Guitar free
 

Is being guitar free such a bad thing? I'm not talking about Lindsey. I'm talking about his instrument? Why were they so self conscious about the dark possibility of being a piano band? They have some great piano songs: Hold Me, Angel, Sisters of the Moon, Sara, Songbird, Game of Pretend. That's one third of the set right there. Why was it never even considered that the foursome could be great? :nod:

Because without the energy of the guitar I think the chances of slipping into a sleepy lounge act are 90 %. IMHO.

......as the great band Heart sings...Never....Never!

If the intent was simply to replace the guitar (and clearly it wasn't), they could have brought Mike in on his own. He is not a singer, so he would be there for instrumental purposes only, to play guitar on Stevie and Chris's songs.
However, they thought they could replace Buckingham's voice as well as his guitar. There, I agree, NEVER!

Because they're supposed to be a rock band. You can't be much of a rock band without guitar.

They can still rock without Neil, surely?

Fleetwood Mac has always been a guitar band. The band’s history is defined by who the guitarist was at a particular point in time: Peter Green, Bob Welch, Lindsey Buckingham, Billy Burnette, Lindsey Buckingham (reprise), and now Mike Campbell.

Tambourine Woman
 

Sara with just piano and no guitar? Blech.


Or maybe you just meant no lead guitar.

They'd at least need rhythm, which Christine could do. In fact, give Christine an accordion as well. Even better, just dress her up in one of those one-man-band contraptions that Dick Van Dyke wore in Mary Poppins.

And Stevie could be in charge of piano duties.

It'll be an evening you'll never forget--however hard you try!

I think you mean Rick Vito, in referencing Billy.

Billy was the Neil Finn of that lineup.

Neil wasn't really brought in for the purpose of guitar playing as much as because Mike doesn't sing. Mike was a done deal but they still would need a male lead singer since that's way too essential to their songs to lose.

But he defines the 87-95 years. Bob was basically the Neil Finn to Kirwan and then Weston.

ETA: I guess I define the eras by who sings “Oh Well.”

Mike sings a lot like Tom Petty.

Because the singer is the face. But he wasn't the VERY talented guitar player. I saw Rick a few months ago, and he was still smoking hot!

Is that meant to be a compliment?:D

I’ve long maintained Rick was the best guitarist they ever had from a technical standpoint. Not the most original and not someone who could be a driving force within the context of the band as it was, which is a shame. I think he got screwed worse in some ways than Lindsey. Not only did they not put Rick’s best songs on the album, they only gave him one song of his own, and it was probably the weakest one.

:laugh:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

LOL!

This band needs guitar! Look at how lame "Rhiannon" has become without the guitar solo.

I'd put Rick in there before Billy. And don't forget Bob Weston.

100% agree here. Reason S&L wound up in the band is because they were looking for a guitarist. I can't imagine a rock band without one. And yes, this band has been defined by all of their guitarists (rightfully so). Fully disclosure, didn't pay too much attention to the Rick Vito/Billy Burnette years, but I do believe if MC "sang" more---NF wouldn't be in this incarnation.

When I heard that he was joining, I checked out him singing with the Dirty Knobs. I thought he could have handled everything just fine and that they didn’t need another guitarist/vocalist. However, I was thrilled with the choice of Neil.

Any rock band is going to have to have a guitar (or more). There is no way Fleetwood Mac as a 4-piece would be Mick-John-Stevie-Chris and some session guitarist. It's different with a band like The Eagles who never really replaced Don Felder as far as another full member (Steuart Smith plays the role but is a 'hired hand') because they also have Joe Walsh.

As stupid as what they have done to the band is, it would be even more ridiculous if they just went with the four of them and someone like Waddy.

Well, this band has been owning ridiculous this year. STUPID, even.

And really, HOW is Waddy any worse than MC or NF? Prosecutions notwithstanding? I don't see the difference.

I meant like....MC/NF - they get photos with the band in publication. "Hey look at our two new members!" Whereas Waddy would be more like a hired hand..."Hey look it's Mick, John, Chris, and Stevie!" and Waddy as lead guitarist being relegated to backing band status with Neale, ReplacementBrett, and Stevie's "GIRRRRRLLLLS" :rolleyes:

The whole thing sucks, don't get me wrong. I don't really think either option is good. One might be less ridiculous than the other for a rock band but both at a level of f'n ridiculous that even surprises me for Fleetwood Mac.

Oh god no, no Waddy please. His arrangements on Stevie's solo tours have butchered enough Fleetwood Mac songs, there's no need to let him have his hand at any more.

Well I didn't mean as a "bandleader", but just as "the" lead guitar player.



Funny side note. I became obsessed with this country(POP) singer named David Nail, around 2010/2011. Absolutely LOVED his music. I never bothered looking at the liner notes until a couple years after,(after a Ledgie posted a pic of him on FB). His guitar player on his album was Waddy! Talk about tying it all together! I told her that I had no idea whether my obsession with that album was because of his singing, or subliminally, because of Waddy's guitar playing, sucking me into something I've heard my whole life.

Well Waddy ya know.

Don't be a trying to steal mah crown!:mad:


:lol: