I have all the Buckingham Nicks era stuff, what now?

[EricBliss12345]

Oh I showed it to him the minute I did it. He knows I'm playin.

I'm lucky I edited what I DID write or I'd have been so out of here permanantly. I hate having to do that, but oh well.

[EricBliss12345]

resume pre B/N albums convo

[chiliD]

Originally posted by mylittledemon
Hey ChiliD, that's jut my opinion. If we were all alike, we'd be completely boring wouldn't we? At any rate...Time is a terrible album. Aside from Mick and John's constant as musicians and Christine's voice/writing the album is terrible. Bekka Bramlett is a joke. Out of the Cradle by Lindsey is fantastic and underrated, and Stevie's first solo album is solid.

Then state it as "your opinion". You stated it as "fact"...not just originally, but above, too. Time is NOT a terrible album. YOU think it is, *I* think it isn't. I love Bekka's voice. I've been a Dave Mason fan since his days in Traffic. I like Billy Burnette, too. I think if this lineup would've been kept together for at least one more album (without Christine, who I think hi-jacked Time by not touring), they would've been better accepted.

Out of The Cradle: yeah, it's Lindsey's best album. But, it is also very self-indulgent (as just about ALL of Lindsey's material is)

Bella Donna: again, one of Stevie's best, but between BD & TISL, she released alot of crap (in MY opinion), too.

I think Rumours is boring, too...so what?

[mylittledemon]

Hey that's cool. You're entitled to that. Next time I state my opinion, which is what these forums are all about, maybe I should make it more clear. I wouldn't want anyone to get the impression that every idea I have about Fleetwood Mac is FACTUAL. At any rate, I'm not the one who's acting I'm like dumber for having heard someone else's thoughts. I respect what you feel about the early/latter Mac stuff and I'm not putting it down. So nanny nanny poo poo.

One more thing about Bekka Bramlett. I saw this bootleg video of her and the Mac that looked like they were playing at some club. Billy/Mick/John were there. She was singing this godawful version of Gold Dust Woman while wearing cut off shorts. I wanted to barf.

[chiliD]

And, I saw the same thing and thought that was the 2nd best version of "Gold Dust Woman" I ever saw/heard (closely behind Stevie's version w/Sheryl Crow at Central Park). See? We're NEVER going to agree on that lineup, so let's agree to disagree and call a *truce*, eh?

[mylittledemon]

WOW. Second best version of Gold Dust Woman!? That's hardcore. You really must've liked TIME. Bramlett totally butchered that song. I think the best version I've seen is on the Dance DVD. I love the screaming part.

[chiliD]

I like Fleetwood Mac.

I like Billy Burnette & Rick Vito's version of "Oh Well" the best.

I like Bob Welch's version of "Green Manalishi" the best.

I like Lindsey's version of "Station Man" the best.

And, as I said, I like Bekka's version of "Gold Dust Woman" over any other FLEETWOOD MAC version.

Doesn't matter to me...it is just Fleetwood Mac playing Fleetwood Mac songs...regardless of "personnel".

For all of Christine's contributions to the band and have them only play "Don't Stop" in the current set really irks me; and to have the current Fleetwood Mac totally ignore any material prior to 1975 is just sad.

I get annoyed when the Rumours lineup is deified as the "be all & end all of Fleetwood Mac". Sure they were the most well-known, but that doesn't automatically make them "the best" incarnation.

But, then, in the whole scheme of things it seems really moronic to be arguing about some pop/rock band...there's a whole string of things that are infinitely more important and should take priority, in our daily lives.

[face of glass]

Then state it as "your opinion". You stated it as "fact"...not just originally, but above, too. Time is NOT a terrible album. YOU think it is, *I* think it isn't. I love Bekka's voice. I've been a Dave Mason fan since his days in Traffic. I like Billy Burnette, too. I think if this lineup would've been kept together for at least one more album (without Christine, who I think hi-jacked Time by not touring), they would've been better accepted.

I agree. When I bought the album not too long ago, I had to seriously nullify my head in order to give it an unbiased listen. And when I did listen to it, it didn’t turn out to be the loathsome monster I was told it was. I think some people are seriously overreacting when they’re discussing Time. Yes, I can understand the hatred towards “Blow By Blow” and “These Strange Times”, but otherwise not. If you hate Billy/Bekka/Dave, it’s most likely because you they’re not Buckingham and Nicks. It has to be accepted before giving the album a proper listen. You shouldn’t expect the album to sound like the Rumours era anyway; the only thing that hints at it is of course the rhythm section, some of Richard Dashut’s production/arrangement ideas and Christine’s songs. Speaking of which, I know Johnny Stew said something similar at Burnish, but any Rumours-era fan who is avoiding Time because of its reputation should have the album anyway, if only for Chris’ contributions. She’s as consistent there as ever. Why “Temporary One” (although catchy) with its very routine arrangement gets praised is beyond me, when every Chris song on Time is the equal of it in songwriting and surpasses it in attention to detail.

I know, that should go to the Post-Rumours forum. Maybe one day.

Out of The Cradle: yeah, it's Lindsey's best album. But, it is also very self-indulgent (as just about ALL of Lindsey's material is)

An understandable backlash. But yeah, it is so very serious and very self-indulgent. That’s about the only negative thing I can say of the album.

I think Rumours is boring, too...so what?

Backlash again? Surely you didn’t feel that way in early 1977? But I can understand this, the whole album has overshadowed the rest of the back catalogue like a giant mushroom cloud. If it’s the reason they’re going to be remembered alongside the Beatles, Dark Side Of The Moon and (gasp) Thriller, then fine. But I do agree with your previously expressed sentiment; it might have been better for the band to have a success on a smaller scale throughout the entire 36-year-old career.

For all of Christine's contributions to the band and have them only play "Don't Stop" in the current set really irks me; and to have the current Fleetwood Mac totally ignore any material prior to 1975 is just sad.

Complete agreement.

[chiliD]

Originally posted by face of glass
Surely you didn’t feel that way in early 1977?

Well, no, THEN it was a brand new Fleetwood Mac album. But, it DID get "old" quickly, for me. The soap opera hype eclipsed the music...and pretty much HAS, still to this day.

Originally posted by face of glass
...the whole album has overshadowed the rest of the back catalogue like a giant mushroom cloud.

Not just their BACK catalogue...their ENTIRE catalogue.

Originally posted by face of glass
...If it’s the reason they’re going to be remembered alongside the Beatles, Dark Side Of The Moon and (gasp) Thriller, then fine.

The Beatles called it a day and didn't have to (and at the time COULDN'T) and mostly likely WOULDN'T have performed most of "Sgt Pepper" in their set for 25 years.

Pink Floyd doesn't focus their entire concert set on Dark Side Of The Moon each tour...they focus on the material from their most current album and then they fill the remainder of their set from a variety of tunes from their previous albums.

With Fleetwood Mac nowadays, we get a tease of new material, a majority of Rumours & the "white album", a couple of Tusk gems, and that's pretty much it. There's been PAINFULLY little variation in their concert sets in the past 28 years. At least from the Tango tour, through Time tours, they shook up the set due to the change in personnel. It was back to the same thread-bare set during The Dance, and that has carried over into THIS tour, as well. Sure, a few new tunes and a changed arrangement here & there DO add some flavor, but it still is like having mashed potatoes for the fourth night in a row...just having a different type gravy topping.

[face of glass]

Originally posted by chiliD
Well, no, THEN it was a brand new Fleetwood Mac album. But, it DID get "old" quickly, for me. The soap opera hype eclipsed the music...and pretty much HAS, still to this day.

And that is a problem; that's why the Rumours line-up still lacks credibility in elitist rock circles.
Only the people in the future will be able to view this music in adequate objective surroundings. No mega-seller of the '70s would have sold as much as it did without additional hoopla around it that had nothing to do with music. Led Zeppelin IV had the mysticism and the accusations of paganism. Dark Side Of The Moon sold because of its "deep artistic pretentiousness" and because of Pink Floyd's stage show. Rumours had the drama. I guess it's a huge part of the music for some people, but for those who would rather just sit down and listen and take the music at face value, it will get stale really quick.

The Beatles called it a day and didn't have to (and at the time COULDN'T) and mostly likely WOULDN'T have performed most of "Sgt Pepper" in their set for 25 years.

Pink Floyd doesn't focus their entire concert set on Dark Side Of The Moon each tour...they focus on the material from their most current album and then they fill the remainder of their set from a variety of tunes from their previous albums.

Well, I guess that's because nothing in their catalogues overshadows the other albums like Rumours does in the Mac's output. Other Beatles albums from 1965 to 1969 may not have the status of Pepper, but they get nearly the same respect anyway. And for Pink Floyd, it's still three albums that they're focusing on: DSOTM, Wish You Were Here and The Wall. Those were all monsters. If the White Fleetwood Mac album, as the second biggest seller in FM's output, has sold five million copies, then it's nowhere near Rumours. The band is itself responsible of this situation though. I don't think the same old repetitive promotion of Rumours is helping the sales THAT much.

Sure, a few new tunes and a changed arrangement here & there DO add some flavor, but it still is like having mashed potatoes for the fourth night in a row...just having a different type gravy topping. [/B]

I agree. Collecting recordings of current Fleetwood Mac performances is pretty much these days only a job for the hardcores, who will always swoon over Stevie's change of lyric or Lindsey's change of a speech/guitar solo. Whereas in the past I would have recommended the whole collecting procedure to just about any lover of rock music.

[chiliD]

It just boils down to you can't believe what the band says. Mick & Lindsey say that Say You Will is the best they've ever played. Cool. If the album is that damned great, then back it up by playing more of it in concert. Be a "now" band, not a "revival" band. That's what The Dance tour was about. Move on.

By just looking at the set list this tour, one would wonder which album they're promoting...Rumours or Say You Will? With the evidence I've seen so far, I'd choose the former.

ANNNNYWAY...back to the topic of the thread:

Get Mystery To Me...don't wait, go to the store NOW!

Collect aluminum cans, take 'em to the recycling center, take the cash, go get Bare Trees.

Sell a pint of blood, go buy Future Games.

Sell an internal organ or two and go buy the rest of the catalogue.

[mylittledemon]

Here's a thought about RUMOURS for you ChiliD. Obviously you're older than some of us here. I wasn't even BORN when Rumours came out. I didnt even get "into" Fleetwood Mac until The Dance back in 97. I had just started college. So...in that sense, the days of the late 70s/early 80s where the drama that was Fleetwood Mac was overshadowing the music were long since gone by the time I got into them. I didn't grow up having to watch that; in a sense "growing up" with the band. I only found out about it after the fact. Fleetwood Mac/Rumours/Tusk were all very fresh albums to me. I still don't get tired of listening to them either. Maybe I'll feel differently in 10 years...?

[chiliD]

If you read the interviews, even now, the drama HASN'T gone away...it is still there. With Christine gone, the focus is even MORE about Lindsey & Stevie. Just read threads here (and other FMac/Lindsey/Stevie message boards) started by people even younger than you. "Will Lindsey & Stevie ever get back together" or "Wouldn't it be great if..."

It is all about them. The concept of Fleetwood Mac as a band, a really good, creative BAND is non-existent anymore.

They're destined to milk the "soap opera" forever. So, I think they should bail out, be "Buckingham Nicks", let Mick & John carry on as Fleetwood Mac with more creative MUSICIANS.

[mylittledemon]

I almost agree with you there. I think the Buckingham/Nicks lineup sans Christine is little more than Buckingham Nicks. I daresay that only 3 or 4 tracks on the new album really "feel" like Mac tunes. Destiny Rules being one of them. At any rate...I think the drama to this day keeps it interesting. The departure of Christine and the obvious love that still exists between Lindsey and Stevie onstage. They will never get back together, and I dont even think about that sort of stuff. I'm just glad they're still together and making music. I think that given the chance, if Lindsey and Stevie were to write music again with Mick and John giving their input, we could have a truly new and fresh Fleetwood Mac album. It also sucks that Christine is no longer there to balance out the eccentricities of Lindsey and Stevie.

[ShamHy89]

Collect aluminum cans, take 'em to the recycling center, take the cash, go get Bare Trees.

Oh, believe me...I was almost at this point a month ago. Once you get Mystery To Me, you'll probably be screaming to get to a store with more pre-BN Mac. (Well, I was anyways. ) Oh, and once you get something, please share your thoughts. I'd love to know what you think of the albums. Remember, keep saving...there's always more to buy.

Shamus