2013 Lineup

[2rare2die]

No new material maybe?

Think pulp, ratm and blur!

[lightning1000]

The same RATM that played a free gig at Finsbury Park? Yup, all about the money!

[The Mean Bean]

Lets not forget all that money they donated to Shelter, the greedy bastards.

[2rare2die]

Haha, I think that was a thankyou for all the money the uk public made them. But the r+l, t and oxygen and download gigs were definitely take the money and run gigs.

[lightning1000]

They donated all the proceeds from Killing In The Name Of getting to no.1 to Shelter and Youth Music, so i think people are being more than a little cynical if they are mentioning RATM in the 'reforming for the money' argument. Given the amount of charity work they've done, they really don't strike me as the greedy type.

[KVShinedown]

Speaking of Rage, can we have them headlining next year? with Tool subbing...?

Please Melv!!

[Vieuphoria]

Don't see the point in having Rage back really. They are good n'all. But like no new material? No point really. If they bring out a new album then yes 100%. Same with Pixies, best to leave it until (or if) they ever release new material

[kaosmark2]

Can't we have Tool in both headline and sub slots?

[jump]

famous band. Would any of us pass up the chance to see Led Zep (etc). Band are put on pedestals way too much. Just because a band aren't who they used to be, doesn't mean they aren't playing the same music. Bands are just bands, that is all. Nothing more. If a band reunites (no matter how big or small the band are) there will always be an audience for it (no matter how big or small). A band don't have to be the same exact people they were first time round. Some times it takes time away for a band to renew themselves and put on a better show. Pulp, Blur, Refused etc

[AcademicPistol]

Can't we have Tool in both headline and sub slots?

[Vieuphoria]

Yet the reason they are put on a pedestal is because they are famous. When the band plays shit or is so far removed from the orginal the line that it's just 1 member who wasn't even the frontman or creative force (yet it's still Sublime ) it's tolareted for the sake of people being able to say their saw whoever but if a newish band start doing the same they are written off. Not that I'm saying all reforms are bad but considering just how shit some of them turn out that it better off not seeing them at all.

And I'm not sure how a band doing a few one off renews them tho.

[AcademicPistol]

You think the stone roses are playing for any other reason?

Edited April 26, 2012 by AcademicPistol

[jump]

But what does it matter if a band play a shit gig first time round, or on a reunion tour. Led Zep played an legendarily awful performance at Live Aid. Doesn't dampen their legend.

Plus I was referring to the topic at hand of The Roses and Smiths reunion talk. So your talk of Sublime isn't relevant. That being said, i've never said Sublime with Rome are Sublime... they are Sublime with Rome. You really must get your head around this.

but again, a band can reunite at any point if they want to. For whatever reason, and to play to however many people they can. It'll be for them and the fans to enjoy whatever comes of it. Can't guarantee it'll be a 'good' reunion, but you can't guarantee anything will be good. As for renewal... most of the bands of that that have reunited, on the whole they've been incredibly successful. I can't think of a recently reunited band who've played badly or have been badly received.

[Vieuphoria]

Yeah, what does it matter if you see a band and they are shit as long as you can see them.

I was reffering to reunions in general with Sublime with being an example and I never said you said they are Sublime but they are stupid people who think they are Sublime which is almost as stupid as what you keep saying that they are a band in their own right.

[jump]

Of course it matters. But how does it matter any more than if a band who never broke up play a bad gig?

But they didn't make the album under the name of Sublime. The were the suffix of With Rome at the end. No issue with it at all.

By your logic AC/DC aren't a band in their own right. In fact they should have never bothered with Black In Black and should be ashamed for going on to be one of the biggest bands in the world.

[thetime]

Blur never split though. That was a hiatus.

[Vieuphoria]

Go up a few posts and you will see it's a double standard, if they are a "famous" band people but up with it for the sake of saying they saw them but a new band gets written off.

Yeah, AC/DC is the same thing. Sublime was 15ish years later against the wishes of Brad's family and the only thing that prevented them from being called Sublime was because they couldn't do it legally. With no Brad who was the front man and main song writer it's very much not the band the same way if Nirvana "reformed" without Kurt. AC/DC wasn't the same as the Youngs are the core memebers and Bon Scott wasn't even the orginal (or 2nd) singer

[lightning1000]

I find it funny we've discussed this for pages when the smiths story that started it has been proven to be bs haha

[thetime]

I find it funny we've discussed this for pages when the smiths story that started it has been proven to be bs haha

[Vieuphoria]

you forgot the chunk where people suggested The Cure weren't headliners

[AcademicPistol]

you forgot the chunk where people suggested The Cure weren't headliners

[kaosmark2]

Now thats a big talking point you got there.

Amount of people claiming a band have got back together, where infact they have just not done anything in a couple of years. At the drive in is that a reunion even though they have done less than say pulp?

[Vieuphoria]

They won't be headliners in 2013. Which is what this thread is meant to be about.

[thetime]

A band saying they're going on hiatus and don't intend to do anything for a while is very different from a band splitting up for some reason.

if you announce you're taking a break from writing material and performing together, then it's not a reunion is it? It's just returning to a neglected project. I don't think you can level accusations of money-making at such bands.

Or do Radiohead keep splitting up and reuniting rather than taking breaks and hiatus'? Do musicians in several bands keep splitting up and reuniting, or do they just divert their focus and time to other projects?

[AcademicPistol]

Since Robert Smith is in love on/with Fridays does that mean he prefers Reading as they are playing there Friday and Saturday, wait at Leeds?