Still think Stevie is going to do the FM album?

[johnnystorms]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

Sheryl Crow. I'm sure Stevie would be happy she was replaced by one of her good friends.

Sheryl went country because her rock records no longer sold

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

what female rocker is more popular than Stevie? they'd have to find a country or pop chick to fill that bill

They'd never add another singer now. If Stevie doesn't participate they'll just do a foursome or quietly disband.

That said
Thinking of women of a suitable age bracket...

Tori Amos (sure, they don't need another pianist but her kooky personality would add so much fun to the band)
Annie Lennox (a bit bland for my liking, but if Stevie wants to go off and work with Dave then maybe AL could join FM edit: and I bet she could belt out a half-decent Rhiannon)
Wendy James (no particular reason except I had a crush on her when I was 15)

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

I dont get the 4 or 5 year album/tour thing. I think LB with JM had other things encompassed within 4/5 years.
The current tour started in October and once Australia/NZ is done it'll be October/November. This whole massive tour is only a year or slightly more. If they'd spent 2015 working on an album then they'd have had the album out and tour wrapped up by the middle of 2016. It wouldnt be them directly editing a DVD. Other people would do thet I'm sure and would take little/no time. They wouldnt have needed to go to 2019. By 2019 they could have had 3 albums out if Stevie Nicks just got her sh*t together.
If they knocked an album out by the end of this year they could do a tour in mid-2016 and then a last album in 2016/17.

But no...it's all just going to fizzle out.

well, I'd disagree with you respectfully on this point. FM spends a long time overdubbing and sweetening the music and vocals on any dvd they put out (a huge chunk of The Dance is overdubs and tweaks). It almost becomes like recording another album in some ways. FM never puts out truly live, raw recordings and never will. It's not in their nature. So someone might edit the video, but Lindsey and whomever will be running the whole audio mixing and fixing and that takes months with these people.

I do totally agree with you, sadly, that it will fizzle.

[bombaysaffires]

on a happier note, there's some lovely moments of Lindsey and Chris working in the studio during Tusk in this clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6t3ut06pz0#t=172

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by johnnystorms

what female rocker is more popular than Stevie? they'd have to find a country or pop chick to fill that bill

But the point would be just to find someone to sing Stevie's songs, wouldn't it? To me, it would be better to go with a no name than to replace her with a singer with her own catalog of hits that would have to be shoehorned in.

That said, I don't want any replacements for anyone. Just put out the album as a foursome and tour as a foursome, if it comes to that. No new people at this stage of the game. They could find 2 Stevie songs to add to the setlist to pay homage to her, like they did when Christine was gone and that can be the end of it. No new singer. Then Stevie can return in a couple of years and they can get "reunion" publicity for the umpteenth time.

Michele

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

well, I'd disagree with you respectfully on this point. FM spends a long time overdubbing and sweetening the music and vocals on any dvd they put out (a huge chunk of The Dance is overdubs and tweaks). It almost becomes like recording another album in some ways. FM never puts out truly live, raw recordings and never will. It's not in their nature. So someone might edit the video, but Lindsey and whomever will be running the whole audio mixing and fixing and that takes months with these people.

I do totally agree with you, sadly, that it will fizzle.

I don't think you can equate it to recording an album. The Dance came out just three months after it was recorded (to coincide with the start of the tour). Yes there was a fair bit of over-dubbing but most of the time-consuming work was done by Elliott Scheiner, surely.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

I don't think you can equate it to recording an album. The Dance came out just three months after it was recorded (to coincide with the start of the tour). Yes there was a fair bit of over-dubbing but most of the time-consuming work was done by Elliott Scheiner, surely.

well, he can't sing or play. so the band members have to be available to come in and re-sing vocals, dub vocals, or play additional instrumental pieces. that's the kind of thing I meant that is similar to making an album, i.e. band members have to be there and go to the studio, some outside person can't do that, they can just be at the controls of the recording/mixing.

[elle]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

I don't think you can equate it to recording an album. The Dance came out just three months after it was recorded (to coincide with the start of the tour). Yes there was a fair bit of over-dubbing but most of the time-consuming work was done by Elliott Scheiner, surely.

when Elliott was giving Lindsey one of those music legend or whatever it was awards few years ago, he said he and Lindsey were doing all the work together on the Dance, and how much he learned from Lindsey during that time.

that said, in 2012 Lindsey released what was practically a straight-out soundboard recording of one of his live OMS shows, about a month after it was recorded, while he was in the middle of the ongoing tour. so i suspect he may have evolved into maybe a more hands-off, raw, with less overdubbing approach since the Dance.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by elle

when Elliott was giving Lindsey one of those music legend or whatever it was awards few years ago, he said he and Lindsey were doing all the work together on the Dance, and how much he learned from Lindsey during that time.

that said, in 2012 Lindsey released what was practically a straight-out soundboard recording of one of his live OMS shows, about a month after it was recorded, while he was in the middle of the ongoing tour. so i suspect he may have evolved into maybe a more hands-off, raw, with less overdubbing approach since the Dance.

love ya elle, and might agree re: LB solo, but I still remain skeptical the band as the band would really go this route. (I didn't see evidence of that on DR) Maybe it's just Stevie, I dunno. I just have lost a lot of hope they'll do anything but same old same old.

is Elliott his new Richard?? lol

[elle]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

love ya elle, and might agree re: LB solo, but I still remain skeptical the band as the band would really go this route. (I didn't see evidence of that on DR) Maybe it's just Stevie, I dunno. I just have lost a lot of hope they'll do anything but same old same old.

is Elliott his new Richard?? lol

yeah i really don't expect them to put out a DVD of this tour; Richard seems to be convinced they will but i see little evidence of that intention. but who knows, maybe they surprise us. and he does talk to Lindsey, so maybe it's not just pure speculation on RD's part.

and agree with you that solo tour is different; i think in one of the interviews when that live OMS came out LB said he originally considered making available recording after each show like some bands do, but ended up doing this instead.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

Sheryl Crow.

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

Tori Amos (sure, they don't need another pianist but her kooky personality would add so much fun to the band)
Annie Lennox (a bit bland for my liking, but if Stevie wants to go off and work with Dave then maybe AL could join FM edit: and I bet she could belt out a half-decent Rhiannon)
Wendy James (no particular reason except I had a crush on her when I was 15)

None of those women have been in a band like Fleetwood Mac. Annie Lennox comes the closest, and would be an amazingly empathetic figure in that she understands what it's like working with an ex. The reason this is a problem that solo artists don't understand the challenges of being in a band. I think Fleetwood Mac has already seen this with the issues they had with Dave Mason. Even when he was in Traffic, Dave was never really a part of the band, so he never really learned the art of being in a band. There are challenges and compromises that solo/duo artists don't really have to deal with.

Originally Posted by michelej1

But the point would be just to find someone to sing Stevie's songs, wouldn't it?

That's a good question. I would hope that adding another woman to the band would be so they would continue for a few more years, both on stage and in the studio, which means they would need her to be a contributing member of the band. This is the only reason I could see to bring in new blood.

To me, it would be better to go with a no name than to replace her with a singer with her own catalog of hits that would have to be shoehorned in.

If that's the case, just bring back Bekka Bramlett. But, I think that bringing in somebody just to fill in for Stevie is the type of lounge act move Lindsey really detests. What they need is somebody who has some hits that could be shoehorned in (so that the distinction between the new girl and Stevie can be made), somebody who could cover a couple of Stevie's songs, and somebody who could contribute new material.

For me, it's the Sammy Hagar rule. David Lee Roth was the face and voice of Van Halen. They replaced him with Sammy Hagar, and that version of the band went on to sell 46 million albums. Sammy was a well known commodity when he joined, and people were willing to buy into it. They did some DLR songs, some Sammy solo songs, and new songs on those tours, and fans enjoyed it. By contrast, Gary Cherone had a #1 hit with Extreme, but it was "More Than Words" which was hardly a Van Halen-esq song. Not like "There's Only One Way To Rock" or "I Can't Drive 55."

I still maintain Susanna Hoffs is the perfect choice.

1. There would be no expectation for her to be Stevie #2. She was the face of a band that sold 23 million albums. She sang lead vocals on seven of eight of their Top 40 singles, co-wrote the band’s only # 1 single (Eternal Flame), and had a solo song in the Top 40. Hoffs could join Fleetwood Mac and just be herself.

2. She’s in a band that has multiple lead vocalists. The fact she was made to be the star of that band is ultimately what split the band up. Susanna was the one who fought the hardest to get the band back together. She learned the value of being in such a band, and now understands the challenges and compromises that being in such a band entails, as well as the value of being humble. She's NOT a diva, and that's exactly what Fleetwood Mac needs at this point.

3. Musically, she’d be a perfect fit. She’s in a band that uses lush harmonies throughout their music. Her voice is reminiscent of a younger Stevie Nicks, while Christine’s voice has a similar range and timbre to Debbie Peterson’s. She would be able to come into the band and instinctively fit in.

4. She’s a contemporary of Fleetwood Mac. The Bangles had their greatest success between 1986-1990, which is the same timeframe that Fleetwood Mac had the last of their mainstream success with new material. Susanna’s only nine years younger than Lindsey. She wouldn’t seem terribly out of place in Fleetwood Mac.

5. She still has sex appeal. She’s as gorgeous a woman as Lindsey is a man, but especially so considering their ages (56 and 65, respectively). There could be a chemistry there well worth exploring. Bringing somebody in who's of a different generation would be creepy, especially if there was a bit of a flirtation (that whole "chemistry" thing) on stage.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

None of those women have been in a band like Fleetwood Mac. Annie Lennox comes the closest, and would be an amazingly empathetic figure in that she understands what it's like working with an ex. The reason this is a problem that solo artists don't understand the challenges of being in a band. I think Fleetwood Mac has already seen this with the issues they had with Dave Mason. Even when he was in Traffic, Dave was never really a part of the band, so he never really learned the art of being in a band. There are challenges and compromises that solo/duo artists don't really have to deal with.


That's a good question. I would hope that adding another woman to the band would be so they would continue for a few more years, both on stage and in the studio, which means they would need her to be a contributing member of the band. This is the only reason I could see to bring in new blood.


If that's the case, just bring back Bekka Bramlett. But, I think that bringing in somebody just to fill in for Stevie is the type of lounge act move Lindsey really detests. What they need is somebody who has some hits that could be shoehorned in (so that the distinction between the new girl and Stevie can be made), somebody who could cover a couple of Stevie's songs, and somebody who could contribute new material.

For me, it's the Sammy Hagar rule. David Lee Roth was the face and voice of Van Halen. They replaced him with Sammy Hagar, and that version of the band went on to sell 46 million albums. Sammy was a well known commodity when he joined, and people were willing to buy into it. They did some DLR songs, some Sammy solo songs, and new songs on those tours, and fans enjoyed it. By contrast, Gary Cherone had a #1 hit with Extreme, but it was "More Than Words" which was hardly a Van Halen-esq song. Not like "There's Only One Way To Rock" or "I Can't Drive 55."

I still maintain Susanna Hoffs is the perfect choice.

1. There would be no expectation for her to be Stevie #2. She was the face of a band that sold 23 million albums. She sang lead vocals on seven of eight of their Top 40 singles, co-wrote the band’s only # 1 single (Eternal Flame), and had a solo song in the Top 40. Hoffs could join Fleetwood Mac and just be herself.

2. She’s in a band that has multiple lead vocalists. The fact she was made to be the star of that band is ultimately what split the band up. Susanna was the one who fought the hardest to get the band back together. She learned the value of being in such a band, and now understands the challenges and compromises that being in such a band entails, as well as the value of being humble. She's NOT a diva, and that's exactly what Fleetwood Mac needs at this point.

3. Musically, she’d be a perfect fit. She’s in a band that uses lush harmonies throughout their music. Her voice is reminiscent of a younger Stevie Nicks, while Christine’s voice has a similar range and timbre to Debbie Peterson’s. She would be able to come into the band and instinctively fit in.

4. She’s a contemporary of Fleetwood Mac. The Bangles had their greatest success between 1986-1990, which is the same timeframe that Fleetwood Mac had the last of their mainstream success with new material. Susanna’s only nine years younger than Lindsey. She wouldn’t seem terribly out of place in Fleetwood Mac.

5. She still has sex appeal. She’s as gorgeous a woman as Lindsey is a man, but especially so considering their ages (56 and 65, respectively). There could be a chemistry there well worth exploring. Bringing somebody in who's of a different generation would be creepy, especially if there was a bit of a flirtation (that whole "chemistry" thing) on stage.

No one can replace Stevie. Just get over yourself. She decides the fate of the band.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

No one can replace Stevie. Just get over yourself. She decides the fate of the band.

It's not so much about replacing Stevie as it is about going forward with someone else who would be a good fit creatively, professionally, and personally.

No, Stevie doesn't decide the band's fate. The other four could easily continue without her if they would so choose.

[MikeInNV]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

She sang lead vocals on seven of eight of their Top 40 singles, co-wrote the band’s only # 1 single (Eternal Flame), and had a solo song in the Top 40.

A minor correction, but "Walk Like an Egyptian" was also a #1 single.

[nicole21290]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

No, Stevie doesn't decide the band's fate. The other four could easily continue without her if they would so choose.