| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Horn-Loaded Speakers» Good midbass is complicated, if not unobtainable. (75 posts, 4 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 3 of 4 (75 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 »
02-20-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Rewind
Posts 20
Joined on 04-15-2013

Post #: 41
Post ID: 20622
Reply to: 20125
Macondo vs Meyer
fiogf49gjkf0d
Macman: Maybe your tapped horns were too small. Speedysteve is absolutely in love with his, and you and him have a very similar setup with your 15" upper midbass horn and all.

02-20-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Scott L
Posts 17
Joined on 02-26-2008

Post #: 42
Post ID: 20623
Reply to: 20111
Tweeter ?
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Jorge wrote:
Actually a Tapped Horn would be bigger than a sealed enclosure,  here is one of my first TH tests.  The sound is very different than the sound coming form a Sealed encolsure.  My first impression was that the bass was gone!  There was no bass sensation in the room anymore, no chest thumping, lets say (which is a wrong term). After a while you realize that the bass is there and all the frequencies played by the instruments are present,  it sounds like a bass is playing in the room,  but we have grown accostumed to hearing sealed and ported enclosure bass, and IME this bass generates a sort of accompanying bass sound that is not generated by any instrument,  a sort of fat bass sound that can be very rewarding.  Lets just say that TH  bass is much cleaner and generates a different "bass sensation" in the room.  Once you get used to it, it is very difficult to go back to boxed bass.
I find the sound similar to what a Mid bass horn woud play. 
Romy what differences in sound did you find when you changed from your Scanspeak Bass array to the big MB horns?




Tapped Horn a.jpg


Jorge,
          What kind of tweeter is that ?
02-20-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Jorge
Austin TX
Posts 141
Joined on 10-17-2010

Post #: 43
Post ID: 20624
Reply to: 20623
Stage Accompany
fiogf49gjkf0d
Pretty nice tweeter, probably a little less effcient that the compression driver.
Very smooth imho.
02-21-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Macman
Stockholm, Sweden
Posts 10
Joined on 10-27-2011

Post #: 44
Post ID: 20625
Reply to: 20622
No tapped for me
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Rewind wrote:
Macman: Maybe your tapped horns were too small. Speedysteve is absolutely in love with his, and you and him have a very similar setup with your 15" upper midbass horn and all.



Yes, Im sure you could make them better. I believe I was a little greedy when I designed them. I think I should have settled with a 10Hz higher cutoff. I have heard two tapped horns and they both have that the same issues that I wrote about above. As Romy stated of course it might be the room but I wont go back to Tapped horns, been there... moving on

/Marcus
02-21-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
speedysteve
UK
Posts 7
Joined on 03-08-2013

Post #: 45
Post ID: 20627
Reply to: 20625
Still the best solution for me...
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Macman wrote:
 Rewind wrote:
Macman: Maybe your tapped horns were too small. Speedysteve is absolutely in love with his, and you and him have a very similar setup with your 15" upper midbass horn and all.



Yes, Im sure you could make them better. I believe I was a little greedy when I designed them. I think I should have settled with a 10Hz higher cutoff. I have heard two tapped horns and they both have that the same issues that I wrote about above. As Romy stated of course it might be the room but I wont go back to Tapped horns, been there... moving on

/Marcus

I have found that 8th order X/O works best with them and I cross at 90Hz these days.  4th order is ok but you get minor colourations and some bleed through that just aren't a distraction on 8th order. The bass horn takes over form there and it gels very well for me. I also found them unusable in an average UK sized room without a couple of PEQ corrections to fix room modes / tune to my taste.  Once done, the bass weight, speed / impact and depth are to my liking.  regards, Steve
02-21-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Jorge
Austin TX
Posts 141
Joined on 10-17-2010

Post #: 46
Post ID: 20628
Reply to: 20627
Digital room correction
fiogf49gjkf0d
I listened for a few days a nice room with a digital correction done on computer for bass only, to minimize room peaks.  It was very easy to do an ON=OFF test  I could hear a clear benefit with the filter and no damage to the signal.  Quite interesting.
I wouldnt use it for anything above 100 or 150 hz but it did work.
02-21-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 47
Post ID: 20629
Reply to: 20627
Not so good?
fiogf49gjkf0d
 speedysteve wrote:
I have found that 8th order X/O works best with them and I cross at 90Hz these days.  4th order is ok but you get minor colourations and some bleed through that just aren't a distraction on 8th order. The bass horn takes over form there and it gels very well for me. I also found them unusable in an average UK sized room  without  a couple of PEQ corrections to fix room modes / tune to my taste.  Once done, the bass weight, speed / impact and depth are to my liking.

Hm, the 8th order high-pass X/O mixed with low pass upper bass horn? This is very strange. I do not know the taped horn’s upper knee character but from what you do, suffocating the uppperbass’s upper bass it does not sound that taped horn is too pretty.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-21-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
speedysteve
UK
Posts 7
Joined on 03-08-2013

Post #: 48
Post ID: 20630
Reply to: 20629
Horses for courses
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
 speedysteve wrote:
I have found that 8th order X/O works best with them and I cross at 90Hz these days.  4th order is ok but you get minor colourations and some bleed through that just aren't a distraction on 8th order. The bass horn takes over form there and it gels very well for me. I also found them unusable in an average UK sized room  without  a couple of PEQ corrections to fix room modes / tune to my taste.  Once done, the bass weight, speed / impact and depth are to my liking.

Hm, the 8th order high-pass X/O mixed with low pass upper bass horn? This is very strange. I do not know the taped horn’s upper knee character but from what you do, suffocating the uppperbass’s upper bass it does not sound that taped horn is too pretty.

Well, I think it is horses for courses and the tapped horns are a bit of a different gigi.     I found it is imperative to suffocate the rubbish that is coming out of tapped horns above say 100Hz - mine are sized to work from around 20Hz to 90Hz. Below this there is great bass deep bass to be had - well at least I like it.      The mid bass / upper bass I do not use such a slope. 2nd order on the upper knee of my bass at 330Hz and same for the lower knee of the mid horns. Above that I like 2nd order and then on the upper mids and tweeter 1st order. That is the current set.
    regards,  Steve

02-21-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 49
Post ID: 20631
Reply to: 20630
Strange.....
fiogf49gjkf0d
 speedysteve wrote:
Well, I think it is horses for courses and the tapped horns are a bit of a different gigi.     I found it is imperative to suffocate the rubbish that is coming out of tapped horns above say 100Hz - mine are sized to work from around 20Hz to 90Hz. Below this there is great bass deep bass to be had - well at least I like it.      The mid bass / upper bass I do not use such a slope. 2nd order on the upper knee of my bass at 330Hz and same for the lower knee of the mid horns. Above that I like 2nd order and then on the upper mids and tweeter 1st order. That is the current set.
 
Ok, the upperbass that you have I think it was something around 125Hz. Regardless what kind profile and size of the horn you have we all know what kind lower knew decay uppperbass has, even in a smallish room it is “large” but  “thin”.  Then you have LF section, the trapped horn that you decided to stop with brick-filter. That reasonably long tail from LF is important in my view. If you have rubbish out of tapped horns above 100Hz then it is problem of tapped horn, not the problem of uppperbass.  The brick-filter shall swing phase super violently in addition to everything else… Anyhow, I would not use any topology that demands 8th order filter. I wonder: at 90Hz the trapped horn makes “good bass”   but at 120Hz it gives rubbish? Are you listening mostly rick-n-roll?


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
02-21-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
speedysteve
UK
Posts 7
Joined on 03-08-2013

Post #: 50
Post ID: 20632
Reply to: 20631
All sorts
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
 speedysteve wrote:
Well, I think it is horses for courses and the tapped horns are a bit of a different gigi.     I found it is imperative to suffocate the rubbish that is coming out of tapped horns above say 100Hz - mine are sized to work from around 20Hz to 90Hz. Below this there is great bass deep bass to be had - well at least I like it.      The mid bass / upper bass I do not use such a slope. 2nd order on the upper knee of my bass at 330Hz and same for the lower knee of the mid horns. Above that I like 2nd order and then on the upper mids and tweeter 1st order. That is the current set.
 
Ok, the upperbass that you have I think it was something around 125Hz. Regardless what kind profile and size of the horn you have we all know what kind lower knew decay uppperbass has, even in a smallish room it is “large” but  “thin”.  Then you have LF section, the trapped horn that you decided to stop with brick-filter. That reasonably long tail from LF is important in my view. If you have rubbish out of tapped horns above 100Hz then it is problem of tapped horn, not the problem of uppperbass.  The brick-filter shall swing phase super violently in addition to everything else… Anyhow, I would not use any topology that demands 8th order filter. I wonder: at 90Hz the trapped horn makes “good bass”   but at 120Hz it gives rubbish? Are you listening mostly rick-n-roll?

