After May 27th 2015 - I'm never going to try and see this band again.

[ChickenStu]

I saw them in 2013 at the 02 - really enjoyed the gig and was satisfied that I had achieved something. Christine McVie returned for one song and for a brief few minutes I saw the classic Rumours lineup. I walked out of there very, very happy. Yeah, cause of McVie's absence for the most part there where some songs I love that they didn't play (Everywhere for example)... but I thought I shouldn't be churlish and should just be happy with my lot.

Not long after seeing that gig I heard Christine McVie had rejoined the band permanently and that they would be doing a new, huge historic tour on the back of this. Even though I loved seeing the concert I did and had a great time, I suddenly became dissatisfied with my experience.

By some stroke of luck - I'll be seeing them AGAIN - with McVie back full time in May of next year.

I've decided that will be the last ever time. Looking at the setlist for the new concerts it seems that they will be doing some of the songs I missed in 2013 and I'm very excited about it.

Looking into the future - I think there will be another big tour in 2016/2017 where new tracks from the forthcoming album will be showcased. You can count me out on that one. I personally believe that you don't go and see a band like Fleetwood Mac to hear NEW tracks, you go to hear the OLD ones. Well, I do anyway.

I'm pretty sure it will be a great night in May but it feels like more of a "taking care of unfinished business" thing for me. There won't be a third time.

Anyone here share a similar view?

[Neil72uk]

In a word...'No'. :D

I appreciate where you're coming from but I'm just too damn stubborn for my own good. You never know what will happen in the future so I just take the opportunity when it presents itself.

[The dance]

If that new album is a good one and you like the music than why not go to a new tour. Than you can hear some new songs and the old hits again... Why not?? These day's the artists seems to go on forever and some off them being in their 70's are still performing (Paul Simon, Art Garfunkel, Neil Diamond, Roger Waters to name a few). I think this band will go on for some more years if everybody stays on board!

[Ali]

As long as CMV is around, I will keep going. If she leaves again, I'd probably stop. I've seen enough of the Lindsey/Stevie show that I don't need to see it again.

[Ulpian]

I saw them in 2013 at the 02 - really enjoyed the gig and was satisfied that I had achieved something. Christine McVie returned for one song and for a brief few minutes I saw the classic Rumours lineup. I walked out of there very, very happy. Yeah, cause of McVie's absence for the most part there where some songs I love that they didn't play (Everywhere for example)... but I thought I shouldn't be churlish and should just be happy with my lot.

Not long after seeing that gig I heard Christine McVie had rejoined the band permanently and that they would be doing a new, huge historic tour on the back of this. Even though I loved seeing the concert I did and had a great time, I suddenly became dissatisfied with my experience.

By some stroke of luck - I'll be seeing them AGAIN - with McVie back full time in May of next year.

I've decided that will be the last ever time. Looking at the setlist for the new concerts it seems that they will be doing some of the songs I missed in 2013 and I'm very excited about it.

Looking into the future - I think there will be another big tour in 2016/2017 where new tracks from the forthcoming album will be showcased. You can count me out on that one. I personally believe that you don't go and see a band like Fleetwood Mac to hear NEW tracks, you go to hear the OLD ones. Well, I do anyway.

I'm pretty sure it will be a great night in May but it feels like more of a "taking care of unfinished business" thing for me. There won't be a third time.

Anyone here share a similar view?

You and I are on the same plane.

I saw them in 2003, 2009 and 2013 at the O2 with Christine. That last night I felt as though I couldn't be happier. Now the edge is slightly taken off that special night in London, because of this new tour. However, I got tickets to see them at Manchester, and I'll hear all the Christine songs I wanted (even Little Lies!). It was a struggle to get the tickets and they weren't cheap; I'm taking my old roommate who first really got me into FM nearly 20 years ago. I'm tempted, too, to leave things there.

[Angie1980]

I might have a different view since I am a late bloomer fan....I wasn't even born during the Rumours era and I hit my 30's before REALLY becoming a fan. I had known and listened to both Fleetwood mac and Stevie Nicks before I simply wasn't that big of a fan.

Anyhow....I got to see them in Stockholm in October 2013 and that was an amazing experience. For several days afterwards I was walking around with this bittersweet feeling. The excitement of having attended the show and that sad feeling....almost a feeling of loss....due to the fact that they are not getting any older and it might as well could have been their last tour. So at the same time as I was so thrilled about having had the opportunity to see them live (at 5th row) I was also jealous of all the fans that had had the chance of being a part of music releases, several tours, Stevie releasing solo work.....all those things that I thought I would never get to experience as a fan.

So I promised myself that I would try to go to as many shows as possible if they ever did tour again and I am sticking to that promise!

[louielouie2000]

I've held off going to see the Mac for 12 years now. Unlike you, though I AM waiting for a new album. I'm not interested in hearing the same old hits. That's what the radio & my music collection is for. I need freshness in the setlist to make me ever care to empty my pockets for this band again. Even significantly mixing up the set with lesser known album tracks & b-sides would do the trick for me. I don't even like hearing songs such as Don't Stop, Go Your Own Way, and Rhiannon on the radio anymore... they're just so tired. Why would I pay $200+ to hear them performed increasingly poorly live? :sorry:

[ChickenStu]

Oh I'm sure I will like the new album!

Another thing I should have mentioned is that getting to a concert (I'm speaking for me) is a very difficult trick to pull off successfully. Both times I've managed to secure tickets to Fleetwood Mac have not been easy tasks at all. They're not cheap - and the venue isn't exactly just "up the road" from where I live.

If I DID see the band a third time - IF - then it would have to be because someone else got the tickets and offered me one. I feel the stress of making attendance to a concert happen is not worth usually going through twice for the same artist. Like I said, the only reason I've made this effort with the Mac is because Christine McVie is back. If it was the same line up as last time I wouldn't have done it.

Generally speaking if I'm going to go through it again I would rather see someone I've not seen before. The next band I want to see is Toto, and I wouldn't mind seeing Foo Fighters or Faith No More either.

Stress, inconvenience and money are all major factions in this kind of decision making!

[olive]

I've held off going to see the Mac for 12 years now. Unlike you, though I AM waiting for a new album. I'm not interested in hearing the same old hits. That's what the radio & my music collection is for. I need freshness in the setlist to make me ever care to empty my pockets for this band again. Even significantly mixing up the set with lesser known album tracks & b-sides would do the trick for me. I don't even like hearing songs such as Don't Stop, Go Your Own Way, and Rhiannon on the radio anymore... they're just so tired. Why would I pay $200+ to hear them performed increasingly poorly live? :sorry:

You are not alone !

[Macfanforever]

I must be a outcast here.

Stevie that brought me to FM.I will go and see FM in whatever carnation they will be until I die.


I would not go overboard and condemn any band or artist I enjoy because they dont record new tunes or tour anymore.

Thats how I feel about it.

[kak125]

I must be a outcast here.

Stevie that brought me to FM.I will go and see FM in whatever carnation they will be until I die.


I would not go overboard and condemn any band or artist I enjoy because they dont record new tunes or tour anymore.

Thats how I feel about it.

I agree! I will always go see them whenever I can they are so worth it me! Of course I want a new album but if they dont make another one then oh well. Just the fact that they are in their 60's and 70's and are still touring is so amazing to me. I have no complaints at all. I just love their music so much.

[FuzzyPlum]

(as with most people on here, I'm sure) Fleetwood Mac are an addiction. The next hit might not be as good as the last but I'm always going to be back for more, no matter what. Would prefer a fresher set list- either more deep cuts or new songs but if not, that's okay.

[Macfanforever]

I agree! I will always go see them whenever I can they are so worth it me! Of course I want a new album but if they dont make another one then oh well. Just the fact that they are in their 60's and 70's and are still touring is so amazing to me. I have no complaints at all. I just love their music so much.

I agree.We are soooooo lucky they are still touring.Now even Chris is back in the picture.I'm making up for lost time when I missed out of the 1970's and early 1980's tours.

I know they cant tour forever but I soak every show in.

[Macfanforever]

I minds as will say I quit going to country concerts.The new country artists and their so called country music does not appeal to me but I'll go to any classic country artists or band concerts if they come my way.

Emmylou Harris,Dolly Parton and Loretta Lynn to name a few from a list of many.

I will continue to go see FM even if they do rap .:shocked:.LOL...............

[PenguinHead]

The prospect of a new Fleetwood Mac album seems to be in jeopardy. Aside from this ever expanding and never ending tour of greed, Stevie's ambivalence is a stunning insult to the band and fans. And time, inevitably, is not on their side.

Even if they manage to make and tour with a new album, the set list won't change much. They are so tentative with new material; maybe four new songs will be performed, and at least one will be dropped before the tour ends. I have hard time being at peace with on how restrictive, rote, stagnant and uninspired their set lists have become, even though they have surprised us with some minor alterations.

Other bands I love create unique set lists for each of their tours, featuring deep cuts, a healthy amount of new material, and a handful of their hits.
Fleetwood Mac is just doesn't have that kind of nimbleness. Because they have three singer/songwriters, they have to achieve a balance between them. Aside from that, they have a lot of hits and standards they feel they required to play. This mindset leaves little wiggle room. It's like they are performing the same play every time they tour, with very minor scene and script changes. When Stevie proclaims the set list is set in stone, she's stating the obvious par for course.

Look at a band like Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. They have a lot of signature hits, but they don't glut their sets with the same songs in the same sequence over and over. They'll play inspired covers, deep tracks, and some select hit songs. No one leaves their shows bitching about the set. "I paid a lot of money and they didn't play the songs I wanted to hear! No "Free Fall" I'm so pissed off." Their fans come for a show, not a greatest hits album.

I realize this is a somewhat unfair comparison; group dynamics and demographics vary vastly among bands and their fans.

[Macfanforever]

The prospect of a new Fleetwood Mac seems to be in jeopardy. Aside from this ever expanding and never ending tour of greed, Stevie's ambivalence is a stunning insult to the band and fans. And time, inevitably, is not on their side.

Even if they manage to make and tour with a new album, the set list won't change much. They are so tentative with new material; maybe four new songs will be performed, and at least one will be dropped before the tour ends.

I'll save my rant on how restrictive, rote, stagnant and uninspired their set lists. Other bands I love create unique set lists for each of their tours, featuring deep cuts, a healthy amount of new material, and a handful of their hits.

Fleetwood Mac is just doesn't have that kind of nimbleness. Because they have three singer/songwriters, they have to achieve a balance between them. Aside from that, they have a lot of hits and standards they feel they required to play. This mindset leaves little wiggle room. It's like they are performing the same play every time they tour, with very minor changes to the scenes.

Look at a band like Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. They have a lot of signature hits, but they don't glut their sets with the same songs in the same sequence over and over. They'll play inspired covers, deep tracks, and some select hit songs. No one leaves their shows bitching about the set. "I paid a lot of money and they didn't play the songs I wanted to hear! No "Free Fall" I'm so pissed off."

I realize this is a somewhat unfair comparison, because dynamics vary vastly among bands and their fans.

I never could understand why they cant mix up the setlist.As long as the band and sound and lighting crew are on the same page and knows what tune is next and they should be OK.

As long as Songbird ends the show .I dont see whats the big issue.

I must of missed the interview of Stevie or anybody else in the band explained why they dont change the order of the setlist every night or every week.

I agree and add my gripes and rants to the same order stale setlist.

I've been saying this for years .Whats the excuse for not changing it.

This is a good question for Mick at his meet and greets.
Or maybe he already answered it already.I dont know.

Knock on "my head" wood.The tunes are still in tacked and no dropsy's yet.As far as I know.

[Dragonfly]

I missed the 2009/2013 tours so really wanted to go to one this time around as there are a few songs I've never seen performed live, including Christine's songs obviously.


I'll keep looking/saving and hope I can still make it, but I also think it will be the last time if I do go. I don't think they'll tour Europe again anyway, I'm guessing this is the last time we'll see a world tour (just a gut feeling).

[Dreamz19]

Can't say that I do. This tour was my first time seeing the Mac, but I would love to hear new songs or album tracks. I wish I could have went to the SYW tour to hear some of the newer songs.

[PenguinHead]

I agree and add my gripes and rants to the same order stale setlist.

I've been saying this for years .Whats the excuse for not changing it.

This is a good question for Mick at his meet and greets.



Asking that to Mick would be a waste of a question. Since he doesn't write or sing the songs, that would be a better question for Stevie or Lindsey, as they likely decide what they want to perform. Mick would answer in a very diplomatic generic way.

At this point in their history, I guess we should just except the status quo. Who knows what factors determine their set lists. Is it just easier for them to go through the motions with their most familiar live material? Do they feel a responsibility to placate the masses with the well-known songs overrules trying any new songs for fear it alienate their lightweight fans? All of their songs were new at one point in time; aside the from the high profile radio hits, album tracks become familiar staples by performing them - I Know I'm Not Wrong is a good example of that.

However, as artists, I find it peculiar they take such little stock in their body of never-performed or under-performed work --with very little interest to dust off songs worthy of performing, if only just to keep it fresh and challenging? Most of their albums sold in huge numbers; it's not as if we haven't heard those songs. I give them credit for some of the songs they surprisingly brought to life like Storms and Beautiful Child. But it looks like the Say You Will album has been entirely abandoned. Steal Your Heart Away would have been a good choice. Didn't Christine sing on it?

[secondhandchain]

Was going to see them at the forum in LA but can't do it now. I know Stevie and Christine both left the band, but time is of the essence. Stevie begged for Christine to be back. We all thought that would be the game changer. So we all bought our tickets as Stevie stayed mum. Now that all the tickets are purchased she can finally say she's not recording. NOT going to the show because I couldn't stomach applauding for Stevie right now.

[nicepace]

I understand Fleetwood Mac's reasons for playing the same show night after night. There's so much production involved (pre-recorded tracks, lighting, canned banter etc.). I don't particularly like it, but nobody asked me.

What I wish they would do is prepare two shows instead of just one. Each show would consist of 25 songs and begin with "The Chain" and end with "Songbird." However, the intermediate 23 songs would be entirely different. One night we'd get "Little Lies." The next night we'd get "Everywhere." One night "Sisters of the Moon." The next, "Seven Wonders." You get the picture.

There'd be room for some deep cuts, and maybe a solo track or two, if the heaviest hits were spaced out this way, too.

They'd be going on stage and someone would ask: "Which show tonight?" Mick would say: "The B show!"

And wouldn't it be more interesting for the musicians, too? They must get really bored playing the same show night after night.

[DauphineMarie]

Was going to see them at the forum in LA but can't do it now. I know Stevie and Christine both left the band, but time is of the essence. Stevie begged for Christine to be back. We all thought that would be the game changer. So we all bought our tickets as Stevie stayed mum. Now that all the tickets are purchased she can finally say she's not recording. NOT going to the show because I couldn't stomach applauding for Stevie right now.

There's not still not any sufficient evidence she won't record another album, and secondly, we don't know Stevie's intentions, but considering how much of her life she's dedicated to FM, she wouldn't abandon them as easily as you'd think.

Other than that, I wish they would change the setlist considerably. WHY couldn't they add some Tusk tracks.. I know they would be popular if they wanted them to be popular.

[ChickenStu]

All this criticism of the guys playing the same setlist every night is lost on me. I'm only going to one of the gigs.

I'd actually be kind of pissed off if they did change the setlist night by night - cause I'm the kind of guy who really hates feeling like I've missed something - which is the precise reason I'm seeing them a second time anyway!

Anyway. As I said in the title of this thread, I'm never going to "TRY" and see this band again. But if someday, a friend of mine gets tickets and offers me one... who knows? I'll tell that friend I've already seen them twice and to try and ask all their other friends who might want to go first, but if they get no bites then yeah, I'd probably take the ticket.

[SteveMacD]

And wouldn't it be more interesting for the musicians, too? They must get really bored playing the same show night after night.
My experience of being on a tour is that the show is just another part of the day. Granted, the tours I've been on are small beer by comparison, but there are so many other things going on during the day, like traveling, being on the phone for interviews, checking into hotels, soundchecks, finding a place for dinner, getting mentally prepared to play a show, actually getting ready (i.e. a shower and getting into stage clothes), figuring out if there are guests for the guest list, getting to the venue, discussing what they need to pay close attention to, last minute preparations, and finally the show.

If anything, playing the same setlist night after night is one less thing they have to think about. Going on autopilot when you're feeling half-fried from just being on the road can be a blessing, especially with the level of machinery involved in putting on a Fleetwood Mac show.

[elle]

I understand Fleetwood Mac's reasons for playing the same show night after night. There's so much production involved (pre-recorded tracks, lighting, canned banter etc.). I don't particularly like it, but nobody asked me.

What I wish they would do is prepare two shows instead of just one. Each show would consist of 25 songs and begin with "The Chain" and end with "Songbird." However, the intermediate 23 songs would be entirely different. One night we'd get "Little Lies." The next night we'd get "Everywhere." One night "Sisters of the Moon." The next, "Seven Wonders." You get the picture.

There'd be room for some deep cuts, and maybe a solo track or two, if the heaviest hits were spaced out this way, too.

They'd be going on stage and someone would ask: "Which show tonight?" Mick would say: "The B show!"

And wouldn't it be more interesting for the musicians, too? They must get really bored playing the same show night after night.

exactly, to almost every word of this!

and if not 2 completely different shows (like many bands their age and status are doing, Steely Dan to name one), then at least 3-6 extra songs like majority of other bands are doing, and that they can rehearse upfront and rotate from show to show.

i was told that they don't change up the setlist because of band politics, i.e., 3 different songwriters/singers, and each having to have the same number of songs represented, i guess with the same weight, etc. so that once they settle on which songs, the setlist is pretty much set in stone. i don't completely buy it, although it is obvious there is a lot of "band politics" that other bands who maybe have the same songwriter for everything, as well as the same main singer, would not have to deal with. but then, if they rehearse 1 (or 2!) songs extra from each of the songwriters, they should still be able to arrive at that balance. they know many people follow them around.

[WayOfTheDragon]

However, as artists, I find it peculiar they take such little stock in their body of never-performed or under-performed work --with very little interest to dust off songs worthy of performing, if only just to keep it fresh and challenging? Most of their albums sold in huge numbers; it's not as if we haven't heard those songs. I give them credit for some of the songs they surprisingly brought to life like Storms and Beautiful Child. But it looks like the Say You Will album has been entirely abandoned. Steal Your Heart Away would have been a good choice. Didn't Christine sing on it?

I was listening to a recent podcast interview with Lindsey here (http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/the-andy-greenwald-podcast-lindsey-buckingham). When the interviewer mentions Bleed To Love Her, Lindsey says: "It's funny you mention Bleed To Love Her, I love that and I sit around at soundcheck and play that, and I'm hoping someone will say, 'Hey, let's do that in the set!'" What struck me about the comment was that he was hoping others in the band would suggest the song to him. I always assumed that he could just pick whichever 7 songs he wanted to play for each tour. In the recent Stevie interview, where there is a question about whether "Lady" would ever be played in a Fleetwood Mac show, she said something about how she gave Christine an ipod with the song on it, but isn't sure if Christine listened to it. I get the impression that they hope that other band members will suggest that they put these songs in the set, but they don't want to bring it up themselves, which could be another reason why the status quo is maintained in their set lists.

[AliceLover]

They could be playing Mary Had A Little Lamb, 25 times in a row, and I would still go.

[michelej1]

I was listening to a recent podcast interview with Lindsey here (http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/the-andy-greenwald-podcast-lindsey-buckingham). When the interviewer mentions Bleed To Love Her, Lindsey says: "It's funny you mention Bleed To Love Her, I love that and I sit around at soundcheck and play that, and I'm hoping someone will say, 'Hey, let's do that in the set!'"

What's hilarious to me is imagining him sitting there ardent and focused trying to play it so passionately that everyone will be moved and a light bulb will go off in the heads of the others. Meanwhile, they're all oblivious to his intention, hardly listening and wondering where they're going to go for lunch.

That said, I guess he could get BTLH in the setlist if he really wanted it there. I mean, I'm so sure for the SYW tour no one was listening to him play Red Rover during the sound check and saying, "oh Lindsey, you simply must play that live." Michele

[LesPaulPlayer91]

However, as artists, I find it peculiar they take such little stock in their body of never-performed or under-performed work --with very little interest to dust off songs worthy of performing, if only just to keep it fresh and challenging? Most of their albums sold in huge numbers; it's not as if we haven't heard those songs. I give them credit for some of the songs they surprisingly brought to life like Storms and Beautiful Child. But it looks like the Say You Will album has been entirely abandoned. Steal Your Heart Away would have been a good choice. Didn't Christine sing on it?

Agree re Say You Will, obviously Christine wasn't really on it in a big way but I think it's a really great record and it's a shame they're not playing anything off it. Personally, I think adding Christine into some of those songs live would be great (but maybe that's just me...).

It would be cool if there were some setlist alterations but I'm pretty happy with the set they've been playing. Would be great if they dusted off Storms again for the European leg next year though!

Re seeing the band again after next year, I will as part of me thinks their next tour after this one will be the last. Obviously I'd like them to go on longer but you've got to be realistic. I actually have a completely different viewpoint to the thread poster re new music and older bands. Generally speaking if a band releases great new material and incorporates it into their it makes me want to see them more to hear it live, especially if it's a band/act I've seen before. The highlight of seeing Bob Dylan live in London last year for me was hearing the songs from Tempest played live.

[julieannboo]

Yeah next year will be the last fleetwood mac concert for me too.

I saw them in 2009 and last year. So next year with Christine will feel like it has been 'completed'.

Also because of their ages, reckon they will tour again after the tour finishes?

[julieannboo]

The prospect of a new Fleetwood Mac album seems to be in jeopardy. Aside from this ever expanding and never ending tour of greed, Stevie's ambivalence is a stunning insult to the band and fans. And time, inevitably, is not on their side.

Even if they manage to make and tour with a new album, the set list won't change much. They are so tentative with new material; maybe four new songs will be performed, and at least one will be dropped before the tour ends. I have hard time being at peace with on how restrictive, rote, stagnant and uninspired their set lists have become, even though they have surprised us with some minor alterations.

Other bands I love create unique set lists for each of their tours, featuring deep cuts, a healthy amount of new material, and a handful of their hits.
Fleetwood Mac is just doesn't have that kind of nimbleness. Because they have three singer/songwriters, they have to achieve a balance between them. Aside from that, they have a lot of hits and standards they feel they required to play. This mindset leaves little wiggle room. It's like they are performing the same play every time they tour, with very minor scene and script changes. When Stevie proclaims the set list is set in stone, she's stating the obvious par for course.

Look at a band like Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. They have a lot of signature hits, but they don't glut their sets with the same songs in the same sequence over and over. They'll play inspired covers, deep tracks, and some select hit songs. No one leaves their shows bitching about the set. "I paid a lot of money and they didn't play the songs I wanted to hear! No "Free Fall" I'm so pissed off." Their fans come for a show, not a greatest hits album.

I realize this is a somewhat unfair comparison; group dynamics and demographics vary vastly among bands and their fans.

See i disagree. Most fleetwood mac fans go for a greatest hits setlist.

I remember when fans go to madonnas new shows and show come away disappointed as they want the greatest hits and she just plays music from her latest album.

[nicepace]

I'll bet a lot of you who are saying "they're old, they won't tour anymore" are in your 20s.

Age by itself is not going to prevent them from continuing to to tour. If they maintain their health, they can keep on going. (<-- FM reference) There are plenty of rockers in their 70s who are still touring. Ray Davies, Ian Hunter, Paul McCartney, many more.

More concerning than a number on a calendar are the facts that (a) John McVie has had cancer and (b) there was a lot of tobacco, alcohol, and drug use by most or all of the Rumours five, for many years. Even if they have all cleaned up, sometimes those destructive health habits cause problems down the line.

But I think everyone here should cut out the ageist, negative crap about them not being able to tour again after next year because they're "so old."

[ChickenStu]

OK. After this year I don't think I'm ever going to another concert ever again. I just don't think I can top what's coming this year.

I've got Toto and Fleetwood Mac in May, Foo Fighters in June and finally... David Gilmour in September.

If I EVER try to see another concert again it will be Toto. The one I'm seeing in May I'm taking my oldest daughter too - my youngest is a bit too young for a concert. So if they make it to England once again in a few years then I might try and get tickets for me and my youngest when she's a bit older.

Other than that, seeing David Gilmour is as close as you'll ever get to seeing Pink Floyd live. There simply is no topping that. So come the end of 2015 when I've seen all these concerts I think I'll be satisfied that I've seen all the live bands I want to see... and happily leave it there. :)

[Danielle]

Other than that, seeing David Gilmour is as close as you'll ever get to seeing Pink Floyd live.

I am sorry to get off topic but don't you think that seeing Roger Waters is as close as you get to seeing PF live? :D

[Macfanforever]

The only concerts that I attended lately or the last 6 plus years were Stevie and FM shows.The last other artists I've seen live were Kieth Urban and comic Lewis Black.They both were great.

Now I think I have the rest of this year off from FM shows unless FM or Stevie throw out some surprise shows this summer.I would like to see some classic country artists that come here for shows at the casinos as long the tix are cheap.I would not even bother with the current country artists because they are not country but I would like to see some of the classic rock bands live before its to late again as long the tix are cheap.

Its nice to see Toto is still touring.

Enjoy the shows ChickenStu.

[sorcerer999]

Blargh! I just spent $160.00 on a "nosebleed seat"...A NOSEBLEED SEAT all the way in the back...for FMac's upcoming Nashville show next week!

Originally, I wasn't going to go AT ALL because of the outrageous ticket prices and the fact that there isn't any new material to promote.

But the thought of Fleetwood Mac coming to my city and me not being there just got under my skin. All would NOT be right with the world if I didn't go. :laugh:

It was the same when Stevie came round in 2012 with Rod Stewart. I HAD to be there. So very glad that she went on first and I could duck out before Rod Stewart came on.

Oh the things I've done (and the money I've spent) on that woman and THIS band!!!

[PenguinHead]

Agree re
Generally speaking if a band releases great new material and incorporates it into their it makes me want to see them more to hear it live, especially if it's a band/act I've seen before. The highlight of seeing Bob Dylan live in London last year for me was hearing the songs from [I]Tempest played live.

Exactly. After all the effort that goes into making an album, why wouldn't a band want to showcase it on stage? If you are a true fan of a band, why wouldn't you appreciate that? All songs are new in their initial debut. Just because they are not familiar shouldn't preclude you from enjoying a show.

As someone who appreciates live music, I can see a band completely unknown to me and still be entertained. If I was at a Fleetwood Mac show and they came out and announced they decided to ditch their set list perform deep album cuts and covers, I'd be elated!

And there no reason "The Chain" has to be the opener at every tour and show they do, nor does "Songbird" always have to be the closer. Why the demand for familiarity? I was always appreciative of the variety of songs that opened shows - Get Like You Used to Be, Monday Morning, Second Hand News, Say You Love Me, In The Back of My Mind (not their best choice - too dirge -like).

When set lists get too predictable, it's like seeing a movie over and over. You know what's going to happen. The element of surprise is what keeps a set list fresh, even if it's just the same songs arranged in a different order.

[aleuzzi]

I enjoyed the two times I saw them on this tour, which I would not have bothered with if Christine weren't around. But I will NOT see them again after this without new music available to us in an album or digital download form.

I got to see a miracle: the return of Christine. But now I'm waiting for the promise: the "prolific new chapter" to end all chapters.

[starshine]

I've held off going to see the Mac for 12 years now. Unlike you, though I AM waiting for a new album. I'm not interested in hearing the same old hits. That's what the radio & my music collection is for. I need freshness in the setlist to make me ever care to empty my pockets for this band again. Even significantly mixing up the set with lesser known album tracks & b-sides would do the trick for me. I don't even like hearing songs such as Don't Stop, Go Your Own Way, and Rhiannon on the radio anymore... they're just so tired. Why would I pay $200+ to hear them performed increasingly poorly live? :sorry: I couldn't agree with you more. I haven't seen Mac live since '03 (SYW) and Stevie last time was '08 ,really haven't seen much of anybody cause I'm NOT willing to overpay anymore for the same old same old. I did see the Rumours line up during the Dance tour plus Mask (even though NO Lindsey) & SYW so its not like I haven't 'seen' them over the yrs as well as through video etc. I don't feel like I have missed anything much. I have video of the yrs that I haven't went to concerts and other than the hits its not like I've missed much. I'd say the heyday was during the 70's-early 80's so at least I have video and audio from those times. I'm satisfied enough. But there's nothing wrong with going if you want to. Enjoy!! :D:shrug:

[starshine]

Exactly. After all the effort that goes into making an album, why wouldn't a band want to showcase it on stage? If you are a true fan of a band, why wouldn't you appreciate that? All songs are new in their initial debut. Just because they are not familiar shouldn't preclude you from enjoying a show.

As someone who appreciates live music, I can see a band completely unknown to me and still be entertained. If I was at a Fleetwood Mac show and they came out and announced they decided to ditch their set list perform deep album cuts and covers, I'd be elated!

And there no reason "The Chain" has to be the opener at every tour and show they do, nor does "Songbird" always have to be the closer. Why the demand for familiarity? I was always appreciative of the variety of songs that opened shows - Get Like You Used to Be, Monday Morning, Second Hand News, Say You Love Me, In The Back of My Mind (not their best choice - too dirge -like).

When set lists get too predictable, it's like seeing a movie over and over. You know what's going to happen. The element of surprise is what keeps a set list fresh, even if it's just the same songs arranged in a different order.I also agree, why not change??? why does Stevie always wear black now??? Its like she is afraid of some color?? I think alot needs to change but I'm afraid all of them are too old now to care what we think. There used to there 'usual' ways. Heck, even during the tours in the 70-80's they never ever changed there set list up very much at all. Always the same , maybe a couple of early and later song changes but not a complete setlist overhaul (same with Stevie solo). Its such a shame that through the years they couldn't have played songs that we don't hear much. Its really a travesty now cause its just not gonna happen--sad but true. :shrug:

[ChickenStu]

I am sorry to get off topic but don't you think that seeing Roger Waters is as close as you get to seeing PF live? :D

Depends what kind of Pink Floyd you like I suppose. If you want miserable stories about kids being left by their Dads and political rants that are about stuff that happened 30 years ago, then yeah - Waters is your man.

I on the other hand want spectacular light shows and soaring guitar solos. That's why I'm going with Gilmour. :)

Its nice to see Toto is still touring.

Oh it's so great. The new album Toto XIV came out at the start of this week and it's just utterly magnificent. They are a SERIOUSLY underrated band.
That album is really worth a punt if you fancy a flutter.

Did you read Mick Fleetwood's autobiography? The new one? He mentions Toto early in the book and talks about their late drummer Jeff Porcaro. Fleetwood really rated him and his talent. He died in the early 90's after an allergic reaction to pesticides (Toto's former bassist, Jeff's brother Mike sadly died of ALS last week. The last remaining brother Steve Porcaro is in the lineup as keyboardist)

Enjoy the shows ChickenStu.

Thank you Macfanforever and I hope you enjoy anything you have lined up for 2015! :)

[Macfanforever]

Depends what kind of Pink Floyd you like I suppose. If you want miserable stories about kids being left by their Dads and political rants that are about stuff that happened 30 years ago, then yeah - Waters is your man.

I on the other hand want spectacular light shows and soaring guitar solos. That's why I'm going with Gilmour. :)



Oh it's so great. The new album Toto XIV came out at the start of this week and it's just utterly magnificent. They are a SERIOUSLY underrated band.
That album is really worth a punt if you fancy a flutter.

Did you read Mick Fleetwood's autobiography? The new one? He mentions Toto early in the book and talks about their late drummer Jeff Porcaro. Fleetwood really rated him and his talent. He died in the early 90's after an allergic reaction to pesticides (Toto's former bassist, Jeff's brother Mike sadly died of ALS last week. The last remaining brother Steve Porcaro is in the lineup as keyboardist)



Thank you Macfanforever and I hope you enjoy anything you have lined up for 2015! :)

No problem .I'll try .I already got the Mac under belt for this year.
Thanks for the Toto tidbit.I have not get a chance to get Micks new book.I'll get it soon.

Enjoy your shows.

[nicepace]

That album is really worth a punt if you fancy a flutter.


Ummm ... what? I can usually decipher English slang that I encounter here and on other internet sites, but this one has me stumped.

Could someone please translate into American? (lol)

[reebokandlace]

Ummm ... what? I can usually decipher English slang that I encounter here and on other internet sites, but this one has me stumped.

Could someone please translate into American? (lol)

Roughly translated into American:

The album is really worth a punt if you fancy a flutter = The album is worth the gamble if you are willing to take a chance.

[ChickenStu]

After last night, I'm sticking to my original statement more than ever.

[APerfectLie]

After last night, I'm sticking to my original statement more than ever.

Why more than ever?

[olive]

After last night, I'm sticking to my original statement more than ever.

I get it .

[ChickenStu]

Why more than ever?

Didn't have the best evening to be fair. The drive through London to get to the 02 was TRAUMATIC (please don't ask me any questions about that, I REALLY do not want to talk about it :( ). We were right up in the nosebleeds and that made me feel sick, and some stupid security guard woman kept harassing me.
Plus the change in key on a few of the songs was very jarring.

It's not really Fleetwood Mac's fault, it's just the 02. It's a horrible venue for live music and I NEVER want to go there again.

If Fleetwood Mac decide to do Wembley or something instead, or do a more intimate gig at say... the Hammersmith Apollo.... then I MIGHT consider seeing them a third time. But never again at the 02. The 02 can f*** off frankly.

[FuzzyPlum]

Didn't have the best evening to be fair. The drive through London to get to the 02 was TRAUMATIC (please don't ask me any questions about that, I REALLY do not want to talk about it :( ). We were right up in the nosebleeds and that made me feel sick, and some stupid security guard woman kept harassing me.
Plus the change in key on a few of the songs was very jarring.

It's not really Fleetwood Mac's fault, it's just the 02. It's a horrible venue for live music and I NEVER want to go there again.

If Fleetwood Mac decide to do Wembley or something instead, or do a more intimate gig at say... the Hammersmith Apollo.... then I MIGHT consider seeing them a third time. But never again at the 02. The 02 can f*** off frankly.

So sorry to hear that.
In my experience the 02 is a really great venue- it's quite big but I've always personally found it to feel quite intimate even right up in the gods. Each of us are different, I guess. I wouldn't fancy Wembley; the arena for Unleashed was an awful venue and the stadium would just be way too big. You are very brave for even attempting to drive across London.

[ChickenStu]

So sorry to hear that.
In my experience the 02 is a really great venue- it's quite big but I've always personally found it to feel quite intimate even right up in the gods. Each of us are different, I guess. I wouldn't fancy Wembley; the arena for Say You Will was an awful venue and the stadium would just be way too big.

I dunno what it is... I didn't mind so much when I saw FM at the 02 in 2013 but I was buzzing, I was with my best mate and we were really having a laugh together... it was just a great vibe.

I was with a pretty good mate this time around so the company was good. It's just something had changed for the worse and pointed out flaws I'd perhaps never noticed before.

You are very brave for even attempting to drive across London.

I honestly feel like crying when I think about it. Seriously. :(

[Macfanforever]

I dunno what it is... I didn't mind so much when I saw FM at the 02 in 2013 but I was buzzing, I was with my best mate and we were really having a laugh together... it was just a great vibe.

I was with a pretty good mate this time around so the company was good. It's just something had changed for the worse and pointed out flaws I'd perhaps never noticed before.



I honestly feel like crying when I think about it. Seriously. :(

I'm sorry to hear this ChickenStu.

Yes The venue plays a big part of having a great experience at a concert.
You have issues with its employees including security acting like aholes,Pain in the neck parking,Sound acoustics which make a great band sound like crap.