Your guess on why Stevies Solo careeer eclipsed lindsey and Christines

[Craig]

what do you think the reasoning behind her larger success out of the band over Christine and Lindsey is?

[squealy]

She had the most sex appeal and charisma of any of the group, and she worked the hardest at it. Christine is a solid singer and writer but she's not a spellbinding performer, and she was usually content to just work within the band. And Lindsey's albums were too eccentric for mass success, plus he takes so long to make them. Stevie is also a strong, distinctive and prolific songwriter. It's actually amazing she stayed with Fleetwood Mac considering the situation with Lindsey and the small number of songs she was allowed on each record. I think it's because she knew that no matter how successful her solo records were, she always sounded the best with Lindsey arranging her material.

[CarneVaca]

It's like people slowing down on the highway to watch a car wreck.

[gldstwmn]

Stevie is a complete dichotomy in that her music is all about the ethereal, as is her image while she also appears to be very human and real and approachable. I don't sense that from Lindsey or Chris. Chris wants nothing to do with the spotlight. She considers herself a solid player. Lindsey is an eccentric genius and seems to be a loner. While both Lindsey and Chris's music is appealing, it doesn't reach people on the same level as Stevie's.

[DownOnRodeo]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
It's like people slowing down on the highway to watch a car wreck.
Ahaha! :laugh: Thanks for laugh, Carne! ;)
Yeah, Squealy summed it up spot on. My first thoughts were just simply that Stevie wanted to be a musical celeb, and Lindsey/Christine wanted to be musicians.
Oh, Stevie's songs are her 'children' ... You might even say she has lived vicariously through her own songwriting/performing career.. but I'm not sure that even makes sense actually :P

[DeeGeMe]

I once read a theory that went something like this: Stevie was the woman that other women wanted to be, and that men wanted to be with!

[PenguinHead]

Could it simply be because Stevie wanted it more? Christine, by her own admission, preferred to be part of a band- not the lead singer --hence just one solo album and tour. Christine has her strengths, but as a solo performer, she's fairly bland.

Lindsey is just a completely insane studio junkie. Releasing albums seems to not to be as important to him as just noodling around. Plus, now it is evident from what he has been saying, that record companies are not that interested in him as a solo artist (i.e. because he doesn't have the broad commercial appeal).

[Janet]

Why do these questions exsist? I think its totally obvious. Stevie is a woman--she is gorgeous--she has good music.

Not to say Lindsey and Christine aren't but not in the degree of Stevie. She had the total package more than those two. She had this spark...and a definite look.

There is no question..she was born to be a star. That's all. Christine and Lindsey are stars in their own rights too.

[Ali]

To put it simply, Stevie just wanted it more. Christine and Lindsey's albums were more to get their music out and maybe get heard. Stevie wanted the spotlight and the attention and was willing to work for it. Christine and Lindsey did that only when they felt like it because it wasn't necessary to their well-being as musicians.

[tommer]

the answer to this question is as simple as possible: her solo stuff was good, the others' solo stuff sucked.
mick: his solo albums' highlights were when lindsey jumped on board.
john: honestly- i didn't even bother checking.
christine: although her debut album was great, her 1984 solo was lame, uninteresting and dull, it had nothing to add to her FM efforts, instead- it was just a pale copy of them.
lindsey: okay, i guess so you could call OOTC "strange" and Go Insane "not his greatest work" but gimme a break, Law & Order is a total waste of plastic material (which as you all know, is enviromenytally harmful)
stevie: she joined hands with jimmy iovine, the man who became the best producer she ever worked with (a common mistake claims lindsey was the one, he wasn't.) Bella Donna extended her FM persona and succesfuly proclaimed her spot as a solo artist who's got her own unique and distinctive voice apart from the combo.
let me make it even more simple; take their most succesful singles: lindsey's Trouble, christine's Got A Hold On Me, and stevie's Stand Back. compare the three. who wins?

[sparky]

Squealy, you put it very well.

I don't think Stevie is the greatest songwriter alive or dead, the most beautiful woman, or the greatest singer. She has said as much herself. However, she has a magnetic aura about her, and her talents and looks are unique. She can walk onto a stage or into a small room - and she has an effect on people. Charisma ? Magnetism ? I can't explain it. But it's hard to deny.

The music - I think people connect with it on an almost inexplicable emotional level. She inspires very passionate feelings in people. On both ends of the spectrum.

Lindsey and Christine are both remarkable musicians and artists. No doubt about it. I think their music has touched people and truly changed their lives. They would have succeeded no matter what.

Stevie though, has something else. She's a star, a show, a frontwoman. The record people picked her out right off as the focal point in the group - and they were right. The record companies believed it to be true, she was willing to be in the spotlight, and the machine went into motion.

If we knew what it was that made some people stars and others not - we could bottle it and make a million.

Nonetheless, people know it when they see it.

[DownOnRodeo]

Originally posted by tommer

let me make it even more simple; take their most succesful singles: lindsey's Trouble, christine's Got A Hold On Me, and stevie's Stand Back. compare the three. who wins?
Well if you mean sales of singles, it was Stevie's I'm assuming. But I've gotta say I much prefer the other two, especially Trouble.
Christine's material for the eponymous 1984 album was 'not lame' and was easily as good as or better than much of her FM stuff... but the production was straight out of a cereal packet, that's for sure. Had that material been on an FM album, it would be gold, and it still is to me regardless (especially compared to her FM stuff around Tusk and Mirage).

[BombaySapphire3]

"but the production was straight out of a cereal packet" Which begs the question why would someone who had written and performed some of the biggest hits from one of the biggest bands in the world put out such a lamely produced LP not to mention the tacky low budget vidieos that went with it.Christine's make up in "Love Will Show us How' looked like it came out of a $1.49 Halloween makeup kit and was applied by Boy George's makeup artist.

[tommer]

yeap, i can't recall where exactly did i read this review of her album, but i remember it said "christine mcvie used to be a decent blues singer, today she's just a stevie nicks without her hairdressers" :laugh:
and to DownOnRodeo, i meant quality wise, if you really think Trouble and GAHOM are satnd-back-classed in some way or another, i'll just laugh quietly and leave you to it. both of these songs are as classy and sophisticated as their videos are.

[Vianna]

Stevie is more of a "people"person than the other two. She is also more of an actress. Think about it. Can you see Christine whirling around like Stevie does when she does Rhiannon? She almost acts her songs. She also reaches out to the audience in a way the others don't. In fact, I think they depend on her to do that part for them=:-)Lindsey and Chris both strike me as kind of shy.

It's also what she wanted - she says "I want to be a star" in the demo to Sara. It was a goal for her and she worked for it. She was single-minded in pursuit of it. Lindsey and Chris wanted to be musicians first and foremost.

Something that's interesting to consider about the group: how many are first-borns in their family? I think only Stevie is, maybe John. All the others have older sibs, even if it's only a half-sib. First-borns are more achievement oriented according to all the books on this subject. Certainly it holds true for Stevie.

[CarneVaca]

Tommer, I don't know just what you hear when you're listening to this stuff, but ... Stand Back? If it weren't for Prince, that song would be just another bland "woe is me, the woman child" Stevie Nicks song. Don't get me wrong. I like the song. I used to misinterpret the lyrics, and then one day when I bothered to read what she was actually saying, the song lost its mystique.

But, with all due respect, "Trouble" is a timeless song. "Stand Back" is so 1984. Although, I must admit, if Lindsey had given it his production magical touch, it might have just been a masterpiece.

Let's be fair.

As for Christine, well, I don't own her solo work. Listening to a full album of her stuff would probably put me in a coma.

[SeventhWonder]

Hmmm the reason Stevie was successfull....

to quote Courtney Love, "She's got a lot of Mojo"

[Craig]

Originally posted by CarneVaca


But, with all due respect, "Trouble" is a timeless song. "Stand Back" is so 1984. Although, I must admit, if Lindsey had given it his production magical touch, it might have just been a masterpiece.

I'm sorry but Trouble is timeless because it ripped off a 30 year old sound..you know, that decade people call the 50s. It was a nice song but come on, it sounded just like the songs on Mirage, which to me was a tired sound, the 50s revival was weak at best.

Stand back is far superior as both a song and a single, it has the great verse, the great chorus a great vamp and it climaxes very well.

I'd actually put it up there as one of the best written pop singles of all time. That's not to say it's the best thing since sliced bread, I just mean as far as song formula goes.

That's not to say that trouble goes against pop formula so that automatically makes it better..as I'm sure a fan of his or twenty would love to say, it's just to say as far as songs are written it doesn't do the same magic Stand back does.

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by BombaySapphire3
"but the production was straight out of a cereal packet" Christine's make up in "Love Will Show us How' looked like it came out of a $1.49 Halloween makeup kit and was applied by Boy George's makeup artist.

Well, it was the 80's so you never know...:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Tommer, I don't know just what you hear when you're listening to this stuff, but ... Stand Back? ..."woe is me, the woman child" Stevie Nicks song. Don't get me wrong. I like the song. I used to misinterpret the lyrics, and then one day when I bothered to read what she was actually saying, the song lost its mystique.



Actually Carne, you're right. That's why millions of women related to the song and it became such a huge hit. As for you guys, well I always thought you were only interested in the video.:laugh:

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by BombaySapphire3
Christine's make up in "Love Will Show us How' looked like it came out of a $1.49 Halloween makeup kit and was applied by Boy George's makeup artist.

In all fairness, I know it was miserably hot shooting the Hold Me video, but every time I see Stevie's face up close in it I think of that make-up commercial with the jingle "Gonna get that shine-free look". Granted, Stevie looked beautiful, but the make-up looked over-done. The words "third coat" come to mind. It also reminds me of the early '80s shined faces look like in the Don't you Want me Baby video. I'm glad that look has not come back.

Then again, in the Mirage concert video, Christine looks like she's in the Mummers' Parade. (You Philly folks will get that one.)

- Jake

[tommer]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Tommer, I don't know just what you hear when you're listening to this stuff, but ... Stand Back? If it weren't for Prince, that song would be just another bland "woe is me, the woman child" Stevie Nicks song. Don't get me wrong. I like the song. I used to misinterpret the lyrics, and then one day when I bothered to read what she was actually saying, the song lost its mystique.

