I suppose the answer may work for most any electric car, but the bottom line is the Sprint 22s is way too fast out of the box for a kid. Yes, I love it. But is there a simple fix to give a car a max speed when the kid isn't quite yet good enough to control the throttle on the radio?
Sadly, the article is now behind a paywall but here is the very simple version:
Last week, detectives secured a warrant to extract soil samples from the yard of the mother of Kristin Smart's convicted killer (house 529), after soil samples along the fence line of her neighbors yard (house 523) detected indicators of human decomposition (see attached graphic). In short, it is believed by investigators that the body was once buried in the 529 yard, and may still be. Over time, rain and such has forced those compounds to plain/seep into the neighbors yard. The area shown in red is stated to be the area where the presence of volatile compound concentrations associated with human decomposition has been found.
The gist of this aspect of the story is that Paul Flores mother (the owner of house 529) has been completely uncooperative with detectives. I've read about civil suits where neighbors sue other neighbors due to invasive bamboo, or a tree that falls from your yard into mine, etc. If Marcia Papich (neighbor 523) wanted, could she sue Susan Flores for allowing the seepage of human remains (per this study) into her yard, and is there any circumstance where this unique approach would bring about discovery that would require Susan Flores to answer questions in a civil suit that she has thus far not been required to answer in her sons criminal case?
From the article:
"Computer modeling from a team of scientists shows how soil vapor sampling discovered human decomposition compounds in Marcia Papich’s yard at 523 East Branch St., adjacent to Susan Flores’ fence and home at 529 East Branch St., in August 2021. The data shows compounds were found at more than 3100 parts per billion in the soil in the red zone."
I understand that Bukka White wrote the song and KWS doesn't legally owe credit to The Snakes. But the fact is, The Snakes arrangement of the song is very unique and very unlike the original Bukka version. It is very much an original arrangement. Yet KWS's version is identical to The Snakes version, and to this day, he has never referenced them as his inspiration. He would certainly have been inspired by their version, as his is a carbon copy.
These things were incredible and are highly sought after now. Seems like there's a market. Why don't they reintroduce it?
We know Wolf came into the fold in 2006, the 4 guys rehearsed, and then the Summer 2007 'reunion' tour that was planned but never announced was suddenly postponed in Feb 2007. Eddie enters rehab. On August 13th 2007, the band held the press conference at the Four Seasons Hotel and announced the tour.
But after the end of the 2004 tour, did Mike ever visit 5150 again? If my memory serves, there was talk of a reunion tour that included Mike post 2004, but then once it was formally announced, Wolf was already in the fold.
Simple version is this: John Lennon famously excluded his first son, Julian, from his will. Julian sued Yoko / the estate for inclusion and Yoko ultimately settled for millions. Did John Lennon error in the way his will was written or his estate was set up, or was there no way to prevent this no matter what? Even in 1980, surely John had sound legal council given his wealth and stature.
Nothing against Julian, but what's the point in a will if it can simply be challenged and overturned by a scorned family member?
I know there is that suggestion that if you leave someone $100.00, they have less grounds to challenge the will than if you exclude them entirely, but surely that was not a factor here.
Best summary:
https://www.antonelli-legal.com/blog/litigating-john-lennon-estate-antonelli-and-antonelli.cfm
We keep seeing this technology from a company called Othram Labs in Texas that uses the DNA/genealogy paradigm to identify human remains and also solve murders and what not. But I am curious if investigators or law enforcement have applied this technology to some of the famous art heists such as Isabella Stewart Gardner ?
I feel like I see indicators of both sides of this and was curious if any insiders have the scoop. I am only interested in discussing the Country genre.
This all started due a to a close friend who is a songwriter with numerous verifiable credits. He explained to me how and why certain songs are ghostwritten, so that an artist can gain 'cred' as a songwriter. He provided one example of a song that topped the Billboard Country chart in 2009 that he claimed to know the songs true writer, which I initially found hard to believe. But when I went down the rabbit hole, I was able to see that this song, specifically, was credited differently than any other song in the bands catalogue and published differently than any other (credit included the manager). I'll be vague about the circumstances, but the real writer was offered a choice between a hefty lump sum or simply a published co write that may or not pay out much over time if the song was a hit. He took the lump because it was a sizeable amount and he wanted to pay cash for a house. He is not credited anywhere, and he does not regret his decision. Although the long term payout due to the songs success would have been more, this was early in his career and he has written many other songs and these days, is not hurting for cash. He also now refuses to ghost write.
