![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
They Are FLEETWOOD MAC. All ya have to say is I'm going to see Fleetwood Mac. We all know what year it is, its The Mac who needs to be reminded. |
As a long time fan...(been going to FM shows and Stevie shows since the late 70's)...I can see both sides of this topic...while I am glad they are going on tour and, being a New Orleanian, I get my dream of seeing them at Jazzfest!!! this year...I am thrilled to see them in my home town at an outdoor festival for the first time since 1977. And while I am happy that the setlist contains some gems that I will always love....I wish they would include some older Fleetwood Mac songs from before the LB/Stevie era...I daydreamed of them performing *Hypnotized*, which was the cool FM song we listened to as teens before the Rumours era...and what about another song from Mirage, like Straight Back or Empire State? And Tango in The Night/Say You Will get NO play at all...I also thought it would be cool to hear Stevie do her cover of *Note Fade Away* with The Mac...
But having said all of that, I am happy they are making a stop in my town even though the setlist isn't my dream setlist...I also realize that as I get older...they are even older than me...and getting older by the day...So at this point I am just happy to be able to have the FM experience at least one more time...reading some of the ideas and posts on here, sometimes I think us fans could do a better job managing the band than the actual managers! |
Wow, such vitriole from a supposed fan. If you want to get really brutally honest, one could really say that Fleetwood Mac essentially ceased to be an "artistic outlet" after Tusk; that's when everyone seemed to focus their artistic mojo onto their respective solo careers. Since Tusk, it seems that every subsequent reconvening of the "fab five/four" has been a forced affair that seemed to arise only because arms were twisted or political pressure was applied and NOT due to some magnetic artistic chemistry that compelled them to work together. Rather than approaching each new album as a means of exorcising musical/interpersonal demons, everything from Mirage onward seemed to be a deliberate, calculated affair that carried the baggage of hyper-stardom as well as conflicting priorities.
The "Fleetwood Mac" that you pine for disbanded over thirty years ago. And you know what? It's all good. Time marches forward. People change. Music evolves. They are still a great band, albeit, in a different way. This is clearly a group of people (specifically Lindsey and Stevie) who grew sick of working with each other in the studio and who has now figured out a way to stay together while enjoying themselves- touring. Of course the alternative would be to have Fleetwood Mac disbanded once and for all, which would be a crying shame. For me, an appreciation for FM isn't about charting new artistic ground or taking edgy, bold chances; in fact, I think you are following the wrong band if you are all about the new and edgy! It's all about chemistry and being in the music in the moment as it happens. Yes, most of the songs are old and they have played them a gazillion times, but there is a brilliant shimmery electricity that hangs in the air when they are up on stage, together, doing what they do best. It isn't something that can be captured on crappy audience recordings or shaky/blurry/tinny-sounding clips on YouTube. Yes, a new FM studio album would be a dream come true, and yes, I would love it if they would play nothing but deep cuts in concert. But what we have in 2013 is a band that is realistically in its twilight. I don't hold them up to the level of scrutiny that I did 30 years ago; nobody is the same after 30 years. They certainly don't need to do this for the money, and they could certainly be doing things that are more personally gratifying (solo careers). And they have certainly earned the right to look back on an extraordinary body of work. If you don't agree, then simply don't patronize their shows. But why does one feel the need to come on here to pi$$ on them and everyone else who just wants to enjoy some good f***ing music? |
I certainly understand the frustration. I didn't go to one Stevie show between 2005 and 2011 because I didn't want to spend the money to hear LITERALLY the same set list that she'd been doing for years, with the inclusion of a few covers as her idea of shaking things up.
However, I've come to accept, as has Mr. Buckingham, that Fleetwood Mac is the BIG MACHINE. We're not going to get the "riskier" set lists that we would love, or that LB (and to some extent in recent years, Stevie) might be willing to do on a solo tour. It boggles my mind when people seriously suggest that FM do a set that contains "Seven Wonders," "Can't Go Back," "Crystal," "Walk a Thin Line," "Angel," and "Tango in the Night." Might we get 2-3 of those songs on a tour? Possibly. And we did on this tour! Two new songs, "Sisters," "Say Goodbye," "Not That Funny" (which hadn't been done in FIFTEEN YEARS...to put that in perspective, that's the same length of time between Mirage and The Dance, and remember how big of a deal that was?). But this has never, ever, ever been a band that really shakes up its set list. Take a look at their sets from the Tusk tour on. They'll play a handful of tunes from whatever album they're promoting, and then stick to the hits. Would I love a tour where half the set is songs they haven't done in 10+ years, or ever? ABSOLUTELY. Am I happy with this current tour's set? ABSOLUTELY. |
Quote:
If FM wants to be a band -- and I would be fine with them just packing it in at this point because they are so stale -- then they should have new music. Ten years and counting since the last studio album. In the meantime, the two songwriters of the band have been producing new music. They are so prolific now that there's just no excuse. Really, this band has been taking fans for a ride since the mid 1990s, when it looked like they might actually do something cool and meaningful. Instead we got one decent, but not great, studio album, a bunch of retreads and a couple of live recordings. Compare that measly output -- even going back to 1977 -- to some of the more prolific bands of the 1990s, like Counting Crows, Cracker, Dave Mathews or Sheryl Crow, and you can see how pathetic FM really has been. They simply don't deserve the adoration they get here. I'm sorry if that offends some fans, but it's true. They are a washed-up musical collaboration that really can't collaborate. They would be better off retiring the band and going off on their own. But they know that as long as they feed people little drabs here and there, go on tour with their rickety tired old show, and continue to play up the Stevie-Lindsey thing, some people are still going to fall for it. Sad to say, FM has become precisely the thing that Lindsey fought so hard against for son long. Now he wants to justify it with the big machine/small machine stuff, but it must be killing him inside. Ten years or so ago he was still talking about artistic integrity. Do those words even pass his lips anymore? |
Quote:
As a band, they should bow, not after the show, but in shame. |
If you don't like the band, don't respect them, and feel they should retire...why don't you just step away from a message board...for FM fans? Seriously, if the glory years of FM are behind them and you feel you aren't getting what you need (which, I would imagine 90% of the thousands of people in the audiene would disagree with) ... abandon ship already!
And, really, judging something you haven't seen is not really going to pursuade those of us who have seen the show that we should send them potted plants in the Retired Rockers home. |
Quote:
|
This whole thread is so typical of this message board. I love all the loyalty to the Mac and its members that i am seeing from many of you here. I know that they are human and are not without fault, but they are 65 years old and have NEVER been ones to put a lot of consecutive albums out or be spontaneous or anything like that. Why is this such a newsflash to people?
To me, the negativity in this thread is why I dont post here much. I mostly dont consider this a FAN board...I consider this a place to come if you want to be picked apart down to your bones. While those who feel negatively about this tour may disagree, many years of being a member here has proven this over and over to me. |
Quote:
Fleetwood Mac (1975) . Rumours (1977) . Tusk (1979) . . Mirage (1982) . . . . Tango in the Night (1987) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Say You Will (2003) And nothing since. How many chances are we supposed to give them? I love Fleetwood Mac's music. Even without Christine, I think this lineup is capable of making timeless and classic music. They just don't care enough to do it, and why should they when there are fans willing to fork out thousands and thousands of dollars to hear the same old song and dance? Quote:
|
Quote:
And, frankly, I don't post here -- which is actually rather rare -- to "persuade" anyone but to express my views. And if my views of the band at this moment in time happen to be negative, that is what I have to offer. No one is forced to read anything. |
Quote:
LONG LIVE FLEETWOOD MAC. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved