Dance Appreciation Thread - Page 6

JazmenFlowers · #76 02-09-2006, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

#3 Hey, I like Fleetwood Mac. They're my favorite band. I'm not entirely happy with the set list either...but there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. Other than to boycott, and simply not go to shows. Which I wont do, because some Fleetwood Mac is better than none.

I agree totally.

I sing your praises. what's the going rate for cyberbooty? lol

**mylittledemon** · #77 02-09-2006, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JazmenFlowers

what's the going rate for cyberbooty? lol

HA! You're crazy J. Well, Nikki's my agent around here so give her a ring and she'll set something up. I don't like to talk about dollar amounts...

JazmenFlowers · #78 02-09-2006, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

HA! You're crazy J. Well, Nikki's my agent around here so give her a ring and she'll set something up. I don't like to talk about dollar amounts...

you two would do good on the jersey turnpike.

I'll be sure to PM her.

**mylittledemon** · #79 02-09-2006, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JazmenFlowers

you two would do good on the jersey turnpike.

I'll be sure to PM her.

Dude...thats f*cking hilarious! hahaha.....the turnpike.

Jyqm · #80 02-09-2006, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

#1 I think Springsteen appeals to a wider audience than Fleetwood Mac does...so that could account for the larger crowds.

Well, which is it? Do certain bands sell more tickets because they appeal to a larger audience (and Rumours has sold quite a few more copies than Born In The USA, by the way), or because they play stale greatest hits setlists?

Quote:

I'm also under the impression that they tour a helluva' lot less than Fleetwood Mac does. Weren't the "broken up" for a long time?

There was an E Street Band reunion tour in 1999-2000. Prior to that, the last E Street Band tour had been in 1988 (although Bruce had launched a large-scale tour with another band in 1992-1993). But they had only been off the road for two years when the Rising tour began in 2002.

To compare, there was a Fleetwood Mac reunion tour in 1997. Prior to that, the last large-scale Fleetwood Mac tour had been in 1990. But they had been off the road for nearly six years when the Say You Will tour began in 2003.

So in the past decade, there have been the same number of Fleetwood Mac and E Street Band tours. In 2003, however, one would think demand would be higher for Fleetwood Mac, as they had been off the road for much longer than Bruce & pals at that point.

Quote:

#2 I didnt say they were trying to lure in new fans...but if some kid recognizes and old song, well guess what, then they're pushing old catalog material as well as the new CD. I was implying that it was about money.

As always: Nobody is saying that Fleetwood Mac should completely stop playing any and all of their hits. But they don't need to play seven songs from Rumours every single night of a given tour.

See my post about how mind-numbingly simple it would be to substantially mix up their setlists while still including a slew of major hits.

Quote:

#3 Hey, I like Fleetwood Mac. They're my favorite band. I'm not entirely happy with the set list either...but there is absolutely nothing I can do about it.

Perhaps not, but you don't have to apologize for them and make excuses. Their setlist decisions are totally indefensible. Except for the possibility that Lindsey and Stevie are simply incredibly uncomfortable with mixing things up, there's not a single good reason for them to do what they do in regards to their setlists.

Boots · #81 02-09-2006, 04:32 PM

I have to say that after reading and participating in all these terrific, thought provoking comments about the set lists of a FM concert - a thought occured to me.

Thank GOD that they are all alive! I mean, it's been over 30 years, and not one of them has passed on! So, let them play whatever they want. After losing 2 out of 4 Beatles, and all those regrets of what might have been if Lennon were alive, or Zappa, or Elvis...Thank goodness "the five" are still around making music and sharing this world with us.

**mylittledemon** · #82 02-09-2006, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jyqm

To compare, there was a Fleetwood Mac reunion tour in 1997. Prior to that, the last large-scale Fleetwood Mac tour had been in 1990. But they had been off the road for nearly six years when the Say You Will tour began in 2003.

As always: Nobody is saying that Fleetwood Mac should completely stop playing any and all of their hits. But they don't need to play seven songs from Rumours every single night of a given tour.

Perhaps not, but you don't have to apologize for them and make excuses. Their setlist decisions are totally indefensible. Except for the possibility that Lindsey and Stevie are simply incredibly uncomfortable with mixing things up, there's not a single good reason for them to do what they do in regards to their setlists.

