UnCut Magazine FM: The Ultimate Music Guide

[michelej1]

Introducing… Fleetwood Mac: The Ultimate Music Guide
John MulveySeptember 8, 20150

Read more at http://www.uncut.co.uk/uncut-editors-diary/introducing-fleetwood-mac-the-ultimate-music-guide-70698#zBTIdJ2b4bGJ8Z3Q.99

Early 1969. California has been hit by a series of destructive floods, so bad that the international telephone operator is sceptical a connection can be made between London and Los Angeles. When the call goes through, however, the NME’s Nick Logan has a few demanding questions for the first leader of Fleetwood Mac, Peter Green. One is how Green’s band will sustain their reputation as blues purists in the wake of a big hit single, the expansive “Albatross”. Will their next single be another change from what their fans have come to expect?

“I don’t really care,” says Green, yawning. “I never have done really. We’ve never done what was expected of Fleetwood Mac – we’ve always done the opposite. We just do what we want to do.”

Thus begins the remarkable story of Fleetwood Mac – a saga unparalleled in rock, as our new Uncut Ultimate Music Guide dedicated to the band makes clear (on sale in the UK on Thursday Sept 10, but available to order now at our online shop). Over the next four and a half decades, the band’s history has often read like an infinite series of surprise plot twists, where radical upheavals arrive with every new album. Key members come and go, lost to religious cults and mental breakdowns, victims of multiple romantic traumas. Musical directions and locations change as frequently as the lineup: the blues evolve into the apotheosis of sophisticated pop; and a remote Hampshire commune is swapped for the LA highlife.

As the revealing features collected in this Ultimate Music Guide prove, the journalists of Uncut, NME and Melody Maker have been alongside Fleetwood Mac every step of the way. They documented the rise and fall of Peter Green’s band, the emergence of Christine McVie, the transitional lineups of the early ’70s, the dramatic arrival of Lindsey Buckingham and Stevie Nicks, and the glory and devastation that soon followed. “Being in Fleetwood Mac is more like being in group therapy,” noted the mostly redoubtable Mick Fleetwood in 1977, as he contemplated the seismic impact of “Rumours” and laid bare – not for the last time – the private lives of its key players.

Our Ultimate Music Guide, though, focuses on Fleetwood Mac’s extraordinary music as much as their intimate affairs. To that end, we’ve commissioned new, in-depth reviews of every single one of their albums, from lost gems to some of the biggest-selling releases of all time. Like everything about Fleetwood Mac, it makes for an uncommonly long and complicated story, but one that is never less than compelling.

“Looking back, it’s like listening to war stories,” Mick Fleetwood told Uncut in 2002. “But you have to remember there were people yelling in pain with their legs shot away. There’s blood and guts and disagreements still to this day. But that’s what makes it mean a ****.”


Read more at http://www.uncut.co.uk/uncut-editors-diary/introducing-fleetwood-mac-the-ultimate-music-guide-70698#zBTIdJ2b4bGJ8Z3Q.99

[nicole21290]

Lovely. I was wondering if they'd ever get around to doing one of these. I've enjoyed and bought quite a number of their other guides.

[tango87]

About bleedin' time! I expected this to appear when they were here on tour - yet another opportunity missed... But better late than never. I've bought plenty of these before, and they're usually well worth it. Should make up for LIFE magazine.

[SisterNightroad]

Every time I see some awesome special number on Fleetwood Mac like this one I'm terribly envious of all of you because in my country I can't buy it!

[haleyd]

Every time I see some awesome special number on Fleetwood Mac like this one I'm terribly envious of all of you because in my country I can't buy it!

Ditto!
Although it can be ordered online... Which I will certainly be doing. But then I have to wait incredibly long to get it rather than getting it at the store and having instant gratification lol!

[SisterNightroad]

Ditto!
Although it can be ordered online... Which I will certainly be doing. But then I have to wait incredibly long to get it rather than getting it at the store and having instant gratification lol!
True, but since I live in a totally different continent the shipping costs would be outrageous.

I want everyone that has bought this to report/review as soon as they can please!

[elle]

True, but since I live in a totally different continent the shipping costs would be outrageous.

I want everyone that has bought this to report/review as soon as they can please!

How is Italy on a different continent from the UK?

[SisterNightroad]

Oh, I initially thought it was a magazine from the United States.
However the point is the same, I can't pay 20 Euros for this now.

[aleuzzi]

About bleedin' time! I expected this to appear when they were here on tour - yet another opportunity missed... But better late than never. I've bought plenty of these before, and they're usually well worth it. Should make up for LIFE magazine.

Maybe it'll also make up for the well-intentioned but botched job in SHINDIG.

[nicole21290]

I've ordered the print copy (because that'll be a wait of less than a fortnight rather than the month or two til it reaches newsagencies here...) but I'm keeping an eye out for when it's released digitally as well. Will post some bits and pieces when that happens. I've pretty much always been happy with these editions Uncut does; even if I don't agree with the evaluations of the albums, say, they're generally well-considered and written.

[tango87]

Got this yesterday. It's pretty good, with equal space given over to all the different incarnations of the band. Some very interesting archive interviews and features, and new reviews of all the albums, which throw up some interesting opinions: for example, four stars for Empire State...

One very odd thing though, from Andy Gill's review of 'Rumours', discussing Stevie and Lindsey's lyrical exchanges:

'She only had to refer to "thunder" in 'Dreams' for him to snipe back "You can roll like thunder" in 'Go Your Own Way'...'

- how can you get the lyrics of one of the most famous songs from one of the most famous albums in the history of anything so very wrong? I can't even work out what he was mishearing...

[SisterNightroad]

Got this yesterday. It's pretty good, with equal space given over to all the different incarnations of the band. Some very interesting archive interviews and features, and new reviews of all the albums, which throw up some interesting opinions: for example, four stars for Empire State...

One very odd thing though, from Andy Gill's review of 'Rumours', discussing Stevie and Lindsey's lyrical exchanges:

'She only had to refer to "thunder" in 'Dreams' for him to snipe back "You can roll like thunder" in 'Go Your Own Way'...'

- how can you get the lyrics of one of the most famous songs from one of the most famous albums in the history of anything so very wrong? I can't even work out what he was mishearing...
I remember that in the earlier live versions of Go your own way Lindsey did sing "you can roll like thunder" instead of "you can call it on another lonely day", you can hear it on the 1975 New Orleans bootleg.
I bet that version has transpired on one of the Rumours reissues additional content.

[tango87]

I remember that in the earlier live versions of Go your own way Lindsey did sing "you can roll like thunder" instead of "you can call it on another lonely day", you can hear it on the 1975 New Orleans bootleg.
I bet that version has transpired on one of the Rumours reissues additional content.

Well I did not know that. He's a proper FM geek!

[SisterNightroad]

I really love you Nicole.

[michelej1]

Thank you, Nicole. Priceless.

Michele

[tango87]

Thank you, Nicole. Priceless.

Michele

Slightly uncomfortable with the idea of this - yes, it is literally 'priceless', whereas the magazine is the work of many journalists, whose work should have a value. It's different to scanning an old, out-of-print publication that most of us would never get to see - this is a new publication which is available now, and can be bought and sent pretty much anywhere in the world:

https://nme.backstreetmerch.com/shipping-zones

It's not even the same as sharing a bootleg. Would you rip and upload Fleetwood Mac's new album, and offer it for free? Home taping is killing music!!

[Macfanforever]

Slightly uncomfortable with the idea of this - yes, it is literally 'priceless', whereas the magazine is the work of many journalists, whose work should have a value. It's different to scanning an old, out-of-print publication that most of us would never get to see - this is a new publication which is available now, and can be bought and sent pretty much anywhere in the world:

https://nme.backstreetmerch.com/shipping-zones

It's not even the same as sharing a bootleg. Would you rip and upload Fleetwood Mac's new album, and offer it for free? Home taping is killing music!!

Hehehehe.The Mac wont like the idea.LOL.....

Good point.Home taping has been going on since I was a teen and even before that.To be honest .I still do it today.

Quality of music is killing the industry itself.:eek:

[Montclare]

Thanks Nicole!

Posting this isn't doing all that much damage. It's not like thousands upon thousands are going to download something one person posted rather than buying it themselves, especially since it's not in book stores in many countries. Plus, it's actually kind of free advertising. You might not have considered buying it before, especially if you thought it was only going to be a few pages on the Mac (as I originally did), but when you see what it actually is, you might go ahead and fork over the money for a hard copy.

I've taken a number of songs for free from Youtube, solely because Itunes doesn't offer them or are album only offerings. Of course I generally support paying for songs, but I'm not going to pay for the entire album of This Is 40 when I can find Lindsey's songs on Youtube.

[michelej1]

Slightly uncomfortable with the idea of this - yes, it is literally 'priceless',

Well, I didn't mean the magazine was priceless. It has a definite price. I meant, Nicole's contribution was priceless.

No, I wouldn't rip a new (or even an old) in print FM album and share it for free, nor would I let it be shared on the site. But I'm happy to have the magazine article posted. I bought the Uncut for my Kindle Fire and would have posted it myself here, but I actually only know how to deal with photobucket. So, when there are too many pages for me to screen cap and upload, I don't share.

I take your point however. I have ethical concerns about other things, but not this.

Michele

[SisterNightroad]

Especially when the band isn't concerned at all by our posting the article here, the money that would have been spent on the magazine weren't supposed to go to the band's pockets but in the publishing house funds. The journlists get payed anyway in spite of the number of sold copies.
I'd say that this Uncut magazine doesn't risk at all to go broke.

