Permabanned
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
Watched a load of Glastonbury on telly out of interest.
All my mates say it is INCREDIBLE. It's AMAZING. AWESOME. Here is what I think
1) Apart from the headlines, the acts seem rubbish people you've never heard of, playing songs you've never heard of. Normally sung by some almost-not-quite-punk with a mohican and 62 earrings, who can only play the tamborine. Awesome.
2) About 60% of the acts involve hippies stringing 4 chords together whilst madly shaking their heads. Or a kind of mess of sound .. with some bloke with dreadlocks shouting swear words as three of his mates hit bongos :/
3) Lots of cold rain, just kinda everywhere
4) I am amazed at just how bad the sound quality is. Seriously. Apart from U2, the bands all just sound a shambles. I mean, kind of like pub bands down the dog n' goat, being paid £80 for a Friday night ... a LOT WORSE than CDs. Why do people like live music, when it seems to be 20 * WORSE quality than if someone banged on a CD through exactly the same sound system?
5) What is it with people kind of shouting rather than actually singing? And a LOT of their notes are off tune .. Why can't singers sing on tune nowadays? Is it not the 'done' thing?
BUT most of all I think it's a case of 'the king has no clothes'. That is, it is uncool to slate it, it is uncool for anyone to say 'hold on, its a cold, rainy field, with 4 kind of stoned looking hippies badly singing a song I've never heard of'. Glastonbury is supposed to be loved by the young and cool, whatever it's actually like. Well, the king is wearing no clothes!
What am I missing? (Apart from about a kilo of drugs inside me with 9 pints of cider?????)
U2 were passable admittedly
All my mates say it is INCREDIBLE. It's AMAZING. AWESOME. Here is what I think
1) Apart from the headlines, the acts seem rubbish people you've never heard of, playing songs you've never heard of. Normally sung by some almost-not-quite-punk with a mohican and 62 earrings, who can only play the tamborine. Awesome.
2) About 60% of the acts involve hippies stringing 4 chords together whilst madly shaking their heads. Or a kind of mess of sound .. with some bloke with dreadlocks shouting swear words as three of his mates hit bongos :/
3) Lots of cold rain, just kinda everywhere
4) I am amazed at just how bad the sound quality is. Seriously. Apart from U2, the bands all just sound a shambles. I mean, kind of like pub bands down the dog n' goat, being paid £80 for a Friday night ... a LOT WORSE than CDs. Why do people like live music, when it seems to be 20 * WORSE quality than if someone banged on a CD through exactly the same sound system?
5) What is it with people kind of shouting rather than actually singing? And a LOT of their notes are off tune .. Why can't singers sing on tune nowadays? Is it not the 'done' thing?
BUT most of all I think it's a case of 'the king has no clothes'. That is, it is uncool to slate it, it is uncool for anyone to say 'hold on, its a cold, rainy field, with 4 kind of stoned looking hippies badly singing a song I've never heard of'. Glastonbury is supposed to be loved by the young and cool, whatever it's actually like. Well, the king is wearing no clothes!
What am I missing? (Apart from about a kilo of drugs inside me with 9 pints of cider?????)
U2 were passable admittedly
Last edited:
![[TW]Sponge](/styles/overclockers/avatars/6.png){kind=avatar}
