Fleetwood Mac is just so good!

[BombaySapphire3]

For three superb albums in the last half of the 1970s Fleetwood Mac was likely the closest thing that the era had to a Beatles..after this the band's chemistry was gone..sure they had more hits some of them quite good, but the post Tusk albums were wildly uneven compared to the trinity of Fleetwood Mac ,Rumours and Tusk.If they could have held onto their chemistry and not gotten sidetracked with all the solo projects perhaps they could have rivaled the Beatles at least for consistency, but as it stands they cannot.

[goldustsongbird]

*Fleetwood Mac was just so good.

I have the same thought every time I hear Rhiannon. The only thing that bothers me about the studio version is the chorus, but other than that? Ding dang goddamned perfection. Dreams, too, but Rhiannon comes first in terms of vocals.

[justcrazylove]

Woah woah woah there everyone, The Beatles are not even comparable! they are the greatest no questions asked! Fleetwood Mac are my favourite band and they have produced some of the greatest music of their generation, whereas the Beatles created the greatest music of all time. Furthermore if you honestly think that the beatles are not "extraordinary" musicians you have no idea about writing or playing music period!

I understand the love that we all have for Fleetwood Mac but this isn't a personal situation where "personally i believe" there is no question, the Beatles changed the landscape forever! for god sake, Revolver, Abbey Road, The White Album, George's eastern influences, John's Lyrics, Ringo's off kilter style, and Paul's melodic bass lines.

without John i don't think we would have Lindsey, Or Stevie, as we know them.

Please a bit of perspective!

[trackaghost]

Originally Posted by chiliD

Not really. It's pretty much FACT that the Beatles changed EVERYTHING (not just music) as a whole in the '60s and nothing since then has been the same. Everything else FOLLOWED the Beatles and there's really been nobody since then who has had that kind of impact. Bono WISHES, but he's just a Lennon poseur.

But none of what you have said acknowledges the fact that certain people may not enjoy their music as much as Fleetwood Mac. It is indeed down to preference. Erin said she appreciates and realises the contribution The Beatles made but FM's music means more to her. So to her they are better.
This idea that it's blasphemy to say anything negative about The Beatles has always baffled me. Just because they are probably, along with Dylan, one of the most important artists in music history doesn't mean you're going to like them. I think The Who are better than The Beatles, that doesn't mean I am saying they are as historically as important, that they made the same impact as The Beatles just that my preference leans towards The Who. Which is what, I believe Erin was saying the first place (only about FM).
I could argue all day that Citizen Kane is one of the most important, brilliant and influential films of all time that paved the way for some of your favourite movies but that doesn't mean you are going to like it more than, say, The Shawshank Redemption or some other beloved, popular movie.

[HomerMcvie]

Originally Posted by trackaghost

This idea that it's blasphemy to say anything negative about The Beatles has always baffled me.

Me too, Sharon! But in musician's circles, it IS considered blasphemy! I, for one, have never been much of a Beatles fan, but I DARE NOT ever speak that, around musicians.

They just don't really do it for me. The first band I ever fell in love with, was FM, and everything else has paled in comparison. I can appreciate the Beatles, and the impact they had on our culture, but that doesn't mean that they're my #1 band. Or #2, for that matter.

[GypsySorcerer]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

Me too, Sharon! But in musician's circles, it IS considered blasphemy! I, for one, have never been much of a Beatles fan, but I DARE NOT ever speak that, around musicians.

They just don't really do it for me. The first band I ever fell in love with, was FM, and everything else has paled in comparison. I can appreciate the Beatles, and the impact they had on our culture, but that doesn't mean that they're my #1 band. Or #2, for that matter.

I like the Beatles, but I don't think the sun rises and sets on them. One of my college friends (not a musician) held a personal grudge against anyone who disliked the Beatles. Seriously. I never told her my true feelings.

[gypsy4life]

I like the Beatles...but I LOVE Fleetwood Mac!!!
Why?----because they are just so good!! corny, I know, sorry

[thatgirlwasme]

Gosh, I didn't realize the thread I started would turn into an such an interesting discussion about The Beatles vs. Fleetwood Mac! I agree that it just comes down to preference. It's certainly possible to recognize and appreciate something while prefering something else. I certainly appreciate The Beatles, but I just like Fleetwood Mac much better. There's just something about the opening chords of Dreams, Rhiannon, Sara, or any number of Mac songs that just gives me chills because they are so good--I just don't get that with The Beatles.

A

[Janis_no1]

Yeah, i'm you on this... even yesterday i walked into an Oroton shop and Stand back was on... i just thought, how awesome, do the sales girls know just how good this music is! So of course stayed in the shop a little longer just to hear it.

[blondyy-x]

I like the Beatles, but a good part of their music sounds the same, and is bland. I agree that they did help shape music, but they aren't everything. There was many many artists before them, and many artists after them who also helped to shape and create music.

And back on topic - I love Fleetwood Mac

[Andy Man]

Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3

For three superb albums in the last half of the 1970s Fleetwood Mac was likely the closest thing that the era had to a Beatles..after this the band's chemistry was gone..sure they had more hits some of them quite good, but the post Tusk albums were wildly uneven compared to the trinity of Fleetwood Mac ,Rumours and Tusk.If they could have held onto their chemistry and not gotten sidetracked with all the solo projects perhaps they could have rivaled the Beatles at least for consistency, but as it stands they cannot.

While I don't know if FM (or any other band) could rival the Beatles in terms of cultural importance, I do agree with the trilogy comments. Those first three albums were all creative perfection and, for me, they are the three 'band' albums from FM (Rumours line-up). Just by listening to them you can feel the creative collaboration between band members and you do get a real sense of musical relationships. The albums after 1979 (expect maybe The Dance) have always felt like considerable efforts for the band - sometimes it feels forced. Now I love songs on Mirage and TITN - some songs are spectacular, but as albums they have less of that 'band' quality than the first three records. They feel more like individuals coming to play together rather than a unified band.

Oh and to add to the original topic of this thread - yes, Fleetwood Mac is sooooooooo good!

[FMlex]

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

Ummm... George Harrison?

[APerfectLie]

Who had the largest impact on the music industry and the world? The Beatles.

Who was the better band? Fleetwood Mac.

The Beatles were great, and they made a HUGE impact and are more popular than Fleetwood Mac today. But Fleetwood Mac is a much better band and I prefer their music over the Beatles any day.

[DavidMn]

Fleetwood Mac is and has been my favorite band for 34 years, basically my whole life. That's all I'm going to say. I PREFER them over the Beatles. Having said that I will leave it to others here who have forgotten more about music than I will ever know to judge who is "better."

[Meowi]

Yes Fleetwood Mac IS my favorite band
But sometimes we have to realise that it isn't the best in the world.