Quote:
Even as far back on the first tour swing-through as July 1994, Mick was telling the newspapers that the band was preparing a new album. He told the Times of Northwest Indiana, right before a Fleetwood Mac show at the Star Plaza Theatre, that the band was "nurturing the creative process for a new album." He added that the tour was "partly the test of the chemistry of songs off a new album" that the reporter mentioned was as yet unnamed & that would appear the following spring. So although strictly speaking, Fleetwood Mac wasn't supporting a new album on tour -- they really were. To that end, they should have put the new songs front & center in the set. At both Northern CA shows I saw, the new material was not emphasized -- much of it, in fact, wasn't even played at all. But boy did we get the white album & Rumours! Say You Love Me & Go Your Own Way & Don't Stop & World Turning & Gold Dust Woman & The Chain & Blue Letter & You Make Loving Fun ... it was just ridiculous. In May & June of 1975, Fleetwood Mac also toured before a new album was out, but at that point, according to people who saw them in Texas that month (& who posted about it to amfm), the band played most of the white album & really roared & put a lot of passion & commitment into driving the new material so that audiences would come to live it. That's a far cry from what I saw Dave Mason do with the band in 1994 & 1995: essentially just snooze through the set. Obviously, the circumstances were different in terms of respective ages & careers (they were kids in 1975 & wanted to build careers, whereas Dave was no kid in 1994 & already had a career). But that's really what makes Mick's choice of adding Dave so inane. He should have hired Dave Grohl! I wish I could remember whether anyone onstage mentioned that some of the songs they did -- like "Blow by Blow" -- were going to be on a new album. But, alas, I can't. The prime rib was pretty good that night, however! |
Quote:
I don't disagree with a lot of what you say. But, I think there's a lot of middle ground between what you're talking about and what they actually did. I think those '75-'76 sets were among the best in the band's history. And, it's not like they didn't perform ANY of the old songs. They were still there. They had a nice mix of old an new, which is what they should have been doing 19 years later! Look at the "Heroes" boots that are floating around. There's usually only two songs from "Heroes," but the band does "Manalishi," "Oh Well," "Black Magic Woman," and "Rattlesnake." I find it odd that the "Heroes" tour doesn't get the same type of criticism that the "Time" tours get, especially considering that they were touring in support of an album. I think the band had to do "Oh Well" (which I believe almost every incarnation of Fleetwood Mac has done at one point), "Go Your Own Way," "Don't Stop," and, since Mason was in the band "We Just Disagree." But, after those four songs, the set should have been new and/or original material with maybe a few other "classics" for good measure. Here's what I think a good set would have been: In The Back Of My Mind Winds Of Change Oh Well We Just Disagree Talkin' To My Heart Blow By Blow Shakin' The Cage (Revamped and with drum vest) Only You Know And I Know Go Your Own Way -- Tear It Up Don't Stop -- Dreamin' The Dream |
Quote:
Quote:
Fleetwood Mac in 1994/95 were up against previous incarnations in the United States that swamped it in the public's eye. Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The big problem is that no older (classic) artist, save maybe for Tina Turner, was having a lot of chart success. Fleetwood Mac was the opening act for CSN in 1994. They were touring in support of a new album. It went nowhere, which was also the case when Neil Young came back into the fold a few years later. This is the time when radio became completely fragmented. Classic rock stations were classic hits by the classic artists. New rock stations were new hits by new artists This made it impossible for the new hits by old artists. As such, and this is the key point with all of this, the old songs were really the only thing the old acts had to market the shows. "Then they should have changed the name" so some say. They would still have had the exact same problem. Mick, John, and even Billy were too heavily associated with their membership in Fleetwood Mac, so breaking away from the band's legacy altogether, even under a new name, would have been impossible. People would still expect to hear the classics from Fleetwood Mac. Sure, I could see how some not familiar with the band's history would think they were seeing a bastardized version of Fleetwood Mac. They would have thought that regardless if they were playing "Talkin' To My Heart" or "Don't Stop." Oddly enough, most people, at least at the shows I attended or have bootlegs, seem to give the band an overwhelmingly positive reception. (I even heard a few CSN fans say that CSN should have been the opening act!) |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Any time ANYONE plays Dreams or SYLM (at least in this country), the listener immediately thinks of Fleetwood Mac if he thinks of anyone at all (i.e., assuming we're not talking about a 14-year-old black kid who has never heard the classic pop-rock playlist--& such a kid probably didn't turn out in droves for the Time concerts, so that's a moot exception). Quote:
The 1994 band should not have been playing any of those if they wanted to cement a new identity & get their own hits or grow their own audience!! it's as simple as that. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
There was a lot that could have been different, and should have been different. In their early days, they needed to balance past glories (also true of the Mason material) with creating a new sound. It's not something I see happening with any band over one tour. But, since they ultimately closed shop before doing a proper tour, we'll never know. I'm pretty sure it's safe to say they wouldn't have had a hit with "Time" regardless, but I think it could have turned into something different, if given the opportunity to develop. We'll never know. |
Ok...I'm going to chime in, not so much regarding Time, since I'm pretty much the middle ground between you guys (although, David, in most of the set list ideas, I'm leaning more toward Steve), and I'd only be "Captain Redundant"; but since you brought the comparison of the Heroes... tour into it, I have to toss my two-cents in regarding that tour.
1) They did more than just two songs from Heroes..., "Bermuda Triangle", "Coming Home", "Angel", "Come A Little Bit Closer"...that's four. 2) Why did they pack the set with older material? You have to remember what the band was going through in 1974...they were fighting for their very survival due to the Cliff Davies/Bogus band litigation. They played a plethora of Peter Green material (and "Black Magic Woman" HAD been a constant in their set since 1968). to PROVE to their record company, to the lawyers, to their fans that they were STILL "Fleetwood Mac". 3) Ok, one point regarding the 1994/95 tour...HAD Christine been on stage with them, toured with them, this whole issue of the Time incarnation's "worth" would be moot. My view is that it was the fact that Christine wasn't there, moreso than the absence of Lindsey & Stevie, that created the oddness/weirdness. I think in the 13 previous years, Fleetwood Mac fans HAD to have some inkling in their minds that "one of these days Stevie & Lindsey would leave the band". Lindsey had been grumbling for 6 years until he finally gave notice, Stevie seemed to be going through the motions with Fleetwood Mac since Wild Heart; proving that her solo career was more than a one album creative outlet anomaly. And, her "interest" seemed to wane even further after Lindsey's departure. ALLLL RIGHT, you know once I got going...Captain Redundant HAS to chime in: 4) I'm right with Steve regarding the crew on the 1994/95 tour playing SOME of "the hits", but the main downer was that they didn't have enough NEW material to divert the focus off the Rumours material. (Like they did in 1975 by mixing their new material with the bands then "standards": "Oh Well", Green Manalishi", "Station Man", "Hypnotized", etc) And while I like Steve's hypothetical set list as a base, I think it could be tweaked a bit: The Chain/In The Back Of My Mind Winds Of Change I Got It In For You Oh Well We Just Disagree Talkin' To My Heart Gold Dust Woman Blow By Blow Hard Feelings Shakin' The Cage When The Sun Goes Down Nothing Without You Only You Know And I Know You Make Loving Fun Go Your Own Way -- Tear It Up Dreamin' The Dream 5) Quote:
|
Whatever the case, I think that what they set out to do was fairly ambitious: Three singers playing Fleetwood Mac classics, Dave Mason/Traffic classics, and new songs in typically a twelve song set. Even if they had done a balanced set, it would have still been a challenge coming up with a semi-cohesive set in which each singer gets a fair representation. But then, creative set-lists aren't really Fleetwood Mac's, or Dave Mason's, specialty to begin with.
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved