Arctic monkeys

[Flobadobalob]

What? 2000 is considered to be one of the best line-ups ever, certainly what I think to be the best Leeds line-up, and 2001 is general well-liked.

They both had the great 90s bands (Oasis, Pulp, RATM, Manics, Green Day) and bands that would go onto big things later on in the decade (Foos, QOTSA, Muse, The Strokes, Lostprophets).

[chubbz]

I dont think you understand. Because indie is the in thing at the moment. Radiohead are one of the bigger bands to come from a previous high point of indie. Indie will soon disappear again and just a few bands will survive for example the killers. They cant have 3 indie headliners, it will put off a big portion of their fanbase.

[howlin_pete]

I was halfway through typing that rant, but I think his main point is that all 3 headliners share a simular fanbase which is kinda true, at least moreso than most previous years.

Radiohead really arn't indie though

[Viva La Revolution 909]

I'd say slipknot. But then again they wouldnt headline. 2000 an 2001 have gone down as having awful lineups, i dont see why they would do that again.

[VCK]

I'm not an immensely massive fan of Radiohead (although I would watch them as I hear they're incredible live) but it would be sad days when Teh Slapknutz get a larger crowd than them. A group of respectable musicians who have released what is considered to be some of the greatest British albums ever don't get as great a turnout as a joke band who should have dropped their immature gimmick years ago.

[Dave]

The line up in 2000 was f**king immense, how anyone can fault it is beyond me.

Back on topic, yes AM deserve to headline. Massive fan base, huge band.

[thomasowen]

RADIOHEAD AREN'T INDIE!

Have you ever actually listened to them? You listen to In Kid A and tell me it's indie, listen to Amnesiac and tell me it's indie, or In Rainbows and tell me it's indie. THEY'RE NOT INDIE. And I have nothing against indie I like quit a few 'indie' bands, although I'm pretty sure indie is actually a form and not a genre.

[benisright]

RADIOHEAD AREN'T INDIE!

Have you ever actually listened to them? You listen to In Kid A and tell me it's indie, listen to Amnesiac and tell me it's indie, or In Rainbows and tell me it's indie. THEY'RE NOT INDIE. And I have nothing against indie I like quit a few 'indie' bands, although I'm pretty sure indie is actually a form and not a genre.

[kaosmark2]

I think the problam here is that there is such a loose definition of what an indie band is. Some people see it as a genre of music, some as a state of mind, some as being a band that are on an indipedndent label. Radiohead were on a major most of their life so they aren't (or werent) really indie in that sense and I would agree that they don't have what I would call an indie sound.

I also find the users previous comment about Indie being just a fad that goes in and out of fashion bizzare.

[Budweiser]

great set of headliners really to be honest. and when you have download, bloodstock, hellfest and sonisphere, where actually would you get a metal headliner from?

even if you had iron maiden or guns and roses, its not metal.

have they got a metal headliner no, have they got the bigggest british act and one of the biggest bands around yes, have they got the biggest band at the moment and the big pulling international band last year yes and have they got the band everyone or most people want for any festival to headline? thats yes to so any complaints is just that you dont like the bands really and if ya dont, well i'm sure you can find another festival like one that's supposed to actualyl be a metal one

[Benj]

Radiohead are indie. As for arctic monkeys nobody talks about them anymore and noone will say arctic monkeys are their fave band. More likely that radiohead or kings of leon are someones fave band.

Edited February 20, 2009 by Benj

[Bradders]

V and T have too much pop for indie fans (and I mean proper indie fans, not pop fans who just happen to like the indie they hear on the radio). Glastonbury and Leeds are spot on, but that's about it (+ Latitude maybe.).

I think I've used the word indie more since these rumours came up than I have in my whole life...

Edited February 20, 2009 by Bradders

[benisright]

You could say the same about indie, You've got Glastonbury, V and T in the park to go to.

[beLIEveR]

V isnt a festival, its a 2 day version of party in the park with camping

[saltybugger]

You could say the same about indie, You've got Glastonbury, V and T in the park to go to.

[andy1673]

Not really a fan of Radiohead to be honest, but they are huge and like them or not you have to appreciate that.

As far as the Arctic Monkeys go, I've seen them a few times and not too fussed about seeing them again but i know it could've been a whole lot worse. For example, i'd have killed for them two years ago instead of Razorlight and in hindsight the RHCP.

Fact is, if you don't like a particular band thats on, go to another stage and find something you do like. I'll wait and see whats on, on other stages before I decide if I want to sample some Radiohead. One things for sure, i'm gonna have a cracking time!

[Lithium05]

RADIOHEAD AREN'T INDIE!

[thomasowen]

Indie is such a subjective genre, it doesn't have the same kind of defined rules that Pop, Punk, blues etc have. There use to be a time when Indie meant being on an Indie label, which I believe XL is.

[benisright]

Indie is such a subjective genre, it doesn't have the same kind of defined rules that Pop, Punk, blues etc have. There use to be a time when Indie meant being on an Indie label, which I believe XL is.

Edited March 2, 2009 by benisright

[rivalschools.price]

Whilst I agree that that's true, I can appreciate the argument that they're not far enough away from indie to create whet many would consider a mix of styles. I know its a poor argument but I think what many are too ashamed to say is that what they want is a band who would appear on the cover of Kerrang rather than NME. As sad as it may sound I imagine that thet's the basis for a lot of these arguments, and I kind of feel the same.

Don't get me wrong, I like radiohead, but given the choice I would much rather have Green Day or someone this year then Radiohead next year when the other headliners aren't so similar.

(And I know people make the claim that AM are more like Green Day than they are radiohead, and I don't dispute that, but in terms of fan bases and to use the admittedly poor example again, they're more for readers of kerrang than NME)

[hearing_aid]

NME and Kerrang are both utter shite tho... If were going to use those two magazines a reference point for bands that play reading then I really think the festival is in trouble...

And I backup the point that somone made that these someone who is a fan of the arctic monkeys is more likely to have a Green Day album then a Radiohead one.

Edited March 2, 2009 by hearing_aid

[thomasowen]

NME and Kerrang are both utter shite tho... If were going to use those two magazines a reference point for bands then that play reading then I really think the festival is in trouble...

[pigshair123]

kaiser chiefs get slated in NME nowadays

[thomasowen]

kaiser chiefs get slated in NME nowadays

[ArcticMonkeysUK]

But this is what NME do, bring up a band only to hack them to bits when they release their second album. The list of casualties is endless - Kaiser Chiefs, Kooks, Fratelis, Maximo Park, Magic Numbers etc. They even joked at the NME awards how a few years ago Kaiser chiefs won best album.