SYW: A Dud Album

[buckymcnix]

Originally Posted by Sarah

or how it's a mole on the ass of fleetwood mac, :

Michelle?

[Peestie]

I like Illume. It's one of the Stevie tracks I seem to come back to most.

I also like the GOS versions of all the songs that had Stevie added to them more than the SYW version. SG is seems so much more intimate without Stevie's vocals on there.

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by Sarah

There's an earlier version of peacekeeper that is faster with only Lindsey vocals. Much, much, much better than the SYW version with Stevie harmonies.

Can you post it?

Thnx!

[Sarah]

Originally Posted by Betsy

Can you post it?

Thnx!

I don't know if I still have it. I'll check when I get home from work. If I do, I will!

[mylittledemon]

Originally Posted by Chrislit18

Agreed. Miranda is my least fav. Lindsey track on the whole album

I thought peacekeeper was new also [to whoever [sorry forgot who] said that WTWCT was the only 'new' Linds song] maybe Im wrong.

Illume is just horrible. I get the theme, but I cant even stand to listen to it for like 2 seconds.

I skip that and Miranda. occasionally I skip SYW too, because that gets just as repetative as BTLH

i like the Chris Lord Alge mix of SYW better.

[mylittledemon]

Originally Posted by Sarah

I understand why Bleed To Love Her was on there - with it being the track that kind of "kicked off" the reunion project - but this version totally sucks compared to the Dance. The noodling guitar solo at the end just gets so old. It's pretty, but end it already.

I disagree. I like it a lot. I think the Dance version is better...but I like the SYW version for separate reasons. Especially that pretty guitar part at the end.

[Villavic]

Originally Posted by michelej1

As for the successful tour that the article mentioned, here's a list of the top grossing 2003 tours. Translated from Spanish by Babelfish. I'm surprised that Cher is up there with the big groups:

SURPRISED?? WHY??? Cher's concerts are great!! No doubt her tours are so successful..

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by Villavic

SURPRISED?? WHY??? Cher's concerts are great!! No doubt her tours are so successful..

Yeah I've been a Sonny and Cher fan since I was a child. I've seen a few of their concerts and would have seen more, had I been an adult and had they not broken up. I've also seen Cher solo many times. I first heard Needles and Pins long before Stevie and Tom sang it. Still, I was surprised at the 2003 box office for Cher. That surprise was not a comment on the merit of her performances.



Michele

[LukeA]

Originally Posted by michelej1

Yeah I've been a Sonny and Cher fan since I was a child. I've seen a few of their concerts and would have seen more, had I been an adult and had they not broken up. I've also seen Cher solo many times. I first heard Needles and Pins long before Stevie and Tom sang it. Still, I was surprised at the 2003 box office for Cher. That surprise was not a comment on the merit of her performances.

In 2003, Cher was in the middle of her massive 300+ date "farewell" arena tour, which stretched over three years. She was a top box office earner 2002-2005, and stands to be again once her Vegas residency starts next year.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by LukeA

In 2003, Cher was in the middle of her massive 300+ date "farewell" arena tour, which stretched over three years. She was a top box office earner 2002-2005, and stands to be again once her Vegas residency starts next year.

Yes, I saw that show and she was at Staples here in Los Angeles. But because the tour did last so long, I didn't know that sales were that high. I guess I assumed that they thinned out, sort of the way FM's box office haul fell off during the 2nd leg of their tour. At any rate, while I would expect her to make a Top list, I didn't think she would rank as high as she actually did, right up there with the Springsteen's and supergroup's of the world.

Michele

[amber]

I thought the work was very good, basically, but they did under spotlight their harmony abilities, and their mixing and production was a bit off, but still intriguing.
It reminded me of people who used to know each other well, then got together after a few years, but didn't quite find the synergy they used to have, because of unfamiliarity and the simple fact of, if you don't spend much time together, you don't grow in the same way. And they didn't take the time to delve in and really meet eye to eye, musically. Or, they just didn't take the time. It's hard to re-know someone after you haven't seen them for long. You have different points of reference.

I really like SYW, though. And, I really, really like Lindsey's contributions to it with his own songs.

Ain't no shame in that game.

[mylittledemon]

Originally Posted by amber

I thought the work was very good, basically, but they did under spotlight their harmony abilities, and their mixing and production was a bit off, but still intriguing.
It reminded me of people who used to know each other well, then got together after a few years, but didn't quite find the synergy they used to have, because of unfamiliarity and the simple fact of, if you don't spend much time together, you don't grow in the same way. And they didn't take the time to delve in and really meet eye to eye, musically. Or, they just didn't take the time. It's hard to re-know someone after you haven't seen them for long. You have different points of reference.

I really like SYW, though. And, I really, really like Lindsey's contributions to it with his own songs.

Ain't no shame in that game.

I think the albums major problems were a) Christine was absent and b) the material was old. I mean, in the sense that it was solo material slapped together to make a Fleetwood Mac record.

[Gailh]

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

I think the albums major problems were a) Christine was absent and b) the material was old. I mean, in the sense that it was solo material slapped together to make a Fleetwood Mac record.

totally agree.

without Christine it did sound like Buckingham Nicks backed by Fleetwood & McVie. Not bad if that's your thing but I thought it sounded like 2 solo albums.

I think it is too long by about 15 - 20 minutes but I dont hate it and I don't think it's a dud

Gail

[mylittledemon]

Originally Posted by Gailh

totally agree.

without Christine it did sound like Buckingham Nicks backed by Fleetwood & McVie. Not bad if that's your thing but I thought it sounded like 2 solo albums.

I think it is too long by about 15 - 20 minutes but I dont hate it and I don't think it's a dud

Gail

I agree...but thats cause we're "fans"...the mainstreamers might not have taken to the album for those reasons. I do think the album would've been better if they had cut 4-5 of Stevie and Lindsey's songs. (or replaced them with 4 or 5 of Christines!)

[Villavic]

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

I think the albums major problems were a) Christine was absent and b) the material was old. I mean, in the sense that it was solo material slapped together to make a Fleetwood Mac record.

I agree, too. And the order.
and. let's face it. Fleetwood Mac is an old band, it's very hard for old bands to get a mega hit album. Tours are other story, but albums.. hard to sell for a band like Fleetwood Mac in these days..