Fleetwood Mac Vs The Eagles - Pls Tell Me What You Think

[David A]

Ok. I have been listening to plenty and plenty of Eagles Stuff lately, and heres my comparison with them to Fleetwood Mac. Remember ! I LOVE !! Fleetwood Mac, But im starting to like The Eagles more and more

AS A BAND - I will have to say that I think as a Band over all, FM Are better. True, the Mac have had many line ups, but the LB/SN era is just better overall, they compliment each other really well, and I think as a band FM are better. The Eagles are to one sided IMO

LIVE ACT - Tough One, im gonna say FM again, The Eagles are rather boring live and In the Hey Day FM kicked butt on stage

VOCALLY - The Eagles are WAYYYYYY Better Than FM Vocally, I mean Henley and Frey sound so good today compared to how LB and SN sound. The Eagles harmonies and their vocals are by far the best I have ever heard, I mean dont get me wrong FM have good vocals to, but The Eagles vocals are way better, better then and now

MUSIC - Tough one, But FM have a wider variety of selection and have more music to choose from compared to The Eagles who keep releasing live concerts, greates hits. FM music is time less and has a wide variety of emotion. The Eagles have good music to, but FM take this one

PRODUCING, ETC. - FM ONLY because of LB, I like Henleys and Freys abilities, but LB is the genius

GUITARS - FM, but I tell you this I have seen Live In Melbourn and Hell Freezes Over, and I really like Don Felder. Joe Walsh is a avergage guitar player

BIGGER EGOS - Eagles because of Henley, I thought LB Was a bit arrogant during certain periods, but Henley is sooo arrogant its not even funny

Bottom line, I like the Eagles and they are legends, but FM take is bya score of like 10-7. I like Don Felder, and this guy they have now is soooo boring its not even funny

[DavidMn]

No contest for me, Fleetwood Mac all the way, although I do like the Eagles.

[HomerMcvie]

Vocally, I agree 100% that The Eagles now kick FM vocally(having Timothy B. Schmidt on the top harmony could make even Bob Dylan sound good!). Christine's the only one who can still sing in FM, and she ain't in FM anymore!

On guitars, I agree 100%! The DUMBEST thing the Eagles EVER did was fire Don Felder. He was on FIRE with great solos, -IMO- blowing that hack Joe Walsh OFF the stage! He played RINGS around Walsh. Walsh is extremely average.......I don't know how he ever got the reputation as a "great".

Lastly, Don Henley has one of the greatest voices in Rock history. Unfortunately, he's an ass, with the personality of a rock. I'd rather meet Osama Bin Laden than Henley.

[Gailh]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

I'd rather meet Osama Bin Laden than Henley.

Homer there's no need to hide what you really feel! We're all adults here - say it how it is Homer!

Gail

[Gailh]

I quite like The Eagles although their country rock kind of feel is something I never "got"

I don't tend to analyse music too much. Or why I like it.

For me there is no contest - Fleetwood Mac

Gail

[David A]

Tim B Schmidt really has a great voice and u know what hes not a bad bass player either

Henley just seems even more of a arrogant perfectionist than LB ever was

[SortaSavageLike]

I hate to say this, but...

They might be talented musicians, but with the exception of Joe Walsh's solo material, and a couple of songs on Hotel California, The Eagles just bore the life out of me. My mother was absolutely smitten with them (actually, I think she still is) and I had to listen to their Greatest Hits album over and over when I was younger. I used to like them but now I just turn the station whenever they come on.

My Fleetwood Mac fandom literally exists in a vacuum - it's my own damn fault. It wasn't forced down my throat by my parents, I just woke up one morning and realized that I was a fan.

[Villavic]

Well I'm a mac fan so it's hard to say something objective, but I'll do my best..
(I'll focus on the Rumours lineup, of course, since that was the friendly rivals era)

AS A BAND - I chose FM as the best, but I think people identifies Eagles as more.. american, for obvious reasons of course, so I think Eagles are more remembered as a legend.

LIVE ACT - Well I've never seen the Hell freezes over video completely. I can't, it's boring. The Dance is more exciting, though.. of course there were not the only shows.

VOCALLY - Henley and Frey may sound better than LB and SN sound, even than LB/CM/SN.. but the White-Tusk era gave us really good voice (studio) sounds .

MUSIC - It's hard to compare, but as a mac fan I find the FM music more complete. Eagles is sometimes monotonous.

PRODUCING, ETC. - LB with Richard Dashut were superb.

GUITARS - hard to choose.

BIGGER EGOS - Maybe Eagles have stronger egos,, but the Fleetwood Mac soup opera was exciting and thrilling!!

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by David A

GUITARS - FM, but I tell you this I have seen Live In Melbourn and Hell Freezes Over, and I really like Don Felder. Joe Walsh is a avergage guitar player

Felder isn't on Live In Melbourne...Henley & Frey kicked Felder to the curb after the Hell Freezes Over tour. (he subsequently sued them for "wrongful termination" and "unpaid royalties"...haven't heard outcome of lawsuit.)

[David]

Originally Posted by SortaSavageLike

I hate to say this, but...

They might be talented musicians, but with the exception of Joe Walsh's solo material, and a couple of songs on Hotel California, The Eagles just bore the life out of me.

The Eagles lack that obsessive, feverish quality that marks so many sides of Fleetwood Mac, from Peter's & Danny's injured psyches at the height of their fame & achievement to Fleetwood's & Buckingham's isolationist devotion to their respective muses.

When you think of or hear the Eagles, you hear professionalism & skill, but you don't get the sense that those guys had any more love for their music than they had for, say, sports or good food. I demand of my pop stars that obsessive, passionate fealty to the muse, & the Eagles are about as passionate as a plumbing job on the bathroom sink.

[HomerMcvie]

Originally Posted by Gailh

Homer there's no need to hide what you really feel! We're all adults here - say it how it is Homer!

Gail

Well Gail, I'm about as politically correct as...........an outhouse on a wedding alter.
I don't tolerate much molly coddling in my world.

[hmcannally]

I love Fleetwood Mac, indiviually and collectively just as I do the Eagles. Heart is my other Fav along with The Beatles;indiviually and collectively,The doors, Santana and more for a list someother time. FM wins out in The Long Run; sorry couldn't resist that one. I have not heard the Melbourne DVD all the way through but I love Frey and the rest of the guys on No More Stormy Nights or whatever the title to that fab song is. I could write about this all day but to be totallly honest I still stand that Felder and Walsh are ahead of Lindsey as my guitarist picks from the other thread. I think kicking Felder out for ANY reason for a mistake by the group that has hurt them despote theor Success of Hole In The World.

[aleuzzi]

The two groups have often been compared, but it's a bit of a false comparison, I think, since the Rumors lineup had two women and the Eagles always were and are men.

They both worked the same demographic and earned (somewhat inaccurately) reputations as easy-listening rock bands, but Mac is a band with far more personality and distinction. Live, they occasionally sing off key or hit wrong notes, and they do not pretend to be too polished, wheras an Eagles concert sounds like it's being recorded--all slick perfection. But give me the Mac anyday, with all of their off-tune harmonies and occasional messiness. They bewitch and transform their audience. The Eagles merely impress the crowd with their sophistication, intellignce, charm, and polish.

Besides, Christine and Stevie aren't just any two women. They are as original as they come. Even if the Eagles did have two female singers, I doubt they'd achieve the same distinctiveness.

[sodascouts]

I agree with aleuzzi - it's impossible to really put the two side by side, as they are so different, despite their direct competition in the market. Also, are we talking heydey here or now or does anything go? But being a huge fan of both groups, I'll try to do some overall comparisons.

First off, as a band, they have such completely different chemistries it's hard to say. As aleuzzi noted, a group of men is quite different from a group of men and women. Also, all of the Eagles songs, with a couple early exceptions, were co-written. In Fleetwood Mac, you have three distinct sounds emerging: Lindsey's guitar-centric pieces in the beginning, then the quirky beat-on-a-box, then the techo, then the acoustic, then the hyperproduced stuff on SYW. Next to that, you have Stevie and her dramatic vocals and imagery, Christine and her mellow "honey" voice. You buy a Fleetwood Mac album, you get a lot more variety than the Eagles. Again, all their songs are cowritten, the only thing changing is the lead singer. The guys mix it up - their songs certainly don't all sound the same - but there's not that huge contrast in sounds. This is more true after the Frey/Henley dominance. There used to be a difference between what you'd hear from Leadon and what you'd hear from Frey/Henley, for instance, but after Leadon left, not so much. Even Walsh's tunes were incorporated seamlessly into the Eagles sound at the time. Additionally, they take very few real risks.

As most people know, I have been to a horde of Fleetwood Mac and Stevie concerts, and even a Lindsey one. I have also been to some Eagles shows recently. Back in the day, Fleetwood Mac were far more compelling than the Eagles live. Although the Eagles rocked live as well, they really just kind of stood there and sang. Meanwhile Stevie was throwing herself to her knees and Lindsey was kicking her (hehe). OK, he wasn't always, but you get the idea. Even as late as the Dance, with the thick sexual tension, they beat out the Eagle's Hell Freezes Over video by far when it comes to entertainment value. HFO was so sedate it wasn't even funny, and the guys hardly ever looked at the camera. Henley raising his fist during the Last Resort was about as dramatic as that video got. Compare that to Stevie blasting Lindsey during Silver Springs or Lindsey's intense guitar solo during ISA and there's no contest. However, to be fair, HFO was not a representation of their live show at all. The HFO tour was chock full of energy and fun. Joe Walsh is an absolute riot on stage. Frey is always cracking jokes. So it starts getting tricky. You have to choose between sexual tension and masculine fun... what to do?!

The same holds true today. You won't see Glenn Frey and Don Henley doing slow dances while Timothy B. Schmit sings Love Will Keeps Us Alive, but they have a more playful vibe - guys having a good time. They seem more relaxed than the members of Fleetwood Mac. Lindsey and Stevie are so intense! But there's all that history, that drama.... again, it's hard to choose. (Side note: there are some interesting parallels between the Frey/Henley relationship and the Buckingham/Nicks relationship but that's another can of worms). If I put Farewell 1 next to Live in Boston though... Farewell 1 is more fun to watch. There's more laughter. Is it more interesting, though? That depends.

In order to decide, you might fall back on the way they do the songs live. Lindsey's incredible guitar solos surpass what I hear from Joe Walsh. I disagree that he is a "hack" - he can really rock it. I was very impressed by him. However, the Eagles do not have the kind of guitar showpiece songs that Lindsey does - no ISA, Big Love, Red Rover... Lindsey wows the crowd with his skill. Again, though, there's a different mood. Playful vs. intense.

So you might fall back on the quality of the vocals. The Eagles have it down. They are flawless onstage, mistakes rare, harmonies gorgeous. Stevie and Lindsey have rougher vocals, more mistakes, more variance from records. The Eagles actually pride themselves on sounding exactly like the record. But if Fleetwood Mac had the same attitude, people would be going to the bathroom during ISA rather than rocking out to it. In the studio, ISA is a snooze. Live, it's a beast. Which do you prefer? The rougher edges or the smooth cut? That's how you decide which you'd rather hear live.

It's hard to compare the Eagles' canon of music with Fleetwood Mac's because they have far less. Also, the FM canon includes everything from the early blues of Peter Green to what we hear today. During Fleetwood Mac's long period of time, you will find more inconsistencies in quality than you will on the Eagles albums, but is it really fair to judge it that way? They both have incredible songs, and they both have sucky songs. What's worse - Family Man or Disco Strangler? Hard to say. So I leave this one up in the air.

When it comes to producing, the Eagles have a smoother sound again, but if you like risk-takers, you'll go with Lindsey. That said, I find some of Lindsey's risks to be mistakes, but I guess you win some, you lose some. The Eagles arrange sophisticated harmonies with nuanced variations that belie what at first seems simplistic. However, the brilliance of the arrangement of Gypsy... less conventional, but oh-so-effective. So we have more consistency in arrangement with the Eagles, whereas Fleetwood Mac has the highest of highs (like Gypsy) and the lowest of lows (like The Ledge, IMHO).

In terms of egos, nowadays, Henley seems to have mellowed somewhat. He also seems to defer to Glenn Frey on a lot of stuff having to do with the band. Meanwhile, Frey is complimenting everybody in the band except himself. Walsh and Schmit stay quiet. Back in the day... well, that's another story. Back then these guys were fighting over who got the biggest hotel room. However, Lindsey and Stevie's battles had a lot to do with ego, too, didn't they? Even now... the Say You Will documentary and the fights over who gets to name the album... and that's just what they let us see! But what about band egos overall? Well, the Eagles threatened not to show up at the Rock'nRoll Hall of Fame unless they got to go last, after Fleetwood Mac. That says a lot.

Which band comes out on top? It depends on what you're looking for, in the end. There's no way to quantify it. It's different for everyone. So I say... both.

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by David

The Eagles lack that obsessive, feverish quality that marks so many sides of Fleetwood Mac, from Peter's & Danny's injured psyches at the height of their fame & achievement to Fleetwood's & Buckingham's isolationist devotion to their respective muses.

When you think of or hear the Eagles, you hear professionalism & skill, but you don't get the sense that those guys had any more love for their music than they had for, say, sports or good food. I demand of my pop stars that obsessive, passionate fealty to the muse, & the Eagles are about as passionate as a plumbing job on the bathroom sink.

Oh, I hear passion in the Eagles' vocals, definitely. Obsessive? It's said that the reason the Long Run took so long to make was that they were obsessing over very note and lyric. I do think it's true that they weren't as single-minded as some of the Mac members, especially Lindsey. They actually left the studio occasionally. lol