The Buckingham McVie album! Out June 9th, 2017!!!

[MikeInNV]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

if you're implying that I hate Stevie, far from it. I have been a huge fan of hers since the 70s and she was the main reason I got into the band in the first place. I am, however, incredibly, sadly disappointed in her.

I wasn't implying that at all, I know you're a fan. Perhaps somewhat unfairly, I used your post as a singular example of something that happens all the time. I do respect that you're feeling disappointed and even share the sentiment to an extent. An album with all five would be fantastic, but Stevie has a right to choose what is best for her, just as Lindsey and Christine have also done.

Originally Posted by elle

there are 180+ posts in this thread already, countless pages, with people celebrating that we are actually really getting this new music, and discussing how exactly it will all happen. and among those there are less than handful negative posts. most really don't care about Stevie at this point as she is not involved. yet all of the sudden several posts showed up just now lecturing and accusing fans of stevie-bashing. it was bound to happen knowing this crazy fandom. but i'm happy to see how enthusiastic and positive both here and all the social media reactions are. christine mcvie and lindsey buckingham are still trending on facebook, and it's been like that the whole day.

I'm not being negative. Although I'm not nearly as big a fan of LB and CM as Stevie, I'm very happy this album is coming out. I'm sure it will be very good, I'm sure the fans will be thrilled, and I don't see it as disrespectful or a slap in the face to Stevie in any way, shape, or form. I was merely pointing out that when someone questioned why the project wasn't being called Fleetwood Mac, it was suggested that Stevie threatened to sick lawyers on them and go to the press when no one knows that at all. Even you offered a more sensible explanation for the decision that wasn't personal or insulting to anyone. Maybe Stevie did do that, but I doubt it. I can't imagine you would stay silent if someone accused Lindsey of such off-putting behavior if there wasn't a trace of evidence to suggest it.

[elle]

Originally Posted by MikeInNV

I was merely pointing out that when someone questioned why the project wasn't being called Fleetwood Mac, it was suggested that Stevie threatened to sick lawyers on them and go to the press when no one knows that at all. Even you offered a more sensible explanation for the decision that wasn't personal or insulting to anyone. Maybe Stevie did do that, but I doubt it.

even me? what does THAT mean? are you accusing me of being unreasonable Nicks-hater?

my point remains. huge majority here have been nothing but positive about this project, similar as on social media. it's a win-win situation and something we've been hoping and waiting for since 2014 tour started. i still can't believe it's finally happening and that something will not stop it, it's been a such a long and frustrating wait.

some peeps (not saying you!) come here just looking to stir trouble while trying to stick that label on others instead.

[aleuzzi]

Originally Posted by Matthew

Im big fan of Stevie and Im sad that she´s not gonna participate, but it´s her decision. I would be much more sad if that would be the reason to the rest of the band not to record anything new, even when they want. So Im very happy now, that they found a way to record new album without her.

But I have to say that it´s little unfair to Christine, because when she left and the rest recorded Say You Will, it was still Fleetwood Mac. So I dont see the reason why now it shouldn´t have been called Fleetwood Mac album when it´s without Stevie. There was so many incarnations of Fleetwood Mac in history, that it would not be so special... it certainly would have bigger potential of sales with the name Fleetwood Mac. So I guess that they feel that the popularity of Stevie and her being in Fleetwood Mac is so strong, that they need to call it diferently... but yeah, I think it would be more fair to Chrstine to keep the name Fleetwood Mac.
But anyway, who cares... there will be new music from these two and Im really looking forward to it.

I agree that it seems unfair. But the decision appears to be a business one. When Christine left, she didn't want to tour at all. She wanted to work on a new studio album with them but not go out on the road, so, given the ultimatum, she left completely, without ever intending to return. Since tour money has always been a BIG priority in Mac, her decision seemed irrevocable.

Stevie is willing to tour all the friggin' time. So, there you have it...

Also, if Christine had stayed in 1998 and Stevie left for good, the ensuing album would have been Fleetwood Mac. They were all a lot younger then. They had hopes of a "new" era of more music, more tours. Here, at this time, they're all trying to tie a bow on the thing and put it to bed before they die. By calling the album Buckingham/McVie, they avoid disturbing a situation that is A LOT more delicate than it was in 2003.

Unfair? Yes. Realistic/pragmatic: yes.

I also agree with others who are saying that calling the project Buckingham/McVie gives the two a lot more artistic freedom to do whatever the heck they want. They get to call the shots, they get to determine the direction of the production, they get to essentially break free of some of the traps Fleetwood Mac has laid for itself since 1980.

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

Their name should be BuckVie.

Buckingham Mac

[elle]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

Buckingham Mac

Fleetwood Mac's Buckingham McVie that has been reported as their working title actually works the best, and makes it very clear what it is.

all other iterations sound like a FM cover band.

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by elle

Fleetwood Mac's Buckingham McVie that has been reported as their working title actually works the best, and makes it very clear what it is.

all other iterations sound like a FM cover band.

