![]() 02/20/2017 at 11:26 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
Annnndd - Peter Green era vs. Buckingham era Mac fight starts: NOW!
![]() 02/20/2017 at 12:30 |
|
Peter Green. Hands down.
![]() 02/20/2017 at 12:35 |
|
I think what makes the argument evergreen (heh) is that the two bands are so utterly different. There’s no denying that Buckingmac was a pop hits
machine
and a mix of incredibly talented love/angst song artists... but they weren’t hard-hitting dirty blues focused around a virtuoso. Not at all.
![]() 02/20/2017 at 13:22 |
|
Very true. I love dirty blues, so that’s the only era of Fleetwood Mac that interests me.
![]() 02/20/2017 at 13:25 |
|
It’s not every day that a band is an apples and oranges comparison with itself. Jefferson Airplane through to Starship has some obvious continuity, and Van Halen/Van Hagar can be compared on points, but Fleetwood Mac, not so much.
![]() 02/20/2017 at 16:33 |
|
I can’t think of another band that was so dissimilar between two iterations of itself. I remember very clearly when my uncle put on some early Fleetwood Mac for me, and it blew my teenage mind. I had no idea that stuff existed and if you had quizzed me who was playing, I never in a million years would’ve pulled Fleetwood Mac.
![]() 02/20/2017 at 16:37 |
|
I would like to contend that where the Doobie Brothers
decayed
, Fleetwood Mac actually
transformed.
Even the Small Faces -> Faces -> Faces and Rod Stewart wasn’t that much of a jump.
![]() 02/20/2017 at 16:53 |
|
I agree with all of those assertions.
![]() 02/21/2017 at 05:50 |
|
Buckingham.