Your guess on why Stevies Solo careeer eclipsed lindsey and Christines

[jeffles]

i would tend to disagree with the comment "mediocrity sells".
There's plenty of good music that sells, and **** music that doesn't. Just to say something like that isn't valid.

Hipness may be part of it, but not all. FM really isn't all that hip in 2003, but "Say You Will" is doing considerably well.

The marketing machine behind these conglomerates that own record labels is what sells records. Fleetwood Mac, which has gone through a major marketing campaign, is a benefactor. Some of these companies also own the radio stations that play the music. Just one company alone, Clear Channel, owns over 1500 radio stations across the country. Now, wouldn't you think that a comany like this is in cahoots with various record companies??

[wetcamelfood]

I could be wrong but from what I understand, SYW "peaked" at number three and has since dropped off, not disappeared mind you, but dropped off, no?

So, would it be safe to assume that because FM USED to be a HUGE band, this is the reasons it has MANY devoted, loyal followers and THESE are the people who "rushed out" to buy the album when it came out (hence the initial high chart placing)? OK, maybe some promotion had some influence but I get the feeling that those sales were already going to be there regardless of what marketing was/wasn't done and what was on the record, for the most part, they maybe lost some sales due to it not being "all five" but generally speaking, whether it was "good or not"...same with TISL really in so far as SN followers.

I won't get in to the SN vs. LB thing as I agree that it is all opinion. To me, "commercial success" doesn't = "good music". What "sells" is what is marketed regardless of whether it's good or not. The labels go by what they can get people to think is hip, like Johnny Stew says, I wish it weren't that way, but it is unfortunately. Just like we're told when we are small when we say "That's not fair". "No one ever said life was fair". We always see "artists" we don't think "should" be marketed and then we see some really talented artists busting their ass for meager club earnings (i.e. no promotion). They have nothing to do with each other. I liked (and still do like) "Time" and that "failed" but it doesn't bother me. I bought a few "big" albums last year, some I liked, some I didn't like so much, you know? JMHO though.

John

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Oh, that settles it. I'm glad you're explaining what high quality is: something that doesn't bore you (sarcasm, but not disrespect, intended.)

You can sugar-coat it however you want, but the reality is mediocrity sells. Plain and simple. I'm not saying Bella Donna and The Wild Heart were mediocre, however.

If something bores me, it's mediocre in my eyes. If I'm moved and entertained at the same time, then it's of a higher quality.
That's the general rule of thumb, and I think it's a fairly reasonable one.

I'm not an unintelligent boob who follows a mob mentality. I listen to what I want to listen to, and I always have.
It was terribly uncool to be a 15 year old Stevie Nicks fan in 1987, but I couldn't have cared less, because I saw the quality in the music... and I still do (and it's still not terribly "hip" to be a Stevie Nicks fan).

All of those offbeat recording techniques, and fast-panning vocals, may be impressive and interesting sonically, but it doesn't inherently mean that Lindsey has a lock on quality. (Nor am I saying that his music lacks quality.)
At the end of the day, they're still "just" pop albums.

While there may not be anything trail-blazing about the sound of Stevie's albums, there doesn't need to be... the lyrics and her emotive vocal style speak for themselves. She's a singer/songwriter... she doesn't purport to be anything more than that.

Whether or not each of her songs speaks to every individual is a completely different story. But they all speak to someone... people who are quite capable of thinking for themselves, and deciding what they like and what they don't like. No matter how many other people like it or dislike it... or how many other people bought it.
To me, that's yet another example of "quality" music.

Stevie's music is every bit as artistic and valuable as Lindsey's... they just come at it in completely different ways. Which is why they compliment each other so well when they come together.

[Dulcimer]

Stevie was more successful solo because she had the most identifiable image and a great voice that allowed her to stand apart from most other artists. Something has been lost in recent years, but she remains very appealing.

[Craig]

I should have paid a little more attention to this..I would just like to say how ridiculous some Lindsey fans act, they say that because he hasn't been successful that it must be because his music is too "deep" and significant for mainstream to grab hold of.. not to mention the fact that I'm sure most would go as far as saying they're GLAD he never hit the mainstream as big as Stevie..again I say

What was Go your own way? what was Big Love? They weren't one offs for mr Buckingham, the man is just as capable of being "mainstream" as Stevie..that is when he's capable of writing a song that more than hardcore zealots will force themselves to appreciate.

I really am tired of the whole "they don't sell well so they must be better" argument, I happen to love Madonna and she's sold more than all of the Fleetwood Mac Allumni combined with the actual group, that definetly doesn't mean she is to be looked down on, neither are the beatles. Sales do not always equate light weight trash.

It boggles the mind to wonder why people think a song made in 1994 that sounds like it was made in 1987 wouldn't be a hit because it was above the scope of the public, the man isn't as successful as Stevie because he isn't as accomplished as a songwriter. I say that not saying he writes lesser songs, I'm saying that he doesn't have the same abilities to keep up, having said that, Stevie isn't up to date either really but she's not as stuck as Lindsey can be at times.

I say all this realyl not trying to disrespect him as I respect what he has done and who he is and his abilities but I really cannot stand the bleatings of pretentious fans when it comes to "quality vs quantity" and "sales make you mainstream fluff", it bothers me a lot.

I only have go insane and while it's an ok album, it doesn't touch any Stevie Album, maybe street angel.

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by Craig
I only have go insane and while it's an ok album, it doesn't touch any Stevie Album, maybe street angel.

I would strongly advise you to get Lindsey's Out of the Cradle. That album is his strongest...lyrically, musically and vocally. It's pop perfection and IMO, better than ANY Stevie solo album (and I LOVE Belladonna). There are no "wierd" songs on OOTC and he hit a musical groove on that album that is just outta this world amazing. If Street of Dreams doesn't leave you in tears, then...I just don't know...

[jeffles]

Back in the eighties, Madonna made some good records, but today, she makes ****ty Eurotrash Techno, as witnessed by her current single.

Go Insane doesn't touch any Stevie Nicks record? Try revisiting The Other Side of the Mirror. Not a bad album , but not a good one, and one in which she was reduced to sharing songwriting credit with her producers Rupert Hine and Rick Nowels.

Besides , you're comparing apples and oranges. Go Insane was written, engineered and peformed by LB himself, not to mention co-produced. The end result, considering its the work of, basically, one person--not a who's who of ace session players--was very satisfying.

[seteca]

Originally posted by jeffles
Go Insane was written, engineered and peformed by LB himself, not to mention co-produced. The end result, considering its the work of, basically, one person--not a who's who of ace session players--was very satisfying.

And even that's an understatement....I think the entire album is a masterpiece. In fact, I prefer it to Out Of The Cradle (which as Christy said, is perfection anyway!).

[Tim Robinson]

First, remember that is it very difficult for anyone from any band to make a solo career.
Quality music is not enough. You have to unique.
Stevie is unique. No one else has a voice like hers. No one else has lyrics like hers.

[seeker007nmss]

Why do a lot of people quote sales and chart action as to whether an artists is good or not? if YOU like it, if YOU enjoy it why would you care what others think, or the industry favors? Chart action and sales has just as much to do with politics and industry promotion as anything else. I am sure we all have great albumns in our collections that never "made" it for a variety of reasons. If you like a cetain band or person, thats what truly matters. I have heard "number one" hits that I wouldn't use the cd for a drink coaster. But that is my choice. Music is like art, everyone has to make their own choice what they enjoy, not because someone else says it is good.

Just my 2 cents


seeker007nmss

[wondergirl9847]

ITA with your entire post...who CARES what is #1 as long as you find pleasure in listening to a certain artist/group, MORE POWER TO YA!! I've got #1 albums in my collection along with albums that hardly anyone bought probably. I love em all!! I've never liked following the crowd tho anyways...doing your own thing...that's what I like.