FM: Releasing More New Songs a 'Matter of How and When'

[SteveMacD]

Fire Stevie and get another singer who ***has her own audience*** who will go to shows and records. There are many out there ***with LARGE followings*** who'd love to be in a band like Fleetwood Mac. Being beholden to Stevie Nicks makes no sense for a band called Fleetwood Mac, which has Lindsey Buckingham in it, especially when they're releasing stuff on their own.

[RockawayBlind]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Fire Stevie and get another singer who ***has her own audience*** who will go to shows and records. There are many out there ***with LARGE followings*** who'd love to be in a band like Fleetwood Mac. Being beholden to Stevie Nicks makes no sense for a band called Fleetwood Mac, which has Lindsey Buckingham in it, especially when they're releasing stuff on their own.

Yeah, Sheryl Crow. Maybe that girl from Massachusetts, Angie, who just got bumped off American Idol. She can play the piano too!

[MacShadowsBall]

I'd love to see some new Mac members! Doesn't have to be a female, but somebody that fits in good with Lindsey, Mick, and John.

[bluefox4000]

Even though it'll never fly Without Stevie.....Go for it. Why should they be held up. Screw it, move on. It would be very interesting, IMO. New blood in the band would be great.

Mick

[TrueFaith77]

The only artist worthy of joining the Mac is Iris DeMent.

[Dex]

As fun as it is to imagine some non-Stevie incarnations of Fleetwood Mac, at this point it's really only commercial interest that keeps Lindsey wanting to release work under the Mac name. Without Stevie, people just aren't going to buy into it, and there wouldn't be much point. Lindsey would be better off just working with John and Mick under his solo name. For it to work she's going to have to have some involvement, however half-assed. Which (and I say this as a diehard Stevie fan) is really too bad.

I like the idea of casually "dropping" EPs as you make them, though. I think an EP can be an artistic statement just as much as an album can be, although I don't think they've done that here. But the Mac has always been more of an individual-song band, for me, rather than a listen-to-the-full-album band, so it doesn't bother me much.

[shackin'up]

Why work on an album with Mick and John under Lindsey's own name while it IS Fleetwood Mac? Of course it has annother appeal with Stevie; But why not use the name? I really don't see that. Especially if Lindsey keeps all creative possibility's open for the rythmsection like he did with the Froomtracks, according to Mick himself? let's be fair: M&J wrap Sad Angel and Miss Fantasy up as Fleetwood Mac. Those songs really DIFFER from Lindsey's solo-approach because of them.

[WildHearted]

I think new mac members at this point would not only be completely pointless, but also completely improbable. They make most of their money because they're a nostalgia act, let's be honest, and I think they know that. I am excited about and I love that they are putting out new music, but no matter who the members in the band are, it's going to stay at a certain level of success and won't exceed that unless there's some weird fluke or something. And they'd have even LESS success if it were with anyone but these 4 (although they'd have more if Christine were there, of course, but that won't happen), so I just think it's kind of pointless. Taylor Swift is not going to join Fleetwood Mac.

I hope they can get more music out soon, though, because I really liked what the EP had to offer and I'd like to hear what else they can bring to the table.

[Regina]

New members for Fleetwood Mac? Sure. Maybe they'll sell out a garage in Fresno.

Did Lindsey ever categorically state that Stevie would not be doing any more songs? Or is all this just conjecture?

78 RPMs, IIRC could hold 4-6 songs, I think, by the way. So, that might be what he was referring to. They certainly were around in his day.

[johnnystorms]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Fire Stevie and get another singer who ***has her own audience*** who will go to shows and records. There are many out there ***with LARGE followings*** who'd love to be in a band like Fleetwood Mac. Being beholden to Stevie Nicks makes no sense for a band called Fleetwood Mac, which has Lindsey Buckingham in it, especially when they're releasing stuff on their own.

"Fire Stevie"??? are you kidding.. Tango and Behind the Mask tours were huge draws. how did the Time tour do sans Stevie? they aren't stupid.

[bluefox4000]

I don't how she'd take to being let go......it's obvious her heart's not in the band. Anyway we can throw this around all we want It'll never happen.

Mick

[MikeInNV]

Why does everything always get put on Stevie? If the men want to record, they should just do so and say, "Stevie, we're recording an album." She either shows up or she doesn't. No need for her to be fired, no need for them to be beholden.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by MikeInNV

Why does everything always get put on Stevie? If the men want to record, they should just do so and say, "Stevie, we're recording an album." She either shows up or she doesn't. No need for her to be fired, no need for them to be beholden.

You know, they have all earned the right to do what they want. Seems like a mad dash for the finish line. Every man for himself.

[elle]

Originally Posted by MikeInNV

Why does everything always get put on Stevie? If the men want to record, they should just do so and say, "Stevie, we're recording an album." She either shows up or she doesn't. No need for her to be fired, no need for them to be beholden.

isn't that what basically happened?

[MikeInNV]

Originally Posted by elle

isn't that what basically happened?

Yes, it is. So it seems overly dramatic for people to say she needs to be fired or that she is preventing the recording of new material. She doesn't need to be fired, and nobody is preventing anything. The men can do whatever they want, and Stevie can take it or leave it.