dvduser6

This is pretty cool treat, but there aren't enough other interesting acts to be able to drag me out there for a whole weekend.

nothingfails

I saw that article as well. But when you think about it, the 18 year olds going to Coachella to see the hot indie bands were born around the time the last Stone Roses cd came out. To the demo who was the right age in 1989-1991 or so, their reunion is quite an event.

Still as a whole, I think sometimes having "too big" headliners (like Prince, Springsteen and Madonna in the past) sometimes overshadows everyone else and also doesn't really play to the target demographic market of 18-30 year olds and hip people who are older than that. Springsteen and Madonna sell out tickets faster than about anyone, but does the average Grizzly Bear/Tame Impala loving Coachella attendee really connect with them? Coachella is supposed to be a showcase of what is hot in alternative/rock at the present moment... Madonna, Springsteen, Rolling Stones, Prince, The Who, etc... doesn't really fall into that group. And I say this as someone who has seen almost all of those artists live, but Coachella is for indie rock loving 18-30 year olds and older people who refuse to resort to classic rock (and The Stones are a band who refuse to play anything post-Tattoo You outside of "latest album" tracks, at least when I saw them... that is as classic rock as you can get. The likes of Prince and Springsteen mix in as many "recent/semi-recent" tracks as they do the Greatest Hits in their sets). Imagine Frank Sinatra or Tony Bennett at Woodstock.

Giles

honestly no...

it's nice that the festival organizers are giving the Stone Roses a chance to play and headline the festival, but as they have demonstrated from the blog, the "huh? who, why?' response is not a surprise to me in the least.

speaking of Tony Bennett wasn't he that made a surprise appearance at one of WHFS X-mas concerts one year?

Supermallet

I offered my ticket to a friend. I really hope Blur plays a solo show somewhere on the west coast.

ResIpsa

I'm old, but it was sad to see Sparks buried way down in the fine print (even below the awful Medicine, which makes it sting even worse).

Anyway, pretty solid "B-list" acts. Third set for me, Nick Cave, Dead Can Dance, OMD (buried in the semi-fine print), Grimes and (The) Three O'Clock (!?!). Bonus is that I can leave early and avoid some traffic because I don't care for RHCPs.

Supermallet

Wait, Sparks is on the list? Fuuuuck, I might have to go now.

nothingfails

I don't see what's so terrible about the list. Yea, it's low on A-level superstars but as a whole it's a great lineup showcasing a lot of the bands I've been digging in the past few years. When you look at this, and then look at all the nu-metal frat bands who were playing Woodstock 99 and festivals for the few years afterwards, I'll gladly take this over it anyday (I think of the 1999-2005 period of nu-metal and rap-rock as the worst period ever for mainstream rock).

Of the list alone, if I was nearby, I'd watch Blur, Stone Roses, Yeah Yeah Yeahs, Modest Mouse, Lou Reed, How To Destroy Angels (Trent freaking Reznor!!), Passion Pit, Tegan And Sara, Band Of Horses, Of Monsters And Men, Japandroids, Divine Fits, Stars, Johnny Marr, Alt-J, Purity Ring, Phoenix, The XX, Postal Service, New Order, Hot Chip, Grizzly Bear, Two Door Cinema Club, Franz Ferdinand, Portugal The Man, Bat For Lashes, Janelle Monae, Nick Cave, Vampire Weekend, Lumineers, James Blake, Grimes, Gaslight Anthem, OMD, Tanlines, Rodriguez and Jeff The Brotherhood. That's 37 freaking acts.

You keep forgetting that Coachella is a showcase of what's current in the alternative scene (and even then we have acts like Lou Reed, OMD, New Order, Nick Cave and Rodriguez for those who want to hear some classic older music)... it is not a festival geared to aging boomers who think music went to crap and never recovered after Michael Jackson released Thriller.

bluetoast

Tokyo Ska Paradise Orchestra? Wow, that's a name I haven't heard in a while, wonder what they've been up to.

CRM114

I don't understand how Stone Roses pass for a headliner at Coachella. The supporting bands are SO MUCH more interesting than the headliners.

Lou Reed is an undercard to Stone Roses?

wendersfan

I'm loving all these Stone Roses comments.

The band creates one of the half-dozen greatest rock albums ever and you guys all take a giant dump on them.

CRM114

Hiro11

I would be most excited to see:
Yeah, Yeah, Yeahs
Grinderman
Infected Mushroom
Sigur Ros
Spiritualized
Major Lazer
Nick Cave
Vampire Weekend
Tame Impala
Dinosaur Jr.
Ghost
DIIV

..but I'm a 40-year-old suburban dad in Chicago so let's not pretend that I'm actually going to do any of this.

Hiro11

Yeah, but that was ~24 years ago. Then they made some real shit and broke up in complete acrimony.

nothingfails

But a lot of people want one of the greatest bands of all time... whose last "great" album was either 1972, 1978 or 1981 depending on the person (and nothing post 1981) to headline Coachella, never mind that their fees are probably what 30 of the mid-tier level acts are put together and that they'd do a stale oldies set to a lot of 20-something alt-rock fans who'd just as well see Tame Impala.

CRM114

I'm headed to Solid Sound to see Wilco headline night one and then Wilco to headline night 2. Last time they threw in Thurston Moore and Levon Helm too.

Hiro11

I agree. I'll never understand why there's so many people willing to pay big bucks to see older, well out of their prime bands play their greatest hits and so few willing to pay five bucks to see a band in their prime.

Don't misunderstand me, there are plenty of older bands that are still great and worth paying to see live, but who in their right mind is paying thousands of dollars to see a geriatric Stones dodder around the stage?

Pillowhead

I'm going weekend 2. Although the headliners (aside from Blur and the Stone Roses) are meh, there are some excellent 2nd liners and below. There are a TON of bands I want to see.

I can't wait and this will be my 6th Coachella! (5th in a row).

Ropes Pierre

they had me at Social D and Gaslight Anthem.

E Unit

Holy shit - Dead Can Dance. I thought they disbanded at least a decade ago. Have to agree, there's about a dozen or so supporting bands I'd rather see than the headliners. Would like to see Reznor's Hot To Destroy Angels as well.

nothingfails

I saw The Stones in 06 since my dad got tickets and I do respect their legacy. While it was nice to see them live, I felt like the entire show was them going through the motions playing nothing but song after song that they've done 3000 times before and didn't even hide that they were sick of Satisfaction, Brown Sugar, etc...

They def are one of the greatest bands of all time, and I'll even admit I didn't expect them to have a song as good as "Doom And Gloom" at their career, but while Coachella has hosted a number of "big legendary" acts before like Springsteen and Prince, those two artists generally seem to be more forward-minded artistically while The Stones have long since resigned to playing the same setlist year and year out and that "Start Me Up" was the last great hit and nothing since matters. I hate that mentality when artists concede that their old music is all that matters. Springsteen for example hasn't burned up the singles chart in ages but yet he still mixes in songs from all eras of his career as opposed to doing a straight ahead rundown of Born To Run and Born In The U.S.A. classics with maybe "Hungry Heart" thrown in for good measure.

Supermallet

I saw The Stones in 2005 and it was amazing, but apparently it was a rare on night for them.

nothingfails

You saw them earlier on the tour. They had been touring for over a year by the time I saw them and you could tell they were going through the motions. Plus it was an outdoors show and it was raining hard and it was unusually cold for September. But still they played nothing post-Tattoo You outside of like 2 Bigger Bang tracks. It was the epitome of a Greatest Hits nostalgia show as pretty much every song they performed was on 40 Licks or Hot Rocks except for the new songs and Dead Flowers (as they were performing in Louisville, they had to add that one) and I am someone who would've been more than satisfied had they done the Springsteen/Prince/Bowie half-hits/half-deep cuts and other tracks type of show where both the die-hard fans and those who just wanted a nice night out listening to old favorites can be satisfied.

Giles

eesh, just watched the Stone Roses set (via YouTube) Ian Brown's attempt at carrying a note was just cringe inducing.

Ranger

I liked How to Destroy Angels' Ice Age. Did they do other songs?

Dan

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/W_IzYUJANfk?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>