"THROWN DOWN" Not that great...

[Steve]

I now this will appear blasphamous, but I hope "Thrown Down" was just a leak (even not final version) and is not the lead track from the new album. To me, "TD" sounds very late 80's, early 90's. It doesn't have a fresh, dynamic, up-to-date sound. Stevie's TISL had that sound (including the lead track and "Planets"). In fact, "Planets" blows "TD" out of the water in terms of song and production. I expect more from FM, especially under Lindsey's thumb (well..we were just happy to get them together for "Twisted").

I may be a FM fanatic, but I know a great song from a mediocre song..."Silver Springs" vs. the Lindsey produced "Twisted".

Maybe it's been just too long between studio albums and I'm just hoping for too much, but I don't think so. I remember waiting for Tusk, Mirage, Tango, the Dance, and all the others in between. When it's great, it's great. When it's so, so..it's "Save Me" or "Paper Doll".

Being a true FM fan, my fingers are crossed. Yes, they have something else up their sleeves to surprise us with. I can't wait!

[Christopher]

Now that I have had time to listen to the newer version of Thrown down"over and over again for a few weeks..... and the excitement and newness has somewhat worn off......I can say that I somewhat agree with you.
I have always thought or hoped that this is not the final mix, and we will see some more enhancements when we get the final version.
The song will be a good album track, but I also hope it is not the lead,... It sounds too familiar and not groundbreaking enough...
although it wouldn't sound out of place on Stevie's TISL, I aslo agree that "Planets" or even "TISL" or "Fall from Grace" blow Thrown Down out of the water all around!!!

But then again I rank "Planets" right up there with the best Stevie has ever done ie: "Edge of 17", or "Stand Back".

While we all are having "Great Expectations" for the new FM, Im sure that every song on the CD will not be groundbreaking...and I chalk "Thrown Down" as being one of the more predictable classic sounds Fleetwood mac is known for. The instrumentation on it is very energized...that rhythm section! ....and I still assert it's several notches above a "Save me" or "Paper Doll".

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by Christopher
It sounds too familiar and not groundbreaking enough...I guess that's where I differ from a lot of people... I'm definitely expecting to have my socks knocked off, but I'm not worried if the album is "groundbreaking," or not.

I'm not even sure what that term means anymore. Seems like everything's already been done once by someone anyway, so the band might as well just make some great music... the kind they do best... and not worry about whether it's innovative.

I'm certainly not disagreeing with you guys, or anything. I'm just saying that I like Fleetwood Mac, when they sound like FLEETWOOD MAC... superb instrumentation, top-of-the-line production, sublime harmonies, heartfelt lyrics... and yes, that bit of quirkiness. Which, to me, is also part of "The Fleetwood Mac Sound."

So, under those terms, I absolutely love "Thrown Down," and I'm still loving it, even after the dozens of times I've listened to it.
:)



Johnny Stew

[tommer]

steve, i could easily just reply by saying that you don't know what the hell you're talking about, but i don't mind specifying.
1-you don't expect musicians in their 50's/60's to create musical revolutions, you can only hope they'll keep on doing what they used to do best, which i believe IS the case with this song.
2-TD is NO Twisted. it doesn't sound 'tired' in any way, it's full of energy and spirit, they did a fabulous job.
3-i think the production is great, it sounds 'full' despite the fact that there are no keyboards there, it's very 'classic mac' yet it doesn't sound like something which was recorded in the 70's or 80's.
4-when you write 'up to date sound' what do you mean exactly? system of a down? nelly? las ketchup sound? no thank you.
5-in my wildest dreams i couldn't have imagined we will get the biggest amount of new FM music EVER in 2003. in this double album i'm sure every FM fan will find his/her niche and so would you.
since i first heard this recording my waiting for the complete album has become more and more anxious, and i just can't decide where i'm gonna fly to see them this time!!!

[MissJanet]

I can see it from two points. Thrown Down sounds like a Stevie song with a great musical background and fine guitar work, or it sounds like a Lindsey song wich happens to have Stevie on vocals. And that is my problem with it. FM without Christine McVie cannot sound like a group, they will be the combined solo efforts of Stevie and Lindsey. Not bad, but not what FM is about.
I'm guite sure that Christine will be missed alot when the album is out.

[nae]

I agree with you MissJanet~ Christine will be missed~I love Stevie's solo work, and I like Lindsey on his own, S&L together, etc...but to me, none of them have ever sounded better than when they're all FIVE playing together~I have a feeling the new album will be really good, but I'm not getting my hopes up for another ground breaker like Rumors~Also, it's not so much the cd
I'm looking foward to, it's the TOUR!

Nae

[WelshWitchPMD]

I am still trying to let Thrown Down grow on me. I like the TISL demo better. I don't know why I do.

[Street Angel]

Originally posted by MissJanet
FM without Christine McVie cannot sound like a group, they will be the combined solo efforts of Stevie and Lindsey. Not bad, but not what FM is about.
I'm guite sure that Christine will be missed alot when the album is out.

This is not intended to sound harsh or rude, but let´s look at the opposite example: What was the "Time" album then? "Christine McVie & Her All-Star Band" ? ;)

[David]

Originally posted by Steve
I now this will appear blasphamous, but I hope "Thrown Down" was just a leak (even not final version) and is not the lead track from the new album. To me, "TD" sounds very late 80's, early 90's. It doesn't have a fresh, dynamic, up-to-date sound. Stevie's TISL had that sound (including the lead track and "Planets"). In fact, "Planets" blows "TD" out of the water in terms of song and production. I expect more from FM, especially under Lindsey's thumb (well..we were just happy to get them together for "Twisted").I liked "Thrown Down" when I heard it but I thought it sounded too mainstream. Also, I didn't sense staying power in it for me; I don't think I'll be listening to it ten years from now with the kick I still feel listening to some of the tunes on "Rumours" or the Dog & Dustbin album.

Actually, though, in light of what you said, I have to reply that essentially "Thrown Down" pleases me & displeases me in the same ways as "Planets" on Stevie's solo album. I find that both songs have the same strengths & weaknesses to me. I find them both extremely mainstream/commercial of a certain type, which I guess is a benefit to some & a drawback to others. From my own point of view, that's a drawback. I think the "Planets" production had some embarrassments in it, namely the cheesy & derivative synth-generated engine-like sounds preceding the bridge. One of the strengths of "Thrown Down" is its thick, lustrous sheen. But both "Planets" & "Thrown Down" lack the energy of a great funk tune; both seem a little sluggish. When I listen to the production style of both songs, I don't sense visionary excitement in the capabilities of the medium.

I'm sure the Mac will take some interesting musical chances on this new album. I don't think the four of them would be content to go for just a slick radio-friendly sound on each & every track.

[Mac Fan]

I've never heard this song, so I can't comment on it.(Someone on here did ask if I wanted it on MP3, but hasn't sent it yet)

[Steve]

By up-to-dates sound, I mean a contemporary sounding production, while keeping the great style (writing, melodies, harmonies, quirkiness, etc.).

Need an example?: When "Street Angel" came out, it sounded like it could have been produced in 1983. In contrast, "TISL" sounded like it was produced in 2001 - it had a fresh sound. I would use a FM example, but it's just been too long.

I'm not saying I think "Thrown Down" sucks, I'm saying I hope it's not the lead track and is not indicative of overall production sound on the album.

On a scale from 1 to 10, I consider the song a 7 or 8. I am expecting a 9 or 10 for the lead track.

It's been 20 years since the last great Lindsey produced Stevie studio song. I still think it's(they) on the new album. Sorry, but I don't think "Thrown Down" is it.

[brass_monkey]

Steve, you said exactly what I was thinking. TD is a fairly bland song, although it's moderately catchy. The lyrics are typical Stevie, i.e. banal high school "poetry" delivered in her usual irritating third-person style.

If you compare the (finished?) version with the Stevie demo, the only obvious difference is in the production. Also, the recorded quality of the vocals is surprisingly poor - very thin and reedy.

I think this track was leaked deliberately to try to "stoke up" excitement among the fans prior to the album's release. It's quite a common tactic. Nike do a similar thing with their new sneakers. If this is the case, then I fear that it doesn't bode well for the rest of the album.

I don't hate TD, it's just unadventurous.

[jwd]

I have to agree with the general consensus of what's been posted here. "Thrown Down"...a good song, but not what I'd expect to be a "lead off" single from the album. An appealing tune but not "adventurous" enough as brass-monkey put it. Now "Big Love" WAS a good first single...love grunts and all! :laugh:



Joe

[CarneVaca]

Steve:

You made some good points. It's not a bad song; it's just bland. Lindsey did a marvelous job with what he was handed.

[Sorcerer386]

The lyrics are typical Stevie, i.e. banal high school "poetry"

Do you really think "typical Stevie" lyrics are like banal high school poetry? Just having come out of high school a few years ago and having to read some of the poetry that came out of my theme writing class, there's just no comparison. I think Thrown Down is so untypical of Stevie lyric wise, using more of the prose style Christine was known for.

Obviously Lindsey liked this song and saw its potential...and he must like the final production, or else you know it'd never have made it on the album. To add, basically no band is going to make their lead single some ground breaking, adventurous song. You want to stick with what's commercially viable, then the 2nd or 3rd single can be a little wilder. The first single should be catchy and normal to the sound of the band, especially one that hasn't been around much. Granted, Tusk was wildly adventurous, but was it not also a surprise to hit the top 10? I remember someone saying how surprising it was to have a song backed by a marching band hit the top 10 on the pop charts. FM can wait to release other wilder singles for you guys, but they need to re-establish their familiar ground, and I believe Thrown Down does that.

I don't see how this song is "bland," but I DO see how it can be labelled as "nonadventurous." When I played it for the first time to my friend, within the first 10 seconds he immediately said "this sounds 80s'ish." Yes, because it's got that SAME Big Love sounding background guitar to it. I'm happy with Thrown Down, I don't hear the vocals as lazy at all. The harmonies are dead on. It sounds like classic Fleetwood Mac, which is what they need to be right now.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by Steve
By up-to-dates sound, I mean a contemporary sounding production.... "TISL" sounded like it was produced in 2001 - it had a fresh sound.I *do* agree that 'Trouble In Shangri-La' sounded fresh in many ways. Thankfully though, the producers (and mixer Chris Lord-Alge) also captured a timeless quality... which is even more important.

I think that striving to create a "contemporary sound" can be a double-edged sword... while it may make an album feel like a breath of fresh air at the time, it can doom it to sounding dated just a year or two after its release.

Don't get me wrong... I love when they throw something a bit off-the-wall into the mix... like a toy piano, or something. And I'm sure they'll do things like that on the new album too.
I just don't want to hear Fleetwood Mac going techno-metal, or hip-hop, or whatever else might sound "contemporary" in 2003.

To me, the best albums are the ones that you can listen to, and not determine what year they were made.
Which is exactly why I'll be happiest if the new album sounds like "classic Mac."

Hell, with all the aforementioned genres getting so much radio and MTV play, maybe that "classic Mac sound" WILL sound fresh and new next to the latest Ja Rule tripe.

Either way, I love exactly the kind of music Fleetwood Mac makes... so I have no worries that I might be disappointed by the new album.



Johnny Stew

[Steve]

You all are funny. When I say contemporary production, I don't mean techno-metal or hip-hop. What contemporary music are you listening to? I don't even mean something like the 1997 remixes of "Landslide".

I would just like to hear the FM songs and sounds with fresh, up-to-date production. Think about it, go back and listen to your FM albums. There are differences in the production values each consistent with the decades in which they originated. Did "Tango" have a contemporary sound for its time....YES (minus the 2 well-known dud tracks). It didn't sound like FM, Rumours, Tusk, or Mirage...it had a contemporary sound for 1987.

I just think the production on "Thrown Down" is sooooooooooo last millenium.

[brass_monkey]

Do you really think "typical Stevie" lyrics are like banal high school poetry?

Well, I don't want to start another Stevie-bashing thread, but her lyrics are often obscure and impenetrable, or more usually, just plain immature. Her songs often read like a silly 16-year old's fumbling attempt at poetry.

I really hope TD isn't the first song to be released as a single. Although I'm sure those FM soft-rock MOR stations would love it, I'd much rather they chose a Gift Of Screws track. Maybe that says more about my preference for Lindsey's songs.

Oh, and I meant the recording quality of the vocals on TD sounded poor, not the quality of the original vocals.

[Johnny Stew]

I think I understand what you're getting at, but... at the same time... I have to admit that I still don't entirely "get it."
Maybe I'm just being thick-headed.

It just seems to me that a song can't help but feel fresher than something released 5, 10, or 15 years prior... even if it's within a band's already established stylistic territory.

When I think "groundbreaking," i think of something unlike anything that anyone has ever done before.
Or, unlike anything that particular artist has done.

And again, I think making an album that can be related to a certain year, or decade, can be a deadly thing in terms of longevity.
For example, you listen to Thomas Dolby, and you can't help but think, "1984."
I prefer it when a song sounds like it could have been recorded this morning, or 28 years ago... like "Landslide."
Something timeless always sounds contemporary... at least in my book.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be combative or argumentative... I'm just trying to explain my view on the criticisms of "Thrown Down."
But, at the end of the day, that old cliché rings true...
"You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time."
Hopefully Fleetwood Mac is recording music that pleases THEM. :)


Johnny Stew

[Josh2003]

Originally posted by Steve
It didn't sound like FM, Rumours, Tusk, or Mirage...it had a contemporary sound for 1987.


And I think that might be one of the reasons Tango is my least favorite album from the Rumours incarnation. It was "contemporary" in 1987--overdone synths and drum tracks--and, to me, sounds dated. Same goes with Stevie's Rock a Little...to me, it sounds too "eighties"...whereas her other albums from that decade don't sound dated, in my opinion.

I think something can be *too* contemporary. Tango and RAL, for instance. But then you have Tusk, my favorite Mac album, which was an envelope-pushing experiment, definitely what many considered comtemporary (if not odd) in 1979. But the contemporary techniques that Lindsey used with Tusk have stood the test of time, and I don't think it sounds as dated as Tango or RAL.

[FiercestCalmSea]

I think the fact that TD was leaked,and it is the first real "new" thing we have had in eons,is why we have failed to really dissect it until now.I DO like the song,don't misunderstand me here,but i am not blown away by it. Linds did a good job of making into a listenable song,but there is nothing about it that screams brillant.I like listening to it..but it is not the type of song that i am just amazed by.Again,this was on a TISL sampler...so it may be a very rough cut...so who knows what we will get with the new album?

[jwd]

I prefer it when a song sounds like it could have been recorded this morning, or 28 years ago... like "Landslide."
Something timeless always sounds contemporary... at least in my book.

Yea me too Brian! But unfortunately, to these ears anyway, TD(if even released on the next lp) will fall into the ranks of FM's more obscure songs.


Joe

[CarneVaca]

There's no guarantee "Thrown Down" will be on the new album just because it was leaked. However, if a lot of songs on the album sound like it, it is bound to be an at best average album. Yet, hopefully it won't be that if a lot of the "Gift of Screws" songs make it. Don't forget, even when you look back at "Tusk," its unique quality owes primarily to the quirky Lindsey songs, as well as the production on Stevie's songs and some of Christine's songs. For instance, I can't imagine Christine doing "Honey, Hi" as a strictly acoustic guitar song without Lindsey's input. Even in "Mirage," Lindsey's songs were pretty different, if not quirky.

As for the first single discussion, also let's remember that "Go Your Own Way" when it was released was pretty different from anything on the radio at the time. And it was the first single off "Rumours." That was certainly the case with "Tusk." And "Big Love" wasn't exactly the most commercial choice off "Tango" as a first single either. So don't be surprised if the first single turns out to be fairly quirky. But my hunch is that it will be one of the most commercial songs on the album because it appears that Fleetwood Mac wants to release an album that will sell millions of copies. Otherwise, Lindsey would have released "Gift of Screws."

[Vianna]

OK-I'll have to say that at first I was not overwhelmed. The song didn't grab me the way Gypsy did when I first heard it, or the way most of the Tusk album did when I first heard it. The song has grown on me though the more that I have heard it. I love it now even though I certainly wouldn't call it unconventional=:-) but I love the Lindsey guitar work in it.

John said on one of the specials that Rumours was a "moment"-maybe Tusk was too. Maybe there can't be another Tusk, although when I think about new FM albums I want it to be like Tusk-brilliant=:-)Maybe I am setting my standards too high.

I have said all along I hope it is not the first single because I don't think it will capture a lot of attention from the regular radio listeners that aren't fanatic FM fans like us. We want radio play to promote this album=:-)

[xhector]

Well here's my point of view:
The relationship between Lindsey & Stevie is not like in the old days, and even in terms of working together. Lindsey respected TISL and this time has respected a lot more Stevie's songs: he didn't want to change the whole thing over & over 'till it sounded a perfect 10 to him. He has been also too long in the studio being too much perfectionist with GOS, and I don't think he has spent a large amount of hours and hours discussing with Stevie how her songs had to sound. I think these are some clues about what we can expect from the new album (which I'll love with no doubt).
Hector

[seteca]

Almost all of the LB songs on the album will be GOS songs...we practically know that for a fact, now. Which means the big mystery is the Stevie songs. I personally really like that "Thrown Down"-type of song which is very "Stevie", so, if this track is any sign of what the rest of her songs are going to be like (in terms of, will I like them or dislike them), then I will definitely be very happy with this album.:nod:

:wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

[Steve]

It's been twenty years since Lindsey sent a Stevie song into the stratosphere. Still waiting. Hope it happens this Spring.:nod:

[chiliD]

"Thrown Down" is TYPICAL Buckingham Nicks era Fleetwood Mac; it HAS contemporary ingredients...such as Lindsey's new-fangled "guitar as percussion" sound driving in the background (listen to "Try For The Sun" or "Red Rover" as examples of that) It has probably THE most UN-Lindsey like guitar solo over the end...that could've been Vito or Clapton...Lindsey plays "normal", film at eleven!! Stevie's voice sounds better than her last studio Fleetwood Mac album, even a bit better than TISL...two thumbs up.

