Fleetwood Mac on Dick Clark's *Primetime* New Year's Rockin' Eve

[dissention]

Originally posted by snwriter
Lindsey DOES get too much credit about "creating" Stevie's songs.

See, I always thought that he didn't get enough credit. LOL

[face of glass]

Once again the oddball of this board is coming to the thread late. Bon voyage people, don’t forget to take something to eat with you.

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Strip it down. That's all. Strip every single one of those songs down to the bare vocal and essential rhythm. Go to Dissention's site and listen to some of the center-channel mixes, particularly Red Rover. Everyone of Lindsey's songs on SYW is more dynamic from a melodic standpoint.

I don’t believe it’s the vocal melody itself that matters, it’s what chords are those notes against that usually determines how strongly the song is written. It’s not like LB’s musical sophistication has grown that much during his career; he’s confessed himself that he only knows three or four different keys.

So, we’re getting into this age-old “complexity vs. simplicity� battle, aren’t we? Hey, why don’t we actually notate the entire Say You Will album. Let’s look at the notation now; yes, LB uses more notes from the stave than SN does. Now let’s compare the SYW notation to any piece of classical music. Now which is more simplistic and derivative? Everything on SYW would be laughable if taken from this viewpoint. The notation, however, fails to convey the tone colours and the rhythmic subtleties. That’s where the fascination of rock, pop and jazz is.

So how does this relate to the Stevie’s writing vs. Lindsey’s writing battle? You could easily claim that LB is a better writer because he has a better grasp of complexity than Stevie does. But so what; LB himself would be beaten by Burt Bacharach, Brian Wilson, Anderson/Ulvaeus, Rodgers/Hammerstein, Porter, the Gershwins et cetera if we were to start comparing the complexity in the writing of these gentlemen. These men, in turn, would be beaten by classical composers. Comparing LB’s and SN’s writing is, as someone said before me, like comparing apples with oranges. Or like comparing classical music with blues. I know I coined the term “Nicksian drone� before (referring to the usual statement that Stevie has been writing just one long song throughout her career), but I might as well change it to “Nicksian blues� now. The Nicksian drone/blues, like the most basic blues, is always superficially the same, always uses the same chord progressions and isn’t aiming at changing the world of music. It’s an approach of personal expression. All blues would sound the same if the performer wasn’t capable of injecting his/her own personality into the proceedings. The differences between every blues performance are not immediately notable; you need to have some listening background before that. When you have that background you will start to notice subtle differences and then the songs will establish an identity of their own in your mind.

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Strand makes a good point about Smile at You. But outside of that one, Stevie rarely stretches her vocals in a melodically interesting way. We can all discuss opinions of what we like and don't like, but you want to insist that from a musical standpoint her songs are better, you either don't know better or you're kidding yourself.

I guess I wouldn’t want to insist on that; after all I do think that the core of Stevie’s songwriting, the basic chords have lost their freshness a long time ago. But it would be pretty much useless because Stevie’s main appeal has never been songwriting in the “classic� sense. Her music needs to be taken as a whole; the lyrics, the vocal delivery, the basic songwriting and the arrangement. So it is with most blues. It isn’t easy to explain the appeal of Stevie’s current writing (mind you, I don’t find the demos that appealing myself, but I’m just trying to understand the fans who do so), but I guess I once read something that could do the trick. It was written by a Norwegian called Tarjei Vatne:

I sometimes think of music [that’s simple sounding, but has subtle, elaborate structure and dynamics] as being in essence a kind of hologram composed with the aid of a dozen mirrors or so. The mirrors stand round it and reflect the light that makes up the hologram. Change the position, however slightly, of just one of them, and the hologram, the "central essence" of the music is in fact completely changed. In music like this, the balance between chords, phrase lenghts, melodic figures, rythmic accents, dynamic variations, lyrics(for non-instrumental music), voicings etc. is very delicate. And although the music seems like entering our feelings in an instant, there are so many things going on at once! In this respect, music can never be "simple".

That’s basically what Stevie’s songs do; they sound simple but there’s a lot being expressed in the performance. Or at least that’s how I believe it is for most hardcore fans.

