Where does Fleetwood Mac rank among the greatest bands?

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by chiliD

Had Peter Green, Danny Kirwan & Jeremy Spencer stayed together & not had the illness, religious epiphanies, etc, Fleetwood Mac today would probably have the status we now reserve for Led Zeppelin. PG was 10x's the guitarist Jimmy Page had ever HOPED to be...as a band, Fleetwood Mac was tighter (even on their extended jams) than Zep ever was even on a GOOD night. But, that's all reserved for some parallel universe that only exists in the "what if" filing cabinet of our minds.

The thing is, once bands start shifting personnel (after a bout of huge fame), the mystique is damaged bit by bit.

The Beatles got their personnel changes out of the way before the "Mania" hit full on.

The Rolling Stones shift in personnel was for the better, Brian Jones was pretty much holding them back, then mysteriously left this astral plane, to be replaced by Mick Taylor (Peter Green's replacement in the Bluesbreakers)...the result of which was the Stones took a big leap in both songwriting, record production, etc, etc. and at the time, really DID deserve the "Greatest Rock & Roll Band In The World" moniker. Pretty much their ascent to that level was aided immensely by the Beatles calling it a day in 1970, as well. The combination of their already being #2, the addition of Mick Taylor, the move to their own label, when the #1's decided they didn't want to be a band anymore, the Stones were the obvious "next #1". They even are the exception to my "personnel changes" rule too. When Mick Taylor opted out of the Stones, the only REAL choice WAS Ronnie Wood, since Faces had pretty much been dropped by Rod Stewart and closed down their musical drinking establishment. The Stones popularity (and creativity) had another spike. The Stones rode that wave for another decade & a half.


The Who...pretty much were #3 behind Beatles & Stones in the 60's, and were leap-frogged by Led Zeppelin in the 70's, keeping them in the #3 spot, although they gave it a good fight with "Tommy", "Who's Next", "Quadrophenia" & "Who By Numbers"...they just couldn't really survive the death of Keith Moon, although they soldiered on with exactly the WORST choice of drummer to take Moon's place. Kenney Jones was great with Faces, but he was nowhere near Moon's level. And, because of Moon's death and the subsequent dip in quality songwriting (Townshend was obviously affected dramatically by Keith's demise), showed Zeppelin how to respond to the death of their drummer. Just not go on. (at least until the next generation was old enough and able enough to sit in for his father....which The Who followed that process by eventually getting Zak Starkey (Ringo's son, but who had been taught how to play the instrument by "Uncle" Keith Moon, being basically Keith's progeny moreso than Ringo's.)

Somewhere around the mid-70s, some weird little progressive rock band all of a sudden leapt onto the scene pretty much out of nowhere (except for a rabid UK following) and became one of the "Mt Rushmore" candidates of rock & roll...Pink Floyd. Today, they're definitely Top 5.

Fleetwood Mac, yep, they had their "reincarnation" of popularity with Rumours, but by their own hand, they've not shaken that whole Rumours hype/mystique/soap opera. Fleetwood Mac's fame was more non-musical than it was musical. To the point of being the butt of the Rumours joke for quite a while, and they still were trying to keep that whole Rumours thing going...and damned if they still aren't in a lot of ways. That's been a hinderance rather than a boon.


I'd say that these days, Fleetwood Mac would probably be in the Top 10 or 15 bands/artists of all-time, but not much higher than that.

How I'd rank them:

1) Beatles
2) Rolling Stones
3) Led Zeppelin
4) Pink Floyd
5) U2
6) Bob Dylan
7) Neil Young
8) Jimi Hendrix Experience
9) Eric Clapton
10) Eagles
11) The Grateful Dead
12) The Doors
13) Prince
14) The Who
15) Fleetwood Mac

U2????????????????? Huh, like where - in Ireland? Don't buy that one.

[MikeVielhaber]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

Ummmm ever since Garth Brooks, country has been in which favors the Eagles. Also FM was missing Christine McVie. The Eagles is modern country. Where is their Tusk? Blah

We're trying judge objectively where they would place. There's no handicaps or excuses because none of that matters for this discussion (and anyway I don't think Christine's presence would've added another 3 million in sales when it failed to get even 1 million without her). So basically we have to consider how the public in general would view them and their legacy among music fans and not simply our individual opinions on them. That's where all the hit singles, album sales and enduring popularity come into play. And it's all greater than FM by any objective measure.

Whether The Eagles released an album as adventurous or risky as Tusk is irrelevant. Tusk isn't the album FM is most known for anyway, Rumours is, and it sold fewer copies,by a large amount, in 1979 (and to date) at the height of their popularity and when people still bought albums than Long Road Out of Eden sold in 2007 in the digital age. And again I like Fleetwood Mac way more than the Eagles so I think FM is a much better band, but what the Eagles did was enormously popular and still is. Rumours has sold more than any Eagles studio album, but Hotel California comes close. Their greatest hits is neck and neck with Thriller for best selling album ever in the US.

To put a little perspective, FMs greatest hits is their second best selling album after Rumours. The difference in US sales between the Eagles greatest hits and FMs greatest hits is greater than total sales of Rumours. They also had 5 number 1 hits and another just missing at number 2. That is reality whether you like it or not. They both have had immense and enduring popularity and influence, but I'd say, looking at the evidence, the Eagles were/are at a higher level.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by MikeVielhaber

We're trying judge objectively where they would place. There's no handicaps or excuses because none of that matters for this discussion (and anyway I don't think Christine's presence would've added another 3 million in sales when it failed to get even 1 million without her). So basically we have to consider how the public in general would view them and their legacy among music fans and not simply our individual opinions on them. That's where all the hit singles, album sales and enduring popularity come into play. And it's all greater than FM by any objective measure.

Whether The Eagles released an album as adventurous or risky as Tusk is irrelevant. Tusk isn't the album FM is most known for anyway, Rumours is, and it sold fewer copies,by a large amount, in 1979 (and to date) at the height of their popularity and when people still bought albums than Long Road Out of Eden sold in 2007 in the digital age. And again I like Fleetwood Mac way more than the Eagles so I think FM is a much better band, but what the Eagles did was enormously popular and still is. Rumours has sold more than any Eagles studio album, but Hotel California comes close. Their greatest hits is neck and neck with Thriller for best selling album ever in the US.

To put a little perspective, FMs greatest hits is their second best selling album after Rumours. The difference in US sales between the Eagles greatest hits and FMs greatest hits is greater than total sales of Rumours. They also had 5 number 1 hits and another just missing at number 2. That is reality whether you like it or not. They both have had immense and enduring popularity and influence, but I'd say, looking at the evidence, the Eagles were/are at a higher level.

Greatest hits? It's not a studio album.

[Angel69]

Originally Posted by RockawayBlind

LOL, I have no problem admitting that!




Sit back and think about whether FM would have the widespread respect it has today if so many artists in the 1990s hadn't rediscovered it and cited it as an influence. Could that have happened if FM had gone the way of Bread or America, which is what likely would have happened if Lindsey hadn't gotten bitten by the punk bug?

Fleetwood Mac at any incarnation are light years ahead of Bread and America. Both of those bands while good were basically faceless bands. Meaning that there was no central charismatic figurehead such as Peter Green, Bob Welch, Lindsey Buckingham, Christine McVie and yes even Stevie Nicks. Stevie bless her soul has an undeniable magnetism about her. The woman just radiates power and star quality.

[MikeVielhaber]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

Greatest hits? It's not a studio album.

I wasn't comparing greatest hits to studio albums. Apparently you just skimmed my post. I compared greatest hits to greatest hits. And mentioned that while Rumours has sold more than any Eagles studio album Hotel California is not far behind. Outside of those two albums released around the same time, The Eagles generally were a bigger seller and at the very least no worse. So you could say that FM at their peak popularity were bigger than the Eagles, though not by a lot. But outside of that, probably not.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by MikeVielhaber

I wasn't comparing greatest hits to studio albums. Apparently you just skimmed my post. I compared greatest hits to greatest hits. And mentioned that while Rumours has sold more than any Eagles studio album Hotel California is not far behind. Outside of those two albums released around the same time, The Eagles generally were a bigger seller and at the very least no worse. So you could say that FM at their peak popularity were bigger than the Eagles, though not by a lot. But outside of that, probably not.

Ok I agree. But Fleetwood Mac is the better band. They experiment musically. The Eagles no.

[Nicks Fan]

What I always found interesting is that Eagles got that award around 99-2000 where they were honored for selling more albums then any othere artist (Including Elvis and The Beatles). I like the Eagles but I am amazed that given there small output of studio albums (7 in 40 odd years) and yet they sold so many. Also everytime they get back together it seems to be bigger then the last time. I like FM more simply because they have more albums and have taken risks in their music. FM unfortuantely will always be defined by Rumors even though they have made some worthy music since then.

[MikeVielhaber]

Originally Posted by Nicks Fan

What I always found interesting is that Eagles got that award around 99-2000 where they were honored for selling more albums then any othere artist (Including Elvis and The Beatles). I like the Eagles but I am amazed that given there small output of studio albums (7 in 40 odd years) and yet they sold so many. Also everytime they get back together it seems to be bigger then the last time. I like FM more simply because they have more albums and have taken risks in their music. FM unfortuantely will always be defined by Rumors even though they have made some worthy music since then.

I'm not sure what that award would've been for because they certainly didn't sell more than the Beatles or Elvis. But it doesn't hurt that their greatest hits album is tied for the best selling album in the US. It took Michael Jackson dying for Thriller to catch up because the Eagles had pulled ahead at one point. They really didn't get crazy sales until that greatest hits album in 1976 and later that year with Hotel California. Everything after that sold a ton...studio albums, live albums, greatest hits albums.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by MikeVielhaber

We're trying judge objectively where they would place. There's no handicaps or excuses because none of that matters for this discussion (and anyway I don't think Christine's presence would've added another 3 million in sales when it failed to get even 1 million without her). So basically we have to consider how the public in general would view them and their legacy among music fans and not simply our individual opinions on them. That's where all the hit singles, album sales and enduring popularity come into play. And it's all greater than FM by any objective measure.

Whether The Eagles released an album as adventurous or risky as Tusk is irrelevant. Tusk isn't the album FM is most known for anyway, Rumours is, and it sold fewer copies,by a large amount, in 1979 (and to date) at the height of their popularity and when people still bought albums than Long Road Out of Eden sold in 2007 in the digital age. And again I like Fleetwood Mac way more than the Eagles so I think FM is a much better band, but what the Eagles did was enormously popular and still is. Rumours has sold more than any Eagles studio album, but Hotel California comes close. Their greatest hits is neck and neck with Thriller for best selling album ever in the US.

To put a little perspective, FMs greatest hits is their second best selling album after Rumours. The difference in US sales between the Eagles greatest hits and FMs greatest hits is greater than total sales of Rumours. They also had 5 number 1 hits and another just missing at number 2. That is reality whether you like it or not. They both have had immense and enduring popularity and influence, but I'd say, looking at the evidence, the Eagles were/are at a higher level.

I don't think you read the initial question. It had nothing to do with sales. I love the Eagles but they do the same thing over and over again. Fleetwood Mac is more diverse. It's got 3 completely different songwriters which make the bands sound unique. And Fleetwood Mac has experimented musically. I don't think the Eagles are unique. They are the best of the country rock bands, which means a lot. However, there is nothing innovative about them.

[MikeVielhaber]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

I don't think you read the initial question. It had nothing to do with sales. I love the Eagles but they do the same thing over and over again. Fleetwood Mac is more diverse. It's got 3 completely different songwriters which make the bands sound unique. And Fleetwood Mac has experimented musically. I don't think the Eagles are unique. They are the best of the country rock bands, which means a lot. However, there is nothing innovative about them.

But it kinda does. All those things you mention are what you value. That's for you personally and it's subjective. As I mentioned, I agree with you. But if we're trying to objectively rank them we have to use some kind of objective measures. So hits, sales, enduring popularity, influence......those would definitely be things to consider.

[Nicks Fan]

I remembered what it was and I stand corrected. This is what was said. I watched an interview that former Eagles member Don Felder gave on the Jeff Probst talk show. He said something about at the millennium they were honored as having the biggest selling album of the 20th Century. I remember him saying something along the lines of when mentioning the Beatles and Elvis he "it was pretty cool to think we outsold them all".

Matt

[FuzzyPlum]

Moving my thread to this old one...


I'm sure this has been pondered often...

...where exactly do Fleetwood Mac sit in the all time list of biggest bands?
In terms of overall sales they are propped up significantly by Rumours compared to many other bands who have a number of mass-selling albums. That said, when I think of the 'biggest bands' I don't necessarily think in terms of overall sales and the number of hit singles- its also about their influence, notoriety etc.

For some reason, over the past ten years or so I think Fleetwood Mac have reached a status that's above where they would generally be placed solely on their body of work.

Excluding FM I'd suggest;

1) The Beatles
2) The Rolling Stones
3) Led Zeppelin
4) Pink Floyd
5) The Beach Boys
6) The Eagles
7) AC/DC
8) Queen
9) U2
10) Aerosmith

I'd be inclined to rank FM around The Eagles and AC/DC in terms of their overall status. Anyone agree/disagree?