Stevie discusses Possible New - Page 12

shackin'up · #**166** 02-19-2013, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

You stated earlier in this thread that Lindsey, Mick & John should still release them as Fleetwood Mac songs, even without Stevie's participation. I didn't get the sense that the inclusion of Stevie's voice was as important to you as the songs being released in general. As such, I was making the case for re-purposing them as solo tracks, if she decides not to record.

I know Lindsey envisioned them as Fleetwood Mac songs with Stevie singing on them -- but, in my view, if she doesn't ultimately sing on them, then all bets are off as to which artist name gets attached to them ("Fleetwood Mac" or "Lindsey Buckingham").

I said that tongue in cheek; That I secretly hope that she bails out and that L, M and J release them as FM to big succes. I'm not waiting for miss diva to sing on them; Lindsey is. And I'm very curious what he envisioned with it. That includes Miss Nicks. If you'd ask me what I want, not counting what LB wants, I'd say: start an all Male Mac. But you all know that.

jkmaletic · #**167** 02-19-2013, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shackin'up

I said that tongue in cheek; That I secretly hope that she bails out and that L, M and J release them as FM to big succes. I'm not waiting for miss diva to sing on them; Lindsey is. And I'm very curious what he envisioned with it. That includes Miss Nicks. If you'd ask me what I want, not counting what LB wants, I'd say: start an all Male Mac. But you all know that.

An all-male Fleetwood Mac? That's cool I guess. They could change the name of the band to Fleetwood Sack!

shackin'up · #**168** 02-19-2013, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkmaletic

An all-male Fleetwood Mac? That's cool I guess. They could change the name of the band to Fleetwood Sack!

TrueFaith77 · #**169** 02-19-2013, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CADreaming

Hmmm... and that may have been the plan all along!

That's morbid.

CADreaming · #**170** 02-19-2013, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

That's morbid.

Insert sinister laugh icon.

SteveMacD · #**171** 02-19-2013, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkmaletic

An all-male Fleetwood Mac?

How ridiculous would that be?

McTrouble · #**172** 02-19-2013, 05:39 PM

Men of Mac - how cool, and sooooooo much better!

jkmaletic · #**173** 02-19-2013, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McTrouble

Men of Mac - how cool, and sooooooo much better!

Have at it. More solo Stevie for me. Everyone wins!!

FLEETWOOD SACK - Tea-baggin' across the USA!!

shackin'up · #**174** 02-19-2013, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

How ridiculous would that be?

I know Steve. It's a cycle.

I really wouldn't mind seeing Fleetwood Mac as a powerrocktrio with folky touches.

CADreaming · #**175** 02-19-2013, 06:47 PM

Maybe they're kicking BN out and bringing Christine back.

mitzo · #**176** 02-19-2013, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

So I guess, by your definition, Van Gogh is no longer an artist because he doesn't create new paintings because he's, um, DEAD.

He's a "former artist."

He's dead. Stevie is not.

chiliD · #**177** 02-19-2013, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

So I guess, by your definition, Van Gogh is no longer an artist because he doesn't create new paintings because he's, um, DEAD.

He's a "former artist."

As in the Monty Python skit: "It is a LATE Parrot, it ceases to exist!"

Well, pretty much the same as Jimi Hendrix still releasing "new" albums 43 years after his passing. With "new" material just being still amazingly unreleased versions of songs that have appeared in different incarnatons on the last 6...7?...8?...Jimi Hendrix albums.