But, overall this track is RECOGNIZABLY "Fleetwood Mac"...that's ALL it needs to be. Just like the new Stones' song (ironically) titled "Don't Stop"...its the Stones...are they breaking "new ground"? NO. Does it sound "contemporary"? To me, YES. Has EVERY "new" Stones song since "Jumpin' Jack Flash" sounded "contemporary"?? YES.

:shrug: I guess it all comes down to what our personal expectations are for this new Fleetwood Mac album. I think being that it is 5 years overdue (with being jilted on a Buckingham solo album in the meantime...at least, we can assume that MOST of what we've heard as "GoS" will finally be given the "stamp of approval for our consumption" by Lindsey on this upcoming album) our "expectation bar" has been set higher than they could pole vault over...expect to be let down, expect to be thrilled...its going to happen, from song to song as we listen to it once we get it...some are going to knock our socks off, some songs will probably disgust us...some songs will probably take 10 years to grow on us...it is just going to be a typical Fleetwood Mac album. I'm expecting everything and nothing all at the same time.

[PenguinHead]

Gee, there are a lot of unwarrented assumptions and expectations here for the new album and the song Thrown Down. First off, I believe it is a myth to conclude that the song was officially leaked to promote the album. That seems highly unlikely, and completely unprecedented for Fleetwood Mac.

Secondly, who determined that this was going to be the single or the lead track??????? Who is anyone to make those kind of assumptions. And to formulate opinions on the rest of the album just based on this one song seems ridiculous to me. Give them a break!! I have no expectations and will just accept the album for what it is...when I hear it.

[Johnny Stew]

*Stands up and greets chiliD's post with wild applause!!!*
:D

[Steve]

In response to chili D, is it...and Johnny Strew's apparent glee to his post, I am not surprised by the content of your lengthy response ............... I was anticipating such responses from both of you, and the others to follow this thread. I have logged onto the Ledge on and off over the past several years, and judging from what I have seen, you are both EXTREMELY (understated) diehard FM/SN fans. So given that, I will put your responses into perspective. Thank you, I appreciate your input to my post and the responses that followed.:nod:

[Phil]

Not being a fan of the TISL demo of Thrown Down, I was enormously impressed by the upcoming Mac version (which, by the way, I believe to be a finished mix - it is super smooth - just try listening to it through proper speakers as opposed to the tinny sheen of a computer). With each successive listening, my adoration of it becomes magnified. There is no doubt that Stevie sounds the best she has on a studio recording in quite some time; not that I didn't love Shangri-La, it's just I get the impression that with Lindsey at the helm, she goes that extra mile in terms of pushing herself vocally. Additionally, Lindsey's harmonies are spot on and for a moment there, the Buckingham Nicks era is conjured up, at least in my mind.

As cliched as this comment may seem, it has to be said that Lindsey's arranging skills are second to none ie nobody can arrange Stevie's songs as effectively as he can. I do concede that both John Shanks and Sheryl Crow performed admirable production duties on Shangri-La, but there is a unique chemistry between Stevie and Lindsey that I don't think either will ever share without the other. I realise how steeped in mythology and fairytale-esque that reads, but I have to believe in this!

I am actually fascinated by this mature phase of Stevie's and Lindsey's relationship, both the personal and the professional aspects. I adore the fact that they are now on an equal footing musically - from a fan's perspective they always were, but now Stevie is recognised as being just as talented by the critics and (more importantly) by Lindsey himself. I love that Lindsey was knocked out by the clutch of demos Stevie handed him for this album and believe he will be true to these in terms of honouring their original intent and integrity as well as realising their full potential.

I am confident that he is sincere in wanting to right the wrongs of the past with this new album. He has admitted in interviews since 1997 that he was not always interested in producing Stevie's songs to the best of his ability due to his past feelings of acrimony and bitterness towards her. However, now they are respectful of one another and perhaps in some ways, nostalgic for what they once had, musically and maybe to some degree as lovers.

Of course, Lindsey is happily married these days and a relationship is not exactly one of Stevie's priorities at the present time but there is a tangible bond between them that can not be denied. If we can sense it, I'm certain they can sure as hell feel it. Their relationship went beyond an intense affair - they were together romantically for many years but of more credence was their muscial partnership and this has continued to evolve over time, even when they were apart from one another. Something of that magnitude doesn't disappear forever but instead is strengthened over time and that my friends, is where things become interesting.

One final point I would like to make is that until we hear the finished album as whole, it will be impossible to judge the songs that we may have heard either as demos or properly recorded and mixed. A few years back, prior to all the technology we now have at our disposal, very few of us, maybe even none of us would have had access to the advance listening of Thrown Down.

For those who have been less than enamoured of what they have heard, try to imagine how it may sound within the context of the full album. Remember, this is a double set and my prediction is that a great many styles will be encompassed therein, facilitating a place for the likes of Thrown Down and its polar opposite, Come. If the magnificent Tusk album can be replicated in any form, let it be in spirit.

In terms of how this should all sound, as long as the band are true to themselves (and by default the songs) then I think we will all, to some degree, be satisfied with the final result. Experimentation doesn't necessarily equate to sampling the latest trends or techniques; for me it's all about inventiveness and exploration... I don't think Lindsey would be in disagreement with this.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by xhector
Lindsey respected TISL and this time has respected a lot more Stevie's songs: he didn't want to change the whole thing over & over 'till it sounded a perfect 10 to him. He has been also too long in the studio being too much perfectionist with GOS, and I don't think he has spent a large amount of hours and hours discussing with Stevie how her songs had to sound.
Hector

I think you just hit the nail right on the head. This is precisely what I said when I heard "Sweet Girl" off "The Dance." Though Mrs. Carne became enamored of the song, I just saw it as a silly little ditty that was included to appease Stevie. Listen to the demo and there isn't much difference. I suspect Lindsey has taken this same approach with "Thrown Down." That is to say that he produced it as best he could without fundamentally changing the song or discarding it altogether. Lyrically, as I have said before, this song is rather bland.

Now, Phil, as for your statement, "I am confident that he is sincere in wanting to right the wrongs of the past with this new album," I know you are referring to Lindsey's admittedly nearly giving in to his inner demon to not want to produce Stevie's songs. I believe he wrestled with that often, but I don't believe he actually acted on it. If so, would we have had "Gypsy," "Dreams," "Gold Dust Woman," "That's Alright," etc.? Perhaps the only time he actually gave in was during "Tango," but I happen to believe Stevie's contributions were just mediocre, plain and simple, and he couldn't do much more with them.

I would not say that taking a more hands-off approach to Stevie's songs would be "righting the wrongs of the past." If anything, he would be doing a disservice to Stevie, himself and to us all.

Chili made some good points, especially about the solo at the end. While Chili called it "normal," I saw it as rather generic. What pulls the song together for me is all the guitar tracks and the harmonies. I think Stevie's voice sounds OK and I like the tasteful use of the organ/synthesizer in the chorus. It's a decent song for a deep cut on an album, but it it gets released as a single, I wouldn't be surprised considering the "safe" approach the band took with "The Dance" and is likely to take with the new album.

[Johnny Stew]

I've gone on and on about how *I* feel about the song, so I thought I'd post something that happened to me this weekend.


A friend of mine and I finally got together on Saturday to exchange our Christmas gifts, and I decided to play "Thrown Down" for her.

She likes Fleetwood Mac, but she's not a big fan. On a fandom scale of 1 - 10, she's probably a 4.
(She's more of a fan of REM, POD, Nine Inch Nails, and... oddly enough... Indigo Girls.)
So I was really interested in HER opinion.

I played the song, and she sat there pretty stone-faced thru the whole thing.
I thought, "Aw, crap... she hates it."

When the song finished, she turned to me and said, "Play it again."
I was surprised because she didn't seem to be into it at all, but I played it again for her (like she really had to twist my arm!).

Well, she ended up asking me to put it on repeat, and I think it played a total of 8 times before *I* actually decided to turn it off, before we got burnt out on it.
She ended up TOTALLY getting into it, and asked me to burn it on CD for her.

In the meantime, she grilled me about everything I know in regards to the upcoming album... and she was really disappointed that I didn't know a release date yet (she even told me that since she has so many vacation days coming to her this year, she'll take a half day off of work, so we could go get the CD on release day).
All of that, based on how much she liked this one song.

So... hopefully her reaction bodes well for "Thrown Down," if it does happen to be released as a single.



Johnny Stew

[Johnny Stew]

There's another theory... other than the one that "Sweet Girl" and "Thrown Down" were recorded only to appease Stevie.

And that theory is... that Lindsey actually likes the songs!!! :eek:

I know, I know... it's absolutely impossible to believe, but stranger things have happened! ;)


:D
Johnny Stew (who's feeling silly today)

[chiliD]

I can see that about "Sweet Girl"...since, from everything I've read, it was the only "new" song Stevie brought to The Dance. So they kind of had to do it by default. (and, they had just prior to that worked on "Twisted" together) But, from reading about Lindsey actually liking "TISL" (and why shouldn't he, it seems like John Shanks & Sheryl Crow were TRYING to get that "Buckingham sound") and having 17 demos of Stevie's to work with, I think he was really excited to actually WORK on Stevie's tunes with a renewed appreciation, instead of the trepidation he seemed to have during "Mirage" & "Tango".

[Sorcerer386]

And that theory is... that Lindsey actually likes the songs!!!

Now Johnny Stew...let's be serious here. Lindsey could never possibly like anything Stevie does...I mean, she can't write songs, she can't write lyrics, and she's basically a total useless entity in creation of anything musical. All those albums she did solo must have been such a fluke at going gold and platinum. Come on now...

DISCLAIMER: Sorry for the sarcasm and cynicism, but I've grown increasingly tired of this whole subject. Why don't we just leave it that all these people hate Thrown Down?

[FiercestCalmSea]

Why don't we just leave it that all these people hate Thrown Down?

Amen to that:rolleyes:

[CarneVaca]

Johnny Stew, it is quite possible that Lindsey likes the songs. Anything is possible.

Here's some food for thought: Quite often some folks here have made the point that Stevie has sold far more records as a solo artist than Lindsey, that hers have gone gold and platinum and "Out of the Cradle" barely sold. The implication being that there's a correlation between big sales and big talent.

That may be so in some cases, but how do you explain Milli Vanilli and the Spice Girls? Or all those boy bands and the talentless coming-of-age pop princesses?

[Barbara]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Johnny Stew, it is quite possible that Lindsey likes the songs. Anything is possible.

Here's some food for thought: Quite often some folks here have made the point that Stevie has sold far more records as a solo artist than Lindsey, that hers have gone gold and platinum and "Out of the Cradle" barely sold. The implication being that there's a correlation between big sales and big talent.

That may be so in some cases, but how do you explain Milli Vanilli and the Spice Girls? Or all those boy bands and the talentless coming-of-age pop princesses?

Excellent points, CV! Stevie made 8 solo albums between '81 and '01, LB made 3 between '81 and '92. Also, he has never generated much name recognition.

Barbara

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Here's some food for thought: Quite often some folks here have made the point that Stevie has sold far more records as a solo artist than Lindsey, that hers have gone gold and platinum and "Out of the Cradle" barely sold. The implication being that there's a correlation between big sales and big talent.

That may be so in some cases, but how do you explain Milli Vanilli and the Spice Girls? Or all those boy bands and the talentless coming-of-age pop princesses?Originally posted by Barbara
Excellent points, CV! Stevie made 8 solo albums between '81 and '01, LB made 3 between '81 and '92. Also, he has never generated much name recognition.I wholeheartedly agree with anyone who says that sales and Billboard chart placements are not necessarily an indication of talent or quality of music.
I think we can all agree on that point. :)

However, when it comes to established artists, I think it's pretty unlikely that high sales, or high chart placements, are a fluke.
Sure, every now and then you get an album like Cher's 'Believe,' or Santana's 'Supernatural,' which... while they may be established artists... sold so astronomically that one is left to believe that *some* of those sales were based on the hype surrounding the album, or their hipness quotient.

Stevie's 'Street Angel' peaked at #45 on the Billboard charts, and eventually went Gold.
Granted, it didn't sell nearly as well as her previous albums, but in 1994, within her peer group, it was not that big of an embarrassment.

In a case like this... an established artist, who wasn't exactly "hip" at that point in time... I *do* believe it has a lot to do with talent, as well as audience affection.

And hell, one could argue that, with the exception maybe of the last few years, it was NEVER a hip thing to like Stevie Nicks' music... and yet those albums sold extremely well despite that.

Stevie has worked hard... damn near killed herself, in fact... to build up a large and very loyal fan base.
If she has a creative misstep along the way, it's ok, because they know that she'll redeem herself the next time around.

It's a damn shame that 'Out Of The Cradle' didn't reach a larger audience. Lindsey was at the top of his game on that album, and I think he had finally found an excellent marriage between the experimental and the relatable.
Not only was it a joyride for your ears, it was also music you could *connect* with... and music that you could come back to a few years later, and still enjoy.

In his Behind The Music, Lindsey said that he has "always" liked Stevie's lyrics, but he... as we all know so well... admitted that he didn't always want to work on making them even better.

So now that they've removed the drama, bitterness, and resentment, that seemed to often cloud the working environment, it doesn't at all surprise me that Lindsey could... and DOES... like the songs Stevie contributed, and that he would want to take the time to polish them into something dynamic.
And not just to appease her, or to sell more albums using her name value.



Johnny Stew

[CarneVaca]

Lindsey is back in Fleetwood Mac and sacrificed his solo album for sales. Let's have no delusions about that. Regardless of whether it was his decision or the label's to go this route, the bottom line is sales. I have no doubt he would rather be in his own home studio working on his own songs. It's entirely possible that he is enjoying working with Stevie, and I would expect so. But let's not forget that she was the only Fleetwood Mac member who wasn't invited to help record GOS songs. So that tells you something.

[Vianna]

I certainly have no idea really why Lindsey didn't ask her, but just
maybe he thought she wouldn't want to?

[The Tower]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Lindsey is back in Fleetwood Mac and sacrificed his solo album for sales. Let's have no delusions about that. Regardless of whether it was his decision or the label's to go this route, the bottom line is sales. I have no doubt he would rather be in his own home studio working on his own songs. It's entirely possible that he is enjoying working with Stevie, and I would expect so. But let's not forget that she was the only Fleetwood Mac member who wasn't invited to help record GOS songs. So that tells you something.

Well.... from personal experience I know that one may want to work in a band atmosphere for exactly that- the atmosphere. One cannot just assume that Lindsey is doing it for sales. I'm guessing he's not so strapped for cash that he's doing this new album for the money.

That "band creative magic" (the kind that gives me goosebumps when I play) is something that exists and cannot be replicated on a solo venture.

Stevie's absence from the GOS songs doesn't really tell me anything one way or another. She doesn't record instrumentation, occasional tambourine and keyboards. Maybe she was just busy with HER career and Lindsey was cool with it.

[tommer]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
But let's not forget that she was the only Fleetwood Mac member who wasn't invited to help record GOS songs. So that tells you something.
do you consider this some kind of a seal of approval? let's keep in mind that we are talking about a speculative album, which was declined by lindsey's record company after their 25 year relations (does THAT tell you something?).
i must say that i find stevie's ongoing ambition to be respected by lindsey as a musician to be somewhat pathetic.
it's plain to see that lindsey is more of a musician and stevie is more of an artist, and while she always needed a strong producer at her side, he always needed her to gather a crowd of more than 5 people.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by tommer
do you consider this some kind of a seal of approval?

No, Tommer, I think you misunderstood. Or I wasn't clear. I was referring to my belief that if Lindsey had his way, he might not be doing this thing with Fleetwood Mac. If his solo career had taken off, he probably would not be doing this. In fact, about a year ago he told the Los Angeles Times that he would do the Fleetwood Mac album because he could not get his released as a solo album. There had been in fact a lot of talk about doing a solo tour, some of which came from him.

In my heart, I don't believe he truly wants to do this. But I am speculating of course.

while she always needed a strong producer at her side, he always needed her to gather a crowd of more than 5 people.

I won't disagree with either of those points. Though, I'd say he might get an audience of seven. You left out Seteca and Wondergirl. :] :] :]

[Sorcerer386]

Quite often some folks here have made the point that Stevie has sold far more records as a solo artist than Lindsey, that hers have gone gold and platinum and "Out of the Cradle" barely sold. The implication being that there's a correlation between big sales and big talent.

If this wasn't directed at my comment, then disregard it, but considering it's proximity to my post, I am assuming that it is. I never made any comparison to Stevie's sales versus Lindsey's sales. I was simply making a comment that seemingly some people think Stevie is a no talent waste of space. As for the boy band comparison, boy bands and pop acts sell quick then disappear after a while unless they change their content, image, etc. Justin Timberlake, J-Lo, and many other pop acts have dropped what they were doing because it stopped selling, and have moved on to different styles of music. If they didn't, their albums wouldn't be selling I don't think. I would consider an artist VERY talented to have the lasting power Stevie Nicks has had. Yes, acts have sold more than her, but over 20 years she's never had a non-gold solo album, and regardless of what anyone says, there's a lot to be said about that. She never really changed, the only thing that did change was the transition to synth rock, which happened BECAUSE that's what rock and roll had become. It was either that, punk, or metal. I don't have time to go on more because it's Christmas for me and time to eat. I just want to clarify that there was NO Stevie vs. Lindsey comparison. Not only do I KNOW better than to do that here, but I wouldn't do it anyway because I don't care...

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
It's entirely possible that he is enjoying working with Stevie, and I would expect so. But let's not forget that she was the only Fleetwood Mac member who wasn't invited to help record GOS songs. So that tells you something. Stevie was asked to write a song for the soundtrack to 'Twister'... it was HER choice to have Lindsey produce and sing on it, and HIS choice to do so.

"Twisted" was released as a promo single, but received absolutely no hype from the record company, so I don't think that either Stevie or Lindsey did this project in order to sell copies.
They've said that they wanted to patch things up, and to see if they could work together again.

As for Stevie not appearing on any of the 'Gift Of Screws' demos... Mick was there because he and Lindsey had worked thru their differences, and Lindsey decided he wanted to have a live drum sound on the songs... John came aboard because Mick suggested him when Lindsey was looking for a bassist... and Christine's services were then requested when LB wanted her vocals on (as far as I know) only one particular track.
To call Stevie as well, automatically makes it a Fleetwood Mac thing... which is exactly what they did.
Why bother releasing an album that has every member of that particular lineup on it, and not just do a legitimate Fleetwood Mac reunion?

And really, if Lindsey was just piggy-backing on Stevie's success to sell albums, then I'd think he'd have rather used her on his solo album.
We all know that many of Stevie's die-hard fans would buy it just because of her appearance... and anyone looking for some shred of a Fleetwood Mac reunion, would buy it because of Mick, John, and Christine's scattered appearances throughout.

Meanwhile, the album sells more copies, and gets more hype... and Lindsey would be the one to get any of the accolades, because HIS name is the only one on the album cover.
He wouldn't have to share the spotlight or the credit with anyone, and any involvement with Stevie would have been kept to a minimum.
He wouldn't have even had to work on any of her songs!
So I think it's more than just that.

It's understandable that Lindsey would fold his album into a Fleetwood Mac project, in order to get his music to a larger audience, and I have no problems with that. After all, who would want to toil away in a studio for years on end, only to have relatively few people ever hear the fruits of your labours?

But if he doesn't have more integrity than to only work with Stevie in order to sell more albums, then he isn't deserving of half of the praise that his most loyal fans give him.

Personally, I give him more credit than that, and I feel he legitimately wants to work with Stevie, and is actually enjoying doing so.
And I think Stevie would be wise enough to know whether or not her artistic input was really desired or if it was just a calculated move to sell albums.

That's my two cents.


Johnny Stew

[CarneVaca]

Johnny, all I can say is, Go back and read his interview from the LA Times about a year ago. It kind of says it all. You call it reaching a wider audience, I call it sales. Same thing.

[Phil]

In relation to Lindsey's decision to forego his solo album in favour of a band project, I think the impetus for this shift was originally due to commercial concerns. In fact, he may have had very little choice in the matter if some of the comments on this board about record company intervention are accurate. However, he has stated that once he resumed working with the various band members on his solo project, he realised that he had actually missed this group of musicians and I believe him to be genuine. Sacrificing his solo collection for a new Mac album may have not been his initial preference, but I imagine once he became immersed in these new recordings he realised that this would pan out to be a worthwhile experience.

He also feels strongly about revisiting the legacy of Fleetwood Mac in order to restore a certain dignity to this incarnation of the band. I'm sure he views this album as their swansong and so leaving a lasting impression in terms of integrity, innovation and quality would figure heavily in his decision.

With regard to Stevie not being part of the GOS sessions, I do recall a rumour in 1995 that he and Stevie had actually recorded a duet for the album. Whether this eventuated into "Twisted" or not, I can't be sure but I'm certain she would have been welcome. Of course, as already mentioned, Stevie is not a musician and so her input would be limited in any case. Let's also not forget that she was probably the only member not waiting by the phone looking for the next job!

[David]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
In his Behind The Music, Lindsey said that he has "always" liked Stevie's lyrics, but he... as we all know so well... admitted that he didn't always want to work on making them even better.I think everyone in Fleetwood Mac really admired Stevie for her very unusual & powerful voice.

[Les]

Originally posted by Phil
However, he has stated that once he resumed working with the various band members on his solo project, he realised that he had actually missed this group of musicians and I believe him to be genuine. Sacrificing his solo collection for a new Mac album may have not been his initial preference, but I imagine once he became immersed in these new recordings he realised that this would pan out to be a worthwhile experience.

I agree with you Phil. I think that's spot on.

The last statement Lindsey made to the press that was anything like a full length interview was to Rolling Stone in January, 2001. I found that interview pretty significant in demonstrating Lindsey’s attitude about solo vs. FM in his present state of mind, as opposed to how he may have felt about the issue with the residual memories of 87 as his most recent experience working with FM in the studio.

He seemed very open about being involved with the band again as long as the others in the band were open to being involved thoroughly themselves. One can view his comments as being entirely about the sales, but I personally don't. Some may find this too sentimental, but I think there is much to be said for all of them having smoothed out past personal differences and I think there's more to it, along the lines again of what Phil said:

He also feels strongly about revisiting the legacy of Fleetwood Mac in order to restore a certain dignity to this incarnation of the band. I'm sure he views this album as their swansong and so leaving a lasting impression in terms of integrity, innovation and quality would figure heavily in his decision.

[Johnny Stew]

I get a bit verbose sometimes, so thankfully Phil and Les both did a much more succinct job of expressing the point I was trying to get across.

I have no doubt that doing another Fleetwood Mac album wasn't Lindsey's first choice... and I also have no delusions that the chance to sell more albums didn't weigh in his decision somewhere.
I just feel that it wasn't entirely about sales, or money.

The affection with which they seem to regard each other now, seems genuine to me, so I don't imagine the reluctance that Lindsey had about working with Fleetwood Mac in 1986/1987 exists anymore.

He had his frustrations in the past, with being a part of a band... and things definitely got worse by 'Tango,' when the other members were basically just breezing in to do their parts, and then leaving again.
But as Lindsey himself has said, with those differences ironed out, there really isn't any reason for them to not work together.

So whatever additional motivations there may have been at the outset, I honestly feel that his heart is 100% in this project... including Stevie's songs. :)



Johnny Stew

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
I won't disagree with either of those points. Though, I'd say he might get an audience of seven. You left out Seteca and Wondergirl. :] :] :]

If Lindsey were doing a concert in the middle of shark infested waters on a raft, I'd be RIGHT there!!! LMAO!! That's how much I love this man!! Thank you for including seteca and I, CV!! :D

I may need to go ahead and buy some smelling salts now, for when they come to Dallas...I will be in an awesome stupor when the concert is over and for probably many days after....;)

tommer, the reason LB's solo album was rejected by the record company is because...THEY SUCK! They only want to put out crap and then expect us to buy it. I say to them...BITE ME!! :nod:

OOTC coming out in 1992 (the HEIGHT of grunge/Nirvana) was bad timing. I truly believe if it came out this year, it would sell better, because the return of the singer/songwriter is the IN thing right now...and by cracky, if John Mayer doesn't win a Grammy, HEADS WILL ROLL!!!!!! :mad:

[seteca]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
I won't disagree with either of those points. Though, I'd say he might get an audience of seven. You left out Seteca and Wondergirl...

:laugh: Only 7 people including me and Christy in an audience in front of Lindsey Buckingham.....I think I would force Neale Heywood (and his Strat) off the stage, grab my Model One and join Lindsey for a I'm So Afraid "duo solo"....!!!:laugh: :laugh:

I'm not even going to go into what I think Christy will try to do....!!:D

On a more serious note.....

Originally posted by Phil
He also feels strongly about revisiting the legacy of Fleetwood Mac in order to restore a certain dignity to this incarnation of the band. I'm sure he views this album as their swansong and so leaving a lasting impression in terms of integrity, innovation and quality would figure heavily in his decision.


I strongly agree with this. Most people (i.e not fans) think (if anything at all) of Fleetwood Mac as a band who put out a fantastic album in the late 70s called "Rumours" and then went downhill from there and are lucky that they haven't all died either by their use of drugs or at eachother's hands....:rolleyes:
The right publicity this year, coupled with a very strong album and tour, would mean that the members of Fleetwood Mac could say goodbye (no pun intended) with their heads held high in the faces of ALL the music-listening public, and not just their diehard fans like us.

And also, one last point...there are several posts from various people regarding "Gift Of Screws", and I must say IMO CarneVaca has it spot on....the album was aborted as a solo project because of (and you can disguise the word in whatever form you like but ultimately it comes down to one thing)........SALES (or predicted lack of, rather). It's the job of the people at the record company to decide whether or not it will SELL. That is what they do for a living. Doesn't matter whether they sat down, listened to the album and THEY thought that it was the greatest pieces of music they have ever heard, or if they thought it sounded like a toilet flushing...the FACT is that the final verdict was "we predict that, given the currrent state of the general music buying public, this is not going to, under the name "Lindsey Buckingham" at least, sell the amount we would like it to." Which totally SUCKS for us LB fans, but such is life, and I can respect and understand (although with gritted teeth!:mad: ) their decision.

:wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

[Phil]

seteca, I concede your point about sales and yes I too lament the fact that Lindsey doesn't have the opportunity to release the album he slaved over for so many years. However, another way of looking at it is that if the album does indeed get released as a double set, then effectively we will have what amounts to an album's worth of material from each of Lindsey and Stevie.

I really don't think that Lindsey has had to compromise his ideals or any of his songs in order to release it under the Fleetwood Mac banner. As we know, Mick and John were essentially his backing band for the GOS sessions and any backing vocals Stevie may have added could only be viewed as an enhancement. So at the end of the day, the only real problem is that the release date became somewhat protracted. Hey but we know it'll be worth the wait.

[stefan]

And what makes all of you think, this will be the last FM album? LB has abandoned his solo plans. The perspective for his solo projects won't change- this will be the same in the future than it was 1997 or today. Critical acclaimation but no megaseller. Does this mean you think he retires at the age of 53 even if the FM album and tour was succesful...?

As far as they stay healthy I don't see that this is inevitably the last project. I think these people will produce and perform music for their entire liftime. Except of Stevie they don`t have the needed recognition and musical platform outside FM. So I certainly don't believe in new albums every 2 years. But I also don't see why they all should officially retire. Any opinions?

[blinker12]

I just wanted to jump in and address the original subject of this post... the quality of "Thrown Down."

I personally like the track a lot. No, it's not one of the best songs Stevie's ever written (the lyrics are weak), and it's not the greatest arranging job Lindsey's ever done. In other words: it's no "Silver Springs" or "Sara."

But there are a lot of things to like about it. Both Lindsey and Stevie sing energetically (esp. Lindsey), the guitar playing is exemplary, the background vocals catchy.

It sounds a heck of a lot fresher than anything the Eagles or the Rolling Stones or Paul McCartney could come up with at this point in their careers, don't you think?

No, it doesn't sound like a "hit," but a) we don't have any real evidence that it'll be the first single and b) who cares? Good songs rarely make the charts anymore.

Even if you don't like the song much, remember: this doesn't necessarily represent the best of the new album just because it's been leaked first. There are still 22 others you haven't heard (at least in their final form)! :)

[chiliD]

So I certainly don't believe in new albums every 2 years. But I also don't see why they all should officially retire.

Ok, maybe my age is showing, but both The Beatles & Elton John used to release two album PER YEAR. So an album every 2 years is FOUR TIMES as long to record an album. Fleetwood Mac used to release an album per year, and two in 1973...plus an album in 1975, 1977, 1979...every two years. It CAN be done...even if Lindsey Buckingham IS in the band! :laugh:

[Sugar]

Only seven people at a Lindsey solo concert??? Not the last time I went to one!

Oh that's right! That was the Mick Fleetwood's Zoo solo concert I went too! ;)

[Steve]

The more I think about it, "Thrown Down" is a kind of bland song. It's more than the production, it's the song itself. I always felt that most Stevie's songs written in the third person were rather bla. Of course, there are a few exceptions such as "Rhiannon". I was so happy to hear that she had dropped that perspective during most of TISL. To me, the only dissapointment on that album was halfway through "Love Is" when Stevie had a "third person" goop-meltdown. Not the music, just the words.
;)

[Street Angel]

Originally posted by Phil
seteca, I concede your point about sales and yes I too lament the fact that Lindsey doesn't have the opportunity to release the album he slaved over for so many years. [...]

I really don't think that Lindsey has had to compromise his ideals or any of his songs in order to release it under the Fleetwood Mac banner. [...]

It´s easy to put the blame on the record company. Of course it is my personal interpretation, but why can´t it be Lindsey´s own decision to release at least *some* of the songs on a Fleetwood Mac album? And yes, of course it is about SALES. So the truth should be (as often) somewhere in the middle. If I exaggerated the theory a bit, it would mean that the record company forced (or at least talked) LB back into working with FM to sell his material? I don´t think so. Just look at the time he was given over the years for working on the material without even *releasing* it. Please name a couple of other artists with a "normal" contract that would be allowed to do that (unlike, say, Kate Bush, who has a licensing deal and can take her time). Even George Harrison suffered the humiliation of having an album *rejected* by his record company in the early 80´s and was told to record another (= a different/new) album. And he didn´t have YEARS to come up with it.
Going by what I understood from reading the RS interview I´d assume... Lindsey himself has made that decision and it is totally understandable. Lindsey might be a genius, but he´s not living somewhere above the clouds, and no matter how rich he is or how big his achievements have been, he is certainly not against seeing himself again in the upper region of the charts (or more idealistically, reaching a wider audience). If that is easier to achieve with the FM banner - why not? :)

[QUOTE] Originally posted by blinker12

[about Thrown Down] It sounds a heck of a lot fresher than anything the Eagles or the Rolling Stones or Paul McCartney could come up with at this point in their careers, don't you think? [QUOTE]

I hope that doesn´t sound rude (because it´s not intended like that), but what are the fundaments of this statement? Which albums have you listened to (hopefully more than once :D) /do you own by these artists? :)

P.S. I totally agree that TD sounds fresh indeed, but let´s not pretend that similar things like the quote above aren´t said/thought by the "general public" about Fleetwood Mac either. Unfortunately, to these people they have a lot to prove as well. That´s at least what *I* had to hear several times when mentioning a forthcoming new FM album. :distress:

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by seteca
I'm not even going to go into what I think Christy will try to do....!!

Well, first I would...;)...then I would :D:D:D....after that, I'd....:nod:...which would lead to...:blob1:...with a side of...:]...followed by a :shocked:

Anywho...I am so wanting to hear Thrown Down, but I'm holding off because I wanna be surprised....at hearing Lindsey's part in a song in which I found the demo very boring. It's wierd to read all the comments upon NOT hearing the actual song...veddy interestink, indeed. :cool:

[DownOnRodeo]

Originally posted by Steve
It's been twenty years since Lindsey sent a Stevie song into the stratosphere. Still waiting. Hope it happens this Spring.:nod:

Dr Phil says the number one thing that annoys us is not what we are given alone, but in relation to our expectations.
IMHO, some people's expectations are confused...

Mirage was it. That was the end of an era for one kind of Stevie voice, and its never comin back.

I don't believe anything we get after Mirage (apart from Live 1981 and Landslide/Silver Springs The Dance) can be likened more to the pre-Mirage Fleetwood Mac than to post-Miarge solo Stevie.

Now I feel like an ass - I havent even been able to get thenew Thrown Down yet. But from what you've all writen I get a a good picture of what it is like. Solo Stevie, huh? Well, that's becuase of her voice. Not the lyrics either, which I don't honestly believe deserve the usual Stevie slander in this case.

[Johnny Stew]

Tastes Great!
Less Filling!

TASTES GREAT!!!
LESS FILLING!!!



:laugh:
Johnny Stew

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by Steve
The more I think about it, "Thrown Down" is a kind of bland song. It's more than the production, it's the song itself. I always felt that most Stevie's songs written in the third person were rather bla. Of course, there are a few exceptions such as "Rhiannon
;)

It's like an echo! Steve, you must be my long lost twin that I didn't even know I had. I couldn't possibly agree with you more about the blandness and the third-person stuff.

I still enjoy the song, but I'm sure it won't be one of my favorites on the album.

[The Tower]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847

Anywho...I am so wanting to hear Thrown Down, but I'm holding off because I wanna be surprised....at hearing Lindsey's part in a song in which I found the demo very boring. It's wierd to read all the comments upon NOT hearing the actual song...veddy interestink, indeed. :cool:

DITTO, DITTO, DITTO!!

I am very much NOT wanting to hear any material before the release of the album. I really want to hear all the songs together. Also, all the commentary on a song that may not be the final mix, or even on the album, seems kind of hasty. Although, commentary on this particular snapshot of "Thrown Down" is cool to read.

This is kinda similar to my experience with the Enchanted tour. I was REALLY looking forward to it, because I just knew Stevie would play some songs live that had never seen the light of day. Against my better judgement, I checked out the tour setlists on nicksfix and that revealation took some of the magic away from the actual concert once I got there.

[seteca]

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
Well, first I would...;)...then I would :D:D:D....after that, I'd....:nod:...which would lead to...:blob1:...with a side of...:]...followed by a :shocked:

Would he even be ALIVE after that???:laugh:

[Steve]

CarneVaca, it's refreshing to hear constructive criticism from a true FM fan. Especially on a fan website. It gets so tiresome reading the sheepish, OCD blather. I appreciate a "healthy discussion". Thanks for your insightful input!! We may not always agree, but I like your style. :nod: :wavey: :D :wavey:

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by seteca
Would he even be ALIVE after that???:laugh:

Barely. ;)

Tower: I purposefully did NOT read any reviews of the American Idol concert I went to because I wanted to be surprised. I agree, when you get a heads up of stuff, it takes the excitement out of the moment you FIRST hear or see something. :nod:

[Johnny Stew]

Golly, fans actually *liking* a band's music, and not tearing it apart... what were we thinking?
:laugh: ;)


Seriously though, I, too, like the debates, and the discussions... but... and this is in no way meant as a jab to anyone in particular, I just sometimes have trouble figuring out what it is that someone *likes* about a band, after they've finished laundry-listing all of the things they dislike.

To use a similar situation as an example: A friend of mine and I used to visit a comic book store pretty frequently. My friend is a major Star Wars fan, as was one of the guys who worked there.
So when they'd get together, they'd discuss all of the things that they feel are wrong with the movies, and all of the things George Lucas should have done differently, and all of the scenes that should have been changed, or edited, or embellished. Yadda-yadda-yadda.
When they'd finish their discussions, it seemed to me as if people who *hated* the movies, still liked them better than these "fans" did.

I guess it's just that I always thought a fan of something, was someone who actually liked that movie, or that band, or that TV show.... not necessarily someone who liked only a few episodes, or a handful of songs, and then disliked all other aspects.

So Steve, I know you and others probably think guys like chiliD and I, look at Fleetwood Mac with rose-colored glasses... but it's really not that at all.
(Forgive me for speaking for you here, chili.)
It's just that we happen to love the music that this band makes... period.
We may be frustrated by the sparcity of their releases, or the many missed opportunities over the course of their career, but the music is the one thing we rarely find fault with, because it's that music.. in all of its perfections and imperfections... which caused us to be fans in the first place.
And it's the factor that keeps us coming back for more... year after year, album after album.