I was thinking about that. Initially I thought the idea of Fleetwood Mac's Buckingham McVie would be a great idea as it would give credit to the band name without it actually being called Fleetwood Mac. The more I think about it though, the more I think it would be a bad idea. It tends to remind me of all the touring oldies bands that have broken up and splintered into more than one off-shoot. The ones that have one band member that has to add their own name for legal reasons and it always sounds a bit sad. 'Jeff Lynne's ELO'.As I write, I actually can't think of any other examples but you get what I mean.
Then there's the oldies acts that tour as '....from....'
Anyway, I don't think Fleetwood Mac's Buckingham McVie has been reported anywhere has it? Just Buckingham McVie.

[elle]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

I was thinking about that. Initially I thought the idea of Fleetwood Mac's Buckingham McVie would be a great idea as it would give credit to the band name without it actually being called Fleetwood Mac. The more I think about it though, the more I think it would be a bad idea.

Buckingham McVie's Fleetwood Mac (like Peter Green's FM).

they would not be trending all over social media if the headlines and tags were not "Fleetwood Mac's....". if they want the project to be heard, the fact they are majority of Fleetwood Mac needs to be very clear. what they did (or more probable, what headline writers for LA Times did!) was very smart.

[secondhandchain]

As of now I am officially an ex fan of Stevie's. That being said I am extremely excited to hear this music. I only hope they get incredible recognition from critics and possibly some award nominations. We know it isn't going to sell, but that's ok. A grammy nod would just make my year. Stevie will not be happy. Please God let this album be great.

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by elle

what they did (or more probable, what headline writers for LA Times did!) was very smart.

Sorry Elle, I don't know whether I'm just being a bit slow here...what are you referring to? All I see is the headline of the article;

Fleetwood Mac's Christine McVie and Lindsey Buckingham talk about making their first duet album.

And then the line embedded in the article;

The album coming out of these sessions, however, won’t bear the Fleetwood Mac imprimatur. Rather, the release with the working title “Buckingham McVie” will arrive as the first full-length collaboration between the pair.

I'm not seeing anything that mentions 'Fleetwood Mac's Buckingham McVie' or 'Buckingham McVie's Fleetwood Mac'

I think alluding to the fact they are both in Fleetwood Mac within the title of the piece is just a natural thing to write for the benefit of readers.

[elle]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

Sorry Elle, I don't know whether I'm just being a bit slow here...what are you referring to? All I see is the headline of the article;

Fleetwood Mac's Christine McVie and Lindsey Buckingham talk about making their first duet album.

And then the line embedded in the article;

The album coming out of these sessions, however, won’t bear the Fleetwood Mac imprimatur. Rather, the release with the working title “Buckingham McVie” will arrive as the first full-length collaboration between the pair.

I'm not seeing anything that mentions 'Fleetwood Mac's Buckingham McVie' or 'Buckingham McVie's Fleetwood Mac'

no, you are right. i'm just playing with some words. there's nothing to suggest FM's will be in the duo title. but they should definitely advertise it as FM's, just as that article and all that followed it did.

i've been in small towns following various Lindsey tours enough to know that if you mention his name people will give you a blank stare. but if you then tell them he's from Fleetwood Mac the lights immediately go on.

i suspect it may be similar with Christine's name, but might be different in the UK?

[FuzzyPlum]

Well, they are already getting a lot of attention. They don't necessarily need to officially involve the use of the Fleetwood Mac moniker as the media are going to automatically point out they are from Fleetwood Mac when they are talking about/reviewing the album. In fact the intrigue created by the use of a completely different name seems to be making it news worthy and could be a good marketing 'angle'.

[MikeInNV]

Originally Posted by elle

even me? what does THAT mean?

"Even you" was because you had already shared an explanation of why the project might need to be called something other than Fleetwood Mac, an explanation which is probably the most reasonable and likely of any we have heard, so I figured you would understand that we don't necessarily have to assume a worst-case scenario regarding animosity between the band members.

Originally Posted by elle

are you accusing me of being unreasonable Nicks-hater?

That wasn't the intent of my post, but perhaps I struck a nerve?

Originally Posted by elle

huge majority here have been nothing but positive about this project, similar as on social media. it's a win-win

Agree!

[singertobe]

Originally Posted by jbrownsjr

Glad I'm not the only one who thought of this

[jbrownsjr]

Originally Posted by singertobe

Glad I'm not the only one who thought of this

I found it on FB.. made me LOL.. really hard..

[jbrownsjr]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

Well, they are already getting a lot of attention. They don't necessarily need to officially involve the use of the Fleetwood Mac moniker as the media are going to automatically point out they are from Fleetwood Mac when they are talking about/reviewing the album. In fact the intrigue created by the use of a completely different name seems to be making it news worthy and could be a good marketing 'angle'.

I was very pleased to see them get a decent amount of attention. I still want smaller theaters vs. arenas. But, I'm not going to complain. (there's a first) lol