I agree for those reasons completely! I love the Mirage concert. I love it for its rawness...and they had a great set list. And it was the only tour when Love In Store and Hold Me were ever performed.

I saw them on this tour and it was an amazing show. No one felt that something was missing because 10 other musicians weren't there to replicate the sound of a studio recording. Since 1975 they always adapted their heavily layered studio songs for live performance with just four instruments and three voices. It made for surprisingly different renditions...very suitable for a rock and roll arena show...much more raw and honest.

The Mirage concerts marked the end of this era. After Lindsey ditched the band, perhaps they lost some confidence in that more minimal approach on stage. Hired two guitarists, and added vocalists and numerous backup musicians. And alas, that overwrought tradition still continues to this day (although I understand with the exit of Christine, some backup is needed).

When it comes to live performances, I generally prefer the era 1975-1982. Yes, since then the band became more technically proficient in delivering the songs with a slicker more fuller style. But the sound lost some soul.

Given Lindsey's new mindset and minimal approach to Under The Skin, perhaps that will translate over to a new approach with Fleetwood Mac...whenever that happens. I'd love to see him and Stevie do something like he just did with his new solo album. Under The Skirt anyone?

I think the problem is... they are too old for that rawrness... voices have less range... they need the back up.... I honestly think part of Christine's departure had to do with the fact that they got pretty boring... or vanilla would be a better word.... You look at that Dance Concert and it's so watered down... and they can't don't really move like they used to... one of the great benifits was LB and Stevie could really move across the stage.... now they just kind of graze...... I think Stevie looks great for her age.. but both of their vocal ranges have become naturally smaller... they have paid their dues... i give them that... but the gig is almost up.... that's just natural science

I agree partially. Yes, vocal ranges are smaller. Some have been hear bad at some shows, we have heard dissapointing performances of Silver Springs, Farmer's Daughter, GYOW, etc.. and some songs are always bad comparing with what we used to hear in the 70s and early 80s.

But about they don't moving like they used to, yes it's a undeniable reality, but that doesn't make the show boring. Is it boring because Stevie doesn't scream or move in Rhiannon like in 1977?? I don't think so. I still think their shows are good.

The day that we see a really really bad show, that day (with lot of sadness) we will tell them.. Ok guys, it's time for you to go home and rest.. But I think they can play on few more times...

A lot of the things people complain about are crazy. Say what you want, but the 70's and 80's shows weren't always as wonderful and great as some people would have you believe. The Mac of '97 and '03-'04 may not be able to vocally and physically do what they could thirty years ago, but that is not to say the shows back then were always showing the band in tip-top shape.

And I can't imagine 57 yr old Stevie trying to put on a 1975-77 performance of Rhiannon today. It would be highly embarrassing and it would sound and look horrible. The shows are still good and these guys can still put out one hell of a product (album, concert, etc) if they want to.

I agree. Their shows, especially in the 1970s, were not always consistent. While I prefer the shows from that period, that in no way implies that I don't like the Fleetwood Mac of today. Nor would I expect any of them to be frozen in time and appear or sound like they did 20 something years ago.

Like with many other older bands, I guess it's just common nature for the volume of band members to expand (in concert that is)....along with their waist bands.