Tusk the worst album ever?

[macfan 57]

Originally Posted by tynan88

Mojo Magazine is quite a bluesy oriented magazine, so I am not surprised at alll to see Chris get so much praise there before of her background. It is just as likely for people to know her for her earlier stuff than with Mac, if you noticed there were a few people there who mentioned pre-Rumours material.

Exactly. I'll bet there are quite a few of those people who like Chris from back in her Chicken Shack/Christine Perfect days. It's not surprising to me that there's a lot of respect for Christine on that board. If there are alot of Beatles fans there, they're probably a bit older anyway. Those would be the kind of people who like & respect Christine McVie. In my opinion, they have good taste.

[Gailh]

Have you noticed that the person who started the thread didn't even buy the CD. They borrowed it from a library and burned their own copy! Isn't that illegal? Shall we get them arrested?

And they have the cheek to say it's the worst album ever! Gosh how disappointing for them.

Personally I think it took a hell of a lot of nerve to make Tusk after the success of Rumours. It makes a refreshing change from bands just churning out the same crap from a tried and tested formula.

Tusk is one my favourite FM albums and if people don't get it then that's their loss.

Gail

[GODDESS6]

Originally Posted by amber

These people are high. Or, rather, not high.

lololololololol i busted a gut on this~

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by Lux

You can listen to my heartbeat. With my panic attacks and constant hyperventilation it might actually provide for some amusement. Oh, I have a new party trick. Now I just need to find a party.

Well, I do appreciate the offer very much!

My first memory of music is a kids tape which had Yellow Submarine (performed by The Beatles, not some group of kids or overly enthusiastic adult trying to entertain children). I was most surprised when I became a fan later on in life and realised that it was then singing Yellow Submarine. It's safe to say that if you entered my room (apart from requiring an international aeroplane ticket and then proceeding to startle the crap out of me) you'd come to the conclusion that I am a devoted Lennon fan.

Again, a post where I seem to have forgotten the initial point in doing so.

Yep, "Yellow Submarine" was one of the first I ever heard, too. As a child, I loved that one and "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds." Anyway, yeah, wouldn't that be a total shock if I showed up at your place? I think I might be more shocked than you, though. I hardly ever make it out of the state and making it out of the country would be quite a feat. I'd love to see the Lennon themed room, though.

[MACFAN]

HARDLY !!!!!

The album was a complete 360 from the "Rumours sound", which throws a lot of folks off.

I remember buying that album the day it came out. Me and a few friends cut school that day and went to one of their homes to listen to it. Was I taken aback? Yes. It was completely different. But that album made me love them all the more for the the fact of the risk they took and of course the music. No band has ever took that radical approach to follow up a monster album. It is a masterpiece right up there with the best of them.

[wondergirl9847]

Most people are stupid.

[henryscutter]

Saying it is the worst album ever is a moronic statement. Believe me, I have bought many cd's because I liked one song and found the rest to be worthless. So, there are probably about a billion more canidates I would choose for worst album ever. I think they have been hitting the bong water a little too hard over on that MOJO board

[dissention]

Originally Posted by henryscutter

Saying it is the worst album ever is a moronic statement. Believe me, I have bought many cd's because I liked one song and found the rest to be worthless. So, there are probably about a billion more canidates I would choose for worst album ever. I think they have been hitting the bong water a little too hard over on that MOJO board

I love what someone on there said.

"Worst album ever? Hardly. It contains neither Belle or Sebastian."

[Gazza]

Originally Posted by dissention

Ooh, my kind of place. Unlike much of the Mac, their stuff can be dissected and studied over millions of times and it's always interesting to hear new interpretations and stories.

David Bowie spoke at Oxford once, and said that it amuses him when people try to read things into his songs, because most of the time the songs have no meaning whatsoever.


I think those people are listening to it very casually and failing to notice the beauty of Christine's vocals on Never Make Me Cry, the drumming on What Makes You Think You're The One, the manicness of The Ledge and That's Enough For Me.

Stevie's voice is also at it's very best on that album imo. Beautiful Child and Storms in particular are just beautiful vocal performances, and very personal songs. I hate that people think she's just some witch with little depth, when in truth she has more depth than most female singer/songwriters who those same idiots would claim to rate because their magazine told them they were good.

But hey, the masses are asses

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Gazza

David Bowie spoke at Oxford once, and said that it amuses him when people try to read things into his songs, because most of the time the songs have no meaning whatsoever.

I know, that's what makes them so fun to dissect, dear. He writes them using cut-outs, which I find utterly fascinating.

[jwd]

Originally Posted by dissention

I can feel the Lindsey and Christine love on that board, but Miss Stevie isn't getting any respect.

Originally Posted by Nixxed

And all the posts aren't bad. There are a few positive reviews

Yea, I think a lot of you are just picking up on the negatives posted. There are quite a few positive posts in there as well. I suppose it's only human nature to reflect on the negatives and see only what one wants to.

It's a well crafted album despite the half-finished throwaway nature of some of Lindsey's tracks and both Nicks and Christine McVie contribute some lovely songs.

In Detroit at the time it came out, I believe they played only one song on rock radio here from it, "Sara".

But in both Buckingham, Christine McVie and (although I don't care too much for her groaning vocal stylings) Stevie Nicks they had great pop songwriters, so there was a ****load more to them than a shiny production.


god, three excellent songwriters in one band - not may bands can achieve one, let alone 3!!

Eh, music is all very subjective anyway. To tell someone that this music is bad or this music is good seems pretty futile and pointless anyway.

[GeminiCusp82]

Originally Posted by golddustwoman77

There is another reason to disregard this crap. They obviously know so little about the band they can't even spell his name right.

And what girl "cant sing to save her life"? I wonder if they were talking about Christine or Stevie. LOL in a way I am hoping they meant Christine but I do love Christine. But they CANNOT mean Stevie! NOOO lol I think Stevie sings A LOT better than Christine imo.

[Nico]

Originally Posted by dissention

No, not really. My mother is a big fan of The Beatles and The Eagles, so she really made me hate both of them after torturing me with them for 18 years of my life. I can only take the heavy Dylan pondering in small doses because Dylan fans act like philosophical snobs and major league ass kissers, but Bowie is endlessly fascinating to me. Of course, that doesn't include the majority of his eighties output.

lol! I see what you mean about the Beatles, I hate the Eagles, with Dylan ponderings its really been there/done that for me, and David Bowie fascinates me mainly with his 70s output. After that it's bits and pieces.

[David]

Originally Posted by jwd

Eh, music is all very subjective anyway.

The fallacy is to draw the conclusion from the apparent subjectivity of taste that value or the absence of value is nonexistent. Thus the importance of ongoing debate -- the hope & the very real possibility that universal (or at least widespread) value conclusions can be reached. Time itself plays an important role in settling matters of value. Shakespeare is universally regarded as a greater artist than Kyd or Marston.

To tell someone that this music is bad or this music is good seems pretty futile and pointless anyway.

Not futile, not pointless. It's debate, discussion, the endless pattern of assertion & refutation. It's what human beings do. It's what makes human beings human beings. It's your only hope of real education (the habits & inclinations of a reflective mind) instead of the counterfeit they sell in government-issue schools.

As a contemporary literary critic once wrote, "Teach the conflict!"

[jwd]

David, I understand and somewhat agree with your points. But specifically when discussing music it becomes completely subjective to me simply because "value" cannot be placed on what the art/song/music does for a particular person or a group of people. Who's to say what makes music "work" for someone? Music does what it's supposed to do if it moves, inspires, or simply brings enjoyment to one's life by listening to it. From a technical aspect I suppose one could say it's good or bad ala the Grammys. But then again Led Zeppelin has never won a Grammy. Go figure.