My nit picks for Tusk.

[ryan4136]

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

I love Tusk and see it as a truly remarkable record. However, my concerns with it are more than mere nitpicks (unlike whatever unreasonable complaint I might have about some aspect of either of the the previous two).

1. The track sequencing is bizarre. That might be part of the point. But it does get in the way of the flow. .

This is largely because this wasnt intended to be a double album, but actually 2 companion albums released virtually at the same time. There was suppose to be a story between the two. When the record company shot it down they approved a single "double album" release. Which explains partly the sequencing.

[olive]

All this time i thought Stevie did it when really , really ,really, really high

[aleuzzi]

Originally Posted by ryan4136

This is largely because this wasnt intended to be a double album, but actually 2 companion albums released virtually at the same time. There was suppose to be a story between the two. When the record company shot it down they approved a single "double album" release. Which explains partly the sequencing.

I had never heard this before.

Are you saying each "single" album was originally differently sequenced? And then, when the label said no to releasing two companion albums they went in an resequenced? I'm confused.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

I had never heard this before.

Are you saying each "single" album was originally differently sequenced? And then, when the label said no to releasing two companion albums they went in an resequenced? I'm confused.

There was a thread discussing Tusk as two albums a few years ago.

http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?p=1040674

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by ryan4136

This is largely because this wasnt intended to be a double album, but actually 2 companion albums released virtually at the same time. There was suppose to be a story between the two. When the record company shot it down they approved a single "double album" release. Which explains partly the sequencing.

I'm still not sure about this. My understanding was Tusk was always supposed to be a single album but they ended up with far too much material and decided they couldnt not use it so opted for a full double album. I've read your mention of Ken Caillat. I wonder if perhaps he personally had an idea at some point- rather than it being a band idea. KC's ideas and Lindsey's ideas were very different.

In the end I'm pretty sure the odd running order was deliberate to make the album uneven- particularly following Over and Over with The Ledge; lull them in with something they are familiar with and then immediately hit them with the new sound.

I've never personally had an issue with the running order- seems okay to me.

[Macfan4life]

This is just a fun thread. I doubt anyone seriously is trying to de-Tusk Tusk or nit pick it to death. Its just another fun conversation about a great album.
With so many songs sometimes they get over looked. I was just listening to Never Forget Tonight last night. What a great song and an excellent way to close the album.

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by Macfan4life

This is just a fun thread. I doubt anyone seriously is trying to de-Tusk Tusk or nit pick it to death. Its just another fun conversation about a great album.

Yes, got to talk about something!

[Wdm6789]

Yeah I said in my original nit pick thread about the white album that I have OCD and I'm too critical. I'm also a perfectionist. We needed some debate around here.

[ryan4136]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

I'm still not sure about this. My understanding was Tusk was always supposed to be a single album but they ended up with far too much material and decided they couldnt not use it so opted for a full double album. I've read your mention of Ken Caillat. I wonder if perhaps he personally had an idea at some point- rather than it being a band idea. KC's ideas and Lindsey's ideas were very different.

In the end I'm pretty sure the odd running order was deliberate to make the album uneven- particularly following Over and Over with The Ledge; lull them in with something they are familiar with and then immediately hit them with the new sound.

I've never personally had an issue with the running order- seems okay to me.

I certainly can't speak on anything beyond what I was told. I was having a convo with KC, I forgot what my specific question was, probably something like "did you go in with the plan to make this a double album" or something similar, and his answer was basically "it wasn't always intended to be a double album" which sparked my interest. He went on to explain the concept of partner albums that were destined to tell two individual stories that would compliment each other.

I didn't press the tracking question (largely because the concept caught me off guard" it was my impression the idea died prior to finalizing the exact number of tracks, so it's possible there was no final track listing concept for partner albums but I'm guessing there was a rough sketch at least. I wonder if ine was to be more "pop" the other "creative leaps" or if it was just to tell a love story some sort of "get together" album and "breakup" album. I wish I had time to grasp how many questions I really had.


EDIT:::: I found word for word the part of my convo that I was looking for. We talked about several things but this line clears up what I mentioned. This Is straight from the horses mouth.

"It was supposed to be 2 single albums that eventully would fit in a custom jacket that both albums would form one picture, but the label chickened out and went w a traditional double album format"