Spin Magazine covered festivals this summer (along with everyone else), but I thought they brought up an interesting point. They interviewed Perry Farrel (lead singer of Jane's Addiction, founder of Lollapalooza, and foot-in-mouth extraordinaire) who said that the festival business is doomed. He said that today there are no huge bands, and that in 10-15 years there will be no such thing as a headliner band. This would lead to diminished ticket sales, lower funds for festival organizers, and in turn crappier festivals. Now what makes this argument so unsettling is not only that it hits home with music lovers who plan their summers around such extravaganzas as Lollapalooza, Bonnaroo, and Coachella, but that it's particularly valid.
Festivals in the 90's (Lollapalooza, Woodstock 94, etc.) relied heavily on popular acts of the time to draw their crowds. A big part of that was MTV exposure and alternative rock radio play. Today's modern rock festival takes an alternate route. Festivals like Bonnaroo highlight upcoming indie bands (i.e. Vampire Weekend, Animal Collective, MGMT, Of Montreal), popular dance music artists (M.I.A., Justice, MSTRKRFT), international acts (Gogol Bordello, Ozomatli, Orchestra Baobab), Soul Performers (Solomon Burke, Sharon Jones and the Dap Kings), and the list goes on and on. What the point is is that today's festival is a whole new animal. Going to a festival like Lollapalooza is no longer like listening to the live version of an alternative rock radio station. It's a complete musical experience where one can immerse themselves into every arcane corner of the musical spectrum or tailor their daily schedule to their existing musical preferences.
However, the headliner has always been the major draw for festivals. There the bands who gather all the tribes so to speak. There also the true money makers for festivals. A festival can often be made or broken depending on who they get to headline. Over the last 5 years, there have been 51 headliners at the three major festivals in the US (Bonnaroo, Coachella, Lollapalooza). Of those 51, 42 came to popularity before this decade. Obviously this is disheartening for the future, but will festivals cease to exist? This savvy music critic thinks not.
Festivals today depend on bands who were popular during an era of less musical exposure. The only bands people listened to were major label talents that they heard on the radio and saw on TV. Today that's not the case. More and more people base their taste off of music that they hear first online. MTV is no longer credible with presenting the best music of the time, and radio stations are frantically updating and diversifying their playlists to keep up with this new trend. There are no popular bands. Well, sort of.
In the last two years or so, festivals have started to highlight more and more bands that have bcome popular in ths decade. Performers include The White Stripes, The Raconteurs, Jack Johnson, and The Killers.
Of course this should last us the next few years (along with still active artists like Beck, Radiohead, and The Red Hot Chili Peppers), but what of the next generation? It's really impossible to tell. Radio stations could change their programming to suit the new tastes (some already have), MTV could start covering real music (it was really hard to write that), or smaller bands now could get huge after a few more successful albums. All there really is is speculation.
My speculation you ask? Personally I think we're going to see a change in what people consider the "headliner". The headliner will play a less important role (it arguably already has) and festivals will have to depend on the strength of their entire and diverse lineup (many already have). It's really hard to say, it's arguable that a society has to have some sort of popular music. Maybe bands like Vampire Weekend or MGMT will be catapaulted into the mainstream? Either way, we're in the middle of the transition right now. It should be entertaining.
What do you think will happen to festivals?
