Lindsey Buckingham gets kicked out of Fleetwood Mac and the band gets better?

[TheWildHeart67]

I don't know what the writer of this article has been smoking?
What kind of crazy, ****ed-up world do we live in where Lindsey Buckingham gets kicked out of Fleetwood Mac and the band gets better?

The same one in which Glenn Frey passes and the Eagles improve.

Now we know the Mac can’t sustain without Stevie, but without Lindsey…NO PROBLEM!

No one doubts Mike Campbell’s guitarwork, he doesn’t emote quite like Lindsey, but he can pick just as well.

As for Neil Finn…HE’S A REVELATION!

Maybe you remember Crowded House, but you should really look back to Split Enz, which couldn’t get traction until Neil joined. Then he got us and sent a message to our girl and won our hearts and financial success to boot. But being a proud New Zealander, he tends not to be on our radar screen, but he is now!

It’s no secret Stevie Nicks can do arena business without the rest of the group, but this is something different, it takes Stevie’s skills and appeals, mixes in the temporarily gone crooning of Christine McVie and now the band has been reenergized, gone from an oldies act to a new one overnight, how did this happen?

Now we know there was a schism in the band’s history, multiple ones in fact. I doubt fans of the Peter Green iteration liked the Stevie/Lindsey concoction. Then again, there was the interim era with Bob Welch and this seems more like an evolution than a substitution of journeyman players. Who knew Vince Gill could add so much to the Eagles, who knew Neil Finn could add so much to Fleetwood Mac? And as “The Chain” ends and Mike Campbell starts to wail you don’t miss Lindsey Buckingham one bit. Used to be his band, no longer. If they paid to see the act without Christine, what is Lindsey gonna bring to the picture to share the cash…NOTHING!

Now the funny thing about this iteration is it makes you want to hear new material. McCartney was on Stern today and it made you realize how much he missed Lennon. Because John held his nose when McCartney delivered tripe, and vice versa, they pushed each other to excellence. You’ve got to believe Mike and Neil have reinvigorated the other four members of Fleetwood Mac, and one thing you know about Neil is he can write, and unlike his peers, having never reached superstar status, he can still do it, he still has the fire.

But does anybody really want new Fleetwood Mac music?

Today it’s all about the road. The modern music business has detached from classic rock, all rock in fact. It’s all hip-hop all the time. Did you read today’s “Wall Street Journal” about the huge payments by the majors for barely proven hip-hop talent? They don’t care about radio, they can make their bones online and cash too, it’s a whole new paradigm. And never underestimate the power of classic rock, it too is streamed now, but its acolytes are no longer hungry, they might have smartphones but they still don’t subscribe to streaming services.

But they’re fans.

That’s the difference between the oldsters of yesterday and today. THE FERVOR! Go to a Mac show and people are not sitting in their seats, rattling their jewelry, they’re standing and singing and dancing…

The oldsters lived through something. It’s hard for the youngsters to understand. Music was EVERYTHING! Everybody had a stereo, everybody bought albums, they were addicted! Let’s analogize it to movies. Neil Simon dies and you remember his flicks and how you used to go to the theatre. Now you no longer go to the theatre, they make movies but you don’t want to see ’em. Sure, you might hit a documentary, about Mr. Rogers or RBG, but they’re a zit on the financial ass of the theatrical business.

But the funny thing is the classic rockers still rule at the venues.

So modern music is like today’s movies. Two-dimensional characters, nothing you can believe in. Candy that’s eaten and forgotten. There’s a business, they trumpet the grosses, but does anybody care?

Of course, a few do.

But when it comes to movies, the great stuff was all pre-blockbuster, pre “Jaws” and “Star Wars,” when there was not that much money in it and all the glamour and the impact was in films.

Even more in music. Because movies, when done right are larger than life, music when done right is life itself.

And now television has taken over from movies by being what flicks used to be. About people as opposed to superheroes and monsters. Because we want to see our real lives reflected.

And you can say today’s pop music is just today’s kids’ flavor, but the truth is it was different. Stevie Nicks was not an overnight success… Nobody in today’s Fleetwood Mac was an overnight success. They paid their dues, starved in obscurity, toured, lived the hard life until breakthroughs came years later.

That is not the paradigm today. Today everything is instant and then fades away. Those with intellects and souls stay far away from entertainment, the odds are too long, they want a protected life, but…back then entertainment was ruled by the middle class, playing without a backup plan.

Then again, there was little income inequality.

And a bigger safety net.

You could survive.

And you’ll be rejuvenated and alive when the lights go down and the band implores you to…

LISTEN TO THE WIND BLOW!

“Gypsy”: https://bit.ly/2oJ2BkF

“The Chain”: https://bit.ly/2Q5qLCthttps://celebrityaccess.com/2018/09/06/the-chain/

[Storms123]

I don't know what the writer of this article has been smoking?
What kind of crazy, ****ed-up world do we live in where Lindsey Buckingham gets kicked out of Fleetwood Mac and the band gets better?

The same one in which Glenn Frey passes and the Eagles improve.

Now we know the Mac can’t sustain without Stevie, but without Lindsey…NO PROBLEM!

No one doubts Mike Campbell’s guitarwork, he doesn’t emote quite like Lindsey, but he can pick just as well.

As for Neil Finn…HE’S A REVELATION!

Maybe you remember Crowded House, but you should really look back to Split Enz, which couldn’t get traction until Neil joined. Then he got us and sent a message to our girl and won our hearts and financial success to boot. But being a proud New Zealander, he tends not to be on our radar screen, but he is now!

It’s no secret Stevie Nicks can do arena business without the rest of the group, but this is something different, it takes Stevie’s skills and appeals, mixes in the temporarily gone crooning of Christine McVie and now the band has been reenergized, gone from an oldies act to a new one overnight, how did this happen?

Now we know there was a schism in the band’s history, multiple ones in fact. I doubt fans of the Peter Green iteration liked the Stevie/Lindsey concoction. Then again, there was the interim era with Bob Welch and this seems more like an evolution than a substitution of journeyman players. Who knew Vince Gill could add so much to the Eagles, who knew Neil Finn could add so much to Fleetwood Mac? And as “The Chain” ends and Mike Campbell starts to wail you don’t miss Lindsey Buckingham one bit. Used to be his band, no longer. If they paid to see the act without Christine, what is Lindsey gonna bring to the picture to share the cash…NOTHING!

Now the funny thing about this iteration is it makes you want to hear new material. McCartney was on Stern today and it made you realize how much he missed Lennon. Because John held his nose when McCartney delivered tripe, and vice versa, they pushed each other to excellence. You’ve got to believe Mike and Neil have reinvigorated the other four members of Fleetwood Mac, and one thing you know about Neil is he can write, and unlike his peers, having never reached superstar status, he can still do it, he still has the fire.

But does anybody really want new Fleetwood Mac music?

Today it’s all about the road. The modern music business has detached from classic rock, all rock in fact. It’s all hip-hop all the time. Did you read today’s “Wall Street Journal” about the huge payments by the majors for barely proven hip-hop talent? They don’t care about radio, they can make their bones online and cash too, it’s a whole new paradigm. And never underestimate the power of classic rock, it too is streamed now, but its acolytes are no longer hungry, they might have smartphones but they still don’t subscribe to streaming services.

But they’re fans.

That’s the difference between the oldsters of yesterday and today. THE FERVOR! Go to a Mac show and people are not sitting in their seats, rattling their jewelry, they’re standing and singing and dancing…

The oldsters lived through something. It’s hard for the youngsters to understand. Music was EVERYTHING! Everybody had a stereo, everybody bought albums, they were addicted! Let’s analogize it to movies. Neil Simon dies and you remember his flicks and how you used to go to the theatre. Now you no longer go to the theatre, they make movies but you don’t want to see ’em. Sure, you might hit a documentary, about Mr. Rogers or RBG, but they’re a zit on the financial ass of the theatrical business.

But the funny thing is the classic rockers still rule at the venues.

So modern music is like today’s movies. Two-dimensional characters, nothing you can believe in. Candy that’s eaten and forgotten. There’s a business, they trumpet the grosses, but does anybody care?

Of course, a few do.

But when it comes to movies, the great stuff was all pre-blockbuster, pre “Jaws” and “Star Wars,” when there was not that much money in it and all the glamour and the impact was in films.

Even more in music. Because movies, when done right are larger than life, music when done right is life itself.

And now television has taken over from movies by being what flicks used to be. About people as opposed to superheroes and monsters. Because we want to see our real lives reflected.

And you can say today’s pop music is just today’s kids’ flavor, but the truth is it was different. Stevie Nicks was not an overnight success… Nobody in today’s Fleetwood Mac was an overnight success. They paid their dues, starved in obscurity, toured, lived the hard life until breakthroughs came years later.

That is not the paradigm today. Today everything is instant and then fades away. Those with intellects and souls stay far away from entertainment, the odds are too long, they want a protected life, but…back then entertainment was ruled by the middle class, playing without a backup plan.

Then again, there was little income inequality.

And a bigger safety net.

You could survive.

And you’ll be rejuvenated and alive when the lights go down and the band implores you to…

LISTEN TO THE WIND BLOW!

“Gypsy”: https://bit.ly/2oJ2BkF

“The Chain”: https://bit.ly/2Q5qLCthttps://celebrityaccess.com/2018/09/06/the-chain/


Is this the bands response to the reviews from yesterday's performance? :laugh:

[SteveMacD]

WTF was that guy smoking?

I’m keeping an open mind and choose to stay positive about the new lineup, and yesterday didn’t move the marker for me either way. I’m still excited, but I wasn’t completely blown away, just like every other post-Dance TV appearance. It could very well be great on its own, and I will appreciate it for what it is, not hate it for what it is not. Neil and Mike have proven track records.

But I can’t get behind declaring it’s better without Lindsey. There’s too much history, and I still am not happy that there was a parting.

[dreamsunwind]

Even if you're open to it/don't think it's bad, you would have to be on Mick-and-Stevie-in-the-80s levels of crack to think this made the band better lol.

[Miss Vicky]

That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.

[secondhandchain]

Sugar Mouse's day job.

[sodascouts]

That's Lefsetz, right? Yeah, he also gushed that the Eagles were better without Glenn Frey after their first performance without him, in front of their first tour without him. Maybe he takes pay offs from Azoff, or maybe it's just who he likes on a personal level (he's in love with Don Henley), but it sure as hell has nothing to do with actual sound quality. This proves that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

[SteveMacD]

Sugar Mouse's day job.

Damnit. That made me spit out my beer.

[DownOnRodeo]

LISTEN TO THE WIND BLOW!

I think we just did. (And I'll leave it to Homer "Potty-Mouth" McVie to tell us where this writer blew it from. :lol: )

[Angel75]

Sugar Mouse's day job.

Priceless


Seriously, That writer is a complete joke, clearly he's never seen LB live so knows F all what he's talking about

[lovethemac1]

Sugar Mouse's day job.

:laugh::laugh::laugh: I laughed out loud so hard, I startled my napping dogs!!!

[lovethemac1]

That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.

I agree. 100% waste of time reading that article.

[HomerMcvie]

Sugar Mouse's day job.

I LOVE YOU!!!!!!!!!:xoxo::xoxo::xoxo::xoxo::xoxo:

[jmn3]

Sorry to the clown who wrote this crap, but Fleetwood Mac did not get better. And The Eagles are not even close to better without Glenn. Are people out of their minds?

[dontlookdown]

That’s Bob Lefsetz. He has a great and very well written blog.
Which you should all subscribe to if you don’t already.

This is a great damage control piece. Billboard printed one too.

There are a lot of Fleetwood Mac loyalist out there — I’m one too, but I don’t believe in denial.
The links he posted contradict his enthusiasm.
The Ellen performance was awful. I chalk it up to a bad mix and an off day.



I don't know what the writer of this article has been smoking?
What kind of crazy, ****ed-up world do we live in where Lindsey Buckingham gets kicked out of Fleetwood Mac and the band gets better?

The same one in which Glenn Frey passes and the Eagles improve.

Now we know the Mac can’t sustain without Stevie, but without Lindsey…NO PROBLEM!

No one doubts Mike Campbell’s guitarwork, he doesn’t emote quite like Lindsey, but he can pick just as well.

