Festivals: Keep It True, Organisers

Festivals: Keep It True, Organisers

Festival season for 2009 is nigh over bar the shouting, with really the only one of note still to come being Winterfest in Cork. Looking back over the festivals I hit this year myself (and attempted to hit, fuck you for the 348th time, FlyBe), the issue of festival scaling up struck me.

I’m sure there are people out there who can recall the early days of Wacken when it was a small festival, and who have seen it grow into the massive event that sells out months in advance that it is now. My question to them is – would you still attend today?

My one and only Wacken was in 2006, and I swore never to go back. Too few amenities like toilets, several fights, tents getting robbed and sheer overcrowding put me off the entire thing. Fighting your way through a shoulder to shoulder crowd to get to the Orphaned Land stage is not anybody’s idea of fun.

So it’s with interest that I keep a weather eye on relatively small festivals in the transition stage between small and super sized such as France’s Hellfest. Big crowd at it this year surely, but getting around it was simple.

Lots of space, no massive queues for the toilets, and a great atmosphere. In a way it seemed like what I imagine Wacken to have been like several years back. I assume the organisers will want to build it up into a Rock In Rio-sized extravaganza, but at what point does the heart of a festival get lost in the business aspect of it? Does scaling up mean less concern for the enjoyment of the fans?

The same is applying to the Ragnarok festival in Germany. Several years back when I went, it was a two-day event, with the guts of a thousand people at it, with ale-horn toting Europeans roaring “Skål!!” or “Prost!!” every two minutes.

It was a great laugh, and a fun, intimate festival. But in 2010, they’re adding another day to the festival, with a lot more bands, and it’s in a larger venue than before. Obviously, you can’t argue against their success, or even feel unhappy that the fest is getting popular, but I’ve been somewhat reluctant to go back due to this. And maybe because I’m a little awed by the sheer lack of vowels in all the attending band names next year.

Problems caused by mirrors in the crowd at Wacken

Roadburn in Holland seems to be going the same way, and there were numerous complaints last year at not being able to physically get into the Damnation festival area to see Carcass live. 2500 people pushing into a room designed for 1000 people equals zero enjoyment of a band’s performance. But should Damnation scale up like Ragnarok and Roadburn, or simply restrict the amount of tickets sold?

It’s hard to decide where you draw the line. A packed festival is a pain in the arse whether it holds five hundred or five thousand. But to preserve the heart and atmosphere of the festival, is scaling up to meet demand the answer? Compare Wacken and Keep It True.

Both festivals sell out months in advance, but where Wacken has scaled up to hold 70-odd thousand, Keep It True has resolutely refused to leave the small venue it has always been in. In doing this, it enables only the die hards to attend, and thus ensure a distinct dearth of the type of “only going for the drinking session” posers that Wacken has in abundance, getting in the way of those who actually like watching bands.

Keep It True is in bad need of a bigger venue, but it’s obvious the organizers know this will dilute the exclusivity of it, and thus the fans’ enjoyment, and so they purposely keep it smaller, with room to enjoy yourself, and a much better festival experience.

The more money-grabbing festivals would do well to take note of their style. Restrict the amount of tickets sold to fit the venue, increase the ticket price to gain the same amount of income if need be, but think of the fans instead of the profit.