Glastonbury 2013

[Pranet]

I have no idea why people would spend hundreds on tickets to a festival where they have no idea who will actually be playing (except for people who just go to festivals to be drunk in the mud).

The reason I do it is because it is big and varied enough that there will be something worth doing all the time. I don't go for the main stage headliners anyway, by and large.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Past experience?

If you have faith in the people who curate certain stages then it becomes a lot easier - e.g. I know for a fact I'll almost certainly love a lot of what's on the line-up in West Holts, even if I haven't heard of half of them when the line-up's announced.  Plus the sheer size of it leads to diversity across the board, with all sorts of hidden gems playing in tiny stages at all sorts of odd times.  A sort of eclecticism borne out of the economies of scale sort of thing, as well as the fact that it has such a good reputation that people are willing to play for less cash than they would elsewhere so it can attract the biggest acts in the world.  Line up-wise, it has a strength in depth that's unmatched by any other festival.

Plus, er, the 'vibe' man.

[thugler]

I have no idea why people would spend hundreds on tickets to a festival where they have no idea who will actually be playing (except for people who just go to festivals to be drunk in the mud).

For most festivals this makes sense. But Glastonbury has something like 100 stages, many of which contains acts I have no idea about from many different genres, and at least a few with something I like. Add to that the fact that there's so much more to it than the music aspect, it's just incredibly fun and exciting to wander around. And you get to bring your stash of booze/whatever wherever you go without the tyranny of a arena section and camping section divide. And it's great fun camping with a big bunch of mates. And the atmosphere is far beyond any other festival, even compared to the next couple of massive festivals, they are a complete joke compared to Glastonbury, after wandering around for 15 minutes the first time I went this became clear to me and I felt rather giddy. Even the usually over zealous security and other nasty aspects of festivals is not present, and slightly half arsed.

I think I saw 2 acts from the main stage last time (wu tang clan and paul simon). So the headliners really aren't all that important. It's clear that people aren't too bothered about the headliners when the tickets sell out in an hour and 40 minutes with nothing announced.

[Noodle Lizard]

So pretty much what I said, then: "drunk in the mud".  With the possibility of something good being on one of the hundred stages.  Meh.

I went once in 2010, I believe, on a free ticket.  I thought it was pretty bad and absolutely packed with cunts[nb]presumably because, like you said, most of them don't care/know about music[/nb].  A festival's 'vibe' can't sustain it for me when my options are The View, Little Boots or a hundred unknown acoustic/synth acts, and the vibe wasn't that good to start with.  Not as bad as Reading (or Leeds, I assume), but not worth any hassle - even if you do get to see Stevie Wonder do a half-assed set from a few hundred miles away at the end of it all.

[Beagle 2]

Well, you sound a bit like you don't "care/know about music" if you don't like the Glastonbury headliners, haven't heard of any of the acts playing any of the other stages but still think it's better than Leeds or Reading.

I dunno, I think it's bloody brilliant, and has an atmosphere I've never found anywhere else on the planet, but I can see how you might have a miserable time if it's not your bag. If you don't like festivals you're not going to like it, admittedly. If you do, it's the best one by a mile.

[CaledonianGonzo]

So pretty much what I said, then: "drunk in the mud".  With the possibility of something good being on one of the hundred stages.  Meh.

I went once in 2010, I believe, on a free ticket.  I thought it was pretty bad and absolutely packed with cunts[nb]presumably because, like you said, most of them don't care/know about music[/nb].  A festival's 'vibe' can't sustain it for me when my options are The View, Little Boots or a hundred unknown acoustic/synth acts, and the vibe wasn't that good to start with.  Not as bad as Reading (or Leeds, I assume), but not worth any hassle - even if you do get to see Stevie Wonder do a half-assed set from a few hundred miles away at the end of it all.

Then your experience in 2010 was entirely different to mine - I saw no end of amazing stuff that year:  Toots & The Maytals, Dr John, Femi Kuti, Quantic, Ray Davies, Flaming Lips, Funkadelic as the sun set opening with a stunning 20 minute version of Maggot Brain.  And from where I was standing Stevie Wonder was ruddy marvellous.  At no point in the weekend were my options as narrow as two things I didn't like.

There wasn't any mud that year, either.

