Stevie as scapegoat

[sodascouts]

Originally Posted by Sugar Mouse

Actually ... no. A good producer doesn't control every single detail. They delegate to engineers and others. They don't kick the other band members into another room for hours at a time. Lindsey, good or bad, has been a control guy who controls every detail far more than most any producer does. I'm not saying that the band hasn't catered, at times, to Stevie but they absolutely have catered to Lindsey's very "unique" and exhausting producing style.

So now Lindsey's not a good producer? You know more about his process than Christine McVie does? She has actively praised him, yet you dismiss her opinion. That's rather presumptuous of you.

If you truly knew these people and their professional proclivities as well as you insinuate, you would not act as if her words are worthless and superimpose your own narrative on top of them.

[Sugar Mouse]

Originally Posted by sodascouts

So now Lindsey's not a good producer? You know more about his process than Christine McVie does? She has actively praised him, yet you dismiss her opinion. That's rather presumptuous of you.

If you truly knew these people and their professional proclivities as well as you insinuate, you would not act as if her words are worthless and superimpose your own narrative on top of them.

Where exactly did I say that Lindsey isn't a good producer? I said that Lindsey is a producer that likes to control every detail and likes to take a long time to produce his records and some people (Stevie) find this exhausting.

[David]

Originally Posted by Sugar Mouse

Where exactly did I say that Lindsey isn't a good producer? I said that Lindsey is a producer that likes to control every detail and likes to take a long time to produce his records and some people (Stevie) find this exhausting.

He would drive me up the wall if I had to work with him in the studio, to be sure. But he wasn't merely a producer for that band. He was a songwriter and the lead guitarist, and he was the only one in the band who had much expertise with orchestration. He was George Martin and Paul McCartney and possibly John Lennon all rolled into one. He was the only one in the band who spent painstaking hours mastering recording technology, studying classic tracks by taking them apart and observing their components, and exploring new technology (like the Fairlight) for use with Fleetwood Mac. None of the other four were interested in sonics. It's natural that the band turned over a lot of the studio crafting to him, certainly the reins for building demos into finished tracks. He was the perfect svengali for Fleetwood Mac's non-live approach.

But for Mirage, he had to back off or dial it all down. They told him there would be no more band fragmentation in the building of tracks, no more recording his own bass or drums or keyboards at home and then using those recordings in the finished product.

For Tango, he was forced by circumstance to exert more control than on Mirage. Stevie and John weren't around, and Mick was baked all day. Only Christine and Richard worked with him on a sustained basis to get that album finished, and they all had to employ all manner of tricks to fake the sound of a whole band participating fully.

It's important to remember that Stevie has had major problems with several of her solo producers. Many of those relationships have gone sour for some reasons we know and many we don't: Iovine, Glyn Johns, Rupert Hine, etc. I think Stevie has a sensitive gag reflex in the studio, maybe because she's not as self-confident as she could be.

[aleuzzi]

Lindsey was/is a control freak in the studio. But that's the kind of person you need in order to get the sound from good to distinctive. Each of FM's albums under his direction has a unique SOUND, even if the sound differs from record to record. I don't always love his choices but they serve a purpose: studio-wise, FM with LB doesn't sound like a run-of-the-mill band. That's something.

One of the things I've always hated about LB's Tusk songs is that he doesn't allow the other two singers to sing on them. The Tusk tour rehearsal version of "Save Me A Place" is exciting because of their harmonies. As much as his 1000 voice dubs sounds cool, it sounds so much better with the full band participation. I think the same way about the instrumentation on "What Makes You Think..."

I don't think any of the band has ever played on any version of "Big Love."

[AliP]

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

One of the things I've always hated about LB's Tusk songs is that he doesn't allow the other two singers to sing on them. The Tusk tour rehearsal version of "Save Me A Place" is exciting because of their harmonies. As much as his 1000 voice dubs sounds cool, it sounds so much better with the full band participation. I think the same way about the instrumentation on "What Makes You Think..."

I don't think any of the band has ever played on any version of "Big Love."

Yes, I agree with that. It was like his songs on Tusk were his solo songs with no other input from any other member. I remember that was the first thing I noticed when I first listened to the Tusk album. Then, of course, on CMV and SN songs he's singing background, sharing vocals etc. That's fine because I love the Tusk album. But it's apparent on Tusk he was already in the "solo" state of mind.

[sasja]

Originally Posted by AliP

Yes, I agree with that. It was like his songs on Tusk were his solo songs with no other input from any other member. I remember that was the first thing I noticed when I first listened to the Tusk album. Then, of course, on CMV and SN songs he's singing background, sharing vocals etc. That's fine because I love the Tusk album. But it's apparent on Tusk he was already in the "solo" state of mind.

I always have had the feeling that he was already going in a quite more modern, experimental and fresh and new direction, by the time it was time to make Tusk. He was already listening to The Clash, Talking Heads, Punk, Two-Tone, all the great musical stuff that was happening starting in the late seventies in England and Germany (and maybe in the US too, I cannot speak from experience there, not yet living here then). And it influenced his writing and orchestration I am certain. I also think the rest of the band was not ready to, or into, venturing outside their borders. So it may well be that that caused the huge disconnect, and maybe the others had no idea what to add to those songs. It's interesting that Lindsey did still sing background on theirs, ( and of course he played guitar ) but I sometimes wonder if he did it also to enhance cohesiveness between his songs and theirs.
In any event, Tusk is one of my favorite albums of all time, by any artist, dichotomy or no. It's fresh sounding and not at all dated to this day. IMHO.

[Straightback]

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

One of the things I've always hated about LB's Tusk songs is that he doesn't allow the other two singers to sing on them. The Tusk tour rehearsal version of "Save Me A Place" is exciting because of their harmonies. As much as his 1000 voice dubs sounds cool, it sounds so much better with the full band participation. I think the same way about the instrumentation on "What Makes You Think..."

I don't think any of the band has ever played on any version of "Big Love."

Absolutely agree. I remember when I got the "Tusk" super deluxe edition and hearing "I Know I'm Not Wrong (11/2/78 version)" with Stevie doing harmonies and I was blown away that that was not the version to make it onto the album. So much more interesting and energized.

[sasja]

Originally Posted by Straightback

Absolutely agree. I remember when I got the "Tusk" super deluxe edition and hearing "I Know I'm Not Wrong (11/2/78 version)" with Stevie doing harmonies and I was blown away that that was not the version to make it onto the album. So much more interesting and energized.

Oh boy, and I am of the opinion that Stevie wrecks that great song completely, and her vocals are not at all suited to that song. It just goes to show you, different tastes make the world go round

[dreamsunwind]

Originally Posted by David

He would drive me up the wall if I had to work with him in the studio, to be sure. But he wasn't merely a producer for that band. He was a songwriter and the lead guitarist, and he was the only one in the band who had much expertise with orchestration. He was George Martin and Paul McCartney and possibly John Lennon all rolled into one. He was the only one in the band who spent painstaking hours mastering recording technology, studying classic tracks by taking them apart and observing their components, and exploring new technology (like the Fairlight) for use with Fleetwood Mac. None of the other four were interested in sonics. It's natural that the band turned over a lot of the studio crafting to him, certainly the reins for building demos into finished tracks. He was the perfect svengali for Fleetwood Mac's non-live approach.

But for Mirage, he had to back off or dial it all down. They told him there would be no more band fragmentation in the building of tracks, no more recording his own bass or drums or keyboards at home and then using those recordings in the finished product.

For Tango, he was forced by circumstance to exert more control than on Mirage. Stevie and John weren't around, and Mick was baked all day. Only Christine and Richard worked with him on a sustained basis to get that album finished, and they all had to employ all manner of tricks to fake the sound of a whole band participating fully.

It's important to remember that Stevie has had major problems with several of her solo producers. Many of those relationships have gone sour for some reasons we know and many we don't: Iovine, Glyn Johns, Rupert Hine, etc. I think Stevie has a sensitive gag reflex in the studio, maybe because she's not as self-confident as she could be.

This was so well said.

[SisterNightroad]

Originally Posted by David

He was the perfect svengali for Fleetwood Mac's non-live approach.

I don't want to sound evil because it's not my intention, but Svengali was a negative (and possibly anti-semite) character.

[louielouie2000]

To me, assigning blame to Stevie is simply a matter of deduction. We know that Chris was not party to the decision to fire Lindsey- she was simply informed of it after the fact. I cannot fathom John having any other opinion than deferring to Mick. We know that Mick is ALWAYS desperate to tour, and that he's also very close with Stevie. We also know Mick will always side with whatever keeps the band going and money flowing, which also means he'll bend to Stevie's wishes- she's the cash cow. Stevie's very rigid 3 years between FM tours rule has been drilled into everyone's heads, too... and it's been 3 years. Finally, Stevie's issues with Lindsey are very well documented. To me, it's plain Stevie and Lindsey came to an impasse... and Stevie won the game of chicken.

As to exactly what the impasse was, I think that's irrelevant. If it was because Lindsey wanted to put off a FM tour for a year so he can do a solo album/tour- so what? FM has spent most of the 21st century waiting around for Stevie. If Lindsey wanted to sprinkle in solo dates with the FM tour- again, why would they care? His 21st century audiences number in the hundreds... it's not like his shows would have a measurable impact on FM's bottom line. If Lindsey was insisting on a new FM album before touring... again, why should that equate to his firing? Clearly Stevie is the only one averse to recording... why should she be able to fire Lindsey when she's in the minority?

And I'll reiterate I am not now nor have I ever been primarily a Lindsey fan. Stevie has always been my favorite FM member... but my love of FM by far eclipses my love of her solo work, ten to one. I'm no misogynist, either (like most gay men, I prefer the company of women). Nor am I an Enquirer-reading Trumpite (I'm a registered Democrat). All of these things have been hurled at those of us angry about Lindsey's firing. All that most people on this board wanted was a final album from the Rumours 5... which is why we're so upset by this whole thing, end of story. We won't get that now, and it's very clear to us who is to blame.

[Sugar Mouse]

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

To me, assigning blame to Stevie is simply a matter of deduction. We know that Chris was not party to the decision to fire Lindsey- she was simply informed of it after the fact. I cannot fathom John having any other opinion than deferring to Mick. We know that Mick is ALWAYS desperate to tour, and that he's also very close with Stevie. We also know Mick will always side with whatever keeps the band going and money flowing, which also means he'll bend to Stevie's wishes- she's the cash cow. Stevie's very rigid 3 years between FM tours rule has been drilled into everyone's heads, too... and it's been 3 years. Finally, Stevie's issues with Lindsey are very well documented. To me, it's plain Stevie and Lindsey came to an impasse... and Stevie won the game of chicken.

As to exactly what the impasse was, I think that's irrelevant. If it was because Lindsey wanted to put off a FM tour for a year so he can do a solo album/tour- so what? FM has spent most of the 21st century waiting around for Stevie. If Lindsey wanted to sprinkle in solo dates with the FM tour- again, why would they care? His 21st century audiences number in the hundreds... it's not like his shows would have a measurable impact on FM's bottom line. If Lindsey was insisting on a new FM album before touring... again, why should that equate to his firing? Clearly Stevie is the only one averse to recording... why should she be able to fire Lindsey when she's in the minority?

And I'll reiterate I am not now nor have I ever been primarily a Lindsey fan. Stevie has always been my favorite FM member... but my love of FM by far eclipses my love of her solo work, ten to one. I'm no misogynist, either (like most gay men, I prefer the company of women). Nor am I an Enquirer-reading Trumpite (I'm a registered Democrat). All of these things have been hurled at those of us angry about Lindsey's firing. All that most people on this board wanted was a final album from the Rumours 5... which is why we're so upset by this whole thing, end of story. We won't get that now, and it's very clear to us who is to blame.

I can respect what you wrote that even if Lindsey wanted to put off the tour for a year the band shouldn't have fired him. That's the core issue. I think it's highly likely that Lindsey did want to put off the tour for a long while once the band nixed his idea of Lindsey touring at the same time as a Fleetwood Mac tour. The core issue is whether the band should have fired him if they had a tour scheduled and Lindsey decided to back out. You believe that they should have cancelled the tour.

[AliP]

Originally Posted by Sugar Mouse

The core issue is whether the band should have fired him if they had a tour scheduled and Lindsey decided to back out. You believe that they should have cancelled the tour.

But was the tour scheduled? I thought there were plans but no schedule. I think if he was backing out after a scheduled tour then serious contractual repercussions would result.

[sleepless child]

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

To me, assigning blame to Stevie is simply a matter of deduction. We know that Chris was not party to the decision to fire Lindsey- she was simply informed of it after the fact. I cannot fathom John having any other opinion than deferring to Mick. We know that Mick is ALWAYS desperate to tour, and that he's also very close with Stevie. We also know Mick will always side with whatever keeps the band going and money flowing, which also means he'll bend to Stevie's wishes- she's the cash cow. Stevie's very rigid 3 years between FM tours rule has been drilled into everyone's heads, too... and it's been 3 years. Finally, Stevie's issues with Lindsey are very well documented. To me, it's plain Stevie and Lindsey came to an impasse... and Stevie won the game of chicken.

As to exactly what the impasse was, I think that's irrelevant. If it was because Lindsey wanted to put off a FM tour for a year so he can do a solo album/tour- so what? FM has spent most of the 21st century waiting around for Stevie. If Lindsey wanted to sprinkle in solo dates with the FM tour- again, why would they care? His 21st century audiences number in the hundreds... it's not like his shows would have a measurable impact on FM's bottom line. If Lindsey was insisting on a new FM album before touring... again, why should that equate to his firing? Clearly Stevie is the only one averse to recording... why should she be able to fire Lindsey when she's in the minority?

And I'll reiterate I am not now nor have I ever been primarily a Lindsey fan. Stevie has always been my favorite FM member... but my love of FM by far eclipses my love of her solo work, ten to one. I'm no misogynist, either (like most gay men, I prefer the company of women). Nor am I an Enquirer-reading Trumpite (I'm a registered Democrat). All of these things have been hurled at those of us angry about Lindsey's firing. All that most people on this board wanted was a final album from the Rumours 5... which is why we're so upset by this whole thing, end of story. We won't get that now, and it's very clear to us who is to blame.

Very well said. My thoughts exactly.

[aleuzzi]

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

To me, assigning blame to Stevie is simply a matter of deduction. We know that Chris was not party to the decision to fire Lindsey- she was simply informed of it after the fact. I cannot fathom John having any other opinion than deferring to Mick. We know that Mick is ALWAYS desperate to tour, and that he's also very close with Stevie. We also know Mick will always side with whatever keeps the band going and money flowing, which also means he'll bend to Stevie's wishes- she's the cash cow. Stevie's very rigid 3 years between FM tours rule has been drilled into everyone's heads, too... and it's been 3 years. Finally, Stevie's issues with Lindsey are very well documented. To me, it's plain Stevie and Lindsey came to an impasse... and Stevie won the game of chicken.

As to exactly what the impasse was, I think that's irrelevant. If it was because Lindsey wanted to put off a FM tour for a year so he can do a solo album/tour- so what? FM has spent most of the 21st century waiting around for Stevie. If Lindsey wanted to sprinkle in solo dates with the FM tour- again, why would they care? His 21st century audiences number in the hundreds... it's not like his shows would have a measurable impact on FM's bottom line. If Lindsey was insisting on a new FM album before touring... again, why should that equate to his firing? Clearly Stevie is the only one averse to recording... why should she be able to fire Lindsey when she's in the minority?

And I'll reiterate I am not now nor have I ever been primarily a Lindsey fan. Stevie has always been my favorite FM member... but my love of FM by far eclipses my love of her solo work, ten to one. I'm no misogynist, either (like most gay men, I prefer the company of women). Nor am I an Enquirer-reading Trumpite (I'm a registered Democrat). All of these things have been hurled at those of us angry about Lindsey's firing. All that most people on this board wanted was a final album from the Rumours 5... which is why we're so upset by this whole thing, end of story. We won't get that now, and it's very clear to us who is to blame.

Yes. And Yes. Oh--and yes.