"THROWN DOWN" Not that great...
 

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!

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".

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

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!!!

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.

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

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

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" ? ;)

Re: "THROWN DOWN" Not that great...
 

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.

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)

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.

A poor start
 

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.

Thrown Down
 

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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?

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

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."

Thrown Down
 

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=:-)

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

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:

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

"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.

Give Thrown Down a break
 

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.

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

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:

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.

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.

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

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)

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".

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?

Amen to that:rolleyes:

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