 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
77.111.245.13
Ah yes: "Today's audiences listen to a recording like this new [Harmonia Mundi HIP-influenced] Beethoven album with docile contentedness."
BTW, I'm trying to get our taxes in by April 15th, and they always take time, so I may not be able to reply very extensively to further posts on this thread. We'll see.
Follow Ups:
HIP is both presumptuous in it's mind set of "autenticity" and simply inferior in it's musical qualities. Forte Pianos are inferior to pianos. End of story. And the differences are far more vast when we hear them live. With a recording you can crank up the volume to compensate to the shear lack of dynamics of a forte piano. In person they simply sound like broken children's pianos. I have a few "HIP" performances that I enjoy. Those hand full of recordings are the exception not the rule.Just shows that some artists can make the something good using inferior tools.
Edits: 04/14/21
/
Why do you think the quality of musical instruments has progressed over the years and centuries? Because everyone has been completely satisfied with them to begin with? You don't think today's composers and musicians think all musical instruments as they are are perfect without room for improvement?
Besides, what they knew or did not know has really no relevance to my assertion that the modern piano is simply a superior instrument to any forte piano by every measure. And I am QUITE confident that if they had the choice all of those composers saddled with forte pianos would have chosen to have their music played on modern pianos. I don't know for sure but I think their works are evidence enough of good taste and good judgement.
From what I understand, the steel-framed, louder pianos arose from the need to project sound into larger venues. Of course, steel-framed instruments have a much different sound quality, as well. Since we CAN listen to old instruments such as harpsichords and fortepianos, by choice, either in small venues or on recordings, doesn't this allow us to simply enjoy their unique sound characteristics? Sure, they must be in-tune, high quality instruments (either original or modern facsimiles...and well recorded), but they can sound GREAT...and, the main point, DIFFERENT than newer instruments. While I have read that Beethoven wanted more from the keyboard instruments of his time, Beethoven's actual compositions show little compromise, and can be enjoyed on all kinds. I have a few recordings of Bach's Goldberg Variations played on a harp (!) and, honestly, there is much pleasure to be derived by these alien transcriptions. The rest is politics and, to me, the OP/Reviewer was buried in that state of thinking.
That's an awfully nice way of putting it! ;-)
What Beethoven actually SAID was, "the piano [i.e., the pianos of his time!] is and remains an inadequate instrument" - and this was not long before he died. This was a point made by the reviewer in the link in my OP. And in fact, that review, far from being buried in "politics", is well argued and well thought out, with substantial evidence (such as that Beethoven quote) brought to bear for the opinions expressed therein. Below, you say he doesn't know how to think. And yet your own criticisms of the review are mere complaints that his view of things doesn't line up with your own. All that shows is that you're a proponent of "right thinking" (i.e., thinking which reflects your own predispositions) only.
My view of things is that this fetish for listening to "original instruments" and vibratoless (or practically vibratoless) string playing is a kind of perverse enjoyment occasioned by the ennui resulting from not having listened very closely to modern-instrument performances (or, as I like to call them, "adequate-instrument performances"!), so that, with the subtleties of the performances being glossed over in the listening, they all begin to sound the same after awhile. And then these types of listeners NEED the gross differences heard in HIP performances to discern any difference at all! But that's just MY view, resulting from my "intuition and feelings" - LOL!
BTW, have any of you HIP fetishizers here actually heard the album that was under review (i.e., Faust, Melnikov et al do in the Beethoven Triple Concerto and the Ries arrangement of the Second Symphony for piano trio)?
As for the development of the modern piano it was simply a result of competing manufacturers trying to make a better product. And they did. "Since we CAN listen to old instruments such as harpsichords and fortepianos, by choice, either in small venues or on recordings, doesn't this allow us to simply enjoy their unique sound characteristics?" Sure. As Chris has mentioned we can do the same with grade school orchestras. We certainly are free to enjoy whatever we want. But this is not simply about that. If someone enjoys listening to music on inferior instruments as some sort of novelty experience that's fine. But the argument runs towards what is "correct." IMO better is simply better which makes it more correct if we are going to deem something as correct. I have no problem with parents enjoying the scriblings of their young children and haning it on the refridgerator, where it belongs. I enjoy seeing antique forte pianos in museums. But in concert halls they simply suck.
.
. . . in the linked review of the OP. Basically, it's clear from Beethoven's own statements/writings that he wasn't happy with the keyboard instruments of his time. And yet, that's what the HIPsters want to do: saddle Beethoven with performances on the very instruments he hated!
and ever- evolving culture down to a few simple..."terms" that poll well with Grampy. :)
Would that an actual discussion about Bach and Monteverdi generate as much interest!
and it just keeps getting worse. It took my recently kindled interest in taking a deep and serious look at Baroque compositions to have me realize just how much has been lost and, in all probability, will never be regained in terms of the pure discovery and high intellect at work in the foundations of classical music. And, that is without us even getting into the part that a genuine and abiding religious faith could play for many of the great composers of the past (I am sure THAT conversation would become a major mess in our current times).
The politics of classical music, instrumentation, performance practices, etc. is one of the dumbest topics I know of. Evidently, some highly intelligent people can get caught up in it.
Are you sure you have a sufficient grasp of HIP's entire universe? It doesn't seem so.
I've listened critically to maybe 80-100 HIP recordings in the last couple of decades, from Machaut to Vaughan Williams.
Some of it I've liked, some I haven't. Some have been interesting duds, some have been boring duds. Some approaches seem clearly misguided, other approaches have saved composers (like Vivaldi) from the dust bin imho. Some instruments I like, some I don't.
I've also collected multiple performances of individual works, such as the Marais Gamba suites, Handel's Fireworks, the Brandenburg's etc. I've just begun to plumb the depths.
Where are you at in this journey? Or does it matter?
My collection of and experience with HIP represents probably less than 1% of what's available so I'm just not yet ready to call the culture police and enact a ban, burn the books, etc.
. . . cancel culture and pointing out the absurdities and historical blunders of the HIP movement.Strange, but I suspect that I've listened to at least as many HIP recordings as you have. Maybe I got an earlier start! ;-)
As for knowing the "HIP Universe", I wouldn't know whether I'm better versed on HIPdom than you are. One thing I do suspect however is that I'm better versed on the original sources which supposedly underlie the HIP movement. I still have in my library such works as CPE Bach's Essay on the True Art of Playing Keyboard Instruments , Daniel Gottlob Turk's Klavierschule oder Anweisung zum Klavierspielen fur Lehrer und Lernende mit kritischen Anmerkungen , Quantz's Versuch einer Anweisung die Flote traversiere zu spielen , and others. I'm thinking that that's what drives you and other HIP nut-cases crazy: not only do I abhor certain aspects of HIP, but I hate it intelligently, with a knowledge of the very sources with which HIP academicians and performers justify their perversities.
Furthermore, you've been trying to frame this as all-or-nothing, black/white thinking on my part, but in fact I've carefully selected the aspects of HIP which I object to AND I've provided the historical evidence as to why I object. You can't stand the fact that this disagreement can't be reduced to a question of simple likes and dislikes, and you lack the knowledge yourself to argue from actual evidence.
[Edited to restore the post after the umlauts in the original post crashed our server. They're now left out.]
Edits: 04/16/21 04/17/21
: )So...which aspects do you not object to?
I've simply tried to point out that those aspects,(or rules) supported or unsupported by research, are often adjusted or ignored in the real world, (of HIP). Imho you seem to assume they're followed to a "T" across the spectrum. That's where I believe the Absolutism comes in.
Forgive the edits. I'm poking away at my phone and allowing myself to be distracted while listen to Stravinsky on modern instruments. : )
Edits: 04/16/21 04/16/21
. . . reduced orchestral and choral forces as appropriate (unless it's that one-singer-to-a-part choral singing crap that we sometimes encounter), hard tympani sticks, generally brisk tempos. (Although HIPsters would have us believe that they discovered fast metronome markings! They have to realize that not all modern instrument performances* go at speeds like those which Giulini, Sanderling and Celibidache employed in their later years!)
*i.e., adequate instrument performances! ;-)
.
.
Apologies if that one has been done before!:-)
Visit my Image Gallery
View YouTube Video
Some guy sawing away at a gamba for an interminable five minutes or so. I thought it was never going to end.
And BTW, is this one of those recordings "we've been over" where the player supposed uses vibrato on the gamba? I think if I used my imagination REALLY hard, I just just make out maybe a quarter second of vibrato (total!) during the whole performance! ;-)
And of course it masterfully blends open string tone, vibrato and ornamentation.
Seems that this debate has raged on for quite a while...enjoy it.
https://www.earlymusicamerica.org/emag-feature-article/vibrato-wars/
I would also suggest that at some level, the study and performance of classical music is historically informed. As a pianist, we often debate which version of a score is most authentic, which urtext is best, which scholarly version offers the most insight into the composer's intent. Also as a pianist, we approach Bach differently on modern piano than Chopin or Beethoven, since we know that it was written with a different instrument in mind.
I do very much enjoy music that is well played by talented performers on period and modern instruments. I simply do not take a right/wrong correct/incorrect position on music.
Enjoy the music.
all so intolerable.
Where did I say that you claimed ALL HIP performances use rubato? I'm afraid that's rather an example of your own binary thinking. ;-)
I like the classic Savall set but time for a new take.
I liked it.
actually, I think I owe you a drink!
The IRS has extended the deadline for 1040 filing until May 17.
LowIQ
a medieval torture instrument! Concerto for Guillotine, anyone? An especially effective solo instrument when the sustain pedal is held down. Lola likes it too!!!
'Lola likes it too!!!'
too bad ... let her eat cake!
Do some people listen with their anus rather than their ears ? It would seem so.
NT
Different instruments and different playing styles make for different sound and feeling in a performance.
The only differences anyone should care about ?
NT
They play without vibrato too! AND they have different instruments and different playing styles! ;-)
I think with all the lack of vibrato here, HIPsters would be proud of this orchestra:
View YouTube Video
C'mon, admit it: even YOU have standards sometimes! ;-)
But they play with vibrato!
Nice non sequitur, there. : )
I think you're confused: HIP performances are charmless and arrogant, not Fischer and the BFO. If anything, Fischer gets a bit too cutesy in some of his performances, like the Beethoven Pastoral, where he switches Beethoven's writing for a full section to front-desk players only (at the beginning of the last movement IIRC), in contravention of the score. But, yes, they do play with vibrato, thank goodness!
How ironic is that? Anyway--
Comparing tastes in the timbre of modern or historical instruments to sounds produced by 3rd graders is specious, imho.
. . . you've never heard of HIP-influenced performances on modern instruments? You should get out more! ;-)
And the comparison of modern-instrument performances by 3rd graders to those of HIP practitioners is very much to the point when it comes to the subject of vibrato - not specious at all! It's as if the HIPsters stopped their musical training before they were taught (or learned) vibrato! There's something that just sounds stunted about their kind of playing. (And some of the execution on some HIP recordings isn't THAT different from that of the 3rd graders!)
It's a free country but I just get the feeling that at this point you couldn't admit deriving pleasure from any HIP performance, even if it drove you to augmented 7th Heaven.
With that,I'm bowing out. A fool's errand to continue.
And, yes, it's true: even performances on modern instruments can be HIP-influenced.
And, BTW, I have about half a dozen albums of Rameau opera suites - all HIP.
I'll reply directly to your Marais post.
NT
.
And, yeah, you've got this thing for Scherchen. I guess that's all part of your charm!
As for me, I've got the complete Kubelik DG set as well as all the Mahler Fischer has recorded for Channel Classics. The rap against Fischer is that he's quite fast in some movements (kind of like Scherchen in the Beethoven symphonies?). Kubelik? Fischer? - I like them both, so it's a toss up for me.
getting in the way.
It's not an old-school thing, imho Janowski's youthful Suisse Romande is able to sound very comfortable in Bruckner's skin, and his idiom can elusive too.
But HIP definitely gets in the way! ;-)
A great example is Mehta's LAPO strings in their Decca Mahler's 3rd sixth movt vs Fischer's. Heck, even Janowski's youthful Suisse Romande string section seems more collectively comfortable and confident when playing Bruckner.
Sometimes it's good to be singular! ;-)
I own all the recordings you mention, and that was hardly my impression (i.e., that the BFO strings were lacking in unified purpose or direction, compared to other recordings). Nor do I know of a single other reviewer (or even poster) who has expressed the same sentiments as yours. Nothing wrong with that of course, and it doesn't make your opinion incorrect. But that's all it is: your opinion (unless you have something more objective to buttress it).
right? : )
The Budapest strings are pleasant enough, but, using the finale of the Mahler 3rd as an example, even when they soar, they seem to be flying into headwinds.
Mehta's LAPO corporate string sound, for example? They achieve what I call "tossing the score" and playing with abandon. I don't know of an M3 Finale that is more ravishing.
Odd, because otherwise I've never heard the LAPO mentioned when people talk about the world's best string sections.
When I lived down in the LA area, I remember radio station KFAC did a program about how there were four Strads which had been willed/gifted to the LAPO, for the express use of the principal players in each section for the duration of their time as LAPO members. I wonder if that might have something to do with the wonderful corporate sound of the orchestra's string section?
OTOH, Mehta's LAPO Mahler Fifth with the LAPO can be pretty slapdash, with a couple of violins even entering early at one point in the finale! It makes me wonder if the Decca engineers couldn't have used another take there instead!
... while disliking other things in the very same.
There is no *perfect performance* style, at least not to my ears. I like some Hogwood and some Furtwangler, as best as I can tell from the recordings I own.
Maybe if I'd ever heard either one of them live I might change my mind ?
Pick your poison(s) ?
heard over the car radio 30 years ago.
-from the guy who "authoritatively" judges new releases via snippets on a download site!
BTW, that guy who writes about a snippet heard on the car radio 30 years ago wouldn't also be you, would it? ;-)
and accellerando? Come on. The real issue was that I stepped on another beloved 5 channel release, Gardner's Berlioz Requiem. I had the audacity to say that I would have preferred a little more accellerando into the brass fanfare, though I don't know what the score calls for.: )
Wouldn't it be amusing if your anti-hip music web reviewer bombed that one as well?
Yeah there's no way you can really grasp the full measure of HIP without living with it for decades. Not living beside it, or across the street from it, but amassing a collection of depth and breadth; similar to the way one gets to know Mahler performing practice, from Scherchen, Rosbaud and Adler in Vienna to Dausgaard in Seattle and all the successes and failures in between.
No one has ever said that YouTube is incapable of capturing tempo, rubato, and accellerando. Where did you get that? I HAVE said that YouTube is incapable of capturing the subtleties of a performance, but that's no reason for you to make this other stuff up. And the fact that you don't like some accelerando in Gardner's Berlioz Requiem is hardly an "issue" for me - you flatter yourself. ;-)
And your last paragraph is nothing but silliness. I've had in my actual library over 80 performances of the Mahler Fifth (every one of which I've listened to), including the Scherchen VSOO. You? (Actually, it's probably not a good idea for you to go down this road.)
Some things I heard as a snippet on the car radio 30 years ago might be more meaningful today than the music I just listened to an hour ago.
Never underestimate the power of a debased mind.
Removing or adding vibrato or changing the instrumentation might help me focus on different aspects of a performance. Playing or singing sans vibrato (for instance) might force me to concentrate a little bit more on the formal or structural aspects of the music, and a little bit less on the emotive or romantic aspects of it.
These things equate to different ways of thinking about the music, that's all.
I choose to listen first but maybe I'm simply too inexperienced. Oh well.
d
Sinfonia Baroque, which is an Award Winning Local Group.
The SF Sym uses Modern Inst.
So listen to them, and leave other groups in Peace!
The plague of HIP has taken over, killing what could have been good performances of Baroque and classical music.
Played on the mammoth Notre Dame organ.
Although I prefer the more reasonably-scaled organs of Herrick, Goode and Suzuki, the Latry is a fun wallow.
Never mind, I did it for you
Visit my Image Gallery
Long ago, I had to review several Philharmonia Baroque concerts over the course of years for the Oakland Tribune. It was very traumatic for me. ;-)(I do realize that the power of my opinions is so strong and influential, that HIP groups the world over cower in fear at my wrath and just want to be left "in Peace". As Rodney King once asked, "Can't we all just get along?" Indeed, it would be a much kinder and gentler world if only nobody would criticize anything - and I know that many dream of a world like this!)
Edits: 04/13/21
Did you see Reinhard Goebel was quoted as saying the original instrument movement has run it's course or some such similar words. He was conducting a modern instrument outfit in something. I forget the details.
Andrew Manze left the fold, Victoria Mullova dabbles in both -- why be stuck in one "school of thinking"? Christopher Hogwood did a great series of Martinu violin works with the Czech PO. But, HIP will always be around, I think. Can't do anything Viola da Gamba otherwise!
Actually, I'm a fan of HIP. I can't imagine ever again listening to Bach or Handel, for instance, on modern instruments. It's would be a bad joke.
. . . that's up to you - and I'll defend to the death your right to like it.
(Well, not really, but that would be a very fine sentiment anyway! ;-)
I'd rather listen to Bach played by Angela Hewitt rather than by somebody on a harpsichord.Here's another example. I believe this group plays on historic instruments but the piano is modern. The best of both worlds. This series of discs is great.
Edits: 04/14/21
You don't like Angela Hewitt either? Me thinks you're a bit of a snob. No offense.
It adds character to a world otherwise filled with REAL snobs. The last "live" concert I attended before the pandemic was Angela Hewitt performing the Goldberg Variations. Most amazing performance of anything I've ever seen live. The piano was her pre-wrecked Fazioli (it was destroyed later by movers). A modern grand piano with distinctive aural qualities can be a nice bridge between HIP and contemporary tastes.
Hewitt is working on Beethoven's Hammerklavier to complete her cycle on Hyperion, and I am looking forward to it.
The editing must be taking a LONG time!
I'd like to hear Angela Hewitt perform the Shostakovich Piano Concerto #1 accompanied by John Eliot Gardiner and his Orchestre Revolutionnaire et Romantique band and have Chris write a review! One catch: he would actually have to listen to it before he writes the review.
Aye! There's the rub! ;-)
to love it. : )
Humans are funny that way.
n
,
. . . I actually heard violas da gamba played expressively. (Whether the playing was "infinitely more expressive" I tend to doubt, but. . . it was expressive nevertheless, and at least the players seemed to employ vibrato without fear of the HIP Inquisition coming down on them.) I think the Collegium Aureum had gambists who played like that. Alas - it's but a distant memory!
.
And if you want to learn me, I'm willing! ;-)
.
.
Why just be a gatekeeper and a bouncer when you can serve the drinks and hire/fire the band. If you are going to hang at the speakeasy, acknowledge the lawlessness, I say!:-)
Anyone remember the old game "Clue" and its format for offering up the answer to the clues? Here's mine: Lola playing the Viola Da Gamba without shoes.
'Lola playing the Viola Da Gamba without shoes'
please tell me it was in the rectory
unless rent is being paid!
without paying rent aren't you just a squatter?
IME women that are cavalier about 'any location' are both rare & trouble
and usually European ... butt still rare
moving right along .....
regards,
d
Maybe not an extension, but a pretty long harpsichord.
d
,
And of course with reference to the review in question, it would be very early 19th century.
BTW, I use H&R Block. ;-)
Chris Salocks' comment that "The trouble is that, even if Beethoven did know this type of sound, there's little evidence that he was pleased with it!" NEGATES everything he has to say, as that perspective is EXACTLY the same presumption that infuses HIP itself.A couple of comments to temper the discourse. Original instruments (even modern versions in emulation) make sense, both objectively and artistically. If there is one thing that CAN be "proven" it is the physical characteristics and sound of old metal and wood constructions -- this is not voodoo, it's fact. Choosing to use them or not is a contemporary performing decision. Insisting on "right or wrong" is purely subjective.
I like the "salt perspective," as I encounter it every day. Folks who always add salt to their food think anything prepared without it is painfully bland. Folks who don't use salt think anything WITH salt is over-salted. Neither is wrong, neither is right.
As far as the "toy piano" comments regarding fortepianos, I will let the recordings of Paul Badura-Skoda stand in opposition.
Finally, with so many world class artists presenting HIP stylings, it is foolish to dismiss these interpretive decisions as simply "academic." The writer is a bit too self-absorbed and distracted by the politics to render a useful review -- a fact he admits up front when he states that he isn't sympathetic with HIP. MWI should not have given this review to him -- I guess that makes it an editorial decision, and not a music review at all.
Edits: 04/13/21 04/13/21
I think you missed the key word, "if". ;-)So. . . IF Beethoven was not pleased with the pianos of his time, how does this negate everything else in the review? Is the "presumption" of "HIP itself" that we should use the very instruments which the composers themselves hated?
You say, "[o]riginal instruments (even modern versions in emulation) make sense" and "this is not voodoo, it's fact".
No, it's merely a misbegotten assertion on your part.;-)EDIT: Sorry for the low blow! But when you say "make sense", what does "make sense" mean in this context? IOW, "make sense" in terms of what?
Edits: 04/13/21
I'm OK with earlier styles of stringed instruments---they were not too bad.
But a clarinet (particularly), oboe or flute in 1800 was simply lousy compared to the modern style, which was mostly perfected by the French in the mid 1800's.
Earlier ones were--to be blunt--out of tune and honky on many notes, and moreover today there isn't the teaching or performance practice history for people to get really good at them to overcome their limitations.
And after Boehm and Buffet invented the system of modern flutes and clarinets, there wasn't much need to change them significantly after that, so for 170 years they've been accepted by musicians and composers as is---unlike the situation before.
I don't have much comment on the bassoon but it needs an overhaul.
I think brass instruments gained ability to play more keys chromatically with new technology but I don't know if their tone quality/intonation correctness improved as much.
So I'm OK with 1780 or 1800 stringed instruments but with modern winds.
I wasn't commenting on the condition ("if"), only the projection that the writer was making regarding Beethoven's mindset. I'm not comfortable with suppositions like, "If Beethoven heard Stravinsky, surely he wouldn't like his compositions." I am also not comfortable with, "HIP is a more accurate representation of the period performance style" -- it's the same hypothetical, to me.
"Make sense" is plain enough. The instruments existed, we either have them or can make copies, we make recordings with them.
Elsewhere in the thread, the idea of "degrees of HIP" is presented. That sounds about right. For example, having recently heard a segment of a Handel opera recorded back in the early 1960's or thereabouts -- that is, with big modern orchestra forces and romantic operatic vocals -- the whole thing sounded like goulash -- too big and thick. I just didn't buy it!;-)
You have the right to not like HIP and historic instruments. I don't like HIP all of the time (especially when it outright distorts the composition) and, yes, a harpsichord can be a disaster. But this is very conditional. For Baroque and Renaissance works, 90 percent of my listening is period instruments (100 percent for baroque opera).
Speaking of "low blow," I still think that the writer of the review shouldn't have been the writer of the review. Honestly, it feels like a pizza guy is preparing my sushi. Sorry!:-)
.
Oh no! Somebody rushed the third movement of a Rachmaninoff Symphony!
But the constant, creepy mannerisms of HIP? Those always get a pass! ;-)
.
Nt.
- Vibrato banished from strings
- Toy pianos
Of course, there's more than that (including clangsichords), but those two items are a good starting point.
As for vibrato, (or intentionally bend the pitch out of tune to add "spice"), we've established, with real-world exhibits ad nauseum, that it is employed by many HIP performers and groups every time this perennial thirsty post comes up.
Two "terms" for a school that's been around 70 years, has branched out in many different directions, not to mention HIP instruments are sometimes combined with modern instruments, (hybrid), and HIP style runs the gamut from extreme orthodoxy to a loose, pick and choose style.
I am aware that obsessing over the most extreme elements of any movement is all the rage these days. Less "terms" to deal with. : )
I don't think you've established your claim at all - but maybe now I'm having a hallucination! ;-)HIP performers may think about vibrato as they play a note or two - to them, that counts as "using" vibrato. ;-)
And, BTW, if HIP is combined with modern instruments, is it HIP anymore?
HIP - the Covid Virus of music! ;-)
Edits: 04/15/21
. . . a distortion of the composition. ;-)
And I know what you mean when you say that 90% of what you listen to in the Baroque and Renaissance periods is HIP. Some composers are almost impossible to access in non-HIP performances (think Rameau for example).
Finally, as far as the writer of the review is concerned, I think he's well on his way to becoming one of my all-time favorites - he's already far, far ahead of George Bernard Shaw! ;-)
d
and having a strong preference for the sound of modern instruments, I find the 'politicization' of such views a bit offensive.
.
.
. . . in general, clangsichords are highly incapable, compared to more highly developed keyboard instruments. And, yes, I'm aware of the different tone colors you can get with the different stops and manuals.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
