The Ledge

Go Back   The Ledge > Main Forums > Post-Rumours
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Make the Ads Go Away! Click here.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 11-21-2010, 11:04 PM
vivfox's Avatar
vivfox vivfox is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,956
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjpdg View Post
With some different song choices and better promotion, "BTM" probably would have done better and been more widely accepted and if Stevie had not stuck around for "Time", then (again theoretically) perhaps that would have been the change over to Bekka joining the band or some other female personnel change.
She didn't.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 11-21-2010, 11:04 PM
iamnotafraid iamnotafraid is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjpdg View Post
With some different song choices "BTM" probably would have done better...
I'd substitute the words "lots of" for the word "some".
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 11-21-2010, 11:25 PM
David's Avatar
David David is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Posts: 14,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HejiraNYC View Post
Instead, Mick did the unthinkable... the almost unforgiveable... he tried to replace Stevie Nicks! He can deny it all he wants to, but it was no mere coincidence that he enlisted this new member who was a cute blonde chick singer who stood center stage. He failed to grasp then what he now knows the hard way- Stevie Nicks cannot be replaced. Period. Ask any Chiffonhead. There are just some things in the world that you just don't f*** with. You just don't f*** with Mama!
Actually, I think Stevie Nicks can easily be replaced. Replace her with Jazzmen Flowers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UV2ykrB65Vc
Jazzmen's energetic pastiche kicks Stevie's poor old ass into the nether reaches.

But I'm enjoying reading what you guys all have to say.
__________________

moviekinks.blogspot.com
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 11-22-2010, 05:25 AM
iamnotafraid iamnotafraid is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,850
Default

This review was tucked into the BTM CD booklet.
I believe it was from the magazine Stereo Review.
The initials P.P. were credited. So this is how it was
looked at back in 1990...

Fleetwood Mac: Behind The Mask.

Performance: Solid but cautious
Recording: Airy, well-ballanced


The professionalism with which "Behind The Mask" was
produced is sufficient evidence that Fleetwood Mac has
landed on it's feet after losing it's creative mainstay, Lindsey
Buckingham. It is at least as much of a group effort as anything
the notoriously unstable Mac has turned out to date. Behind The
Mask, however, some essential spark is missing. New guitarist Rick
Vito and Billy Burnette add fluid solos and lively chording, respectively,
but they're reined in by spotless, homogenized arrangements that leave
precious little room for expression. Even Stevie Nicks out-there personality
has been sanded down and subsumed into a conservative, democratic mix.

After many years of willful experimentation from Buckingham, the suddenly
rudderless band has played it safe and paddled closer to shore. The air of
caution is compounded by an aura of melancholy that invades nearly every
song, Christine McVie's "Skies The Limit", the opening cut, being a notable
exception. It's as invigorating as a spring breeze, featuring gorgeous, billowy
group vocals and some lovely guitar work from Vito. But this exuberant
outburst quickly yields to songs of an autumnal cast-all of them attractive,
to be sure, if somewhat muted in temperment. McVie, singing of unfulfilled
desire and wary attraction, provides the most memorable songs (Do You
Know and Save Me) and seems to have the surest handle on a consistent
direction for the band. By no means a bad album, "Behind The Mask" is
instead a tentative and probably transitional one: smooth on the outside,
uncertain on the inside.

P.P.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 11-22-2010, 04:21 PM
iamnotafraid iamnotafraid is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,850
Default

Still torturing myself...

There is one hot picture of Bekka in
the Time CD booklet. I don't
remember seeing that black and white
photo before.

I'd forgot that Time was released
just two years before The Dance.
We are lucky that MTV wanted anything
to do with the Mac after Time.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 11-23-2010, 07:27 AM
iamnotafraid iamnotafraid is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,850
Default

I've been searching for professional reviews concerning Time,
anyone care to post them. Doesn't have to agree with my feelings
on the album, I'm just curious to read them. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 11-23-2010, 08:53 AM
HejiraNYC's Avatar
HejiraNYC HejiraNYC is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,834
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iamnotafraid View Post
I've been searching for professional reviews concerning Time,
anyone care to post them. Doesn't have to agree with my feelings
on the album, I'm just curious to read them. Thanks.
I think Amazon's editorial review sums it up rather nicely:

Quote:
The temptation is to compare this version of Fleetwood Mac with the multiplatinum quintet that peaked in the '70s and then made a triumphant return in 1997. But there've been some half dozen versions of Mac over the last 28 years, some significantly more memorable than others. This 1995 lineup isn't likely to make anyone forget Rumours. Three stalwart members--Mick Fleetwood, John McVie, and Christine McVie--are back, joined by 10-year Mac vet Billy Burnette and short-term members Bekka Bramlett (the daughter of first generation Mac contemporaries Delaney and Bonnie Bramlett) and journeyman rocker Dave Mason. The spotlight inevitably shines brightest upon McVie, who responds with four songs that are never less, or more, than pleasant. For their part, Burnette, Bramlett, and Mason check in with mostly nondescript contributions. --Steven Stolder
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 11-23-2010, 08:59 AM
holidayroad's Avatar
holidayroad holidayroad is offline
Addicted Ledgie
Supporting Ledgie
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Down Endless Street
Posts: 5,140
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacShadowsBall View Post

Just for fun, what do you guys think Fleetwood Mac should have done in '87 when Lindsey left abruptly? I believe FM were obligated to tour - should they had canceled to tour and disbanded?
At the time it happened, I guess I felt they did what they had to do when they brought on Billy and Rick. Now, I think they should have brought in a 'background' guitar player and let Christine and Stevie front the band. (No offense to Billy Burnette, I really like his music!)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 11-23-2010, 06:59 PM
iamnotafraid iamnotafraid is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,850
Default

Thanks HejiraNYC.

I'm still searching for more reviews on TIME.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 11-23-2010, 09:23 PM
SteveMacD's Avatar
SteveMacD SteveMacD is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Buckeye State
Posts: 8,719
Default

Warning, it's long, but worth it:


“Time” didn’t kill Fleetwood Mac. It was merely one more step in what has really been a slow, agonizing death that's been going on for 30 years now.

As a (creative) viable entity, Fleetwood Mac really died in 1980, after the “Tusk” tour. After that, it became something the principle members have done between solo albums.

The subsequent albums have either been bland, sterile AOR efforts (Mirage, BTM, Time), or failed over-the-top attempts at trying to reinvent/modernize the band’s sound (Tango, SYW).

That the band has only recorded five albums in 30 years should really be the only thing one needs to understand Fleetwood Mac's post-Tusk relevancy (or lack thereof). To put it another way, I’ve been to three studio sessions where Robert Pollard recorded two solo albums (where he plays guitar and sings) and one collaboration (where he overdubs vocals to music that his collaborator sends him), played in a one-off solo Robert Pollard show, AND was a roadie for Robert Pollard & co. for the Guided by Voices 20 city reunion tour. It CAN be done, folks.

But, if we want to nitpick...

I think the image of Fleetwood Mac changed too drastically in 1987. “Tango” was a huge hit because the band had gone away for five years. That the band was back was good enough. The actual quality of the album (not bad, but it sounded dated not too long after its release) really didn’t matter. They were back.

However, Stevie’s transformation was fairly drastic. She went from being a slender bombshell with a decent range to looking bloated and had a much more limited range.

Then Lindsey quit. Where the band ultimately failed, would continue to fail, and is still failing, is that instead of distancing itself from “the Big Mac”, it has tried (in vein) to recapture that, even while paying lip service to NOT doing that. IMO, if bringing Dave Mason was in the cards, 1987 would’ve been the time to do it, and do it as a five piece. What made Mason a liability in 1994/95 (namely that he was used to being a band leader) is exactly what the band needed in 1987. The fact that he had somewhat of a name still (though admittedly not much of one by that point) would’ve given the band more freedom to move away from “the Big Mac” image. As it is, Billy and Rick were good additions at the time, and were able to pull off the tour. Billy sounded great with Stevie and Christine, and Rick was able to bring back the blues element that really left the band (at least in terms of the shows) sometime in 1975. The problem is that they tried to make Billy look like Lindsey in the beginning. His clothes were similar, his hair was similar, and he played a white Les Paul Custom.

After the tour, the band releases a Greatest Hits record, which should be the first clue that the band thinks it’s probably over, and that anything that comes after will be okay, but probably not great. It’s the white flag. It’s their signal that it’s over.

Stevie Nicks released OSOTM, which only further hurt Fleetwood Mac’s image. The Klonopin was starting to take its toll. Now Stevie looked old and tired, and had almost no range. The songs were bland AOR, complete with Kenny G. She looked like a has-been by that point.

BTM was a bland, safe effort. Stevie’s contributions were unremarkable (as in she used her best material at that time on her solo album...INCLUDING A BLUES SONG...gee, three British blues legends and a brilliant blues guitarist in Fleetwood Mac, and she does her blues song ON A SOLO ALBUM...WTF???). Christine was typical Christine: safe, reassuring, sometimes bland, sometimes dark and great pop songs. Billy and Rick had great contributions, but their best material was left off the record for some inexplicable reason. The production was horrid.

After the tour, the band basically splits up. Rick quits and puts out a record. Stevie quits, releases a solo Greatest Hits record (her white flag?) and starts talking about how the band was so mean to her, she was always scared. Mick released a tell-all that really didn’t shed too much new information, and exaggerated some events. John releases a solo album that sounded close to a typical AOR Fleetwood Mac album. The Zoo releases a record that introduced Bekka Bramlett to Fleetwood Mac fans, but it was over-the-top metal-meets-Southern-rock. And almost nobody knew about any of this.

Lindsey Buckingham returns. Five years after quitting the band, the wonderboy returns with the critically acclaimed OOTC. He did a few videos, did the TV circuit, opened for Tina Turner, and sold about as many copies that the Mac would a few years later with their big “flop”. Everybody else was smelling like teen spirit. ALL RELEVANCY FOR FLEETWOOD MAC WAS GONE BY THIS POINT. But, it still got a little worse...

Bill Clinton: Uh oh, a Fleetwood Mac hit is now officially the theme song for the first baby boomer president. Great that it’s the same year as the box set (that 15 people bought), but now it’s forever going to be associated with a narcissism that can only be associated by baby boomer who ran for president. (Although, appropriate, considering how narcissistic most of the band comes off in interviews.) Hey, he got the band back together, but holy crap, Stevie Nicks looked like Mary Travers and the band sounded awful. A few weeks later, Mick, the McVies, Billy and Rick played the Super Bowl pre-game, and three people watched. Billy quit the band shortly thereafter and did a country album that five people bought.

But, be damned, Mick and the McVies decided to carry on. Time to reinvent the band. First off, bring in Bekka. She’s young, fresh, and doesn’t really sound like Stevie. And, let’s bring in Dave Mason while we’re at it. It’s not like he has anything going on right now. Hey, he worked with her parents. We’ll turn Fleetwood Mac into Delaney & Bonnie The Next Generation! Around this time, Stevie releases a record that got very little acclaim (even she hated it), though to be fair, was the best selling record of this period (1991-1996). Of course, you could add up all the solo sales and still come up significantly short of BTM. Her tour was not a success. Billy came back (hey, Delaney Bramlett was a good friend of his), and everybody but Christine went on the road opening for CSN. (Upcoming Stevie Nicks show announcement=awkward!)

The next year, they tour as part of an oldies package. The line was that they didn’t have the new record out, yet, and wanted to get some playing chops for when it was released. Apparently Mick’s only knowledge of D&B was the live album they did with Clapton, because who would’ve guessed Bekka and Billy wanted to do country? And, who would’ve guessed that Mason, who hadn’t released a record since 1987, wouldn’t have great songs? Christine was her usual, but Fleetwood Mac AS A WHOLE (the “Time” incarnation, Lindsey, and Stevie) were simply irrelevant. By the time it was released, Christine was out, Bekka and Billy had extracurricular plans to make a country album, Mason wasn’t really working out, and Lindsey was wanting to make a record with Mick. Gee, why’s THAT??? The image had taken a beating. The band failed AS A WHOLE to find ways to make their image and their sound relevant. Instead of reinventing themselves and take risks, they played it safe and followed the money. And, the members made the band a secondary priority.

The ONLY great thing about this period is the victorious return of Peter Green.

Without the support of Warner Bros. or Viacom, the Big Mac could’ve done an album, and the results would NOT have been much different than BTM or SYW. But both saw a way of making the Mac’s reunion another “Hell Freezes Over” to the point where the formula was exactly the same. {sarcasm} Yay! Fleetwood Mac officially starts taking cues from the Eagles. Color me excited. {/sarcasm} I mean, yeah, it’s good to see they’re all alive and well, and still have chops (John McVie alone is worth the concert ticket), but if it’s gonna be these five, please ONLY be these five. I don’t want a bunch of back up singers, an extra guitarist, an extra multi-instrumentalist, and an extra percussionist, I WANT FLEETWOOD MAC, and ONLY Fleetwood Mac. But, hey, it got them into the Hall of Fame.

After a couple of Stevie solo tours, the Mac came back, sans Christine, and released the WAYYY too overly ambitious SYW. There’s a pretty good record in there, but too much of it sounds like solo material. If the band learned nothing else from Peter Green, LESS IS MORE! And then to do a tour where, save for a handful of shows, the band plays the exact same set, same order and all, night after night, really tells me the band really just gave up. In a surprise move, Christine releases a new record, which sounds like a typical Christine record. Lindsey’s done a couple of albums since, and both he and Stevie have new ones coming.

And, other than an official sell-out tour, that’s where we leave Fleetwood Mac.

Hey, if a band isn’t even relevant to the members of the band, why should it be to anybody else?
__________________
On and on it will always be, the rhythm, rhyme, and harmony.



THE Stephen Hopkins

Last edited by SteveMacD; 11-23-2010 at 10:10 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 11-23-2010, 10:16 PM
MacShadowsBall MacShadowsBall is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 2,792
Default

SteveMacD, I nominate your post "Post of the Year"!

It made a lot of sense about whole "slow death". I think part of the problem was that there were too many "new" members, i.e. Billy, Rick, Dave, Bekka, and too many members leaving or wanting to leave, i.e. Lindsey, Christine, Rick, and Stevie.

Does anyone know why Rick left after the Behind the Mask tour? Was it his choice or was the choice made for him?

Personally if feel FM should have went to a more hard rock style instead of the country/rockabilly route they went. Not neccessarily hard, hard rock/heavy metal, but more a rock and roll band and less of a soft rock/pop/country band.

Lastly, Billy should have been more of the focus during the Time era. Was Dave Mason really even neccessary?
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 11-23-2010, 10:47 PM
SteveMacD's Avatar
SteveMacD SteveMacD is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Buckeye State
Posts: 8,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacShadowsBall View Post
Does anyone know why Rick left after the Behind the Mask tour? Was it his choice or was the choice made for him?
It was on his own. He's never really said why, as he's a very private person, but I suspect it had something to do with that Mick-Stevie feud. I mean, his record featured Stevie, was on Modern, and he toured with her a few years later. Water under the bridge, now.

Quote:
Personally if feel FM should have went to a more hard rock style instead of the country/rockabilly route they went. Not neccessarily hard, hard rock/heavy metal, but more a rock and roll band and less of a soft rock/pop/country band.
Ironically, Billy Burnette was the one who gave the band it's hardest rocking song of that time (In The Back Of My Mind).

IMO, with alt.country gaining popularity with bands like Uncle Tupelo, I think Fleetwood Mac should've maybe found a way to use the talents of Bramlett and Burnette to go that direction. In some ways, I wish they would've continued after "Time" with Bekka and Billy. Chris was out by then. I would've parted ways with Mason, and brought in Mick Taylor, who helped the Stones create that sound that blended country, blues, and pop. (Plus, it would've given them an excuse to have Bekka and Billy do "Gimme Shelter", and you know that would've rocked.) I doubt it would've been all that commercially successful, but there would've been a market for it, and I think there would've been some critical acclaim for reinventing themselves.

Quote:
Lastly, Billy should have been more of the focus during the Time era. Was Dave Mason really even neccessary?
Billy quit in 1993 to focus on his solo and acting careers. The band hired Dave Mason in the interim. Billy rejoined prior to the band hitting the road. He has stated that his limited role was mainly due to coming into the sessions late.

(There has been some dispute about Christine's involvement. All I know is that every interview the band did mentioned her still being in the band, and a few pictures that have surfaced showing Christine playing in a practice space with Mick, John, Bekka, and Dave prior to Billy coming back.)


NOTE: Two things I forgot to mention in my slow death of Fleetwood Mac's image were the two horrid videos put out around "Tango," namely "Red Rocks" and "Tango In The Night." Close-ups that were clearly not the same footage as the show? Lame.
__________________
On and on it will always be, the rhythm, rhyme, and harmony.



THE Stephen Hopkins
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 11-24-2010, 01:33 AM
iamnotafraid iamnotafraid is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,850
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacShadowsBall View Post
SteveMacD, I nominate your post "Post of the Year"!
SteveMacD I second this wholeheartedly.

I sense you like Billy and Rick better than I.

CSN = Crosby Stills and Nash (my only guess)?
If so, I didn't know they opened for them. It's
sad they would open for anyone.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 11-24-2010, 02:08 AM
SteveMacD's Avatar
SteveMacD SteveMacD is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Buckeye State
Posts: 8,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iamnotafraid View Post
SteveMacD I second this wholeheartedly.

I sense you like Billy and Rick better than I.

CSN = Crosby Stills and Nash (my only guess)?
If so, I didn't know they opened for them. It's
sad they would open for anyone.
I do like Billy and Rick. I don't think they, or Bekka, were allowed the same creative freedoms that were afforded to Danny Kirwan, Christine McVie, Bob Welch, Stevie Nicks, and Lindsey Buckingham. Dave Mason isn't the most creative force, but he does have an established career, so he was allowed to maintain his individuality.

As for opening for CSN, that made total sense. They were not yet ready to be the headliner (same went for Lindsey a year earlier), but it was a good bill to build on the band's future. Dave is heavily associated with CSN, including their keyboardist Mike Finnigan, who was in the Dave Mason Band. Bekka's mom also had ties, singing with Stills and acting opposite of Crosby on "Roseanne". Friendly crowd. It's not sad. It's the reality of rebuilding a brand. (Now, the oldies tour was a huge mistake.)
__________________
On and on it will always be, the rhythm, rhyme, and harmony.



THE Stephen Hopkins

Last edited by SteveMacD; 11-24-2010 at 02:10 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 11-24-2010, 04:42 AM
DavidMn DavidMn is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Minneapolis Minnesota
Posts: 13,872
Default

I always find these discussions rather amusing. I have been a fan for 33 years now since the age of 6. I prefer the era of Stevie and Lindsey. That is my personal opinion. I dont care for Time at all, but again thats just personal taste. I think some of this is rooted in fans trying to one up each other by saying this or that era is better. WHO CARES!!!!! Just enjoy whichever style or era of the band you choose to and let it be at that.
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 On

Forum Jump


Christine Mcvie (reissue) by Christine McVie (CD, 1997) 1984 Solo Album picture

Christine Mcvie (reissue) by Christine McVie (CD, 1997) 1984 Solo Album

$6.98



Lindsey Buckingham Christine McV... - Lindsey Buckingham Christine McVie CD XLVG picture

Lindsey Buckingham Christine McV... - Lindsey Buckingham Christine McVie CD XLVG

$7.94



Christine McVie - Christine Mcvie [New CD] picture

Christine McVie - Christine Mcvie [New CD]

$16.44



Christine Mcvie Old Photo Singer Music Band Performer 4 picture

Christine Mcvie Old Photo Singer Music Band Performer 4

$5.87



Christine McVie Self Titled CD of FLEETWOOD MAC picture

Christine McVie Self Titled CD of FLEETWOOD MAC

$4.99




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved