Well, we all know how her stories change along with her underwear. :nod:

Sadly - not with that black dress!! :cool:

Seriously, I took Stevie's story to mean, that she removed her vocals and then they completed the record once they saw how it sounded. I did not take it to mean that she snuck in at the end of the mixing process and removed them without telling anyone and then sent the record to the final mass production stage.

The exact quote, from Creem magazine, September 1987....

I have no doubt that she probably did wipe her vocal from the mix (there's an alternate mix floating around out there that definitely has Stevie and Lindsey both singing the coda), but certainly Lindsey knew about it not long afterwards, and certainly he knew about it before the final mixes were approved and sent to be pressed.

Stevie never said that it was some kind of surprise to him when the album was released, just that he wouldn't have thought to record it that way in the first place.

Yeah, and don't forget, Stevie creeped into the studio late one night to remove her love grunts from Big Love. Lindsey would have never thought to be grunting alone. ;) (kidding, especially if Mrs. Buckingham is reading this)

- Jake

:wavey:
I would just like to say that I love this song too! Just the whole Stevie singing "When I see you again...." and Lindsey at the end singing "If I see you again..." :distress: Its just heartbreaking!

Jen~*

WISYA is my favourite Stevie song from Tango, its awesome!

Love Sarah

Well I alway get in on these threads at the end *dang*...
I thought the song did sound a little out of place on the album (but so did WTTR...S). Only Seven Wonders seemed to really fit. But I am glad it wasn't a piano ballad. The keyboard and then the ______'s (? Marachas or whatever-the rubbing metal on metal kinda sound?) at the end kind of give it a quirkiness -for a ballad at least-which I think does help it to fit. I don't think a song has to be lyrically brilliant to move you. Simple pop songs generally aren't brilliant lyrically. Everywhere comes to mind: simple lyrics/sort of a fluff song, but I love it Everytime that I have ever heard it.

About the Mcvie/Welch era being my favorite you're most definately right. But don't get me wrong, I like the best of Stevie's and Lindsey's time in the band just as much. Most of Stevie's Tusk and Mirage songs are my very favorite Fleetwood Mac songs and I also think Silver Springs may very well be the bands best song along with The Chain. I have about an equal amount of albums from both era, and I like both of them equally but for different reasons. I just swing towards the Welch era because that's when Chris was at the top of her game. I'd like to go on record saying that I definately don't think Stevie was a slouch in the least. It's more of a very minimal interest in Lindsey's stuff than Stevie's (even though when I heard "Trouble" for the first time recently it really made me want to check out Law And Order).

I was in no way trying to stir **** when I said Lindsey let her make an ass out of herself. Do you really think none of the other band members winced when they heard that vocal track play back? I really thought I was giving a well thought out and balanced opinion there! That's the best I can do! :laugh:

I was having problems to log in but I think I may have solved them already. Of course the wink was because of that! I was just laughing about the course of the thread. I cannot seriously think about other Fleetwood Mac/Stevie song that can inspire so many multi-page threads (you can just check the files!) as "When I See You Again". :)

In my opinion is a very, very weak song, but I've come to find people who think it's a masterpiece and it's OK. Matter of tastes, one can guess.



Song of the moment - I Sing For The Things

Highly unlikely that the voice would be wiped out. I just don't see it happening. Plus, if it's true that a second mix exists with both voices, that only proves my point and weakens yours.

I would generally agree with this statement. In some cases, it is more like 90/10. That, however, all depends on the artist and how completely they are able to realize the vision of a song in the demo process. My own estimation of Lindsey's production skills skyrocketed when I heard the finished version of "Thrown Down." The TISL demo of that song is nearly unlistenable IMO. I thought it couldn't be saved, and felt there was barely a song there at all. In it's present form, I think it is a solid piece of work. For that feat I give Lindsey major credit.

How do I access the old threads? I'd like to read them. I'm wondering if you guys ever discusssed the use of the lyric "When I see you again" on Destiny Rules, which was on Say You Will, the first FM album with both Stevie and Lindsey since TITN, which included the song WISYA. Just another case of recycled lyrics or something more?

The whole "When..." by Stevie, then Lindsey comes in with "If..."...one word just swings the whole meaning of the line 180 degrees from "hopeful" to "doubtful".


Holy crap, chiliD gets "sentimental", wtf's up with THAT?

I'm not really sure why we're even debating this. I'm also not sure how the existence of another mix featuring both vocals, necessarily "proves" your point and "weakens" mine.

You stated that it was "highly unlikely" Stevie removed her voice from the mix, which I assume to mean that you believe Lindsey must have recorded his vocal separately... therefore there would be no need to remove another vocal.

(And perhaps it should be noted here that Lindsey's voice is noticeably more prominent on the left channel, even on the album version.)

I have three versions of "When I See You Again."
The album version; the mix where they're both singing the "If I see you again" coda; and a third where the ending is merely more repetitions of the line "what's the matter, baby," as the song fades.

Given that it's common practice to make safeties (backup copies) of the various takes, why is it so hard to believe that a copy could still exist of the mix that featured both Stevie and Lindsey, while also believing that Stevie could have "removed" her vocals (a task which probably really only amounted to dropping her voice out of the mix) from the master to create the version the band used for the album?

Stevie has had a hand in remixing various tracks over the years, and has produced or co-produced some others... so surely she has enough knowledge of the soundboard to be able to drop her vocals out of a mix.

So what causes the improbability in your mind? And what would make it such a hard pill to swallow if she had?
It was 17 years ago, and it's not like it really matters one way or the other if she had.

All over again.
 

Late, later, the latest. That’s the story of my life on these boards. Please don’t mind the occasional weirdness, this was mainly written during night. ;)

If it seems that I have implied so in this thread, then I have to apologize. I guess I’ve been looking at the whole thing through Buckingham-filled spectacles (I wonder if Stevie uses those too). Let it be stated now: I love Bella Donna and The Wild Heart; I like Rock A Little, The Other Side Of The Mirror, Trouble In Shangri-La and even Street Angel. No, I do not consider them the greatest albums in the history of the universe but I do have tolerance to Stevie’s approach, to the point where I can honestly say that I do not actively dislike any track on any album. Yes, I do think that all of them have their amount of monotonousness; on Street Angel it gets to the point where I can’t even begin to discern the majority of songs from each other. And yes, I do think that every album could use a bit of that diversity that Lindsey gives Stevie through his production. But that’s just a minor complaint.

What I feel that producers other than Lindsey are doing is just picking up the crumbs from a table where he just feasted. They are building on what he helped to create, and for me at least, the results seem secondary when compared to “the real thing”. You have to consider the circumstances though.

In the ‘70s female singer-songwriters who were dealing with these “feminine, romantic topics” were basically all given the same production (except for those who had the reins in their own hands, like Joni Mitchell); you usually slapped on a piano, an acoustic guitar and a bunch of strings and that was that. That was the producers’ idea of romance at the time. Then enter Lindsey Buckingham. What Lindsey, Ken and Richard basically did was show to the world that you can convey a sense of romance through other measures too. This style starts in earnest on “Dreams” and runs through Stevie’s Tusk songs. It’s a non-conformist style that does not fail to sell but doesn’t bow to the mainstream; it’s not dependent on what’s going on around it. Enter part two of the story:

So there it is. Suddenly Lindsey’s no longer in control; there’s this Jimmy Iovine guy who’s going to bring in a great band and give Stevie her music back. I have to agree with you somehow Johnny, Mr. Iovine is my favourite Stevie solo producer too. If what David told us earlier in another thread is true: that Jimmy was a very laissez-faire producer in that he let the band work on the songs throughout the whole arranging/recording period, then it’s simply a different approach to Lindsey’s.

Yet I still get the feeling that no matter how great work there is on Bella Donna and The Wild Heart, it would be even greater if Buckingham was let to leave his stamp on them. And it’s just not on the likes of “Outside The Rain” (which most people cite as the most FM-like song on the album). Stuff like “Leather And Lace”, “After The Glitter Fades” and “The Highwayman” come off as too routine and safe sounding; as if Stevie was trying to make herself appealing to the country radio. Compare those to something like “That’s Alright” where the chorus sounds like a grasp of ethereality from heavens and beyond and you’ll see what I mean. In concert a song like “Edge Of Seventeen” could have been a showcase for Stevie on the level of “Rhiannon” and “Sisters Of The Moon” if there had been a partner who would be willing to be the equal of Stevie’s vocal intensity with a guitar; namely Buckingham. Don’t get me wrong; I love the song. But there’s certain areas where Stevie’s unwilling to go if Lindsey’s not there with her. I guess that’s a bit beside the point though.

Jimmy had also the good fortune of producing some of Stevie’s best songs. She had some of those ‘70s “rejects” (rejects? Fools!) to give him and add to that the fact that her basic songwriting still hadn’t lost its freshness, that she was capable of writing material that would possibly interest a larger audience (than a group of hardcore fans) up to The Wild Heart was important in building her a significant following. Of course she and Jimmy were still leaning on the groundwork that came from Buckingham, Caillat and Dashut but they were also establishing a new audience; a bunch of Nicksheads that didn’t want to hear anything of Fleetwood Mac (although I have no idea how sizeable this group is).

Yet they were still following a mainstreamish path. Danny Goldberg may claim in the booklet of Enchanted that Stevie’s solo work was “artsy-craftsy, not muscular commercial music like Fleetwood Mac’s”, but for me it’s always been the opposite. I’m not denying the shades of mainstream on Fleetwood Mac’s albums but for me Lindsey has always walked the plank between the experimental and the commercial. He’s been more daring in his production than Jimmy Iovine and others. You may claim that doing “epics” like the title tracks on Stevie’s two first solo albums took some nerve but I might as well claim that they had the nerve to do those tracks because they were doing an entire album, not a collection of hit singles (or 2-5 tracks, as on Fleetwood Mac albums) where you would have to make sure that every track is commercially appealing. I mean, take a look at how similar those two albums are. The Wild Heart is essentially a repetition of Bella Donna with some synths slapped on (because the times demanded it; everyone at that point had converted to synthesizers. Thanks a lot, new wave); both begin with a long “epic” (why, they’re both also the title tracks! How come!), stuff like “Gate And Garden” and “How Still My Love” are practically interchangeable (for someone who doesn’t hear the subtle differences anyway), “Stand Back” has the same foundation to it as “Edge Of Seventeen” does (that little “sixteenth-note” thing that Waddy plays with the guitar constantly during “EO17” is too similar to the one that’s played on the keyboards in “Stand Back”), the synthesizers on “If Anyone Falls” do not add anything significant to it that wasn’t already there on Bella Donna, etc. It’s a bunch of people following almost the same approach two years later.

Buckingham’s quirks aren’t present on either of these and that’s a drawback for me (even though they do an admirable job in almost covering it up). The tracks set almost similar atmospheres throughout. At least Lindsey, when he re-uses something, uses the recycled idea in a new context. Lindsey’s shadow is still there looming on these two albums (on places where his influence is heard and where it can’t be heard = the most mainstream tracks; surely they didn’t want to sound like Buckingham all the time); hell, “Sable On Blond” is basically “Gypsy” all over again.
Sure, they’re adding synthesizers into the picture but that was something that the mainstream told them to do. They certainly didn’t want to appear as “non-modernistic” or anything like that. “I Can’t Wait”, for all its goodness, sounds like a typical ‘80s Fairlight experiment. Compare that to the approach of Go Insane where the Fairlight is used in an untrivial way. Yes, both approaches may sound dated today but Lindsey’s work on that album is more reminiscent of what Kate Bush and Laurie Anderson were doing at the time than whatever the “powers-to-be” in the music industry said was hip.

Then enter Rupert Hine. Sure, he’s creating this aura of romanticism too and it is a different kind of romanticism. It’s not like what Lindsey was doing on Tango In The Night. So what is it then? Loads of mainstream ‘80s production again. Generic, non-intrusive saxophone solos. Acoustic, “Spanish”-sounding guitars (come on, the guitar in “Family Man” is at least playful and quirky, these sound like they’re inviting you to Santa Barbara). In short, the usual deal, even worse this time. And I still like the album. Goes to show how much respect I have for Stevie.

Hello Street Angel. Oh, you’re a much maligned creature, even though you’re not that much weaker than the others. Now what do you have in there? Very little synthesizers? Something that at least sounds like a real band? Hooray! But oh, wait, it seems like your songs mostly sound the same. No great production and arrangement work has gone into you and it seems like the band isn’t that inspired either. Oh, the songs aren’t as inspired as on Bella Donna either. That explains why this particular approach isn’t working the fourth time around.

And so it goes, in comes Mr. John Shanks. Now we all know TISL very well at this point and I would have to say that right after Lindsey Buckingham and Jimmy Iovine Shanks would be the next in line for me. Who cares about those suspected Pro Tools or that the album sounds a bit too mainstreamish again; Stevie sounds good there and there’s enough arrangement details so that I can separate the songs from each other. There’s one small problem though and that’s something that other people, including veterans like ChiliD have noticed too; Shanks’ style on this album is essentially an imitation of a Lindsey production, except on places where it once again sounds way too mainstream. I can’t deny it myself either and I can’t escape from thinking how much better the thing would sound in Lindsey’s hands. I even find myself escaping to the original demos of “Sorcerer” (because what could replace those valuable Buckingham vocals?) and “Planets Of The Universe” (take that technophilia off from the final take!).

So there you have it. That’s why I still prefer Lindsey to any other Stevie’s producer. This is not to underestimate the contributions of the producers or Waddy or Sharon (& other vocalists) or whoever but I think that certain sides of Stevie come out only when she’s working with Lindsey. It shows right there in the way he wraps his guitars onto a Nickssong so that it becomes difficult (for me, at least) to imagine that there’s some other kind of approach. It’s also there in his singing and how he cleverly inserts his voice into Stevie’s work; he knows the reactions that their two voices still generate. Above all, it still creates this network of emotions that’s definitely alone-standing in the world of rock music.

I haven’t tried to suggest here that Stevie should solely work with LB or that she should not do another solo album. I’ve only tried to explain why I prefer Lindsey to any other producer of Nicks that there is. If Lindsey’s the perfectionist he’s reputed to be in the studio, then I see no problem with Stevie doing a solo album including all the usual hubbub that comes along with it. But neither do I think that anyone will ever come and match Buckingham’s impact on Nicks’ music and life; that’s what you wanted to hear you romantics! ;)

Opinion understood. Of course you’re speaking as someone for whom the lyrics are an integral part of music. I’ve explained this several times: lyrics don’t hold that much value for me (it’s not that difficult to write lyrics that are adequate to the piece, or something that’s thoroughly incomprehensible and thus the message wouldn’t matter), that’s why I’m prone to give more credit to those who are responsible of the actual music. When there’s this “hi-jacking” going on; large atmospheric shifts that happen when Lindsey takes a particular Stevie song into his gloves, my appreciation for the arranger will be even bigger. Like David once quoted, it’s “magnificent castles of sound built out of seemingly thin air”. But I guess it doesn’t matter how we put the ratio here; Stevie’s performance is always crucial to the success of a song. And we all love these songs in the end. :)

That’s how it tends to be with works of art where self-parody and seriousness go together hand in hand. ;) Note though, I still appreciate the song, like I appreciate “Family Man” which is another self-parody that deserves a book written about it.

It’s not just a single quote that I’m basing this on; it’s by comparing Stevie’s demos to the final products and by intent listening on Lindsey’s playing that leads into this. For me “Dreams” is musically all about that guitar and those harmonies. One of the message boards I like to visit on is a board where people discuss all kinds of music. Occasionally there’s a discussion on FM; a while ago they were talking about “Dreams” and how the track seems to have no immediately grappling musical hook on it (as you can guess, there’s no FM fans on that board; I wonder if they have anything else than Rumours anyway). They came to the conclusion that the track relies on subtle little things: how darn sexy Stevie sounds on it, how the minimal groove of Mick and John contributes a lot to the final track, etc. They praised the guitar and the harmonies especially. No one commended on Stevie’s basic songwriting. It just proves to me that you can go from very rough beginnings to something so great that even former musical snobs would feel the significance.

No problem there Eric; I overreacted myself and apologize for that. Your comment just seemed to me to be playing around with the stereotype of Lindsey being this “dominative ego-feeding idiot” who around the time of TITN sessions didn’t want to support Stevie because of emotional problems or whatever. Basically it would be the same if I went to the pre-Rumours board and started talking about Bob Welch being the biggest stoned-out hippie whose writing is always the same because of a brain atrophy (compare 'HOW-many-PEOple-SIT-home-at-NIGHT...' with 'And ALL of the THINGS that I SAID that I WANted'). Mind you, I wouldn’t do that because I respect Bob deeply. Anyone who creates an album like The Other One can always have a pint or two in my household.

Down, boy! Methinks you're getting waaaaay too defensive here. I'm not questioning whether your beloved Nicks can push up a f*cking slider on a soundboard. You'd have to be an idiot not to figure that out. What I am saying is that because of the very nature of how recordings are approached, it is highly unlikely she could get away with "wiping out" her voice from the mix. You addressed that issue yourself: There are safety copies and sound engineers/producers don't tend to erase things from the mix; they merely hide them. Is it possible that she touched a slider? Of course. I'm merely arguing that she didn't wipe out the vocal nor was it her final decision.