[Steviegirl]

I really love you Nicole.

Co-sign. Thank you, Nicole!

[Mr Scarrott]

I bought it the other day. I particularly like the fact that each of the 17 studio albums gets a review of a broadly similar size. I can only dare hope that this increases interest in the Bob Welch years here in the UK. There's the odd mistake here and there, but isn't there always?

The Ledge itself gets the odd nod here and there, including Bob Welch's Q & As as well as acknowledging an uncredited Ledgie (it's Neb-Maat-Re, as it turns out) who tracked down details of Mrs Scarrott.

[tango87]

Especially when the band isn't concerned at all by our posting the article here, the money that would have been spent on the magazine weren't supposed to go to the band's pockets but in the publishing house funds. The journlists get payed anyway in spite of the number of sold copies.
I'd say that this Uncut magazine doesn't risk at all to go broke.

Ah well, just an observation. Nicole's scans are a great way of letting the FM community know about this publication.

I know no one will go broke, but good print journalism is an endangered species these days - in fact, all print journalism - and since this is the only decent overview of the band's whole career we've had since - well, ever, - I would say, if you like what you've seen, buy the real thing too! Physical is always better than digital...

[SisterNightroad]

Physical is always better than digital...
On this I totally agree.
However since I couldn't have afforded to buy the magazine I'm happy that thanks to Nicole I get to read it at all.

[michelej1]

I know no one will go broke, but good print journalism is an endangered species these days - in fact, all print journalism - and since this is the only decent overview of the band's whole career we've had since - well, ever, - I would say, if you like what you've seen, buy the real thing too! Physical is always better than digital...

I agree with that. I still keep scrap books or at least I keep large binders with magazines, ticket stubs and concert photos. And I save X-Files clippings, articles, magazines, too and have had to start that up again, with the reboot.

Anyway, I did buy a hard copy of Uncut (and the Mojo one two) on Ebay, but I don't have it yet.

Michele

[FuzzyPlum]

Just had a quick scan- it looks like a pretty well researched and written piece of work. Disappointed You and I Part 2 was adjudged to be on a par with These Strange Times though. Also, Bleed to Love Her was harshly given 3 stars.

I think I'll start reading properly from the beginning and simultaneously play through everything I own now.

Thank you Nicole

[KenB]

Thanks Nicole!

Posting this isn't doing all that much damage. It's not like thousands upon thousands are going to download something one person posted rather than buying it themselves, especially since it's not in book stores in many countries. Plus, it's actually kind of free advertising. You might not have considered buying it before, especially if you thought it was only going to be a few pages on the Mac (as I originally did), but when you see what it actually is, you might go ahead and fork over the money for a hard copy.

I've taken a number of songs for free from Youtube, solely because Itunes doesn't offer them or are album only offerings. Of course I generally support paying for songs, but I'm not going to pay for the entire album of This Is 40 when I can find Lindsey's songs on Youtube.

As a longtime professional music journalist who has been out of work and job hunting, fruitlessly, for the last year, I need to point out that pretty much everything in this post sounds like self-justifying rationalizing of theft. As a FM fanatic, I'm as happy as anyone to have the contents of this magazine posted here so I can read it -- but I won't try to justify to myself that it is "right" to not pay for written content, or music, and I hope the rest of you don't either. Too many of my friends and colleagues -- incredibly knowledgable writers who dedicated their lives to music -- have lost most of their income, and in many cases has to change careers entirely, as I am on the verge of doing, because Internet sharing has led society over the last 15 years to believe stealing is okay.

I mean, I get it. I want things for free too. I guess what I'm saying is: do what you're gonna do, but don't try to pretend it's anything but theft.

Someone else commented that they're sure this magazine isn't near bankruptcy. Don't be so certain of that. A huge percentage of music publications have gone under thanks to the era of "sharing," including some of the biggest ones and many (probably MOST) of the smaller ones -- the niche magazines that are the most likely to feature bands like Fleetwood Mac. So share if you must, but please buy a copy as well, and please encourage others to do the same.

[MikeInNV]

Someone else commented that they're sure this magazine isn't near bankruptcy. Don't be so certain of that.

And even if they are financially fine, that's not really the point. No one in Fleetwood Mac will go to the poor house if we download their music for free, but it's generally accepted around here that it's wrong to do so.

[nicole21290]

I think the vast majority of the demographic who frequent this forum and even on my Tumblr (which does have less than 400 followers) WANT the physical copy. I did wonder whether it was right to upload the entire thing. At the moment, the benefits outweigh the guilt for me.

I'm clear and free on the 'stealing' bit, though (even though I could've waited and downloaded from a forum I use which uploads dozens of ebooks and magazines daily...). I paid over $10 for the digital copy, $30 for the print one to be delivered and will probably have to fork out another $15 for another print copy for my Mum when it gets to newsagencies here. I'm a collector; I love print magazines and have a nice stack of them from Mojo, Q, Word, and Uncut. I'm still bitter about Word going under. However, I like having digital copies as well. I think some people fall into that boat. Really, there are multiple reasons a person might download the PDF and only one of them means the publisher/author is losing out monetarily.

1. They can’t afford or access the magazine (in which case, they wouldn’t have bought it anyway)
2. They can afford the magazine and will buy or have bought it, but they want a digital copy for convenience or because they don’t want to wait (me)
3. They want to check the content out before buying it (in which case, most of those people wouldn’t have bought it anyway so it may actually INCREASE sales)
4. Cheapskates who don’t want to pay for anything

Really, though, I think the vast majority of people in this case still like having a physical copy of something, and that Category 4 is actually smaller than the others. Maybe that’s me being naive. It's not a 'casual buy' like a new popular record is or anything, though; it's a bit different, I think.

[aleuzzi]

I think the vast majority of the demographic who frequent this forum and even on my Tumblr (which does have less than 400 followers) WANT the physical copy. I did wonder whether it was right to upload the entire thing. At the moment, the benefits outweigh the guilt for me.

I'm clear and free on the 'stealing' bit, though (even though I could've waited and downloaded from a forum I use which uploads dozens of ebooks and magazines daily...). I paid over $10 for the digital copy, $30 for the print one to be delivered and will probably have to fork out another $15 for another print copy for my Mum when it gets to newsagencies here. I'm a collector; I love print magazines and have a nice stack of them from Mojo, Q, Word, and Uncut. I'm still bitter about Word going under. However, I like having digital copies as well. I think some people fall into that boat. Really, there are multiple reasons a person might download the PDF and only one of them means the publisher/author is losing out monetarily.

1. They can’t afford or access the magazine (in which case, they wouldn’t have bought it anyway)
2. They can afford the magazine and will buy or have bought it, but they want a digital copy for convenience or because they don’t want to wait (me)
3. They want to check the content out before buying it (in which case, most of those people wouldn’t have bought it anyway so it may actually INCREASE sales)
4. Cheapskates who don’t want to pay for anything

Really, though, I think the vast majority of people in this case still like having a physical copy of something, and that Category 4 is actually smaller than the others. Maybe that’s me being naive. It's not a 'casual buy' like a new popular record is or anything, though; it's a bit different, I think.

I want to thank you for downloading it. I am one of those people who want to know the quality of something before I purchase it. (I got burned on the Shindig issue, which was really poorly done.) Having downloaded it and read through most of the record reviews, I am now committed to buying the paper edition. It will be a feast, since there are a lot of early-era articles and interviews I have never seen before.

So, yes, thank you! And you shouldn't feel guilt. The magazine is making sale based on my reaction to your download.

............................

I was pretty impressed with a lot of the research and the record reviews, which were largely fair and not afraid to depart from majority opinion in a few places. No surprises about RUMOURS, of course, but seeing how highly HEROES was valued compared to the mixed reaction to MYSTERY says the writer(s) was not merely rehashing popular opinions. I didn't always agree with the conclusions: nothing on FLEETWOOD MAC deserves two stars, especially "Sugar Daddy"; "Why" getting four stars while "Just Crazy Love" got five; the lukewarm reception to "Miles Away"; awarding "You and I Part 2" one star...But overall I was impressed with how honest and fair the album assessments really were. Even "oft-overlooked moments of success on TIME were given due recognition.

[SisterNightroad]

As a longtime professional music journalist who has been out of work and job hunting, fruitlessly, for the last year, I need to point out that pretty much everything in this post sounds like self-justifying rationalizing of theft. As a FM fanatic, I'm as happy as anyone to have the contents of this magazine posted here so I can read it -- but I won't try to justify to myself that it is "right" to not pay for written content, or music, and I hope the rest of you don't either. Too many of my friends and colleagues -- incredibly knowledgable writers who dedicated their lives to music -- have lost most of their income, and in many cases has to change careers entirely, as I am on the verge of doing, because Internet sharing has led society over the last 15 years to believe stealing is okay.

I mean, I get it. I want things for free too. I guess what I'm saying is: do what you're gonna do, but don't try to pretend it's anything but theft.

Someone else commented that they're sure this magazine isn't near bankruptcy. Don't be so certain of that. A huge percentage of music publications have gone under thanks to the era of "sharing," including some of the biggest ones and many (probably MOST) of the smaller ones -- the niche magazines that are the most likely to feature bands like Fleetwood Mac. So share if you must, but please buy a copy as well, and please encourage others to do the same.

And even if they are financially fine, that's not really the point. No one in Fleetwood Mac will go to the poor house if we download their music for free, but it's generally accepted around here that it's wrong to do so.

I think the vast majority of the demographic who frequent this forum and even on my Tumblr (which does have less than 400 followers) WANT the physical copy. I did wonder whether it was right to upload the entire thing. At the moment, the benefits outweigh the guilt for me.

I'm clear and free on the 'stealing' bit, though (even though I could've waited and downloaded from a forum I use which uploads dozens of ebooks and magazines daily...). I paid over $10 for the digital copy, $30 for the print one to be delivered and will probably have to fork out another $15 for another print copy for my Mum when it gets to newsagencies here. I'm a collector; I love print magazines and have a nice stack of them from Mojo, Q, Word, and Uncut. I'm still bitter about Word going under. However, I like having digital copies as well. I think some people fall into that boat. Really, there are multiple reasons a person might download the PDF and only one of them means the publisher/author is losing out monetarily.

1. They can’t afford or access the magazine (in which case, they wouldn’t have bought it anyway)
I'm the one that said the magazine isn't going broke, and even if I generally agree with all of you I must say that it's hypocritical to judge others for downloading this magazine if you did it yourself, even presuming that (unlike you) they think it's right.

In my country Fleetwood Mac don't have a large fan base so they never get special issues of any kind and I'd never get the chance to buy many of the magazines you have easy access to in the first place. Uncut isn't a magazine that's available in my country so I don't know for sure, but by the number of quotes it receives by other magazines I read, I presumed that it's a major newspaper and it wouldn't be damaged by my download, especially since I wouldn't have bought it anyway. In this I totally agree with Nicole as I fall in the first category mentioned in her post. I don't think that downloading is right, simply I don't feel guilty.

I don't think that free-downloading CDs is the same thing. Stevie has loads of money but I did buy her CD because I think it's a valuable effort and it deserves my little contribution to get higher on the charts in spite of all those crappy music that usually infest the top positions.
I didn't say anywhere that downloading is right but the economic crisis doesn't concerns these magazines alone but us buyers first and foremost. I am much more concerned about my and my family's economic condition than that of a big periodical, I am a student and I don't want to burden me and my family with unnecessary costs, because here the economic crisis is a bottomless pit.

[KenB]

I'm the one that said the magazine isn't going broke, and even if I generally agree with all of you I must say that it's hypocritical to judge others for downloading this magazine if you did it yourself, even presuming that (unlike you, they think it's right).

Like I said in my post, I totally understand the impulse, because I did it too. But that doesn't make it right, for me or for anyone. I hope everyone who can afford to do so will also buy a copy of the magazine, like I will be doing.

I am much more concerned about my and my family's economic condition than that of a big periodical, I am a student and I don't want to burden me and my family with unnecessary costs, because here the economic crisis is a bottomless pit.

Well, naturally, every person on earth is more concerned about their own economic condition than anyone else's. That still doesn't make it right to go to your local clothing store and walk out with that hat you've had your eye on, without paying for it. As for that "big periodical" -- just be aware that there no longer is such a thing. Virtually every music magazine in existence is small these days, and hanging on by the skin of their teeth. Not because of the overall economic crisis, but because our culture has decided that we no longer feel guilty about stealing, as long as we do it on the Internet, where it's easy to do it anonymously.

[nicole21290]

Well, naturally, every person on earth is more concerned about their own economic condition than anyone else's. That still doesn't make it right to go to your local clothing store and walk out with that hat you've had your eye on, without paying for it. As for that "big periodical" -- just be aware that there no longer is such a thing. Virtually every music magazine in existence is small these days, and hanging on by the skin of their teeth. Not because of the overall economic crisis, but because our culture has decided that we no longer feel guilty about stealing, as long as we do it on the Internet, where it's easy to do it anonymously.

I don't think there's a huge market for people illegally downloading music magazines online, to be honest. It's a much smaller market than, say, pop music records, and I think is more to do with the decline of print media rather than people 'stealing on the internet'. People can read reviews on the AV Club; they don't need Mojo. They can read free blogs instead of Word. They can just read interviews and features on the magazine's (now necessary) websites. They've become unnecessary in some ways; they're not immediate enough for news, which was one of the boons for something like the NME. And the normal news media now covers music, which it really didn't use to. That's also decreased the demand. There'll always be a group of people, young and old, who prefer the physical media but while internet culture and expecting free content has contributed to the closure and difficulties music magazines have now, I don't think it's necessarily all or even mostly to do with 'stealing anonymously'.

While I know of one forum which uploads digitial editions of magazines (amongst the large tide of ebooks), those threads don't get much traffic at all.

[SisterNightroad]

Well, naturally, every person on earth is more concerned about their own economic condition than anyone else's. That still doesn't make it right to go to your local clothing store and walk out with that hat you've had your eye on, without paying for it. As for that "big periodical" -- just be aware that there no longer is such a thing. Virtually every music magazine in existence is small these days, and hanging on by the skin of their teeth. Not because of the overall economic crisis, but because our culture has decided that we no longer feel guilty about stealing, as long as we do it on the Internet, where it's easy to do it anonymously.
Obviously internet has impacted negatively papers, papers spreading has been in danger even since the arrive of the television but I was talking about consumers, they are the most affected by the crisis and during economically harder times among the first goods to be cut off are printed communication mediums.
I searched for Uncut's circulation numbers and since it's a magazine and its circulation still exceeds the 50 thousands of copies it is considered a periodical with a strong circulation.

[KenB]

I don't think there's a huge market for people illegally downloading music magazines online, to be honest. It's a much smaller market than, say, pop music records, and I think is more to do with the decline of print media rather than people 'stealing on the internet'.

But its precisely the attitude of shifting the blame elsewhere that is the problem. The decline of the sale of "pop music records" due to piracy has meant that record companies no longer have the money to advertise in music magazines, which means that music magazines don't survive. Those are just the facts. I know because I've seen it happen time after time. Yes, people can read blogs, the AV Club, etc. for free instead of reading a print magazine like Uncut. But you must think there's something of value in this issue of Uncut, otherwise you wouldn't be sharing it.

SisterNightroad wrote:
I searched for Uncut's circulation numbers and since it's a magazine and its circulation still exceeds the 50 thousands of copies it is considered a periodical with a strong circulation.

Uncut once had a circulation of over 100,000. Now it's half that. Maybe in a couple of years it'll be gone, too.

I promise you: A magazine with a circulation of 50,000 is a small magazine that needs every sale it can get. I spent almost 13 years employed at a music magazine with a circulation of a little less than 50,000. (This happened to be a magazine that, over the years, published interviews with several members of Fleetwood Mac.) That magazine is now gone, and so are many, many others. I can tell you with 100% certainty that a huge part of the reason why (not the ONLY reason, but the biggest) is the "give me stuff for free" attitude that has resulted from the ability to share things anonymously, whether it's music, writing, or whatever. Believe it or don't believe it, keep sharing content or don't, but the fact remains that music magazines are nearly extinct because the music and publishing industries haven't found a good way to battle theft. Sure, that's partly on them for not responding adequately to the new realities -- but why should they have to? If a clothing store is repeatedly robbed because people want hats or shirts for free and the store can't find a way to stop it, is it the store's fault, or the thieves'? Maybe both; I don't know. I don't have a solution.

[SisterNightroad]

But its precisely the attitude of shifting the blame elsewhere that is the problem. The decline of the sale of "pop music records" due to piracy has meant that record companies no longer have the money to advertise in music magazines, which means that music magazines don't survive. Those are just the facts. I know because I've seen it happen time after time. Yes, people can read blogs, the AV Club, etc. for free instead of reading a print magazine like Uncut. But you must think there's something of value in this issue of Uncut, otherwise you wouldn't be sharing it.

SisterNightroad wrote:


Uncut once had a circulation of over 100,000. Now it's half that. Maybe in a couple of years it'll be gone, too.

I promise you: A magazine with a circulation of 50,000 is a small magazine that needs every sale it can get. I spent almost 13 years employed at a music magazine with a circulation of a little less than 50,000. (This happened to be a magazine that, over the years, published interviews with several members of Fleetwood Mac.) That magazine is now gone, and so are many, many others. I can tell you with 100% certainty that a huge part of the reason why (not the ONLY reason, but the biggest) is the "give me stuff for free" attitude that has resulted from the ability to share things anonymously, whether it's music, writing, or whatever. Believe it or don't believe it, keep sharing content or don't, but the fact remains that music magazines are nearly extinct because the music and publishing industries haven't found a good way to battle theft. Sure, that's partly on them for not responding adequately to the new realities -- but why should they have to? If a clothing store is repeatedly robbed because people want hats or shirts for free and the store can't find a way to stop it, is it the store's fault, or the thieves'? Maybe both; I don't know. I don't have a solution.
Today a magazine with more circulation than 30.000 copies is considered big for all the reasons that have enlisted.
You are right saying that it's because of internet but piracy is just a small aspect of it; this is because times are changing and times are changing because media are changing. The only medium negatively impacted is print, journals are fading while all the other media like TV keep existing alongside internet but with the web being the first source of information and entertainment. It's not only free-download we're in the middle of a transition period, some things we know will be lost and new others will take their place but is it right, is it wrong? In the past other forms of media have been subsided because of the development of new technologies, with the advent of the radio people lamented that noone would have bought journals or gone to concerts anymore because you could listen to news and music at home; with the coming of the television people lamented that news, music and cinema would have been cast aside. With the beginning of cinema people feared that theater would disappear. This is a story as ancient as the world.

[KenB]

Today a magazine with more circulation than 30.000 copies is considered big for all the reasons that have enlisted.
You are right saying that it's because of internet but piracy is just a small aspect of it; this is because times are changing and times are changing because media are changing. The only medium negatively impacted is print, journals are fading while all the other media like TV keep existing alongside internet but with the web being the first source of information and entertainment. It's not only free-download we're in the middle of a transition period, some things we know will be lost and new others will take their place but is it right, is it wrong? In the past other forms of media have been subsided because of the development of new technologies, with the advent of the radio people lamented that noone would have bought journals or gone to concerts anymore because you could listen to news and music at home; with the coming of the television people lamented that news, music and cinema would have been cast aside. With the beginning of cinema people feared that theater would disappear. This is a story as ancient as the world.

You're right in pointing out that this is a very complex issue and that piracy is only part of it. What is not complex, however, is that taking things without paying for them is pretty uncool.

Just to be clear, I love this forum and enjoy the people on it, even though I've never met any of them in real life. All I'm saying is that if you downloaded this magazine and liked it, please buy a copy if you're able to do so. One person buying or not buying a magazine isn't going to change the world; an overall awareness of the effects of sharing might make some difference, though. When I see so many talented, hard-working people in my industry now unable to afford basic things like health insurance, it's hard not to have strong feelings about the issue.

[michelej1]

I have no problem acknowledging it as theft. Most of the articles posted here are free online and even pasting them here like I do on an almost daily basis, rather than just posting the link, is depriving the original website of a "click". That's stealing too.

Still, I don't think the magazines are dying due to illegal sharing. I think it's because no one wants to pay for the content and, in most cases, consumers are just doing without it, not stealing. Advertisers aren't buying space and the publications have to try to find a new way of making money in the digital era. I don't think people are illegally downloading rather than buying. I think that faced with a paywall, they just won't pursue the content at all, in most cases. It's not that they go looking around to steal it, instead of buying. They just find comparable content elsewhere that's free.

There are lots of writing jobs that are still out there, even more with the online publications than there used to be, but they mostly want to pay the journalists pennies on the dollar, rather than a living wage. I think it's because no one is paying the publications the money needed to produce the content, rather than that it's being stolen after it exists. Subscriptions are down yes, but that isn't the loss of revenue that is hurting magazines the most.

The publications that are surviving are the ones that have a strong online presence and by being on line, I don't mean just having a digital store. I mean, having lots of traffic to your site, with the visitors paying nothing, but advertisers paying to have access to them and their personal information.

Michele

[sorcerer999]

Most of the articles posted here are free online and even pasting them here like I do on an almost daily basis, rather than just posting the link, is depriving the original website of a "click". That's stealing too.

Agreed! I'd like to thank EVERYONE here who posts links and uploads content to this forum. I really appreciate it. Thanks Nicole for the upload. And yes, I will STILL be going out to buy a physical copy as well.

I frequent this forum first and foremost whenever I want to know the latest news about the band and its members. I don't want to have to go searching all over the stupid internet hoping that some website (be it from a magazine, TV station or consumer product) will have some sort of article about them. That would drive me insane!

Now is it cool if we stop arguing over rear window ethics here and get back to discussing what this thread is actually about?

[SisterNightroad]

Now is it cool if we stop arguing over rear window ethics here and get back to discussing what this thread is actually about?
I agree 100%!

[johnnystorms]

I think the vast majority of the demographic who frequent this forum and even on my Tumblr (which does have less than 400 followers) WANT the physical copy. I did wonder whether it was right to upload the entire thing. At the moment, the benefits outweigh the guilt for me.

I'm clear and free on the 'stealing' bit, though (even though I could've waited and downloaded from a forum I use which uploads dozens of ebooks and magazines daily...). I paid over $10 for the digital copy, $30 for the print one to be delivered and will probably have to fork out another $15 for another print copy for my Mum when it gets to newsagencies here. I'm a collector; I love print magazines and have a nice stack of them from Mojo, Q, Word, and Uncut. I'm still bitter about Word going under. However, I like having digital copies as well. I think some people fall into that boat. Really, there are multiple reasons a person might download the PDF and only one of them means the publisher/author is losing out monetarily.

1. They can’t afford or access the magazine (in which case, they wouldn’t have bought it anyway)
2. They can afford the magazine and will buy or have bought it, but they want a digital copy for convenience or because they don’t want to wait (me)
3. They want to check the content out before buying it (in which case, most of those people wouldn’t have bought it anyway so it may actually INCREASE sales)
4. Cheapskates who don’t want to pay for anything

Really, though, I think the vast majority of people in this case still like having a physical copy of something, and that Category 4 is actually smaller than the others. Maybe that’s me being naive. It's not a 'casual buy' like a new popular record is or anything, though; it's a bit different, I think.

not a cheapskate but have NO idea how to obtain a UK publication.. any idea how I might read it? PM me if you can help

[nicole21290]

not a cheapskate but have NO idea how to obtain a UK publication.. any idea how I might read it? PM me if you can help

I've PM'd you.

[jbrownsjr]

Thanks Nicole... You're always very sharing with info!

[nicole21290]

Thanks Nicole... You're always very sharing with info!

Well, what does it accomplish, keeping anything and everything I buy to myself? Not much point in that. :D

[jbrownsjr]

Well, what does it accomplish, keeping anything and everything I buy to myself? Not much point in that. :D

muah!:):):)

[Macfanforever]

I see and understand the points here.I did support Life mag by picking up the FM special issue.Ive always enjoyed reading Life mag since I was a kid.

I always prefer a hardcopy then a digital copy of anything.

I rant and stressed enough on here on hating album digital copies but what I do enjoy is the digital backcopies of magazines from years ago from current publishers and past publishers.

As I probably have some of those old magazines in my garage .I do enjoy going online and read them again without going out into the garage or in the basement and lift tons of boxes looking for issues that I want to read again.My back appreciates it.

Googlebooks,Archive.org are loaded with old books and magazines to read.

As a electronics and TV/Radio geek .I enjoy going to my friends David G's website American Radio History.com .

He has a awesome collection of magazines ,books ,ETC in broadcasting and electronics field.

www.americanradiohistory.com

[Macfanforever]

Probably whats driving readers to go online looking for freebies is the price what the publishers are charging for these mags.

Which is understandable .Producing them and cost of living drove up the cost of from the old reasonable US 99 cents to $1.99 a issue to $3.99 plus a issue and these special issues like the FM Life special at $14.99.


I remember most were .50 to .75 cents an issue.I'm showing my age.LOL................................Time have change.............

[Wdm6789]

Where can I buy this Magazine?

[nicole21290]

Where can I buy this Magazine?

There may be bookshops, newsagents, etc, where you live who might sell it. Otherwise:

Physical copy: https://nme.backstreetmerch.com/artist/uncut/magazines/fleetwood-mac-ultimate-music-guide

Digital edition: http://www.uncut.co.uk/digital-editions

[Murrow]

In the Bare Trees review, they even quoted our findings about Mrs Scarrott from the "In search of the Hampshire years" thread, which I started.

That gives me some pride after all these years of devotion to the Mac.

[Neb-Maat-Re]

In the Bare Trees review, they even quoted our findings about Mrs Scarrott from the "In search of the Hampshire years" thread, which I started.

That gives me some pride after all these years of devotion to the Mac.

Would someone be kind enough to quote/transcribe that reference in the article for me? Not the whole article, just the section that mentions identifying Mrs Scarrott.

[nicole21290]

Would someone be kind enough to quote/transcribe that reference in the article for me? Not the whole article, just the section that mentions identifying Mrs Scarrott.

The album ends with a poem of a different sort. "Thoughts On A Grey Day", a rumination on winter weather and the birth of a baby, is read aloud - a little too quickly and enthusiastically - by a Hampshire neighbour of the band's named Mrs Scarrott, whose joy at the sight of bare trees nicely complements Kirwan's air of tragic melancholy. In January 2015, an enterprising fan on the Mac messageboard The Ledge found out some details about Mrs Scarrott by searching online birth registers. Originally from Eastbourne, Aileen Scarrott was 68 years old and thrice-married by the time she made her appearance on Bare Trees. She was the third wife of her husband, Harry, whose voice can be heard behind her. Three marriages each? They were certainly the right couple for a Fleetwood Mac album.

[Neb-Maat-Re]

Thanks for that, it's much appreciated.

Nice quip at the end about multiple marriages - although technically Harry and Aileen were twice widowed when they married so not the typical Mac type of re-coupling.

[Neb-Maat-Re]

I've now passed the information about the reference on to the relative of Harry Scarrott who confirmed my research.

[sorcerer999]

Has this been released in the States yet? I've been going to all the large bookshops in my area that carry a huge selection of music magazines (including Uncut) for the past three or four weeks since I saw this thread, but I still can't find a copy.

[Wdm6789]

Has this been released in the States yet? I've been going to all the large bookshops in my area that carry a huge selection of music magazines (including Uncut) for the past three or four weeks since I saw this thread, but I still can't find a copy.



^^^^^^^ This.

[GJK]

I found it at the bookstore at the train station in my home town; it was very well worth the 14 euro.
I haven't found any mention of 'The purple dancer' yet; my favourite FM song.

GJK

[Macfanforever]

I have to look in a couple specialty book shops in the area at the mall.They sometimes stock out of the country mags and books.

[pattyfan]

I just looked on line. With postage, it's $23 to get it in the US. Hmm. How badly do I want it? I found a bookstore that sells Uncut here in SF, but it didn't have that issue.

Kevin

[dino]

Excellent issue covering all eras of the band in valuable original extensive NME interviews. The albums reviews are OK, quite informative but it's one of those things where one tends to disagree - Kiln House gets a higher rating than Then Play On, for example.