Lineup 2018

[Steve1000]

9 minutes ago, Mattymooz said:

I could see either of them subheadlining, but I doubt theyd go for headling/coheadlining as they don't have the same draw as many other acts. They may have coheadline I guess if it was like this year where there weren't many people around, but there are gonna be so many options next year with new arcitcs, killers, foos, paramore, royal blood, 21p, kendrick, kanye, 1975, BMTH etc. that there is no way they'll go with someone like the stokes who is just that high up because of their status 10 years ago

If that's the case then 'there is no way they'll go with someone like The Killers who is just that high up because of their status 10 years ago'

Anyway it's because I think Kendrick, Royal Blood and Foos will headline, so I'm throwing in the Strokes so it's indie enough

Edited July 29, 2017 by Steve1000

[Mattymooz]

Just now, Steve1000 said:

If that's the case then 'there is no way they'll go with someone like The Killers who is just that high up because of their status 10 years ago'

Anyway it's because I think Kendrick, Royal Blood and Foos will headline, so I'm throwing in the Strokes so it's indie enough

Even so Killers are waaay more popular/relevant nowadays than the the Strokes and have songs that are still popular. It's l;ike how Liam Gallagher got sub because he was part of Oasis who are still popular now. Even just looking at spotify listens The Killers' recent stuff has way more listens than the stokes - heck Mr Brightside only left the UK charts a couple of weeks ago.....

[Steve1000]

40 minutes ago, Mattymooz said:

Even so Killers are waaay more popular/relevant nowadays than the the Strokes and have songs that are still popular. It's l;ike how Liam Gallagher got sub because he was part of Oasis who are still popular now. Even just looking at spotify listens The Killers' recent stuff has way more listens than the stokes - heck Mr Brightside only left the UK charts a couple of weeks ago.....

DJ Khaled has more Spotify listens than the Rolling Stones. This clearly shows DJ Khaled is bigger than the Rolling Stones. 

Spotify listens are a horrible way of judging an acts size

Edited July 29, 2017 by Steve1000

[Mattymooz]

Just now, Steve1000 said:

DJ Khaled has more Spotify listens than the Rolling Stones. This clearly shows DJ Khaled is bigger than the Rolling Stones. 

Spotify listens are a horrible way of judging an acts size

I'm not saying that DJ Khaled is bigger than the rolling stones, you're the one who is saying the Strokes would be a bigger draw to teenagers than The Killers which is just stupid

[Steve1000]

3 minutes ago, Mattymooz said:

I'm not saying that DJ Khaled is bigger than the rolling stones, you're the one who is saying the Strokes would be a bigger draw to teenagers than The Killers which is just stupid

when did I ever say that

[Mattymooz]

Just now, Steve1000 said:

when did I ever say that

I assumed thats what you were inferring by this comment:

37 minutes ago, Steve1000 said:

If that's the case then 'there is no way they'll go with someone like The Killers who is just that high up because of their status 10 years ago'

Anyway it's because I think Kendrick, Royal Blood and Foos will headline, so I'm throwing in the Strokes so it's indie enough

[Steve1000]

1 minute ago, Mattymooz said:

I assumed thats what you were inferring by this comment:

That comment was a reference to you saying the Strokes won't headline because it would be based on success over a decade ago. You then suggested the Killers (and Foo Fighters) who would infact be booked based on success from over a decade ago. Not once did I say The Strokes are bigger, because they are not 

[justanothername]

1 hour ago, Mattymooz said:

Even so Killers are waaay more popular/relevant nowadays than the the Strokes and have songs that are still popular. It's l;ike how Liam Gallagher got sub because he was part of Oasis who are still popular now. Even just looking at spotify listens The Killers' recent stuff has way more listens than the stokes - heck Mr Brightside only left the UK charts a couple of weeks ago.....

The Killers aren't relevant now and basing which bands are bigger based on Spotify listeners is dumb

 

[Mattymooz]

Just now, justanothername said:

The Killers aren't relevant now and basing which bands are bigger based on Spotify listeners is dumb

 

*sells out their day of BST* *people denied entry to their set at Glasto cause it was so popular* *sells out arena tour*  *debut single has spent the more time in the charts than any other song ever* *releases 2 really well received songs*

"Oh yeah definitely not relevant, teens will have no clue who they are, they're basically just a small band who nobody listens oto or cares about. Let's get the strokes in instead they had that one pretty decent album in 2001 they're soo in and trendy right now its unbelievable."

 

Even though I think The Strokes headlining is ridiculous, I thought The Libertines headlining in 2015 was a bit silly so who knows.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

Even having dropped off since their heyday The Strokes are still a miles better band now than The Killers ever were tbh. Even that half-arsed EP The Strokes put out last year was better than most of The Killers' albums. And I like The Killers. That said I don't think either will ever headline R+L again.

