[www.nojazzfest.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-01-27 22:56 by BluzDude.

Shows how great Jazz Fest always is that I looked at this amazing lineup and thought "hmm, not quite as good as usual . . ".

Quote
Aquamarine
Shows how great Jazz Fest always is that I looked at this amazing lineup and thought "hmm, not quite as good as usual . . ".

....Tom Petty makes it worthwhile for me.

...and includes one Ms Lisa Fischer!

Wow, what a line-up! Each year I wish I could attend. It is now an official "bucket-list" item. I will make it in the next couple of years.

Just purchased my package for weekend 1

The Meters!

Agree that it's a good line-up, but not as great as the past few years - at least to my taste.

Stevie Wonder was on last year's bill, but was cancelled because of the monsoon that hit on second Saturday afternoon. Hopefully he'll have better weather this year.

Great lineup !

Great Meters tune on the Jazz Fest promo video...

Funkify Your Life
[www.youtube.com]

Very weak lineup. Probably the worst ever.

Quote
The Sicilian
Very weak lineup. Probably the worst ever.

How so. Maroon 5? I won't argue with you on that. Widespread Panic? Eh, long in the tooth and boring. But otherwise it's a strong lineup compared to previous years: Elton John, for one.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
The Sicilian
Very weak lineup. Probably the worst ever.

How so. Maroon 5? I won't argue with you on that. Widespread Panic? Eh, long in the tooth and boring. But otherwise it's a strong lineup compared to previous years: Elton John, for one.

I didn't see Elton John's name on the list for 2017. Take a look at last year. Just Van Morrison alone was worth the admission. 2016 was a fantastic lineup. This year is very mediocre.

[2016 NO Jazz Fest]

I agree that for Jazz Fest it's pretty mediocre. Most other festivals, it would be great. (Some nice down-bill acts, though.)

Quote
The Sicilian

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
The Sicilian
Very weak lineup. Probably the worst ever.

How so. Maroon 5? I won't argue with you on that. Widespread Panic? Eh, long in the tooth and boring. But otherwise it's a strong lineup compared to previous years: Elton John, for one.

I didn't see Elton John's name on the list for 2017. Take a look at last year. Just Van Morrison alone was worth the admission. 2016 was a fantastic lineup. This year is very mediocre.

[2016 NO Jazz Fest]

Elton John... so that's your idea of a strong lineup? Van Morrison. From what I have heard of him at Jazz Fest and from what others have heard of him at Jazz Fest, he should quit.

Your idea of a strong lineup is similar to how HMS thinks the Stones' worst album is great.

I'd say the opposite about Van Morrison, and Elton John isn't on this year's bill, last time was 2015 (along with the Who). This thread is getting very confusing.

The headliners draw the crowds, but Fest is about the mindblowing lesser known regional acts in the tents and smaller stages. I've stopped in to check out acts for a few songs on the way to something else. But the performance was so powerful that I hung around for the entire set and left a fan. I found Johnathan Boogie Long and Ruthie Foster this way.

Other times I've seen sets by people whose work I knew but of which I wasn't necessarily the biggest fan where they rose to the moment and gave me a new appreciation of their work. Steve Earle's set a few years ago comes to mind.

I come away from Fest thinking that everyone in New Orleans has serious chops and plays in at least two bands and that George Porter Jr. plays in every band in town.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-02-04 10:35 by ab.

Quote
Aquamarine
I'd say the opposite about Van Morrison, and Elton John isn't on this year's bill, last time was 2015 (along with the Who). This thread is getting very confusing.

You can say the opposite about Van Morrison but from what was heard he was horrible. As in he sucked. So... he sucked. Long time fans said he was terrible.

Elton John had too many people. The fact that JF does that is just to make money. Not having such a big named act this year is a move in the right direction.

Quote
ab
The headliners draw the crowds, but Fest is about the mindblowing lesser known regional acts in the tents and smaller stages. I've stopped in to check out acts for a few songs on the way to something else. But the performance was so powerful that I hung around for the entire set and left a fan. I found Johnathan Boogie Long and Ruthie Foster this way.

Other times I've seen sets by people whose work I knew but of which I wasn't necessarily the biggest fan where they rose to the moment and gave me a new appreciation of their work. Steve Earle's set a few years ago comes to mind.

I come away from Fest thinking that everyone in New Orleans has serious chops and plays in at least two bands and that George Porter Jr. plays in every band in town.

What you just said is possibly part of the reason bands like U2 and the Stones stop coming to New Orleans - there are better and local, state and or city, musicians playing most nights of the week.

A few years back I saw Fats Domino, Ray Charles and Jeffrey Osborne within the space of a few hours at the Jazz Fest. Don't forget some of the major acts will also play side shows in NO while in town.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Aquamarine
I'd say the opposite about Van Morrison, and Elton John isn't on this year's bill, last time was 2015 (along with the Who). This thread is getting very confusing.

You can say the opposite about Van Morrison but from what was heard he was horrible. As in he sucked. So... he sucked. Long time fans said he was terrible.

Elton John had too many people. The fact that JF does that is just to make money. Not having such a big named act this year is a move in the right direction.

I'm a long time fan and I didn't think he was terrible (note--I only saw video). But it's obviously a question of opinion, not some hard-and-fast fact. And of course JF wants to make money. It's a business and New Orleans desperately needs the money it attracts.

I am going because of the whole experience.....It's been on my bucket list for many years, so this year I plan to take advantage.....

....Tom Petty is an added plus for me, even though I've seen him more than 10 times.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
ab
The headliners draw the crowds, but Fest is about the mindblowing lesser known regional acts in the tents and smaller stages. I've stopped in to check out acts for a few songs on the way to something else. But the performance was so powerful that I hung around for the entire set and left a fan. I found Johnathan Boogie Long and Ruthie Foster this way.

Other times I've seen sets by people whose work I knew but of which I wasn't necessarily the biggest fan where they rose to the moment and gave me a new appreciation of their work. Steve Earle's set a few years ago comes to mind.

I come away from Fest thinking that everyone in New Orleans has serious chops and plays in at least two bands and that George Porter Jr. plays in every band in town.

What you just said is possibly part of the reason bands like U2 and the Stones stop coming to New Orleans - there are better and local, state and or city, musicians playing most nights of the week.

My understanding is that 3/4 of the acts booked at Jazzfest are from Louisiana and that the remaining 1/4 don't play Fest in consecutive years.

Many of New Orleans' giants are gone (Allen Toussaint, Buckwheat Zydeco, Wardell Quezergue) or not playing anymore (Fats Domino), while others are not getting any younger (Dr. John). So, those of you who have Fest on your bucket list and haven't gone, don't put it off any longer than you must.

Stevie Wonder is an unusual situation: he's scheduled again this year after his set last year was cancelled due to extreme rain. His 2008 set was epic: what a catalog!

Quote
Aquamarine

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Aquamarine
I'd say the opposite about Van Morrison, and Elton John isn't on this year's bill, last time was 2015 (along with the Who). This thread is getting very confusing.

You can say the opposite about Van Morrison but from what was heard he was horrible. As in he sucked. So... he sucked. Long time fans said he was terrible.

Elton John had too many people. The fact that JF does that is just to make money. Not having such a big named act this year is a move in the right direction.

I'm a long time fan and I didn't think he was terrible (note--I only saw video). But it's obviously a question of opinion, not some hard-and-fast fact. And of course JF wants to make money. It's a business and New Orleans desperately needs the money it attracts.

A bunch of people saying he sucked is fact enough. There's plenty of other good and great stuff that draws people.

Well, we seem to have a different definition of "fact." "Alternative facts," if you will. (A bunch of people think Justin Bieber is the most musically talented person living, a bunch of people think the Stones are a great band. Opinions--the number of people that believe them doesn't make them facts.)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-02-07 10:40 by Aquamarine.

Quote
Aquamarine
Well, we seem to have a different definition of "fact." "Alternative facts," if you will. (A bunch of people think Justin Bieber is the most musically talented person living, a bunch of people think the Stones are a great band. Opinions--the number of people that believe them doesn't make them facts.)

Bad is bad. That's a fact. An opinion from someone that hears something bad and states it as so and gives proof, well, it stops being an opinion (the same with something that tastes bad - no one is going to eat poop and say "That's great! What's wrong with you?"). There are clear cases of fact overriding opinion.

Just because someone's opinion about something that goes against the grain of say, I dunno, truth based on observation from more than 3 sources, does not make it a fact. That's how opinions can be wrong. It's those opinions that show up for band that's playing a show with seating for 500 and only 12 people show up.

Even the people that think the Stones are a great band doesn't take away from any other band being a great band, just that they're a great band. They could be talking about 1969 or 1978 or 1981. And even people who say they're TGRNRBITW can (the ones with a soul, anyway) admit they've done some horrible albums, horrible songs and have had some rotten clam performances.

One can giggle and like the screw ups but fact is fact: they screwed up. There's no saying "They're still better than (xxx) when they screw up". That's just being a fanboy and avoiding reality ie fact.

There are a lot of great bands. So saying the Stones are a great band is a fact. So if someone hates them, the greatness of the Stones is not in peril, that person is just confused.

If you replace "people" with "stupid kids" about Justin Bieber and wait just a bit longer you'll see that their idea of what "is the most musically talented person living" will not be true at all. Yet alone the fact that they have complete garbage to choose from with thinking such stupidity.

Do you think this is good?
[www.youtube.com]

I give up.

PITBULL?

What is some crazy bald techno rap dance dude doing in this lineup?



Pitbull - Bon, Bon

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......