Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveMacD
Neil Finn and Mike Campbell are in a completely different class than the rest of the listed people.
|
Different class? Higher class? Lower class? Who's talking about class? In fact, my point was that individual class of musician is largely irrelevant in any consideration of the rightness of "fit" within a band. Did that point soar over your head, Steve?
Quote:
|
I think it’s too early to tell. And, who said it was going to be another classic lineup? I don’t think anyone, even those of us who are excited about it, believes it could possibly be mentioned in the same breath as the Peter Green or Rumours versions of Fleetwood Mac.
|
But that absence of potential is precisely what's frustrating a bunch of Rumours fans—they lost a classic grouping (even past its heyday) and got stuck with a . . . federation of more-or-less interesting individuals. Dave Walker was interesting (I love "The Derelict"), Burnette was interesting, Vito was interesting, Sheryl Crow would have been interesting. But these individual ingredients didn't (or wouldn't) capture the imaginations of generations; they'd have left no lasting mark on the culture. The effects of the 1990 Fleetwood Mac have long since dissipated, and the 1994 Fleetwood Mac never reverberated at all. My point is that the current lineup does not have the potential to make any sort of lasting artistic statement
because it isn't anything more than a collection of interesting musicians and songwriters, and that's a sad end to the band.
Quote:
|
Still, it certainly has the potential to be compelling, if not great.
|
You may find it so. Many others of course don't. I find the current lineup potentially no more compelling than Coldplay. These are subjective matters; you can't issue a ruling on them.