"THROWN DOWN" Not that great...

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by Steve
By up-to-dates sound, I mean a contemporary sounding production.... "TISL" sounded like it was produced in 2001 - it had a fresh sound.

I *do* agree that 'Trouble In Shangri-La' sounded fresh in many ways. Thankfully though, the producers (and mixer Chris Lord-Alge) also captured a timeless quality... which is even more important.

I think that striving to create a "contemporary sound" can be a double-edged sword... while it may make an album feel like a breath of fresh air at the time, it can doom it to sounding dated just a year or two after its release.

Don't get me wrong... I love when they throw something a bit off-the-wall into the mix... like a toy piano, or something. And I'm sure they'll do things like that on the new album too.
I just don't want to hear Fleetwood Mac going techno-metal, or hip-hop, or whatever else might sound "contemporary" in 2003.

To me, the best albums are the ones that you can listen to, and not determine what year they were made.
Which is exactly why I'll be happiest if the new album sounds like "classic Mac."

Hell, with all the aforementioned genres getting so much radio and MTV play, maybe that "classic Mac sound" WILL sound fresh and new next to the latest Ja Rule tripe.

Either way, I love exactly the kind of music Fleetwood Mac makes... so I have no worries that I might be disappointed by the new album.



Johnny Stew

[Steve]

You all are funny. When I say contemporary production, I don't mean techno-metal or hip-hop. What contemporary music are you listening to? I don't even mean something like the 1997 remixes of "Landslide".

I would just like to hear the FM songs and sounds with fresh, up-to-date production. Think about it, go back and listen to your FM albums. There are differences in the production values each consistent with the decades in which they originated. Did "Tango" have a contemporary sound for its time....YES (minus the 2 well-known dud tracks). It didn't sound like FM, Rumours, Tusk, or Mirage...it had a contemporary sound for 1987.

I just think the production on "Thrown Down" is sooooooooooo last millenium.

[brass_monkey]

Do you really think "typical Stevie" lyrics are like banal high school poetry?

Well, I don't want to start another Stevie-bashing thread, but her lyrics are often obscure and impenetrable, or more usually, just plain immature. Her songs often read like a silly 16-year old's fumbling attempt at poetry.

I really hope TD isn't the first song to be released as a single. Although I'm sure those FM soft-rock MOR stations would love it, I'd much rather they chose a Gift Of Screws track. Maybe that says more about my preference for Lindsey's songs.

Oh, and I meant the recording quality of the vocals on TD sounded poor, not the quality of the original vocals.

[Johnny Stew]

I think I understand what you're getting at, but... at the same time... I have to admit that I still don't entirely "get it."
Maybe I'm just being thick-headed.

It just seems to me that a song can't help but feel fresher than something released 5, 10, or 15 years prior... even if it's within a band's already established stylistic territory.

When I think "groundbreaking," i think of something unlike anything that anyone has ever done before.
Or, unlike anything that particular artist has done.

And again, I think making an album that can be related to a certain year, or decade, can be a deadly thing in terms of longevity.
For example, you listen to Thomas Dolby, and you can't help but think, "1984."
I prefer it when a song sounds like it could have been recorded this morning, or 28 years ago... like "Landslide."
Something timeless always sounds contemporary... at least in my book.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be combative or argumentative... I'm just trying to explain my view on the criticisms of "Thrown Down."
But, at the end of the day, that old cliché rings true...
"You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time."
Hopefully Fleetwood Mac is recording music that pleases THEM.


Johnny Stew

[Josh2003]

Originally posted by Steve
It didn't sound like FM, Rumours, Tusk, or Mirage...it had a contemporary sound for 1987.

And I think that might be one of the reasons Tango is my least favorite album from the Rumours incarnation. It was "contemporary" in 1987--overdone synths and drum tracks--and, to me, sounds dated. Same goes with Stevie's Rock a Little...to me, it sounds too "eighties"...whereas her other albums from that decade don't sound dated, in my opinion.

I think something can be *too* contemporary. Tango and RAL, for instance. But then you have Tusk, my favorite Mac album, which was an envelope-pushing experiment, definitely what many considered comtemporary (if not odd) in 1979. But the contemporary techniques that Lindsey used with Tusk have stood the test of time, and I don't think it sounds as dated as Tango or RAL.

[FiercestCalmSea]

I think the fact that TD was leaked,and it is the first real "new" thing we have had in eons,is why we have failed to really dissect it until now.I DO like the song,don't misunderstand me here,but i am not blown away by it. Linds did a good job of making into a listenable song,but there is nothing about it that screams brillant.I like listening to it..but it is not the type of song that i am just amazed by.Again,this was on a TISL sampler...so it may be a very rough cut...so who knows what we will get with the new album?

[jwd]

I prefer it when a song sounds like it could have been recorded this morning, or 28 years ago... like "Landslide."
Something timeless always sounds contemporary... at least in my book.

Yea me too Brian! But unfortunately, to these ears anyway, TD(if even released on the next lp) will fall into the ranks of FM's more obscure songs.


Joe

[CarneVaca]

There's no guarantee "Thrown Down" will be on the new album just because it was leaked. However, if a lot of songs on the album sound like it, it is bound to be an at best average album. Yet, hopefully it won't be that if a lot of the "Gift of Screws" songs make it. Don't forget, even when you look back at "Tusk," its unique quality owes primarily to the quirky Lindsey songs, as well as the production on Stevie's songs and some of Christine's songs. For instance, I can't imagine Christine doing "Honey, Hi" as a strictly acoustic guitar song without Lindsey's input. Even in "Mirage," Lindsey's songs were pretty different, if not quirky.

As for the first single discussion, also let's remember that "Go Your Own Way" when it was released was pretty different from anything on the radio at the time. And it was the first single off "Rumours." That was certainly the case with "Tusk." And "Big Love" wasn't exactly the most commercial choice off "Tango" as a first single either. So don't be surprised if the first single turns out to be fairly quirky. But my hunch is that it will be one of the most commercial songs on the album because it appears that Fleetwood Mac wants to release an album that will sell millions of copies. Otherwise, Lindsey would have released "Gift of Screws."

[Vianna]

OK-I'll have to say that at first I was not overwhelmed. The song didn't grab me the way Gypsy did when I first heard it, or the way most of the Tusk album did when I first heard it. The song has grown on me though the more that I have heard it. I love it now even though I certainly wouldn't call it unconventional=:-) but I love the Lindsey guitar work in it.

John said on one of the specials that Rumours was a "moment"-maybe Tusk was too. Maybe there can't be another Tusk, although when I think about new FM albums I want it to be like Tusk-brilliant=:-)Maybe I am setting my standards too high.

I have said all along I hope it is not the first single because I don't think it will capture a lot of attention from the regular radio listeners that aren't fanatic FM fans like us. We want radio play to promote this album=:-)

[xhector]

Well here's my point of view:
The relationship between Lindsey & Stevie is not like in the old days, and even in terms of working together. Lindsey respected TISL and this time has respected a lot more Stevie's songs: he didn't want to change the whole thing over & over 'till it sounded a perfect 10 to him. He has been also too long in the studio being too much perfectionist with GOS, and I don't think he has spent a large amount of hours and hours discussing with Stevie how her songs had to sound. I think these are some clues about what we can expect from the new album (which I'll love with no doubt).
Hector

[seteca]

Almost all of the LB songs on the album will be GOS songs...we practically know that for a fact, now. Which means the big mystery is the Stevie songs. I personally really like that "Thrown Down"-type of song which is very "Stevie", so, if this track is any sign of what the rest of her songs are going to be like (in terms of, will I like them or dislike them), then I will definitely be very happy with this album.

[Steve]

It's been twenty years since Lindsey sent a Stevie song into the stratosphere. Still waiting. Hope it happens this Spring.

[chiliD]

"Thrown Down" is TYPICAL Buckingham Nicks era Fleetwood Mac; it HAS contemporary ingredients...such as Lindsey's new-fangled "guitar as percussion" sound driving in the background (listen to "Try For The Sun" or "Red Rover" as examples of that) It has probably THE most UN-Lindsey like guitar solo over the end...that could've been Vito or Clapton...Lindsey plays "normal", film at eleven!! Stevie's voice sounds better than her last studio Fleetwood Mac album, even a bit better than TISL...two thumbs up.

But, overall this track is RECOGNIZABLY "Fleetwood Mac"...that's ALL it needs to be. Just like the new Stones' song (ironically) titled "Don't Stop"...its the Stones...are they breaking "new ground"? NO. Does it sound "contemporary"? To me, YES. Has EVERY "new" Stones song since "Jumpin' Jack Flash" sounded "contemporary"?? YES.

I guess it all comes down to what our personal expectations are for this new Fleetwood Mac album. I think being that it is 5 years overdue (with being jilted on a Buckingham solo album in the meantime...at least, we can assume that MOST of what we've heard as "GoS" will finally be given the "stamp of approval for our consumption" by Lindsey on this upcoming album) our "expectation bar" has been set higher than they could pole vault over...expect to be let down, expect to be thrilled...its going to happen, from song to song as we listen to it once we get it...some are going to knock our socks off, some songs will probably disgust us...some songs will probably take 10 years to grow on us...it is just going to be a typical Fleetwood Mac album. I'm expecting everything and nothing all at the same time.

[PenguinHead]

Gee, there are a lot of unwarrented assumptions and expectations here for the new album and the song Thrown Down. First off, I believe it is a myth to conclude that the song was officially leaked to promote the album. That seems highly unlikely, and completely unprecedented for Fleetwood Mac.

Secondly, who determined that this was going to be the single or the lead track??????? Who is anyone to make those kind of assumptions. And to formulate opinions on the rest of the album just based on this one song seems ridiculous to me. Give them a break!! I have no expectations and will just accept the album for what it is...when I hear it.

[Johnny Stew]

*Stands up and greets chiliD's post with wild applause!!!*