True...the mac did tour in 97 and it was a 40 date tour. Probably would've been bigger had Lindsey agreed to more shows. The one reason I think the Say You Will tour wasnt as big as it should have been was because of the lack of Christine on the tour and the album. But, thats a whole 'nuther can of worms.

If Fleetwood Mac wanna play 7 or 8 songs from Rumours a night they can do that. Like I said...I DONT LIKE it either, I'd love to see more Tusk and Mirage stuff but I can't make that call. I cant do anything about that.

And I never apologized for Fleetwood Mac making poor setlist choices or making excuses for them. I'm simply giving you reasons why these things possibly are the way they are. You know, another opinion from your own. And as far as mixing the setlist up...once again, there is a defensible reason as to why....MONEY. Everyone has to get paid. The album didnt sell terribly well...tours are expensive. Dont think for a minute the management and agents and lawyers and nose pickers arent telling them they have to keep the setlist more "safe" to bring in more crowds. Does it make it right? No. Do I like it? Not really. But thats the state of the music biz right now.

JazmenFlowers · #83 02-09-2006, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boots

I have to say that after reading and participating in all these terrific, thought provoking comments about the set lists of a FM concert - a thought occured to me.

Thank GOD that they are all alive! I mean, it's been over 30 years, and not one of them has passed on! So, let them play whatever they want. After losing 2 out of 4 Beatles, and all those regrets of what might have been if Lennon were alive, or Zappa, or Elvis...Thank goodness "the five" are still around making music and sharing this world with us.

see my reply in David's "Let's Be Thankful" thread

chiliD · #84 02-09-2006, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boots

Thank goodness "the five" are still around making music and sharing this world with us.

All 16 members are alive...why do people keep forgetting that there ARE more members to Fleetwood Mac than "the five"??

Conversely, the Allman Bros Band have: lost an Allman & three bass players, yet are as great as ever. (and in some ways, even BETTER than ever)

**mylittledemon** · #85 02-09-2006, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiliD

All 16 members are alive...why do people keep forgetting that there ARE more members to Fleetwood Mac than "the five"??

oh ****, here he goes!

JazmenFlowers · #86 02-09-2006, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

True...the mac did tour in 97 and it was a 40 date tour. Probably would've been bigger had Lindsey agreed to more shows. The one reason I think the Say You Will tour wasnt as big as it should have been was because of the lack of Christine on the tour and the album. But, thats a whole 'nuther can of worms.

If Fleetwood Mac wanna play 7 or 8 songs from Rumours a night they can do that. Like I said...I DONT LIKE it either, I'd love to see more Tusk and Mirage stuff but I can't make that call. I cant do anything about that.

And I never apologized for Fleetwood Mac making poor setlist choices or making excuses for them. I'm simply giving you reasons why these things possibly are the way they are. You know, another opinion from your own. And as far as mixing the setlist up...once again, there is a defensible reason as to why....MONEY. Everyone has to get paid. The album didnt sell terribly well...tours are expensive. Dont think for a minute the management and agents and lawyers and nose pickers arent telling them they have to keep the setlist more "safe" to bring in more crowds. Does it make it right? No. Do I like it? Not really. But thats the state of the music biz right now.

are you listening...PRAISE, PRAISE, PRAISE.

agreed. they aren't as setlist adventursome as say Tori Amos or the Grateful Dead as chiliD pointed out, but they do try to change it up some...in my opinion, their outlook towards their setlists have never changed...it's been the same mindset since the 70's - and the mindset of most performers

JazmenFlowers · #87 02-09-2006, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiliD

All 16 members are alive...why do people keep forgetting that there ARE more members to Fleetwood Mac than "the five"??

cause the others don't contribute to the band now - they aren't actively a part of FM

chiliD · #88 02-09-2006, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

True...the mac did tour in 97 and it was a 40 date tour. Probably would've been bigger had Lindsey agreed to more shows.

It WASN'T limited to 40 dates because of Lindsey...it was Christine who put the kabosh on extending the tour.

**mylittledemon** · #89 02-09-2006, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiliD

It WASN'T limited to 40 dates because of Lindsey...it was Christine who put the kabosh on extending the tour.

true, but originally I think Lindsey only signed on for the States....I guess he had more fun than he thought he would.

chiliD · #90 02-09-2006, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JazmenFlowers

cause the others don't contribute to the band now - they aren't actively a part of FM

In that case, "the five" aren't "FIVE" anymore. So, let's just ignore that Christine ever was in the band, then, eh?