Modified mechanical anti-skate

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby Votan » Sun Mar 03, 2019 4:34 pm

Hi All,
Newbie in the forum (with the exception of some posts in another thread concerning Dual Pivot) but too old as a VPI owner (TNT V-HR/JMW 12,5/SDS/Lyra Titan from 2002), I would be happy to share my own acquired experience in the a/s subject .
Until recently in my JMW 12,5, a/s was not in my main concerns, because the only way to adjust it was to give the lemo wire one full turn (no mechanical a/s). This proved to be enough (sonically at list), probably due to 12’’ arm, as well due to small uphill of the record due to the washer in the spindle and the screwed clamp of V-HR. But from February 2019 I am the happy owner of a Prime Signature/JMW 10-3DR/Lyra Delos/ADS, so things are a lot more sophisticated and demanding for a/s fine tuning.
There are a lot of contradictory theories and opinions (most of them mentioned in this forum) on how someone could approach a decent a/s adjustment. With most of them I was very lucky to become accustomed and to repeatedly test them for many years because some friends (of our audiophile club in my hometown) ask me from time to time to set up their TT-tonearms (Linn LP12/Ekos II-9”/Koetsu Rosewood Signature, Garrard 301/SME 312S-12”/Lyra Delos, TW Raven? Triplanar VII/Clearaudio Goldfinger Statement, Gyrodeck/SME V-9”/Lyra Delos, Clearaudio/Morch UP-4-9”/Clearaudio something).
Our own (subjective) findings and conclusions (mine and of the club’s present members in each set up session) for a/s fine tuning in all the above particular set ups are unanimously (but may differ from yours or everybody else’s due to a lot of variables) as follows:
1. “BY EAR” method: We use one well known LP with some vocals and some decent dynamics. Starting with zero or too low a/s we should hear the right channel duller, almost lower in dynamic volume and crispness than the left. Very slowly we turn the a/s force up and compare by ear relative dynamics, crispness and distortion in the right channel (outer wall of groove) vs left channel (inner wall of groove).
a. If the right is a bit duller/less crisp and focused, or has more distortion (because the stylus has less than the proper contact with the outer groove wall of the right channel due to higher skating force than a/s), then we must increase a/s.
b. If on the contrary this happens to the left channel, this means that we have put too much a/s.
c. Increase, or degrease a/s till both channels reach sonic equilibrium.
d. Validate equilibrium by crossing phono cables (L to R, R to L) in phono stage inputs.
e. Avoid being misleading by any room acoustical asymmetry, using headphones.
We found this method VALID IN ALL (of the above) CASES giving the best sonic (among others) results especially if headphones are used. But it demands a lot of patience and healthy ears, as well the azimuth to be in perfect equilibrium before the above comparisons (btw, most of the above set ups have fixed azimuth), otherwise an insufficiently leveled azimuth in our JMWs can be misleading in a/s fine tuning.
2. “By EYE” method (recommended as well in all Lyra’s manuals): Lower the stylus onto the last 1/2 of a spinning musical LP with a decent modulation. The moment the needle touches down the groove, look at the stylus from the front with a magnifier (and with one eye in perfect line into vertical plane to the cantilever) if the needle end of cantilever gets pulled a tiny bit inward (spindle wise) or pushed a tiny bit outward and remains in this angled position during play.
a. If it is angled outwards, the skating force is too much higher than a/s (stylus anchored in the groove, but tonearm pushing inwards), so we must increase a/s.
b. If it’s angled towards the spindle, the anti-skate force is too high, so we must degrease it.
c. If it touches down nicely in the groove and cantilever's vertical plane appears to be constantly at a 90 degree angle to the cart body, then a/s is O.K.
VALID IN ALL CASES but giving a not so much accurate fine tuning, because eyes could probably be misled. For that it requires a large number of iterations. In all cases it’s good a bit finer tuning using the “By ear” method.
But it surely can tell you instantly if you have too much or too low a/s, something which could additionally protect your cart from a permanent deformation in the cantilever’s suspension. In its plus is that it is not so sensitive if the azimuth is not perfectly leveled.
3. “PUT A/S TO THE SAME VALUE AS THE VTF” method (not for JMWs): For tonearms that features a user-adjustable pre-calibrated knob, begin by adjusting it to the same value as VTF, which will get you in the ballpark.
VALID IN ALL CASES (and double checked using the "By the eye” method), giving good and immediate (plug and play) results. But In most cases it needs a bit finer tuning using the “By Ear” method.
4. The “TEST RECORD” method: For a/s, we always use the Band 6, 7 & 8 (never the 9, it’s a dangerous torture test for carts), in B side of Hi-Fi News Test LP. But in most cases we find this method NOT AT ALL VALID. Namely: There were some set ups where we had put a/s to zero, where the “By Ear” and/or “BY Eye” methods told us that we needed a lot of more a/s, but Test LP gave us no distortion or instability in order to force us to increase a/s. On the contrary, in other set ups where the a/s had been adjusted accurately with “By Ear” and “By Eye” methods, the Test LP demanded more and more additional a/s giving distortion and instability. Maybe those bias tests would be heavily influenced from the tracking ability of each different cartridge.
5. The “SOUNDSMITH” suggested Method with the stylus placed on the surface of the record (not in the groove) at the end of the record on the un-pressed flat space where the run-out groove.
We continuously found this method NOT AT ALL VALID with almost all of our set ups ( as well Lyra and VPI suggest to avoid it). First of all, why all this frustrating placing the stylus on the un-pressed flat space of the run-out groove where you should have only one second until stylus collides with the run-out groove? Why not, all this to better take place on a run-out territory of a blank (grooveless) record that most of audiophiles have in their possession.
But the main problem of this method is that in all our set ups, if you set a/s in order stylus track at the end of a grooveless LP slowly inwards, then the a/s setting demanded almost two to three times higher setting than when we set a/s at the same value as VTF (e.g. for VTF=1,9g the a/s should be at 3,5 in the a/s knob that puts an extreme pressure in the outer wall of the groove-right channel!). That was something that continuously proved obviously wrong setting, both “By Ear” and “By Eye”.

