Does anyone here think of Time as a great album?

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by Mr Scarrott

I've just seen this video of the pre-Clinton inauguration press conference for the first time. It helps to clarify the timeline of Time a little.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Lc7hE9TIr0

At 8:36 Christine confirms that the band will be going into the studio in April (1993). Presumably by then, Billy Burnette had gone and Bekka and Dave were yet to be recruited. I guess this explains their near-total absence from her songs- there's clearly some Billy and Bekka overdubbing done later on, but it's quite subtle, I think.

This article from August 1994 confirmed that Christine was going to appear on the album

http://bla.fleetwoodmac.net/index.ph...2&id=6541&c=18

I think this might knock on the head the theory that the band presented a Christine-less album to Warners and her tracks were then recorded later on to make it more marketable (not that they bothered much, anyway).

I've always liked Time. With the odd exception, it hangs together better than it should.

I've only just seen this.
Thanks for that Mr Scarrott (and thanks to Nicole for the original Youtube posting, I believe). That was really interesting to watch. I guess- though Billy wasn't around at that time they knew he would be with them soon as they had the Superbowl gig already booked. I'm not quite clear though whether he was back in the band at the time of the Superbowl or whether he was just dropping in ad-hoc. What confuses me is why he didn't join them in the studio. I can't understand why Mick, Chris and John would have gone into the studio (in April of that year) without a recognised guitarist band-member with them. Anyway, Chris did indeed get her solo album but she had to wait another 10 years. It's interesting how they've compared FM with the Eagles in that article; how times have changed- I guess absence does indeed make the heart grow fonder.

Edit: it's also a lovely reminder of John being in interviews/press conferences