Destiny Rules and Lindsey [Archive]

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 03:28 PM

I admire him for trying - I just question his sincerity :laugh:

I mean does he really think Warners is going to advance several million dollars to an essentially and relatively commercially dead solo artist to make a record that will not be a commercial success. I am amazed that LB does not get this point. I mean I am all for him to make songs like "Come" and other stranger stuff. But, I think that if he wants to have someone else pay for him to do it, he better learn to compromise to Big Daddy with the Dollars. Its not like this is his first time making a record :shrug: Thus, I conclude that while LB likes to talk a good game about being a maverick and wanting to be anything but commercial, he fully realizes he needs to be a commerical success to have his luxuries, which I do not blame him one bit for wanting. I mean at least Stevie is honest about realizing that her music must sell to the massess for her to maintain her lifestyle.

I the end, I think LB's whole maverick schtick is rote a la the whole love affair on stage act that he and SN do every night nothwithstanding any real emotion they may otherwise have for each other. I think the maverick bit sells for him and FM. And, I think LB actually brilliantly walk the line and produces great music. :cool:

Les

03-22-2004, 03:57 PM

I think Lindsey "gets" all of it Strand. He just remains idealistic enough about what he believes music and art should be that he never gives up trying to take it there. There's no schtick involved, in my humble opinion. I think he's absolutely sincere about every bit of it and there's not a thing wrong with it -- whether its deemed "good business" or not. It's something I admire.

CarneVaca

03-22-2004, 04:47 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I admire him for trying - I just question his sincerity :laugh:
I mean does he really think Warners is going to advance several million dollars to an essentially and relatively commercially dead solo artist to make a record that will not be a commercial success. I am amazed that LB does not get this point. I mean I am all for him to make songs like "Come" and other stranger stuff. But, I think that if he wants to have someone else pay for him to do it, he better learn to compromise to Big Daddy with the Dollars

Jason, I'm not sure that your "have someone else pay for him to do it" commment is well placed here. I have seen no indication from Lindsey that he thinks he should get any kind of free ride.

I think it's OK to understand his frustration -- how it's important to be creative to remain true to your art but simultanuously having to acquiesce to commercial interests. He obviously understands this, judging from his final decision on the double album, but he still has the right to be frustrated by it.

It must be especially frustrating when he looks back at which of his songs have been FM hits: GYOW, Tusk, Big Love. None of those songs could really be considered "commercial" at the time of their release. Yet, now they are classics. So it is possible to release non-formula music that attains a level of success.

What probably is more of an issue, and one that the members of the band don't seem to recognize, is that FM is not going to sell millions and millions of new releases anymore. At best, they'll do a million or two. SYW hasn't gone platinum yet, as far as I know. So why not just go record some edgy stuff, get it out there and make your money on the tour? As it happens, the new album is not the dizzying commercial success they seemed to think it would be, commercial songs and all.

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by Les
I think Lindsey "gets" all of it Strand. He just remains idealistic enough about what he believes music and art should be that he never gives up trying to take it there. There's no schtick involved, in my humble opinion. I think he's absolutely sincere about every bit of it and there's not a thing wrong with it -- whether its deemed "good business" or not. It's something I admire.

I think that if LB was a true idealist, he would have released GOS on the net and never subjected himself to FM. But he did not do that. He made that choice to go to the very commerical FM. Given their history, which has been beaten and rehashed to death over the last 15 years - hence my feeling that he plays it up a bit, LB certainly did not go into the FM sessions with blinders on. So, while I think LB (and FM and SN for that matter) really does want to make every thing as good as he thinks it should be, LB clearly wants commercial success and all the things that come with it.

I think people think I am being unfair to LB by saying this. I am not. I like LB. I think he is brilliant. I am glad to hear new music from him. I flew from Atlanta to Chicago to see his Soundstage thing. So, its not about disliking LB :laugh: I am just saying LB has a 25 year history of sort of appearing like he is so anti-establishment, anti-commerical, etc., but in the end he craves commercial viablity and always likes to appear like he is "selling out" to get it. I think after all of these years that feeling cannot be genuine - rather, I think it appears contrived after all of these years. I mean why else would he go back to the very commerical FM every time he needs commercial viability :shrug: Some suggest it is because of his love for SN. While I think that has alot to do with it, I also think LB realizes he likes the way he lives and FM can provide him with the commerical success to keep living that way mostly in his own terms - I mean the GOS songs on SYW are not THAT different than GOS solo copies we all heard :shrug:

In the end, LB could sell tapes out of the trunk of his Mercedes ( :laugh: ) and I would buy them because I like his work.

As an aside and just a general comment, I think it is so interesting people in general seem to think commercial viability is a bad thing. I mean its not like every song of the radio is horrible :shrug:

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 04:59 PM

Carne - I totally agree with you. But, I think SYW has hit singles in it that could have been huge if the moon and stars aligned just right. So, although now it is not a huge commerical success, I think it was thought it could be based on the commercial viability of songs like SYHA, BTLH, TD, SYW, SG, etc.

I just am just saying I am amazed LB seemingly always returns to the highly commercial FM to record when he must know what "they" will make him do in terms of art and commercial viability. In the end, I think he loves being around Stevie so he sacrifices. That is the only explanation that works for me :shrug:

Also, I was not implying LB thinks he should get a free ride. I was referring to the conversation in the DR doc. where they are talkng about going with Warners because that was the largest advance. Interestingly, Stevie even mentions that LB might want to reconsider Warners and go with Interscope. I am just saying Warners is not going to advance millions of $$$ for a non commercial record. Clearly LB knows this :laugh:

wondergirl9847

03-22-2004, 05:05 PM

He knows that there is a built-in audience for FM and those people will get to hear his music, unlike going solo, where he won't sell very many copies. :(

It's a double-edged sword, I think. Either play with FM and be called a "sellout" or put our your solo music and barely anyone hears it. Lindsey (Will He Ever Win?) :laugh:

dissention

03-22-2004, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I think that if LB was a true idealist, he would have released GOS on the net and never subjected himself to FM. But he did not do that. He made that choice to go to the very commerical FM. Given their history, which has been beaten and rehashed to death over the last 15 years - hence my feeling that he plays it up a bit, LB certainly did not go into the FM sessions with blinders on. So, while I think LB (and FM and SN for that matter) really does want to make every thing as good as he thinks it should be, LB clearly wants commercial success and all the things that come with it.

ITA - he had many options available to him and enough resources to get the music out independently if he really wanted it released. But he didn't. He chose to make it a Fleetwood Mac project when he could have just started his own label and distributed it over the Net. Lauper did it, so does Aimee Mann. Rick Vito even does it (or did). He's a rich bastard, he could've gotten it out there somehow.

While I can see where Lindsey is coming from as an artist, his whole Todd Solendz/apartment bit was laughable. He'd be very disappointed and let down if SYW had sold 300,000 copies, so I fail to how he would've been able to cope with the miserable failure of a solo record. The fact is, he wants to be the "starving artist"-type and commercial success and money, but unfortunately, he's at that stage in his career where he can't really have both. He can either turn his material into Mac material and make some fast clams, or he can swallow a lot of money and put out the kind of stuff he wants to as an artist with no restrictions, losing a bit of money in the process.

Now, in order to sell a lot of albums, he succumbed to rehashing the band history and compromised his artistry. Yeah, he has a wife and three kids, but can anyone tell me that they can't live comfortably for the rest of their lives unless he makes a Fleetwood Mac album with commercial appeal? Puhleaze. He wants to sell albums, that's obvious. So he promotes them by talking about his relationship with Stevie ad nauseum, blah, blah, blah. It's a conscious attempt to sell albums.

His comment about Stevie possibly pulling out after 40 shows was also a bit lame. So, he was going to make SYW a double and eat the cost only if they kept touring and making steak? It's all just a convoluted mess. He wants to be commercially viable so he can sell as many records as possible, so that he rakes in the cash. But then, he wants to be the artist and release music on his own terms a la a double album, but only if he can be guaranteed that they'll continue touring and making dough. It's almost as if he's saying he wants to release a double, but only if the others keep at it so that he makes his money back that he's gonna lose.

I love the guy and his music to death, but he's simply out of touch with reality and lives in just a big a dream world as dear Stevie. The tortured artist routine is old; he can bitch all he wants, but no one is forcing him to do anyhting he doesn't want to do.

Just my thoughts, don't flame me, Carne. :laugh: :wavey:

dissention

03-22-2004, 05:21 PM

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
He knows that there is a built-in audience for FM and those people will get to hear his music, unlike going solo, where he won't sell very many copies. :(

But this is the man that said if his music only reached the right couple of folks, he would be content and satisfied because at least two people heard it. ;) :laugh:

Sorry, if Kathie Lee can sell 32,000 copies in todays market, Lindsey could at least double that figure. :laugh:

Les

03-22-2004, 05:45 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I think that if LB was a true idealist, he would have released GOS on the net and never subjected himself to FM.

I guess I missed the memo on what a "true" idealist is. ;)

But he did not do that. He made that choice to go to the very commerical FM. Given their history, which has been beaten and rehashed to death over the last 15 years - hence my feeling that he plays it up a bit, LB certainly did not go into the FM sessions with blinders on.

Blinders? No. But he clearly thought he went with FM with what he thought was buy in from Mick to do a double album. That means he thought he was going to be able to get more his music to a broader audience, which I think is quite important to him. It also means he thought that the bigger artistic statement that he saw the double ablum as being, wasn't something he was going to have to battle for so hard this time around.

So, while I think LB (and FM and SN for that matter) really does want to make every thing as good as he thinks it should be, LB clearly wants commercial success and all the things that come with it.

Your assumption is that he wants to reach a broader audience because he wants more money/luxuries. That's not an equation that I make.

I think people think I am being unfair to LB by saying this. I am not. I like LB. I think he is brilliant.

I don't think you're unfair. It just appears to me that you don't take him particularly seriously. You said something about how "at least Stevie is being honest about wanting to make money." That's fine if you feel that way. But just because Lindsey is willing to make less money in service of a different sort of artistic statement doesn't make him less honest. He's just got different priorities.

You seem to feel that his talking about being an artist first, with everything else about the business being secondary to that is all a put on and has always been a put on. I think that's a remarkably cynical view to take of him. That's all.

I am just saying LB has a 25 year history of sort of appearing like he is so anti-establishment, anti-commerical, etc., but in the end he craves commercial viablity and always likes to appear like he is "selling out" to get it.

I disagree. I think he loathes the idea that one would think he's selling out.

I think after all of these years that feeling cannot be genuine - rather, I think it appears contrived after all of these years.

So, I guess I'm trying to understand. Do you think everything he said in the documentary was all for show and really it was an elaborate ruse to make sure that nobody would think he was really just dying to roll around in mounds of cash? Wouldn't simply going with an easy single album, and skipping all of the money talk in front of the cameras have been a slightly more straightforward and simple way to do that?

I mean why else would he go back to the very commerical FM every time he needs commercial viability :shrug:

He's said hundreds of times by now, I dare say, that he's far more able to appreciate the chemistry of the band now and feels it's very special that they can all still come back together and still feel the spark of doing something special. He's also said it's a lot easier to get material released under the name of Fleetwood Mac because labels open the door for Fleetwood where they close the door to Buckingham.

As an aside and just a general comment, I think it is so interesting people in general seem to think commercial viability is a bad thing. I mean its not like every song of the radio is horrible :shrug:

Well, by the same token, I guess I think it's odd that some are seemingly offended by the notion that making the most money he can possibly make on every project isn't his main motivator.

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 06:02 PM

I was getting the idea that LB certainly is interested in the commerical appeal and the money that comes with it from his own statements that he has a wife, a new house, and kids. In the doc., he stated he was concerned about supporting them in his well earned and well deserved lifestyle through the music on SYW and the subsequent tour revenues. Thus, my problem with LB's acting like the tortured artist always being forced to bend to the evil commercial side of music when he repeatedly and clearly does it of his own free will. Its a little bit like the boy who cried wolf once too often. After 25 years, his credibility when he says the band, the record company, etc. made him sacrifice his art is a bit tarnished.

I mean after 25 years and a very recent self-admitted snub by Warners, I just cannot believe LB would think that FM and Warners were not going to assert creative control over him, esp. after LB consciously chose Warners and accepted their millions in advance. Again, his GOS songs were not that changed for SYW, the lyric change Peacekeeper being the only possible exception and he stated he did not have a problem with that. In the end, I think record execs. and FM know that although the tension in FM is real, a played up tension sells more. They have been relying on this theory for 25 years. Just as I think there is very real emotion behind SN and LB's clearly contrived current stage antics, I similarly think that although LB (and SN for that matter) clearly has artistic integrity, LB likes to make a show of it because he and Warners know it will help sell the product - it was in all the press surrounding the release of the record and here it is again. I mean who would have watched the doc. but us ( :laugh: ) if everyone got along :shrug:

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by dissention

I love the guy and his music to death, but he's simply out of touch with reality and lives in just a big a dream world as dear Stevie. The tortured artist routine is old; he can bitch all he wants, but no one is forcing him to do anyhting he doesn't want to do.

Just my thoughts, don't flame me, Carne. :laugh: :wavey:

Interestingly, La Nicks came across as a savy businesswoman on the doc. She is well aware of the need to be commerically viable if she wants to maintain "the lifestyle" and she is still commerically viable although to a much lesser extent than she was in the 80's. Who would have thought our airy fairie Stevie could be so practicle :laugh: Also, I thought Stevie went out of her way to make sure LB's feelings were not hurt ("I touch with gossamer wings" ). I thought she was not screaming at him like a harpy - except perhaps unintentionally in vocal warmup to Silver Girl :laugh: I am glad those two have reached this place in their lives and am even happier with the music that comes from it :cool:

I the end, I think they made a band decision to release the 18/20 songs because that is what they are - a band :shrug:

shackin'up

03-22-2004, 06:28 PM

Les

03-22-2004, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I was getting the idea that LB certainly is interested in the commerical appeal and the money that comes with it from his own statements that he has a wife, a new house, and kids.

My difficulty with your argument here is that this situation has never been black and white. He's always said he'd like his material to reach a bigger audience than it does. He's never said he wants to be a starving artist. In the documentary, he was not suggesting that he, in fact, is like Todd Solendz in material wealth. He was trying to make an analogy for Mick to try to convince him that making the most money possible on the project doesn't have to be the only measure of success.

Thus, my problem with LB's acting like the tortured artist always being forced to bend to the evil commercial side of music when he repeatedly and clearly does it of his own free will.

Yes, he did it of his own free will. Part of the reason we know this is because he clearly says so on the tape. There is no talk of being forced.

However, I don't think there's any question that if he'd gotten his way, the album would have been a double. He made his decision after trying and trying and trying to convince his bandmates to go in another direction, and offering to take far less pay so that they would still make everything they wanted. As for the final battle that really made him change his mind --- since that's not shown, I don't think we'll really quite know exactly what all went into that. Mick's and Lindsey's vague and ambiguous comments suggest a really aggressive argument took place. Whatever it was, it was enough to convince Lindsey to change his mind.

He made a compromise. Because he made that compromise, he's now a total fake and always has been??

Had Lindsey not compromised and pulled out of the Mac project after two years of promises in the press of a new Mac album, I can only imagine the labels splattered all over him for doing that.

I mean after 25 years and a very recent self-admitted snub by Warners, I just cannot believe LB would think that FM and Warners were not going to assert creative control over him, esp. after LB consciously chose Warners and accepted their millions in advance.

Lindsey wasn't the only one involved in the decision. He said they almost signed with Interscope. Then Warners offered a bigger advance. He alone didn't make the decision to go with Warners. If the decision was left up to him and him alone, we don't really have any idea what Lindsey might have done. He might have stuck with Warners and he might not.

LB likes to make a show of it because he and Warners know it will help sell the product - it was in all the press surrounding the release of the record and here it is again. I mean who would have watched the doc. but us ( :laugh: ) if everyone got along :shrug:

Here again, I just see a fairly intense amount of cynicism in your comments. How does telling everyone that Warners didn't like his material as a solo artist help sell the album when that same basic material is on the album? I guess I just disagree with you here. :shrug:

I don't think it's really a big surprise, but we obviously just have different perceptions about the kind of artist Lindsey is.

sodascouts

03-22-2004, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I similarly think that although LB (and SN for that matter) clearly has artistic integrity, LB likes to make a show of it because he and Warners know it will help sell the product - it was in all the press surrounding the release of the record and here it is again.

I thikn Lindsey wants it to be known that he is concerned about such things because he has always been very conscious about how he is perceived by others in the music industry. He seemed to be very upset by the fact that experimental bands thought so little of him because of his association with Fleetwood Mac, and that carries over to his attitudes today.

I also think that, though he may not admit it, LB craves fame and "mass adulation" and that is impossible to get outside of Fleetwood Mac for him. I think that draws him much more than the monetary aspect - knowing people hear him and love him. :)

Yes, I too rolled my eyes at the "I have a family, a house to pay for" line. PUH-LEEZE. I think you're right that he wasn't really prepared to eat the money as he claimed.... that he was only willing to do that if he knew he would get his money back through touring and be none the worse. In that sense, money does seem to be a consideration for him.... Im' not denying that.

I do find it extremely difficult to believe he would knowingly lie bald-faced to fans with the motive to make himself look like a tortured artist in order to sell more records. Frankly, I think that's ridiculous. The man is not Machiavelli! He wants to sell records. He wants to make money. But he's not so depserate that he'd resort to such elborate and unethical machinations to get a few hundred more records sold. In the end, how many would really buy an album based on that anway? As for Warners being in on it - yeah, I'm sure they're willing to appear to be greedy artist-hostile execs in order to help Fleetwood Mac sell a tiny amount more. Yeah, right.

I know you love LB's music, but you sure don't seem to respect him very much as a man. That's too bad. :(

Les

03-22-2004, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by sodascouts
He seemed to be very upset by the fact that experimental bands thought so little of him because of his association with Fleetwood Mac, and that carries over to his attitudes today.

You think? I think Lindsey actually did get some recognition from those circles. I recall a Musician article from 1981 in which the writer discusses how Lindsey was actually quite respected in some of those musical circles. I'd be sure that he was thrilled down to his toes that he and Laurie Anderson were able to strike up a friendship.

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 07:47 PM

Originally posted by Les
Here again, I just see a fairly intense amount of cynicism in your comments. How does telling everyone that Warners didn't like his material as a solo artist help sell the album when that same basic material is on the album? I guess I just disagree with you here. :shrug:

I don't think it's really a big surprise, but we obviously just have different perceptions about the kind of artist Lindsey is. [/B]

The largest difference is the same basically unchanged GOS material has La Nicks on about 2/3 of the tracks and is being released as a FM project. Warners has no problem with this because they know it will sell at least enough to pay for the outrageous recording costs, etc.

Also, I think LB is a great artist. In fact, I have never really seen a greater player in my life and I have seen many. I just think LB, SN, and FM are savy in their marketing in that they play up what sells. I mean no one made them dish all this dirt and I can assure you it did not just happen by accident no matter how true it is. I mean they talk about it in every interview and have been since 1977 :shrug: None of this changes my impression of LB as an artist - it just reaffirms my suspicion that he wants his cake and eat it too - and I do not blame him one bit because I would do the same thing :laugh:

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 07:53 PM

Originally posted by sodascouts
I know you love LB's music, but you sure don't seem to respect him very much as a man. That's too bad. :(

People Please :laugh:

I am not saying LB and SN sit around at night and make a script or that they are not telling the truth. I do not think that. I am merely saying the fact that in every interview since Tusk all they talk about is the relationship troubles and all of the drama around that as well as LB constantly saying "I want to do everything completely and totally different than what has been done and considered mainstream" may be true - in fact I think he does that and am glad he does - but I am saying FM enhances this image because it is drama and drama sells :cool: I do not fault them or disrespect them fpor that.

The only disrespect I have for LB was his decision to leave the band after the TITN tour was booked. I thought that was a bad thing to do. But, I am over it :laugh:

Les

03-22-2004, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
The largest difference is the same basically unchanged GOS material has La Nicks on about 2.3 of the tracks and is being released as a FM project. Warners has no problem with this because they know it will sell at least enough to pay for the outrageous recording costs, etc.

Who says there were outrageous recording costs? Just curious. Part of the reason they rented the house was because it cut way, way down on booking expensive studio time.

As to the rest of your post, I don't follow how this goes with your previous statement. Any album released by FM is, well, an FM album and will sell better than a solo album. So how does all of Lindsey's "pretending" to be a tortured artist who couldn't get his work out help sell the album again??

Les

03-22-2004, 07:59 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I am not saying LB and SN sit around at night and make a script or that they are not telling the truth.

Well, not to quibble Strand, but you started out the first several posts in this thread saying exactly that. No? You think Lindsey is not telling the truth. That he's just making up some fake personality and fake principles to try to impress somebody and to sell a product, not because he might actually be the person he's purported to be for 30 years. ;)

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 08:01 PM

Look up rent in Bel Aire. I think you will see it is not cheap. Then there was the cost of moving state of the art equipment in there. It does not take a stretch of the imagination to get to figure of well over a million very quickly.

Also, if you cannot see LB loves the tortured artist persona and has for the last 25 or more years, I certainly am never going to be able to change your mind :laugh:

Les

03-22-2004, 08:03 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Look up rent in Bel Aire. I think you will see it is not cheap. Then there was the cost of moving state of the art equipment in there. It does not take a stretch of the imagination to get to figure of well over a million very quickly.

No kidding, Bel Air is expensive! ;) However, Mick gave more than one interview saying that it was less expensive to rent the house than pay for studio time.

Also, if you cannot see LB loves the tortured artist persona and has for the last 25 or more years, I certainly am never going to be able to change your mind :laugh:

I think Lindsey is himself. If he loves himself, then sure, he loves whatever "persona" that gets across. Hehe. :D

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 08:07 PM

Originally posted by Les
Well, not to quibble Strand, but you started out the first several posts in this thread saying exactly that. No? You think Lindsey is not telling the truth. That he's just making up some fake personality and fake principles to try to impress somebody and to sell a product, not because he might actually be the person he's purported to be for 30 years. ;)

No I did not. I said LB may think he is being a genuine maverick or whatever, but in the end he goes for the commercial aspect. I think he plays on this in an attempt to keeo the public's interest. For example, in the PBS interview with Charlie Rose, did you notice how he skited answering the question about his relationship with SN. Why not just answer the question? Well, I think he does not answer it because he knows that the more vague he is the more people will talk about it.

Again, I think you guys think I am implying that LB is an a$$hole who will do and say anything for a buck. I am not. I am just saying he likes the commercial aspect of being one of the greatest guitarists ever and I do not fault him for that. I just get a little tired of his "I'm a tortured artist that is forced to be commercial" attitude. I think it is a little contrived because he has been being commercial for 25 years against his will :laugh:

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 08:10 PM

Originally posted by Les
No kidding, Bel Air is expensive! ;) However, Mick gave more than one interview saying that it was less expensive to rent the house than pay for studio time.

I think Lindsey is himself. If he loves himself, then sure, he loves whatever "persona" that gets across. Hehe. :D

I could have this totally wrong, but didn't I read that LB and his family lived in that house for awhile while his house was being built and FM got it later on? So, the recording equipment could have been LB's and could have already been there. Oh it is sad when the memory goes :laugh:

Les

03-22-2004, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
No I did not. I said LB may think he is being a genuine maverick or whatever, but in the end he goes for the commercial aspect.

Sorry, guess I was thrown off by the comments about his "schtick" being "rote" and his personality and professed feelings about music being "not genuine" but "contrived". ;)

Yep, he's made some commercial decisions in his lifetime. He's also consciously made several that are not.

But context is always important. Clearly, Lindsey isn't the most radical, maverik, free-wheeling type out there. But within the context of the band, he is the maverik.

PS - I don't believe the house they rented for the album was the house he and his family lived in. But I do think the studio equipment they used in the house was probably Lindsey's.

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by Les
Sorry, guess I was thrown off by the comments about his "schtick" being "rote" and his personality and professed feelings about music being "not genuine" but "contrived". ;)

Yep, he's made some commercial decisions in his lifetime. He's also consciously made several that are not.

But context is always important. Clearly, Lindsey isn't the most radical, maverik, free-wheeling type out there. But within the context of the band, he is the maverik.

I honestly think the general canned answers LB and SN give in every single interview for the last who knows how many years are for the most part rote and not contrived? Ditto for the Landslide hug and all of the other stage stuff done to perpetuate their highly publicized doomed love affair that most believe ended 30 years ago :laugh: That is what I think is rote and contrived. As I stated, I think the feelings behind those onstage antics and LB's perception of himself are real. I think LB views himself as a tortured artist. I just think "they" made a decision to play these things up because it keeps the public interested - e.g. the same Landslide hug they have been doing since The Dance gets huge applause every time :shrug: :cool:

Les

03-22-2004, 09:08 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I just think "they" made a decision to play these things up because it keeps the public interested - e.g. the same Landslide hug they have been doing since The Dance gets huge applause every time :shrug: :cool:

I don't argue about the Stevie and Lindsey show. But you're comparing apples to oranges. Discussing the way Lindsey and Stevie perform, isn't the same thing as questioning the very essence of what Lindsey's says is important to him about his music. You're not questioning the very essence of who Stevie says she is and what is important to her about her work because they hug in the same place during the same song in every single show. The two things aren't really related. At least they aren't to me. :shrug:

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 09:25 PM

I am not questioning that quality in LB except perhaps in general. I think the shows, the interviews, and this doc. are all part and parcel of the same marketing thing. I think they all touch on those areas we discussed that the public wants to see. Again and to be clear :cool: :laugh: , I do not think these rote activities make them less genuine or take away from their artistic integrity. I just think they are done to promote interest in FM.

Again, I do think LB views himself as a tortured artist and he is that in many ways. I just think he is not willing to give up commerical success as much as he aludes to do. But, hey - maybe his is willing to do so after 25 years of coming back to it :laugh:

Les

03-22-2004, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I am not questioning that quality in LB except perhaps in general. I think the shows, the interviews, and this doc. are all part and parcel of the same marketing thing. I think they all touch on those areas we discussed that the public wants to see.

Okay. I suppose I'm just not all that convinced that the public is clamboring to see Lindsey fretting because that's going to make them buy records. :shrug:

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 09:44 PM

Les

03-22-2004, 09:46 PM

By the way, "fretting" as in worrying. Not "fretting" as in playing guitar. :laugh:

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by Les
By the way, "fretting" as in worrying. Not "fretting" as in playing guitar. :laugh:

I was wondering which you meant!!!!! :laugh: :laugh:

Apprently, LB can frett with the best of them no matter which definition!!!!

CarneVaca

03-22-2004, 10:16 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I am just saying LB has a 25 year history of sort of appearing like he is so anti-establishment, anti-commerical, etc., but in the end he craves commercial viablity and always likes to appear like he is "selling out" to get it. I think after all of these years that feeling cannot be genuine - rather, I think it appears contrived after all of these years.

Jason, at the risk of getting slammed again for nuance, I will say this: craving success and craving commercial viability are not necessarily the same. Yes, they go hand in hand, but what really is success? I'm sure Lindsey doesn't view it as monetary succes. What I see is a guy who is always slightly irritated that success is measured by commercial viability and that commercial viability is an unfortunate necessity.

Translate that into your own lives. I for one am often irritated that I have to bust my rump to put money in the pocket of some multimillionaire capitalist while I get crumbs. Now I'm not complaining because I have fared well. But it's still just crumbs in comparison.

CarneVaca

03-22-2004, 10:20 PM

Originally posted by Les
But he clearly thought he went with FM with what he thought was buy in from Mick to do a double album. That means he thought he was going to be able to get more his music to a broader audience, which I think is quite important to him.[/b]

Bingo, Les! The guy was hurt that he wouldn't be able to get as much music as he wanted out, after all those years. I can certainly understand it.

Your assumption is that he wants to reach a broader audience because he wants more money/luxuries. That's not an equation that I make.

Once again, I fully agree with this, as I explained in my previous post.

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 10:21 PM

Touche' Carne!!!!

CarneVaca

03-22-2004, 10:27 PM

Originally posted by sodascouts
I thikn Lindsey wants it to be known that he is concerned about such things because he has always been very conscious about how he is perceived by others in the music industry. He seemed to be very upset by the fact that experimental bands thought so little of him because of his association with Fleetwood Mac, and that carries over to his attitudes today.

I think you're way off there. A lot of the alternative bands have come clean about Lindsey, Camper Van being the most salient example. Besides, how he is perceived is not what motivates him. What motivates him is getting music out that means something to him and that isn't just pablum.

