who should replace SN if she continues refusing to record

[elle]

after seeing various discussions veering towards different hypothetical options in "Still think Stevie is going to do the FM album?" thread, and loving Steve's arguments for Susanna Hoffs, i thought it might be fun to create a poll and discuss different options.

i asked some FM-loving friends with diverse favorites in the band for opinion on what the poll options should be and what is currently offered in the poll is the list we came up with, so far. feel free to comment and propose other options.

who should replace SN if she continues refusing to record with the band?

Susanna Hoffs
Sheryl Crow
Cyndi Lauper
Gwen Stefani
some other girl with well known mainstream persona
some relatively unknown girl but creative (and influenced by FM)
Peter Quirk (of The Cave Singers) (or some other guy?)
Michelle Twig
Ann or Nancy Wilson
nobody - it should be just the 4 (Christine, Lindsey, John & Mick)



PS dear shippers and chiffs - this is meant to spur some fun discussion here, so no need to get all serious and offended - after all this is all entertainment, we are not curing cancer here people! :wavey:

[BlueDenimLamp]

after seeing various discussions veering towards different hypothetical options in "Still think Stevie is going to do the FM album?" thread, and loving Steve's arguments for Susanna Hoffs, i thought it might be fun to create a poll and discuss different options.

i asked some FM-loving friends with diverse favorites in the band for opinion on what the poll options should be and what is currently offered in the poll is the list we came up with, so far. feel free to comment and propose other options.

who should replace SN if she continues refusing to record with the band?

Susanna Hoffs
Sheryl Crow
Cyndi Lauper
Gwen Stefani
some other girl with well known mainstream persona
some relatively unknown girl but creative (and influenced by FM)
Peter Quirk (of The Cave Singers) (or some other guy?)
Michelle Twig
Ann or Nancy Wilson
nobody - it should be just the 4 (Christine, Lindsey, John & Mick)



PS dear shippers and chiffs - this is meant to spur some fun discussion here, so no need to get all serious and offended - after all this is all entertainment, we are not curing cancer here people! :wavey:

I don't think the band will continue under the "Fleetwood Mac" label without Stevie. I'm not singling Stevie out as I think that if any of them retire from the band the others will continue to work together but under a different name and they will leave the "On With Show" tour as their last great stand. If the 4 do continue I think it will be as "The Men Of Mac" featuring Christine McVie or something like that.

[PenguinHead]

An interesting but ridiculous proposition. Stevie is not replaceable. It would seem like a cover band if someone else singing her songs. Bekka Bramlett was suitable only because it was a drastically different line up, without Lindsey, Stevie or Christine. Bekka wasn't a cookie cutter Stevie replacement, but it allowed them to perform a couple of her songs.

[PenguinHead]

I don't think the band will continue under the "Fleetwood Mac" label without Stevie. I'm not singling Stevie out as I think that if any of them retire from the band the others will continue to work together but under a different name and they will leave the "On With Show" tour as their last great stand. If the 4 do continue I think it will be as "The Men Of Mac" featuring Christine McVie or something like that.

Since Mick and John are the namesake of the band, why would change the name? It's their brand, regardless of the many permutations of the band. Fleetwood Mac was initially all men. Fleetwood Men!

So much speculation as to what will happen after the tour. It's clear their end is near. Hopefully there will be one last album. I think Stevie will be a part of it. I don't see them doing a tour on the scale of this current, ridiculously massive world tour.

[SteveMacD]

I don't think the band will continue under the "Fleetwood Mac" label without Stevie. I'm not singling Stevie out as I think that if any of them retire from the band the others will continue to work together but under a different name and they will leave the "On With Show" tour as their last great stand. If the 4 do continue I think it will be as "The Men Of Mac" featuring Christine McVie or something like that.
Yeah, because concert promoters want to bill something as "The Men of Mac Featuring Christine McVie."

[SteveMacD]

Also:

Bonnie Raitt
Terri Nunn (Berlin)

[BlueDenimLamp]

Since Mick and John are the namesake of the band, why would change the name? It's their brand, maintained throughout the many permutations of the band.

Fleetwood Mac was initially all men. Fleetwood Men! So much speculation as to what will happen after the tour! It's clear their end is near. Hopefully there will be one last album. I think Stevie will be a part of it. I don't see them doing a tour on the scale of this current, ridiculously massive world tour.

Yeah, because concert promoters want to bill something as "The Men of Mac Featuring Christine McVie."

Yes but would FM want the final chapter to be that they were reduced to playing smaller venues or do they want to retire the "FM brand" and have "OWTS" as the final shining star in their crown. Mick is already saying that the new product may take the form of a solo record. If Mick did not care about the FM legacy why would he be saying that?

[BlueDenimLamp]

Yeah, because concert promoters want to bill something as "The Men of Mac Featuring Christine McVie."

It was just a suggestion.

[BlueDenimLamp]

Also:

Bonnie Raitt
Terri Nunn (Berlin)

Why does she have to be replaced? And why does it have to be a girl? When Cm bailed on the band she was not replaced. Are you saying that a LB CM JM & MF lineup can't be as good or profitable as the SN LB JM MF lineup? If they hire another person will the increase in sales (if any) justify what they have to pay them? In other words will they get a good return on the investment? These are just questions. Like Elle said no need to get "all serious and offended"

[elle]

Why does she have to be replaced? And why does it have to be a girl? When Cm bailed on the band she was not replaced.

:laugh: did you read the poll?

there are guy options, and just 4 of them / no replacement option.

you can pick any of them and describe why you think that would be the best one. looking fw to see which one you pick!

and just to make it clear, the band would still be called Fleetwood Mac.

[SteveMacD]

Yes but would FM want the final chapter to be that they were reduced to playing smaller venues or do they want to retire the "FM brand" and have "OWTS" as the final shining star in their crown. Mick is already saying that the new product may take the form of a solo record. If Mick did not care about the FM legacy why would he be saying that?
Therein lies the disconnect. I don't think Lindsey really cares about the arena rock aspect of Fleetwood Mac. I think he'd be perfectly happy playing smaller venues if it meant Fleetwood Mac would be creatively relevant.

While Mick loves being in an arena rock band, no doubt, I suspect he'd rather have Fleetwood Mac be around a few more years even if that meant not being an arena rock band anymore. If Christine, John, and Lindsey said they wanted to go back out as Fleetwood Mac, do you honestly think he'd say no to that? John always struck me as being indifferent. He just wants to play bass. The rest is what it is.

Christine is the one I can't read, and the band's future could be squarely on her shoulders. Based on what she has pretty consistently said since rejoining, I think she came out of retirement to make more new music with Fleetwood Mac. If playing smaller venues doesn't bother her, I see no reason why the band has to call it a day. If it has to be arena rock or nothing for her, then the band is pretty much over.

[SteveMacD]

Why does she have to be replaced? And why does it have to be a girl?
Well, she has the backup singers, so they need SOMEBODY to do the high harmonies...

[SteveMacD]

It was just a suggestion.
If Mick, John, Christine, and Lindsey decide to do a tour, it's Fleetwood Mac. I don't understand how it was okay to call it Fleetwood Mac when it was just Stevie and Lindsey fronting the band, but it's not okay to call it Fleetwood Mac if it's just Lindsey and Christine fronting the band (especially considering Christine has been on way more Fleetwood Mac albums than Stevie).

[elle]

If Mick, John, Christine, and Lindsey decide to do a tour, it's Fleetwood Mac. I don't understand how it was okay to call it Fleetwood Mac when it was just Stevie and Lindsey fronting the band, but it's not okay to call it Fleetwood Mac if it's just Lindsey and Christine fronting the band (especially considering Christine has been on way more Fleetwood Mac albums than Stevie).

yeah it's a ridiculous argument. they are Fleetwood Mac. that's not issue in this poll, its premise is we are talking about FM.


meanwhile i don't know how to vote. my preference is just the 4.

but i'm intrigued by your arguments for Susanna Hoffs and i think that would be really interesting.

i also think there are a number of interesting lesser known or somewhat younger and very creative artists who could contribute to the album nicely and it would be really interesting to hear what those combinations would produce.

when we discussed it on fb before posting the thread, people were bringing up many potential artists that sound interesting in the context of FM, especially women. and also some well known artists like Annie Lennox.

[HelloMonster]

It needs to be Florence Welch. Needs. Needs! :]
Amazing singer? Check
Unique voice? Check
Style icon? Check
Fleetwood Mac fan/influenced by?
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-IJYYrixqaI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Check

Florence would be a breath of fresh air! Something new, creative and exciting.

[BlueDenimLamp]

If Mick, John, Christine, and Lindsey decide to do a tour, it's Fleetwood Mac. I don't understand how it was okay to call it Fleetwood Mac when it was just Stevie and Lindsey fronting the band, but it's not okay to call it Fleetwood Mac if it's just Lindsey and Christine fronting the band (especially considering Christine has been on way more Fleetwood Mac albums than Stevie).

I'm not saying it would not be FM I'm saying does the band want the blockbuster "OWTS" tour to be the last thing great thing the band is remembered for or do they want people looking back 10 or 20 years from now and saying FM went down hill after Stevie left and just faded away.

[elle]

It needs to be Florence Welch. Needs. Needs! :]
Amazing singer? Check
Unique voice? Check
Style icon? Check
Fleetwood Mac fan/influenced by? Check

Florence would be a breath of fresh air! Something new, creative and exciting.

ha haven't thought of her - she does tick off all these boxes, as you said. interesting option!

[SteveMacD]

My first choice is for Stevie to stay on, followed by them going on as a quartet.

But, it's interesting to think of possible choices as to who could come in if Stevie left. They all have pros and cons. I think Susanna Hoffs has the most pros and the least cons. I think the transition from Stevie to Susanna would be the most effortless. Susanna would instinctively understand her role in the band and where she'd fit in with their harmony structure. I also like that nobody would consider her to be Stevie II (which was a problem for Bekka).

One "younger" artist that I think would do an amazing job is Neko Case. Her voice is haunting, and she was in a band that had multiple lead singers (New Pornographers).

[SteveMacD]

It needs to be Florence Welch.
No new Welch until they rectify getting the previous Welch into the HoF.

[elle]

No new Welch until they rectify getting the previous Welch into the HoF.

ha! good point!

love Neko Case suggestion.

[SteveMacD]

I'm not saying it would not be FM I'm saying does the band want the blockbuster "OWTS" tour to be the last thing great thing the band is remembered for or do they want people looking back 10 or 20 years from now and saying FM went down hill after Stevie left and just faded away.
If they had ten more years, then I think that could be a valid concern. But, I think whatever they do from here on out will generate some level of interest. When 80% of one of the most successful bands in rock history make an album, people will still notice, especially considering they DON'T have another decade. And, I don't think Lindsey wants OWTS to be the last thing they're remembered for. I think he'd much rather see Fleetwood Mac to go out on a creative high note than on a commercial one, and Christine didn't come out of retirement just to do a greatest hits tour. She wanted to make new music with Fleetwood Mac, and almost immediately went into the studio with the boys after rejoining.

[BlueDenimLamp]

My first choice is for Stevie to stay on, followed by them going on as a quartet.

But, it's interesting to think of possible choices as to who could come in if Stevie left. They all have pros and cons. I think Susanna Hoffs has the most pros and the least cons. I think the transition from Stevie to Susanna would be the most effortless. Susanna would instinctively understand her role in the band and where she'd fit in with their harmony structure. I also like that nobody would consider her to be Stevie II (which was a problem for Bekka).

One "younger" artist that I think would do an amazing job is Neko Case. Her voice is haunting, and she was in a band that had multiple lead singers (New Pornographers).

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y5FHslmkBFA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Might appeal to LB's quirky side. You have to love Elvis, looks like Sheryl might be a little intimidated.

[SteveMacD]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y3HfgCoL8mY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

It sounds muddy because they're loud, but it was a great performance (except for that idiot behind the amps recording it on a digital camera).

ETA: She actually played that tambourine!

[SteveMacD]

It needs to be Florence Welch. Needs. Needs! :]
Amazing singer? Check
Unique voice? Check
Style icon? Check
Fleetwood Mac fan/influenced by?
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-IJYYrixqaI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Check

Florence would be a breath of fresh air! Something new, creative and exciting.
Susanna Hoffs
Easily fits into three part harmonies? Check.
Established public identity? Check.
Experience in multi-vocalist band? Check.
Has worked with Lindsey and Mick? Check.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rJCJuvxBRVU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Check!


("Falling" featuring Mick Fleetwood on drums)

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xhG1qgg1NHU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Checkmate! ;)

[HelloMonster]

Current (and known) with the younger generation* who are attending the Fleetwood Mac shows these days?

Nope! :sorry: :laugh:

*unknown by some. I shouldn't generalize.

[SteveMacD]

Current (and known) with the younger generation* who are attending the Fleetwood Mac shows these days?

Nope! :sorry: :laugh:

*unknown by some. I shouldn't generalize.
So, we could have an older artist not necessarily known by younger fans OR we could go with a newer artist not necessarily known by older fans. The crowds are too mixed at a Fleetwood Mac show to use that alone as a criteria. However, if we’re being honest, Fleetwood Mac taps into concert goers’ sense of nostalgia. Even if and when they release new music, the majority of people will be going to see them for the nostalgia. In that sense, bringing in a contemporary (especially one who has worked with Mick and Lindsey) makes more sense than bringing in a young, fresh face who’s young enough to be Christine’s granddaughter. It would look, feel, and sound more natural with a contemporary. For a band like Fleetwood Mac, brining in a fresh face at this point would seem terribly forced, if not altogether cynical.

[chiliD]

If we're going to start dragging 80's female vocalist survivors into the conjecture...

I'd say, let's go with Martha Davis.

Would love to hear the Fleetwood/McVie rhythm section tear into a couple of old Motels tunes like "Envy" or "Tragic Surf". ;)

[nicepace]

Throughout this band's history, there has always been a fluid lineup of personnel. Usually, when someone leaves, they are replaced. But not always, and not always with just one person. There is no Fleetwood Mac Rule that says there have to be three equal singer/songwriters in the band at all times.

