Jump to content


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

Moog Sub 37 Tribute


WWW
 Share

Recommended Posts

MOOG failed w/ the polysynth (memorymoog) in the past because of buggy OS and other hardware problems in addition.

Today, Memorymoog is a cool synth because Rudi Linhardt did the LAMM modifications, which b.t.w. are easiest to install into a Memorymoog w/o MIDI,- the non Plus version.

 

With all due respect Al I disagree with a couple of your points: I'm not aware of one single bug with the OS on the Memorymoog+. I do agree that the hardware is extremely temperamental. Also...there's at least one person (and maybe a few more based on resale price) that thinks the Memmoog is a cool synth without the LAMM modification. AT least when it's not on fire. :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

True, but a poly based on the Sub 37 design might be a lot more affordable.

 

Why ?

For a real poly, you´ d need everything of the Sub37´s voice for each voice of the polysynth, just only the haptics exist only 1x.

But all the voices have to be coordinated,- there´s a quality voice allocation necessary as well as keyboard play modes and a preset system storing everything,- all you don´t find in a Sub37 being designed for a poly.

That´s true when the polysynth comes w/ it´s own keyboard action.

You were able to run, for example, three Slim Phattys ~$700@(?) off a $1400(?) Little Phatty, thereby turning the Little Phatty into a 4-voice synth. The Phattys had the intelligence for the keyboard scanning to send each keypress to the next available sound generator. (I think each of the Slims could be completely sonically independent if you wanted, but that's not a must for a 4+ voice synth; for most purposes, it's fine if they are all playing the same sound.)

[video:youtube]

 

So extrapolating from that, imagine a Sub 37 with no keyboard and virtually no controls, at about half the price of a Sub 37. If it supports the same kind of intelligent key routing that the Phatty series did, then you could add one module for 4 voice (to the same extent that the Sub is 2 voice), another one for 6 voice, another one for 8 voice. (Since it has no controls, it would have to pick up the patch settings from the master.) I don't know if something along these lines is feasible, but based on what they have done in the past, it's not too much of a stretch to think that it might be. (Personally, a $1495 Sub 37 with a $995 module that increased it from two-voice paraphonic to six-voice paraphonic would really just about hit the spot for me.)

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

In studio, the emulations are pretty cool. I've used Minimonsta live and then replaced it with a Phatty. (Yes, Minimonsta is not Minimax, but they are not that far apart.

 

That´s correct soundwise, but there´s ONE difference between a native calculated VSTi and Minimax running on DSP hardware,- using the DSP hardware´s MIDI In,- Minimax has NO latency and/or jitter but Minimonsta will have ever running on a PC or MAC and w/ USB MIDI.

I don´t want to discuss here if it´s been very audible because it´s also system/configuration dependend,- but it´s there.

 

So,- also live, the DSP hardware based emulations work better than VST as hardware replacements.

In fact, it is hardware,- you just only see the GUI on the computer screen and there´s no difference compared to any hardware synth running on DSP today except you miss the haptics when using p.ex. Minimax in SCOPE on a Creamware DSP card or a Sonic Core XITE.

 

For live purposes, real analog cuts through, even at low volumes. You don't want it to merely sound like a Mini. You want it to also function in the band like one. It really does matter.

 

Confirmed !

I always prefered using hardware live and I also prefer it in the studio,- but all the other solutions, DSP as also VST offer so many possibilities, I´m using it too.

 

It's my belief that Moog has managed to reduce their hardware cost structure, first going to surface mount with the Phatties, then reducing cost even further with the Minitaur/Sub and their V/Hz oscillators. Concurrently, they have added digital control features, which are very desirable yet relatively cheap to implement. I can't prove this of course, but it's one way to explain the pricing.

 

I imagine they have found ways to produce cheaper now.

Today, we get lots of functionality in only one chip p.ex.,- but that was also the case when synth production in the past went from discrete to IC based, say SSM / CEM, and we all know, it changed sound.

That´s also w/ the new MOOGs,- they sound different from old ones but they still sound good !

 

A.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you switch on polyphonic mode in the phatties and subs, you need to tell each one how many synths are being combined, and in what order. Then they round-robin allocate each successive note so that you get some timbral variety.

 

Ahh, thx for info,- than they have at least that method already.

 

There are additional purely analog schemes that have been used by others (I am thinking of Tom Oberheim's voice allocation unit which you alluded to, for example)

 

That´s exactly what I was thinking about.

Oberheim 4- and 8- voice keyboard assignments because it doesn´t matter here if there were SEM hardware modules or MOOG SlimPhattys p.ex..

These keyboard play modes went into the later Oberheims too and I see these still in my Oberheim Xpander and working great.

Just only round robbin´ is a bit spartanic IMO.

 

let's hope for more from them in the polyphonic department.

 

Yep.

 

A.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already said it, and i say it again: With a third audio oscillator and exactly the same other features, for about $2000, this thing could be the Voyager Destroyer. But even as it is, my ears tell me that it's the best Moog of the modern era. The ideal balance between 'old' and 'new' sound. I think of it as a Source for the modern times - with a MUCH better panel.

*If* I had some money to spend, I would have pre-ordered it already..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

With all due respect Al I disagree with a couple of your points: I'm not aware of one single bug with the OS on the Memorymoog+. I do agree that the hardware is extremely temperamental. Also...there's at least one person (and maybe a few more based on resale price) that thinks the Memmoog is a cool synth without the LAMM modification. AT least when it's not on fire. :laugh:

 

O.k., but today I know exactly 2 people using a Memorymoog and subsequently I know their synths,- one is w/o LAMM modification but has MIDI and the other is a LAMM.

Late 80s, I toured w/ the guy who owns the stock Memorymoog w/ MIDI and he never took this thing out on the road because already at that time it was a extremely unreliable piece of gear.

He used it in the studio though.

 

The LAMM of my other friend is dead on stable all day.

 

From what they told me, there were bugs w/ MIDI in the originals and that´s OS to me.

Maybe there were differences in component tolerance and/or build quality too.

I´ve heard from new Memorymoogs being unusable in the past and needing service, upgrades and updates from day one.

I myself was interested when it came out, also because I had a Moog Source for some time,- but I never pulled the trigger.

My roommate at that time had the authorized service for MOOG, Sequential Circuits and Oberheim in my hometown.

 

A.C.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were able to run, for example, three Slim Phattys ~$700@(?) off a $1400(?) Little Phatty, thereby turning the Little Phatty into a 4-voice synth. The Phattys had the intelligence for the keyboard scanning to send each keypress to the next available sound generator. (I think each of the Slims could be completely sonically independent if you wanted, but that's not a must for a 4+ voice synth; for most purposes, it's fine if they are all playing the same sound.)

 

I´ve seen that vid before.

Tusker made it pretty clear it´s "only" round robbin voice allocation.

To make it polytimbral, different note priority modes as well as voice re-assign mode would be essential and it would be also nice to have mono, unison and,- ice on the cake,- poly-unison modes.

 

So extrapolating from that, imagine a Sub 37 with no keyboard and virtually no controls, at about half the price of a Sub 37.

 

That´s EUR 750.- here, for 1 voice in a poly synth. Not cheap when I want a 8-voice at least and one of these is the controller at the full price. Total 6.750.-.

 

Buy Solaris and have actually 10 voices, amongst other things Minimax OSCs and filters and all the other stuff it offers,- for 4.500.-.

And it´s lightweight and compact, but for the market, it´s a high priced polysynth already.

 

O.k.,- it´s not a real analogue Moog and we want one ...

 

I think it will come the other way around WHEN they do it,- Moog will design a new mainboard and eventually cascades voiceboards of a monosynth in one enclosure and adds all the polyphony related stuff they think it needs.

Or they also put all the voice on a single circuit board too and finaly throw in a keyboard, wheels and such.

That way it will be compact and lightweight and a competitor.

But that´s somewhat a new design technically and has it´s price too.

 

As much I wish to see a rackmout Sub37,- I´d have no intention buying several of these to create a polysynth because it´s too bulky.

If it is 2HU,- 7 voices fill 14HU and there´s the keyboard synth in addition, then comes a mixer etc..

 

If it supports the same kind of intelligent key routing that the Phatty series did,...

 

Which is basic (see above)

 

... then you could add one module for 4 voice (to the same extent that the Sub is 2 voice), another one for 6 voice, another one for 8 voice. (Since it has no controls, it would have to pick up the patch settings from the master.) I don't know if something along these lines is feasible, but based on what they have done in the past, it's not too much of a stretch to think that it might be. (Personally, a $1495 Sub 37 with a $995 module that increased it from two-voice paraphonic to six-voice paraphonic would really just about hit the spot for me.)

 

Ooops, now your polysynth is partially based on the paraphonic mode of the Sub37 ?

That´s not what I´d expect from a polysynth at all.

 

I see that as a nice gimmick for the monophonic Sub37 and it´s very welcome,- but not in a polysynth.

 

Anyway,- it´s all speculation,- but interesting and fun.

 

A.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uber GAS: The Voyager expanded into an 8 voice, polysynth. My 1983 Memorymoog never quite stabilized - despite repeated efforts. Seeing that concept re-introduced with the technology now available, wow... :love:

 

Check out the Studio Electronics Omega/Code 8 and you have that and more in a box...

SE sounds better IMO and you have both the Moog filter AND the OB-multimode filter stock. Can be expanded with ARP 2600 lowpass and CS-80 multimode filters.

I´ll get one when the timing is right!

 

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, I recently read that Lyle Mays may have used multitracking to get some of his amazing Oberheim pads.

 

Of course, adding delay and reverb help tool.

 

Interesting....Lyle Mays used the Four-voice, but his chords definitely were bigger than 4 notes....Also saw some DVD with Metheny where on a ballad, Lyle had his right hand on the Four-voice and played the bass notes on some other synth.

Even then he might have recorded the notes one at the time for more "liveliness"

Do you have a link to where you read about Lyle multitracking?

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, I recently read that Lyle Mays may have used multitracking to get some of his amazing Oberheim pads.

 

Of course, adding delay and reverb help tool.

 

Interesting....Lyle Mays used the Four-voice, but his chords definitely were bigger than 4 notes....Also saw some DVD with Metheny where on a ballad, Lyle had his right hand on the Four-voice and played the bass notes on some other synth.

Even then he might have recorded the notes one at the time for more "liveliness"

Do you have a link to where you read about Lyle multitracking?

 

Here's where I read it. I don't know who "mikael488" is though:

 

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/5199181-post42.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, I recently read that Lyle Mays may have used multitracking to get some of his amazing Oberheim pads.

 

Of course, adding delay and reverb help tool.

 

Interesting....Lyle Mays used the Four-voice, but his chords definitely were bigger than 4 notes....Also saw some DVD with Metheny where on a ballad, Lyle had his right hand on the Four-voice and played the bass notes on some other synth.

Even then he might have recorded the notes one at the time for more "liveliness"

Do you have a link to where you read about Lyle multitracking?

 

Here's where I read it. I don't know who "mikael488" is though:

 

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/5199181-post42.html

 

Thanks man!

 

This is too weird....I mean what´s the chance for this....

I was on a swedish forum couple of minutes ago, searching for something entirely different and then suddenly that exact same info shows up in swedish written by Micke/mikael488....btw this guy probably knows who played which synth on any fxxking tune/record. He´s like a living database :)

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one of these is the controller at the full price.

 

No. :)

 

That's why they didn't implement the more sophisticated voice allocation schemes. This way any collection of subs and phatties that you have lying around can become a polysynth. You can trigger them off any midi controller. :thu:

 

Given the relatively complex stuff that Moog is putting into the phatty / subs I don't think the polyphonic allocation stuff will take them more then a week to write and test, if that. By not creating a "master-controller" they are avoiding code bloat, and keeping it at a proof of concept / occasional use level. If we were gigging polyphonically regularly we would want more functionality and as you mentioned 4-5 slim phatties take a lot of space. So they haven't crossed the bridge yet because they are not there yet. Until they can deliver a per-voice cost that's more like DSI and less like the SE Code, it doesn't make sense to go polyphonic, it seems to me. Unless they wanted a limited edition polyphonic flagship priced like Voyager XL just to burnish their reputation, which I don't think they need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was talking with one of the Moog guys at NAMM on the topic of chaining synths for polyphony. He said they ultimately want to make all synths capable of poly chainable, such that one could connect a Sub 37 with a Slim plus an original Sub etc. to stack polyphony. Sounds pretty cool.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

one of these is the controller at the full price.

 

No. :)

 

That's why they didn't implement the more sophisticated voice allocation schemes. This way any collection of subs and phatties that you have lying around can become a polysynth. You can trigger them off any midi controller. :thu:

 

Well,- of course any combo of Phattys can be triggered by anything using the round robbin voice allocation scheme,- but IF it´s me who wants the MOOG polysynth,- I myself I´d want to play that combo from a keyboard controller and that´s what I see in the vid too,- several modules connected and ONE Phatty is the keyboard controller, it´s voice being part of the polyphony too.

So, in my case for a 8 voice poly,- 7 modules plus 1 synth w/ keyboard action.

I think it´s just only MIDI and/or CV and w/ MIDI, any keyboard can be the controller or a sequencer does.

 

Given the relatively complex stuff that Moog is putting into the phatty / subs I don't think the polyphonic allocation stuff will take them more then a week to write and test, if that.

 

Can be and we don´t know anything about their progress according to development of any fictive polysynth.

 

By not creating a "master-controller" they are avoiding code bloat, and keeping it at a proof of concept / occasional use level.

 

There might have been some misunderstanding because I never said I expect the polysynth to be a mastercontroller,- instead I meant,- IF it will be a all new keyboard instrument,- the circuitry/OS has to control several internal voices, which are comparable to a external hardware module considering each voice being a complete mono synth like we have p.ex. in a Oberheim Xpander or Matrix-12.

 

In fact, that´s the same as in software when creating a virtual polyphonic synth using separate voice design what the old analogues were,- and until that point, it doesn´t mean it´s polytimbral then,- what Xpander and Matrix-12 were in multi patch mode.

 

So,- it´s thinkable they´d prefer something like a standard polysynth, each voice being a complete monosynth but all voices play the same patch,- like Xpander/Matrix-12 in single-patch mode.

 

But then, there are many competitors and I wonder if such a machine would have a real chance in the market.

IMO, Moog would have to create something special.

 

Synths like Prophet 08 etc. aren´t expensive today and the top end is SE w/ Omega-8 /Code-8 and such and as already others mentioned here,- there are 2 sets of filters in the stock units and the option to get more.

 

If we were gigging polyphonically regularly we would want more functionality and as you mentioned 4-5 slim phatties take a lot of space. So they haven't crossed the bridge yet because they are not there yet. Until they can deliver a per-voice cost that's more like DSI and less like the SE Code, it doesn't make sense to go polyphonic, it seems to me. Unless they wanted a limited edition polyphonic flagship priced like Voyager XL just to burnish their reputation, which I don't think they need.

 

Confirmed.

In fact, the question is if we´d not only want but need a polyphonic MOOG synthesizer at all because there are lots of polyphonic synths out there working great and sounding good.

Can be, synth enthusiasts and collectors would be happy about a limited edition MOOG polysynth,- but for the real world daily work I won´t need it.

 

I´m a big MOOG fan and play Moogs since the 70s,- I had 3 Minimoogs,- a Taurus I and a Source,- but I never missed a poly,- I´m fine w/ the excellent monophonic Moog synths.

 

A.C.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are discussing what Moog has done polyphonically and speculating on what they might do. It's just for fun. :D

 

Well,- of course any combo of Phattys can be triggered by anything using the round robbin voice allocation scheme,- but IF it´s me who wants the MOOG polysynth,- I myself I´d want to play that combo from a keyboard controller and that´s what I see in the vid too,- several modules connected and ONE Phatty is the keyboard controller, it´s voice being part of the polyphony too.

 

It's important for others reading this thread to understand that the controller is optional and it's your personal preference, so thanks for pointing that out. Al I am guessing, that for the very good reasons you mentioned, you probably won't be their customer for a polyphonic, whether it's a polyphonic from scratch or a set of monos hooked together.

 

I agree with you that monophonic is Moog's traditional sweet-spot.

 

However, I've always enjoyed polyphonic uses of four-pole ladder filters (as you can tell from the PG track I attached) so perhaps our mileage will vary. Also, I quite enjoy the low-pole variations of the new Moogs, which aren't nearly as thick, and can create some pleasant air and shimmer, as long as you don't overdrive everything to death like many youtube demos do.

 

So,- it´s thinkable they´d prefer something like a standard polysynth, each voice being a complete monosynth but all voices play the same patch,- like Xpander/Matrix-12 in single-patch mode.

 

But then, there are many competitors and I wonder if such a machine would have a real chance in the market.

IMO, Moog would have to create something special.

 

Synths like Prophet 08 etc. aren´t expensive today and the top end is SE w/ Omega-8 /Code-8 and such and as already others mentioned here,- there are 2 sets of filters in the stock units and the option to get more.

 

Agreed. They should take their time to get the economics and the features right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are discussing what Moog has accomplished polyphonically and speculating on what they might do. It's fun. :D

 

Yes, it is ! :)

 

Al I think for the very good reasons you mentioned, you probably won't be their customer for a polyphonic, whether it's a polyphonic from scratch or a set of monos hooked together.

 

I don´t think so, because MOOG now came up w/ so many new features in their models, from Voyager to Sub37, so it could become interesting when they do a flagship polysynth.

I doubt it has to be a re-creation of the Memorymoog except they make it possibly 6-voice what is still enough.

And in the end it all depends on the features and the price too.

 

I've always enjoyed polyphonic uses of four-pole ladder filters (as you can tell from the PG track I attached) so perhaps our mileage will vary.

 

Well, I still own a Roland MPU-101 MIDI CV interface and when I had the 3 Minimoogs,- all modified w/ +5V CV/Gate inputs (and kbd CV/gate outs), I also experimented w/ THE 3-voice MOOG.

Well,- it was a mighty sound at that time but not very stable tuning wise.

I also remember, before the Prophet 5 appeared, in the studio we did poly synth recording by multitracking w/ the Minimoog, but it was hard work, really.

My experience was, the low end of these filters went into the way of the bass and bassdrum and then on the console we cut all below 200Hz or so.

 

I think, a MOOG poly needs a separate HP filter in addition to the LP (or multi-mode) filter.

It was very welcome on the Jupiter-8 and MKS-80 !

 

Also, I quite enjoy the low-pole variations of the new Moogs, which aren't nearly as thick, and can create some pleasant air and shimmer

 

Yes, I also recognize the differences in sound.

 

They should take their time to get the economics and the features right.

 

Yes, and I hope they won´t get bankrupt because of a flagship poly ...

I remember the SCI (Prophet 10 and T8) desaster as well as original Waldorf company w/ the Waldorf WAVE.

 

A.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone found out anything yet about whether there will be another edition and whether this edition is already sold out everywhere in terms of pre-sale orders?

Eugenio Upright, 60th P-Bass, Geddy Lee J-Bass, Hofner HCT-500/7, Yamaha BBP35, Viking Bari

Select Strat, Select Tele, Am Pro JM, LP 57 Gold, G5422DC-12, T486, ES295, PM2, EXL1

XK1c, Voyager, Prophet XL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
Has anyone found out anything yet about whether there will be another edition and whether this edition is already sold out everywhere in terms of pre-sale orders?

 

They are still available --- my wife just ordered one for me.

http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/smileys-and-emoticons/dancing/smileys-dancing-176278.gif

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott, you should gas up the car a couple times and get me one too. :poke::snax::rawk:

 

:laugh: They are getting snapped up like crazy - most (maybe all) places are out of stock until next month - should have mine mid-April.

 

Getting this was totally unexpected - I was just watching demos of the Sub 37 and my wife got nosy and started asking about it. I sensed a weakness in the force and drove it home with the (true) story of the Moog I missed out on when I was a kid ($100 - didn't even know the model, but the guy selling it said it was HUGE and heavy - but I was too late).. So the next day she ordered the Sub 37 for me - I guess the tears worked.

 

:cheers:

 

Anyway - besides the Moog sound I have been wanting, the Sub 37 will make a great controller for my iPad VA synths: all the knobs send MIDI CC, and the arpeggiator/step seq. send MIDI as well.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seen on the MW forum:

 

I'm fortunate enough to be in a position where I currently own all 3 (pro2, keys, 37) and each is an extremely different experience.

 

When working with a modular rig, the pro 2 is obviously a madman but not for the cv/sequencer outs. It's the inputs! Audio rate FM the hell out of your pro2 with your modular rig. It's bawlin! The sub37 will be able to do this once OS 1.1 is released. You'll be able to assign anything coming into a cv in to any destination on the 37.

 

For playing experience, the sub37 is my fav. Those two mod busses are so quick to use and so well thought out that I can spend hours jamming out grooves with them. Again, OS 1.1 will expand this by creating instant mod bus assignments by turning any target knob. Speed of use is a major perk on the 37.

 

The keys represents a bit of a different animal. It's much more contained than the others. Yes, with the cv outs you can do whatever you like to your modular rig but in reality, when I'm programming the keys, I end up tweaking a million things and getting lost in making cool grooves and sounds. The pro2 lends itself to working outside the box though both are quite capable.

 

The keyboard on the pro2 is the best for shredding on, if that's your thing.

 

Each of the three are wildly different experiences but it's the Sub37 you can take over my corpse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seen on the MW forum:

The sub37 will be able to do this once OS 1.1 is released. You'll be able to assign anything coming into a cv in to any destination on the 37.

 

 

Aaaahh VERY nice !!!

I was wondwering about this since IIRC, they did this for the Minitaur as well?

 

Dammit...this REALLY sealed the deal for me....

 

Picked up a used Sub Phatty not long ago and I really like it.

The only "negatives" IMO are a bit too stable oscillators and the pink noise which is unusable to me. Anyone knows if it´s possible to mod pink noise to white?

 

The guy I bought from had a Sub 37 on his keyboard stand.

So I got a bit curious of course and a bit blown away when I svengled it to find out what it can do.

That one is a winner!

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[

They are still available --- my wife just ordered one for me.

http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/smileys-and-emoticons/dancing/smileys-dancing-176278.gif

 

Congrats !!! Wow, what a cool wife !!!

 

Now, does she have a sister who´s single? :drool:

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more question,

 

The sub 37 has among many goodies the famous feedback thing built is.

 

Wonder (since it will be a while before I get get my hands on a Sub 37) if I could route the headphone out on the Sub Phatty to the external in. I guess I would need a stereo to mono cable...

Any danger doing this?

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...