But, with all due respect, "Trouble" is a timeless song. "Stand Back" is so 1984. Although, I must admit, if Lindsey had given it his production magical touch, it might have just been a masterpiece.

Let's be fair.

As for Christine, well, I don't own her solo work. Listening to a full album of her stuff would probably put me in a coma. well well well... there goes the old nagging doctrine again.... if stevie's done something meaningful- it must be someone else's fault... if it's not lindsey this time- then it must be Prince's.
Prince's sole contribution to this song was a little synth hook, one of many, the guy's not even credited for it!
yes, it IS contemporary 1984, why? coz it was an effective contemporary rock piece recorded back then, and if you ask me, the music (not the 2nd video) can still hold water to this day.
Trouble, on the other hand, sounded like a jingle when it was released, but TODAY it sounds like a VERY OLD commercial.
as for christine, i suggest you try her Legendary Christine Perfect album, it's actually really good, but as for her 1984 album- beware!

[strandinthewind]

Here we go again :rolleyes: :laugh:

In the beginning and even more so now, Stevie knew/knows how to sell it. She has worked very, very hard to do so and put herself and her mostly great music out there. In fact, I think with FM, she now tries not to sell it too much in a live performance or interview out of respect for the other members. She can take all of the light and ficus from everyone else on stage; I've seen her do it on more than one occasion. I cite as an example when they inducted FM into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. SN stood away from the center to allow everyone else to speak; she did not run up to the mike to be first. But, the crowd kept screaming for her. Right or wrong, I heard no screams for anyone else. And - although she is still pretty, she was hot, hot, hot in the days when people were beginning to notice her - and right or wrong that sells (not that her music was any slouch!). Finally, if you ever are lucky enough to meet her as I have been twice (once in about 1985 and once in 1998), I think you will very quickly realize as I did that when she is in the room and even more so when talking to you, no one else appears to be in the room even though the room may be very crowded. Few people in the world have this quality.

Not that LB is not good looking, he is. He is also a brilliant musician and producer, esp. on the guitar; few can match him. Yet, right or wrong, in the public's opinion, LB's apparently careful manipulation of his image (Rumors era Japanese kimono wearing hippie, Tusk era GQ, Law and Order New Wave look, Go Insane high hair, etc.) just did not sell him to the public like SN's pretty much unwavering mystic image, which was also a premeditated thought. Also, while I like LB's solo stuff, it just never connected to as many people as SN's solo stuff. I think that is kind of a shame becasue LB's solo stuff was mostly very, very good and some of it was excellent.

As for CM, what a brilliant person and artist and, in my opinion, classy looking lady. She just by her own admission never wanted to be up front selling it and the way of the world dictates you have to do that to make it. I think that is somewhat of a shame because, in my opinion, she just could be the most talented of the three. I cite "Why" as an example and leave it at that.

Finally, I would put just about every song on Bella Donna up against any other "Rumors" era member's song either solo or with FM. Moreover, the demos for After the Glitter Fades, The Highwayman, and Leather and Lace (three of my favorites) clearly indicate the actual music was the same as the finished product and the producer just added a professional sound with a few more instruments, etc. So, although the producer and musicians clearly enhanced the already good original product, I conclude these three songs, along with most of the rest of Bella Donna in my opinion, were pure Stevie in words and music.

Moreover, even if Prince did contribute to Stand Back - so what. LB and CM never let anyone contribute to their songs? I suggest a review of the credits on their solo records will suggest the contrary. In sum, Stand Back is pure Stevie; all you have to do is watch her perform and "sell" it live even now to see it in my opinion.

Note: Nowehere in my comments should anyone get the impression that I am saying LB and CM are worthless. I am solely saying in friendly tones that in my opinion SN has musical talent, and rarely found star quality and was willing to work very very hard to put those out for the anxiously awaiting public.

[Tusk57]

Just to set the record staight, I can testify that Christine's makeup on the "Love will show us how" video was great! She has never looked better. And this comes from a big Stevie supporter! Heck, I like them all. They all have their strenghts, which when put out as a package (FM) they are the greatest! As a solo artist, Stevie wins because she was the sexiest of the bunch. In the video age that is very important.

[CarneVaca]

Stand Book without the Prince hook sounds like every other Stevie Nicks song.

Trouble, on the other hand, has beautiful guitar work and a nice sunny-day beat.

It seems to me just about all the stand-outs in Stevie's albums have major input from someone else. That applies to even The Other Side of the Mirror, one of the best songs in which is a collaboration with Bruce Hornsby. And when I say "best" in relation to that album, I use the term rather loosely.

[jeffles]

take a look who Stevie Nicks has worked with....

Her debut featured high profile duets with Tom Petty (song written by Petty and Campbell) and Don Henley. Not only that, the album was produced by Jimmy Iovine, who, at the time, was one of the top producers around.

She continued to collaborate with Iovine and her next album featured assistance from Prince and another duet with Petty. I should also be noted that the top session players such as Waddy Wachtel, Russ Kunkel, Bob Glaub, Danny Kortchmar, etc. all backed her.

There is no question that Nicks wrote some great songs, but, throughout her career, she has surrounded herself with MAJOR talent, Lindsey Buckingham did not.

Her music "spoke" to a much wider audience that Buckingham's more eclectic and quirky self-produced and performed work.

I believe Christine only made 1 solo album (not including her "Christine Perfect" album in the early 70's, which most people are unaware of anyway). 1 album doesn't make for a solo career.

[CarneVaca]

I think you guys are missing something here: Everybody likes a circus!

[Johnny Stew]

*yawn*
"Bored now."


Here I go "defending" Stevie again, but the sarcasm and cynicism leveled at her on these boards is unparalleled.
Folks only begrudgingly admit she has any talent, and then they want to contribute any success she's had, to others.

It seems that the same few people lob the same criticisms over and over again, and yet none of them ever give any clear, concise, or interesting answers as to why she remains a success some 27 years after people first noticed her.
All they can muster is some pithy little comments that add up to nothing.

If Stevie were such an untalented leach, who was successful only because of a unique image, a pretty face, and the talents of other people, the public would have long forgotten her.
And yet, her most recent solo album debuted at #5 on the charts (alongside releases by artists 30 years younger than her), and has sold over half a million copies (and is still selling)... 20 years after her first solo album was released.
A better showing than practically ANY artist in her peer group, and a far better showing than any other member of Fleetwood Mac has mustered with their solo careers.

Stevie has worked very hard over the years, and she has never treated her solo career as a "side-project" or a hobby, like the other band members have often seemed to.
And she has toured for every single solo effort (including the 'Timespace' compilation, and the 'Enchanted' boxed-set), to the point that it almost killed her.

And some may argue that the level of her contributions to Fleetwood Mac suffered because of that, but truly, 'Tango' was the only album that really got the short end of the stick.

Even before she struck out on her solo career, there were huge chunks of time when Fleetwood Mac just didn't need her, as they layed down tracks and overbubs.
Until it was time to go in and do the vocal parts, Stevie really just wasn't needed in the studio.

So she started making good use of that time... she'd record her solo albums while the rest of F.M. would go on vacations or take time off, she would then tour while they filtered back into the studio to begin recording (having given them several songs of her to evaluate while she was away), and then she'd return to them in time to do her lead and background vocals.
Once the album was finished, she then hit the road with Fleetwood Mac (having very little time, if any, to rest from the last tour she had just completed).
This was true of both 'Mirage,' and 'Behind The Mask' (and of course, 'Say You Will'), and while her presence in the studio for 'Tango' was regretably limited, she still went out on the road with the band for an extensive world tour, not long after having come off the road for her 'Rock A Little' tour (and out of Betty Ford).

I have read countless interviews with her, that cover the entire length of her career, and she has always given credit where credit is due.
She does not deny the fact that she hires very talented producers and musicians to play on her songs. She's very clear on the fact that production and instrumentation are not her forté, and that she "needs" people whose talents are in those areas.
But no one can deny that it was Stevie out on the road, year after year after year... it wasn't Jimmy, it wasn't Rupert Hine, it wasn't Lindsey... it was her.

(And in my very humble opinion, production and instrumentation is only the "icing" on a record anyway.
My ears always go to the voice and the lyrics first... everything else plays second fiddle to me.
Which is why I can enjoy one of Stevie's demos, with her playing clunky piano, as much as I can enjoy any of the high-gloss album tracks.
For me, the substance is in the lyrics and performance.)

As for why she has the most successful solo career, I think what it comes down to, is commitment.
The level of commitment to which Stevie gives her music and career, is what helped catapult her to stardom.

I realize that Stevie's albums are too "safe" for many people's tastes, and she will never be everyone's cup of tea... but I think more often than not, she struck an excellent balance between what is relatable for the masses, and what speaks to fans in a more esoteric way.
Christine recorded her solo album more because it was "expected" of her, than out of a desire to get her music out there. She even said as much in various interviews around the time.
And Lindsey often seemed to get lost in his studio, trying to come up with as many zany sounds, and offbeat special effects as possible... leaving much of the music coming off too contrived for it to click on any major emotional level with the majority of the listening audience.
In many cases I don't think it was a matter of people not "getting it," I think it just didn't appeal to people in a broad way because it sometimes lacked warmth (this based on the comments I've heard from various friends, when trying to introduce them to Lindsey's solo music).

Of course, 'Out Of The Cradle' is the exception to all rules... being an utterly amazing album both lyrically and musically, and one that almost everyone seems to enjoy. But it should also be noted that 'Out Of The Cradle' was the first album Lindsey made, without it seeming as if he just wanted a chance to try out all the gizmos and gadgets that he didn't get to use on Fleetwood Mac albums. There's a warmth, beauty, vulnerability, and humanity to the entire album, that was often missing on 'Go Insane' and 'Law & Order.'

I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for some of the things I said, but I am absolutely by no means dismissing Christine's or Lindsey's solo careers. I cannot stress enough that i am a HUGE fan of both individuals, and I think both produced some truly amazing and memorable music in their solo careers.
However, the things noted above, are what I believe contributed to Stevie's solo career "clicking" in a bigger way than the others.'

[CarneVaca]

The public is often wrong. How else would you explain Milli Vanilli and the Backstreet Boys? I'd rather keep Lindsey squarely in the column of artistic integrity, for better or for worse from a commercial standpoint.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
The public is often wrong. How else would you explain Milli Vanilli and the Backstreet Boys? True, but Milli Vanilli vanished without a trace, and boy-bands are gasping their last breath. No matter how successful something may be out of the gate, if there isn't any talent or substance to back it up, it won't last.
Which is why I made it a point to note that Stevie's most recent hit album came 20 years after her first hit album. :)

Stevie may have achieved the most commercial success, but she has done so while recording the music she wants to record (with the exception of being strong-armed into recording "Sometimes It's A Bitch" 12 years ago)... so her artistic integrity remains just as true to me as Lindsey's. :)

For me, both Stevie and Lindsey are in the upper echelon of artists with the most artistic integrity.

I've always taken great pride in being a fan of theirs. :)

[jeffles]

I didn't solely credit her success to others. Indeed, she is a good writer and singer, and she can still sing.

No one will, or should rather, argue that Stevie Nicks isn't hard working. She constantly records, hits the road, etc. and when she's not doing that, she's doing a charity event, soundtrack or the like which keeps her profile pretty high. I give her all the credit in the world for that.

But, the reality is, she has made (mostly) radio-friendly music, certainly more than LB. That isn't too say its bad. No. But she had help...

Why would you discount listing key individuals who made these significant contributions to her records, as I did, as "pithy little comments that add up to nothing"??

[wondergirl9847]

I think I'll PM Marty about adding a Stevie vs. Lindsey forum. It will get more posts than all the other forums combined. :laugh:

Anyways...they are BOTH mega-mega-mega talented people. We ALL identify with one or the other (or in some cases, BOTH) in different ways. WHY must we fight over who is better? It's SUBJECTIVE...just like with favorite song, food, color...some of us like Rhiannon, some hate it, some like chicken fried steak, some hate it, some like the color orange, some hate it. WHO CARES?!?!?

I do like the fact we can all DEBATE this kind of thing, it's a free country, do what you want (as long as you don't physically hurt another person), but it's getting kinda ridiculous with the viciousness.

Lindsey is probably not as popular because his unique style of music isn't the kind you hear on the radio played 389,000 times a frickin day. ALSO, because he stays in the studio like a hermit and only makes appearances on tour or rarely in magazines and on TV. Stevie just does more press and is more outgoing. Lindsey is shy. Stevie has that elusive X factor as well....she's got the unique voice, the fun songs, she's gorgeous and has a unique style.

So, there's my answer to the question. And, while we are getting things off our chest about stuff...I DO NOT LIKE THE BEATLES!!!! Okay, flame away folks. LMAO!!

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by jeffles
Why would you discount listing key individuals who made these significant contributions to her records, as I did, as "pithy little comments that add up to nothing"?? Hi Jeff... I wasn't discounting the contributions of the musicians and producers Stevie has worked with... which was why I made it a point to bring up the fact that even Stevie herself makes no bones about the fact that she relies on these individuals to help "bring her music to the masses."

I only made mention of the significance of the various producers, etc., because so often her reliance on these people is used by her detractors to discount her talents and success... which I think is a cop-out.

But I wasn't singling out your comments (or anyone else's), just the general bias in those regards. :)

Hope that clears things up. :D

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by jeffles
I didn't solely credit her success to others. Indeed, she is a good writer and singer, and she can still sing.

No one will, or should rather, argue that Stevie Nicks isn't hard working. She constantly records, hits the road, etc. and when she's not doing that, she's doing a charity event, soundtrack or the like which keeps her profile pretty high. I give her all the credit in the world for that.

But, the reality is, she has made (mostly) radio-friendly music, certainly more than LB. That isn't too say its bad. No. But she had help...

Why would you discount listing key individuals who made these significant contributions to her records, as I did, as "pithy little comments that add up to nothing"??


Most of those "good songs" you talk about were written by Stevie and Stevie alone, without any help from anyone. Case in point - Leather & Lace. And Carne, the Bruce Hornsby tune makes me want to vomit but you certainly have a right to your opinion and your...taste.:rolleyes:

[sara1998]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
I think you guys are missing something here: Everybody likes a circus!

yadda, yadda, yadda....

I sense some bitterness....

Get over attacking Stevie about her success. Your constant sarcasm and snide remarks about Stevie show that you take it too far in terms of "his success vs. her success." While we're all terribly sorry that LB is not the major success that SN is, there's nothing that can be done to change that. Your constant, bitter comments are not only rude, their getting rather old.

Get a life.

Maria

Disclaimer: This post is not intended to attack LB or his fans, just CarneVaca.

[glitter_fades]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by sara1998

Disclaimer: This post is not intended to attack LB or his fans, just CarneVaca.

:eek: Meeeeoooowwww!

[strandinthewind]

What wrong with liking a circus?????????

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by jeffles
Why would you discount listing key individuals who made these significant contributions to her records, as I did, as "pithy little comments that add up to nothing"??

Jeffles, I think Johnny Stew was addressing me.

The whole Lindsey vs. Stevie issue is quality vs. quantity. While I can count Lindsey stinkers in one hand, I believe the reverse is true with Stevie's work since 1985. Starting with Rock a Little, most of her stuff is mediocre and it doesn't surprise me that the public prefers her over Lindsey. Mediocrity, especially with a pretty face, sells. That's reality.

Sara1998, I was this close to ignoring your comments since I really don't care what you think. But at least you came right out and admitted you were attacking me. I don't have any bitterness toward Stevie. To feel bitter toward someone would require my having a personal investment. That's just not the case here. While I understand you don't like my comments, I would just say tough **** to that. This is a discussion board. As long as questions over one's solo career vs. the other's come up, I am going to post. Hit the ignore button if you don't want to read my comments.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
What wrong with liking a circus?????????

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Exactly. ;)

[rianbay1]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by glitter_fades

Disclaimer: This post is not intended to attack LB or his fans, just CarneVaca.



Hat's off to you Maria and, of course, to you too Johnny. Anyone in doubt of Stevie's true talent REALLY needs to take a CLOSE listen to TISL. I think it's the project she has had the most "hands on" approach in. She co-produced and even produced a fair amount of the album and in LINDSEY'S own words to Stevie "this is the best thing you have ever done." I think TISL is truly a masterpiece. In fact, I find it a great compliment to Stevie that Lindsey chose to co-produce a couple tracks from SYW with one of TISL's key producers, John Shanks. I hope Stevie herself works with him more in the future.

Obviously, Lindsey HIMSELF has no doubts of Stevie's talent nor should anyone here.

BRIAN

[CarneVaca]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rianbay1
[QUOTE]Originally posted by glitter_fades
Anyone in doubt of Stevie's true talent REALLY needs to take a CLOSE listen to TISL.

I respectfully disagree that I need to do anything to "get" Stevie. I've spent enough time listening to hers and many other artists' music to figure out what I like and don't like.

In fact, I find it a great compliment to Stevie that Lindsey chose to co-produce a couple tracks from SYW with one of TISL's key producers, John Shanks

Unless you know for a fact that Lindsey "chose" to do this, you're just applying wishful thinking here. I tend to believe this was imposed on Lindsey, and since he was in a peacekeeping mode for this album, he went along. I question the decision, for I believe the weakest moments in SYW are Stevie songs, i.e., Silver Girl, Running Through the Garden and Destiny Rules.

[jeffles]

Johnny Stew-Maybe I misunderstood you. I don't discount her talent as a songwriter and a singer.

gldstwmn-I don't believe i ever said anything about her not writing those songs, with the exeption of Stop Draggin My Heart Around, which was written by Tom Petty and Mike Campbell. I think she's a very good writer.

I think some people are getting off track from what the original post was about. It wasn't to validate Stevie Nicks' success and talent, nor was it to argue about who is better.

It was to explain why her solo career has surpassed that of the other members of the band, and its reasonable to consider the contributions of others as part of that success. Again, it wasn't to discount her own talents.

I happen to enjoy her solo work, especially her debut and the most recent effort.

[Janet]

Thats why I hate these questions. Its a matter of opinion.

On these boards we have strong avid Stevie fans who HATE Lindsey . WE have the Lindsey fans who think Stevie is a total flake and waste of space. Then we have the few who love BOTH.

These questions should belong to a Stevie vs Lindsey board...enter at your own risk. MAN!!!!

I think some of you really try hard to express strong opinions without ruffling feathers...really good job guys. We can have opinions guys!

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Jeffles, I think Johnny Stew was addressing me.

The whole Lindsey vs. Stevie issue is quality vs. quantity. While I can count Lindsey stinkers in one hand, I believe the reverse is true with Stevie's work since 1985. Starting with Rock a Little, most of her stuff is mediocre and it doesn't surprise me that the public prefers her over Lindsey. Mediocrity, especially with a pretty face, sells. That's reality.The "quality vs. quantity" thing is another one that comes up a lot, but I feel it's a weak issue too.
I think the rationalization of Lindsey's music being something sophisticated to the extreme, and "above the heads" of the general public, is a bit of a cop-out.
Certainly Lindsey's solo music has every bit of the pop nuances of Stevie's solo music. He may imploy more gadgets and wizardry, but the end product is a pop-rock album... just the same as Stevie's albums. What's not to "get" about a pop album, with thematical issues such as love, and, well, love?

They're both trying to appeal to the masses (why else would Lindsey continue to work for Warner Bros. after all these years?), and if they weren't, they'd just be a pair of unknown singers, like they were in 1973.

I love Lindsey's music (sad that I feel the need to repeat that over and over again, lest my intentions be misconstrued), but I think sometimes he went just a little overboard in his search for offbeat sounds.
I think sometimes the heart and soul that can be found in the best music, became a little forgotten or too far buried among all the sonic flash.

'Out Of The Cradle' is Lindsey's finest solo album, because it sounds pretty, AND we can relate to it.

As to why it didn't take off in a major way... who knows?
But I can see why 'Law & Order' and 'Go Insane' didn't.

Like I've said, I've played Lindsey's songs to many people... people who, based on their other musical tastes, I thought would greatly enjoy his music... and it's not a matter of them not "getting it," it's just simply that a lot of it didn't appeal to them in any major way. There are maybe 4 or 5 songs on the first two solo albums that seem to elicit any interest from people, and even some of the 'OotC' tracks get a less-than-enthusiastic response.

