Musical Subs and Complete Bass - Page 10 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 295 Old 03-04-2012, 06:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pokekevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 5,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post


Firstly, you misunderstood me. Secondly, there's a difference from singling out a particular sub and brand and bashing it like the poster accused me of doing.

You said the ref 12 is more musical but not by much. Yet you haven't heard one? Reserve judgement?

No subwoofer I've heard has been able to produce the bass I've experienced in the Corps!

Must..stop...buying...every bluray release...
pokekevin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 295 Old 03-04-2012, 06:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mojomike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: South Florida
Posts: 6,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_big View Post

This topic currently interests me greatly. The general rule of thumb among audiophiles is that a small sealed sub is best for music, with the ideal system being something like two JL F113s.

The conventional thinking seems to say that two larger ported subs -- something like the ED A7-450 -- wouldn't sound as good, given that it's a big-ass driver and ported too.

You guys seem to be positing that this isn't in fact the case. That, all else being equal, the ported big sub should sound as good as the sealed smaller sub. Given the following parameters --
-- acoustic jazz music with acoustic bass
-- neither sub being overdriven (obviously not, given that we're talking acoustic music played at live levels)
-- both subs set up correctly
-- considering sound quality only, not overall output, not extreme extension (given that the acoustic bass doesn't drop down below 30hz)
-- crossover implementation aside

So given those parameters, are you guys saying that I wouldn't hear a difference between the two subs I mentioned? They'd have the same timbre, same crispness, detail, etc?

Thanks very much,
Jason

Nobody said they would sound the same, but as far as to which would be more accurate would mostly depend on the room conditions, the eq, and the setup in general.
mojomike is offline  
post #273 of 295 Old 03-04-2012, 06:36 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
ccotenj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: the toxic waste dumps of new jersey
Posts: 21,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 89
@dr_big...

nope... that's not what is being said...

- chris

 

my build thread - updated 8-20-12 - new seating installed and projector isolation solution

 

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1332917/ccotenj-finally-gets-a-projector

ccotenj is offline  
post #274 of 295 Old 03-04-2012, 09:20 PM
Senior Member
 
ironhead1230's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_big View Post

This topic currently interests me greatly. The general rule of thumb among audiophiles is that a small sealed sub is best for music, with the ideal system being something like two JL F113s.

The conventional thinking seems to say that two larger ported subs -- something like the ED A7-450 -- wouldn't sound as good, given that it's a big-ass driver and ported too.

You guys seem to be positing that this isn't in fact the case. That, all else being equal, the ported big sub should sound as good as the sealed smaller sub. Given the following parameters --
-- acoustic jazz music with acoustic bass
-- neither sub being overdriven (obviously not, given that we're talking acoustic music played at live levels)
-- both subs set up correctly
-- considering sound quality only, not overall output, not extreme extension (given that the acoustic bass doesn't drop down below 30hz)
-- crossover implementation aside

So given those parameters, are you guys saying that I wouldn't hear a difference between the two subs I mentioned? They'd have the same timbre, same crispness, detail, etc?

Thanks very much,
Jason

What is being said is if there is a sound quality difference between the two subs in your example, it is not because one has a smaller driver. Sound quality is dependent on the entire design of the sub, making sure it is not being pushed to its limits and its integration with the room and the rest of the speakers, not on driver size alone.

-Mike
ironhead1230 is offline  
post #275 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 03:52 AM
Member
 
dr_big's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironhead1230 View Post

What is being said is if there is a sound quality difference between the two subs in your example, it is not because one has a smaller driver. Sound quality is dependent on the entire design of the sub, making sure it is not being pushed to its limits and its integration with the room and the rest of the speakers, not on driver size alone.

-Mike

I see. But can a big driver (15-18") in a ported configuration (I know this isn't part of the discussion here -- sorry!) sound as accurate with music as its smaller cousin?

Is there any truth to the "ism" that says a large ported enclosure is good for HT while a smaller sealed unit is better for music? Can a large box work well with small-scale, acoustic music? Measurements are one thing, and while they're a great guide and a wonderful means of trying to explain what we're hearing, listening is the final arbiter, in my opinion of course.

I know that I'm coming into the middle of a heated debate, but it seems as if you're already peripherally discussing this topic.

Thanks again,
Jason
dr_big is offline  
post #276 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 05:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mojomike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: South Florida
Posts: 6,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_big View Post

I see. But can a big driver (15-18") in a ported configuration (I know this isn't part of the discussion here -- sorry!) sound as accurate with music as its smaller cousin?

Is there any truth to the "ism" that says a large ported enclosure is good for HT while a smaller sealed unit is better for music? Can a large box work well with small-scale, acoustic music? Measurements are one thing, and while they're a great guide and a wonderful means of trying to explain what we're hearing, listening is the final arbiter, in my opinion of course.

I know that I'm coming into the middle of a heated debate, but it seems as if you're already peripherally discussing this topic.

Thanks again,
Jason

The answer to your question is: Yes, a big ported sub with a big driver can sound as accurate as a smaller sub with music. Whether it actually will sound as accurate, or more accurate, or less accurate, is going to depend on many other factors beginning with how well the design of the sub is executed, how well matched it is for the room it's going into, and ultimately how well it is set up and adjusted by the user.
mojomike is offline  
post #277 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 05:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bfreedma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 9 iron from Philly
Posts: 1,952
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojomike View Post

The answer to your question is: Yes, a big ported sub with a big driver can sound as accurate as a smaller sub with music. Whether it actually will sound as accurate, or more accurate, or less accurate, is going to depend on many other factors beginning with how well the design of the sub is executed, how well matched it is for the room it's going into, and ultimately how well it is set up and adjusted by the user.

Exactly!

Can this thread be locked now?
bfreedma is offline  
post #278 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 05:45 AM
Senior Member
 
vinyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 434
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_big View Post

I see. But can a big driver (15-18") in a ported configuration (I know this isn't part of the discussion here -- sorry!) sound as accurate with music as its smaller cousin?Jason

Yes - IF subwoofer is designed to integrate with full system design with competent engineering behind it - Keep in mind that subwoofer is an add-on to the complete system - not just the foundation it supplies to speakers.

If one is a seasoned finicky audiophool you already know this - the dissimilar timber of the add-on is enough for most phools to go without.

Most people don't know what they want...but, they're pretty sure they haven't got it. ©

vinyl is offline  
post #279 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 06:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
Steve1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

group delay is arrival time, not settling time. See http://avtalk.co.uk/showthread.php?t=10999

:Group Delay

This is a measure of how the sub delays certain frequencies with respect to others. Typically the extreme bass will arrive at your ears (or our test mic) a few milliseconds after the rest of the frequencies and the extent to which this happens varies from sub to sub. The smaller and more consistent the group delay is across the frequency range, the better the sub should sound. If group delay becomes excessive it may be audible as 'slowness' in the bass or muddiness. For example, if the bass associated with a bass drum beat arrives after the 'thwack', it may sound ponderous and slow. If they arrive more or less in sync then it will sound 'tight'.

"How much group delay is audible? Opinions are divided, but a good rule of thumb is that a time delay of between 1 and 1.5 cycles is just audible. So at 50Hz, group delay should be kept below 20ms (1000/50) and at 20Hz, it should be below 50ms (1000/20) to guarantee inaudibility."

An OT question (not that I'm worried about it on this thread):
Given that Audyssey is reputed to correct issues with phase & the time domain, are problems with group delay something that it could/would correct?
Steve1981 is offline  
post #280 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 07:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JHAz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve1981 View Post


An OT question (not that I'm worried about it on this thread):
Given that Audyssey is reputed to correct issues with phase & the time domain, are problems with group delay something that it could/would correct?

Not afaik. Would be a complex delay line to make all the frequencies line up with the most delayed frequency.
JHAz is offline  
post #281 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 07:18 AM
Advanced Member
 
Steve1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Not afaik. Would be a complex delay line to make all the frequencies line up with the most delayed frequency.

It's definitely a bit complicated, but it doesn't have to be extremely so. If you start off by delaying everything by 150 milliseconds or so, and then only applying the correction as needed, it wouldn't appear too difficult to create the line. Just depends on the processing power you've got to apply it in real time along with the other corrections.
Steve1981 is offline  
post #282 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 07:29 AM
Senior Member
 
ironhead1230's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve1981 View Post

An OT question (not that I'm worried about it on this thread):
Given that Audyssey is reputed to correct issues with phase & the time domain, are problems with group delay something that it could/would correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Not afaik. Would be a complex delay line to make all the frequencies line up with the most delayed frequency.

Actually audsyssey can correct problems with group delay, but so can anything else that smooths the frequency response. Group delay is directly related to frequency response. Any peaks or dips in the frequency response will relate to a sharp change in group delay. Look at these in-room measurements of the DD18 from here. Notice how the changes in group delay after EQ line up with the changes in FR. This was briefly discussed here and here.

In room group delay



In room frequency response



-Mike
ironhead1230 is offline  
post #283 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 07:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mojomike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: South Florida
Posts: 6,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 27
The fortunate thing about group delay is that the frequencies in which it rises (the deeper frequencies) also happen to be where our hearing becomes less sensitive to it.
mojomike is offline  
post #284 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 08:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
Steve1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by ironhead1230 View Post

Actually audsyssey can correct problems with group delay, but so can anything else that smooths the frequency response. Group delay is directly related to frequency response. Any peaks or dips in the frequency response will relate to a sharp change in group delay.

Hi Mike,

I've read info to that extent, but it still makes me wonder a little. Take the case of the boxy twin to my sub, the SVS PB12-NSD. Its FR is extremely flat down to the 20Hz mark where the typical 24dB/octave rolloff of a ported enclosure meets a 24dB/octave rumble filter. One would expect significant group delay issues at 20Hz and below, but the problems seem to start much earlier. Group delay is exceeding 1 cycle at a hair under 40Hz and exceeding 1.5 cycles by 30Hz. Seems like the only way to fix that without getting rid of the roll-off would be a delay via DSP.
Steve1981 is offline  
post #285 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 08:21 AM
Advanced Member
 
Steve1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojomike View Post

The fortunate thing about group delay is that the frequencies in which it rises (the deeper frequencies) also happen to be where our hearing becomes less sensitive to it.

Indeed. In spite of the graphs, I'm happy with the performance of my sub. Just curious mostly.
Steve1981 is offline  
post #286 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 08:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JHAz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 139
I'm not sure that group delan and FR are necessarily tied together. For example, the RELQ200 has almost uniform group delay, but ther is not a flat spot anywhere in its frequency response. http://www.avtalk.co.uk/showthread.php?t=10953

At least that's how it looks to me. I'd expect group delay to relate closely to phase (seems to me they're two different ways of saying the same thing).
JHAz is offline  
post #287 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 11:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 5,844
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 223
I was under the impression Audyssey handled time and FR in which case it would correct group delay. Pioneer's MCACC does correct group delay across frequency. Hard (but not impossible) to believe a modern DSP solution would not deal with phase and group delay over frequency.

The relationship between group delay and frequency depends upon the type of filter. In a room, I can see where group delay would impact the FR by changing the nodal points, but AFAIK there's no fixed absolute general relationship between FR and group delay.

Group delay is the derivative of phase.

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
post #288 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 11:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mojomike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: South Florida
Posts: 6,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

I was under the impression Audyssey handled time and FR in which case it would correct group delay. Pioneer's MCACC does correct group delay across frequency. Hard (but not impossible) to believe a modern DSP solution would not deal with phase and group delay over frequency.

The relationship between group delay and frequency depends upon the type of filter. In a room, I can see where group delay would impact the FR by changing the nodal points, but AFAIK there's no fixed absolute general relationship between FR and group delay.

Group delay is the derivative of phase.

That's an interesting point about Audyssey. I'd like to know if it does indeed correct group delay.
mojomike is offline  
post #289 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 11:49 AM
Advanced Member
 
Steve1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by mojomike View Post

That's an interesting point about Audyssey. I'd like to know if it does indeed correct group delay.

Well then, I'll ask Chris K!
Steve1981 is offline  
post #290 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 03:05 PM
Senior Member
 
ironhead1230's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

I'm not sure that group delan and FR are necessarily tied together. For example, the RELQ200 has almost uniform group delay, but ther is not a flat spot anywhere in its frequency response. http://www.avtalk.co.uk/showthread.php?t=10953

At least that's how it looks to me. I'd expect group delay to relate closely to phase (seems to me they're two different ways of saying the same thing).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

I was under the impression Audyssey handled time and FR in which case it would correct group delay. Pioneer's MCACC does correct group delay across frequency. Hard (but not impossible) to believe a modern DSP solution would not deal with phase and group delay over frequency.

The relationship between group delay and frequency depends upon the type of filter. In a room, I can see where group delay would impact the FR by changing the nodal points, but AFAIK there's no fixed absolute general relationship between FR and group delay.

Group delay is the derivative of phase.

I am definitely not an expert on this, so I would like to know if what I posted is incorrect. This is some of what I found that I based my previous post on.

From this link:

Quote:


Since group delay is directly related to acoustic phase, we can actually make one further leap: group delay is
related to frequency response. The Hilbert transform is a method of deriving the acoustic phase from the
acoustic magnitude (the typical frequency response curve shown in most all literature and design programs).
There is one caveat: the Hilbert transform is valid ONLY for what is called a minimum phase system. What is
a minimum phase system? The actual way to calculate one is also beyond the scope of this paper; however,
for our purposes, a subwoofer driver operating in a box, in it's linear mode is a minimum phase system.
Operate beyond the linear limits of the driver (where distortion, power compression, suspension compression,
and other nonlinear issues come into play) and the system is no linger minimum phase, and hence cannot
use the Hilbert transform.
With the Hilbert transform, we can directly calculate the acoustic phase from the frequency response. That
is, given the acoustic magnitude frequency response of the subwoofer system, we can transform the data into
the acoustic phase frequency response, via the Hilbert transform. And, as we have seen above, we can use
the derivative of the acoustic phase to calculate the group delay. Hence, group delay is related to magnitude
frequency response for minimum phase systems (linear subwoofer systems).

http://www.trueaudio.com/post_010.htm
Quote:


I just wanted to point out that (for a minimum phase system) frequency response, phase response, and group delay response are simply three different views of the same physical 'delay' phenomenon. Change one of these responses an the other will change accordingly (remember, it's a minimum phase system).

For example, given only the frequency response of a system the phase response and group delay response can be calculated. This implies that the frequency response curve contains all the information concerning both phase and group delay. So frequency, phase and group delay are really just different takes on the same information.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post21496869

I guess the big assumption is treating the sub as a minimum phase system. Most of the other links I found about this topic had math that was beyond my understanding. Looks like I have more reading to do to really understand what is going on.

-Mike
ironhead1230 is offline  
post #291 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 04:07 PM
Advanced Member
 
jchong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_big View Post

I see. But can a big driver (15-18") in a ported configuration (I know this isn't part of the discussion here -- sorry!) sound as accurate with music as its smaller cousin?

Is there any truth to the "ism" that says a large ported enclosure is good for HT while a smaller sealed unit is better for music? Can a large box work well with small-scale, acoustic music?

You seem to be focused on size, large ported vs smaller sealed, whereas most of these discussions usually revolve around ported vs sealed (and size doesn't enter the equation). There are a number of large sealed subs that are praised for music, e.g. the Submersive (2 x 15" drivers) and the new Captivator S (1 x 18" driver) and the Rythmik F15 (1 x 15" driver). So in terms of size alone, it is possible for a large box to work well with music.

Of course even the debate of ported vs sealed subs for music can be convoluted and contentious. I suppose in theory a ported sub could be as good as a sealed sub for music, but more design challenges need to be overcome to do so.
jchong is offline  
post #292 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 04:57 PM
 
Auditor55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Silicon Valley, CA.
Posts: 8,795
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokekevin View Post

You said the ref 12 is more musical but not by much. Yet you haven't heard one? Reserve judgement?

I don't think I was referring to the ULS-15. Anyway, that's a far difference from saying that ULS-15 is no good for music. I have my gripes about HSU, however not enough to belittle their products.
Auditor55 is offline  
post #293 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 06:11 PM
Advanced Member
 
Steve1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve1981 View Post

Well then, I'll ask Chris K!

For those interested:

Quote:


Chris Kyriakakis, Mar 05 05:37 pm (PST):

Yes, the time domain filter correction includes magnitude and phase across frequency.

Best regards,
Chris Kyriakakis
Founder and CTO, Audyssey

Steve1981 is offline  
post #294 of 295 Old 03-05-2012, 08:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 5,844
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 223
@Steve1981: Thanks! I figured... I met TH a few times years ago, and almost took a job working with his son... Sharp folk! At least I wasn't crazy, or rather remembered that rightly.

@ironhead1230: My apologies. I am too used to seeing people post "frequency response" and meaning only the magnitude. If you have the phase of the response you can calculate the group delay (as the negative of the derivative of the phase). Not sure why you would want to use Hilbert but OK. However, room response makes its calculation rather complex...

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
post #295 of 295 Old 03-06-2012, 01:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pokekevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 5,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post


I don't think I was referring to the ULS-15. Anyway, that's a far difference from saying that ULS-15 is no good for music. I have my gripes about HSU, however not enough to belittle their products.

Naw you were talking about the uls for sure. What experiences do you have with Hsu? Most I've heard were positive. Top notch service from what I've experienced myself

No subwoofer I've heard has been able to produce the bass I've experienced in the Corps!

Must..stop...buying...every bluray release...
pokekevin is offline  
Reply Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off