i can think of only one band worse than The Eagles and that is Fleetwood mac.
However, each to their own.
That's true, Kerr. I felt Henley in particular was going through the motions. He has everything in order but I don't feel his hearts in it anymore.
I think the big change in terms of connecting with the audience is the absence of Glen Frey. His son is a fair substitute but doesn't have a big personality. Vince Gill, who does a huge amount of hard work in creating the Eagles sound now, seems not to want to come forward too much though he is an excellent musician and entertainer in his own right.
I think Frey's absence also goes a bit towards explaining Henley's more subdued role. The two have always competed like mad and it's their adversarial style that gave the group it's spark in the past.
A lot of the more complex guitar work is now played by (very good) session men with Don Felder gone which also adds to a sense of detachment. Joe Walsh is his brilliant self still but has obviously quietened down a fair bit. (He is 71 after all...)
i can think of only one band worse than The Eagles and that is Fleetwood mac.
However, each to their own.
I like Fleetwood Mac (the 70s Fleetwood Mac, Rumours and Tusk albums anyway) but don't like The Eagles at all.
They must have done as many farewell tours as Cher too.
GF....You are jesting?
How can you like all that fake white-boy blues stuff?
[QUOTE=the_idiotb_stardson;39255504]i can think of only one band worse than The Eagles and that is Fleetwood mac.
Its an odd thing, IBS, when they were at the height of their popularity in the seventies and eighties, I could take or leave the Eagles. They did zilch for me musically. It’s only in the last twenty years or so, after they reformed, that I’ve really enjoyed their stuff.
They were a band I was going to suggest on the other thread about groups that one used to have no time for but who have subsequently become favorites.