Woodstock 50 Lineup Revealed

Ledbetterman10

Ledbetterman10

I like the looks of day 1 with Robert Plant, John Fogerty, and The Raconteurs 

PJ_Soul

Ledbetterman10 said:

I like the looks of day 1 with Robert Plant, John Fogerty, and The Raconteurs 

The Killers are probably going to be the highlight/crown fave of day 1. They are actually a phenomenal live act.

Portugal. The Man. I bet will be great for day 2, as well as Leon Bridges and Gary Clark Jr.

Ledbetterman10

Yeah the first two days look really good. Not much from day 3 in my wheelhouse. 

josevolution

Nah not worth it for me ..

Ledbetterman10

josevolution said:

Nah not worth it for me ..

That may end up being the case for me too. I live only a few hours away so it's definitely a doable road trip. And I had a couple of friends that were down with the idea when it was rumored that PJ and the Foo Fighters would be headlining, but now I don't know. My one buddy loves John Mayer so he may be down to go to see Dead and Co. But I gotta still wait and see what the tickets are going to cost, and if you have to buy a 3-day pass, because day 3 doesn't interest me much. 

Gary Carter

josevolution said:

Nah not worth it for me ..

QFT

Zod

Ledbetterman10 said:

josevolution said:

Nah not worth it for me ..

That may end up being the case for me too. I live only a few hours away so it's definitely a doable road trip. And I had a couple of friends that were down with the idea when it was rumored that PJ and the Foo Fighters would be headlining, but now I don't know. My one buddy loves John Mayer so he may be down to go to see Dead and Co. But I gotta still wait and see what the tickets are going to cost, and if you have to buy a 3-day pass, because day 3 doesn't interest me much. 

I find this to be one of the hardest things with modern festivals.   When I was younger you'd get single day festivals with pretty amazing lineups (lollapalooza, ozzfest etc..).  Now there's less quality bands to fill out a roster, and they spread it out over 3 days.    This festival would be dissapointing to me.   Some modern rock bands I'm not really into.  Some solo artists from bands that I do like.   No one I would really consider a headliner.

tbergs

Day 1 looks amazing. Some of my favorites are on the 3rd line; Head and the Heart, Maggie Rogers and Michael Franti, not to mention the headliners. 

helplessdancer

zac turned me on to nahko
nahko is incredible ++
Nahko and Medicine For the People - Be Here Now - 3/7/2018 - Paste Studios - New York - NY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRdZ496xrm0

VINNY GOOMBA

Ledbetterman10 said:

josevolution said:

Nah not worth it for me ..

That may end up being the case for me too. I live only a few hours away so it's definitely a doable road trip. And I had a couple of friends that were down with the idea when it was rumored that PJ and the Foo Fighters would be headlining, but now I don't know. My one buddy loves John Mayer so he may be down to go to see Dead and Co. But I gotta still wait and see what the tickets are going to cost, and if you have to buy a 3-day pass, because day 3 doesn't interest me much. 

The best guitar player in all 3 days is on Sunday-- Marcus King! He's maybe 23 years old and shreds unbelievably.  Check him out!

g under p

The line up on day 1 is awesome. My friend Michael Franti & Spearhead is playing and seems like a perfect trek to NY from here in Palm Beach. Gotta make this happen.

Peace

brianlux

I hate to sound like an old guy, but when I look at a list of the bands from the original Woodstock festival and then look at the lists from Woodstock '94 and Woodstock 50 I can't help but wonder why there was ever more than one.  Not that I have issues with the newer bands, but I have to ask, how many people would sit through three days of mud to see any of them?  Do people still get that wasted and dirty?  And I never got why the second and third festivals are called "Woodstock".  It's a whole new generation or three, a whole new music scene, and a whole new vibe-  and probably a better one- there are good reasons why Pete Townshend hated Woodstock.

josevolution

Gary Carter said:

josevolution said:

Nah not worth it for me ..

QFT

Where you been kid ? I hope all is well yeah no way I’m camping for three days to watch maybe 4 bands out of that lineup..

tempo_n_groove

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ passs.

I'd rather got to Firefly or ACL.

Who Princess

Ledbetterman10 said:

Yeah the first two days look really good. Not much from day 3 in my wheelhouse. 

Hot Tuna is one of my all time favorite bands but you can probably catch them at a smaller venue.

Glorified KC

I'm definitely getting old.  I don't recognize 90% of these bands.

PJ_Soul

brianlux said:

I hate to sound like an old guy, but when I look at a list of the bands from the original Woodstock festival and then look at the lists from Woodstock '94 and Woodstock 50 I can't help but wonder why there was ever more than one.  Not that I have issues with the newer bands, but I have to ask, how many people would sit through three days of mud to see any of them?  Do people still get that wasted and dirty?  And I never got why the second and third festivals are called "Woodstock".  It's a whole new generation or three, a whole new music scene, and a whole new vibe-  and probably a better one- there are good reasons why Pete Townshend hated Woodstock.

I wouldn't sit through 3 days of mud to see anyone, lol. I might sit through 1 day of mud to see Led Zeppelin with John Bonham resurrected from the dead. 3 days? No.

Obviously the original Woodstock can never be replicated or anything like that - not the vibe, not the music. I don't think they ever should have done Woodstock '94, let alone one that is meant to celebrate the original now. What this is is a regular music festival with a pretty decent lineup, although not absolutely stellar or anything. There aren't any internationally massive artists in it at all. This is not a reflection of the state of the current music scene at all - simply a reflection of a poorly planned music festival that didn't manage to attract any massive acts.

HesCalledDyer

When did EVERY music festival become a hodge-podge of various bands & artists that are completely unrelated in genre or style?  Whatever happened to just a good old rock fest?  Every festival is the fucking same anymore, and they're almost all watered-down as fuck.

jerparker20

Sounds like a bunch of 40 year olds in here...

Theres just way too many festivals out there nowadays, and so many that cater to specific types of music. It seems like there is some big festival happening somewhere every weekend of the summer. It makes these giant, destination festivals irrelevant.

PJ_Soul

HesCalledDyer said:

When did EVERY music festival become a hodge-podge of various bands & artists that are completely unrelated in genre or style?  Whatever happened to just a good old rock fest?  Every festival is the fucking same anymore, and they're almost all watered-down as fuck.

Well good question. Music festivals pretty much ALL suck now. It's just a relative matter, lol. Which shitty music festival is less shitty than the other shitty music festival? I personally can't even stand multi-day festivals. Just do one day and fucking get it over with, and cater to one audience at a time, not every audience. Although I think we have to admit that these stupid festivals are good for music artists. A lot of lesser known artists get a stage a lot more often now, apparently, since every festival is somehow made suitable for their genre.