Lack of Productivity Makes Fleetwood Mac Irrelevent.

[newyawka]

Fleetwood Mac takes forever to create anything of real importance, for example a new studio album. This is how it always is, yes. But back in the 70's and the 80's it was alright for them to take such time between breaks because it was their heyday. Back then people were eager for new Fleetwood Mac material. Now that the heyday is over, they really can't be taking this much time between projects and here is why: people forget. Fleetwood Mac is not in demand, no matter how many concerts they may or may not sell out. Fleetwood Mac has become forgetable and now completely irrelevent. I love Fleetwood Mac, they are my favorite band but unfortunately for me it's not become out with the old and in with the new.

Lady GaGa has won over my heart. She's quirky, she's hip, she's relevent, she's definately not forgetable, she's a trendsetter, she's smart, she's talented, she writes her own songs. She's the new Stevie Nicks. I'm sorry Stevie, I'm sorry Fleetwood Mac, but now it is time to hang in the towel. Finished.

[Sanne2]

Lady GaGa has won over my heart. She's quirky, she's hip, she's relevent, she's definately not forgetable, she's a trendsetter, she's smart, she's talented, she writes her own songs. She's the new Stevie Nicks. I'm sorry Stevie, I'm sorry Fleetwood Mac, but now it is time to hang in the towel. Finished.

Gag me with a spoon.

I'm sorry, you are totally entitled to your own opinion, and Lady Gaga makes fun and catchy pop-songs, but she's a hype, I seriously doubt she'll still be around in 3 years. No way in hell she's going to be the new Stevie Nicks, or the new Britney Spears or Madonna for that matter.

However, I do agree with you on the fact that the Mac should be more productive.

[LukeA]

Gag me with a spoon.

I'm sorry, you are tototally entitled to your own opinion, and Lady Gaga makes fun and catchy pop-songs, but she's a hype, I seriously doubt she'll still be around in 3 years. No way in hell she's going to be the new Stevie Nicks, or the new Britney Spears or Madonna for that matter.

I have her potential ceiling as a poor-man's Pink.

[iamnotafraid]

Duffy has won over my heart. She's quirky, she's hip, she's relevent, she's definately not forgetable, she's a trendsetter, she's smart, she's talented, she writes her own songs.

I agree, Duffy's really good.

[chriskisn]

I'm curious as to why you think a more productive FM would be more relevant? They could turn out an album every six months, they still wouldn't re-live that heyday.

Their relevance is more the influence they have had on the artists of today.

Oh and Elvis has been mighty quiet for the past 30 years - I'd suggest he's not quite irrelevant yet (though maybe heading that way).

[mylittledemon]

They aren't irrelevant to those that still love their music.

[Angel69]

Lady GaGa has won over my heart. She's quirky, she's hip, she's relevent, she's definately not forgetable, she's a trendsetter, she's smart, she's talented, she writes her own songs. She's the new Stevie Nicks. I'm sorry Stevie, I'm sorry Fleetwood Mac, but now it is time to hang in the towel. Finished.


Google Missing Persons or Dale Bozio. The new Stevie Nicks? Not quite.

[chriskisn]

They aren't irrelevant to those that still love their music.

or more to the point, to those who love decent music

[GoldDustOrphan]

Sure, they're both female singer/songwriters that play piano, but Lady GaGa and Stevie share one specific, if less obvious, trait - mystery. Both have tailored very specific, eccentric stage personas without sacrificing sincerity.

I attended a Lady GaGa concert at the House of Blues and she was incredible. She performed a few songs cabaret style (she sang & played piano), and those songs were just as dynamic as her big production numbers. She can sing her ass off and demonstrated a considerable amount of charm, humor and smarts.

Her two recent number one hits (Just Dance, Poker Face) are setting records for paid downloads, having sold four and three million, respectively. Only five songs have hit the four million mark. She currently has three songs in the top 40 on Billboard's Hot 100 chart: Poker Face (#2), new single Love Game (#22) and Just Dance (#26, with 42 weeks on the chart). She's on the cover of this week's Rolling Stone.

I have to disagree, strongly and passionately, with those who dismiss GaGa as a weightless fluke or underestimate her musicianship.

P.S. In response to the opening post, Stevie said she's relieved you've moved on, because she never liked you and the strain of faking it was killing her. She like to return the teddy bear and your fan letters, which she corrected herself with a red pen. And, yes, she'd like to confirm your longheld suspicion about that Edge walk in '98. She did purposely recoil from your pleading, out-stretched hand. She didn't know where it had been. That, and the fan-gifted crystal ball/snow globe in her other hand had just predicted your future betrayal, so her gesture was intended to haunt.

[shackin'up]

I agree that FM is irrelevant. But :
a] spell irrelevant right
b] don't compare to Duffy: that's a very good but reactive pastiche-act. Not a great "new ground"-breaking act.
c] Fleetwood Mac will never be finished: they've had too much influence. Also on todays relevant acts like the Decemberists, Elliott Brood, Death Cab For Cutie, Ryan Adams, Greg Dulli etcetera.

So move over to Duffy's board and feed your undying need to be "relevent", you modern newyawka.

[skuncles]

I question the age of the the original poster, Fleetwood Mac's core audience is 35 and up. To the majority of the fans they have no clue who Lady GaGa is, nor do they care. Every artist gets about a five year span of "relevance" after that you get to coast on your past. How long you get to coast depends on how relevant you were. Fleetwood Mac's heyday ended around 1987 with Tango In The Night. Now here we are twenty-two years later and they touring the country to sold out venues. I'd say that's a pretty good coast.
How about we look up Lady GaGa around 2044 and see how well she's doing huh?

[Enchanted_Stevi]

I wouldnt say Lady Gaga is the new Stevie Nicks. They are quite similar, but totaly different. They are both VERY different, write their own songs, "sex symbols", and non forgetable. BUT Lady Gaga isnt Rock and Roll shes POP/Dance. Her songs dont have the same message that Stevie's does. I DO LOVE Lady Gaga her songs are VERY catchy and I love ALL of her songs on her cd...not one I dont like(kinda like Stevie). but I definatly wouldnt say Lady Gaga is the new Stevie Nicks.

[newyawka]

First of all, who the **** is this Duffy? I never said anything about a "Duffy." I said "Lady GaGa has won over my heart." And to the person who responded to me liking Duffy after the original poster of the whole "Duffy" comment, maybe if you took the time to read my post in it's entirety before commenting you wouldn't have made that comment and sounded like a dumbass who has no idea what's being discussed.

Secondly, yes, I am twenty-years old so I admit that I don't quite fit the age group for the average Fleetwood Mac fan but I still appreciate their music, I'm just disappointed in what they've ultimately become.

Thirdly, the fact that I misspelled irrelevant is your main argument? Why did you even bother to post?

And finally, I was not dissing Stevie Nicks because honestly, it's Stevie Nicks who's still kept the band from becoming a total bore.

Also, to the person who spent probably five minutes writing that paragraph on how Stevie is relieved that she doesn't have to bear the burden of me being her fan...what a total waste of time on your part.

I've made my peace...for now. :wavey:

[WelshWitchPMD]

[QUOTE=newyawka;822816]
And finally, I was not dissing Stevie Nicks because honestly, it's Stevie Nicks who's still kept the band from becoming a total bore.

No, that would be Lindsey Buckingham.;)

[OldTimer]

Also, to the person who spent probably five minutes writing that paragraph on how Stevie is relieved that she doesn't have to bear the burden of me being her fan...what a total waste of time on your part.

Gotta disagree with you there. That paragraph was the best thing about this thread :D. I liked it so much I'm going to repeat it.....
P.S. In response to the opening post, Stevie said she's relieved you've moved on, because she never liked you and the strain of faking it was killing her. She like to return the teddy bear and your fan letters, which she corrected herself with a red pen. And, yes, she'd like to confirm your longheld suspicion about that Edge walk in '98. She did purposely recoil from your pleading, out-stretched hand. She didn't know where it had been. That, and the fan-gifted crystal ball/snow globe in her other hand had just predicted your future betrayal, so her gesture was intended to haunt.
:laugh:
It's called humor, an entity that's been known to make occasional appearances in the Ledge. Try reading it with a smile. :)

[RockALittle250]

Fleetwood Mac takes forever to create anything of real importance, for example a new studio album. This is how it always is, yes. But back in the 70's and the 80's it was alright for them to take such time between breaks because it was their heyday. Back then people were eager for new Fleetwood Mac material. Now that the heyday is over, they really can't be taking this much time between projects and here is why: people forget. Fleetwood Mac is not in demand, no matter how many concerts they may or may not sell out. Fleetwood Mac has become forgetable and now completely irrelevent. I love Fleetwood Mac, they are my favorite band but unfortunately for me it's become out with the old and in with the new.
Lady GaGa has won over my heart. She's quirky, she's hip, she's relevent, she's definately not forgetable, she's a trendsetter, she's smart, she's talented, she writes her own songs. She's the new Stevie Nicks. I'm sorry Stevie, I'm sorry Fleetwood Mac, but now it is time to hang in the towel. Finished.

I have never heard of this kind of mentality...who "replaces" one band or artist with another? I have about 50 different artists on my iPod and i am constantly expanding my music catologue almost every day, but i certainly don't delete the Fleetwood Mac songs on my iPod to "make room" for the newer artists that i add. You are basically saying Fleetwood Mac has to take a back seat to newer artists that are coming out, when in actuality, there's plenty of room for everyone.

[David]

First of all, who the **** is this Duffy? I never said anything about a "Duffy." I said "Lady GaGa has won over my heart." And to the person who responded to me liking Duffy after the original poster of the whole "Duffy" comment, maybe if you took the time to read my post in it's entirety before commenting you wouldn't have made that comment and sounded like a dumbass who has no idea what's being discussed.You don't have to call another ledgie a dumbass.

Thirdly, the fact that I misspelled irrelevant is your main argument? Why did you even bother to post?Don't worry about that. Bad grammar & rotten spelling are hallmarks of the fans, & anyone who calls you on it (except me) is bound to need a little editing, too.

And finally, I was not dissing Stevie Nicks because honestly, it's Stevie Nicks who's still kept the band from becoming a total bore.Some of these guys think Stevie Nicks is the one who MAKES the band a total bore.

I think this notion of relevance (& irrelevance) needs defining. In most contexts, it seems to mean nothing more than marketing mumbo-jumbo -- popularity measured in sales figures, & only in current sales figures, at that. Only here & there (for example, in Gerald's post) is relevance discussed in terms of artistic influence or even more general ideas as status in popular culture. In that sense, Fleetwood's relevance is higher than most of their contemporaries in the late 1970s but not so high as, say, the Stones, the Who, U2, Dylan, Mitchell, & the other seminal figures in rock & pre-rock.

[BTFLCHLD]

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a152/BTFLCHLD/MISC/white_rose-3260.gif

[Moz]

Why is relevancy so important?

[nightbird89]

I personally think this whole thread is stupid. I LOVE Lady GaGa but she has nothing on Stevie. They are COMPLETELY different artists, in different generations. I give a lot of respect to both of them, but she has been around nowhere NEAR as long as Stevie.

And as far as the whole "relevance" topic, to many many people Lady GaGa is irrelevant, as well as major icons like Britney Spears and Madonna. Over at the Britney Spears forum, people are complaining she's irrelevant, even though she JUST had a #1 album and three hit singles, as well as the #2 tour of any current artist. And guess who's currently #6? Fleetwood Mac! Relevance (spelling?) is all about the individual person's interest.

And as far as Stevie on this current tour, IMHO, she kicks ass! I haven't seen her this energetic since The Dance/Enchanted era. JUST MY OPINION. I think both she and Lindsey add equally to these shows!

[BellaDonna93]

I agree that Lady GaGa IS NOT the new Stevie Nicks! She can NEVER, EVER, EVER be like Stevie. Stevie's songs is affecting people like Lady GaGa's songs don't do. Well, maybe for some people but NOT for me and other huge Stevie/Mac fans.

[nightbird89]

I agree that Lady GaGa IS NOT the new Stevie Nicks! She can NEVER, EVER, EVER be like Stevie. Stevie's songs is affecting people like Lady GaGa's songs don't do. Well, maybe for some people but NOT for me and other huge Stevie/Mac fans.

They are completely different.

Oh and I LOVE ur sig! :thumbsup:

[trackaghost]

This thread is funny :lol:

But seriously, aside from specialising in a completely different genre of music, I think it's pretty weird to compare an act who has the sum total of two singles and one album under her belt with a band with a vast discography and one of the best selling albums of all time, who have been around for more than 30 years.

Ten years ago you could have written the same post and replaced Lady GaGa with, say, Alanis Morissette. Alanis was very "relevant" back then, now, to put it mildly, not so much.

Anyway, I'm with Gerald on this one, I don't think it's got that much to do with productivity. I'd say Johnny Cash is still relevant, and he's not even with us any more. But he's so iconic, his music is still played and his influence is so huge it would be silly to say he's irrelevant.
As it is more and more new bands are coming out and claiming the Mac as an influence from The Decemberists to Bat For Lashes and Ladyhawke (all very "hip" and relevant artists) and the band is still out there and getting plenty of press and attention, maybe not the kind that Lady GaGa is getting but I'm pretty sure the next big thing will come along and steal some of her light too.

[macpai]

Yeah, entertaining people in a time when life is so difficult is irrelevant.

You can keep Lady GagGag. I'll stay gaga over the Mac, thank you.

[Nico]

So is this thread about whether FM's irrelevancy is making them less appealing or simply a Lady Gaga vs. Stevie Nicks debate? I'm confused. Because, if it is the latter, I'll hand it to Ms. Nicks simply because I find her music to have a lot more heart in it than that other chic. However, this is all completely based on the fact that I really like Stevie Nicks and Lady Gaga isn't quite comparable.

But (once again) I TOTALLY DISAGREE with the people that are saying it is Stevie, and only Stevie, who is preventing FM from being boring. Uh...huh? I guess it goes with the territory of complete biasness in Stevie's favor but I would hardly consider Lindsey, his music, or his performances boring. I mean, really.:rolleyes:

I also agree that it's strange to "replace" artists because they aren't doing something new and fresh. Why can't we just love a song because it rocks or is beautiful and not expect any more from it than that? Why does it always have to be about some kind of movement or whatever is "hip?" I realize that it makes sense to feel a connection to something when it corresponds to a time or a moment, but is that a really valid reason to consider an artist relevant over another?

I go back and listen to a lot of things I used to rave about in my youth, that were connected to some period and realize now I can't really enjoy the song because it's meaning is so topical and dated that I have a hard time separating that from the music. Nowadays, I listen to music to just enjoy the music, the voice, the words and not expect it to be pertinent to things happening in the world. I can attach my own interpretation, but it doesn't have to be a popular song with words about such and such to sway me. I mean, I LOVE artists who make statement songs, but I can also really appreciate the Scissor Sister because they make me dance.:shrug:

And Fleetwood Mac is a timeless, classic rock band that (I feel) anybody should be proud to be a fan of and own records of. They have beautiful songs, consistent albums, and they put on great live shows. I don't feel they are resting on their laurels when I see how much effort they put into showcasing the songs that have really been a part of people's lives. I think it's lovely and I love loving them, quite frankly. But please...if Lady Gaga is more your thing...by all means replace them with her.

[iamnotafraid]

In response to the opening post, Stevie said she's relieved you've moved on, because she never liked you and the strain of faking it was killing her. She like to return the teddy bear and your fan letters, which she corrected herself with a red pen. And, yes, she'd like to confirm your longheld suspicion about that Edge walk in '98. She did purposely recoil from your pleading, out-stretched hand. She didn't know where it had been. That, and the fan-gifted crystal ball/snow globe in her other hand had just predicted your future betrayal, so her gesture was intended to haunt.

This made The Ledge worth visiting today.

[shackin'up]

First of all, who the **** is this Duffy? I never said anything about a "Duffy." I said "Lady GaGa has won over my heart." And to the person who responded to me liking Duffy after the original poster of the whole "Duffy" comment, maybe if you took the time to read my post in it's entirety before commenting you wouldn't have made that comment and sounded like a dumbass who has no idea what's being discussed.

Secondly, yes, I am twenty-years old so I admit that I don't quite fit the age group for the average Fleetwood Mac fan but I still appreciate their music, I'm just disappointed in what they've ultimately become.

Thirdly, the fact that I misspelled irrelevant is your main argument? Why did you even bother to post?

And finally, I was not dissing Stevie Nicks because honestly, it's Stevie Nicks who's still kept the band from becoming a total bore.

Also, to the person who spent probably five minutes writing that paragraph on how Stevie is relieved that she doesn't have to bear the burden of me being her fan...what a total waste of time on your part.

I've made my peace...for now. :wavey:

My first argument was that I agreed with you that FM has become irrelevant. Case closed. Gaga, Duffy, whaever. :shrug: You should go over to Gaga's board and stop posting about an oldfarty band that has actually played an important role in our lives. Let Gaga stuff your Duffy and leave us with our geriatric patients.

[mylittledemon]

First of all, who the **** is this Duffy? I never said anything about a "Duffy." I said "Lady GaGa has won over my heart." And to the person who responded to me liking Duffy after the original poster of the whole "Duffy" comment, maybe if you took the time to read my post in it's entirety before commenting you wouldn't have made that comment and sounded like a dumbass who has no idea what's being discussed.

Secondly, yes, I am twenty-years old so I admit that I don't quite fit the age group for the average Fleetwood Mac fan but I still appreciate their music, I'm just disappointed in what they've ultimately become.

Thirdly, the fact that I misspelled irrelevant is your main argument? Why did you even bother to post?

And finally, I was not dissing Stevie Nicks because honestly, it's Stevie Nicks who's still kept the band from becoming a total bore.

Also, to the person who spent probably five minutes writing that paragraph on how Stevie is relieved that she doesn't have to bear the burden of me being her fan...what a total waste of time on your part.

I've made my peace...for now. :wavey:

Everything you've said is a matter of opinion. For me, it's Buckingham of late that's kept Fleetwood Mac from being boring. Go back and give a listen to TUSK, or RUMOURS...or even the white Fleetwood Mac album. Renew your love, and relevancy, for the MAC.

[michelej1]

P.S. In response to the opening post, Stevie said she's relieved you've moved on, because she never liked you and the strain of faking it was killing her. She like to return the teddy bear and your fan letters, which she corrected herself with a red pen. And, yes, she'd like to confirm your longheld suspicion about that Edge walk in '98. She did purposely recoil from your pleading, out-stretched hand. She didn't know where it had been. That, and the fan-gifted crystal ball/snow globe in her other hand had just predicted your future betrayal, so her gesture was intended to haunt.

The red pen was an especially nice touch, because it reminded me of what Stevie said about Mick's book.

Michele

[David]

The red pen was an especially nice touch, because it reminded me of what Stevie said about Mick's book.

MicheleI forgot.....what did she say? Something about taking a red pen to Mick's manuscript?

[skuncles]

It comes down to this, the original poster said he's 22, so my guess is his first "taste" of Fleetwood Mac probably came with "The Dance". Like most people who discover a band they believe (albiet briefly) that whichever album they first hear is the bands first album. They then hope they can enjoy the ride not realizing that the ride is almost over.
Fleetwood Mac's impact was in the 70's if you missed it, then that's too bad. They aren't trying to be relevant to today's music buying public, they are doing what they want, when they want. They aren't trying to get a #1 album or single because they know it's not going to happen. They just go out and do it because they want to not because they have to. They don't need to try and make a name for themselves, they've already done that. Your GaGa's and Duffy's etc are new artists, so they are heading down the roads that others have already paved a long time ago.
Fleetwood Mac is not trying to appeal to a 20 something year old. This isn't to say that can't, it's just that those aren't the people they are trying to please. I guess they could be like the other bands from the 70's who are still racing up the charts and scoring #1 albums and singles and are wowing the Hannah Montana generation like.....um....uh....hmmm....oh yeah there aren't any!!!!

[michelej1]

I forgot.....what did she say? Something about taking a red pen to Mick's manuscript?

She said she'd be marking it: not true, never happened, BIG LIE.

She's a droll doll, when she wants to be.

Michele

[Musicman408]

Looks like I need to do some research on Lady Gaga because I don't know anything about her music.

Only thing I know she and Stevie have in common are their first names.

[iamnotafraid]

wowing the Hannah Montana generation

Wasn't there someone on here with insider information about Hannah Montana (Miley) joining Fleetwood Mac?

[golddustdrummer]

Lady Gaga...her music, like much of today's top 40 that is being force-fed to MY generation (yes I'm 21), is of absolutely no substance. She is a passing fad just like all the other technicolor clad idiots. She is just a rip off of all the other pop singers now. Wow, she is a trendsetter...she dresses in ways that would make a drag queen blush. Real music (like Fleetwood Mac) is everlasting and timeless. In five years, people will say Lady who? she is already tired and worn out...Just Dance? just give up.

the new Stevie Nicks? that is just blasphemous

[Nico]

Looks like I need to do some research on Lady Gaga because I don't know anything about her music.

Only thing I know she and Stevie have in common are their first names.

My brother's wife claims to have lost all her baby weight by simultaneously dancing to this Lady Gaga woman and doing the wii Fit. So...:shrug: There's some legitimate good in her I guess.

I found this quote from her:
"I’m quite sure that if it were 1968 I may not be the Lady GaGa that I am today...I might be arguing with Yoko Ono and trying to win John Lennon’s heart and chasing The Beatles in a bus on LSD, hoping that one of them hands me a microphone one day," she added.

And then a pic with the Pet Shop Boys and Brandon Flowers:
http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/The+Brit+Awards+2009+Show+9Vgv7zCcqyil.jpg

So she has some good taste and can't dress for *&%. But I'll have to actually sit through her stuff a little more attentively to really understand her greatness I suppose.

[skuncles]

This is just weird. Lady GaGa is on the cover of this week's "Rolling Stone" magazine wearing bubbles. A buddy of mine saw the magazine in my kitchen this afternoon and said "Is that Stevie Nicks!?" So maybe GaGa IS the new Stevie!!! ;P

[ShangriLaTroubl]

Just the simple fact that the person who created this thread is leaving the Mac for LADY GAGA makes HIM/HER irrelevant..give me a break, Lady GaGa? "Where are my keys I lost my phone?" Yeah her sounds are catchy, but there's not much substance there, just because she dresses like catwoman.

[David]

Lady GaGa is on the cover of this week's "Rolling Stone" magazine wearing bubbles.I hope they dub her "The Reigning Queen of Rock & Roll" so we can finally put into perspective a 28-year-old headline concocted by an associate editor.

As for GaGa, what's with the babytalk? Is it a tribute to the old Queen song?

[newyawka]

Just the simple fact that the person who created this thread is leaving the Mac for LADY GAGA makes HIM/HER irrelevant..give me a break, Lady GaGa? "Where are my keys I lost my phone?" Yeah her sounds are catchy, but there's not much substance there, just because she dresses like catwoman.

Okay, no substance there? Maybe lyrically, yes. But the impact that song has had on culture so far is substantial enough. You're basing the substance of her lyrics on one song, though. Try listening to other's such as "Paper Gangsta," "Paparazzi," "Brown Eyes."

Plus the "Poker Face" lyric:

"Russian roulette is not the same without a gun
And baby if it's love if it's not rough it isn't fun"

That's a great ****in' lyric if I ever did hear one.

And yes, she was called GaGa in reference to the Freddie Mercury song. She stuck with the name and became famous with it.

[jedw]

Im sorry but lady Gaga is a waste of oxygen.

Dont get me wrong, I dislike arguments on forums where people wade in with their opinions and upset everyone. But come on.

its like saying your ringtone is the new Mozart.

[Dodfather]

It comes down to this, the original poster said he's 22, so my guess is his first "taste" of Fleetwood Mac probably came with "The Dance". Like most people who discover a band they believe (albiet briefly) that whichever album they first hear is the bands first album. They then hope they can enjoy the ride not realizing that the ride is almost over.
Fleetwood Mac's impact was in the 70's if you missed it, then that's too bad. They aren't trying to be relevant to today's music buying public, they are doing what they want, when they want. They aren't trying to get a #1 album or single because they know it's not going to happen. They just go out and do it because they want to not because they have to. They don't need to try and make a name for themselves, they've already done that. Your GaGa's and Duffy's etc are new artists, so they are heading down the roads that others have already paved a long time ago.
Fleetwood Mac is not trying to appeal to a 20 something year old. This isn't to say that can't, it's just that those aren't the people they are trying to please. I guess they could be like the other bands from the 70's who are still racing up the charts and scoring #1 albums and singles and are wowing the Hannah Montana generation like.....um....uh....hmmm....oh yeah there aren't any!!!!

Isn't this exactly what Stevie said in the Destiny Rules documentary as regards a double album and the (really rather tame) "fight" with Lindsey about it?

I would LOVE the Mac to be more productive but not for reasons of relevancy, just because I'm a fan! None of the huge bands churn out an album every 2 years any more, look at The Rolling Stones.

An argument can also be made for the Mac's (or maybe more specifically Stevie's) current importance by the Perez Hilton coverage (featured earlier on this board). Perez Hilton, like him or laothe him, is a cultural product that is very relevant for our times and he features Stevie fairly regualrly.

Oh, and I'm 26.

[BTFLCHLD]

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a152/BTFLCHLD/MISC/SIGH.jpg

[shackin'up]

Ok, now I've researched Lady GaGa and laughed my duck out of my punts. That is that pokerface-onedayfly bull!!!! Hahahaha, calling me a dumbass has gathered a completely new meaning!!!

Oh my what a crackerjoke. You should have stuck with my Duffy-misunderstanding. Duffy has ten times more class. And the music of Pokerface is build on the biggest selling musical joke of the seventies: Ma Baker by Boney M. Oh my what are you doing on a Fleetwood Mac-board? :shrug: Chew bubblegum and buy some happy hardcore from the early nineties. Maybe you could organise an Aqua reunion and sing Barbiegirl with your friends.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Ooh my, you are some Newyawka....

Radio Gaga, radio googoo. Man, I love Queen, but there were times that even they went overboard. What a crap.

[shackin'up]

http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/The+Brit+Awards+2009+Show+9Vgv7zCcqyil.jpg



Oh my God, what a bunch of morons. Anyone who takes these phoney empty flatheads serious can call me dumbass all day and all night long.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Oh my, I'm choking here.

[GoldDustOrphan]

Musically, Lady GaGa and Stevie come from very different places, and both have completely different perspectives and goals. For me, Stevie hits every button that I possess. GaGa knows where one or two of those buttons are, but she hits them every time. Even when she's drunk and it's dark in club. It's the difference between a decades-long romance that inspires a novel and a passionate summer fling that fills out the three naughtiest pages you've ever read.

I don't feel the need to judge one's merits against the other's. One has been thrilling me for 28 years, and her music has been present during at key moments in my life. The other has put out one CD.

In her defense, GaGa is vastly superior to the pop chicks she's being compared to. One can despise her music - it's all subjective - but it's unfair to label someone as talentless when they can play piano, sing on key, produce records (they're own and for others), and write songs, including two number one hits. That takes some kind of skill. Below is video of her deconstructing her electro-pop #1 hit Poker Face. Just voice and piano...
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nwdXnlvUe3I&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nwdXnlvUe3I&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[David]

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a152/BTFLCHLD/MISC/SIGH.jpgUh-oh. You're communicating in images again.

[David]

An argument can also be made for the Mac's (or maybe more specifically Stevie's) current importance by the Perez Hilton coverage (featured earlier on this board). Perez Hilton, like him or laothe him, is a cultural product that is very relevant for our times and he features Stevie fairly regualrly.Nobody has yet adequately defined relevance. We're tossing that word around like a pizza dough.

So I'm forced to extrapolate a definition based on context. Perez Hilton is "very relevant for our times," according to Dodfather. But the only substantially large demographic that knows Perez is the teens on the Internet. The middle-aged & on don't know anything about him. My conclusion: relevance is a function of wide recognition only among the young?

That's not logical. But it is very typical of the solipsism of the young.

[Glittermoondust]

Musically, Lady GaGa and Stevie come from very different places, and both have completely different perspectives and goals. For me, Stevie hits every button that I possess. GaGa knows where one or two of those buttons are, but she hits them every time. Even when she's drunk and it's dark in club. It's the difference between a decades-long romance that inspires a novel and a passionate summer fling that fills out the three naughtiest pages you've ever read.

I don't feel the need to judge one's merits against the other's. One has been thrilling me for 28 years, and her music has been present during at key moments in my life. The other has put out one CD.

In her defense, GaGa is vastly superior to the pop chicks she's being compared to. One can despise her music - it's all subjective - but it's unfair to label someone as talentless when they can play piano, sing on key, produce records (they're own and for others), and write songs, including two number one hits. That takes some kind of skill. Below is video of her deconstructing her electro-pop #1 hit Poker Face. Just voice and piano...
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nwdXnlvUe3I&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nwdXnlvUe3I&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

okay never heard of this Lady Gaga person......... watched the video out of curiosity..... reminds me of a cross between Pink and Amy Winehouse--yuk!! Sorry didn't even make it through the whole video.... comparing her to Stevie is kind of insulting........sorry :shrug: Maybe I'll be eating my words someday but I doubt it......

[trackaghost]

And then a pic with the Pet Shop Boys and Brandon Flowers:
http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/The+Brit+Awards+2009+Show+9Vgv7zCcqyil.jpg


:laugh: Oh dear.

[trackaghost]

Nobody has yet adequately defined relevance. We're tossing that word around like a pizza dough.

So I'm forced to extrapolate a definition based on context. Perez Hilton is "very relevant for our times," according to Dodfather. But the only substantially large demographic that knows Perez is the teens on the Internet. The middle-aged & on don't know anything about him. My conclusion: relevance is a function of wide recognition only among the young?

That's not logical. But it is very typical of the solipsism of the young.

I think newyawka is very much defining relevance that way. Lady GaGa is instantly recognisable to "the kids" while most youngsters don't know who the Mac are because they aren't producing banging tunes you can download to your phone and impress your friends with on the school bus.

[Glittermoondust]

okay watched another video........ she actually reminds me of Madonna.... I don't see the Stevie comparison AT ALL though--not even close..... :shrug:

[Regina]

Nobody has yet adequately defined relevance. We're tossing that word around like a pizza dough.

So I'm forced to extrapolate a definition based on context. Perez Hilton is "very relevant for our times," according to Dodfather. But the only substantially large demographic that knows Perez is the teens on the Internet. The middle-aged & on don't know anything about him. My conclusion: relevance is a function of wide recognition only among the young?

That's not logical. But it is very typical of the solipsism of the young.

Goal for tomorrow: work in "solipsism" into conversation at least 5 times.
Goal for today: learn how to pronounce "solipsism.":laugh:

[gldstwmn]

Im sorry but lady Gaga is a waste of oxygen.

Dont get me wrong, I dislike arguments on forums where people wade in with their opinions and upset everyone. But come on.

its like saying your ringtone is the new Mozart.

I like Just Dance. I saw her on DWTS and liked her fun performance. But comparing her to Stevie is like comparing noodles to peas. They have little in common. But to the OP, way to provoke a discussion!

[macpai]

You know what's also irrelevant? Spelling.

[gldstwmn]

You know what's also irrelevant? Spelling.

Sorry. My left pinky finger is broken. I'm doing the best I can over here. :laugh:

[newyawka]

David: Yes, relevance is determined by the young. Jealous? ;)

Onto other things...

While Lady GaGa is probably easier to compare to Madonna than Stevie Nicks in terms of musical style and fashion, I think it's Lady GaGa's originality and creativity that's comparable to Stevie and to me that's more important in an artist. I love Madonna, don't get me wrong, but Madonna is a product to me, she's not an artist. Stevie is an artist we can all agree on that, yes. Lady GaGa is an artist, as well. She thoughtfully takes the time out to create her own show, her own outfits, and her own songs. Just as Stevie does.

[trackaghost]

If relevance is only determined by the young than this is the most stupid argument ever. How many teenagers think 30-year-old bands are relevant in the first place?
As for Lady GaGa, she's been in the spotlight for a whole five months. Given the amount of fads and fashions that come and go, whether she'll be "relevant" in a year's time is very hard to determine. Most likely the press, bloggers and whoever decides these things these days, will move on to the next big thing. But I guess we'll see. As I've said before there have been plenty of singers who are momentarily relevant that saw that very quickly disappear despite their "artistry".
At the end of the day this thread is ridiculous. Lady GaGa has no connection whatsoever to Fleetwood Mac. I may as well start up 20 other threads comparing them to random artists. "Fleetwood Mac are not as relevant as MGMT" or "Fleetwood Mac are not as relevant as Lily Allen" etc, etc.

[Nico]

Oh my God, what a bunch of morons. Anyone who takes these phoney empty flatheads serious can call me dumbass all day and all night long.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Oh my, I'm choking here.

Hmmm...well, I take Brandon Flowers seriously, no matter how overblown his ego. I adore his talent, love his band, and prefer to avoid any of his silly little boy declarations because he's quite fantastic. Lady Gaga? Eh. Pet Shop Boys? I can dig them.

Music is subjective.:shrug: One person's Stevie Nicks is, I guess, another person's Lady Gaga. I don't understand that, and I may not really agree, but I pretty much have to accept that it exists. :)

[David]

David: Yes, relevance is determined by the young. Jealous? ;)Well, yes.

I know you're just kidding with me, but I want to add one more point. Relevance as you define it -- what used to be known as flash-in-the-pan popularity -- isn't even determined by the young, strictly speaking. The young (what a weird noun) react to marketing. They go nuts for the singers whose cute faces are plastered all over the celebrity magazines. That's why the biggest sellers in pop are not & have never been the underground bands, because those bands don't have the publicity that Britney & Madonna have, which stretches around the globe & bombards young listeners with nonstop sounds & images. So we're left defining "relevance" as that which is marketed the most heavily. Publicity & public relations employees are the fundamental determiners in this matter. What a comforting thought!

I think pop culture has pulled the rug out from under us all.

Stevie is an artist we can all agree on that, yes. No. I disagree.

[skuncles]

David: Yes, relevance is determined by the young. Jealous? ;)

Onto other things...

While Lady GaGa is probably easier to compare to Madonna than Stevie Nicks in terms of musical style and fashion, I think it's Lady GaGa's originality and creativity that's comparable to Stevie and to me that's more important in an artist. I love Madonna, don't get me wrong, but Madonna is a product to me, she's not an artist. Stevie is an artist we can all agree on that, yes. Lady GaGa is an artist, as well. She thoughtfully takes the time out to create her own show, her own outfits, and her own songs. Just as Stevie does.

Ok to say that Madonna is not an artist is kind of stupid. Like her or hate her she opened up the door for others such as GaGa. Back before you were born there was a channel on cable called "MTV", it showed nothing but music videos. The channel is still on most cable boxes, but it has very little if any music content. But back in the day, MTV was ALL music 24/7 and music videos made up 98% of it's programming (the other 2% was music news and concerts). You would go to the school and discuss with your friends various videos you saw. Madonna came along with a new image for each video and she did a video for every single released. She wrote or co-wrote her songs, she produced or co-produced her albums and she came up with her image as well.
I'm not a huge Madonna fan, but trying to explain her to people who only know her from what she's done in the past five or ten years is nearly impossible. I was 12 when Madonna came out with "Borderline" so I watched how she went from nothing to having every girl in school dress like her and every guy wanting the girls to dress like her. I watched as people actually debated as to who was better Madonna or Cyndi Lauper. Watched as she came out with "Like A Prayer" and pissed off A LOT of people. An issue of Rolling Stone with Madonna on the cover actually caused a major uproar at my high school when the issue was removed from the school library because of a photo of Madonna inside, which was seen as inappropriate for teen agers to look at. Lady GaGa is far more in line with Madonna than Stevie. Stevie has even said that she could have been Madonna, but had no interest in that. I have a feeling that GaGa would rather be Madonna than Stevie.

[newyawka]

That's why the biggest sellers in pop are not & have never been the underground bands, because those bands don't have the publicity that Britney & Madonna have, which stretches around the globe & bombards young listeners with nonstop sounds & images.

Lady GaGa began her career in the New York underground. Then she began writing pop songs about her life as an underground artist and made her claim to fame that way.

I watched as people actually debated as to who was better Madonna or Cyndi Lauper.

I would definately have to pick Cyndi Lauper in that debate.

[iamnotafraid]

I would definately have to pick Cyndi Lauper in that debate.

But the more important question is, where does Duffy fit into all
of this?

[David]

Lady GaGa began her career in the New York underground. Then she began writing pop songs about her life as an underground artist and made her claim to fame that way.A lot of wildly popular singers started small. That's not what I said. Let's not mince words. I said that an enormous promotional machine undergirds every hugely popular singer or band. To the extent that Stevie Nicks, or Lady GaGa, or the Fray, or anyone else is hugely popular, it's a function of marketing.

You tied relevance to popularity in the here & now, & I'm merely tying popularity in the here & now to publicity.

[golddustdrummer]

Back before you were born there was a channel on cable called "MTV", it showed nothing but music videos. The channel is still on most cable boxes, but it has very little if any music content. But back in the day, MTV was ALL music 24/7 and music videos made up 98% of it's programming (the other 2% was music news and concerts). You would go to the school and discuss with your friends various videos you saw.

While I in no way agree with the whole Lady Gaga, Stevie Nicks comparison newyawka made...you are coming off as a little condescending. As someone in the age group of 18-25, I can say that not all of us are completely clueless as to what MTV used to be. :wavey:

[fleetwoodtrick]

Are you off your nut!? Lady Gag the new Stevie!? Stevie's not dead, as she's expressed in many interviews. Lady Gag is totally creepy. All of her songs have some sort of perverted meaning behind them. Her songs are catchy, but shes NO Stevie.

[chriskisn]

Are you off your nut!? Lady Gag the new Stevie!? Stevie's not dead, as she's expressed in many interviews. Lady Gag is totally creepy. All of her songs have some sort of perverted meaning behind them. Her songs are catchy, but shes NO Stevie.

Give me Lily Allen any day... ;)

[fleetwoodtrick]

Give me Lily Allen any day... ;)

Oh, ho, don't even get me started on her! :laugh:

[Nico]

Oh, ho, don't even get me started on her! :laugh:

Lily Allen is a mess.

Now, what ever happened to Amy Winehouse? I'd say she seemed a bit more talented than Lady Gaga. Did she ever actually go to rehab? Is she still alive? I've wondered that for a few months but never bothered to research it. I really loved that song You Know I'm No Good.

[chriskisn]

Lily Allen is a mess.

Now, what ever happened to Amy Winehouse? I'd say she seemed a bit more talented than Lady Gaga. Did she ever actually go to rehab? Is she still alive? I've wondered that for a few months but never bothered to research it. I really loved that song You Know I'm No Good.

Actually of all the new acts out there today, pretty much the only two I like are Lily Allen and Amy Winehouse. Amy is very talented (pity about everything else though)

[newyawka]

But the more important question is, where does Duffy fit into all
of this?

Again, who the f--k is Duffy?

[sjpdg]

Nobody has yet adequately defined relevance. We're tossing that word around like a pizza dough.

.

Much like yourself throwing around the "Hanslick Syndrome" on other posts here and not defining it or showing its relevance to the topic being discussed?? Please!! You crack me up!!

Are you a psych major or do you look these words up in a thesarus just to make yourself sound important??:laugh:

[chriskisn]

Again, who the f--k is Duffy?

Where have you been? The album is called Rockferry. Duffy is a poor second to Amy Winehouse...

[Dodfather]

While I in no way agree with the whole Lady Gaga, Stevie Nicks comparison newyawka made...you are coming off as a little condescending. As someone in the age group of 18-25, I can say that not all of us are completely clueless as to what MTV used to be. :wavey:

Absolutely. The Lady Gaga/Stevie comparison is somewhat odd (but bearing in mind that all criticism of it is subjective then who are we to say?) but the fact that you tie it entirely to the age of the original poster and then use that fact, something that no-one can help, as a tool to patronise is really not on. Like the poster above, I am under 30 and far from clueless.

In my original reply I was also not saying that relevance is entirely dictated by someone's age. Instead I was trying to make the point that Perez Hilton is indicative of a wider "celebrity culture" that, like it or not, dominates so much of the tabloids, internet, music scene etc... That is what I meant by relevant -the fact that Lady Gaga fits much more with that cultural sensibility than Stevie does.

[golddustdrummer]

..."celebrity culture" that, like it or not, dominates so much of the tabloids, internet, music scene etc...


eventual downfall of western civilization

[skuncles]

The whole reason for mentioning MTV and one's age was because the post said that Madonna was a product whereas Lady GaGa is an artist. So my point was that Madonna is/was also an artist who has already done everything that GaGa is currently doing. In fact in the latest Rolling Stone issue GaGa mentions Madonna as being an influence on her.
I'm sure there are many who are not clueless and know what's going on. However there are just as many who don't realize that people like Lady GaGa and others are nothing new. A few years ago when the Backstreet Boys and NSync were huge and everyone was saying how they are the best things since sliced bread someone at MTV said "We all saw the New Kids On The Block story, we all know how this ends!!"
That's all I was getting at, that this Lady GaGa is the flavor of the moment. She'll be big for awhile and then fade away. I don't see her becoming another Madonna. That's how the world of pop works.

[golddustdrummer]

I absolutely agree with you...but the MTV thing just rubbed me the wrong way (might have just been my mood yesterday lol). I vaguely remember MTV playing nothing but music videos. Then the Real World hit and everything turned to sh*t. Although I will confess to watching a couple seasons, but it just got to the point where I felt as though I was watching soft core porn with all the making out naked in the hot tub scenes.

call me a prude, but that is just raunchy.

[FMlex]

For the love of all that is holy.... can we stop talking about Lady Gaga now??

May I remind you that this is a Fleetwood Mac fan board and while no one is stopping any of you from discussing other artists, we're specifically in the Rumours group board here.
If you want to compare and contrast Stevie to these other yahoos, then fine, but can you do it over in the Stevie board?
Sheesh...

Sorry but this thread is getting a little annoying! :rolleyes:

[Fannymac]

Interesting.....the LA Times review said the exact opposite....that the band is still VERY relevant, with a lot of potential tricks still up their sleeves (or hidden in their shawls, as the case may be!)

And I agree with the others who stated that we should just wait and see where Lady GaGa is in 35 years!:laugh:

[TheScoop]

Oh my God, what a bunch of morons. Anyone who takes these phoney empty flatheads serious can call me dumbass all day and all night long.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Oh my, I'm choking here.

Good, keep choking. Trashing other artists and calling them "morons" simply because they do not appeal to your musical tastes is pretty "dumbass" in my opinion. I saw The Killers in concert a few weeks back and their show made the Fleetwood Mac concert I saw look like a complete debacle. Of course, that's just my opinion. At least Brandon Flowers cares enough about his fans to genuinely interact with them and perform "in the moment" instead of going through the motions like a drone in an attempt to milk the tit of a cash cow that has been dead and buried for at least a decade now.

If you know nothing about the artists you are bashing, then say nothing. Just because they may look like "phoneys" to you, doesn't mean they are. I went to the Stevie "let me continue to take advantage of my fans that have been waiting for something new for 8 years" Nicks CD/DVD signing back in March and let me tell you, that is one of the biggest "phoneys" I have ever had the displeasure of meeting in my life.

[trackaghost]

:lol: You're right, hoping someone chokes is so much nicer than calling outrageous outfits moronic and famous people phonies.
Knowing Shackin' Up I'm pretty sure he's familiar with The Killers, Brandon Flowers and his feathers (whose derivative stadium rock does nothing for me personally).
I also think he was mainly referring to Lady GaGa and her utterly ridiculous outfit in that photo.

[nailatixela]

If you know nothing about the artists you are bashing, then say nothing. Just because they may look like "phoneys" to you, doesn't mean they are. I went to the Stevie "let me continue to take advantage of my fans that have been waiting for something new for 8 years" Nicks CD/DVD signing back in March and let me tell you, that is one of the biggest "phoneys" I have ever had the displeasure of meeting in my life.

You know a lot of people missed out on that once in a life time chance - so if you were not happy about going know that a lot of people were angry that they couldn't. Thanks again for bringing "The Scoop" to the ledge. I can diss things the Mac do, sure. But negativity in every post (or info without sources) is so stupid - if you're not into the band why do you waste your time here?

You confuse me. I guess I just can't read your poker face. ;)

[Nico]

Good, keep choking. Trashing other artists and calling them "morons" simply because they do not appeal to your musical tastes is pretty "dumbass" in my opinion. I saw The Killers in concert a few weeks back and their show made the Fleetwood Mac concert I saw look like a complete debacle. Of course, that's just my opinion. At least Brandon Flowers cares enough about his fans to genuinely interact with them and perform "in the moment" instead of going through the motions like a drone in an attempt to milk the tit of a cash cow that has been dead and buried for at least a decade now.


Ooohh, I agree with you re: The Killers and how amazing their show is. I have been a fan of theirs for years, so their absolute amazing-ness is hardly a revelation, but I realize others probably don't get them and definitely wouldn't get Brandon in all his wear-your-heart-on-your-sleeve, self-centered, and egotistical greatness. Just know that your opinion is shared by many...certainly myself, who is making it a point to go to the Lollapoalooza just to see them again.:nod:

But FM's show? " Complete debacle??!!?" I respectfully disagree. I found that concert experience to be absolutely mesmerizing. I was blown away by the artistry and care they put into their performances. Yes, Stevie was a little slower and possibly not as "into" some of the songs, but I sincerely didn't feel that loss. I said that the day I posted my reviews: I wasn't expecting her to come out doing high-kicks and belting 2 minute-long notes. I came in expecting to see a 60 year-old dame do her thing and I saw she still has a lot of it. And Lindsey? Puhlease. I love Brandon Flowers but even he couldn't keep me as transfixed as that man. I truly thought I got every penny's worth. Even when I had the not-so-great seats that I paid quite a bit for, where I was surrounded by 2 women and 1 guy wearing capes and banging on tambourines while simultaneously twirling and playing air guitar...it was an incredible experience.

I'm sorry you didn't feel that way.:wavey: I wish, though, for everyone's sake that we all kind of come to a truce with regards to people's musical tastes. I didn't take too much offense when Brandon Flowers was called a moron, because he doesn't make it easier for himself the way he dresses, and quite frankly the Pet Shop Boys are color-blind...but still, anyone has a right to get a little miffed if that's an artist they really love. So I apologize to anyone I may have hurt by my complete non-interest in Lady Gaga's musical output. I will try to be more sensitive in the future.

[RockALittle250]

Good, keep choking. Trashing other artists and calling them "morons" simply because they do not appeal to your musical tastes is pretty "dumbass" in my opinion. I saw The Killers in concert a few weeks back and their show made the Fleetwood Mac concert I saw look like a complete debacle. Of course, that's just my opinion. At least Brandon Flowers cares enough about his fans to genuinely interact with them and perform "in the moment" instead of going through the motions like a drone in an attempt to milk the tit of a cash cow that has been dead and buried for at least a decade now.

If you know nothing about the artists you are bashing, then say nothing. Just because they may look like "phoneys" to you, doesn't mean they are. I went to the Stevie "let me continue to take advantage of my fans that have been waiting for something new for 8 years" Nicks CD/DVD signing back in March and let me tell you, that is one of the biggest "phoneys" I have ever had the displeasure of meeting in my life.

I HIGHLY doubt that someone with your level of disgust towards Stevie Nicks would wait hours in line to meet her, just to come on here and tell us what a "phoney" she really is. Why are you on this forum if you hate her and the band so much?? I'm pretty sure we all know the answer to that though...troll.

[David]

Why are you on this forum if you hate her and the band so much??Well, I hang out at the Ledge because I like talking to ledgies.

[RockALittle250]

Well, I hang out at the Ledge because I like talking to ledgies.

Well David, you can be pretty critical sometimes, but deep down we all know you love the band as much as the rest of us. :nod:

[shackin'up]

. .

Like I said: You take them serious, so You can call me a dumbass all day and all night long!! :blob2::blob1::blob2::blob1:


:laugh::laugh:

Look again at that picture: even if their music was brilliant: there's a bunch of idiots on that pic. They look like a troop of retarded playing popstar on a sundayafternoon.


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

And I keep on choking!!! :woohoo:

[shackin'up]

I also think he was mainly referring to Lady GaGa and her utterly ridiculous outfit in that photo.

Not to mention Those pet-shop phoneys. I grew up with those piles of chewinggum.

[shackin'up]

http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/The+Brit+Awards+2009+Show+9Vgv7zCcqyil.jpg

.

Oh come on people. Look at it again.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

WHAHAHAHAHAHA

[MoonWaterPoet]

Lady Gag does not compare to Stevie at all... IMHO... Lady Gag looks like Judy Jetson from the Jetsons' on Crack!!! LOL!!!


Donnie Wayne ~

[LukeA]

Oh come on people. Look at it again.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

WHAHAHAHAHAHA

I liked her better when she called herself Dale Bozzio.

OOOOOOHHH HOW RELEVANT

She needs to sell about 10M more albums to recoup her label's advance for expenses thus far. After the second album tanks, bye bye Lady GaGa.

[Lindsey Jr.]

Lady Gaga is overhyped and I hate her music. I'd take FM... and Christina Aguilera every day.

[newyawka]

Sorry but this thread is getting a little annoying! :rolleyes:

As are you.

Interesting.....the LA Times review said the exact opposite....that the band is still VERY relevant, with a lot of potential tricks still up their sleeves (or hidden in their shawls, as the case may be!)

I’ll believe it when I see it!

I saw The Killers in concert a few weeks back and their show made the Fleetwood Mac concert I saw look like a complete debacle.

“Let’s go see The Killers and make out in the bleachers.”

-Lady GaGa, “Boys Boys Boys”

I also think he was mainly referring to Lady GaGa and her utterly ridiculous outfit in that photo.

Like Stevie Nicks hasn’t had utterly ridiculous outfits in the past and the present?

You confuse me. I guess I just can't read your poker face. ;)

Good one. ;)

But FM's show? " Complete debacle??!!?" I respectfully disagree. I found that concert experience to be absolutely mesmerizing. I was blown away by the artistry and care they put into their performances. Yes, Stevie was a little slower and possibly not as "into" some of the songs, but I sincerely didn't feel that loss. I said that the day I posted my reviews: I wasn't expecting her to come out doing high-kicks and belting 2 minute-long notes. I came in expecting to see a 60 year-old dame do her thing and I saw she still has a lot of it. And Lindsey? Puhlease. I love Brandon Flowers but even he couldn't keep me as transfixed as that man. I truly thought I got every penny's worth. Even when I had the not-so-great seats that I paid quite a bit for, where I was surrounded by 2 women and 1 guy wearing capes and banging on tambourines while simultaneously twirling and playing air guitar...it was an incredible experience.

I agree with you, Fleetwood Mac does put on a fantastically entertaining show. I just wish they did more new things in the studio.

[LukeA]

“Let’s go see The Killers and make out in the bleachers.”

-Lady GaGa, “Boys Boys Boys”


OMG HOW PRESCIENT

[sjpdg]

Well David, you can be pretty critical sometimes, but deep down we all know you love the band as much as the rest of us. :nod:

I personally wonder about that idea myself. Not only critical of the band but of other posters such as ourselves.

[sjpdg]

Well, I hang out at the Ledge because I like talking to ledgies.


By the way, how's that whole "Hanslick Syndrome" thing coming? Any explanation as to its relevance to this site coming anytime soon? Or should be just wait for more psychobabble on some other topic?

Just curious.

Cheers!!:thumbsup:

[chiliD]

Are you a psych major or do you look these words up in a thesarus just to make yourself sound important??:laugh:

His last name IS "Thesaurus"...he IS important. Read, consume, learn from him. :nod:

[Street_Dreamer]

Something I just read concerning Lady GaGa that I found fairly relevant.

Lady Gaga
Right now, you can hear her music over the PA at the health club. Next year, you'll hear it in a dentist's waiting room on the "Lite Hits of the '80s, '90s and Today!" station. Two years from now, you'll hear it at the supermarket. Five years from now, you'll hear it on VH1's Celebrity Fit Club. Ten years from now, you'll hear it in an elevator.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neumann/090603

Matt

[carrie721]

Something I just read concerning Lady GaGa that I found fairly relevant.



http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neumann/090603

Matt

you could say the same thing about many fleetwood mac/stevie/lindsey singles.

i swear i hear lindsey every time i walk in the 99 cent store.

not that i'm defending lady gaga.

[Nico]

Oh come on people. Look at it again.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

WHAHAHAHAHAHA

It is an absurd sight, though. I wonder what prompts her to dress like that. It's quite unflattering and tacky. I totally dislike those feathers, and he insists on wearing that ridiculous jacket every where he goes. He must think it's pretty amazing. The Pet Shop Boys have always looked like two dorks to me. Now they're just two old dorks in wigs. I don't understand their sense of style at all. And the backup dancers behind them look like they're doing some kind of tribal chant. Everyone looks constipated or in the middle of prayer.

But I still love Brandon. He's my boy, even with the feathers.:xoxo:

[Phoenix]

Musically, Lady GaGa and Stevie come from very different places, and both have completely different perspectives and goals. For me, Stevie hits every button that I possess. GaGa knows where one or two of those buttons are, but she hits them every time. Even when she's drunk and it's dark in club. It's the difference between a decades-long romance that inspires a novel and a passionate summer fling that fills out the three naughtiest pages you've ever read.

I don't feel the need to judge one's merits against the other's. One has been thrilling me for 28 years, and her music has been present during at key moments in my life. The other has put out one CD.


THIS was my favorite post out of this entire thread. you are so right.

[GoldDustOrphan]

Thank you.

I only added my two cents to this thread - not to agree that GaGa is some kind of inheritor to Stevie's crown or she's somehow more "relevant," etc. - because I disagree with the initial poster's argument. However, I found it unfair for some to declare GaGa untalented or without merit just because the poster used her in his argument. And it's always a slippery slope to give someone's career an expiration date or to predict longevity based on one's personal likes and dislikes. I've read too many flippant reviews assuring readers that Pop Star X or Y is not just solely responsible for the sorry state of pop music and will most definitely be working as counter help in two years time. I'm still waiting for either Justin Timberlake, Britney Spears, Christina Aquilera, or Mandy Moore to super-size my fries.

If I were a Vegas odds-maker, the cards are in GaGa's favor that she'll maintain some level of success. Performers who write their own hit songs usually stick around longer, or with more consistency than the vast majority of "artists" who rely on the efforts of pricey hit songwriter/producer/production teams. She didn't require Max Martin, Timbaland, etc. to supply her with hits. She was originally hired by Akon to write songs for others. Her recent tour sold out in minutes. Touring and music publishing are where the money's at and she's got both. (The show I attended was 18+ at the House of Blues (capacity: 2,5000).

Her CD has sold 2.4 million physical copies worldwide during its 8 months in release. (To compare: Taylor Swift's Fearless is 2009's top-seller with 1,173,000 units sold since Jan. 1, 2009. Only one other album has move more than a million copies this year and that's Miley Cyrus. GaGa's The Fame has moved just over 900,000 units during that same period, putting it in this year's top five U.S. best-sellers. Collectively, her single sales are astronomical: nearly 8 million paid digital downloads. Her songs have hit number one in over 20 countries.

I'm sure many on this board are only familiar with GaGa's three dance-oriented hit singles, so I can understand why it's easy to dismiss her as another weightless pop star.

Below is download link for a brand new song she recorded with Midway State. It's a cover of the Peter Gabriel/Kate Bush duet "Don't Give Up." It's a better representation of her vocal capability than "Just Dance," "Poker Face" and "Love Game."

Midway State ft. Lady GaGa - Don't Give Up.mp3
http://www.mediafire.com/?43em1gmnggi

and about the wigs and wild costumes: Prior to her first CD, GaGa (who is 23 years old) had three record deals fall apart. She was told she could be a successful songwriter (having written for Britney, Pussycat Dolls & New Kids), but that she didn't have the look the labels wanted. One told her she wasn't someone men would fantasize about or that girls would want to emulate. When she got aggressive about one label sticking to a contract (they only wanted her songs), she was told - right to her face - that she was homely.
Taking a given nickname that was inspired by the Queen song "Radio Gaga," she created a character - similar to past inventions by David Bowie - that some people have really responded to. She's defied the industry standard or expectation of what women should look like. No ever told Bowie, Elton John or Freddie Mercury they were phony for wearing outrageous outfits. It's just part of the theatrical experience that clearly motivates and inspires her, and that joy translates to her fans.

If Stevie packed up her shawls, boots and moon-medallions in an effort to assure critics she's not a caricature, I would call "shenanigans" and alert the world police that something more valuable than the Hope diamond had been stolen.

[shackin'up]

Yeah right.
David Bowie, Freddie Mercury, Elton John, Lady GaGa.

Come on people. Blow the sh*t out of your ears. This cover of Gabriel/Bush's Don't give up proves it. The phoneyness is not only in the outfit. This is deliberately sucking the life out of an emotional duet. Incredible. Not a question of taste. A question of having ears.

[carrie721]

Yeah right.
David Bowie, Freddie Mercury, Elton John, Lady GaGa.

Come on people. Blow the sh*t out of your ears. This cover of Gabriel/Bush's Don't give up proves it. The phoneyness is not only in the outfit. This is deliberately sucking the life out of an emotional duet. Incredible. Not a question of taste. A question of having ears.

just curious what your issues are with the cover.

i love peter gabriel to the point where i almost think he can do no wrong. nothing can compete with the original, but i don't see what's wrong with that cover. i don't love lady gaga, and i've never even heard of the midway state. but saying something is phony is pretty imprecise.

do you think it's overproduced? the original is overproduced. :lol: and i think that vocal was extremely conservative for LG and respectful of the original melody.

in a way, i am playing devil's advocate. i don't get lady gaga, but i am interested in you expressing your music opinions in a more rational way. it gets tiring to hear that so-and-so is phony for no real reason. what are your criteria for "good" music?

[trackaghost]

Personally, I think the male on that track is copying Gabriel's original vocal a little too closely for my taste and Lady GaGa's vocals are big but strangely emotionless.
I find Lady GaGa an interesting character, I actually enjoy her eccentricity, if not her music so much, I think pop needs more of that, but I think it's far too early to say whether or not she's a true artist. I also find it interesting to note that all of her album was co-written.

[GoldDustOrphan]

Come on people. Blow the sh*t out of your ears. This cover of Gabriel/Bush's Don't give up proves it. The phoneyness is not only in the outfit. This is deliberately sucking the life out of an emotional duet. Incredible. Not a question of taste. A question of having ears.

You got me, I don't have ears. I have no taste in music. Thank you for setting me straight. It's like a giant weight has been lifted and I'm feeling hopeful for the first time in my life. How did I get this far without you?

[newyawka]

It is an absurd sight, though. I wonder what prompts her to dress like that. It's quite unflattering and tacky.

What prompts Stevie to dress as she does? Because a lot of what she wears is also absurd, unflattering and, most of all, tacky.

However, I found it unfair for some to declare GaGa untalented or without merit just because the poster used her in his argument. And it's always a slippery slope to give someone's career an expiration date or to predict longevity based on one's personal likes and dislikes.

It seems to me that Lady GaGa threatens them. They are letting their personal fan feelings for Fleetwood Mac cloud their judgment therefore refusing to admit that Fleetwood Mac is o-v-e-r. OVER!

[DigYourGrave]

Oh sweet Moses. I'm all for originality but Gaga is just trying too hard. That picture of her wearing a cross between a babygrow, a swimsuit and a pair of victorian curtains. Honestly. Mystery? I'd say she just looks ridiculous. And I don't have any respect for a female musician who uses the term "glue gunning" to describe her in the er, throws of passion. There's writing clever lyrics about sex and there's being over informative and, quite basically, tacky. I liked her version of Viva La Vida by Coldplay, she is a good musician and you can't take that away from her. But what I don't get is this obsession with dressing like a prostitute from 'Total Recall'..:shrug:

There is no, REPEAT, no musical comparison between Gaga and Stevie. Both sex symbols in their hayday, both chart toppers. Lyrics? Completely different. Vocal technique? TOTALLY different. Melodic Style? Oh HELLLA different.

[DigYourGrave]

[QUOTE]What prompts Stevie to dress as she does? Because a lot of what she wears is also absurd, unflattering and, most of all, tacky.



Are you actually serious? Stevie wears some of the most fabulously tailored and classy outfits Ive ever seen. Tophat excluded, though.


It seems to me that Lady GaGa threatens them. They are letting their personal fan feelings for Fleetwood Mac cloud their judgment therefore refusing to admit that Fleetwood Mac is o-v-e-r. OVER!

Priceless.

Over? Have you seen the new tour? The only thing thats over is your argument owing to your totally uninformed and totally inaccurate summation of The Mac. :laugh:

[DigYourGrave]

Personally, I think the male on that track is copying Gabriel's original vocal a little too closely for my taste and Lady GaGa's vocals are big but strangely emotionless.


Exactly!!! She has no emotion in her mindless songs, whereas Stevie's main appeal in her songs is the amount of heart that goes into them.


Ok, this is the last time I'll post. :laugh:

[newyawka]

To DigYour Grace:

Oh please, Stevie is a big fan of the tack in terms of fashion as far as I'm concerned. 95% of the clothes she has worn are tacky. Why do you think crossdressers emulate her so much?

And just because a band is touring does not mean they aren't over. Maybe to balding middle-aged losers they are not over, but they are just desperately holding onto something that is not there. Like I said before, it's the youth that determines who's over and who's not and Fleetwood Mac is not in the youth's demand.

Stevie said it herself in Destiny Rules, “We have to sell records to [people] between [the ages of] ten to twenty-seven years old. That’s who buys records now. So, they’re not going to buy [our] record, they’re not going to get how deep it is and how serious and how multi-layered it is. They’re not going to buy twenty-two songs on a record from people who are in their fifties. It’s just not going to happen.” Even Stevie know, even the band knows they are over, it's time for you biased die-hard fans to admit it as well.

[MacMan]

To DigYour Grace:

Oh please, Stevie is a big fan of the tack in terms of fashion as far as I'm concerned. 95% of the clothes she has worn are tacky. Why do you think crossdressers emulate her so much?

And just because a band is touring does not mean they aren't over. Maybe to balding middle-aged losers they are not over, but they are just desperately holding onto something that is not there. Like I said before, it's the youth that determines who's over and who's not and Fleetwood Mac is not in the youth's demand.

Stevie said it herself in Destiny Rules, “We have to sell records to [people] between [the ages of] ten to twenty-seven years old. That’s who buys records now. So, they’re not going to buy [our] record, they’re not going to get how deep it is and how serious and how multi-layered it is. They’re not going to buy twenty-two songs on a record from people who are in their fifties. It’s just not going to happen.” Even Stevie know, even the band knows they are over, it's time for you biased die-hard fans to admit it as well.

Having not read this whole thead - and just going by your statement here, how do you explain the Eagles shifting over 3 million cds of a double album in the last couple of years? They are essentially the same age as the members of FM.

[newyawka]

Having not read this whole thead - and just going by your statement here, how do you explain the Eagles shifting over 3 million cds of a double album in the last couple of years? They are essentially the same age as the members of FM.

Well it's also age combined with many other things, marketing for example. I feel that Fleetwood Mac might be able to sell more product if they put themselves out there more but with Stevie's anxiety over the internet and what-not that's probably not going to happen. Fleetwood Mac really needs to get into the whole internet, iTunes, marketing thing in order to survive. They are holding on by a thread.

[sjpdg]

His last name IS "Thesaurus"...he IS important. Read, consume, learn from him. :nod:


:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Ummmmmmm, . . . . . . . . no.

[shackin'up]

You got me, I don't have ears. I have no taste in music. Thank you for setting me straight. It's like a giant weight has been lifted and I'm feeling hopeful for the first time in my life. How did I get this far without you?

It was nothing, you're welcome. :D

[TrueFaith77]

Stevie said it herself in Destiny Rules, “We have to sell records to [people] between [the ages of] ten to twenty-seven years old. That’s who buys records now. So, they’re not going to buy [our] record, they’re not going to get how deep it is and how serious and how multi-layered it is. They’re not going to buy twenty-two songs on a record from people who are in their fifties. It’s just not going to happen.” Even Stevie know, even the band knows they are over, it's time for you biased die-hard fans to admit it as well.


But I got how multi-layered it is, how deep, how serious.

The Mac may not be able to push (new) product but that doesn't mean they aren't capable of great art.

In fact, in my estimation, Say You Will is the best American album of the decade.

And I can't wait to hear what they come out with next. I hope, for the sake of their efforts and for the sake of the culture, that it's a hit and as many people as possible hear it. But I don't consider that the sole measure of relevance.

--

As for the Lady GaGa debate, I honestly don't know her beyond the hits and music videos, but, from that exposure, she strikes me as just another Madonna clone, but not even as good as early Madonna. She's like a younger old Madonna. Not my idea of a good time.

Now, if you had compared Stevie's relevance to Beyonce or Missy Elliott or Iris Dement, I might have understood what you meant. . . though I would have tried to argue for Stevie's worthiness nonetheless.

[golddustdrummer]

To DigYour Grace:

Oh please, Stevie is a big fan of the tack in terms of fashion as far as I'm concerned. 95% of the clothes she has worn are tacky. Why do you think crossdressers emulate her so much?



Yes, but why does Lady Gaga emulate crossdressers?

http://nyheter24.se/multimedia/dynamic/00050/ste_lady_gaga_ar_278_50197w.jpg

http://www.inquisitr.com/wp-content/crossdresser.png

[LukeA]

Yes, but why does Lady Gaga emulate crossdressers?

http://nyheter24.se/multimedia/dynamic/00050/ste_lady_gaga_ar_278_50197w.jpg

http://www.inquisitr.com/wp-content/crossdresser.png

There are male Female Impersonators, and there are female Female Impersonators. Lady Gaga is the latter.

[newyawka]

But I got how multi-layered it is, how deep, how serious.

The Mac may not be able to push (new) product but that doesn't mean they aren't capable of great art.

In fact, in my estimation, Say You Will is the best American album of the decade.

Okay you got how multi-layed and deep it is but you are one person and one person versus the majority...in the end it doesn't really matter.

I never said they weren't caple of great art. They are. But in the larger scheme of things it doesn't really matter that they make great art. It's not relevant anymore.

And by the way, you're deluded if you think Say You Will is the best American album of the decade. Wake up, amigo.

[trackaghost]

But in the larger scheme of things it doesn't really matter that they make great art. It's not relevant anymore.

And by the way, you're deluded if you think Say You Will is the best American album of the decade. Wake up, amigo.

So musicians should only continue to make music if it's "relevant"?

I'm also curious what you do think the best American album of the decade is.

[tr1]

I played in a band for 15 years in Los Angeles. When we started in 1992 the style of music we were playing was not "relevant". Meaning, it wasn't hip. But we played it because we loved it. And there was an audience that wanted that type of music. A few years into our career, our music suddenly became "relevant". Why? Because some band sold a lot of albums doing it. And then everyone jumped on the bandwagon and suddenly it was "cool" to play that music and dress that way. But some of those bands weren't around long. And we kept going. And our audiences got bigger. Why? Because we truly loved what we played and that comes across to an audience. When you're faking it, people know. So is Fleetwood Mac selling 35 million albums these days? No. But they still have an audience. They're playing arenas all around the country. Now, are they sold out to the max? No. But drawing 10,000-15,000 people is still considered to be a success. And obviously they still have an audience to be able to sell that many tickets. And they do it because they love playing. It's what they do. They're not following trends and they still have a successful tour. To me, that means they're "relevant". They may not be relevant to some people. But to the ones who love them and follow them, they are more then relevant and that's all that matters. I mean, what exactly does "relevant" mean anyways???

[trackaghost]

I played in a band for 15 years in Los Angeles. When we started in 1992 the style of music we were playing was not "relevant". Meaning, it wasn't hip. But we played it because we loved it. And there was an audience that wanted that type of music. A few years into our career, our music suddenly became "relevant". Why? Because some band sold a lot of albums doing it. And then everyone jumped on the bandwagon and suddenly it was "cool" to play that music and dress that way. But some of those bands weren't around long. And we kept going. And our audiences got bigger. Why? Because we truly loved what we played and that comes across to an audience. When you're faking it, people know. So is Fleetwood Mac selling 35 million albums these days? No. But they still have an audience. They're playing arenas all around the country. Now, are they sold out to the max? No. But drawing 10,000-15,000 people is still considered to be a success. And obviously they still have an audience to be able to sell that many tickets. And they do it because they love playing. It's what they do. They're not following trends and they still have a successful tour. To me, that means they're "relevant". They may not be relevant to some people. But to the ones who love them and follow them, they are more then relevant and that's all that matters. I mean, what exactly does "relevant" mean anyways???

I think this is the best post of the whole thread.

[newyawka]

I'm also curious what you do think the best American album of the decade is.

Well the decade isn't over yet so I'll just hafta get back to you on that! :)

Oh, and I wouldn't narrow it down to just one either.

[trackaghost]

Well the decade isn't over yet so I'll just hafta get back to you on that! :)

Oh, and I wouldn't narrow it down to just one either.

Come now, that's a cop out. I'll re-phrase the question for you: what are some of the best albums this decade so far, in your opinion?

[DigYourGrave]

Okay you got how multi-layed and deep it is but you are one person and one person versus the majority...in the end it doesn't really matter.

And by the way, you're deluded if you think Say You Will is the best American album of the decade. Wake up, amigo.

Who is this "majority" that didn't get Say You Will on a deep level?

Also, I don't like the way you talk to people. I know thats probably not my place to say, but nobody has said anything yet. You can express your opinion with having such an arrogant/contemptuous tone..

[LukeA]

I played in a band for 15 years in Los Angeles. When we started in 1992 the style of music we were playing was not "relevant". Meaning, it wasn't hip. But we played it because we loved it. And there was an audience that wanted that type of music. A few years into our career, our music suddenly became "relevant". Why? Because some band sold a lot of albums doing it. And then everyone jumped on the bandwagon and suddenly it was "cool" to play that music and dress that way. But some of those bands weren't around long. And we kept going. And our audiences got bigger. Why? Because we truly loved what we played and that comes across to an audience.

Cool! (was it swing?)

[newyawka]

Come now, that's a cop out. I'll re-phrase the question for you: what are some of the best albums this decade so far, in your opinion?

Kanye West - 808s & Heartbreak
Lady GaGa - The Fame
Britney Spears - Circus
Evanescence - Fallen
John Mayer - Continuum

And yes, I would have to say that Say You Will would probably make it on my list for not the best but one of the best albums of the decade. I would also have to add Trouble in Shangri-La because that album is, what I believe, to be Stevie's biggest success. It proved, at the time, that she was still contemporary and still revelvant...I only wish she would have held on to that. However, I am glad that she's not making any more studio albums because Trouble in Shangri-La was such a big success. I feel that Trouble in Shangri-La was a great way to go out. As I feel Say You Will is probably a good way to go out for Fleetwood Mac and Gift of Screws is a good way for Lindsey to go out. Although I don't think Lindsey will let his candle burn out.

Also, I don't like the way you talk to people. I know thats probably not my place to say, but nobody has said anything yet. You can express your opinion with having such an arrogant/contemptuous tone..

No, you have a right to say whatever you feel as do I which is why I do. Yes, I can be arrogant and I can be very condescending but that's okay because that's my perogative as it is yours not to like me. I express my opinions in the way that I do because that's how I do it. I'm happy with the way that I talk. I'm happy with being an obnoxious, loud and contemptuous person from New Yawk.

[MacMan]

Well it's also age combined with many other things, marketing for example. I feel that Fleetwood Mac might be able to sell more product if they put themselves out there more but with Stevie's anxiety over the internet and what-not that's probably not going to happen. Fleetwood Mac really needs to get into the whole internet, iTunes, marketing thing in order to survive. They are holding on by a thread.

So what would you suggest the band do in these instances to maintain relevancy.... And has anyone defined relevance like David asked?.

[nailatixela]

Why the heck would you (the listener) care if a band is relevent or not? You either like the sound or you don't.

If you only like "relevent" bands then you only are jumping on the bandwagon - to be hip - nothing else. The phase will come and go.

Why the heck should I care if Fleetwood Mac is relevent or not? Whatever they are, I like their music anyway. The case that they are irrelevent means nothing to me. And that's all that counts - the personal connection between artist and listener. I like "Pokerface" but can't say I feel much of a connection with GaGa and her bluffin' muffin'

And I'm 17 by the way.

[tr1]

Luka A.,
Not swing. It was best described as high energy dance music. Very 80's new wave with guitars. Grunge was HUGE at the time we started. We called our style of music NEW new wave. It was great. Then No Doubt broke big and suddenly everyone was playing dance/rock.

But the difference with Fleetwood Mac and all these other groups name like Lady Gaga and Kanye West is that the Mac is timeless. There music is classic and always will be. 50 yrs from now nobody will know who Lady Gaga is.

[tr1]

One more thing, there's a difference between relevant and trendy. Let's not get the 2 confused. Gaga is a trend and a gimmick. Nothing more.

[SortaSavageLike]

Lady GaGa - The Fame
Britney Spears - Circus


Did I just hear a record skip, or was that the sound of this thread's irrelevant relevancy flying out the window?

[newyawka]

So what would you suggest the band do in these instances to maintain relevancy.... And has anyone defined relevance like David asked?.

I think I stated my suggestion in the above quote you're commenting on. Fleetwood Mac needs to get into the whole internet, iTunes, marketing thing in order to survive.

They also need to stick together and just be Fleetwood Mac, none of this solo tour sh*t anymore. They need to make studio albums with less that five to six years apart from each other because they'll stay in people's minds better that way.

Also, Lindsey and Stevie need to quit with the childish arguments. Lindsey needs to step back from his whole experimental thing and create more commercial songs for Fleetwood Mac. If you ask me a lot of songs on Gift of Screws should have been Fleetwood Mac songs. "Did You Miss Me" should have been a Fleetwood Mac single, not a solo single.

They need to take whatever deals they can get, whether that be through Wal-Mart or Starbucks or whatever. And they need more fan-to-band interaction.

But the difference with Fleetwood Mac and all these other groups name like Lady Gaga and Kanye West is that the Mac is timeless. There music is classic and always will be. 50 yrs from now nobody will know who Lady Gaga is.

I disagree. I think some Lady GaGa songs will become timeless. “Just Dance” being one of them. I hear dance songs from the 80’s still played on KTU all the time. Those songs are about twenty years old and I think twenty years from now we’ll still be hearing “Just Dance.”