As for her voice; a similar argument could be brought up. This is originally an excerpt from Robert Tally’s review of the Rolling Stones’ Let It Bleed album, but I think it works just as well here:

…by Let It Bleed, they were taking very simple musical ideas and playing them in a way no beginner possibly could. Take the slide guitar on 'No Expectations' - there's a world of complexity within each note. All of the players on that track display an utmost amount of patience. A beginner would grow impatient waiting for the next chord to come along and start hurrying through it, sacrificing any sense of subtlety. A musician doesn't need to be a technical virtuoso to master this aspect of playing. This is why I don't buy into the argument that progressive musicians are necessarily better. As far as 'great music' being 'sophisticated and complex,' this may be true, but there are a lot of ways to be complex. In the case of Let It Bleed, the notes, chords and rhythms are fairly simple, but the emotions put across through the music are pretty complex. There's more than meets the ear, so to speak.

That, I believe, can be said about Stevie’s voice. She doesn’t just bluntly express a single emotion; she’s expressing something else too. It is a voice that has lost some of its range, yes. It is a voice that’s not as versatile as it used to be. She may not be capable of expressing the broadest scale of emotion these days; she’s using what she has to convey the subtleties and the “shades of grey� that these emotions have. She’s never been an operatic virtuoso, she’s a virtuoso in using her limited vocals fully.

As you said in the LB forum, CarneVaca, you yourself take Lindsey’s music as a whole, with all those bells and whistles. I’m going to insist that same should be done with Stevie’s music. It’s useless to claim that her songwriting is bad when it’s always been the same (as can be said for blues music too). You need to take her music as a whole, otherwise you’re missing something crucial.

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Carne - I agree Stevie's voice is limited by its own nature (perhaps self-imposed) in Illume. In fact and although I like the song, I will never get why she chose to sing it like that, when IMO she could have and should have branched out a little more. I think it would have made the IMO beautiful imagery of the song more compelling.

It’s kind of weird for me but with Say You Will I found that the songs where Stevie is at her most “limited� vocally are the ones that move me the most. Especially “Illume�. Yes, it is a monotone, drone-like vocal. However, it comes off as very insistent. She doesn’t vary her delivery. If the song is, like Johnny Stew said, “a chant�, a mourning over what has happened, then the “branching out� would be inappropriate. For me, when that insistent vocal changes into LB’s cartoonish parody of the message and then into this intense delivery of Stevie, it’s a moment when I start to cry in lumps. I can’t explain it, but the song certainly wouldn’t have the impression it has now if Stevie chose a different approach.

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Nothing LB does on SYW approaches that vocally. Rather, LB's vocals are mostly heavily produced in that he likes to distort the human voice with a filter, etc. Not that there is anything wrong with that, in fact he is very clever and effective at doing it, esp. considering singing, although he certainly can sing, is not his strongest suit (no slam - even he admits Stevie's got a great voice).

I agree here. I’ve never thought of Lindsey as the greatest in any field, be it producing, arranging, singing, playing or songwriting. When he uses his limited skills in all these fields, then we’re talking! I do admit that he doesn’t have the greatest voice in the classic sense but I do believe that he has always put his soul into singing. However, he doesn’t always make it so obvious. That’s why he’s doing the voice manipulations. He knows his voice doesn’t have the same subtleties that Stevie’s has. Les stated on the LB board that Lindsey likes to run two or more different emotions at the same time within a song. You can’t convey that with a single voice, not even Stevie can. Those filters, etc. help him with that goal. In “Say Goodbye� the sadness that he expresses is contrasted with those left-field harmonies that distort the superficial emotion; it would be natural to put some kind grandiose choir in there to endorse the drama. Instead he uses these cartoonish voices that almost end up mocking the sadness.

And of course using those filters is a must when he wants to add some subtlety inside the vocal performance. Stevie has never needed that stuff.

However, Stevie herself hasn’t come up with anything as directly arresting as the vocal performances on the acoustic versions of “Big Love� and “Go Insane�. Both sound like they’re coming from the dark, murky depths of mind, directly from the human psyche without going through any filters, aural or psychological. Stevie hasn’t wanted to go into that area for a long time; a choice that I do grumble over a bit, even though it’s an understandable one.

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
…come on... how many fans and critics have noted the distinct similarities between many of Lindsey's 'SYW' tunes and those he's recorded before?

And come on, how many fans have noticed the similarity between nearly every Stevie song throughout the years? It would be extremely noticeable if Lindsey wasn’t producing. The subtlety that her writing has is noticeable only to those who have listened to her for a long, long time. The hardcore fans, that is.

Lindsey may have recycled “Big Love� (for instance) for “Doing What I Can�, “Miranda� and “Destiny Rules�. However, if he uses the same idea he puts it into a different context. The original “Big Love�, the subtle pop composition that it is, was turned into a speedy rocker for “Doing What I Can� while for “Miranda� he used the same idea to create an image of a self-destructive woman while setting the tune to bouncy, uplifting music. Of course he shatters that illusion in the closing section where I can easily picture the woman plunging into total madness. For “Destiny Rules� he plays the chorus riff of “Big Love� in a different harmony (and with a dobro), creating this image of dryness, of a desert, that perfectly suits Stevie’s vocals in the opening.

I think there’s very little new you can do with rock music these days; those that use the ideas of the past in a new context are the ones who will succeed. If Lindsey’s work, with the man himself in late middle age, can be compared with artists as diverse as Steve Reich, Roy Wood, The Smiths and The Associates (as Marcello Carlin did), then he’s still obviously very relevant instead of just rehashing on the past ideas.

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
Even "Peacekeeper"... which is the song you're directly referring to here... has been "criticized" for a striking similarity to Paul Simon's "Kodachrome."

I’m not a musician, but I find what Sarah G posted on this at Burnish more believable than something a non-musician would say:

I don't think they are related at all, except that they share the same intervals between the first three notes of the chorus. There's no telling how many songs have that same interval. Paul sustains the third note, and Lindsey sustains the fourth.

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
And just about every sonic trick he used on the production of this album, is something he's used on a previous recording.

Which isn’t surprising. After all, there’s this woman in the band who stubbornly refuses to vary her writing style.

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
I like this critique by Marcello Carlin... "If Stevie provides the emotional adventure, Lindsey provides the sonics.

As well-written and moving as his review was, I still find that statement a bit “flawed�. It’s Lindsey, with his diversity, who provides this emotional adventure for me. From the obsessive statements in the verses of “Come� to the huge “slap in the face� that the chorus is, from the hyperactive nuttiness of “Red Rover� to romanticism of “Bleed To Love Her�, from the grief of “Say Goodbye� to the angry flaming of “Murrow�, it’s he who runs the gamut of emotions, even inserting some of these into the same song. The diversity enters Stevie’s songs through his production. With Stevie though, it’s more like watching at the same two or three things. However, it’s from different angles, hence the subtlety. But it’s also more difficult to discover the differences.

If Marcello Carlin wanted to state that you can only express true emotion through a human voice, I have to disagree with him. Lindsey is expressing through “the sonics� as much as he is expressing vocally.

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
Her stuff holds up extremely well, even when it's damn-near acapella. In fact, some of her songs are even more arresting in this context.
They're not subservient to the music going on around them.

And this is what makes her demos “fan-only�. If you identify with her persona, you will most likely be pleased with every single demo that there is. Whatever “emotional nakedness� we can find from a certain song is always a product of the listeners’ minds. That’s how I believe it is. There’s no way anyone can objectively state whether LB or SN are into their performances or not.

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Interestingly, if La Nicks' songs are musically "at fault," a position I do not take in general, I submit that "fault" belongs mostly to LB. After all, he was the producer. He drastically altered several of her songs from the original demos I have heard. Also, no slam to Stevie, but she pretty much is not capable of this level of production.

I understand your intentions Strand. After all, this past year saw the usual bashing of Stevie’s songs on TITN. You made a good point in saying that the band and especially LB, as the producer, should share the blame. And I agree, Lindsey could have worked on “WTTR…S� and “WISYA� more. Yet I thought that Carne’s (and mine) critique was directed at the core of her songwriting, the chords and the vocal melody she chooses to use. LB doesn’t touch those. It’s as if Stevie’s drawing a sketch, or a black-and-white picture with those demo arrangements and then Lindsey gets to colour them.

My personal belief is that this “drastic alteration� is necessary if these songs are going to be made appealing for the common listener. So if a song is unsuccessful, I do think that Lindsey should take a part of the “blame� along with the group, since Stevie’s sketches are very, very rough. However, I do believe that the main “blame� should still be on the songwriter. If he/she has very substandard material to offer, like on TITN, then you can’t really blame the producer.

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
The meat and potatoes of the songs... the lyrics and melody... are all hers.
Everything else is gravy.

I still think that depends on what you take from music. Since you’re a lyrics person, as you’ve stated before, you will think of those as the “meat and potatoes�.
I’m someone who listens to the entire track. And that’s what matters to the common listener too; very rarely do they listen to only certain elements of the song. You need to find something that makes the track ear-catching and that’s what you can’t find from Stevie’s demos these days, unless you’re “trained� (=a big fan).

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
And you have to figure, in many cases we're listening to Stevie actually writing the song, in "real time"... so of course, things will eventually get re-worked or discarded as the song takes shape.

I guess that’s true for the legendary 16-minute “Sara� and the “Gypsy� demo. But for those that made it on to albums, I’m mostly listening to the finished track without the crucial arrangements and those, if we’re speaking of the post-70’s demos with the drum machine and some keyboard drone, are not enough for me. And I’m quite sure that only the hardcores are interested in them. Release them publicly and give them the same promotion as TISL received. They will most likely be the biggest flop in Stevie’s career.

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
Lindsey, Jimmy Iovine, and others, deserve credit for polishing her rough gems into something even better... but they most definitely do not deserve all the credit for the appeal of her songs.

I agree that they shouldn’t get “all the credit�. But I still think that too many fans in this forum have been somewhat belittling Lindsey’s, Jimmy’s, et cetera contributions. I can understand that position because I guess some have made the claim that the producer is totally responsible for the magic. I do think that Stevie should get at least half the credit for everything she’s released. Without those lyrics and without that voice the producer wouldn’t be able to create an arrangement like that. I can’t imagine all those great works without those lyrics, without that voice and without the basic song writing. Everything contributes to the “atmosphere� and that’s the one I always pay attention first in music. Not everything has to be catchy or instantly memorable.

Lindsey still hasn’t been recognized by the public for the great work he’s done for producing Fleetwood Mac. I guess it bothers me that when the man should get all the support possible, some fans are actually underestimating his achievements. I will always praise him for this though, and I won’t stop until Lindsey has been rightfully placed alongside the greatest producers in the history of popular music. But no, he shouldn’t get all the credit, that’s for sure.

This debate will most likely rage on, in different threads also. I came to these boards as a lurker about a year ago and it was already here, in other forms but still visible. I have nothing against this; it’s a different thing to badmouth someone’s persona than something that the person has written. There’s no problem discussing the musical contributions, but when the debate sinks to the level of “Lindsey’s a dominative ego-feeding idiot� and “Stevie’s an airhead living in a fairy-tale world�, then there’s something seriously wrong. It hasn’t happened here and I thank everyone for that.

Overall, I guess we all should learn something from debaters of the opposite side; we should at least learn to understand why they think the way they think. Then there will be less need to call someone’s work “bad�. Just calling something “bad� or “good� isn’t informative at all.

Ah well, “seems like everything goes in cycles�. Let’s do this again next year, shall we?

[dissention]

Gaius,

I have to hand it to you. Even though I don't agree with everything you said, that was an awesome post.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
…come on... how many fans and critics have noted the distinct similarities between many of Lindsey's 'SYW' tunes and those he's recorded before?

Originally posted by face of glass
And come on, how many fans have noticed the similarity between nearly every Stevie song throughout the years?

I'm not denying that Stevie's songs have a definite similarity, or that that statement isn't an accurate one, I just wanted to add that if one is going to knock Stevie's tunes for "sounding the same" as things she's done in the past, then we absolutely have to keep in mind that the same can be said, and has been said, about many of Lindsey's songs.

I was just trying to keep the playing field level... you know my thing about double-standards.

In a technical way, I think it's safe to say that neither Stevie or Lindsey is lightyears ahead of what they're were doing back in 1973... but I think they are definitely ahead in the overall tone of their songs.
They both convey things now lyrically that they never could have 30 years ago, and they're both more sophisticated in the ways in which they get that across, performance-wise.

As usual, Gaius, yours is one of the best-written, most interesting posts in this entire thread... thank you for sharing your thoughts with us!

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by face of glass
I don’t believe it’s the vocal melody itself that matters, it’s what chords are those notes against that usually determines how strongly the song is written.

I grant you that point, but it doesn't diminish my assertion that if you strip the songs down -- melody notes against the chords -- Lindsey still comes out ahead. It is the dynamic interplay between melody, chord structure and rhythm that makes a song good or bad musically. As an example of something that sounds simple, but is very dynamic and irrepressibly evocative, take a listen to Save Me a Place. Or better yet, take Go Insane acoustic, in which you have the man and his guitar, and put it up against one of Stevie's vocals-and-piano demos.

So, we’re getting into this age-old “complexity vs. simplicity� battle, aren’t we?

Not really. The point, which I stopped just short of making, is to strip down the songs to the core. There, if you try, you will tap the inherent complexities in the apparent simplicity. So you could have a three-note melody that sounds positively out of this world as a result of how it was put together. My point with the two-note comment about Stevie's songs was that she will strike the same note repeatedly before making a change to the second note, whereas Lindsey's melodies are more dynamic. Compare Say Goodbye to Say You Will for a good example of what we're talking about in relation to the interplay between melody, chord structure and rhythm.

[quote]You could easily claim that LB is a better writer because he has a better grasp of complexity than Stevie does. But so what; [quote]

He may or may not, but that's not the point. The point is when the writer sits down at the keyboard or with a guitar, does the writer take up the challenge presented by the interplay mentioned earlier or does the writer simply put new words to the same chords he/she has used before? So it comes down, not to a matter of skill, but artistic complacency.

As you say:

I do think that the core of Stevie’s songwriting, the basic chords have lost their freshness a long time ago.

And you add:

Her music needs to be taken as a whole; the lyrics, the vocal delivery, the basic songwriting and the arrangement.

And taking it as a whole, I stand by my original assertion.

And I'm not so sure that comparing Stevie's tired chord structures to the blues is appropriate. Pop music, though in some ways derivative of the blues, is a whole different animal. Anyone can write a melody using the same 12-bar blues in E without being accused of copyright infringement or artistic laziness (necessarily), but if you keep using the same G-Em-C-D chord structure (as an example) in multiple songs, it will most likely become tiresome. Pop has evolved to the point where the chord structure of the song becomes one of the means of expression. So think of pop songs as sculpture that you can shape anyway you want, as opposed to the blues 12-bar form, which is a canvas to which you can throw whatever color of paint you want. But you still have to use the canvas. With pop, you can take the plaster, shape it however you like, and add pastic horns to it if you wish.

Ultimately, we're probably not that far apart, but I wanted to address the nuances.

Oh, and by the way, this seems inconsistent:

I’ve never thought of Lindsey as the greatest in any field, be it producing, arranging, singing, playing or songwriting.

I won’t stop until Lindsey has been rightfully placed alongside the greatest producers...

So you do consider him to be among the greatest when it comes to producing, but not the other roles unless you combine them?

To me, he is one of the greatest in the individual roles, as well as in the sum of all roles. Of course, that doesn't mean everyone has to agree. I was just a little confused by your comments.

[celestenadia]

Just felt like poking the fire a little bit...
I think that "Dreams" might be one of the most
perfectly, simplistic songs ever written.
I was a serious classical pianist
in my youth for about ten years. I
then started to play guitar. But I'm
telling you, 'til this day, I love it when
I can hear a song just once, and then
right away proceed to bang out the chords on the
piano or strum out the chord progressions on
guitar. It's also pretty funny, any song that
I instantly love, is always the most simple...

[CarneVaca]

Dreams is a beautifully simple song with two-chord verses and two-chord choruses. But contrast the way Stevie approaches that song vocally with Say You Will. In Dreams, she floats in and out over the progression, adding little melodic nuances. In Say You Will, she's chained her vocal down to the rigidity of the progression.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Dreams is a beautifully simple song with two-chord verses and two-chord choruses. But contrast the way Stevie approaches that song vocally with Say You Will. In Dreams, she floats in and out over the progression, adding little melodic nuances. In Say You Will, she's chained her vocal down to the rigidity of the progression.

I agree (WE AGREEE ) I submit Stevie's current lack of an upper register she consistently is willing to use (I still maintain its there but she finds it easier not to use it) makes it impossible for her to be as melodic as she was in "Dreams." As you said, she positively floats her vocals throughout that song and sort of comes vocally from the top down, never straining to reach a note. Now, her "new voice" is suited to what she is doing, which is singing the melody only. This produces a very different result - almost chant like. then, she stuns with "Smile at You."

Note: I like all of Stevie's voices throughout the years. I am just making observations on the changing of her styles to suit the changes of of voice.

[face of glass]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
I was just trying to keep the playing field level... you know my thing about double-standards.

Oh, alright. That’s often very necessary in these boards, for sure.

And thanks for the compliments, Dissention and Johnny.

Originally posted by CarneVaca
-- Lindsey still comes out ahead. It is the dynamic interplay between melody, chord structure and rhythm that makes a song good or bad musically.

If it’s pure songwriting, stuff you put down on paper as notation, then I do agree. But then again, no one is capable of conveying that interplay through notation alone. It is only through performance when it is conveyed.

Originally posted by CarneVaca
As an example of something that sounds simple, but is very dynamic and irrepressibly evocative, take a listen to Save Me a Place.

I’m sorry Carne, I know that “Save Me A Place� is one of your very favourites, but I’ve never found it an attractive piece of songwriting. It sounds to me about as simplistic as any Stevie demo. Such as piece can only be salvaged by a performer who can express also the untrivial emotions (think of Stevie, think of the late Johnny Cash, etc). I don’t think Lindsey is always up to that challenge. Instead he made this piece work by paying attention to the production details: the way those guitars (and his cardboard box drumming) were recorded and the warm harmonies. It wouldn’t work as a simplistic demo with just strumming and a basic vocal performance, at least for me.

Or better yet, take Go Insane acoustic, in which you have the man and his guitar, and put it up against one of Stevie's vocals-and-piano demos.

No contest there. But then again we all know that Lindsey easily beats Stevie in arranging. And I do believe that with most of her demos Stevie was just drawing rough sketches; she wasn’t trying to do a finished work of any kind. The acoustic “Go Insane�, on the other hand, is a very thoroughly arranged and calculated (by this I do not mean that it’s “emotionally devoid� or anything like that) piece. Lindsey prepared that arrangement especially for the OOTC tour and I do believe that he never wanted to approach it as a simple “strum-and-sing� piece. It is based on pre-arranged riffage; there was a slight, notable change in the opening phrase between the OOTC tour and the Dance versions but that was about it. There’s never been a rough demo version of “Go Insane� in circulation (which is too bad, since we LB fans could use any alternate version of any song!), so I do think it can’t be used as a proper example here.
There’s been one rough version (or maybe more, I don’t know how many) of “Down On Rodeo� available, though. I have to say that even though I love the song, I still find that the demo is miles away from what we all assume is the final version. There’s still a lot to of work to be done. A similar case could be made for “Soul Drifter�. At MadnessFades.net there’s this video clip of Lindsey playing the song alone in the studio, accompanying himself with a few strums, so it’s not like the version he played as an encore during the OOTC tour. That, too, is still a long way from the final take (even though, I guess, it was filmed in 1993). This is why I’m not capable of following your example and calling Lindsey one of the greatest songwriters. Ok, those two performances of “Down On Rodeo� and “Soul Drifter� are more appealing to me than Stevie’s recent demos, but a lot of the impact that the final takes had is not there.

My point with the two-note comment about Stevie's songs was that she will strike the same note repeatedly before making a change to the second note, whereas Lindsey's melodies are more dynamic.

Ok, so Stevie does that. So does Lennon in “I Am The Walrus�, which is still considered by many to be his finest piece of writing. But then again, I guess that’s once again beside the point.

He may or may not, but that's not the point. The point is when the writer sits down at the keyboard or with a guitar, does the writer take up the challenge presented by the interplay mentioned earlier or does the writer simply put new words to the same chords he/she has used before? So it comes down, not to a matter of skill, but artistic complacency.

Basically I think that there won’t be great songwriters in the classic sense anymore. That’s simply because there’s only a limited amount of purely musical things that will sound appealing to the ear. Most of those things have been used and reused for a long time. So what matters these days is not what you do in the compositional stage (because you’re most likely bound to repeat yourself or break some ear-pleasing rules), but how the overall track sounds and what tone colours you choose to complement your writing. So, purely as a songwriter, Lindsey isn’t in a much better situation than Stevie.

And I'm not so sure that comparing Stevie's tired chord structures to the blues is appropriate. Pop music, though in some ways derivative of the blues, is a whole different animal. Anyone can write a melody using the same 12-bar blues in E without being accused of copyright infringement or artistic laziness (necessarily), but if you keep using the same G-Em-C-D chord structure (as an example) in multiple songs, it will most likely become tiresome.

I admit my comparison may seem far-fetched. However, it felt natural to me because that’s the only way I can find some value in those current demos. Blues hasn’t been about composition for decades, neither have Stevie’s demos been about composition for a long time. It may seem that Stevie is still writing “pop music� (although I’ve never cared that much for genre boundaries). In the end, though, her songwriting rules are similar to those of the blues. Stevie’s demos, like most blues, can superficially sound the same. So it should be assumed that they will always sound the same at first; the impact of the track is due to whether the performer is capable of showing a new side of the same old emotion or not. It’s clear that both Stevie and the blues artists are putting the emphasis on their performances, not on what they write musically. Stevie refers to her recent works as “poems�, so it’s obvious she hasn’t been concentrating on the traditional songwriting for a long time. She’s still searching for new ways of expressing the same “two or three things�, she’s trying to find the nuances, just like a blues performer. It’s evident in her voice, there’s a richness there that LB isn’t capable of capturing vocally (but in some other terms he is). Johnny Stew said it best:

They both convey things now lyrically that they never could have 30 years ago, and they're both more sophisticated in the ways in which they get that across, performance-wise.

I understand Carne, that you prefer Stevie’s older performances and past writings. It’s easy to look at the surface and say that Stevie’s voice is now a lot weaker and that her scribbles are derivative. When you speak of Stevie striking “the same note repeatedly before making a change to the second note�, it reminds me of something that Branford Marsalis said of Billie Holiday’s “April In Paris�. Billie’s voice had lost most of the surprisingly small range it used to have before the recording of that song. Yet Mr. Marsalis praised the performance even though Billie was using about one or two notes throughout. It was obvious to him that she was expressing a lot with so little. That’s what I believe can be said of Stevie’s singing these days. If she had sung with that voice in the golden days of Ella Fitzgerald, Billie Holiday, Bessie Smith, Edith Piaf, etc., she would be considered a legend alongside those other ladies. For me the best female vocalists of the 20th century weren’t always the most attractive in the traditional sense of singing, and they certainly were limited from an academic standpoint. Yet they made most of what they had with emotionally devastating results, especially those ladies I just mentioned. For me Stevie is in that league too and we shouldn’t be afraid of admitting that.
So I think comparing Lindsey’s and Stevie’s writing styles is not entirely appropriate; after all they both put the emphasis on different things; Stevie on her performance and LB on the way the track will sound.
I wish we all could learn to appreciate their differences. I don’t think Stevie should be criticized for not writing/arranging like Lindsey. And Lindsey shouldn’t be criticized for not singing like Stevie. But I’m being very utopian here.

Originally posted by CarneVaca
So you do consider him to be among the greatest when it comes to producing, but not the other roles unless you combine them?

Well yes, one of the greatest in producing/arranging (since they can be essentially the same); that’s what I was trying to say. One of the curses of a long post at work there.
I do find him a great guitar player and a vocalist as well but there are many others I’d place on the same level. I think LB has been putting the emphasis on his production work for a long time; the guitar showcases in the sense of playing long solos in the studio have never been that constant throughout his career. The overall arranging is still what he does best. Even when he engages in a long solo in the studio it seems like it serves to the outcome of the track itself. The male aggression mocking of “Come� needs that hair-metal solo as its “extension�.
Happy Christmas to everyone. May it be full of every excess you can think of.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by face of glass
So I think comparing Lindsey’s and Stevie’s writing styles is not entirely appropriate; after all they both put the emphasis on different things; Stevie on her performance and LB on the way the track will sound.
I wish we all could learn to appreciate their differences. I don’t think Stevie should be criticized for not writing/arranging like Lindsey. And Lindsey shouldn’t be criticized for not singing like Stevie. But I’m being very utopian here.

AMEN

I said a long time ago that if Lindsey and Stevie had never recorded together, or been in the same band together, no one would ever dream of comparing the two as artists.
They both come from very different places.

But when they're together, they each bring something the other "lacks"... so it's the best of both worlds for all of us lucky enough to hear their music.

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
AMEN

I said a long time ago that if Lindsey and Stevie had never recorded together, or been in the same band together, no one would ever dream of comparing the two as artists.
They both come from very different places.

IS there a parallel universe where they were never together? Say it isn't so.

- Jake

[strandinthewind]

Gaius (Face of Glass)

I agree about vocal imperfection adding interest to a singer's voice. I mean Whittney (in the old days) and Celine are fantastic singers and rarely if ever miss a note or pitch. But, could they sing "Have a Heart" or "I Can't Make you Love Me" like Bonnie Raitt can. BR's vocals in those are imperfect, which adds to the heartbrake for me. Same for Marlene D. when she sang very flatly in German to the Israeli's (many of whom were concentration camp survivors or their progeny) in the 60's (?) - not a dry eye in the house due to personage and delivery, both of which Stevie has in spades.

Finally, I agree Illume is moving as sung and I totally get, understand, appreciate, and like her moving trance-like message. I just wish she would have written a third stanza because I do not care for the repetition. Same for the song SYW. But and again, I like the songs as recorded. I just want more, everyone's a critic, etc.

[Tango]

Originally posted by darklinensuit
IS there a parallel universe where they were never together? Say it isn't so.

- Jake

I think we have to closely examine "the text" to get an answer to this one Jake.

Destiny Rules
Maybe we are together in a parallel universe.


You see that? She doesn't say:
Maybe we are together in the parallel universe.

Perhaps her use of the article "a" suggests more than one parallel universe. You bring up an interesting point and we have entered The OUTTER Limits!

[darklinensuit]

Originally posted by Tango
You bring up an interesting point and we have entered The OUTTER Limits!

Just an alternative TimeSpace.

- Jake

[face of glass]

Once again Strand and Johnny made good points. Of course I have to come back and correct a mistake I made:

Originally posted by face of glass
Billie Holiday’s “April In Paris�.

It’s actually “Autumn In New York� that Branford Marsalis was talking about and I can’t for the life of me understand how my brain could have made such a mistake. It’s sometimes not too good in the name department.

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Finally, I agree Illume is moving as sung and I totally get, understand, appreciate, and like her moving trance-like message. I just wish she would have written a third stanza because I do not care for the repetition. Same for the song SYW. But and again, I like the songs as recorded. I just want more, everyone's a critic, etc.

For me, I think, the repetition and the “monotonous� vocal (which I know you’re not criticizing) is necessary for the song itself. The vocal on “Illume� shows great self-restraint; it’s a vocal that she wouldn’t have been able to do 12-13 years ago. It demands this mature approach that she has now. If it was “her voice dancing with the lyrics� (as you stated earlier when discussing “Thrown Down�), it wouldn’t have the same impact. I appreciate it how she doesn’t try to make the vocal “prettier� or more varying. Her vocal goes well with this groove-like, static arrangement. The whole “intentionally restrained monotony� (that the repetitive lyrics support) builds up to Lindsey’s goofy voice and then climaxes when Stevie’s voice returns. That’s the moment that makes everything before it rewarding; her vocals at the end feel even more intense than usual because of the self-control she has during most of the track. It’s just as devastating as the dramatic shift from the verses of “Come� to the chorus.

That’s just my take on it. For me it's a song that only goes to prove the age-old cliché: “sometimes less is more�.