gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
650718 Posts in 26004 Topics by 3711 Members - Latest Member: JPP4 September 21, 2019, 07:03:06 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 89
1  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Beach Boys playing for Trump on: July 02, 2016, 01:28:18 AM
FYI everybody, I wouldn't put too much into anything that filledeplage says. She's a birther who doesn't have the guts to admit the current President of the United States is a natural born citizen.

What does that mean?  Of course if his mother was a citizen, he would be one.  

Hillary Clinton raised that issue in 2008, and was not raised by me.

You are a liar. Hillary did not raise that issue in 2008. Some of her "supporters" did, but not her.

In fact, it is your candidate, Mr. Donald J. Trump who has pushed that President Barack Hussein Obama is not a natural born citizen, is not a Christian and only got through college due to some type of Affirmative Action, as Trump believes his grades were not good.

Also, you always seem to talk about "vets" and Donald. Can you tell me why Mr. Trump accused United States troops of stealing millions of dollars in Iraq. Can you imagine if Hillary did that? And we can just add that on top of the fact that he only likes the ones who "weren't captured" while showing up and hanging out with Mike Love at a POW/MIA thing. But you'll excuse it as him being a political neophyte, because to you, unless someone has run for office how can we expect them to be a decent person and not mock those who have been captured serving our country?

SDJ - I guess wiki is a liar.  There is plenty online.  Hillary had to walk her comments back.  

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

We are here to discuss, even spiritedly and not to insult or be confrontational.  I hope the mods are noting your confrontational approach to other posters as well.  




1) Anybody can edit wikipedia,which is why it's not 100% reliable as a source

2) One of the things we mods are notating is that you *still* have not answered my question (asked twice now) above.

Still waiting.

Explain why you posted this
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24118.msg583083.html#msg583083
in response to me.

If I see any  further posts in this topic from you  without a response to this, I will assume you were trolling me, and I will deal with it accordingly.

Some may find this post to be a aggressive/bullying, Billy, just a-sayin.
2  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Beach Boys playing for Trump on: July 02, 2016, 01:25:36 AM
Stands for Beach Girl, you dumb fucks.
3  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Pet Sounds Forum on: June 20, 2016, 02:47:48 AM

It turned into this, and unless there was a special freebie deal going the day it was registered, the normal fees and charges put on anyone who registers a domain through popular hosting companies would say this isn't accurate if certain options are chosen. Usually a third-party service's options have to be selected and approved, and are not defaulted into a package deal.

Does it matter? In the grand scheme, probably not. But why duck and dodge over such a damned simple question and issue? Maybe one party didn't know what the other party had done, but why not clarify it first instead of ducking and denying?

Speaking of ducking and dodging and denying, Bubbly & Dirk have answered your incessant questions about the origin of the board and who is footing the bills.

Unless you want to detail here the "truth" you seem to have up your sleeve, enough of calling people bullshitters and liars about the how the page got off the ground.  Your comments & name calling are far from classy, and until you elaborate on your comments, baseless.

Suggest you focus on your strengths and get back to talking about the music, Craig - this thread was relatively quiet for a few days until you started sh*t stirring again.

4  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Pet Sounds Forum on: June 04, 2016, 01:53:56 AM
Why do people who make a flamboyant, drama-filled exit from on online community always have to reappear, usually within very short order?

HeyJude - are you talking about Rab2591?  I don't think he's joined the PS Forum - cheers - A
5  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 30, 2016, 04:13:10 PM
I just don't really get the outrage. The Austin festival was cancelled. I lost the cost of my hotel room and ticket (the festival claims it will be refunded, but they don't seem to be getting around to it.)
It's annoying, but it's part of life.

Outrage?  Hardly.

Val's was letting the BW management know of some disappointment - from a group of people who've done a lot to support BW and his product for many years, and wanted it known they didn't feel things were handled. 

If you're happy to roll with inconvenience due to undelivered product, that's your value - it's not necessary to belittle others values and their opportunity to speak up about it, filed under the "That's life" category.

There's some really off hyperbole (bordering on smear) in some of the responses about a letter that was no more than a statement of complaint/suggestion to resolve. 

And let's not forget, the letter was raised by Debbie KL as response to a tussle she had unnecessarily started in the first place.



6  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Brian Wilson 2016 Tour Thread (Pet Sounds 50th Anniversary Tour) on: May 28, 2016, 02:33:55 AM
I managed to get one at the end. I'll get it up tomorrow as I'm at tonight's show.

Soundcheck highlight today:  Monster Mash! Brian wants tw play it tonight! They also did God, DWB, Wake, Wild (part).
that you in the radish shirt?

Just saw your post John.  It was me with the Radish Shirt!

Where did you see me?

It was another great night.  They were less chatty tonight between songs than they were last night but still fabulous.  Grin

Amazing reports from John and Mike!

Monster Mash!  The best song in the history of music performed by Brian W & Al Jardine etc.  Then Proud Mary!  Perhaps "that" rock album would see the light of day.

Mike, I can't believe you wouldn't have noticed John Manning - he'd be the guy with walking poles, sitting in a one man tent, brewing up a steel canteen of tea over a one burner butane stove.
7  Smiley Smile Stuff / 21st Century Beach Boys Albums / Re: Made In California on: May 28, 2016, 12:42:32 AM
Outstanding boxset. The use of really badly done melodyne was a stupid decision and I can't even imagine how they could've thought it was a good idea to keep it in. I would have loved some more rarities. But all in all, it does the band a lot of justice and I love all the new stereo mixes, remasters, and most of all the rarities.

4.899934562816/5.

Melodyne? What's that?

Sorry, should of made that more clear. It's like a more versatile and more widely-used Auto-tune.

Outstanding boxset. The use of really badly done melodyne was a stupid decision and I can't even imagine how they could've thought it was a good idea to keep it in. I would have loved some more rarities. But all in all, it does the band a lot of justice and I love all the new stereo mixes, remasters, and most of all the rarities.

4.899934562816/5.

Melodyne? What's that?

I believe he's talking about the program that can change pitch, notes, tempo of a song, etc.

Zach, where are you hearing this used on here?
As another Zach, I'll hop on this. Listen to 1:04-1:09 in Sherry She Needs Me and you'll see.
You'll all see...

Yep, and on the 2nd verse, "Sherry don't" sounds robotic, "hate her" sounds garbled. As well, on the line "and maybe you wanna make friends with her some day", "wanna make" sounds robotic, and "with" seems to not fall down to as low a pitch as on the boot. I listened to the boot and the MIC version side-by-side and there is a definite difference.  There are probably other spots, too. They didn't even correct the worst pitch problems, they just messed with the sections that were fine. But honestly, after re-listening to the song on MIC, my initial post was quite exaggerated and it doesn't even bother me that much. I seem to remember it being worse than it really is.

Yes, I'm responding to a post several years old...

A compilation I made once ended up making the rounds online. One of the tracks was a mashup of the different Sherry versions. It sounded very close to the version on MIC....very, VERY close to it....right down to the part mentioned here. The exact same spot. Definitely gives me pause for thought.

If it was indeed my version, then it was Antares Auto-Tune used. I may even still have the preset saved....

 Cheesy That's a great story, Billy!  Resonates even more as I recall (and if I'm wrong, let me know) a few people chipped in get you a copy of MIC given the funds weren't too cool for you at the time.  Not sure who those kind souls were, but interesting that something you put there may have been returned!
8  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 28, 2016, 12:34:28 AM
Ah ha! At first, I was genuinely upset that RDZ was allegedly banned because of the "asshole" post, and then I read further in this thread and learned he had flagrantly violated other rules, which led to his real banning. And it makes sense now (I'm glad I didn't immediately flame somebody for some out of context post three pages before the most recent post).

So- context does help work through some of this labyrinthine sh*t. Then again, so does being fair minded, rationale and calm.

I learned something today.
Yeah, it's a very interesting & educational thread.
9  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: So I'm goin away but not forever on: May 28, 2016, 12:32:06 AM
Not sure "people", I just was curious.
I do like Al's name Alan.
Fcukin' great name!
10  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 27, 2016, 06:33:35 PM
Quote
We are told bannings are only enacted when the mods are in agreement (or Charles is summoned) yet Billy claimed he was unaware of why RDZ was banned.

Wait...what? Where did I say that? I must've had a major brain fart if I did, or was thinking of someone else other than runners...one of the reasons why his suspension was made permanent was because he had multiple accounts.

Fair call, my bad - you didn't say it verbatim so I've modified the post to say "yet Billy seemed to be unsure of why RDZ was banned" - in relation to the legendary "Asshole" banning, which you subsequently overturned further down; which may not have been the last banning as you've indicated.

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,22826.msg540696.html#msg540696
11  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 27, 2016, 05:56:35 PM
The point that has (perhaps understandably) gotten lost (due to emotional reaction and standard over-analysis) is about the need for consistent moderation and an awareness by the moderators of the values they project.

For example, peeps are upset that AGD is banned, and have indicated it's a loss to the board - I don't think anyone has outright denied his f***-up, a royal one it was.
He's gone and it's disappointing.  There are subsequent reactions/implications across the board many of which have been heavily addressed both ways.

OSD got banned for fucking up, then got reinstated, then goes about trolling the hell out of the place and it's disappointing. There have been subsequent reactions/implications across the board with no action to address.  (Consistency)

Craig puts the squeeze on BW and Judd for their naughty NPP thread calling their postings into account, yet is wounded here when his moderation or posting is called into account. (Values projected)

We are told bannings are only enacted when the mods are in agreement (or Charles is summoned) yet Billy seemed to be unsure of why RDZ was banned.  Consistency again.

Deadpool's comments about imposing an authoritarian approach are a little interesting - I'm not for mass bannings: what a headache.  But more public warnings that promote one of the key rules here: 2) Debate is fine; when it crosses into personal attacks, might go a long way to (re)lift the game on this board; Debbie KL - re your response to your postings about Val.  I assure you, I am not calling for your head, Debbie.  I don't think the comment was appropriate in light of values mods have expressed here about how they've been treated on other boards & the rule stated, and think you should have been called on it.

Easy stuff and enough with the examples.

One last thing, Charles, can you provide the hard evidence re this alledged threat against your family by Mikie - or retract the statement to avoid speculation becoming fact.

Anyway, enough (for now).  It's nearly winter here, but for some reason Avocados are in season.  Guacamole time! - A





12  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 26, 2016, 07:26:37 PM
.
13  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 26, 2016, 02:58:16 PM
Debbie - at no time, do I recall that Val encouraged legal action with respect to Brian's tour in the UK.  I did read a lot of frustration with posters who had arranged vacations and time off, to coincide with the tour.  I went back to last June (26) to see her "A Plea to the Management/Promoters of the Brian Wilson Tour in the UK" and re-read what Val posted.  It is around page 19 of the BBB site.  

There was an initial complaint by some other fans, that some fee associated with the ticket was not to be refunded and then it was.  My impression was that the fans were venting at the news.  I can well remember my colossal disappointment when the Maharishi tour was cancelled the afternoon of that show.  I read frustration and disappointment in those posts which I can identify with after having experienced the same alongside the uncertainty of whether they would be back performing in the area any time soon.  
  

This?

"A PLEA TO THE MANAGEMENT/PROMOTERS OF THE BRIAN WILSON TOUR IN THE UK
Posted on June 26, 2015 at 11:10:51 by Val

I do feel that I need to speak out on behalf of all the fans who have been bitterly disappointed by the latest news of the cancellation of Brian's UK Tour and feel that some acknowledgment of losses is due.

As many have stated below, when this tour was announced, we all thought that the venues were WAY too large for "Our Brian". Please note that we don't blame Brian personally and in fact we are fairly sure that this is nothing to do with any decision made by him.

I do feel though, that is it a pretty poor show when fans have to book time off at their jobs, way in advance and they also have to book flights and hotels (most of which is non refundable) and then to add insult to injury, we are advised that although we should all get our money back from the respective venues, the booking fees charged will not be refunded!

This is causing an awful lot of bad feeling among fans, along with feelings that Management should surely have known better than to do this in the first place and sadly, it shows us that the fans have not been considered in this venture, compounding that feeling by the "Announcement" on Brian's Pages (and really, so NOT from Brian Wilson himself!) which I believe many fans take to be an insult to their intelligence.

It really saddens me to write this, but shame on you BW Management - and I would love to see some form of recompense for the fans, who have lost such a lot through your poor judgement.

Surely, even a "residency" at The Royal Festival Hall in London for a few nights, with a show or two in Scotland and maybe Birmingham, would have been the best decision made and would have saved face?

A Jam Session/Charity Gig with our lovely Beach Boys Britain Musicians and Brian's Musicians would be the icing on the cake, to heal some very open wounds right now and I would be delighted to work with you on this.

Sent with Love and Respect.

Val Johnson-Howe
Beach Boys Britain"

Pretty tame stuff really and little more than a complaint to the management.

Those who think it's more than that, go get some sunshine, or speak to Deadpool about tips for gettin' more action.
14  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 26, 2016, 02:09:39 PM
Quote
The issue I have with moderation here is the posters who are allowed to continually derail threads with the same gripes or personal attacks on band members.

Definitely understand that, which is one of the reasons why I have been more active lately, even though it got me into a bit of trouble at work. For me,the one thing that I absolutely draw the line at is when band members, i.e. not Mike & Brian, but the band members...anyway...attacks on them to me should be off-limits, if it's a case where said member was being attacked just because they're in so-and-so's band.

So I can't call Mike, Gigantic Douche Coupe? Sad

I only remember Totten and Cowsill from any of the bands participating on the board, who all have I missed/forgotten?

Edit: You forgot Brian, Cam. Oh yeah, duh.
Adam Jardine has popped in once or twice.  or once.

I don't recall Adam Jardine posting here (could be wrong, though). Matt Jardine has posted on occasion, and when he has, he has offered some pretty interesting information (a few updates on recording with Brian, and in the past insights into the logistics of doing live shows, etc.). There was a particularly interesting post where he (somewhat) defended all of the various "falsetto" guys in the band over the years and explained some of the difficulties in singing those harmony parts in concert.
You are 100% correct, my screw-up. I meant Matt, of course - cheers - A
15  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: \ on: May 26, 2016, 02:02:11 AM
...I've been doing it myself as a hobby for several years.
Twice a day, everyday, right?
16  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 26, 2016, 01:54:59 AM
Quote
The issue I have with moderation here is the posters who are allowed to continually derail threads with the same gripes or personal attacks on band members.

Definitely understand that, which is one of the reasons why I have been more active lately, even though it got me into a bit of trouble at work. For me,the one thing that I absolutely draw the line at is when band members, i.e. not Mike & Brian, but the band members...anyway...attacks on them to me should be off-limits, if it's a case where said member was being attacked just because they're in so-and-so's band.

So I can't call Mike, Gigantic Douche Coupe? Sad

I only remember Totten and Cowsill from any of the bands participating on the board, who all have I missed/forgotten?

Edit: You forgot Brian, Cam. Oh yeah, duh.
Adam Jardine has popped in once or twice.  or once.
17  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 25, 2016, 03:30:38 PM
So, in relation to consistency in moderation, did we ever get a landing on GF reaming AGD repeatedly for offensive comments about Smiley board mods on the BBB board (Mike's Band thread, circa Dec 15) vs no apparent reaming of Debbie KL for making offensive comments about BBB board mods on the Smiley board (PS tour thread)?

Apologies if I missed it in the melee.

- A

I was defending myself against negative comments made on a forum where I'm not registered, where I never have posted, and in a situation where I had no idea it was even happening until someone mentioned it. I had every right to defend myself against both the attacks themselves, and since Andrew was one of the main contributors and the thread's starter on BBB and was also a member here, I had every right to call it out and defend myself on a board where I actually AM a registered member.

If Val wants to reply, she can do so. If a precedent is set by allowing something to happen, the consequences might not be agreeable but they're not unexpected.
Uh huh, so sounds like a "No".

I recall while "defending yourself" you wondered why the BBB admins and mods didn't shut down offending thread - if you still carry these convictions, don't let this kind of behaviour happen here (naming & bagging people on other boards).
18  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / The Sandbox / Re: Thread for arguments with or about moderation on: May 25, 2016, 04:58:59 AM
So, in relation to consistency in moderation, did we ever get a landing on GF reaming AGD repeatedly for offensive comments about Smiley board mods on the BBB board (Mike's Band thread, circa Dec 15) vs no apparent reaming of Debbie KL for making offensive comments about BBB board mods on the Smiley board (PS tour thread)?

Apologies if I missed it in the melee.

- A
19  Smiley Smile Stuff / 1990's Beach Boys Albums / Re: Summer In Paradise on: May 25, 2016, 04:29:09 AM
c'mon! you gotta at least love the artwork.  It's better artwork than 'bb85', 'still cruisin', 'LDC', 'miu', 'light album', '15 big ones'.
Even the Cd case design was great, thoughtful and original.  There are worse albums out there than 'SIP'
Franklin Mint, dude  LOL
20  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: 14 Beach Boys albums coming to vinyl/SACD on: May 23, 2016, 03:12:43 PM
the SACD's look really well packaged from images online.  Can't justify spendin' the dough on these yet after rebuying the mono/stereo releases from a few years back.  The SACD's no doubt are the better product, but gee, how many copies of surfer girl or little deuce coupe draws the line?....
Rick - sell the CDs on ebay, then get the SACDs. You know you want to.

Or download one of the tracks in High Def from AP website, A/B against the CD then see what you think.
21  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: 14 Beach Boys albums coming to vinyl/SACD on: May 22, 2016, 04:13:50 AM
The mono mix of Surfin' USA on the SACD sounds fantastic.  Great sonics, engaging - a hypnotising presentation, quite amazing and head turning for something I've heard many a time before.
22  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Pet Sounds 50 track listing on: May 22, 2016, 04:11:10 AM
Okay, now pardon my ignorance but before the 1972 twofer master being used on this reissue, what mono master was being used for the prior reissues? Is the original 1966 master not around anymore? Anybody feel like giving me a run through of what's been what?
Well, I thought the original master was what was used for the mono AP re-issue. Maybe, Steve Desper knows the full story as to how the Carl Wilson supervised master of 1972 came to be.

The '66 master has been missing since '92.  This was discovered when Mark L went to source the master for use in the GV Box.

Prior to this Mark had used the '66 master for the 87 CD, when he made at least 2 digital transfer copies:
- 1 with No Noise & EQ adjustments to address tape hiss.  Used on the 87 and '90 CDs.
- 1 without No Noise & a flat transfer (no EQ adjustments) which was lost and gone but found and used for the 40th CD in '06 and subsequent Capitol releases.  

For all mono releases post the '88 & '90 CD's & up until the '06 40th anniversary release, a safety copy (2nd gen) made in '66 from the original was used; this safety was also used for the DVD-A.

There is some contention what was used for the DCC & Audio Fidelity Hoffman jobbies in the '90's/naughties (ie, the original or the safety).

I am also led to believe the original master had a duophonic mix of WIBN tacked on, the mono from the master thought to have been cut off and put on a comp reel & the dogs of Caroline No excised, these atrocities have meant that the safety copy has been sourced at various times to augment gaps.

I do not know what was used for the AP reissue - I can only speculate, but from listener comments I've read, I'm guessing the 2nd gen safety was used.

The news of the '72 master is a nice surprise - again, speculating wildly, but I assume Carl and engineer X (not Mr Desper) took a copy of the original master and applied some specific "sonic" signatures or eq adjustments - some listeners have commented the '72 vinyl sounds a little compressed, and a little less boomy on the bass - perhaps these adjustments, IF they happened, were to update/align PS to the sound of the times.

As to where this master has been hiding for the last 44 years, dunno - A

*all of the above re the original tape comes from posts by either Mark L, Bicyclerider or petsite's posts of old: apologies for any gleaning or other errors.


 
23  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Pet Sounds 50 track listing on: May 19, 2016, 07:58:10 PM
From UnCut:


The Beach Boys
Pet Sounds: 50th Anniversary Edition
Capitol

Another generous box chronicling one of pop's greatest achievements

10/10 — Wouldn't it be nice if we could get a definitive edition of The Beach Boys' magnum opus? Pet Sounds still rewards with every listen, retaining the vibrancy of Brian Wilson's intricate arrangements and the bittersweet romanticism of Tony Asher's lyrics. A flop upon its 1966 release, the LP has grown in stature to become a true American rhapsody, which Wilson himself deconstructed on its 30th anniversary. A highly influential '90s CD, The Pet Sounds Sessions, set the template for every subsequent anniversary reissue, collecting the first stereo version as well as instrumentals, vocal tracks and studio puzzle-pieces. Subsequent repackagings simply revisit that idea, turning listeners into armchair producers but failing to replicate the sense of discovery. This new 50th anniversary edition does add a new twist: a handful of live tracks chronicle the band's history and take the studio-bound album onto the stage and, ultimately, out of Wilson's hands, showing how these songs took on a life of their own.
EXTRAS 6/10 — Previously available studio outtakes make up the bulk of the set, complemented by 11 new live tracks and a Blu-ray audio disc, but the real draw is the mono version of the album taken from the '72 Brother/Reprise vinyl reissue.
STEPHEN DEUSNER


 Thumbs Up Cheers, John - A
24  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Pet Sounds 50 track listing on: May 19, 2016, 03:39:34 PM
It is indeed from the master used for the 72 Brother/ Reprise release which was originally supervised by Carl. We used it for both the CD and BluRay on the box as well as the new vinyl release.

Mark

Many thanks Mark, damned intriguing! Is the master a recent discovery or was it neatly filed all along, and only recently referenced?

Is the next move a fresh vinyl pressing from it? . Actually scratch that; I have one pressing from that master, and one's as many as I think I need, given that I'll have bought around 10 different incarnations of that album in the last 12 months! LOL I might even have bought at Knebworth in 1980, now I think about it…
Mark, wow, thanks for the above. Some questions if you are able/inclined to answer:
- how was this master made (dubbed 2nd gen?)
- does it have compression or other specific EQ adjustments added as some listeners (at various sites) have suggested/assumed
- was Stephen D involved with this master; ie assisted Carl
- was the '66 master version of WIBN spliced onto this tape thus missing from the now missing '66 master (apols if I have my notes wrong here)
- where did this tape go for the last 44 or so years
- did A/P use this twofer tape for their reissue

Cheers - A
25  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Pet Sounds 50 track listing on: May 19, 2016, 01:48:11 AM
Uncut gives the new box 4 stars and identifies one of the highlights as being the '72 CATP two-fer mono master. If I had known that was included, I'd forgotten! Smiley
That's possibly incorrect (the master used was the '66 master, subsequently maimed (WIBN, CN fade) & MIA) or "they"'re presenting a needle drop of the '72 vinyl.

Unless an intact first gen reel has just appeared in the magical dumpster of lost classic rock tapes.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 89
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.16 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!