In the quote you used, "took my voice off" are the words she uses, as if to imply that sneaking into the studio to "take off" her voice from the mix is as simple as that. As if Lindsey wouldn't have noticed before the mix was mastered. That's why I called it a tall tale. Even if she did that -- which is unlikely because she was in the studio for, what, three days? -- chances are Lindsey would have noticed the very next time he played the mix. Her quote implies she pulled one over on him, and I contend it's simply not believable.

Take a deep breath now.

Mine, too. It's a naked little ballad on which Fleetwood Mac sounds sublime. It's one of the highlights of the album.

Aren't you just the teeniest bit proud of me for staying out of this thread with my negative WISYA energy?

I deserve a medal! :laugh:

:wavey:

Re: Re: All over again.
 

You're right and "That Made Me Stronger" is a testament to that. The lyrics are pretty bad, but the music is worse. I don't understand why she wrote those lyrics but didn't heed them. ;)

But he also produced Mirror Mirror. :eek:

He couldn't make those good songs, but I'd bet my life that he could make them more tolerable. I think what we're all missing is that Lindsey is the one person who truly understands what Stevie is trying to do and that understanding makes him a better producer than the other people she's worked with. For me, no one can compare to what Lindsey has done with her songs. Yeah, some of her solo songs are works of genius, but could imagine how much better those genius songs would be if Lindsey put his stamp on them? They were meant to work together and appreciate each others work.

OOTC was his most mainstream work up until that point in his career. The reason it failed was because the general public had forgotten about him, the promotion behind it stunk, and it wasn't the hippest kind of music at the time. The same things you said about that album can be attributed to many of Stevie's solo albums, IMO. I enjoy many songs off of RAL, but the slickness of it really turns me off like you said about Lindsey's album. It seems to me that the rawness and emotion of her work was literally buried underneath a bunch of junk; it had turned into a non-entity, whereas with OOTC, I appreciate the slickness because I know that it was produced as a labor of love. Lindsey put his heart and soul into that record, lyrically and musically, while RAL came off as a calculated attempt at modernizing Stevie's sound, all the while forgetting what the whole thing was about: the music.

If those songs had been originally released as FM songs, you'd say the same thing, though. However, I do agree with you somewhat.

I think they do have the same formula and approach: make a really great record that is as mainstream as possible and make sure that it sounds slick enough to slip on. Granted, FM is a very mainstream band, but not as mainstream as Stevie solo is. After awhile, a lot of Stevie's solo tunes got pretty boring because you could tell exactly how it would sound before you even got up to the first-minute mark.

The opening chords to POTU sound like the opening chords to Rhiannon, only backwards. I don't know the technical jargon, so someone help me out! And I always thought the reason she needed to do solo stuff was to release more of an output.

Well, isn't that sweet? In a matter of a few sentences, you painted me like some over-emotional and irrational fan, who has no idea what they're talking about.

I think I've offered a very probable explanation as to how Stevie's comments could be true, without ever veering into "Stevie's a goddess, so it MUST be true" territory.

So thanks for the little pat on the head, Daddy.

And sure, "took my voice off" is how she described it, but I doubt anyone expects Stevie to go into some long technical explanation as to how one would go about fiddling with various knobs in order to drop their voice out of a mix.

She also never said that Lindsey was shocked or surprised when the album was released, and he heard that he was the only one singing at the end of the song. That's putting words into her mouth.

All she ever said was that Lindsey would not think to sing solo at the end of one of her songs, and that, in order to get the vibe she was after, she had to sing the lines along with him, and then remove her voice from the mix.

She very well could have played "her" mix for the band five minutes later to show them how she had been wanting it to sound all along.

Again, as I said previously, I'm 100% positive that Lindsey had to be aware of what she did fairly quickly after the fact, as these mixes must get final approval from all involved before they're sent off to be mastered.
I don't think I ever implied that she pulled a major fast-one on Lindsey, and that he was in the dark the entire time.

But hey, you know, if you want to believe Stevie's just completely talking out of her ass there, and that the whole thing could only have been another one of Lindsey's brilliant touches, that's fine. :nod:

(By the way, that she was only in the studio for "three days" is another one of those exaggerated comments that has been taken for gospel. If it was only three days, they must have gotten a lot of work done, what with Stevie recording multiple vocals takes on "Seven Wonders," "When I See You Again," and "Welcome To The Room, Sara," as well as "What Has Rock And Roll Ever Done For You," "Juliet," and "Joan Of Arc."
Not to mention recording backing vocals for "Little Lies," "Everywhere," "Family Man," and "Big Love.")

Re: Re: Re: All over again.
 

'Out Of The Cradle' deserved far more recognition and success than it received, but to say that the promotion behind it stunk, isn't very accurate.

They released four singles to radio, some of which featured special mixes to help make them even more radio-friendly... they filmed four promo videos... Lindsey appeared on Lettermen (twice), Leno (twice), Live with Regis & Kathy Lee, ABC In Concert, PBS, and VH1... there were multiple print ads that ran in magazines like Rolling Stone... Lindsey toured (even opened for Tina Turner for a while!)... and so on.

That is a pretty big promotional blitz for an album that peaked at #128 on the Billboard Top 200 Albums chart.

:lol:

I have to say that I was actually going to post earlier in this thread about how much I appreciated the fact that you hadn't jumped in to slam the song... given how much I know you dislike it.

But I refrained, because I didn't want it to sound like a veiled slap in the face to anyone who did post something negative about it.

But yes, you definitely deserve a medal!!! :laugh:

Thanks, doll. :D

Re: Re: Re: Re: All over again.
 

Let's not forget that Lindsey, the artist, paid mostly for the videos and when serviced, they didn't get much rotation.

I don't believe the number of singles released has much bearing, either, because if it isn't the kind of music that is going to do well on radio, not one of them is going to get airplay.

What I meant was that the promotion being given out by Lindsey and his label wasn't getting picked up by the national media or the public. :) Unfortunate, IMO, because it's a masterpiece.

Re: Re: Re: Re: All over again.
 

Don't feel bad, at least the two of us got a good discussion out of it! :D

Re: Re: Re: Re: All over again.
 

I have to say that I agree. :D

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: All over again.
 

Ah, ok... on that last point we can agree.

I took your comments to mean that the record company/Powers That Be didn't do enough to promote the album. And in my opinion, releasing four singles (the hope is always that they WILL get played), etc., is a pretty decent show of faith for an album that never sold big numbers.

Re: All over again.
 

For Gaius....

Forgive me for not replying in a more involved manner, but you made so many points, that I'd be here forever trying to fashion all of my responses into a concise post.

I just wanted to say that i do agree with you, that Lindsey and Stevie seem to bring out the best in each other.
She always seems more inspired and daring with him... and he always seems to be at his best when producing one of her songs.

But, having said that, I don't think Stevie's other producers were necessarily taking the easy way out, or following in Lindsey's footsteps.
I think that the way in which Stevie writes, somewhat dictates the progression the songs will take on their way to being a finished product.

"Sisters Of The Moon" is a good example: Lindsey approached the song in a dark, moody fashion, and his electric guitar touches throughout are perfect.
But... in the piano demo of the song, Stevie is clearly playing the basis of those guitar parts. Albeit, in a slower fashion, and with less finesse.

Certainly there have been other songs where Lindsey's approach was not as obvious, based on the sound of the demo... "Gypsy" being a good example of that... but for the most part (and this is entirely my opinion) what the songs will end up becoming, is well laid-out in Stevie's original demos.

It's the other elements that Lindsey adds... the left-of-center instrumental touches, for example... that help the songs to stand out that much more.

Re: Re: All over again.
 

The master reel piano demo ("pretty weird, huh?") that's floating around is astonishing. She sounds absolutely amazing on it. I much prefer it to the album version. :nod:

Woah, where did this come from? Totally uncalled for.


I've read somewhere - was it Mick's book? That she did without Lindsey's knowledge and then played the "new and improved" version for the band along with Lindsey. Lindsey wanted to change it back, but the band outvoted him, agreeing with Stevie that it sounded better - and so it stayed. Stevie only pulled a "fast one" by having the band listen to the version with her vocals turned down without consulting Lindsey first. It was an idea which Lindsey had already vetoed but which the rest of the band could now see was a good one. You go Stevie! :)

Re: Re: Re: All over again.
 

Amen - she is resplendent on it and another copy I have.

For me, I think SOTM is one of the songs , probably with SN's approval for all we know, somewhat ruined for me. the Tusk version is just too produced (albeit brilliantly) for me. In any event, I still like the Tusk version.

The same could be said about John Shanks and POTU. I like the TISL version, but the piano demo is just heartwrenching. :cool:

I need not paint you in any way, Johnny. Don't attribute to me more power than I have.

Geezus... Give me a break, man. You're like dog with a bone about his stuff. Read her own words. If you don't get that she's trying to convey that she thinks she was so clever to sneak into the studio and pull this stunt you're not reading it right then. All I'm saying is it is highly unlikely it happened that way. Stevie has been known to exaggerate. And besides, she probably was so coked up at the time, so how could she remember?

Perhaps you should stick to moderating.

Technically, I think she had quit coke and gone through rehab by then - but I could be wrong as I am unsure how much of TITN was recorded prior to Betty Ford. Stevie did send in tapes from the road.

Personally, I think all Stevie is saying is she wanted LB to sing in a certain manner that he normally does not sing in. So, she got him to sing in her preferred manner by tricking him by singing it with him (thus getting him into the preferred voice) and then taking her voice off of or out of it.

Oh to have been a fly on the wall!!!! :laugh:

That she may have romanticized her actions by using the phrases "snuck in" and "took her voice off," rather than giving a detailed technical explanation of the mixing process, was not in question.
You stated outright that it was all a big lie, and that Lindsey just went out and recorded the vocal by himself.

I merely tried to offer reasons and evidence (the alternate take that exists with both vocalists, for example), as to how her story could very well be true... even if she had simplified it when she spoke about it with Creem Magazine.

Meanwhile, I haven't seen you offer any evidence or proof to contradict Stevie's story, or to prove why you're certain she must be lying. Beyond the statement that she was just coked out of her mind, that is... which most fans know that, by all accounts, she was clean by the time she went in to record 'Tango.'
Trust me, pal, you have no power in my life. At the end of the day, you're just some guy on a message board.
And if you want to deny that your post was condescending and dismissive, that's fine. I wouldn't expect an apology from you.
But I'm not the only one who noted your tone, so I trust that I wasn't over-reacting.

I stated my case, and I think I did so in an articulate and clear fashion, without ever getting emotional or responding to anyone in a patronizing way. So I think I'll just go right on posting as often as my little heart desires. :nod:

I never said "big lie." You don't seem to know the difference between "big lie" and "tall tale," but that's your problem.

You provided the evidence yourself. The fact you have alternate takes of the song proves that she did not "wipe" the vocals. That's all I've contented all along -- that it didn't happen.

Awwhhh, what a huuuuuuge disappointment.

Here we go with the generalizations. You and your buddies are exchanging private messages again. That's fine. But just keep them private; I could give a **** less about your exchanges with them.

As I'm sure you should be well aware, a "tall tale" is something improbable or unlikely to be true... and when we purposely say something "untrue," it amounts to telling a "lie."

So no, you may not have actually used the word "lie," but it's just a matter of semantics, when you stated that you believe Stevie was telling a story that wasn't true.
IE:, a lie.

But hey, I'm just a dumb Stevie fan, who apparently doesn't have a grasp on the English language, so what do I know?I have multiple mixes of many songs where a certain harmony or backing vocal was mixed out, or... conversely... made more prominent. "Oh Daddy" being a good example of that... where Stevie's backing vocal is nowhere to be found on the album version, but is clearly noticeable on the DVD-Audio mix. Same exact take, different mix.

So I'm still not sure why you consider that alternate mix of "When I See You Again" to be proof that your theory has to be the only one that's right.Nancy (sodascouts) posted right here on this thread, saying your comments to me were "uncalled for" (Sorry to bring you into this, Nancy - I hope you don't mind), and that's what I was referring to.
Anything else you read into it is completely on you and your ego, buddy.

At any rate, this whole thing has become absolutely ridiculous. :rolleyes:

This is just getting tedious now. And boring. Not worth my time.

well what was a thread about When I See You Again SUPPOSED to generate:laugh: Could you imagine how bad it would get if this was The Second Time appreciation Thread:laugh:

Not only do I LOVE "The Second Time," but I sang it a capella on Tracy's site and dedicated my performance to the talented and handsome Johnny Stew! :cool:

Agreed. I also think he should stick to moderating.

Shut up Stew. :laugh: