"If Christine McVie isn't on board, then it doesn't count"
 

Here's an internet posting with which I agree 100%.

From http://steelyankee.blogspot.com/2008...ack-again.html

Agreed, but it's doubtful she'll be back. I think she has pretty much made it clear her performing days are over now. Of course one can always hope upon a lucky star ... and we've certainly seen our share of celebs and stars who pack it in for good, only to reprise a while later. :D

Otherwise :sorry: but here's to wishin'

Hmmm

Controversial opinion.

I think the band lack the balance that Christine gave them and of course that voice.

It's not an opinion that most would agree with but yes (for me at least) if she's not there it's not the real deal

Gail

If Bob Welch were picked up in her place, then frankly I wouldn't care. THAT lineup I would pay to see in a heartbeat. :nod:

Hmmm, wonder what Lindsey + Dave Mason would sound like paired together?

But that's the point. It doesn't matter who is in the band as long as Mick and John are in the band. That's part of the wonder of Fleetwood Mac!

Yes, I definitely think it's the genuine Mac without Christine. But I like the 5 of them together -- or if forced to reduce, I'll take the three songwriters -- better than I like any one of them by him or herself. I live for the dame, the gal and the guitarist.

And I feel I never got a last concert from Christine. I want that. I don't feel complete. No goodbye. No closure.

Michele

The only reason I don't like this logic is she wasn't a member during the Green years, and that most certainly counted.

BTW, if they bring back anybody, I'd love to see Rick Vito come back to do some of the Green-era stuff. Bob Welch and/or Billy Burnette wouldn't be bad, either. For that matter, I liked the way Bekka Bramlett sang Christine McVie songs better than Stevie.

As good as they come as a backbone in the biz, no doubt about it, but let's be real here also. What sets FM apart is the great frontmen and leading ladies they have employed over the years, each adding uniquely to the namesake sound. That will always remain the wonder of Fleetwood Mac to me! [and chops to Fleetwood and Mac in that department -- they're either remarkably talented in that regard (spotting and enlisting talent), or incredibly lucky -- or both!]

There is NEVER closure with Fleetwood Mac. Not with Green, not with Spencer, or Kirwan, Weston, Welch, Mason, Bramlett, etc. It's a never ending conundrum, part of the mystery - and even allure - I suppose. Come to think of it, Christie is more complete than many of the others, most of whom slipped off into the night.

So many possibilities, so little time. :eek: :p :laugh:

Well, I wasn't a fan for any of those. So, I'm closed on that score;). I just want Christine.

Michele

Wa wha WHAT??!! :eek: Hold on, I'm about to faint...

* thud *





Is there such a thing as blasphemy around these parts? :shocked:

If it's a FM record, it always counts--regardless of who is on it. That philosophy has kept the band chugging along even when it seemed to do so on one wheel.

I think, Time would have been more interesting if there were no Dave Mason (horrible contributions there) and no Christine (great contributions). Becka and Billy coulda' done their own, unified thing. Christine coulda' done that solo album she was talking about.

More Christine--even if it means apart from the band--is my philosophy.

Maybe it "counts" as Fleetwood Mac without Christine ... but to me the band is now missing its heart and soul. I think that may have been the point the person who wrote that post was trying to make.

By the way, this is not my feeling about the PRE-Christine Mac. I like the early Peter Green band just fine. But I think of them as virtually a different band, for which the name "Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac" can be used. That was a blues band (with some pop/rock elements) that ended when Peter left the band. Then the band recreated itself, and the sound of the band made a fairly abrupt turn toward pop/rock. Christine has been present for the band's entire pop/rock history up until the last album, and in my thinking she is an essential ingredient of the band in its long-enduring pop/rock incarnation. Something is very seriously missing without Christine.

Very nicely put

Gail

For someone as talented and well versed as DM, his contributions were pretty weak indeed. That said, I still think I would like to see him paired with LB in a concert setting. Not sure if it would really work, but it's an intriguing notion, since both are masters of the stage and live settings.

That's odd, as I always have viewed CM as the ultimate (dare I say "Perfect") compliment or supplement, as opposed to the heart and soul of FM. Peter Green, Danny Kirwan, Bob Welch, and Lindsey Buckingham I have always viewed as carrying the H&S leadership torch, but never Christy.

Decent argument, only I'd beg to differ on one account, a critical one IMO. That is, the band "recreated itself" aspect. FM sound and identity has always been evolving, even in the PG era. Their sound changed considerably - and for the better IMHO - when Green enlisted Kirwan, who first brought in rock/pop elements and sensibilities to the band (kinda like adding a dose of McCartney to a Lennon palette). Then Play On was the culmination of that synthesis. When Green departed, Kirwan and Spencer took the FM torch and further distanced the band's sound from their pure blues-rock roots, with a little help from Christy into the bargain. After Bob Welch came aboard, it was a straight-up rock-n-roll band, with but a touch of blues-rock and jazz pizazz. Then came B&N, which further pushed the pop (a very smooth sounding pop) envelope.

