What you don't like of Lindsey music.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Also, keep in mind that Go Insane and Big Love acoustic happened pretty much simultaneously. Lindsey performed both those versions during his 1993 solo tour, and I was blown away.

Oops forgot to comment on that... basically I just wanted to say that I heard the acoustic "Big Love" first, so I guess that's why I always tend to think of that one as coming first.

Also, I *think* I recall reading that Lindsey worked "Big Love" in that manner first, liked the result, then went back and took the same approach with "Go Insane"... but that's neither here or there, they both debuted in their acoustic form on the same tour, so you're right in saying they pretty much happened simultaneously.

[sodascouts]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
I think a lot of times in the past he was too preoccupied with creating interesting sounds, and forgot to focus on the heart of the songs.
Not a condemnation, just a comment.

A comment well-put. I agree.

[AliP]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
I
I completely agree that lyrically "Red Rover" and "Say Goodbye" are right up there. For just the lyrics alone, "Say Goodbye" could be one of my all-time favorite L.B. songs.
Which is probably why I was so disappointed with the execution. Beautiful lyrics totally lost in a production mess. Like you said, "there's a lot going on there"... but unfortunately, for me at least, there's too much going on.

Really, Say Goodbye is overproduced? How so? I always thought it was one of his more simpler songs, in a way like NGBA. Red Rover I would agree has a lot going on, though I like it - it seems to be more of a guitar oriented song rather than a song where he used all that mumbo jumbo production stuff. Sorry, I don't know much about production and though I play piano I'm not a musician in the sense that I know what is going on musicially in any of Lindsey's songs.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by AliP
Really, Say Goodbye is overproduced? How so? I always thought it was one of his more simpler songs, in a way like NGBA.

Technically, if I understand the technology correctly, it isn't overproduced. When you consider that the guitar is set up to produce those sounds, what you essentially have is a guy playing a guitar and adding some harmony vocals. Not exactly overproduced. I suspect Johnny was commenting on the guitar sound, though. What this all means is that Lindsey, with the able help of Rick Turner, is a pioneer in a type of guitar sound that may or may not become more common. I suspect a handful of Lindsey-influenced guitarists out there might want to emulate it.

I have to admit that after Big Love, Go Insane, Red Rover and Say Goodbye, when you get to things like She Smiled Sweetly (which is very nice) and Try for the Sun (eh), you start to say, "Enough already." With one caveat: Red Rover stands apart from the rest of this bunch because the approach, as I mentioned before, was taken up a few notches.

[chiliD]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
I have to admit that after Big Love, Go Insane, Red Rover and Say Goodbye, when you get to things like She Smiled Sweetly (which is very nice) and Try for the Sun (eh), you start to say, "Enough already." With one caveat: Red Rover stands apart from the rest of this bunch because the approach, as I mentioned before, was taken up a few notches.

"Try For The Sun" uses the same techniques as "Red Rover". Being that "TFTS" is a cover tune, I'd surmise that "Red Rover" is another of Lindsey's plethora of "recycled ideas" tunes from what he learned from recording "TFTS".

Those are the only two tunes that he's done that (the "guitar as percussion" idea) to that effect. So, I wouldn't really say that "Red Rover" actually "stands apart", it stands in TANDEM with "Try For The Sun".

[CarneVaca]

Chili, that may be. I'll have to go listen to Try for the Sun again. I don't usually play it, and I was remembering it as a Big Love-type approach.

But in addition to the percussion aspect, Red Rover has several guitars going. Is Try for the Sun more than one guitar?

[chiliD]

Yes. It is the same technique as "Red Rover" multiple guitars getting that "percussive" sound.

[shackin'up]

The only, read my lips-the only thing i don't like about lindsey's music is that he uses drummachines and/or syndrums on a lot of his solowork. I think it's great that he used fairlight and other electronics. I am convinced that if he used a "live" rythmsection for the base of his songs, filled with all the electronic percussion, barstools,spoons and kleenexboxes etc. alot of his work wouldn't sound dated as much. And Go Insane and Cradle would have conquered Tusk as the best album ever recorded by anyone, which IMO, it is 'till today. Or did I mentioned that before?

gerald

[BlueGrass]

Yeah, "Big Love" & "Go Insane" really opened up for Lindsey to be using one guitar as an orchestral entity for a whole track.

Try For The Sun
Here Comes The Sun
Say Goodbye
Red Rover

All use that technique

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by AliP
Really, Say Goodbye is overproduced? How so? I always thought it was one of his more simpler songs, in a way like NGBA.

When I said that it's a "production mess," I wasn't meaning that it's "over-produced."

To my ears, it just feels that the two main parts of the song... the guitar part, and the vocal melody... work against each other, rather than in a complementary way.
The technique Lindsey used to record the guitar part(s) sounds fussy alongside the vocal melody, and the vocal melody sounds rushed and overpowered, in turn.

So, for me, this is one of those cases where Lindsey's desire to do something experimental, didn't benefit the song... which is a damn shame, since it has some of his most heartfelt lyrics.

I will say that the idea does work better on "Red Rover." It might not be my favorite, but that song has the cohesion "Say Goodbye" seems to lack.
"Red Rover" really is pretty incredible on the "and the lips you were kissing," parts.

You have to keep in mind that I don't hate anything Lindsey has done (not even "Here Comes The Sun"), I just find that there are a few songs that leave me cold, for one reason or another.

i don't like the little synth "80's" stuff he uses...especially now...it seems to cheapen the overall sound. I also don't like how, in the past, a lot of his stuff sounded like tv theme music: "you and i pt.2", some of the stuff on OOTC. and i don't like how he says the same speeches over and over again.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by chiliD
Yes. It is the same technique as "Red Rover" multiple guitars getting that "percussive" sound.

Yeah, I listened to Try for the Sun yesterday. It is the same technique indeed. I also figured out why I don't listen to it that often: The muffled vocals drive me nuts as I try to figure out what he's saying. It's odd because in some songs that doesn't bother me.

[face of glass]

Apologies to everyone who feel like reading this; I’m coming to the thread very late and some of this is very random. But “the tale grew in telling”, as some guy who was born 111 years ago once said.

Note: I’m someone who likes every song that the Rumours line-up and the SYW line-up have done. I’m also someone who likes every song Lindsey has done on his own. Keep that in mind when you read this.

First of all I definitely agree with those who think he’s musically the antithesis of spontaneity on stage these days. But I guess I’ve never had any big problems with any LB studio song. Sure, there’s a tone colour here and there that I’d like to change but I’ve never had any major gripes with the way he approaches his songs. Except for two occasions, but more on that later.

While discussing LB, I think it’s necessary to compare him to the other songwriters of the most famous line-up. I’ve never thought that any songwriter of the Rumours line-up could be called “the greatest songwriter of all time”. I’d say that of the three main writers tunes Chris’ survive the best. They’re the ones I could easily imagine done in other arrangements, used as jazz standards (oh, if the times were only different) etc. She’s the one who understands the rules of classic songwriting. As for Stevie, her songwriting, voice and lyrics form a unique relationship with each other, to the point where the appeal of her music would disappear if one was to either replace or remove one part of the trinity, as I’ve claimed before. This makes her music very appealing to people. Performers that have such a way of writing/performing usually have a very fanatical following. Not that I mind it that much; I still get lost in her world very often. But what sometimes gets forgotten is that not too many of her songs would survive as done by other performers. The lyrics and the vocals are still, to this very day, her main strength, whereas her the musical ideas she likes to use have lost their freshness a long time ago.

