| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Steve A
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 1808
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2023 6:25 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| At its heart, I think this is an unresolvable question. There are just too many examples of people who have used purely musical approaches to solving physical problems that one wouldn't expect could be solved without physical interventions to discount that approach, and, similarly, there are too many cases of people who couldn't find success without physical interventions, regardless of their hard work or the merit of their teachers. Neither one can be clearly shown to always be the right answer, at least based on evidence I find satisfying, and I don't really understand why it should be necessary to choose - we can do both. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wilktone
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Aug 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Asheville, NC
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2023 6:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Two sides of the same coin.
About 15 years ago I did a deep dive into this topic and conducted some academic research about the development of motor skills. I looked at both the music literature as well as in the areas of athletic training, particularly focused on fine motor skill development.
The implicit approach (focus on the music, let the body figure itself out) tends to be found more effective when compared to the explicit approach (instruct on the how of the various steps of playing) - when used exclusively. In other words, if you're only going to use one, teach through the sound. But the most effective approach combines the two.
Trying to place a ranking or value on either one is going to miss the mark because it really depends on how the student is currently playing and where he or she needs to go. It depends on the intellectual capabilities of the student and their ability to focus on the correct thing while practicing or performing. And this will change for the student as they develop and grow, and not necessarily trending towards one direction or another.
Realistically, I don't find that many teachers out there teach purely through one or the other, but some do. The teachers who instruct playing mechanics alone often do so because they have developed a reputation for helping players work their way out of playing issues ("chop doc"). Many of the lessons I teach these days are focused on embouchure technique because it is a personal area of interest and I have insights that most brass musicians can't get elsewhere. But I do not teach regular students this way.
You do sometimes find teachers that instruct purely through modeling and sound concept alone. They are often very fine musicians themselves and make excellent musical coaches. However, sometimes they don't know what they don't know. They can't (or won't) recognize when a student could be helped by simply telling them how to play. There is a culture of ignorance in mainstream brass pedagogy. Many teachers dismiss any sort of discussion of technique, which I feel is a mistake.
Dave
_________________
wilktone.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert P
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 28 Feb 2013
Posts: 2596
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2023 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thinking of Doc Severinsen, after listening to various interviews with him over the years, he talked about having a lot of success as a kid not really having any real idea what he was doing - he put the horn up and it worked, which I'm sure has a lot to do with his success. But at some point - I believe it was his late teens or early 20s he had a chops crash 'n burn where he couldn't play for a while and after that he said he always had a "bugaboo" about it, realizing that it was possible to have such a problem. Later he ran into a plateau with range that it took him a long time to get past - you can see that over the years he changed his placement and horn angle - this was with a lot of experimentation and focus on his chops.
_________________
Getzen Eterna Severinsen
King Silver Flair
Besson 1000
Bundy
Chinese C
Getzen Eterna Bb/A piccolo
Chinese Rotary Bb/A piccolo
Chinese Flugel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doug Elliott
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1172
Location: Silver Spring, MD
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
"explicit approach (instruct on the how of the various steps of playing) - when used exclusively"
There's no such thing as exclusively, because the sound is always there and is the major gauge of success.
You know where I stand on this subject but that needs to be mentioned - an "explicit approach" is a combined approach no matter how you look at it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dstpt
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 1286
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilktone wrote: | Two sides of the same coin.
...You do sometimes find teachers that instruct purely through modeling and sound concept alone. They are often very fine musicians themselves and make excellent musical coaches. However, sometimes they don't know what they don't know. They can't (or won't) recognize when a student could be helped by simply telling them how to play. There is a culture of ignorance in mainstream brass pedagogy. Many teachers dismiss any sort of discussion of technique, which I feel is a mistake.
Dave |
+1
| Doug Elliott wrote: | | ...an "explicit approach" is a combined approach no matter how you look at it. |
+1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilktone
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 25 Aug 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Asheville, NC
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Doug Elliott wrote: | "explicit approach (instruct on the how of the various steps of playing) - when used exclusively"
There's no such thing as exclusively, because the sound is always there and is the major gauge of success.
You know where I stand on this subject but that needs to be mentioned - an "explicit approach" is a combined approach no matter how you look at it. |
Well, you know where I stand too since we're standing pretty close to each other on this issue.
But I should point out that the reverse is also true - when an implicit (goal oriented, imagine the sound in your head and let the body figure itself out) approach is used almost exclusively explicit (how to move the body to play) learning also takes place. Here's a relevant quote from my research:
| Quote: | | Researchers using transcranial magnetic stimulation to map brain regions demonstrated that implicit practice showed gradual activity in areas in the brain associated with explicit learning as well, until subjects achieved explicit knowledge of the task when brain activity returned to its base line (Pascual-Leone, et al., 1994). Similarly, Willingham and Goedert-Eschmann (1999) point out that while functional MRI studies indicate that motor skill development may be purely implicitly or explicitly developed, their experimental study showed that when presented with a random task, subjects in the explicit group demonstrated similar sequential knowledge to those in the implicit group. |
To which I'll add is that as teachers we need to have the conceptual understanding of good brass technique so that when the explicit knowledge is achieved that is correct for the individual student. If you prefer to teach largely through modeling and putting your student's focus on the sound you will want a method to evaluate whether the student is moving in the correct direction. A lot of players get pretty good at playing wrong, until it stops working and things break down.
I mentioned above how many of my students these days come to me because they need help with their embouchures. The majority of those folks were taught mainly through implicit instructions and often achieved very good results that way, but it became obvious that something wasn't working correctly and they don't have the conceptual tools to analyze their playing for mechanical flaws and correct them.
Doug, I know that your teaching situation is similar. I took my first lesson with Doug back in 1997, I think, because I certainly had issues and no amount of sound conception had been able to get me past those problems.
Dave
_________________
wilktone.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JayKosta
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 24 Dec 2018
Posts: 3303
Location: Endwell NY USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2023 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilktone wrote: | ...
But I should point out that the reverse is also true - when an implicit (goal oriented, imagine the sound in your head and let the body figure itself out) approach is used almost exclusively explicit (how to move the body to play) learning also takes place. ... |
------------------------------------
The bit about 'how to move the body to play' is critical, because it validates the need for physical adjustment (not just mental sound imagination).
Of course the player needs to have awareness of what physical adjustments are possible, and are worth trying. Someone who has been taught (and has learned) to 'always do it this way' is at a disadvantage when change would help.
_________________
Most Important Note ? - the next one !
KNOW (see) what the next note is BEFORE you have to play it.
PLAY the next note 'on time' and 'in rhythm'.
Oh ya, watch the conductor - they set what is 'on time'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cliffardo
Regular Member
Joined: 27 May 2023
Posts: 30
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2023 4:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JoseLindE4 wrote: | Ray Crisara taught me in almost exclusively musical terms. He once called some notes in a passage that skipped around “belly button” notes, but otherwise he just gave me musical instructions — dynamics, articulation, notes to focus on, etc. There was zero discussion of the lips, tongue, air, or even sound really. He only occasionally played for me to demonstrate — only when I really wasn’t getting it. We didn’t sing, or buzz anything; just worked out of Arban, played lots of etudes, and dealt with everything as musicians, not trumpet players.
I came to him as a severely broken trumpet player — regular lip pain when I played and by far the weakest among my peers. Everything was a mess. I sounded bad, had a limited range, and it hurt to play. If anyone needed direct physical instruction it was me. I left with the foundation for a productive playing career. His teaching took me places I would have never imagined. He didn’t seem dogmatic about his focus. To him it just seemed more practical and reliable.
It was a common experience among his students to work on their etudes through the week, but still have a few passages that seemed impossible come lesson time. Somehow during the lesson, just by fixing the musical idea, the impossible would suddenly become easy. It seemed like magic, but he’d just say that “good music plays better” and move on to something harder.
My own teaching sits more in the middle, although with a lean to the music and sound focus, but I sometimes wonder what would happen if I fully embraced the music only approach of my youth. |
I am finding this concept very interesting! It seems similar to Bill Fielder saying to focus on a musical concept, which would allow body to follow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kehaulani
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 23 Mar 2003
Posts: 9025
Location: Hawai`i - Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2023 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is the way I was taught, too. My main teachers were Richard Lum, principle of the Honolulu Symphony and Schilke student, and Bob Fleming, L.A. studio player, MGM, Walt Disney, Warner Bros. Also learned a lot from Larry Ford, lead with Herman, Kenton first-call L.A. studio player.
Very little physiological micro-analysis. It was all about the mind - creating the picture in it of how you wanted to sound and perform. "Let the mind lead and the body will follow."
