hiram.k.hackenbacker

I always think of Counterparts as the forgotten gem of the Rush catalogue. Test For Echo was a nosedive as far as I’m concerned, but I really like Counterpsrts.

Listening to it now through decent headphones on lossless and it sounds ace.

Sounds like a sensible decision. Enjoy your retirement 👍

Prof Honig has this to say. Just about sums DT up I think…. “I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don't know, I'm an adjunct professor at Indiana University - Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes. Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of "The Art of the Deal," a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you've read The Art of the Deal, or if you've followed Trump lately, you'll know, even if you didn't know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call "distributive bargaining." Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you're fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump's world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins. The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don't have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over. The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can't demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren't binary. China's choices aren't (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don't buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation. One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you're going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don't have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won't agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you're going to have to find another cabinet maker. There isn't another Canada. So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already. Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM - HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem. Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that's just not how politics works, not over the long run. For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here's another huge problem for us. Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it. From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn't even bringing checkers to a chess match. He's bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.” — David Honig

....and then we have the room to be released Roger Waters TDSOTM Redux for £220. Think you missed the boat on that one Roger.

The upcoming Fleetwood Mac boxed set serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever that I can see. Old remasters (only 6 mind) on clear vinyl for £150. No thanks.

I agree. All I’ll say in their defence is that the Rush 40th SDE’s are a thing of beauty. Really well put together, as I’m sure these are, but the 50 releases lack any significant content to justify the price. YMMV of course.

Rush R50 releases.... https://www.rushbackstage.com/product/6XAMRU303/r50-backstage-exclusive-super-deluxe-edition?cp=102112_115293 Cunningly, the CD version only comes with one of the two books. To get both, you have to upgrade to the CD & vinyl SDE which is another $300 on top of the $100 for the standard edition. I can only assume, given the audio content, very few would buy the SDE unless there was something 'exclusive' to lure them in. All digital content in stereo only as far as I can tell. Undoubtedly, there will be several with spare cash that won't think twice about it. I've bought every Rush SDE to date, but I'm having trouble justifying this one.

So very sad to hear this awful news. RIP Nick.

I have no intention of trying that one, so not a request, just thought you might like it.

I have an address in the USA that you are welcome to send the parts to. There would a charge for getting them to me and forwarding them to you, but it solves the problem.

Hi Chris, Have you ever looked at Close (To The Edit) by The Art of Noise? Trevor Horn makes it look so easy, but I'm not so sure it is and there doesn't appear to be any decent attempts at it on You Tube - none with dots anyway.

My ACS plugs were a lifesaver last night. The venue was fine, but due to the shape of the space we were in, there was no escape from the sound of the snare on my left and FOH speaker on my other side. Plugged up I could still hear and feel my cab right behind me, but no pain and no nastiness afterwards. It always surprises me when I take them out after we've finished at just how loud a noisy pub is on it's own without music. Comes from having hearing suppressed for two hours.

Ah man, I've played Chinnery's loads of times and also seen some really good shows there too. I don't get down there as much as I would like as I'm usually gigging elsewhere myself. We've always had excellent sound there. I think this was taken straight off the board.