So much effort to play crappy CD's - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 123 Old 08-23-2010, 04:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 5,997
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 253
You left out "take CD out of case". Maybe that's what's wrong?

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 123 Old 08-23-2010, 04:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiomixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,350
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Who is this guy & what is he out to prove?

Santa Claus has the right idea...visit people only once a year...Victor Borge
audiomixer is offline  
post #93 of 123 Old 08-23-2010, 06:24 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

Blu-ray video sucks because it is not bit-for-bit identical to the studio master, and as of 2010 I expect something better.

Do you agree or disagree with the above statement? Why or why not?

Here is a hint: let's take raw uncompressed 4k RED camera footage at 24fps, let's just say in 10-bit RGB, with 7.1 16/48 audio, and that gives us a filesize of about 6,500 Gigabytes for two hours of footage with audio.

Let's look at a Blu-ray movie of the same, at 1080p, 24fps, let's just pretend somewhere around the neighborhood of 30 gigabytes for the same two hours.

That gives us about 0.4% of the original video data has been conveyed. What's funny about that though, is that this pathetic, paltry 0.4% of the video and audio data is actually in many cases quite a bit better quality than you will get at an average movie theater.

Or since you desire bit-for-bit identical to the studio master, let's do a little figuring how much standard-definition DVD-quality video and audio we could fit onto a 50GB blu-ray disc at studio-quality. Let's do 30fps video at a relatively modest 10-bit RGB, and 5.1 at 16/44.1. That gives us ~153GB per hour. So we could fit about 20 minutes of video on a 50GB BD disc. Or about 3.5 minutes of video on a full-sized ~8GB DVD.

Is that what you want? You could watch video right now, today, in glorious standard-definition 480i, lossless to the studio master by using about THIRTY dvds, changing the DVD every 2-3 minutes. And you'd still be looking at just 480i. But hey, it's bit-for-bit identical to the studio master, so it MUST be better than the paltry 0.4% that BD provides, where literally more than 99% of the information is just thrown away. Right?

I'm sure I lost you at the first post in this thread, but perhaps other people who are capable of basic reading comprehension and rudimentary thought might find it interesting.



The capability easily exists for audio and can be easily implemented for the consumer so why not use it?

I agree the capability may not exist for video

Thats the difference. You should have given this some rudimentary thought.
ps24eva is offline  
post #94 of 123 Old 08-23-2010, 06:35 PM
 
geekhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva View Post

so why not use it?

Maybe because it doesn't sound any better to you or anyone else?
geekhd is offline  
post #95 of 123 Old 08-23-2010, 06:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,069
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 290
Quote:


The capability easily exists for audio and can be easily implemented for the consumer so why not use it?

What capability? The capability to take a 16-bit studio master and replay it at 16-bit resolution? Because that is all that Blu-Ray audio does in most cases. And CDs have done the same since 1983.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
post #96 of 123 Old 08-23-2010, 08:31 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva View Post

The capability easily exists for audio and can be easily implemented for the consumer so why not use it?

It *is* used. Two formats have already existed for a decade which do exactly that, as I have told you repeatedly: SACD and DVD-Audio.

And the compact disc has been around for nearly 30 years and accomplishes the audible equivalent as has been pointed out repeatedly to you, despite your grotesque ignorance.

Quote:


I agree the capability may not exist for video

Thats the difference. You should have given this some rudimentary thought.

Maybe you should have a clue about both audio formats, and the fact that you're b*tching about something that ALREADY HAS A SOLUTION THAT HAS BEEN FOR SALE AND AVAILABLE TO YOU FOR 10 YEARS.

What is it that you want?

If you want high-resolution audio, there are literally thousands of titles in the SACD and DVD-A format for you to choose from.

If you want to discuss science, reason, and facts, there is also the fact that nobody has demonstrated ANY audible difference whatsoever between the Compact Disc and the high-resolution audio that SACD, DVD-A, and now BD are capable of.

See here:
http://www.aes.org/journal/toc/AES-Sep2007TOC.cfm

You can find the article here:
http://drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf

And an addendum here:
http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/explanation.htm

So what is it that you want? You want to start a Tea-party protest or something? You are making absolutely no sense at all except sitting around screeching about "I just want it bit-for-bit identical even though I have no idea what I'm talking about and there is no reason whatsoever that it would provide any benefits at all!"

What do you want people to say? That yes, a clueless n00b is totally right that the compact disc, the most successful audio format in history, just totally sucks because the n00b said so? I mean, would you like a hug? Do you want a piece of candy? What do you want?
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #97 of 123 Old 08-23-2010, 08:32 PM
Member
 
zworykin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Folks, what you've got here is a plain ol' garden variety forum troll. Just stop feeding it and it'll go away.

Whatever you do though, please be gentle with it. It doesn't even really know what it's saying or doing; with a brain the size of a walnut, how could it? Just let the poor thing realize that there's no more food here and eventually it will crawl away and find someone else's door to scratch at.
zworykin is online now  
post #98 of 123 Old 08-23-2010, 09:55 PM
Member
 
Johnnycloud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 62
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Actually the rest of you are the trolls. The nattering nabobs of audiophile negativism. You use every tool but your ears. Right now I am listening to the Tom Petty live anthology on 96/24 blu-ray. There is no way in hell what I am hearing could be replicated by a 44/16 CD...No Way!

In the book that comes with the anthlology it says this about the blu-ray, "The 96k 24-bit audio on this disc has 256 times more resolution than a CD, providing greater detail and reproducing the music's full dynamic range, from the softest to the loudest sounds." It goes on to say, "With this disc you are now ABLE TO HEAR AT HOME WHAT WE HEAR IN THE STUDIO"
So we can either believe you neg-heads or Tom Petty. I am going with Tom Petty... and my ears.
Johnnycloud is offline  
post #99 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 12:11 AM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnycloud View Post

Actually the rest of you are the trolls. The nattering nabobs of audiophile negativism. You use every tool but your ears. Right now I am listening to the Tom Petty live anthology on 96/24 blu-ray. There is no way in hell what I am hearing could be replicated by a 44/16 CD...No Way!

In the book that comes with the anthlology it says this about the blu-ray, "The 96k 24-bit audio on this disc has 256 times more resolution than a CD, providing greater detail and reproducing the music's full dynamic range, from the softest to the loudest sounds." It goes on to say, "With this disc you are now ABLE TO HEAR AT HOME WHAT WE HEAR IN THE STUDIO"
So we can either believe you neg-heads or Tom Petty. I am going with Tom Petty... and my ears.

Clearly you, and whatever numbnuts wrote that booklet blurb can't do basic arithmetic and just looked at the sampling depth, which is ironic because that's probably the least impactful benefit compared to the higher sampling rate. But I don't expect you to understand that.

Feel free to do a blind test and see if you can hear a difference between a 2-channel high-res track and the equivalent 2-channel audio on CD. You'll be famous if you succeed.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #100 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 12:34 AM
Newbie
 
Tim92gts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: England
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

It *is* used. Two formats have already existed for a decade which do exactly that, as I have told you repeatedly: SACD and DVD-Audio.

And the compact disc has been around for nearly 30 years and accomplishes the audible equivalent as has been pointed out repeatedly to you, despite your grotesque ignorance.



Maybe you should have a clue about both audio formats, and the fact that you're b*tching about something that ALREADY HAS A SOLUTION THAT HAS BEEN FOR SALE AND AVAILABLE TO YOU FOR 10 YEARS.

What is it that you want?

If you want high-resolution audio, there are literally thousands of titles in the SACD and DVD-A format for you to choose from.

If you want to discuss science, reason, and facts, there is also the fact that nobody has demonstrated ANY audible difference whatsoever between the Compact Disc and the high-resolution audio that SACD, DVD-A, and now BD are capable of.[/b]

Hi,
don't want to fuel the format war again but i've been through this on another forum and the conclusion seemed to be that although we could , in theory, hear a difference between CD and SACD the usual cause of a big difference was more careful mastering.
The SACD market is different with often different material and maybe more discerning customers.
The CD is optimised for a low fi system and environment.
My 4 year old daughter wouldn't pay 10p extra for a copy of Paramore on SACD.
I'd happily pay £5 extra to get wider dynamic range with no compression on most of my CDs.
Cheers
Tim
Tim92gts is offline  
post #101 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 09:58 AM
Member
 
centurymantra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I touched on this idea in a previous post, but I'm gonna go out on a bit of a limb and say that I really do believe that is is possible that certain digital formats, such as lossless vs. lossy or, more relevant to this conversation, SACD/DSD vs. CD/PCM can offer more natural sound that is simply easier to listen to, more relaxing, etc. - and just feels better. This type of thing could register on a more sub-conscious level, similar to the way a room with nice lighting or a comfortable couch will make things sound better. I've suggested before that, if one has a CD with both mp3s and regular wav files on it, one might find themselves simply enjoying the wav files more without fully realizing or consciously knowing why. Not that you won't enjoy the mp3 tunes, but you might, say, find yourself tapping your foot, nodding your head and getting a little more of a smile on your face as you go about cooking in the kitchen when listening to the full-res tunes.

I really do strongly feel this is a valid point for consideration and it is the kind of thing that is, unfortunately, hard to prove with scientific analysis or DBT tests.
centurymantra is offline  
post #102 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 10:11 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Is either SACD or DVD-A bit for bit identical with the studio masters?

Not merely high resolution, but bit for bit identical?
ps24eva is offline  
post #103 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 10:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MSmith83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva View Post

Is either SACD or DVD-A bit for bit identical with the studio masters?

Not merely high resolution, but bit for bit identical?

The same exact rules apply as with Blu-ray; it depends on the studio's decision. I have numerous DVD-Audio discs where the studio claims in the liner notes that the output of their work flow was transferred directly to disc without down-sampling. Lossless compression is used (and uncompressed delivery is also possible), so the capability is obviously there.

By the way, since this seems to be a source of confusion based on what was posted earlier, DTS-HD MA is merely a lossless compression codec (with advanced metadata capabilities). It losslessly compresses what the studio feeds it. DTS doesn't tell the studio what to feed the codec. The studio could very well encode a 48/16 track with the codec after it was first down-sampled/dithered from 96/24.
MSmith83 is offline  
post #104 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 10:40 AM
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
one doesn't run across such unintentioned irony on a daily basis...

- 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 #105 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 10:41 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSmith83 View Post

DTS doesn't tell the studio what to feed the codec.

Not true. The studio HAS to feed the lossless codec the studio master AS-IS as a REQUIREMENT for using DTS-HD MA. Same for Dolby TrueHD. I tried to explain that before.

So yes you will be getting the studio master with blu-ray.

If you feel the studio master is not as high resolution as it can be, thats a different issue.
ps24eva is offline  
post #106 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 10:43 AM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva View Post

Is either SACD or DVD-A bit for bit identical with the studio masters?

Not merely high resolution, but bit for bit identical?

Yes, they absolutely can be.

But again, WHO CARES?
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #107 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 10:47 AM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva View Post

But the studio HAS to feed the lossless codec the studio master AS-IS as a REQUIREMENT for using DTS-HD MA. Same for Dolby TrueHD. I tried to explain that before.

That's not in any way true.


Quote:


So yes you will be getting the studio master with blu-ray.

No, that's frequently not true.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #108 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 10:50 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

Yes, they absolutely can be.

But again, WHO CARES?

I know you are an secret agent for the music industry trying to convince us that the status quo and Justin Beeber are amazing.
ps24eva is offline  
post #109 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 10:59 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
ps24eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,330
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

That's not in any way true.




No, that's frequently not true.



How is this not true?

Do you have any proof?
ps24eva is offline  
post #110 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 11:30 AM
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
y'know...

just for a second here... since none of us have even brought up the "bigger issue" with what you want... let's say you do get what you want...

let's say that the "studio master" is quantized at greater than 192 (which, as we've already established, is available today)...

what, pray tell, do you plan to play this back on?

merely encoding something at a higher rate in no way means that the dac/dsp would actually handle it... merely being on bluray in no way means that the dac/dsp would actually handle it...

- 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 #111 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 12:18 PM
Member
 
centurymantra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva View Post

Is either SACD or DVD-A bit for bit identical with the studio masters?

Not merely high resolution, but bit for bit identical?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

Yes, they absolutely can be.

But again, WHO CARES?



Well...not if the studio master is on tape.

Uncommon, but not unheard of, nowadays.
centurymantra is offline  
post #112 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 01:36 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by centurymantra View Post

Well...not if the studio master is on tape.

Uncommon, but not unheard of, nowadays.

I said that many posts ago.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #113 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 01:38 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva View Post

How is this not true?

Do you have any proof?

It's just a codec. They don't have to use the full-resolution mastering format, they can use a slightly lower res finish and then just put that on the disc losslessly.

You can't put 48-bit or 32-bit floating point on a disc, and that's what is generally under the hood of most modern audio mixing/mastering software. It all gets down-res'd to 16 or 24bit usually for output.

So your whole demand of having "exactly what the master is bit-for-bit" is, as I have been explaining to you this whole time, is a grotesquely ignorant oversimplification. Which part of the master do you want bit-for-bit identical? Because there can be points in the mastering chain which are quite a bit higher resolution than anything that is conveyed on Blu-Ray, DVD-A, or SACD, but that isn't a meaningful issue because they are interim processing steps, as I already explained. You don't need that kind of precision for finishing or delivery.

Do you have any brain cells?
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #114 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 01:47 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps24eva View Post

I know you are an secret agent for the music industry trying to convince us that the status quo and Justin Beeber are amazing.

I also shot JFK. I forged Obama's birth certificate. I put fluoride in the water. And I filmed the fake moon landing.

You got me good.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #115 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 01:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
skriefal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: SLC, Utah
Posts: 927
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by centurymantra View Post

Well...not if the studio master is on tape.

Uncommon, but not unheard of, nowadays.

Or if the Blu-ray audio track is upsampled from a lower-resolution digital source. This happens occasionally with video; it'd be naive to assume that it doesn't also happen occasionally with the audio. Possibly more frequently than we'd expect -- and probably not audible anyway.
skriefal is online now  
post #116 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 02:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,069
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 290
Quote:


Is either SACD or DVD-A bit for bit identical with the studio masters?

Not merely high resolution, but bit for bit identical?

Yes, if you're using the term "studio master" the way you've been using it. But then, CD is also bit-for-bit identical with its studio master too, in that sense.

That's what "no compression" and "lossless compression" mean.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
post #117 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 02:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MSmith83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

I also shot JFK. I forged Obama's birth certificate. I put fluoride in the water. And I filmed the fake moon landing.

You got me good.

Don't forget deliberately sabotaging our public school system. You're a dangerous man indeed.

As for the moon landing, I could have sworn I saw you with Stanley Kubrick during filming.
MSmith83 is offline  
post #118 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 02:29 PM
 
geekhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

What is it that you want?

What do you want?

You are giving it to him, post-for-post.
geekhd is offline  
post #119 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 04:30 PM
Member
 
zworykin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Stop. Feeding. The. Troll.

It will GO AWAY if you stop giving it what it wants.
zworykin is online now  
post #120 of 123 Old 08-24-2010, 05:51 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSmith83 View Post

Don't forget deliberately sabotaging our public school system. You're a dangerous man indeed.

That actually isn't me. The aliens are doing that all on their own.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
Closed Thread CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports

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