Stevie discusses Possible New

[FierySequences]

So many opinions on this topic...thought I'd through my 2 cents in.

I agree with CADreaming and others. I do believe Stevie wants to tour for the money. hell who wouldn't? Does that make her a bad person-absolutley not.

LB has 3 children to support and didn't they just buy another house? I'm not throwing flames here, but it seems if Anyone was doing FM for the money it is logical that it would be LB and Mick. Certainly not Stevie, she has a dog

I'd love new material from the Mac (actually moreso than a SN album right now). But I believe SN just doesn't want to record with the Mac/LB and do another SYW. Her heart and creativity is Not there. Although I would LOVE Mac material, I don't see the point in pressuring her. I'd rather her want to do it, than deliver lackluster songs.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by CADreaming

Well, isn't that the age old irony? Artists work hard at their craft to become successful and then when they do, maintaining success takes precedence over the art. I think Stevie is still an artist, but she's always wanted to make money off of it - and lots of it.

In today's world, nobody is making lots of money on music sales. There will always be a market for new music, but the days of mega-millions are over for Stevie, and have been for some time. The last commercially successful studio album, by the standard she seems to be setting, solo or Mac, was TITN.

How/why do people like Elvis Costello, Paul McCartney, Neil Young, and Emmylou Harris find ways of releasing new music when they know it most likely won't come close to matching their past success, but Fleetwood Mac has only released THREE studio albums in 25 years (all relative bombs by their standards)?

Isn't the goal always to make a living (money to support yourself) by doing what you love (music/songwriting) instead of any other mainstream job? It's crazy to think that's not the ultimate goal.

That hasn't been an issue for Stevie since 1976.

why would she bother doing another album at all if she didn't want to fill a creative void?

She's in a band where everybody else wants to fill a creative void. But, I guess that would interfere with her "art".

[redtulip]

Originally Posted by FierySequences

So many opinions on this topic...thought I'd through my 2 cents in.

I agree with CADreaming and others. I do believe Stevie wants to tour for the money. hell who wouldn't? Does that make her a bad person-absolutley not.

LB has 3 children to support and didn't they just buy another house? I'm not throwing flames here, but it seems if Anyone was doing FM for the money it is logical that it would be LB and Mick. Certainly not Stevie, she has a dog

I'd love new material from the Mac (actually moreso than a SN album right now). But I believe SN just doesn't want to record with the Mac/LB and do another SYW. Her heart and creativity is Not there. Although I would LOVE Mac material, I don't see the point in pressuring her. I'd rather her want to do it, than deliver lackluster songs.

Stevie probably supports just as many people as Lindsey. I'm sure she helps out family members and she's always got an entourage with her, that doesn't come cheap.

Originally Posted by CADreaming

Excellent point. I'm not judging FM for being from the old school where labels gave you big budgets, focused on artist development, branded (with all the necessary evils that incurs), etc. So, they are ducks out of water right now and have to figure out how to maneuver in this new world. I'm sure it's really hard and a bit of a culture shock. I believe there was a time when an artist could cut out touring almost altogether and still make a very comfortable living based off royalties/publishing if they wrote their own stuff.

By the way, I bet LB did make money off the OMS tour. Stan works for peanuts, right? Lol.

By not touring with a band, Lindsey doesn't have to pay band members, their techs, and I assume probably a few roadies to move around the equipment as well. Think about it, much less overhead for OMS, regardless of what his remaining crew is paid.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by FierySequences

I'd love new material from the Mac (actually moreso than a SN album right now). But I believe SN just doesn't want to record with the Mac/LB and do another SYW. Her heart and creativity is Not there. Although I would LOVE Mac material, I don't see the point in pressuring her. I'd rather her want to do it, than deliver lackluster songs.

So, she's holding the band hostage. If she doesn't want to write, she could always do somebody else's material and save her "art" for her solo records.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by mitzo

We see plenty of other vintage acts who still release new music and seem content to see sales much lower than IYD, and who tour and play in small venues. Look at Lindsey's recent flurry of activity, for example. Did he lose money on all that?

he surely doesn't tour with as huge a staff as a Mac tour does, and when he tours without any other musicians to pay.... I bet he does actually make a few bucks.

[tothegypsy]

Originally Posted by TheWILDheart

The ridiculous thing is, an album with the name "Fleetwood Mac" on it will ALWAYS out-sell and album with the words "Stevie Nicks" or "Lindsey Buckingham" on it. Especially outside the US where neither have had hugely successful solo careers. Especially with the insane hype around the tour, a new album to follow it seems like the most logical approach.

Having said that, since when has Stevie ever taken the logical approach to something? . In recent years, she seems to have really lost touch with the music business - especially to say that she was so on the ball during SYW.

My memory may be a bit foggy, but didn't Trouble In Shangri-La and Say You Will actually sell fairly similar amounts?

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

In today's world, nobody is making lots of money on music sales.

Exactly.

How/why do people like Elvis Costello, Paul McCartney, Neil Young, and Emmylou Harris find ways of releasing new music when they know it most likely won't come close to matching their past success, but Fleetwood Mac has only released THREE studio albums in 25 years (all relative bombs by their standards)?

All those people are solo artists as opposed to a band with multiple members. You need to have a bigger piece of pie to split.

That hasn't been an issue for Stevie since 1976.

So, she doesn't still need to make money to pay her bills? Regardless of her status, everybody's gotta do that...

She's in a band where everybody else wants to fill a creative void. But, I guess that would interfere with her "art".

I think she's just trying to be smart about it. I don't think she's totally against it. No one remembers during Unleashed when she said they would do another FM album "because the world deserves it"...

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by tothegypsy

My memory may be a bit foggy, but didn't Trouble In Shangri-La and Say You Will actually sell fairly similar amounts?

I think I remember that SYW and BTM sold similar amounts (over a million), but TISL only 663,000.

[elle]

Originally Posted by CADreaming

I think she's just trying to be smart about it. I don't think she's totally against it. No one remembers during Unleashed when she said they would do another FM album "because the world deserves it"...

lol - and that was 4 years ago! guess since it needs to be at least 3 years in between Mac tours, maybe we'll hear soon how many years does it need to be between Mac albums... it's looking more and more like 15 rather than 6 or 10

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by elle

lol - and that was 4 years ago! guess since it needs to be at least 3 years in between Mac tours, maybe we'll hear soon how many years does it need to be between Mac albums... it's looking more and more like 15 rather than 6 or 10

At the rate they're going, the next FM record may be a BN record by default.

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by elle

lol - and that was 4 years ago! guess since it needs to be at least 3 years in between Mac tours, maybe we'll hear soon how many years does it need to be between Mac albums... it's looking more and more like 15 rather than 6 or 10

5 between Mirage & TITN, 6 between The Dance & SYW. On track!

You're forgetting they didn't have a deal. Obviously, some negotiating with Warners had taken place. What do you do if your record label & management say they don't want a full FM album? I think they test other waters - and I think they're doing that. Be a little patient.

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

At the rate they're going, the next FM record may be a BN record by default.

Hmmm... and that may have been the plan all along!

[redtulip]

Originally Posted by CADreaming

5 between Mirage & TITN, 6 between The Dance & SYW. On track!

You're forgetting they didn't have a deal. Obviously, some negotiating with Warners had taken place. What do you do if your record label & management say they don't want a full FM album? I think they test other waters - and I think they're doing that. Be a little patient.



Hmmm... and that may have been the plan all along!

They have a label, Lindsey's. I don't think they need a major label for an album release anymore. They'd probably make a lot more money that way too without so many hands in the cookie jar.

[mitzo]

Stop calling yourself an artist if you do not create. A singer/songwriter's craft is the creation of new songs. If you do not do that then you are not an artist. If you stop doing that then you are a former artist. Period.

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by redtulip

They have a label, Lindsey's. I don't think they need a major label for an album release anymore. They'd probably make a lot more money that way too without so many hands in the cookie jar.

Yeah, that's the water I was talking about but I really don't see that happening. And, I guess they don't need it now. But, it's probably an option if WB totally washed their hands.

Originally Posted by mitzo

Stop calling yourself an artist if you do not create. A singer/songwriter's craft is the creation of new songs. If you do not do that then you are not an artist. If you stop doing that then you are a former artist. Period.

Who stopped creating??? There are many ways to be creative anyway.

Y'all just want to place blame squarely on Stevie's shoulders for getting an EP instead of an album, when as always, we are not privy to all the information. It's speculative.

For all we know, the Rumours reissue was part if the deal. They may have had to do that to be able to get new stuff out. And, sure they don't have to go the big label route but I'm sure there are still reasons they all prefer that - even if they have to smile & make nice. That could change - maybe it is. Time will tell.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by mitzo

Stop calling yourself an artist if you do not create. A singer/songwriter's craft is the creation of new songs. If you do not do that then you are not an artist. If you stop doing that then you are a former artist. Period.

So I guess, by your definition, Van Gogh is no longer an artist because he doesn't create new paintings because he's, um, DEAD.

He's a "former artist."