The Ledge

The Ledge (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/index.php)
-   Rumours (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Is an album without Stevie possible to be released? (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=56571)

dreamsunwind 11-06-2016 05:37 PM

Is an album without Stevie possible to be released?
 
I know everyone's saying that if Stevie's not interested, they should just finish the album and release it without her, and I agree-- there's no use in having her if she doesn't want to be there and if the process will upset her.
However, I question whether or not they could release it without her. Meaning, would the record company even be interested in a Fleetwood Mac album if her name isn't there? BTM was kind of awkward without Lindsey and then of course Time was a disaster. She's the biggest star of the band and aside from how weird it would be to have there be a final album without her, they probably already think that they won't make much money off a new FM album and without Stevie it would make even less, so I wonder if they do get around to finishing the album, if they'll be able to release it.
I remember on Ken Caillait's tumblr blog last year, someone asked him if he thinks a new album will happen and he said no because the world of music is different today and so are they. He said that they might try but decide to not release it.

AncientQueen 11-06-2016 05:48 PM

I don't think that FM can exist without Stevie. I love them and would buy the new album without Stevie, but that is just me as a longtime fan.

Nowadays bands/artists make the biggest money from touring. I doubt that any promoter would view the 4 remaining bandmembers as bookable for a world tour. It's like the Rolling Stones without Mick Jagger or Led Zeppelin without Robert Plant. It's just not happening.

SisterNightroad 11-06-2016 05:54 PM

I think it probably won't matter because the amount of time Fleetwood Mac spend working on albums before releasing them is biblical, and Stevie will have all the time to finish her little tour and make a second Songs From The Vaults, if she mantains the same timing and process schedule of the first, before contributing something to the album at the last minute.
This is particularly true since this could be the last album of the band and they will want to produce and polish the **** out of it. You also have to think that she isn't a musician for the band, so a late contribution won't slow much the process.

Andrew Smith 11-06-2016 06:24 PM

As much as I think Mick and Lindsey are the backbone behind the band, I feel a Fleetwood Mac album without Nicks' contribution would be a great shame. If Stevie did participate it would be the first studio album to feature the "Rumours" line-up since Tango In The Night in 1987.

I'm really hoping that there is one more studio album released with the "Rumours" line-up, including a tour to support the album, also featuring all five members.

Am I right in thinking that Stevie Nicks is definitely participating in the 2017 Fleetwood Mac world tour?

dreamsunwind 11-06-2016 06:32 PM

Christine said they're all on board for the 2017 tour. But imagine how awkward if the album never gets to be finished because Stevie won't contribute and it can't be released even though the rest of them want it and then they all get together on tour. Not gonna be a happy family.

bwboy 11-06-2016 07:21 PM

Dreamsunwind, I posted a thread saying why I don't believe the record company would want to release a FLEETWOOD MAC album without Stevie Nicks being on it, and my opinion didn't go over too well. I won't rehash it, but I do agree with you that the record company would have some concerns. I also think the band does, too, which would explain why they're still waiting for Stevie, rather than just releasing the album without her.

louielouie2000 11-06-2016 07:21 PM

I think Stevie is just throwing around her power to get what she wants. She doesn't want to sit in the studio and do 5,000 overdubs, so she's off doing a solo tour while all that groundwork is being laid. A remarkably short solo tour that will easily allow her to join the band in the studio immediately following the holidays. She's sent up warning flares about how she and Lindsey have gone in diverging musical directions; yet her absence right now is giving the band ample time to craft their songs into a sound that would be palatable to Stevie.

I always want to stab my fellow chiffonheads when they wield this quote, but "don't listen to her, listen through her." Like others have said, Stevie is the star of this band. She would not dare allow that limelight to be shifted away from her by not participating in the first Fleetwood Mac album in nearly a decade and a half. She's just making sure she has a firm grip on the proceedings before she signs on.

WatchChain 11-06-2016 07:32 PM

I don't think Fleetwood Mac is even signed to a record label at the present time. Their record contract with Warner/Reprise ended years ago, as did Stevie and Lindsey's solo deals with the label. Thus, I really don't think any of them are currently signed to a record label roster.

That being said, and with the way records are release now, I'm sure that a label somewhere would be interested in releasing a Fleetwood Mac record with any lineup. However, if they want major label support, it's probably best to get Stevie on board.

elle 11-06-2016 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamsunwind (Post 1195795)
I know everyone's saying that if Stevie's not interested, they should just finish the album and release it without her, and I agree-- there's no use in having her if she doesn't want to be there and if the process will upset her.
However, I question whether or not they could release it without her. Meaning, would the record company even be interested in a Fleetwood Mac album if her name isn't there?

of course it's possible!! :thumbsup: :]

frankly, i don't think i really understand the question. why are people talking about "record company" like we are not in 21st century? they don't need a record company. Lindsey self released several albums - both studio and live. Mick self released live album just in the last few days. FM 4 without Christine self released their EP. so why are we still talking about some imaginary "record company" - when we know neither FM or any of the 5 individual members have a label.

dreamsunwind 11-06-2016 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by louielouie2000 (Post 1195809)
I think Stevie is just throwing around her power to get what she wants. She doesn't want to sit in the studio and do 5,000 overdubs, so she's off doing a solo tour while all that groundwork is being laid. A remarkably short solo tour that will easily allow her to join the band in the studio immediately following the holidays. She's sent up warning flares about how she and Lindsey have gone in diverging musical directions; yet her absence right now is giving the band ample time to craft their songs into a sound that would be palatable to Stevie.

I always want to stab my fellow chiffonheads when they wield this quote, but "don't listen to her, listen through her." Like others have said, Stevie is the star of this band. She would not dare allow that limelight to be shifted away from her by not participating in the first Fleetwood Mac album in nearly a decade and a half. She's just making sure she has a firm grip on the proceedings before she signs on.


I saw that interview. I think that just goes back to Say You Will. I feel like she just didn't like anything about that album or the process of making it. She and Lindsey have gone in different directions musically but that started with Tusk and they still made albums after that. Tusk itself is a masterpiece in my opinion, and her songs on Mirage were fine, Gypsy especially is a classic and she was hardly even there for Tango. I disagree with what she said about how they used to be on the same page, I feel like that band was very rarely ever on the same page.

I think it's what you said, the 'overdubs'. She doesn't have the patience. So hopefully you're right, that she'll come in at last minute. But even then I feel it would be sad if she didn't want to be there and her efforts are half-assed. And I don't want her to be grumpy about it on the tour and then complain later.

elle 11-06-2016 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SisterNightroad (Post 1195799)
I think it probably won't matter because the amount of time Fleetwood Mac spend working on albums before releasing them is biblical

and now we are getting more and more glimpses of why their timelines used to be so biblical - like working for the last 8 years trying to talk Stevie into album!!

i really hope they finally grew some balls like they've been claiming lately and they release this album they seem to be in studio finishing right now!! actually the FM men don't even need to grow the balls considering they now have a woman pushing it forward (instead of one holding them back) finally in their midst - go Christine!! :thumbsup:

dreamsunwind 11-06-2016 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elle (Post 1195812)
of course it's possible!! :thumbsup: :]

frankly, i don't think i really understand the question. why are people talking about "record company" like we are not in 21st century? they don't need a record company. Lindsey self released several albums - both studio and live. Mick self released live album just in the last few days. FM 4 without Christine self released their EP. so why are we still talking about some imaginary "record company" - when we know neither FM or any of the 5 individual members have a label.

You have a point but I also think there's a difference between someone like Lindsey as a solo artist versus Fleetwood Mac. I loove Lindsey but his career as a solo artist never really took off, his name on its own is not that big, so it's not really anything odd if he were to self-release an album. But Fleetwood Mac is a big legendary band, I think it would be strange if they were to release an album without a big label behind it. Not like I'm saying they couldn't, it would just be strange I think and they might be hesitant. The EP was just that-- an EP that had like zero promotion. I don't think a big label will look at the 4 of them without Stevie and be so thrilled about it.

SteveMacD 11-06-2016 07:56 PM

A larger indie label would love a major band like Fleetwood Mac on its roster, with or without Stevie.

BLY 11-06-2016 08:05 PM

This is why "Julia"has yet to be released on a reissue or the 24k disc.Stevie is saving this for the new Fleetwood Mac album.

elle 11-06-2016 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamsunwind (Post 1195816)
Not like I'm saying they couldn't, it would just be strange I think and they might be hesitant. The EP was just that-- an EP that had like zero promotion.

i think you might be right there - that some of them are hesitant. don't think that's because of the label, but of some other reasons, but i do think Mick is probably VERY hesitant - and that's why they have been at this standstill. we can only speculate, but my feeling is that Lindsey and Christine both cannot wait to release the new stuff they've been working on. i don't think John cares much either way. so who knows, if it's Mick who's hesitant, maybe Christine and Lindsey push forward and release as a duo?

i used to care and wanted them to release as FM since that would be right thing to do, but they broke me after all that wait - and now i just want that new music to come out and they tour it in intimate venues next year (before yet another big FM 5 reunion).

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveMacD (Post 1195817)
A larger indie label would love a major band like Fleetwood Mac on its roster, with or without Stevie.

there you go - from someone who actually knows indie business.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:20 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved