Musings with Savvy

Metatron

Aurally Satisfied
Wammer
Jan 15, 2009
2,405
1,453
158
Remote
AKA
Varies by deed poll
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
This is a continuation of a thread that went tangential, but @savvypaul asked some questions and I felt best to answer on a new thread.
Interesting post. Thanks. I'm afraid I won't read the ASR link, and all my books by Floyd are about cooking, but I am interested in your own views.

If the point of the equipment is accuracy to the recording, what would you say is the point of accuracy to the recording? Beyond the the obvious answer, what outcome is that accuracy for, why is it sought-after? Is the purpose of that accuracy to enable us enjoy music to the maximum possible degree, or is it an academic exercise (I don't mean that last bit in any pejorative sense)? If it's the former, how do you measure how much you enjoy your music?

I generally seem to like (what is considered to be) accuracy, and I definitely want all the information that I can get, but I have liked some pieces of equipment (usually speakers) that would be considered 'not flat'. Is that a distortion, or is it a minor and intentional deviation from a flat response in order to increase musical enjoyment within a domestic environment? Is the BBC speaker dip / hump a distortion?
RE: if equipment shoud be accurate? Why, what purpose etc...

I don't believe it's an academic exercise. If one has some distortion that creates a bass hump that is nice on the initially tested tracks, will it sound nice on every track, such as those already bass heavy? And vice versa. Also, who listens to a live performance and thinks, that needed more bass, or more midrange, creates kit to do the same and then think it applies equally well to all things other than that live performance? If a system tunes for one set of characteristics, it will no doubt seem preferable in some areas to others, but then equally, the owner may end up listening to the subset of music that 'works' on such a system and avoid other music because it sounds 'bad' or 'wrong' and may be blaming the music over the system in this example. So, no, it's not an academic exercise, it's to portray a recording as it was intended by the studio engineer. If that was a good recording and sounded real, the recording if played back faithfully should sound real. Nothing added, nothing taken away.

RE: how do you measure how much you enjoy your music?

Well, as said on the original thread, reproduction is a physical/electronic phenomena and enjoyment of sound is psychological. However, I personally find that if one's music tastes broaden on a system change and formerly unlistenable music becomes enjoyable, while formerly excellent music remains so, then it's probably going in the right direction. Of course, one can compare in-room recording with the signal, and scale it, to see if things are moving closer to the original, but that's not a requirement by any means.

RE: is not flat a distortion? what about BBC speaker dip/hump?

I think speaker designers consider it an incorrect response rather than a distortion, but excess or too little bass relative to the original performance is effectively (in my view) a distortion. Same with phase-shifted speaker responses. So I'd say the same about the BBC speaker dip/hump. But I know many people like it. It probably allows the vocal to be more set back than it would otherwise, so those with perhaps forward speakers, do not feel as if the vocalist is in their personal space :)

Separately things you might have wanted to ask...

Do I think everything should be measured?

No, but it helps if you can do what you can be faffed with to replace guessing accuracy with measuring it. Using REW to generate convolution filters that account for speaker and room anomalies and give an overall response more in line with the Harman Curver, seems to pay dividends in my experience.

So when do I think measurements are necessary?

Simply when somebody experiences something that current science says should not be so. When microphones are more sensitive than the human ear, they can pick up every little vibration we only 'think' was there. Since we experience differences as a psychological effect when we tweak something, try a power lead, an interconnect, a speaker cable, a network switch, a different DDC, it seems prudent to check that instrumentation more sensitve than our own does actually confirm or deny what we think we hear.

Do I use specs to buy equipment?

I somewhat used to, and now definitely do. Not because I am all about measurements, but because where in the past I would have compared similar measuring equipment for preference on a demo, I now live alone with a dog, and so getting to a demo in a shop requires getting a dog-sitter at cost. No shop will put something in my home unless they meet me and verify me first, so any outing to a hifi store means I have to try and make concrete arrangements for my dog.

As a result, I now use specs for things like DACs, and amps. My older system of Chord Hugo DAC, Modwright LS36.5 and Pass Labs X250 amp have been replaced by experimentation with buying 'transparent' kit via specs. The Pass Labs X250 is too expensive to run while I work from home all day, so I went Class D and got Purifi-based monoblocks.

The Purifi monoblocks reportedly give best measured performance in low gain mode, and the docs say that requires a preamp that can output 10Vrms or more. So I bought a Benchmark LA4 on the basis it measures in the same ballpark and is about as 'clean' spec-wise as it's possible to get.

DAC wise, I still have a makeshift SMSL M500 Mk1, which reportedly measures better than the Chord Hugo I had. So waht about the results?

First, I thought the system sounded brighter, but over time, it improved and when I stick either my old preamp or power amp in the system, I can immediately hear the distortion I never noticed before starting this experiment. Sure, the Pass Labs at least still sounds 'huge', but the effects are pretty much gone once adjusting for the different gain. The Pass has plenty of 2nd harmonic and I thought this was an amp I'd never get rid of as I found it more enjoyable than all sorts of esoterica I heard elsewhere. But now, I find it lacks the incisiveness or bass impact of the Purifi monoblocks once level-matched. There is more 'texture' to my ears than the Pass gave.

The same is true when I slot in the Modwright, which is valve based. I enjoy the sound, but there is a euphony I didn't notice before and it can sometimes harden or blur in ways that don't seem right to my ears.

As for the DAC... well, cannot say I notice too much difference at all with that, but I don't have the Hugo to swap to for a direct comparison.

What now?

I'd like objectively better speakers. The thing is, given all speaker designs are a trade-off, some better my WIlson Benesch on things like smooth response or directivity, while the WB seem to always win with resolution, refinement, bass texture and indeed measured bass distortion. So not sure what will ultimately replace them as I doubt I can afford what probably is better all round.

I won't be going back to the old system, even if energy prices plummet. The aim to seem what 'transparent' kit brought was illuminating for me, and demonstrated to me how a cheaper system can better more expensive stalwart brands that somewhat trade on brand cache.

@savvypaul So what are your thoughts on these topics?
 

savvypaul

NVA Hi-Fi
HiFi Trade
Jan 11, 2017
7,083
10,472
148
Durham Uk
nvahifi.co.uk
AKA
Paul
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
@Metatron

Musings with Savvy? I've always wanted a muse of my own, but I couldn't afford the loft space in Monmartre, let alone the silk stockings and absinthe... ;)

There's much common ground between us, I think, but our approaches are undeniably different. In no particular order, I shall muse, lol:

I think the most worthwhile possible purpose of accuracy to the recording would be to provide enjoyment to the listener. Therefore, it seems to me that the 'bottom line' reason for existence of a hi-fi system is to satisfy the listener. I don't want colourations that get in the way of the music, but I think that enough accuracy, is enough. I'm happy enough when there are no obvious anomalies, and given there are so many variables - the room, my ears, my mood, the whims of the recording engineer - I can live with some minor variations.

I sort of take the view that speakers are virtually a musical instrument; they all have some colourations and they all have some variation from flat, and they often interact quite differently with different rooms. Subsequently, I don't get particularly vexed by minor variations in sources or amplifiers, because I know that these are (usually) as nothing compared to the variations in speakers. Overall, I like clarity, separation, all the information I can get...and all combined with a natural air and freedom from fatigue.

I measure my enjoyment by how much I want to listen to my music on my system, how late I stay up, how many hairs on my arms and neck are standing up, how the music makes me feel. Musicians seem to play better on better systems. So, when I'm describing a system, I tend to describe the music, rather than the sound. I can quickly identify a system that is not accurate enough, but I'm not trying to set a benchmark for supreme accuracy above subjective enjoyment.

In my consumer life, I only use my ears to judge. They are my ears, connected directly to my own brain, and therefore the best things to use for the purpose of measuring musical enjoyment in the ways that I want to measure it. I will use electrical specifications, in advance, to avoid any serious compatibility missteps - I wouldn't want to run a SET into a pair of Thiels, or arc original Quad 57s with a 200w Krell. I buy things that I can try for an extended period and return if necessary, or things that I've heard plenty of, one way or another, or that I can get secondhand and sell on with minimal hassle / loss. The internet is great for the former, meet-ups are excellent for the latter. I'm fairly well settled with my system line-up, though I am about to scratch my Quad 57 itch - I'm collecting a well cared for set on Friday.

Price is between the seller and the buyer, which is to acknowledge that we don't all buy things for exactly the same reasons. But, I agree that price does not guarantee sonic success. One of the systems that I most enjoyed at the WAM show in Stoke (in the Lenco Heaven room) could probably be put together out of the classifieds for around £500.

I also live (mostly) alone, with a dog, but I'm lucky that he is cool with being left at home when necessary (he's a greyhound, sleeps for England, bar a couple of 15 minute bursts each day chasing small furry creatures), though he does come to work with me - he has his own leather couch in the office, next to the radiator.
 
Last edited:

DomT

Food and coffee and rock n roll
Wammer Plus
Jul 23, 2019
10,328
9,595
198
Village near Nottingham.
AKA
Dom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
This is a great thread and tells us a lot about the two posters. Of course they are both right as music and HiFi are a personal thing. Is it open for others to join in?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Metatron

rabski

Everything in moderation
Staff member
Dec 2, 2006
32,873
1
26,119
173
Kettering
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Musings...

I measure everything when I'm building stuff. I also did some basic room measurements to see if room and the way I have the system set up in it meant it had few nasties (it doesn't).

Once it's on the rack(s) in the system, the only measurement I really care about is how long I can listen to it before I get fed up. That now seems be be determined only by the length of time I can stay awake, so to me, it measures fine.

I don't determine the quality of anything based on its price, but equally, as long as I can justify the expenditure, I don't mind paying to get what I want. My system bears testimony to that, as there is 'very cheap' combined with 'not at all very cheap'.

Should it be 'accurate'? I don't really care to be honest. I want something that sounds close to reality, and the only sensible way to achieve that is by listening. I also want something that makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end at times, and only my barber has a suitable measurement for that.

Above all, I want the system, my listening and this place (the wigwam) to primarily be pleasurable and fun.
 

Metatron

Aurally Satisfied
Wammer
Jan 15, 2009
2,405
1,453
158
Remote
AKA
Varies by deed poll
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
@Metatron

Musings with Savvy? I've always wanted a muse of my own, but I couldn't afford the loft space in Monmartre, let alone the silk stockings and absinthe... ;)

There's much common ground between us, I think, but our approaches are undeniably different. In no particular order, I shall muse, lol:

I think the most worthwhile possible purpose of accuracy to the recording would be to provide enjoyment to the listener. Therefore, it seems to me that the 'bottom line' reason for existence of a hi-fi system is to satisfy the listener. I don't want colourations that get in the way of the music, but I think that enough accuracy, is enough. I'm happy enough when there are no obvious anomalies, and given there are so many variables - the room, my ears, my mood, the whims of the recording engineer - I can live with some minor variations.

I sort of take the view that speakers are virtually a musical instrument; they all have some colourations and they all have some variation from flat, and they often interact quite differently with different rooms. Subsequently, I don't get particularly vexed by minor variations in sources or amplifiers, because I know that these are (usually) as nothing compared to the variations in speakers. Overall, I like clarity, separation, all the information I can get...and all combined with a natural air and freedom from fatigue.

I measure my enjoyment by how much I want to listen to my music on my system, how late I stay up, how many hairs on my arms and neck are standing up, how the music makes me feel. Musicians seem to play better on better systems. So, when I'm describing a system, I tend to describe the music, rather than the sound. I can quickly identify a system that is not accurate enough, but I'm not trying to set a benchmark for supreme accuracy above subjective enjoyment.

In my consumer life, I only use my ears to judge. They are my ears, connected directly to my own brain, and therefore the best things to use for the purpose of measuring musical enjoyment in the ways that I want to measure it. I will use electrical specifications, in advance, to avoid any serious compatibility missteps - I wouldn't want to run a SET into a pair of Thiels, or arc original Quad 57s with a 200w Krell. I buy things that I can try for an extended period and return if necessary, or things that I've heard plenty of, one way or another, or that I can get secondhand and sell on with minimal hassle / loss. The internet is great for the former, meet-ups are excellent for the latter. I'm fairly well settled with my system line-up, though I am about to scratch my Quad 57 itch - I'm collecting a well cared for set on Friday.

Price is between the seller and the buyer, which is to acknowledge that we don't all buy things for exactly the same reasons. But, I agree that price does not guarantee sonic success. One of the systems that I most enjoyed at the WAM show in Stoke (in the Lenco Heaven room) could probably be put together out of the classifieds for around £500.

I also live (mostly) alone, with a dog, but I'm lucky that he is cool with being left at home when necessary (he's a greyhound, sleeps for England, bar a couple of 15 minute bursts each day, chasing small furry creatures), though he does come to work with me - he has his own leather couch in the office, next to the radiator.
What a lucky hound! I work from home on the sofa, so I have a Basset on my sofa, but she struggles if she doesn't get much interaction, or if left alone.

I don't really perceive what you call how you measure your enjoyment as different to mine, except I may get out REW and measure the in-room speaker response and produce a convolution filter for ROON. It's much about hearing things as intended/recorded. Am I listening to sound or to music? Well, I use the terms interchangeably. Mostly I mean music. I certainly am not a fan of playing white or pink noise when getting REW out.
 

rabski

Everything in moderation
Staff member
Dec 2, 2006
32,873
1
26,119
173
Kettering
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
WRT the other bits. The absinthe is in the past, as I no longer partake of the devil's liquids. Unfortunately, at the moment although Anne and I both technically work from home, we are also both out, about and away a fair bit, so it would be unfair and impractical to have a full-time canine companion.

Fortunately though, our son's cockapoo is a frequent visitor, sometimes for a few days. When we feel the need, we also have friends nearby whose spaniel seems as fond of us as we are of her, so she too is a not infrequent guest. That sort of stuff is far more important than hifi anyway.
 

Metatron

Aurally Satisfied
Wammer
Jan 15, 2009
2,405
1,453
158
Remote
AKA
Varies by deed poll
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I no longer partake of the devil's liquids
Say it ain't so!!

I noticed the occurences of thread locking threats had gone down ;)

Unfortunately, at the moment although Anne and I both technically work from home, we are also both out, about and away a fair bit, so it would be unfair and impractical to have a full-time canine companion.
I wish more people were this responsible. So many got a dog during lockdown only to now give them up.

I've seen how dogs that bonded to their owners as pups become mistrustful of people when given up. Now doubt the trauma of abandonment.

I met a lady walking my dog Toffee.... we got talking and on this topic she asked if I was just anthropomorphizing. I am not sure empathising with an animals predicament is anthropomorphizing. I think they feel things pretty much as we do, just without the same comprehension of language.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Tony_J and Jules_S

rabski

Everything in moderation
Staff member
Dec 2, 2006
32,873
1
26,119
173
Kettering
AKA
Richard
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Sadly, it is so. Haven't touched it for over four years. And that's not an innuendo either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustinTime

oldius

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 30, 2008
6,938
5,969
158
Liverpool
AKA
Geoff
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
I only use my ears. To be fair, I buy products (or have done) that have a reputation as being well-engineered, often with a studio heritage, and I suppose that, after forty years of listening, I know what sounds right to me and what doesn't.

For a while now, I have realised that it really doesn't matter how products measure: I have sat and listened to speakers that are so clearly limited, and will measure badly, yet are loved by many. We haven't found a way to measure what our ears and brain prefer, and the eyes have massively more influence than many of us would like to admit. The hobby is interesting because of the variety that it offers, from the characters that occupy it, and because of the commonality that we all share. Whether cables and fuses make a difference is actually utterly meaningless in the face of that.
 
Last edited:

garn63

Wammer Plus
Wammer Plus
Mar 3, 2020
12,284
18,700
198
www.avfc.co.uk
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Have been focusing on what I really like for a while. Got nowt to do with hifi but it helps (immeasurably) when deciding what equipment I would like to play music through.
Just need a full body transplant now & I'll be a happy boy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: savvypaul

DomT

Food and coffee and rock n roll
Wammer Plus
Jul 23, 2019
10,328
9,595
198
Village near Nottingham.
AKA
Dom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
So, no, it's not an academic exercise, it's to portray a recording as it was intended by the studio engineer. If that was a good recording and sounded real, the recording if played back faithfully should sound real. Nothing added, nothing taken away.

So I'd say the same about the BBC speaker dip/hump. But I know many people like it. It probably allows the vocal to be more set back than it would otherwise, so those with perhaps forward speakers, do not feel as if the vocalist is in their personal space

Do I think everything should be measured?

No, but it helps if you can do what you can be faffed with to replace guessing accuracy with measuring it. Using REW to generate convolution filters that account for speaker and room anomalies and give an overall response more in line with the Harman Curver, seems to pay dividends in my experience.
I thought that I would join in the fun. It’s great that you have been very articulate as it’s helpful to know where people are coming from. I picked up a few interesting comments. And added a bit about me so hopefully you will understand me a little bit better.

The intended by the studio engineer quote. As a musician, producer and studio owner it’s true that artists take care and are particular over what they produce. Some are fanatical about it and have the funds to be so. But when it comes to listening to this music then no we will not hear what the mastering engineer heard unless we were at the actual mastering session. At home we will get an approximation to a greater or lesser degree. One reason is that in a mastering studio the engineer is in a treated room and listening nearfield. At home people typically do not listen like this and so even if the HiFi owner has ‘studio’ monitors they may not be the same ones as the mastering engineer used and the signal chain will be very different and people tend to listen mid to far field. Well no problem if there is no distortion in the chain in my system. Well the speaker room interaction has much more of a bearing than the difference between two DACs. Well the speakers are flat and so therefore accurate. Except that HiFi speakers are not flat. Well ATC speakers are flat. Well not when compared to my Neumann monitors in my studio. In my view, and yours may be different, it’s a fools errand to try to hear at home what the mastering engineer heard.

But do artists expect listeners to hear exactly what is on the record? No that wouldn’t be realistic. And especially not if talking about rock and pop music. Then if we discuss 70s rock and pop recordings then by todays standards of low noise high resolution we could be hearing more than what the artist heard. I remember hearing some very high resolution systems a few years back and if the artists from the 70s and 80s heard what I heard they would have remixed the tracks. And why do many studios including high end studios have a cheap pair of Auratones? To check what Joe Public might be listening on at home as music needs to sound great on the radio or in the car or ear buds etc. So it’s not quite so straight forward.

BBC hump. I (now) really like BBC speakers. I used to have Wilson Benesch Curves. A great speaker when used with my Audio Research valve pre/power amps. When on returning to the UK I wanted a simpler family friendly system I went solid state but I wasn’t keen on the explicitness of the Curves with solid state and so tried a few different speakers. The amazing thing that I found about the Harbeth SHL5 compared to Electrostatic Martin Logan’s is that the Logan’s gave me more detail but the Harbeths that I had zero interest in at the time told me more about how the instruments were being played. It’s very difficult for me to explain this but as a musician I understood the music better with the Harbeths even though the SHL5 was inferior to the Logans and others that I tried including the Curves. People hear different things when listening and so on here you will see me write very often that it just depends.

Measurements. Measurements could be useful especially for amps if there was an agreed formula for determining the sound of an amp. Really this would have been so helpful for me. I have three preamps and three power amps and an integrated amp they sound very very different despite having individual measurements that are similar. Funnily enough the amp with the highest distortion measurement is the more detailed sounding. And I find clear differences with DACs as written up on here explaining the different bass note harmonics and string pressure even though the DACs measure almost the same. Weird right as the differences should be tiny but even obvious when visiting Wammers houses for the first time and doing a comparison on an unfamiliar system.

So what is my approach? I was a classically trained musician from a young age but I left that behind in my late teams to be an improv electronic musician but where everything is played by hand with no computers or sequencers up until this day. So I don’t write and produce from a technical perspective and I don’t want anything in the way of the message being created. When I choose HiFi I want to hear the message but in a way that I want to hear it. Listening for pleasure is different to listening in a studio. I do want realism but not in a way that I can’t relax when listening. Digital until recently has always put me a bit on edge and so the rest of the system needed to take the edge off that. I tried listening to commercially released music on my Neumanns but they are not to my taste at all for listening for pleasure. One reason is that a lot of what I listen to is 70s r&b funk and new wave recorded on a budget or just not always well recorded. Explicit systems really show this off in a way that’s not at all pleasing as all I hear is the need for a remix. If I want to analyse a mix then sure but for pleasure no thank you.

So I try and balance my need for things to sound real, hear the message, have enough detail to marvel at the great musicianship, but also to relax and have a pleasing experience. I run two systems that give me different experiences and also the studio if I really want to get forensic which is rare because it’s not really a fun listen for me.

Music and the HiFi we choose is a personal thing and everyone is correct in their vision of what is best for them. There are many ways to happiness. But I think that it’s far easier to achieve success when buying a system to enjoy listening to music on rather than aiming for the seemingly impossible dream of creating the perfectly neutral system in a perfectly neutral room.
 

savvypaul

NVA Hi-Fi
HiFi Trade
Jan 11, 2017
7,083
10,472
148
Durham Uk
nvahifi.co.uk
AKA
Paul
HiFi Trade?
  1. Yes
After looking for one nice pair of 57s for a few months, we bought two pairs in two days, with the 'inspired' but slightly mad idea of stacking them (possibly at the WAM show, in October).

Mark got a pair from another hi-fi forum and I ended up with these (below) from Andrew at AQuadThing. They've had a couple of Quad services in their 50 odd years, and clamp boards fitted, but nothing '3rd party'. They 'came up' very quickly (within 5 minutes of being switched on), and have excellent balance. Andrew, who has been listening to 57s for over 50 years (and servicing / refurbing them for a fair chunk of that), reckons they're as close to original factory measurements as any pair that he has come across in the last 10 to 15 years years. They sound even better after being on for 24 hours, at home. They are not modern hi-fi, but, wow... vocals... like the singer is in the room and you can reach out and touch them. Exceptionally natural, zero fatigue.

I'll be rejigging the room a little in order to get them a bit further apart, but they've been easier to fit in (and get sounding really good) than I had anticipated. At the moment, they're nearly 4 feet from the front wall, and I'm listening from around 10 feet away...

quads at home.jpg
 
Last edited:

bencat

Amplifier Destroyer
Wammer Plus
Feb 6, 2010
10,311
8,115
208
Liverpool
AKA
Andrew
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Looking at the pictures Paul I presume it is your current integrated you are using with the Quads ? How do you find it for volume levels with them ? Do they go loud enough.
 

pmcuk

Wammer
Wammer
Sep 12, 2015
7,317
1
4,880
148
Kensington, London
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
An interesting thread, and I'm glad to see wammers using their ears and comparing what they are hearing with "reality" as Rabski puts it, i.e. live acoustic instruments and voices. I'm a trained and performing musician like Dom and others here, and I can't stress enough how important the tonality of acoustic instruments is to practising musicians who use their instruments every day in orchestras and groups as well as at home.

Take a look and listen to concert pianist Tiffany Chan choosing a Type B Steinway from the Steinway showroom. She spends the whole day choosing the model she is most comfortable with. The video lasts 17 minutes and it gives you a very good idea of the tiny nuances of tone that make or break your relationship with an instrument. Which Steinway is good for Chopin, which is good for playing a concerto and so forth?



So while others get their kicks on Route 66, I get my kicks from equipment that sounds just like real acoustic instruments. The reediness of a clarinet, the shimmer of a Zildjian cymbal, the "ding" of a vibraphone, the unique steely tonality of a Steinway as distinct from a Bechstein or a Bosendorfer. I've played music live for most of my life in everything from symphony orchestras to jazz clubs and the tonalities of acoustic instruments are indelibly imprinted on my brain.

Speaking of Purify amps, I heard one in my system directly compared with my 2a3 amp. It was spooky - it sounded like a fairly persuasive artificial reproduction of music. But it just wasn't real. Extended listening showed a lack of nuance in the tonality of instruments and the decay of notes and voices kind of just "died" as opposed to lingering in the air with the 2a3. It was as if it was trying really hard to sound like the real thing, but there was a glass wall between it and the real thing that it just could never get through at the end of the day. I've tried again and again to set up SMPS power supplies and always failed, and I'm not the only one - they just don't sound like linear power supplies. I have yet to hear anything with the tonality of triode valves and in particular DHTs. But I'm always open and I'm going to build a Pass F7 and play with it, driven with my 10Y line stage. We'll see how that goes when it's built.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
113,444
Messages
2,451,263
Members
70,783
Latest member
reg66

Latest Articles