Stevie & Christine in Nashville

[elle]

Originally Posted by drag00n

Here's a simple question or maybe not so much simple.... and possibly 2 questions...

What do you all think would have happened if Stevie Nicks had left FM in 1998 instead of Christine McVie? Would the "perfect" version of FM have been as successful or even still relevant ?

And....

So hypothetically... if Stevie went country and solo.... what do you think would happen to FM ticket sales...... ?

And a bonus 3rd question....

Which EP / LP / CD would get the biggest pop? A Stevie-less FM or Stevie Rocks Country ?

Just seriously curious.....

all the more reason for them to release both simultaneously so we can see and don't need to speculate.

SN is touring with FM. FM tours are where the cash is. so that part is a moot point. the only question is about the album.

[BlueDenimLamp]

Originally Posted by drag00n

Here's a simple question or maybe not so much simple.... and possibly 2 questions...

What do you all think would have happened if Stevie Nicks had left FM in 1998 instead of Christine McVie? Would the "perfect" version of FM have been as successful or even still relevant ?

And....

So hypothetically... if Stevie went country and solo.... what do you think would happen to FM ticket sales...... ?

And a bonus 3rd question....

Which EP / LP / CD would get the biggest pop? A Stevie-less FM or Stevie Rocks Country ?

Just seriously curious.....

The answer to all your questions is simple...From a visibility and promotional standpoint if Stevie leaves they will loose a large chunk of their fan base...Casual fans may have not have noticed that Christine was gone but rest assured people will notice Stevie's absence...From an artistic point Stevie being gone will probably have little impact on Lindsey & Christine's songs with the real question being will people buy a FM record with out Stevie on it...I don't think Stevie will go all out "Country" although there may be a few countryish songs which would be nothing new for her...

[BlueDenimLamp]

Originally Posted by elle

all the more reason for them to release both simultaneously so we can see and don't need to speculate.

SN is touring with FM. FM tours are where the cash is. so that part is a moot point. the only question is about the album.

Are you suggesting a contest??? GAME ON!!!

[elle]

Originally Posted by BlueDenimLamp

Are you suggesting a contest??? GAME ON!!!

anything to get that FM album finally out!

[elle]

Originally Posted by BlueDenimLamp

Are you suggesting a contest??? GAME ON!!!

you know, (and i know that's not you and i really appreciate your candidness and contributions to discussions ) but i'm looking at the votes against FM album coming out without SN's contributions and seeing so many SN-solo fans (many of whom freely admit they can't care less about FM) quietly voting that FM should wait for her... and i have to wonder - why is that?

are they afraid it will show FM as viable without her??

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by elle

you know, (and i know that's not you and i really appreciate your candidness and contributions to discussions ) but i'm looking at the votes against FM album coming out without SN's contributions and seeing so many SN-solo fans (many of whom freely admit they can't care less about FM) quietly voting that FM should wait for her... and i have to wonder - why is that?

are they afraid it will show FM as viable without her??

So far, 13 people have voted to wait for Stevie. Of those on that list that I recognize to be mainly Stevie fans, have any of them ever posted on here that they couldn't care less about Fleetwood Mac?

There are a lot of people who are mainly fans of one member or another, yet still enjoy when the band makes music together. You should be well aware of that, Elle!

As for your last sentence... that just sounds like fan-baiting.

[elle]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

As for your last sentence... that just sounds like fan-baiting.

no, i am really curious.

yes, many people are fans of the band first, or all the members. i understand their reasoning, and most of them have expressed it. i would expect Gerald, for example, to say he wants all 5 because he's been consistently saying that (he hasn't voted yet).

you expressed your reasoning, too, although i still don't get why wouldn't you want 3 albums instead of 2.

but some people that voted there are SN-only fans, and they don't have a problem saying that, the same as i don't have a problem saying i'm really a LB fan, whether with the band or solo. so, if you tell me you have no interest in FM album without SN, why do you care whether it's out or not?

