Fleetwood mac WILL record new album says stevie - Page 102

SteveMacD · #**1516** 09-06-2016, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shackin'up

If you're fed up you quit. That's a harsh but honest decision.

It's her turn now, instead of letting them 'hang' with an almost finished album.

Really, they should grow a pair and tell her that there will be a new Fleetwood Mac album with or without her and that she needs to give them new songs by a certain date if she wants to be included on the album. I wouldn't tie her membership in the band to her involvement on the album, but I would firmly let her know that the band will go on one way or another.

aleuzzi · #**1517** 09-06-2016, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Really, they should grow a pair and tell her that there will be a new Fleetwood Mac album with or without her and that she needs to give them new songs by a certain date if she wants to be included on the album. I wouldn't tie her membership in the band to her involvement on the album, but I would firmly let her know that the band will go on one way or another.

Absolutely. Agree 100%. I think the band, however, are scared to death of carrying on without her and what Mick once called "her impressive constituency." They're scared of not filling arenas, scared of scaling down their millions in earnings, too. They have, in a word, sold their souls to keep themselves in the public eye--and that means sacrificing artistic integrity as well as their original, longstanding commitment to being an ever-changing entity that moves with the times.

Jondalar · #**1518** 09-06-2016, 06:42 PM

I think people were hoping that Stevie would succumb to peer pressure, but bullying didn't work. You lost.

aleuzzi · #**1519** 09-06-2016, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jondalar

I think people were hoping that Stevie would succumb to peer pressure, but bullying didn't work. You lost.

Not quite. I think many of us were hoping the band would simply carry on without her should she refuse to make new music with them. We're frustrated because the band doesn't want to take that step. Personally, I could care less if she shows up on a new FM record. I want to hear the new Christine material and am beyond annoyed that the rest of the band are shelving it because they're too afraid to work without her.

This doesn't mean I don't love Stevie. But she's clearly not interested in making new music with them and only wants to do her own thing (which, btw, I have supported by buying all through the years).

Did the band bully her? I have no idea. From the outside looking in, it appears they were trying to build momentum for new music and were pissed (or at least Mick and Lindsey were pissed) that her celebrity trumped their efforts (the Rolling Stone cover, etc.).

BlueDenimLamp · #**1520** 09-06-2016, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

Absolutely. Agree 100%. I think the band, however, are scared to death of carrying on without her and what Mick once called "her impressive constituency." They're scared of not filling arenas, scared of scaling down their millions in earnings, too. They have, in a word, sold their souls to keep themselves in the public eye--and that means sacrificing artistic integrity as well as their original, longstanding commitment to being an ever-changing entity that moves with the times.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

Not quite. I think many of us were hoping the band would simply carry on without her should she refuse to make new music with them. We're frustrated because the band doesn't want to take that step. Personally, I could care less if she shows up on a new FM record. I want to hear the new Christine material and am beyond annoyed that the rest of the band are shelving it because they're too afraid to work without her.

This doesn't mean I don't love Stevie. But she's clearly not interested in making new music with them and only wants to do her own thing (which, btw, I have supported by buying all through the years).

Did the band bully her? I have no idea. From the outside looking in, it appears they were trying to build momentum for new music and were pissed (or at least Mick and Lindsey were pissed) that her celebrity trumped their efforts (the Rolling Stone cover, etc.).

BRAVO!!! It's about time someone admits that FM only keeps Stevie around because of the extra profits she brings in for the band...

There's no way Mick is letting Stevie go anywhere...She's his meal ticket...

Jondalar · #**1521** 09-06-2016, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

Not quite. I think many of us were hoping the band would simply carry on without her should she refuse to make new music with them. We're frustrated because the band doesn't want to take that step. Personally, I could care less if she shows up on a new FM record. I want to hear the new Christine material and am beyond annoyed that the rest of the band are shelving it because they're too afraid to work without her.

This doesn't mean I don't love Stevie. But she's clearly not interested in making new music with them and only wants to do her own thing (which, btw, I have supported by buying all through the years).

Did the band bully her? I have no idea. From the outside looking in, it appears they were trying to build momentum for new music and were pissed (or at least Mick and Lindsey were pissed) that her celebrity trumped their efforts (the Rolling Stone cover, etc.).

Mick wasn't very supportive of her supporting In Your Dreams either. She is probably sick of it.

BlueDenimLamp · #**1522** 09-06-2016, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jondalar

Mick wasn't very supportive of her supporting In Your Dreams either. She is probably sick of it.

He was fine with "IYD" when he was getting paid for studio work...

aleuzzi · #**1523** 09-06-2016, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jondalar

Mick wasn't very supportive of her supporting In Your Dreams either. She is probably sick of it.

Sure. But then she shouldn't condescendingly refer to the members of FM as her "team." Mick, et al have advocated for new music since before Christine's return. Part of being a team is making new music, not just cashing in on a 45 year old story: in that interview, she talks more about "Landslide" and her posterity through that song than anything else, a song she once said "was about Katrina" and, now that that story is over, a song that could be about Hillary's potentially historic win. The other members of FM are eager to tell new stories and write new songs, but they refuse to move on without her. Hence fan frustration.

SteveMacD · #**1524** 09-06-2016, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

I think the band, however, are scared to death of carrying on without her and what Mick once called "her impressive constituency." They're scared of not filling arenas, scared of scaling down their millions in earnings, too.

I think Stevie's perceived importance to Fleetwood Mac today is a little overblown. Her last three solo albums combined only sold a little more than what SYW sold. She was in such high demand as a solo artist a few years ago that she had to open for Rod Stewart. The 2014-15 Fleetwood Mac tour was much more successful than the 2013 tour, only one thing changed, and it wasn't Stevie's involvement. Yes, Fleetwood Mac won't sell out large arenas without Stevie, but neither will she without them. Christine and Lindsey have enough hits and standards between them to put on a viable set without Stevie. They're absolutely in a great position to force the issue.

**jbrownsjr** · #**1525** 09-06-2016, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

I think Stevie's perceived importance to Fleetwood Mac today is a little overblown. Her last three solo albums combined only sold a little more than what SYW sold. She was in such high demand as a solo artist a few years ago that she had to open for Rod Stewart. The 2014-15 Fleetwood Mac tour was much more successful than the 2013 tour, only one thing changed, and it wasn't Stevie's involvement. Yes, Fleetwood Mac won't sell out large arenas without Stevie, but neither will she without them. Christine and Lindsey have enough hits and standards between them to put on a viable set without Stevie. They're absolutely in a great position to force the issue.

I believe she will always try and rub her solo career in Lindsey's face. And somewhat Mick's.

AlexD · #**1526** 09-06-2016, 07:55 PM

Pretty ridiculous that Lindsey gave up TWO solo projects for the good of Fleetwood Mac and now that they are old and Johns time could be limited, Stevie is not willing to do the same for the band.

aleuzzi · #**1527** 09-06-2016, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

I think Stevie's perceived importance to Fleetwood Mac today is a little overblown. Her last three solo albums combined only sold a little more than what SYW sold. She was in such high demand as a solo artist a few years ago that she had to open for Rod Stewart. The 2014-15 Fleetwood Mac tour was much more successful than the 2013 tour, only one thing changed, and it wasn't Stevie's involvement. Yes, Fleetwood Mac won't sell out large arenas without Stevie, but neither will she without them. Christine and Lindsey have enough hits and standards between them to put on a viable set without Stevie. They're absolutely in a great position to force the issue.

Again, I agree. 100%. But the band doesn't see it this way. Mick wants all five of them as a group so that the collective lineup can rake in cash, cash, cash. They toured without Christine because she didn't give them a choice. But Stevie's still lured to big money and touring is, as usual, Mick's first priority.

I would LOVE to see a FM show with Lindsey and Christine fronting the band.

SteveMacD · #**1528** 09-06-2016, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbrownsjr

I believe she will always try and rub her solo career in Lindsey's face. And somewhat Mick's.

That's exactly why they need to make a go without Stevie. I think so long as Christine and Lindsey are there people will show up. I also think it will be a bigger draw than a solo Stevie. I'd love to see them do the "I Won't Be Waiting Around For You" tour.

**jbrownsjr** · #**1529** 09-06-2016, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

That's exactly why they need to make a go without Stevie. I think so long as Christine and Lindsey are there people will show up. I also think it will be a bigger draw than a solo Stevie. I'd love to see them do the "I Won't Be Waiting Around For You" tour.

Musically it would be better, too. These two can write and jam. Their chemistry is very strong. Stevie is very nasal for my taste.

WatchChain · #**1530** 09-06-2016, 08:24 PM

While I am not happy with Stevie's stalling, diva behavior, a Mac album and tour WITHOUT her is simply NOT AN OPTION. The idea is ludicrous.

That being said, it's now clear what will happen. Stevie will go on the road for a short tour this fall to promote a 2 year old solo album (she's been dying to get onstage and sing the tracks from 24KG, ok Stevie go for it!). In early 2017, she will be free to record with MAC. If Mac were smart, they would be in the studio right now recording the record. Then, in early spring, just have Stevie record her 3 songs and lay down background vocals on the completed CM/LB tracks. This whole process could be done with Stevie in the studio for 4-6 weeks. The Fleetwood Mac album could be out by summer 2017 with a fall tour to follow.