Christine hasn't recorded with this band for decades. Lindsey hasn't recorded enough with this band for a very long time. I want to hear more from both of them, and I want to hear more of their collaborations. I am not interested in hearing what a Sheryl Crow or a Susanna Hoffs could bring to the band. Including them in a new album would just take song space away from Chris and Lindsey. I like both of those women's music quite a bit, but not as part of Fleetwood Mac. Even if they only had two songs on the new album, that would be two songs from Chris or Lindsey that we wouldn't get to hear.

Now, if the band were to record a new album and tour with the album, it might be a good idea to have another female singer as a "special guest performer" to cover a couple of Stevie songs. That's where a Susanna or a Sheryl might work in this band. But she should just come on stage for a couple of tunes, and she shouldn't be considered an actual member of the band.

[dontlookdown]

Neko Case.

[bombaysaffires]

Christine hasn't recorded with this band for decades. Lindsey hasn't recorded enough with this band for a very long time. I want to hear more from both of them, and I want to hear more of their collaborations. I am not interested in hearing what a Sheryl Crow or a Susanna Hoffs could bring to the band. Including them in a new album would just take song space away from Chris and Lindsey. I like both of those women's music quite a bit, but not as part of Fleetwood Mac. Even if they only had two songs on the new album, that would be two songs from Chris or Lindsey that we wouldn't get to hear.

Yes to this.

Now, if the band were to record a new album and tour with the album, it might be a good idea to have another female singer as a "special guest performer" to cover a couple of Stevie songs. That's where a Susanna or a Sheryl might work in this band. But she should just come on stage for a couple of tunes, and she shouldn't be considered an actual member of the band.

To this, respectfully…..No. Just no. And if Lindsey ever agreed to such a cheesy move that reeks of playing smoky casinos or cruise ships, I would give up on this band forever. :distress:

[Dr.Brown]

I voted "nobody" since realistically this is likely to be their farewell album but, if Christine had rejoined 10 years ago and Stevie had refused to record, I agree that Neko Case would have been an amazing choice with her incredible vocal range and energy.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_FhVbyeWFvo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[PenguinHead]

I'm not saying it would not be FM I'm saying does the band want the blockbuster "OWTS" tour to be the last thing great thing the band is remembered for or do they want people looking back 10 or 20 years from now and saying FM went down hill after Stevie left and just faded away.

The On With The Show tour will hold little significance in terms of their long term legacy. The hill you presume they will go down without Stevie would just be a twist in the road of a band with a twisted history.

Unwarranted are the dire predictions that their last years will be spent be limping around, reduced to playing to half-filled road houses; their status and reputation so sadly damaged that it will nullify all they have accomplished.

Bollocks!

[BlueDenimLamp]

The On With The Show tour will hold little significance in terms of their long term legacy. The hill you presume they will go down without Stevie would just be a twist in the road of a band with a twisted history.

Unwarranted are the dire predictions that their last years will be spent be limping around, reduced to playing to half-filled road houses; their status and reputation so sadly damaged that it will nullify all they have accomplished.

Bollocks!

You seem to be forgetting the "Time" years when FM was a mere shadow of it's former self...This could happen again as it's possible that CM or LB would grow weary of a SN replacement and retire leaving Mick with trying to carry on with only one of the 3 "Rumours" singers in the band.

[jbrownsjr]

The B/N version of FM was very generic in my opinion, which confuses me because their one album is very good. It's probably because they can't stand each other most of the time, and it really informs why there was not much output in 16 years of capitalizing on just the two of them.

You could tell in LB's body language during DR how he feels about Stevie. While they did have some great performances, adding Christine really re-energized them. Perhaps, Stevie will let that translate into the studio. (That's my first choice of what I would like to see.)

They need more output and LB and CM as artists have recognized that and have written many new songs for their band. The more Stevie doesn't want to make new music with this band, the more it was about the huge paycheck she scooped up for doing this tour.

If not, I would like to see Nancy Wilson. Same era.. good range, good harmony, and work some of her own tunes in.

Not plausible, but it's a poll.

Having said that, I think just the 4 would be less generic, more musical, and less popular. In my experience as a musician and a fan, some of the best music is unpopular.

[jcalzaretta]

SN will record

[chiliD]

Even if they only had two songs on the new album, that would be two songs from Chris or Lindsey that we wouldn't get to hear.
Yes to this.

That's assuming that they HAD 2 more decent songs to put on the album. EVERY album has "filler"...maybe those 2 extra Christine or Lindsey songs would fit in that category, whereas a Suzanna Hoffs/Sheryl Crow tune or two would actually be the stronger choice for the album. Let go of your biases.

Now, if the band were to record a new album and tour with the album, it might be a good idea to have another female singer as a "special guest performer" to cover a couple of Stevie songs. That's where a Susanna or a Sheryl might work in this band. But she should just come on stage for a couple of tunes, and she shouldn't be considered an actual member of the band.

