Radiohead Headlining 2017

[Mash011]

12 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Course, and they seemed to have gone down really well with the majority. It was just an observation. I wasn't there and have no interest in even looking at any of the it on iplayer so have nothing invested either way. Merely pointing out that it doesn't seem to be the 100% success people are saying. Providing a bit of balance for historical accuracy!

 

Sure, and those dreadful MOR showings that go down as a '100% success' with everyone in the field are the kinds of boring things that a lot of us would prefer to swerve completely - plenty of that on the other two nights. A little divisiveness, yes please. (although that does occasionally go the other way - see Kanye where I was very much on the disappointed side)

[The Nal]

5 minutes ago, Mash011 said:

Sure, and those dreadful MOR showings that go down as a '100% success' with everyone in the field are the kinds of boring things that a lot of us would prefer to swerve completely - plenty of that on the other two nights. A little divisiveness, yes please. (although that does occasionally go the other way - see Kanye where I was very much on the disappointed side)

Yep, like the middle hour of the Foos set. @Wooderson turned to me halfway through and asked "Were Status Quo better?" (referring to 2009) which made me laugh. Because they were. 

Mucho respect to Radiohead for shaking it up and challenging the audience. Would've been much easier to come out and just play the old hits with the traditional screen thing.  

Kanye, well, now that was a complete disaster. 

[The Red Telephone]

13 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Course, and they seemed to have gone down really well with the majority. It was just an observation. I wasn't there and have no interest in even looking at any of the it on iplayer so have nothing invested either way. Merely pointing out that it doesn't seem to be the 100% success people are saying. Providing a bit of balance for historical accuracy!

 

Get over it - the weather was ace and Radiohead played the best ever set seen on the Pyramid 

I agree, it wasn't a 100% success. To me, it was incredible in places and slightly frustrating in others. They make you work for your adulation, Thom and the boys!

I can't imagine few, if any, non-fans being won over by that. 

[The Nal]

4 minutes ago, The Red Telephone said:

Get over it - the weather was ace and Radiohead played the best ever set seen on the Pyramid 

haha.

Yeah, the weather was ace!

[CaledonianGonzo]

I really enjoyed it when watching on iPlayer - though realistically Glasgow Green is probably in for a way less crowd-pleasing setlist.

(And a bit more of a aggro crowd)

[strummer77]

37 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Course, and they seemed to have gone down really well with the majority. It was just an observation. I wasn't there and have no interest in even looking at any of the it on iplayer so have nothing invested either way. Merely pointing out that it doesn't seem to be the 100% success people are saying. Providing a bit of balance for historical accuracy!

 

Yeah I agree basically. I'm a massive fan but there were issues early on. I was to the right and the weird screens (and flags) meant it was hard to see, sound was quietish and some people around me needed a Creep etc to get going. It was by no means poor, lots of early songs still went down superbly.

However in the end they emerged triumphant and the atmosphere in the field around me for the last hour was euphoric. It's nice to see a set that's interesting - and not the same band playing the same set etc. The journey is part of the fun
 

Edited June 30, 2017 by strummer77

[The Nal]

15 minutes ago, strummer77 said:

Yeah I agree basically. I'm a massive fan but there were issues early on. I was to the right and the weird screens (and flags) meant it was hard to see, sound was quietish and some people around me needed a Creep etc to get going. It was by no means poor, lots of early songs still went down superbly.

However in the end they emerged triumphant and the atmosphere in the field around me for the last hour was euphoric. It's nice to see a set that's interesting - and not the same band playing the same set etc. The journey is part of the fun
 

Indeed. I suppose a lot of people were expecting 97 or 03 again and hadn't listened to anything by them this century. 

[Stokesy10]

Gutted, tried about 10 times to get tickets on Absolute for the Manchester LCCC gig then and failed

I've been there before but only standing....has anyone been there seated before? A mate of mine has a seat in Block C which appears to be basically directly opposite the stage at the far side; any idea if that'll still be great sound/worth it? I'd happily watch them seating, stood every time I've seen them.

[Wooderson]

1997 was itself of a time and moment and might not get touched. For my money however, 2017 was a million miles better than 2003.

[stuartbert two hats]

1 hour ago, jparx said:

Thousands leave most headliner sets tbh. Attention span has gone down the drain and people are always afraid of missing something better elsewhere. Thousands would leave if Pink Floyd played.

Obviously.  People say Radiohead are dreary.  Be thankful we've not had to suffer through the dirge that is Pink Floyd.  

[Wooderson]

An inert passing review of the size of the crowd has zilcho bearing on the perceived quality of a performance.

For example... when 6 people went for a piss during Ryley Walker it reduced his audience by 10%. What an abject failure that gig was.*

*not necessarily true

[CaledonianGonzo]

I'm not so sure.  Due to the temporal nature of a gig, audience retention has got to be one measure of success.  A band is there to entertain people and if large numbers walk away feeling that they're not being entertained then the show can only ever be a qualified success. - and to discuss it without the caveat is to pretend that it didn't happen.  And so is not particularly honest.  If Riley Walker was being unmissable, then 6 people wouldn't have walked away.  As it was, they felt they could wander off.

Maybe it's the difference between the quality of the performance and the quality of the experience.  Technically audacious free jazz can still empty rooms.

[rpfranks]

21 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

I'm not so sure.  Due to the temporal nature of a gig, audience retention has got to be one measure of success.  A band is there to entertain people and if large numbers walk away feeling that they're not being entertained then the show can only ever be a qualified success. - and to discuss it without the caveat is to pretend that it didn't happen.  And so is not particularly honest.  If Riley Walker was being unmissable, then 6 people wouldn't have walked away.  As it was, they felt they could wander off.

Maybe it's the difference between the quality of the performance and the quality of the experience.  Technically audacious free jazz can still empty rooms.

Yes and no - bands like Radiohead will always struggle to keep a passive audience captive - it's the likes of Foo Fighters for example, who are instantly more upbeat, that will find it easy to keep a crowd on side even if they're not so interested. 

Ed Sheeran as well to an extent because of radio hits. 

[arcade fireman]

26 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

I'm not so sure.  Due to the temporal nature of a gig, audience retention has got to be one measure of success.  A band is there to entertain people and if large numbers walk away feeling that they're not being entertained then the show can only ever be a qualified success. - and to discuss it without the caveat is to pretend that it didn't happen.  And so is not particularly honest.  If Riley Walker was being unmissable, then 6 people wouldn't have walked away.  As it was, they felt they could wander off.

Maybe it's the difference between the quality of the performance and the quality of the experience.  Technically audacious free jazz can still empty rooms.

It would be a much bigger measure of success for someone like Ed Sheeran than for Radiohead. Radiohead's songs haven't been in the charts or regularly on the radio for years, likely a fair few people went to see them just to see what the fuss was about. Whereas everyone pretty much knows where they stand with Ed Sheeran.

I think if you took a straw poll round the site about how many people liked Sheeran's set vs Radiohead's, Ed's would come out on top. But if you took a straw poll and asked how many people found Sheeran's set amazing vs Radiohead's, how many would list Ed's as one of their favourite gigs vs Radiohead, I'm pretty sure Radiohead would come out on top. Audience retention is a very poor measure, especially at Glasto when there's so much else on and loads of people try and catch a bit of two headliners.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Yeah - it's only one measure, and maybe not the main one.  But to say that, say, Gorillaz was a success - and not to caveat with the fact that half the audience obviously didn't think so - isn't painting the full picture.

[jparx]

Manchester tickets have just been emailed to me.

[alibear]

We made friends for the evening with the people next to us for The xx/Radiohead. They were enjoying it but said they were "hoping for more hits". They didn't even know Exit Music... even when I told them the song featured in one of he biggest Hollywood films ever, so I really don't think they knew the band that well!

On the other hand, my Mr Bear is very much a casual fan but has persevered because he knows how much I like them. He came with me to the 2012(?) O2 gig (which he hated and I wasn't a massive fan of) and The Roundhouse (which we both obviously thought was awesome) so was happy to see them on Pyramid. He's a bit of anomaly because he's not really fussed abut their hits and much prefers their later, ravy stuff, or "the ones where Johnny gets to twiddle his knobs", as he describes it, so this was perfect for him, even though he's not an obsessive fan.

Not entirely sure where I'm going with this.. I guess it just interested me that so many people weren't fussed because they didn't play enough off The Bends when there was so much happening on stage and I think the music itself is so versatile - the set was incredible and I couldn't wait to watch it back. 

On the other hand, I also loved the Foos because all I'd planned to do was get drunk and air guitar with my friends in a field for two hours - I wasn't that arsed about the pointless extended jams or Taylor's crappy Under Pressure cover - but I have no desire to watch it again.

[Wooderson]

1 hour ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

I'm not so sure.  Due to the temporal nature of a gig, audience retention has got to be one measure of success.  A band is there to entertain people and if large numbers walk away feeling that they're not being entertained then the show can only ever be a qualified success. - and to discuss it without the caveat is to pretend that it didn't happen.  And so is not particularly honest.  If Riley Walker was being unmissable, then 6 people wouldn't have walked away.  As it was, they felt they could wander off.

Maybe it's the difference between the quality of the performance and the quality of the experience.  Technically audacious free jazz can still empty rooms.

They really needed a piss.

[bocumaroy]

Bit of a tangent but I was listening to a Father John Misty interview (yeah yeah, i know) and found it interesting when he said that live performances are, to paraphrase, the only environment in which the music can do something more than simply make a case for itself. That kind of sums up what I find quite depressing about a lot of discussion around music (even though I'm often guilty of it), in that a lot of the noise is just people negatively reacting to things they don't like without any attempt to actually get it or meet the artist halfway. It's why gigs are so appealing I think, because the people there tend to be invested in the artist and what they're trying to do, rather than a room full of eye-rolls and hot takes.