As for the statement that "mediocrity sells"... that's not actually true. Mediocrity doesn't sell, and it never has.
The biggest thing that sells records, is hipness.
Once an act is no longer hip, if they don't have the quality to back up their music, they're bound to disappear into obscurity.

Even 'Street Angel'... Stevie's lowest selling album... sold more, and charted higher than albums by many of her peers (Heart, Pat Benatar, Chrissie Hynde, etc.).
Then 'Trouble In Shangri-La' came along, and its sales figures defied all expectations the industry had for a 50-something female rocker.

Surely the unenlightened masses aren't lining up to buy a mediocre, low-quality album, by an un-hip and aging rock chick.
That's a bit far-fetched.

Granted there may be one or two songs on each album that leave a little to be desired, but the average quality of each release is extremely high... otherwise I would have grown bored with Stevie's music long ago.
And as a longtime fan, it's her CURRENT music that keeps me interested and keeps me buying her releases... not her past glories.

As I've stated before, Stevie has a very high success-rate. One can look across her career and pick out maybe half a dozen true clunkers (anything beyond that, is a matter of personal preference)... but when you place that number against the hundred+ other songs she's released over the years (most of which had absolutely no involvement from Lindsey), I think she has more than proven that she has what it takes.

A few duds every couple of years isn't bad... 5 or 6 duds every few (or more) years, is.

Personally, it matters very little to me. All of these songs... even ones that aren't exactly favorites mean something to me. I've been listening to them for the better part of my life, and... as I've said before... at the end of the day, my opinion is the only one that matters to me, where music is involved.
As a fan, I'll always do my part to try and help people "discover" Lindsey's music... but Craig asked why we feel Stevie's solo career was more successful than the others,' and I've given my thoughts on the various reasons.

"There ain't no good guy... there ain't no bad guy... there's only you and me, and we just disagree...."

[CarneVaca]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Johnny Stew
the average quality of each release is extremely high... otherwise I would have grown bored with Stevie's music long ago.


Oh, that settles it. I'm glad you're explaining what high quality is: something that doesn't bore you (sarcasm, but not disrespect, intended.)

You can sugar-coat it however you want, but the reality is mediocrity sells. Plain and simple. I'm not saying Bella Donna and The Wild Heart were mediocre, however.

[jeffles]

i would tend to disagree with the comment "mediocrity sells".
There's plenty of good music that sells, and **** music that doesn't. Just to say something like that isn't valid.

Hipness may be part of it, but not all. FM really isn't all that hip in 2003, but "Say You Will" is doing considerably well.

The marketing machine behind these conglomerates that own record labels is what sells records. Fleetwood Mac, which has gone through a major marketing campaign, is a benefactor. Some of these companies also own the radio stations that play the music. Just one company alone, Clear Channel, owns over 1500 radio stations across the country. Now, wouldn't you think that a comany like this is in cahoots with various record companies??

[wetcamelfood]

I could be wrong but from what I understand, SYW "peaked" at number three and has since dropped off, not disappeared mind you, but dropped off, no?

So, would it be safe to assume that because FM USED to be a HUGE band, this is the reasons it has MANY devoted, loyal followers and THESE are the people who "rushed out" to buy the album when it came out (hence the initial high chart placing)? OK, maybe some promotion had some influence but I get the feeling that those sales were already going to be there regardless of what marketing was/wasn't done and what was on the record, for the most part, they maybe lost some sales due to it not being "all five" but generally speaking, whether it was "good or not"...same with TISL really in so far as SN followers.

I won't get in to the SN vs. LB thing as I agree that it is all opinion. :) To me, "commercial success" doesn't = "good music". What "sells" is what is marketed regardless of whether it's good or not. The labels go by what they can get people to think is hip, like Johnny Stew says, I wish it weren't that way, but it is unfortunately. Just like we're told when we are small when we say "That's not fair". "No one ever said life was fair". We always see "artists" we don't think "should" be marketed and then we see some really talented artists busting their ass for meager club earnings (i.e. no promotion). They have nothing to do with each other. I liked (and still do like) "Time" and that "failed" but it doesn't bother me. I bought a few "big" albums last year, some I liked, some I didn't like so much, you know? JMHO though. :)

John

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Oh, that settles it. I'm glad you're explaining what high quality is: something that doesn't bore you (sarcasm, but not disrespect, intended.)

You can sugar-coat it however you want, but the reality is mediocrity sells. Plain and simple. I'm not saying Bella Donna and The Wild Heart were mediocre, however. If something bores me, it's mediocre in my eyes. If I'm moved and entertained at the same time, then it's of a higher quality.
That's the general rule of thumb, and I think it's a fairly reasonable one.

I'm not an unintelligent boob who follows a mob mentality. I listen to what I want to listen to, and I always have.
It was terribly uncool to be a 15 year old Stevie Nicks fan in 1987, but I couldn't have cared less, because I saw the quality in the music... and I still do (and it's still not terribly "hip" to be a Stevie Nicks fan).

All of those offbeat recording techniques, and fast-panning vocals, may be impressive and interesting sonically, but it doesn't inherently mean that Lindsey has a lock on quality. (Nor am I saying that his music lacks quality.)
At the end of the day, they're still "just" pop albums. :)

While there may not be anything trail-blazing about the sound of Stevie's albums, there doesn't need to be... the lyrics and her emotive vocal style speak for themselves. She's a singer/songwriter... she doesn't purport to be anything more than that.

Whether or not each of her songs speaks to every individual is a completely different story. But they all speak to someone... people who are quite capable of thinking for themselves, and deciding what they like and what they don't like. No matter how many other people like it or dislike it... or how many other people bought it.
To me, that's yet another example of "quality" music. :)

Stevie's music is every bit as artistic and valuable as Lindsey's... they just come at it in completely different ways. Which is why they compliment each other so well when they come together. :)

[Dulcimer]

Stevie was more successful solo because she had the most identifiable image and a great voice that allowed her to stand apart from most other artists. Something has been lost in recent years, but she remains very appealing.

[Craig]

I should have paid a little more attention to this..I would just like to say how ridiculous some Lindsey fans act, they say that because he hasn't been successful that it must be because his music is too "deep" and significant for mainstream to grab hold of..:rolleyes: not to mention the fact that I'm sure most would go as far as saying they're GLAD he never hit the mainstream as big as Stevie..again I say :rolleyes:

What was Go your own way? what was Big Love? They weren't one offs for mr Buckingham, the man is just as capable of being "mainstream" as Stevie..that is when he's capable of writing a song that more than hardcore zealots will force themselves to appreciate.

I really am tired of the whole "they don't sell well so they must be better" argument, I happen to love Madonna and she's sold more than all of the Fleetwood Mac Allumni combined with the actual group, that definetly doesn't mean she is to be looked down on, neither are the beatles. Sales do not always equate light weight trash.

It boggles the mind to wonder why people think a song made in 1994 that sounds like it was made in 1987 wouldn't be a hit because it was above the scope of the public, the man isn't as successful as Stevie because he isn't as accomplished as a songwriter. I say that not saying he writes lesser songs, I'm saying that he doesn't have the same abilities to keep up, having said that, Stevie isn't up to date either really but she's not as stuck as Lindsey can be at times.

I say all this realyl not trying to disrespect him as I respect what he has done and who he is and his abilities but I really cannot stand the bleatings of pretentious fans when it comes to "quality vs quantity" and "sales make you mainstream fluff", it bothers me a lot.

I only have go insane and while it's an ok album, it doesn't touch any Stevie Album, maybe street angel.

[wondergirl9847]

Originally posted by Craig
I only have go insane and while it's an ok album, it doesn't touch any Stevie Album, maybe street angel.

I would strongly advise you to get Lindsey's Out of the Cradle. That album is his strongest...lyrically, musically and vocally. It's pop perfection and IMO, better than ANY Stevie solo album (and I LOVE Belladonna). There are no "wierd" songs on OOTC and he hit a musical groove on that album that is just outta this world amazing. If Street of Dreams doesn't leave you in tears, then...I just don't know...:(

[jeffles]

Back in the eighties, Madonna made some good records, but today, she makes ****ty Eurotrash Techno, as witnessed by her current single.

Go Insane doesn't touch any Stevie Nicks record? Try revisiting The Other Side of the Mirror. Not a bad album , but not a good one, and one in which she was reduced to sharing songwriting credit with her producers Rupert Hine and Rick Nowels.

Besides , you're comparing apples and oranges. Go Insane was written, engineered and peformed by LB himself, not to mention co-produced. The end result, considering its the work of, basically, one person--not a who's who of ace session players--was very satisfying.

[seteca]

Originally posted by jeffles
Go Insane was written, engineered and peformed by LB himself, not to mention co-produced. The end result, considering its the work of, basically, one person--not a who's who of ace session players--was very satisfying.

And even that's an understatement....I think the entire album is a masterpiece. In fact, I prefer it to Out Of The Cradle (which as Christy said, is perfection anyway!).:D

:wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

[Tim Robinson]

First, remember that is it very difficult for anyone from any band to make a solo career.
Quality music is not enough. You have to unique.
Stevie is unique. No one else has a voice like hers. No one else has lyrics like hers.

[seeker007nmss]

Why do a lot of people quote sales and chart action as to whether an artists is good or not? if YOU like it, if YOU enjoy it why would you care what others think, or the industry favors? Chart action and sales has just as much to do with politics and industry promotion as anything else. I am sure we all have great albumns in our collections that never "made" it for a variety of reasons. If you like a cetain band or person, thats what truly matters. I have heard "number one" hits that I wouldn't use the cd for a drink coaster. But that is my choice. Music is like art, everyone has to make their own choice what they enjoy, not because someone else says it is good.

Just my 2 cents


seeker007nmss

[wondergirl9847]

ITA with your entire post...who CARES what is #1 as long as you find pleasure in listening to a certain artist/group, MORE POWER TO YA!! I've got #1 albums in my collection along with albums that hardly anyone bought probably. I love em all!! I've never liked following the crowd tho anyways...doing your own thing...that's what I like. :nod: