Lack of Productivity Makes Fleetwood Mac Irrelevent. - Page 9

tr1 · #**121** 06-04-2009, 04:27 PM

I played in a band for 15 years in Los Angeles. When we started in 1992 the style of music we were playing was not "relevant". Meaning, it wasn't hip. But we played it because we loved it. And there was an audience that wanted that type of music. A few years into our career, our music suddenly became "relevant". Why? Because some band sold a lot of albums doing it. And then everyone jumped on the bandwagon and suddenly it was "cool" to play that music and dress that way. But some of those bands weren't around long. And we kept going. And our audiences got bigger. Why? Because we truly loved what we played and that comes across to an audience. When you're faking it, people know. So is Fleetwood Mac selling 35 million albums these days? No. But they still have an audience. They're playing arenas all around the country. Now, are they sold out to the max? No. But drawing 10,000-15,000 people is still considered to be a success. And obviously they still have an audience to be able to sell that many tickets. And they do it because they love playing. It's what they do. They're not following trends and they still have a successful tour. To me, that means they're "relevant". They may not be relevant to some people. But to the ones who love them and follow them, they are more then relevant and that's all that matters. I mean, what exactly does "relevant" mean anyways???

trackaghost · #**122** 06-04-2009, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tr1

I played in a band for 15 years in Los Angeles. When we started in 1992 the style of music we were playing was not "relevant". Meaning, it wasn't hip. But we played it because we loved it. And there was an audience that wanted that type of music. A few years into our career, our music suddenly became "relevant". Why? Because some band sold a lot of albums doing it. And then everyone jumped on the bandwagon and suddenly it was "cool" to play that music and dress that way. But some of those bands weren't around long. And we kept going. And our audiences got bigger. Why? Because we truly loved what we played and that comes across to an audience. When you're faking it, people know. So is Fleetwood Mac selling 35 million albums these days? No. But they still have an audience. They're playing arenas all around the country. Now, are they sold out to the max? No. But drawing 10,000-15,000 people is still considered to be a success. And obviously they still have an audience to be able to sell that many tickets. And they do it because they love playing. It's what they do. They're not following trends and they still have a successful tour. To me, that means they're "relevant". They may not be relevant to some people. But to the ones who love them and follow them, they are more then relevant and that's all that matters. I mean, what exactly does "relevant" mean anyways???

I think this is the best post of the whole thread.

newyawka · #**123** 06-04-2009, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trackaghost

I'm also curious what you do think the best American album of the decade is.

Well the decade isn't over yet so I'll just hafta get back to you on that!

Oh, and I wouldn't narrow it down to just one either.

trackaghost · #**124** 06-04-2009, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newyawka

Well the decade isn't over yet so I'll just hafta get back to you on that!

Oh, and I wouldn't narrow it down to just one either.

Come now, that's a cop out. I'll re-phrase the question for you: what are some of the best albums this decade so far, in your opinion?

DigYourGrave · #**125** 06-04-2009, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newyawka

Okay you got how multi-layed and deep it is but you are one person and one person versus the majority...in the end it doesn't really matter.

And by the way, you're deluded if you think Say You Will is the best American album of the decade. Wake up, amigo.

Who is this "majority" that didn't get Say You Will on a deep level?

Also, I don't like the way you talk to people. I know thats probably not my place to say, but nobody has said anything yet. You can express your opinion with having such an arrogant/contemptuous tone..

LukeA · #**126** 06-04-2009, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tr1

I played in a band for 15 years in Los Angeles. When we started in 1992 the style of music we were playing was not "relevant". Meaning, it wasn't hip. But we played it because we loved it. And there was an audience that wanted that type of music. A few years into our career, our music suddenly became "relevant". Why? Because some band sold a lot of albums doing it. And then everyone jumped on the bandwagon and suddenly it was "cool" to play that music and dress that way. But some of those bands weren't around long. And we kept going. And our audiences got bigger. Why? Because we truly loved what we played and that comes across to an audience.

Cool! (was it swing?)

newyawka · #**127** 06-04-2009, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trackaghost

Come now, that's a cop out. I'll re-phrase the question for you: what are some of the best albums this decade so far, in your opinion?

Kanye West - 808s & Heartbreak
Lady GaGa - The Fame
Britney Spears - Circus
Evanescence - Fallen
John Mayer - Continuum

And yes, I would have to say that Say You Will would probably make it on my list for not the best but one of the best albums of the decade. I would also have to add Trouble in Shangri-La because that album is, what I believe, to be Stevie's biggest success. It proved, at the time, that she was still contemporary and still revelvant...I only wish she would have held on to that. However, I am glad that she's not making any more studio albums because Trouble in Shangri-La was such a big success. I feel that Trouble in Shangri-La was a great way to go out. As I feel Say You Will is probably a good way to go out for Fleetwood Mac and Gift of Screws is a good way for Lindsey to go out. Although I don't think Lindsey will let his candle burn out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DigYourGrave

Also, I don't like the way you talk to people. I know thats probably not my place to say, but nobody has said anything yet. You can express your opinion with having such an arrogant/contemptuous tone..

No, you have a right to say whatever you feel as do I which is why I do. Yes, I can be arrogant and I can be very condescending but that's okay because that's my perogative as it is yours not to like me. I express my opinions in the way that I do because that's how I do it. I'm happy with the way that I talk. I'm happy with being an obnoxious, loud and contemptuous person from New Yawk.

MacMan · #**128** 06-04-2009, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newyawka

Well it's also age combined with many other things, marketing for example. I feel that Fleetwood Mac might be able to sell more product if they put themselves out there more but with Stevie's anxiety over the internet and what-not that's probably not going to happen. Fleetwood Mac really needs to get into the whole internet, iTunes, marketing thing in order to survive. They are holding on by a thread.

So what would you suggest the band do in these instances to maintain relevancy.... And has anyone defined relevance like David asked?.

nailatixela · #**129** 06-04-2009, 06:32 PM

Why the heck would you (the listener) care if a band is relevent or not? You either like the sound or you don't.

If you only like "relevent" bands then you only are jumping on the bandwagon - to be hip - nothing else. The phase will come and go.

Why the heck should I care if Fleetwood Mac is relevent or not? Whatever they are, I like their music anyway. The case that they are irrelevent means nothing to me. And that's all that counts - the personal connection between artist and listener. I like "Pokerface" but can't say I feel much of a connection with GaGa and her bluffin' muffin'

And I'm 17 by the way.

tr1 · #**130** 06-04-2009, 06:32 PM

Luka A.,
Not swing. It was best described as high energy dance music. Very 80's new wave with guitars. Grunge was HUGE at the time we started. We called our style of music NEW new wave. It was great. Then No Doubt broke big and suddenly everyone was playing dance/rock.

But the difference with Fleetwood Mac and all these other groups name like Lady Gaga and Kanye West is that the Mac is timeless. There music is classic and always will be. 50 yrs from now nobody will know who Lady Gaga is.

tr1 · #**131** 06-04-2009, 06:35 PM

One more thing, there's a difference between relevant and trendy. Let's not get the 2 confused. Gaga is a trend and a gimmick. Nothing more.

SortaSavageLike · #**132** 06-04-2009, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newyawka

Lady GaGa - The Fame
Britney Spears - Circus

Did I just hear a record skip, or was that the sound of this thread's irrelevant relevancy flying out the window?

newyawka · #**133** 06-04-2009, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacMan

So what would you suggest the band do in these instances to maintain relevancy.... And has anyone defined relevance like David asked?.

I think I stated my suggestion in the above quote you're commenting on. Fleetwood Mac needs to get into the whole internet, iTunes, marketing thing in order to survive.

They also need to stick together and just be Fleetwood Mac, none of this solo tour sh*t anymore. They need to make studio albums with less that five to six years apart from each other because they'll stay in people's minds better that way.

Also, Lindsey and Stevie need to quit with the childish arguments. Lindsey needs to step back from his whole experimental thing and create more commercial songs for Fleetwood Mac. If you ask me a lot of songs on Gift of Screws should have been Fleetwood Mac songs. "Did You Miss Me" should have been a Fleetwood Mac single, not a solo single.

They need to take whatever deals they can get, whether that be through Wal-Mart or Starbucks or whatever. And they need more fan-to-band interaction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tr1

But the difference with Fleetwood Mac and all these other groups name like Lady Gaga and Kanye West is that the Mac is timeless. There music is classic and always will be. 50 yrs from now nobody will know who Lady Gaga is.

I disagree. I think some Lady GaGa songs will become timeless. “Just Dance” being one of them. I hear dance songs from the 80’s still played on KTU all the time. Those songs are about twenty years old and I think twenty years from now we’ll still be hearing “Just Dance.”

Quote:

Originally Posted by SortaSavageLike

Did I just hear a record skip, or was that the sound of this thread's irrelevant relevancy flying out the window?

I listed The Fame because it’s Lady GaGa’s first album and it already proved to be a commercial success. There are six singles for crying out loud! That’s pretty impressive.

I listed Circus because it demonstrates Britney Spears’ fantastic return to the music industry. It marked the fact that she’s still relevant because for a while there it was becoming debatable.