Lollapalooza 2011 Lineup.

[regretfullySaid]

I still like small to mid sized stinky old venues the best.
At least around here palooza is a lot of casual observers just wanting to check out an artist to see what the hype is about or hear their favorite hit and there's not enough WEIRD. Not that there's anything wrong with that but it's not my taste.
I'd rather be surrounded by a few people who are really into who they're checking out.

Not that I can't enjoy an artist regardless of the crowd, but I'd rather be surrounded by people who genuinely love the shit instead of a lot of people hoping for a spectacle they can catch on their phone to prove some street cred, because that's what I got out of it.
Not that it's all like that, but the palooza experience here is very touristy.

[beats me]

the reason you guys have not heard of a lot them is because there is a lot of filler.
its not because you are out of the loop.
my 19 year old sister has not heard of most of them.
i have only heard of about ten bands counting the four shit headliners.

That's comforting to know and probably not surprising when you consider the current state of internet music. Too much shit out there and probably every one of the artists at the festival is easily interchangeable with at least 100 others. They probably use hats with genres on them and just pull out a name and see who bites.

[regretfullySaid]

I line-up of unknown artists who put their albums out on bandcamp sounds more appealing.

[regretfullySaid]

also why is cee lo green at all of these rock festivals now?

They probably use hats with genres on them and just pull out a name and see who bites.

Come on let's not play dumb here, they pick who's "hot". Code word: Sponsors.
It's mainstream to midstream to a few local bands trying to make it to 2nd stage.

They've always had good line ups --- from an overall major music perspective; majors take 1st stage, up-n'comers midstream hitters on 2nd stage, etc. The "dj tent" that became part of it has been more appealing as I've outgrown the usual rock band formula (not that I completely disregard bands but you know, the typical E-G-A rock band shit that's been recycled for the past 40 years has gotten old).

My memorable moments were palooza 2 with Sonic Youth and Cypress being most memorable, though I caught the end of Jesus Lizard and wished I saw the whole thing.
Oh, and Moby was on 2nd stage; I'd heard of him at the time but that's it; he was triggering different midi sounds when he was hitting bongos and even though his singing and playing sucked on a Hendrix cover he had hunger and emotion in it that overrode it. Then I bought the tape and the production was 10 times worse than the live show:/

Palooza a few years ago with Daft and Pearl Jam were great. Iggy would've been better if it was smaller. It's not really the shows, it's the atmosphere. It's gotten too big and jumbled. You have to prioritize conflicting schedules. It's less music lovers and more tourists. If I had an extra few hundred to spend on a weekend with a chick who really wanted to go, I'd do it, otherwise I feel like I'd miss out more on one artist playing at their prospective smaller venue than that, like Trentemoeller at Mid last Thursday(!). But like I said, Pitchfork is more together, and I've missed on Coachellas and Sonars which seem more appealing.

This would be the year Little Dragon should take over 2nd stage (1st stage band but not enough monetarily in promoters eyes), but fortunately they aren't. Now that I think of it, I could really dig a big Little Dragon show at palooza because the Lincoln Hall shows they've done in the past 2 years have shown that they belong up there and the audience would know them and be into it. A hot day right after sunset with Dragon going into "Forever" would get the audience humid and that would be the perfect time to make babies.
If Metronomy (cuz of new album, only one I know) and Little Dragon were headlining I'd definitely consider it. I would've liked to have seen Bat for Lashes last year.

I've had way more memorable times seeing 1 or 2 bands I really enjoy play at their normal smaller venue, but if you're in a tailgate party kind of mood, fests are where it's at.

+1 on it not being an age thing. Most of the names are 2nd and 3rd stage bands. 3rd stage bands are regional, and 2nd stages are hit and miss between artists about to be mainstream or going back to 3rd stage.

Besides, the thing I like about being older is being more interested than just the surface and losing interest in it (because there's usually not much depth to it!). Genuine and Intimate rules more in my book over a tailgate party, but there's a place for both.

[Chase!]

The lineup is actually pretty good. Not the best headliners but.. Deadmau5 would be pretty awesome to see live. I wonder how much money Eminem would be getting paid to perform Lollapalooza '11?

[Cezband]

I could never justify a festival from a cost vs experience standpoint. The whole selling point is "Pay once, see all these bands" - but I always think how many of those bands I would individually pay to see live and add up the cost of individual tickets and it is always, always nowhere near the price of a festival ticket.

Plus if you go to an individual gig, you know the audience are full of people that are passionate about that band. Go to a festival and watch your favourite act and stand next to some schmuck who's going to boo their way through the set because the band won't play that one song that was sort of popular 4 years ago that he had on a compilation CD from a music magazine? No thanks.

[regretfullySaid]

Shan't we also forget the overpriced everything as well?

[Machinesworking]

So glad nobody I'm interested is playing.