Prolific band
 

Now here is a band making new music…
The Stones advertise new album…..Hackney Diamonds..
That will be their 31st Album.
Rumours five made 8 ( if you count The Dance and BuckVie )
That’s so tragic.

That's the egos of you know who, and you know who. :wavey:

The Brits had 4 albums between 1972-1974:lol:

I suppose 12 albums from 1967 to 1979 (13 if we count the Chess jam album) was pretty good going. But oh, what could have been...what did someone say once-
"Rumours was the sound of Fleetwood Mac exploding; Tusk was the pieces of the band falling back to earth" Something like that, anyway.

In 50 years, there probably should be more albums.

Stones fans gripe about the output of new music being minimal and for set lists being stale. However, even in their most recent tour in 2022, the set had variation from night to night. And they were playing a newish song from 2020 each night. Fleetwood Mac would never.

This album is a long time coming. I’m certain it will be the last by the boys and will include Charlie’s drumming on several tracks and apparently a return by Bill Wyman on one song. It will get panned for certain (derp derp it isn’t Exile!) and probably have some of the pros and cons that every Stones album has had for 40 years now.

It certainly is tragic. The Stones have never really stopped, despite a 4-year sulk in the 80s. Even if the albums have slowed down compared with their glory days, they've carried on touring, and have released a huge amount of classic live shows, on CD and DVD. Stones forums still find plenty to gripe about though - but nothing compared to us... The Stones are a going concern; Fleetwood Mac is a defunct pop group.

The frustrating thing is that some members of FM have always wanted to work. Chaotic as Mick may be, he's certainly been driven to keep the band going. And Lindsey pushed for new music since his return in 97.

The problem is, what made them so beguiling and work so beautifully as a band is what drove them apart - that unique, wonderful chemistry.

We all dreamt of a perfect ending for them, but perhaps what we got was always inevitable.

Well said. I agree with this post.

If Stevie didn’t go solo…we would have had a Fleetwood Mac album in 1981, 1983, 1985 and 1989. It is what it is but Stevie going solo in 1981 kind of changed everything.

That would mean that Lindsey left the band because of Stevie's presence? I don't think that was the only reason.

August 7, 1987 Lindsey apologised. "Look, I'm sorry. I just can't do any more. I've given twelve years of my life to this band! I've done it all arranged, produced, played guitar, sang. I just can't . . . hack it . . . and do it all anymore."
Christine spoke now. "What do you mean, Lindsey, do it all?" Her tone was withering. (Mick's first book)

Even if these words are not completely accurate, I do think Lindsey just wanted to go solo, and Tango was a favor to his friend Mick.

That's my tone too when he or any other folks try and paint it like he was the only one crafting, writing, singing, arranging etc. The more I listen to the complete FM works, (not just the B/N period), the more I understand that he had some killer raw material and amazing support in the other members and crew. Look at what they did for Rhiannon, Monday Morning and Crystal.

If Stevie didn’t go solo and the rest of the band followed Lindsey’s “Vision “ after Tusk, I think we would’ve had more Fleetwood Mac alums and No need for all the solo carriers.

Yep, something crummy happened, whatever it was. After Tusk and the tour, Fleetwood Mac lost its enthusiasm for group music-making. The whole dynamic was fractured from that point on. Everything the group did after that probably felt like a chore for each member. “Fleetwood Mac” became a day job for them, hobbled by inertia and “don’t-give-a-f***”

Those musical comparisons to the Beatles in Rolling Stone in the seventies were totally apt. Fleetwood Mac fractured the way the Beatles did, with a lot of the same mood states damaging the pretty group picture. When the members of a band all wish they were elsewhere, that’s what you get.

All of the members were frustrated with the recording of Tusk because of Lindsey, including the crew, according to Richard, Ken, Mick, and Stevie. Read any interviews, articles, or books about that period for more info. Add on to that that the album barely went platinum and led to a year long tour that somehow didn’t make the band the money they were expecting, and it’s easy to see that THAT is what led to FM taking a break. They even agreed to take a year long break, which is when Stevie made her first album. Frankly, I’m surprised they ever bothered to record Mirage, it’s clear no one’s heart was in it and it shows. Not a disaster but you simply can’t compare Mirage to the first three albums and say it’s as good. Some good songs, but as an album, it doesn’t hold a candle. Same thing with Tango, except every song by Christine is killer with the exception of Mystified. Again, Tango as an album cannot hold a candle to the first three.

I say Tusk is what changed everything, not anyone’s solo work, including Christine’s or Lindsey’s.

I agree Tusk did change everything. If they took the year off and then went back in the studio without all the baggage things could have been very different. Tusk worked as a double album and had a solo feel to it because of Lindsey’s experiments. The next release should’ve been a Fleetwood Mac not 2 solo albums. IMO.