| Author |
Message |
Mark D
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Oct 26, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
Hi All, Sorry if this has been covered a zillion times before, but I
have some questions concerned Hi-End equipment, and thier features, or I
should say, lack of.
I notice that many modern high end Pre-Amplifiers have an absence of
simple Tone Controls.
I understand the reasoning behind this, as the simpler the chain, the
less interference, or "destruction" I should say of the purity of sound
by introducing Tone Controls into the Pre-Amplifier's Circuittry. Do
purists now cringe at the thought of having at least a Bass-Treble
Control on thier Pre-Amps?
We would assume with these modern Pre-Amps, that the signal produced
would be flat from xxHz to xx,xxxHz, but I wonder what one now does due
to inefficiencies in room acoustics, or the inefficiencies of a given
speaker?
Does one with these type of systems now have to typically resort to
modifying thier speakers x-overs, spend countless $100's, to $1,000's of
dollars in room treatments, call in the "sound techs" for advice-testing
or what?
Is the addition of a simple Graphic EQ such a taboo thing nowadays?
I do see EQ's in abundance for the pro user, but really not much
available for the home audio user? What is left out there? Is there
such a thing as a good EQ that will not be a detriment to high-end audio
components?
Or am I missing the boat somehow, that people who own audio gear like
$12K Krell Amps, $7K Krell Pre-Amps, and $14K Speaker systems have no
need for such an animal? TIA, Mark
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kalman Rubinson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
On 27 Oct 2005 02:32:10 GMT, mmd49@webtv.net (Mark D) wrote:
| Quote: | Hmm, seems like you're all afraid to touch this post? It wasn't a
troll. Don't be afraid to respond, the High End Gods, (or Arny) won't
come down too hard on ya! :-) Mark
|
No patience, huh? It also seems that there's a fair amount of
agreement among the responses even though they vary a bit.
Bottom line: You can add always an EQ if you choose or if you decide
it necessary.
Kal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stewart Pinkerton
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
On 26 Oct 2005 02:39:03 GMT, mmd49@webtv.net (Mark D) wrote:
| Quote: | We would assume with these modern Pre-Amps, that the signal produced
would be flat from xxHz to xx,xxxHz, but I wonder what one now does due
to inefficiencies in room acoustics, or the inefficiencies of a given
speaker?
|
One treats one's room acoustically, and avoids the purchase of poor
speakers.
| Quote: | Does one with these type of systems now have to typically resort to
modifying thier speakers x-overs, spend countless $100's, to $1,000's of
dollars in room treatments, call in the "sound techs" for advice-testing
or what?
|
You should certainly *not* mess with your speaker at that end of the
market (or indeed at all), but spending money on room treatments is
certainly more effective than spending it on 'high end' electronics.
| Quote: | Is the addition of a simple Graphic EQ such a taboo thing nowadays?
I do see EQ's in abundance for the pro user, but really not much
available for the home audio user? What is left out there? Is there
such a thing as a good EQ that will not be a detriment to high-end audio
components?
|
Companies such as Z-systems make excellent and essentially transparent
equalisers, but these are no substitute for a good room carefully
treated.
| Quote: | Or am I missing the boat somehow, that people who own audio gear like
$12K Krell Amps, $7K Krell Pre-Amps, and $14K Speaker systems have no
need for such an animal?
|
You're missing the boat that they would be much better off with $3k
electronics, $25k speakers and $5k of room treatment.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
"Mark D" <mmd49@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:djmq87013qa@news2.newsguy.com...
| Quote: | Hi All, Sorry if this has been covered a zillion times before, but I
have some questions concerned Hi-End equipment, and thier features, or I
should say, lack of.
I notice that many modern high end Pre-Amplifiers have an absence of
simple Tone Controls.
I understand the reasoning behind this, as the simpler the chain, the
less interference, or "destruction" I should say of the purity of sound
by introducing Tone Controls into the Pre-Amplifier's Circuittry. Do
purists now cringe at the thought of having at least a Bass-Treble
Control on thier Pre-Amps?
|
The whole idea of abandoning tone controls is pretty stupid when compared to
the things people do instead to try and get things to sound the way the want
them. The fact is that if you don't have a room that's acoustically
perfect, then you need some way to adjust for the variables in frequency
response.
While a bass and treble control alone will propably not cure all the ills of
a given room, there is no reason to not have them. A better bet would be a
couple of parametric EQ controls, particularly for bass response. Ideally
there should be selectable frequencies.
| Quote: | We would assume with these modern Pre-Amps, that the signal produced
would be flat from xxHz to xx,xxxHz, but I wonder what one now does due
to inefficiencies in room acoustics, or the inefficiencies of a given
speaker?
Either room treatements (passive EQ) or an active equalizer or some |
combination of both. But the high enders seem to want to try out cables,
different amps, preamps, speakers, or whatever they are being told will have
an effect on thesound, especially if it's expensive.
| Quote: | Does one with these type of systems now have to typically resort to
modifying thier speakers x-overs, spend countless $100's, to $1,000's of
dollars in room treatments, call in the "sound techs" for advice-testing
or what?
If you want the best possible sound, you do what it takes. Modifying |
speakers seems fraught with danger, unless the person doing it is also an EE
who has the proper test equpment.
| Quote: | Is the addition of a simple Graphic EQ such a taboo thing nowadays?
Many people seem to think so. It is pretty hard to get enough EQ controls |
to take care of every possible problem, but to my ears a room that has been
properly EQ'd sounds much better. If you choose to EQ it would make sense to
use a digital EQ with constant Q, such as made by RANE, although they can be
pricey. There are other digital EQ's with constant Q from the pro sound
market by such manufacturers as Alesis and Behringer. DBX, DOD, Peavey and
some others make affordable analog Equalizers, but for my ears the digital
ones would be the way to go. Your ears may be fine with a non digital EQ
and may be that the frequencies that need attention in your room could be
handled without any problem from an analog one. Before there were such
things as digital Equalizers I hear rooms that were done with what was
available atthe time and it still sounded better than no EQ.
| Quote: | I do see EQ's in abundance for the pro user, but really not much
available for the home audio user? What is left out there? Is there
such a thing as a good EQ that will not be a detriment to high-end audio
components?
|
You just spoke of them.
| Quote: | Or am I missing the boat somehow, that people who own audio gear like
$12K Krell Amps, $7K Krell Pre-Amps, and $14K Speaker systems have no
need for such an animal? TIA, Mark
|
Depends on what other steps they took with room treatments. For some it
seems to be a snobbery issue. Active EQ is somehow low class or something,
I've never understood the reluctance.
For the asking price of some of the pro stuff, it's hard not to be
interested in trying it out.
I say go for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark D
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
Thank you folks for your responses, and opinions, It's very deeply
appreciated.
While in my current system, which consists of McIntosh Amps-Pre-Amps, I
only have Bass-Treble Controls, and a Loudness Contour Control on the
Pre-Amp-Tuner (MX-130)
I understand an EQ can be virtually inserted into almost any home audio
Amp-Pre-Amp system, provided it has RCA In/outs.
I've notice many of these pro EQ's such as the Rane use XLR's, or 1/4"
Phone Plugs.
Mark |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kalman Rubinson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
On 26 Oct 2005 02:39:03 GMT, mmd49@webtv.net (Mark D) wrote:
| Quote: | We would assume with these modern Pre-Amps, that the signal produced
would be flat from xxHz to xx,xxxHz, but I wonder what one now does due
to inefficiencies in room acoustics, or the inefficiencies of a given
speaker?
|
Traditional tone controls are quite inadequate for these applications.
| Quote: | Does one with these type of systems now have to typically resort to
modifying thier speakers x-overs, spend countless $100's, to $1,000's of
dollars in room treatments, call in the "sound techs" for advice-testing
or what?
|
Rational acoustic room treatment should be a prerequisite before
installing expensive and sophisticated equipment.
| Quote: | Is the addition of a simple Graphic EQ such a taboo thing nowadays?
|
And, generally, useless. A multiband parametric EQ can help correct
for speaker aberrations and sources but, again, not as a replacement
for good acoustics. There are DSP room equalisers which attempt to
correct for both magnitude and time (TacT, DEQX).
| Quote: | I do see EQ's in abundance for the pro user, but really not much
available for the home audio user? What is left out there? Is there
such a thing as a good EQ that will not be a detriment to high-end audio
components?
|
There's also the Rives analog and Z-systems digital parametric EQs
which can work wonders in particular installations but they are not
the equivalent of competent room design/treatment and speakers.
| Quote: | Or am I missing the boat somehow, that people who own audio gear like
$12K Krell Amps, $7K Krell Pre-Amps, and $14K Speaker systems have no
need for such an animal?
|
It ain't the equipment that needs EQ; it's the room that needs design.
Kal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
"Mark D" <mmd49@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:djmq87013qa@news2.newsguy.com...
| Quote: | Hi All, Sorry if this has been covered a zillion times before, but I
have some questions concerned Hi-End equipment, and thier features, or I
should say, lack of.
I notice that many modern high end Pre-Amplifiers have an absence of
simple Tone Controls.
I understand the reasoning behind this, as the simpler the chain, the
less interference, or "destruction" I should say of the purity of sound
by introducing Tone Controls into the Pre-Amplifier's Circuittry. Do
purists now cringe at the thought of having at least a Bass-Treble
Control on thier Pre-Amps?
|
(snip)
Unlike cars, where the top-line models have lots of features, high end audio
components have fewer features. You have to pay more to get less. :-)
This is strictly a psychological ploy, since there's nothing wrong with
having switchable tone controls. High end manufacturers know that added
features arouse negative reactions in their target customers. Even valuable
and very useful controls are dispensed with as the price heads for the
stratosphere. A balance control is a clear plus for most audiophiles, but
I've run across preamps that use separate level controls for the right and
left channels just so they can avoid the balance control. To me it's
crazy; simply changing the volume becomes a major headache.
Then there's the headphone jack issue. How many preamps have a headphone
jack on the front panel? Almost none--although even the cheapest receivers
always have them. If you ask about this, you will get comically ridiculous
excuses for why expensive components shouldn't have headphone outputs. I
think I've heard them all, and none of them pass the comedy test.
Norm Strong |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark D
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
Hmm, seems like you're all afraid to touch this post? It wasn't a
troll. Don't be afraid to respond, the High End Gods, (or Arny) won't
come down too hard on ya! :-) Mark |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bear
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
Mark D wrote:
| Quote: | Hi All, Sorry if this has been covered a zillion times before, but I
have some questions concerned Hi-End equipment, and thier features, or I
should say, lack of.
I notice that many modern high end Pre-Amplifiers have an absence of
simple Tone Controls.
I understand the reasoning behind this, as the simpler the chain, the
less interference, or "destruction" I should say of the purity of sound
by introducing Tone Controls into the Pre-Amplifier's Circuittry. Do
purists now cringe at the thought of having at least a Bass-Treble
Control on thier Pre-Amps?
We would assume with these modern Pre-Amps, that the signal produced
would be flat from xxHz to xx,xxxHz, but I wonder what one now does due
to inefficiencies in room acoustics, or the inefficiencies of a given
speaker?
Does one with these type of systems now have to typically resort to
modifying thier speakers x-overs, spend countless $100's, to $1,000's of
dollars in room treatments, call in the "sound techs" for advice-testing
or what?
Is the addition of a simple Graphic EQ such a taboo thing nowadays?
I do see EQ's in abundance for the pro user, but really not much
available for the home audio user? What is left out there? Is there
such a thing as a good EQ that will not be a detriment to high-end audio
components?
Or am I missing the boat somehow, that people who own audio gear like
$12K Krell Amps, $7K Krell Pre-Amps, and $14K Speaker systems have no
need for such an animal? TIA, Mark
|
EQ can not correct for anything other than frequency response - usually
on axis. If used for on axis frequency response, power response is altered.
In addition EQ often adds noise and if not noise, definitely phase
shift, which if it is in the form of narrow band correction (higher "Q")
results in phase shift which is potentially more audible.
Graphic EQ circuits are usually "horrid little things"...
It is plausible to employ an outboard device for frequency response
correction - indeed many of the participants on this particular forum
have indicated that they do this in their own systems. I do not.
In the case of modern DSP based "EQ" it may be possible to avoid many of
the issues found with traditional analog EQ circuitry - but perhaps
introduce some other issues. In theory it ought to be possible to create
an "ideal" EQ in the digital domain, having no phase shift whatsoever.
And also mirroring the exact frequency deviations of the speaker
precisely. Some modern digital correction products attempt to do this
sort of thing.
Generally speaking, with true high end speakers and associated gear,
proper room treatments, it is likely that EQ is not needed for most
program material.
The traditional Baxandall Treble and Bass controls really have limited
application or use with modern high-end systems. Even so, there are
situations where adding in an outboard EQ or Baxandall tone control
section may be euphonically pleasing... I do have these available for
use, if required, but that is a rare occurance these days indeed.
_-_-bear |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kalman Rubinson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:43 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
On 27 Oct 2005 03:01:23 GMT, mmd49@webtv.net (Mark D) wrote:
| Quote: | I've notice many of these pro EQ's such as the Rane use XLR's, or 1/4"
Phone Plugs.
|
You can buy adapters.
Kal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
---MIKE---
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:43 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
| Quote: | I've notice many of these pro EQ's such
as the Rane use XLR's, or 1/4" Phone
Plugs.
Mark
|
I use a Rane 31 band equalizer. It does not have RCA connections but
you can get cables that go from 1/4 inch phone plugs to RCA. This is
what I have done. Just be careful to get the correct phone plug to a
male RCA plug. The Rane instruction manual has a good section on
selecting cables.
---MIKE---
| Quote: | In the White Mountains of New Hampshire
(44° 15' N - Elevation 1580') |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:43 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
"In theory it ought to be possible to create an "ideal" EQ in the digital
domain, having no phase shift whatsoever."
But phase and frequency change are two sides of the coin and can be
expressed one into the other. In a speaker where a freq dip happens it is
also because of a phase shift. It seems almost a contridiction in terms
to have freqency change with out phase change and the other way round.
Change in one is because of change in the other.
We see phase shift correction, as in the time domain which is also
related, in xover in the digital domain, but this is another topic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MD
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:43 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
bear wrote:
| Quote: | Mark D wrote:
Hi All, Sorry if this has been covered a zillion times before, but I
have some questions concerned Hi-End equipment, and thier features, or I
should say, lack of.
I notice that many modern high end Pre-Amplifiers have an absence of
simple Tone Controls.
I understand the reasoning behind this, as the simpler the chain, the
less interference, or "destruction" I should say of the purity of sound
by introducing Tone Controls into the Pre-Amplifier's Circuittry. Do
purists now cringe at the thought of having at least a Bass-Treble
Control on thier Pre-Amps?
We would assume with these modern Pre-Amps, that the signal produced
would be flat from xxHz to xx,xxxHz, but I wonder what one now does due
to inefficiencies in room acoustics, or the inefficiencies of a given
speaker?
Does one with these type of systems now have to typically resort to
modifying thier speakers x-overs, spend countless $100's, to $1,000's of
dollars in room treatments, call in the "sound techs" for advice-testing
or what?
Is the addition of a simple Graphic EQ such a taboo thing nowadays?
I do see EQ's in abundance for the pro user, but really not much
available for the home audio user? What is left out there? Is there
such a thing as a good EQ that will not be a detriment to high-end audio
components?
Or am I missing the boat somehow, that people who own audio gear like
$12K Krell Amps, $7K Krell Pre-Amps, and $14K Speaker systems have no
need for such an animal? TIA, Mark
EQ can not correct for anything other than frequency response - usually
on axis. If used for on axis frequency response, power response is altered.
In addition EQ often adds noise and if not noise, definitely phase
shift, which if it is in the form of narrow band correction (higher "Q")
results in phase shift which is potentially more audible.
Graphic EQ circuits are usually "horrid little things"...
It is plausible to employ an outboard device for frequency response
correction - indeed many of the participants on this particular forum
have indicated that they do this in their own systems. I do not.
In the case of modern DSP based "EQ" it may be possible to avoid many of
the issues found with traditional analog EQ circuitry - but perhaps
introduce some other issues. In theory it ought to be possible to create
an "ideal" EQ in the digital domain, having no phase shift whatsoever.
And also mirroring the exact frequency deviations of the speaker
precisely. Some modern digital correction products attempt to do this
sort of thing.
Generally speaking, with true high end speakers and associated gear,
proper room treatments, it is likely that EQ is not needed for most
program material.
The traditional Baxandall Treble and Bass controls really have limited
application or use with modern high-end systems. Even so, there are
situations where adding in an outboard EQ or Baxandall tone control
section may be euphonically pleasing... I do have these available for
use, if required, but that is a rare occurance these days indeed.
_-_-bear
I have recently introduced a DSP Parametric EQ in my system (Behringer) |
It works extremely well with no negative side effects (blind and sighted
A/B). I have a problem with passive room treatment for bass (vs echo
flutter - first order reflection treatment). Bass room treatments are
not discriminating enough. I situated my speakers the best I could in
the room and still had bumps at 48hz, 68hz and 130hz with a big dip at
50hz and a broad dip from about 180-300hz. A passive treatment would
just absorb most of this - dips included. My Behringer para EQ let me
fix all of this (by the way you REALLY need to graph this with
individual tones and a sound meter. I have tones from 20-300hz in 1 hz
increments. Most test CDs - warble or straight mask real bumps and dips) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:43 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
"bear" <bearlabs@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:djpfpt04te@news4.newsguy.com...
| Quote: | Mark D wrote:
Hi All, Sorry if this has been covered a zillion times before, but I
have some questions concerned Hi-End equipment, and thier features, or I
should say, lack of.
I notice that many modern high end Pre-Amplifiers have an absence of
simple Tone Controls. I understand the reasoning behind this, as the
simpler the chain, the
less interference, or "destruction" I should say of the purity of sound
by introducing Tone Controls into the Pre-Amplifier's Circuittry. Do
purists now cringe at the thought of having at least a Bass-Treble
Control on thier Pre-Amps?
We would assume with these modern Pre-Amps, that the signal produced
would be flat from xxHz to xx,xxxHz, but I wonder what one now does due
to inefficiencies in room acoustics, or the inefficiencies of a given
speaker?
Does one with these type of systems now have to typically resort to
modifying thier speakers x-overs, spend countless $100's, to $1,000's of
dollars in room treatments, call in the "sound techs" for advice-testing
or what?
Is the addition of a simple Graphic EQ such a taboo thing nowadays?
I do see EQ's in abundance for the pro user, but really not much
available for the home audio user? What is left out there? Is there
such a thing as a good EQ that will not be a detriment to high-end audio
components?
Or am I missing the boat somehow, that people who own audio gear like
$12K Krell Amps, $7K Krell Pre-Amps, and $14K Speaker systems have no
need for such an animal? TIA, Mark
EQ can not correct for anything other than frequency response - usually on
axis. If used for on axis frequency response, power response is altered.
In addition EQ often adds noise and if not noise, definitely phase shift,
which if it is in the form of narrow band correction (higher "Q") results
in phase shift which is potentially more audible.
|
Which Equalizers are not minimum phase?
Will 2 equalizers generating the same curve, will they not then generate the
same amount of phase shift?
| Quote: | Graphic EQ circuits are usually "horrid little things"...
|
Because of what?
| Quote: | It is plausible to employ an outboard device for frequency response
correction - indeed many of the participants on this particular forum have
indicated that they do this in their own systems. I do not.
In the case of modern DSP based "EQ" it may be possible to avoid many of
the issues found with traditional analog EQ circuitry - but perhaps
introduce some other issues. In theory it ought to be possible to create
an "ideal" EQ in the digital domain, having no phase shift whatsoever.
And also mirroring the exact frequency deviations of the speaker
precisely. Some modern digital correction products attempt to do this sort
of thing.
Generally speaking, with true high end speakers and associated gear,
proper room treatments, it is likely that EQ is not needed for most
program material.
Still, it seems that most studios where the music is recorded use some of |
both.
They start by having a decent room and then tweaking it as needed.
| Quote: | The traditional Baxandall Treble and Bass controls really have limited
application or use with modern high-end systems. Even so, there are
situations where adding in an outboard EQ or Baxandall tone control
section may be euphonically pleasing... I do have these available for use,
if required, but that is a rare occurance these days indeed.
|
IME, typical rooms have bass bumps that can cause 10 dB or more of boost at
low freqencies, some sort of parametric or other EQ would certainly be
advantageous for these situations, and indeed it seems that some makers of
subwoofer amps are including them.
I just don't see why an anybody with a hi-fi shouldn't be given a bit of
flexability in tailoring the sound of their system.
Some FM brodcasts or certain older LPs could oftten benefit from a bit of
trebel boost that is simply absent from so much of todays equipment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark D
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:43 am Post subject:
Re: Tone Controls-EQ's, Etc. |
|
|
No patience, huh? It also seems that there's a fair amount of agreement
among the responses even though they vary a bit. Bottom line: You can
add always an EQ if you choose or if you decide it necessary.
Kal
======================================
Sorry Kal/All,
I keep forgetting that this is a moderated group, so posts take time to
be approved
As I've stated in a previous post, I deeply appreciate all of your
experience, your knowledge, and the time you have all spent responding
to my questions, and thoughts.
As far as my own personal equipment goes, while it is decent,
satisfying, and consisting of mostly vintage Mac Amps, Vintage JBL
Speakers, VPI HW-19 Table, AQ Arm, Benz Glider Cartridge/McCormack Phono
Pre-Amp, CAL Audio Labs CD Transport/DAC, I would by no means try to
call my equipment "High End" in the modern realm.
I've seen, and heard some of the "real" high end gear, (Levinson, Pass
Labs, Krell, Rowland, Dynaudio, Revel, Apogee, MBL, Dunlavy, etc) and I
do understand many of these systems can easily surpass the cost of
people's homes ($50K can easily be a drop in the bucket)
A Krell "Fanatic" by the name of Fabio comes to mind on just how far the
high end can go, and how much one can spend to try to achieve "audio
nirvana". :-)
I understand what all have said about room acoustics being a very
important consideration, but unfortunately, many of us music lovers have
equipment set up in regular living quarters, with furniture, etc in
rooms which weren't ever designed to be acoustically sound.
Thank you again all, Mark |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in