Oh yes, lower bitrate AAC was better, But 320 mp3 is better than AAC. But still, all shqt.


But I'll buy anything where Lindsey, Mick and John are playing on together, in whatevah format.

It should be a whole farking album, not this cheap three song bone to the fans. Where's the artistic integrity?? It's been what, ten years since the last original album release? And they couldn't have stockpiled 12 songs that would make good FM songs??
Sheesh.

they have. But miss Nicks didn't add anything yet.

I don't think they'll be negatively effected very much by releasing it digital only. Most are willing to download. Personally, I prefer buying a hard copy, but am not opposed to download if I have to. Even though I buy cds I don't actually listen to cds anymore. I rip them to my computer and listen there or on my ipod. I stopped listening to cds a few years ago when my car cd player stopped working.

Same here. I can't stand the thought of a digital-release-only EP. I want a traditional CD with some beautiful artwork.

I don't think that we will get the latter, though. There were just too many things that obviously lead to this conclusion: the new merchandise which is really not pretty, the sloppy annoncement of this EP plus the still unknown release date, the absence of a proper title for the tour...
Sometimes I get the feeling that they just don't care about anything anymore as long as the tickets are sold. :(
Nevertheless I love them more than I can say...

I'm not so sure that there will be a physical release, either. I just hope it. And what about Stevie? She hates the internet, wouldn't she hate the thought of an internet-only release, too? Again, I'm hoping... :shrug:

I have a great stereo system at home, and there really is no difference unless you put headphones on. Granted, you'll need to raise the volume on a digital file and the bass might need some tinkering, but without the software to show you the loss of high and low spectrum, you'd never be able to tell the difference, without knowing in advance.

Audiophiles can argue all they want over this issue, but you'd never know without the software.

That said, I know some despise digital music (Skip). All I can say is 'sorry'. it *is* the future and someday will be the only choice. You can fight it, and miss out on stuff you might enjoy. Your choice. :shrug: Personally, I think CDs sound like high-tech sh*t and I prefer vinyl. That doesn't stop me from enjoying my favorite bands, regardless of format.

I kind of feel like many of you in this thread also spend time waving your canes at all the neighborhood kids and yelling at them to get off your lawn. :laugh:

:laugh: Hey! I'm only 39! Now that we've got that straightened out, "Get off my lawn!!!"

My Itunes account has $$$, and I'm ready to download.

I would buy an EP, a new album, Buckingham Nicks 40th Anniversary, box sets for the band, and solo box sets.

Fleetwood Mac, where's the music already???!!!

I'm proud of them for finally embracing the possibilities of technology. Another of my favorites, Ben Folds, has been doing this for years... a few songs on digital EP and then an album later. It's pretty great.

And while I understand the quality issue, especially with older releases, most artists today (and especially their mixing engineers) know that they're mastering for compression... new releases are worlds better than older ones. Digital is the native format, for better or worse...

I listen to both digital files and CDs on a regular basis. There is a clear difference in sound quality, as most of you know. When you compare both formats, CD sound is just "fuller." But it took years to get to that point. When CDs first came out, the sound quality was crap, hence all the subsequent digital remasters. Digital audio technology has evolved, but lossy data compression been such a disservice to sound quality. We're basically going backwards.

Well, I'm not going to discuss this. When you don't hear it, you don't hear it. I can't imagine that. I'm lightyears away from being an audiophile, but I hear big difference. Without headphones.

I agree. I"m all for the instant satisfaction of digital, but I do miss the visual and tactile sense. Hard copies also gave the music context, more like a full story, and something to kinda look at while you first listened to the CD. The artists could say stuff and thank people. You got lyrics, for heaven's sake! Even opening your new album or CD was like a ritual - you couldn't wait to get to the good stuff inside. It's not a huge deal, but I do miss it - :shrug:

I beg to differ. I don't buy anything from iTunes because I don't like Apple's restrictive policies, but AAC is still better than any MP3 format out there.

Whatever. You want quality, you gotta have a CD.

*No New Album
*No OFFICIAL NAME for the "Tour"
*A stage show and set list that (with the exception of the remarkable "Sisters" and two new songs) has been REHASHED for the past 20 years)

Call me crazy, but I'm a bit UNDERWHELMED by the whole "effort" (or lack thereof). I have WORSHIPPED Fleetwood Mac since 1977. I have bought EVERYTHING they've ever done and attended EVERY TOUR (and ALL solo member tours, including Chris McVie's only solo tour in 1984). But, I'm on the verge of losing interest.

Artists like Johnny Cash, Bruce Springsteen, Bob Dylan and Tom Petty have made some of the best music of their careers after the age of 50 or 60. NOTE TO FLEETWOOD MAC: You can still saving this sinking vessel. Get Christine McVie to give up gardening and come back ONE MORE TIME. Hire an amazing producer like Rick Rubin, Ethan Johns, Mitchell Fromme or T-Bone Burnett and get back into the studio to make the greatest ART of your life (like you once did with "RUMOURS" and "TUSK, two of the greatest masterpieces in music history). Who gives a crap about TOP 40 hits or record sales? It's not going to happen anyway. Do you think Dylan and Springsteen are sitting around worrying about getting a TOP 40 RADIO HIT in 2013's market? Then, go out on the road with a revamped show (including the new music) and become ARTISTS again. You might even get critical acclaim and win a GRAMMY.......(RESPECT???)

BUT, I guess you're too busy trying to fill corporate rock arenas with the same tired casual fans and the same set list you've been playing for years. I did enjoy "SAY YOU WILL". While not perfect, it was a FINE EFFORT and you at least tried something different. Keep moving in that direction and I'll be the first to jump on board. For the first time in 35 years, I am considering NOT attending a Fleetwood Mac Tour. Why would I shell out 300 dollars plus parking and 15 dollar drinks to see the same show that I've been watching for years just to keep Mick from going broke for the 10th time. It seems to me that you're not really concerned with exploring the artistic future of this band, but rather just biding time to fill your retirement accounts. If not with the band, let Stevie and Lindsey go back to solo projects where THEY DO try to make some new and interesting art (SEEDS WE SOW & IN YOUR DREAMS). case closed