The Student Room Group

Reading & Leeds 2013

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Devel

This is what they played at Leeds;
Wish
Terrible Lie
The Beginning of the End
1,000,000
March of the Pigs
Survivalism
Piggy
Burn
Reptile
The Frail
The Wretched
Gave Up
Suck
The Hand That Feeds
Head Like a Hole


Oh man I would really have preferred that :frown:

Reading got Somewhat Damaged at least...
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Devel
You mean have a band who are yet to do an arena tour headline above the biggest worldwide artist of this century?


Cool. He mimed. Nice to listen to his hype man for 80% of it too.

Everyone at the press tent was disappointed afterward.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 1162
Original post by Redolent
Oh man I would really have preferred that :frown:

At least Reading got Somewhat Damaged at least...


I would have liked to hear the new songs. I didn't expect to hear Beginning Of The End though. I love that song. :woo:

Original post by Swwils


Cool. He mimed. Nice to listen to his hype man for 80% of it too.

Everyone at the press tent was disappointed afterward.


Does using a backing track class as miming? This seems to be unclear right now. A lot of people are saying he gave a mimed performance which he didn't. The organizer has had to respond by stating he didn't mime his set. He did however rely on the backing track that much was clear. Surely for it to be classed as a mimed performance he wouldn't even have his mic on? I can't argue that is was underwhelming, just that I don't think it can be classed as a mimed performance.
Original post by Swwils


Chase and status absolutely killed it however and a better order would have been Eminem then chase and status IMHO.


Must disagree with you on that
I thought Chase and Status were good but the crowd at the front was horrible. I spent half their set getting away from there, then when I got behind the barrier to the big screens the atmosphere was ten times better. Shame I'd lost all my friends and completely sobered up in that time.
I thought Eminem was brilliant at Reading, Chase & Status were ok but I agree that the crowd at the front was horrible - worst I've seen at a gig so far tbh, I've never had to move from the front before but I just couldn't take it there. Wish I could have gone on the Sunday as well to see NIN but I'll see them next year on their tour so I'm glad I went to see Eminem while I had a chance :smile: Well worth the money all in all.
Original post by SummerSerenade
I thought Eminem was brilliant at Reading, Chase & Status were ok but I agree that the crowd at the front was horrible - worst I've seen at a gig so far tbh, I've never had to move from the front before but I just couldn't take it there. Wish I could have gone on the Sunday as well to see NIN but I'll see them next year on their tour so I'm glad I went to see Eminem while I had a chance :smile: Well worth the money all in all.


Why were they bad?
Original post by Endless Blue
Why were they bad?


I was at the front for Chase and Status at Reading (friends dragged me in there) and it was pretty dangerous. They had to keep stopping throughout songs to tell people to move back because of the crushing. At one point the pushing was so bad that the whole section of the crowd I was in got shoved to the floor in a big pile up and people were just getting trampled on.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 1168
It appears that Nine Inch Nails were told during their set at Leeds festival to stop which explains why one of them smashed their equipment and left the stage early.

This really sounds like the promoter made promises which he couldn't keep to make sure the band didn't drop out.
Original post by Devel
It appears that Nine Inch Nails were told during their set at Leeds festival to stop which explains why one of them smashed their equipment and left the stage early.

This really sounds like the promoter made promises which he couldn't keep to make sure the band didn't drop out.


How were NIN? I've heard a lot of people say they were a bit disappointed - especially with Trent's attitude (re tweets) towards Biffy Clyro when the latter actually put on (apparently) a much better show.
Reply 1170
Original post by Endless Blue
How were NIN? I've heard a lot of people say they were a bit disappointed - especially with Trent's attitude (re tweets) towards Biffy Clyro when the latter actually put on (apparently) a much better show.


I haven't seen much negativity towards the bands performance itself. There have been complaints about the setlist choices and a lack of interaction but these aren't really surprising when its NIN. I thought they were outstanding in Leeds and they well and truly delivered. Biffy were also fantastic and were easily the headliner of the weekend. In all honesty it was two of the best sets I have seen at a festival and to see them together was brilliant.

I think his anger was mainly towards the festival promoter. The fact they have used their production at numerous festivals around the world this year means that what they were bringing will have been in their contract. The promoter is responsible for making sure that artists are aware of what is happening and I am guessing they failed to inform NIN the extent of Biffys production. Not only does this affect what they can use on stage but also how long they can play for. It also means the cost of transporting their set up is a complete waste. I am guessing Trent probably assumed the worst and blamed both the promoter and Biffy. I doubt Biffy had any knowledge of what would be going on though. I think Axl Rose claimed that they were informed they could play later at Reading and I believe the Foo Fighters were meant to have a longer set than they actually did there as well. It isn't a rarity that issues like this seem to arise at this festival.

Kicking off at festival promoters isn't something that is unheard of with NIN either.

Original post by Devel


I think his anger was mainly towards the festival promoter. The fact they have used their production at numerous festivals around the world this year means that what they were bringing will have been in their contract. The promoter is responsible for making sure that artists are aware of what is happening and I am guessing they failed to inform NIN the extent of Biffys production. Not only does this affect what they can use on stage but also how long they can play for. It also means the cost of transporting their set up is a complete waste. I am guessing Trent probably assumed the worst and blamed both the promoter and Biffy. I doubt Biffy had any knowledge of what would be going on though. I think Axl Rose claimed that they were informed they could play later at Reading and I believe the Foo Fighters were meant to have a longer set than they actually did there as well. It isn't a rarity that issues like this seem to arise at this festival.




It's a bit unfair to blame Melvin for all of those, I spoke to him about GNR and that is widely accepted to be all Axl. Foo Fighters were given three hours but chose to fill 2 and a half, something Melvin knew in advance. It helped ease congestion through the exits too. It's also worth noting he vociferously denied Trent's allegations, as did the sessions guitarist from Biffy (&Oceansize, he's awesome!). It's heavily rumoured Trent changed the Reading NIN setlist after he threw his tantrum, removing Head Like a Hole and Hand that Feeds at least.

Melvin's a decent guy who's pretty good at his job. He wouldn't **** around one of his favourite bands.
Original post by St. Brynjar
It's a bit unfair to blame Melvin for all of those, I spoke to him about GNR and that is widely accepted to be all Axl. Foo Fighters were given three hours but chose to fill 2 and a half, something Melvin knew in advance. It helped ease congestion through the exits too. It's also worth noting he vociferously denied Trent's allegations, as did the sessions guitarist from Biffy (&Oceansize, he's awesome!). It's heavily rumoured Trent changed the Reading NIN setlist after he threw his tantrum, removing Head Like a Hole and Hand that Feeds at least.

Melvin's a decent guy who's pretty good at his job. He wouldn't **** around one of his favourite bands.


If that's the case, what was his reason for throwing a tantrum?
Reply 1173
Original post by St. Brynjar
It's a bit unfair to blame Melvin for all of those, I spoke to him about GNR and that is widely accepted to be all Axl. Foo Fighters were given three hours but chose to fill 2 and a half, something Melvin knew in advance. It helped ease congestion through the exits too. It's also worth noting he vociferously denied Trent's allegations, as did the sessions guitarist from Biffy (&Oceansize, he's awesome!). It's heavily rumoured Trent changed the Reading NIN setlist after he threw his tantrum, removing Head Like a Hole and Hand that Feeds at least.

Melvin's a decent guy who's pretty good at his job. He wouldn't **** around one of his favourite bands.


The Guns N' Roses issue is odd because as far as I know Axl doesn't have a bad record with festival times because he knows there is no negotiation with the curfews. They then kicked up a huge fuss at the Reading show and didn't want to leave the stage (which I don't think they have ever done). Fair enough on the Foo Fighters front, I didn't think it was ever made clear what happened.

His denial just doesn't explain what has happened though. Why would someone transport, at a huge cost, equipment which they should have been informed they could not use? Trent is smart enough to know the logistics of how festivals work and if he was told outright that it wasn't going to happen then they would avoided transporting the full production to the UK (they played France in between the festival shows). The Reading setlist actually isn't that odd in context of their current tour. It is the Leeds one that is distinctly different. They were also told to stop at Leeds which led to some equipment being wrecked. Again NIN aren't a band who don't know how festivals work, it just looks like they weren't clearly informed of what they could bring or how long they could perform.

It just looks likely that NIN weren't informed fully of what they could do because they might have dropped out. They stopped the BBC broadcast because they couldn't use their full production. Once they were on site however they were told what was going on and at that point having spent a significant amount transporting equipment they would play. Regardless of the fact they couldn't use everything they brought to the sites.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 1174
If you wanted to know how much effort a band like NIN put into their production check this out.

Original post by Devel
The Guns N' Roses issue is odd because as far as I know Axl doesn't have a bad record with festival times because he knows there is no negotiation with the curfews. They then kicked up a huge fuss at the Reading show and didn't want to leave the stage (which I don't think they have ever done). Fair enough on the Foo Fighters front, I didn't think it was ever made clear what happened.

His denial just doesn't explain what has happened though. Why would someone transport, at a huge cost, equipment which they should have been informed they could not use? Trent is smart enough to know the logistics of how festivals work and if he was told outright that it wasn't going to happen then they would avoided transporting the full production to the UK (they played France in between the festival shows). The Reading setlist actually isn't that odd in context of their current tour. It is the Leeds one that is distinctly different. They were also told to stop at Leeds which led to some equipment being wrecked. Again NIN aren't a band who don't know how festivals work, it just looks like they weren't clearly informed of what they could bring or how long they could perform.

It just looks likely that NIN weren't informed fully of what they could do because they might have dropped out. They stopped the BBC broadcast because they couldn't use their full production. Once they were on site however they were told what was going on and at that point having spent a significant amount transporting equipment they would play. Regardless of the fact they couldn't use everything they brought to the sites.


The Axl thing is seriously indisputably his fault, the only blame on Melvin is for being a bit naive and expecting to have him on time. The Reading curfew is rigid because the site is literally minutes from the town centre and a residential area. The cost for running over allotted set time is something like £1,000 per minute (bands are aware of this before, Muse I think it was in '02 stayed on a while extra and used it as crowd banter) and it really does have to stop. The band play an hour over their time, the organiser has to be firm and cut the music. Why did they kick up a fuss? Well it's all just conjecture, but Axl is very well known to have quite an ego, which must have taken a battering when being cut before a performance was finished.

I chalk the Trent thing down to a bit of miscommunication, either NIN thinking their production would take less time than planned, or thinking they had more time, or expecting set times to be more flexible or something and found out too late. Melvin loves Nine Inch Nails, when I asked for his top three they were there with Pixies and Pearl Jam. It's one of those things that could have been a mistake made by a member of Festival Republic or NIN innocently. Trent was annoyed at Biffy because they had a huge set up which wasn't allowed to be eaten into, I'm certain that Biffy wouldn't have done anything deliberately. You mention that Trent knows the way festivals work, I agree but have to point out that Festival Republic know how to book and manage bands, and even those in the same slot as NIN with huge productions (Pulp in '11, NIN in '07, The Prodigy in '09) have been successful. The way Trent managed his disappointment (i.e. refusing to let his set be broadcast and taking to Twitter to vent) suggests to me, and I'm well aware I could be completely wrong, that it was a toys out of the pram situation.
Reply 1176
Original post by St. Brynjar
The Axl thing is seriously indisputably his fault, the only blame on Melvin is for being a bit naive and expecting to have him on time. The Reading curfew is rigid because the site is literally minutes from the town centre and a residential area. The cost for running over allotted set time is something like £1,000 per minute (bands are aware of this before, Muse I think it was in '02 stayed on a while extra and used it as crowd banter) and it really does have to stop. The band play an hour over their time, the organiser has to be firm and cut the music. Why did they kick up a fuss? Well it's all just conjecture, but Axl is very well known to have quite an ego, which must have taken a battering when being cut before a performance was finished.

I chalk the Trent thing down to a bit of miscommunication, either NIN thinking their production would take less time than planned, or thinking they had more time, or expecting set times to be more flexible or something and found out too late. Melvin loves Nine Inch Nails, when I asked for his top three they were there with Pixies and Pearl Jam. It's one of those things that could have been a mistake made by a member of Festival Republic or NIN innocently. Trent was annoyed at Biffy because they had a huge set up which wasn't allowed to be eaten into, I'm certain that Biffy wouldn't have done anything deliberately. You mention that Trent knows the way festivals work, I agree but have to point out that Festival Republic know how to book and manage bands, and even those in the same slot as NIN with huge productions (Pulp in '11, NIN in '07, The Prodigy in '09) have been successful. The way Trent managed his disappointment (i.e. refusing to let his set be broadcast and taking to Twitter to vent) suggests to me, and I'm well aware I could be completely wrong, that it was a toys out of the pram situation.


That is the point though. Axl is well aware of how festival curfews don't work like they do at GnR concerts and he has a pretty good record of being on time for them. Don't get me wrong I see no reason why a band should be allowed to play past curfew (unless a promoter accepts responsibility like Glastonbury with Springsteen) but it was just out of character for his festival appearances and something which he attributed to being told they would have later. I don't think they had a similar incident at Leeds festival after their Reading show.

The miscommunication part is the most likely scenario I agree but surely the promoter must accept responsibility? They had to have known what NIN were going to turn up with. They had used the same setup for almost all their shows on this run and the promoter, if not provided with, should have demanded exact details of what they were turning up with. If NIN had been playing with a small production this run and suddenly turned up with a huge set up then NIN would have been mostly responsible. Their set up however has been covered by the music press quite a fair bit and the festival should have known everything about it. I doubt Trent would have taken anything out on Biffy if he knew in advance what would happen (in which they may have dropped out). The Leeds setlist just seems like it was put together on the day. He didn't want it to be broadcast because it is not the show that he had put together for the tour. The fact this all kicked off is because he is known to be dedicated to having a high standard for his production and there was no way he would allow a set to be broadcast live that was put together in a weekend.
had so much fun at the festival. soad, eminem, chase n status were the highlights for me. now answering a reading questionnaire....anybody got any suggestions as to what improvements the festival could make? can't think of any except cheaper food and booze! but i know that's never gonna happen. for me an ideal line up would include rage against the machine, prodigy and soad. shame red hot chilli peppers suck live.
Original post by bananaterracottapie
had so much fun at the festival. soad, eminem, chase n status were the highlights for me. now answering a reading questionnaire....anybody got any suggestions as to what improvements the festival could make? can't think of any except cheaper food and booze! but i know that's never gonna happen. for me an ideal line up would include rage against the machine, prodigy and soad. shame red hot chilli peppers suck live.


I did that survey too, had to put dre and snoop as dream acts for 2014 - that would be perfect
Reply 1179
Original post by bananaterracottapie
had so much fun at the festival. soad, eminem, chase n status were the highlights for me. now answering a reading questionnaire....anybody got any suggestions as to what improvements the festival could make? can't think of any except cheaper food and booze! but i know that's never gonna happen. for me an ideal line up would include rage against the machine, prodigy and soad. shame red hot chilli peppers suck live.


I put something about better toilets... I'd definitely pay to not go in toilets that smelt that bad!!
I think I put rhcp as part of my ideal line up, I've always wanted to see them live, but I've heard they suck so I think I'll avoid it just so I'm not disappointed ever.
I don't understand people buying tickets now though. I'd be so miffed if I bought my ticket and the line up sucked, I only got my ticket in April once some of the really big ones were confirmed.

Quick Reply

Latest