Back to the 70's for good rock? (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.

shimmerz_777

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
130
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
I'm pretty sure its just me, but i have gotten kinda fed up with the rock music which has been coming out of pretty much everywhere since 2000, Being a guitar player i really really hate the music from simple plan, good charlette, and what not, who mangage to dumb down the talent required to be a successful guitarist or musician ( all of this is my opinion, i expect many will not agree). Some of the contemporary stuff is ok, such as RHCP, wolfmother is alright too, but everything else gives me the shits.

Am i the only one whose actually ended up going back to listening to the rock from the late 60's, and 70's, which were by far more complex, powerful and better quality that what is being created now?

Im talking about bands such as Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix and what not, but not particularly the beetles.

any thoughts on the subject?
 

Ellie_Belly

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Messages
349
Location
In the sky with diamonds
Gender
Female
HSC
2006
shimmerz_777 said:
I'm pretty sure its just me, but i have gotten kinda fed up with the rock music which has been coming out of pretty much everywhere since 2000, Being a guitar player i really really hate the music from simple plan, good charlette, and what not, who mangage to dumb down the talent required to be a successful guitarist or musician ( all of this is my opinion, i expect many will not agree). Some of the contemporary stuff is ok, such as RHCP, wolfmother is alright too, but everything else gives me the shits.

Am i the only one whose actually ended up going back to listening to the rock from the late 60's, and 70's, which were by far more complex, powerful and better quality that what is being created now?

Im talking about bands such as Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix and what not, but not particularly the beetles.

any thoughts on the subject?
You're definetly not the only one.
Led Zep and the Beatles rock. As do Pink Floyd, The Animals (and artists like Van Morrison, Don Mclean who aren't really rock).
The new stuff - most of it I think is fairly average.
But I do like Good Charlotte. I don't listen to the radio anymore, just the songs I have on iTunes. The radio is pretty crappeh these days. Unless you listen to 101.7 or 104.9
 

shimmerz_777

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
130
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
I found that the beatels got a bit boring with some of there silly songs, but they had a fair few good ones. pink floyd are awesome too, van morrisons great. Im in the school jazz band so my interests in music are very unique i guess, i really only appreciate songs which are really unique, complex in either theory or style. ill sum up my lists of why i dislike contemporary rock:


1. over over over use of repetition through bar chords (i.e riff only changes once in a song)
2. Singers cant help but complain over the radio ( Simple Plan "I'm sorry i cant b perfect")
3. Solo's written for a song which are constructed like a riff opposed to improvisation
4. Tendancy to move away from riffs and have a whole song with only chords
5. No band is unique anymore, sure they may have there own songs, but besides the singing the music all sounds the same.

i could rant and rave for hours cause its something that i really really really hate, but it would be really good to know if there are others who think the same as me.
 

Ellie_Belly

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Messages
349
Location
In the sky with diamonds
Gender
Female
HSC
2006
To tell you the truth, I don't know anything about guitar. But I think the same sort of thing is happening with the lyrics - I mean, there are some songs with like two verses and the chorus repeated over and over again.
Old songs like American Pie by Don Mclean have so many verses, so it makes it a lot less repetitive and you don't get sick of the song so quick.
 

shimmerz_777

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
130
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
That is so true. its another thing that goes on my list of dislikes. songs with 2 sentence verses, a 2 sentence chorus, and repeats the first verse to finish the song. i think that they arent very creative if they do something like that.
 

AsyLum

Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
15,899
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
shimmerz_777 said:
Im in the school jazz band so my interests in music are very unique i guess, i really only appreciate songs which are really unique, complex in either theory or style.
This basically sums up your whole thread.

a) I think I'm a musical purist and that pop stuff is below me
b) If it isn't complex, its shit.
 

shimmerz_777

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
130
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
AsyLum said:
This basically sums up your whole thread.

a) I think I'm a musical purist and that pop stuff is below me
b) If it isn't complex, its shit.
i did say that these were my opinions and i didnt expect every one to agree with them so there you have it. all i said was that i dislike many things about pop music, gave a reason why, gave my likes and you have to go throwing personal insults. sorry if my idea of freedom of speech offended your views, and that my music nazi-ism to too disturbing for you to put up with.
 

AsyLum

Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
15,899
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Fuck off with freedom of speech and the opinion argument, you are not Maddox. It was funny ONCE.

I fail to see any logic in liking music purely because they are 'technically' proficient. Its all just musical snobbery at its best to be honest. There are plenty of 70s rock and 70's riffing which was highly structured, simple, and very uninspired. Do these make them any lesser of songs?

Just because something isn't technically proficient then its automatically crap or 'pop' manufactured?

I assume being a keen guitarist your god must be Malmsteen and Michael Angelo Batio and Petrucci purely because they can produce the most technically proficient tunes at blistering speeds right?

Broaden your horizons, there are plenty of bands out there who still possess the ability to evoke raw emotion and a love for the music. Heck the bands you described even allude to the fact that you've got a pretty narrow range of musical spectrum. The Living End, 67 Special and Breed 77 are a few bands which disprove that musically proficient music had stopped being made after 2000. Further evidence:

Go listen to The Back Horn, Thee Michelle Gun Elephant, Seraphim and Bugy Craxone
 
Last edited:

myeewyee

New Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
28
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
I agree with Asylum. I also play guitar, however I'd like to think that I'm openminded when it comes to music. I also don't like a lot of the stuff that is on tv and radio, HOWEVER I generally don't discount its musical value. Well composed music is not necessarily unique, or overly complex. I can enjoy Air by Jason Becker just as much as Toxic by Britney Spears. The first is beautifully constructed and I appreciate that; Toxic is also well constructed and *catchy*. Seriously, forget that Britney Spears sings it (its not like she writes it, professional musicians do), and have a listen to this cover:

http://rapidshare.de/files/17229666/Instrumental_-_Toxic__Britney_Spears_Cover_.mp3.html

I'm not going to comment on Simple Plan, GC etc cause I can't stand their voices. That is my personal, subjective opinion. But perhaps you need to open your eyes a little? There is plenty of 'good' music coming out nowadays, you may simply need to broaden your musical horizons a little bit. Also, I gotta admit that not much makes it to popular channels (tv, radio etc) so you should also try looking a little harder for music that suites your tastes.
 

AsyLum

Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
15,899
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Only if played through a proper gramophone from the 30s!
 

shimmerz_777

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
130
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
AsyLum said:
Fuck off with freedom of speech and the opinion argument, you are not Maddox. It was funny ONCE.

I fail to see any logic in liking music purely because they are 'technically' proficient. Its all just musical snobbery at its best to be honest. There are plenty of 70s rock and 70's riffing which was highly structured, simple, and very uninspired. Do these make them any lesser of songs?

Just because something isn't technically proficient then its automatically crap or 'pop' manufactured?

I assume being a keen guitarist your god must be Malmsteen and Michael Angelo Batio and Petrucci purely because they can produce the most technically proficient tunes at blistering speeds right?

Broaden your horizons, there are plenty of bands out there who still possess the ability to evoke raw emotion and a love for the music. Heck the bands you described even allude to the fact that you've got a pretty narrow range of musical spectrum. The Living End, 67 Special and Breed 77 are a few bands which disprove that musically proficient music had stopped being made after 2000. Further evidence:

Go listen to The Back Horn, Thee Michelle Gun Elephant, Seraphim and Bugy Craxone
I'll clarify the fact that i do, also have music likes which do not come from the 70's, and are not "technically proficient", if not, I could claim i must therefore hate ACDC and the Living end, because there music is not complex enough for a music snob for me to seek any enjoyment from, and i must disregard it all together. However in 2000 i went and saw them play live and i did enjoy it.

One of my points i was trying to get at really was i can find more enjoyment in music, when there are aspects to it which might make it more interesting, i.e, knowing that Hendrix playes his D chord in and augmented way so he can improvise from chord fragments. i find it interesting on how he does it, so it adds to my liking of the songs which he does it in.

I may agree that i would hate Pop manufactured songs, but i would believe that anyone with any shred of musical intellect would also as well. you may call me a music snob for this, however it will not change the fact that i do not like "musicians" who instead of writing their own material, outsources to other people who do it for them. if a catchy pop song comes my way, i very still may like it, but i doubt there will be those subtle things i.e the hendrix stuff mentioned above, which will increase my enjoyment from it.

No my god is actually the Catholic god, and i doubt Malmsteen and who ever else could play guitar as fast as him.

My 'narrow musical spectrum' mainly consists of past bands which are long fogotten, and jazz bands and artists. i did not like jazz when i was asked to join the schools band, but i managed to broaden my horizon to a new style of music, and im glad that i have, and in truth, it is still expanding today. i could talk about Duke ellington, Victor wooten, and drop many names you may not know too, and call you a narrow minded individual, but i know this is an assumption that may very well not be correct.

i hope i did not say that ALL rock music is getting dumbed down, if i did, id like to apologize and say that a high proportion of contemporary music, which gets a high proportion of radio air time is in MY opinion ( as every one believes in something different to someone else) getting dumbed down.

and thanks for some more bands to listen to, i probably will go and try to listen to them because i would like to find some more good songs which i enjoy.
 

AsyLum

Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
15,899
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Reread my statement:

"The Living End, 67 Special and Breed 77 are a few bands which disprove that musically proficient music had stopped being made after 2000."

I thereby acknowledged that there exists musically proficient music out there. But thats pedantic.

One of my points i was trying to get at really was i can find more enjoyment in music, when there are aspects to it which might make it more interesting, i.e, knowing that Hendrix playes his D chord in and augmented way so he can improvise from chord fragments. i find it interesting on how he does it, so it adds to my liking of the songs which he does it in.
And what is wrong with going over a simple style? What is wrong with the simplicity of a 4-5 chords, with the rawness of a powerful vocalist? What makes someone who is able to pull off a Ebsus7th with a raised 5th any more of an interest that someone who can pour their heart into what is a rather simple song, but still contain more passion than the virtuoso?

I may agree that i would hate Pop manufactured songs, but i would believe that anyone with any shred of musical intellect would also as well. you may call me a music snob for this, however it will not change the fact that i do not like "musicians" who instead of writing their own material, outsources to other people who do it for them. if a catchy pop song comes my way, i very still may like it, but i doubt there will be those subtle things i.e the hendrix stuff mentioned above, which will increase my enjoyment from it.
Please, tell me what pop manufactured songs are? Define for me the key aspects which make them so. Then tell me, how many of these people are actually called 'musicians' or carry on like they are? There are quite a few things within pop music, particularly their production which definitely has them on another level compared to most of the 60s and 70s. I evidence Michael Jackson's Thriller as a level of production which started the precision and increased awareness for the wholistic approach.

i hope i did not say that ALL rock music is getting dumbed down, if i did, id like to apologize and say that a high proportion of contemporary music, which gets a high proportion of radio air time is in MY opinion ( as every one believes in something different to someone else) getting dumbed down.
Meh.
 

shimmerz_777

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
130
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
AsyLum said:
Reread my statement:

"The Living End, 67 Special and Breed 77 are a few bands which disprove that musically proficient music had stopped being made after 2000."

I thereby acknowledged that there exists musically proficient music out there. But thats pedantic.



And what is wrong with going over a simple style? What is wrong with the simplicity of a 4-5 chords, with the rawness of a powerful vocalist? What makes someone who is able to pull off a Ebsus7th with a raised 5th any more of an interest that someone who can pour their heart into what is a rather simple song, but still contain more passion than the virtuoso?



Please, tell me what pop manufactured songs are? Define for me the key aspects which make them so. Then tell me, how many of these people are actually called 'musicians' or carry on like they are? There are quite a few things within pop music, particularly their production which definitely has them on another level compared to most of the 60s and 70s. I evidence Michael Jackson's Thriller as a level of production which started the precision and increased awareness for the wholistic approach.



Meh.
I never said that there was absolutely no musically technical songs being created anymore. period. as another said, its just harder to find, as it rarely reaches tv, radio e.c.t

this may seem hypocritical but there is nothing wrong with a simple song with simple chords, if every part of the band works in context with eachother, simple things can produce quite effective songs. for example, any Creedence Clearwater Revival song is ultimately, a simple song to learn. it all stems from minor pentatonic scales, and simple chords. yet it manages to produce a unique sound which i thoughroughly enjoy. i would even call Tom Fogarty a raw vocalist, as u put it. but again, in my opinion, i do not see many of the bands today, who do the same simple style creating the effect which CCR may have done. you need to understan that MUSIC TASTES ARE SUBJECTIVE. no matter what you believe, it may be different from what i believe. all i can do is explain my self to why i like some music over others. i cant just click my fingers and presto, i now can listen to anything.

you mentioned the term Pop manufactured songs before i did, so i dont think id have to describe it, but it generally is music in which the actual musicians, or singer, put very little input into the creation of the songs, other than the recording. i.e people write the lyrics, music and what not for them, much like from the tv show popstars.

the thing i was getting at about the chordal fragments with hendrix is this. essentially, all of his songs can be reduced to chordal progressions, Little Wing's intro and verse can be played as Em, G, Am, Em7, B.... so on and so forth however he creates a whole different effect by breaking up these chords into fragments, with little lead improvised licks over them. if one was to play just the raw chords, you would not get the same effect as he did, and comparing the two would make one sound similiar, yet very different. Today, it is all just raw chords. the only band which i know does the same thing as what i have described is RHCP, in under the bridge and some others. again, i may not know of every example of this, but i know of very few. i like this style of playing, as i believe it enhances the song, and it is more technicle, and requires more skill to master. because i like this style, im more prone to enjoy the music which encompasses it, which unfortunately does not include the contemporary music which i have heard from today.

As for passion in music, i never brought that subject up, but if a band is passionate, it does not mean i have to like it. i would respect a passionate band for their involvement in music, but i may not enjoy their music.

so all im trying to get at, is that people like different music for different reasons. and if my reasons are related to the technical aspects of some songs then so be it. i just have to point out that this does not apply to all songs which i like, and that by not explaining every area of my music tastes i can understand y one would see me as a music snob, because i emphasise on those aspects which would associate me as such a person.
 

AsyLum

Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
15,899
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
you need to understan that MUSIC TASTES ARE SUBJECTIVE. no matter what you believe, it may be different from what i believe. all i can do is explain my self to why i like some music over others. i cant just click my fingers and presto, i now can listen to anything.
What is at stake is not whether musical tastes are subjective, but rather if the beliefs which are deduced from the logic concerning the decision to be subjective, holds any form of validity.

again, i may not know of every example of this, but i know of very few. i like this style of playing, as i believe it enhances the song, and it is more technicle, and requires more skill to master. because i like this style, im more prone to enjoy the music which encompasses it, which unfortunately does not include the contemporary music which i have heard from today.
Again, you've summed it up in your own words:

a) I think I'm a musical purist and that pop stuff is below me (...which unfortunately does not include the contemporary music which i have heard from today)
b) If it isn't complex, its shit. (it is more technicle, and requires more skill to master)

It's not a matter of agree to disagree, its a matter of investigating how and why people form beliefs that such statements are true or not. Surely, as you have said, it is your opinion, but by putting them upon a public forum, we have a right to question this belief/statement?
 

shimmerz_777

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
130
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
AsyLum said:
What is at stake is not whether musical tastes are subjective, but rather if the beliefs which are deduced from the logic concerning the decision to be subjective, holds any form of validity.



Again, you've summed it up in your own words:

a) I think I'm a musical purist and that pop stuff is below me (...which unfortunately does not include the contemporary music which i have heard from today)
b) If it isn't complex, its shit. (it is more technicle, and requires more skill to master)

It's not a matter of agree to disagree, its a matter of investigating how and why people form beliefs that such statements are true or not. Surely, as you have said, it is your opinion, but by putting them upon a public forum, we have a right to question this belief/statement?

Man you missed my point.

a) calling me a musical purist is a very defined term done in such a way i can only interperate it as an insult when put in context. i may say that i do not like pop music, but to make that statement upon your reasoning is the same as saying every one who listens to rap because they think the bass and the rhythm is better than rock is now putting rock below them. If Pop music released some songs i like then i would listen to it, even if it is pop.
i would agree with you if you would just change your statement into one which isnt so provokative and insulting.

b)i said that i can enjoy music which in not complex. CCR, ACDC, and when was the last time ACDC created a new album. it sure as hell wasnt this year. CCR have split up, but their music remains simple. i still enjoy it. whether i also enjoy music with a more technicle aspect is now irrelevant, as your statement is flawed due to the above fact.

by providing my opinion, and explaining reasoning behind it, i do not expect to have to be insulted because some one wants to judge my character as a result of it. i have never placed a claim of what i think of you, all ive done is defended my reasoning for my musical beliefs and you still judge me in a public forum. i said everyone will think differently to try to avoid anyone getting into an argument.

you do have a right to question my opinion, but it is common courtesy not to place such a provokative judgement upon it in which one can only interperate as an insult.
 

shimmerz_777

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
130
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
This whole argument pretty much came from when i said something like " i pretty much only like music which is unique, complex" or something like that. id just like to revoke that statement by saying plenty of, but not all the music i like is..... i need to point out that that wasnt refering to every single solitary piece of music i like, and as i described later, i do like other and simpler types of music.
 

AsyLum

Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
15,899
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
You really do fail to see the underlying concepts at hand don't you?

Your first post:

...but i have gotten kinda fed up with the rock music which has been coming out of pretty much everywhere since 2000
Premise 1: ...music everywhere, since 2000.
Being a guitar player i really really hate the music from simple plan, good charlette, and what not, who mangage to dumb down the talent required to be a successful guitarist or musician
Premise 2: Music which is dumbed down, ala simplistic in nature, which reduces the talent required to be a 'successful' guitarist or musician.
Some of the contemporary stuff is ok, such as RHCP, wolfmother is alright too, but everything else gives me the shits.
Premise 3: There are bands, but they are few, which are ok. Emphasis on 'everything else gives me the shits'.
Am i the only one whose actually ended up going back to listening to the rock from the late 60's, and 70's, which were by far more complex, powerful and better quality that what is being created now?
Premise 4: Reversion to rock during the 60s, 70s, reasoning included that these were 'far more complex, powerful and better quality' as opposed to 'what is being created now'.
Im talking about bands such as Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix and what not, but not particularly the beetles.
Premise 5: Distinction between Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix and The Beatles. Reasoning given via 2nd post: 'I found that the beatels got a bit boring with some of there silly songs, but they had a fair few good ones.'

2nd Post:
Im in the school jazz band so my interests in music are very unique i guess, i really only appreciate songs which are really unique, complex in either theory or style.
Premise 6: Being in a school jazz band makes your tastes unique, and appreciation for songs which are really 'unique, complex in either theory or style.'
ill sum up my lists of why i dislike contemporary rock:


1. over over over use of repetition through bar chords (i.e riff only changes once in a song)
2. Singers cant help but complain over the radio ( Simple Plan "I'm sorry i cant b perfect")
3. Solo's written for a song which are constructed like a riff opposed to improvisation
4. Tendancy to move away from riffs and have a whole song with only chords
5. No band is unique anymore, sure they may have there own songs, but besides the singing the music all sounds the same.
Premise 7: Offers reasons for 'dislike' of contemporary rock.
- over use of repetition
- subject matter
- solo's being too 'rigid'
- chord patterns > riffs
- uniqueness is gone

songs with 2 sentence verses, a 2 sentence chorus, and repeats the first verse to finish the song. i think that they arent very creative if they do something like that.
Premise 8: Additional criteria, lack of sentences = lack of creativity.

From here on, things get interesting :)

I'll clarify the fact that i do, also have music likes which do not come from the 70's, and are not "technically proficient", if not, I could claim i must therefore hate ACDC and the Living end, because there music is not complex enough for a music snob for me to seek any enjoyment from, and i must disregard it all together. However in 2000 i went and saw them play live and i did enjoy it.
Admission that there are in fact musical likes which stem from non-technically proficient bands. (Probably a misunderstood point here, since the original quote was saying exactly what I had said).

One of my points i was trying to get at really was i can find more enjoyment in music, when there are aspects to it which might make it more interesting, i.e, knowing that Hendrix playes his D chord in and augmented way so he can improvise from chord fragments. i find it interesting on how he does it, so it adds to my liking of the songs which he does it in.
Musical technicality leading to musical enjoyment, given.

i hope i did not say that ALL rock music is getting dumbed down, if i did, id like to apologize and say that a high proportion of contemporary music, which gets a high proportion of radio air time is in MY opinion ( as every one believes in something different to someone else) getting dumbed down.
...but i have gotten kinda fed up with the rock music which has been coming out of pretty much everywhere since 2000
Premise 1: ...music everywhere, since 2000.
Being a guitar player i really really hate the music from simple plan, good charlette, and what not, who mangage to dumb down the talent required to be a successful guitarist or musician
Premise 2: Music which is dumbed down, ala simplistic in nature, which reduces the talent required to be a 'successful' guitarist or musician.
Given.

Now we come to the crux of the matter:

but again, in my opinion, i do not see many of the bands today, who do the same simple style creating the effect which CCR may have done.
Today, it is all just raw chords. the only band which i know does the same thing as what i have described is RHCP, in under the bridge and some others. again, i may not know of every example of this, but i know of very few.
i like this style of playing, as i believe it enhances the song, and it is more technicle, and requires more skill to master. because i like this style, im more prone to enjoy the music which encompasses it, which unfortunately does not include the contemporary music which i have heard from today.
So:
- Simple is ok, but no bands to your knowledge have done this.
- it is 'all' just raw chords, simple nature again.
- More technical stuff will be appreciated more, but the simple stuff, which can be ok, isnt present in contemporary music.

Conclusion: Technical skill therefore should be used as a medium for musical appreciation.
if my reasons are related to the technical aspects of some songs then so be it.
.

Now, I've been arguing that this is a flawed way of logic. It has nothing to do with individual tastes, perspectives and all that other crap.

You've surmised that a) the contemporary rock scene is overtly simplistic, b) low quality, c) does not hold up to older bands/releases.

Yes, calling you a musical elitist was meant as an insult. Why? Because as I stated, the logic is flawed. Technical appreciation is one thing, but to throw a blanket over and say that the contemporary music is all just simple 4 chord chuggers is a pretty big statement.

Then you throw in, the "back in the old days" argument, by saying things were better back then. Now you have said that the reasons for these are a) they were technically better b) more original c) better quality.

I retorted by asking what is wrong with simple songs, you answered nothing. So therefore, there is nothing wrong with simple songs, like the creedence clearwater revival. But what exactly made these songs better?

it all stems from minor pentatonic scales, and simple chords. yet it manages to produce a unique sound which i thoughroughly enjoy.
It manages to produce a unique sound. So here we have it.

The one remaining point, you want more 'unique' sounding music. See I would agree with you, that there are more things which need more uniqueness to them. But is it really that bad to sound like someone else? Especially since the early trend-setters basically laid the foundations for contemporary music, and some continue to do so. The Rolling Stones' unique sound has been replicated by many bands. Led Zeppelin's songs contained unique raw vocals and use of new effects, same as Jimi Hendrix.

But where were these artists getting their influence from? Probably country, through players such as Chet Atkins, big-bands like Duke Ellington, soloists like Chuck Berry.

So my point is, for contemporary music to 'give you the shits' is not a fault of contemporary music, but rather your own. As you and others have stated, commercial channels focus on a minute level of exposure. So go find something unique, music isn't just what's on the radio.

And to discount the Beatles as the driving force for most of the contemporary music world. For shame.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top