• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Fleetwood Mac - Ugh.

#225
dennis james said:
Walked into a biker bar the other day and was confronted by the biggest ugliest one who didn't like the way I looked. I said "Back off man. I was a history major" and he sat down and left me alone.
Click to expand...
I’ll bet that’s exactly what happened. I’ve seen it before.

It’s quite a cunning stunt if you can pull it off well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JMacBass65 and Peteyboy
#230
honeyiscool said:


Bassist (John McVie?) plays a G instead of an F at 0:12, and I can't believe they'd leave that mistake in. Every other time for this progression, the bass plays the correct notes, so it's like... why the first one? Why????

Come on, am I crazy? Why were they OK with this take? It's a I-IV-V and it's like the band don't even care if the bassist plays a V on an IV.
Click to expand...

All you guys are going to loose a lot of good members with Bass experience if that's all you can find to talk about, come on guys!
 
#231
To each in everyone who replied to my post that should have benefited a particularly ignorant and entitled presumed owner of this forum - I have not and will not read any replies for 6 months. Discuss among yourselves.
 
#232
OneOfThose said:
Back off man. I was a history major.

I doubt anyone can escavate from your rambling and scattered reply what you’re trying to do besides tone policing. But you’re ignorance is remarkable - as is your laziness. Dig. When you’ve tried 5 sets of the best LA players, trust me, you get frantic (damn shame about Sklar not being able to cut it on this one). That’s a lotta money wasted - probably more than the the blow budget for the record (chop chop sniff sniff). But since I’m genourous and would like to share what I found after a whole 10 seconds of searching, the following will amaze you. But first, one word: Google.

...cutting the basics for "Werewolves of London" was unusually problematic. "We were doing a lot of the record with Russ Kunkel and Bob Glaub, but when we got to 'Werewolves,' we tried it with them, and it just didn't sound right," Wachtel says. "We got a decent track, but there was something lacking in it. It didn't sound stupid enough; it sounded cute. Jackson was saying, 'It's really good!' and Warren and I were saying, 'No, man, it's too cute. It's got to be...heavy. So we proceeded to try five or six bands after that-Russ and Lee Sklar, Jeff Porcaro and Bob Glaub, Jeff Porcaro and Lee Sklar, Michael Botts on drums, Gary Mallaber on drums, both with different bass players-and it just wasn't working. It was getting depressing. Then, and I can't remember whose idea it was, someone mentioned Mick Fleetwood and John McVie [of Fleetwood Mac], and I flashed, 'That's it! That's who can play this f-ing song!'" Adds Ladanyi, "The energy that 'Werewolves of London' demanded was this kind of animal feeling in the rhythm and the whole attitude of the song. And when you think about Mick Fleetwood and the way he plays...well, there was the werewolf right there. It was perfect!"
Click to expand...
I find it hilarious that you’d accuse me of being nitpicky and perfectionist and missing the forest for the trees.

Then proceed to tell a story about an artist who was far more nitpicky than I have ever been in this thread or in my life.

That song is V-IV-I and has no changes. And they needed 50 takes for that? How does this prove your point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Garret Graves
#234
Bassbeater said:
I appreciate FM for their songwriting and vibe, which are inimitable. The technical prowess and perfection are really not very important to me with a band like that.
Click to expand...
See, I find it fascinating that you’d say that about a band that I enjoy largely because of their sophistication and musicianship. I like their precise harmonies, their deliberate arrangements, and the thoughtful musical choices they seem to make. To me, they represent a lot of what I love about good pop rock, which is the same genre that I mainly work in. Their songwriting is good, sure, but a lot of the genius of their writing becomes experienced through their technical execution, and anybody who has ever attempted to play and sing their music with a band will see that they’re pretty technically masterful. And if you don’t execute a lot of their technical elements, their songs just lose a lot of sparkle. Being able to write, arrange, and sing closely woven three part harmonies while the instruments enhance the vocals is as technical as anything anybody does in that genre.
 
#235
honeyiscool said:
I find it hilarious that you’d accuse me of being nitpicky and perfectionist and missing the forest for the trees.

Then proceed to tell a story about an artist who was far more nitpicky than I have ever been in this thread or in my life.

That song is V-IV-I and has no changes. And they needed 50 takes for that? How does this prove your point?
Click to expand...
Take it from me, the Tone Police - History Boy is a cut-and-paste Googler from way back.
 
#236
Much ado about nothing. Before the digital age mistakes were often left in and even worked around for the final mix. Btw I play in a Fleetwood Mac tribute, never really my cuppa but I dived in and have intensely studied the catalog. It has been a eye opener and I have a much greater appreciation for FMs music and MacVie's playing. I am very grateful for the catalog and the opportunity to perform this music. The audience reaction is amazing. We are reaching a point where we get quit your day job money with comped rooms and meals.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MCF, Lowendtech and Nevada Pete
#237
Peteyboy said:
I think we should pitch a reality show where we identify botched parts like this and then track down the original musician and stage an intervention. 40 years later. Fix that sh** McVie! See where THAT gets us...

We'll call it Clamdiggers.
Click to expand...
Clamdiggers! Now that's funny!
 
#238
12 pages later and I listened to the cut again, on headphones (good headphones, Fostex T20's). I'll agree that it is an odd choice, but not really "wrong". It's not the root of the chord, but it's chromatically "in there". And it sounds to me (strictly opinion this) like he played it with authority. Either he meant to do that or he committed strongly to the error.
Greg
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back