Rock n Roll Tombstone-Fleetwood Mac 1967-2009

[mike_nh]

Hard to imagine rock n roll without this band.

[chiliD]

We've been "without" them more than "with" them the last 25 years; so, I doubt life will be that difficult after they're officially "no more".

[louielouie2000]

Originally Posted by chiliD

We've been "without" them more than "with" them the last 25 years; so, I doubt life will be that difficult after they're officially "no more".

Ehh, that's arguable. You argue about the validity of the Rumours crew being a band post 1980, yet you give creedence to the 1988-1994 period, so let's break it down in decade increments:

From 1975-1985 they put out 4 albums (Fleetwood Mac, Rumours, Tusk, Mirage)
From 1987-1997 they put out 4 albums (Tango, Behind the Mask, Time, Dance)
From 1998-2008 they put out 1 album (Say You Will)

Obviously they were most active pre 1975... so we can certainly say we've been without them more the past 10 years than ever in history. I guess it's preparing us for the end. I just hope they record one last GOOD album to be remembered by. I'd hate for Say You Will to be their swan song .

[mylittledemon]

Originally Posted by chiliD

We've been "without" them more than "with" them the last 25 years; so, I doubt life will be that difficult after they're officially "no more".

HA! I love your curmudgeonly dismissal. Yer just silly now. Come on. You KNOW you don't mean it.

The last 25 years has give us Mirage, Tango in the Night, Behind the Mask, Time, The Dance and Say You Will. Not to mention The Chain set and Live in Boston...

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

HA! I love your curmudgeonly dismissal. Yer just silly now. Come on. You KNOW you don't mean it.

The last 25 years has give us Mirage, Tango in the Night, Behind the Mask, Time, The Dance and Say You Will. Not to mention The Chain set and Live in Boston...

Time for a math refresher. Mirage was released in 1982. It's now 2008. That was 26 years ago. Also, I have a hard time including The Dance on that list. How hard could it have been to basically do a greatest hits live album with Viacom, Warner Bros., and Clear Channel on your side? Four studio albums in 25 years, ONE studio album in ten years...Yeah, I've moved on.

Compared to my new favorite artist, Robert Pollard, the Mac's output since 1987 has been laughable at best. He released three full length albums, one double album, a mini-EP, a "comedy" album of stage banter, a self-published art magazine, and a Best Of compilation LAST YEAR. He's already released three albums, an EP, and a self-published magazine of funny stories this year AND has an art book coming out next month, and has close to FIVE albums in the can. He has also released a series of 12 7" singles since last July. He's done more in two years that the Mac have done in two decades.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Compared to my new favorite artist, Robert Pollard, the Mac's output since 1987 has been laughable at best. He released three full length albums, one double album, a mini-EP, a "comedy" album of stage banter, a self-published art magazine, and a Best Of compilation LAST YEAR. He's already released three albums, an EP, and a self-published magazine of funny stories this year AND has an art book coming out next month, and has close to FIVE albums in the can. He has also released a series of 12 7" singles since last July. He's done more in two years that the Mac have done in two decades.

I wouldn't even want Fleetwood Mac to do half of that stuff. Here guys, here's $50, do not release a comedy album of stage banter. Not that they aren't funny mind you, it's just . . .

Michele

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Time for a math refresher. Mirage was released in 1982. It's now 2008. That was 26 years ago. Also, I have a hard time including The Dance on that list. How hard could it have been to basically do a greatest hits live album with Viacom, Warner Bros., and Clear Channel on your side? Four studio albums in 25 years, ONE studio album in ten years...Yeah, I've moved on.

Compared to my new favorite artist, Robert Pollard, the Mac's output since 1987 has been laughable at best. He released three full length albums, one double album, a mini-EP, a "comedy" album of stage banter, a self-published art magazine, and a Best Of compilation LAST YEAR. He's already released three albums, an EP, and a self-published magazine of funny stories this year AND has an art book coming out next month, and has close to FIVE albums in the can. He has also released a series of 12 7" singles since last July. He's done more in two years that the Mac have done in two decades.

(sniff, sniff) Why am I not your favorite band.....

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by michelej1

I wouldn't even want Fleetwood Mac to do half of that stuff. Here guys, here's $50, do not release a comedy album of stage banter. Not that they aren't funny mind you, it's just . . .

Fleetwood Mac couldn't do one. Maybe back in 1968-1970. Today it would be a self-help record about healing.

But, Bob is one funny mofo. It's mostly just trash talk (Bob was a jock in rough, blue collar part of Dayton), and it's hilarious. One time I saw GbV, and he came out holding a microphone in one hand and a bottle of beer and a cigarette in the other. He then went on to say this:

We are the fourth greatest band in the world. The first greatest band in the world is Pearl Jam. The second greatest band in the world is Radiohead. The third greatest band in the world is R.E.M. And we're number four! F*CK you Foo Fighters, we're number four.

Bob is one of the few guys who you can see, not know any songs, and still have an amazing time.

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

(sniff, sniff) Why am I not your favorite band.....

Because Lindsey Buckingham has turned the live show into his therapy session. I'm a social worker. That **** bores me to tears. I'm paying to have a good time, and that just makes it feel like a day at work. And, at the time, I was working at a homeless shelter, so Lindsey's whining seemed all the more rediculous. The last thing I want at a show is somebody recanting a therapy session. It's bull****. If he has nothing to say, then shut the eff up and play. Plus, I think it's bull**** that he charged $30+ and played, really, an hour's worth of music. The big event on a Saturday night should NOT be over by 10. Gee, great. I paid over $30 so you could play some songs -mostly live, though somewhat Memorex- and essentially have me be your emotional tampon because you were in one of the world's biggest bands, but they didn't think you **** rainbows. You know, you chould have just shut the hell up and played ALL of your songs off of Tusk instead of whining about the band not thinking glowing things about that album back in 1979. Quit bein' a pussy. [PS, the specific straw that broke the camel's back was something about realizing a dream he had wasn't going to come true, and that he had to allow himself time to mourn the loss of the dream. You know, when you've seen somebody mourn the loss of a mustard sandwich, losing a dream seems irrelevant.]

Bob charges $15-ish and turns it into a party, and I ain't talkin' 'bout a dancin' to the oldies party. I'm talking about a "how in the f*ck did I not get arrested last night" party.

[trackaghost]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Compared to my new favorite artist, Robert Pollard, the Mac's output since 1987 has been laughable at best. He released three full length albums, one double album, a mini-EP, a "comedy" album of stage banter, a self-published art magazine, and a Best Of compilation LAST YEAR. He's already released three albums, an EP, and a self-published magazine of funny stories this year AND has an art book coming out next month, and has close to FIVE albums in the can. He has also released a series of 12 7" singles since last July. He's done more in two years that the Mac have done in two decades.

Steve do you ever think of anything other than Robert Pollard/Guided By Voices these days? I'm starting to wonder if you are him.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by trackaghost

Steve do you ever think of anything other than Robert Pollard/Guided By Voices these days? I'm starting to wonder if you are him.

Well, I also think about my music, my job, and going to hockey and soccer games (and subsequently narrowly avoiding death and/or jail). But the rest is pretty much Bob. With a release schedule like that, there's always something new and fresh. Actually, it's sometimes hard to digest all of that new material. I'm definitely NOT him. I know him, and sometimes go drinking with him and his crew. Bob's an amazingly talented and genuine man and I feel extraordinarily lucky to know somebody like that. He lived the dream without selling out.

Although, I've been listening to Madison Blues (the rehearsal/live recordings of Christine's first Mac tour) a lot lately. Actually, I made a hypothetical album from the bits and pieces I have from that era, and think it may have been my favorite Mac album yet. Christine's voice could be a little rough at times, which isn't a bad thing for me. (I'd MUCH rather have rough over polished these days.)

1. Crazy 'Bout You
2. When Will I Be Loved (BBC Sessions)
3. Dragonfly
4. Purple Dancer
5. Down At The Crown
6. I Can't Stop Loving Her
7. Open The Door
8. Lonely Without You
9. When I See (BBC Sessions)
10. Preachin' (BBC Sessions)
11. It's Alright Now (from a bootleg I have from the tour)
12. Trinity

[aleuzzi]

Originally Posted by chiliD

We've been "without" them more than "with" them the last 25 years; so, I doubt life will be that difficult after they're officially "no more".

But a big part of the excitement of FM in the last 25 years has been the promise (no matter how distant) of new music--in whatever configuration. The band hasn't always measured up to the promise and, in some cases, their efforts were horribly underrated. Time, for instance, is a GOOD record. In fact, with the exception of the Dave Mason tracks, I prefer it to Behind the Mask. The Dance was charming and entertaining but, alas, thin: I resented the Grammy nomination because they were essentially being rewarded twice for their Rumors-era efforts. The four news songs were strong, and I would have enjoyed about four more.

Whatever the case, I imagine the band will continue on and on and on until Mick keels over at the age of 300.

[Musicman408]

Originally Posted by chiliD

We've been "without" them more than "with" them the last 25 years; so, I doubt life will be that difficult after they're officially "no more".

I have a hard time believing that they are completely calling it quits. I mean, they got back together for the Dance, so who is to say that that could never happen again in the future? I don't know, I still hold out hope.

[jwd]

Originally Posted by mike_nh

Hard to imagine rock n roll without this band.

Did I miss something? Where they going? Who died?

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by jwd

Did I miss something? Where they going? Who died?

Well, the post suggests they will die in 2009, even though I think their tour will last well into 2010, so I'm kinda scared here.

Michele

[jwd]

Originally Posted by michelej1

Well, the post suggests they will die in 2009, even though I think their tour will last well into 2010, so I'm kinda scared here.

Michele

Well, it's about time for another bogus Fleetwood Mac to take the stage. Last time that happened was when some chick named Bekka Bramlett(sp?) tried to take the place of Stevie Nicks. COME ON!!