[Noodle Lizard]

Well, you sound a bit like you don't "care/know about music" if you don't like the Glastonbury headliners, haven't heard of any of the acts playing any of the other stages but still think it's better than Leeds or Reading.

I just prefer to go to festivals where I know that I like at least a quarter of the bands playing.  I don't really understand why Glastonbury can't announce any acts before putting tickets on sale - that way it may weed out some of the "drunk in the mud" people and get some actual fans of the bands in there.  Same goes for Reading/Leeds, I think they do the same thing.  Aside from that, Glastonbury's probably just not for me.  My sister goes every year though, she was really excited to see "that one which goes na-da-da-na" last year, so good for her I guess.

That being said, yeah, it was certainly better than Reading 2008 which was possibly the biggest gathering of pricks I've ever seen, followed closely-ish by Download.  Now I think of it, the only festivals I've been to in the UK which I thought were good were Sonisphere 2010, Bloodstock 2009 and High Voltage 2010.  The better ones can be found in mainland Europe.

But this should really be in a thread for "festivals what were bad", don't let me interrupt.  I'm going to have to find some festivals to hate in the USA now.  Coachella looks tempting.

[vrailaine]

I have no idea why people would spend hundreds on tickets to a festival where they have no idea who will actually be playing (except for people who just go to festivals to be drunk in the mud).

sounds more alluring than that year kings of Leon headlined, at least.

[CaledonianGonzo]

I don't really understand why Glastonbury can't announce any acts before putting tickets on sale - that way it may weed out some of the "drunk in the mud" people and get some actual fans of the bands in there.

The converse is that if they announce, say, Muse headlining then the place becomes overrun with Muse fans.  It skews the demographics and that's often not a particularly beneficial thing, as anyone who's been to a festival headlined by Oasis will attest.

[Petey Pate]

I'm going to have to find some festivals to hate in the USA now.

May I suggest Burning Man?

I also went to Glasto 2010 and my experience was a lot more similar to Caledonian Gonzo's than yours.  I had taken some magic mushrooms prior to Parliament/Funkadelic's set (during Jeremy Damner's Sun Ra tribute band, who were also excellent) which peaked during 'Maggot Brain'.  It was made more poignant due to it being a tribute to Gary 'diaper man' Shyder, one of the main P-Funk members, who had died only a month or so ago (I was unaware of this until then).  The only downside was that when the band came on for an encore, the sound engineers fucked up.  Still, it was probably one of the high points of my life so far.

The converse is that if they announce, say, Muse headlining then the place becomes overrun with Muse fans.  It skews the demographics and that's often not a particularly beneficial thing, as anyone who's been to a festival headlined by Oasis will attest.

This is true.  People I know who went last time said that they met someone who had come down for one day just to see U2.  What a waste of a ticket.

[glitch]

That being said, yeah, it was certainly better than Reading 2008 which was possibly the biggest gathering of pricks I've ever seen, followed closely-ish by Download.  Now I think of it, the only festivals I've been to in the UK which I thought were good were Sonisphere 2010, Bloodstock 2009 and High Voltage 2010.  The better ones can be found in mainland Europe.

I think the problem is you're going to rock/metal festivals.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Still, it was probably one of the high points of my life so far.

cf.  The thread in GB talking about your individual utopia.  Mind would probably be a sunny afternoon/evening in West Holts, pint of toffee apple cider on the go, plate of something from La Grand Bouffe/Pieminster/Goan Seafood Curry/Moro North African and excellent band after excellent band on the stage.

Even last year on the Friday in the rain when Mulatu Astatke and Jimmy Cliff were on in a downpour it was still most definitely not shit for cunts.

[Noodle Lizard]

May I suggest Burning Man?

I really don't know if I could handle that.  Maybe when I was a teenager and did psychedelics and still believed there was "someone tending the light at the end of the tunnel".

[sproggy]

The converse is that if they announce, say, Muse headlining then the place becomes overrun with Muse fans.  It skews the demographics and that's often not a particularly beneficial thing, as anyone who's been to a festival headlined by Oasis will attest.

I think the ticket purchasing system has become pretty good at skewing the demographic, when was the last time anyone got a ticket over the phone?  Hence my previous insulting synonyms.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Well - yeah.  Most of us probably remember the days of sauntering into Virgin a few weeks beforehand and paying over the counter, but the current panicky online sell-out situation for gig tickets isn't really unique to Glastonbury.  They've done their best to at least eradicate the touts from the equation, so everyone's paying face value.  Provided you have internet access it's still a bit of a lottery as to whether you get one.

[thugler]

I just prefer to go to festivals where I know that I like at least a quarter of the bands playing.  I don't really understand why Glastonbury can't announce any acts before putting tickets on sale - that way it may weed out some of the "drunk in the mud" people and get some actual fans of the bands in there.  Same goes for Reading/Leeds, I think they do the same thing.  Aside from that, Glastonbury's probably just not for me.  My sister goes every year though, she was really excited to see "that one which goes na-da-da-na" last year, so good for her I guess.

That being said, yeah, it was certainly better than Reading 2008 which was possibly the biggest gathering of pricks I've ever seen, followed closely-ish by Download.  Now I think of it, the only festivals I've been to in the UK which I thought were good were Sonisphere 2010, Bloodstock 2009 and High Voltage 2010.  The better ones can be found in mainland Europe.

But this should really be in a thread for "festivals what were bad", don't let me interrupt.  I'm going to have to find some festivals to hate in the USA now.  Coachella looks tempting.

I can see the appeal of a single genre festival and I've been to some, but I've rarely been to a festival where I like a quarter of the bands playing, or been arsed to see that many.

I've been to all of the ones you mention, and there's not much atmosphere at all, just a bunch of metalheads in a field. It doesn't feel like much of an event and it will be solely populated by metalheads, which is fine but it's nicer to have a bit of variety in both music and festival goers.

Just to confirm I am a huge metal fan.

Glastonbury is more like going to a massive carnival that feels like a small city, and the feeling of freedom is far superior to the security laden festivals you mention. High Voltage/anything at Hyde Park would go down as some of my worst gig experiences ever.

I don't even expect to like the main stage acts! but there are 100 stages, and it's pretty much impossible for me not to find 5 or 6 things I'd love to see each and every day of the fest. Rather than seeing 5 metal bands in a day I could see 5 bands of different genres, and a few I've never heard of or seen before. And I can continue the fun ALL NIGHT AND ALL MORNING.

There's little to no fun wandering around most festivals, it's the same old shit you see everywhere else. Glasto is so massive that you could never see everything, and is frequently surprising and interesting just to wander around.

Headline acts matter at the festivals you mention because the main attraction is the headliners and the main stage in general. At Glastonbury this is absolutely not the case. Those sort of festivals have 3 or 4 stages perhaps. Glastonbury has hundreds!

[Noodle Lizard]

Well, in one day at Sonisphere 2010 I was able to see Iggy & The Stooges, The Cult, Henry Rollins (spoken word), Sean Hughes, Dir en grey, Skindred, Slayer, Pendulum, a Beatles tribute act and Iron Maiden, as well as a bunch of weird fellows doing gypsy covers of famous rock songs who travelled around the grounds, which I'd say is a fairly diverse bunch.  Yeah, there may not be much in the way of trip-synthstep-tronica DJs or two-man orchestras playing nursery rhymes in a rubber dinghy, but I can't say I wished there was.  And those are only ones I've been to in England, but I think as far as rock/metal goes, Hellfest 2011 in France was the best for me.

As far as the actual "atmosphere" goes, at the three I mentioned it was always relatively easy to get near the stage, the stages weren't far from each other (but far enough not to have sound clashes), the set times were arranged so there weren't any obvious clashes and it just felt "easier".  Metalheads are always going to be irritating, but never quite as much as a private school Skins reject on pills.

I dunno, those festivals just suited me more.  I'm not really a purist when it comes to genres, but Glastonbury's line-up has generally never impressed me.  Out of 2011's line-up, the only ones I'd care about seeing were B.B. King, Don McLean (for novelty more than anything), The Chemical Brothers just for the stage show, Molotov Jukebox and ... eh, that's more or less it.  When I went in 2010 I did wander around the smaller stages looking for new and exciting stuff but none of it was - maybe I just had bad luck, but I definitely wouldn't risk trying so hard/spending so much to get a ticket again on the off-chance that it might be better.  Call me set in my ways, but I prefer going to events where I know what's on.

EDIT:  As far as security goes, I got stopped and searched twice at Glastonbury - once on the way in and once for smoking "too many cigarettes" (seriously), which caused them to think I may be a drug dealer apparently.  But the award for worst security presence has to go to Glade festival, which I'm pretty sure utilises actual policemen.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Interview with Emily of the Eavii in today's NME saying that the late night areas will be split in two at opposite ends of the site to reduce the crowding/queuing issues that have bedevilled the Shangri-La part of the site for the last few years, which have been victims of their own success.

[Beagle 2]

That's  a very good idea. We're always camped at the opposite end and it takes bloody hours to trek there and back.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Yeah - it's the best solution, really.  I understand it's previously not been possible due to noise issues for the residents at the other side of the site, but some sort of arrangement must have been made.

The people who run the late night areas have mentioned a Heaven and Hell theme, so presumably one's one and one's t'other.

[glitch]

EDIT:  As far as security goes, I got stopped and searched twice at Glastonbury - once on the way in and once for smoking "too many cigarettes" (seriously), which caused them to think I may be a drug dealer apparently.  But the award for worst security presence has to go to Glade festival, which I'm pretty sure utilises actual policemen.

Which year did you go, as it was nothing like that at this year's Glade. Seriously the best/worst sniffer dog I've ever seen (depending on your viewpoint).

[Noodle Lizard]

Which year did you go, as it was nothing like that at this year's Glade. Seriously the best/worst sniffer dog I've ever seen (depending on your viewpoint).

It was a while ago, I think 2007, back when I consorted with people who liked that electro stuff exclusively.  I was only there for one day, but it felt like we were never not being watched and we had to leave our stash in the car before we even got in there.  Once in, it was all legal highs and poppers.

[CaledonianGonzo]

No more Special Guests up in The Park:

http://www.contactmusic.com/news/glastonbury-bosses-rule-out-more-secret-shows_3319562

[thugler]

No more Special Guests up in The Park:

http://www.contactmusic.com/news/glastonbury-bosses-rule-out-more-secret-shows_3319562

It's mainly due to the 'surprise performances' bein announced well before.

During pulp I was genuinely worried that people might be getting crushed such was the sudden influx of people.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Aye - I suppose it was inevitable , really.  Just a shame, as I had one eye on either The Stone Roses or Blur maybe putting in a cheeky appearance.

Unless, of course, this is a smokescreen..

[George Oscar Bluth II]

Pulp last year was the greatest gig I've ever been to by an absolute mile ("I've got one question for you Glastonbury...do you remember the first time?"), but it did feel properly unsafe up there. Also a bit unfair on people who didn't have friends outside text them to tell them they were on and probably watched KT Tunstall or someone instead.

[CaledonianGonzo]

From memory, Pulp were timed to clash with Elbow, which is about the best they could hope for in divvying up the crowds a bit.  I'll be honest, I don't remember it being that squished.  Busy no doubt, but nothing ludicrous.

However, the organizers and everyone else clearly remembers it differently to the way I do - but then I had availed myself of a largish quantity of cocktails in The Rabbit Hole after Tame Impala had commenced boring me to death.

[ThisIsHardcore]

Didn't get one in the end, shame really, 2009 was maybe the greatest weekend of my life.

Eavis has said Stone Roses won't play, hasn't he? Reckon it'll be Arctic Monkeys, Radiohead and Lady Gaga headlining.

[Waking Life]

I tried to see Pulp last year, but couldn't actually see them after I crushed my way into the area, as was stuck behind a sort of hill.  I could hear them fine, but it wasn't quite the live experience I hoped for and wandered off somewhere else.  If you were closer to the front, it wouldn't really have felt much busier than seeing anyone else I suppose.

How busy were Radiohead?

[Beagle 2]

It's really looking like the Stones, eh? I'm praying for Radiohead, they're the one band left I need to tick off my live list and it's been long enough since they did it last time. Not holding my breath though. I did hear that Mumford and Sons might be doing the Friday, which would be worse than Travis. Really hope it's not the Arctic Monkeys since they went shit some time ago. Ah... Lady Ga Ga would make sense. Not my cup of tea but I'm sure she'd draw a crowd.