All sorts of music types. Piano, orchestral/choral and church organ feature, as well as electro / and what you might call rock.Could be - lots of problems in audio. The fun is in solving them.
12-17-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
noviygera


Chicago, IL
Posts 177
Joined on 06-12-2009

Post #: 51
Post ID: 22306
Reply to: 20632
Well, it looks like I am again back to working on midbass channel.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Besides hornresp modeling, is there things to think about when starting design and build of midbass channel from scratch? The range I need is 60 to 300 hz. It will be used with 6db/octave crossover. It will be located under my midrange horn -- the mouth of midbass. It can be folded or curved. Please help me with questions to formulate and I can provide answers. Maybe this will be a good start to formulate the design.Thanks!

12-17-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 52
Post ID: 22307
Reply to: 22306
I do not think so.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Generally,  I do not think it is possible to put 60Hz horn under MF channel. You have a limited highs of MF and you need to put 60Hz under it. You have no room for circular horn and you have to go rectangular, mach wider then you want it to be. Then the length hit you. Chose your profile and calculate in your hornresp the length of the horn- it will be too long to be able to time align with MF. Sure you can male the 60Hz horn with very large throat and put the MF all the way back but it will be not truly a horn but a direct radiator. There are many other reasons why I would not put any 60Hz along with the rest horns. Anyhow, if you need 60-300 horn then try to do it as a separate device, not integrated with your horns but integrated with your room, also do not think what kind crossover it will/should have - you are too far from this thinking. Again, generally I do not like idea of integrated 60-300 horns and I consider them a design mistake. It does not mean that you shall not build it , however. Perhaps if you describe the rest of your system/objectives then I will see where the proposed horn might fit.

Rgs, Romy The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-17-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
noviygera


Chicago, IL
Posts 177
Joined on 06-12-2009

Post #: 53
Post ID: 22311
Reply to: 22307
TWO issues may have been addressed.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy, I have somewhat different possibilities than you are seeing. My system is physically higher than most because my listening position is at standing height or sitting in a high stool. I have used this litening height for a few years and grew to appreciate for a number of reasons (worth separate discussion). One of which is increased space under the midrange horn and less interaction from floor.  So I gain about 20" of height below mid. In fact I measure easy 46" from floor to mid horn edge. Another contraversial thing I use is DSP crossover. It is not perfect but I have DELAY in my arsenal! So I can use full length horn. This, at least covers TWO of your rightly noted concerns. Does this open options to continue discussion further? If so I am happy to further formulate my requirements. 1. Gracefully integration with midrange horn at 250-300hz with 6db/oct crossover and absolutely no allowed EQ. 2. Staright rectangular or five sided vs folded: this is something I do not know.
12-18-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 54
Post ID: 22314
Reply to: 22311
Extra 20" will do.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 noviygera wrote:
Romy, I have somewhat different possibilities than you are seeing. My system is physically higher than most because my listening position is at standing height or sitting in a high stool. I have used this litening height for a few years and grew to appreciate for a number of reasons (worth separate discussion). One of which is increased space under the midrange horn and less interaction from floor.  So I gain about 20" of height below mid. In fact I measure easy 46" from floor to mid horn edge. Another contraversial thing I use is DSP crossover. It is not perfect but I have DELAY in my arsenal! So I can use full length horn. This, at least covers TWO of your rightly noted concerns. Does this open options to continue discussion further? If so I am happy to further formulate my requirements. 1. Gracefully integration with midrange horn at 250-300hz with 6db/oct crossover and absolutely no allowed EQ. 2. Staright rectangular or five sided vs folded: this is something I do not know.
   
Sure, if you have your listening position 20" higher then this is absolutely different story that changes everything. With extra 20" you shall be able to put your 60hz horn  under your MF with no problems. Also, if you insist to use the DSP crossover then the time alignment become no problem. Certainly it would not be something that I endorse but my approval should not be your design criteria. I am a little concern why you insist on 6dB crossover with no EQ.  "No EQ" is fine demand but usually no one EQ horns explicitly. That will be your personal playback and if you do not want to EQ it then juts do not do it. What I mean that "NO EQ" is not a design objective. Abut the 6dB crossover - that what I disagree. Of cause it would be great to have 6dB crossover BUT it is VERY and complitly not necessary to do have as a design objective if you do not have characteristics of horn and driver in your head. You might choose a driver that shoot all the way to 6-7khz with large horn throat and you will never kill the channel output with 6dB crossover. Anyhow, I think you need to start with throat size. Knowing the throat  and measuring the size of the space you have under MF channel you will get the horn length and the horn rate (presumably it will be 60Hz). Then you need to start modeling how your system will look like. The shape of the horn and folds is complitly up to you. There are many slippery slopes with any of the approaches but it it possible to deal with all of them. 
 
I think the biggest problem that people like you will face (I mean people who are in design phase of Midbass horn) is that they do not know what throat  they need to target as they do not know what driver they will be using. In reality the driver is the key. You can buy zillion of them, found the one that you love but no one knows how this driver will sound in your horn. So, you can't pick driver withe have horn built and you can't design a horn until you know your throat  size that is dictated by your driver. That is the main bitch of the midbass horns. So, what we all do is building some kind of approximation that can be move to one or to another direction. The best solution that I found and that  always recommend is to implement a joint 2" away from throat  and make the driver part of the horn along with the final throat  size removable. 
 
Rgs, the Cat



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-19-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
noviygera


Chicago, IL
Posts 177
Joined on 06-12-2009

Post #: 55
Post ID: 22315
Reply to: 22314
The Driver
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy,I am in agreement with your observations. I am not certain I will end up using specific crossover slope, like 6db or whatever. It's what I prefer in my current setup. I will try to have make a design that will work with this type of crossover -- one that will roll off naturally below 60hz and above 300hz. In this case 6db crossovers will be a good match. I understand that this will be the result of interaction of driver and horn. So lets say it will depend... Now would be a good time to narrow down on actual driver and revisit above points again later.
Also you say: "In reality the driver is the key"So let me ask for advice on suitable driver(s). This be my next step. Need I select a size? Or driver with certain spec? For example lets say driver "x" is good for this range and has been tried and proven. What is your recommendation on driver for this range? Or better way to look at this, HOW do you recommend to select the driver? For example, you use Fane Studio 8 in a different range with different horn but maybe this driver will also work in my application? No? ok, but what qualifies the driver? Or is it purely coincidental match? Is it the case that all 400watt treated paper pro drivers should not be even considered, etc.

12-19-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 56
Post ID: 22316
Reply to: 22315
The Last driver is never a first one.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 noviygera wrote:
Also you say: "In reality the driver is the key"So let me ask for advice on suitable driver(s). This be my next step. Need I select a size? Or driver with certain spec? For example lets say driver "x" is good for this range and has been tried and proven. What is your recommendation on driver for this range? Or better way to look at this, HOW do you recommend to select the driver? For example, you use Fane Studio 8 in a different range with different horn but maybe this driver will also work in my application? No? ok, but what qualifies the driver? Or is it purely coincidental match? Is it the case that all 400watt treated paper pro drivers should not be even considered, etc.
noviygera, they are all good questions, I wish I were able to answer them definitively. The reality is that you never truly know how a specific driver will sound in a specific horn. It would be nice to have a compression driver but I do not think you will find a lot of them that can accommodate 60Hz. There are a few Japanese-made but I do not know how they work. They are also too expensive to buy them juts to experiment with them. If you look at direct radiators to be used as compression driver then discard T/S. Look for highest sensitivity at lower diameter, lowest exertion and lower cone mass, lowest power handling. Look at open air resonance frequency around 40-50Hz. it is very hard to find a driver like this and even if you do then it does not mean that that it work out for you. In my view you need to take one single driver that you like and to make that driver to work it's best in context of your horn. If you do so then you will learn the whole horn/driver interface and then you will be able to do whatever you want. 
 
The best direction that I would recommend would be to get some new production of whatever you want that fit the criteria and to make a horn that works with this new production driver. Then you can look into the realm of good vintage drivers. Some of the vintage drivers are much more interesting in trim of dynamic and tone but the vintage drivers will have own problems that you will need to be equipped to deal with. Anyhow, at this point look for a driver and do not worry that it will not be a "last driver".

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-21-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
noviygera


Chicago, IL
Posts 177
Joined on 06-12-2009

Post #: 57
Post ID: 22332
Reply to: 22316
Driver size
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy,
You provided very good starting points on the driver selection and I am also corresponding with a gentleman that may help me with actual horn design. I have found a couple of drivers that seem to work based on your guidelines. They are pro sound 10" to 12" with Fs around 50-55hz. Is it the case that driver size should be no more than certain diameter to sound decent in 60 to 300hz range? Such as, 15" being too large I need to look at no more than 12"? It looks like current hifi drivers are out question and anything remotely suitable is going to be PA.
Thanks.
ps. Correction: I just noticed that Fostex 8" full range drivers meet those specs and have very low power handling (maybe too low).
12-22-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 58
Post ID: 22333
Reply to: 22332
Some words of warning.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 noviygera wrote:
You provided very good starting points on the driver selection and I am also corresponding with a gentleman that may help me with actual horn design. I have found a couple of drivers that seem to work based on your guidelines. They are pro sound 10" to 12" with Fs around 50-55hz. Is it the case that driver size should be no more than certain diameter to sound decent in 60 to 300hz range? Such as, 15" being too large I need to look at no more than 12"? It looks like current hifi drivers are out question and anything remotely suitable is going to be PA.
ps. Correction: I just noticed that Fostex 8" full range drivers meet those specs and have very low power handling (maybe too low).

Noviygera, If I was targeting 60Horn then I would be looking for something as you said: Fs around 50-55hz, with 10-12” driver and probably 7-8” throat. I do not know about Fostex 8", I never used them. To have a good 8” driver and load it into let say 5-7” would be wonderful.  I just do not know if Fostex 8", being a “full-range” will have stiff enough code to be used as a compression driver. That all need to be your experiments. Do not forget to use in vintage JBL drivers, some of them are very dood.
 
I would like you also clearly understand that doing what you planning to do you will be out of “save zone”. I do understand that 20” of additional height do give to you a wondeful opportunely to kill with one channel both upper bass and midbass regions. As I told you there are many problems with this approaches. I did name juts two and you did have good justifiable reasons to neglect it. There are more to it and I would like to share with you as it very much might bite you by your foot in future. My idea to split channels across mid and upper basses did not derive from thin air but it descended from dealing with reality and practicality of real installations.  The 80-120Hz regions is VERY problematic in the average rooms we use for listening. In my view it is virtual impossible to have more or less even response from a channel that runs 60-300Hz and that is size of 2-6 refrigerators. You might get a response with huge drops or peaks at each channels but you will be unbelievably lucky if you do. Most of the time it is MUCH more manageable if you have a channel split in the mid of the “dangers zone” when you can with crossovers, positioning and many other ways to make a right fit into the acoustics of your room. Also, I kind of recognize that the above 80s horns are speaker’s channels and they comply with esthetics of the rest of the horns. The sub 80s horns are rather room’s channels and they are not part of your playback but rather a part of the room décor. There are others censers that I would express. For instance do you really want 60Hz shooting at your face? I feel that any horns under 80hz should not s
 
Anyhow, I do it is a noble task to integrate everything into one 60-300Hz channels but you do need to understand that if you during do it will have some acoustic integration problems then by the venture of the size of your channels you won’t be able to do anything.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-22-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
noviygera


Chicago, IL
Posts 177
Joined on 06-12-2009

Post #: 59
Post ID: 22337
Reply to: 22333
I think you are right.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy,
You make very, very good points now I am re-evaluating this all-in-one horn concept. I do know one thing that I learned from my current system. Midbass horn that rolls off below 120 hz and integrated with sub is not good. I have struggled with this format for 2 years with no successful solution and this led me to explore a more expanded midbass channel. The transition from 120hz horn to direct radiator subs is not possible to be seamless without significant loss of focused sound. Some may like this "artificial fuzziness region" but to me it is better to push it down in the frequency range. However, I think you are correct. It may be that true 80hz midbass will be perfectly good and in a different league compared to 120hz. I think what made me look past this 80hz was my bad experience with 80hz straight Edgar horn that I had. But now I will take your advice and curb my excitement with the 60hz "brute force" approach. I will think carefully about something like 70-80hz solution. Very good points and I thank you again.
12-23-2015 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 60
Post ID: 22338
Reply to: 22337
Everything is possible if done properly.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 noviygera wrote:
Romy,
You make very, very good points now I am re-evaluating this all-in-one horn concept. I do know one thing that I learned from my current system. Midbass horn that rolls off below 120 hz and integrated with sub is not good. I have struggled with this format for 2 years with no successful solution and this led me to explore a more expanded midbass channel. The transition from 120hz horn to direct radiator subs is not possible to be seamless without significant loss of focused sound.

Noviygera, I do not know what you do and what you current acoustic system is. If you do have extra 20” of high then to go for midbass solution sound reasonable. What kind of midbass would it be and how low it makes send to do it another subject. If I have the picture of your current horns and know what would meet the midbass atop them we could strategize something together. What I very much disagree is that integration of upper bass horns with direct radiators at the bottom is VERY much possible with spectacular result if the things done properly.



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 3 of 4 (75 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 »
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts