Log in

View Full Version : Coachella : o


EverythingWillSuck
Feb 7th, 2004, 11:25 PM
http://www.coachella.com/main.html

im going, final :(

Snatchtastic
Feb 8th, 2004, 04:08 PM
Both days have amazing lineups. :eek

Bobo Adobo
Feb 8th, 2004, 05:33 PM
$140 for Two days!!!! Jesus christ, you might well charge a blowjob at the gate. there probly going to be charging 5$ dollars for water and 8$ from beer too.

Decent lineup though.

Royal Tenenbaum
Feb 8th, 2004, 07:49 PM
I'd pay the $140 just for Radiohead, Wilco, Air, Pixies, and Belle & Sebastian. God, I wish this show was near me.

distance
Feb 8th, 2004, 09:09 PM
$140 for that many bands isn't ridiculous at all.

i'm going. i can't wait to see FSOL. i think that's now top priority for saturday of things to see. i'm not letting the fact that it's 3000 miles from me stop me from going.

Bobo Adobo
Feb 8th, 2004, 10:34 PM
Most music festivals I've been to (10,000 Lakes, Bonnaroo, High Sierra, New Orleans jazz, Telluride Bluegrass...) last 3-4 days and cost $100-$140 and have more bands a just about as many big names.

mindlessboy
Mar 15th, 2004, 02:11 PM
This festival has got the greatest line-up I ever heard of, seriously. Unfortunately, I'm on the wrong continent.

iron mitchell
Mar 15th, 2004, 03:49 PM
fuck that shit...
http://www.nofunfest.com/
and that's pricey, actually. last two fests i went to were free.

crash0814
Mar 15th, 2004, 06:42 PM
I would willingly murder to go to Coachella. Fucking lineup reads like a list of my favorite bands. As for No Fun, why doesn't Sonic Youth just perform instead of splitting into all these different performances?

iron mitchell
Mar 15th, 2004, 07:42 PM
because some musicians are actually trying to do new things, push boundaries, get away from the same bandmates they've been around for the past several decades.

AChimp
Mar 15th, 2004, 08:14 PM
Hi.

crash0814
Mar 15th, 2004, 09:50 PM
because some musicians are actually trying to do new things, push boundaries, get away from the same bandmates they've been around for the past several decades.

Yes, but why disappoint the fans? What would you rather see: your favorite band, or your favorite band's singer performing with some fuck you've never heard of?

iron mitchell
Mar 15th, 2004, 09:54 PM
um, music is primarily done for personal enjoyment and expression... not to fulfill an ultimate whack-off fantasy for "the fans".
i usually adore my favorite bands side projects. for example, wolf eyes... i have seen them twice now. amazing as fuck both times... however, now i'm really wanting to see dead machines or aaron dilloway solo.

crash0814
Mar 15th, 2004, 11:17 PM
You're missing the point. Would you rather see your favorite band or your favorite band's side project?

iron mitchell
Mar 15th, 2004, 11:25 PM
that question answers itself for the most part. unless you've seen your favorite band a lot already. but again, if you're not completely excited about a side-project of your favorite band, hoping that this could maybe even transcend the original, then you blow goats.

Bobo Adobo
Mar 16th, 2004, 12:30 AM
I hate it when its called a "side project". Les Claypool's "side projects" actually appealed to alot of people more than Primus, and also Jerry Garcia's side projects.

The term makes it seem like its second rate compared to the original band's works, but in fact they are totally different.

iron mitchell
Mar 16th, 2004, 08:00 AM
i agree, bobo.

AChimp
Mar 16th, 2004, 08:48 AM
Hi. >:

EverythingWillSuck
Mar 16th, 2004, 07:08 PM
AChimp please stop spamming or I'll report a mod!