every single song they did the night before.

They kicked this out and all bets were off from the opener;



That's talent. It's like two different bands. These guys play 300 seats and 30,000 seats and switch it up. I'm not saying Ed needs to throw a donk on it but he can put in a little fcuking effort. He's lazy as all hell. It's the pyramid stage at Glastonbury and all he wants it's a sing-along.
 
noodlehair said:
I doubt he'd get criticised for that since it's what pretty much every other musician does whether they are a solo artist tor a group act.

Sheeran isn't really a pop star. He doesn't come out and dance around or put on some kind of visual spectacle as you've said. He'd never pull something like that off.

He is about the music, and while I hate it personally, the music really isn't that bad and a lot (I mean really a bafflingly large amount) of people seem to like it.

There aren't very many musicians out there though who can play to and entertain a world audience just by playing an acoustic guitar for two hours, and Sheeran definitely isn't one of them. You really have to be an extraordinarily unique talent to be able to pull something like that off. Sheeran probably isn't even in the 50 most uniquely talented musicians, who were at Glastonbury.

It just comes across to me like he's almost scared of letting anyone else on stage with him, in case it means people aren't playing attention to him, or because he thinks it would demean him in some way. It would actually do the opposite. He has plenty of songs where he CAN get away with just having his guitar and foot pedal, and he has plenty where backing musicians would make it infinitely less bland.

Just look at the three headliners this weekend. You have two who put on a show which everyone seemed to love everything about. Then you have one where it's kind of "meh" or "what was that about?"

It's not about him not being able to win or people not liking what he represents. It's about the fact his live act is boring to a significant number of people. Which as headliner at a festival isn't the best thing.
Click to expand...

Why the feck should he care if he's boring some people? Radiohead I'm sure bore people, regardless of their superior talent. However the positive far outweighs the negativity as the concerts themselves show, as with all musicians of their global fame. I certainly wouldn't give a feck if I was them.
 
Never been into Glastonbury before, as I've always been a hip hop head, and associate the festival with indie and rock. I know the likes of Jay-Z and Kanye have played before, but I don't really like either of them, so always swerved it. Have to say, watched a fair bit of it with friends this weekend and enjoyed most of what I saw. I'm not into the Killers, but I've obviously heard their hits, and they put on a great show. They were the highlight for me.
 
Shark said:
Why the feck should he care if he's boring some people? Radiohead I'm sure bore people, regardless of their superior talent. However the positive far outweighs the negativity as the concerts themselves show, as with all musicians of their global fame. I certainly wouldn't give a feck if I was them.
Click to expand...

Probably the majority of people let's be fair. They're an acquired taste. I do think most people would recognise they're talented regardless.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Heh. Didn't you say your daughter introduced you to Clean Bandits? Mine is a massive fan of Royal Blood. She'd play Loose Change from their first album all day every day, given half a chance. The fact I still like them despite this over-exposure shows how good they are. Probably my most satisfying musical discovery of the last 10 years.

Never heard of Clean Bandits. Will give them a listen.
Click to expand...
Very poppy but trust me as a man in his middle ages I think you'll enjoy the show.
 
noodlehair said:
I doubt he'd get criticised for that since it's what pretty much every other musician does whether they are a solo artist tor a group act.

Sheeran isn't really a pop star. He doesn't come out and dance around or put on some kind of visual spectacle as you've said. He'd never pull something like that off.

He is about the music, and while I hate it personally, the music really isn't that bad and a lot (I mean really a bafflingly large amount) of people seem to like it.

There aren't very many musicians out there though who can play to and entertain a world audience just by playing an acoustic guitar for two hours, and Sheeran definitely isn't one of them. You really have to be an extraordinarily unique talent to be able to pull something like that off. Sheeran probably isn't even in the 50 most uniquely talented musicians, who were at Glastonbury.

It just comes across to me like he's almost scared of letting anyone else on stage with him, in case it means people aren't playing attention to him, or because he thinks it would demean him in some way. It would actually do the opposite. He has plenty of songs where he CAN get away with just having his guitar and foot pedal, and he has plenty where backing musicians would make it infinitely less bland.

Just look at the three headliners this weekend. You have two who put on a show which everyone seemed to love everything about. Then you have one where it's kind of "meh" or "what was that about?"

It's not about him not being able to win or people not liking what he represents. It's about the fact his live act is boring to a significant number of people. Which as headliner at a festival isn't the best thing.
Click to expand...

But Radiohead are boring to a lot more people than Ed Sheeran is. Whether that be their music or what they look like. This is reflected in their respective mainstream popularity - which is part of the reason Sheeran is derided by so many.

Radiohead are held in higher esteem within the industry, and clearly by somebody like you, but to the teenagers/twentysomethings at Glastonbury (and at home), they'd sure as hell rather listen to that Ed Sheeran set and have a sing-a-long than endure two hours of Radiohead.

If many of the same people that watched Sheeran last night had watched Radiohead on Friday then there would be equally 'meh' reaction. Infact, the only reason there isn't is because they wouldn't have bothered to turn them on in the first place. I haven't got the figures, but I can well imagine that more people watched Sheeran on tele than Radiohead, and probably the Foos. Many of those that are taking a pop at Sheeran didn't really like him in advance of last night's performance, yet watched it anyway. There's something a little bit funny about that. Of course, if I'm wrong about the tele stats then this post is null and void.
 
noodlehair said:
He doesn't really get away with it though. Read te reviews and comments in this thread. It's mixed at best.

His fan base like it but that's generally how a fanbase works...his fan base would probably like it if he came out and threw his own excrement at them for two hours.

His music isn't that bad...in fact when it isn't self absorbed it is very good. He could have a much bigger live performance fan base, and he could be a very good live act.

But a guy standing there playing an acoustic guitar for two hours IS boring. He isn't Bob Dylan. He isn't an amazingly good guitarist. He isn't a comedian. His music isn't full of meaning or anything else that allows it to be carried just by a foot pedal and a guitar.

It's fecking Glastonbury. Leave your ego at the door as someone else said, and put on a show that's about entertaining everyone there, not about being desperate to show everyone how great you think you are.

There is a reason why Ed Sheeran is "divisive" while other acts will be praised even by people who don't "get" their music.

I mean I don't really get Radiohead but I'd have enjoyed their set on the Friday. If Thom Yorke had come out to main event Glastonbury and just played acoustic guitar for two hours on his own, he could feck right off. Nothing to do with tastes or unjust hatred towards Sheeran's type of music at all.
Click to expand...

Well...yeah, but don't most musicians do stuff that appeals to their fans? Considering their genre/style tends to be what gets them those fans in the first place? I'm no fan but it's clear there's a significant number of people out there (both his dedicated fans and casual ones) who love the whole one-man-band thing.
 
Just think, in the next few years, Glastonbury is going to be showcasing all the mumble shit that pretends to be rap music nowadays. Imagine 10,000 people muttering under their breath at the same time. Can't wait.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Heh. Didn't you say your daughter introduced you to Clean Bandits? Mine is a massive fan of Royal Blood. She'd play Loose Change from their first album all day every day, given half a chance. The fact I still like them despite this over-exposure shows how good they are. Probably my most satisfying musical discovery of the last 10 years.

Never heard of Clean Bandits. Will give them a listen.
Click to expand...
I am watching them now on iplayer, I like them.
Marina Lambrini Diamandis and Grace Chatto :drool:
 
Badunk said:
Just think, in the next few years, Glastonbury is going to be showcasing all the mumble shit that pretends to be rap music nowadays. Imagine 10,000 people muttering under their breath at the same time. Can't wait.
Click to expand...

It'll never get high levels of exposure at Glasto. Thankfully.
 
Peanut Butter said:
No mate, watched on tv :lol:

Radiohead were great but the rest of the crap there - Ed fecking Sheerhan?!

I went to Glasto in 97 and 99. Both were amazing.
Click to expand...

I don't know how anyone that has been to Glastonbury could could come to that conclusion from watching it on TV!
 
Pexbo said:
I don't know how anyone that has been to Glastonbury could could come to that conclusion from watching it on TV!
Click to expand...
I was being dramatic. But from the acts I caught, this year was poor.

I can't stomach Radio 1 crap like Ed Sheeran. And Barry Gibb? Not for me.
 
Just woke up having gone to bed at 6pm yesterday. What a fecking weekend (week? was there from Wednesday morning)

Hardly went near the Pyramid stage. Saw the last half hour of The National and the first hour of Foos and of course went to see the absolute boy Jeremy Corbyn.

Highlights were The Moonlandingz, Parcels, Maggie Rogers, Baloji, Confidence Man, Flaming Lips, Matt Maltese, Loyle Carner, Ailbhe Reddy, Angel Olsen, Elbow, Rews and Slaves.

Cannot recommend going enough to all those pondering it above. It's so much more than the big stages. The line-up is secondary in importance.
 
Zebs said:
Just woke up having gone to bed at 6pm yesterday. What a fecking weekend (week? was there from Wednesday morning)

Hardly went near the Pyramid stage. Saw the last half hour of The National and the first hour of Foos and of course went to see the absolute boy Jeremy Corbyn.

Highlights were The Moonlandingz, Parcels, Maggie Rogers, Baloji, Confidence Man, Flaming Lips, Matt Maltese, Loyle Carner, Ailbhe Reddy, Angel Olsen, Elbow, Rews and Slaves.

Cannot recommend going enough to all those pondering it above. It's so much more than the big stages. The line-up is secondary in importance.
Click to expand...
I was there. Love that I only saw three of the acts you did and still had similar feelings about the week. What a place, can't wait to be back.
 
Shark said:
Why the feck should he care if he's boring some people? Radiohead I'm sure bore people, regardless of their superior talent. However the positive far outweighs the negativity as the concerts themselves show, as with all musicians of their global fame. I certainly wouldn't give a feck if I was them.
Click to expand...

He probably doesn't. Concerts or gigs are one thing. Only his fans would go (and the odd unlucky boyfriend or parent who gets dragged along). Festivals are for everyone and accommodate all tastes.

Most people at a Festival like Glastonbury don't want the headline act on the last night of the festival to be a guy playing acoustic guitar with a foot pedal for two hours. Especially when he's not particularly amazing at it. It's a fun gimmick for a few songs here and there. Not nearly enough on it's own to be on a par with other headline Glastonbury acts.

I don't think it's an unfair criticism to make of him, at all. He's under no obligation to give a feck, though I suspect from his persona that he constantly gives a feck what people think of him.

Kag said:
But Radiohead are boring to a lot more people than Ed Sheeran is. Whether that be their music or what they look like. This is reflected in their respective mainstream popularity - which is part of the reason Sheeran is derided by so many.

Radiohead are held in higher esteem within the industry, and clearly by somebody like you, but to the teenagers/twentysomethings at Glastonbury (and at home), they'd sure as hell rather listen to that Ed Sheeran set and have a sing-a-long than endure two hours of Radiohead.

If many of the same people that watched Sheeran last night had watched Radiohead on Friday then there would be equally 'meh' reaction. Infact, the only reason there isn't is because they wouldn't have bothered to turn them on in the first place. I haven't got the figures, but I can well imagine that more people watched Sheeran on tele than Radiohead, and probably the Foos. Many of those that are taking a pop at Sheeran didn't really like him in advance of last night's performance, yet watched it anyway. There's something a little bit funny about that. Of course, if I'm wrong about the tele stats then this post is null and void.
Click to expand...

I enjoy live music. I try to go to festivals as often as I can. If I don't like a band or act I usually still enjoy them live to a degree as generally they either know how to put on a show or there is something to appreciate or enjoy.

Ed Sheeran doesn't do this. He comes out and faffs around with a foot pedal for two hours while people stand and stare at him. If you don't like his music, or even if you do but aren't in love with it, this isn't very exciting if it goes on for any extended period of time. It wouldn't matter if he was NME's favourite artist, came out smothered in tattoes, and sung songs about how he loves the devil. If he did so by playing an acoustic guitar with a loop pedal to a standard good guitar player level for the entire set, a number of people would say afterwards "he's boring".

I don't like Radiohead but I did enjoy their set because it had some variation, there were things going on to enjoy or appreciate. There was a uniqueness to it that in itself made it stand out. They also I think understand how to play to an audience who aren't necessarily all Radiohead fanatics. Foo Fighters are basically all about putting a show on. Countless other acts put on a show aimed at entertaining everyone, fans or otherwise. Ed Sheeran is about the fact he knows how to sing and use a loop pedal, for two hours. If that's his thing, ok, but you kind of either have to be the best person ever at it, or expect fair criticism.

I mean, if you REALLY like Ed Sheeran songs, it's ok. If you don't, your enjoyment factor will depend on how much you like constantly checking the time on your phone, and your opinion afterwards will be reflective of this. Putting it all down to the fact people just don't like what Sheeran represents is completely inaccurate. There's an element of that from a small group of people...but if Sheeran came out and put on literally the best live show ever, those people would still say the same thing.

Cheesy said:
Well...yeah, but don't most musicians do stuff that appeals to their fans? Considering their genre/style tends to be what gets them those fans in the first place? I'm no fan but it's clear there's a significant number of people out there (both his dedicated fans and casual ones) who love the whole one-man-band thing.
Click to expand...

It depends. Ed Sheeran has fans who are in love with his songs. They're already won over before they even see him...but I've never heard anyone tell me how amazing he was live. My girlfriend loves his music and saw him at Wembley. She thought he was ok and enjoyed it...this is someone who saw Celine Dion last week and thought she was amazing. Celine fecking Dion. She came to see Lower Than Atlantis with me a few months ago who she'd never listened to. She thought they were amazing. She thought Ed Sheeran was "ok"

I also remember seeing Arctic Monkeys at Finsbury Park and it was literally the worst gig I'd been to. They were awful. I like their music and had seen them before and enjoyed their performance immensely, but on this occasion they looked lifeless and disinterested, you could also barely hear them...they were just plain crap..but you try telling that to any dedicated Arctic Monkeys fan (and there are swarms of them on twitter, I discovered). Even the ones who were there. They wont have it. They wont even allow YOU to have that opinion. Fans are strange things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.