Did I just hear a record skip, or was that the sound of this thread's irrelevant relevancy flying out the window?

I listed The Fame because it’s Lady GaGa’s first album and it already proved to be a commercial success. There are six singles for crying out loud! That’s pretty impressive.

I listed Circus because it demonstrates Britney Spears’ fantastic return to the music industry. It marked the fact that she’s still relevant because for a while there it was becoming debatable.

[Stephanie]

I asked my 2 year old, who knows all the words to Stand Back, and she says they are relevant. So there you have it.

[DigYourGrave]

I like "Pokerface" but can't say I feel much of a connection with GaGa and her bluffin' muffin'



Oh man this cracked me up so much! :laugh:

[DigYourGrave]

newyawka- Are you basically saying you want FM to sell out, to change the way they do things, to stop doing what they love doing (we all know Lindsey absolutely loves going solo for a few years at a time) and to basically try and be something they're not just so people like you can consider them relevant again in today's absolute shambles of a music industry??

Ok, we can all agree that Unleashed is nothing but a money making tour. But they're still enjoying it. And we the fans are enjoying it. Does that not make them relevant??

I'm actually quite confused now.

[newyawka]

newyawka- Are you basically saying you want FM to sell out, to change the way they do things, to stop doing what they love doing (we all know Lindsey absolutely loves going solo for a few years at a time) and to basically try and be something they're not just so people like you can consider them relevant again in today's absolute shambles of a music industry??

Ok, we can all agree that Unleashed is nothing but a money making tour. But they're still enjoying it. And we the fans are enjoying it. Does that not make them relevant??

I'm actually quite confused now.

In a sense, yes, I want them to sell-out. But that doesn't mean they still can't make great music. They really just need to have themselves marketed better. What they have been doing lately is totally asinine.

[Peestie]

So musicians should only continue to make music if it's "relevant"?

I'm also curious what you do think the best American album of the decade is.

Well that would be GOS or Merriweather Post Pavilion :p Well, I'd need to think harder to give a real answer but those are two great albums.

Although I don't think Lindsey will let his candle burn out.

I hope he doesn't! I want as many albums from his as possible. His last two albums have been great so there's not reason that he should stop now.

Also, Lindsey and Stevie need to quit with the childish arguments. Lindsey needs to step back from his whole experimental thing and create more commercial songs for Fleetwood Mac. If you ask me a lot of songs on Gift of Screws should have been Fleetwood Mac songs. "Did You Miss Me" should have been a Fleetwood Mac single, not a solo single

Nah, Lindsey should be experimenting all he wants. The more the better. I love his commercial songs but the experimental stuff is why he's interesting. I'm glad they put Murrow on SYW because it's one of the best tracks on the album and I'd have hated to have seen it replaced by SGCYM or DOR (and I adore DOR).


As for Lady Gaga's relevancy... I'm a student. I go to places they play music for students and a lot of it is what's in the charts at the minute. I have never heard a Lady Gaga song while I've been out, even at places where they play more dance music. I know that she's very popular at the minute but apparently she's not appealing to a large demographic of 18+ year olds over here. She's only "relevant" to certain groups, if relevancy equates to popularity. We're still waiting on a real definition.

[newyawka]

I hope he doesn't! I want as many albums from his as possible. His last two albums have been great so there's not reason that he should stop now.

You know what, really giving that some thought, I agree with you. You're right, his last two albums have been pretty good. I don't think he should stop. I recant my statement that he should.

[trackaghost]

Kanye West - 808s & Heartbreak
Lady GaGa - The Fame
Britney Spears - Circus
Evanescence - Fallen
John Mayer - Continuum


Well, those choices prove to me that we are on different planets musically. Wait unless you mean in a commercial sense...



I listed The Fame because it’s Lady GaGa’s first album and it already proved to be a commercial success. There are six singles for crying out loud! That’s pretty impressive.

I listed Circus because it demonstrates Britney Spears’ fantastic return to the music industry. It marked the fact that she’s still relevant because for a while there it was becoming debatable.

Oh, you do. Weird. Because when someone asks me, say, what the best Rilo Kiley album is I just say my favourite, I don't say what the most popular one is or the biggest selling. I wasn't asking what you thought the "most relevant" is under your definition, I was asking what you thought were the best.

Even so John Mayer relevant? You know his music is pretty much unknown outside of the States. I couldn't name one of his songs if you tied me up and tortured me for a song title.


I disagree. I think some Lady GaGa songs will become timeless. “Just Dance” being one of them. I hear dance songs from the 80’s still played on KTU all the time. Those songs are about twenty years old and I think twenty years from now we’ll still be hearing “Just Dance.”


That's pure assumption based on your own taste. How old are you anyway? I'm old enough to have seen many artists like Lady GaGa come and go. Believe me the worst thing about being trendy is that eventually you'll be untrendy.


In a sense, yes, I want them to sell-out. But that doesn't mean they still can't make great music. They really just need to have themselves marketed better. What they have been doing lately is totally asinine.

Well, you're for everything I'm against in music. If Fleetwood Mac started trying to appeal to "the youth" at the expense of their art, I'd be the first to stop listening and I'm pretty certain I'm not the only one.

[trackaghost]

Well that would be GOS or Merriweather Post Pavilion :p Well, I'd need to think harder to give a real answer but those are two great albums.


Those are both amazing albums, but as with a lot of newyawka's list, I think it's too early to say because they haven't been out very long. I remember when NME had The White Stripes' Elephant on its list of the greatest albums ever made before it even came out! Personally I'd say longevity and a certain timelessness plays a big part of what makes an album great.

[newyawka]

Even so John Mayer relevant? You know his music is pretty much unknown outside of the States. I couldn't name one of his songs if you tied me up and tortured me for a song title.

How old are you anyway?

I couldn't care less if John Mayer's pretty much unknown outside of the States. I don't live outside of the States, I live in the States and therefore that fact doesn't matter.

I am twenty and loving every second of it.

[trackaghost]

Well, you just proved the point a lot of people have made in the thread perfectly: John Mayer is irrelevant to a lot of people the same age as you outside the States, but he's relevant to you. It can be pretty subjective.

[Peestie]

Those are both amazing albums, but as with a lot of newyawka's list, I think it's too early to say because they haven't been out very long. I remember when NME had The White Stripes' Elephant on its list of the greatest albums ever made before it even came out! Personally I'd say longevity and a certain timelessness plays a big part of what makes an album great.

I know, they were just the first two albums that sprang to mind from this decade this they're the new ones I've listened to most over the last few months. I've not given any real thought to what the best of the decade would be. Any list would be hard to make until a decent way into the next decade so all the newer stuff has time to become as tested as the stuff that came out in '01.

I couldn't care less if John Mayer's pretty much unknown outside of the States. I don't live outside of the States, I live in the States and therefore that fact doesn't matter.

:laugh:

So you only have to be popular in the US to be relevant?

Trackie, I actually know someone who like John Mayer but she's the only person who's even heard of him that I know. I'd be in the same boat as you for song names. I do know he did a (crap) cover of Old Love by Eric Clapton live once so would that save me from torture?

[newyawka]

Well, you just proved the point a lot of people have made in the thread perfectly: John Mayer is irrelevant to a lot of people the same age as you outside the States, but he's relevant to you. It can be pretty subjective.

He's not just relevant to me. He's relevant to millions of other people in the United States and probably a few outside, as well. What country do you come from anyway?

[Peestie]

He's not just relevant to me. He's relevant to millions of other people in the United States and probably a few outside, as well. What country do you come from anyway?

Relevant how? What do you mean when you say that?

[Nico]

newyawka: you can't be serious about those albums being the best of the past decade...surely you can't. Those albums are all fairly new and appear to be quite Top 40 radio-play. Is your opinion of relevancy based on what's popular on the radio or the Music Now albums only? I'm certainly not insinuating that any of those artists aren't relevant, but they're also the typical stuff that most of my younger cousins listen to because it's what's hyped at the moment...I mean, if this is what you want FM to aspire to rank amongst I'm afraid it isn't going to happen.

Their music is sublime and beautiful because it has a sound that is very much their own sound. I don't think I could ever imagine Lindsey or Stevie trying to make records like Britney Spears or Kanye West (gawd I hate him). But, really, what do you identify relevancy with? I'm just wondering...

Also: I really like John Mayer. His celebrity and persona I can do without, but his music is really quite beautiful and he has a lot of talent. However, I still don't understand how he's relevant...based on what? Because you like him? If a song is great, then that's all that matters to me. Never in my life have I put thought into what artists are relevant or not...unless we're talking about lyrics I'm just dumbfounded.

[trackaghost]

I know, they were just the first two albums that sprang to mind from this decade this they're the new ones I've listened to most over the last few months. I've not given any real thought to what the best of the decade would be. Any list would be hard to make until a decent way into the next decade so all the newer stuff has time to become as tested as the stuff that came out in '01.


I totally agree. But if I had to bet on it, I do think Merriweather Post Pavilion will be remembered as one of 2009's great albums. The funny thing is that it's not always the biggest selling, most popular albums that are the best remembered. I mean The Velvet Underground & Nico hardly sold anything at the time of its release but now any list of the best albums of 1967 or even the 60s would look stupid without it and it's made a huge cultural impact over the years too.


:laugh:

So you only have to be popular in the US to be relevant?

Trackie, I actually know someone who like John Mayer but she's the only person who's even heard of him that I know. I'd be in the same boat as you for song names. I do know he did a (crap) cover of Old Love by Eric Clapton live once so would that save me from torture?

I think so :laugh: But that's actually saved me from future torture, so thank you. I've never met anyone who knows his music although he's become a little better known since he dated Jennifer Aniston but even then not that much.

[trackaghost]

He's not just relevant to me. He's relevant to millions of other people in the United States and probably a few outside, as well. What country do you come from anyway?

And he's irrelevant to millions more. I'm from the UK.

[Nico]

I mean The Velvet Underground & Nico hardly sold anything at the time of its release but now any list of the best albums of 1967 or even the 60s would look stupid without it and it's made a huge cultural impact over the years too.


Thank you. When I think of my most favorite kind of music in the world, the Velvets will always be amongst the top of my list (ahem, name. Check.) That's why I'm confused about this relevancy thing...van Gogh was a nobody during his lifetime and then afterward a god. Would he miss that relevancy mark, then, because he didn't sell a ton of paintings during his lifetime/career? Is Vincent van Gogh irrelevant as well?

[tr1]

It's funny, you say that Lindsey shouldn't be experimental but it was his being experimental that led to Fleetwood Mac's most critically acclaimed album, "Tusk", being widely considered to be their best album. Not their most popular, their BEST. At the time is was considered a failure because it only sold 4 million copies. Since when is selling 4 million copies a failure? I guess that album wasn't relevant.

As for putting out albums every 6 years, I don't think anyone will forget them. Fleetwood Mac hadn't had an album out since 1997 when they released "Say You Will". People bought it, and bought tickets to the shows. They weren't forgotten.

The Rolling Stones put out albums every 5 or 6 years and they still sell out Stadiums. But they're not relevant. They don't get records in the charts anymore. In fact, the Stones have never been a big record selling band. They're known more for their live show. And they are still one of those most influential bands of all time.

As for some music from the 80's now being considered classic, that is true. But guess what, half of those 80's songs were by 1 hit wonders who nobody can name. They just know the song. How many of those 80's bands are in the Hall of Fame? Not many. If Lady Gaga takes that route I guess that makes her an important artist of our times. But she'll never be in the Hall of Fame. That I know.

[GoldDustOrphan]

Will GaGa make the Rock Hall of Fame? Probably not, since that institution doesn't really recognize dance music artists. But she's no one-hit wonder. Having two number one hits, and possibly a third on the way, has saved her from that fate. All three of her singles are currently in the top 40. (#2, #10 & #22).

From this week's Billboard:

GAGA'S 'GAME' FOR TOP 10: Lady GaGa becomes the sixth female artist this decade to send her first three singles from a debut album into the top 10 on the Billboard Hot 100, as "LoveGame" leaps 22-10 with Greatest Gainer/Digital honors.

With "Just Dance" and "Poker Face" having reached No. 1, Lady GaGa is in line to become the just the second artist in the Hot 100's history to post a trio of No. 1s with her first three singles from a debut album, joining Mariah Carey, who sent her first five to the top in 1990-91.

[BombaySapphire3]

Will GaGa make the Rock Hall of Fame? Probably not, since that institution doesn't really recognize dance music artists. But she's no one-hit wonder. Having two number one hits, and possibly a third on the way, has saved her from that fate. All three of her singles are currently in the top 40. (#2, #10 & #22).

From this week's Billboard:

GAGA'S 'GAME' FOR TOP 10: Lady GaGa becomes the sixth female artist this decade to send her first three singles from a debut album into the top 10 on the Billboard Hot 100, as "LoveGame" leaps 22-10 with Greatest Gainer/Digital honors.

With "Just Dance" and "Poker Face" having reached No. 1, Lady GaGa is in line to become the just the second artist in the Hot 100's history to post a trio of No. 1s with her first three singles from a debut album, joining Mariah Carey, who sent her first five to the top in 1990-91.

The thing is though is that Fleetwood Mac and Stevie Nicks at her height ,were still in the age of the album and even their studio albums then that weren't Rumours still sold several million copies each .A 4 or 5 million sellling album today is almost unheard of when back in the day there were quite a few artists that could sell that much each time out.Lady Gaga will be lucky if she sees double platinum so in that realm she just cannot compete with the past.

[newyawka]

I don't think I could ever imagine Lindsey or Stevie trying to make records like Britney Spears or Kanye West (gawd I hate him). But, really, what do you identify relevancy with? I'm just wondering...

No, I can’t imagine that either, which is why they are OVER in terms of competing with the artists of today’s standards which makes them IRRELEVANT. All that matters about Fleetwood Mac is their story and the fact that they made great music.

Onto Kanye, despite your “hate” he is a great artist who is always coming up with a new sound, and a good new sound at that (unlike much of Lindsey’s new sounds.) Kanye is relevant because with every new album he raises the standards for pop music. He is an artist that defines to the world what sounds cool.

It's funny, you say that Lindsey shouldn't be experimental but it was his being experimental that led to Fleetwood Mac's most critically acclaimed album, "Tusk", being widely considered to be their best album. Not their most popular, their BEST. At the time is was considered a failure because it only sold 4 million copies. Since when is selling 4 million copies a failure? I guess that album wasn't relevant.

As for some music from the 80's now being considered classic, that is true. But guess what, half of those 80's songs were by 1 hit wonders who nobody can name. They just know the song. How many of those 80's bands are in the Hall of Fame? Not many. If Lady Gaga takes that route I guess that makes her an important artist of our times. But she'll never be in the Hall of Fame. That I know.

Tusk was irrelevant. The only two Fleetwood Mac albums that are relevant are Fleetwood Mac (1973) and Rumours. Every album after Rumours was completely irrelevant, even though Tusk might be their most creative album to date. Tusk didn’t make as huge of a impact on pop culture which is why I don’t consider it relevant. Actually, I’m wrong. The Dance was also relevant because it was the reunion of the five most popular Fleetwood Mac members.

Doesn’t make her irrelevant to not be included in the hall of fame. Lady GaGa is pop culture and so therefore she is relevant. It’s all about the impact and the uniqueness of the artist. Which is why Stevie Nicks is so popular. She’s unique, she had an impact on our pop culture. I admit, someday Lady GaGa will be irrelevant, but I have a feeling she’s going to be sticking around for a while, just as Stevie has. And once again, there is the GaGa/Nicks connection I’ve been trying to describe. No one gets it.

[BombaySapphire3]

No, I can’t imagine that either, which is why they are OVER in terms of competing with the artists of today’s standards which makes them IRRELEVANT. All that matters about Fleetwood Mac is their story and the fact that they made great music.

Onto Kanye, despite your “hate” he is a great artist who is always coming up with a new sound, and a good new sound at that (unlike much of Lindsey’s new sounds.) Kanye is relevant because with every new album he raises the standards for pop music. He is an artist that defines to the world what sounds cool.



Tusk was irrelevant. The only two Fleetwood Mac albums that are relevant are Fleetwood Mac (1973) and Rumours. Every album after Rumours was completely irrelevant, even though Tusk might be their most creative album to date. Tusk didn’t make as huge of a impact on pop culture which is why I don’t consider it relevant. Actually, I’m wrong. The Dance was also relevant because it was the reunion of the five most popular Fleetwood Mac members.

Doesn’t make her irrelevant to not be included in the hall of fame. Lady GaGa is pop culture and so therefore she is relevant. It’s all about the impact and the uniqueness of the artist. Which is why Stevie Nicks is so popular. She’s unique, she had an impact on our pop culture. I admit, someday Lady GaGa will be irrelevant, but I have a feeling she’s going to be sticking around for a while, just as Stevie has. And once again, there is the GaGa/Nicks connection I’ve been trying to describe. No one gets it.

Uh the Fleetwood Mac white album was realeased in 1975.Tusk is a very influential album amoung newer indie type bands to this day .So it is STILL relevant.I don't get what Lady GaGA is doing that is unique,innovative or original .IMO she just seems like a less vocally gifted third rate Christina Auguilera

[trackaghost]

No one gets it.

Then why do you care? I don't get that.
By your standards Fleetwood Mac can never become relevant again. Even if they released the best album ever they are never going to compete with Britney Spears at this stage in their career. But why that matters to you I have no clue, because if it sounds good and you enjoy it, I don't know why you care so much if your friends have heard it or if it's played in the clubs or shooting up the chart. Obviously that means a lot to you for some crazy reason. And if that's the case, just move on. Why don't you just go and listen to Lady GaGa and post on her messageboard? Maybe in a few years when the next big thing comes along you can stop listening to her too and move on to another new trend instead since that's what's important to you, how music or bands are seen rather than what it means to you personally.

In my opinion I think you are confusing commercial success and what your peers like with being relevant (or your definition is different to most people here, which obviously irks you).
Most people see it in terms of a certain integrity that doesn't bow to musical trends rather influences the music of today (I could namecheck some much-talked-about bands for you influenced by Fleetwood Mac but obviously you don't listen to music unless it's sold a million).
As for cultural impact, well actually it isn't always seen at the time, sometimes it's a long time after, which is what you don't get. Big time.

[LukeA]

Tusk was irrelevant.

aaaaaaand that about sums this thread up.

[newyawka]

Uh the Fleetwood Mac white album was realeased in 1975.

Yes, thank you. I mean 1975.

[sjpdg]

[QUOTE=newyawka;824105]they are OVER in terms of competing with the artists of today’s standards which makes them IRRELEVANT. All that matters about Fleetwood Mac is their story and the fact that they made great music.

Tusk was irrelevant. The only two Fleetwood Mac albums that are relevant are Fleetwood Mac (1973) and Rumours. Every album after Rumours was completely irrelevant, even though Tusk might be their most creative album to date. Tusk didn’t make as huge of a impact on pop culture which is why I don’t consider it relevant. Actually, I’m wrong. The Dance was also relevant because it was the reunion of the five most popular Fleetwood Mac members.

You've got to be kidding me!!!! Apparently you are totally unaware of "Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac", "English Rose", "Then Play On", "Mystery To Me" and "Tango In The Night". All of which were relevant albums at their time, with music that still resonates today. The other albums you mentioned are, of course, relevant and important in the FM history, no need to discuss their importance. From that standpoint you are correct.

You've got to be totally insane to say that FM is irrelevant today. You are comparing modern pop music to classic rock. Try comparing apples and oranges and you'll get the same result. They are not trying to compete with modern pop artists, so your comparison is IRRELEVANT. FM is appealing to their long-standing audience. They don't need to appeal to younger listeners. They have an audience. They don't need to build one. Spears, Lohan, GaGa and all the rest of that pop "shyte" won't last. Spears, Lohan, Gaga and the rest will be minor footnotes in musical history while FM will have their own chapter. None of them have the sustainability that FM has shown. That is undeniable.

Catch a clue.

[sjpdg]

aaaaaaand that about sums this thread up.

Aaaaaaaagreeeed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[tr1]

Well said Luke A.


Tusk is irrelevant and Kanye West is a genius? Well, Rumours won a grammy for album of the year. Kanye has never won that award. By your theories that would make HIM irrelevant right?

[newyawka]

Rumours won a grammy for album of the year. Kanye has never won that award. By your theories that would make HIM irrelevant right?

Kanye has won the following:

Favorite Rap/Hip-Hop Album: American Music Awards 2008
Best New Artist: BET Awards 2004
Best Male Hip-Hop Artist: BET Awards 2005, 2008
Top Rap Album: Billboard R&B/Hip-Hop Awards 2006
Man of the Year: GQ Awards 2007
Best Rap Album: Grammy Awards 2005
Best Rap Album: Grammy Awards 2006
Best Rap Album: Grammy Awards 2008
Best Hip-Hop Artist: MOBO Awards 2004
Best Album: MOBO Awards 2004
Outstanding New Artist: NAACP Image Awards 2005
Best Rapper: Vibe Awards 2005
World's Best New Male Artist: World Music Awards 2004
World's Best Selling Hip-Hop/Rap Artist: World Music Awards

I think that more than qualifies him as being relevant by my "theories."

[tr1]

Best Rap album is quite different then album of the year. He'll never win album of the year. He's overrated. And he can't sing in tune. Did you catch his relevant Saturday Night Live performance where he was totally off key?

[newyawka]

Best Rap album is quite different then album of the year. He'll never win album of the year. He's overrated. And he can't sing in tune. Did you catch his relevant Saturday Night Live performance where he was totally off key?

Did you happen to catch that performance where Lindsey was singing off key on every single song...oh wait, that's every performance. Stevie as well, although she's better at keeping tune.

And I didn't mind Kanye's performance, I thought it was capitivating despite his shortcomings. No one is perfect.

[LukeA]

This thread will be hilarious to bump in 2-3 years...

...on oh so many levels.

[The Chain]

.. which is why they are OVER in terms of competing with the artists of today’s standards which makes them IRRELEVANT..


...Tusk was irrelevant..

:laugh:

But really... when has relevance to "pop culture" had anything to do with great music? Some of the best music I've ever heard is still considered "underground" to many. And it's stupid labels and expecations like these that are just obscuring art with bussiness.

[trackaghost]

This thread will be hilarious to bump in 2-3 years...

...on oh so many levels.

I know. Although I'm finding it hilarious already.

:laugh:

But really... when has relevance to "pop culture" had anything to do with great music? Some of the best music I've ever heard is still considered "underground" to many. And it's stupid labels and expecations like these that are just obscuring art with bussiness.

Amen to that. As a music fan when I'm asked what the best album of the decade is I immediately think the one that has meant the most to me, not the one with the biggest marketing campaign and sales figures.
But I guess music means different things to different people. For some it's a business and recognisability thing, for others it's much more personal than that.

[DigYourGrave]

Well, you're for everything I'm against in music. If Fleetwood Mac started trying to appeal to "the youth" at the expense of their art, I'd be the first to stop listening and I'm pretty certain I'm not the only one.

I wholeheartedly agree here. Well said.

[Peestie]

Tusk is getting more and more recognition among younger, arty indie bands. Fleetwood Mac seem to be getting name dropped more and more recently by younger bands and their influence finally seems to be coming to the front. I think that makes them relevant.

[Stephanie]

I'm just catching up on this, and I see that relevance does not equal longevity for this discussion. The artists mentioned, while popular now, will not likely enjoy the longevity of Fleetwood Mac.

[David]

Did you happen to catch that performance where Lindsey was singing off key on every single song...oh wait, that's every performance. Stevie as well, although she's better at keeping tune.They're both sometimes noticeably flat (or sharp).

Are you getting a rise?

[Nico]

Onto Kanye, despite your “hate” he is a great artist who is always coming up with a new sound, and a good new sound at that (unlike much of Lindsey’s new sounds.) Kanye is relevant because with every new album he raises the standards for pop music. He is an artist that defines to the world what sounds cool.

To each his own. My hate doesn't need quotations, though. I plainly despise him. He is completely overrated, and I have his albums so I can say that with some legitimate prior knowledge. I have throughly listened to Kanye and was once very thrilled with some of his output, in particular College Droupout and Graduation, but I would hardly classify him as someone who raises pop music standards...why? Because he sells a lot of albums and has a ton of popular ring-tones? He's had some pretty great tunes but his own attitude about himself and his music is far too outrageous for me to take him seriously. And call me conservative, but I was disgusted by his "Rolling Stone" cover. That has nothing to do with his music, but his hideous superior attitude does very little to win him over. He's a pretty good rapper. There's many better, and I'd place Andre 3000 on a higher mantel in a second.:shrug: But you are totally entitled to your opinion and, really and truly, Kanye is an acceptable artist to argue for, more so than Britney or Lady Gaga anyway.

[iamnotafraid]

Tusk was relevant. Every album after Rumours was completely relevant, even though Tusk might be their most creative album to date. Tusk did make a huge of a impact on pop culture.

Lady GaGa’s going to be sticking around for a while, just as Stevie has.

Am I reading this right?

Still no mention of Duffy....