Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
The difference is that Phoenix doesn't suck, and earned their way up.
The Coach board expat's motto: these two things are different because I only like one of them.
Nah, if you want me to legitimately get into it, the Chainsmokers were always a ridiculous idea of a headliner on the basis of experience and critical acclaim, and Phoenix weren't. The only headliner to have fewer than 3 albums was the Stone Roses, which was a reunion, so that's basically disqualifying on its own for the Chainsmokers. And there's never been a headliner whose albums were as universally panned (going off metacritic) as the Chainsmokers, which is doubly disqualifying. The Chainsmokers were a comical suggestion for a headliner; Phoenix was not. Even if the Chainsmokers were more popular.
I just didn't want to go all bumbles, but you got it out of me.
The Coach board expat's motto: these two things are different because I only like one of them.
Nah, if you want me to legitimately get into it, the Chainsmokers were always a ridiculous idea of a headliner on the basis of experience and critical acclaim, and Phoenix weren't. The only headliner to have fewer than 3 albums was the Stone Roses, which was a reunion, so that's basically disqualifying on its own for the Chainsmokers. And there's never been a headliner whose albums were as universally panned (going off metacritic) as the Chainsmokers, which is doubly disqualifying. The Chainsmokers were a comical suggestion for a headliner; Phoenix was not. Even if the Chainsmokers were more popular.
I just didn't want to go all bumbles, but you got it out of me.
I doubt Coachella has some kind of formula for what qualifies an artist to be a headliner, but that is pretty interesting if true. What about Jack Johnson?
Nah, if you want me to legitimately get into it, the Chainsmokers were always a ridiculous idea of a headliner on the basis of experience and critical acclaim, and Phoenix weren't. The only headliner to have fewer than 3 albums was the Stone Roses, which was a reunion, so that's basically disqualifying on its own for the Chainsmokers. And there's never been a headliner whose albums were as universally panned (going off metacritic) as the Chainsmokers, which is doubly disqualifying. The Chainsmokers were a comical suggestion for a headliner; Phoenix was not. Even if the Chainsmokers were more popular.
I just didn't want to go all bumbles, but you got it out of me.
I doubt Coachella has some kind of formula for what qualifies an artist to be a headliner, but that is pretty interesting if true. What about Jack Johnson?
I have no idea / doubt it's a formula, those are both just generally true things. Jack was on his third album when he headlined, so he met that qualification, and while he probably had the worst critical acclaim of any headliner he was still well above where the Chainsmokers are. If I were to guess, I'd think three albums is the closest thing to a rule (given they _always_ stick to it) and some level of moderate critical acclaim is preferred moreso than required.
Any trend can change, anything's possible, but back to my original point, a Phoenix/Chainsmokers comparison is stupid.
Phoenix was a stretch for sure, but the Chainsmokers would've been a pretty significant departure. The closest (really, only) headliner you can analogize them to is Calvin Harris, who has a long history with the festival, has (or at least had) critical appeal and longevity, and was a pretty obvious budget headliner in an expensive ass year (reuniting LCD and GNR).
There's parallels for sure, but it would've been them pushing in a direction they'd never really gone, whereas Phoenix was definitely in their wheelhouse, just pushed a little too soon probably. If the festival wasn't so different now there's a good chance we'd talk about Tame this year in the exact same way.
Yeah I see them going through Rihanna, Adele, Katy Perry before they get to Taylor on the pop critical acclaim ladder
If you're talking critical acclaim, Taylor's at the top of the list. The gap is small, though, and I agree that they'd go after Rihanna and Adele first.
Katy Perry is never headlining this festival, though.
Post by Whereispassionpit on May 3, 2019 12:50:10 GMT -5
Adele would be amazing for me, no way I'm paying what it would cost for a good seat at her own show.
Ever since someone put Sade in a mock last year I've been wanting that. I talked to a friend that's involved with a different festival a while back who said "Sade is something they're working on. She's a toughie". Something like Sade into Frank Ocean to close the festival would be a dream.
Post by Fozzie Bear on May 3, 2019 12:52:10 GMT -5
It really just depends who's available. Right now, Taylor seems the most likely out of the options for massive female pop star. We'll see if Rihanna or Adele get active as the year goes on.
Post by WhyTheLongFace on May 3, 2019 14:01:11 GMT -5
I just don’t see it. I get they need a huge name to sell tickets but unless Taylor makes a jump like Ariana into critical acclaim (by acclaim I mean respect from the music industry outside of your fans and iheartradio. And I would even say Ariana had less of a drastic jump to make) then I don’t see it.
Getting Taylor without an undisputed great album across the board would be Coachella saying “Look we bought these grounds for 2 decades. There WILL be people here weekend 2 damnit”
I just don’t see it. I get they need a huge name to sell tickets but unless Taylor makes a jump like Ariana into critical acclaim (by acclaim I mean respect from the music industry outside of your fans and iheartradio. And I would even say Ariana had less of a drastic jump to make) then I don’t see it.
