This Lineup Sucks. Coachella Can Suck It!

[grannock]

There are a number of items factually incorrect with that article.

The article is horseshit. The fact remains that most people with a ticket are upset.

[TeamCoachellaHellYeah]

The article is horseshit. The fact remains that most people with a ticket are upset.

Can you prove it?

[still_lurking]

the fuck is with you elitist "regular" fucks on this board that wont shut the fuck up about how amazing the undercard is and that people should shut up about the headliners?

the undercard is fucking stacked EVERY SINGLE YEAR. when has coachella put out a shit lineup from top to bottom? every single year there is a great undercard, that's kind of the point of paying out the ass for this festival.

and it's funny because you guys being so defensive about the undercard proves just how shitty the headliners really are. its like you guys want to pretend GV is some magical unicorn of a company that can never do no wrong. yeah its just a coincidence that they go to two weekends, pull everyone in with the cheese edm, and then give us a budget lineup the following year with an insanely early presale and double the revenue from two weekends. i mean fuck, give me one act on this lineup that cost them a lot of money to book.

my god

Exactly. Need 2-3 as a must to cost $380/ticket.

[stinkbutt]

Don't go, stop posting, problem solved.

[ods..]

WAAAAA WAAAAAAAAAAAAa

[WhyTheLongFace]

I love how the regulars are saying "Shut up. If you dont like it don't go" like they havent been complaining about SHM, Tiesto, Skrillex, Guetta, Kaskade the last 3 years.

[travelfan]

Guess im right dipshit.

http://www.businessinsider.com/coach...up-2013-2013-1

Just for the record i think the lineup is better than '11 and '12, but i think forcing a sellout without giving a lineup is bullshit.

1. How is it "forcing a sellout". You take a gamble and say, "I'll buy a ticket and take the risk I may not enjoy the lineup". If you don't want to take that risk, you don't buy one.

2. That is the derpiest article ever. A guy I know, who is actually a great guy but has no interest in music and comes to Coachella to party (favorite set last year was Calvin Harris), posted that same thing yesterday. They are acting like this "sunny California mega-band party" thing has been in existence forever, and wasn't just the 2012 lineup. I would bet anything that this author had never been prior to 2012.

If Swedish House Mafia was on one of these days, not even Daft Punk, most of the complainers would be like, "Sickest lineup ever!". While I was pretty apologetic for non-music fans coming to Coachella in droves last year, thinking that they'd be open minded, seeing them complain on Facebook has been eye opening...they want one or two huge mainstream blow out acts a night, and have absolutely no interest in anything else, and if they don't get that, they think their opinions of a festival lineup matters and is "correct".

The Facebook page this past year was flooded with potential first time and second time attendees legitimately and sincerely requesting/expecting Young Money and G.O.O.D. Music to headline, Swedish House Mafia to return, and like, Coldplay and Blink 182 to play. While I am open minded and think anybody should be able to experience new music at a festival, you cannot look at that objectively and say requests like that are in line with what GV's vision is. Thus, many of those first/second timers who bought a pre-sale ticket clearly had incorrect expectations about the type of acts this festival gravitates to. I will be the first one to say that the headliners are not nearly as high profile as the past few years, but I'm not really sure that is the only problem here.

[shoegazer76]

Coldplay has already headlined Coachella thats why people request them.

[stinkbutt]

They were also a replacement for a band these kids would hate

[lostatlimbo]

I don't know how Phoenix and RHCP are considered headliners that take Coachella back to "indie roots". I heard them on the radio in 2012 more times than I can even count. I just really wonder who they tried for. I would have loved a Tears for Fears/Talking Heads for a classic 'reunion' thing, Blur & Stone Roses or someone more mainstream/fun to close. I guess that's the biggest bummer. You want to end Sunday on a crazy highnote and there just isn't that element.

Good call on Talking Heads. Could have doubled that with a Byrne/Vincent show.

Maybe for Sasquatch?

[lostatlimbo]

the fuck is with you elitist "regular" fucks on this board that wont shut the fuck up about how amazing the undercard is and that people should shut up about the headliners?

the undercard is fucking stacked EVERY SINGLE YEAR. when has coachella put out a shit lineup from top to bottom? every single year there is a great undercard, that's kind of the point of paying out the ass for this festival.

and it's funny because you guys being so defensive about the undercard proves just how shitty the headliners really are. its like you guys want to pretend GV is some magical unicorn of a company that can never do no wrong. yeah its just a coincidence that they go to two weekends, pull everyone in with the cheese edm, and then give us a budget lineup the following year with an insanely early presale and double the revenue from two weekends. i mean fuck, give me one act on this lineup that cost them a lot of money to book.

my god

Sure, the headliners are weak, but so is your argument.

My first Coachella was last year and I never stepped foot in the Sahara. The undercard was stacked last year, but its much deeper this year and the overall quality of all genres has improved.

I don't afford GV any altruism, but I think its wise not to pigeonhole themselves into a redundant formula. It would be a shit festival if they only focused on getting a handful of "coveted" headliners. Maybe they tried for that and it fell flat, so they changed the gameplan and made sure the rest of the lineup was solid. Good on them.

I don't expect to have any trouble finding good music this year. If you do, you're doing it wrong.

[mrhand]

the fuck is with you elitist "regular" fucks on this board that wont shut the fuck up about how amazing the undercard is and that people should shut up about the headliners?

the undercard is fucking stacked EVERY SINGLE YEAR. when has coachella put out a shit lineup from top to bottom? every single year there is a great undercard, that's kind of the point of paying out the ass for this festival.

You're wasting your time. The blind, knee-jerk GV defenders are too invested in the myth of the magical unicorn to even consider the possibility that a Coachella lineup is average or sub-par in comparison to years past.

It's not that complicated: Undercard is great every year. Headliners fluctuate. The quality of the headliners can make the difference between a good festival and a fucking fantastic one. People that pay a couple grand to attend and commit to a ticket a year in advance want to be blown away and want fucking fantastic, and GV has delivered that enough times to reasonably expect it.

Bitching and moaning about shit headliners doesn't equate to saying Coachella is going to be awful. It just means the ceiling on the festival potential has been lowered, and that's a legitimate gripe.

[bmack86]

Guess im right dipshit.

http://www.businessinsider.com/coach...up-2013-2013-1

Just for the record i think the lineup is better than '11 and '12, but i think forcing a sellout without giving a lineup is bullshit.

What part of PEOPLE ARE NOT FORCED TO BUY TICKETS don't you understand? Goldenvoice didn't force anyone to sell it out during the pre-sale. People who are excited about the concept of Coachella based on what little they've seen at it sold it out. Goldenvoice did not say, "Buy your tickets now because we won't sell any more." They did not say, "Things will probably sell out here, so buy them now." They said, "Hey, you like going to Coachella every year? Here's a chance to buy them extra early so your monthly payment is less and its thus easier for you to pay for it."

I'm sorry that you feel forced. I'd wager you don't quite understand what that means.

[bmack86]

Good call on Talking Heads. Could have doubled that with a Byrne/Vincent show.

Maybe for Sasquatch?

They should get the Beatles too, right? David Byrne said he has no interest in reuniting the Talking Heads. It's not gonna happen, he just doesn't like the rest of the band and has no interest in doing that.

That article just posted says that Rolling Stone claims the Rolling Stones were pretty much a lock. When was the last time Rolling Stone was a reliable news source? Never? Yup, never. A photo of a polo ball on a polo field does not equal Rolling Stones.

It's nobody else's fault that people buy into the speculation that happens on this board and elsewhere. It's just that: speculation. There's frequently little weight behind it, and many of the rumors that people were hoping for were expressly negated before the lineup was announced. Sure, these headliners are not big like in years past and RHCP is a weak choice, but what is a logical, realistic alternative they could have gone with?

Bruce Springsteen, sure. Repeat any other old headliner, fine (but they're doing that.) Daft Punk? Not touring, so it was never gonna happen? Bon Jovi? Go jump off a bridge.

[igotmyxomatosis]

I don't expect to have any trouble finding good music this year. If you do, you're doing it wrong.

That's my point though. Nobody should ever have trouble finding music throughout the day at Coachalla. It's always been like that and this year is no different. The only difference is last year we closed down the festival with a huge fucking party with Dre and Snoop while this year it'll be some dickhead band nobody gives two shits about forcing us in to a tent that hopefully will have a quality closing act.

[bmack86]

You may not like RHCP, but it's just plain wrong to call them a band nobody gives two shits about.

[canexplain]

What part of PEOPLE ARE NOT FORCED TO BUY TICKETS don't you understand? Goldenvoice didn't force anyone to sell it out during the pre-sale. People who are excited about the concept of Coachella based on what little they've seen at it sold it out. Goldenvoice did not say, "Buy your tickets now because we won't sell any more." They did not say, "Things will probably sell out here, so buy them now." They said, "Hey, you like going to Coachella every year? Here's a chance to buy them extra early so your monthly payment is less and its thus easier for you to pay for it."

I'm sorry that you feel forced. I'd wager you don't quite understand what that means.

WHAT I'm not being forced to buy tics!!! Guess I'll test my luck Tuesday anyway
It would have been nice to see zzz or ttt or who the fuck. It's water under the bridge (Just for the RHCP haters) cr****

[WhyTheLongFace]

You're wasting your time. The blind, knee-jerk GV defenders are too invested in the myth of the magical unicorn to even consider the possibility that a Coachella lineup is average or sub-par in comparison to years past.

It's not that complicated: Undercard is great every year. Headliners fluctuate. The quality of the headliners can make the difference between a good festival and a fucking fantastic one. People that pay a couple grand to attend and commit to a ticket a year in advance want to be blown away and want fucking fantastic, and GV has delivered that enough times to reasonably expect it.

Bitching and moaning about shit headliners doesn't equate to saying Coachella is going to be awful. It just means the ceiling on the festival potential has been lowered, and that's a legitimate gripe.

[travelfan]

That's my point though. Nobody should ever have trouble finding music throughout the day at Coachalla. It's always been like that and this year is no different. The only difference is last year we closed down the festival with a huge fucking party with Dre and Snoop while this year it'll be some dickhead band nobody gives two shits about forcing us in to a tent that hopefully will have a quality closing act.

Just out of curiosity, what headliner that is realistically available, at the current moment, could provide the party you are looking.

I'll help and eliminate some options for you for.

Daft Punk - Not ready. They are asked every year
David Bowie - Not ready, may never even perform live again
The Smiths - Publicly stated they turned down the festival
Talking Heads - David Byrne has said they have no interest
OutKast - Andre 3000 has been very public they are not reuniting anytime soon
Watch the Throne - Admittedly potentially plausible, if Kanye is doing shows right now.
The Rolling Stones - Depending on the source you believe, either not playing festivals at all or cost way too much money for GV to afford
U2 - See above, way too much money, do not do festivals outside of Glastonbury for a trillion reasons
Madonna - Bad history with Coachella, and really?
Justin Timberlake - Admittedly may or may not have been an option, no idea here

In 2011 everybody accused Coachella of having weak headliners, and then Bonnarroo, Lolla, ACL, etc followed with similarly weaker choices. It may just be one of those years where the huge blowout headliner is not readily available.

[GuyInTucson]

Bonnaroo is getting Bjork and Macca. Expect people here to bitch about Coachella not getting them this year when the lineup comes out.

[fabbianarr]

Bro, you just don't understand. We HAD to buy tickets last year and they LIED to us. How am I gonna rave to Lou Reed? Who is Stone Roses anyway?

Coachella was never something to rave to. I was horribly disappointed by last years lineup, almost everything was djs, worst coachella in my experience. Spent a lot of time in the camp napping or drinking, wasn't my scene, and it felt like I got robbed, there's alot of other places to rave, and coachella was turning into another, I still love the experience and went ahead and put the money on the tickets, assuming it would be another disappointing year, boy was I surprised, it is not at all what last year was, it had actual instruments, actual bands, I love at least 15+ bands from everyday, haven't felt like this in a few years, I do understand that the headliners aren't great, but last year radiohead was the only headliner I saw worthy, you can't feel robbed because last year was an identity crisis for the festival, you shouldn't of expected anything from last years lineup, just like no one should've expected holograms, the hologram was nothing but a prop for snoop and dre, nothing but a prop for them.

[WhyTheLongFace]

Coachella was never something to rave to.

Even tho they originally had 2 dance tents with one curated by Insomniac.

[igotmyxomatosis]

Just out of curiosity, what headliner that is realistically available, at the current moment, could provide the party you are looking.

I'll help and eliminate some options for you for.

Daft Punk - Not ready. They are asked every year
David Bowie - Not ready, may never even perform live again
The Smiths - Publicly stated they turned down the festival
Talking Heads - David Byrne has said they have no interest
OutKast - Andre 3000 has been very public they are not reuniting anytime soon
Watch the Throne - Admittedly potentially plausible, if Kanye is doing shows right now.
The Rolling Stones - Depending on the source you believe, either not playing festivals at all or cost way too much money for GV to afford
U2 - See above, way too much money, do not do festivals outside of Glastonbury for a trillion reasons
Madonna - Bad history with Coachella, and really?
Justin Timberlake - Admittedly may or may not have been an option, no idea here

In 2011 everybody accused Coachella of having weak headliners, and then Bonnarroo, Lolla, ACL, etc followed with similarly weaker choices. It may just be one of those years where the huge blowout headliner is not readily available.

People complaining about Kanye+AF is fucking hilarious to me, but I wasn't on this board back then. Was there something big people were expecting that year that they didn't get?

And to me, Watch The Throne was a ridiculously obvious choice for festival closer this year if they weren't going to make a bold move with someone new to begin with. Wouldn't mind Timberlake either. Hell, I have said at least have Blur close out the festival. I think there is a shot they win tons of people over with a big set. At least there is a chance at something exciting there. RHCP is a 100% guaranteed dud as far as I'm concerned.

[fabbianarr]

I apologize, Lets be specific when we say tents not main stage, I honestly don't mind it staying I. The tents, and you have to be honest In admitting last year was covered in djs all over the schedule.

[kreutz2112]

Sigh. I really wish Bjork was playing.

[bmack86]

Not just DJs, shitty shitty shitty DJs. Cheeze left and right.

[heart cooks brain]

travelfan, stop being reasonable. it's falling on retarded ears.

[Vic Viper]

A couple things no one's posted in this thread yet.

One is that the on paper line-up and the final experience rarely have little correspondence.

Bands most aren't keyed on knock it out of the park (Gil Scott Heron 2010, Foals & Elbow 2011)...everyone's must gets finally arrives and disappoint (ie Radiohead 2012, Fever Ray 2010) and scheduling conflicts either make or break your day.

The line-up sucks argument is a tradition, but 2008 is the only year I can remember it being as loud as this year's, and it ended up being my favorite Coachella ever.

2010 was the year that received the lightest complaints about what was on paper, and it was easily my least favorite festival, and the day that was most stacked, Sunday (possibly the most stacked single day in festival's history to my ears), kinda stunk because I was half-setting everyone I wanted to catch.

Second, Coachella is as much about discovery as it is seeing your sacred cows, at least it is for me. As the years have gone on, the 11-3pm stretch has in some ways become my favorite part of each day. No expectations, smaller crowds, No must sees, just four hours of pleasant, stress free surprises from young bands hoping to make their mark.

So I get that some mostly younger fans are saying The Stone Roses, wtf, not realizing that the whole rave scene they cherish actually originated around the Stone Roses, but trust me, every year GV stuffs the polo fields with 120 - 170 acts, and every one of those acts has in some way earned the right to be a part of the bill.

Coachella has never been about the headliners, the joys of the experience has never been limited to the headliners (I've been 50-50 on catching Headliner sets at best) - just go for the full 14 hours each day, keep an open mind, and it's hard to imagine your experience being anything other than awesome.

i too, need clarification on who was disappointed with fever ray.

but, i agree with your general sentiment. the problem (for me) this year, is that the lineup fails to justify the ticket price. the idea being that price of ticket equates with the rarity/exclusivity/caliber of artists booked. i'm not saying that great artists aren't on the lineup, and i'm not saying that my opinion speaks for everyone else, but the sentiment that the lineup this year is particularly weak obviously isn't a new one. it doesn't have any "sacred cows" for me, and i don't feel like it would have been that much of a stretch (logistically or financially) for GV to have booked some bigger/bigger/more relevant artists. especially in the EDM lineup. everyone is raving (no pun?) how this year is more diverse and less cheeseball than last year, but aside from a few bands and gimmicky artists, i'm just looking at a list of DJs who probably will or would realistically appear, at other nearby festivals.

i felt 2012 was the worst lineup i'd seen yet (going since 2006), but i ended up having a great time. part of my enjoyment came from discovering new acts on the poster but i'm still of the opinion that overall it was a middling lineup. i'm hoping this year i have a similar experience. as some say "once is a fluke, twice is a trend..."; my belief in the festival remains strong, but it is waning...

[igotmyxomatosis]

Bonnaroo is getting Bjork and Macca. Expect people here to bitch about Coachella not getting them this year when the lineup comes out.

BUT GOOD HEADLINERS ARENT AVAILABLE THIS YEAR

[GuyInTucson]

BUT GOOD HEADLINERS ARENT AVAILABLE THIS YEAR

Thanks for validating my statement.

Having McCartney and Bjork certainly would help in some eyes, but Bjork, like RHCP, would be a three-time headliner and McCartney headlined four years ago and would be back to play what? The same set? There would still be plenty of people bitching about the headliners.

I am not going to argue the legitimacy of three questionable headliners and one lazy choice, because I agree with the general consensus. But I don't go for the sole purpose of seeing the headliners. I agree that some bigger and / or better headliners would put this lineup over the top, but I am making the choice to observe what I DO like about the lineup and there is plenty for me to be happy about.