Edited July 29, 2017 by Zac Quinn

[dentalplan]

What's relevance got to do with demand? Eminem is painfully irrelevant to modern day hip hop yet he still moves units quicker than anyone in the genre can and probably ever will.

[Steve1000]

14 minutes ago, Mattymooz said:

*sells out their day of BST* *people denied entry to their set at Glasto cause it was so popular* *sells out arena tour*  *debut single has spent the more time in the charts than any other song ever* *releases 2 really well received songs*

"Oh yeah definitely not relevant, teens will have no clue who they are, they're basically just a small band who nobody listens oto or cares about. Let's get the strokes in instead they had that one pretty decent album in 2001 they're soo in and trendy right now its unbelievable."

 

Even though I think The Strokes headlining is ridiculous, I thought The Libertines headlining in 2015 was a bit silly so who knows.

Fucking hell mate. There's a difference between being large and being relevant. The Rolling Stones are not relevant nowadays even tho they are arguably the biggest rock band on the planet

The Strokes aren't relevant either, not every headliner has to be. The Killers would be a very big headliner but not all headliners can be, so if they can only afford a small-medium sized one The Strokes are decent bet

Edited July 29, 2017 by Steve1000

[Rose-Colored Boy]

Dunno where The Man was 'really well received' either. Maybe it's just my confirmation bias talking cos I thought it was the worst thing they've ever done but the response seemed mixed at best to me.

[Steve1000]

Also I've never been to Glasto but can't be sure but I'd expect The Strokes would pack out the tent early afternoon

[Amy Lawn]

Metallica headlined the other year, but The Killers haven't been relevant for too long?

[Mattymooz]

Just now, dentalplan said:

What's relevance got to do with demand? Eminem is painfully irrelevant to modern day hip hop yet he still moves units quicker than anyone in the genre can and probably ever will.

My definition of relevant is that lots of people would want to go and see the act, not just the fans. Eminem is a good example as although he hasn't put music out in forever, people still wanna go and see him. KoRn is a good example of someone who isnt relevant anymore, only people who were fans will probably go and see them.

Just now, Steve1000 said:

The Strokes aren't relevant either, not every headliner has to be. The Killers would be a very big headliner but not all headliners can be, so if they can only afford a small-medium sized one The Strokes are decent bet

I dunno The Strokes just don't seem like headliners to me, great subs or sure but not a full headliner. I think its way more likely someone like Catfish or Royal Blood would headline. I hate how this has blown out of proportion, I'm not saying their a good act I just think everyone here is really underestimating the power of the killers.

Just now, Zac Quinn said:

Dunno where The Man was 'really well received' either. Maybe it's just my confirmation bias talking cos I thought it was the worst thing they've ever done but the response seemed mixed at best to me.

TBH I think it was like Paramores new stuff, it was so much less rocky that a lot of the rock fans weren't interested anymore.

[dentalplan]

15 minutes ago, Mattymooz said:

My definition of relevant is that lots of people would want to go and see the act, not just the fans. Eminem is a good example as although he hasn't put music out in forever, people still wanna go and see him. KoRn is a good example of someone who isnt relevant anymore, only people who were fans will probably go and see them.

Okay but I think everyone else means acts that can be perceived to be popular whilst also being current and at the forefront of musical trends within their field, rather than popular for what they did all those years ago.

The Man, the apparent new single by The Killers, just entered the charts at #100. Mr Brightside is at #45. I think that illustrates the point.

[justanothername]

48 minutes ago, Mattymooz said:

*sells out their day of BST* *people denied entry to their set at Glasto cause it was so popular* *sells out arena tour*  *debut single has spent the more time in the charts than any other song ever* *releases 2 really well received songs*

"Oh yeah definitely not relevant, teens will have no clue who they are, they're basically just a small band who nobody listens oto or cares about. Let's get the strokes in instead they had that one pretty decent album in 2001 they're soo in and trendy right now its unbelievable."

I didn't say that they weren't a popular band. I mean those things you listed are many of a result of the bands work from over 10 years ago. Hardly call that relevant. Also Brightside wan't their debut and The Man which described as well received peaked at number 100 on the singles charts. Massive success there I guess.

29 minutes ago, GETOFFAMYLAWN said:

Metallica headlined the other year, but The Killers haven't been relevant for too long?

At least Metallica were good at some point in time I guess

24 minutes ago, Mattymooz said:

My definition of relevant is that lots of people would want to go and see the act, not just the fans. Eminem is a good example as although he hasn't put music out in forever, people still wanna go and see him. KoRn is a good example of someone who isnt relevant anymore, only people who were fans will probably go and see them.

If you want to go and see an act wouldn't that make you a fan? I mean the only bands I see at festivals that I'm not a fan is because there is no one else on but I didn't get a ticket for them or affect my decision to get a ticket but it's just that I have nothing better to do and I presume that'st the same for a lot of people.

[Mattymooz]

Just now, justanothername said:

If you want to go and see an act wouldn't that make you a fan? I mean the only bands I see at festivals that I'm not a fan is because there is no one else on but I didn't get a ticket for them or affect my decision to get a ticket but it's just that I have nothing better to do and I presume that'st the same for a lot of people.

Nope. I wanna see Foo Fighters at some point but the only songs I know from them are Learn To Fly and Best Of You. I've only listened to OK Computer by Radiohead and I'd buy a festival ticket to go see them. I really wanna go see Lorde too but I've only really heard her singles. I wouldn't say I'm a fan of any of these bands, but due to recommendations from friends, clips I have seen/heard all make me wanna go and see them.

I always say to people if they dont want to already to go and see Muse cause I think they're a really great band. Most of my friends aren't fans but they've said they're gonna go and see them.

Obviously people aren't going to go and see them if there is someone else they want to go and see instead. For example if some festival had Muse vs. Foo Fighters (dunno what kind of festival that wouold be but there we go) I'd probably go see Muse. But that doesnt mean that I dont wanna see foo fighters at some point too.

Just now, justanothername said:

I didn't say that they weren't a popular band. I mean those things you listed are many of a result of the bands work from over 10 years ago. Hardly call that relevant. Also Brightside wan't their debut and The Man which described as well received peaked at number 100 on the singles charts. Massive success there I guess.

I mean all their albums went to number 1, which compared to the strokes (which is the point of this conversation) only 1 album went to no. 1

And from Wikipedia: ""Mr. Brightside" is the first single released by American rock band the Killers"

Just now, dentalplan said:

Okay but I think everyone else means acts that can be perceived to be popular whilst also being current and at the forefront of musical trends within their field, rather than popular for what they did all those years ago.

The Man, the apparent new single by The Killers, just entered the charts at #100. Mr Brightside is at #45. I think that illustrates the point.

Mr Brightside is still at 45? God damn what a joke lol

[dentalplan]

1 hour ago, GETOFFAMYLAWN said:

Metallica headlined the other year, but The Killers haven't been relevant for too long?

I don't think anyone is saying relevance is an obstacle to headlining. If anything, they exclusively book irrelevant acts to headline.

[Steve1000]

I don't think anyone's disputing the size of the Killers, if they did headline it would be a nice moneymaker for them

The Strokes are as an indie option for a co-headline, since I can't think of any other realistic acts that fit that category

[Bisque]

4 hours ago, Mattymooz said:

Nope. I wanna see Foo Fighters at some point but the only songs I know from them are Learn To Fly and Best Of You. I've only listened to OK Computer by Radiohead and I'd buy a festival ticket to go see them. I really wanna go see Lorde too but I've only really heard her singles. I wouldn't say I'm a fan of any of these bands, but due to recommendations from friends, clips I have seen/heard all make me wanna go and see them.

I always say to people if they dont want to already to go and see Muse cause I think they're a really great band. Most of my friends aren't fans but they've said they're gonna go and see them.

Obviously people aren't going to go and see them if there is someone else they want to go and see instead. For example if some festival had Muse vs. Foo Fighters (dunno what kind of festival that wouold be but there we go) I'd probably go see Muse. But that doesnt mean that I dont wanna see foo fighters at some point too.

I mean all their albums went to number 1, which compared to the strokes (which is the point of this conversation) only 1 album went to no. 1

And from Wikipedia: ""Mr. Brightside" is the first single released by American rock band the Killers"

Mr Brightside is still at 45? God damn what a joke lol

This is the most boring post I've ever read on efests.

[manchestermusicreview]

14 hours ago, Steve1000 said:

I don't think anyone's disputing the size of the Killers, if they did headline it would be a nice moneymaker for them

The Strokes are as an indie option for a co-headline, since I can't think of any other realistic acts that fit that category

Florence and the machine, tame impala? 

[Amy Lawn]

16 hours ago, dentalplan said:

I don't think anyone is saying relevance is an obstacle to headlining. If anything, they exclusively book irrelevant acts to headline.

how you gonna say that when Fall Out Boy headlined last year?

[dentalplan]

30 minutes ago, GETOFFAMYLAWN said:

how you gonna say that when Fall Out Boy headlined last year?

Do you listen to their new stuff?