_________________
"If you don't live it, it won't come out of your horn." Bird
Yamaha 8310Z Bobby Shew trumpet
Benge 3X Trumpet
Benge 3X Cornet
Adams F-1 Flghn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cliffardo
Regular Member
Joined: 27 May 2023
Posts: 30
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2023 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilktone wrote: | Two sides of the same coin.
About 15 years ago I did a deep dive into this topic and conducted some academic research about the development of motor skills. I looked at both the music literature as well as in the areas of athletic training, particularly focused on fine motor skill development.
The implicit approach (focus on the music, let the body figure itself out) tends to be found more effective when compared to the explicit approach (instruct on the how of the various steps of playing) - when used exclusively. In other words, if you're only going to use one, teach through the sound. But the most effective approach combines the two.
Trying to place a ranking or value on either one is going to miss the mark because it really depends on how the student is currently playing and where he or she needs to go. It depends on the intellectual capabilities of the student and their ability to focus on the correct thing while practicing or performing. And this will change for the student as they develop and grow, and not necessarily trending towards one direction or another.
Realistically, I don't find that many teachers out there teach purely through one or the other, but some do. The teachers who instruct playing mechanics alone often do so because they have developed a reputation for helping players work their way out of playing issues ("chop doc"). Many of the lessons I teach these days are focused on embouchure technique because it is a personal area of interest and I have insights that most brass musicians can't get elsewhere. But I do not teach regular students this way.
You do sometimes find teachers that instruct purely through modeling and sound concept alone. They are often very fine musicians themselves and make excellent musical coaches. However, sometimes they don't know what they don't know. They can't (or won't) recognize when a student could be helped by simply telling them how to play. There is a culture of ignorance in mainstream brass pedagogy. Many teachers dismiss any sort of discussion of technique, which I feel is a mistake.
Dave |
Hey, Dave, thank you! This is really helpful and, interestingly, relates to my current struggles with composition PhD. I think I have been in that classic 'paralysis by analysis' camp. But lately I have been trying to start with the sound and then when things don't work out, think of the technical things that might not work (through the aid of the mirror and recording myself). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shaft
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 985
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2023 4:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
The two schools of thought make it quite interesting.
Focus on physical adjustments first or focus on sound concept and let the body make changes naturally in response. Perhaps others would frame it different than I have.
Examples exist of great players and teachers from both avenues.
Maynard never liked to discuss or think about what he does to play.
Clifford Lillya at U of M said Analysis = Paralysis as his student Professor Dennis Horton had on his door at Central Michigan among other quotes and advice.
Some of us young aspiring trumpeters sought to learn some step by step mechanics and then I sought oit Clint Pops Mclaughlin and then enjoyed reading theough a book by Roddy-O and Don Jacoby for more of that.
Like learning nomenclature, scales, patterns, and jazz improv. there is a point sometimes where the best advice people would recommend to someone is to unlearn what you have learned to focus on making music.
This and more truly makes the art of the craft and performing quite an exhilerating ride.
Music is a fine art |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spitvalve
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 11 Mar 2002
Posts: 2158
Location: Little Elm, TX
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2023 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Once I was late to a big band gig (don't ever do that!) and before I made it to the stage the leader had already kicked off the first tune, which had a solo on my part.
I had time to pull my horn out of the bag and climb onto the riser just before my solo entrance--no warmup and no time to think about what I was going to play or what the guys in the band or the audience would think--and it was probably one of the better solos I ever played, according to my bandmates and the leader (who was willing to forgive me for being late that one time).
Sometimes you just have to shut down the analytical side and let your musical side do its job.
_________________
Bryan Fields
----------------
1991 Bach LR180 ML 37S
1999 Getzen Eterna 700S
1977 Getzen Eterna 895S Flugelhorn
1969 Getzen Capri cornet
1995 UMI Benge 4PSP piccolo trumpet
Warburton and Stomvi Flex mouthpieces |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trickg
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Posts: 5677
Location: Glen Burnie, Maryland
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2023 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've skimmed through the thread to this point and it seems to me that there's nothing really defining "technique," and some people are confusing mechanics with technique. There's the mechanical side of what physically happens when we play the instrument, and then there's technique.
(I've read back over this - it's a bit long, but bear with me.)
I've said this over and over - ALL of trumpet playing is comprised of combining just a few basic constructs of the physical act of playing the instrument, and these, I believe, are the things we should be referring to when we talk about "technique."
-- Sound production/tone (this includes breath support)
-- Articulation - beginning attacks and individual notes
-- lip flexibilities
-- fingers, and coordination of fingers with the articulation
-- rhythm and time - the ability to play evenly though a line or phrase without speeding up or slowing down
-- phrasing/dymanics - this comes later, but there's a technical aspect to this that has to be considered, learned, and controlled if we are to play musically.