And please don't get me wrong... I am definitely not saying that someone is less of a fan if they don't salivate over every single song FM or Stevie has ever released, and I really hope it didn't sound like that's what I was implying... it's just that I sometimes wonder what's left for someone to like, after they've dissected and criticized all of the music. Sort of takes the enjoyment out of it, ya know?
But that's just me.

Like chili says... when a band has been around for 35+ years, and you can count the songs of theirs that you dislike on one-hand, then they're definitely doing something right. :)



Johnny Stew

[Nicks Fan]

The way I see it is that the Band is back. Who cares how or why they were reunuited. As long as it truly a GOOD album and not something that they are making for the sake of having a new album out with the Buckingham Nicks era of FM. Thrown Down is a good song and is radio friendly. If it is the first single who cares? I for one am just glad that the band is back. If Thrown is the first single it is because a) they REALLY like it and think it has potential. or b) They want something radio friendly that will chart well. This may very well be the last project that Fleetwood Mac EVER does and so we should be happy that the band is back in any way shape or form.

[chiliD]

So Steve, I know you and others probably think guys like chiliD and I, look at Fleetwood Mac with rose-colored glasses... but it's really not that at all. (Forgive me for speaking for you here, chili.)


Not a problem.

For those who have read my posts over the past close-to-a-decade, I have, at frequent times, been as equally critical of Fleetwood Mac as those Star Wars "fans" that Johnny described are about George Lucas; so, I find it odd that I, of all people, would be accused of seeing Fleetwood Mac "through rose-colored glasses", also since I've been one of the biggest critics of those fans who I consider DO! :laugh:

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by Steve
CarneVaca, it's refreshing to hear constructive criticism from a true FM fan. Especially on a fan website. It gets so tiresome reading the sheepish, OCD blather. I appreciate a "healthy discussion". Thanks for your insightful input!! We may not always agree, but I like your style. :nod: :wavey: :D :wavey:

Hey, thanks. I think it's OK to be a sober fan. I love the Stones, Cracker, World Party and a bunch of other bands, but there are songs by each one of them that I simply cannot stand.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
Seriously though, I, too, like the debates, and the discussions... but... and this is in no way meant as a jab to anyone in particular, I just sometimes have trouble figuring out what it is that someone *likes* about a band, after they've finished laundry-listing all of the things they dislike.
Johnny Stew

You raise an interesting question: What is a fan? "Fan" is short for "fanatic," which means literally "marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion." So according to the literal definition, that would make me and a lot of other people that have often been critical of the band truly not fans.

Or would it?

Let's think about a sports fan. Jimmy loves the Red Sox. He is a fanatic. He goes to as many games at Fenway as he can, and when he can't he catches the games on TV. Jimmy yells at the TV, curses out the referee and the opposing team frequently. But he gets frustrated with his favorite team when they play poorly. Jimmy picks up the phone and calls his friend across town and says, "Can you believe how the Sox are playing tonight? What is wrong with them? The third basemen just let that ball roll right through his legs. What was he doing, just standing there? Could the Sox play any worse?"

The next day at work, Jimmy meets up with Karl at the ubiquitous water cooler. Karl says: "Boy, your Sox really sucked rotten eggs last night. What is up with that? There's no way they'll ever make it to the pennant that way."

Jimmy gets defensive. "Well they had a bad night. But they're still doing pretty damn good for the season, anyway, better than your Padres..."

And the conversation goes on.

Jimmy as a fan feels perfectly in his right to criticize the team when it plays poorly. But let anyone else do it, and Jimmy gets defensive. Jimmy is a big fan.

Are music fans really that much different?

[chiliD]

In your example, being "Red Sox" and therefore BASEBALL, Jimmy would be chewing out the UMP, not the "referee". :laugh:

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by chiliD
In your example, being "Red Sox" and therefore BASEBALL, Jimmy would be chewing out the UMP, not the "referee". :laugh:

Oh, right. That's what I meant. Honest. ;)

[Steve]

YES...YES...YES... I have always likened rooting for one's favorite band to rooting for one's favorite sports team! In fact, that's what I was thinking when I started this post. Spring 2003 is the opening season and FM has a great track record, but haven't won the World Series/Super Bowl (the Grammy's) since 1977. They had a good "season" in 1997 season and were in the finals..but, well we know what happened. All of us fans want them to "win the games" (sell records, perform great concerts in our towns, etc.) and play in the World Series or Super Bowl of music (again, the Grammy Awards). Anyway, you get the picture.

By the way Johnny Stew and Chili D, what SN/FM albums/songs have you ever been dissapointed in or felt was not up to par? If you don't mind me asking. Just curious. Thanks!:wavey:

[The Tower]

Sports and Fleetwood Mac?!?!?! I feel like that's oil and water. Ah, to each his/her own, however....

:laugh: :wavey: :laugh:

[jwd]

I find it incredible over the years that some people take credit away from Stevie Nicks or put the bum wrap on her. When one of her Fleetwood Mac songs turn out not up to par, then it's her lyrics or the way she wrote the song, or her vocals that is to blame. On the other hand when she delivers a gem like "Gypsy" or "Sara" it's the production work of Lindsey, or he put his "magic" in. Granted Lindsey does add something to the song as does Mick, John, and then Christine......If a song turns out to be a stinker(I'm not saying that TD is one but maybe just a bunt to get the guy on first into scoring position), then I feel like all the members in the band should share the blame...after all it is a "Fleetwood Mac" song. Every player on a TEAM....even the "managers" and the "owners" have a role to play in its successes and failures. To say we lost the game because Stevie dropped the ball in the outfield is a "cop out" to me and reeks of BAD sportsmanship. :)



Joe

[CarneVaca]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by jwd
When one of her Fleetwood Mac songs turn out not up to par, then it's her lyrics or the way she wrote the song, or her vocals that is to blame.

Oh, come on, Joe, what else would it be? If a song is mediocre to begin with, even Lindsey can only do so much. I'm thinking of "Welcome to the Room, Sara," and "When I See You Again."

"On the other hand when she delivers a gem like "Gypsy" or "Sara" it's the production work of Lindsey, or he put his "magic" in.

"Gypsy," "Sara," "Landslide" and some others are tremendous songs, with or without Lindsey. However, it is undeniable that his arrangements took some excellent songs and made them works of art. I can think of a couple of production stinkers on his part, but I won't say which. I don't want to see Bella Figura gloating again over my dissing Lindsey. ;)

Every player on a TEAM....even the "managers" and the "owners" have a role to play in its successes and failures. To say we lost the game because Stevie dropped the ball in the outfield is a "cop out" to me and reeks of BAD sportsmanship. :)

Amen to that, but is is undeniable that one player can give away the whole game. I could use the Red Sox example again, and I am thinking of the year 1986. 'Nuff said.

[jwd]

Oh, come on, Joe, what else would it be? If a song is mediocre to begin with

I think there a lot of things that play into the importance of making the "sound" of a song and in particular making it sound good. Lyrics, music, vocals, production, arranging, mixing and the like. The combination of these and how they're used makes or breaks the song in my opinion.....setting the mood if you will. Sometimes bad decisions are made. I don't know, I really can't peg it, but TD doesn't work for me....but it's NOT all about the lyrics, it's just the vibe I get from the song. It's OK, I like it, but not the greatest, that's all. To single Stevie out would be wrong.


I can think of a couple of production stinkers on his part, but I won't say which. I don't want to see Bella Figura gloating again over my dissing Lindsey.

It could be entertaining!! ;)


but is is undeniable that one player can give away the whole game.

Yea CV, you're right......maybe the baseball analogy wasn't the most appropriate to use in THIS text, but it's amazing how so many do apply. :)


Joe

[amber]

Thrown Down...Awesome...nough said.

[tynan88]

Wow i though a thread had sprung up in the last 45 since I was last on WOW! Interesting opinion, I love TD in any form.

Tynan

[joe]

Thrown Down...Awesome...nough said.


yes...i think i like the "wall of sound" version these days. when i heard the album version, i liked that better but now i've changed my mind - that's a man's right they say... ;) i still like em both though. i just flip back and forth.

Amber - your pics are so cute! ;)

[Dreammms]

I think it's a good song. I like the lyrics and the sound of it. However, it's wrong to say you hope its not the "lead song from the new album." The album is a year and a half old now. I don't think we'll be seeing a resurgence in the sales of it until a new record comes out.


i am confused isn't this post from.....

01-04-2003, 07:17 PM
Steve
Ledgie Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 71

"THROWN DOWN" Not that great

[Hawkeye]

These are ALL from 1-04-03, this is a VERY old thread from January 2003 4 months BEFORE SYW came out and the WOS version of TD was leaked that we all thought would be on SYW.

[dissention]

Now that Amber dredged this damn thing back up, I'll have to profess my disdain for the album version once more.

It sucks teabags. The worst song on SYW.

[mylittledemon]

Thrown Down worst track on the album!? Worse than Miranda? Worse than Everybody Finds Out? Worse than Goodbye Baby? FOOLISHNESS!!!

[ontheEdgeof17]

Both versions are a little bland, actually. :rolleyes:

[GateandGarden]

Thrown Down worst track on the album!? Worse than Miranda? Worse than Everybody Finds Out? Worse than Goodbye Baby? FOOLISHNESS!!!Whoa! "Miranda" rocks! Am I the only one who thinks "Miranda" rocks and continuously thinks How cool is Lindsey??? whenever she hears that song?

Anyway, I have a question about the "wall of sound" version of TD. Is that the same as the "single version," or is that something else entirely?

Hillary

[amber]

Whoa! "Miranda" rocks! Am I the only one who thinks "Miranda" rocks and continuously thinks How cool is Lindsey??? whenever she hears that song?

Anyway, I have a question about the "wall of sound" version of TD. Is that the same as the "single version," or is that something else entirely?

Hillary
Nope, I LOVVVE Miranda. Loveit, loveit, loveit! I haven't heard other version of TD.
Amber

[tommer]

Thrown Down worst track on the album!? Worse than Miranda? Worse than Everybody Finds Out? Worse than Goodbye Baby? FOOLISHNESS!!!
wow! you are fighting fire with fire!

[DownOnRodeo]

I'll add my two cents, as I'm sure I did at some point in this thread last year.

I thought that the first version done by FM was lacking a clear, strong melody that I have come to expect from their songs. Thankfully, the song was turned on its head and the final cut is one of the songs I really look forward to when I put on SYW.

[GateandGarden]

I still have my question and I'm an impatient chick. ...about the "wall of sound" version of TD. Is that the same as the "single version," or is that something else entirely?

Hillary

[ontheEdgeof17]

I still have my question and I'm an impatient chick. ...about the "wall of sound" version of TD. Is that the same as the "single version," or is that something else entirely?

Hillary


It's the same version.

I dunno why artists do that.....different version from the album. Since singles are becoming nonexisitant, it kinda disappoints the ppl that buy the album for that particular version of that song, and it's totally different. I know I would be pissed.

-Curt

[Johnny Stew]

In all actuality, there is no legitimate "single version" of "Thrown Down."

"Thrown Down," as it was released to radio stations on promo singles, is exactly the same as the album version.

Some stations apparently picked up on the so-called "Wall Of Sound" (an appellation I can't stand, to be honest) version that leaked online though, and played it instead.
So various fans began referring to that early outtake version as a "single/radio version," when it really isn't. Which, of course, created needless confusion.

The outtake version has never been officially released. Not even as a radio-only promo.

[Johnny Stew]

I dunno why artists do that.....different version from the album. Since singles are becoming nonexisitant, it kinda disappoints the ppl that buy the album for that particular version of that song, and it's totally different. I know I would be pissed.

Sometimes a mix sounds really good in the context of an album, but wouldn't stand out as much on the radio... so the track is remixed for maximum potential radio play. (The 'Fleetwood Mac' tracks, for example.)

It's a long-standing practice, and I think it's often a wise idea. I just hate that the artists and/or record companies seem so reluctant to release the radio versions commercially. "Best of" and "greatest hits" sets are the best forum for the inclusion of a radio mix, but they miss the boat more often than not. And these days it would be so easy to make the remix available online for 99 cents. :shrug:

[GateandGarden]

Thanks for the info, Curtis and Johnny. :)

Hillary

[ontheEdgeof17]

Sometimes a mix sounds really good in the context of an album, but wouldn't stand out as much on the radio... so the track is remixed for maximum potential radio play. (The 'Fleetwood Mac' tracks, for example.)

It's a long-standing practice, and I think it's often a wise idea. I just hate that the artists and/or record companies seem so reluctant to release the radio versions commercially. "Best of" and "greatest hits" sets are the best forum for the inclusion of a radio mix, but they miss the boat more often than not. And these days it would be so easy to make the remix available online for 99 cents. :shrug:


I think it's a crappy idea. The song I hear on the radio, is the song I want on the CD.

-Curt

[MirrorInTheSky]

I guess I'm in the minority, but Thrown Down is one of my absolute favorite songs on the SYW album. I crank my car stereo so loud and sing my heart out. There's my two cents...don't spend it all in one place.

[golden braid]

I guess I'm in the minority, but Thrown Down is one of my absolute favorite songs on the SYW album. I crank my car stereo so loud and sing my heart out. There's my two cents...don't spend it all in one place.

Thrown Down was my favorite song on the album when I first heard SYW and it still is my favorite. I like both versions of the song too. :)

[MirrorInTheSky]

I hate to resurrect this thread again, but since someone else is actually in accord with me, I have to at least make the observation:

Tiffany asks: Why didn't Fleetwood Mac do Thrown Down during the tour? It seemed to be the song the fans most wanted to hear.
[CB] Tell me about it. I love that song. LOVE it. They rehearsed it, but I think it just comes down to four people voting on what songs make the cut, and how well the song flows with the rest of the set. I know it’s a generic and uninformed answer, but it’s the best I can do. Sorry.

[Gypsy3]

"Thrown Down" was not only my favorite song on "Say You Will" but my favorite song by them in about 16 years when it came out.

[elle]

And what makes all of you think, this will be the last FM album? LB has abandoned his solo plans. The perspective for his solo projects won't change- this will be the same in the future than it was 1997 or today. Critical acclaimation but no megaseller. Does this mean you think he retires at the age of 53 even if the FM album and tour was succesful...?

As far as they stay healthy I don't see that this is inevitably the last project. I think these people will produce and perform music for their entire liftime. Except of Stevie they don`t have the needed recognition and musical platform outside FM. So I certainly don't believe in new albums every 2 years. But I also don't see why they all should officially retire. Any opinions?

:lol: gotta love reading these old discussions and how wrong predictions were. including that SYW was gonna be a swan song album! sound familiar?? ;)

[KarmaContestant]

:lol: gotta love reading these old discussions and how wrong predictions were. including that SYW was gonna be a swan song album! sound familiar?? ;)

I love all the people trashing Thrown Down, who in more recent years, cite it as a great song. :laugh:

[pauls90]

I love all the people trashing Thrown Down, who in more recent years, cite it as a great song. :laugh:

I'm only 24 and discovered my love for Fleetwood Mac at the end of high school. Up until last year I had been saving Say You Will to listen to down the line so I had one last album to look forward to (I didn't think it was plausible they would ever record another).

Thrown Down and Destiny Rules were instantly my top favorites. I was just twirling and listening to Thrown Down in the shower last night actually <3

[SisterNightroad]

Similarly, I'm 23, discovered Fleetwood Mac in 2011 and I've listened to say you will thouroughly only a year ago and my favourite song is Thrown Down.
I had already listened to the Trouble in Shangri-La outtake then and I loved it but couldn't stand the too many layers of harmonies and I found it a bit overproduced.
The Say you will version is almost perfect, just a bit too toned down but it's still very intense.
Perfection for me would be unifying Stevie and Lindsey's vocals and Lindsey's guitar solo of the Trouble in Shangri-La version with the musical arrangement from the Say you will version.

This is the one I'm talking about: http://www.mediafire.com/view/4yfawv4kko2w9v6/Thrown%20Down%20-%20Trouble%20In%20Shangri-La.mp3

[pauls90]

The Say you will version is almost perfect, just a bit too toned down but it's still very intense.
Perfection for me would be unifying Stevie and Lindsey's vocals and Lindsey's guitar solo of the Trouble in Shangri-La version with the musical arrangement from the Say you will version.

This is the one I'm talking about: https://www.dropbox.com/s/cnzec5klph3xalh/Thrown%20Down%20-%20Trouble%20In%20Shangri-La.mp3?dl=0

OMG! I didn't know this existed!!!!!!!!!! I just discovered the extended version of Planets of the Universe a couple weeks ago though so I'm behind apparently.

[MikeVielhaber]

Interesting seeing these discussions that happened while I was still a few months from high school graduation and several months to a year before I found this place. I had become a fan starting with finding an old cassette of my dads with Rumours on it while I was in junior high and then going out and getting the recently released The Dance and playing the hell out of it. So by the time Say You Will had come out Anticipation was high. I had already heard Lindsey's aborted solo album where most of his SYW contributions came from so that was a bit of a bummer. As I would've liked more new stuff, but also really liked those songs and was glad they were getting release. Though I recall being disappointed that "twist of fate" was not among the chosen. I also recall hearing a prerelease stream on aol and being blown away. Probably a better first impression than how I would later come to evaluate the album. It's a good album, too long and missing Christine. But not amazing. I was probably just excited to hear new Fleetwood Mac.

Thrown Down isn't a favorite and I'm more of a lindsey fan, especially compared to latter day Stevie, so most of my favorites are his, but some of Stevie's are pretty good too.

[Turn It On]

Thrown Down is Fleetwood Mac's best song.

[teedeerocks]

:thumbsup:Whoa! "Miranda" rocks! Am I the only one who thinks "Miranda" rocks and continuously thinks How cool is Lindsey??? whenever she hears that song?

Anyway, I have a question about the "wall of sound" version of TD. Is that the same as the "single version," or is that something else entirely?

Hillary

I soooooooooooooo agree!I like some of Bucky's stuff but Miranda struck a nerve that hasn't stopped vibrating since I first heard it.It's the gift that keeps on giving;).Also,Everybody Finds Out and Goodbye Baby=:thumbsup: