Why does everyone say Lindsey Buckingham IS Fleetwood Mac? - Page 7

chiliD · #91 03-27-2006, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wondergirl9847

Kelly Rowland and Michelle Williams. Michelle put out a gospel album while DC was on downtime...so I don't understand the whore thing.

Instead of typing "who are", I contracted it to "who're"...I didn't realize how that looked until I proof-read my post...then added my comment.

The Nisse · #92 03-27-2006, 05:09 PM

...didn't Stevie take more chances with the SYW-project? I mean, more than half the songs she contributed were old. She could have stalled the project if she needed more time, surely. Not that old is a bad thing, it just indicates her level of adventure-seeking..

And the tour... Man, she didn't take one step that surprised anyone. Oh yeah, she played Beautiful Child, but that was it, really.. Besides, we heard the same ol' same ol'.. She regularly played Say You Will and Goodbye Baby from SYW and the the classics (sometimes Destiny Rules). I keep thinking Thrown Down or Everybody Finds Out could've kicked some butt live.. Lindsey, on the other hand, played more new songs and generally gave more of himself at the gigs, as many has pointed out.. No wonder he steals the show..

I think it falls back to something Lindsey has always mildly critizised her for, her strong conservative point of view.. I mean, come on...! She keeps hangin' around the same people. Sheryl Crow, Don Henley and Tom Petty, and each time she does so she's using the power of nostalgia. You don't see Lindsey doing that, he makes appearences on albums, including Tom Pettys, but he doesn't abuse it in the same. He tries, as much as he can, to tread new ground..

chiliD · #93 03-27-2006, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Nisse

He tries, as much as he can, to tread new ground..

"tread new ground"?? He hasn't since 1979. He's just re-tread that "new ground" over & over, ever since.

The Nisse · #94 03-27-2006, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiliD

"tread new ground"?? He hasn't since 1979. He's just re-tread that "new ground" over & over, ever since.

As much as he can....as much as he can. :-) It's a tough thing to do..

But yeah, I think he's done a decent job of it, especially when comparing him to Stevie.. If you listen to technical details going on in the tracks, I hear stuff that I don't hear anywhere else. He's use of manipulated vocals for instance. And that's released after 1979..

chiliD · #95 03-27-2006, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Nisse

As much as he can....as much as he can. :-) It's a tough thing to do..

But yeah, I think he's done a decent job of it, especially when comparing him to Stevie.. If you listen to technical details going on in the tracks, I hear stuff that I don't hear anywhere else. He's use of manipulated vocals for instance. And that's released after 1979..

Right...he used manipulated voices on Tusk (in 1979)...and he's used them on every album since.

The Beatles used manipulated voices in 1966; wanna talk "new ground" still?

**jbrownsjr** · #96 03-27-2006, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

His ex-wife's playing is equally tasteful. Can I get an AMEN from Mary Anne & Homer & jbrownsjr?

it's tasteful, but she should break out the solo's more

ok ok ok AMEN

**jbrownsjr** · #97 03-27-2006, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

Hallelujah, sista!

From a musican standpoint, it's pretty amazing that here you had this husband & wife, both blues & rock musicians, & their styles are so beautifully complementary & both so "tasteful" as MacDougall says that you can't help thinking they both had enormous influence on each other in terms of style & approach.

It really worked out luckily for both of them in terms of their development. What a happy, fortunate set of circumstances! I feel more than certain that John played a big role in Christine's development as a rhythm keyboard player of a very specific type, & that Chris played a big role (perhaps not as big?) in John's developing style as a bassist. The source of this two-way influence would have been all those weeks, months & ultimately years that they spent at home or in studios & rehearsal rooms playing together, following each other, listening to each other, mimicking each other musically, learning to play in each other's pocket. You add Mick into the mix--with his special timekeeping style--& you really get a heady brew rhythm section for Fleetwood Mac all those years, the kind of rhythm section that was singled out for its excellence by countless critics & musicians, even to this day. (In 29 or 30 years of reading concert reviews of Fleetwood Mac, I can't remember even once reading a critic say that the rhythm section was anything less than first-rate powerhouse solid.)

Fans talk about the luck of the combination of the 1977 five people in creating such potent chemistry, but I think the luck of the combination of the three Britishers was equally amazing, & the musical chemistry those three created as a rhythm section was just as potent, totally irrespective of Nicks & Buckingham, or of Green/Kirwan/Spencer before that.

It's so nice to know that someone else can see, hear, and observe the same details and nuances that you do.

The Nisse · #98 03-28-2006, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiliD

Right...he used manipulated voices on Tusk (in 1979)...and he's used them on every album since.

The Beatles used manipulated voices in 1966; wanna talk "new ground" still?

Generally, an idea can develop.. I still believe he was 1/8 the engineer he is now when they made tusk. I can clearly hear a difference in Tusk and releases onwards..

Besides, it was just an example.. My whole point was still the comparison with Stevie, which is what this thread startet out with..