In a way what I said about Stevie could be said about Lindsey too. I’ve never thought of Lindsey as a great songwriter, more like a good one. In that way I agree with CarneVaca; I also think that a lot of Lindsey’s music should be taken as a whole. He’s stated himself that he only knows a few keys and is very aware of his limitations. It’s not like he’s using unusual chord progressions; the likes of “Miranda”, “Come”, “Murrow” and “Loving Cup” are still mutated blues progressions, no matter what. If I was to compare him to his main inspiration, Brian Wilson, he would clearly lose to the master. Some of LB’s tunes would fall flat if taken out of their finalized arrangements or left in embryonic form. Here’s a quote from Bob Josef’s Tusk review:

It's Lindsey trying every idea in the kitchen sink. But the main problem is that his tracks are more idea than actual composition. I remember playing the title track for a friend of mine. He said, "That's a nonsong."
That's an interesting point. I mean, it's special effects, production experimentation. Which is OK, but it seems that these are fragments as opposed to fully fleshed out songs (wonder if he got this idea from the Beach Boys' Smiley Smile, which has the same problem). And his lyrics are basically worthless.

Here’s one from All-Music Guide’s Out Of The Cradle review, by William Ruhlmann:

Perhaps the biggest difference from his previous solo work, however, was that Buckingham actually wrote a group of songs that were about something, not just riffs full of aural tricks.

And here’s one from our beloved Johnny Stew:

All the bells and whistles and panning vocals are fun and interesting the first few times I listen, but then we get into my need for something more substantive, and the songs come up fairly empty. So I may like them a great deal and enjoy listening to them, but I don't love them.

So basically, we have the two most common “accusations” against Lindsey here:

A) Weak lyrics, at least in the early days. This I can agree with.

B) No “substance” behind all the production
I think Johnny Stew should remember by now what I’ve said before: substance depends on the listener. If you’re looking for classic songwriting from Lindsey, which I believe Bob Josef and William Ruhlmann are after, you won’t find it too easily. Chris beats him in that area. If you’re looking for “good”/”meaningful” lyrics, which, for Johnny Stew at least, are the most attractive thing in a song, you’ll see that those are difficult to find from his pre-Go Insane work. If you’re looking for musical revolutions from the FM catalogue (as some unmentioned web reviewer has), you won’t find any.

However, I don’t think that “Go Your Own Way” (his only recognized classic) is any more substantial than LB’s work on Tusk, Law And Order and wherever. What has, and always will, separate his Rumours work from Tusk is that his musical values changed somewhere in between the two. He could have gone down the classic rock route forever, but he didn’t. Punk/New Wave shook him up; suddenly he wanted to strip off the easily accessible arrangements of Rumours. He didn’t want to do carbon copies of the “I’m So Afraid” solo anymore. Not that I’m saying he could do no wrong during those years; I believe that some of Stevie’s and Chris’ songs on Tusk could have benefited from arrangements not too different from the ones on White Album/Rumours. The main point remains though, LB began to question things. He decided that his songs could do more than convey the feelings the American mainstream accepted at the time. Hey, it might not even do any harm if those feelings weren’t obvious, if they were shrouded. But more on that a bit later.

So, as of now I will try to explain why LB’s work appeals to me the most of the Fleetwood Mac canon.

Reason #1: diversity. I think there are only certain areas that Chris and Stevie can reach on their own. Chris can convey a sense of darkness (“Oh Daddy”, “Behind The Mask”, “Sooner Or Later”), she can do the uplifting numbers (a lot of her catalogue) and she is capable of romantic longing (“Warm Ways”, “Songbird”, “Never Make Me Cry”, “Only Over You”). But that’s pretty much about it for me.
Stevie knows/knew how to rock (you know the songs I’m talking about) and she shines on the romantic, poetic numbers of hers. Sometimes she even gets downright vulnerable. But for me she doesn’t really get any more diverse; she’s stated herself that all her songs are extensions of each other.
Basically, you can all disagree with that. You can tell me that I’m biased, that I don’t hear all the “subtle diversity” that’s apparent in the music of these ladies. Let me tell you however, that before I became a fan I thought that Chris basically recycled “Don’t Stop” all the time and that Stevie’s songs on Tusk were all a part of the same murky drone. Of course I think differently now but that’s because I’ve become a fan. In many cases only fans are likely to hear the “subtle differences” between each song, simply because they’ve listened to the tracks long enough. Thus the songs have developed personalities of their own inside the fanatics’ heads. This is how you develop a bias.

So, how is Lindsey that different then? Let’s see:
Playfulness: (“Lola”, “That’s Enough For Me”, “That’s How We Do It In LA”, “Red Rover” etc.) checked.
Romanticism: (“Stephanie”, “Trouble”, “You And I Part One”, “Steal Your Heart Away”) checked.
Longing: (“Down On Rodeo”, “Say Goodbye”)
Uplift: (“Second Hand News”, “The Ledge”, “Turn It On”, “Deep Dense”, etc.) checked.
Darkness: (“I’m So Afraid”, “Street Of Dreams”, “Someone’s Gotta Change Your Mind”) checked.
Anger/Violence: (“Go Your Own Way”, “This Is The Time”, “Come”, “Murrow”) checked.

And there is also music that I can’t specifically put into any of these categories. Bottom line is: Lindsey’s diversity is more obvious than that of the ladies.

Reason #2: experimentalism. This is a common complaint:

I don't love everything Lindsey's done, because sometimes I think he tries too hard - sometimes I've wondered if some choices he makes are based on what would be most "different" rather than what would be the most aesthetically enjoyable to the listener. Why? To prove something to others, to himself. But hey, he can do whatever he wants. I happen to like his more natural work.

I guess it’s opposite for me. His “natural” work, the likes of “Oh Diane” and “Steal Your Heart Away” can rub me the wrong way, especially if I feel that he’s trying to make the songs too listener-friendly. As someone who came into FM after years of being into experimental, non-mainstream artists, it was Lindsey’s weirder work that first drew me in and taught me to appreciate the other members too. I can get songs like “Oh Diane” and “SYHA” from just about any mainstream performer, not with as many interesting details though.

I mean, I could just as easily criticize Stevie for “not trying hard enough”. That’s my main problem with “the Nicksian drone”; it doesn’t vary itself enough. She’s had that mainstream production on her work since the beginning of her solo career. She knows what her devoted fans want and she’s not going to change her music because of that. She knows her limits and unfortunately she’s afraid of stretching them.

Alright, so Law And Order is an “insubstantial”, childish joke of an album. But it has a sense of fun. A sense of spontaneity. Out Of The Cradle doesn’t have that. Where one can easily criticize L&O for being shallow and empty because it’s about “having fun”, I could easily criticize OOTC for being overly serious and having this pretentious “I’ve finally seen the light” concept to it. I don’t think “having fun” is any less worthy than “preaching the truth” or whatever. Actually I think of Gift Of Screws as LB’s best solo work, because it strikes a balance between the two, even though seriousness still rules there in the end.

The thing is that I love Law And Order almost as much as Out Of The Cradle. I don’t think that the older Lindsey, with his childish musical humour, was any less shallow a person than the mature one that raises its head with Go Insane and flourishes on OOTC. Tgee of Burnish.net has said that L&O has Lindsey acting, not being himself. I’d like to think, though, that Law And Order has Lindsey just as revealed before us as OOTC. No one here knows who is the real Lindsey Buckingham and I believe that the roles the actor chooses for himself tell us as much of him as a personal biography would.

Reason #3: my own gut feeling:

I don’t think that songs always have to convey emotions. I think that LB songs people think of as “unemotional” are like abstract paintings; the emotions and the images in them are not obvious. What I am going to try next is describe my subjective feelings and images that come into my head and my body when I listen to a particular song. This is written under no influence of anything and listening to the songs hasn’t involved substances of any kind either:

“Play In The Rain”: I get this image of a woman standing in heavy rain (and not just because of the song title). She gets down on her knees and looks completely alienated. She looks at a puddle only to find her image completely distorted. By the end of the part one of the piece her body has begun to twitch uncontrollably. That gets interrupted soon and she falls into self-reflection again. At the end of part two she’s just shouting at nothing.

“Come”: The verses give me an image of falling into a web where every fibre is fragile. I just keep on falling deeper with thoughts filling my head. I find myself looking at the totally calm surface of an ocean. Suddenly the surface breaks, it feels like someone’s slapping my face.

“Red Rover”: Suddenly I have become a young pup who is running around on grass. I run across the lawn only to find people shouting at me in agony. I ignore them and start scratching my body intensely.

“The Ledge”: This, to me, is like I was standing in the middle of three conversations at once. It’s impossible to follow any of them; I only hear snatches and try to combine them together in my mind but fail. Eventually I just start laughing at the craziness of it all”.

I guess this reveals more of me than of the pieces themselves. But I can get lots of these images from his songs, even the ones that seem unemotional to people. Not every emotion in every song has to be obvious. Life itself isn’t obvious anyway; there have been many situations where I just haven’t known how to react, where I haven’t felt a particular thing because the situation is new to me. I think that’s what some of his “unemotional” songs reflect, it’s like he’s watching at something new through the eyes of a kid. I recall what Les once said; Lindsey’s songs on Tusk are like “flashes of emotion”. They describe a particular moment, something that you can’t grasp too easily because it goes by quickly. Like watching a little girl dancing on the train station while passing it. Or like watching your cat catch a bird. Things like this we may brush off as “insignificant”. I think, though, that they’re just as valuable as wallowing in misery. The latter may be longer lasting and therefore may feel more substantial, but it’s not that way for me. Not at all.

Of course there are cases when I do not get anything particular from a song except a big question mark on my head. I love that too, however. Everything in this life should not be easily explained. LB does not bow to “the lowest common denominator”; he knows that life is more than just a bunch of “simplistic” feelings and his music reflects that. This is not to say that I think Stevie’s and Chris’ music is “simplistic in emotion”. They are more natural writers, they very rarely question what they write and they follow their heart. At the same time they limit themselves to certain areas. Lindsey may not be as natural a writer, he may appear as self-conscious very often. But I’ve never doubted his complete involvement in his music and I don’t believe I ever need to. Who is to judge anyway what is natural and what is not? Just because you feel a particular idea irks you the wrong way doesn’t mean that it’s unnatural. Ugliness has its value too, it’s a part of life and LB reflects that while the ladies of the Rumours line-up do that only very rarely.

And if someone still thinks of Lindsey as the most far-out, experimental, unnatural musician out there, you’re dead wrong. Believe this from someone who six years ago listened to only “pure noise”. You can be as experimental as you want. If someone farted into a microphone for the first time it would be experimental and innovative, alright, but most likely the idea wouldn’t be appreciated by the public. The best artists, for me, are the ones who straddle the fence between the experimental and the accessible. Lindsey belongs into that group and I’d say that even Stevie does because despite the mainstream production she’s very rarely tried to please the common public in her writing. If I felt that was the case, I wouldn’t be a fan.

I recall a comparison that John (Wetcamelfood) made a while ago; he drew a parallel (modestly) of his and ChiliD’s writing between Clapton’s and Green’s guitar playing; that Green needed only one note to express what Clapton conveyed in five. So, does this make me Eddie Van Halen of the Ledge? A couple of points though, before I go:

"Say Goodbye" could be one of my all-time favorite L.B. songs.
Which is probably why I was so disappointed with the execution. Beautiful lyrics totally lost in a production mess. Like you said, "there's a lot going on there"... but unfortunately, for me at least, there's [I]too much[/I[ going on.

I understand Johnny. But I think that the song would appear too simplistic if it wasn’t arranged the way it has been. Live versions are a different thing, that’s where the contrast between the drunken crowd and the gentleness of the arrangement can be harsh. But why did LB then arrange it the way he did?

Because he didn’t want to play the drama game that obviously, that’s why!

“Say Goodbye” could easily be “When I See You Again (Lindsey’s version)”. Written in 1987, a simple acoustic ballad, lyrics about leaving a formerly loved one (he’s admitted this himself). A perfect object of worship for the Buckingham/Nicks romantics. FM did this with “WISYA” earlier; a very simple arrangement, focusing on Stevie’s voice, just contributes to the drama. And then there’s Lindsey’s vocals that sound very distant during the fade-out. So why not do it again with “Say Goodbye”? That’s what the romantics want and that’s obviously what Johnny Stew wants. After all, JS, we know that “When I See You Again” is still your favourite Stevie song and it’s the simplicity of it all that does it for you.

I’m glad Lindsey arranged “Say Goodbye” the way he did. It shows that he’s above the obviousness, that he doesn’t need to repeat a former pattern just because the circumstances would demand it. He wanted to be above the cheap sentimentalism with this one and so he is. That he arranged it as a quirky song, with shades of Law And Order combined with the finger-picking, just proves that he’s still questioning the obvious. The questioning is still there in his work, has been there since 1979. And if he chooses to keep that attitude then I have no worries of LB becoming a stagnated old studio musician.

[golden braid]

Wow. Some of you have really deep thoughts. I'm pretty simple. I tend to like a song more for the music than for the lyrics. I'm definitely into the lyrics of Stevie, Lindsey, and Christine's songs but a lot of the other music I listen to I like because of the music itself.

[Les]

Originally posted by face of glass
[B]Apologies to everyone who feel like reading this; I’m coming to the thread very late and some of this is very random. But “the tale grew in telling”, as some guy who was born 111 years ago once said.

Please, no apologies necessary. This is a great post, Gaius. From reading all that you said, I think you and I must be kindred spirits of a sort, because you captured much of what I also hold to be true and dear about Lindsey.

I don't know if I've ever really thought of Lindsey as a fantastic songwriter or lyricist, and I'm sure some of that stems from his own self-deprecation in that area. He always backs off from even calling himself a "writer". I think maybe what he means by that...or maybe how I interpret what he's getting at...is that he isn't a narrator. He doesn't appear to try to tell a coherent story about something, or straightforwardly plead his case about something in 4 minutes or less. To me, what he does is capture an intense emotion by giving it back to us through images and intensely colorful sounds. I love that about his writing. I get so much emotion from that. I don't necessarily understand what motivated some of the songs, but then I don't feel like I need to. I still feel something very visceral from the way the whole atmosphere of the track speaks to me.

Plus, I think it speaks to the complexity of emotion. He rarely sets out to just create "a sad song." Usually, the communication of the an overall emotion is mingled with all sorts of other feelings too, which just makes it so much more real and dear to me. "I'll Tell You Now" is one of my very favorite songs of his. It appears to basically be a song about depression. But he never actually gets to telling you that upfront. He muses about how people must think he's odd that he stayed home today instead of going out. It's sort of funny. And the track lopes along in this lazy, but sort of dreamy pace of a horse casually strolling along. It not only works on the level of communicating how depression can sap your energy and swallow you up, but it adds this sense of comedy and sweetness to a song all about sadness. You can see him looking at himself and smiling in amusement at the state of his wallowing. How many of us do that too? I love this stuff and can think of so many other songs of his that do this same sort of thing.

What I also think he does, with every one of his solo albums, is put those songs together to collectively communicate a theme that then reflects back on the songs, providing more meaning to them. That's something else I love about his work. It truly is impressionisitic in that way. Some of the songs alone may show a flash of something that can sometimes be nebulous, but when taken with the whole album, a portrait emerges. And add to that the great thought behind the song constructions - the conviction to try to stretch himself, and the refusal to be pigeon-holed artistically or emotionally - and I think that too then reflects on the theme of the album. I think tremendous thought has gone into each album in that way, and it makes the experience so deeply rich for me.

Anyway, very interesting to read your post, Gaius. Thanks for taking the time to type it all out.