As I have always seen it, having followed the group from its early days (even watching Bob Welch shut down a concert in mid-flight due to poor audience response), it's been a continual evolution, as opposed to an accumulation of separate sound units. I definitely agree that their history could be divided into three "waves" or periods, but fact is they have all been thoroughly connected and overlapped, with Fleetwood and Mac (J. McVie) serving as the continuum or glue so to speak.

If you want a "recreated itself" scenario, look no further than the Moody Blues. When led by Denny Laine (later of Wings fame) initially, they were a true Birmingham blues-rock unit. When he departed in '66 and Justin Hayward and John Lodge came aboard, the band truly recreated its sound and stage image, quite consciously (purposefully), even when 3 of the 5 originals remained on board. Hayward took center stage, and with the help of Mike Pinder's mellotron and producer Tony Clarke, they never looked back.

Good point, and I totally agree. Danny's contribution was the "pop/rock" element in the band during the Peter Green years. By the way, I absolutely love Danny's songs; he is my third favorite Mac member (after Chris and Bob).

It would be interesting to visit a parallel universe where Peter and then Jeremy didn't succumb to outside influences and leave the band, to see how the band might have continued to evolve with that lineup intact. They most certainly would, considering how different 'Then Play On' was from the previous, more blues-centered records.

Danny was a true ace, a child prodigy of R&R. Is it any wonder Mick was so hesitant to cut him? With Green's prodding and nurturing, he was on a blaze towards ever greater heights. The shame, the tragedy, is that Peter and Danny couldn't have played on.

Then again we may not have seen Bob Welch if that were the case, or Christine McVie in all her wonder, or - egads - Buckingham & Nicks. So in another sense, maybe it worked out for the best. They certainly left us some choice pearls before their days were done.

I also have to say we are very lucky Kiln House was produced. On that transitional production Jeremy Spencer really shines bright, a fitting and lasting tribute to his influence in the FM legacy. Danny worked nicely with him on both vocal and instrumental interplay (just like DK did with Welch later on), and we further catch our first glimpse of sweet Christie's vocals.

You really can't appreciate all that Fleetwood Mac is without visiting their early and middle periods. The superstardom phase we all know about (and it was good, very good).

The parallel universe concept -- I like that. ;)

Christine was, without a doubt, the stellar center point in the "Rumours" era of the band, no question. To a certain extent, Stevie and Lindsey owe their success to her (and vice versa). However, band member mutations are a natural occurance in the history of Fleetwood Mac; that's what really defines them -- their tenacity!

Rejoyce in the fact that Christine has had a longest tenure with the band, aside from Mick and John. So many others came and went, and she endured the lows and eventually enjoyed the highs. And she knew when it was time for her to bow out of heavy obligations that come with being in the band. She chose to live more placidly. I respect her for that.

She could have left under worse circumstances:

Dissapeared and joined a cult while on The Dance Tour

Demanded that the band give way all their money

Screwed around with Mick's wife

Became too much of drunk to perform

Had to check into a mental ward
...

Mick might have liked that.

Michele

Yeah... My friend Mr Bill refers to Fleetwood Mac now as "Fleetwood Mac-lite" It's a shame really. I'm glad to see them continuing on, but I do miss Christine. It's almost like a different band now.

My feelings about the band without Christine must be similar to the way the fans of the Peter Green-era Mac felt many years ago when Peter left. They must have thought, "well, this new bunch of musicians is interesting, but without Peter, they're missing the element that made me love them."

Of course, many PG-era fans disliked the pop direction the band took without him. The comparison breaks down because now because the band isn't taking a radically new direction without Christine. But without her they are missing the element that made me love them. Lindsey and Stevie are still going to put out good music but without Chris's contribution, I think the band is missing something crucial. Of course they're still Fleetwood Mac without her, but a diminished version of the band. "Fleetwood Mac Lite" as the previous poster said. That about says it all, in my opinion.

I miss Christine as well. But it was the same when Lindsey was gone, when Lindsey & Stevie were gone. Those five pieces make magic. And they can be magical in different configurations, but it's just different.

Actually, I think that's a first-rate idea -- Rick could inject some much-needed energy into the show. He and Mick have been dynamite in the Blues Band tour, and besides, he learned all the songs 20 years ago. :p

The scenario of Rick playing alongside Lindsey is intriguing, but probably falls into the hell-freezing-over category....

Clever. :laugh: Don't forget left due to exhaustion, as in shades of '74.

And ... Accomplished all that realistically could be expected, as in shades of '74 ... oh, wait ... as in shades of '98!

That could also be called knowing when to quit >> aka >> gettin' out while the gettin's good! ;)

FM Lite. Some of us have been thinking this way for the last 20 years. The Dance was a nice revisit to the past, but they should have "beefed things up" not all that long after Tusk imo. Adding a second guitarist/songwriter may have righted the ship more, which was arguably listing as early on as that.

Not so fast old timer. To all our surprise it may have been closer than you think. But who would have been the "mystery side axe," that's the bigger question. Vito? Burnette? BOTH? Lookey here for more (note in particular where Handsome Steve shocks the monkey): :D

http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showth...t=15567&page=6