I don't agree with this statement at all...they don't publish them because they don't have to because people are still buying the product in droves, often times you will see the market leaders ignoring the enthusiast circles which surround their niche because enthusiasts make up such a small percentage of the buying public, something like less than .05%...fact is average consumers don't care about frequency response, wattage or any of that Jazz ...most average consumers don't want to know or see any of that info as it just confuses them, and since most who buy Bose do so for convenience why would Bose want to confuse them??
I don't agree with this statement at all...they don't publish them because they don't have to because people are still buying the product in droves, often times you will see the market leaders ignoring the enthusiast circles which surround their niche because enthusiasts make up such a small percentage of the buying public, something like less than .05%...fact is average consumers don't care about frequency response, wattage or any of that Jazz ...most average consumers don't want to know or see any of that info as it just confuses them, and since most who buy Bose do so for convenience why would Bose want to confuse them??
If you are an enthusiast and spank your monkey over this stuff then sure...but if you are joe blow who just wants a decent speaker system it is really TMI...I mean are they really going to give a rats ass about the nominal impedance or how their woofer is constructed?...no, these people go into a store, listen to a few and then buy plain and simple. Audiophiles are the ones who obsess over specs and info just as comp hardware junkes care about bus speeds and bios tuneability....
actually, audiophiles care more about the music than anything else. specs are there so you're not buying a speaker that can't provide decent bass and provides what is expected of a speaker - you get the same sound you put into it.
With bose there are entire octaves missing from the response - that means you don't hear some instruments.
With bose there are entire octaves missing from the response - that means you don't hear some instruments.
IHateMyJob2004
Lifer
- Sep 29, 2004
- 18,656
- 68
- 91
WRONG
Exagerated highs and lows...must be Bose. Soudns great to the average person, but it's NOT FAITHFUL to music reproduction.
Want Bose, spend half ion anything else...that's hte general rule.
IHateMyJob2004
Lifer
- Sep 29, 2004
- 18,656
- 68
- 91
Also true. When you buy Bose, you are buying the name, not a good product. The irony. People that know audio will laugh at anyone that thinks they have a great system with Bose.... I feal sorry for people liek that (and my in-;aws who are brainwahsed
IHateMyJob2004
Lifer
- Sep 29, 2004
- 18,656
- 68
- 91
Has anyone else seen what the bose acoustic labs has cooked up beyond speakers? They had this car shock absorber system - there was a video poster here not to long ago. They were driving over insane obstacle courses (think early WWII jeep videos) and the car was remaining perfectly stable, level, and parallel to the ground.
True Spidey but as I said in my post this is not solely limited to Bose but rather all Sub/Sat speaker systems out there due to the nature of their design, the only ones that skirt this are those which are boarderline in size to bookselves such as the Athenas and the Energys.....
Personally with surround sound systems music takes a back seat as really IMHO a stereo system is far better for sound reproduction...surround sound is for movies and the like primarily with music being a distant concern.
This happens with every industry though...look at Alienware for computers for example.
Also I really don't think highly of people who are audiophiles, I rate them up there with astrologists and tv evangelists as IMHO they are nuts.
If someone likes something for whatever reason then I know I will never be the one to spoil their fun...especially if they already own it...now if someone wants advice before a purchase I will be honest, but to ridicule someone for their choice in home theater or any material purchase is rather shallow and heartless IMHO.
yup...saw that a while ago. they use magnets or reverse polarity to make a friction free absorber...the shocks were huge though and it was an older lexus.
www.hometheaterforum.com
www.head-fi.org
http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html
You want advice on high quality audio components? Go there. People hate Bose because they make sh*tty cheap products and then oversell them.
There was a good article on how Bose dupes customers - but I can't think of it offhand :/. But don't buy Bose. Just don't.
www.head-fi.org
http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html
You want advice on high quality audio components? Go there. People hate Bose because they make sh*tty cheap products and then oversell them.
There was a good article on how Bose dupes customers - but I can't think of it offhand :/. But don't buy Bose. Just don't.
Anyone considering Bose should definitely read this article: link
I particularly like the part about the $1300 Acoustimass system completely missing about 80hz worth of frequency, and the horrendous specs for the tweeters and "bass module". I dunno about you, but if I'm dropping a wad of cash on surround sound, it damn well better reproduce the entire 20hz-20khz frequency spectrum...
If you still buy Bose after reading that article, you're a fvcking idiot. Period. For the money there are much better alternatives available. If small size is your thing, there are several alternatives that match Bose there too, for the same amount of cash...
Dave
[edit] Damn you Taejin!
I particularly like the part about the $1300 Acoustimass system completely missing about 80hz worth of frequency, and the horrendous specs for the tweeters and "bass module". I dunno about you, but if I'm dropping a wad of cash on surround sound, it damn well better reproduce the entire 20hz-20khz frequency spectrum...
If you still buy Bose after reading that article, you're a fvcking idiot. Period. For the money there are much better alternatives available. If small size is your thing, there are several alternatives that match Bose there too, for the same amount of cash...
Dave
[edit] Damn you Taejin!
Bozack,
While some of what you wrote is true, a lot of it is full of generalizations from both sides of the spectrum.
First and foremost, there are a lot of people out there ( I hope) like myself that enjoy the pleasure of accurate music reproduction but are by no means audiophiles. I love listening to a variety of music, but prefer to hear it as the sound engineer intended it to sound, not after some sort of later manipulation. This is why I look for "numbers."
Although there are a lot of anti-Bose arguments, there is a lot of clout due to the ignorant masses, or ?haters?. The ones who know what they are talking about and actually care about the music are the ones who don?t car whether something is popular or not. They care about the final output and that is that.
Once you research it a bit, you get to the heart of the argument against Bose. Bose Acoustimass systems simply aren't accurate. Perhaps it may seem like they produce accurate sound, but they actually produce "pleasing" sound that is somewhat reserved. This works well with the masses who are indifferent, but it meddles with the output that enthusiasts prefer. I want to hear Mick Jagger breathing on the mike. I want to hear Keith Richards? fingers rubbing against his guitar strings. I want to hear the internal reverberation of Heifetz?s playing from inside his violin. I want to hear the audience in the Smetana recording that I love so dearly.
Bose simply doesn?t offer that. Perhaps it can dazzle the masses with deceptively small speakers, but in the case of my sense of hearing, I am willing to sacrifice nothing in the pursuit of hearing what that recording engineer wanted me to hear.
As for myself, I have proven that commercialism or popularity had minimal effect on what I bought.
For fronts I have a pair of Mirage Frx-5?s, notably, Mirage?s cheapest floor standing speaker at the time. At the time, JBL Northridge?s had more bass, and Paradigms had higher highs. So why did I buy them exactly? In one word, I bought them for Accuracy. They are truly very neutral speakers that can about beautiful sound without adding practically anything of their own to the source. As for bass, they don?t output a lot as their floor is 45 Hz, but what a bass can be heard. It is truly a very rich sound that can make anyone happy, and the highs, wow. I was playing a Sibelius opera the other day at nearly full volume and went mad at how beautiful it sounded; it was truly crystal clear. At $400 for the pair, I feel that every cent was worth it.
For my subwoofer, I bought an Athena asp-400ps. Sure there are subs that will go lower, but I bought this one because it never stands out with music. It is simply invisible. With Rap or Classical or even Latin music, it remains in the background, providing beautiful bass that seems to come from my front speakers. It?s 10?? keeps up with fast tempo beats due to its 100watts (rms) while it outputs luscious, creamy and room-filling lows when asked to (during my receiver?s speaker test, the sub shakes every part of a three story house: Q). For the $325 I spent on it, I couldn?t be happier.
Basically, my speakers and my Sub are both commerical brands that can be bought readily (Athena's are now sold at BB but weren't when I bought mine and had to buy it all the way from Cali :Q) and are excellent. People usually critcize commericialization becasue sometimes i resutls in reduced QA, but that is not always the case.
Finally, I could not afford a separate component amp and actually required a receiver for the inputs, so I got an Onkyo tx-sr600. It is quite the neutral device, and provides 90watts of clean power (rated at 80) for each front speaker. It has a variety of inputs, and has served me well for the $400 I spent on it.
<---2.1 is all i need for music for now; Actually 5.1 for DVDA and SACD is out of my reach
While some of what you wrote is true, a lot of it is full of generalizations from both sides of the spectrum.
First and foremost, there are a lot of people out there ( I hope) like myself that enjoy the pleasure of accurate music reproduction but are by no means audiophiles. I love listening to a variety of music, but prefer to hear it as the sound engineer intended it to sound, not after some sort of later manipulation. This is why I look for "numbers."
Although there are a lot of anti-Bose arguments, there is a lot of clout due to the ignorant masses, or ?haters?
. The ones who know what they are talking about and actually care about the music are the ones who don?t car whether something is popular or not. They care about the final output and that is that. Once you research it a bit, you get to the heart of the argument against Bose. Bose Acoustimass systems simply aren't accurate. Perhaps it may seem like they produce accurate sound, but they actually produce "pleasing" sound that is somewhat reserved. This works well with the masses who are indifferent, but it meddles with the output that enthusiasts prefer. I want to hear Mick Jagger breathing on the mike. I want to hear Keith Richards? fingers rubbing against his guitar strings. I want to hear the internal reverberation of Heifetz?s playing from inside his violin. I want to hear the audience in the Smetana recording that I love so dearly.
Bose simply doesn?t offer that. Perhaps it can dazzle the masses with deceptively small speakers, but in the case of my sense of hearing, I am willing to sacrifice nothing in the pursuit of hearing what that recording engineer wanted me to hear.
As for myself, I have proven that commercialism or popularity had minimal effect on what I bought.
For fronts I have a pair of Mirage Frx-5?s, notably, Mirage?s cheapest floor standing speaker at the time. At the time, JBL Northridge?s had more bass, and Paradigms had higher highs. So why did I buy them exactly? In one word, I bought them for Accuracy. They are truly very neutral speakers that can about beautiful sound without adding practically anything of their own to the source. As for bass, they don?t output a lot as their floor is 45 Hz, but what a bass can be heard. It is truly a very rich sound that can make anyone happy, and the highs, wow. I was playing a Sibelius opera the other day at nearly full volume and went mad at how beautiful it sounded; it was truly crystal clear. At $400 for the pair, I feel that every cent was worth it.
For my subwoofer, I bought an Athena asp-400ps. Sure there are subs that will go lower, but I bought this one because it never stands out with music. It is simply invisible. With Rap or Classical or even Latin music, it remains in the background, providing beautiful bass that seems to come from my front speakers. It?s 10?? keeps up with fast tempo beats due to its 100watts (rms) while it outputs luscious, creamy and room-filling lows when asked to (during my receiver?s speaker test, the sub shakes every part of a three story house: Q). For the $325 I spent on it, I couldn?t be happier.
Basically, my speakers and my Sub are both commerical brands that can be bought readily (Athena's are now sold at BB but weren't when I bought mine and had to buy it all the way from Cali :Q) and are excellent. People usually critcize commericialization becasue sometimes i resutls in reduced QA, but that is not always the case.
Finally, I could not afford a separate component amp and actually required a receiver for the inputs, so I got an Onkyo tx-sr600. It is quite the neutral device, and provides 90watts of clean power (rated at 80
) for each front speaker. It has a variety of inputs, and has served me well for the $400 I spent on it. <---2.1 is all i need for music for now; Actually 5.1 for DVDA and SACD is out of my reach
I have seen this link posted many many times and honestly was waiting for it to show up here...honestly you cannot take this article seriously in the least as its sole purpose is to bash a product/brand combined with the fact that the author outwright lies in the second paragraph when he says:
When in fact the site he links to says exactly:
Clearly these are NOT the SAME EXACT driver as those used in the Acoustimass cubes and the author if he were credible would make some note of this....
If you look at the rest of his site both it and he himself seem less than impressive, unfortunately I feel this is a case of net regurgitation where the author personally doesn't like bose and made it their mission to exaggerate some facts and blatantly lie in the instance I pointed out to slander the company....I mean really what is his credibility or what should make us as the readers believe his opinion?? he has no other reviews on the site of audio equipment, the only system he lists as having experience with is his personal system and nothing more....now if he were someone who worked in the industry, this as a collaberation of knoweldgable people working in and around the industry or all deeply involved in HT then maybe, but going from this poorly designed site all you see is one very biased op/ed piece with no links to back up his claims written by someone who also harbors other biases as indicated in the other op/ed pieces contained in his site dealing with iraq and the current president.
There was also the Bose "faq" on another forum which IMHO is a much better article that is a bit more objective.
Also the guy brags about using Monster cable in his system specs page, how seriously can you take someone who slams bose and then brags about that overpriced garbage??
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Bozack,
While some of what you wrote is true, a lot of it is full of generalizations from both sides of the spectrum.
First and foremost, there are a lot of people out there ( I hope) like myself that enjoy the pleasure of accurate music reproduction but are by no means audiophiles. I love listening to a variety of music, but prefer to hear it as the sound engineer intended it to sound, not after some sort of later manipulation. This is why I look for "numbers."
Although there are a lot of anti-Bose arguments, there is a lot of clout due to the ignorant masses, or ?haters?
Once you research it a bit, you get to the heart of the argument against Bose. Bose Acoustimass systems simply aren't accurate. Perhaps it may seem like they produce accurate sound, but they actually produce "pleasing" sound that is somewhat reserved. This works well with the masses who are indifferent, but it meddles with the output that enthusiasts prefer. I want to hear Mick Jagger breathing on the mike. I want to hear Keith Richards? fingers rubbing against his guitar strings. I want to hear the internal reverberation of Heifetz?s playing from inside his violin. I want to hear the audience in the Smetana recording that I love so dearly.
Bose simply doesn?t offer that. Perhaps it can dazzle the masses with deceptively small speakers, but in the case of my sense of hearing, I am willing to sacrifice nothing in the pursuit of hearing what that recording engineer wanted me to hear.
As for myself, I have proven that commercialism or popularity had minimal effect on what I bought.
For fronts I have a pair of Mirage Frx-5?s, notably, Mirage?s cheapest floor standing speaker at the time. At the time, JBL Northridge?s had more bass, and Paradigms had higher highs. So why did I buy them exactly? In one word, I bought them for Accuracy. They are truly very neutral speakers that can about beautiful sound without adding practically anything of their own to the source. As for bass, they don?t output a lot as their floor is 45 Hz, but what a bass can be heard. It is truly a very rich sound that can make anyone happy, and the highs, wow. I was playing a Sibelius opera the other day at nearly full volume and went mad at how beautiful it sounded; it was truly crystal clear. At $400 for the pair, I feel that every cent was worth it.
For my subwoofer, I bought an Athena asp-400ps. Sure there are subs that will go lower, but I bought this one because it never stands out with music. It is simply invisible. With Rap or Classical or even Latin music, it remains in the background, providing beautiful bass that seems to come from my front speakers. It?s 10?? keeps up with fast tempo beats due to its 100watts (rms) while it outputs luscious, creamy and room-filling lows when asked to (during my receiver?s speaker test, the sub shakes every part of a three story house: Q). For the $325 I spent on it, I couldn?t be happier.
Finally, I could not afford a separate component amp and actually required a receiver for the inputs, so I got an Onkyo tx-sr600. It is quite the neutral device, and provides 90watts of clean power (rated at 80
Goose the problem is that the criticism generally begins and ends with Bose amongst audiophiles when in reality can be leved against any micro speaker system as they ALL have the same or similar shortcommings in terms of sound reproduction, audiophiles just don't like mentioning other brands/products as they feel it will turn people away from "enthusiast" brands....
Also you are trying to make an audiophile argument fly with me which I already said I personally don't agree with....
You are explaining your system and justifying your purchase but remember I already said that there shouldn't ever be an attempt to compare a full size bookshelf or even worse system that uses floorstanding speakers to one which uses small sats and a bass module, it is pointless....I would certainly hope that the larger system is not only cheaper but also better sounding as you are sacrificing not only living space in your home to accomodate but also visual aesthetics as IMHO larger speakers are an eyesore, but then again the latter is simply a subjective point solely dependant on the end user.
So while I can fully understand there are those who are willing to sacrifice their living space in the name of great sound, it seems that those in the audio community cannot understand those who are not willing to make the same sacrifice and instead would want the best sound from a sub/sat combo.
Personally I want to get the best sounding small speaker package on the market with price and overly accurate sound reproduction being a secondary concern...for me size and function are my primaries and I feel many more of the general public gravitate in the same direction, where good sound is good enough as long as the design does not take up a ton of room and or look ugly, heck I live in an area where realestate comes at a premium and I am not willing to give up some of the small living area that I have now to an overly large/loud home theatre system...
The system you have I am guessing took a good deal of research to come up with all of the components possibly some trial and error, most likely involved going to multiple vendors and the setup of the components while not difficult might not be the easiest either....people who buy Bose and or any product like it want simplicity...being an audiophile and simplicity are two things which do not go together.
Again just my 2
Bozack,
Of course the most readily available material will be gibberish and garbage from the mouths of "haters," but as an educated individual (assumption), it shoulid be everyones perrogative to research the claims of those who actually know of what they speak and arern't out to bash something just to get attention.
I know people who have had Bose systems, and I won't criciticize them because they are happy with it. On the other hand, if they ask my honest opinion, as a friend I will not lie to them that I am a musican and appreciate accuracy, for better or for worse. I like hearing the "hiss" of an age old recording that was beautifulyl preserved. I like hearing the rich fullness and somewhat monoural sound of analog transfers. They will end up both understanding my point, and not feeling cheated. Hell sometimes it has even convinced some music lovers to change over.
Does my system blow theirs away? Of course not. Do I like my system better? Infinitely.
Of course the most readily available material will be gibberish and garbage from the mouths of "haters," but as an educated individual (assumption), it shoulid be everyones perrogative to research the claims of those who actually know of what they speak and arern't out to bash something just to get attention.
I know people who have had Bose systems, and I won't criciticize them because they are happy with it. On the other hand, if they ask my honest opinion, as a friend I will not lie to them that I am a musican and appreciate accuracy, for better or for worse. I like hearing the "hiss" of an age old recording that was beautifulyl preserved. I like hearing the rich fullness and somewhat monoural sound of analog transfers. They will end up both understanding my point, and not feeling cheated. Hell sometimes it has even convinced some music lovers to change over.
Does my system blow theirs away? Of course not. Do I like my system better? Infinitely.
The enthusiasts you speak of then are businessmen. People who are truly passionate about the music without being trolls are quite different.
As for your point of view, as with most any superfluous purchase that anyone can make besides more food will have bias associated with it. Just as you value function in terms of form for speakers, I do so for vehicles. I don't care what the car can do, because if it doesn't look good, I'm not buying it.
As for small speaker packages of all brands, yes, they currently have sometimes grievous limitations. I find that the harshest argument is that Bose markets the implausible while other brands are more realistic in their claims. This is of course subjective. As you said, the damn things are highly positional with certain exceptions, and require that you have a quality sub to formidably take on the 120 Hz and lower responsibilities, if not more.
As for my system, it did indeed take a bit of research, but for hook up, I have 8 cables.
2 - One 18gauge cable to each speaker
2 - Power cords for receiver and amp
3 - Sub cable
1 - Source cable (used to be digital optical; currently it is analog rca)
It is by no means plug and play, but it is not rocket science either.
As I said, people pay for Bose because they want something that sounds "nice." I paid for my system because I wanted something that sounded "real."
The same price structure and competition is universal in the capitalism world.
I don't buy the "sub/sat system" limitations. Sure there are limitations, but a decent sub/sat system can still sound very good. In fact for home theater applications it has advantages over a tower.
But the fact remains that the bose systems do not reproduce music well, nor do they have bass at a cost that is simply ridiculous.
For 2000 bucks one could get a 1400 speaker system (400 sub, 1000 speakers) and a 600 dollar receiver and it would sound fabulous. Oh, and said receiver would also be able to accept other video/music sources, control your TV, etc - all from one remote. That sounds like simplicity to me.
For size, there are numerous subs out there that are small and produce butt shaking low bass. But most importantly they produce it with minimal distortion - the bose accustimass simply pounds out distorted midbass rumble.
My next home theater will be a satellite for the mains, because I can get a much better sat for the money over a tower. The polk LSi 9s come to mind, with a larger SVS sub. Or maybe B&W nautilus. Or maybe the smaller martin logans.
