Reviews: USA Today, AP

[blinker12]

Positive notice from USA Today; negative from AP, although he has some kind words for Stevie. (And yes, he says "Throw Down" instead of "Thrown Down." Duh.)
Gee, I'm kinda surprised by how many bad reviews Say You Will is getting. I worried when I heard it would be 18 songs long that the critics would bitch, but I didn't realize they would run with it like they have been.
Oh well, I'm still loving the CD myself. The critics hated Tusk, too, right? And that album is now revered. I think Say You Will will undergo a similar reappraisal one or two decades from now.


USA TODAY
HEADLINE: Return of the Mac
Pop/rock: Fleetwood Mac, Say You Will ( * * * out of four) Like some kind of melodic flu, Fleetwood Mac periodically erupts after undergoing mutations and spreads a new, yet familiar, bout of infectious pop-rock. The current strain consists of founding members Mick Fleetwood and John McVie and singer/songwriters Stevie Nicks and Lindsey Buckingham. This first original album with Nicks and Buckingham since 1987's Tango in the Night comes off as two interlocking solo albums more in sync with 1974's Buckingham Nicks than Mac's chart-busting Rumours. It's also the first without Christine McVie, whose harmonies, sunny sentimentality and spry keyboards gave Mac a certain pop lilt. That's occasionally missed, but her absence leaves a broader stage for Buckingham's agile guitar and Nicks' bewitching romanticism, resulting in darker, meatier fare. Buckingham brings tension and daring to his tunes; his breezy production cradles Nicks' fragile rasp, an impossible amalgam of strength and vulnerability in such bittersweet tales as 9/11 reflection Illume, Thrown Down and Silver Girl, a touching ode to Sheryl Crow. Say what you will about the band's bumpy past, Say You Will is a welcome relapse of the Mac attack. --Edna Gundersen


ASSOCIATED PRESS
" Say You Will" (Reprise, $18.98) - Fleetwood Mac
You'd think being gone for 15 years would make it hard for a band to wear out its welcome. But Fleetwood Mac manages that with an album that buries its treasures in an avalanche of mediocrity. At 18 songs and more than 76 minutes, you could put
this disc on, leave the room to make a sandwich, run a few errands, go to college for four years, come back and it will STILL be playing.
That sense of slog is more glaring now that Lindsey Buckingham and Stevie Nicks are the two main songwriters and voices, given the retirement of Christine McVie. McVie is listed on this disc as a contributor, but it's unclear what she did. The understated elegance of her songwriting and singing is sorely missed.
As a result, "Say You Will" is like two alternating solo albums with a band that too often is trying to sound like Fleetwood Mac instead of just being Fleetwood Mac.
It's also quite a surprise, frankly, that Nicks is the real mainstay now. Buckingham often appears too tightly wound and muddled in his writing, while the ethereal hoo-hah of the old Stevie has been replaced with a down-to-earth, world-weary wisdom.
There are some fine songs here. Buckingham's questioning opener, "What's the World Coming To" and the melodic "Miranda" and "Bleed to Love Her," and Nicks' "Ilume (9-11)," "Throw Down," "Everybody Finds Out" and the closing lullaby, "Goodbye Baby," are the best. Put them together with a few Christine McVie
songs, throw the rest out and you've got a killer Fleetwood Mac album. - David Bauder, AP Writer

[misterbug]

I'm a little astonished at some of the poor comments about SYW, especially AP's "avalanche of mediocrity" remark. I've heard the first song and a half and am already impressed. They are catchy songs with superb production and music. I just hope these negative reviews don't dissuade the record buying public from picking up the album.

[CarneVaca]

Folks, don't be too surprised about the negative reviews. There's no way a band like Fleetwood Mac can come back and get all positive reviews. If the band simply rehashed the Rumours sound, it would get panned for it. On the other hand, throwing in some quirky songs and unconventional production is going to turn some people off. It's a no-win, from that standpoint. The AP guy, much like the Newsday reviewer, doesn't seem to "get" Lindsey.

[stefan]

Yes there are relatively often bad or soso reviews as far as it seems. I think there are several obstacles in this albums way-

Prejudice 1: Age and history.
Most of the reviews start discussing the bands past and so we get to hear/read the same stories again and again. Broken relationships in the 70`s and blah goes on-we all know it. Nobody cares for that in terms of if this album is good and worth listening to or not. Sometimes this takes a large part of the "review". Comparisons are made between then and now and the age is mentioned. I believe this is one point which is noticed on the on the reviewers papersheet (or the screen nowadays) before one song comes out of the CD player.

Prejudice 2: Christines absence
About the absence of Christine Mc Vie is often said that something is lacking without her. I too believe that this is also a prejudice which is planned to be mentioned before ever hearing one single song from the album. (By the way-did they say that back in the "Behind the mask"- era too concerning Lindseys departure?)

Prejudice 3: Album length
I'm sure it is not a fine thing for the reviewers to be forced to get through 18 songs for making their article. Rather they would like a 12 track quicky, which they could listen to in 45 minutes (or faster by skipping after 2 minutes per song). This way the article gets done faster and it's really annoying when it doesn`t work this way. Shame on Fleetwood Mac for not taking care of these problems

Prejudice 4: Bands and their music have to be the same for ever

i.e. A lot of reviewers want a 70's pop band to play 70`s pop music. What's the world coming to- yes in my opinion too it's a good song and I like it. But it's not the best on the album imo. But this one is very often mentioned as example of how it should have been in its entirety. They want Rumours music and 70`s style to re-live their own past and memories. That's the categorie (70`s and a little 80`s easy pop) and therefore it is not fine by Fleetwood Mac and LB to do something different and not fit into this categorie they think FM should be. Or probably they are glad that this isn`t the case as they then are able to write that the band is not as good as in the past.
Note to Nr 4: Was der Bauer nicht kennt, das frisst er nicht!
I.e.: the farmer doesn`t eat what he doesn`t know (old proverbial saying from Germany)



---I think reviewing always is subjective. But there's a difference between not liking a song or a song style and stating that a song is bad. Murrow or Red rover receive very contradictionary evaluations and often are mentioned as the worst contributions. But the question is not if I as a reviewer like that one but if I as a reviewer acknowledge that something is different, well played or sung (or even not) or in terms of composition and production is good or has a certain quality or not. And all you can say about these two tracks- they are not boring, whether you like them or not.

So these 4 points are redundant in many reviews.
I am pretty surprised about the relatively bad feedback up until now and I really have no idea of how the album will be received by the buying public. On the other hand did Lindsey receive great feedback for Out of the cradle and nobody else bought it and listened to it except of the visitors of this board. So this could be a good sign for the band

BTW anybody seen a praise for "Come" by the way (from the critics)? Nobody likes it? Or am I missing something?

Anyway I´m not too annoyed by the critics. I'm glad we have the 18 tracks and if it comes to Silver girl I still can skip Stefan

[SpyNote]

Originally posted by blinker12
Gee, I'm kinda surprised by how many bad reviews Say You Will is getting. I worried when I heard it would be 18 songs long that the critics would bitch, but I didn't realize they would run with it like they have been.

I don't think the album has received a lot of "bad" reviews. Most of the major reviews have actually been quite positive. Hearing negative remarks about anything can have the tendency to overshadow everything good that has been said -- which is more of less human nature. I think critics are generally confused by this new album because it's not as instantly gratifying as Rumours, which every new Fleetwood Mac album is weighed against. What review hasn't, yawn, mentioned Rumours for the um-teenth time? The criticisms are in response to this distraction. But most agree there are a handful of good tracks. Once they get past all the Rumours drama and other preconceive notions they have about the band, it becomes more clear to them what treasures actually lurk on this record. But by the time they realize this, they've already written 90% of their review.

With that in mind, the only thing I would have changed about the album is the running order. The album should have opened with a chunk of familiar stuff, like they would for a concert, before unleashing some of the more "eccentric" compositions. I would have also alternated singing duties evenly between writers.

Open with the familar Mac sound:
1. What's the World
2. Say You Will
3. Peacekeeper
4. Thrown Down
5. Steal Your Heart Away
I see these tracks as the album's singles

Then go into some of the harder, experimental stuff. And by "experimental", I mean tracks you wouldn't normally associate with a typical "Fleetwood Mac album"
6. Illume
7. Murrow Turning Over
8. Smile at You
9. Come
10. Everybody Finds Out
11. Red Rover
12. Running Through the Garden

And start to come down, returning to the familiar
13. Miranda (some of these vocals remind me of 'Love Is Dangerous')
14. Destiny Rules
15. Bleed to Love Her
16. Silver Girl

Mellow out with the closers:
17. Say Goodbye
18. Goodbye Baby

Daniel

[blinker12]

Stefan and SpyNote, you both make some excellent points.
As far as the reviews go: I suppose there haven't been many that have been out-and-out pans (although the Atlanta Constitution and AP reviews are pretty darn negative). Still, there haven't been any that have been raves, either. And frankly, that's disappointing to me as a fan, because I feel (at least at the moment) that this is Fleetwood Mac's best material since TUSK. I became a hard-core fan in 1990 (admittedly well after the Mac's prime), and nothing the band or any solo member has released since then has moved me as much as SAY YOU WILL. I think it's a fantastic album, and it mystifies me that the critics can't seem to get past the length to see that.
The tepid response is especially strange in light of TISL's reception: most reviews for that disc were glowing. Don't get me wrong, TISL is a nice, solid album, but it's no SYW. Stevie's songs on this disc trounce the ones she wrote for TISL.
It's as if the media's post-THE DANCE goodwill toward her and the band was used up on TISL, and now there's none left. It shows how predictable the media are when it comes to their coverage of pop culture icons: build them up, tear them down, build them up, tear them down _ and on and on.
The only reason I care is that I don't want the critical response to turn off the public. For my part, I couldn't care less what the media say. I'm loving the new music.

[SpyNote]

Originally posted by blinker12
The only reason I care is that I don't want the critical response to turn off the public. For my part, I couldn't care less what the media say. I'm loving the new music.

That's why we all have to buy our copies THIS week for a #1 debut. To show everyone what the "fuss" is all about!

Buy! buy! buy!

Daniel