Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Heads-up: SpaceStation keyboard amp is apparently back


Recommended Posts

dB, just for interest's sake IIRC you were very happy at one time with Line6 StageSource. Have you ever tried one of them combined with your SSv.3, as you had with your K8?

____________________________________
Rod

Here for the gear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



dB, just for interest's sake IIRC you were very happy at one time with Line6 StageSource. Have you ever tried one of them combined with your SSv.3, as you had with your K8?

I did indeed. :thu:

 

Although I prefer the sound of the Line 6 by itself against the K8 by itself, I felt that the K8 was a little bit better in this application. The way the sound of that unit meshed with the v5 was a bit more coherent, and adding the K8's bass boost sealed the deal.

 

dB

:snax:

 

:keys:==> David Bryce Music • Funky Young Monks <==:rawk:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...my hunch is Alan's EQ settings have a lot to do with his satisfaction level. Mine certainly did. I was able to dial in a better piano sound out of my SSv.3 from my NS2 than I could with my CP4.

When testing I kept all the SSv3 settings on both units at noon, and only brightened up the Rhodes sound a bit via the Nord front panel. Didn't touch the Royal Grand piano EQ.

 

Other than manufacturing variance or severe quality control issues, which seems unlikely, the only thing I can figure is that my needs (using this primarily as a stage monitor with large orchestras) generally top out at lower volume levels than those of you commenting on a big difference between original and Lite versions. Testing up to about 100 dB, I found effectively no difference between the two units, and my new one sounds the same as well.

 

(Side note: my friend Chris, who helped with my testing, is a very happy CP4 owner. But he was blown away by the Nord/SSv3 combo, and the Royal Grand sample in particular.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...my hunch is Alan's EQ settings have a lot to do with his satisfaction level. Mine certainly did. I was able to dial in a better piano sound out of my SSv.3 from my NS2 than I could with my CP4.

When testing I kept all the SSv3 settings on both units at noon, and only brightened up the Rhodes sound a bit via the Nord front panel. Didn't touch the Royal Grand piano EQ.

 

Other than manufacturing variance or severe quality control issues, which seems unlikely, the only thing I can figure is that my needs (using this primarily as a stage monitor with large orchestras) generally top out at lower volume levels than those of you commenting on a big difference between original and Lite versions. Testing up to about 100 dB, I found effectively no difference between the two units, and my new one sounds the same as well.

 

(Side note: my friend Chris, who helped with my testing, is a very happy CP4 owner. But he was blown away by the Nord/SSv3 combo, and the Royal Grand sample in particular.)

 

Thanks for this info, Alan :)

 

:thu:

 

 

____________________________________
Rod

Here for the gear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dave, and will do. That's actually where we did the double-blind shootout. There's a young Pilates trainer who was quite baffled when I asked her to position the two Spacestations while my back was turned (so that I wouldn't know which was the older/heavier one).

 

By the way I gave out your name just last week for what was likely a dreadful rehearsal band. Sorry about that. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I decided to let my ears decide, pulled the trigger and the space station arrived today!

 

I have to admit, I'm on the fence at the moment. I'm A/Bing it against a Mackie SRM350 at the moment which isn't the fairest of tests but I do notice the lack of bass in the space station (and there's no way I'm adding sub). Maybe I just need to get used to that though as our band already has lot of bass going on without me. We've also got subs at FOH and I think my keys have probably been clouding the sound in the monitor mix previously.

 

In its favour I'd say it sounds nice and clear though! I've only been able to test it in a small room so I'm guessing need to get it to a rehearsal to put it to the test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi AlQuinn, it is not easy to record the SS3 output in order to demonstrate any Faital coax benefit versus the original coax. May be you would be interested to lesson to this recording extract taken from an iPhone of one of of a recent concert. I think that it gives a pretty good idea of how my SS3 with the Faital would enhance a digital piano sound in the context of a big band sonorisation in a poor concert hall acoustic environment . I hope it helps ......

Steinway M!70 - Hammond B3 - Nordstqge - Physis piano H1 - Moog Prodigy - Piano Rodes MK2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting some crackle on one of the Nord EP sounds when playing in the lower octaves. Sound normal? Already got a plug in th sub output

 

Depends on what you mean by crackle. If it is more of a frequency-specific rattle/buzz...it may be the fuse holder, which tends to rattle at the resonant frequency of the cabinet. At the recommendation of another forum member I solved that issue with a small piece of duct tape.

Yamaha CK88, Arturia Keylab 61 MkII, Moog Sub 37, Yamaha U1 Upright, Casio CT-S500, Mac Logic/Mainstage, iPad Camelot, Spacestation V.3, QSC K10.2, JBL EON One Compact

www.stickmanor.com

There's a thin white line between fear and fury - Stickman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi AlQuinn, it is not easy to record the SS3 output in order to demonstrate any Faital coax benefit versus the original coax. May be you would be interested to lesson to this recording extract taken from an iPhone of one of of a recent concert. I think that it gives a pretty good idea of how my SS3 with the Faital would enhance a digital piano sound in the context of a big band sonorisation in a poor concert hall acoustic environment . I hope it helps ......

Thank you very much! I can hear the difference with the Faital speaker. Certainly higher fidelity than the SS front speaker. I enjoyed your music too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit, I'm on the fence at the moment...I've only been able to test it in a small room so I'm guessing need to get it to a rehearsal to put it to the test.

 

I had a similar initial reaction right after I unboxed mine. After this 100+ thread of praises, I was expecting a lot more than what I heard on first plug in.

 

It would be foolish for me to guess whether the SS is the right amp for you, but some suggestions to help you make your decision:

 

- if you're demo'ing at home, try to get it as far away from you as practically possible. Try A/B'ing it with your other options at a distance. Then try it at a distance and off-axis, to get and idea whether the "bloom / spread" is enough of a benefit for you.

 

- when you take it to rehearsal, let the band know you're trying new amplification and you want their unvarnished opinions. Press them to be brutally honest. Ask them about fidelity, clarity, tone...and LF response. You might find they like the reduction in your bottom end...or not, depending on what you typically play.

 

- If you (or one of your guitar player friends) has one, try using it sideways with the front speaker pointing at you (and the side speaker firing at the floor).

 

- if you have any KB playing friends, have them play your rig and listen from as far away as the back half of your audience might end up on a normal gig.

 

Anyway just some ideas. Let us know what you find and decide.

 

Tim

 

 

..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim offers sage advice, as always. It all depends on where you're coming from: amplification-wise and keyboard-wise. Without a lot of stereo content, you'll find it lacking. It also takes some time to figure out how to place it, and equalize it.

 

Not like other amps in the least.

 

That being said, it's now my go-to amp 4 out of 5 times for smaller gigs and rehearsals. And I have a ton of other choices.

Want to make your band better?  Check out "A Guide To Starting (Or Improving!) Your Own Local Band"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did my first duo gig with Spacestation and Soundcraft Signature 12 as the ONLY amplification for both of us...replacing two amps and a full PA system. It worked well in a small setting. Besides the much easier load in/out, the main positive was that we were basically hearing the mix that the audience heard. Feedback from the audience was good.

Yamaha CK88, Arturia Keylab 61 MkII, Moog Sub 37, Yamaha U1 Upright, Casio CT-S500, Mac Logic/Mainstage, iPad Camelot, Spacestation V.3, QSC K10.2, JBL EON One Compact

www.stickmanor.com

There's a thin white line between fear and fury - Stickman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The keyboards, or should I say synths I have tested

through the CP3

Timbre Wolf

MS-20kit

Waldorf Blofeld

Monotribe

Sledge

 

They all sound quite good, my old setup, 2 KC-150 amps (L-R)

just sound the smallest bit better, but that could be because they were separated by 8 foot and I was always in the sweetspot.

Centre Point Stereo Monitor

10" mini tremor sub

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So given the SS3 demonstrates the effectiveness of the principal, but some of us have been experimenting with placing the SS3 face to the floor with another more hi-fi speaker set on top of it and the SS3 providing the summed signal minus the one side out the side speaker, would it not be not only possible but foreseeably commercially viable to manufacture a signal processor as suggested that outputs the appropriate signals, and we use whatever speakers we choose for front and side? Aspen?

 

JazzPiano88 Replies:

"Everything unique to R" is just a wordy phrase for "All of the content in R that is not identical to anything in L"

 

L-R is generated electronically but can mentally be pictured (at least to me) as: (Everything unique to L) - (Everything unique to R)

 

I skipped some steps above, so combining the mental and math:

L-R = (All of L) - (All of R)

= (L unique + L Identical to R) - (R Unique + R Identical to L)

= (L unique) - (R unique) + (L Identical to R) - (R Identical to L)

 

the last two terms cancel giving:

 

(L-R) = (L unique) - (R unique) = (L unique) + -1.0*(R unique)

 

 

Let me try this one more time. 'Unique' is undefined. 'Not Identical' is undefined. Fugetaboutit . These terms make understanding about this stuff impossible.

 

1). L is what comes from the Left output on your keyboard.

2). R is what comes from the Right output on your keyboard.

 

3). L+R is the strict summation of the two signals.

(This is the same as using the 'Mono' Left only jack on most boards.)

 

4). L-R is strictly the sum of the L signal plus the phase inverted R signal.

(You might get this if your mixer has a phase button. Or as Zaphod B. has pointed out, if you apply the L and R signals to the two input pins of a balanced XLR input, the input amplifier will output the difference: L-R)

 

This was all done back in 30s or 40s when M/S was invented and used. There's no DSPs, no algorithms, no secret sauce. They didn't have any then, and didn't need it. Just '+' and '-'.

 

This is easy to do in software, or in a well-featured digital mixer, or with a few OpAmps. What's missing from my perspective is a piece of commercially available hardware, most likely a mixer, that can output both L+R and L-R.

Gig keys: Hammond SKpro, Korg Vox Continental, Crumar Mojo 61, Crumar Mojo Pedals

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So given the SS3 demonstrates the effectiveness of the principal, but some of us have been experimenting with placing the SS3 face to the floor with another more hi-fi speaker set on top of it and the SS3 providing the summed signal minus the one side out the side speaker, would it not be not only possible but foreseeably commercially viable to manufacture a signal processor as suggested that outputs the appropriate signals, and we use whatever speakers we choose for front and side? Aspen?

 

JazzPiano88 Replies:

"Everything unique to R" is just a wordy phrase for "All of the content in R that is not identical to anything in L"

 

L-R is generated electronically but can mentally be pictured (at least to me) as: (Everything unique to L) - (Everything unique to R)

 

I skipped some steps above, so combining the mental and math:

L-R = (All of L) - (All of R)

= (L unique + L Identical to R) - (R Unique + R Identical to L)

= (L unique) - (R unique) + (L Identical to R) - (R Identical to L)

 

the last two terms cancel giving:

 

(L-R) = (L unique) - (R unique) = (L unique) + -1.0*(R unique)

 

 

Let me try this one more time. 'Unique' is undefined. 'Not Identical' is undefined. Fugetaboutit . These terms make understanding about this stuff impossible.

 

1). L is what comes from the Left output on your keyboard.

2). R is what comes from the Right output on your keyboard.

 

3). L+R is the strict summation of the two signals.

(This is the same as using the 'Mono' Left only jack on most boards.)

 

4). L-R is strictly the sum of the L signal plus the phase inverted R signal.

(You might get this if your mixer has a phase button. Or as Zaphod B. has pointed out, if you apply the L and R signals to the two input pins of a balanced XLR input, the input amplifier will output the difference: L-R)

 

This was all done back in 30s or 40s when M/S was invented and used. There's no DSPs, no algorithms, no secret sauce. They didn't have any then, and didn't need it. Just '+' and '-'.

 

This is easy to do in software, or in a well-featured digital mixer, or with a few OpAmps. What's missing from my perspective is a piece of commercially available hardware, most likely a mixer, that can output both L+R and L-R.

 

That precise discussion came up early in the thread (season 1 episode 3?).

 

Bottom line from my recollections: Aspen said he had an external processor unit way back when, but it wasn't a success and was highly dependent on proper speaker positioning, component selection, etc. So he wasn't interested in try that one again.

Want to make your band better?  Check out "A Guide To Starting (Or Improving!) Your Own Local Band"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I must've missed that episode. It does leave me wondering though that with quite a few folks experimenting with other speakers replacing the front-firing one in the SS3 whether circumstances haven't changed, but thanks for posting :like:

 

So given the SS3 demonstrates the effectiveness of the principal, but some of us have been experimenting with placing the SS3 face to the floor with another more hi-fi speaker set on top of it and the SS3 providing the summed signal minus the one side out the side speaker, would it not be not only possible but foreseeably commercially viable to manufacture a signal processor as suggested that outputs the appropriate signals, and we use whatever speakers we choose for front and side? Aspen?

 

JazzPiano88 Replies:

"Everything unique to R" is just a wordy phrase for "All of the content in R that is not identical to anything in L"

 

L-R is generated electronically but can mentally be pictured (at least to me) as: (Everything unique to L) - (Everything unique to R)

 

I skipped some steps above, so combining the mental and math:

L-R = (All of L) - (All of R)

= (L unique + L Identical to R) - (R Unique + R Identical to L)

= (L unique) - (R unique) + (L Identical to R) - (R Identical to L)

 

the last two terms cancel giving:

 

(L-R) = (L unique) - (R unique) = (L unique) + -1.0*(R unique)

 

 

Let me try this one more time. 'Unique' is undefined. 'Not Identical' is undefined. Fugetaboutit . These terms make understanding about this stuff impossible.

 

1). L is what comes from the Left output on your keyboard.

2). R is what comes from the Right output on your keyboard.

 

3). L+R is the strict summation of the two signals.

(This is the same as using the 'Mono' Left only jack on most boards.)

 

4). L-R is strictly the sum of the L signal plus the phase inverted R signal.

(You might get this if your mixer has a phase button. Or as Zaphod B. has pointed out, if you apply the L and R signals to the two input pins of a balanced XLR input, the input amplifier will output the difference: L-R)

 

This was all done back in 30s or 40s when M/S was invented and used. There's no DSPs, no algorithms, no secret sauce. They didn't have any then, and didn't need it. Just '+' and '-'.

 

This is easy to do in software, or in a well-featured digital mixer, or with a few OpAmps. What's missing from my perspective is a piece of commercially available hardware, most likely a mixer, that can output both L+R and L-R.

 

That precise discussion came up early in the thread (season 1 episode 3?).

 

Bottom line from my recollections: Aspen said he had an external processor unit way back when, but it wasn't a success and was highly dependent on proper speaker positioning, component selection, etc. So he wasn't interested in try that one again.

Gig keys: Hammond SKpro, Korg Vox Continental, Crumar Mojo 61, Crumar Mojo Pedals

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concept of buying an $800 amplifier and then burying the main driver into the carpet (to avoid hearing it) and instead add a "more hi-fi" main driver for the primary (summed) sonic output baffles me.
The baiting I do is purely for entertainment value. Please feel free to ignore it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concept of buying an $800 amplifier and then burying the main driver into the carpet (to avoid hearing it) and instead add a "more hi-fi" main driver for the primary (summed) sonic output baffles me.

 

Apt. Remember those? Season 1, episode 5.

 

 

Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material.
www.joshweinstein.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concept of buying an $800 amplifier and then burying the main driver into the carpet (to avoid hearing it) and instead add a "more hi-fi" main driver for the primary (summed) sonic output baffles me.

 

It's about different tools for different situations.

 

For example, I use the SSv3 by its lonesome self very often. Just the thing for rehearsals and small bar gigs. One small unit, and you're good to go. Sound quality and levels are more than adequate, and the stereo effect is very pleasing.

 

Doing the face-down thing steps it up to the next level, sort of like stepping up from a single self-powered PA unit to two. It's entirely optional.

 

The advantage of this approach vs. a pair of self-powered PA units is (a) easy placement, (b) relatively unobtrusive and © the CPS SSv3 surround effect still intact.

 

Yes, you're spending more than you would with the self-powered PA approach, but it also has some advantages, depending on your situation.

 

The face-down-plus-something-else seems to work well in more intimate settings where you're not playing full electric. It's a cleaner, crisper sound.

 

By the same token, if I was thumpin' some bass, I'd be bringing a sub.

Want to make your band better?  Check out "A Guide To Starting (Or Improving!) Your Own Local Band"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concept of buying an $800 amplifier and then burying the main driver into the carpet (to avoid hearing it) and instead add a "more hi-fi" main driver for the primary (summed) sonic output baffles me.

Me, too.

 

No disrespect to those of you using it that way (hey, we all like what we like, right?), but to me adding another full range cab and just balancing its volume against the SS sounds muuuuuch better to me than turning the SS face down. Putting the SS on the bottom so its front speaker is pointing at my shins helps get that balance as well (as I don't love the mids of the current SS), but do want the full weight of the front array's low end.

 

dB

:snax:

 

:keys:==> David Bryce Music • Funky Young Monks <==:rawk:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just did a club gig with a 4-piece funk band. Full house, about 120 people. My SK1, Vent 2 and the SS3, plus a line out to the house for some barely-there fill. Small stage but I was able o get about 5-6 feet away from the amp, always my preferred distance. I had it on my stand, *side speaker* firing down--best for the drummer sitting next to it.

 

People commented all night how cool and huge the Hammond sounded. Told me they heard it "in stereo" from everywhere in the room.

 

Edited

Doug Robinson

www.dougrobinson.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No disrespect to those of you using it that way (hey, we all like what we like, right?), but to me adding another full range cab and just balancing its volume against the SS sounds muuuuuch better to me than turning the SS face down. Putting the SS on the bottom so its front speaker is pointing at my shins helps get that balance as well (as I don't love the mids of the current SS), but do want the full weight of the front array's low end.

And then there's the third option, of putting the spacestation above the full range cab, which someone else thought sounded best! I guess the idea being that you still get enough of the full range cab's sound to improve the overall tonal balance, but lifting the SS higher improved the the stereo effect (perhaps largely at the player's location).

 

The advantage of this approach vs. a pair of self-powered PA units is (a) easy placement, (b) relatively unobtrusive and © the CPS SSv3 surround effect still intact.

I think its mostly the third of those three things. Placement/obtrusiveness is not very different from two 8" PA units placed right next to each other, angled away from each other, and that also gives you a sense of "spread" to the sound if not true stereo, which in a sense, is what the SSv3 gives you, though the SS effect is more three dimensional(and perhaps provides that effect over a wider area).

Or as Jaxxooo said...

People commented all night how cool and huge the Hammond sounded. Told me they heard it "in stereo" from everywhere in the room.

Yeah, that's the raison d'etre of the SS3, and the big reason why--if you want to improve the sound quality--you may add a PA cab to it, rather than just sticking with 2 PA cabs. Even though 2 PA cabs can be cheaper and lighter (i.e. if using a K8/K8.2 or ZXa1).

Maybe this is the best place for a shameless plug! Our now not-so-new new video at https://youtu.be/3ZRC3b4p4EI is a 40 minute adaptation of T. S. Eliot's "Prufrock" - check it out! And hopefully I'll have something new here this year. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concept of buying an $800 amplifier and then burying the main driver into the carpet (to avoid hearing it) and instead add a "more hi-fi" main driver for the primary (summed) sonic output baffles me.

I certainly understand why you would be baffled because on the surface it doesn't make sense. I'll explain my personal experience and perhaps it will make more sense.

 

I have a pair of RCF TT08A's which do a great job reproducing all sounds including digital AP. I then bought a SSV3 to replace the 75 lb chopped Leslie 145 I was using for jazz organ gigs. I found that organ sounded better through the SSV3 and AP sounded better through the TT08As. So, I tried to get the best of both worlds by putting a TT08A on top of the SSV3 but, to my ear, the sound was a bit blurry. When I face the SS front speaker into the floor the sound is clean and clear (since I only hear the front speaker signal through the TT08A). So, I didn't buy a SS to face it into the floor. As a matter of fact, for jazz trio gigs I use the SS front speaker (along with a Markbass CMP121 for bottom end).

 

If I knew how to upgrade the SS front speaker so that it sounded as good as a TT08A I would consider doing it. Problem is, I don't know if this is possible. I realize the SS front speaker can be swapped with a better speaker but I'm skeptical that it would sound as good as a TT08A. And, doing so, would cost money and time while not providing much benefit. Hope this makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like DB, I didn't mean any disrespect either. I've read the almost 200 pages of v3, and I did try it. Wasn't right for me. but hundreds of threads and thousands of pages illustrate how personal sound is to each person's ears and how we each hear our own subjective optimum. Live and let live, all are welcome in the village of amplified sound.
The baiting I do is purely for entertainment value. Please feel free to ignore it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No disrespect to those of you using it that way (hey, we all like what we like, right?), but to me adding another full range cab and just balancing its volume against the SS sounds muuuuuch better to me than turning the SS face down. Putting the SS on the bottom so its front speaker is pointing at my shins helps get that balance as well (as I don't love the mids of the current SS), but do want the full weight of the front array's low end.

And then there's the third option, of putting the spacestation above the full range cab, which someone else thought sounded best! I guess the idea being that you still get enough of the full range cab's sound to improve the overall tonal balance, but lifting the SS higher improved the the stereo effect (perhaps largely at the player's location).

I might/probably would have have been more inclined to try that configuration with the v3 than the v5. :idk:

 

dB

 

 

:snax:

 

:keys:==> David Bryce Music • Funky Young Monks <==:rawk:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No disrespect to those of you using it that way (hey, we all like what we like, right?), but to me adding another full range cab and just balancing its volume against the SS sounds muuuuuch better to me than turning the SS face down. Putting the SS on the bottom so its front speaker is pointing at my shins helps get that balance as well (as I don't love the mids of the current SS), but do want the full weight of the front array's low end.

And then there's the third option, of putting the spacestation above the full range cab, which someone else thought sounded best! I guess the idea being that you still get enough of the full range cab's sound to improve the overall tonal balance, but lifting the SS higher improved the the stereo effect (perhaps largely at the player's location).

I might/probably would have have been more inclined to try that configuration with the v3 than the v5. :idk:

 

dB

It seems like a lot of people are essentially using the SS as amplified source for the L-R and R-L side throws (obviously to generate the stereo effect).

 

I'm guessing it has been discussed before but it sounds like there could be a market for a lower cost L-R / R-L transducer that supplements a single pick-your-favorite powered full range speaker. Would beat spending $800 for the essentially just the side throw capability.

J a z z  P i a n o 8 8

--

Yamaha C7D

Montage8 | CP300 | CP4 | SK1-73 | OB6 | Seven

K8.2 | 3300 | CPSv.3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait, when I put it on my stand it's not face down--the side speaker is what fires down. That to me is the optimal position in many rooms and it saves the drummer from having that side speaker firing directly at him.

 

However, what works, works. I did a house concert three weeks ago and because the audience was so close, I turned the amp around with the main spkr firing into a corner and it was just right. Loud enough to be intense but diffuse enough not to aggravate.

Doug Robinson

www.dougrobinson.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I think its mostly the third of those three things. Placement/obtrusiveness is not very different from two 8" PA units placed right next to each other, angled away from each other, and that also gives you a sense of "spread" to the sound if not true stereo, which in a sense, is what the SSv3 gives you, though the SS effect is more three dimensional(and perhaps provides that effect over a wider area)."

 

In my experience this only works the way you're describing if you are positioned just right, whereas the illusion of "dimensional spread" with the S3 works all over the room. In the first method it might seem like it would work but go out into the audience and move around the room and you'll see what I mean. If you stand more in front of one speaker, that's pretty much what you hear--the one speaker.

Doug Robinson

www.dougrobinson.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...