As for Neil Finn…HE’S A REVELATION!

Maybe you remember Crowded House, but you should really look back to Split Enz, which couldn’t get traction until Neil joined. Then he got us and sent a message to our girl and won our hearts and financial success to boot. But being a proud New Zealander, he tends not to be on our radar screen, but he is now!

It’s no secret Stevie Nicks can do arena business without the rest of the group, but this is something different, it takes Stevie’s skills and appeals, mixes in the temporarily gone crooning of Christine McVie and now the band has been reenergized, gone from an oldies act to a new one overnight, how did this happen?

Now we know there was a schism in the band’s history, multiple ones in fact. I doubt fans of the Peter Green iteration liked the Stevie/Lindsey concoction. Then again, there was the interim era with Bob Welch and this seems more like an evolution than a substitution of journeyman players. Who knew Vince Gill could add so much to the Eagles, who knew Neil Finn could add so much to Fleetwood Mac? And as “The Chain” ends and Mike Campbell starts to wail you don’t miss Lindsey Buckingham one bit. Used to be his band, no longer. If they paid to see the act without Christine, what is Lindsey gonna bring to the picture to share the cash…NOTHING!

Now the funny thing about this iteration is it makes you want to hear new material. McCartney was on Stern today and it made you realize how much he missed Lennon. Because John held his nose when McCartney delivered tripe, and vice versa, they pushed each other to excellence. You’ve got to believe Mike and Neil have reinvigorated the other four members of Fleetwood Mac, and one thing you know about Neil is he can write, and unlike his peers, having never reached superstar status, he can still do it, he still has the fire.

But does anybody really want new Fleetwood Mac music?

Today it’s all about the road. The modern music business has detached from classic rock, all rock in fact. It’s all hip-hop all the time. Did you read today’s “Wall Street Journal” about the huge payments by the majors for barely proven hip-hop talent? They don’t care about radio, they can make their bones online and cash too, it’s a whole new paradigm. And never underestimate the power of classic rock, it too is streamed now, but its acolytes are no longer hungry, they might have smartphones but they still don’t subscribe to streaming services.

But they’re fans.

That’s the difference between the oldsters of yesterday and today. THE FERVOR! Go to a Mac show and people are not sitting in their seats, rattling their jewelry, they’re standing and singing and dancing…

The oldsters lived through something. It’s hard for the youngsters to understand. Music was EVERYTHING! Everybody had a stereo, everybody bought albums, they were addicted! Let’s analogize it to movies. Neil Simon dies and you remember his flicks and how you used to go to the theatre. Now you no longer go to the theatre, they make movies but you don’t want to see ’em. Sure, you might hit a documentary, about Mr. Rogers or RBG, but they’re a zit on the financial ass of the theatrical business.

But the funny thing is the classic rockers still rule at the venues.

So modern music is like today’s movies. Two-dimensional characters, nothing you can believe in. Candy that’s eaten and forgotten. There’s a business, they trumpet the grosses, but does anybody care?

Of course, a few do.

But when it comes to movies, the great stuff was all pre-blockbuster, pre “Jaws” and “Star Wars,” when there was not that much money in it and all the glamour and the impact was in films.

Even more in music. Because movies, when done right are larger than life, music when done right is life itself.

And now television has taken over from movies by being what flicks used to be. About people as opposed to superheroes and monsters. Because we want to see our real lives reflected.

And you can say today’s pop music is just today’s kids’ flavor, but the truth is it was different. Stevie Nicks was not an overnight success… Nobody in today’s Fleetwood Mac was an overnight success. They paid their dues, starved in obscurity, toured, lived the hard life until breakthroughs came years later.

That is not the paradigm today. Today everything is instant and then fades away. Those with intellects and souls stay far away from entertainment, the odds are too long, they want a protected life, but…back then entertainment was ruled by the middle class, playing without a backup plan.

Then again, there was little income inequality.

And a bigger safety net.

You could survive.

And you’ll be rejuvenated and alive when the lights go down and the band implores you to…

LISTEN TO THE WIND BLOW!

“Gypsy”: https://bit.ly/2oJ2BkF

“The Chain”: https://bit.ly/2Q5qLCthttps://celebrityaccess.com/2018/09/06/the-chain/

[secondhandchain]

I LOVE YOU!!!!!!!!!:xoxo::xoxo::xoxo::xoxo::xoxo:

I knew you'd like that. But am I that far off? BTW Stevie was all smiles on that horrible show but inside she KNOWS what she's done isn't good.

[HomerMcvie]

I knew you'd like that. But am I that far off? BTW Stevie was all smiles on that horrible show but inside she KNOWS what she's done isn't good.

I wish $he hated her$elf, but I seriously doubt that'$ even po$$ible.

Old goat has a staff to follow her around, convincing her that her ***** smells like ro$e$.

But you probably are right....deep inside, she knows that she f*cked up. But she'll NEVER admit it. She'll take that secret to goat Hell.

[BombaySapphire3]

I wish $he hated her$elf, but I seriously doubt that'$ even po$$ible.

Old goat has a staff to follow her around, convincing her that her ***** smells like ro$e$.

But you probably are right....deep inside, she knows that she f*cked up. But she'll NEVER admit it. She'll take that secret to goat Hell.

I thought all Hells were goat Hells:shrug: isn't Satan often depicted with the head of a goat? But anyway judging by her performance of Gypsy on Ellen I think that we are doing a disservice to Nanny goats everywhere by comparing them to her. Most goats that I have heard have way more range than Stevie does now.

[HomerMcvie]

I thought all Hells were goat Hells:shrug: isn't Satan often depicted with the head of a goat? But anyway judging by her performance of Gypsy on Ellen I think that we are doing a disservice to Nanny goats everywhere by comparing them to her. Most goats that I have heard have way more range than Stevie does now.

If $he went to Heaven, I'd rather be in Hell.

But let's pause now, for a sweet, goat loving moment....

https://youtu.be/NGBqB_k84Ms

[sodascouts]

In his "Mailbag," Lefsetz published two emails from readers who agreed with him.

Those two readers just happened to be the executive producer and music producer of Ellen.

I imagine Lefsetz is counting on the fact that very few people will actually take the time to click on those links to the performance to verify what he says, and just accept his claim that their performance on Ellen was so incredible that it has outshone anything they have done in recent memory. Read: Buy tickets to see them now, folks!

I've subscribed for years, and I've never seen a more blatant example of Lefsetz being a "company man."

If you're curious, here are the employee emails of which I speak:

Subject: Re: The Chain

This piece made me very happy, Bob. During the soundcheck I turned to a younger co-worker next to me and said, "...and all of those sounds are actually coming from the band!" They even count themselves in, instead of clips or digital tracks counting them in. Mick Fleetwood on drums sounded incredible. And the whole band looked so happy to be performing together. It was a booking Jonny Norman, our Co-EP and music booker wanted so badly, and it was so much fun.

Ed Glavin
Exec. Producer, The Ellen Show

_____________________________________________________

Subject: Re: The Chain

Longtime fan, first time caller!

Thanks for this Bob, I'm the Music Producer at Ellen, and this booking was 15 years in the making, and let me tell you, they were incredible. I wish you had been in the room, because it was electric. They sounded not only better than ever, they sounded fresh, like a new band. I?m not sure even the band thought it could be possible, that they could reinvent the wheel at this stage of their career and succeed, but they did it.

And their work ethic. So many acts show up, perform their song, and get right back into their car. Not these guys. They show up early, they rehearse, they stay long after to make sure it sounds great, they work HARD. And that's why it works. And why this machine has been working for so long. They actually CARE about the music. And they?ve been smart. They have an amazing team of people around them, from the top - down. It was an extraordinary thing to be a part of and to watch them create their magic. And I'm so happy you posted our clip and felt the same way.

Best,
Jonathan
_______
Jonathan Norman
Co-Executive Producer
"The Ellen DeGeneres Show"

[DownOnRodeo]

they stay long after to make sure it sounds great, they work HARD

Aha!!
This proves that the Ellen performance (unlike the 100% live-to-air Today Show performances) was operated on during editing.

They spent SO much dedicated time on rehearsing and post-mixing, and yet half the band was still completely inaudible???

[HomerMcvie]

Aha!!
This proves that the Ellen performance (unlike the 100% live-to-air Today Show performances) was operated on during editing.

They spent SO much dedicated time on rehearsing and post-mixing, and yet half the band was still completely inaudible???

It was ridiculous that the Crowded House guy and the backup singers were the only ones you could hear!

[lovethemac1]

It was ridiculous that the Crowded House guy and the backup singers were the only ones you could hear!

Sugar Mouse's other day job.....sound engineer.:nod:

[HomerMcvie]

Sugar Mouse's other day job.....sound engineer.:nod:

:lol::lol::lol:
And Crowded House publicist!

[sodascouts]

Aha!!
This proves that the Ellen performance (unlike the 100% live-to-air Today Show performances) was operated on during editing.

They spent SO much dedicated time on rehearsing and post-mixing, and yet half the band was still completely inaudible???

I hadn't thought about that.

Wow.

Do you think that perhaps they deliberately lowered Stevie and Christine in the mix after the fact? That their voices were so "off" that for the band to "sound great" (ha!) they had to be turned down? That their inaudibility wasn't a mistake?

[DownOnRodeo]

Do you think that perhaps they deliberately lowered Stevie and Christine in the mix after the fact? That their voices were so "off" that for the band to "sound great" (ha!) they had to be turned down? That their inaudibility wasn't a mistake?

Exactly--that becomes one of the possibilities. Along with the question of who "they" is. The FM "machine", the Ellen producers, or a combination thereof? To what extent did the likes of Christine have any say? And I certainly can't imagine that Stevie was hanging around for ages in the post-edit studio. (Wasn't she off cavorting with that muscular guy half her age in the green room?...)

I can even read the producer's letter as being satire--ie taking a dig at the band's members and keepers--if not for the remark about Mick's energetic drumming, which rings true.

Sugar Mouse's other day job.....sound engineer.

Lol, that's as funny as the original. :laugh:

Sugar Mouse: "Neil Finn to 11!"
Stevie: "More cowbell!"
Sugar Mouse: "Those harmonies with himself are off-the-charts spine-tingling!"
The McVies: "Sorry to interrupt--we can't hear ourselves in the mix."
Ellen producer: "Increase the volume of Mike Campbell's casio keyboard!"

[SteveMacD]

It was ridiculous that the Crowded House guy and the backup singers were the only ones you could hear!

The only instruments I could easily hear during the first part of The Chain were drums, Neil’s guitar, and the trills at the end of the chorus. I had turn up the volume and focus to hear John, the organ, and Stevie. Mike’s resonator guitar wasn’t in the mix during the second verse. I could see him playing, but couldn’t hear anything.

[TheWildHeart67]

Is that producer's email for real? Pure denial and embarrassing.

[lovethemac1]

Exactly--that becomes one of the possibilities. Along with the question of who "they" is. The FM "machine", the Ellen producers, or a combination thereof? To what extent did the likes of Christine have any say? And I certainly can't imagine that Stevie was hanging around for ages in the post-edit studio. (Wasn't she off cavorting with that muscular guy half her age in the green room?...)

I can even read the producer's letter as being satire--ie taking a dig at the band's members and keepers--if not for the remark about Mick's energetic drumming, which rings true.



Lol, that's as funny as the original. :laugh:

Sugar Mouse: "Neil Finn to 11!"
Stevie: "More cowbell!"
Sugar Mouse: "Those harmonies with himself are off-the-charts spine-tingling!"
The McVies: "Sorry to interrupt--we can't hear ourselves in the mix."
Ellen producer: "Increase the volume of Mike Campbell's casio keyboard!"

That's pretty hilarious too!!! More cowbell...hahahahahaha.

[David]

Thanks for this Bob, I'm the Music Producer at Ellen, and this booking was 15 years in the making, and let me tell you, they were incredible. I wish you had been in the room, because it was electric. They sounded not only better than ever, they sounded fresh, like a new band. I'm not sure even the band thought it could be possible, that they could reinvent the wheel at this stage of their career and succeed, but they did it.
_______
Jonathan Norman
Co-Executive Producer
"The Ellen DeGeneres Show"[/INDENT] You called it, Nancy. It's just silly marketing hyperbole. It means nothing genuine. It has no connection to anything except selling.

What I'm wondering is whether Jonathan Norman knows what "reinventing the wheel" actually means. It is NOT a term of praise.

As for the blogger whose piece is the reason for this thread: I have no idea who he is, but I don't have to know. He's just being perverse, probably to make a splash in his little corner of the pond. Everybody's doing that these days. It's the online behavioral norm.

[bombaysaffires]

Aha!!
This proves that the Ellen performance (unlike the 100% live-to-air Today Show performances) was operated on during editing.

They spent SO much dedicated time on rehearsing and post-mixing, and yet half the band was still completely inaudible???

that was the first thing that popped into my head as soon as I read that line as well.

Why would they hang around? to FIX things!!

This points to how bad the SN team has gotten. They also ask for copies of audio recordings of interviews she does, and then go through them and tell reporters which parts to edit out. I don't have time to find it now but one reporter wrote about it.

She's OBSESSED with herself. I mean, she always has been....who else stays up all night taking pics of themselves and then spending countless hours hand tinting and tweaking them oh, wait....Kim Kardashian.... except you know what? Kim K has managed to get married and have multiple children as well. And she has family members who (for better or worse reasons) will call her out on stuff. Stevie has her career, and that's it. Sad. She really is on her way to becoming Norma Desmond.

[Moz]

They sounded not only better than ever, they sounded fresh, like a new band.

Yeah, because Lindsey was so stale. :rolleyes:

[David]

She's OBSESSED with herself. I mean, she always has been....who else stays up all night taking pics of themselves and then spending countless hours hand tinting and tweaking them oh, wait....Kim Kardashian.... except you know what? Kim K has managed to get married and have multiple children as well. And she has family members who (for better or worse reasons) will call her out on stuff. Stevie has her career, and that's it. Sad. She really is on her way to becoming Norma Desmond.Norma Desmond, Miss Havisham, Sylvia Browne, Elizabeth Taylor. The references aren't very flattering—not the way they're intended.

Everything Stevie says and does is forced through her own gills. She romanticizes herself. She writes about other women real and fictional in the third person—Rhiannon, Mabel Normand, Garbo, Julia, Cecilia, sisters of the moon (or the moon and her sisters). But everybody knows those "characters" are really Stevie. That's why fans all interpret Stevie's hundreds of songs autobiographically. Those third-person princesses suffer just like Stevie. They're waifs with flowing golden hair trapped in ancient windswept castles, and it's all metaphorical for Stevie Nicks and her life circumstances. (Notice how the female faces in all the Maxfield Parrish paintings all look like the same girl?)

Back in her heyday, concert critics used to say the same thing about her in every review: "She has shed some, though far from all, of the spacey narcissism that has made her something of a caricature in rock," "Stripped of all her dying swan poses and faerie queen pretensions, Nicks was riveting," and so on. I know them all practically from memory. One of them wrote, "She is simply too flighty and fluttery to command a stage." The rock press accurately called out her narcissism back in the day, and we Macheads got really pissed off at them. (Treat yourself to the old reviews in the Blue Letter Archives.) But they were right. Stevie can't talk about anything without referring back to herself—the movies she loves, the movie stars she believes she resembles, the career choices other people make, the other members of Fleetwood Mac or Lady Antebellum or the Heartbreakers or any other band she takes a shine to, or those dozens of younger singer-songwriters she promotes in creepy ways, like Vanessa Carlton. Stevie thinks they're all younger versions of her.

She is obsessed with herself to a degree that seems to indicate a certain degree of pathology. It was compelling in a 30-year-old, but it seems twisted or creepy in a 70-year-old. Last year's 60 Minutes piece on Stevie and Chrissie Hynde was intended to celebrate two tough old rock stars, but the incongruity in their respective psychiatric health left me with a sour stomach and a crabbed fatigue. Chrissie sounded like a normal, healthy post-Freudian woman ("Why should I care if other people don't like the way I talk about my rape? I did some stupid sh|t when I was younger. I'm not here to give my critics the warm fuzzies."), and there was Stevie, locked in her self-worship, romanticizing her every golden curl, engaging in ditzy, pre-Freudian Barbie doll commentary. What other 60-year-old woman was moved beyond description by the Twilight movies? She has something wrong with her.

[jwd]

Norma Desmond, Miss Havisham, Sylvia Browne, Elizabeth Taylor. The references aren't very flattering—not the way they're intended.

Everything Stevie says and does is forced through her own gills. She romanticizes herself. She writes about other women real and fictional in the third person—Rhiannon, Mabel Normand, Garbo, Julia, Cecilia, sisters of the moon (or the moon and her sisters). But everybody knows those "characters" are really Stevie. That's why fans all interpret Stevie's hundreds of songs autobiographically. Those third-person princesses suffer just like Stevie. They're waifs with flowing golden hair trapped in ancient windswept castles, and it's all metaphorical for Stevie Nicks and her life circumstances. (Notice how the female faces in all the Maxfield Parrish paintings all look like the same girl?)

Back in her heyday, concert critics used to say the same thing about her in every review: "She has shed some, though far from all, of the spacey narcissism that has made her something of a caricature in rock," "Stripped of all her dying swan poses and faerie queen pretensions, Nicks was riveting," and so on. I know them all practically from memory. One of them wrote, "She is simply too flighty and fluttery to command a stage." The rock press accurately called out her narcissism back in the day, and we Macheads got really pissed off at them. (Treat yourself to the old reviews in the Blue Letter Archives.) But they were right. Stevie can't talk about anything without referring back to herself—the movies she loves, the movie stars she believes she resembles, the career choices other people make, the other members of Fleetwood Mac or Lady Antebellum or the Heartbreakers or any other band she takes a shine to, or those dozens of younger singer-songwriters she promotes in creepy ways, like Vanessa Carlton. Stevie thinks they're all younger versions of her.

She is obsessed with herself to a degree that seems to indicate a certain degree of pathology. It was compelling in a 30-year-old, but it seems twisted or creepy in a 70-year-old. Last year's 60 Minutes piece on Stevie and Chrissie Hynde was intended to celebrate two tough old rock stars, but the incongruity in their respective psychiatric health left me with a sour stomach and a crabbed fatigue. Chrissie sounded like a normal, healthy post-Freudian woman ("Why should I care if other people don't like the way I talk about my rape? I did some stupid sh|t when I was younger. I'm not here to give my critics the warm fuzzies."), and there was Stevie, locked in her self-worship, romanticizing her every golden curl, engaging in ditzy, pre-Freudian Barbie doll commentary. What other 60-year-old woman was moved beyond description by the Twilight movies? She has something wrong with her.

Excellent post David! You summed up our long lost Queen so well.

[sodascouts]

...those dozens of younger singer-songwriters she promotes in creepy ways, like Vanessa Carlton. Stevie thinks they're all younger versions of her.

I'd never thought of it that way, but now that you mention it... you're right.

What other 60-year-old woman was moved beyond description by the Twilight movies?

Because Bella reminded her of herself.

Now that you've laid it all out like that... it's a pretty depressing read.

[Storms123]

Yeah, because Lindsey was so stale. :rolleyes:

After seeing "Fleetwood Mac--High School Musical" the other day--I've really faced the reality that Stevie and Christine COULDN'T keep up with Lindsey anymore. He's a year younger than Stevie, but his energy level indicates far younger than that (and yes I agree Stevie looks fantastic for her a 70 year old) but whenever I see her moving in those heals on stage--I see a broken hip. With every twirl..... Mike and Neil are perfect for Christine and Stevie as we have them now. Mike doesn't move and if Neil moves to much, Stevie will just remind him to stop because she owns him now.

[jwd]

After seeing "Fleetwood Mac--High School Musical" the other day--I've really faced the reality that Stevie and Christine COULDN'T keep up with Lindsey anymore. He's a year younger than Stevie, but his energy level indicates far younger than that (and yes I agree Stevie looks fantastic for her a 70 year old) but whenever I see her moving in those heals on stage--I see a broken hip. With every twirl..... Mike and Neil are perfect for Christine and Stevie as we have them now. Mike doesn't move and if Neil moves to much, Stevie will just remind him to stop because she owns him now.

You're not serious. Neil Finn is an adult man, with a little more self respect than that. :laugh:

[Storms123]

In his "Mailbag," Lefsetz published two emails from readers who agreed with him.

Those two readers just happened to be the executive producer and music producer of Ellen.

I imagine Lefsetz is counting on the fact that very few people will actually take the time to click on those links to the performance to verify what he says, and just accept his claim that their performance on Ellen was so incredible that it has outshone anything they have done in recent memory. Read: Buy tickets to see them now, folks!

I've subscribed for years, and I've never seen a more blatant example of Lefsetz being a "company man."

If you're curious, here are the employee emails of which I speak:

Subject: Re: The Chain

This piece made me very happy, Bob. During the soundcheck I turned to a younger co-worker next to me and said, "...and all of those sounds are actually coming from the band!" They even count themselves in, instead of clips or digital tracks counting them in. Mick Fleetwood on drums sounded incredible. And the whole band looked so happy to be performing together. It was a booking Jonny Norman, our Co-EP and music booker wanted so badly, and it was so much fun.

Ed Glavin
Exec. Producer, The Ellen Show

_____________________________________________________

Subject: Re: The Chain

Longtime fan, first time caller!

Thanks for this Bob, I'm the Music Producer at Ellen, and this booking was 15 years in the making, and let me tell you, they were incredible. I wish you had been in the room, because it was electric. They sounded not only better than ever, they sounded fresh, like a new band. I?m not sure even the band thought it could be possible, that they could reinvent the wheel at this stage of their career and succeed, but they did it.

And their work ethic. So many acts show up, perform their song, and get right back into their car. Not these guys. They show up early, they rehearse, they stay long after to make sure it sounds great, they work HARD. And that's why it works. And why this machine has been working for so long. They actually CARE about the music. And they?ve been smart. They have an amazing team of people around them, from the top - down. It was an extraordinary thing to be a part of and to watch them create their magic. And I'm so happy you posted our clip and felt the same way.

Best,
Jonathan
_______
Jonathan Norman
Co-Executive Producer
"The Ellen DeGeneres Show"

Karen probably wrote these emails :]

[elle]

Karen probably wrote these emails :]

if these people really did this, it's as sad for them as it is hilarious.

[Storms123]

if these people really did this, it's as sad for them as it is hilarious.

HA--I said it in jest, but honestly--it's pretty amazing the backlash they are getting. If they didn't lie from day 1, it probably wouldn't be so bad, but when you think about it--the Rumours 5 haven't put out new music collectively in what, 30+ years--yet OWTS was virtually sold out. People want to see them. Fast forward to now, this tour isn't selling well. Yes it will likely do "fine" but with so many bands and performers of their era out doing tours/farewell tours now, this is a sad way to end. And I understand many disagree, but their legacy is tarnished. The backlash, nasty-grams on line, etc is still pretty vocal 5 months later. I know Stevie lives in a bubble and her people shield her from everything, but she's not a stupid woman. She knows what people are saying about this. Mick is not an idiot either. He may look like a court jester, but he's not. Even Azoff is probably saying "WTF" right now. Promoters are on the hook for a lot right now. I don't think it's an accident that no dates beyond the US have been announced yet. The next few months will be telling ( I would imagine)
There is a nostalgia to seeing the Rumours 5 play together. And I am not saying they don't play well together, because they do (or did) OWTS was amazing. Even with Chrisitne missing a note and Stevie sounding pitchy--it was okay they were singing 40 year old songs because the songs tell THEIR story. People don't feel that beholden to shell out money to see this iteration. There's no history, there are no stories, there is no thread pulling them together. Their "people" need to do something to entice broader masses of people to want to see this group. Better interviews ( and preferably telling the truth in them) better performances to promote, etc. It seems like any promotion around this tour has been slow to build and I have to wonder if it's because their PR folks didn't expect what's happened and are hoping it will blow over (i.e. after Ellen (not) or after iHeart Radio) We shall see.

[jwd]

HA--I said it in jest, but honestly--it's pretty amazing the backlash they are getting. If they didn't lie from day 1, it probably wouldn't be so bad, but when you think about it--the Rumours 5 haven't put out new music collectively in what, 30+ years--yet OWTS was virtually sold out. People want to see them. Fast forward to now, this tour isn't selling well. Yes it will likely do "fine" but with so many bands and performers of their era out doing tours/farewell tours now, this is a sad way to end. And I understand many disagree, but their legacy is tarnished. The backlash, nasty-grams on line, etc is still pretty vocal 5 months later. I know Stevie lives in a bubble and her people shield her from everything, but she's not a stupid woman. She knows what people are saying about this. Mick is not an idiot either. He may look like a court jester, but he's not. Even Azoff is probably saying "WTF" right now. Promoters are on the hook for a lot right now. I don't think it's an accident that no dates beyond the US have been announced yet. The next few months will be telling ( I would imagine)
There is a nostalgia to seeing the Rumours 5 play together. And I am not saying they don't play well together, because they do (or did) OWTS was amazing. Even with Chrisitne missing a note and Stevie sounding pitchy--it was okay they were singing 40 year old songs because the songs tell THEIR story. People don't feel that beholden to shell out money to see this iteration. There's no history, there are no stories, there is no thread pulling them together. Their "people" need to do something to entice broader masses of people to want to see this group. Better interviews ( and preferably telling the truth in them) better performances to promote, etc. It seems like any promotion around this tour has been slow to build and I have to wonder if it's because their PR folks didn't expect what's happened and are hoping it will blow over (i.e. after Ellen (not) or after iHeart Radio) We shall see.

Well said Stormy! It's all about the Rumours 5, not some karaoke band.

[Storms123]

Well said Stormy! It's all about the Rumours 5, not some karaoke band.

I'm still heart broken--can you tell?

[HomerMcvie]

You're not serious. Neil Finn is an adult man, with a little more self respect than that. :laugh:

If he had self respect, given his own career, he wouldn't have joined this FARCE. Seriously, WTF was he thinking?

Mike, I get that. He's lost his lifelong gig...

[Nathan]

This points to how bad the SN team has gotten. They also ask for copies of audio recordings of interviews she does, and then go through them and tell reporters which parts to edit out. I don't have time to find it now but one reporter wrote about it.

She's OBSESSED with herself. I mean, she always has been....who else stays up all night taking pics of themselves and then spending countless hours hand tinting and tweaking them oh, wait....Kim Kardashian.... except you know what? Kim K has managed to get married and have multiple children as well. And she has family members who (for better or worse reasons) will call her out on stuff. Stevie has her career, and that's it. Sad. She really is on her way to becoming Norma Desmond.


Which part of this is news to you?

And you can say that it's "sad" that the woman doesn't have a family in the traditional, nuclear sense of the word but that's really just your opinion. Hers is a life lived on her own terms, with more freedom than you or I can comprehend, as a result of her excessive wealth. I don't know this firsthand but my guess is that with her level of access, domestic bliss might seem a little unimportant.

Also, if I recall correctly, Kim Kardashian is famous because of a sex tape.

[Nathan]

Norma Desmond, Miss Havisham, Sylvia Browne, Elizabeth Taylor. The references aren't very flattering—not the way they're intended.

Everything Stevie says and does is forced through her own gills. She romanticizes herself. She writes about other women real and fictional in the third person—Rhiannon, Mabel Normand, Garbo, Julia, Cecilia, sisters of the moon (or the moon and her sisters). But everybody knows those "characters" are really Stevie. That's why fans all interpret Stevie's hundreds of songs autobiographically. Those third-person princesses suffer just like Stevie. They're waifs with flowing golden hair trapped in ancient windswept castles, and it's all metaphorical for Stevie Nicks and her life circumstances. (Notice how the female faces in all the Maxfield Parrish paintings all look like the same girl?)

Back in her heyday, concert critics used to say the same thing about her in every review: "She has shed some, though far from all, of the spacey narcissism that has made her something of a caricature in rock," "Stripped of all her dying swan poses and faerie queen pretensions, Nicks was riveting," and so on. I know them all practically from memory. One of them wrote, "She is simply too flighty and fluttery to command a stage." The rock press accurately called out her narcissism back in the day, and we Macheads got really pissed off at them. (Treat yourself to the old reviews in the Blue Letter Archives.) But they were right. Stevie can't talk about anything without referring back to herself—the movies she loves, the movie stars she believes she resembles, the career choices other people make, the other members of Fleetwood Mac or Lady Antebellum or the Heartbreakers or any other band she takes a shine to, or those dozens of younger singer-songwriters she promotes in creepy ways, like Vanessa Carlton. Stevie thinks they're all younger versions of her.

She is obsessed with herself to a degree that seems to indicate a certain degree of pathology. It was compelling in a 30-year-old, but it seems twisted or creepy in a 70-year-old. Last year's 60 Minutes piece on Stevie and Chrissie Hynde was intended to celebrate two tough old rock stars, but the incongruity in their respective psychiatric health left me with a sour stomach and a crabbed fatigue. Chrissie sounded like a normal, healthy post-Freudian woman ("Why should I care if other people don't like the way I talk about my rape? I did some stupid sh|t when I was younger. I'm not here to give my critics the warm fuzzies."), and there was Stevie, locked in her self-worship, romanticizing her every golden curl, engaging in ditzy, pre-Freudian Barbie doll commentary. What other 60-year-old woman was moved beyond description by the Twilight movies? She has something wrong with her.

Well said, as usual David.

I felt the same way about that 60 Minutes piece. I was also front row center for the 24 Karat Gold Tour, and the difference between Chrissie and Stevie's musical styles, personalities, and interactions with the crowd, was equally stark in that setting, and in exactly the way that you describe.

"She has something wrong with her." Yes, for sure she does. I think that it has a great deal to do with (1) the small mountain of cocaine she spent ten years shoveling into her face, (2) the brain rot that resulted, (3) the pharmacy of pills she ingested over the better part of a decade, (4) far, far too much money, and (5), a "team" (to use their corporate lingo) of handmaidens and homegirls that are probably a little bit overindulgent.

She's also old.

But the fact that she has something wrong with her isn't new. That paper that someone wrote for a college film class likening her to Norma Desmond (right down to her fashion sense) was done in the mid-90s, during the Street Angel-era. So that's been 25 years. In my view, the likeness between SN and Desmond began even earlier - around 1987 or so, after she had gotten off the blow, and record sales had slowed.

Jim from Boston (SaidSomething is his username) has some fantastic stories about serving her in restaurants during that time period. I will PM him to see if he would like to chime in for those who haven't heard them.

For me, the Desmond connection has always been part of the appeal and the make-up of the whole package. She is at least half, and perhaps wholly, off of her rocker, and has been for some time. Her relationship with reality or lack thereof is one of the many contradictions that play a part in her image, and keep people engaged. If we remain tuned in, we might be able to figure her out completely. I call it the Stevie Nicks Scavenger Hunt, and I think it's the puzzle that many fans are intent on putting together. Is she crazy? Or just rich and eccentric? Or both? Is she strong or fragile? Impassioned performer or just high as a bat? Gifted writer or lifter of Oscar Wilde, the Spinners, Joni Mitchel, et al? Controlling diva or, humble woman who is aware that she got lucky by virtue of destiny and Lindsey Buckingham? An artist living life on her own new-wave feminist terms or, a giant B. who is so insufferably self-involved that she was unable to maintain a marriage or have children?

I subscribe to the theory of "I don't know."

[David]

"She has something wrong with her." Yes, for sure she does. I think that it has a great deal to do with (1) the small mountain of cocaine she spent ten years shoveling into her face, (2) the brain rot that resulted, (3) the pharmacy of pills she ingested over the better part of a decade, (4) far, far too much money, and (5), a "team" (to use their corporate lingo) of handmaidens and homegirls that are probably a little bit overindulgent.

She's also old. That's really why it feels bad to slag off on her. But I should add I still love her no matter how remote she feels from those qualities that I originally found so compelling.

For me, the Desmond connection has always been part of the appeal and the make-up of the whole package. She is at least half, and perhaps wholly, off of her rocker, and has been for some time. Her relationship with reality or lack thereof is one of the many contradictions that play a part in her image, and keep people engaged. If we remain tuned in, we might be able to figure her out completely. I call it the Stevie Nicks Scavenger Hunt, and I think it's the puzzle that many fans are intent on putting together. Is she crazy? Or just rich and eccentric? Or both? Is she strong or fragile?Impassioned performer or just high as a bat? Gifted writer or lifter of Oscar Wilde, the Spinners, Joni Mitchell, et al? Controlling diva or humble woman who is aware that she got lucky by virtue of destiny and Lindsey Buckingham? An artist living life on her own new-wave feminist terms or a giant B. who is so insufferably self-involved that she was unable to maintain a marriage or have children?
Yes and yes, Nate, absolutely. And the fact that she started in this business as a genuinely warm and considerate girl keeps her within reach. No matter how odd she gets, there's always that little piece of Stevie Nicks at the very center, amazingly enough. I haven't seen her live since 2003, but the videos of her singing Wild Heart and Bella Donna and Moonlight last year contain those glimpses of Stevie Nicks. She hasn't lost it, but she has done a lot to obscure it. Some people's narcissism can be fascinating, but the fascination inevitably wanes over time.

[button-lip]

That's really why it feels bad to slag off on her. But I should add I still love her no matter how remote she feels from those qualities that I originally found so compelling.

She didn't have any problem in breaking a fan's heart, and I'm talking about Lindsey's daughter, Leelee. She's always talking about her fans and "oh, how much they mean to me!". Yet, she was so determined to kick Lindsey out of the band that she didn't even care what his daughter, one of her fans, might feel.

So, no, I don't feel bad to slag her off. She clearly didn't care about the consequences of her actions and how many people she hurt in the process.

[dreamsunwind]

Norma Desmond, Miss Havisham, Sylvia Browne, Elizabeth Taylor. The references aren't very flattering—not the way they're intended.

Everything Stevie says and does is forced through her own gills. She romanticizes herself. She writes about other women real and fictional in the third person—Rhiannon, Mabel Normand, Garbo, Julia, Cecilia, sisters of the moon (or the moon and her sisters). But everybody knows those "characters" are really Stevie. That's why fans all interpret Stevie's hundreds of songs autobiographically. Those third-person princesses suffer just like Stevie. They're waifs with flowing golden hair trapped in ancient windswept castles, and it's all metaphorical for Stevie Nicks and her life circumstances. (Notice how the female faces in all the Maxfield Parrish paintings all look like the same girl?)

Back in her heyday, concert critics used to say the same thing about her in every review: "She has shed some, though far from all, of the spacey narcissism that has made her something of a caricature in rock," "Stripped of all her dying swan poses and faerie queen pretensions, Nicks was riveting," and so on. I know them all practically from memory. One of them wrote, "She is simply too flighty and fluttery to command a stage." The rock press accurately called out her narcissism back in the day, and we Macheads got really pissed off at them. (Treat yourself to the old reviews in the Blue Letter Archives.) But they were right. Stevie can't talk about anything without referring back to herself—the movies she loves, the movie stars she believes she resembles, the career choices other people make, the other members of Fleetwood Mac or Lady Antebellum or the Heartbreakers or any other band she takes a shine to, or those dozens of younger singer-songwriters she promotes in creepy ways, like Vanessa Carlton. Stevie thinks they're all younger versions of her.

She is obsessed with herself to a degree that seems to indicate a certain degree of pathology. It was compelling in a 30-year-old, but it seems twisted or creepy in a 70-year-old. Last year's 60 Minutes piece on Stevie and Chrissie Hynde was intended to celebrate two tough old rock stars, but the incongruity in their respective psychiatric health left me with a sour stomach and a crabbed fatigue. Chrissie sounded like a normal, healthy post-Freudian woman ("Why should I care if other people don't like the way I talk about my rape? I did some stupid sh|t when I was younger. I'm not here to give my critics the warm fuzzies."), and there was Stevie, locked in her self-worship, romanticizing her every golden curl, engaging in ditzy, pre-Freudian Barbie doll commentary. What other 60-year-old woman was moved beyond description by the Twilight movies? She has something wrong with her.

This is honestly everything I've ever thought about Stevie, but never could find a way to describe, put into words perfectly.

[elle]

And the fact that she started in this business as a genuinely warm and considerate girl keeps her within reach. No matter how odd she gets, there's always that little piece of Stevie Nicks at the very center

now you sound like Lindsey Buckingham.