New Great Article that answers the solo album question!

[Highwayman]

i really think she really thought the song "Say You Will" could have been a big hit for her.. but does she really think pop radio is going to go from playing Kelly Clarkson, to Beyonce, to Eminem, to Stevie Nicks back-to-back-to-back-to back?? not gonna happen.. no matter how "radio-friendly" her songs may or may not be in 2003, or 2005 or whenever...

:distress: That's why they should have been listening to the radio and they would have picked a different song. While WTWCT is catchy, and Thrown Down is classic, I didn't hear a radio hit from SYW until track 11 RTTG. With what was being played on the radio at that time, RTTG would have gotten some airplay. Not Peaskeeper, not SYW. SYHA would have been good too, and I think they did release it, but the stations were already poisoned by PK and SYW, so it didn't have a chance. Same thing happened with TISL -- there is no pop radio friendly song until Love Changes. Now I know many of you are groaning right now, but with what was being played on Star 94 and Q100 here in Atlanta at the time, it would have fit right in and gotten air time. I think our musicians and their record companies just are not really in tune with what is really happening in music right now, and are relying on eachother to tell them what will sell or not. SUX!!! :mad:

[LiquidBlue5000]

:distress: That's why they should have been listening to the radio and they would have picked a different song. While WTWCT is catchy, and Thrown Down is classic, I didn't hear a radio hit from SYW until track 11 RTTG. With what was being played on the radio at that time, RTTG would have gotten some airplay. Not Peaskeeper, not SYW. SYHA would have been good too, and I think they did release it, but the stations were already poisoned by PK and SYW, so it didn't have a chance. Same thing happened with TISL -- there is no pop radio friendly song until Love Changes. Now I know many of you are groaning right now, but with what was being played on Star 94 and Q100 here in Atlanta at the time, it would have fit right in and gotten air time. I think our musicians and their record companies just are not really in tune with what is really happening in music right now, and are relying on eachother to tell them what will sell or not. SUX!!! :mad:


i TOTALLY agree with "Love Changes"... :thumbsup:

i think it is one of the few songs that could have been a single off TISL.. it has a very modern feel to it and is catchy :nod:

[Serrart]

No, i am implying that Madonna is a business woman who is consumed with staying popular.. she has built a career based on controversy more so than content and it has payed off for her... that is why she is one of the only artists left over from the 80's still played on current top 40 radio..

But that's the only way it could have worked for her. Madonna didn't have a substantial talent in music or songwriting to start with so she had to choose other ways to be noticed. She is very business wise but became also ridiculous at times (especially with the Britney episode :shocked: ). Stevie is an artist who probably doesn't feel now she could reach her public and possibly find a new one through the channels she's always used. I think she just needs the right project or producer to give her confidence.

Romy

[LiquidBlue5000]

Stevie is an artist who probably doesn't feel now she could reach her public and possibly find a new one through the channels she's always used. I think she just needs the right project or producer to give her confidence.

Romy


I believe Stevie is completely oblivious as to who her public is at this point... yes, she needs confidence... but more so, she needs to take a risk and go into a new direction.. it is the ONLY way she can possibly survive as an artist.. she cannot rest on "Rhiannon" and "Landslide" much longer.. in fact, I would venture to say that this is probably her last year where she can do that..

it's time for a change :nod:

[jwd]

I still don't believe it's an ego thing. I really do think perhaps she's seriously questioning why she should even put her "babies" out there, if no one's going to hear them.

I'm sure it has to be frustrating to think that only your core audience will hear your songs, and no one else.

Radio has been absolutely no help for artists on independent labels, but the article that glitter_fades linked to gives some hope for the near future... so hopefully Stevie will see what a good thing it would be for her artistically and financially to move to an indy.


Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh. Your post is like a breath of fresh air. Has anyone ever told you you're a very smart man? :thumbsup:

[Johnny Stew]

I believe Stevie is completely oblivious as to who her public is at this point... yes, she needs confidence... but more so, she needs to take a risk and go into a new direction.. it is the ONLY way she can possibly survive as an artist.. Are we talking "new direction" as in how to get her songs out on the market, or "new direction" artistically?

My argument to the latter is that, Stevie DOES seem to be following her own artistic direction.
She's a lady who has tastes which can be considered "mainstream" and "commercial"... just check out her "favorite artist" lists... so of course she's going to make albums that reflect that.

But if you're talking "new direction" in terms of leaving the big record companies behind and releasing her albums on an indy label with a vastly different marketing approach, then I agree.

Of course, we're all "armchair quarterbacking" here (ooh, don't I sound so butch), so it's extremely easy for us to say what Stevie should or shouldn't do regarding her career.

[Johnny Stew]

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh. Your post is like a breath of fresh air. Has anyone ever told you you're a very smart man? :thumbsup:Are we counting the ones who were just trying to get into my pants? :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

Are we counting the ones who were just trying to get into my pants? :laugh:


aren't we the confident one :rolleyes:

[LiquidBlue5000]

Are we talking "new direction" as in how to get her songs out on the market, or "new direction" artistically?

My argument to the latter is that, Stevie DOES seem to be following her own artistic direction.
She's a lady who has tastes which can be considered "mainstream" and "commercial"... just check out her "favorite artist" lists... so of course she's going to make albums that reflect that.

But if you're talking "new direction" in terms of leaving the big record companies behind and releasing her albums on an indy label with a vastly different marketing approach, then I agree.


I'm mostly refering to a new direction in marketing herself, but I also think she could take some chances musically.. not so much with her style of music, but with specifically her voice.... SYW and TISL did not demonstrate much range.. whether it was the songs themselves or just the way she chose to sing them.. we all know she can hit the high notes in the studio.. it would be nice if she could put out more music that showed that off....

as far as performing goes, she needs to stop performing at the big venues, at least on a consistant basis... and do smaller venues on a constant basis...

she can still perform her classics, but every night change 5 or 6 songs within the set.. it would increase people's interest in her as a live act and also motivate her to GIVE a good show and not get bored with doing "the same songs over and over and over"...

i know for myself, i would personally make an attempt to see all 30 smaller venue shows if i knew one night she was performing "sleeping angel" and another night she was performing "bella donna" in its place... :nod:

[Johnny Stew]

aren't we the confident one :rolleyes:Not really... but I can tell when someone's trying to get into my pants!
They're rarely very sly about it.

Plus, once you've fallen for it the first couple of times, you start to catch on quicker! :laugh:

[Johnny Stew]

she can still perform her classics, but every night change 5 or 6 songs within the set.. it would increase people's interest in her as a live act and also motivate her to GIVE a good show and not get bored with doing "the same songs over and over and over"...I never want to be the one to dash someone's dreams, but I doubt that will ever happen.
She didn't do it in her younger days, she's certainly not going to do it now.

Besides, and I've said this before, it's only the absolute diehard fans who are impressed by ever changing setlists. The majority of the people who buy the tickets, only want to hear the songs they're familiar with via radio play, and they grumble if they don't get to hear them.
Look how many reviews of this current tour have mentioned the folks who take a bathroom break during "Circle Dance" and "Fall From Grace," or just sit there in the audience, acting disinterested.

Personally, I'd still rather she retire from the road completely, and focus solely on recording. Maybe have a new album out once a year, like Petty's talking about doing.

[LiquidBlue5000]

I never want to be the one to dash someone's dreams, but I doubt that will ever happen.
She didn't do it in her younger days, she's certainly not going to do it now.

Besides, and I've said this before, it's only the absolute diehard fans who are impressed by ever changing setlists. The majority of the people who buy the tickets, only want to hear the songs they're familiar with via radio play, and they grumble if they don't get to hear them.
Look how many reviews of this current tour have mentioned the folks who take a bathroom break during "Circle Dance" and "Fall From Grace," or just sit there in the audience, acting disinterested.



Well, then she needs a new audience... her radio hits??? please, she hasn't had a REAL radio hit in 20 years.... besides, Stevie does not HAVE 13 or 14 radio hits in her career to do a full setlist of "hits"... she could do the standards - "stand back", "landslide", "edge of seventeen", "rhiannon", "gold dust woman", "dreams", and "stop draggin my heart around" every single night for the rest of her life if she wants... but instead of doing "enchanted" and "i need to know" or whatever other fill in songs, she can mix up the other 6 or 7 songs every show or every other show to keep it fresh... i don't see where casual fans and diehard fans alike wouldn't appreciate a show like that... :shrug:




she needs to get smart about her solo career now or she might as well just retire after this year...

[AliceLover]

I never want to be the one to dash someone's dreams, but I doubt that will ever happen.
She didn't do it in her younger days, she's certainly not going to do it now.

Besides, and I've said this before, it's only the absolute diehard fans who are impressed by ever changing setlists. The majority of the people who buy the tickets, only want to hear the songs they're familiar with via radio play, and they grumble if they don't get to hear them.
Look how many reviews of this current tour have mentioned the folks who take a bathroom break during "Circle Dance" and "Fall From Grace," or just sit there in the audience, acting disinterested.

Personally, I'd still rather she retire from the road completely, and focus solely on recording. Maybe have a new album out once a year, like Petty's talking about doing.

Im sorry but I must say that idea SUCKS to me of course. I love going to a live show. Theres os much build up on the boards and then when you get there and see the mic you get so thrilled. All the people and then she walks out and its unreal. I love to see how Stevie takes a song then converts it to stage. I started to love alice because I heard it live and if I never heard that then I don't think it would be my favorite song. Do I like to see her out out new albums yes, do I want her to stop touring no. She won't record another solo album then tour, shes too old. A MAc farewell tour then thats it IMO.

[Johnny Stew]

Well, then she needs a new audience... her radio hits??? please, she hasn't had a REAL radio hit in 20 years.... besides, Stevie does not HAVE 13 or 14 radio hits in her career to do a full setlist of "hits"...No radio hits in 20 years? I take it you're not counting "Talk To Me," "Rooms On Fire," "Silver Springs" and "Landslide"?

She definitely has enough "radio hits" to do a full setlist of them if she wanted to... "Rhiannon," "Landslide," "Dreams," "Silver Springs," "Sara," "Stop Draggin' My Heart Around," "Leather & Lace," "Edge Of Seventeen," "Gyspy," "Stand Back," "If Anyone Falls," "Talk To Me," "I Can't Wait," "Seven Wonders" and "Rooms On Fire."

If it made the Top 20, I'd say it would be familiar enough for people to remember it. I certainly hear all of those songs on the radio these days. Albeit I only hear the last six I mentioned, on stations whose playlist focuses on 70s & 80s material, or when other stations are doing '80s blocks & '80s weekends.
But, still, the people going to Stevie's shows are exactly the kind of people listening to 70s and 80s stations.

she needs to get smart about her solo career now or she might as well just retire after this year...Her tours apparently make enough money for her to continue doing them... so why quit?
The sad fact remains, as diehards we probably account for a mere 1/3rd of the people at her shows. Everyone else is there to hear some songs they know from the radio, drink some beer, and have a good time.

And when Stevie does branch out... "Circle Dance," for example... people get up to get another beer or take a whiz. With that being the case, I wouldn't bother busting my hump to rehearse something new either. Especially not a dozen "alternates."

[SandyMac]

Personally, I would LOVE to see Stevie throwing commercial considerations to the wind and simply fulfilling the artist inside - being true to herself and to heck with radio, fans, critics - just do what SHE wants to do.... I wish I had contact with her and be able to persuade her that at this point in her life, she needs to be a little like Joni Mitchell, and become a true artist in every sense of the word and indulge her art!

I second this notion. Wow, can you imagine what wonderful masterpieces Stevie could come up with if she didn't have to worry so much about a commercial hit? Her songs would be 100 percent Stevie and no one else.
I do know Stevie fights for her songs as she originally conceived of them, but I am sure producers and Managers have had their influences upon her work.

[LiquidBlue5000]

No radio hits in 20 years? I take it you're not counting "Talk To Me," "Rooms On Fire," "Silver Springs" and "Landslide"?


"Talk To Me" was her last solo radio hit.. that was 20 years ago.. "Rooms On Fire" was not a hit single and I personally have never heard it on the radio in my life.. ever.. so, although it was a "single", it was not neccessarily a "radio hit" wheras the common non-fan would immediately go "oh, i know this song"... "Landslide '97" and "Silver Springs '97" were kinda sorta "hits", but neither one of them made the top 20 in 1997 and I have rarely heard "Silver Springs" on the radio... both of course were of Fleetwood Mac, not Stevie Nicks solo (that is what we're talking about, yes?) and were originally released in 1975 and 1977...


She definitely has enough "radio hits" to do a full setlist of them if she wanted to... "Rhiannon," "Landslide," "Dreams," "Silver Springs," "Sara," "Stop Draggin' My Heart Around," "Leather & Lace," "Edge Of Seventeen," "Gyspy," "Stand Back," "If Anyone Falls," "Talk To Me," "I Can't Wait," "Seven Wonders" and "Rooms On Fire."


That's more of a "best of Stevie" setlist than a "radio hits" setlist.... again, I am refering to songs played frequently on top 40 radio or even "70's, 80's, 90's, and today" radio... songs that Stevie considers her big hits and would actually perform live again.. those would be: "edge of seventeen", "stand back", "rhiannon", "landslide", "dreams", "stop draggin my heart around", and "leather and lace"...

she will no longer do "talk to me", she will no longer do "i can't wait", she will no longer do "seven wonders"....


I found it very interesting that on the "Two Voices" tour, her newest song in the setlist was from 1983!!

I think that pretty much says it all..

[Johnny Stew]

"Talk To Me" was her last solo radio hit.. that was 20 years ago.. "Rooms On Fire" was not a hit single and I personally have never heard it on the radio in my life.. ever.. so, although it was a "single", it was not neccessarily a "radio hit" wheras the common non-fan would immediately go "oh, i know this song"...You don't consider #16 on Billboard's Hot 100 chart a hit?

I most certainly heard it on the radio when it was released ("Rooms" actually won our local Top 40 station's "Battle Of The New Sounds" eight nights in a row, the week it was released), and I have heard it in years since. Though certainly not as frequently as "Stand Back" or "Edge."

Not to mention the fact that the video was in Heavy Rotation on MTV, and made their Top 20 Videos countdown several weeks in a row.

I think "Rooms" qualifies as a hit.

"Landslide '97" and "Silver Springs '97" were kinda sorta "hits", but neither one of them made the top 20 in 1997 and I have rarely heard "Silver Springs" on the radio... both of course were of Fleetwood Mac, not Stevie Nicks solo (that is what we're talking about, yes?) and were originally released in 1975 and 1977...You mentioned "Gold Dust Woman," "Dreams" and "Rhiannon" in your post, so I mentioned "Landslide" and "Silver Springs," even though they're Mac songs, too.
Still, they were both extremely successful on Adult Contemporary radio, and I'm sure most people only know "Silver Springs" from the radio play it received in 1997.

I found it very interesting that on the "Two Voices" tour, her newest song in the setlist was from 1983!!

I think that pretty much says it all..Yes... it proves that Stevie feels she needs to stick closely to the songs that the majority of people will recognize from the radio. And, yes, the majority of those songs are the ones released prior to 1984.
But we already knew that to be fact, right?

My only point was that Stevie could add a few more radio hits/hit singles, if she wanted to, that many people would most likely recognize.
And if she ever dropped stuff like "I Need To Know" and "Enchanted," I think it's a much safer bet that they'd be replaced with another "hit"... rather than with something like "Storms" or "Nothing Ever Changes."

She's not a "Hey, Waddy, let's play 'I Sing For The Things' for the San Jose crowd tonight" kinda gal, and never will be.

[Phoenix]

[QUOTE=Johnny Stew]I think "Rooms" qualifies as a hit.

I have to say, I don't even really like rooms on fire, but I used to live in australia, and it was a big song for her over there. It was big in europe and in the U.K as well. And although I have never heard it in Phoenix (where stevie lives a quarter of the year!) :shrug: on the radio, alot of my english friends always say that they remember rooms on fire, and I know that it gets air play in Australia.

[LiquidBlue5000]

She's not a "Hey, Waddy, let's play 'I Sing For The Things' for the San Jose crowd tonight" kinda gal, and never will be.

well, then i think she is missing out on alot by being that way... missing out on a lot of enjoyment for herself, her diehard fans, and the additional money that can be made from breaking out of the mold she's in....

just imagine a solo tour in which there were only 30 shows played at small venues... and at those 30 shows, she changed just 3 songs each night... and on those nights, a soundboard recording was released.. this would accomplish three things: 1. it would keep her fresh, 2. it would keep the fans happy, and 3. her and her record label would make tons and tons of extra $$$... that's just one example of her doing something different with her solo career that would be both enjoyable all the way around and yet still profitable...

[Kelly]

Maybe I need to reread the article but I don't recall Stevie saying, or even implying, that she didnt want to release her babies because no one would hear them, via radio. The interviewer is the one who brought up radio play and Stevie responded. She never stated that was the real reason she was considering not recording another solo album. Stevie has known for years that her songs do not get much radio airplay...this is not suddenly dawning on her. She sold nearly 800,000 copies of TISL so she knows people other than hardcores are hearing her music...maybe not on the radio, but they are buying it. Worrying that people won't hear her songs or they won't be played on the radio is probably not the reason she is even considering changing directions. Perhaps it is a small part but the interviewer took the conversation in that direction...NOT Stevie. If he had never brought up airplay, I seriously doubt Stevie would have brought up the subject. I, personally, think airplay, commercial success, popularity are only small parts of why she is taking a new path. I am sure she wants to go out on a high note and SHE, maybe not you, but SHE, considers TISL to be her masterpiece. Her real career began with FM, maybe she wants to go out with FM. You know, more of the circles stuff.

Stevie says she is writing better than ever. That does not mean she is writing songs or even completing demos. Writing poetry and stanzas in her journals is a pretty different thing and I bet that is mostly what she has done for the last few years.

It makes me sad to think we will never have another solo album from Stevie but we will still have her from time to time. Perhaps we will get some soundtracks or she will make some guest appearances on her musical friends albums. Perhaps she will write poetry. Perhaps we will get another Mac album, although I think that is pretty unlikely. Perhaps we will get some new demos on the reissues...if they ever come out. Change doesn't always have to be a bad thing and Stevie has been pretty absorbed in her career for over thirty years. Maybe she wants to relax and enjoy her life instead of constantly working and traveling. I do think she needs an outlet for her creativity, so we will get some stuff from her from time to time, I just do not think we will get a full on new solo album, even with an independent label. If she moves to an indy label, I bet it is with other motivations in mind. (demo/outtake album, live album, getting them to buy out her contract with WB, some other kind of album perhaps)
I can live without another solo album if that is what Stevie wants...I would have a much harder time if she wanted to retire from live performing. I do hope she cuts back the large tours because I think they are difficult on her...she looks exhausted. I just would like some new stuff, like Twisted, from time to time. I would like to be able to see her live every other year or so...more if she wants to do it. I cannot deal with the idea of Fleetwood Mac retiring...but I honestly see that coming after this next tour.
:> (
It makes me sad, sad, SAD! (especially knowing that without FM, it is damn near impossible to see or hear Lindsey)

[LiquidBlue5000]

I just would like some new stuff, like Twisted, from time to time.


I am someone who believes "Twisted" should be in every Stevie setlist ;)

[David]

She sold nearly 800,000 copies of TISL so she knows people other than hardcores are hearing her music...maybe not on the radio, but they are buying it.I think that 800,000 figure represents her fan base. It's approximately the same people -- & the same-sized group -- who bought the Fleetwood album in 2003.
Change doesn't always have to be a bad thing and Stevie has been pretty absorbed in her career for over thirty years. Maybe she wants to relax and enjoy her life instead of constantly working and traveling.Everybody always says she wants to "relax" & "enjoy life." What do you guys think she's been doing? Making music & touring incessantly are her way of enjoying life.

If she had been cleaning public restroom stalls all these years, I'd say she probably wants to relax & enjoy life.

All you have to do is listen to her giggle & joke her way through the hundreds of hours of studio tapes we've all heard to know that she has had a ball.

[Rickypt]

just imagine a solo tour in which there were only 30 shows played at small venues

I'll go to a large arena or a shed to see FM in their farewell tour, but never for a Stevie solo concert again. She needs to start playing more intimate environments.

[AliceLover]

You don't consider #16 on Billboard's Hot 100 chart a hit?

I most certainly heard it on the radio when it was released ("Rooms" actually won our local Top 40 station's "Battle Of The New Sounds" eight nights in a row, the week it was released), and I have heard it in years since. Though certainly not as frequently as "Stand Back" or "Edge."

Not to mention the fact that the video was in Heavy Rotation on MTV, and made their Top 20 Videos countdown several weeks in a row.

I think "Rooms" qualifies as a hit.
You mentioned "Gold Dust Woman," "Dreams" and "Rhiannon" in your post, so I mentioned "Landslide" and "Silver Springs," even though they're Mac songs, too.
Still, they were both extremely successful on Adult Contemporary radio, and I'm sure most people only know "Silver Springs" from the radio play it received in 1997.

Yes... it proves that Stevie feels she needs to stick closely to the songs that the majority of people will recognize from the radio. And, yes, the majority of those songs are the ones released prior to 1984.
But we already knew that to be fact, right?

My only point was that Stevie could add a few more radio hits/hit singles, if she wanted to, that many people would most likely recognize.
And if she ever dropped stuff like "I Need To Know" and "Enchanted," I think it's a much safer bet that they'd be replaced with another "hit"... rather than with something like "Storms" or "Nothing Ever Changes."

She's not a "Hey, Waddy, let's play 'I Sing For The Things' for the San Jose crowd tonight" kinda gal, and never will be.

I qualify it as a hit as well. If you listen to the HOB shows in 1999 the crowd responds to it very well and that was about 5 years since she last sung it on stage. At all the shows ive heard with Rooms on Fire included in the set list it has always been received well.

[Johnny Stew]

well, then i think she is missing out on alot by being that way... missing out on a lot of enjoyment for herself, her diehard fans, and the additional money that can be made from breaking out of the mold she's in....

just imagine a solo tour in which there were only 30 shows played at small venues... and at those 30 shows, she changed just 3 songs each night... and on those nights, a soundboard recording was released.. this would accomplish three things: 1. it would keep her fresh, 2. it would keep the fans happy, and 3. her and her record label would make tons and tons of extra $$$... that's just one example of her doing something different with her solo career that would be both enjoyable all the way around and yet still profitable...First off, let me say that I love the idea of soundboards being sold after the shows. However, I wonder how financially feasible that would be for Stevie as a solo act.
To have every night of a 30-date tour recorded, mixed and pressed to CD... it just doesn't seem logical from a business standpoint. Not for someone in Stevie's position, at least.

But maybe it costs less than I'm guessing.
Then again, if it does cost less than I'm guessing, I'd think far more acts would be doing it for some extra cash. :shrug:

[LiquidBlue5000]

I qualify it as a hit as well. If you listen to the HOB shows in 1999 the crowd responds to it very well and that was about 5 years since she last sung it on stage.


well, i would venture to guess that only the true die-hard fans attended those few shows... the crowds during all of the Millenium shows were outta control.. i would imagine their reaction would have been similar if she busted out "Mirror Mirror"...

[AliceLover]

well, i would venture to guess that only the true die-hard fans attended those few shows... the crowds during all of the Millenium shows were outta control.. i would imagine their reaction would have been similar if she busted out "Mirror Mirror"...

She included Whole Lotta Trouble in her Enchanted set and it was recieved well every night. Rooms on Fire did better than WLT so Im sure the song would be recieved better.

[dissention]

well, then i think she is missing out on alot by being that way... missing out on a lot of enjoyment for herself, her diehard fans, and the additional money that can be made from breaking out of the mold she's in....

just imagine a solo tour in which there were only 30 shows played at small venues... and at those 30 shows, she changed just 3 songs each night... and on those nights, a soundboard recording was released.. this would accomplish three things: 1. it would keep her fresh, 2. it would keep the fans happy, and 3. her and her record label would make tons and tons of extra $$$... that's just one example of her doing something different with her solo career that would be both enjoyable all the way around and yet still profitable...

I COMPLETELY agree, Brian, but at this point, it doesn't seem like the old dog will learn any new tricks. As Dorothy Parker once said, "You can drag a horticulture, but you can't make her think."

I'd do cartwheels for Sean Hannity if Stevie actually toured small venues and consistently swapped songs. I'd make an effort to see quite a few shows, for that matter. But I don't think it's realistic at this point. If she's happy singing the same rote, tired, stale songs night after night with her rehearsed introductions and rehearsed movements, more power to her. It makes her the money that she wants. I'm just grateful that we have the Bob Dylan's, Joan Baez's, Blondie's, Emmylou Harris's, David Bowie's, and Elvis Costello's of the world to keep their live shows fresh and interesting throughout the years. Stevie's foolish to not want to expand her horizons like that, but that's her deal.

[Johnny Stew]

Maybe I need to reread the article but I don't recall Stevie saying, or even implying, that she didnt want to release her babies because no one would hear them, via radio. The interviewer is the one who brought up radio play and Stevie responded. She never stated that was the real reason she was considering not recording another solo album.You're absolutely right. I was just playing Devil's Advocate regarding the "what if" of her worrying about her drop in radio play over the years, and how that would affect her viewpoint regarding indy labels and their uphill battle to get their artists on the radio.

I can live without another solo album if that is what Stevie wants...I would have a much harder time if she wanted to retire from live performing.I pretty much seem to be the lone person who would rather see the opposite happen.
I guess it's just perspective. I'm not a concert-goer, and I can only listen to so many audience boots where the crowd's hooting and hollering is louder than the music I'm trying to hear (mind you, there are some audience boots that are incredible, sound-wise).

I prefer the pristine, "over produced" studio albums that I can listen to with my headphones on and no distractions. :o

[dissention]

First off, let me say that I love the idea of soundboards being sold after the shows. However, I wonder how financially feasible that would be for Stevie as a solo act.
To have every night of a 30-date tour recorded, mixed and pressed to CD... it just doesn't seem logical from a business standpoint. Not for someone in Stevie's position, at least.

Tell that to the artists who do it and don't make nearly as much as Miss Nicks when they tour. :laugh: What most artists who sell their shows do is take orders for the discs at the live shows, have them pressed, and then the fans who want to buy them purchase them from their website. It isn't that expensive. Those who don't take orders don't press large quantities, they press just enough to sell to the die-hards and that's it.

But maybe it costs less than I'm guessing.
Then again, if it does cost less than I'm guessing, I'd think far more acts would be doing it for some extra cash. :shrug:

A lot of artists don't like soundboard recordings and find them inferior to AUD recordings, that's why. As the Tom Tom Club put it:

"As for taping, the best recordings are going to be made on a simple cassette or DAT recorder using a stereo condenser mic. This is how we do it for ourselves. No sound board recordings are permitted. That's because they SUCK. Soundboard recordings give the listener no idea of how the music is intended to sound. They are only of use as a learning tool to the musicians and the soundman.

Why are soundboard tapes so bad? Because the soundman is ALWAYS attempting to compensate for what ISN'T amply amplified, as well as various anomalies of the room, such as backwall slap, and so on; and because soundboard recordings are also dry, i.e. no reverberation, and frequently compressed to the flatness of Kansas, they lack dynamic as well as resonance. They are missing crucial elements that are, in fact, part of the music. It continues to amaze us that these wretchedly inferior recordings are still touted and traded. To us it's a little like those 16th-century surgeons who would "bleed" their patients in the notion that they were doing them some good."

[LeighB04]

I would love to have seen her in her various incarnations and states of mind, but that's all changed...It's getting to the point where once you've seen a concert (at least in the last few years), there's little need to see her again - nothing original and way too expensive - I will not pay over $100 just to see her wearing pants!. She does seem to be VERY conservative in her career, which can't be all that satisfying to a creative spirit like hers...

Smaller venues, shorter tours, longer engagements, more creativity and more variety would be superb - epecially at this time in her life. I think she'd not only make her die-hard fans happy, but generate interest in a newer (not necessarily younger) generation of listeners, as well.
(Anybody listening out there who can pass the word along?)

[Johnny Stew]

What most artists who sell their shows do is take orders for the discs at the live shows, have them pressed, and then the fans who want to buy them purchase them from their website. It isn't that expensive. Those who don't take orders don't press large quantities, they press just enough to sell to the die-hards and that's it.How much do they sell for? What's the profit margin?

I wonder how many discs the bands still end up eating, because people don't follow through on their order, or their check bounces, or their credit card isn't accepted.

Sounds like it has the potential to be a royal headache, and one more thing to have to put someone in charge of running. :shrug:

A lot of artists don't like soundboard recordings and find them inferior to AUD recordings, that's why.I guess the Tom Tom Club never had to suffer through, "STEEEEVIEEEE!!!!! I LOOOOVE YOUUUU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!," when they were trying to listen to the quiet passages in "Beauty And The Beast."

[dissention]

How much do they sell for? What's the profit margin?

I've never seen them go for more than $20.

I wonder how many discs the bands still end up eating, because people don't follow through on their order, or their check bounces, or their credit card isn't accepted.

I doubt they eat that many, if at all. It's not like they're pressing copies of the shows like they would a new album and they wouldn't be stupid enough to press more than what they projected would be sold. Anyone can buy them by going to their sites and the die-hards snap them up.

Sounds like it has the potential to be a royal headache, and one more thing to have to put someone in charge of running. :shrug:

Or one more thing that separates the artists who do it from artists like Stevie Nicks who never do anything differently or adapt to new forms of sale or the changing times.

I guess the Tom Tom Club never had to suffer through, "STEEEEVIEEEE!!!!! I LOOOOVE YOUUUU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!," when they were trying to listen to the quiet passages in "Beauty And The Beast."

Beggars can't be choosers. Since when are bootlegs perfect?

[Johnny Stew]

Or one more thing that separates the artists who do it from artists like Stevie Nicks who never do anything differently or adapt to new forms of sale or the changing times.I'm not knocking it. Just trying to think of it objectively.

How many solo artists do this? Seems like it's more common among bands. And younger ones, at that. Or those with followings much larger than Stevie's.

Not sure if I've heard of any 50-something female solo acts selling soundboards at their shows or on their websites. So it's not like Stevie is the lone holdout to progress. :shrug:

Beggars can't be choosers.I'm not begging for more live recordings. One excellent bootleg or radio show per tour is good enough for me.

[dissention]

I'm not knocking it. Just trying to think of it objectively.

How many solo artists do this? Seems like it's more common among bands. And younger ones, at that. Or those with followings much larger than Stevie's.

Not sure if I've heard of any 50-something female solo acts selling soundboards at their shows or on their websites. So it's not like Stevie is the lone holdout to progress. :shrug:

I never said she was. The whole thing is relatively new, wait and see if it catches on.

I'm not begging for more live recordings. One excellent bootleg or radio show per tour is good enough for me.

There are plenty of excellent bootlegs out there from each tour, with the exception of Bella Donna.

[Johnny Stew]

I never said she was. The whole thing is relatively new, wait and see if it catches on.Your comment about it separating artists who do it from artists like Stevie who "never adapt to changing times" sounded as if you thought Stevie should be doing it NOW, not waiting to see if it catches on.

Again, don't get me wrong -- I want to see Stevie trying new ways to get her music out there. Especially offering rare tracks for download on the internet (for a small fee, of course).

I'm just not going to fret too much about the fact that she doesn't.

There are plenty of excellent bootlegs out there from each tour, with the exception of Bella Donna.I always seek out radio shows first. And for tours without a radio show, I read other fans' comments, etc., and then try to seek out the one that sounds like it's the best quality audience recording with the lowest amount of crowd noise. Such as that LA show everyone's been raving about.

I have plenty of audience recordings from past tours, and I listen to them from time to time, I just have a hard time getting into most of them... the catcalls and yammering take me out of "the moment," and my enjoyment of the performance suffers.

[strandinthewind]

FM relied on the relatively new MTV spot for promotion of The Dance. La Nicks similarly used the VH-1 deal to distribute her music, which was mostly successful - in fact, the demand crashed VH-1's server. Finally, FM tried to use AOL's first listen and other AOL distribution techniques for SYW. So, I think it is a little unfair to say that Stevie and her people are behind the times or that they are unwilling to use new methods.

As for rare stuff, FM just reissued three records with demos, outtakes, etc. So, they are doing this, though I wish they would do more.

[dissention]

Your comment about it separating artists who do it from artists like Stevie who "never adapt to changing times" sounded as if you thought Stevie should be doing it NOW, not waiting to see if it catches on.

Again, don't get me wrong -- I want to see Stevie trying new ways to get her music out there. Especially offering rare tracks for download on the internet (for a small fee, of course).

I'm just not going to fret too much about the fact that she doesn't.

Wait and see if it catches on with other artists. I think we can all assume with great certainty that Nicks is never, ever going to sign up for it.

I always seek out radio shows first. And for tours without a radio show, I read other fans' comments, etc., and then try to seek out the one that sounds like it's the best quality audience recording with the lowest amount of crowd noise. Such as that LA show everyone's been raving about.

The radio shows are too sterile for me. I like a little bit of audience noise, it adds to the fun. The "Welcome To My World" boot isn't live enough for me, she overdubbed the vocals in a studio. I prefer the live radio broadcast, but even that seems to be missing spark. It's not dynamic enough.

I have plenty of audience recordings from past tours, and I listen to them from time to time, I just have a hard time getting into most of them... the catcalls and yammering take me out of "the moment," and my enjoyment of the performance suffers.

I don't mind them. After listening to so many boots, I've learned to ignore them.

[dissention]

FM relied on the relatively new MTV spot for promotion of The Dance. La Nicks similarly used the VH-1 deal to distribute her music, which was mostly successful - in fact, the demand crashed VH-1's server. Finally, FM tried to use AOL's first listen and other AOL distribution techniques for SYW. So, I think it is a little unfair to say that Stevie and her people are behind the times or that they are unwilling to use new methods.

I hope David answers this post, he always puts it pretty well when he talks about how FM is behind the times and stuck in the old days.

As for rare stuff, FM just reissued three records with demos, outtakes, etc. So, they are doing this, though I wish they would do more.

Yup, I have "Mic the Screecher" to prove it. :lol:

Seriously, 99% of that stuff is so polished that they can barely even be called demos or rough mixes. I'm happy to have the stuff, don't get me wrong, but the reviews were right when they pointed out that most of the bonus stuff was so much like the actual albums that there's no point in listening to the bonuses very often.

[Johnny Stew]

Wait and see if it catches on with other artists. I think we can all assume with great certainty that Nicks is never, ever going to sign up for it.I don't think it's certain that it's "never" going to happen. But it's not highly likely that it will either.

I guess I'm rather indifferent to it either way.

The radio shows are too sterile for me. I like a little bit of audience noise, it adds to the fun.See... :laugh:... this is another area where I prefer the polished, more pristine sound. I like things mixed perfectly and sounding great. Even if they're overdubbed or pitch-corrected.

Quite frankly, I guess I'm just spoiled that way. :o

[dissention]

I don't think it's certain that it's "never" going to happen.

I do. :woohoo:

Stevie selling CDs of shows without being able to go into the studio and fix any of her vocals up? Never, I say! :laugh:

I like things mixed perfectly and sounding great.

Then what are you doing listening to radio shows? They're atrocious!

Quite frankly, I guess I'm just spoiled that way. :o

We all are in our own ways.

[strandinthewind]

I hope David answers this post, he always puts it pretty well when he talks about how FM is behind the times and stuck in the old days . . . .

Well, if they are so stuck, then why use new methods at all - that was my point. But, I agree that there are other newer ave. they could take. Will they - I doubt it as I think they may have one more left.

[Johnny Stew]

Stevie selling CDs of shows without being able to go into the studio and fix any of her vocals up? Never, I say! :laugh:Well, it is a longshot! :laugh:
Though to her credit, 'Live In Boston' had extremely few overdubs... even a couple of times where it probably could have used some.

Then what are you doing listening to radio shows? They're atrocious!The sound doesn't compare to an officially released live album, of course, but I prefer the "cleaner" sound of a radio show to the noisy audience boots. Even though they're not without their own flaws.

We all are in our own ways.And I think we have pretty decent hearts, so we deserve to be spoiled in some capacity. :)

[David]

A lot of artists don't like soundboard recordings and find them inferior to AUD recordings, that's why. As the Tom Tom Club put it:

"As for taping, the best recordings are going to be made on a simple cassette or DAT recorder using a stereo condenser mic. This is how we do it for ourselves. No sound board recordings are permitted. That's because they SUCK. Soundboard recordings give the listener no idea of how the music is intended to sound. They are only of use as a learning tool to the musicians and the soundman.

Why are soundboard tapes so bad? Because the soundman is ALWAYS attempting to compensate for what ISN'T amply amplified, as well as various anomalies of the room, such as backwall slap, and so on; and because soundboard recordings are also dry, i.e. no reverberation, and frequently compressed to the flatness of Kansas, they lack dynamic as well as resonance. They are missing crucial elements that are, in fact, part of the music. It continues to amaze us that these wretchedly inferior recordings are still touted and traded. To us it's a little like those 16th-century surgeons who would "bleed" their patients in the notion that they were doing them some good."This is sheer perversity on their part. Of course soundboards don't capture hall reverb or tape echo ... they're not supposed to. That's the idea -- that's what makes them so good most of the time. They extrapolate, in simple dry electronic terms, exactly what's being run through the PA, so they allow you to hear better than a microphoned recording right there in the hall exactly what the musicians are playing & what the singers are singing. This guy is just peeved because he isn't getting all the artifacts & detritus that generate that concert "excitement" & "atmosphere." But that's precisely the stuff that distorts & buries dynamic range to begin with! Now if the sound guy running the mixer is a **** & knocks off the level of the bass during an important passage, or sinks the B3 back into the mix instead of bringing it forward during the final measures of "I'm So Afraid," that's not the intrinsic fault of the board itself -- it's a deliberate human error. But if the sound guy knows what to do -- if he's prepped -- his soundboard mix will make the band sound better than it does just practicing in a room with no mix.

If you want to hear the swell of sound waves from the crowd & the arena acoustics, get yourself a microphone recording. But if you want to hear as clearly as possible what the band is actually doing, soundboard is the way to go.

And to negatively compare soundboards with the vast majority of historical audience recordings is just so idiotic: everybody knows that most audience recordings, especially years ago before everybody had a DAT recorder, are nondynamic, muffled, tweeter-blowing, woofer-pummeling messes. And that's only when you can get any volume out of them. The rest of the time they're just inaudible.

[David]

I hope David answers this post, he always puts it pretty well when he talks about how FM is behind the times and stuck in the old days.Well, I don't know what to say except I agree that band is stuck with the old paradigms. It's like the parable of the cave. They're stuck in the cave & they see their reflections on the walls of the cave, but they seem to have no idea what's happening outside the cave. The cave is their only reality so they take minor steps to fix their shadows inside the cave.

But strand brings up a good point: they tried some other things -- mostly marketing decisions probably made for them by the kids at Reprise or at MTV or VH1. But I don't think it's enough if you're talking about revamping the paradigm or following another one entirely. I don't think it did them any harm. It just doesn't seem to have done them much good, either.

It's unusual in Fleetwood Mac's case to have such a huge gap between the conception (they are still packaged & marketed like a major player on the pop music scene) & the execution (they can't support the weight of their own marketing in terms of sales or appeal). I guess that packaging & marketing style will continue indefinitely -- I guess the label will foot the bill.

[trackaghost]

This is an article about Jewel I read recently. I know a lot of people don't like her much, but I sure wish Stevie would do something like this:

Jewel never knows what songs she will choose from her expansive repertoire when she takes to the stage, she says.
"I never write a list, every show is different," she says. "I just want to meet the crowd and play different songs for them. That's why I'm able to enjoy coming back to the same towns frequently, because audiences know that they are going to continue hearing songs they haven't heard before."

http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/2005/07/22/entertainment/entertainment/58e9b4bf201b7a64862570420071f9ef.txt


Although I guess it's easier for her doing a one-woman show. Didn't she sell live recordings of each gig she did last year through her website? I'm pretty sure I heard that somewhere...

[sparky]

It wouldn't cost much at all to sell the soundboards. I read an interview with some band - I can't for the life of me remember who it was.....They were selling the cd's AFTER the show. For 20 bucks. It took about 20 minutes to crank 'em out. They put a booth outside the venue, so it could empty out, and people waited for them. Of course, I am not the tour manager, but in practical terms this would cost little and make a great return. CD's cost nothing. You have 2 staffers on for about a thousand bucks a week, maybe 1200. You rent the large capacity burning equipment. Or better yet, buy it. You generate generic sleeves for the tour and change the cities and dates.
Desktop publishing, people.
You don't need to remix anything. That's what you pay a sound guy for.
Minimum 200 people buy it. Minimum. And that is a very conservative estimate. Hmmm...4k a night..four shows a week. 16k a week.

The things cost 3 bucks to pruduce. That's 15,400. Minus the guys, 13.
An extra 13k a week for 6 or 8 weeks ? That'd buy a couple of new pairs of shoes.

Can you tell I like to make money ? :laugh:

[sparky]

Like I have said, I don't think Homegirl is going to quit performing anytime soon. She loves it. It's in her blood to get the rush of being onstage. And the thrill of interacting with thousands of people who adore her. I think she will also record more, though it is anyone's guess what the results will be.

I can't really imagine not seeing her again. Seeing Stevie has become such a regular part of my life the past decade or so - it's a ritual that is as much a part of the fabric of my life as yearly holidays. For those who haven't seen her live, for whatever reason, it can be a truly electrifying experience. There's a reason people shell out thousands of dollars to go see her over and over. Sure the set list may have spots that are perfect for fluid breaks...whatever. I need fluid breaks. For me, the experience of seeing her perform and sing is friggin ecstatic, even if it is a subpar night. It's like a visit with your oldest, coolest friend ever. I have missed shows I could have gone to - San Diego last week ! But I do have a life....and frankly, her live shows are a regular and valued part of it. Stellar or rote, I love seeing her. I spend much more money on things I enjoy less, that's for sure.

[LiquidBlue5000]

It wouldn't cost much at all to sell the soundboards. I read an interview with some band - I can't for the life of me remember who it was.....They were selling the cd's AFTER the show. For 20 bucks. It took about 20 minutes to crank 'em out. They put a booth outside the venue, so it could empty out, and people waited for them. Of course, I am not the tour manager, but in practical terms this would cost little and make a great return. CD's cost nothing. You have 2 staffers on for about a thousand bucks a week, maybe 1200. You rent the large capacity burning equipment. Or better yet, buy it. You generate generic sleeves for the tour and change the cities and dates.
Desktop publishing, people.
You don't need to remix anything. That's what you pay a sound guy for.
Minimum 200 people buy it. Minimum. And that is a very conservative estimate. Hmmm...4k a night..four shows a week. 16k a week.

The things cost 3 bucks to pruduce. That's 15,400. Minus the guys, 13.
An extra 13k a week for 6 or 8 weeks ? That'd buy a couple of new pairs of shoes.

Can you tell I like to make money ? :laugh:


Thank You for clarifying all that :nod:

.. and you're right, those numbers are very conservative.. just goes to show you how much more money can be made off of just "1" show... screw the t-shirts and the coffee mugs.. let me have the show on CD instead ;)

[rianbay1]

Of course she's choosing money! You think she puts out albums simply for the passion of writing and the love of her fans?.


Yeah, actually. If she WANTED to retire, I would have a hard time believing she doesn't have the money to do just that. HK management on the other hand...

[Nightbird17]

just a question....is anyone else sick of this thread? :rolleyes:

[dissention]

Like I have said, I don't think Homegirl is going to quit performing anytime soon. She loves it. It's in her blood to get the rush of being onstage. And the thrill of interacting with thousands of people who adore her. I think she will also record more, though it is anyone's guess what the results will be.

I can't really imagine not seeing her again. Seeing Stevie has become such a regular part of my life the past decade or so - it's a ritual that is as much a part of the fabric of my life as yearly holidays. For those who haven't seen her live, for whatever reason, it can be a truly electrifying experience. There's a reason people shell out thousands of dollars to go see her over and over. Sure the set list may have spots that are perfect for fluid breaks...whatever. I need fluid breaks. For me, the experience of seeing her perform and sing is friggin ecstatic, even if it is a subpar night. It's like a visit with your oldest, coolest friend ever. I have missed shows I could have gone to - San Diego last week ! But I do have a life....and frankly, her live shows are a regular and valued part of it. Stellar or rote, I love seeing her. I spend much more money on things I enjoy less, that's for sure.

I knew you were a raging Chiffonhead underneath it all. I. Knew. It. :laugh:

[jwd]

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwd
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh. Your post is like a breath of fresh air. Has anyone ever told you you're a very smart man?

Are we counting the ones who were just trying to get into my pants? :laugh:

:laugh: PLease clarify. They were trying to get into your pants when they told you your post was like a breath of fresh air or when they told you you were smart? :confused: :D

[bikerchic]

Yeah, actually. If she WANTED to retire, I would have a hard time believing she doesn't have the money to do just that. HK management on the other hand...
Stevie's no different then any other good business woman/man. Do you think Martha Stewart or Donald Trump put out a product or develop real estate without thinking of their return or profit? I'm not saying this is all Stevie care's about, but I am sure it is a major factor. She wouldn't be a good business woman other wise.

[Johnny Stew]

:laugh: PLease clarify. They were trying to get into your pants when they told you your post was like a breath of fresh air or when they told you you were smart? :confused: :D:laugh:

I meant that some guys were just trying to get into my pants when they told me I'm smart.
I just automatically assumed you weren't trying to get into my pants. :laugh:

[Johnny Stew]

Minimum 200 people buy it. Minimum. And that is a very conservative estimate. Hmmm...4k a night..four shows a week. 16k a week.

The things cost 3 bucks to pruduce. That's 15,400. Minus the guys, 13.
An extra 13k a week for 6 or 8 weeks ? That'd buy a couple of new pairs of shoes.

Can you tell I like to make money ? :laugh:Dangit, Sparky, we do need to get you working for Stevie! :nod:

[sparky]

I knew you were a raging Chiffonhead underneath it all. I. Knew. It. :laugh:

I have my moments. But, as we all know...when she sucks and blows (and she does sometimes), I am the first to say it. :xoxo:

[KenshiMaster16]

I don't really see what the problem is. A LOT of people at the concerts are older fans sure, but there are so many young people at her concerts and FM's concerts the last two years it isn't funny. She IS getting a new generation of fans, so I don't see what the worry is. So radio doesn't play it doesn't mean squat. A lot of people at my school own the TISL CD and if not, have songs like POTU and FFG and Every Day on their computers. And there is NO ONE at my school who doesn't know what Edge17 is.

[skcin]

just a question....is anyone else sick of this thread? :rolleyes:

What - you don't like beating a dead horse over and over again? And again? And again? ;)

I don't really see what the problem is. A LOT of people at the concerts are older fans sure, but there are so many young people at her concerts and FM's concerts the last two years it isn't funny. She IS getting a new generation of fans, so I don't see what the worry is. So radio doesn't play it doesn't mean squat. A lot of people at my school own the TISL CD and if not, have songs like POTU and FFG and Every Day on their computers. And there is NO ONE at my school who doesn't know what Edge17 is.

I think that's great, but I don't think that's the case at many schools. There are many young Ledgies here who have said that their classmates have no clue who Stevie is, let alone any songs of hers. What area of the country do you live, out of curiousity?

screw the t-shirts and the coffee mugs.. let me have the show on CD instead ;)

But I love my coffee mug! :(

Obviously, I actually would prefer a copy of the show.

[Highwayman]

A friend of mine just sent me this article about Barry Manilow in Vegas:

MANILOW HEATS UP LAS VEGAS

Hot on the heels of the first fifty packed productions of Barry Manilow’s Music and Passion, Las Vegas Hilton executives announced today that Manilow has been asked to stay for another 150 shows that will now take him through 2006 and into 2007.

“The success of Barry’s show is a testament to the success of our entertainment policy, which is dedicated to bringing top headliners to the Las Vegas Hilton,” said Rudy Prieto, CEO and general manager of the legendary property. “In extending Barry’s long-term agreement, we are continuing a strong relationship with a superstar of international appeal that offers our customers an experience that they cannot find anywhere else.”

“Manilow: Music and Passion” is a hybrid multi-faceted production that features contemporary hi-tech music and effects intermingled with the classic entertainment values of Las Vegas legends like Sinatra, Presley, Davis, and Martin.

Starring Manilow and a cast and band of 14, Music & Passion offers not only a full scale production but also the intimacy of a state of the art 1700 seat theatre, unique “on-stage” seating, and a concert that changes on a nightly basis.

“I’ve always avoided a “fixed” show that repeated the same thing every night,” Manilow said. “I’m glad that the Las Vegas Hilton and Music & Passion have given us all the chance to surprise the audience every night. And over the next 150 shows, there’ll be lots of surprises!”

Manilow opened Music and Passion at the Las Vegas Hilton on February 23rd, 2005. The show and the Las Vegas Hilton was a perfect next step for Manilow since his sold-out 2004 “One Night Live! One Last Time!” tour was thought to signal the end of his concert career. “One Last Time” played to more than 250,000 fans in 23 arenas throughout the US and the UK.
_____

Barry has always put on entertaining shows. Stevie sings at a microphone. You mean she is physically and mentally incapable of surprising us every night by singing a different song? It's not like she is dancing and has to remember choreography and stage blocking for something different every night... If she can't remember words, we can chip in for a telepropmter for her!!! Jeez... :mad:

[strandinthewind]

A friend of mine just sent me this article about Barry Manilow in Vegas:

MANILOW HEATS UP LAS VEGAS

Hot on the heels of the first fifty packed productions of Barry Manilow’s Music and Passion, Las Vegas Hilton executives announced today that Manilow has been asked to stay for another 150 shows that will now take him through 2006 and into 2007.

“The success of Barry’s show is a testament to the success of our entertainment policy, which is dedicated to bringing top headliners to the Las Vegas Hilton,” said Rudy Prieto, CEO and general manager of the legendary property. “In extending Barry’s long-term agreement, we are continuing a strong relationship with a superstar of international appeal that offers our customers an experience that they cannot find anywhere else.”

“Manilow: Music and Passion” is a hybrid multi-faceted production that features contemporary hi-tech music and effects intermingled with the classic entertainment values of Las Vegas legends like Sinatra, Presley, Davis, and Martin.

Starring Manilow and a cast and band of 14, Music & Passion offers not only a full scale production but also the intimacy of a state of the art 1700 seat theatre, unique “on-stage” seating, and a concert that changes on a nightly basis.

“I’ve always avoided a “fixed” show that repeated the same thing every night,” Manilow said. “I’m glad that the Las Vegas Hilton and Music & Passion have given us all the chance to surprise the audience every night. And over the next 150 shows, there’ll be lots of surprises!”

Manilow opened Music and Passion at the Las Vegas Hilton on February 23rd, 2005. The show and the Las Vegas Hilton was a perfect next step for Manilow since his sold-out 2004 “One Night Live! One Last Time!” tour was thought to signal the end of his concert career. “One Last Time” played to more than 250,000 fans in 23 arenas throughout the US and the UK.
_____

Barry has always put on entertaining shows. Stevie sings at a microphone. You mean she is physically and mentally incapable of surprising us every night by singing a different song? It's not like she is dancing and has to remember choreography and stage blocking for something different every night... If she can't remember words, we can chip in for a telepropmter for her!!! Jeez... :mad:

Well, when I was in Vegas and at the later shows on this tour, La Nicks was dancing all around the stage, etc. So, I tend to think "Stevie sings at a microphone" is incorrect based on my experiences. However, I do think she should put different songs in the set.

[LiquidBlue5000]

Barry has always put on entertaining shows. Stevie sings at a microphone. You mean she is physically and mentally incapable of surprising us every night by singing a different song? It's not like she is dancing and has to remember choreography and stage blocking for something different every night... If she can't remember words, we can chip in for a telepropmter for her!!! Jeez... :mad:


I completely agree with what you just said... Stevie is a singer, not as much of a "performer".. she doesn't have difficult dance routines like Madonna or Britney Spears where she can't change her setlist EVERY night... again, i have the answer for her fear of trying new songs:

STEVIE!!!!!! SING YOUR 7 BIGGEST HITS EVERY SINGLE NIGHT AND MIX UP THE OTHER 7 SONGS IN YOUR SET WITH SOMETHING DIFFERENT THIS WAY ALL OF YOUR FANS WILL LEAVE YOUR SHOWS COMPLETELY SATISFIED... THANKS! :wavey:

[strandinthewind]

I completely agree with what you just said... Stevie is a singer, not as much of a "performer".. she doesn't have difficult dance routines like Madonna or Britney Spears where she can't change her setlist EVERY night... again, i have the answer for her fear of trying new songs:

STEVIE!!!!!! SING YOUR 7 BIGGEST HITS EVERY SINGLE NIGHT AND MIX UP THE OTHER 7 SONGS IN YOUR SET WITH SOMETHING DIFFERENT THIS WAY ALL OF YOUR FANS WILL LEAVE YOUR SHOWS COMPLETELY SATISFIED... THANKS! :wavey:

EXACTLY - but she will never do it :laugh:

and - can I just say I LOVE BM

err - I mean Barry Manilow :laugh:

[LiquidBlue5000]

EXACTLY - but she will never do it :laugh:


but whyyyyyyyyyyy??? :distress: :distress:

[strandinthewind]

but whyyyyyyyyyyy??? :distress: :distress:

Well, if I see her, I'll ask her :laugh: But, judging from interviews, she likes for the set list to be intact so when she is on the road she gets her paper under the door telling her what to do and that is all she thinks about.

[dissention]

A friend of mine just sent me this article about Barry Manilow in Vegas:

MANILOW HEATS UP LAS VEGAS

Hot on the heels of the first fifty packed productions of Barry Manilow’s Music and Passion, Las Vegas Hilton executives announced today that Manilow has been asked to stay for another 150 shows that will now take him through 2006 and into 2007.

“The success of Barry’s show is a testament to the success of our entertainment policy, which is dedicated to bringing top headliners to the Las Vegas Hilton,” said Rudy Prieto, CEO and general manager of the legendary property. “In extending Barry’s long-term agreement, we are continuing a strong relationship with a superstar of international appeal that offers our customers an experience that they cannot find anywhere else.”

“Manilow: Music and Passion” is a hybrid multi-faceted production that features contemporary hi-tech music and effects intermingled with the classic entertainment values of Las Vegas legends like Sinatra, Presley, Davis, and Martin.

Starring Manilow and a cast and band of 14, Music & Passion offers not only a full scale production but also the intimacy of a state of the art 1700 seat theatre, unique “on-stage” seating, and a concert that changes on a nightly basis.

“I’ve always avoided a “fixed” show that repeated the same thing every night,” Manilow said. “I’m glad that the Las Vegas Hilton and Music & Passion have given us all the chance to surprise the audience every night. And over the next 150 shows, there’ll be lots of surprises!”

Manilow opened Music and Passion at the Las Vegas Hilton on February 23rd, 2005. The show and the Las Vegas Hilton was a perfect next step for Manilow since his sold-out 2004 “One Night Live! One Last Time!” tour was thought to signal the end of his concert career. “One Last Time” played to more than 250,000 fans in 23 arenas throughout the US and the UK.
_____

Barry has always put on entertaining shows. Stevie sings at a microphone. You mean she is physically and mentally incapable of surprising us every night by singing a different song? It's not like she is dancing and has to remember choreography and stage blocking for something different every night... If she can't remember words, we can chip in for a telepropmter for her!!! Jeez... :mad:

Are you a Fanilow? :laugh:

I agree with you. However, Stevie won't change anything up, she has a bad mixture of laziness and a love of the familiar running through her.

[skcin]

STEVIE!!!!!! SING YOUR 7 BIGGEST HITS EVERY SINGLE NIGHT AND MIX UP THE OTHER 7 SONGS IN YOUR SET WITH SOMETHING DIFFERENT THIS WAY ALL OF YOUR FANS WILL LEAVE YOUR SHOWS COMPLETELY SATISFIED... THANKS! :wavey:


I honestly would be happy if she would do just 1 or 2 different songs at each show. :shrug:

I don't think she likes surprises - she likes to know exactly what comes next, so as not to throw her off. We all know she kind of zones out on stage at times (flubbing lyrics, leaving out entire verses, coming in too late or too early, etc.) and that's when it's the same songs every NIGHT! I don't think she could keep track from night to night to be honest, although I suppose she could just leave that to the band & take a quick peek at her setlist before each tune.

Another part of me says "If friggin Ozzy can still get up on stage & get through a show in his state, then Stevie should have no problems at ALL." :D

[Highwayman]

Are you a Fanilow? :laugh:

Heavens, no! But him being so is an endless source of amusement here at work. Bad enough he has the bobblehead doll, but when he pulls out the BM credit card at lunch, we all just fall out. :lol:

I would even rather her wear her glasses on stage and sing from a music stand to hear something different...

[Johnny Stew]

THIS WAY ALL OF YOUR FANS WILL LEAVE YOUR SHOWS COMPLETELY SATISFIED...If you still think there's anything Stevie could possibly do to satisfy all of her fans, you haven't been paying attention. :laugh:

"Argh, she did 'Sable On Blond' at the Chicago show! Why didn't she do it at MY show, instead of that stupid 'Rose Garden'!?!"

The ironic thing is, as much as I hear people complain about the setlists (which, by the way, I'd love to have been to so many shows that I could be bored with the setlist), yet, inevitably, countless people say in their reviews, "you know, I wasn't at all interested in hearing her do ________ again, but it sounded absolutely incredible tonight and was one of the highlights of the evening."

So go figure.

What - you don't like beating a dead horse over and over again? And again? And again? ;):laugh:

This horse has been beaten, resuscitated, killed and beaten again more times than Joan Rivers has had plastic surgery. ;)

[SuzeQuze]

Are you a Fanilow? :laugh:

I agree with you. However, Stevie won't change anything up, she has a bad mixture of laziness and a love of the familiar running through her.

I don't think it is laziness so much as fear, she has a lot of fear of change and just coming accross badly.

[Johnny Stew]

I don't think it is laziness so much as fear, she has a lot of fear of change and just coming accross badly.That's it in a nutshell, if you ask me.
Not laziness... but fear of coming across badly (whether it be justified or unjustified).

Her comment before the 'Dance' tour was most telling: "There will be no bad vocal nights on this tour."

In other words, "no more risk-taking and then getting vicious reviews because of it in the morning."

[dissention]

I don't think it is laziness so much as fear, she has a lot of fear of change and just coming accross badly.

I do. She seems to have the attitude that it doesn't need changing and her inability to recognize that the setlist is tired, and take much effort to freshen up her stale setlist, is a sign of laziness to me. She doesn't want to do more than she has to, even if doing a bit more leads to better shows.

[strandinthewind]

I do. She seems to have the attitude that it doesn't need changing and her inability to recognize that the setlist is tired, and take much effort to freshen up her stale setlist, is a sign of laziness to me. She doesn't want to do more than she has to, even if doing a bit more leads to better shows.

See, I think she does try. I think she tried in Vegas and her comments on that show indicate so. I think she could never satisfy everyone, but that is not really her goal, nor should it be because it is impossible to do so. I also thiunk adding R&R and CD on this tour was a huge change for her as was singing with DH on his songs and him on her songs. So, I think all this she is lazy talk is BS.

[dissention]

See, I think she does try. I think she tried in Vegas and her comments on that show indicate so.

She added a couple of songs that she had done on many tours before. Big whoop. The way she talked about playing old, lesser known songs that she normally wouldn't have a chance to do otherwise was absurd.

I think she could never satisfy everyone, but that is not really her goal, nor should it be because it is impossible to do so. I also thiunk adding R&R and CD on this tour was a huge change for her as was singing with DH on his songs and him on her songs.

I agree on that point. But two newly added songs still isn't enough to warrant praise for freshening up her setlist. She's got so many damned songs and she sings the same freaking ones constantly. A lot of artists shy away from most of their hits and try to introduce audiences to their newer, fresher material. She started to on the TISL tour...and then dropped most of the newer stuff. Attendance isn't much different than the Enchated tour, so what's the excuse for not doing more obscure stuff like she did then? There isn't one, imo.

So, I think all this she is lazy talk is BS.

Then we're even, because I think this "she does try" talk is BS.

[sparky]

This is the most daring setlist she has ever done. Is she David Bowie ? NFW. But to cover two new songs on a tour is something she has never done in her career. It isn't revolutionary on a big scale, but I thought it was movement anyway - considering her history. Of course, I would prefer she move Landslide, Rhiannon, and Dreams to the set list graveyard...but the large scale seizures on the part of others would prevent THAT from ever happening. Some of us are sick of seeing those songs 30 or more times. High class problem, I suppose. :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

She added a couple of songs that she had done on many tours before. Big whoop. The way she talked about playing old, lesser known songs that she normally wouldn't have a chance to do otherwise was absurd.



I agree on that point. But two newly added songs still isn't enough to warrant praise for freshening up her setlist. She's got so many damned songs and she sings the same freaking ones constantly. A lot of artists shy away from most of their hits and try to introduce audiences to their newer, fresher material. She started to on the TISL tour...and then dropped most of the newer stuff. Attendance isn't much different than the Enchated tour, so what's the excuse for not doing more obscure stuff like she did then? There isn't one, imo.



Then we're even, because I think this "she does try" talk is BS.

LOL - she could go out on stage and sing 43 new songs each night and you'd still bitch about it :rolleyes:

[chiliD]

If more artists felt that way, we wouldn't have jack **** to listen to.

We don't now, as it is. When "talk radio" out arbitrons music, we're in a sad state of affairs.

[Johnny Stew]

I do. She seems to have the attitude that it doesn't need changing and her inability to recognize that the setlist is tired, and take much effort to freshen up her stale setlist, is a sign of laziness to me. She doesn't want to do more than she has to, even if doing a bit more leads to better shows.Anyone who says "we are our own harshest critic" has never met you. :p

You have confused her fear of failure with laziness, and, with all do respect, I think you're completely wrong on this one.

[Johnny Stew]

This is the most daring setlist she has ever done. Is she David Bowie ? NFW. But to cover two new songs on a tour is something she has never done in her career. It isn't revolutionary on a big scale, but I thought it was movement anyway - considering her history.I thought the variety in the 'Enchanted' setlist was pretty impressive (though I would have liked to have seen her focus solely on tunes from her solo career for that tour), but her adding "Circle Dance" and "Rock And Roll" (ESPECIALLY "Rock And Roll") knocked my socks off.

[dissention]

LOL - she could go out on stage and sing 43 new songs each night and you'd still bitch about it :rolleyes:

She could fart in a miked milk jug and you'd proclaim it beautiful. :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

She could fart in a miked milk jug and you'd proclaim it beautiful. :laugh:

No, in fact, I often criticize her. I just do it in a fair way as opposed to your "she's great - she's a hag" all or nothing mindset.

For example, I think she should ditch Sorcerer because she sounds bad when she sings it - in fact, it is painful sometimes for me to hear it.

[LiquidBlue5000]

I do. She seems to have the attitude that it doesn't need changing and her inability to recognize that the setlist is tired, and take much effort to freshen up her stale setlist, is a sign of laziness to me. She doesn't want to do more than she has to, even if doing a bit more leads to better shows.


maybe it's not so much laziness as it is her interpretation of what it means to put hard work into a show ... i think she honestly believes that the Vegas shows were truly something that was never done before because it took her "two months" to put together... ummm, i don't quite understand what took two months?? It was just a regular Stevie Nicks concert with a screen in the background.. you mean to tell me it took her two months to pick out those visuals??? I honestly think SHE thinks two months is a reasonable amount of time it takes to create that vegas show... apparently, she's never seen Cher or Madonna in concert before.. in two months, they turn their stages into circus's.. now THAT is "hard work" :nod:

[strandinthewind]

maybe it's not so much laziness as it is her interpretation of what it means to put hard work into a show ... i think she honestly believes that the Vegas shows were truly something that was never done before because it took her "two months" to put together... ummm, i don't quite understand what took two months?? It was just a regular Stevie Nicks concert with a screen in the background.. you mean to tell me it took her two months to pick out those visuals??? I honestly think SHE thinks two months is a reasonable amount of time it takes to create that vegas show... apparently, she's never seen Cher or Madonna in concert before.. in two months, they turn their stages into circus's.. now THAT is "hard work" :nod:

I think it takes a little longer to mount the Cher Madonna things. I would guess it took over two months to build those sets. As for La Nicks and the Vegas thing, she, amongst other things, secured rights to movies to use, which takes awhile. So, I think two months was a reasonable amount of time. Again, I think she should have done more and was and am a little pissed she dod not take that opportunity. But, I do recognize that she put effort into trying to making it different.

[LiquidBlue5000]

I would prefer she move Landslide, Rhiannon, and Dreams to the set list graveyard..

Well, if part of the setlist looked something like this, i'm sure you wouldn't mind:

Outside The Rain/ Dreams
Sable On Blond
Rhiannon
I Can't Wait
Landslide
Sisters Of The Moon

etc, etc, etc

[LiquidBlue5000]

I think it takes a little longer to mount the Cher Madonna things. I would guess it took over two months to build those sets. As for La Nicks and the Vegas thing, she, amongst other things, secured rights to movies to use, which takes awhile. So, I think two months was a reasonable amount of time. Again, I think she should have done more and was and am a little pissed she dod not take that opportunity. But, I do recognize that she put effort into trying to making it different.


All i'm saying is her idea of what "takes two months" is not the same of other female performers who do far more in the same period of time.. the way she talks about those Vegas shows, you would think she would have had a flying trapeze, monkeys swinging from trees, and a whole slew of choreograpphed background dancers... i mean, it's just a backdrop.. i love it, but it's just a backdrop.. :shrug:

[strandinthewind]

All i'm saying is her idea of what "takes two months" is not the same of other female performers who do far more in the same period of time.. the way she talks about those Vegas shows, you would think she would have had a flying trapeze, monkeys swinging from trees, and a whole slew of choreograpphed background dancers... i mean, it's just a backdrop.. i love it, but it's just a backdrop.. :shrug:

touche' touche'

[dissention]

maybe it's not so much laziness as it is her interpretation of what it means to put hard work into a show ...
i think she honestly believes that the Vegas shows were truly something that was never done before because it took her "two months" to put together... ummm, i don't quite understand what took two months?? It was just a regular Stevie Nicks concert with a screen in the background.. you mean to tell me it took her two months to pick out those visuals??? I honestly think SHE thinks two months is a reasonable amount of time it takes to create that vegas show... apparently, she's never seen Cher or Madonna in concert before.. in two months, they turn their stages into circus's.. now THAT is "hard work" :nod:

:nod: Very good points. She built that Vegas show up so much that I was shocked when I logged on a week later and read about them from people that went.

I know Midler's last tour took six months to conceive, but didn't Minogue's last tour (before she went into the hospital) take almost a year? Damn. :laugh:

[dissention]

As for La Nicks and the Vegas thing, she, amongst other things, secured rights to movies to use, which takes awhile.

She did not, her peeps did. :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

She did not, her peeps did. :laugh:

I know - but the actor is irrelevant - it is the time it took. Then, in what media did they send the film in. Did it have to altered to use on the screen - I am sure all footage from all sources did. Then, they had to rehearse for at least two weeks as they had two new drummers. So, two months is not that long when you think about it, esp. considering they may not have had the actual space to work in except for a small portion of that time :shrug:

[skcin]

Didn't the Vegas thing come up pretty last minute? It's not like she knew she was playing there for a year ahead of time & had scads of time to plans a huge show. I don't think, anyway.

[dissention]

Didn't the Vegas thing come up pretty last minute? It's not like she knew she was playing there for a year ahead of time & had scads of time to plans a huge show. I don't think, anyway.

I think she did. Remember when she was showing up as being scheduled to play there in October of last year? Her playing Caesar's was definitely in the works.

[sparky]

apparently, she's never seen Cher or Madonna in concert before.. in two months, they turn their stages into circus's.. now THAT is "hard work" :nod:

Yeah, it's hard work for the designers they hire and the shops that do the building. Meeting with designers and looking at renederings and mock ups ain't hard work. :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

I think she did. Remember when she was showing up as being scheduled to play there in October of last year? Her playing Caesar's was definitely in the works.

Perhaps - but in the interview she said the first time she actually saw the stage was within two months of the actual concert dates :shrug:

[sparky]

As for La Nicks and the Vegas thing, she, amongst other things, secured rights to movies to use, which takes awhile.

:shocked:

A few letters and emails to the offices that give the permission to use those clips...we get clearance to use crap like that all the time in two days. Her manager's assistant did this in about a half hour.

[strandinthewind]

Yeah, it's hard work for the designers they hire and the shops that do the building. Meeting with designers and looking at renederings and mock ups ain't hard work. :laugh:


I always wonder if those sets are built from scratch or is modular stuff is used a la Cher's elevator and Tina's crane/arm that projects her into the audience.

[dissention]

Yeah, it's hard work for the designers they hire and the shops that do the building. Meeting with designers and looking at renederings and mock ups ain't hard work. :laugh:

Of course it's not. :laugh: Neither is saying that you want to sing Beauty and the Beast while a clip of the movie plays in the background and then having your people make it happen. Neither is having other people design animations of large raindrops. I think he was pointing out how much hard work went into other shows and what the end result is when compared to the supposed "hard work" that went into designing a fairly standard Nicks show with the addition of a big screen.

[strandinthewind]

:shocked:

A few letters and emails to the offices that give the permission to use those clips...we get clearance to use crap like that all the time in two days. Her manager's assistant did this in about a half hour.

I think it depends on the willingness of the production company. I was basing this on experience I had with a similar rights obtaining situation where the right holder was hard to reach, had jerks for management, etc. But, if everyone is playing along, it can be done in a day or so.

I also think she rehearsed many more songs than she included, which took time, esp. with two new drummers.

[strandinthewind]

Of course it's not. :laugh: Neither is saying that you want to sing Beauty and the Beast while a clip of the movie plays in the background and then having your people make it happen. Neither is having other people design animations of large raindrops. I think he was pointing out how much hard work went into other shows and what the end result is when compared to the supposed "hard work" that went into designing a fairly standard Nicks show with the addition of a big screen.


But, it still takes time to do all of this. Let's say, and this is a big leap, it took two weeks to get all of this stuff together, into the correct format for the projection device and in the correct running order, correctly edited, and in the correct timing sequence. Then, she had to rehearse to it both there and in the alt. rehearsal space. Then, once they got there, it probably had to be altered to work in that actual theatre. All in all, two months is not a whole lot of time, esp. when in any production, you want to be in full dress rehearsal at least two weeks prior to the opening night.

[sparky]

I always wonder if those sets are built from scratch or is modular stuff is used a la Cher's elevator and Tina's crane/arm that projects her into the audience.

A lot of the mechanical devices can be found. But they have to be built into the design of the show and if that is too much work then they have to be custom made. The crane is a gimme. The elevator ? Probably stock and dolled up with grills and planton decorations.

The actual set pieces are generally custom made - minus structural elements. A lot of the skeletal structure of those sets is usually standard issue aluminum truss and lighting grid material. Things like the U2 set however, can be enormous undertakings and take months to build. Hell, people I know who have done the Oscars start in October and the show is in Feb. And that puppy doesn't need to break down and move every night.

[strandinthewind]

A lot of the mechanical devices can be found. But they have to be built into the design of the show and if that is too much work then they have to be custom made. The crane is a gimme. The elevator ? Probably stock and dolled up with grills and planton decorations.

The actual set pieces are generally custom made - minus structural elements. A lot of the skeletal structure of those sets is usually standard issue aluminum truss and lighting grid material. Things like the U2 set however, can be enormous undertakings and take months to build. Hell, people I know who have done the Oscars start in October and the show is in Feb. And that puppy doesn't need to break down and move every night.

Wow - thanks for that. I remember seeing Tina T. and thinking - they have to break this down everynight. We also saw them loading it, which was a trip. If you saw that tour, she had what appeared to be 30+ foot crane that rose from its formerly flush position across her stage and then swung her out over the audience :eek: I wonder if the arm itself was a series of parts or if it was solid - not to mention the motor and the counter weights :eek:

[LeighB04]

Well, if you see the number of huge trucks used for Tina, Michael Jackson, U2 and others who do BIG shows, you would imagine a lot of parts do go on the road - they're simply constructed easily and there are often two road crews, so they always have two days to build the stage and sets.
Stevie's Vegas shows were a ghastly disappointment any way you look at it: she had the opportunity to do something special and we got what looked like leftovers from the archived sets scrounged from past Vegas shows.

[The Tower]

Stevie lazy? Yeah, probably. She's never been adventurous anyway.

She'll never do a vibrant set list. They've always been the same old stuff since the beginning. She was close with the Enchanted tour, but that's about it. Adding "Rock and Roll" and "Circle Dance" is lame considering the dozens of songs of her own material that she has never played live. Fear is a stupid excuse- just play the damn material. That whole "it doesn't translate live" is the biggest load of **** I've ever heard. If she has the nerve to drop keys and change lyrics, then she should have the nerve to change arrangements to fit a live setting. Songs don't always have to sound exactly like the album versions. Especially with the kind of band she has- yeah, if she had a four piece band backing her up, I probably wouldn't consider "Trouble in Shangri-La" either.

If Stevie had decided to have daring live shows from the beginning her audience would be used to going to concerts where anything goes. Constantly playing songs like "Dreams" just dumbs down the audience to expect it every time. It's not what everyone wants to hear, it's what she thinks everyone wants to hear- which is quite different.

The whole Vegas thing was ridiculous. It was worth it, because the shows were good. But she definitely misrepresented what the outcome would be and I think that sucked.

[Livia]

Wow - thanks for that. I remember seeing Tina T. and thinking - they have to break this down everynight. We also saw them loading it, which was a trip. If you saw that tour, she had what appeared to be 30+ foot crane that rose from its formerly flush position across her stage and then swung her out over the audience :eek: I wonder if the arm itself was a series of parts or if it was solid - not to mention the motor and the counter weights :eek:

I had front row for that tour and I have a crotch-shot of Tina when she was in that crane, right over my head! :D

[ontheEdgeof17]

I had front row for that tour and I have a crotch-shot of Tina when she was in that crane, right over my head! :D


Well? Granny panties or what? :laugh:

[Livia]

Well? Granny panties or what? :laugh:

LOL-white cotton

Next time I borrow the scanner from work, I'll post 'em.

[LeighB04]

LOL-white cotton

Next time I borrow the scanner from work, I'll post 'em.

If memory serves, she was wearing a white dress? Doubtful she would be wearing white panties under her little black leather outfits, and I would think it's more a leotard type thing... although granny panties did make a funny picture in my head... :D

[Highwayman]

I also thiunk adding R&R and CD on this tour was a huge change for her as was singing with DH on his songs and him on her songs. So, I think all this she is lazy talk is BS.

Yeah, but did you hear how fresh and vibrant she sang these songs that were not her own? I was blown away when she was on stage with Henley, how strong she sounded! Then her set started, and POOF the strength was gone and it was same ol', same ol'. She's bored with her own material! Maybe if she did totally redo the set list, she would have that power again. I sure think so.

[LeighB04]

Yeah, but did you hear how fresh and vibrant she sang these songs that were not her own? I was blown away when she was on stage with Henley, how strong she sounded! Then her set started, and POOF the strength was gone and it was same ol', same ol'. She's bored with her own material! Maybe if she did totally redo the set list, she would have that power again. I sure think so.

I didn't see the show, but I think part of what you describe is Stevie having someone to share the stage with her. If not Henley, then Buckingham, or someone! She does seem to put on a different performance when she has someone to play/flirt with/sing to.. maybe she just has to bring the girls forward and do a few more duets!

[Livia]

If memory serves, she was wearing a white dress? Doubtful she would be wearing white panties under her little black leather outfits, and I would think it's more a leotard type thing... although granny panties did make a funny picture in my head... :D

Just dug out my photos - in the "cherry picker" crane - she was wearing leather pants w/ fringe and a matching halter top. But I do have a crotch shot! LOL I have pics of 2 other outfits-a gold, fringy, flapper-looking mini-dress, and a teal mini-dress. I just know I saw her panties at least once that night. And they WERE white. :p

[LiquidBlue5000]

That whole "it doesn't translate live" is the biggest load of **** I've ever heard. If she has the nerve to drop keys and change lyrics, then she should have the nerve to change arrangements to fit a live setting. Songs don't always have to sound exactly like the album versions.

Amen!! :nod:

.. in fact, i would prefer it if her songs didn't sound exactly like the album versions... a live show should never try to duplicate the sound of the album... instead, it should compliment it...

[strandinthewind]

I had front row for that tour and I have a crotch-shot of Tina when she was in that crane, right over my head! :D

OMG ___ she swept toward the handicap section and that was it for me :eek: