Who Shuns FM Albums With No Lindsey/Stevie In Them?

[markolas]

Originally Posted by Sahara

That's true. But at the same time ...

I don't like any of the Pre-Rumours line up stuff. I bought Bare Trees but I didn't like it. Maybe blues aren't just my thing.

Eww...Bare Trees isn't blues.

[gldstwmn]

I don't shun them. I listen to boots a lot more now and the majority of those include Buckingham Nicks so...

[Jyqm]

Originally Posted by David

I don't dig much blues rock, either, but there's something about early Fleetwood Mac that hits me. I take my "Jumping at Shadows" CDs on the road with me often; I really get into it. But otherwise, I don't listen to much blues rock, although I adore blues from earlier decades. One of the first CDs I ever bought was a Bessie Smith "Empress of the Blues" CD.

Same here, David. I'm not that into Clapton or other blues rock heroes, and I don't listen to very much Zeppelin anymore, but I do really enjoy pre-rock blues, especially stuff like Lightnin' Hopkins. The Green/Spencer/Kirwan incarnations of Fleetwood Mac are the huge exceptions to the rule, especially the live stuff. Can't get enough of it. There's just some beautiful, passionate stuff there, and I even love a lot of Spencer's sillier stuff (especially on the BBC CDs).

I don't own the Jumping at Shadows compilation - is it worth getting if I already have the two Vaudeville Years collections?

[Jyqm]

Originally Posted by Sahara

I agree with mylittledemon -- it is a different band to me.

I would imagine that everyone could agree on this point, especially concerning the 67-70 and 75-87 periods. They're the same band in name only, and I don't think anyone would really claim otherwise.

[golddustwoman77]

Personally, I don't see how you could shun the previous eras! Without the previous eras, there is no Fleetwood Mac with or without Lindsey and Stevie. The previous eras was important in making the band who it is today. Also, there is unbelieveable music to be heard from the previous eras. Who could shun Bare Trees, or songs like "Oh Well," "Rattlesnake Shake," "Black Magic Woman," "Albatross," "Shake Your Moneymaker," etc.! IMO, that would be crazy!

[catinthedark]

Originally Posted by Jyqm

I would imagine that everyone could agree on this point, especially concerning the 67-70 and 75-87 periods. They're the same band in name only, and I don't think anyone would really claim otherwise.

I would completely agree with this. The fact that I am a fan of the 75-87 and 97-present incarnation does not mean I shun the pre-75 incarnations. I simply don't care for the music as much ( I do own and like Bare Trees). But I just don't care for it on the whole any more than I care for... I don't know... Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, etc. etc. It's just a question of taste. I don't believe that Fleetwood Mac began in 1975. Not by any stretch. (However, I don't really believe that the Time line up was truly Fleetwood Mac, but again, that's just me. I think it's because I perceive that they were trying to be the 75-87 incarnation, whereas when Stevie and Lindsey joined, the band was not simply trying to imitate earlier incarnations. They created a new sound).

Anyway. I think it does all come down to personal taste. Fans of Van Halen might say the same about the David Lee Roth days. Same band? It's all a matter of taste. But just because you don't care for one line up, doesn't mean you're shunning them or narrow minded.

[Miss Vicky]

Originally Posted by catinthedark

However, I don't really believe that the Time line up was truly Fleetwood Mac, but again, that's just me. I think it's because I perceive that they were trying to be the 75-87 incarnation, whereas when Stevie and Lindsey joined, the band was not simply trying to imitate earlier incarnations. They created a new sound.

I really don't see the similarities between the sound of the Time lineup and that of the Rumours lineup. I also don't see why people think that Burnette/Bramlett/Mason/McVie is somehow faux Fleetwood Mac. If they aren't truly Fleetwood Mac, then what is? As for creating a new sound just what exactly were they supposed to do with it?

In any case, the sound of the band can be largely blamed on Mick Fleetwood. I seem to recall Burnette saying that he and Bramlett were sort of reined in and not allowed to be their true musical selves because they were too country. (Which doesn't make a damned bit of sense to me... why hire country musicians if you don't want a country sound?)

[Sahara]

Originally Posted by Miss Vicky

Were they just supposed to throw in the towel? Dig themselves a grave? Don't get me wrong, I'm a HUGE Lindsey fan, but Fleetwood Mac neither began when he joined nor ended when he left - just like the guitarists that came before him and those who came in his wake.
Also, from what I understand, the band had already booked shows for the tour before Lindsey quit and so were probably contractually obligated to appear, with or without Mr. Buckingham.

Oh I know that. I know all of that! I just love him too much ... He's just wonderful! *sobs of adoration*

[Sahara]

Originally Posted by Miss Vicky

Were they just supposed to throw in the towel? Dig themselves a grave? Don't get me wrong, I'm a HUGE Lindsey fan, but Fleetwood Mac neither began when he joined nor ended when he left - just like the guitarists that came before him and those who came in his wake.
Also, from what I understand, the band had already booked shows for the tour before Lindsey quit and so were probably contractually obligated to appear, with or without Mr. Buckingham.

Oh I know that. I know all of that! I just can't get used to the band without him, you know? I just love him too much ... He's just wonderful! *sobs of adoration*

[Miss Vicky]

Originally Posted by Sahara

Oh I know that. I know all of that! I just love him too much ... He's just wonderful! *sobs of adoration*

Sorry, I get a little defensive over Billy Burnette. I'm not big on his solo material from the 70s but I adore everything from the 80s forward (well... except for the movies. He really should just stick with music. Acting is not his forte). I think he's a gifted songwriter and I really like his voice.

[catinthedark]

Originally Posted by Miss Vicky

I also don't see why people think that Burnette/Bramlett/Mason/McVie is somehow faux Fleetwood Mac...

In any case, the sound of the band can be largely blamed on Mick Fleetwood. I seem to recall Burnette saying that he and Bramlett were sort of reined in and not allowed to be their true musical selves because they were too country. (Which doesn't make a damned bit of sense to me... why hire country musicians if you don't want a country sound?)

I think you have a point. I think the perception I have of the Time band is that Mick was trying to create a Stevie-Lindsey "cover band" - maybe my perception is wrong. I fully admit it could be. I don't own the Time album, and I didn't go see them in concert. Once Stevie was gone, after already losing Lindsey, my main reasons for loving Fleetwood Mac were gone. I certainly didn't want to hear anyone singing or playing their songs. So it sort of has created a mental block in my head.

I did see the band on the TITN tour. Stevie saved that tour for me, but it was nothing like seeing the band with Lindsey. I personally just don't care for Rick and Billy as well. I don't like hearing them playing or singing Lindsey's songs. Their own stuff - absolutely - go for it. I just don't care for their stuff, so I don't listen to it. I don't really like any of the Behind the Mask album, to be honest. I have tried and tried. I just don't.

[Lindsey Jr.]

Of course I can listen to Christine's songs, some of them are really great, and Mick is a cool drummer, but LB/SN are my number ones!

Never heard Time or behind the mask. I also like the Peter Green era, but as a "normal" listener.

And I still think that John is way way underrated!

[Sahara]

Originally Posted by Lindsey Jr.

And I still think that John is way way underrated!

He absolutely is. Greetings from the Creepy Little John Fangirl!

I love the picture of Lindsey in your signature by the way. Weird but highly hilarious.

Originally Posted by Miss Vicky

Sorry, I get a little defensive over Billy Burnette. I'm not big on his solo material from the 70s but I adore everything from the 80s forward (well... except for the movies. He really should just stick with music. Acting is not his forte). I think he's a gifted songwriter and I really like his voice.

I didn't know he had a solo career. Or an acting career. I don't mind Rick and Billy's stuff but as part of Fleetwood Mac ... 'nuff said.

Although I must say, I didn't miss Christine much on SYW. That's mean I know. But true.

[Lindsey Jr.]

[QUOTE=Sahara]He absolutely is. Greetings from the Creepy Little John Fangirl!

I love the picture of Lindsey in your signature by the way. Weird but highly hilarious.


Thx! Yeah, John's great to say the least!
Sahara, maybe you can help me:

Lindsey said that "you don't tell John what to play", I'm almost sure I read it somewhere, but I wanna be REALLY sure

[Miss Vicky]

Originally Posted by Sahara

I didn't know he had a solo career. Or an acting career. I don't mind Rick and Billy's stuff but as part of Fleetwood Mac ... 'nuff said.

Billy's been making music professionally since he was a kid. His father is Rockabilly pioneer Dorsey Burnette (in fact, the term "Rockabilly" was coined by his father and is a combination of Billy's name and that of his cousin, Rocky). His last solo album (unless I've missed something) was 2000's "Are You With Me Baby." More recently he's worked as part of John Fogerty's touring band.
As for the movies, they've mostly been B movies and straight to video sequels. He starred in a B "erotic thriller" called Saturday Night Special which is so bad it's actually quite funny (and has a cameo by Mick Fleetwood), a horror movie called Not Like Us (which I've never managed to get past the first 10 minutes of), and had small roles in Carnosaur 3, Richie Rich's Christmas Wish, Casper Meets Wendy, and Addam's Family Reunion.