To this, respectfully…..No. Just no. And if Lindsey ever agreed to such a cheesy move that reeks of playing smoky casinos or cruise ships, I would give up on this band forever. :distress:

And, doing a tour without releasing an album...playing only 30+ year old songs in their set without is BETTER? I'll take seeing "Fleetwood Mac" anywhere with anybody they deem as a member, either permanent or temporary...I'm an "Unconditional Fan". So, if your fandom has "conditions" attached...good riddance to ya.

[SteveMacD]

You seem to be forgetting the "Time" years when FM was a mere shadow of it's former self...This could happen again as it's possible that CM or LB would grow weary of a SN replacement and retire leaving Mick with trying to carry on with only one of the 3 "Rumours" singers in the band.
Which would still be one more than what they had during the "Time" era. You don't seem to understand what the problem was. NONE of the "Rumours" era vocalists were touring with the band. I also remember Lindsey's album flopped and Stevie's album flopped. None of them were setting the world on fire. At least Fleetwood Mac never promoted or toured in support of "Time."

[bombaysaffires]

That's assuming that they HAD 2 more decent songs to put on the album. EVERY album has "filler"...maybe those 2 extra Christine or Lindsey songs would fit in that category, whereas a Suzanna Hoffs/Sheryl Crow tune or two would actually be the stronger choice for the album. Let go of your biases.


And, doing a tour without releasing an album...playing only 30+ year old songs in their set without is BETTER? I'll take seeing "Fleetwood Mac" anywhere with anybody they deem as a member, either permanent or temporary...I'm an "Unconditional Fan". So, if your fandom has "conditions" attached...good riddance to ya.


Wow. Sorry you're having such a bad day.

I don't recall ever saying I thought this tour with no new album was a good idea. In fact, I've said many times it's not. I wanted them to record first, then tour the new album. That's not what we got. The one thing about this tour at least is that we've got the writers and original performers of all the songs on stage. Bringing in strangers to cover your hits is far, far cheesier. If you would pay to go see that, well good on you. Have fun.

And there are all sorts of fans and none of them have to meet my or your standards to qualify. I've followed this band for 40 years. This is a forum for sharing opinions.
If you don't like other opinions, maybe you're the one in the wrong place.

[FuzzyPlum]

The B/N version of FM was very generic in my opinion, which confuses me because their one album is very good. It's probably because they can't stand each other most of the time, and it really informs why there was not much output in 16 years of capitalizing on just the two of them.

You could tell in LB's body language during DR how he feels about Stevie. While they did have some great performances, adding Christine really re-energized them. Perhaps, Stevie will let that translate into the studio. (That's my first choice of what I would like to see.)

They need more output and LB and CM as artists have recognized that and have written many new songs for their band. The more Stevie doesn't want to make new music with this band, the more it was about the huge paycheck she scooped up for doing this tour.



I wonder if Lindsey and Christine's creative relationship is what makes Stevie so reluctant. She's seen how well they work together- could she now feel like an outsider? Has she reached a point where she's too self-conscious of her own songwriting in relation to the other two. She knows she probably cant write with Christine or Lindsey. Does she feel like the gooseberry? (whether she should feel that way or not).

Its funny how these same discussions keep going around in circles over several threads- for what its worth I wouldn't mind Fleetwood Mac playing to significantly smaller venues so long as MJCL are there. Half-filled roadhouses and smokey casinos are just up my street and would probably be a lot cheaper- could go to more shows.

[SteveMacD]

The one thing about this tour at least is that we've got the writers and original performers of all the songs on stage. Bringing in strangers to cover your hits is far, far cheesier. If you would pay to go see that, well good on you. Have fun.
That's why I think it would be better to have an established artist who has her own well known songs come in instead of a relative newbie. She'd sing a couple of Stevie's songs, a few of her own hits, and a couple of new songs. It's like what they did on the 1975-76 tour.

[SteveMacD]

I wonder if Lindsey and Christine's creative relationship is what makes Stevie so reluctant. She's seen how well they work together- could she now feel like an outsider?
Hasn't that been the case since "World Turning" though?

for what its worth I wouldn't mind Fleetwood Mac playing to significantly smaller venues so long as MJCL are there. Half-filled roadhouses and smokey casinos are just up my street and would probably be a lot cheaper- could go to more shows.
I don't see "half-filled roadhouses and smokey casinos" in their future if MJCL are still in the band. Maybe amphitheaters and medium-to-large theater tours, as well as festivals (where the REAL money is). But, I'm all for anything that brings ticket prices down. I'm sick that I could only do two shows this tour. If they had been cheaper, I probably would/could have done at least ten shows.

[gypsy333]

The more Stevie doesn't want to make new music with this band, the more it was about the huge paycheck she scooped up for doing this tour.

They ALL scooped up the money...St. Christine and St. Lyndsey too!!

[SteveMacD]

They ALL scooped up the money...St. Christine and St. Lyndsey too!!
You missed the point. The others have over an album's worth of material recorded, and would rather have toured behind a new album than doing just a greatest hits tour. They would rather this have had some artistic merit instead of just being another cash grab.

[louielouie2000]

It's hard to pinpoint, but I'd say sometime during the 90s Fleetwood Mac stopped being an amorphous entity, and finally froze into something solid and definable. What I mean by that is Fleetwood Mac is restricted to Fleetwood-McVie-McVie-Buckingham-Nicks. The public will accept one of those members dropping out, but will not tolerate new additions. So all of this talk about replacing a member is much ado about nothing. They've learned their lesson in regards to replacements. That's why they even cut a show short recently when Mick got sick and had to leave the stage. Yes, they could have gotten the drum tech to step in to finish the show, but they didn't dare. So if Stevie were to quit or get fired- neither of which are going to happen- the band could and probably would continue without her. I don't think that would be a quick process; it might be something like the 6 years in between the Dance and Say You Will. They'd wait to see if Stevie changed her mind, but would move forward without her if it became clear she wasn't interested. Because any way you slice it, you still have 4 members who are most eager to continue to make music. So why the hell shouldn't they? :shrug:

[FuzzyPlum]

They've learned their lesson in regards to replacements. That's why they even cut a show short recently when Mick got sick and had to leave the stage. Yes, they could have gotten the drum tech to step in to finish the show, but they didn't dare.

That was a different scenario. That was just a cop-out. On that occasion they just froze because they've come to rely too much on routine and familiarity. They could have/should have continued.

[bombaysaffires]

It's hard to pinpoint, but I'd say sometime during the 90s Fleetwood Mac stopped being an amorphous entity, and finally froze into something solid and definable. What I mean by that is Fleetwood Mac is restricted to Fleetwood-McVie-McVie-Buckingham-Nicks. The public will accept one of those members dropping out, but will not tolerate new additions. So all of this talk about replacing a member is much ado about nothing. They've learned their lesson in regards to replacements. That's why they even cut a show short recently when Mick got sick and had to leave the stage. Yes, they could have gotten the drum tech to step in to finish the show, but they didn't dare. So if Stevie were to quit or get fired- neither of which are going to happen- the band could and probably would continue without her. I don't think that would be a quick process; it might be something like the 6 years in between the Dance and Say You Will. They'd wait to see if Stevie changed her mind, but would move forward without her if it became clear she wasn't interested. Because any way you slice it, you still have 4 members who are most eager to continue to make music. So why the hell shouldn't they? :shrug:

Amen, brother.

[nicole21290]

Hasn't that been the case since "World Turning" though?


"The worst time really for me was, when we were doing that first album, was that Lindsey had been writing World Turning and I really wanted… I was his girlfriend too, you know, so you’ve got to realize that made me extra sensitive. And I really wanted to help with the song and he turned away completely and asked Chris. And that was the worst night of me being in Fleetwood Mac, because I went out to the parking lot and sat in the car and cried because I couldn’t figure out why he would tell me no and tell her yes. And it wasn’t even Christine, it was Lindsey that I was really bummed with, because I was so hurt. Then I realized as the days and weeks went on after that, that if we were going to do this, I was going to have to share him a little bit. And I was going to have to back off, because Christine certainly, of all people, didn’t want to cause any trouble between Lindsey and me. Just her as a musician and singer and a really nice lady that was becoming a friend of Lindsey’s, probably the kind of friend that I never was, nor will I ever be… he could accept her in a lot of ways that he couldn’t accept me. Because I loved her, it was alright. If I hadn’t had liked Christine, it would have been impossible. I would have had to leave, because I would have been so jealous."

[michelej1]

^In 1981, Stevie told Jim Ladd:

Chris was really very nice to me from the beginning and, you know, in her kind of 'ho, ho, ho' way, really, uh, supportive of me and real sweet and funny. And, like, she kept me laughing alot when I was, you know, kind of jealoused out because Lindsey was working with these other people and working with her in a way that he would never work with me and Christine tried very hard to uh, "keep helping me Lindsey, keep asking me to write the bridge on your song and we want Stevie to get shorter and shorter in there, she's sinking into the ground". Um, she made it easier for me.

[Macfanforever]

Who should replace SN if she continues refusing to record?

Mrs Clause. Santa would not mind in the off season.LOL.......

Yes .Finally we will get an Holiday album out of the Mac.

Hahhahahaha.Just playing around.Hehehehehee.


Sheryl Crow is my pick or get some young blood into the band.

I think its late in the game to start with somebody new and they end up waiting it out and Stevie will be there soon.Probably just do the Mick,John,Lindsey,Chris four sum If Stevie quits which I doubt that will happen.

[elle]

current votes:


Susanna Hoffs 2 3.64%
Sheryl Crow 1 1.82%
Cyndi Lauper 1 1.82%
Gwen Stefani 0 0%
some other girl with well known mainstream persona 1 1.82%
some relatively unknown girl but creative (indie? influenced by FM?) 1 1.82%
Peter Quirk (of The Cave Singers) - or some other guy? 1 1.82%
Michelle Twig 0 0%
Ann or Nancy Wilson 2 3.64%
nobody - it should be just the 4 (Christine, Lindsey, John & Mick) 46 83.64%

Voters: 55.

so 46 of 55 voters so far - close to 85% prefer FM with just the 4, to anyone joining to replace SN in the case she continues refusing to record. :wavey:


i find it interesting that some people put emphasis on who would be best for touring, when cashgrab is not the part SN has problems with, apparently. the problem is creative, prolific, recording part. i suspect any replacement would need to be primarily because of the creative fit, and not because she/he would be attracting extra live audience (i.e. supergroup kind of replacement). that said, i liked the argument someone brought up in the thread, that between the 2 of them Lindsey and Christine seem to have plenty of creativity and new songs to fill up an album, so bringing in someone new and their songs would take the space of Christine's and Lindsey's songs we would otherwise hear.

[welcomechris]

Stevie isn't going anywhere. She's done 100 interviews within the last year where she's said "Nobody can leave Fleetwood Mac". If she doesn't record, it will come out as a Lindsey solo album.

[elle]

Also:

Bonnie Raitt
Terri Nunn (Berlin)

It needs to be Florence Welch. Needs. Needs! :]
Amazing singer? Check
Unique voice? Check
Style icon? Check
Fleetwood Mac fan/influenced by? Check

Florence would be a breath of fresh air! Something new, creative and exciting.

One "younger" artist that I think would do an amazing job is Neko Case. Her voice is haunting, and she was in a band that had multiple lead singers (New Pornographers).

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y5FHslmkBFA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Might appeal to LB's quirky side. You have to love Elvis, looks like Sheryl might be a little intimidated.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y3HfgCoL8mY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

It sounds muddy because they're loud, but it was a great performance (except for that idiot behind the amps recording it on a digital camera).

ETA: She actually played that tambourine!

If we're going to start dragging 80's female vocalist survivors into the conjecture...

I'd say, let's go with Martha Davis.

I voted "nobody" since realistically this is likely to be their farewell album but, if Christine had rejoined 10 years ago and Stevie had refused to record, I agree that Neko Case would have been an amazing choice with her incredible vocal range and energy.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_FhVbyeWFvo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

hm, is that Neko Case for the win?

seems we have more votes for her here, than any of the people listed as an option in the poll!

[skuncles]

As far as the record label is concerned, without Steve is there is no Fleetwood Mac. So basically if Stevie decides to blow off the next album (which I doubt she will) then Fleetwood Mac will just end. At this point, and since 1997, Stevie has a lot more pull in the band than she had previously. They need her, she doesn't need them.

[Macfanforever]

As far as the record label is concerned, without Steve is there is no Fleetwood Mac. So basically if Stevie decides to blow off the next album (which I doubt she will) then Fleetwood Mac will just end. At this point, and since 1997, Stevie has a lot more pull in the band than she had previously. They need her, she doesn't need them.

I agree...........

[SteveMacD]

As far as the record label is concerned, without Steve is there is no Fleetwood Mac. So basically if Stevie decides to blow off the next album (which I doubt she will) then Fleetwood Mac will just end. At this point, and since 1997, Stevie has a lot more pull in the band than she had previously. They need her, she doesn't need them.
If Stevie was still a multi-platinum selling artist, that might be true. Her last two albums combined may have sold 250,000. If Stevie held that much power, the biggest news in the Fleetwood Mac world for 2014 would have been the release of 24KG. I'm willing to bet Stevie made more on the first night of the Fleetwood Mac tour than she'll ever see from IYD and 24KG combined. She HAD a lot more pull in the band from 1997-2013, but she overplayed her cards.

[johnnystorms]

If Stevie was still a multi-platinum selling artist, that might be true. Her last two albums combined may have sold 250,000. If Stevie held that much power, the biggest news in the Fleetwood Mac world for 2014 would have been the release of 24KG. I'm willing to bet Stevie made more on the first night of the Fleetwood Mac tour than she'll ever see from IYD and 24KG combined. She HAD a lot more pull in the band from 1997-2013, but she overplayed her cards.

That is a somewhat valid point, but she is the only commercially relevant solo artist of the 5. Lindsey's records don't chart top 10 and hers do. I agree with the prior posts that the record labels will want no part of a Fleetwood Mac sans Stevie Nicks. After all the band doesn't have a label.. so who would sign them without her? the business is cruel, and Stevie seems to know how to work the execs better than LB.
I still think it would be ideal for them to sign with Interscope.. WB sucks in promoting their material!

[SteveMacD]

That is a somewhat valid point, but she is the only commercially relevant solo artist of the 5. Lindsey's records don't chart top 10 and hers do. I agree with the prior posts that the record labels will want no part of a Fleetwood Mac sans Stevie Nicks. After all the band doesn't have a label.. so who would sign them without her? the business is cruel, and Stevie seems to know how to work the execs better than LB.
I still think it would be ideal for them to sign with Interscope.. WB sucks in promoting their material!
Define commercially relevant. I think somebody who makes music videos and tours for two years behind an album that still only sells 125,000 is hardly commercially relevant. At least Lindsey understands the equation, the whole small machine thing, and uses his time outside of Fleetwood Mac to pursue creative interest that he wouldn't be able to pursue within Fleetwood Mac.

I think smaller indie labels would be drooling at the opportunity to release the Fleetwood Mac album, especially if Lindsey Buckingham and Christine McVie were on it. Personally, I would like to see them sign with Matador Records.

[johnnystorms]

Define commercially relevant. I think somebody who makes music videos and tours for two years behind an album that still only sells 125,000 is hardly commercially relevant. At least Lindsey understands the equation, the whole small machine thing, and uses his time outside of Fleetwood Mac to pursue creative interest that he wouldn't be able to pursue within Fleetwood Mac.

I think smaller indie labels would be drooling at the opportunity to release the Fleetwood Mac album, especially if Lindsey Buckingham and Christine McVie were on it. Personally, I would like to see them sign with Matador Records.

yeah, but a small label can't AFFORD to advance them... and if you remember in DR, John didn't even wanna put up 2 grand for a mix test. they'll only sign to a major, and no major will sign them without Stevie.
she IS commercially relevant, no other rocker in her 60s is close to her sales, and top 10 debuts matter. the right record company could have doubled that total

[SteveMacD]

yeah, but a small label can't AFFORD to advance them...
What's to advance, though? They've already recorded the bulk of their work and with the money they're making on this tour, they don't need an advancement. The larger indie labels, like Matador, could very easily afford to release a band like Fleetwood Mac.

they'll only sign to a major, and no major will sign them without Stevie.
I'm still not completely sold on that. I think some labels might be more inclined to sign MJCL over the full five if they knew the band would be fully committed to touring and working the new album as much as possible, and MJCL appear to be willing to make that commitment. That would be a pretty safe investment, especially if the album was already finished. With Stevie being so noncommittal at this point, I'd be more nervous about signing them with her, and I'd make sure legal had an iron clad contract as far as she was concerned.

[BlueDenimLamp]

As far as the record label is concerned, without Steve is there is no Fleetwood Mac. So basically if Stevie decides to blow off the next album (which I doubt she will) then Fleetwood Mac will just end. At this point, and since 1997, Stevie has a lot more pull in the band than she had previously. They need her, she doesn't need them.

Yes Stevie still has enough "star power" that a major label like WB is still interested in her...Didn't WB show Lindsey the door last time he wanted a record deal?

[David]

An interesting but ridiculous proposition. Stevie is not replaceable. It would seem like a cover band if someone else singing her songs. Bekka Bramlett was suitable only because it was a drastically different line up, without Lindsey, Stevie or Christine. Bekka wasn't a cookie cutter Stevie replacement, but it allowed them to perform a couple of her songs.
Yes, I'm on this train. The era of shuffling members in and out of this group as if they were chess pieces should have ended by now. The result always felt like a desperate move—a cloying expression, like "Please love us anyway."

You can replace refrigerator water filters because the new filters are built exactly like the old. But people don't work that way.

[michelej1]

As far as the record label is concerned, without Steve is there is no Fleetwood Mac. So basically if Stevie decides to blow off the next album (which I doubt she will) then Fleetwood Mac will just end. At this point, and since 1997, Stevie has a lot more pull in the band than she had previously. They need her, she doesn't need them.

This logic was born in a time when artists still needed a big record label to put out an album. That's not the case anymore.

Michele

[PenguinHead]

This logic was born in a time when artists still needed a big record label to put out an album. That's not the case anymore.

Michele

Yes!

Christine and Lindsey are still formidable forces. Even without the third engine (Stevie), they could still make a great album fly. This isn't about achieving dizzying heights of commercial success anyway. It's about the ending rein of a historic band with one last musical statement that will cap off their legacy.

Stevie Nicks's (potential) withdrawal, like Peter Green's, isn't a breaking point. The band has persevered, like no other, through numerous drastic tidal waves. Though Stevie still has a lot of appeal, she's not the commercial commodity she once was. Behind the Mask didn't benefit from her presence. Nor have her recent solo albums busted up the charts.

Commercially, it makes little to no difference if Stevie is or isn't on Fleetwood Mac's last album. But from an emotional perspective/standpoint, if Stevie decides to bail on the very last stand for the band, it reveals an unflattering selfishness and a lack of gratitude and respect for the band. She's in it for the profit of live performances, but not for the creative collaboration. It is crass ass move on her part. Shame on her.

I still hope she will pull her ego-swelled head out of her ass and spare a little love and time for the band that made her rich and famous. After that, she can shed the shackles, free to follow her muse for the rest of her life.