Another way this was explained to me is how Garth Brooks has a songwriting credit on virtually all of his major hits once he was developed, and very little credits on any deep cuts. It was said that Garth was so strong in the 90's, that if you wanted Garth to cut your song, which would almost guarantee you a fortune, you had to concede some ownership to Garth.
However, to contradict that, and to bring this entire topic into suspicion, George Strait, for all his success, has virtually zero songwriting credits on any of his hits. Out of more than 50 #1 songs, he has no credit on a single one. Using the supposed Garth Brooks logic, surely, at the peak of his career, had George demanded a writing credit on some songs, he could have gotten it.
By no means am I suggesting that every song with the artists name on it in modern country was secretly ghostwritten. By no means am I saying this is the norm, and that rule of 3 isn't the standard in Nashville. But does ghostwriting happen?
An old interview (1990), this is a pretty fascinating internal look of the first Pink Floyd tour without Roger Waters. What I can't understand is that, if the matter of Floyd continuing without him had been settled legally in 1987, why was he sending letters to promoters 2 years later threatening lawsuits if they booked Pink Floyd?
David Gilmour: The Rightful Heir?
Mat Snow, Q, September 1990
Twenty-five years ago he was just the hired hand. Then he became Syd Barrett's full-time replacement. By 1985, following group leader Roger Waters' traumatic exit, David Gilmour had emerged as their unofficial supreme. But the fight for the Pink Floyd legacy still rages. "We were still in business and no-one was going to stop us," he reminds Mat Snow.
WITHIN THE portals of David Gilmour's town residence, the bustle and hum of London in high summer seems miles away. All is cool repose in his sitting room, which offers aspects over the glinting canal of Little Venice at the front and a large but secluded Victorian garden at the rear. Below stairs, the ill-stocked pantry and fridge tender evidence of a bachelor life, a wide variety of breakfast cereals nourishing the start of the day, a selection of gourmet nibbles providing sustenance for its end. At 44 one must, of course, have due regard for one's health, and perhaps a handful of his impressive armoury of vitamin pills are washed own of an evening with a glass from that bottle of Montrachet '79 that sits temptingly open next to the washing-up liquid.
Upstairs again, much of the Zen-like calm of David Gilmour's living room may be accounted for by the fact that it is so uncluttered. This is because he has barely started to unpack all the personal artefacts that one inevitably acquires over the years. For the sad fact is that the Pink Floyd guitarist – indeed, the leader of the third and most spectacular incarnation of Britain's time-hallowed trip-merchants – has recently separated from his wife, Ginger, who lives in the semi-rural home countries with their four children.
He has, however, adorned his spacious singles pad with a few especially prized trophies as well as the grand piano, guitars and the state-of-the-art audio-visual equipment that are the tools of his trade. The dulcimer and sitar sit forlornly unplayed, however, broken by the little Gilmours ("the bastards!"), and nearby a bas-relief of Beethoven glowers reprovingly upon this modern music-maker, faced on the other side of the room by the more comely features of Candy Dulfer, who looks out from her album sleeve. It's the only record visible in the house.
Roving over the bookshelf, modish New York authors Jay McInerney and Tom Wolfe gleam in pristine hardcover compared to the well-thumbed paperback volumes of Hemingway and Paul Bowles, Ouspensky and Castaneda. On the mantelpiece sits a photo of the small aeroplane he owns and a print of the famed 1963 Ferrari GTO, a million-pound-plus car owned by his Pink Floyd partner, drummer Nick Mason, whose passion for wings and wheels exceeds even Gilmour's own.
Most interestingly, perhaps, are the two photographs of himself, one taken in his hippie heyday of fine cheekbones, full lips and luxuriant hair, the other snapped a few years earlier in 1965. Here he is aged 19 in jeans, checked shirt and Beatles haircut, hoisting a guitar for his first band, Jokers Wild. It was taken at a party in his home town of Cambridge, David recalls, and playing that same evening was another local outfit called the Pink Floyd Sound, plus a young American singer who was, at the time, touring the UK's folk circuit. His name was Paul Simon.
Yes, it has been the proverbial long, strange trip for David Gilmour, particularly the most recent chapter in his professional career. For when bassist and principal songsmith Roger Waters acrimoniously quit Pink Floyd in 1985, to many observers it looked all over for the band. Instead, David Gilmour chose to grasp the driving wheel and get the show back on the road. Despite the spoiling tactics of his erstwhile partner, not only did the new Pink Floyd make a best-selling album, A Momentary Lapse Of Reason, but they played to over four million people in a two-leg tour which took nearly two years to complete. After topping the Billboard list of highest-grossing acts, the band released a successful double live album, Delicate Sound of Thunder, and video to match. Their renaissance culminated in a live satellite broadcast to millions; of a never-before-attempted mega-show in Venice and, despite the driving rain, a triumphant return after 15 years to Knebworth in July. It was the 200th – and last – show of what Gilmour persists in calling "this project".
Were you elected leader of the re-formed Floyd?
I was never elected. I was the one who said, 'Let's get on and do it again'. In Easter '86 I started trying to consolidate the writing I'd done into some sort of shape and get an idea of whether I could make an album. We wanted to do the whole thing. We didn't want to go out with the just the stuff for nostalgia. Myself and Nick [Mason] had to put the money in to fund it all. I had enough and Nick had to borrow some – I think he had to put his Ferrari GTO down. Obviously we could have borrowed money, but then we would have had to share the profits, and we were confident that we would do OK.
We spent from September '86 till Christmas putting the album into some sort of rough shape, and then in early '87 started to record it properly small studio with machines. Then we moved to Los Angeles and did a lot of the live stuff there with drummers and so on – musicians in Los Angeles are very good and reliable; they turn up and know exactly what you want and work quickly. We finished the album in June, and in the last week of July came music rehearsals in Toronto, then in the second week in August all the equipment and ideas came together in a giant hanger and we tried to make it into a show that worked, in only three weeks.
Rick [Wright] had left, or been shoved out by Roger in '79, so this project started without him being involved. Sometime during the process Rick expressed an interest in being part of it, and we thought it would be a great idea. There were one or two legal reasons which made it a little trickier if he joined, and to be honest Nick and I didn't particularly want to get in extra partners – we had put up the money and taken all the big risks, and so wanted to take the largest cut. And it would make the decision-making process harder. There were a multitude of reasons, some solid and legal, others to do with selfishness, why we didn't put him on a fully one-third basis.
Did you make A Momentary Lapse Of Reason with the tastes of the established Pink Floyd fan in mind?
I just started out to make a record I thought I would like – that's all I've ever done with Pink Floyd. Inevitably, one is going to subconsciously lean towards what is acceptable to the Pink Floyd for. We get an advance from the record company only when we deliver, so there's absolutely no pressure from them as to how we make our records. We've always made a very healthy profit for them, so we've never given them that option. The people who do have that problem with their record companies are the people who have not made a profit on their last couple of records.
Before the Floyd comeback tour started, how confident were you that it would succeed?
The tour had to be planned and the tickets put on sale a long way in advance. We were in the studio in Los Angeles still a long way from completing the record, maybe in May '87, when we wanted to start getting the tour going, and had the first dates fixed. Then Roger sent letters out to every single promoter in North America saying he would sue them if they put our tickets on sale and put an injunction on them to prevent them, seal the bank accounts and all that sort of stuff.
That was another good thing about recording in Los Angeles – lawyers can't ring you up in the middle of your working day. Los Angeles starts eight hours after we do, and as we didn't start in the studio until noon, that would mean British lawyers would have to stay in their office until eight or nine at night if they wanted to talk to us about anything. If you're there at the end of a telephone, they ring you up with every little detail. It's never that urgent. Better to have one one-hour phone call once a week, instead of every half an hour and us losing our train of thought.
So it was all very tense and difficult, but promoters tend to be rather street people and don't take kindly to being threatened. Michael Cole, the guy promoting the Rolling Stones' tour, said he was willing to go ahead and put the tickets on sale, six months before we were due to go out. A problem that some of these promoters expressed to us, and we know it's been expressed to other people, is that they would actually be happier if we didn't put out a new record. If the public didn't have a new record that could supposedly disappoint them, then they knew they could sell out. But we wanted to move forward.
The first tickets on sale were for the CN Stadium in Toronto, and that sold out, about 150,000 seats, in a matter of hours, so we knew we could sell tickets. That gave us a big boost in confidence. The first leg of the tour we were pretty out of pocket at the start because we'd spent a lot of money putting it together and making the record. When the record was delivered, we got an advance, but that only paid for the record. So there was the daily risk on tour that would prevent us from doing any more dates – though we couldn't see how they could do that – or there was the very real possibility that some sort of injunction would be put on us that would seal the bank accounts and stop us using any of the money. Never mind what it cost us putting the tour on, the running expenses added up to around $100,000 a day, so the first few weeks of the tour were very nervy, because if the bank accounts had seized up, then raising the money to carry on would have been extremely difficult. But there came a time when we had raised enough money and got it cleared into other bank accounts which couldn't be touched, and the expenses for the rest of the tour were covered. At that point there was nothing more Roger could do to prevent us, and we celebrated.
We'd spent a lot of money fighting him. We had to have a team of lawyers in every city ready and briefed in case it was suddenly in front of a judge and we had to get someone there in 20 minutes. It never happened, but we had to be prepared for it. We didn't think he had an actual case, but you can't tell with the American legal system – there was the possibility you could find a judge somewhere who would take a few thousand dollars back hander. Not that I would want to cast aspersions on the honesty of judges in America, or England – or anywhere else, for that matter. But it certainly has happened before.
Was part of the motivation to come back bigger and better to lay any doubts to rest that the new, Roger-less Floyd was but a shadow of the past?
Precisely. That's why we set about a good album, a spectacular show and a tour that would go on for over a year. We wanted to leave no one in any doubt that we were still in business and meant business – and no one was going to stop us.
Our tour, I believe quite firmly, showed a way forward for many other people. Our attitude towards getting it right with the best p.a., best lighting system, has rubbed off on many other people – The Who, the Rolling Stones. There is certainly a trend at the moment for people not to go out in the haphazard way they used to. They plan it like a military campaign and think big; if you spend a lot of money, you'll make a lot of money – and enjoy yourself a lot more.
Had you kept abreast of the technological developments in rock shows?
Not consciously, but you go and see shows and make mental notes. I had made several mental notes, and so had our lighting man and other involved. We had ideas meetings where people could throw seemingly ridiculous ideas into the pot and we would try and work out which ones were feasible, which ones would look good, which ones were good value for money, so to speak, and gradually whittle it all down into something that makes sense artistically and financially. That is to say, there are many very expensive effects whose value doesn't last very long, just a matter of seconds. So it's a matter of achieving a balance with things that are reasonably cheap and cheerful but keep coming at you all the time.
Did you see anybody else's shows that impressed you?
I can't say there were shows that impressed me very much, but there were shows where there was one thing that might have been there by pure chance. I saw a Paul Young show where he was using a laser wave that went across the audience vertically in a curve, but it was too expensive for him to carry on using and it probably caused too many difficulties with the local safety people to use something that actually touched people in the audience. I wanted to use that sort of effect but, having pinched the idea, I had to find a way of doing it so it didn't touch the audience physically, sort of laying it sideways above their heads. Then one's got to think of other things to do with the lasers – having them for just one effect in just one song is not enough to make the vast expenditure of having them on the road viable. We looked at all the lighting systems, the vari-lights and things like that, and wound up combining them with French telescans, lasers, colour-rays that look like lasers but aren't. They were inside robots that rose up out of the stage and directed beams of different-coloured lights: those used carefully in conjunction with lasers could lead people to believe quite easily that lasers were actually going into the audience and make it all a bit more exciting – but we could obviously demonstrate to the safety people that they were nowhere near.
Doesn't such an organised, clockwork-like show remove all musical spontaneity?
No, because you can have a whole lighting cue organised inside a computer and you have a guy just tap a button at the appropriate moment and then that whole series of cues will just go off. They are flexible, they aren't synchronised up from the beginning of a song to the end, nor are they exactly the same for every song every night. The guy running the lights is able to be artistic if he wants to, or at least different every night, which means we are free to extend or shorten most of the songs. Some of them we couldn't because of the technology we'd used in the studio, like sequencers, which meant we had to use sequencers on stage for four or five songs, so they were more rigid than I would have liked. But that's really a symptom of getting into some new technologies in the studio without realising that they could be a limitation to you live.
Every time you perform a Waters song, you pay him a royalty – thus financing his lawsuits against you. Did you consider the irony of this situation?
That's the way it goes. Every time we'd go into a town there'd be a Pink Floyd Day, tons of records would be played, the Performing Rights Society or the BMI in America would pick up some royalties which would be distributed to the people who wrote those songs – perfectly rightly. And when Roger plays The Wall in Berlin, money for some of those songs will be paid to me. I do think it's slightly funny at times, but it's not a subject one would want to dwell on overlong.
How do you feel about singing live songs associated with his voice?
We only do one, 'Shine On You Crazy Diamond', though there's a part of 'Comfortably Numb' which Roger sang, which I got Rick and Guy [Pratt] and Jon [Carin] to sing. I sang 'Money' on the record. Live, we picked songs we liked and did tend to move towards songs that I had sung or had a greater involvement in. A lot of people think that 'Shine On' sounds very similar the way I sing it, but it's not really conscious, though I've always been good at imitations.
Were you worried at first that fans might respond badly to the Roger-less Floyd?
I knew we would get some fans who would not approve. We didn't get too many. There would be people in the audience who would make their feelings heard about Roger not being there, just by shouting very loudly during moments when the rest of the audience was being respectfully quiet. They're perfectly entitled to; I just can't understand why the fuck they bothered to pay for the tickets. If they don't like us, go see Roger instead. It died away, but there were one or two funny incidents. There was once a whole row of about eight guys with "Fuck Roger" T-shirts on. There was another guy wearing one of Roger's tour T-shirts, which had the name Roger Waters in green fluorescent lettering across the top, so I only had to glance into the audience and his name would be beaming at me. This guy started off by shouting at us, but by the end of the second half he took the T-shirt off, tore it up into little bits, put it on the floor and stamped on it!
These people don't understand what happened. They seem to think that there was something that we did. But we didn't throw Roger out; we didn't do anything to Roger. He left Pink Floyd. He sent a letter to CBS in America and EMI here saying he'd left Pink Floyd – it was quite clear and unequivocal. He didn't tell us – we only found out when we got a copy of the letter from the record company. He left, and we wanted to carry on with our careers. It's as simple as that. We had a fight, which was just about our freedom.
Had you never discussed in the '70s what would happen if a member of the band wanted to leave?
No. When Syd [Barrett] left [in 1968], he was the kingpin of the band before I joined, and the rest didn't say, Oh, we'll pack it in now that Syd's gone. And when Rick left in '79, we didn't say, Let's not do it any more. So when Roger left in '85, why should I not continue what I'd been doing for the last 17 years? I certainly saw no reason why I shouldn't continue my chosen career.
Do you feel tempted to go to Berlin this weekend to see The Wall and what Roger is up to these days?
Yes, I'm fairly tempted, but I'm not going to. None of us are going. I suppose I'll watch it on telly. I'd hate to be there and be caught in the background sneakily watching it by someone of your profession, hahaha! I'm not interested enough to go. I haven't really examined myself deeply enough to know exactly what I feel about it. My fight with Roger was about freedom, and I want mine, so I've got to grant him his. So The Wall is fine by me – I'm sure he'll do very well.
Have you communicated in the last three years other than through lawyers?
Oh yes. We've met and talked. He has not stopped coming to the meetings we have to have – we are still in business together and we have to have board meetings to make various decisions; but now he usually sends a proxy along. The last time I spoke to him was when we signed our agreement [in 1987], which stopped all lawsuits at that time and settled the fact that we had the name in perpetuity. He got some rights and bits and pieces, particularly to do with The Wall. There were one or two areas of the agreement that weren't clear and he subsequently entered two or three lawsuits against us, which he has now dropped.
Is the lawsuit his first resort? No meeting to try to reach an agreement beforehand?
No. I think he's got my phone number and I’ve got his. But I have no interest in discussing anything with him. He's told too many lies and too many bad things have happened. I have no interest in conversing with him.
Do you not foresee a day when you will shake hands and put all this behind you?
I don't foresee it. I'm not very good at holding grudges for very long, but he's done some terrible things. Honesty is not one of the things that he will let get in the way of his pursuit of power. All we did was thwart his plan to go off round the world doing a huge grand show, calling it 'Roger Waters of Pink Floyd' in huge letters, and take over the name himself by us not being on the scene. I'm 100 percent certain, that's what he intended to do, and us going out as Pink Floyd rather put the mockers on it. And his career has not exactly taken off since he left.
What are the lights and sound of the Floyd show like for the performers? Is the effect equally "trippy" on stage?
It can be, yes, but you've got be careful with the drinks beforehand. With the amount of technology up on stage these days, you've got to have your wits about you. The stage is covered in little mirrors and lights and monitors and trapdoors that open with things coming out at you. With pitch darkness between songs you've got to know exactly where you are. We have guide lights up the stairs at the back for when we come up on to the stage, and I have a little lamp with a dimmer that shines on to parts of my equipment, so if I want to twiddle a knob, I can see where it is.
The floating stage you used in Venice – had that ever been done before?
I'd seen it in a Marx Brothers movie, but I don't think it had ever been done before on that scale. We had to hunt the world for a barge big enough –I set problems and other people are sent off to find solutions!
The Venice show was great fun. but it was very tense and nerve-wracking. We had a specific length of show to do; the satellite broadcasting meant we had to get it absolutely precise. We had the list of songs, and we'd shortened them, which we'd never done before. I had a big clock with a red digital read-out on the floor in front of me, and had the start time of each number on a piece of paper. If we were coming near the start time of the next number, I just had to wrap up the one we were on. We had a really good time, but the city authorities who had agreed to provide the services of security, toilets, food, completely reneged on everything they were supposed to do, and then tried to blame all the subsequent problems on us. Lots of twaddle was written about it, even by some nice respectable journalists from The Guardian – stuff about our music disturbing the buildings; complete fucking absolute twaddle.
There was a big row on the Venice council; some people there wanted to get others off, and they used this issue to discredit them. We were political pawns. Most of the residents just left town and hoped Venice would still be there when they came back on Monday, and if anything had gone wrong, they'd blame us.
And then there were the gondoliers – they came to us and threatened that if we didn't give them $10,000 immediately, they would fill the entire space up in front of the stage and blow their whistles all the way through the show. So we said, Fine–come back at the end of the show and we'll give you the $10,000. And when they did, we said, Piss off, you missed your chance. That's the story I was told by our manager, Steve O'Rourke. We got away with that one, but there were other things where we had to bribe people to make things happen, where again they had agreed on something and then reneged, and you have to say, take this money and do it. For example, along one of the main waterways is an island called the Giudecca, and they've got a pontoon bridge all the way across, which they'd agreed to open up for us early the next morning to let us float the whole stage through, towed by tugs. They then refused to open it, so we had to tow this vast stage the size of a football pitch out into the open sea. Then the sea police came up and boarded and said. You can't come this way. We said, They won't let us through that canal where they'd agreed… So we had to pay out.
Initially Steve was very against the idea of playing Venice, saying it would be too difficult. Throughout the second leg of that tour he'd come up to me and say, It's never going to happen. I said, Steve, if Venice doesn't happen, you're fired. Or something like that.
Was that a bluff?
I don't know, really. Never had to find out.
Have you ever seen a Jean-Michel Jarre show?
No, we saw some video of the thing he did in the Docklands, and it didn't really turn me on a great deal. He does some quite pretty music, but he doesn't have the dynamics I personally like, and I thought a lot of the effects were Mickey Mouse, cheapo cheapo productions; but I didn't see it live so I didn’t really know. Poor old Jean-Michel went over his head on that thing; he didn't know how to deal with the local authorities and the whole thing left a very bad taste because people did not get paid, this didn't happen and that. I knew a bad taste was left in some people's mouths with us in Venice, because things didn’t happen that were not our fault got blamed on us, but everyone who was supposed to get paid did get paid and even those who weren't supposed to be paid got paid. It cost us a fortune!
Have you seen any other rock spectaculars of late?
Michael Jackson in an indoor arena in America, and it wasn't great. When I see something like-that, I think, My God, put me in charge for a week and I'll turn this into something good! There's no doubt in my mind that I could have turned something like the Michael Jackson show from pretty average to pretty damned good, given a few days and bucks. There are corners that can be cut and corners that can't – just a million little details that one could look at. But I went to see Prince at Wembley and he was bloody good. He definitely does things from the right attitude; I think he goes out of his way to get the best people do the best job, and thinks about every detail. He gets people around him who share his belief that it will come right if you get it right, which is our attitude. I think Sinead's show is great – again, by my rule book, she's doing things right. We have sessions where people throw their hands up in horror at the things we decide to do, but in the end if you get your show right, then the money will take care of itself.
Have you ever been to a rave?
A rave? What's a rave? Ah, an acid house party! I haven't been to a really big one, but I've been to one indoors. I can see why people like them, but I think I'm a bit too used to comfort. Leaping around all night long is not a thing I still want to do. I did used to go to festivals in the '60s and sleep out on hillsides in sleeping bags; I did that even while I was in Pink Floyd, in 1970 seeing Hendrix at the Isle of Wight. But I'm 44 and a bit unused to that sort of thing now.'
When you play on, say, a Paul McCartney record, how does it actually work? What kind of fee does one millionaire pay another for laying down a guitar track? Or is there a different system?
I just say to anyone that I'm working for, Send a cheque for whatever you like to, the charity of our choice, though sometimes I specify Amnesty International or Greenpeace. It becomes something to do with their conscience, not mine – I'm not going to check up.
Does this work the other way? On your second solo LP, About Face, Stevie Winwood played.
I paid him good money, about $1,000 a day, and he wanted me to use his studio and pay for the studio time. It seemed perhaps a little high. But he doesn't owe me any favours and I didn't know him very well. I've always loved Stevie Winwood. I used to go and see The Spencer Davis Group when I was 18 and he was about 16. He used to play really great guitar as well as great piano –I wanted to hit the little fucker, he was so good!
And Grace Jones, on whose 'Slave To The Rhythm' you played?
I never met Grace Jones. I was approached by Trevor Horn, and went down to their studio SARM East and set up my equipment, and Steve Lipson and Trevor were there. Trevor had terrible food poisoning and was throwing up every three minutes, lying on the floor trying to produce a record and chucking up into a bin! I think mostly they sampled anything I did into a Synclavier and tried to make some sort of sense out of it later, because he was too ill then, poor chap.
What determines whether you will play a session?
Either because I like the artist or I think I might learn something or they're friends of mine.
And which bracket did Arcadia fall into?
I don't really know. I think I thought I might learn something – not a lot, though. But they're nice people, Simon le Bon and, er, what's his name… I was never a big Durannie. With people I know I just go and do it. I don't want to consider myself as some valuable icon who would cheapen himself by playing on some record.
When you brought Kate Bush to the attention of EMI, you somehow acquired the image of an avuncular helping hand to the next generation...
Did I? I did do a couple of things with Kate, I suppose. To a certain extent, if you see something that you think is brilliant, and particularly if that thing is being presented in such a way that most cloth-eared record company people wouldn't notice if it hit them falling off the top of a truck, then I sometimes feel a certain sense of responsibility to bring out what I think is good and then bring it to their attention, which is what I did with Kate. Her home demos were of her sitting at a horrible piano, recorded with a very ancient tape-recorder, and her squeaking away. I listened to them and I could hear the talent but wouldn't have dreamt of taking them to a record company. I knew the only real way to do it was to tart them up, if you like. We recorded her properly, with a proper producer and the best engineer, Geoff Emerick, arranger, and chose three or four songs out of about 50, and made a proper record and presented it to EMI. And of course they said, Yes, great, we'll take it.
Lastly, that 200th and (for the time being) final gig at Knebworth – what are your options when it's pouring with rain?
The options when it starts pouring with rain are: one, walk off and leave a wet, extremely miserable audience out there, Two, cower slightly at the back of the stage – and if you're huddled at the back, then the whole band will huddle as well – and don't give of your best, and the audience knows you're not, so are still sitting there wet and miserable. Three, just revel in it and show solidarity. If you're out there at the front looking as if you're enjoying it, the audience think better of it and the rest of the band think better of it. So there really is no choice.
Could you stand to do it all again?
I think we will make another record, and we will tour, though perhaps not quite as big as this one. I started this project in April '86 and it's now July 1990 – well over four years and almost 100 per cent of my energies dedicated to one project. Now I don't have the appetite to go back into the studio and spend a lot of time there. It's as simple as that. At my age I don't feel compelled to do that. There are other things one wants to do with one's time, and music has probably taken up an unfair amount of it. I know I will want to do it again at some point, but not right now.
© Mat Snow, 1990
Kiffin claims Saban gave him great advice about the LSU job and told him to take it. Why do they even talk if Saban doesn't like the guy?
New Ecobee, and just in case any Ecobee employees monitor this sub, you'll be happy to know my local HVAC company, which is a rather large company, highly promote Ecobee over Nest even though they don't make money off of either. They make no money of thermostats and require customers to provide their own. But they stated they have repeated problems with Nest and never have issues with Ecobee.
Here is my question: When set to Cold, if I want my temp to stay on 72 (or whatever), what does it mean when it says "72 Until 6:30AM" right after I adjusted to 72 ? Also, if it's 70 in the house right now, what does the blue circled 78 indicate? (see photo #2)
I just want one continuous temp, 72, and do not have it set on any type of schedule or cycle.
I have been considering this car for a while and wonder, is this car suitable for some rugged terrain and minor jumps, or is it designed strictly for track racing and flatter surfaces? I would not be racing the car, it's just something to play around with. While I realize a Traxxas or Arrma Buggy is better suited for jumping and grass or rugged terrain, I want the sprint for specific reasons. Any help is much appreciated.
Also, if the ground clearance is an issue in this regard, does this car offer allow an adjustment to raise the clearance ?
Tom Cruise presumably owns his name, image, and likeness. Author Andrew Morton (among countless others) did not procure permission from Tom Cruise to use his name, image, or likeness for the cover of his unauthorized biography, which was released by a major publisher. I'm assuming this relates to the 'public figure' freedoms the press/media have. But can it ever get tricky?
Can anyone give a garden variety scenario where an author, writing a biography of a living human (famous or not), could be prevented from using a photo of the subject as the books cover, even if the photo was not owned by the subject and was rightfully licensed from the photographer who took/owned it?
I neglected to pay tax on some 1099 work from Covid forward, for Covid reasons. I have received letters from the IRS from 2 of the 6 years. One year, the IRS is seeking less than $1,000. The other year, just over $1,000. I am expecting to eventually receive letters for the remaining years, and based on that income, I expect the total some I owe to come to slightly over $10K. I owe this money and have no intention of disputing it. I currently have a mortgage with less than $10K owed. It has long been a goal to pay the house off, and I intend to do that this December. But is it a mistake to pay off the house and it be an outright asset when I owe the IRS this sum, or am I giving the IRS way too much credit for quickly putting a lien on my home when I owe them less than $15,000?
If you're not familiar with the case, you probably won't want to go down the rabbit hole. Very short summary:
In 1996, college student Kristin Smart disappeared from California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo. This case would absolutely be considered the Natalee Holloway of the 90's.
In 2022, the lone suspect in the case, Paul Flores was convicted of her murder and sentenced to 25 years/Life in prison. One major piece of evidence was that soil samples from his fathers backyard were tested and detected the presence of human remains, although Kristins remains have never been found.
Yesterday, police began digging up Paul's mothers backyard. The running theory is that Paul moved her body, at some point shortly after the murder, from his fathers back yard to his mothers.
As I said, Paul was sentenced in 2022 and is serving his time. If Kristins remains are found in Ms. Flores backyard, would/could Paul be re-sentenced to a lengthier sentence or perhaps death?
This is a seating area in my local Botanical Gardens. Cleary the rocks were cut to fit. This is a volunteer / free admission space and I can't see them investing a fortune to have had this done. Can anyone say what the cheapest process of doing this is? Would it be feasible if I wanted something similar in my back yard?
Hello friends. I hate to bug the group with this, but I am looking to purchase some used materials and don't know how to go about identifying what I need. I bought a bunch of old RC nascar bodies and am wanting to convert them to simply shelf pieces, with no mechanics really needed other than the graphite base plates and the bar minimum of chassis or suspension to attach wheels / tires to, the way the #22 Bobby Allison car is. Again, for display only. The issue is that I have no idea what to purchase. As you can see, all 3 of these bodies likely fit different chassis. I believe the country time is a 1/10 scale and the other two are 1/12 scale possibly. If you buy a used body on Ebay, how do you have any idea what it fits on? Can anyone advise me on how best to go about this for this purpose? Any help is much appreciated.