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by elle

no, i am really curious.

Nothing wrong with being curious as to the reasoning behind someone's vote, for or against. The implication that Stevie fans are voting a certain way out of fear, however, is the part that sounds like fan-baiting.

Would you be worried that a Lindsey-free album would prove Fleetwood Mac to be viable without him?

Originally Posted by elle

yes, many people are fans of the band first, or all the members. i understand their reasoning, and most of them have expressed it.

you did, too, although i still don't get why wouldn't you want 3 albums instead of 2.

Who says we'd get three albums instead of two? No offense meant whatsoever, but that's wishful thinking.

Originally Posted by elle

but some people that voted there are SN-only fans, and they don't have a problem saying that, the same as i don't have a problem saying i'm really a LB fan, whether with the band or solo. so, if you tell me you have no interest in FM album without SN, why do you care whether it's out or not?

Let me ask you this -- if Fleetwood Mac had to choose between releasing an album without Lindsey, or waiting just a few months for him to be available, would you prefer they wait or proceed without him? Keep in mind that you'd be then getting two albums with new Lindsey songs, as opposed to just one.

Speaking for myself, I'm always going to opt for a chance at more new songs. And to have new solo material AND new Mac material is the absolute best scenario of all, for me.

[elle]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

Would you be worried that a Lindsey-free album would prove Fleetwood Mac to be viable without him?

why would i be worried, most of his stuff is not commercially viable.

plus, most SN fans disliked 2 last albums/outputs from FM that were with him and SN, anyway.

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

Let me ask you this -- if Fleetwood Mac had to choose between releasing an album without Lindsey, or waiting just a few months for him to be available, would you prefer they wait or proceed without him? Keep in mind that you'd be then getting two albums with new Lindsey songs, as opposed to just one.

i thought i've been pretty clear on that - of course they should put out whatever they have! more output the better! i've been highly frustrated with FM measly output. if LB didn't contribute anything and other songwriters did and have it mostly recorded, why would they wait for him? i would not be getting 2 albums with new LB songs if he didn't contribute any to FM album, so his songs on FM album would be a pure wishful thinking. and i would be extremely happy to get LB solo album, with or without his contributions anywhere else!

[drag00n]

You know ... Think about it...... FM remained successful without Lindsey... They have remained successful for the last 16 years without Christine.... FM's biggest failure was the album and tour for Time.... which had Mick, John AND,,,, Christine on it,,,, BUT no Stevie.......

When I suggested a Stevie country LP, I was only re-voicing something that has been mentioned in the past,,,, She has always done things with a country flair and now with Lady A, CMT Crossroads and the ACM Awards, there is alot of focus in that genre for her. AND I remember reading about the prospects for her working with Lady A after last year's tour had been mentioned... and before this FM additional tour...

No matter what happens..... just remember,,,,, the Fleetwood Mac of old will never be again.... To try to go back and try to re-create it seems to me to be impossible... and rather sad....

Of course......there is always the argument ......... what is FM without alot of hyped drama????

[elle]

Originally Posted by drag00n

Of course......there is always the argument ......... what is FM without alot of hyped drama????

exactly!

and what can be more drama than 4/5 of the band releasing an album while 1/5 releases her own because they seemingly can't work together in the studio?? they don't even have to hype anything, it's hyping itself! they can do press junkets all 5 together, talk how it's still a lovefest, and everybody will be looking for little signs of disagreement. it would be great!

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by elle

why would i be worried, most of his stuff is not commercially viable.

Then why should Stevie fans be concerned either?

The Fleetwood Mac name is almost always going to bring in more consumers than any of the solo members individually (I say "almost always," because 'Time' didn't do 'Street Angel's' numbers -- of course 'Time' only featured one of the classic songwriters, rather than two). I think pretty much everyone concedes that a new Fleetwood Mac album, with or without Stevie, is going to be more commercially successful than a Stevie Nicks solo album.

I highly doubt Nicks fans are going to be devastated if the band chooses to move forward without her. Especially if, as you say, those fans couldn't care less about Fleetwood Mac and only want more Stevie solo. To follow through with that logic, a successful, Nicks-less Fleetwood Mac means more time for Stevie to record and tour without being tied down to the band.

Originally Posted by elle

plus, most SN fans disliked 2 last albums/outputs from FM that were with him and SN, anyway.

I wouldn't say that "most" Stevie fans disliked 'Say You Will' and 'EP.' Many disliked them, certainly. But many (including myself) loved them, too.

I've heard quite a number of Lindsey diehards criticize both releases for various reasons, as well, yet I wouldn't surmise from that criticism that most of his fans disliked them.

Originally Posted by elle

i thought i've been pretty clear on that - of course they should put out whatever they have! more output the better! i've been highly frustrated with FM measly output. if LB didn't contribute anything and other songwriters did and have it mostly recorded, why would they wait for him? i would not be getting 2 albums with new LB songs if he didn't contribute any to FM album, so his songs on FM album would be a pure wishful thinking. and i would be extremely happy to get LB solo album, with or without his contributions anywhere else!

That's not what I asked, though. I asked if you would choose to wait if having a new album with his contributions was only a matter of the band holding off for a few more months.

To have all five on an album, I'm very willing to wait. And I still believe that's exactly what we're going to get... after the tour, just as Christine said.

[BlueDenimLamp]

Originally Posted by drag00n

No matter what happens..... just remember,,,,, the Fleetwood Mac of old will never be again.... To try to go back and try to re-create it seems to me to be impossible... and rather sad..

Well I think that's about as accurate as it gets...

Yes "Rumours" is something to be proud of but it's also hurt the band as much as it's helped them...FM tried doing something different with "TUSK" but when it was not an instant success they ran right back to the security of what has become known as the "Classic Rumours Sound" and they have never strayed far from it...Personally I have grown weary of the whole Rumours thing and I have little interest in a new Mac album since it is almost guaranteed to be especially with CM's return a "Classic Rumours Sound" re-hash...

[elle]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

Then why should Stevie fans be concerned either?

The Fleetwood Mac name is almost always going to bring in more consumers than any of the solo members individually (I say "almost always," because 'Time' didn't do 'Street Angel's' numbers -- of course 'Time' only featured one of the classic songwriters, rather than two). I think pretty much everyone concedes that a new Fleetwood Mac album, with or without Stevie, is going to be more commercially successful than a Stevie Nicks solo album.

i've looked through the rest of your post and you seem to be going in circles so i'm not really sure what you are asking, but i'll try to clarify the parts that i think you are still asking me about:

yes, i think FM should release, without any wait, whatever album they have done, even if they have only 2 out of 3 songwriters on it. and i don't care who is the 3rd songwriter that is out - whether it's LB, CM, or SN.

regarding commercial viability, that concern/question is relevant for SN output since that's what everybody keeps bringing up - that she's by far the most commercially viable solo of the 5 of them, and that FM would not be commercially viable without her.

for LB, the equivalent would be if you ask whether or not the album without him would still be as critically acclaimed as the ones with his involvement are. commercial viability was never his strength.

[elle]

Originally Posted by BlueDenimLamp

Well I think that's about as accurate as it gets...

Yes "Rumours" is something to be proud of but it's also hurt the band as much as it's helped them...FM tried doing something different with "TUSK" but when it was not an instant success they ran right back to the security of what has become known as the "Classic Rumours Sound" and they have never strayed far from it...Personally I have grown weary of the whole Rumours thing and I have little interest in a new Mac album since it is almost guaranteed to be especially with CM's return a "Classic Rumours Sound" re-hash...

well, they did - on Tusk, and on SYW. and they've been reigned back in it seems, both times.