Poll: more or less?

Harvester

Harvester

The Promoter
Sep 16, 2001
7,727
309
83
www.progpowerusa.com
The plan is for 5 bands each night. However, I would like some input. Should I stay with that formula? Or should I drop a single band and extend the set length of the the headliner and possibly other bands on the bill that night? It would mean going from 75 & 90 minutes to 90 minutes & 120 minutes for the last two bands of the night.

Glenn
 
Personally, i would rather see fewer bands, with longer set time per band...assuming that the quality of the bands (and after the last pp, this doesnt seem to be much of a concern) is worth listening to for longer...it's frustrating to be really into a band and have them have to cut it short...45 minute sets for a killer band is like eating one potato chip....:)...i think the headliner time seemed sufficient though, last time, so it would seem dividing the extra time up for the "undercard" would be a good idea...
ok...that was my .02
teri
--------------------------------------

Hard n Heavy CDs online
http://www.hardnheavy.com/

Seismic Radio
http://www.seismicradio.com/
 
Hmmm... I guess it all depends on which bands are cut off. At PP2.0 there were a few bands I could have done without, and there were some I would have liked to see play longer (eg. Superior). So I wouldn't mind 4 bands per night (or 5 and 4). Just don't tell us which bands have been cut off :)

Now I can't wait to see the list of bands for this year... But if Blind Guardian is there (as it was announced at PP2.0) and if Vanden Plas comes to make up for cancelling at PP2.0, then it would already be worth the trip for me !!

Antoine
 
I think a lot would depend on the lineup, I'd hate to say "cut one band" and find out later it was someone I really wanted to see.
For example, the only band last year I didn't personally care for was Nightingale, and would have rather seen Balance of Power
play a longer set. This is just an example! I'm NOT bitching!
I think 5 bands per night is perfect for this kind of festival, but
to shorten it to allow extra time would solely depend on the lineup. Thanks for asking Glen, I'll be there again this year!

JayDubya
 
Personally Glenn, I enjoyed PP 2.0 so much that regardless on who's playing this year, I'll be at 3.0! being able to meet people from all over the globe and listen to bands I love AND bands that I never heard of before was truly amazing experiance!

I would like to have 5 bands each night for the fact that I am not very picky and don't see may good acts come to MY home state. in regards to the set length, It worked fine last year...I don't think we should fix anything that isn't broken. I personaly am looking forward to the event regardless.

Dustin
 
The problem with giving the headliner more time at a festival is that everyone who doesn't like the headliner feels gypped.

PPUSA 2.0 was great for me because I really, REALLY liked the performance of one of the headliners (Symphony X), and the bands I didn't really care for got much less time. But what if it were reversed? What if Symphony X got 40 minutes and Balance of Power got 120? I would be a bit irritated

So, all in all, I'd rather all the bands get the same time; but given that you have to attract the top-name bands with a bigger timeslot, balancing them as much as possible seems fairest to fans with very diverse tastes. Just MHO.
 
Either lineup works, my preference is for 5 bands per night. I liked having many bands around us playing the best of their music.
Perhaps if the show started a bit earlier then you could give more time to all the bands.
 
I like the variety of having 5 bands each night; maybe the set length will give them motivation to go out there and kicks ass from the word go!
 
I'll agree with Teri on this one..one or two fewer bands, with more time for the bands earlier in each day would work perfectly, IMO. I think each band should get at least an hour onstage, with more than that for the headliners..less than an hour goes by way too quickly!
 
I think the alotted time slots for the bands worked out very well Glenn,even though there were 1 or bands there that I really didn't care anyways!!Not bitchin' about your selection,just my personal tastes!I say keep it the same bro & get the date for the gig soon so i can ask for the vacation time!!
Take Care,
Krusty
 
I like the more bands dealio,if it could happen...Its not everday we get to see these bands,and having 5 a night is a totally special thing..Then again it would all depend all the bands you are getting for the gigs as well...

Let me put it like this,at PPUSA 1.0 there were some bands I could have done without seeing,and would have loved to see some of the bands get extended sets...

At PPUSA 2.0 I thought it was perfectly executed,even though a couple bands did get shorter time frames,it was still awesome to see them play...

I think the more the merrier :D

Bear
 
I think the more bands the better. Most of us have to pay for lodging, food, travel, tickets, beer.... I think we're getting more for our money seeing more bands. I don't think it's a matter of quality vs. quantity. All of the bands put on a great "quality" show at 2.0. Of course I wished some of the bands would've played longer but I would never sacrifice the chance to see another band that I know I'll never see in my town for an extra couple of songs from a fewer number of bands.

Can't wait for the line-up for 3.0!! (Does it really matter? It'll be great no matter who it is!!):rolleyes:

-Sheri
 
I agree with what seems to be the general consensus: Dropping one band and lengthening the set of the others is OK *only* if you don't drop a band that we'd be upset about losing.

Of course, unless you're psychic, that's kinda hard to know before it's done. *:^)

Why not keep it at 5 bands/day, and simply lengthen the festival as a whole by one hour each day, and add that time to each band's set? That would add nearly 15 minutes PER band (which gives them an extra 1-3 songs, depending on the band), yet only increase the duration of each day by an hour or so.

I know there are issues with venue booking, paying staff, etc, that would need to be considered to lengthen each day, but *I'd* be willing to pay another $5 or so for my ticket to cover the costs of lengthening the show this way.

Just a thought...

Craig
P.S. Of course, I'll be there (3rd in a row!) regardless of how you handle this! *:^)
 
I would prefer to see 4 bands per night for three reasons:

1) longer set lists for each band
2) fewer bands should imply a cumulative increase in quality - i.e. fewer bands means you can be a bit more selective and secure top notch bands that are comparable in quality (there is a big difference between Nightingale and Symphony X)
3) personally, it was difficult for me to devote full attention to every band at PP2.0 - I can't believe I'm saying this, but it was too much music with too many different styles in too short of a time

Bob
 
Personally, I would rather see the bands get longer sets, and hear fewer bands play longer sets. I think that the majority of the people were primarily present to see one or a few of the bands playing. I think if you cut out one or two slots, that it would make for a more satisfying experience. Obviously, the highest profile stuff is not going to be what is cut, so while, if we did find out what it was, there might be a few people upset, but I think an overwhelming majority will end up much happier with the show, and the bands will probably feel more satisfied with the performance.
 
Well, as a member of the older generations, I tend to find that my mind wanders when there are lots of bands and by the time the headliner's come on stage, I'm tired and have had enough.

Yeah I know the youngsters have more stamina, but at recent festivals I've found myself digging the bands in the afternoon, then finding myself almost asleep, by the time the big names hit the stage.

IMHO 5 bands is an absolute maximum, 4 would be good. It seems a shame to have bands travel a long way just to play 40 minutes, so fewer bands with longers sets would be a good mood. Once again an extra $5-10 on the ticket price is no biggie, given that the ticket price will still be small in comparison to the airfare + hotel bills.

Charlie
 
Hmmm. While I'd be tempted to say that fewer bands each night with longer sets would be the way to go, I find myself agreeing with some previous posts - what if they're bands I don't really care to hear? Another reason to keep the number of bands the same is there is a better chance for diversity, and diversity gets people in the seats. Besides, I sometimes have a fairly short attention span (read: I get bored easily) and it's nice to be able to sit through an entire set even when it's a band I may not be too familiar with.
That's what I think. But I will be there regardless of the poll's outcome! Can't hardly wait!:D

Alicia
 
I think the best solution would be to start 1 or 2 hours earlier to allow more well-deserved time for the non-headliners. Since that isn't an option, I vote for fewer, 'better-quality' bands with longer sets. Quality trumps quantity in my book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Harvester
Potential Format Change: Feedback Requested
Replies
84
Views
2K
ProgPower USA
X man
X
Dustin
what do you expect? my little poll....
Replies
18
Views
1K
ProgPower USA
Desert Valkyrie
D
Harvester
  • Locked
The Pre-Party is officially NO MORE (A message from Glenn & Shane)
Replies
130
Views
4K
ProgPower USA
Harvester
H
jaimek
PP openers
Replies
11
Views
473
ProgPower USA
ashaman7122
A
Harvester
Headliner Feedback Request
Replies
132
Views
4K
ProgPower USA
BlackRoseMetalHeart
B
Top Bottom
Back