Bob Welch

[DavidMn]

I was just wondering about why Bob's name isnt on the wall at the hall of fame with the rest of the band. I know that they didn't have any huge hits with Bob there, but I can't believe he's not on the wall!!!!! I firmly believe that if he hadnt been there to bridge the gap between Peter Green and Stevie/Lindsey, there would be not Rumours or any of the other albums. Does anyone agree with me?

[chiliD]

This has been a VERY SORE subject around here since 1998. :cool:

[GateandGarden]

I was just wondering about why Bob's name isnt on the wall at the hall of fame with the rest of the band. I know that they didn't have any huge hits with Bob there, but I can't believe he's not on the wall!!!!! I firmly believe that if he hadnt been there to bridge the gap between Peter Green and Stevie/Lindsey, there would be not Rumours or any of the other albums. Does anyone agree with me?I totally agree with you!

He should be up there and it's ridiculous that he's not.

[ThePenguin]

This has been a VERY SORE subject around here since 1998. :cool:

Indeed it has. I'm still sore about it. He certainly belonged in the RRHOF. He saved FM's *ss and also made some terrific music.

-Lis

[bretonbanquet]

It's wrong that Bob wasn't included. I understand the reasoning, but it's still wrong :distress:

[chiliD]

It's wrong that Bob wasn't included. I understand the reasoning, but it's still wrong :distress:


I DON'T understand the reasoning...it was an "unreasonable act" to omit Bob from induction.

[macfan 57]

I DON'T understand the reasoning...it was an "unreasonable act" to omit Bob from induction.

I agree. There's no legitimate reason why Bob isn't in the Hall of Fame, other than that lawsuit. And, that's not a legitmate reason, in my opinion.

[SteveMacD]

I'm not so sure the band had much say in the decision. I always got the impression that some of the people who control who gets inducted weren't all that crazy about inducting Fleetwood Mac in the first place. So, I really don't think Mick had the power to say who was to be included that, say, Jerry Garcia had with the Grateful Dead, as it could very well be that Fleetwood Mac was lucky to be inducted at all. In any event, I'm sure that the six who were on stage were the six Mick REALLY wanted to show as Fleetwood Mac. Let's face it, Mick, John, and those four had pretty much ALL of their big hits in Europe and the USA.

I think that Bob Welch, Billy Burnette, and Rick Vito should have been inducted, too. Bob was a critical factor in musically bringing Fleetwood Mac into the '70s, and in establishing Fleetwood Mac more in the USA. And, he actually had a quasi-hit single with "Hypnotized." As for Billy and Rick, if we're being honest, they were in the second most successful incarnation of Fleetwood Mac to date, even more successful than the SYW band. Of course, people will say that people weren't really going to Mac shows to see Billy and Rick, but then were people going to see Danny and Jeremy? No, but they still got in.

[chiliD]

...but then were people going to see Danny and Jeremy?

Actually, when they were members...yes. Jeremy's reputation was a pretty big draw for them "back in the day".

[SteveMacD]

Actually, when they were members...yes. Jeremy's reputation was a pretty big draw for them "back in the day".
He may have been, but if we're being honest, it was the Peter Green show.

[Jyqm]

I'm not so sure the band had much say in the decision. I always got the impression that some of the people who control who gets inducted weren't all that crazy about inducting Fleetwood Mac in the first place. So, I really don't think Mick had the power to say who was to be included that, say, Jerry Garcia had with the Grateful Dead, as it could very well be that Fleetwood Mac was lucky to be inducted at all.

I'm all for a good conspriacy theory, but somehow I really doubt this, Steve. The Rock and Roll Hallf of Fame seems to let in just about anybody with even an ounce of credibility as long as they've been around for 25 years plus. And while it is a little odd that Fleetwood Mac were eligible for a full five years before being inducted, I can't imagine that there was such major opposition to them that Mick was told only certain folks could be included in the band's induction.

Regardless, I have to say that as much as I like Bob's work with Fleetwood Mac, I don't consider his not beign inducted as much of a sore spot, except on a perosnal level. Seems to me there could be few institutions more pointless than a Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

[SteveMacD]

The Rock and Roll Hallf of Fame seems to let in just about anybody with even an ounce of credibility as long as they've been around for 25 years plus.
Tell that to the Guess Who. They've had multiple hits from multiple albums. Randy Bachman has written huge hits for two bands (the Guess Who and Bachman-Turner Overdrive). In fact, Bachman and Burton Cummings were both recently inducted into the Canadian Songwriters Hall of Fame. Yet, they're not in the hall. Another band that probably should be in there is Grand Funk Railroad. Again, multiple hits from multiple albums. So I don't completely agree with that assessment.

I find it odd that Fleetwood Mac were inducted off the heels of a very successful reunion. I believe that had they not done "The Dance," and were still the "Time" band, they would not be in there. And given the band's associations with the Eagles and Santana, and their similarities to the Mamas & the Papas, yeah, I guess I find the class of '98 to be a little suspect. In fact, my HUNCH is that the folks in the Hall had some of the same reservations with the Mamas & the Papas, because they could have been in eight years earlier. Also, the first version of Santana actually formed in 1966, so they would have been eligible seven years earlier. Can you honestly tell me that you don't find it the least bit suspicious that the two most successful groups fronted by both male and female vocalists AND the two bands who list "Black Magic Woman" as a hit were inducted on the same night, when all could have been in YEARS earlier?

As for Bob, again, I don't think Mick was in the same position to demand which members were to be included as was Jerry Garcia (who bless his soul, made the demands AND blew off the ceremony). Even Bob Welch doesn't think it was the fault of anybody in the band.

[HomerMcvie]

I'm not so sure the band had much say in the decision. I always got the impression that some of the people who control who gets inducted weren't all that crazy about inducting Fleetwood Mac in the first place. So, I really don't think Mick had the power to say who was to be included that, say, Jerry Garcia had with the Grateful Dead
I don't buy this. Mick knew(obviously) more about the history of the band than anyone else, and I FIRMLY believe that if he'd stuck up for Bob, Bob would be IN. And Mick could still probably make it right with a couple of phone calls.

http://www.bobwelch.com/index2.htm
Anyone want to ask Bob a question? He's the COOLEST. At the link, go to the forum and ask away. Bob will respond in short order. :thumbsup: How many famous musicians do THAT? I can think of none. :)

[alexsdad]

Being kinda new here, and not up on past discussions....which band members were inducted, and what is the reason Bob wasn't????
Alex's dad

[SteveMacD]

I don't buy this. Mick knew(obviously) more about the history of the band than anyone else, and I FIRMLY believe that if he'd stuck up for Bob, Bob would be IN. And Mick could still probably make it right with a couple of phone calls.
Well, even Bob isn't faulting the band anymore. I honestly don't think the band had much, if any, say as to who was inducted.

http://www.bobwelch.com/index2.htm
Anyone want to ask Bob a question? He's the COOLEST. At the link, go to the forum and ask away. Bob will respond in short order. :thumbsup: How many famous musicians do THAT? I can think of none. :)
Well, I've had e-mails answered quickly by Roger McGuinn and Kim Simmons.

[SteveMacD]

Being kinda new here, and not up on past discussions....which band members were inducted, and what is the reason Bob wasn't????
Well, really, he didn't have a hit with Fleetwood Mac. Peter Green did (hence Jeremy and Danny being inducted) and, of course, the "Rumours" band did.

[HomerMcvie]

Kim Simmons.
Okay, I'll play......who? :confused:

[SteveMacD]

Okay, I'll play......who? :confused:
Savoy Brown's guitarist. I may have spelled his last name wrong.

[HomerMcvie]

You know, the more I think about it, the more pissed I get about Bob and the R&RHOF.
The sheer magnificance of Mystery to Me. Need I say more?

[chiliD]

Savoy Brown's guitarist. I may have spelled his last name wrong.

Simmonds

Of the 1,500 people who've ever claimed to be members of Savoy Brown...Kim is the only constant, the only one in EVERY incarnation of the band. Basically, Savoy Brown IS Kim Simmonds. (and how did Kim never end up in Fleetwood Mac? Seems like he'd have been the logical choice...well, either Kim or Rory Gallagher...to "replace" Peter Green, if they'd have gone that route. Wouldn't THAT have changed music history. Ok, never mind...I annoy even myself with those "what if" games.

[chiliD]

Being kinda new here, and not up on past discussions....which band members were inducted, and what is the reason Bob wasn't????
Alex's dad

Only the Then Play On (Peter, Danny, Jeremy, Mick & John) & Rumours (Lindsey, Stevie, Christine, Mick & John) lineups were inducted.

[bretonbanquet]

I DON'T understand the reasoning...it was an "unreasonable act" to omit Bob from induction.

Barring any conspiracy from Mick to omit Bob from this honour, I understood it to be because the band had zero hits while Bob was a member. If that's the reasoning, I understand it. I don't agree with it, because hits aren't an indication of quality nor contribution made by a member.

I have problems with this kind of institution anyway because it's so subjective. That's why maybe we shouldn't take these people so seriously. If they decide someone's better than someone else and cut a guy out of a fairly pointless honour for a fairly pointless reason, then that's just their opinion and nothing more. The downside is that it's a very public snub which isn't nice.

As for the old line-up being the Peter Green show, well OK but only up to a point. You could just as easily say the current line-up is the Stevie Nicks show. It amounts to much the same thing.

The other thing I'm wondering is how much overseas sales influence the decision on who gets in to the RnRHoF and who doesn't. Obviously the Green-era line-up were tremendously successful in the UK, far more so than any other line-up bar the Rumours band - maybe this was why Jeremy and Danny got in and Billy, Rick etc didn't. Jeremy didn't feel it to be very important anyway since he didn't show up, and I'm sure Danny couldn't have been less interested.

[chiliD]

...and I'm sure Danny couldn't have been less interested.


Well, if anybody bothered to TELL him in the first place, that is. :shrug:

[SteveMacD]

As for the old line-up being the Peter Green show, well OK but only up to a point. You could just as easily say the current line-up is the Stevie Nicks show. It amounts to much the same thing.
Not even close, really. Let's compare the 1971 Greatest Hits album to the 1988 Greatest Hits (NOTE: The European version of the latter album had a different track listing. Thus, I'm using the tracks from BOTH albums for this example.):


The Green Manalishi: Peter
Oh Well - Part 1: Peter
Oh Well - Part 2: Peter
Shake Your Moneymaker: Jeremy
Need Your Love So Bad: Peter
Rattlesnake Shake: Peter
Dragonfly: Danny
Black Magic Woman: Peter
Albatross: Peter
Man Of The World: Peter
Stop Messin' Round: Peter
Love That Burns: Peter
Peter = 10; Jeremy = 1; Danny = 1

Rhiannon: Stevie
Don't Stop: Christine
Go Your Own Way: Lindsey
Hold Me: Christine
Everywhere: Christine
Gypsy: Stevie
You Make Loving Fun: Christine
As Long As You Follow: Christine
Dreams: Stevie
Say You Love Me: Christine
Tusk: Lindsey
Little Lies: Christine
Sara: Stevie
Big Love: Lindsey
Over My Head: Christine
No Questions Asked: Stevie
*Seven Wonders: Stevie
*Oh Diane: Lindsey
Stevie = 6; Christine = 8; Lindsey = 4

Clearly, Peter Green was the hands-down star of his version of Fleetwood Mac, whereas the "Rumours" band was a bit more evenly divided.

[chiliD]

No Questions Asked: Stevie

Sure, it was on the Greatest Hits album...but, it wasn't a hit, wasn't even the B-side of a single...nothin'.

[SteveMacD]

Sure, it was on the Greatest Hits album...but, it wasn't a hit, wasn't even the B-side of a single...nothin'.
True, but then it's not like "Dragonfly" was a hit, either. As far as Mac songs are concerned, this may be one of the most obscure Fleetwood Mac songs ever.

[HomerMcvie]

Sure, it was on the Greatest Hits album...but, it wasn't a hit, wasn't even the B-side of a single...nothin'.
Nothin's a pretty accurate assessment, too!

[chiliD]

True, but then it's not like "Dragonfly" was a hit, either. As far as Mac songs are concerned, this may be one of the most obscure Fleetwood Mac songs ever.

By "this", do you mean "Dragonfly" or "No Questions Asked"?

At least, they used to play "Dragonfly" in concert*...haven't seen a set list with "NQA" in it, yet (and doubt I ever will)


* = and the few live versions I've heard, it was better live than the studio version.


I think the winner of the "most obscure Fleetwood Mac song" would have to go to either "Purple Dancer" or "Lizard People".

[SteveMacD]

By "this", do you mean "Dragonfly" or "No Questions Asked"?
Either one, really.
At least, they used to play "Dragonfly" in concert*...* = and the few live versions I've heard, it was better live than the studio version.

By the same token, they used to play "Trinity" in concert,too. I'd be willing to bet that most fans who've heard the song first heard it on the Box set in 1992. The only "live" version I have of the song is the video from the "Get It On" DVD, which featured the FG/BT band. It was good, though I actually prefer the studio version, as it has more guitar throughout.
haven't seen a set list with "NQA" in it, yet (and doubt I ever will)
What I want to know is why was it included in the Very Best Of set a few years back? It's been released TWICE now, both on compilations that basically imply that this is Fleetwood Mac at their best. :shrug:
I think the winner of the "most obscure Fleetwood Mac song" would have to go to either "Purple Dancer" or "Lizard People".)
Here's my top five list of officially released obscure material:

Somebody's Gonna Get Their Head Kicked In Tonight (b-side to Man Of The World)
World In Harmony (b-side to Green Manalishi, though the live version is common)
Dragonfly
Purple Dancer
Blow By Blow (1994 version)

Of course, I could also list the entire Jeremy Spencer album.

[chiliD]

Somebody's Gonna Get Their Head Kicked In Tonight (b-side to Man Of The World)
World In Harmony (b-side to Green Manalishi, though the live version is common)
Dragonfly
Purple Dancer
Blow By Blow (1994 version)

Of course, I could also list the entire Jeremy Spencer album.

SGGTHKIT: It's on Vaudeville Years...making it not so obscure.
WIH: It's on Showbiz Blues again...not as obscure as it was once.
Dragonfly: Greatest Hits (1971) not that obscure
Purple Dancer: You bet!
Blow By Blow (Soccer Rocks The Globe version, right? Yeah, I'll give you that one, too)

You gotta give me "Lizard People"...that's pretty obscure.

[SteveMacD]

SGGTHKIT: It's on Vaudeville Years...making it not so obscure.
WIH: It's on Showbiz Blues again...not as obscure as it was once.
I wasn't sure if the "Showbiz Blues" versions were the same as the previously released versions, or just earlier versions of the songs. If they are indeed the same, I'll take them off the list. Actually SGGTHKIT was also released on "The Collection" back in the late '80s on Castel records.
Dragonfly: Greatest Hits (1971) not that obscure
D'OH
http://www.freewebs.com/thesimpsonsfanguild/homer%20d'oh.jpg
I meant to say "Lizard People." I was typing too fast. When you type faster than you think...well, you know...
Purple Dancer: You bet!
Blow By Blow (Soccer Rocks The Globe version, right? Yeah, I'll give you that one, too)
Yep, the SRTG version. Or, as I like to call it, the better version :thumbsup:

Okay, the revised top five:

Purple Dancer
Blow By Blow ('94 mix)
Lizard People
Cool Water
Down Endless Street (A b-side for a song that was never really a single. At least it wasn't released in the same quantity as the other four Tango singles.)

[chiliD]

Cool Water

B-side of "GYPSY"??? How obscure is THAT? :shrug: :)

[bretonbanquet]

Not even close, really. Let's compare the 1971 Greatest Hits album to the 1988 Greatest Hits (NOTE: The European version of the latter album had a different track listing. Thus, I'm using the tracks from BOTH albums for this example.):


The Green Manalishi: Peter
Oh Well - Part 1: Peter
Oh Well - Part 2: Peter
Shake Your Moneymaker: Jeremy
Need Your Love So Bad: Peter
Rattlesnake Shake: Peter
Dragonfly: Danny
Black Magic Woman: Peter
Albatross: Peter
Man Of The World: Peter
Stop Messin' Round: Peter
Love That Burns: Peter
Peter = 10; Jeremy = 1; Danny = 1

Rhiannon: Stevie
Don't Stop: Christine
Go Your Own Way: Lindsey
Hold Me: Christine
Everywhere: Christine
Gypsy: Stevie
You Make Loving Fun: Christine
As Long As You Follow: Christine
Dreams: Stevie
Say You Love Me: Christine
Tusk: Lindsey
Little Lies: Christine
Sara: Stevie
Big Love: Lindsey
Over My Head: Christine
No Questions Asked: Stevie
*Seven Wonders: Stevie
*Oh Diane: Lindsey
Stevie = 6; Christine = 8; Lindsey = 4

Clearly, Peter Green was the hands-down star of his version of Fleetwood Mac, whereas the "Rumours" band was a bit more evenly divided.


I appreciate the point you're making, even though I compared the Green-era line-up to the current line-up, not the 'Rumours' line-up - and last time I looked, Christine had left. Also I was thinking more of the band as a live attraction - far more people show up to see Stevie than Lindsey or the other two. I accept that's just an opinion and many many people are about to disagree :o

The reason the 1971 GH album is full of Peter Green songs is that he had all the singles. Danny had none till Peter left and Jeremy had one as far as I know (the first). As far as singles and hits go, sure - it was the Peter Green show, but live it was much more of a group thing. I guess that was my point ;)

As for obscure songs - I'd say the original version of World In Harmony was pretty obscure. I know it has shown up on the Show-Biz Blues set and Live in Boston etc, but the original was only on the B-side of Manalishi and a German GH album (Purple Dancer was on there as well).

[SteveMacD]

I appreciate the point you're making, even though I compared the Green-era line-up to the current line-up, not the 'Rumours' line-up - and last time I looked, Christine had left. Also I was thinking more of the band as a live attraction - far more people show up to see Stevie than Lindsey or the other two. I accept that's just an opinion and many many people are about to disagree :o
In general, I'm sure Stevie is the biggest draw of the lot. But even still, I don't think it's a very good analogy. Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac really only required Peter Green. People would have easily accepted the band without Jeremy or Danny. Sure, those two were great on stage, but people would have gone to see Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac if it were Peter, Mick, John, and Stan Webb, Christine Perfect, Kim Simmonds, or any other combination of British blues musicians. Also, look at what happened right after Peter Green quit. People just stopped caring. Even the addition of Christine Perfect, herself a huge star on the British blues scene, couldn't put the band back on top.

With the SYW band, it's not so cut and dry. Unlike Peter Green's FM, we have proof from solo careers and latter day versions of Fleetwood Mac that basically proves the Big Mac is an entity that is greater than any one member. Sure, Stevie is still the biggest selling point the band has. But, if we look at the time after Stevie quit, we see that the "Rumours"/BTM/SYW bands were bigger than any one member. "Time" was a huge flop, but then again, I'm pretty sure things were in motion for a Big Mac version of "Hell Freezes Over" by the time it came out, so of course they weren't going to promote it. What's odd is that Lindsey worked his tail off for OOTC, and it was a flop, and Stevie's "Street Angel," while doing better than OOTC or "Time" still sold less than 300K. So, while SYW wasn't a hit, it was still the most viable studio album released by any of them since BTM. And, honestly, I don't think the live shows would have done well if it had been, say, Mick, John, Stevie, Billy, and Rick.

[HomerMcvie]

In general, I'm sure Stevie is the biggest draw of the lot. But even still, I don't think it's a very good analogy. Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac really only required Peter Green. People would have easily accepted the band without Jeremy or Danny. Sure, those two were great on stage, but people would have gone to see Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac if it were Peter, Mick, John, and Stan Webb, Christine Perfect, Kim Simmonds, or any other combination of British blues musicians. Also, look at what happened right after Peter Green quit. People just stopped caring. Even the addition of Christine Perfect, herself a huge star on the British blues scene, couldn't put the band back on top.

IMO, nothing says rock star like being a guitar god. The god was gone, so the masses stopped caring.
And on a similar note, I think the litmus test for a band's longevity(whether new material is still their forte or not), is having 4 or 5 big GUITAR rock songs. If you've got that, you can ride those coattails for a looooong time, milking those anthems forever.

[bretonbanquet]

Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac really only required Peter Green. People would have easily accepted the band without Jeremy or Danny. Sure, those two were great on stage, but people would have gone to see Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac if it were Peter, Mick, John, and Stan Webb, Christine Perfect, Kim Simmonds, or any other combination of British blues musicians. Also, look at what happened right after Peter Green quit. People just stopped caring. Even the addition of Christine Perfect, herself a huge star on the British blues scene, couldn't put the band back on top.


Fleetwood Mac did require Peter Green, of course. But Peter Green required Fleetwood Mac. Without them, particularly Danny, I don't think he would have been particularly successful once the brief initial blues-only period was over and Peter was tired of it. He said himself that 'Albatross' wouldn't have happened without Danny, although I accept that the crowds and record-buying public would not have realised that. I am as certain as I can be that Peter required first Jeremy and later Danny in order to achieve what he wanted with the band. I don't believe any of the other musicians you mentioned, talented as they were / are, could have inspired Peter like Danny did. People may well have gone to see Mac with those musicians involved, but I really don't think songs like 'Albatross' and 'Green Manalishi' would have happened, in which case you have to wonder how long the band would have lasted anyway. If you think about what would have happened after 'Mr Wonderful' had Danny not joined, how do you imagine it?

As much as Mac went under without Peter, he went under without them. That is to say, once he had outgrown the inspiration offered to him by Danny and had started moving in a new musical direction (the free form stuff and the improvisational jamming etc) he found himself on his own musically. I think this contributed to his obvious problems in other areas and is often overlooked. Without the musical support of anyone else, he sank like a stone and disappeared for 6 years. Maybe with a new muse to bounce off, maybe things could have been different.

I suppose what I mean by all this is that the composition of the band surrounding Peter was a lot more important than is often realised. They helped him to be who we all saw as Peter Green. It's hypothetical, but I don't believe anyone else could have done that.

In that way I think the early line-up is similar to how you viewed the later line-ups, i.e. the band is bigger than the constituent members, but with Peter's line-up it looked on the surface like he was standing up more or less on his own.

[chiliD]

It is pretty much the same as when Jack Bruce & Ginger Baker got another guitarist (Clem Cleamons, ex-Humble Pie guitarist)...it still wasn't Cream without Clapton. (although, they didn't call the band "Cream" either)

Fleetwood Mac in those days wasn't the same without Peter Green...but, they kept the name the same, therefore the comparisons were escalated. If they'd changed the name of the band after Peter left, then they might have fared better sooner.

[Wouter Vuijk]

Not sure what you folks mean with "obscure". However it appears to me that it was only the Peter Green line-up that played songs live they never recorded in the studio. That is, not only covers of "traditional" blues songs, but also Danny's "One Sided Love".

Wouter :confused:

[Wouter Vuijk]

It is pretty much the same as when Jack Bruce & Ginger Baker got another guitarist (Clem Cleamons, ex-Humble Pie guitarist)...it still wasn't Cream without Clapton. (although, they didn't call the band "Cream" either).

I don't recall a Clem Cleamons being guitarist for Humble Pie aside from Peter Frampton and Steve Marriott.
Sure you're not confused with Clem Clempson, guitarist for Colosseum?

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Wouter

[SteveMacD]

Not sure what you folks mean with "obscure". However it appears to me that it was only the Peter Green line-up that played songs live they never recorded in the studio. That is, not only covers of "traditional" blues songs, but also Danny's "One Sided Love".
Well, we were talking about songs that were officially released, i.e. as an album track, single, or b-side.

[SteveMacD]

Fleetwood Mac did require Peter Green, of course. But Peter Green required Fleetwood Mac. Without them, particularly Danny, I don't think he would have been particularly successful once the brief initial blues-only period was over and Peter was tired of it.
Maybe, maybe not. All I know is that it was Peter Green who was getting all of the attention with other rock royalty, not Danny or Jeremy. It was Peter who had all of the hits, not Jeremy or Danny. Don't get me wrong, I think Danny was probably the most important guitarist the Mac ever had. Peter Green was one of the most noteable guitarists in the music biz for a few years. I think many musicians would quickly volunteer to work with Pete. If Peter had been so inclined, Fleetwood Mac could easily have been a trio.
He said himself that 'Albatross' wouldn't have happened without Danny, although I accept that the crowds and record-buying public would not have realised that.
I've also read an interview where Peter said he was annoyed at some of the things Danny did on "Albatross." Also, he has said that he and Danny really didn't have any chemistry, at least not compared to the "Rumours" band.
I am as certain as I can be that Peter required first Jeremy and later Danny in order to achieve what he wanted with the band.
I don't think he so much required Jeremy, just that he didn't want to be the sole frontman of Fleetwood Mac. Peter has said many times that he didn't want to be the guitar hero. As for Danny, that was Mick's call. I think they were able to work some magic, but I'm still not convinced that it had to be Danny. Now, I think Danny was crucial in taking the Mac out of the blues and out of improv and into more mainstream pop, but that happened after Peter left.
I don't believe any of the other musicians you mentioned, talented as they were / are, could have inspired Peter like Danny did.
Again, from all I've read, I don't think Danny was as big an inspiration on Peter as you seem to think. I think having a second guitarist in general helped Peter (since Jeremy didn't play on Peter's stuff) explore more options. It was just luck that it was Danny.
People may well have gone to see Mac with those musicians involved, but I really don't think songs like 'Albatross' and 'Green Manalishi' would have happened, in which case you have to wonder how long the band would have lasted anyway. If you think about what would have happened after 'Mr Wonderful' had Danny not joined, how do you imagine it?
Well, there are a million "what ifs" that we could do with Fleetwood Mac. When Peter was coming up with "Albatross" he had Santo & Johnny's "Sleepwalk" going through his head, so maybe it could have happened. As for "Manalishi," it might not have happened, but I would rather have never heard that one song in favor of Peter still being a part of Fleetwood Mac, never having left in the first place.
As much as Mac went under without Peter, he went under without them. That is to say, once he had outgrown the inspiration offered to him by Danny and had started moving in a new musical direction (the free form stuff and the improvisational jamming etc) he found himself on his own musically. I think this contributed to his obvious problems in other areas and is often overlooked. Without the musical support of anyone else, he sank like a stone and disappeared for 6 years. Maybe with a new muse to bounce off, maybe things could have been different.
I'm not sure I totally agree. Peter's "going under" had little to do with music and more to do with mental illness. I'm POSITIVE Peter Green could have gotten an A-list group together, had he so chosen, and gone further than Fleetwood Mac. But, Peter wanted to be obscure. Notice that his picture is nowhere to be found on "End Of The Game."

No, I still contend that it was mental illness. As pretty much everybody BUT Peter seems to have noticed, he changed significantly after that trip to Germany. Whenever McVie is asked about it, he still gets very, VERY angry. I'm sure that the Mac wasn't able to musically go where he wanted to go, but I honestly believe that THAT was a very small part of it.
I suppose what I mean by all this is that the composition of the band surrounding Peter was a lot more important than is often realised. They helped him to be who we all saw as Peter Green. It's hypothetical, but I don't believe anyone else could have done that.

In that way I think the early line-up is similar to how you viewed the later line-ups, i.e. the band is bigger than the constituent members, but with Peter's line-up it looked on the surface like he was standing up more or less on his own.
Again, I don't think people would have cared had Jeremy or Danny not been there. I don't think people would feel the same about the band today without Lindsey.

[chiliD]

I don't recall a Clem Cleamons being guitarist for Humble Pie aside from Peter Frampton and Steve Marriott.
Sure you're not confused with Clem Clempson, guitarist for Colosseum?

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Wouter


My mistake...YES, it WAS Clem Clempson. Clem took Peter Frampton's place in Humble Pie in 1972...his first album with them was the Smokin' album (with the great Humble Pie classic, "30 Days In The Hole" and their fantastic cover of Eddie Cochrane's "C'mon Everybody").

I seem to remember Clem leaving Colosseum after their 1971 Live album. I DO remember that Gary Moore replaced Clem when Jon Hiesman reformed Colosseum after a couple of year hiatus. (That reformed band, Hiesman named "Colosseum II" and also included eventual original Peter Green Splinter Group bassist Neal Murray)

[bretonbanquet]

I've also read an interview where Peter said he was annoyed at some of the things Danny did on "Albatross." Also, he has said that he and Danny really didn't have any chemistry, at least not compared to the "Rumours" band.

You don't have to read too many of Peter's interviews to realise that he contradicts himself a lot - I've read several conflicting remarks about Danny and about the other members. To say that he and Danny had no chemistry is patently not correct, and what exactly would he know about any chemistry the 'Rumours' line-up may have had? I'm not really sure Peter has concrete opinions much of the time - he changes his opinion according to the mood he's in at the time.

I don't think he so much required Jeremy, just that he didn't want to be the sole frontman of Fleetwood Mac. Peter has said many times that he didn't want to be the guitar hero.

Yeah, that's what I meant - I think Jeremy was only brought in to take pressure off Peter at shows, and he did a fantastic job of that.

The other thing I wanted to say was regarding the public's view of Jeremy and Danny versus Lindsey. Lindsey's been in and out of the band for 30 years, J & D had only been around 2-3 years during the 69-70 era we're talking about. To me, this is the only reason why Lindsey might be more sorely missed now if the band toured without him. He's had a lot longer to stamp his personality and musical expression on the band.

I don't disagree with most of what you said - a lot of it is conjecture of course, but it's very interesting to discuss it :)

[chiliD]

Lindsey's been in and out of the band for 30 years...

Gotta admit though...mostly OUT.

[SteveMacD]

Gotta admit though...mostly OUT.
True, but he had been in the band longer than Jeremy and probably Danny by the time of "Fleetwood Mac Live," so he may have a point. Personally, for me, I'm still not sold on the comparison due to the fact that the "Rumours" band sold over 25 million albums from 1975 through 1980. The scale was just so different. I think, in terms of status within the band, Lindsey is more comperable to, say, George Harrison with the Beatles than either Jeremy Spencer or Danny Kirwan with Fleetwood Mac. He wasn't the big star, but he had some of the bigger hits, and the public wouldn't likely accept the band without him.

[wetcamelfood]

he had some of the bigger hits

Though I do highly respect LB & all, I found his "biggest hits" were released at the most convenient times:

1. After the 1975 album broke though & everyone was clamouring for the follow up, he got the lead off "Rumours" single (GYOW).

2. After "Rumours" conquered the world, I don't honestly think people generally were particulary crazy about the song "Tusk" but after that kind of massive success they enjoyed with "Rumours", they could've released ANYTHING as the "long awaiting single from the "Rumours" follow up album" & it would've made top 10.

3. Same could be said for "Big love" since MTV embraced the video & the band (at THAT time) & after the "5 years wait, the long awaited comeback single..." (etc.)

Just some thoughts is all. :)

John

[chiliD]

GREAT points!

[Joel Glassman]

re: People not caring as much about Fleetwood Mac after Peter Green quit.
I'm sure some people became less interested in FM without Peter, but
didn't Kiln House sell a lot more than Then Play On?

[chiliD]

re: People not caring as much about Fleetwood Mac after Peter Green quit.
I'm sure some people became less interested in FM without Peter, but
didn't Kiln House sell a lot more than Then Play On?

"a lot more"...no...maybe a "little more". From Then Play On through Mystery To Me they sold a fairly consistent number each album...I think I read somewhere around 250K-300K each.

[SteveMacD]

re: People not caring as much about Fleetwood Mac after Peter Green quit.
I'm sure some people became less interested in FM without Peter, but didn't Kiln House sell a lot more than Then Play On?
Well, it charted in the top 50 in the US, but I don't know if it actually sold any more copies. Their popularity was gradually building in the US at the time. I don't think too many Americans were really aware of who was in Fleetwood Mac, so Peter's defection wasn't as noticed. Now, they all but fell off the planet in Europe, only selling about 5,000 units in England, where they had been HUGE only a year before.

[chiliD]

The "charting" aspect really depends on who else's albums were released at what point in time. Hypothetically, Kiln House COULD have sold LESS units, yet made the charts because of a slow time of album releases overall, whereas Then Play On could've sold more UNITS yet not reached the charts at all because of the competition releasing albums in a relatively close time frame.

:shrug:

[SteveMacD]

The "charting" aspect really depends on who else's albums were released at what point in time. Hypothetically, Kiln House COULD have sold LESS units, yet made the charts because of a slow time of album releases overall, whereas Then Play On could've sold more UNITS yet not reached the charts at all because of the competition releasing albums in a relatively close time frame.
Very true. I think the bigger point is that since they weren't well known in the US, Peter Green's departure wasn't as big a deal, hence why they were able to sustain a career in the US, whereas their career in Europe pretty much tanked altogether.

[David]

2. After "Rumours" conquered the world, I don't honestly think people generally were particulary crazy about the song "Tusk" but after that kind of massive success they enjoyed with "Rumours", they could've released ANYTHING as the "long awaiting single from the "Rumours" follow up album" & it would've made top 10."Tusk" took awhile to sing in & get people to groove to it. It didn't have that immediate impact, but it did have a hook that the public did begin to respond to.

It's my own hypothesis, too, that the USC Trojan Marching Band helped propel "Tusk" (the song & the album) as much as any airplay did. They featured the song at halftime at all the USC games at the Coliseum that year & the next, & you have no idea what it was like to see 80,000 people stand & do their "Victory Sign" thingie when the band launched into its arrangement of "Tusk." It really got everybody pumped.

In fact, "Tusk" probably got a bigger, better reception at the Coliseum that year than on the radio!

Plus, Stevie & Lindsey showed up at the USC-ASU game in October, & those 80,000 people were doubly dazzled, oddly enough. There was just something about seeing Stevie do her baton majorette routine & watching Lindsey fake-conduct the band.

[chiliD]

It's my own hypothesis, too, that the USC Trojan Marching Band helped propel "Tusk" (the song & the album) as much as any airplay did. They featured the song at halftime at all the USC games at the Coliseum that year & the next...

And the year after that, and the year after that...in fact, it is a USC halftime STAPLE....every game, every year, ever since 1979. :nod: And, the band spells out T-U-S-C when they play it.

[wetcamelfood]

"Tusk" took awhile to sing in & get people to groove to it. It didn't have that immediate impact, but it did have a hook that the public did begin to respond to.

It's my own hypothesis, too, that the USC Trojan Marching Band helped propel "Tusk" (the song & the album) as much as any airplay did. They featured the song at halftime at all the USC games at the Coliseum that year & the next, & you have no idea what it was like to see 80,000 people stand & do their "Victory Sign" thingie when the band launched into its arrangement of "Tusk." It really got everybody pumped.

In fact, "Tusk" probably got a bigger, better reception at the Coliseum that year than on the radio!

Plus, Stevie & Lindsey showed up at the USC-ASU game in October, & those 80,000 people were doubly dazzled, oddly enough. There was just something about seeing Stevie do her baton majorette routine & watching Lindsey fake-conduct the band.

Oh yeah, I agree with this, I just meant that I think many younger fans might think that people loved "Tusk" because it made the top 10 on it's release & I think the 1st Tusk single would've charted up there no matter what music was included on it.

John