But I agree with this:

I also think that, though he may not admit it, LB craves fame and "mass adulation" and that is impossible to get outside of Fleetwood Mac for him. I think that draws him much more than the monetary aspect - knowing people hear him and love him. :)

He's a complicated man. A lot of people are.

I think you're right that he wasn't really prepared to eat the money as he claimed.... that he was only willing to do that if he knew he would get his money back through touring and be none the worse.

Again, I think you missed the mark here. He said the label would pay FM for 12 songs. He was willing to forgo royalties on most of his contributions and collect on only two or three. I think he was sincere.

And by the way, this is not unusual. Other bands do this. I know of bands that have released 17-, 18-, 19-cut albums and got paid for only 10 or 12 songs.

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 10:30 PM

The 12 song thing is at that price of a single record. If they chage more for the CD, the artist gets paid. Apparently, LB at first wanted to charge more, but realized that might not work, etc.

CarneVaca

03-22-2004, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Apparently, LB at first wanted to charge more, but realized that might not work, etc.

Uh!? Are you sure about that? I don't remember any discussion that he wanted to charge more.

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 10:36 PM

I just got that from his satement that he'd be willing to eat the price difference. I thought that implied he assumed the price pint would reflect the songs.

CarneVaca

03-22-2004, 10:37 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I just got that from his satement that he'd be willing to eat the price difference. I thought that implied he assumed the price pint would reflect the songs.

That doesn't mean he wanted to charge more. I suspect he was thinking in 1979 terms when a double album was actually a lot more costly to produce.

strandinthewind

03-22-2004, 10:41 PM

I was kind of wondering why WB poo pooed the double record this time. They could have marketed it as the a two disc set and labelled one the actual record and the other the experimental stuff or something like that. I mean CD packaging is not that great of a cost :shrug:

shackin'up

03-23-2004, 04:10 AM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
They could have marketed it as the a two disc set and labelled one the actual record and the other the experimental stuff or something like that.

like Say You Will

WTWCT
Thrown Down
Miranda
Say You Will
Peacekeeper
Silver Girl
SYHA
Destiny Rules
Bleed to love her
RTTG
Goodbye Baby

and Say You Thrill?

Gift of Screws
Murrow
Illume
Red Rover
Come
Smile at You
EFO
I am waiting
Not make believe
Someone's Gonna Change Your Mind
Say Goodbye

HMM....interesting thought....

gerald

stefan

03-23-2004, 05:47 AM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I honestly think the general canned answers LB and SN give in every single interview for the last who knows how many years are for the most part rote and not contrived? Ditto for the Landslide hug and all of the other stage stuff done to perpetuate their highly publicized doomed love affair that most believe ended 30 years ago :laugh: That is what I think is rote and contrived.
I always thought this hugging and kissing and pseudo love affair playrole was annoying. To me it`s obviously following a script. Look at the different message boards- there are enough people hanging on to this absurd romantic love conspiracy-theory. They even go so far to flame a woman they don't remotely know (LBs wife) So FM knows there are lots of people who want to see that and put on that show... That is commercial behaviour!

On the other hand he always complained about how the music wasn`t perceived as the main aspect of Rumours but the soap opera and how that became a problem for him in the following years. Well that's a contradiction then...

Our man likes to be theatrical from time to time- look at the gestures on the shows. Sometimes he is overdoing it imo- putting the hand on the heart after the ISA solo... well on the first concert after 5 years that may be genuine but every night- I don`t think so. Then the romantic comedy we spoke about. Also slamming his guitar on the floor... I mean come on- that's more annoying than funny. He is not the great revolutionary punk outlaw whose main attitude is death and destruction :laugh: So leave your beautiful Turner guitar where it belongs, otherwise it gets unwillingly funny.

But now for the most important thing:

As for the music- I agree that LB`s main interest is the music and how he reaches a broader audience. I understand that- who wouldn't want to get more attention for a work that you put a lot of time and energy in. I do believe that money is not the main subject here. If future FM projects are the most probable way that LB puts out new music on a regular basis instead of sitting on his material for 8 years- then I'm fine with it although I`d prefer regular solo stuff.

shackin'up

03-23-2004, 07:43 AM

Originally posted by stefan
Well that's a contradiction then...

Sorry, Stefan, but you are doing the same thing as the romantics, only vice versa. You just can't divide the romantic/relational thing and the artistic thing in this (version of the) band. This band is a contradiction in the flesh and the source as well as the result of itself.
I mean: the songs are about themself, the arrangements are fed by the emotions at the time etcetera. The image is of course an image, but the weird thing is This image has grown naturally: it's reality in essence.I am not only talking 'bout rumours: also alot of the material from all the LB/SN-era-albums and tours. Okay, on SYW it's a little less obvious, but also there.
Playing before a huge audience (10000+) needs some overacting. otherwise we'd all be looking at "dire Straitsy" performances.(and I would have walked out of the concerts crying....from dissapointment i mean:laugh:. )Lindsey always did it this way: it's sincere, yet PERFORMED. Nothing else.

stefan

03-23-2004, 08:38 AM

Well at least for me I can tell that I just want to hear and see more music from our man. Is that only possible within FM- all right. He often stated that he wanted the music to be in the focus not the soap opera. That's what I`d like too.
Gerald, you're right about the show element- I wouldn't want a playback show like if I had put on my CD player and nothing else. But LB's performances were never like this (nor were Stevies)
- I think his performance skills and entertaining abilities are 100% enough to keep at least me happy during a concert. I don't claim I want emotionless shows, but looking how he plays his solos and sings on songs like ISA, Come and others is very entertaining. Look at the OOTC shows: Sadly I wasn't able to attend one personally but the live tape I have from the "Centerstage Chicago" TV broadcast- that`s obviously completely without SN romantics and nevertheless a fantastic live show.
I also have to disagree that the romantic show element is something natural- it`s choreography which doesn't mean that they don't get along or enjoy their tour and so on. But I would like that to be left off. Part of that is the reason why the setlist is like a irremovable stone and there is so little space left for new elements.

CarneVaca

03-23-2004, 09:06 AM

From what I can gather, there is very little about FM shows these days that is spontaneous. From the inflexible setlist, to the rehearsed speeches between songs, to the hugs and the headbutts, to the contrived gestures. It's silly really. When I saw the band during the Dance tour and realized the speeches and so forth were the same as during the VH1 show, it took something away. It really did. And it (in addition to some other reasons) made me less-than-enthusiastic about seeing FM on the current tour. I am now finally planning to go to a show.

This band needs some spontaneity again. I say dump most of the backup musicians and let it loose a little bit.

wondergirl9847

03-23-2004, 11:23 AM

putting the hand on the heart after the ISA solo... well on the first concert after 5 years that may be genuine but every night- I don`t think so

But, if he DIDN'T put his hand over his heart, he looks like an ungrateful a$$. Right? I can just hear the audience now, "Yeah, after his solo, he just stood there looking out, everyone screaming for him, with a sly smile on his face like he thinks he's God or something." People are disappointing. :(

Also, keep in mind that there are different audiences for each show (minus the Ledgies who go to a million shows...hehe), so even tho WE are wanting them to do something different, the general audience (Rumours lovers) see them once and go "WOW, that show was amazing!! Did you SEE what he did?!"

Anyways...on the CenterStage thing, he was a lil dramatic...Street of Dreams is VERY emotional with the screaming and stuff. Also, he "play-fights" guitars with Janet during ISA (I think).

That's just Lindsey. :)

Les

03-23-2004, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
They could have marketed it as the a two disc set and labelled one the actual record and the other the experimental stuff or something like that. I mean CD packaging is not that great of a cost :shrug:

Hey we agree! A two disc set would have been great! :laugh:

But if you're going to go double, then mix it all together. Why put the experimental stuff off on its own instead of on the "actual record"? Tends to imply it's more of a marginalized curiosity, doesn't it?

face of glass

03-23-2004, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by stefan
I always thought this hugging and kissing and pseudo love affair playrole was annoying. To me it`s obviously following a script. Look at the different message boards- there are enough people hanging on to this absurd romantic love conspiracy-theory. They even go so far to flame a woman they don't remotely know (LBs wife) So FM knows there are lots of people who want to see that and put on that show... That is commercial behaviour!

Before any romantics criticize you for this, I thought I would. I’m not a romantic myself but I fully accept those fans and think they can be as level-headed as others.

I do agree with you that it is acted in that it’s repeated night after night but it doesn’t necessarily take away from any genuine emotion that could be in there. The same with “Silver Springs” and other parts of the set where they’re looking at each other. Yes, it does annoy me but so do the speeches so what the heck. ;)

I wouldn’t criticize the BuckinghamNicks.net message board and the people posting to it that harshly. The meanest (as in tone, constantly, without any attempts at humour whatsoever) Kristen Buckingham bashing over there came from a few slightly deranged posters (not that I’m not one ;)), some of them not even regular, and the rest were not comfortable with those posts. There are a lot of people there who do not approve of KB being Lindsey’s wife but I’ve always found humour in their posts. Even they know they’re just entertaining themselves, no one is seriously trying to do anything to get their romantic dreams fulfilled.

Our man likes to be theatrical from time to time- look at the gestures on the shows. Sometimes he is overdoing it imo- putting the hand on the heart after the ISA solo... well on the first concert after 5 years that may be genuine but every night- I don`t think so.

I agree with this, he was going along with the whole “looking-and-singing-at-each-other-intensely” thing with “The Chain” already on Tusk and Mirage tours. I daresay though that he’s just got more theatrical with time, to the point where the choreography seems to allow for very little changes.

Originally posted by CarneVaca
From what I can gather, there is very little about FM shows these days that is spontaneous. From the inflexible setlist, to the rehearsed speeches between songs, to the hugs and the headbutts, to the contrived gestures. It's silly really.

It is, yes. But it’s also something that very many name bands do, especially when they’re mainly touring for the nostalgia crowds. The Moody Blues, Jon Anderson of Yes, Jethro Tull, they all do this stuff. With Lindsey Buckingham though it tends to be a bit more contrived, mainly due to the guy’s uneasiness on stage when the music is not being played and when he has to step up to the mic and talk.

He’s as much to blame for it as the rest of them. No one cared about the choreography in the ‘70s, the whole thing was more spontaneous because the music business hadn’t yet gone too absurd. Oh, and because of ‘em drugs too. ;) But now many are just afraid of anything going wrong.

It just contributes to the band playing as well, to the point where everything played on the SYW tour has started sounding too safe and similar to me.

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
Also, keep in mind that there are different audiences for each show (minus the Ledgies who go to a million shows...hehe), so even tho WE are wanting them to do something different, the general audience (Rumours lovers) see them once and go "WOW, that show was amazing!! Did you SEE what he did?!"

For me that’s just a wrong attitude to take. It reeks of insincerity in the end, even though the performer may feel he/she is being sincere. It gives a taste of calculation and a feeling that the performer isn’t willing to be him/herself on stage. Afraid of total rejection, I guess.

dissention

03-23-2004, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Interestingly, La Nicks came across as a savy businesswoman on the doc. She is well aware of the need to be commerically viable if she wants to maintain "the lifestyle" and she is still commerically viable although to a much lesser extent than she was in the 80's. Who would have thought our airy fairie Stevie could be so practicle :laugh: Also, I thought Stevie went out of her way to make sure LB's feelings were not hurt ("I touch with gossamer wings" ). I thought she was not screaming at him like a harpy - except perhaps unintentionally in vocal warmup to Silver Girl :laugh: I am glad those two have reached this place in their lives and am even happier with the music that comes from it :cool:

I the end, I think they made a band decision to release the 18/20 songs because that is what they are - a band :shrug:

Oh, I completely agree. That was one instance where Stevie seemed to come out as the smartest businessperson in the whole band. Very savvy and very smart.

dissention

03-23-2004, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by Les
Okay. I suppose I'm just not all that convinced that the public is clamboring to see Lindsey fretting because that's going to make them buy records. :shrug:

I don't think that it is a major selling point, but it does factor into the grand scheme of things when it comes to album sales. The entire band has been built on conflict and drama, so any amount of continued drama will play into the strengths of Fleetwood Mac. I don't think that any of them were acting in the documentary, I thought most of it was brutally honest. But of course they're going to play up the drama, because without it, Fleetwood Mac is less interesting to the public masses.

strandinthewind

03-23-2004, 03:11 PM

I was watching "Bullets Over Broadway" last night and was LMAO at the character played by John Cusak. He is struggling between having his play produced on Broadway and the notion that he is selling out by doing so. Then, he has an affair with the leading lady. I was like - I see similarities!!!!!!!! :laugh:

dissention

03-23-2004, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I was watching "Bullets Over Broadway" last night and was LMAO at the character played by John Cusak. He is struggling between having his play produced on Broadway and the notion that he is selling out by doing so. Then, he has an affair with the leading lady. I was like - I see similarities!!!!!!!! :laugh:

I LOVE that movie; Dianne Wiest is greatness. :D

And I loathe to admit that I LOVE Woody Allen, even though he's a perve. :laugh:

strandinthewind

03-23-2004, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by dissention
I LOVE that movie; Dianne Wiest is greatness. :D

And I loathe to admit that I LOVE Woody Allen, even though he's a perve. :laugh:

I have to say I am a fan of Woddy Allen and have been for a very long time. I agree though, he is a perve and he looks like one too :laugh:

I loved Le Reiner a/k/a Meathead in BOB - "I have written seven plays and none have ever been produced - it would demean my work to commercialize it" :laugh: I have to say I thought of LB there too :cool:

dissention

03-23-2004, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I have to say I am a fan of Woddy Allen and have been for a very long time. I agree though, he is a perve and he looks like one too :laugh:

I loved Le Reiner a/k/a Meathead in BOB - "I have written seven plays and none have ever been produced - it would demean my work to commercialize it" :laugh: I have to say I thought of LB there too :cool:

They had a rerun (on E!) of Mia's appearance on Stern from 1997 last week and she cracked me up. Boy oh boy, she despises Woody (and rightfully so!). Stern and her were going at him like there was no tomorrow; they were vicious and it was hysterical.

His last movie sucked, though. :laugh:

4Buck

03-23-2004, 10:23 PM

This documentary showcased Stevie Nicks as unable to take risks. She was driven by greed and fear........

I can't really cite an incident where she was talking business other than the rehashed "pot-smoking" bit............

Hey Stevie....we all KNOW that young people buy the albums. Eureka! We all KNOW that a double CD will sell less than a single from a veteran band (so did Buckingham, but he wanted his music --out there!) We KNOW that Stevie! Yet she was acting as if she was saying something very profound.

Also, Karen Johnston, Nicks' assistant, was there to aid Nicks in discussing mixing with Buckingham. Nicks may be a puppet on a string for all we know. Both succumbed to Buckingham’s mixer decision in the end. They trust his judgement. :)

B/T/W, my ma's a big Beatle fan. Mia Farrow had an affair with the Beatles' Maharishi...... She's a total sap.

teedee

03-23-2004, 10:35 PM

Originally posted by 4Buck
This documentary showcased Stevie Nicks as unable to take risks. She was driven by greed and fear........

I can't really cite an incident where she was talking business other than the rehashed "pot-smoking" bit............

Hey Stevie....we all KNOW that young people buy the albums. Eureka! We all KNOW that a double CD will sell less than a single from a veteran band (so did Buckingham, but he wanted his music --out there!) We KNOW that Stevie! Yet she was acting as if she was saying something very profound.

Also, Karen Johnston, Nicks' assistant, was there to aid Nicks in discussing mixing with Buckingham. Nicks may be a puppet on a string for all we know. Both succumbed to Buckingham’s mixer decision in the end. They trust his judgement. :)

B/T/W, my ma's a big Beatle fan. Mia Farrow had an affair with the Beatles' Maharishi...... She's a total sap.

"he wanted his music out there" well then lindsey release a solo cd, and dont use the fm vehicle and then complain when you dont get your way .it has to be a group decision. he admitted on the doc that he wanted to double for personal benefit as well, but he also threatened that he owned the masters and he could just throw some songs to syw and go do a solo. well then do that lindsey , we all want to get your solo cd and soon. if he feels so strongly about his music , he should put his money where his mouth is and just release his cd and see what happens.

teedee

03-23-2004, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by 4Buck
This documentary showcased Stevie Nicks as unable to take risks. She was driven by greed and fear........

I can't really cite an incident where she was talking business other than the rehashed "pot-smoking" bit............

Hey Stevie....we all KNOW that young people buy the albums. Eureka! We all KNOW that a double CD will sell less than a single from a veteran band (so did Buckingham, but he wanted his music --out there!) We KNOW that Stevie! Yet she was acting as if she was saying something very profound.

Also, Karen Johnston, Nicks' assistant, was there to aid Nicks in discussing mixing with Buckingham. Nicks may be a puppet on a string for all we know. Both succumbed to Buckingham’s mixer decision in the end. They trust his judgement. :)

B/T/W, my ma's a big Beatle fan. Mia Farrow had an affair with the Beatles' Maharishi...... She's a total sap.

:greed and fear: and how was lindsey portrayed when he stated he needed to pay for his new house and family, after he just stated earlier , he didnt care if he lost alot of money. stevie was being realistic... not greedy. to expect other people to be alright with losing money on their joint project, is rather ballsy to assume that it will be ok.

4Buck

03-23-2004, 11:03 PM

Buckingham offered to put hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own money into getting what he wanted on the album. He and his wife wouldn't have decided on having another child - after that - if he needed money....

Nicks has her ailing, beloved father in a wheelchair that needs care, her mother, nieces (niece?) to put through college, her personal assistant, her out-of-work brother and his wife and family. She spent LOTS of money on cocaine -- the same habit that bankrupted Mick Fleetwood......

teedee

03-23-2004, 11:29 PM

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Jason, I'm not sure that your "have someone else pay for him to do it" commment is well placed here. I have seen no indication from Lindsey that he thinks he should get any kind of free ride.

I think it's OK to understand his frustration -- how it's important to be creative to remain true to your art but simultanuously having to acquiesce to commercial interests. He obviously understands this, judging from his final decision on the double album, but he still has the right to be frustrated by it.

It must be especially frustrating when he looks back at which of his songs have been FM hits: GYOW, Tusk, Big Love. None of those songs could really be considered "commercial" at the time of their release. Yet, now they are classics. So it is possible to release non-formula music that attains a level of success.

What probably is more of an issue, and one that the members of the band don't seem to recognize, is that FM is not going to sell millions and millions of new releases anymore. At best, they'll do a million or two. SYW hasn't gone platinum yet, as far as I know. So why not just go record some edgy stuff, get it out there and make your money on the tour? As it happens, the new album is not the dizzying commercial success they seemed to think it would be, commercial songs and all.

as an artist of the band and a producer, lindsey stating the comment he doesnt mind if it only sell300,000, is not what a record label wants to hear especially from an artist like lindsey who is so in volved with the production of th record being made, its like stating this record may not sell well but who cares? as for you comment about a free ride, i dont think he wanted a free ride, but asking a label to take on a new record deal that will cost the record company some money to be involved with , they arent so willing to take that risk with their money . its kind of what happened with lindseys record company, when they stated his solo material would sell better as a fm cd. they didnt want to take the risk, and i dont think lindsey wanted to take the risk either, because once he realized that fm was interested, he didnt push for his solo cd with that record company or else he would of just done it anyway as a solo.
all that said i still think he is a genious in his own right.

CarneVaca

03-24-2004, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by teedee
as an artist of the band and a producer, lindsey stating the comment he doesnt mind if it only sell300,000, is not what a record label wants to hear especially from an artist like lindsey who is so in volved with the production of th record being made, its like stating this record may not sell well but who cares? as for you comment about a free ride, i dont think he wanted a free ride, but asking a label to take on a new record deal that will cost the record company some money to be involved with , they arent so willing to take that risk with their money . its kind of what happened with lindseys record company, when they stated his solo material would sell better as a fm cd. they didnt want to take the risk, and i dont think lindsey wanted to take the risk either, because once he realized that fm was interested, he didnt push for his solo cd with that record company or else he would of just done it anyway as a solo.
all that said i still think he is a genious in his own right.

Please refer to my post, no. 1971, on page 11 of the "Mick and Stevie rule" thread.

sodascouts

03-24-2004, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Please refer to my post, no. 1971, on page 11 of the "Mick and Stevie rule" thread.

I'm afraid post numbers are retroactively increased on every past post as well as the current one. All posts now (as of noon EST) say 1977 and no doubt they will soon say a bigger number. ;)

CarneVaca

03-24-2004, 12:06 PM

Originally posted by sodascouts
I'm afraid post numbers are retroactively increased on every past post as well as the current one. All posts now (as of noon EST) say 1977 and no doubt they will soon say a bigger number. ;)

Yeah, I know. ;)

strandinthewind

03-24-2004, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Yeah, I know. ;) :eek: :eek: :eek:

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

chiliD

03-24-2004, 01:35 PM

Originally posted by 4Buck
B/T/W, my ma's a big Beatle fan. Mia Farrow had an affair with the Beatles' Maharishi...... She's a total sap.

It was Mia's SISTER who had the affair with the Maharishi (hence the song "Dear Prudence")...tell your ma to get her facts straight.

CarneVaca

03-24-2004, 01:47 PM

Originally posted by 4Buck
Also, Karen Johnston, Nicks' assistant, was there to aid Nicks in discussing mixing with Buckingham. Nicks may be a puppet on a string for all we know. Both succumbed to Buckingham’s mixer decision in the end. They trust his judgement. :)

I don't know whether Stevie is anybody's puppet on a string at this point. I doubt it.

But I admit her assistant's gall was quite irritating. What the hell does she know about music, mixing or production? (Does she?) I might have blown a gasket, as hard that may be to imagine, if I were Lindsey.

teedee

03-24-2004, 02:24 PM

strandinthewind

03-24-2004, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by CarneVaca
I don't know whether Stevie is anybody's puppet on a string at this point. I doubt it.

But I admit her assistant's gall was quite irritating. What the hell does she know about music, mixing or production? (Does she?) I might have blown a gasket, as hard that may be to imagine, if I were Lindsey.

ITA - I think SN was doing what she tought was the right thing to do. I do not think she is anyone's puppet on a string. Just ask LB if you do not believe me :laugh:

Also, I got the impression Karen J was chiming in to reaffirm what Stevie was saying about when the lawyers got involved. I did not think KJ was giving her opinion on who was the best mixer. But, I might have missed something :shrug:

wondergirl9847

03-24-2004, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by CarneVaca
But I admit her assistant's gall was quite irritating. What the hell does she know about music, mixing or production? (Does she?) I might have blown a gasket, as hard that may be to imagine, if I were Lindsey.

I still wanna know what the heck Stevie said to Lindsey during "the fight". Something like "Karen would die something..."

I tried to turn it up, but didn't catch it. Anyone know for sure?

strandinthewind

03-24-2004, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
I still wanna know what the heck Stevie said to Lindsey during "the fight". Something like "Karen would die something..."

I tried to turn it up, but didn't catch it. Anyone know for sure?

I think that is SN telling LB that KJ's assertion that the lawyers did not get involved until that day (or whenever) was the truth and KJ would rather die than not tell the truth. Makes sense to me :laugh:

Gypsy-Rhiannon

03-24-2004, 03:54 PM

wondergirl9847

03-24-2004, 03:58 PM

Thanks much, that was irritating not knowing what she was saying. LOL

4Buck

03-25-2004, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by chiliD
It was Mia's SISTER who had the affair with the Maharishi (hence the song "Dear Prudence")...tell your ma to get her facts straight.

>>>>Here's what actually happened:

George: Someone started the nasty rumour about Maharishi, a rumour that swept the media for years. There were many stories about how Maharishi was not on the level or whatever, but that was just jealousy about Maharishi. We’d need analysts to get into it. I don’t know what goes through these people’s minds, but this whole piece of bull**** was invented. It’s probably even in the history books that Maharishi ‘tried to attack Mia Farrow’ - but it’s bull****, total bull****. Just go and ask Mia Farrow. The story stirred up a situation. John had wanted to leave anyway, so that forced him into the position of thinking: ‘OK, now we’ve got a good reason to get out of here.’ We went to Maharishi and I said, ‘Look, I told you I was going. I’m going to the south of India.’ He couldn’t really accept that we were leaving, and he said, ‘What’s wrong?’ That’s when John said something like, 'Well, you’re supposed to be the mystic, you should know.’ We drove for hours. John had a song he had started to write which he was singing: ‘Maharishi, what have you done?’ and I said, ‘You can’t say that, it’s ridiculous.’ I came up with the title of ‘Sexy Sadie’ and John changed Maharishi to ‘Sexy Sadie’. John flew back to Yoko in England and I went to Madras and the south of India and spent another few weeks there. The story was put around about our leaving and, of course, the newspapers jumped on that. As it says in The Ruttles, ‘The press got hold of the wrong end of the stick and started beating about the bush with it.’ Now, historically, there’s the story that something went on that shouldn’t have done - but nothing did.

JOHN 1980: "'Dear Prudence' is me. Written in India. A song about Mia Farrow's sister, who seemed to go slightly balmy, meditating too long, and couldn't come out of the little hut we were livin' in. They selected me and George to try and bring her out because she would trust us. If she'd been in the West, they would have put her away... We got her out of the house. She'd been locked in for three weeks and was trying to reach God quicker than anybody else. That was the competition in Maharishi's camp-- who was going to get cosmic first. What I didn't know was I was 'already' cosmic." (laughs)

Well....back to the Mac. :)

Miranda

04-13-2004, 12:58 AM

I think that if LB was a true idealist, he would have released GOS on the net and never subjected himself to FM. But he did not do that. He made that choice to go to the very commerical FM. Given their history, which has been beaten and rehashed to death over the last 15 years - hence my feeling that he plays it up a bit, LB certainly did not go into the FM sessions with blinders on. So, while I think LB (and FM and SN for that matter) really does want to make every thing as good as he thinks it should be, LB clearly wants commercial success and all the things that come with it.

I think people think I am being unfair to LB by saying this. I am not. I like LB. I think he is brilliant. I am glad to hear new music from him. I flew from Atlanta to Chicago to see his Soundstage thing. So, its not about disliking LB :laugh: I am just saying LB has a 25 year history of sort of appearing like he is so anti-establishment, anti-commerical, etc., but in the end he craves commercial viablity and always likes to appear like he is "selling out" to get it. I think after all of these years that feeling cannot be genuine - rather, I think it appears contrived after all of these years. I mean why else would he go back to the very commerical FM every time he needs commercial viability :shrug: Some suggest it is because of his love for SN. While I think that has alot to do with it, I also think LB realizes he likes the way he lives and FM can provide him with the commerical success to keep living that way mostly in his own terms - I mean the GOS songs on SYW are not THAT different than GOS solo copies we all heard :shrug:

In the end, LB could sell tapes out of the trunk of his Mercedes ( :laugh: ) and I would buy them because I like his work.

As an aside and just a general comment, I think it is so interesting people in general seem to think commercial viability is a bad thing. I mean its not like every song of the radio is horrible :shrug:

I don't think you're unfair. It sounds harsh to a lot of his loyal fans but I totally understand what you're saying here. I adore Lindsey and his music, but his contradictions are old schtick. I do think his tortured artist idea of himself is probably sincere. Still it's old hat and has become annoyingly hollow. I really expected he'd grow out of this type of posturing by now. For years he's talked in interviews like commerciality and radio hits are a bad thing. He's so full of it. Like when he says stuff in the DR doc like, it would be ok if the new cd isn't a mega hit as long as the "right" ears or "right" 300,000 people heard it. By "right", would that be 300,000 pseudo-macho rock critics and musicians? These are not the people falling at his feet on the tour. Spare me!

He's claims kinship and musical fondness for anti-Mac bands like the Clash and Ramones. Of course that grew out of a time when those bands were darlings of the male music critics. I think he's tried too hard for too long to distance himself from the girlie, pop-machine image the band had during Rumours. LB in the Clash? Who does he think he's kidding? What a waste of talent! A man with such a natural melodic sensibility and inate blueprint for the formula "hit", toiling in a punk band? Even when he uses those funky elements in his "experimental" songs, he does it best within the tightly crafted formula he's genius at. I don't think Lindsey wants to trade bank accounts with the Ramones, either.

Not that I'm against Lindsey's claiming a need for experimentation, just not for it's own sake. Not because it sounds cool, either. Lindsey goes overboard ranting about experimentation and not caring about commercial success. I don't think he really means it the way it comes off when he talks this way. I agree with the person who said Lindsey blows this smoke to impress critics and fellow rockers he wants acceptance from. He's gotten great nods from a lot of musicians and critics, yet he's also always been obsessed with not being seen as a weenie playing guitar and writing lothesome pop tunes for a chick band. It's sad he's still grinding this axe. These days it's beneath him. He's more than proven himself over the years. The man is still "as insecure as ever" as he once said in a very early interview.