Producer for a new album

[face of glass]

Originally Posted by snwriter

I know some of Stevie's solo stuff is not produced that wonderfully, but I think that's true of Lindsey's stuff as well. He overproduces himself and that's one of the reasons his stuff sells nothing and is relegated to bargain bins.

That's your preference speaking out there and I'm sure many listeners would disagree on that. Is there any kind of rule that states that overproduced music is unlistenable and devoid of mass appeal? How come Law And Order wasn't a bigger success then? Oh, don't tell me, because some of that is underproduced and kooky?
You wanna know why I think he doesn't sell any more than he does. Because he's between new wave and classic rock. Between the dirt and the polish. Between the quirky and the traditional. Both sides are equally accessible but not everyone is willing to go to accept both.

He is talented enough to simplify things, as Stevie did on Leather and Lace, Has Anyone Ever Written, I Will Run to You, Rose Garden, etc.

Isn't "Goodbye Baby" simple enough for you?

And the whole OOTC album, which has great songs, would have hit home for more listeners without all that pseudo-Beach Boys heavy production stuff.

How different is the production on Tango In The Night from the production on OOTC? TITN hit home well enough, didn't it?

I think they're both better with each other. But I don't think Stevie's stuff lacks meat. She just has made more recordings than Lindsey because he takes too much damned time and often ends up overproducing.

She made more recordings in the '80s because she was willing to let her solo band do a lot of the work. But lo and behold, it seems that Stevie's more interested in "overproduction" and long labour over an album now. Gift Of Screws and TISL were both begun at the same time and both took about the same time to finish. You may claim that Stevie did Enchanted in between but Lindsey had his family, you know.

One of Stevie's best-produced tracks ever is "Bombay Sapphires," which she produced herself!

A credit which is at best questionable. How come there isn't more production work of hers where she has the only credit?

[dissention]

Originally Posted by snwriter

I disagree about the Lindsey factor. I know some of Stevie's solo stuff is not produced that wonderfully, but I think that's true of Lindsey's stuff as well. He overproduces himself and that's one of the reasons his stuff sells nothing and is relegated to bargain bins. He is talented enough to simplify things, as Stevie did on Leather and Lace, Has Anyone Ever Written, I Will Run to You, Rose Garden, etc. Many of his FM-produced songs for Stevie and Christine are gems but he's messed up a few too, like the "new" Smile at You, a case in point. And the whole OOTC album, which has great songs, would have hit home for more listeners without all that pseudo-Beach Boys heavy production stuff. I think they're both better with each other. But I don't think Stevie's stuff lacks meat. She just has made more recordings than Lindsey because he takes too much damned time and often ends up overproducing.
One of Stevie's best-produced tracks ever is "Bombay Sapphires," which she produced herself!

That assessment couldn't be more off base.

Lindsey's solo material doesn't sell well for many reasons, overproduction being the least of them. OOTC didn't do so hot because it was released when grunge and rap were the flavors of the month. Fleetwood Mac and its counterparts were not "cool" back then, either. Another reason for why it didn't sell well was because he ahd been out of the public eye for five years and it had been seven since his last solo album.

His previous efforts sold minimally because they were just weird, experimental albums that fans of mainstream pop rock were not going to like. His 80s stuff was no more overproduced than any other album by any other artist, including Stevie's "Rock A Little" (the epitome of overproduction, IMO) and the Mac's "Tango In the Night." If you found "Law and Order" and "Go Insane" to be more overproduced than those two albums, I have some cotton swabs for your ears.

Stevie's solo music does lack meat. I'm not knocking the lyrics or her singing because both are dead-on most of the time. But the music itself and the production leaves a lot to be desired sometimes. If you want to compare the "Mirror" album or the "Street Angel" album to one of Lindsey's, both of those albums would be blown out of the water when it came to production/music. Lindsey infuses lots of subtle elements to his music that only emerge with repeated listenings, whereas Stevie's music is as blah and mainstream as possible. You know, you could get Carole King to play the music to HAEWAFY and she could nail it on her first try just as good as it is on the album. But try getting another musician to play one of Lindsey's solo tunes and chances are most of the quirks and subtleties that made the song what it is would be missing. There's nothing really distinct about the Stevie's solo music, probably due to the fact that she concentrates on the emotions, lyrics, and performance of the song more than anything. And that is what draws me to her solo music.

In the end, overproduction means nothing when it comes to what the masses buy. If it mattered, La Nicks would be in the bargain bin right next to Lindsey, singing about "The Nightmare" and talking "to her famous friend last night."

As for Smile At You, it's a helluva lot better than the old demos, IMO. While they are quite good and I like listening to them, I can't say they're favorites because I'm not exactly wowed by someone screaming lyrics instead of singing. The SYW version of it just shows how creative Lindsey is as an arranger and producer. But, then again, Stevie herself could've worked on it over the years and changed it herself.

PS: I like Bombay Sapphires a lot, but it's far from being one of her best produced solo tracks. Far from it.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by face of glass

You may claim that Stevie did Enchanted in between but Lindsey had his family, you know.

Digging out old pictures and picking some of my least favorite album tracks to include on a boxed set does not an album make.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by dissention

Digging out old pictures and picking some of my least favorite album tracks to include on a boxed set does not an album make.

True enough... but she did tour during that time-period, whereas Lindsey did not.

[face of glass]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

True enough... but she did tour during that time-period, whereas Lindsey did not.

Which is what I was aware of but did Stevie change any diapers during that time-period? (Oh, the thought of it! )

[dissention]

Originally Posted by face of glass

Which is what I was aware of but did Stevie change any diapers during that time-period? (Oh, the thought of it! )

[face of glass]

And since this thread is related to another thread where Johnny Stew gave his answer to another of my rants I'll answer to it here (because I was too lazy to do it earlier), just to confuse the matters further.

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

And again, I really disagree with the notion that Stevie's studio albums are lackluster because the "studio musicians are only there to back her."
Stevie is not a musician, and has never purported to be. She's a singer/songwriter.
The production should always be there to enhance her songs... not to overpower them.

Stevie's performance is rarely (and I might almost say never) lackluster. But the musicianship that surrounds them on her solo work does come off as such.
Ideologically your statement is understandable and from a business point of view it might be that even more. But I'm going to claim that certain areas of Stevie Nicks only come out when she is with the band and especially with Lindsey Buckingham. And I think that is because he is allowed certain liberties with Stevie's songs that other producers are not. And I daresay that she is at her most vulnerable and at her bravest when she is with Buckingham (and I've seen even you stating something similar to this) and that is possibly due to the special quality of their relationship. Maybe this sounds like SNL shipper talk but they have an irreplaceable connection between them at least musically. Buckingham actually seems to be willing to understand some of the emotions that Stevie is going through (witness his crying to "Illume", for instance) and is not afraid of conveying that through music. We all know how some of Stevie's vocal performances change from the demo to the final take and that is very probably because of the music that has been laid down there for her. Now if there is someone willing to go with Stevie all the way to her deepest emotions then she most likely puts herself into it totally. It isn't something you necessarily always do alone, it's something you can do with someone who understands you. No wonder she sometimes thinks that it can get so lonely when she's doing a solo act. Her most vulnerable material is on Tusk and that is also because of the music surrounding it. She's never going to put something like "Illume" on a solo album and "Goodbye Baby" as of now is far more vulnerable to me than "Love Is" will ever be. Even "When I See You Again" fits this pattern, now doesn't it?
So that's why I think that Stevie benefits from being in a group, that her message is more underlined within Fleetwood Mac. When she is a solo artist, that's when her personality goes through a filter, IMO.
One can always claim that as a solo act she can release more material but I've never heard such huge difference in it. I think she is a very non-diverse artist and that's why she has to use subtlety. But at that point the argument starts to approaching fan-talk; very few other people will hear that in the music, they will most likely say it's boring instead.
Ok, she didn't have the room to put on a "Beauty And The Beast" or "The Nightmare" on a Fleetwood Mac album and that's why I think the first three solo albums allowed her to be somewhat more excessive than she could be with FM. And that was important, and that was great. But that I will further expand upon a couple of paragraphs later.

What was I trying to say here? I was trying to say that whenever someone is giving their all in a performance, be it instruments or vocals, it's bound to affect the other musicians too. And so it goes with Stevie's performance. She is at her most extreme with Fleetwood Mac and therefore I do not see her solo career being a vital alternative to FM. It feels somewhat more bland to me.

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

But when I started buying all of the albums in '86, I most definitely could hear a difference between Stevie's solo work and her music with Fleetwood Mac.

[...]

Stevie's solo stuff, to me, was a little more "rock and roll"... in that it was a little more "out there" and eccentric, and a little less perfect.

While Fleetwood Mac's stuff sounded glossier, more refined, and more "perfect"... more homogenized overall.

I'm not going to debate over Fleetwood Mac sounding more homogenized and less eccentric than Stevie's solo material. I have always found more eccentricity in Lindsey's genre (and audience) hopping than in works of many other artists.
Like I said, you can make a valid (though I still have my gripes) point of that with Bella Donna, TWH and RAL, the Stevie solo albums that you had the access to in 1986.
But from The Other Side Of The Mirror onwards she's been clinging on to the same homogenous sound that you're speaking of when you're referring to Lindsey-produced Fleetwood Mac albums.
How much eccentricity is there in those albums? Surely there's no self-indulgence of the days of yore, or at least there isn't for me.
They're not diverse (Stevie solo never is) and they sound homogenous so where's the big difference?
I'm far from being the only fan who can hear the similarity between Lindsey's and John Shanks' work. Not to mention the near-sterilization of her voice on TISL, possibly thanks to Chris Lord-Alge.
They're albums I still like but they feel weaker and they feel less emotionally involved.
Should I go through some specific fan training so that my ears would hear the difference?

[Johnny Stew]

As far as albums "lacking meat" and being "overproduced," etc., it's all entirely up to the listener's tastes.

I played "Come" and "Murrow" for my brother (the latter of which is in my Top 5 All-Time Favorite Lindsey Buckingham songs), and he turned up his nose and said they were both "overproduced."
Perhaps they are to some degree, but to my ears, they're two of Lindsey's most straightfoward rockers. In decades.

Some people also feel that 'Tango,' and 'Go Insane' and 'Rock A Little' are all over-produced, but to my ears, they sound terrific.

The ironic thing is, if they were produced in a more sparse way, we'd have a whole faction of people saying they were substandard and run-of-the-mill.
Further cementing the age-old adage, that you can never please everyone.

For me, personally, the lyrics & vocals are what draw me in first... the music and production is always going to be secondary.
I mean, as much as I love Lindsey's albums for how different and brilliantly produced they are, and as much as those albums have a place in my heart, the songs themselves (outside of a couple) don't really tug at my heart-strings or incite the feelings of emotional investment that I find in Stevie's albums.

Which I guess is why it doesn't bother me if Stevie doesn't exactly forge new ground with her albums.
The music and production are not "bad," and they never have been... they're just not terribly innovative. But I'm more than willing to give up innovation for the emotion I find.

Of course, there are fans who find emotion in far more of Lindsey's songs than I do... but I think that most of them would admit that they react more to the instrumentation and production, than they do to the lyrics or vocals.
And as long as the music is reaching you somehow, then I think it's an awesome thing.

I've always said that I prefer to focus on what makes Lindsey, Lindsey, and Stevie, Stevie... rather than trying to compare the two, or wish that one would be more like the other.

When I put on one of Lindsey's albums, I'm assured that I will be blown away by all of the nuances and sonic surprises that this man is able to accomplish in his studio all by himself; and when I put on one of Stevie's albums, I'm assured that I will be blown away by how deeply I find myself immersed in her experiences and life lessons, and how captivating her "weird little voice" is.

[face of glass]

Ok, I'm pretty much with you on that last post of yours Johnny. It's stuff that I've sometimes tried to dress up in words myself too.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by face of glass

Stevie's performance is rarely (and I might almost say never) lackluster. But the musicianship that surrounds them on her solo work does come off as such.
Ideologically your statement is understandable and from a business point of view it might be that even more. But I'm going to claim that certain areas of Stevie Nicks only come out when she is with the band and especially with Lindsey Buckingham. And I think that is because he is allowed certain liberties with Stevie's songs that other producers are not. And I daresay that she is at her most vulnerable and at her bravest when she is with Buckingham (and I've seen even you stating something similar to this) and that is possibly due to the special quality of their relationship. Maybe this sounds like SNL shipper talk but they have an irreplaceable connection between them at least musically.

So that's why I think that Stevie benefits from being in a group, that her message is more underlined within Fleetwood Mac. When she is a solo artist, that's when her personality goes through a filter, IMO.

What was I trying to say here? I was trying to say that whenever someone is giving their all in a performance, be it instruments or vocals, it's bound to affect the other musicians too. And so it goes with Stevie's performance. She is at her most extreme with Fleetwood Mac and therefore I do not see her solo career being a vital alternative to FM. It feels somewhat more bland to me.

You'll never hear me saying that Lindsey's influence doesn't bring forth from Stevie something really incredible.
I wholeheartedly agree that their chemistry lends itself to a completely different level of musical expression... for both of them.

However, I do still believe that there are yet other areas of Stevie's personality, that do not come across with Lindsey & Fleetwood Mac, the way they do in her solo music.

I really can't think of a decent analogy... but for me, it's sort of like having steak prepared two different ways. It's still steak, and it's still delicious... but both styles of preparation bring out something so different in it, making it hard to say one style is "better" than the other.

Anyway, maybe Stevie feels a little more comfortable taking risks within Fleetwood Mac, because she has that safety net. But I think she also likes the fact that she can be a bit more eccentric (lyrically, not musically) in her solo career.

But either way, it's why I value her solo career as much as I value her work with Fleetwood Mac, and why I'd hate to see her ever entirely give up that solo career. One way or the other, I come away from it feeling satisfied.

[Johnny Stew]

(By the way... if I continue making food analogies, someone please drag me to Jenny Craig!)

[ShangriLaTroubl]

I agree I too would LOVE a scaled down Stevie album..I wouldnt mind having her play piano on 1 or two songs

Chris

[EveryHour]

Originally Posted by trackaghost

I already suggested that (check my earlier post) so you're not alone.
She needs someone completely unlike her, to get that cool contrast/conflict going.

Oops! Sorry I missed that, trackaghost! Nice to know there's others who "get" this suggestion!

I, too, would keel over if Stevie played guitar or keys on an album!!! (Although her original demo guitar was left in the mix on Whole Lotta Trouble, right?)

Stevie--we don't care that you may not have the world's greatest technical ability...we want to hear ya!!! (Just in case any associates are lurking, as we suspect!)

[snwriter]

To answer those who have been picking apart my post on this subject, there are many listeners who feel that Lindsey overproduces his stuff to the point of making it unlistenable. Though I don't agree, I feel he is his own worst enemy, and I still believe (IMO) that there's more to OOTC not selling than it being released in the grunge era. It's still in bargain bins today and we're way beyond grunge now.

And the stuff about Lindsey changing diapers is way off base. There are plenty of artists who have families and find time to release an album every two years. It's not fair to compare Stevie's release schedule to his because he has kids. And like someone else said, she toured for "Enchanted," while Lindsey was largely out of the public eye. In fact, though I greatly enjoy Lindsey's music, I will say (IMO) that if it wasn't for the two latest FM reunions, he would be largely unknown by most of the record-buying public (again because of his years between albums) whereas Stevie would still enjoy superstar status.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by snwriter

To answer those who have been picking apart my post on this subject

That's the name of the game around here.

Originally Posted by snwriter

there are many listeners who feel that Lindsey overproduces his stuff to the point of making it unlistenable. Though I don't agree, I feel he is his own worst enemy, and I still believe (IMO) that there's more to OOTC not selling than it being released in the grunge era. It's still in bargain bins today and we're way beyond grunge now.

First off, the album is no longer in print and hasn't been in print since it flopped in '92. Those copies that you supposedly see in the "bargain bins" are leftovers. Personally, I've never seen a single copy in any bargain bins, but who knows. However, I don't understand your point about it still being in baragain bins. Are they supposed to fly out of those bins nowadays and land back on the charts? Not even Stevie's old solo albums do that.

Secondly, refer to my post again, I gave a multitude of reasons for it not selling well.

Originally Posted by snwriter

And the stuff about Lindsey changing diapers is way off base. There are plenty of artists who have families and find time to release an album every two years. It's not fair to compare Stevie's release schedule to his because he has kids. And like someone else said, she toured for "Enchanted," while Lindsey was largely out of the public eye. In fact, though I greatly enjoy Lindsey's music, I will say (IMO) that if it wasn't for the two latest FM reunions, he would be largely unknown by most of the record-buying public (again because of his years between albums) whereas Stevie would still enjoy superstar status.

What do release schedules have to do with anything? Stevie released a boxed set with nothing new that sold to her die-hard fans and went on a tour that didn't do so hot. Again, what does this have to with the quality of music?

If it wasn't for The Dance, Stevie would be just as ignored as Lindsey. Case in point, the Street Angel debacle. Her career was in shambles until the five fireflies reunited, like it or not. Do you honestly think that she'd be selling tons of albums without the reunion? I think not. TISL itself hasn't even been certified platinum and sank like a stone after the first week.

Food for thought.