But think about it - if one wants audio advice they ask ones who know about it. Same with any other purchase - cars, computers, video (shouldn't one look at specs, etc when purchasing a TV?), vacuum cleane.
But the fact remains that the bose systems do not reproduce music well, nor do they have bass at a cost that is simply ridiculous.
For 2000 bucks one could get a 1400 speaker system (400 sub, 1000 speakers) and a 600 dollar receiver and it would sound fabulous. Oh, and said receiver would also be able to accept other video/music sources, control your TV, etc - all from one remote. That sounds like simplicity to me.
For size, there are numerous subs out there that are small and produce butt shaking low bass. But most importantly they produce it with minimal distortion - the bose accustimass simply pounds out distorted midbass rumble.
My next home theater will be a satellite for the mains, because I can get a much better sat for the money over a tower. The polk LSi 9s come to mind, with a larger SVS sub. Or maybe B&W nautilus. Or maybe the smaller martin logans.
But think about it - if one wants audio advice they ask ones who know about it. Same with any other purchase - cars, computers, video (shouldn't one look at specs, etc when purchasing a TV?), vacuum cleane.
I guess my problem is that too many on the net take an article that says what they would like to hear and then pass it off as gospel, case and point that bose review from the intellexual.net site, something written by someone who as far as I can tell has no credentials in the field of critiquing hi fi other than what they have read and digested on the net and also from owning what appears to be a "nice" but not spectacular HT system, and then confusion is furthered when you see him mention his use of Monster products, arguably a brand as bad if not worse than he claims Bose to be with regards to product claims to performance, price gouging, and dirty tricks in terms of marketing.
Like you if somoene asks my honest opinion I will give it but I will not mislead someone into thinking that their system is the only one plauged by said problem...as I said before there are many sub/sat systems which all have the same problems as the Bose setup and many are just about if not more expensive combined with their exclusivity thus making it that much harder to demo them...seems like the buck stops with bose in terms of criticism due to their popularity and availability.
With any micro system you will pay a price in terms of performance for the smaller size....those who have the space to use larger speakers and don't mind the look of them will be rewarded with better quality sound at a lower cost, those who such as myself do not like large speakers and don't want to sacrifice floorspace to bookshelves or towers will be rewarded with more appealing aestheitcs to us and more living area but poorer sound quality....it is all about your needs and desires and priorities.
No, audiophiles just aren't mass-marketed idiots. The speaker listed there is the Klipsch RF-35, which I also own. They can be found at any self-respecting HT store (that DOESN'T carry Bose) for $1000 msrp, but are usually sold for 20% less if you know how to negotiate. A complete 5.1 system for that line will run you $2,500.
I will put my Klipsch setup against ANY Bose system, including any flagship systems they have, hands down. I know that some of their acousitmass systems run to at least $3,000. Nothing reflects specs than clear comparison. The simple fact is that Bose uses terrible drivers, aweful subwoofers (that supposedly compensate for the lack of bass in their sattelites), and prices their systems 10x too expensive so corporate asshats can make an enormous profit from people who play into their marketing scam. Yes, it is a scam because they isolate their retail displays so a customer cannot compare them to anything else side by side, and don't offer any specs on paper, to hide their low quality overpriced systems.
If you want to read more, just go to www.avsforum.com. There is a long thread on the speaker forum that describes exactly what we've said in more detail.
Bose is an engineering company second, a marketing company first. They sell their speakers in slick packages and charge top dollar for them.
Bose's Wave Radio, for example, is a good product for folks who live in tiny apartments where space is at an extreme premium. Because there are bigger speakers that sound better, and are cheaper. But Bose markets the Wave Radio so cleverly that they sell thousands to people who live in big houses, for whom space is not at a premium, because they think they are the greatest speakers ever.
Bose's Wave Radio, for example, is a good product for folks who live in tiny apartments where space is at an extreme premium. Because there are bigger speakers that sound better, and are cheaper. But Bose markets the Wave Radio so cleverly that they sell thousands to people who live in big houses, for whom space is not at a premium, because they think they are the greatest speakers ever.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,584
- 984
- 126
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter