Shorter headline slots?

I think with these headliners theyl have regular length sets, they all have more than enough material to fill the slots.

Petty also has more than enough material I just don't know if he would be up to playing that long.

Yeah, the schedule usually shows a three or three and a half hour slot, but it can really vary based on the artist. I'm not getting my hopes up for an abnormally long Radiohead set (their typical show will do just fine). The basic idea is to go until 11:30 or midnight. Dave has played for two or two and a half hours the last two years, and I guess some people feel that is short, but if he wanted to he could throw a set break in there to make it seem a half hour longer. The one time I saw Radiohead I'm pretty sure they only played one set, and if they stick to that its quite possible they won't fill up three hours. If you're scheduled to start at 8:30, you go on a little late, play a two hour set, take a little break and encore for 10-15 minutes, you can easily be winding it up right around 11:30. If you break into two sets (I'm not sure what Petty's practice is) you can easily fill a three hour slot with not much more than two hours of music. The possibility for unusual, marathon sets certainly exists, but I try to keep my expectations at "I'm going to see a Radiohead show!" rather than "I'm going to see an unusually long Radiohead show" and I'll let anything extra be gravy. Anyway, for me any down time between the headliner and late-night is bonus time, for eating, relief, and getting good spots for late night.

I am wondering if the promoters are going to bring back "Another Tent" like they did in 2004. There are what, 67 acts already. It also seems like the are announcing the thursday bands early.

For the people who went last year, did it feel any different than 04 as far the one less tent is concened and did anyone go to the comedy tent last year?

no you are right. damn i was totally oblivious. for some reason i thought there were more. honestly 5 stages is plenty! too many conflicts arise with 5 as it is, 6 just makes it worse.

yea, last year that had local-bar-band type acts playing in one of the beer tents

I would say I actually prefer the 5 stage setup to the the 6 stage setup (although I don't at all remember the details of what it has been from year to year). It makes for fewer conflicts and a greater feeling that you can sample it all if you please. I loved the feeling of the late night sets the first two years where there were two tents going (along with a DJ in the Arcade maybe?) and you could bounce back and forth and soak it all in. Of course you want there to be enough going on that its not too crowded at every tent, too.

I also think that the whole "reduced capacity" thing has to translate somewhat into how many acts they book, so my guess would be that they stick with the three tent thing assuming that was the setup last year (I really can't remember and don't have a schedule I can find).

I'll even throw in 04 for free!

www.bonnaroo.com/2004/artists04/index.htm

I saw Petty last summer, he rocked for a solid 2+ hours, without a break, so I'd expect something similar at the roo. In my mind, the optimum situation would be some kind of layover, like and hour and a half of radiohead, another hour in which they play with Beck, then just another hour or two of Beck.
Realistically tho, I feel like someone will get pushed into either a late nite tent (beck or radiohead), or a special sunday afternoon show. But what if they really only have 3 headline slots again? Does someone get the shaft, and if so, who? You can't do Phil like that, he's too much of a legend, Petty too. Radiohead probably thinks they're the greatest thing to ever land on bonnaroo, making them a likely third choice. Am I the only one who find Beck the most exciting? (only because I've seen Petty and Phil before)

Beck's website says he'll be playing "the night of the 17th". so i figure he'll be late night on the second stage. which is pretty cool i think.

I don't remember feeling gypped in any way last year w/the absence of a tent. I felt like they had *more* music b/c they had a few smaller venues (Troo music cafe, etc, plus the stage where artists signed CDs). I loved the small bar-ish tents as a cool diversion from the main. Saturday I caught a bunch of breakdancers in one of the mini tents dancing to a cool band whose name I can't recall; anyway, the dancing was a good visual along w/the shade and slightly more chill atmosphere due to having less than 200 people vs more than 2000.

Because the late-night sets tend to start around midnight, I agree that finishing up around 11:30 is a good way to have a nice closer w/o missing any late-night action, and possibly having a quick break for late-night prep. When The Dead started late due to rain two years ago, I missed part of the late-night sets b/c The Dead went past midnight. As a newer Dead fan, I didn't want to miss them but wished that they'd been able to start on time so I didn't miss any of the late shows.

i could see it lasting longer than an hour and 1/2 just because they have the time to do so, but im not necessarily thinking we will get a ton more songs than a normal show on their tour. Im crossing my fingers, but not getting my hopes up. They will have some new material by then which could increase the chances.

I just watched glastonbury 03 performance last night, and i have to admit i am looking forward to a fake plastic trees sing-along...damn that song is still so powerful live...even if it is one of their more popular tracks.

The two times I've seen Radiohead they played for 2 hours sharp, with 2 encores included. I assume we'll get something similar.