Quote:
|
Originally Posted by foxyluva
I disagree about the lineup changes though. I understand that there have been MANY in the past - but I think that the Stevie Nicks & Lindsey Buckingham incarnation had become so famous that to try and call any new reincarnation without them as members was silly  |
I think adding new personnel was a legitimate move, though maybe not a practical one, at least the way they went about it. I completely understand why they did it, though. Losing Stevie and Lindsey was nowhere near as devastating as losing Peter Green, relatively speaking. Peter Green, in terms of success, WAS Fleetwood Mac. Yet, somehow, they managed to not only get beyond Peter Green, they ended up becoming a hugely successful band in the process. But, with the "Rumours" band, there were three writers, and the one still in the band had almost as many hit singles with the band as the other two combined. If they could survive Green's departure, why couldn't they have survived Stevie and Lindsey's departure?
The problem, though, is that they became too subservient to the "Rumours" material. During 1987 and 1990 tours, they glorified the past too much and stopped focusing on the band's future. They became a nostalgia act. And, it only got worse with the "Time" band. Their sets, which I enjoyed on one level, made getting beyond "Rumours" almost impossible. In short, I don’t think it was a bad idea to add new personnel so long as they let the new folks do their own music, with a few of the classics. But, by trying to keep the illusion of the “Rumours” band going, they limited their full potential.