Options
Isle Of Wight boss:Ed Sheeran Boring.
ISle Of Wight boss think festivals are done for if there are more boring acts.
http://www.nme.com/news/ed-sheeran/80500
http://www.nme.com/news/ed-sheeran/80500
0
Hey there!
Welcome to the Digital Spy forums. If you’d like to join in, please sign in or register.
Comments
The comments were a little tongue in cheek, of course.
Does modern pop music produce boring acts and a lack of potential headliners?
There are probably less headline bands than before but more solo, particularly, female solo acts that could headline festivals exist.
I imagine Ed Sheeran would be a fine headline act. Beyoncé, Rihanna, Gaga, Katy Perry are all headliners with a substantial back catalogue and fan base.
Personally I find the DJ acts like Example, Calvin Harris, Guetta less exciting as festival acts but judging by some festivals I'm in the minority.
Well, he's right. Sheeran is bland. A lot of today's acts are boring, and too safe. What brings the crowds is not the likes of Ed Sheeran, or any other also ran coat-tail hangers, but Springsteen or the Sex Pistols. When the great acts of yesteryear finally stop touring, what's left?
Music today is in a better place than it was a few years ago, with the ghastly influence of Mr Cowell slipping further into irrelevance, and there are a number of excellent acts out there who are still young. But, what is desperately needed is an act or acts that are not safe. Something to shake up music and possibly frighten the system. Until that happens, if it still can, then I fear that festivals may literally die of boredom.
None of those are really appropriate headliners for the IOW festival though
True, the headliners tend to be bands. But if you say there are less bands around these days you'll get a torrent of 'There are lots of bands around you just have to find them, stuff'. I think there is a shortage of modern headliner bands.
There are lots of bands around, probably more than there have been for a long time, but you are right there are very few true festival 'headline' bands around today.
As a big Hard Rock/Heavy Metal fan I know from experience that the two major festivals in this country, Download and Sonisphere, have become far too over-reliant on Metallica and Iron Maiden for their main headliner. Although the fans have to take their share of the blame because if either of those don't headline then the attendance numbers are significantly down.
Sonisphere, who had both Iron Maiden and Metallica headline this year, have already said if they can't get the headliners they want they won't fun the festival next year.
Is this the a manifestation of audience fragmentation that has really been coming for a while. That even the best/most popular of the modern rock bands can't quite gain the critical mass to claim real headliner status? I'm not really a metal fan (Metallica excepted) but I thought maybe Slipknot or Korn or one of the leading symphonic metal bands might be close?
Within the Rock & Metal world there are some headlining bands outside of Metallica & Iron Maiden. Slipknot, Aerosmith, Avenged Sevenfold, even the likes of Biffy Clyro. However without the likes of Iron Maiden or Metallica on the bill it is a well known phenomena that the attendance will be considerably lower than if either of them were there.
The only two Symphonic Metal bands who could headline are Nightwish and Within Temptation, however their fanbase is much bigger in Europe than it is here, Nightwish headlined Wacken Open Air last year for example, but certainly Within Temptation are getting more well known in the UK and they are headlining Bloodstock next year.
In the modern say instead of Nirvana or Oasis we get Coldplay/Sheeran.
A lot of young men like both of those acts, so...
MOR no thanks.
I much prefer a metal band with a good production and dymamics, i would simply fall asleep if i went to see cold play roll on december Motorhead and Micheal Schenker Group.
Headlining Band's with pulling potential are getting much harder to find.
As an 'ageing' woman, do bugger off
It's intensely irritating to be continuously told I'm supposed to be listening to safe MOR acts. Who makes these decisions ffs?
Give me Metal any day.
The Chilis are a decent headline act but the other two are unbelievably average. Mind you, I'm not sure there's any great value in "stadium" bands who can fill big spaces anyway. I think it suits heavy rock / metal bands because they produce enough volume to fill a large space but the likes of Coldplay just don't have the the power and energy to play in a large open arena.
And while I can think of a good few old bands which can play to a large audience - U2, Depeche Mode, The Cure, Manic Street Preachers, Radiohead, Nick Cave - I'm really struggling to think of any 21st century non-metal band which can hold a stadium or arena crowd. Muse, probably, although they're not quite 21st century
Personally I prefer to see bands in smaller and more intimate venues or stages, especially if they make a lot of noise. It's better contained in a small(ish) space than lost in the open air of an arena.
You may not like them, but Coldplay have proven themselves to be a consummate festival headlining band over the years. Their performances at Glastonbury were near-faultless, and even their detractors in the media had to concede they knew how to put on a show.
As a live band, they are much more powerful onstage, as years of performing in stadiums has helped them develop a sound that can fill and energise a massive area of people.
I believe they are called young people.
Actually, it's probably more likely to be record companies, radio stations and DJ's, most of whom are middle aged men...........
I'm not a Coldplay fan at all as I find their music bland, but my wife likes them and I have seen them live.
You are right, they do put on a good show but I wouldn't say their music "energised" the fans as it was very much a "sit down" show.
I quite like them as a matter of fact and I actually saw them at Glastonbury in 2000, 2002 and 2005.
The 2005 headliner was certainly good and really got the crowd going inasmuch as we were all singing along and sort of swaying to the music and applauding enthusiastically after each number.
However, they still didn't really come across as a "stadium" act because their music doesn't really suit that environment, except for songs with a bit more oomph like "Politik". Chris Martin did his best to put on a good show, energetically dancing around the stage and effortlessly switching from piano to guitar but the rest of the band may as well have not been there at all.
Maybe they've got "bigger" since then (I don't know - I lost interest after "X&Y") but the ability to play to an appreciative capacity crowd doesn't necessarily make you a good stadium / arena act. Coldplay make nice songs but they're not really what you'd call exciting.
I always think that some bands have a stadium sound...U2, AC/DC, Simple Minds, Metallica, 30 Secs from Mars, Guns N'Roses...it's a big sound that fills out the acoustic space. Maybe to get a certain kind of audience 'energised' or excited requires a metal band but a stadium requires a sound that fills it. I actually think Coldplay do have something approaching that sound.
I haven't seen Angels and Airwaves yet but their records would suggest they have that sound. And I imagine some of the symphonic bands have it as well. I'll admit the audience is probably what is missing for some of these groups but not their sound.