Obviously festivals are different in the sense that artists are playing to non-fans, and it's great when acts can play a massively crowd-pleasing set and convert everyone, but I don't think there's any reason why artists should feel obliged to that, nor would I consider it a necessary barometer for a successful set. Especially with an act like Radiohead who are have so many fans there anyway.

(Not a direct response to anyone in this thread, just got thinking about it whilst skim-reading). 

 

[jplewes]

I think the thing I don't get about this is that I found the Radiohead set incredibly crowd pleasing. Anyone with a passing interest in Radiohead music got the tunes they wanted, Creep, Paranoid Android, Karma Police and some other big cuts from OKC (Let Down, Exit Music, Lucky, Airbag) AND Street Spirit AND Fake Plastic Trees.

With OKNOTOK coming out and a critically acclaimed recent record it could have been a hell of a lot less big hit focused, and I personally would have loved reckoner etc in it. I'm not even some huge Radiohead fan, I like them a lot and I love in rainbows but it's only the second time I've seen them. I thought when they opened with Daydreaming they might go with Desert Island Disk second too which would have been a risky crowd loser but they played lucky ffs.

I still feel like people who didn't enjoy it weren't going to enjoy any Radiohead set.

As for the FJM thing - I haven't actually seen him live (I was tremendously put off by his interview on 6music where he came across as a colossal knob). Maybe I should give him a go. Do his live performances actually bear out what he's saying there..?

[Guest]

Got confirmation that I've got front standing tickets for manchester. Was a bit worried and confused about the process but it's seemed to work out okay. Hope it's been alright for everyone else too!

What's everyone hoping to hear them play then? Ask me tomorrow and my ideal setlist will be different, but here's what i'm feeling today. (semi-realistic with a few hopeful tunes thrown in)

1. Daydreaming
2. Lucky
3. Ful Stop
4. There There
5. All I Need
6. Decks Dark
7. Lotus Flower
8. Let Down
9. Pyramid Song
10. Identikit
11. The National Anthem
12. Weird Fishes/Arpeggi
13. Everything In Its Right Place
14. Idioteque
15. Exit Music (For A Film)
16. The Numbers
17. Bodysnatchers
     
18. Motion Picture Soundtrack
19. Man Of War
20. Nude
21. Paranoid Android
22. Fake Plastic Trees
     
23. The Bends
24. Reckoner
25. Karma Police

[bocumaroy]

14 minutes ago, jplewes said:

As for the FJM thing - I haven't actually seen him live (I was tremendously put off by his interview on 6music where he came across as a colossal knob). Maybe I should give him a go. Do his live performances actually bear out what he's saying there..?

Doesn't necessarily reflect on his performances, just brought it up because I think it's kind of relevant in terms of casual crowd response at festivals and how I personally don't put much stock in it. Without wanting to derail it into a FJM thread, I find him to be a great talker (hence listening to his interviews) and it comes across pretty well on stage too. He's a lot better live than on record imo.

Anyway back to Radiohead. I agree with you that it was a very crowd pleasing set for casual fans with a passing interest in the band, but their music still exists on its own terms and a crowd pleasing Radiohead set is very different to that of The Rolling Stones, as an extreme example, so a lot of people leaving Radiohead would have always been pretty inevitable whatever they did. 

Basically what you've said below, minus the fact that tbf for many people it may have been ruined by the issue with the screens, which probably was/is a mistake on the band's behalf.

25 minutes ago, jplewes said:

I still feel like people who didn't enjoy it weren't going to enjoy any Radiohead set.

 

[bocumaroy]

1 minute ago, SomeoneListeningIn said:

What's everyone hoping to hear them play then?

How to Disappear Completely

[rpfranks]

31 minutes ago, jplewes said:

I think the thing I don't get about this is that I found the Radiohead set incredibly crowd pleasing. Anyone with a passing interest in Radiohead music got the tunes they wanted, Creep, Paranoid Android, Karma Police and some other big cuts from OKC (Let Down, Exit Music, Lucky, Airbag) AND Street Spirit AND Fake Plastic Trees.

But the problem is, for a passive fan it took Radiohead about 90 minutes to get in to the 'big' tunes (discarding OKC tunes as a passive fan favourite as I was with passive fans and they didn't know some of them). So you can see why after 6/7 songs they might have gone elsewhere.

And let's be honest, it was lucky that they even played Creep and Karma Police because they didn't at Open'er the other day and probably won't at Werchter tonight.

[stuartbert two hats]

I wish Radiohead weren't so big.  I'd love them to do a sparsely, but dedicated attended scheduled Park headline set, but that's clearly not going to happen, even if they released three double albums of farting noises for the next 10 years.

Edited June 30, 2017 by stuartbert two hats