RE: Which scales? (Full Version)

Foro Flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/
- Discussions: http://www.foroflamenco.com/default.asp?catApp=0
- - General: http://www.foroflamenco.com/in_forum.asp?forumid=13
- - - RE: Which scales?: http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=320753



Message


Piwin -> RE: Which scales? (Feb. 26 2020 19:05:18)

quote:

I do believe one can't compare pre-internet era with today. Learning flamenco has become easier than ever nowadays


The obvious follow-up question is this: then why haven't we seen hordes of highly skilled flamenco players flood the market? And that goes for any genre of music. Maybe the internet really has made learning music easier. But if it has, then we must find a way to explain why it hasn't led to a sharp increase in the number of skilled musicians.

What certainly hasn't changed is that participating in live performances makes a huge difference and you can always tell when somebody has only ever played flamenco for himself at home (not that there's anything wrong with that; it's just that you can tell the difference). I remember the first time I accompanied a cantaor. He went easy on me and sang a well-known malaguena. No sneaky bits in it. I couldn't have dreamed of anything better to start out with. But I had to throw pretty much everything I knew of malaguena out the window, for the simple fact that I couldn't play 90% of it at a volume that would have even remotely worked with this guy belting his guts out. And at that point I already had some experience accompanying dance classes so it's not like I had no sense at all of the power required. As valuable as it is, the internet just doesn't give you the opportunity for that kind of experiential learning, and it multiplies the chances that you'll mistakenly think you're doing things right when you're really not. That even goes for the accompaniment thread here. It's a great exercise, but you can just set the volume to whatever suits your playing, instead of the other way around. You'll only ever know if you're doing things right if you put yourself out there and play live.




Ricardo -> RE: Which scales? (Feb. 26 2020 23:58:47)

quote:

It's a great exercise, but you can just set the volume to whatever suits your playing, instead of the other way around. You'll only ever know if you're doing things right if you put yourself out there and play live.


Good points. Also, not every Flamenco singer is LOUD like you experienced. In fact since I’ve been studying singing myself, I am no longer impressed by those loud guys like I used to be. BAILE singers tend to be louder but not always. It depends on the technique they use.




Piwin -> RE: Which scales? (Feb. 27 2020 5:31:17)

Man they still impress the crap out of me [8D]
Tbh though, I don't even know if this guy was objectively that loud compared to some. It's more that I had been practicing at home far too quietly. I had done some dance classes before that but always just as a second guitarist. So there was that added pressure of "oh right, I'm the only one playing guitar right now. There's no place to hide!" [&:]




mark indigo -> RE: Which scales? (Feb. 27 2020 14:18:07)

quote:

Learning flamenco has become easier than ever nowadays.


I completely agree with Ricardo about the "double-edged sword"

There is loads of stuff that you can only learn by actually doing it, and that takes time. The information may be at your fingertips with the click of a mouse or swipe of a screen, but after sifting through the crap to find the gold (if you can tell the difference, and beginners can't, because they are beginners....) you still have to actually do it, you still have to integrate technique and compás into your brain and body. Those things aren't available as an "instant download", and there seems to be an ever increasing trend towards people equating "understanding" something (having had it "explained") with being able to actually do it. Not the same thing.




devilhand -> RE: Which scales? (Mar. 7 2020 12:33:09)

quote:

The obvious follow-up question is this: then why haven't we seen hordes of highly skilled flamenco players flood the market? And that goes for any genre of music. Maybe the internet really has made learning music easier. But if it has, then we must find a way to explain why it hasn't led to a sharp increase in the number of skilled musicians.

It has become easier for people wanting to learn flamenco outside Andalusia. I'm sure there are lots of highly skilled unknown flamenco guitarists out there in Andalusia. With or without internet, Andalusia can produce some kick-ass flamenco guitarists for sure. The thing is everything has a cycle. Flamenco reached its peak somewhere in the past. Now it is having a tough time. The consequence is less and less people want to play flamenco or be a flamenco guitarist. No demand no supply. As simple as that.




mark indigo -> RE: Which scales? (Mar. 18 2020 16:43:56)

quote:

Learning flamenco has become easier than ever nowadays.
quote:

It has become easier for people wanting to learn flamenco outside Andalusia.


just putting those quotes from you to put this into context etc., I just came across an old post from Philip John Lee talking about this then/now issue (one of his old guitars is currently for sale in the classifieds), he said,

"It was easy to learn Flamenco then , It was a real tradition that once one understood the elements that go to make it up , was there to be dived into , assimilated and played around with . Coming to Flamenco guitar now must be very confusing as there is so much stuff out there in the way of transcriptions and DVDs etc."

You can read the whole post, and another where he talks about hanging out and playing with Antonio Sanlucar here: http://www.foroflamenco.com/tm.asp?m=89398&appid=&p=&mpage=1&key=&tmode=&smode=&s=#89398




devilhand -> RE: Which scales? (Mar. 18 2020 21:16:46)

Thanks for the link. Really enjoyed his posts. Too bad his website doesnt exist anymore. No wonder there was a rivalry between gitano and non-gitano gitarristas back then. I wonder if its still the same today.

Talking about Antonio Sanlucar, his accompaniment of Solea in rito geografia sounds to me flamenco at its best. Simple but still very fancy. What struck me is he uses Andalusian cadence a lot.

quote:

"It was easy to learn Flamenco then , It was a real tradition that once one understood the elements that go to make it up , was there to be dived into , assimilated and played around with . Coming to Flamenco guitar now must be very confusing as there is so much stuff out there in the way of transcriptions and DVDs etc."

I do believe learning flamenco in Andalusia was easier compared to what we have to learn today. The fusion with jazz and modern flamenco made everything unneccesarily complicated.

Still no contradiction between this and my claim in previous post. Easy access to video, learning materials and lessons on Skype are a great help for people outside Andalusia. Impossible at that time. The thing is we can still learn old school flamenco with a slightly modern touch without making it too complicated.




El Burdo -> RE: Which scales? (Mar. 19 2020 20:56:33)

Good link, mark indigo - he also said this "When I first went to Seville in the 1960s as much as being English it was considered strange that I , as a young man was playing in a very old style , this was because I had been learning from very old recordings ".

This is the difference I think. The old way was to put the 45rpm on at 33 1/3 or even 16 to try and make out what was going on and to try and learn it. (I learned the lyrics to all of the Stan Getz bossa stuff with Joao and Astrud Gilberto despite not speaking Portuguese in the slightest. I just sang along and invented my own phonetic version.)

With every pro and semi pro guitarist becoming a teacher for the income stream and the wide availability of music the cost of (seeming to be) learning is very low. I wonder if the passion to learn stuff is in inverse relation to its availability sometimes. Some mystery is required I'm sure.




Ricardo -> RE: Which scales? (Mar. 20 2020 17:07:30)

quote:

I wonder if the passion to learn stuff is in inverse relation to its availability sometimes.


Speaking for myself, it was the lack of availability that actually drove me to at first build a collection of recordings, like a hunter, and later to seek out and acquire rare learning materials. For example the easy to find flamenco methods were lacking what I needed from say a Moraito or Tomatito instructional video. $200 was a steal at the time for such treasures. Saving up for that return trip to Spain has always been a goal.




devilhand -> RE: Which scales? (Mar. 20 2020 18:05:20)

quote:

I wonder if the passion to learn stuff is in inverse relation to its availability sometimes.

I'm always interested in something that is not that popular or popular anymore or not widely consumed. So for me it's been the inverse relationship between the passion to learn something and its popularity. Not that I have to observe its popularity first and then decide. It happens rather unintentionally.




El Burdo -> RE: Which scales? (Mar. 20 2020 23:56:26)

quote:

So for me it's been the inverse relationship between the passion to learn something and its popularity.


That's a different thing, though I understand what you mean. It is bizarre - I have NEVER wanted to be the only flamenco in the village and my passion was genuine I am sure. But, the more popular it gets the more I feel the original credentials of the art form are diminished, probably by commercial interests, which I think are pretty pernicious in all (musical) art forms. But, we will go to extraordinary lengths to learn when we do have that passion.

quote:

Saving up for that return trip to Spain has always been a goal
Why is that do you think? I'm sure you would support the idea that a foreigner (sic) could be a true flamenco (like PJL, I was shocked...). Why the return to 'the source'? I understand, definitely, but I can't help but think we all buy into the whole sociological thing about specific music as well as the sound - and for me it's not entirely free of stereotypical notions of (other people's) suffering, something I felt about delta blues too. Meh.




Ricardo -> RE: Which scales? (Mar. 21 2020 3:38:17)

quote:

Why the return to 'the source'?


What happens in USA is communities, big or small, evolve along certain lines because of the pros rubbing elbows at gigs and teaching students. Regardless as to how it started it will inevitably be far removed from the evolution going on in Spain. On one hand it’s cool to notice a unique style developing ... on the other, I personally feel I want to keep a connection to what’s happening in Spain. I’m sure it’s the same in other communities outside of Spain. Now we have Solera weekly vids of young Spaniards so perhaps the trip to Spain is nothing more than charging batteries for someone like me. The inspiration.




devilhand -> RE: Which scales? (Mar. 21 2020 18:24:41)

quote:

the more popular it gets the more I feel the original credentials of the art form are diminished, probably by commercial interests, which I think are pretty pernicious in all (musical) art forms.

Very true. A good example is funk music. Disco wave was probably the end of funk although I must admit there are lots of funky disco tunes out there. Disco music is actually an overproduced funk without rawness, dirtiness and soul. Exactly the elements (in addition to the beat) which make funk funky are literally sucked out of funk by white music industry. The similar feeling I get when I listen to jazz flamenco fusion.




devilhand -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 6 2020 23:06:37)

quote:

The inspiration.

One doesn't need a trip to Spain to get inspiration. It's just down there on Youtube.





Ricardo -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 8 2020 21:06:27)

Youtube or any video for that matter, is not the same as being there I’m afraid.




orsonw -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 11 2020 17:03:54)

Adam Del Monte gives an explanation of what he is calling 'the comprehensive flamenco scale.'





El Burdo -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 11 2020 20:01:10)

Now let's have all the responses from all of you who said you can't add notes to scales. Like, oh I don't know, say a G to a E Phrygian dominant scale.

Probably the best line of attack is to denigrate Mr. Del Monte, though he seems quite good.

[:D]




Richard Jernigan -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 11 2020 23:28:06)

Last year I saw Del Monte in concert. He played both classical and flamenco. He played a complex and modern solea as a tribute to his teacher Pepe Habichuela.

RNJ




Ricardo -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 3:51:06)

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Burdo

Now let's have all the responses from all of you who said you can't add notes to scales. Like, oh I don't know, say a G to a E Phrygian dominant scale.

Probably the best line of attack is to denigrate Mr. Del Monte, though he seems quite good.

[:D]


Well, he didn’t say that. And that is not even the resulting scale he shows. He shows a 9 note scale, which accounts for two important harmonies that natural Phrygian doesn’t account for. It’s simply a combination of three scales, the same three I discussed before, similar to the three scales used when describing the Minor key and it’s functioning harmony.

A minor uses
1. A natural minor or aeolian
2. A harmonic minor
3. A melodic minor

A resulting synthetic scale is ABCDEFF#GG#....9 notes. Roman numeral analysis derives from this. Let’s call it “comprehensive minor scale”.

So the Arriba key uses:
1. E natural phrygian
2. E phrygian dominant
3. E double harmonic

His 9 note “comprehensive Flamenco scale” results. One could derive Roman numerals from those the way we do for minor keys above.

The issue I have is that the synthetic “scale” is not truly the basis of either key. 3 missing accidentals of the chromatic scale are available and used. Roman numeral analysis most typically deals with them when they occur for harmonic reasons (vast majority of the time this is the case) as “secondary dominants”. Once you can admit the notes of the entire chromatic scale can be and ARE used in context of either key, then it must be realized that that synthetic 9 note scale is total BS, and all we have is the three DIFFERENT scales used to derive 2 common harmonies that can function without invoking secondary dominants.




mt1007 -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 4:17:35)

I studied with Adam for five years about 20 years ago. We talk once in a while. I'm going to have to call him out on this one the next time I talk to him hahahaha. He means well but this will only confuse people. I want to amend my statement in that by no means am I saying Adam does not know what he is talking about. I think he came up with this explanation to save peeps headaches if they don't study theory. Adam knows the modes, harmonic and melodic minors and all the chords each scale degree creates, etc.. In my opinion this just makes things confusing especially if you're studying theory. As for adding notes to scales... You can add anything you want as long as you know why/what you're doing and with what purpose.

Currently I'm working through the Coltrane changes and putting them into a flamenco context as a study for myself.... I like Coltranes point of view on M3rd movements the modulation and sound of 3 tonics. In doing research I also really like Bartoks view, how he views 3 tonics simultaneously as just 1 tonic. Imagine that, you can use 1 tonics dominant for another tonics dominant, 1 sub dominant for another tonics sub dominant, etc... imagine all the scales implied... So Burdo you can add whatever you want man just as long as you know how to make that happen.

Peace




kitarist -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 6:41:17)

quote:

Adam Del Monte gives an explanation of what he is calling 'the comprehensive flamenco scale.'


Hmmm. His stated rationale for adding a D# is that it is the missing leading tone resolving to E from below (so it;s just like B resolving to C in C major). But a leading tone, a semitone from the tonic, does not have to resolve upwards to the tonic; his definition of a leading tone is too narrow and thus incorrect. A leading tone necessitates resolution towards the tonic regardless of whether from below or above. For E phrygian, we already have an existing diatonic leading tone - F (or Bb for A phrygian), which resolves DOWN to the tonic.

Careful readers [:D] would have anticipated this from prior discussions where we had the visual representations of scales, noting that the phrygian scale is a mirror image of the major scale - hence the semitone away from the tonic is flipped, becoming the 2nd degree in phrygian, a semitone up from the tonic resolving down, compared to the 7th in major, a semitone down from tonic resolving up.

Also, every time he mentioned 'mode', he actually meant a scale.

Another thing, I don't see what is the point of saying that the Am - G - F- E sequence is like i - VII - VI - V and call 'E" dominant as if in A minor tonality (and spending time emphasizing how E(7) resolves to Am). This is not A minor tonality though, it is E phrygian tonality, with the tonic E, thus E is I, and that sequence is iv - III - II - I proper. The reason we encounter it notated as i - VII - VI - V in western writing sometimes is because there everything is either major or minor; a system too narrow for flamenco.

Anyway just thinking about the things that will potentially confuse rather than clarify concepts.




El Burdo -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 12:46:15)

My point is that I was attacked by people for suggesting that an extra tone, thereby forming an extended scale was somehow ludicrous. 'That's not A Hm!!' Head. Hands.

Coupla points

a) I thought Mr Del Monte's later attempt to say the E chord is a clear resolution was just that; an attempt. It had obviously not resolved and anyone with any (ok, 'Western') ears can hear the Am ringing after, if they CHOOSE to. It's a choice. I love the tonality of flamenco but if I am analysing it, post hoc, I'll stick to I(M7), bVII, VI (#11), V(b9) and again, sorry, say that the unresolved nature is part of the sound. I don't need it to resolve. Nothing that has been said in the last 5000 increasingly more complex posts has convinced me otherwise - and I do think about it. Simplicity rules.

b) I don't particularly see that the addition of the D# is needed to make a 9 note scale though I'm happy to think about it. Chromatics are only added as an extension to, or temporary diversion from the 'current' tonality (the Phrygian dominant and the addition of the G say), like when in por arriba, the use of B7 for the final E chord. In that case D# is a necessary chromatic tone for the cadence (as far as the scale is concerned - chordally then I guess you will talk of 'borrowing', a term which is unecessary in my analysis.)

The use of the phrygian dominant plus other notes to make a scale is fine to me and the additional chromatics Ricardo mentions are just that. They don't have to be part of a general scale. Otherwise, you might as well say that the characteristic scale of flamenco is the chromatic scale which defeats the purpose of trying to delineate the characteristics of a genre.

And, yet again, I'll finish saying the map is not the territory, the analysis is not the music.

mt1007 Have you listened and analysed the Bartok String Quartets? It's on my must do list (which is a bit different to my wish list...)




devilhand -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 14:17:14)

Thanks for the video. What Mr. del Monte suggests is a 9 note scale. Phrygian mode + major3rd + leading tone (e.g. E phrygian + G# + D#). I understood adding those 2 notes is for the sake of harmony. Yet he says one can memorize and play this scale all over the fingerboard in all positions. I'll do it only if this scale sounds flamenco enough to me, which is not the case. Let our ear judge what sounds right or wrong.

quote:

As for adding notes to scales... You can add anything you want as long as you know why/what you're doing and with what purpose.

Yes. Jazz harmony book I'm reading suggests it as well. However, the book says the use of this kind of scales should be kept within limits because all modes of the 4 main scales in the chord-scale system - major, melodic and harmonic minor and harmonic major - are sufficient enough. The universal scale for any case is probably the half-whole tone scale.




devilhand -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 14:18:17)

quote:

like when in por arriba, the use of B7 for the final E chord. In that case D# is a necessary chromatic tone for the cadence (as far as the scale is concerned - chordally then I guess you will talk of 'borrowing', a term which is unecessary in my analysis.)

B7? I thought it was F7 (FACD#) creating tritone between A and D#. F7 resolves to E in por arriba.




El Burdo -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 16:13:29)

quote:

B7? I thought it was F7 (FACD#) creating tritone between A and D#. F7 resolves to E in por arriba.


I was referring to the short passage at the end of a whole song of Phrygian dominant (essentially) tonality - the cambio in soleá? The harmony clearly changes from essentially phrygian to E major. In order to do that the dominant of E is played B7, then E.

quote:

not truly the basis of either key

This is really the basis of our disagreement I think. I talk about the construction of a scale that I think will help the OP understand the harmony and which he can practise (like Del Monte says) up and down the neck. Like it or not my approach accounts for all of the chords encountered in anything but the more out-there stuff (and I'll have an argument for those too [;)] ). But you talk of key all the time. I only think in por arriba or medio for the most part and I'm not interested in how it conforms to the requirements of key and key signature. All this classical harmony stuff (the various 6ths) is just so much tits on a bull to me. It may have weight but it is impenetrable enough to make me think it is probably wrong.

quote:

the phrygian scale is a mirror image of the major scale - hence the semitone away from the tonic is flipped, becoming the 2nd degree in phrygian, a semitone up from the tonic resolving down, compared to the 7th in major, a semitone down from tonic resolving up.


What's 'hence' about it? Can you call a semitone neighbour The Leading Tone? I would have thought the leading tone should still be note 7 and that the cadence to 1 is as a result, weak, certainly weaker than 2 to 1. Is that semitone movement a justification for the 'phrygian' note being the rest position? Do we just lookat the disposition of notes and how they help resolutions now? (I don't know, I ask as a supplicant).

Anyway, I'm still saying the same thing and only posted because i thought it was ironic to hear Mr Del Monte's view. I'm done now. Thanks for all the fish.




Ricardo -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 17:45:49)

quote:

Hmmm. His stated rationale for adding a D# is that it is the missing leading tone resolving to E from below (so it;s just like B resolving to C in C major). But a leading tone, a semitone from the tonic, does not have to resolve upwards to the tonic; his definition of a leading tone is too narrow and thus incorrect. A leading tone necessitates resolution towards the tonic regardless of whether from below or above. For E phrygian, we already have an existing diatonic leading tone - F (or Bb for A phrygian), which resolves DOWN to the tonic.


No his logic is correct, and you asked this before. The reason it works is Augmented 6 harmonic function/tritone sub, etc etc all discussed already. If he recognizes this literally I don’t know, but he should have stated it if he does see it. The issue for me is the D# is tied to F7 function in Arriba context, same as B7 in E major, but he never talks about F# in his “scale” so, introducing D# to students without the F7 function is leaving a lot out of it.

Next the andalusian cadence he addresses but it’s ambiguity (Am like burdo sees it, or E Phrygian? No difference?) we’ve also addressed. Traditional Flamenco never would cadence to an E7b9 chord...always a STABLE E triad. Modern Flamenco started adding those tensions as a final chord. To account for the same sequence functioning in two different tonalities, compas or phrasing needs to be discussed along with the stable tonic triad (NOT a dominant 7 equivalent) of the tradition that is part of justifying the practice (so people like burdo don’t have to feel it as an unresolved Am cadence).

In general yes you are right....there are confusing language and typical superficial harmonic explanations, buzz word traps, etc, as we have pointed out already that are super popular. To me he is at just 3 notes away from completing the scale picture, so why not go all the way? Nothing he said was “wrong” per say, simply incomplete and therefore misleading. I love how he starts running that 9 note scale all over the neck and suddenly has a look on his face “huh? That’s weird sounding wtf am I playing?” 🤪




Ricardo -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 18:00:16)

quote:

Otherwise, you might as well say that the characteristic scale of flamenco is the chromatic scale which defeats the purpose of trying to delineate the characteristics of a genre.


I said that exact thing on my first post. The reason, again, is that chromatic means there is NOT a single scale. It’s all scales and what gives character is the harmonic cadence which is very simply F-E...or F7-E.... or F9-E....stronger still F7#11-E. It’s all that simple...plus compas or phrasing.

quote:

All this classical harmony stuff (the various 6ths) is just so much tits on a bull to me. It may have weight but it is impenetrable enough to make me think it is probably wrong.


Well, Flamenco has Eastern sounding elements, but it uses chords and basic harmonic functions which are most simply understood via the western classical tonal harmony system. You can ignore that fact if it suits your personal path, but denying it is happening like it’s one crazy guys conspiracy theory, is doing disservice to others trying to understand what’s going on. It’s like looking at a map of Ohio and saying, “well yes there is some stuff outside those boundaries there, possibly, but this serves as a perfectly fine map representing the USA”.




kitarist -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 18:41:07)

quote:

No his logic is correct, and you asked this before. The reason it works is Augmented 6 harmonic function/tritone sub, etc etc all discussed already.


I thought he was arguing that normal E phrygian scale does not have a leading tone, so that's why he added an additional tone to the scale - D# - so the scale can have a leading tone. The implicit assumption there was that the usual E phrygian does not have a leading tone. But it does - F - so if he wanted to add D# anyway, he should have explained its addition with different arguments - in fact the argument about aug 6 harmonic function that you present.

So, more specifically, my objection here was to the rationale for adding it, rather than for whether D# works - it does as you say because, once you have it, it ALSO wants to resolve to E, and you provided the aug 6 framework to show that before.




kitarist -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 18:54:18)

quote:

Can you call a semitone neighbour The Leading Tone?


A semitone neighbour to the TONIC when you have that tonality established is usually heard as a leading tone - whether resolving to it from above or from below. For E phrygian, the corresponding harmonic movement F - E is a very strong resolving cadence. And I guess F7-E has in addition also the D# pulling to E so F7 - E must feel like an even stronger resolution to the tonic E (?)

In general in videos like that I think more has to be said about the importance of musical context - it is too confusing/misleading to talk about scales only in a vacuum. So, establish first that we are talking still about a tonality (a piece of music with a tonal centre), and that there is harmonic function and thus movement away from tonic and then back toward it, just like in western harmony. There are also key changes sometimes, between 'sections' just like in western music - like for example switching in bulerias from A phrygian to A minor (parallel keys), or in Alegrias from A major to A minor (parallel again).




Mark2 -> RE: Which scales? (Apr. 12 2020 20:54:55)

Interesting topic. I agree with Adam and Ricardo. I think most of us are familiar with falsetas that make use of Adam’s two extra scale tones. But what about Ricardo’s extra three? Por arriba how about F#? Can’t say I’ve used it a whole lot. So I pulled out a guitar and lo and behold it’s in the first falseta in Antonio Rey’s latest solea. What about Bb? A bit harder to work in but definitely doable as a variation of the F chord. And C#? Heck Sabicas used it por solea. So that’s the whole enchilada. But I also agree with Adam in that his two extras are more common and perhaps his view is a more effective way to teach than saying you can use em all, which to someone learning is likely not going to help as much as a bit of prioritizing. As to the resolution, after more than three decades listening to flamenco an E, an E7, and an E7b9 por solea are all heard to me as home and do not need an Am, which in this context would sound completely wrong.




Page: <<   <   9 10 [11] 12 13    >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET