The Ledge

Go Back   The Ledge > Main Forums > Present Band
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Make the Ads Go Away! Click here.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 12-23-2018, 09:21 PM
mitzo mitzo is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,573
Default

I have been apathetic about FM for ages now, no new material makes them a bit of a bore now. Sick of living in the early 80's. So the new lineup is no more or less ho-hum than the Lindsey lineup. And yes, it is Stevie's fault there has been no new material.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-24-2018, 09:11 AM
On Ice On Ice is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 425
Default

Quote:
I have been apathetic about FM for ages now, no new material makes them a bit of a bore now. Sick of living in the early 80's. So the new lineup is no more or less ho-hum than the Lindsey lineup. And yes, it is Stevie's fault there has been no new material.
I agree, this has made it difficult for me to get excited about the new line up- no new music makes it a cash grab and I'm not paying a grand for good seats and travel out of town to see this. Not to say though that Neil Finn doesn't have a great voice- he does and Mike Campbell is an awesome guitarist- he is. But I agree with Lindsey at this point in their career it makes no sense whatsoever and is essentially a cover band. The Tom Petty tribute also irks me to hell- a quick nod would've sufficed. Danny Kirwan and Bob Welch were far more deserving and I don't care if most of the audience don't know those two incredibly talented treasures- they were far more deserving at a Fleetwood Mac concert . Furthermore to drop the only Welch song was unforgivable. Sorry guys, I'm sitting this one out my enthusiasm has dwindled with no new fresh music to offer, while I loved the 80's, it's now almost 2019, time to move on (as Tom would say). If he were alive he'd be telling Stevie to get over herself and record some new music.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-24-2018, 01:49 PM
David's Avatar
David David is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Posts: 13,711
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveMacD View Post
Not exactly the same equation, though. Billy and Rick were a far cry from Neil and Mike.
But why is that putative difference important if they're all just playing Dreams and Rhiannon straight night after night? Do you not see what some people in this thread are driving at?

Mike Campbell has artistic stature because of his work with the Heartbreakers, not because of his work this past year with Fleetwood Mac. As far as the latter goes, he's essentially just playing Rhiannon and Don't Stop again and again . . . just like Vito was roped into doing. The entire band is resting on its achievements and style of the seventies. So far, it has practically nothing new to say. Maybe that's just what Lindsey meant when he talked about perspective.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-24-2018, 03:39 PM
Storms123 Storms123 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 836
Default

[QUOTE=David;1246917]But why is that putative difference important if they're all just playing Dreams and Rhiannon straight night after night? Do you not see what some people in this thread are driving at?

Mike Campbell has artistic stature because of his work with the Heartbreakers, not because of his work this past year with Fleetwood Mac. As far as the latter goes, he's essentially just playing Rhiannon and Don't Stop again and again . . . just like Vito was roped into doing. The entire band is resting on its achievements and style of the seventies. So far, it has practically nothing new to say. Maybe that's just what Lindsey meant when he talked about perspective.[/QU

I agree David. It’s completely true. I think the stint with Mick, Stevie, John and Christine is merely a footnote for Neil and Mike. The bigger story is why they got there, not necessarily what they did once they were there (assuming they continue to not deliver new music....I don’t think they will. I agree with you as well on LBs comments, something to the effect he doesn’t miss playing these songs, but is hurt for the fans and the legacy
Very well said David, thank you
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-24-2018, 05:43 PM
bwboy bwboy is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
But why is that putative difference important if they're all just playing Dreams and Rhiannon straight night after night? Do you not see what some people in this thread are driving at?

Mike Campbell has artistic stature because of his work with the Heartbreakers, not because of his work this past year with Fleetwood Mac. As far as the latter goes, he's essentially just playing Rhiannon and Don't Stop again and again . . . just like Vito was roped into doing. The entire band is resting on its achievements and style of the seventies.
If Lindsey hadn't been fired, he would be the one playing Dreams and Rhiannon and Don't Stop night after night. If Lindsey was still in FM, the band would still be resting on its achievements and style of the seventies, right? Or does that not apply to the band if Lindsey is with them?

If Lindsey was in FM, it would still be a cash grab tour. As opposed to a tour where they play 4 new songs, which then somehow wouldn't be a cash grab tour I really don't get it- the same people who hate FM now talk about how this tour is 'just' a cash grab tour, like somehow it wouldn't have been if Lindsey were still in the band. Look, he wanted to record new material, but he was more than happy to go on the road with FM and sing the same hits they've been doing for 40+years. We know this because he sued them for the money he would have gotten from the tour. Despite the fact that they wouldn't record new material, he WANTED to tour with them, singing the same songs he's been doing for 40+years- I felt that beared repeating became some people seem to gloss over that point completely.

I love this tour, and if Lindsey had still been with them, I would have hoped they still played most of the songs they did. No Don't Dream It's Over or Free Falling maybe, even though I loved those songs as performed by them, but more of Lindsey's songs would have been great. All Over Again, Tell Me All the Things, Isn't It Midnight, Black Magic Woman, all fantastic.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-24-2018, 06:52 PM
David's Avatar
David David is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Posts: 13,711
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwboy View Post
If Lindsey hadn't been fired, he would be the one playing Dreams and Rhiannon and Don't Stop night after night.
Totally true. This isn't a Lindsey issue—other than his bona fide attempt to get the band to record something new.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwboy View Post
If Lindsey was still in FM, the band would still be resting on its achievements and style of the seventies, right? Or does that not apply to the band if Lindsey is with them?
Of course it applies. The band has been retreading its past in concert for a couple of decades, and all sorts of people have been in and out of the band, including Lindsey, Stevie, Christine, Rick, Billy, Dave, Bekka, Mike, and Neil. They've ALL done exactly the same thing. I sometimes think they do what they do because they play big venues and court huge numbers of customers that extend well beyond the fans who are intimately acquainted with their work. But I saw them in 1994 at a little dinner club in Central California—couldn't have been more than 80 people in the crowd—and damned if they still didn't build their entire set on their seventies concert set.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwboy View Post
If Lindsey was in FM, it would still be a cash grab tour.
No one, I hope, is saying otherwise. If they are, they're wrong. That's how I interpret Lindsey's "big machine" metaphor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwboy View Post
Look, he wanted to record new material, but he was more than happy to go on the road with FM and sing the same hits they've been doing for 40+years.
Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Since 2003, there have been three Fleetwood Mac tours with Lindsey. I've skipped them all because I no longer want to hear this aging and musically deteriorating group of people play Gold Dust Woman and Go Your Own Way. Am I explaining myself adequately here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwboy View Post
I love this tour, and if Lindsey had still been with them, I would have hoped they still played most of the songs they did. No Don't Dream It's Over or Free Falling maybe, even though I loved those songs as performed by them, but more of Lindsey's songs would have been great. All Over Again, Tell Me All the Things, Isn't It Midnight, Black Magic Woman, all fantastic.
When tickets go on sale, some of us buy and some of us pass. I'm explaining why I pass. The fact that the 2018 band has thrown in some old work that hasn't been heard in awhile doesn't disprove the fact that the band's set is built around its seventies heyday. It's not my thing anymore. Quite frankly, I can't understand why others who have been to as many Fleetwood Mac concerts as I have would still be interested in them as a concert attraction. Is it a habit, like an addiction? A tic? An autonomic response? What keeps people going back year after year to hear Go Your Own Way sung the same way every year (barring the deterioration that age and boredom generate)—especially in this age of immediately available YouTube videos? Seeing Fleetwood Mac every year is worse than watching the same movie every year because Fleetwood Mac costs hundreds of dollars. I'm fascinated by what keeps people going to see them—the same people who have seen them thirty times since 1977. I guess they're enjoying themselves and enjoying an ever more boring string of Rhiannons, but it puzzles me. Maybe they turn to other bands for fresh, new work, and Fleetwood Mac is just an arthritic walk through an old petrifacted scrapbook for them.

I'd love to see a Fleetwood Mac committed enough to reconceptualize itself the way that it did in 1979—two short years after its mass-market triumph.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-24-2018, 07:38 PM
bwboy bwboy is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,610
Default

I appreciate your response, David. I love it when we can share our thoughts about the band in a reasonable manner. Like you, I would really love a concert with deep cuts, but mainstream audiences want the hits, so that's what we're stuck with.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-25-2018, 08:41 AM
Nicks Fan's Avatar
Nicks Fan Nicks Fan is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Metcalfe Ontario Canada
Posts: 873
Default

What bugs me though is Stevie made the comment that someone didn't want to play the pre 75 material yet between 87-97 all the did perform from the pre 75 era was a total of 4 Peter Green songs between 3 tours. If they cared about the previous lineups then why did they ignore Bob Welch, Danny Kirwan, Jeremy Spencer.

I get that casual fans want the hits but in my opinion they could easily switch it up night to night so that some nights you get Gold Dust Woman and Rhiannon and others you get Dreams and Landslide for example. There is no reason why they couldn't do 10 hits and 10-12 deep cuts if the set list was properly sequenced.

I think the reason Stevie doesn't want to record new material has little to nothing to do with Lindsey and his behavior but more to do with the fact that she has no new music to offer and would have likely given some old demos.

Lindsey has been very creative lately and some of his recent music is very good.

If this current lineup does make new music it will only serve as a big f you from SN to Lindsey.

I sat out this tour because I wasn't paying 700 dollars to hear new guys play hits I have heard before as well as cover songs from the new guys.

I know allot of bands play covers but the difference is that artists like Bruce Springsteen, The Rolling Stones etc do play enough deep cuts and or change up the set list that hearing some cover songs isn't a big deal vs FM who rarely changes up the set list on a nightly basis and or play a ton of rare cuts. For them to do cover songs at this point in time when they have more then enough material of their own to play is stupid.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-25-2018, 09:13 AM
blinker12's Avatar
blinker12 blinker12 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 807
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
lQuite frankly, I can't understand why others who have been to as many Fleetwood Mac concerts as I have would still be interested in them as a concert attraction. Is it a habit, like an addiction? A tic? An autonomic response? What keeps people going back year after year to hear Go Your Own Way sung the same way every year (barring the deterioration that age and boredom generate)—especially in this age of immediately available YouTube videos? Seeing Fleetwood Mac every year is worse than watching the same movie every year because Fleetwood Mac costs hundreds of dollars. I'm fascinated by what keeps people going to see them—the same people who have seen them thirty times since 1977. I guess they're enjoying themselves and enjoying an ever more boring string of Rhiannons, but it puzzles me.
I can’t figure this out, either. Every time they come through town and sell out the arena, I wonder: ‘If I, a super fan, can’t drum up any interest to see this show, how in the heck are they selling out arenas?’ The only thing I can figure out is that they’re drawing not fans, but members of the general public who want to be able to say they’ve seen the famous Fleetwood Mac in their lives. Kinda the same reason why places such as Prague or Venice are now thronged with tourists year-round. It’s the bucket list factor.
__________________
Don't you know that the stars are / A part of us?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-25-2018, 10:33 AM
Nicks Fan's Avatar
Nicks Fan Nicks Fan is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Metcalfe Ontario Canada
Posts: 873
Default

I think the reason they sell well to this day is a few factors. 1) People who have never seen them want to cross them off of their bucket list 2) When a classic rock band comes to town people will likely go just because it is a night out and maybe they haven't seen them live in a while 3) Rabid fans of SN or the band as a whole simply have to be there no matter what. Those types will defend the set list and the tours with such passion because they really like the band and or a certain member. I don't get it either why any die hard fan can be excited about a tour that has so many songs they have been performed to the death. I am a die hard fan and I don't care for the new band or the tour. I have heard most of these songs so many times it has gotten boring.

On social media though lots of people say the band sounds fresh etc but I don't see anyone can say that and actually believe it. Playing mostly the same old tired songs yet again does not make them fresh just because you have new members.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-25-2018, 02:48 PM
bwboy bwboy is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,610
Default

All those reasons could be factors. The friends I went with are casual fans, and they knew Lindsey wasn't with FM anymore. I didn't actually ask them why they wanted to see FM, but both knew Stevie and Christine were in the band, and the impression I got was that was enough for them. They loved the concert just as much as I did. One thought Stevie sounded incredible, the other friend thought Christine sounded incredible. Both said they liked Neil's singing. Neither one said much about John or Mike, and both liked Mick's drum solo. On the floor, everyone was on their feet the entire concert, with the exception of maybe 2 songs and Mick's drum solo.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-25-2018, 03:01 PM
bwboy bwboy is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicks Fan View Post
I think the reason they sell well to this day is a few factors. 1) People who have never seen them want to cross them off of their bucket list 2) When a classic rock band comes to town people will likely go just because it is a night out and maybe they haven't seen them live in a while 3) Rabid fans of SN or the band as a whole simply have to be there no matter what. Those types will defend the set list and the tours with such passion because they really like the band and or a certain member.

On social media though lots of people say the band sounds fresh etc but I don't see anyone can say that and actually believe it. Playing mostly the same old tired songs yet again does not make them fresh just because you have new members.
I used to consider myself a die hard fan until I joined the Ledge- now I think I must just be a casual fan, because I don't know the names of all the family members of Stevie, Lindsey, etc. I've attended 5 FM shows in my life- BTM, Dance, SYW, Hits, and this one, and I went because I was curious how they would sound and because I thought the set list sounded promising, and I was not disappointed. Best FM show I've ever been to. I don't go to every FM tour, I purposely skipped Shake the Cage, Time, the EP, and On With the Show, so I don't have to see every FM tour.

You can believe me when I say they sounded fresh, because in my opinion they did. They sounded tight and fantastic, especially musically. Vocally, Christine not so much, but I didn't care. Seeing them perform songs I'd never seen them perform before was fantastic, and they were clearly inspired by the new members and the set list.

I am not somebody who would say the concert was good if I didn't like it. And I loved it! I would have seen them again in a heartbeat, and I've never had the desire to see a show twice in one tour before. Not even FM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-25-2018, 08:43 PM
Nicks Fan's Avatar
Nicks Fan Nicks Fan is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Metcalfe Ontario Canada
Posts: 873
Default

My point was that they are playing numerous songs they have played before on many tours so I don't get how that is considered fresh. They are playing the songs very much in the same way they always did. No real different arrangements etc. They didn't in my opinion change up the set enough. Opening up with The Chain yet again??? Dreams in my opinion has been performed the same way for decades and pretty much sounds stale. It should be retired. I also think they should have dropped some of the other standards (World Turning, GDW, SHN etc) for some other songs. Wish You Here, Why, That's Alright , Angel, Think About Me, Brown Eyes, Over and Over would have been great additions. A handful of new songs or covers built around the same core songs is not very adventurous. But to each their own. If you enjoyed the show I am glad you did. For me I couldn't support what they did to Lindsey and would have felt the same way no matter who they had fired. As well as paying top dollar for a majority of songs I have heard more then enough times. I have seen them 7 times from 2003 tour to the 2014 tour not missing one of those tours. Each of those tours had something I liked. If they simply had to tour this year then they should have changed up the show much more then they did and make it clear that they were going to really change things up for this tour. They could have still played some well known songs and deep cuts with a show that would have had a nice balance between the familiar and the more obscure tunes.

Last edited by Nicks Fan; 12-26-2018 at 12:46 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-28-2018, 02:14 PM
David's Avatar
David David is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Posts: 13,711
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicks Fan View Post
My point was that they are playing numerous songs they have played before on many tours so I don't get how that is considered fresh. They are playing the songs very much in the same way they always did. No real different arrangements etc. They didn't in my opinion change up the set enough. Opening up with The Chain yet again??? Dreams in my opinion has been performed the same way for decades and pretty much sounds stale. It should be retired. I also think they should have dropped some of the other standards (World Turning, GDW, SHN etc) for some other songs. Wish You Here, Why, That's Alright , Angel, Think About Me, Brown Eyes, Over and Over would have been great additions. A handful of new songs or covers built around the same core songs is not very adventurous.
The band's in sort of a pickle at this stage. They are prisoners of their big-budget tours, which have to fill cavernous arenas in order to recoup costs and deliver expected payouts. In terms of your show, you can't move on to a new stage when you have to attract 15,000 customers every night. These are decisions the band makes, a cycle of big money. I have nothing against big money (in fact, I'd rather enjoy it), but I understand that it does lock you in. The way Fleetwood Mac is "set up" ever since its 1997 reunion, it must play big halls and sell tens of thousands of tickets. In order to do that, it must play Dreams and what-all. A set and a style that are recognizable by the widest number of customers is the locking mechanism. I was thinking about the first time I saw Springsteen, back on the Darkness on the Edge of Town tour in 1978. So I tracked down some interesting info on Wikipedia. It was a rather chaotic but refreshing mix of arenas (like the Inglewood Forum, 13,000), auditoriums (like the San Antonio Memorial, 5,000), and theaters (San Jose Performing Arts, 2,500). Springsteen is an excellent example of a superstar whose tours these days can accurately be said to follow no particular historical pattern. Fleetwood Mac, with its body of work from 1967 to the present, could if it wanted to dispense with its own historical patterns and create something really new for every tour, but it chooses not to, and I call it a shame.

I'm talking about more than just a set list, by the way. I'm talking about an entire approach to entertainment. Lindsey's first solo tour was a great example of true newness: He and his band orchestrated or reorchestrated a whole show in an intricately detailed and precise way, solving any number of aesthetic problems along the way (and creating a few others). His guitar "army" had to figure out exactly what to do, when to do it, and how to do it, and everything was as precisely planned as the assembling of a model. Stevie's first solo tour, which I saw in Beverly Hills, was also truly new—the show was inextricably tied to Bella Donna, not to Fleetwood Mac. Imagine if her subsequent tours had displayed the same care and intelligence for the "moment," the new album!

At the other end of the spectrum, Fleetwood Mac this year is doing what? Backdrop videos of galloping horses and breaching whales? Where's the aesthetic intelligence in that? It isn't worth a damn.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicks Fan View Post
I have seen them 7 times from 2003 tour to the 2014 tour not missing one of those tours. Each of those tours had something I liked. If they simply had to tour this year then they should have changed up the show much more then they did and make it clear that they were going to really change things up for this tour. They could have still played some well known songs and deep cuts with a show that would have had a nice balance between the familiar and the more obscure tunes.
Hiring two big names would have been a perfect opportunity to create some new traditions and make some waves, but instead the organization opted to go back out on the road with a big, expensive circus and all its old traditions intact. Pauline Kael once said that a "classic" is usually just a stunted perennial.
__________________

Last edited by David; 12-28-2018 at 02:19 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-28-2018, 02:41 PM
lovethemac1's Avatar
lovethemac1 lovethemac1 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: center of Canada
Posts: 735
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicks Fan View Post
My point was that they are playing numerous songs they have played before on many tours so I don't get how that is considered fresh. They are playing the songs very much in the same way they always did. No real different arrangements etc. They didn't in my opinion change up the set enough. Opening up with The Chain yet again??? Dreams in my opinion has been performed the same way for decades and pretty much sounds stale. It should be retired. I also think they should have dropped some of the other standards (World Turning, GDW, SHN etc) for some other songs. Wish You Here, Why, That's Alright , Angel, Think About Me, Brown Eyes, Over and Over would have been great additions. A handful of new songs or covers built around the same core songs is not very adventurous. But to each their own. If you enjoyed the show I am glad you did. For me I couldn't support what they did to Lindsey and would have felt the same way no matter who they had fired. As well as paying top dollar for a majority of songs I have heard more then enough times. I have seen them 7 times from 2003 tour to the 2014 tour not missing one of those tours. Each of those tours had something I liked. If they simply had to tour this year then they should have changed up the show much more then they did and make it clear that they were going to really change things up for this tour. They could have still played some well known songs and deep cuts with a show that would have had a nice balance between the familiar and the more obscure tunes.
I feel the same way you do NicksFan.

I'm finding it interesting that the show in my city, for April, is only 1/4 to 1/3 sold. And they've been for sale for weeks now.

Any other tour, they have sold out in a few days, with almost no seats available after a week.

They send the announcement about tickets through on Facebook feed about once an hour. They are NOT in the same boat they were before Lindsey was fired. If I want to hear the same old songs, I definitely want to hear Lindsey as part of them.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

FLEETWOOD MAC SIGNED RUMOURS LP VINYL RECORD ALBUM MICK CHRISTINE MCVIE +JSA COA
$331.99
FLEETWOOD MAC SIGNED RUMOURS LP VINYL RECORD ALBUM MICK CHRISTINE MCVIE +JSA COA pictureFLEETWOOD MAC MICK FLEETWOOD + CHRISTINE MCVIE SIGNED RUMOURS VINYL ALBUM
$299.99
FLEETWOOD MAC MICK FLEETWOOD + CHRISTINE MCVIE SIGNED RUMOURS VINYL ALBUM picture1964 Press Photo Performer Christine McVie - syp17500
$25.88
1964 Press Photo Performer Christine McVie - syp17500 pictureFLEETWOOD MAC STEVIE NICKS MICK CHRISTINE MCVIE LINDSEY GRAMMY AWARD POSTER
$24.99
FLEETWOOD MAC STEVIE NICKS MICK CHRISTINE MCVIE LINDSEY GRAMMY AWARD POSTER picture1979 Press Photo Christine McVie English Stevie Nicks - RRV30497
$19.99
1979 Press Photo Christine McVie English Stevie Nicks - RRV30497 picture



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved