Columbus Opening Night Thread - Audio, Video, Pics and More

[nicolasjz]

Originally Posted by WildHearted

While it would be great to hear many of those, that set-list has nearly 40 songs. It's simply too much. They're already playing for close to 2-3 hours with the 23 (?) they do.

I'm just happy they are still playing, honestly. I'm excited to hear the new songs and I'll be excited to hear all the rest, too.

Obviously I wasn't expecting them to play all of these songs. I consider this list a sample of their repertoire, not a concert setlist Not even Bruce can pull 40 songs in one night
I just think it'd be much more interesting if they paid more attention to these songs and less attention to their big radio hits.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

Stevie always sounds way worse on opening night of a fleetwood Mac tour. Oddly enough it does only apply to Mac tours. I don't recognize this curse on her tours. But watch any song from Pittsburgh march 1st 2009. Stevie's vocals were horrible. But by mid march, they had improved 100 percent. And there's no denying they'll have to improve again from what I've heard.

I'm jealous of the New Yorkers. It's hard to do that big city so early in the tour, but I know FM will bring it hard and I'd love to witness that.

Michele

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by StevieNicksfann

oh come on Sisters of The Moon and Not That Funny make a return along with Sad Angel and Without You plus Say Goodbye which was skipped last time. Those are not regular staples and thus have given 5 songs not regularly performed. It may not be 10 songs but it's not like they only changed 1 song. I say that's a fair compromise to cater to everyone's needs

Seriously. We all have songs we would like them to add, but they can only do so many deep tracks without alienating most of the audience who would much rather hear Landslide than some obscure track from TITTN. As long as they put in a few deep tracks, I'm happy. Let's be fair, folks, and not get all outraged because the entire set wasn't composed of Buckingham Nicks songs and B-sides. I mean we got freaking WITHOUT YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A freaking Buckingham Nicks demo!!!!!!!!!!! How can you say they are not being bold when they're doing a song like that?!

And I, for one, would be extremely disappointed if I didn't hear the awesomeness that is "I'm So Afraid."

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by FierySequences

Sad Angel exceeded my expectations.....I LOVED IT! Hope the band feels the same way! (I know LB does). I was impressed with the Tusk trio or (4) what's the word? Sara was even a decent version. I loved Sisters but was annoyed (just a little) by Stevie's repiticious "Sisters". Overall, Great Effort!

I hope the reaction to Sad Angel that Stevie saw was enthusiastic enough for her. Not everyone hates new music -- although the people around you would have proven her fears true! So wonderful that you got the club level ticket!

Michele

[John Run]

Originally Posted by sodascouts

Seriously. We all have songs we would like them to add, but they can only do so many deep tracks without alienating most of the audience who would much rather hear Landslide than some obscure track from TITTN. As long as they put in a few deep tracks, I'm happy. Let's be fair, folks, and not get all outraged because the entire set wasn't composed of Buckingham Nicks songs and B-sides. I mean we got freaking WITHOUT YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A freaking Buckingham Nicks demo!!!!!!!!!!! How can you say they are not being bold when they're doing a song like that?!

Been a long time since I posted, but seriously folks, exactly what Nancy wrote is so spot on. These are 60 year old plus people that are going far back into their catalog and debuting new music, not to a small group of like minded people, but to an audience of 15,000 each night!

[FierySequences]

Originally Posted by WildHearted

While it would be great to hear many of those, that set-list has nearly 40 songs. It's simply too much. They're already playing for close to 2-3 hours with the 23 (?) they do.

I'm just happy they are still playing, honestly. I'm excited to hear the new songs and I'll be excited to hear all the rest, too.

LOL, I love you WildEyed and WildHearted! That's Not a suggested set-list, per se. Just a collection of the songs (3-5, at best) Or 10 for us die hards, that "Could" be incorporated into the show, along with some hits.

Throw us a bone....we ARE the ones who buy Every CD (reIssue upon reIssue), attend concerts and buy the frivilous merchindise, buy the DVD's, "making ofs", Books, etc.

This is NOT in any way a deversion to my Original post. I enjoyed the show a Great deal. Glad they are healthy and still performing. Just commentary to observations on how other posters think we die hards should be grateful. I am grateful, I pay good money to support my favorite band and reserve the right to post an honest opinion here.

[vivfox]

Originally Posted by JohnL

This is the ONLY reason that I sometimes regret FM touring. All of the Lindsey fans start the Stevie voice bashing. While her voice isnt at the octave and range that it used to be, she sounds great on the samples I heard from last night to me. Without You is not stellar by any means but I personally dont think Lindsey sounds too great on it either.

This Chiff totally disagrees with you. Lindsey sounds wonderful on Without You and his smooth, clear vocal drowns hers out completely. I know her voice sounds great live nowadays but on this song she sings it flat and dull. I bet it is gonna get dropped.

[michelej1]

The Examiner by Chad Hobbs, April 5, 2013
http://www.examiner.com/review/fleet...tionwide-arena

Fleetwood Mac returned to the stage for the first time in over three years at Columbus' Nationwide Arena tonight. The quartet, having long lost fifth member Christine McVie to retirement, looked and sounded as good as ever as they played 23 songs over two and a half hours which included two encores. Celebrating their landmark album, Rumours, the band highlighted the set list with 7 tracks from the record. Tusk and the self titled album were both well represented also.

Adding to the set list were some new music, a Stevie Nicks solo hit, and a few songs from the Mirage and the Tango in the Night albums. Lindsey Buckingham easily highlighted the show with his ridiculous and underrated ability to play the guitar with songs such as "Big Love" and the chilling "I'm So Afraid". Not only is he vastly underrated, but the passion and energy that he pours into his music is more apparent than most other artists could even aspire to portray. Stevie Nicks dazzled as well with her timeless voice and iconic stage presence; especially on songs like "Rhiannon"; "Gold Dust Woman"; "Landslide"; and "Silver Springs".

I'm So Afraid.

Not to be forgotten, the thumping backbeat provided by founding members Mick Fleetwood and John McVie are the heart and soul of the band. McVie's legendary bass riff leading into the guitar solo in "The Chain" is easily one of my most anticipated parts of any song I've ever heard. Fleetwood's work behind the kit also might tend to get lost with the spotlight out front on Nicks and Buckingham but with a closer listen you can't help but notice the seriousness and heavy hitting going on in songs like "Tusk" and how, in perfect harmony with the bass lines, it compliments Buckingham and Nicks' work up front.

Having never seen Fleetwood Mac, I had been anticipating this moment for well over a decade, probably since my dad first introduced me to the The Dance live album and I first heard "I'm So Afraid". While the band members are well into their sixties now, you couldn't tell that by the sound coming from the stage tonight, as Fleetwood Mac brought it, just as I knew they would. Supremely confident, yet professionally humble; the band delighted the 16,000 or so in attendance on the opening night of a tour that is going to hit over sixty cities worldwide.

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Hell, I'd prefer "Welcome To The Room...Sara" because it's never been done live, it's never been considered a hit, she can still hit those notes, and it wouldn't tarnish an otherwise impeccable image I have of a song.

Yeah, it would be hard to tarnish a song that is already painful to listen to in its original recorded version. Self-indulgent rambling that borders on incoherence.

I know, I know, a matter of opinion.

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by michelej1

Lindsey's stomach wouldn't be so big if he would stop wearing tight pants that give him a raging muffin top.

Give 'em a rest Lindsey.

Michele

It's a trade off. He doesn't have a belly with the looser pants but we get a baggy backside. The tighter ones emphasize his butt nicely.

/shallow

[drag00n]

Originally Posted by Sanne2

I really like Sad Angel, it's different from what I expected, more uptempo.
I want to hear Sisters!!

Best I have found so far!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoqUAmLBnRQ

I liked Sad Angel but... there is just something not quite right and I have a bad feeling...

[shackin'up]

Originally Posted by sodascouts

Yeah, it would be hard to tarnish a song that is already painful to listen to in its original recorded version. Self-indulgent rambling that borders on incoherence.

I know, I know, a matter of opinion.

No way, that is a truthfull analysis.

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by michelej1

Heavy persuasion. It was hard to breathe.

I'm not posting your entire review because of space considerations, but I want to thank you for it and say I agree with pretty much everything you said!

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by sodascouts

I'm not posting your entire review because of space considerations, but I want to thank you for it and say I agree with pretty much everything you said!

And thank you for telling us about Mick's meet and greet. I will be doing that later on in the tour and was very curious.

Michele

[MikeVielhaber]

Everyone keeps saying "Sad Angel" is different than what they were expected. Considering the information and descriptions they've given in recent interviews about the song it's right about exactly what I expected.