Why in 1975?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by David

then you're lucky, strand, because there isn't much high-quality stuff to listen to from that year.

But your "Stevie Nicks" is definitely different from my "Stevie Nicks"! More fans nowadays love the "Aunt Stevie" thing going on than the sultry chick of yore ... all these different Stevies wafting around, generation after generation.

Well, I have ben liking her since FM FM - so I have seen all the versions I must say though that in Vegas, THAT Stevie was very much the 83-85 Stevie on stage.

[David]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I must say though that in Vegas, THAT Stevie was very much the 83-85 Stevie on stage.

I didn't see those Vegas shows, but I saw some video that people shot. It didn't remind me in the slightest of what I remember of Stevie in 1983 or 1985.

It just goes to show that, when it comes to Stevie's fans & their recollections & impressions, it's Rashômon in action!

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by David

... it's Rashômon in action!

Not only that, but, it's also to each their own!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by David

I didn't see those Vegas shows, but I saw some video that people shot. It didn't remind me in the slightest of what I remember of Stevie in 1983 or 1985.

It just goes to show that, when it comes to Stevie's fans & their recollections & impressions, it's Rashômon in action!

Well, she wasn't jumping off of speakers at the US Festival

But, during the end of EO17 on Sat. she sort of did this twirl thing at the end a la the Red Rocks video. In the beginning of IAF - she ad libs the vocal a little bit and the intro speech on Sat. to that was spontaneous. It was just little things like that that sort of reminded me of 83-85. But, she was not that outrageous and I must say thank goodness she was not, because a little of that goes a long way, esp. when a la 86 she was not even singing most songs by then, she was just sort of barking the lyric between the word "well" and "baby"

[glitter_fades]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, I have ben liking her since FM FM - so I have seen all the versions I must say though that in Vegas, THAT Stevie was very much the 83-85 Stevie on stage.

I liked her in Vegas but I have to disagree she was anything like "Wild Heart" Stevie. I didn't like watching that Stevie. During the WH tour I stopped watching her. I know she was at the height of her fame then. Like someone else said, she was selling the rock star thing, but I wasn't buying it. I saw a woman suffering and self destructing before eveyone's eyes and putting that out on stage as entertainment. I didn't want to watch that. If you look at those shows mentioned a few posts back, Stevie was not even the same person on any given day depending on how distraught or how high she was. Solid Gold and SNL are like two different people. The US Festival and Landover are the same thing...two different Stevies. She appears pretty high during both concerts, but you can clearly see she's gone from one emotional extreme to the other in just a few months. Her physical appearance clearly changed in those months. I know her appearance still changes quickly these days, and she might have had a little something to calm her nerves during the Wed show in Vegas, but In Vegas she wasn't selling drama or her personal pain. She was doing her best to be a professional. I appreciate that given her limitations as a performer.

[petep9000]

Oh man! I loved it when she used to bark her lyrics between liberally placed "wells" and "babys". That made Stevie, well, Stevie.

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, she wasn't jumping off of speakers at the US Festival

But, during the end of EO17 on Sat. she sort of did this twirl thing at the end a la the Red Rocks video. In the beginning of IAF - she ad libs the vocal a little bit and the intro speech on Sat. to that was spontaneous. It was just little things like that that sort of reminded me of 83-85. But, she was not that outrageous and I must say thank goodness she was not, because a little of that goes a long way, esp. when a la 86 she was not even singing most songs by then, she was just sort of barking the lyric between the word "well" and "baby"

[Ghosty]

Fleetwood Mac had great stuff before S & B joined. But at the time of pre-White-album, they needed a guitar player. So what good would it have been if they didn't find a good guitar player? If they couldn't make another album, they would not have existed anymore. And they needed (for guitar) and furthermore *wanted* Lindsey, so why argue about it? Not only did they need and want him, I really doubt Mick and John and Christine has ever regretted S & B joining. And yes, Lindsey may have said it was he and Stevie, or nothing. But FWM did not have to agree with that if they didn't think Stevie would add to the group in a positive way. They could have just told S&B no thanks and then they could have gone on, looking for another guitarist. But they didn't.

Fleetwood Mac would still have gone one even without S&B most likely, finding a guitarist somewhere, but who knows how long they would have lasted. That bluesy style music was starting to wane and a new style of music was coming in.

Also, I don't think anyone can say Stevie Nicks didn't bring a major change in the band. I love Christine, with Mac and her old solo and new solo stuff. But she's not a show-stopping drama performer. I am not saying you have to be in music, but it helps to have a very vibrant, "leading lady" or "leading man" to "capture" people's attention. Some people are happy just to hear the music, while others want a "performance" too. Stevie sure gives a performance (think Bette Midler, Celine Dion, Maddona, - all who have great voices but don't "just sing', but *perform* and it drives the audience wild...etc). And Stevie and Lindsey together also added drama.

Christine has said in interviews she doesn't like that center attention. Which is fine. But it's usually a strong and dramatic personality that becomes super popular, and a "super star". Like Stevie (compared to the rest of Fleetwood Mac, past and present). Like Cher, Madonna, Brittney Spears, etc. I mean, surely there are much better songs out there than Brittney's, but you see Brittany everywhere. Only because she goes for the more dramatic, and she captures attention. Stevie has that energy to capture people. Even a lot of people that hate her still notice and talk about her (like Martha Stewart - heh!). So, she still is getting the attention and limelight. And when it comes to solo careers, we can all see how Stevie's skyrocketed for a while. Whether you like her solo stuff or not, she was a hot profit for a while. And still is not too shabby for the record people either.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by Ghosty

Fleetwood Mac would still have gone one even without S&B most likely, finding a guitarist somewhere, but who knows how long they would have lasted. That bluesy style music was starting to wane and a new style of music was coming in.

I'd agree if it weren't for the fact that Fleetwood Mac hadn't been a blues band since 1970. Bob Welch was a lot of things, but a bluesman was not one of them.

Originally Posted by Ghosty

Also, I don't think anyone can say Stevie Nicks didn't bring a major change in the band. I love Christine, with Mac and her old solo and new solo stuff. But she's not a show-stopping drama performer...And Stevie and Lindsey together also added drama.

You're right about Christine and about the drama that Stevie and Lindsey added to the band. However, by all accounts, Dave Walker was a show stopping front man, and Bob Welch was a great performer, too. Musically, the 1975 album wasn't too different from "Bare Trees." For me, the most unique thing Stevie and Lindsey brought to Fleetwood Mac was the vocal harmony. The Mac used some very basic vocal harmonies prior to 1975, but nothing like when Stevie and Lindsey joined.

Originally Posted by Ghosty

Christine has said in interviews she doesn't like that center attention. Which is fine. But it's usually a strong and dramatic personality that becomes super popular, and a "super star".

Well, Bob Welch was a very strong personality during the shows. Probably stronger than either Stevie or Lindsey. Some might say too strong. But, from all the boots I have from Bob's time with the band, he was awesome. BTW, I'm only bringing this up as an A-B comparison. As mentioned, I think Fleetwood Mac would have been a success, but wouldn't have sustained their success for as long or reached the level of success without Stevie and Lindsey.

Originally Posted by Ghosty

I mean, surely there are much better songs out there than Brittney's, but you see Brittany everywhere. Only because she goes for the more dramatic, and she captures attention.

Well, quoting Ed The Sock, Brittney's a promosexual. She'll do ANYTHING to keep her name and face in the public eye (i.e. frenching Madonna, endlessly talking about her virginity, having a reality show that would make Ozzy and Anna Nicole blush, etc.) Brittney's fame is based more on shock value than actual talent. Her movie bombed and her recent albums haven't done well. So, I don't think there's an artistic demand for Brittney. I think people only talk about her because of the freak show element.

Which does not apply to Stevie. Stevie is a singer/songwriter/artist, and that's all she is. She doesn't go out of her way to pretend to be something she's not, or fabricate things to keep her name in the media. She's what you'd call "what you see is what you get," and as a result, she has been able to maintain a respectable career overall (save for a few bad years in the 1990s).

[Ghosty]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

I'd agree if it weren't for the fact that Fleetwood Mac hadn't been a blues band since 1970. Bob Welch was a lot of things, but a bluesman was not one of them.

I don't know what you'd call the Bob Welch music. I guess what I meant is it seemed like music was changing. I think you know what I mean...? I can see where the White album and Bare Trees could be sort of in the same area. I like some of the songs on Bare Trees a lot. But I listen to the white album more.

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

You're right about Christine and about the drama that Stevie and Lindsey added to the band. However, by all accounts, Dave Walker was a show stopping front man, and Bob Welch was a great performer, too.

But he didn't having staying power. Actually, I don't remember what happened to him...did he just do some solo stuff afterwards? But he didn't become a mega star like Stevie became, and Fleetwood (the S&L version). That's all. Not everyone reaches that. Bob may have/had some huge fans, but he's not a name that rolls off everyone's tongue. Lots of people don't know who the heck he is. I guess I'm just thinking in terms of popularity, etc. I don't think music has to be that,personally, to be good, it's just this question was about whether FWM would have still be as successful....and unless they found another dramatic person(s) instead of S&L, I don't think FWM would have been. Not in the same hugeness. People love Christine, but I don't think they would have been as huge with just her, and maybe some guitar player. You didn't have hundreds and hundreds of girls showing up at the concerts dressed like Chris, and not as many men talk about "how hot" she is. Which being a woman, I don't care that Stevie's hot. But just that, well, as the saying goes, men wanted to be with her, and women wanted to be her. Not as many men and women felt that way about Chris. And if you revise that statement a little, not many said it about John and Mick either, but more did about Lindsey (women wanting to be with him, and men wanting to be - or play - like him). S&L just had a strong popularity vibe.

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Well, Bob Welch was a very strong personality during the shows. Probably stronger than either Stevie or Lindsey. from all the boots I have from Bob's time with the band, he was awesome. BTW, I'm only bringing this up as an A-B comparison.

He might have been strong, and awesome, but not as many people cared. That might be sad, as far as music and talent goes. But it's how it goes. I think pretty much like you said: "I think Fleetwood Mac would have been a success, but wouldn't have sustained their success for as long or reached the level of success without Stevie and Lindsey."

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Well, quoting Ed The Sock, Brittney's a promosexual. She'll do ANYTHING to keep her name and face in the public eye

Don't know who Ed the Sock is. And don't like Brittney. But besides her sex apparent, I mean - appeal, lol - it seemed like a lot of girls liked her when she was first starting out. She had the teeny-bopper group all hyped up and gained big popularity. And guys started looking at her in a more sexual way before she made it more extreme.

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Which does not apply to Stevie. Stevie is a singer/songwriter/artist, and that's all she is. She doesn't go out of her way to pretend to be something she's not, or fabricate things to keep her name in the media. She's what you'd call "what you see is what you get," and as a result, she has been able to maintain a respectable career overall (save for a few bad years in the 1990s).

But she purposely made an image for herself. She has said she played all the FWM albums from front to back, over and over, to see where she could fit in, and she saw a mystical theme to them, so concentrated on that. And she said she worked with someone to create her stage image, the flowy chiffon, what did she say, like from a character from les miserable? Some Charles Dickenson character? Some wispy wafe? lol! But she worked on it and planned it, created it... But I think if she didn't have that star quality, that certain something, it would not have mattered, you know?

Thanks for the conversation. I'm not a regular here, and only pop in once in a while when I get a chance, and rarely does anyone ever talk with me or to me when I do.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by Ghosty

I don't know what you'd call the Bob Welch music. I guess what I meant is it seemed like music was changing.

I'd call Bob's time with Fleetwood Mac progressive pop. It was a bit too out there and had too many influences to be standard pop, but it was too formulamatic to be straight ahead prog-rock (a la Rush, Yes, Genesis, et al).

Originally Posted by Ghosty

But he didn't having staying power. Actually, I don't remember what happened to him...did he just do some solo stuff afterwards? But he didn't become a mega star like Stevie became, and Fleetwood (the S&L version). That's all. Not everyone reaches that.

The Cliff Notes version is that after he got the band to move to L.A. and did the "Heroes..." album and tour, he left Fleetwood Mac, formed a metal-ish band called Paris, recorded two albums with them, and split that band up. Mick then became his manager and had Chris and Lindsey help rerecord "Sentimental Lady," which was a huge hit off of his platinum album, "French Kiss." Bob's next album, "Three Hearts" (which featured Mick, Chris, and Stevie), went gold. In fact, he was a pretty successful solo artist. Only Stevie Nicks and Dave Mason had better cumulative solo careers.

Originally Posted by Ghosty

it's just this question was about whether FWM would have still be as successful....

Not exactly. This question was would Fleetwood Mac have been successful, not as successful. How many bands ever have a studio album do what "Rumours" did? Even the Beatles and Stones can't say the same.

Originally Posted by Ghosty

He might have been strong, and awesome, but not as many people cared. That might be sad, as far as music and talent goes. But it's how it goes.

Again, there were certain advantages that Stevie and Lindsey enjoyed that Bob did not. Could you imagine if Stevie and Lindsey, by contract, had to record two albums a year? I doubt their albums would have had the detail, and the public wouldn't have enough time to digest an album. That was this situation Bob was in during his tenure with the band. There was just an oversaturation of Fleetwood Mac albums that weren't as well crafted due to contractual reasons released between 1970 through 1974. Bob's last album with Fleetwood Mac was essentially a chess move. They had to record right then or possibly lose the right to use the name Fleetwood Mac. However, just as they won the war, Bob quit.

So, by 1975, Fleetwood Mac was playing by a new set of rules. They no longer had an outside manager calling all the shots. They weren't bound by a contract that would have them record two albums a year. And, they weren't so big that the record company was paying all that much attention to what they were doing, which gave them loads of freedom. Add to that a brilliant three part harmony, and Fleetwood Mac had an ideal situation that had never existed for Fleetwood Mac in the past. Frankly, I don't know what could have happened for Fleetwood Mac with other personnel under those circumstances.

Originally Posted by Ghosty

But she purposely made an image for herself. She has said she played all the FWM albums from front to back, over and over, to see where she could fit in, and she saw a mystical theme to them, so concentrated on that. And she said she worked with someone to create her stage image, the flowy chiffon, what did she say, like from a character from les miserable? Some Charles Dickenson character? Some wispy wafe? lol! But she worked on it and planned it, created it... But I think if she didn't have that star quality, that certain something, it would not have mattered, you know?

Yeah, but I've heard Stevie say that she always liked witches and was always into the etherial. "Rhiannon" was written before she even heard the name Mick Fleetwood. And, there was a mystical quality to the band's music. So, her persona, planned or not, suited her own personal interest. In other words, being in a band like Fleetwood Mac actually helped her be herself.

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

... he left Fleetwood Mac, formed a metal-ish band called Paris, recorded two albums with them, and split that band up.

Just a little extra...he didn't really "split the band" up, in that kind of dry, calculated manner. Hunt Sales (Paris' drummer) was stricken with Bell's Palsy and during his recouperation time, Bob had written new material...French Kiss was recorded & released during that time...had Hunt not been ill, French Kiss would've very well been Paris' 3rd album (this per Bob himself...on his own site's message board).

[Ghosty]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Yeah, but I've heard Stevie say that she always liked witches and was always into the etherial. "Rhiannon" was written before she even heard the name Mick Fleetwood. And, there was a mystical quality to the band's music. So, her persona, planned or not, suited her own personal interest. In other words, being in a band like Fleetwood Mac actually helped her be herself.

She wrote Rhiannon about a woman's name in a fictional novel because she just liked the name and thought it was pretty. At the time she wrote it there was no mystical association with it and she had never even heard of a goddess named Rhiannon at that point. She got into that later on when someone sent her a copy of a book about the goddess Rhiannon (after the song becoming so popular on the radio). Then she thought it was really neat how she had already written a song about the name Rhiannon, and she then started reading all the books she could find about the Welch goddess and myth.

She's was not all witchy and mystical when she was in Fritz or Buckingham Nicks.

I didn't say she isn't herself. But it's more dramatic and planned. I am sure Brittney Spears is also herself, she wouldn't do all the sexy stuff if she wasn't enjoying it and feeling like that is a part of her (women have come a long way and do not have to be pressured into that unless they like that aspect). But I was just saying Stevie did say quite a few times she planned her look and her personna on stage. She was more hippie-ish in style before that in her clothes, wearing what was normal for that era. Which there is nothing wrong with that. But if you look at her onstage clothing and look at her songs, they got more mystical and wispy and witchy as a few years went on. I didn't say it didn't suit her personal interest. I doubt she would have become something she totally was not into or cared about. But that mystical thing did evolve a lot more once she started really planning it and getting into it.

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

So, by 1975, Fleetwood Mac was playing by a new set of rules. They no longer had an outside manager calling all the shots. They weren't bound by a contract that would have them record two albums a year.

[edit]

Again, there were certain advantages that Stevie and Lindsey enjoyed that Bob did not. Could you imagine if Stevie and Lindsey, by contract, had to record two albums a year?

Buckingham would've imploded if he had to release two albums a year.

We're lucky to get two albums a MILLENIUM from him.

[glitter_fades]

Originally Posted by Ghosty

She wrote Rhiannon about a woman's name in a fictional novel because she just liked the name and thought it was pretty. At the time she wrote it there was no mystical association with it and she had never even heard of a goddess named Rhiannon at that point. She got into that later on when someone sent her a copy of a book about the goddess Rhiannon (after the song becoming so popular on the radio). Then she thought it was really neat how she had already written a song about the name Rhiannon, and she then started reading all the books she could find about the Welch goddess and myth.

She's was not all witchy and mystical when she was in Fritz or Buckingham Nicks.

I didn't say she isn't herself. But it's more dramatic and planned. I am sure Brittney Spears is also herself, she wouldn't do all the sexy stuff if she wasn't enjoying it and feeling like that is a part of her (women have come a long way and do not have to be pressured into that unless they like that aspect). But I was just saying Stevie did say quite a few times she planned her look and her personna on stage. She was more hippie-ish in style before that in her clothes, wearing what was normal for that era. Which there is nothing wrong with that. But if you look at her onstage clothing and look at her songs, they got more mystical and wispy and witchy as a few years went on. I didn't say it didn't suit her personal interest. I doubt she would have become something she totally was not into or cared about. But that mystical thing did evolve a lot more once she started really planning it and getting into it.

I agree with a lot of your points. Stevie certainly planned out her mystical stage persona and created a character she could be associated with for her image. Very astute of her. I'll give her that. The stuff about her not knowing the Rhiannon myth is hard to swallow. Perhaps she hadn't read all the books but I thought she said once that she got the idea while reading one of the Triad stories during an airline flight? It doesn't really matter. I don't think the witchy part of that myth is a key to why she liked that character anyway. I think the most significant thing she's ever said about writing Rhiannon was what she said at the Tuscaloosa BN show. She did mention Rhiannon was about a witch, but she also said she wrote the song about a lady with 2 personalities and that she was facinated by that. Nobody ever mentions this as having any significant meaning. It's always the witchy thing people want to drone on about. Aside from playing up the witchy connection in the early years of FM, as much as she runs from it now does anyone wonder about her facination with the lady who has 2 personalities?

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by glitter_fades

She did mention Rhiannon was about a witch, but she also said she wrote the song about a lady with 2 personalities and that she was facinated by that...does anyone wonder about her facination with the lady who has 2 personalities?

Well, whenever I hear that, I think about the ugly scene that Mick described when Lindsey quit the band, when he called Stevie a "schizophrenic bitch."