Have you also noticed how many adds The Lumineers have in comparison to their billing? They're a very trendy act right now.
Yeah don't get me wrong I'm all about Mumford and the Lumineers...but..but...but....its Sir Paul....like, really?!? And this is coming from someone from the "younger" generation. I just don't get it...personally I was shocked when I didn't see the # of people who created a lineup and the # of people that added Macca to be near identical. It just amazes me that Mumford draws more then a Beatle
Except in reality they don't. You have to take into consideration what age demographic is creating their lineup choices on bonnaroo.com. It is most likely that 18-21 age range. Take a wide survey of all age ranges right now and I guarantee you Paul outdraws Mumford by a wide margin.
Random question. Are The xx good live? I like them (although I think they are a bit overrated), but I just picture their live show being a snooze fest, unless they change some things up a bit.
I've seen them live and thought they were great, but I'm also a huge fan of theirs.
I'll take your word for it. I'm still having trouble picturing them playing to 50,000 people on the What or Which. They're more like a band I'd want to see in a hipster cafe while I sip on my mocha latte and surf on my laptop.
Yes I loved their 1st album. I really did. It just translated to lullaby music when played live to me personally.
I can see how that could be the case for some people, but the last time I saw them they were pretty energetic. I wasn't being rocked to sleep, I guess you could say.
I heard that they sped up some of their songs on Coexist to be a little more bouncy and not so much laid back. Not sure if bouncy is the word i'm looking for. But Henrik can you confirm this? Also how do you tag people's names and shiz?
Of all the bands on the lineup that know/have listened to, they are my least favorite. They're so incredibly boring. I watched a few of their videos and it really cemented that thought.
I'll probably skip The XX this go around depending on their location in the schedule. Especially since they released "Coexist" which like said above is incredibly ethereal. I have a playlist on spotify called ZZZZZZZZ for my ZZZZZZZZZs. There's a few The XX tracks on there.
But in regards to their 2010 set, it started off strong. I'm sure this is due in part because they played after the energetic Temper Trap. I remember feeling chills when the bass line to "Intro" started. With that said, my friend and I started feel numb and sedate. I think it was a matter of scheduling. Was it Thursday night?
I recall that bass in Intro very well.. First night, first Roo for me. Bass note hit, and I hit the floor. They try to warn you on here to stay hydrated, but I obviously didn't listen.
I really didn't think that too many people could possibly bitch about this line-up. I mean, I was sure that there would be a small minority of people that would be a little disappointed because pleasing everyone is impossible, but the Bonnaroo Facebook page is starting to look like the Gov's Ball page. I guess I sometimes forget what the internet was made for.
It's not common sense to bill Wilco over Mumford and Sons. I love Wilco way more but they are still a band that a lot of people don't even know about. Mumford are huge right now and their billing reflects that.
I don't think anyone is refusing to accept the fact that they are popular. It's being billed second at bonnaroo that's giving me trouble. You guys are helping me understand though.
It's really, really, really simple.
Mumford played Roo, blew that sh*t out of the water, had the biggest crowd clusterf*ck ever and have released new music since then.
The only place to go up from Which Closer is Pre-Headliner and Headliner. Your issue is they are 2nd instead of 4th, which equates to you not wanting them to have an unopposed set. You think they shouldn't get an unopposed set, which I don't really understand since they're right up the Arcade Fire 2011 alley, but whatever.
Kings of Leon was 2nd in 2010. Arcade Fire in 2011. I do not understand how you think Mumford is so out of place being billed 2nd having similar buzz and similar standing in the public eye as those bands in those years.
Has Mumford and Sons ever headlined other "big" festivals? Like Coachella or Lolla or things like that?
That's what makes this so awesome. Bonnaroo is dictating that they are now a headline level band. It's the sort of thing Juggs has wanted Roo to do in the past and what Coachella seems to do most years. They set the trend. Now....Roo isn't taking any big risks since Mumford is hugely popular (it's not exactly the same as Coachella booking the Blur and Stone Roses as the top acts) but it's still cool to see them bill M&S at #2 and say "We think they belong here. Get used to it".