Getting Taylor without an undisputed great album across the board would be Coachella saying “Look we bought these grounds for 2 decades. There WILL be people here weekend 2 damnit”
Taylor Swift has critical acclaim. “Can she bounce back after a bad last album?” is a fair question, but Red and 1989 are respected albums.
I feel like Taylor would be a bigger get than a lot of those names mentioned but there's really not much to base it on until/if she starts doing music festivals. I do think that if she were to do one it would be Coachella, with maybe an outside shot at Bonnaroo because of Tennessee.
Take the money you would give to Taylor Swift or Justin Timberlake and give it to Kate Bush
I think she’s afraid of flying or something that’s kept her from coming back over here? Wonder what it would take to get Cat Stevens. He sounded good still 4 or 5 years ago.
I just don’t see it. I get they need a huge name to sell tickets but unless Taylor makes a jump like Ariana into critical acclaim (by acclaim I mean respect from the music industry outside of your fans and iheartradio. And I would even say Ariana had less of a drastic jump to make) then I don’t see it.
Getting Taylor without an undisputed great album across the board would be Coachella saying “Look we bought these grounds for 2 decades. There WILL be people here weekend 2 damnit”
Taylor Swift has critical acclaim. “Can she bounce back after a bad last album?” is a fair question, but Red and 1989 are respected albums.
My bigger question is can she compete in this new era of pop? There’s been a shift in pop culture as of late and IMO has sort of divided the big names into two groups, the old and the new. The old guard like Katy Perry, P!nk, Lady Gaga and possibly Justin Timberlake I think are having difficulty keeping up in the current streaming age (aside from tour sales) and Taylor Swift is in danger of getting left behind. Ariana Grande, Drake, Beyoncé and obvious newcomers like Billie Eilish have been able to adapt but Taylor and JT? Eh, I don’t know about that.
How this relates to Coachella is, if they’re going to continue going with pop, is that the direction they want to take? Sure, Taylor is massively popular but pop culture relies heavily on relevancy and I’m not sure how Taylor will fare if she releases another Reputation. I’d argue she doesn’t have the legacy to support her either.
I’m not saying Taylor Swift would be an awful choice since she’ll definitely move tickets. I just think there’s a smarter approach with pop headliners that I think Coachella should take instead of booking artists like her or JT. Coachella prides itself by being the forefront of the current culture among US festivals and I’m not sure if they’re as big of a part of the conversation anymore as much as they used to be.
Take the money you would give to Taylor Swift or Justin Timberlake and give it to Kate Bush
I think she’s afraid of flying or something that’s kept her from coming back over here? Wonder what it would take to get Cat Stevens. He sounded good still 4 or 5 years ago.
Hmm I didn't know about a fear of flying but I don't think she's ever performed in the US.
Cat Stevens would be dope! Barry Gibb and Jeff Lynne's ELO have both played Glastonbury recently and would be fun. I remember I seeing a weird twitter rumor of Blood Sweat & Tears playing with a lot of the original lineup which would be pretty cool too.
I just don’t see it. I get they need a huge name to sell tickets but unless Taylor makes a jump like Ariana into critical acclaim (by acclaim I mean respect from the music industry outside of your fans and iheartradio. And I would even say Ariana had less of a drastic jump to make) then I don’t see it.
Getting Taylor without an undisputed great album across the board would be Coachella saying “Look we bought these grounds for 2 decades. There WILL be people here weekend 2 damnit”
Taylor's average album score (critics, not users): 75 Adele: 74 Rihanna: 69 (nice) Katy Perry: 53
Red and Speak Now both have a higher score than any album by any of the other three. You can knock Taylor for a number of things - and I largely agree with TME's take above - but she's probably the most critically acclaimed pop headliner available.
Take the money you would give to Taylor Swift or Justin Timberlake and give it to Kate Bush
I'd be really curious to see how a "holy grail" artist like Kate Bush or reunited The Smiths would impact overall attendance at this point. Would Kate Bush pull in a huge worldwide (and older) fanbase there primarily to see her and pack the main stage, or would it be of an Aphex scenario where she's in the Mojave at night with a strong, but not gigantic crowd?
That said, I think there's a better chance of Zeppelin or Daft Punk playing than Kate Bush.
Take the money you would give to Taylor Swift or Justin Timberlake and give it to Kate Bush
I'd be really curious to see how a "holy grail" artist like Kate Bush or reunited The Smiths would impact overall attendance at this point. Would Kate Bush pull in a huge worldwide (and older) fanbase there primarily to see her and pack the main stage, or would it be of an Aphex scenario where she's in the Mojave at night with a strong, but not gigantic crowd?
That said, I think there's a better chance of Zeppelin or Daft Punk playing than Kate Bush.
If they could book the Smiths and actually get them to play, and convince people they would actually play, it’d be huge. If I were Kate Bush, I don’t know what the appeal of playing Coachella would be.