I'm sure there are a couple of other things. Ultimately, if we're to become proficient players, technique HAS to be considered. It's the refinement of those abilities listed above that allows us to be musical, and each can be worked on individually in a very fundamental way.
In my own experience, it was specifically when I started working on those aspects individually in a focused way that I began to advance as a player during my first enlistment as an Army trumpet player. I would spend an entire practice session only working one thing, and I'd rotate them:
Day 1 would nothing but long tones. As I got more control over the sound, I started doing long tones with long slow crescendos and decrescendos, starting as soft as I could while maintaining control, building to as loud as I could while maintaining control, and then back down again, working to make those builds and recedes as smooth as possible.
Day 2 would be nothing but articulation - initially it was just scale patterns single tongued, but eventually I delved into working on multiple tonguing, and then more into working on double and triple tonguing through runs, slow at first and then working to get faster, all while working to keep things clean, crisp and clear.
Day 3 would be nothing but lip slurs - arpeggios, basic slurs between intervals, expanding to larger intervals - again working to keep things clean and controlled.
Wash, rinse, repeat - I did that kind of thing in a very disciplined way for about 2-3 months on year before we got busy in the summer season, but by then my playing had already leapt forward considerably - it's amazing how much one can improve when they are working in a very focused way.
Now, when it came down to playing MUSIC, as they say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Because I'd built my technique to a point where I didn't have to think about the physical act of doing those different technical things, it allowed me to be a much better and expressive player. Keep in mind, I wasn't really thinking about the mechanical aspect of playing as much as I was making small adjustments and refinements towards a certain sound goal, but nevertheless, I was working on technique.
That's my 2¢ on "technique." If one is to become proficient, it has to be considered. Some people choose to work on it in a holistic way with musical excerpts, exercises, passages. Some people take a more direct approach, similar to what I did.
Ultimately technique without the ability to express yourself musically won't get you very far, but being expressive without having the technical ability to execute what you are feeling doesn't get you very far either.
_________________
Patrick Gleason
- Jupiter 1600i, ACB 3C, Warburton 4SVW/Titmus RT2
- Brasspire Unicorn C
- ACB Doubler
"95% of the average 'weekend warrior's' problems will be solved by an additional 30 minutes of insightful practice." - PLP |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff_Purtle
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 936
Location: Greenville, South Carolina
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2023 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Both matter but one logically precedes the other.
Solid technique allows for a better sound, which is technique too. Focusing on sound only without consideration of how things work and develop will lead to struggle and frustration.
Those in the Bill Adam and Chicago School of thought are not wrong but just missing the preceding steps to allow you to just play without thinking about technique.
Go back and watch the Music Man movie and ask yourself how dumb the “think system” really is. However, some still approach it that way.
Nobody does this in ballet or martial arts or golf or tennis or violin. I have watched many string auctions and if someone has bad bow technique even I can see it and hear it as a trumpet player.
The problem with adults is to not get too in your head and analyzing everything to the point you can’t be free to just experience playing.
Jeff
_________________
Jeff Purtle
Trumpet Lessons Online since 2004, teaching since 1983
MultiTouch book on Claude Gordon
+1 864-354-3223 iPhone w/ FaceTime
Skype: jeff_purtle |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PH
Bill Adam/Carmine Caruso Forum Moderator
Joined: 26 Nov 2001
Posts: 5860
Location: New Albany, Indiana
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2023 8:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeff_Purtle wrote: | Both matter but one logically precedes the other...
Those in the Bill Adam and Chicago School of thought are not wrong but just missing the preceding steps to allow you to just play without thinking about technique...
Jeff |
This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the Adam approach, and it is the point where I find Adam's teaching to diverge from the Chicago School. On one hand, Adam students do focus the vast majority of their energy to thinking about and listening to the sound. But on the other hand, we are often criticized for being "addicted" to playing several hours per day 7 days a week of "the routine," focused solely on fundamentals and trumpet technique. Focusing on technique work and simultaneously striving to focus our thinking on the sound WHILE WE ARE PLAYING is not a contradiction and does not mean we don't do "the preceding steps." In fact, the biggest criticism I hear of Adam's approach is that those preceding steps are actually OVER EMPHASIZED (not, of course, in my opinion).
We generally try to have the teacher focus on diagnosis and prescription and allow the student to focus on pursuing the modeled sound (in all aspects including tone, tempo, articulation, phrasing...). Even if the student is "thinking about technique" when they aren't playing, we strive to only focus on the sound of the music when we are playing. Anything else that eats up mental bandwidth while we are playing is a distraction that is usually detrimental. Adam often said that lots of things were worthy of 1% of our thinking and anything more than "an awareness" would detract from progress. As a super analytical overthinker, I concur. This is why Adam (and Carmine) were the teachers that clicked for me. I'm not a meathead, so turning off the analysis and self consciousness was a major requirement to get out of my own way.
_________________
Bach trumpet artist-clinician
Clinical Professor of Jazz Trumpet, University of Illinois
Professor Emeritus of Jazz Studies, Indiana University Jacobs School of Music
Faculty Jamey Aebersold Jazz Workshops 1976-2019
JazzRetreats.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Billy B
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 12 Feb 2004
Posts: 6130
Location: Des Moines
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeff_Purtle wrote: | Both matter but one logically precedes the other.
Solid technique allows for a better sound, which is technique too. Focusing on sound only without consideration of how things work and develop will lead to struggle and frustration.
Those in the Bill Adam and Chicago School of thought are not wrong but just missing the preceding steps to allow you to just play without thinking about technique.
Go back and watch the Music Man movie and ask yourself how dumb the “think system” really is. However, some still approach it that way.
Nobody does this in ballet or martial arts or golf or tennis or violin. I have watched many string auctions and if someone has bad bow technique even I can see it and hear it as a trumpet player.
The problem with adults is to not get too in your head and analyzing everything to the point you can’t be free to just experience playing.
Jeff |
Wow! An incredibly ignorant statement.
_________________
Bill Bergren |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve A
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 1808
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 9:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Billy B wrote: | | Jeff_Purtle wrote: | Both matter but one logically precedes the other.
Solid technique allows for a better sound, which is technique too. Focusing on sound only without consideration of how things work and develop will lead to struggle and frustration.
Those in the Bill Adam and Chicago School of thought are not wrong but just missing the preceding steps to allow you to just play without thinking about technique.
Go back and watch the Music Man movie and ask yourself how dumb the “think system” really is. However, some still approach it that way.
Nobody does this in ballet or martial arts or golf or tennis or violin. I have watched many string auctions and if someone has bad bow technique even I can see it and hear it as a trumpet player.
The problem with adults is to not get too in your head and analyzing everything to the point you can’t be free to just experience playing.
Jeff |
Wow! An incredibly ignorant statement. |
Respectfully, I think this is a needlessly confrontational and generally unconstructive response. PH also disagrees in a way that adds to the conversation, and explains his reasoning. Isn't that a better way to disagree? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JayKosta
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 24 Dec 2018
Posts: 3303
Location: Endwell NY USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
It seems to me that there's much confusion about how the Adam method blends the items of:
focus on sound
doing fundamentals and trumpet technique
being 'aware' of how sound, fundamentals, and technique work together
| PH wrote: | ...
On one hand, Adam students do focus the vast majority of their energy to thinking about and listening to the sound. But on the other hand, we are often criticized for being "addicted" to playing several hours per day 7 days a week of "the routine,"
focused solely on fundamentals and trumpet technique.
Focusing on technique work and simultaneously striving to focus our thinking on the sound WHILE WE ARE PLAYING is not a contradiction and does not mean we don't do "the preceding steps."
...
Even if the student is "thinking about technique" when they aren't playing, we strive to only focus on the sound of the music when we are playing. Anything else that eats up mental bandwidth while we are playing is a distraction that is usually detrimental. Adam often said that lots of things were worthy of 1% of our thinking and anything more than "an awareness" would detract from progress. ... |
_________________
Most Important Note ? - the next one !
KNOW (see) what the next note is BEFORE you have to play it.
PLAY the next note 'on time' and 'in rhythm'.
Oh ya, watch the conductor - they set what is 'on time'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doug Elliott
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1172
Location: Silver Spring, MD
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"when we are playing"
When we're playing WHAT?
There's no shortage of "incredibly ignorant" statements constantly made on this whole forum, and not necessarily the ones being called that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Billy B
Heavyweight Member
Joined: 12 Feb 2004
Posts: 6130
Location: Des Moines
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Doug Elliott"]"when we are playing"
When we're playing WHAT? The trumpet.
_________________
Bill Bergren |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