Take into account that all the above findings came out with all the platters perfectly leveled, fixed azimuth on gimbaled tonearms (except unipivot Morch UP-4, which btw has adjustment knob for a/s), as well VTF, VTA and phono stages loadings (resistance, capacitance) in the exact recommended values.
Last edited by Votan on Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
Prime Sign/10"3DR/Finite Element(FE) platform/SOTA's Total Eclipse/Lyra Titan/VPI Ring/WW Silver Eclipse 8 Ph.C/Groove+ SRX MkII Ph. St./Moon 740 Pre/Moon 820 PSU/ATC 100 Active Speakers/AQ Niagara IC/WW Silver Electra AC,FE Ref Rack/RPG Room Treatm.
User avatar
Votan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:59 pm
Location: Greece, Larisa.

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby Golear » Thu Mar 07, 2019 10:16 pm

Mr_Putty wrote:Memory is that the drummer was a member of the Kyoto drumming group in its early days. A quick search did not produce a name or date, but Wikipedia does have a list of musicians that died while performing. Unfortunately the list does not include their group along side the musician name. I try to stay on topic. Apologies if this got too far out there.


Didn't the drummer from Spinal Tap blow up or something? And that happened twice, right?
Golear
Senior Member
 
Posts: 479
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:51 pm

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby Votan » Sun Mar 10, 2019 5:03 pm

Hopping that this forum continues to encourage and to be interested in his members’ field experiences and views in VPI TT setups, here is my relevant attempt in approaching a decent a/s overview and adjustment in my Prime Signature, trying (as a case study) to follow an (improvised) common sense tech protocol (unfortunately needing a lot more page space for that):
- Initial Settings: Platter perfectly leveled, Spindle to Pivot distance: 258,2mm (+0,2mm acceptable error), overhung and cantilever alignment via VPI Jig (validated via Hi-Fi News Protractor), VTA (SRA) and VTF in the recommended values, azimuth statically adjusted via VPI rod and Millennium Block, dynamically see below*. Not yet Dual Pivot assembly.
PART I: A/s via lemo wire only.
1. Before I place the arm in its pivot, I relaxed its lemo wire according Soundsmith’s recommended procedure (not heating like Mr_Putty, being afraid not to hurt its plastic isolation). Then I connected lemo wire in junction box, rotated lemo connector minimally to orient the red dots, keeping wire in its most relaxed state.
2. Trying to find if I could give lemo wire one more full turn CW (to pre-load it for a/s) or CCW (to more relax it for mechanical a/s only), I found that none was normally possible, because in both attempts the wire’s normal arc had a tendency to be heavily deformed.
Is that really normal for Nordost Reference wires on all 3DR tonarms?
3. In order to find out if that inevitable setting (wire in its most relaxed possible state) could create some a/s force, I balanced the tonearm floating in horizontal plane (wearing stylus guard) and released it from the spindle. Yes, even with no preloaded lemo wire, it creates an a/s force when arm sails on the platter, pushing it to return to its arm rest, neither too fast, but nor too slow (video in https://youtu.be/xNbstN7GhZQ)
4. In order to detect if a/s force from the lemo wire could influenced VTF (exerting an unwanted force somewhere), I weighted VTF (via VPI’s electronic scale) in 3 different positions of the scale/needle in the platter. Δ(VTF) was +0,01g in the central area, +0,02g in the lead out area comparing to VTF in lead in one. Negligible or not, that’s inevitable in my setup. But be careful if you have already adjusted VTF in the highest permitted value.
5. Checking for the same reason Azimuth influence from lemo wire statically, I found that if you adjust it horizontal in the outer platter’s area, then there is a tiny CW inclination in the middle-platter area, increased a bit more in the inner platter area. But I think this checking is useless because dynamically, skating force would appear as well, thus upsetting any statically achieved horizontal balance of azimuth.
6. So it’s time to check anti-skating (via lemo wire only) spinning records by using the methods which (for those exact reasons) have been described in my previous post:
-“By Eye” checking: Lowering the stylus onto the last 1/2 of a musical record with a decent modulation, it was evident, that the moment the needle was touching down the groove, the cantilever got pulled a bit outward and remained in this disoriented angled position during play.
That means that the skating force is much higher than the a/s opposed by the lemo wire. Remember that this method is more or less irrelevant of the dynamically precise adjustment of azimuth*.
-“By Ear” checking: It was evident that left channel (inner wall) was much more crisper and dynamically livelier than the right channel (outer wall) which in comparison was dull, lucking crispness and attack, as well in some voice or sax crescendos I could feel a tendency for a bit of distortion in right channel (validated via headphones and L-R cable crossing). All those mean (considering that azimuth* is O.K.) that a/s via only lemo wire is not enough.
-“The Soundsmith” checking (not valid for me): Using the run-out territory of a blank (grooveless) record, I was terrified watching the cart to move inwards with a tremendous speed.
-“The Test Record” checking (not valid for me): Strangely, Hi-Fi News Test LP, gave no L-R instability or distortion to inform me that I ought to increase a/s.
The above “By Eye” and “By Ear” (which I trust) findings, in addition to certifying that the skating force is greater than the a/s created by lemo wire, they cause the following anomalies:
- Cantilever to have lost its initial exact alignment, significantly increasing stylus tracking error, as well causing the cart coils to be disorientated in relation to the cart magnets, hence L-R sonic unbalance, not to mention cantilever’s suspension stress and its possible permanent deformation.
-Stylus to push (and read) a lot more in the inner wall of groove than the outer one, causing as well L-R sonic unbalance, not to mention possible one side premature stylus and/or groove’s wearing.
*Not to mention that because a/s and azimuth affect each other been interrelated, I am pretty sure that if I hypothetically stack with a/s via lemo wire only and its above anomalies, then it probably should be impossible to reach an acceptable sonic equilibrium by adjusting azimuth using either fozgometer, or cross talk tracks of Test records, or even (the by HW proposed) mono tracks of music records (even if azimuth could be more precisely adjusted using Dual pivot).
Or on the contrary, if I ever could succeed that abnormal sonic balance, then, don’t you think that I could probably be sure that the stylus (trying to counterweight the above anomalies) should be everything but vertical to the groove, which would make things even worse?
Closing Part I, it’s more than obvious that in my setup I must immediately increase a/s, engaging mechanical a/s as well, a procedure that I hope to be able to accomplish soon and describe in an upcoming post.
Prime Sign/10"3DR/Finite Element(FE) platform/SOTA's Total Eclipse/Lyra Titan/VPI Ring/WW Silver Eclipse 8 Ph.C/Groove+ SRX MkII Ph. St./Moon 740 Pre/Moon 820 PSU/ATC 100 Active Speakers/AQ Niagara IC/WW Silver Electra AC,FE Ref Rack/RPG Room Treatm.
User avatar
Votan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:59 pm
Location: Greece, Larisa.

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby vienna acoustics » Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:06 am

Hi Votan

Nice seeing you here. We had met in Audio Soul Ultra listening room (during last Athens hifi show) and chatted for a while. I heard later that you had got the Prime Signature (congratulations) and I’m had seen your former turntable.

Thank you for sharing your experience and I am looking forward for your next post. I know from George and Anestis that you are obsessed with the detailed turntable settings.

I am curious to see your findings. In my case with both the 12’’ unipivot and 12’’ Gimbal (I am measuring anti skating in terms of distortion with software and 315Hz sweep to +20 dB) both lemo only twisting and mechanical antiskate can give you low distortion (and equal for both channels results) however when the mechanical antiskating is involved the Intermodulation distortion (measured with 60Hz/7kHz at 4:1 ratio) is getting high, and no matter how I will then adjust the VTA it remains high.

On antiskating distortion measuremt With the lemo only wire method , the distortion I am getting for both channels (is equal ) at about 0.14- 0.16% ( the intermodulation distortion with these settings is 0.98-1.2%) -while the measured distortion using the mechanical antiskating is 0.28-0.34% and the measured intermodulation distortion is 3.8-4.2%
!
vienna acoustics
Senior Member
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:07 pm

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby tony22 » Mon Mar 11, 2019 7:14 am

Votan, I am following your thoughts with interest. Maybe I'm treating this too simply, but isn't a way to set AS to do this - take a real record (not a test record) that is difficult to track, and then set AS until the channel distortion on either side is eliminated, or at least so that both sides sound the same? Then listen to other records to make sure the setting works on other albums? I guess this is a variant of your "By Ear" technique, but in this case it's evaluated by audible distortion on a known (real) record.
Pass XP-20 & XP-17, AVA 600R, Shahinian speakers, PS Audio DMP & DS, Avenger w/mods, 12" Fatboy gimbal + 2nd mount, Benz LPS, VAS & SS carts, Ortofon Quintet Mono, Logitech Touch, Audience and PSA conditioning, PAD and AZ cables.
User avatar
tony22
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1039
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:38 pm

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby Golear » Mon Mar 11, 2019 9:53 am

If you want to set anti-skate via measurement, I think you'd need to make the measurement at the instant the stylus goes through a null points of alignment. Otherwise, the stylus will not be absolutely "centered" in the groove. The zenith would be wrong. This is going to be a major complication, unless there's a test LP with circular tracks at the two null points of alignment.

I don't think you need to be so precise. The anti-skate, like the VTF, is an average setting for the whole LP side, as well as many different LPs. So one other possibility is to average out your test results across the whole LP side, and many other LPs. Alas, there'd be a lot of data to capture.

My feeling is this: I'd get the basic geometry of the mechanical anti-skate right (as I have suggested in this thread) and then vary the distance of the mass on the lower arm from the hub. One can use the SoundSmith's method to get to the ballpark, then make small adjustments by ear. Play many LPs.

If you are going to do the twisted wire, then you can vary the amount of anti-skate force that the twist brings to the arm (somehow). Perhaps the LEMO socket should be mounted on a rotating assembly if some kind, so that the amount of twist can be varied easily.
Golear
Senior Member
 
Posts: 479
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:51 pm

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby Votan » Mon Mar 11, 2019 3:36 pm

vienna acoustics wrote:Hi Votan

Nice seeing you here. We had met in Audio Soul Ultra listening room (during last Athens hifi show) and chatted for a while. I heard later that you had got the Prime Signature (congratulations) and I’m had seen your former turntable.

Thank you for sharing your experience and I am looking forward for your next post. I know from George and Anestis that you are obsessed with the detailed turntable settings.

I am curious to see your findings. In my case with both the 12’’ unipivot and 12’’ Gimbal (I am measuring anti skating in terms of distortion with software and 315Hz sweep to +20 dB) both lemo only twisting and mechanical antiskate can give you low distortion (and equal for both channels results) however when the mechanical antiskating is involved the Intermodulation distortion (measured with 60Hz/7kHz at 4:1 ratio) is getting high, and no matter how I will then adjust the VTA it remains high.

On antiskating distortion measuremt With the lemo only wire method , the distortion I am getting for both channels (is equal ) at about 0.14- 0.16% ( the intermodulation distortion with these settings is 0.98-1.2%) -while the measured distortion using the mechanical antiskating is 0.28-0.34% and the measured intermodulation distortion is 3.8-4.2%

Hi vienna acoustics,
Nice seeing here too and I’m glad that we have already met in 2018 Athens Hi-Fi Show (in VPI listening room) and chatted for (what else?) VPI setups. Thank you and the guys of Audio Soul Ultra as well for your nice comments and for your interest for my findings in my setup.
I must admit that I’m an old school guy in TT setups, not so because I don’t respect relevant test records or computer softwears (I do respect and use them as useful tools), but because especially in that hobby I’ve repeatedly found that experienced ears (not necessarily bat ears) proved repeatedly to be more sensitive and reliable than everything else so far, so for me they must have the leading and decisive role.
In any case, 12’’ tonearms have a much smaller offset angle than the 10’’ of mine, so the skating force (torque in fact) in 12’’ is much less, so only one lemo twisting could be enough for a/s. In my 12’’ good old JMW 12,5 (where mechanical a/s was not provided) I never needed something more for a/s, than to give lemo wire (Discovery) one full turn CW (to pre-load it for a/s) from its relaxed state. But now in my 3DR-10’’, one more full turn CW from its relaxed state is not possible, otherwise (as I described in my post) the wire’s normal arc has a tendency to be heavily deformed.
Prime Sign/10"3DR/Finite Element(FE) platform/SOTA's Total Eclipse/Lyra Titan/VPI Ring/WW Silver Eclipse 8 Ph.C/Groove+ SRX MkII Ph. St./Moon 740 Pre/Moon 820 PSU/ATC 100 Active Speakers/AQ Niagara IC/WW Silver Electra AC,FE Ref Rack/RPG Room Treatm.
User avatar
Votan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:59 pm
Location: Greece, Larisa.

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby Votan » Mon Mar 11, 2019 3:39 pm

tony22 wrote:Votan, I am following your thoughts with interest. Maybe I'm treating this too simply, but isn't a way to set AS to do this - take a real record (not a test record) that is difficult to track, and then set AS until the channel distortion on either side is eliminated, or at least so that both sides sound the same? Then listen to other records to make sure the setting works on other albums? I guess this is a variant of your "By Ear" technique, but in this case it's evaluated by audible distortion on a known (real) record.

Hi tony 22,
Thanks for your comments. And yes, your described way is exact the “By Ear” technique, given that I also use only musical tracks of well known real records (not test records), which should have a decent modulation, but not necessarily to be too much difficult to track.
Prime Sign/10"3DR/Finite Element(FE) platform/SOTA's Total Eclipse/Lyra Titan/VPI Ring/WW Silver Eclipse 8 Ph.C/Groove+ SRX MkII Ph. St./Moon 740 Pre/Moon 820 PSU/ATC 100 Active Speakers/AQ Niagara IC/WW Silver Electra AC,FE Ref Rack/RPG Room Treatm.
User avatar
Votan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:59 pm
Location: Greece, Larisa.

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby Votan » Mon Mar 11, 2019 4:14 pm

Golear wrote:If you want to set anti-skate via measurement, I think you'd need to make the measurement at the instant the stylus goes through a null points of alignment. Otherwise, the stylus will not be absolutely "centered" in the groove. The zenith would be wrong. This is going to be a major complication, unless there's a test LP with circular tracks at the two null points of alignment.

Hi Golear,
Thanks for your comments. If you are referring to the “By Eye” checking described in my posts (suggested by a lot of experts in TT setup and cart manufacturers), this technique doesn’t require to watch if the stylus stays (or not) centered the instant that it tracks in the 2 exact grooves passing from the null points of alignment (I think you mean the cantilever to be exactly tangent to the circumference of the 2 groove circles passing through the 2 null points of alignment).
This technique works even if your cantilever is initially a bit wrongly aligned, because it is based only in the relative change of cantilever’s angle, the instant before vs. the instant after stylus touching the groove (any groove). Namely: The instant that the stylus touches (and constrained in) the groove (any groove), we watch if the cantilever is angled (or not) inwards or outwards relatively to its initial (before touch the groove) orientation (normally 90 degree) to the cart body, not to the groove. To be more explanatory:
1. Lower the stylus onto any groove of the last 1/2 of a spinning musical LP with a decent modulation. This is only because approaching the spindle the skating force increases, as it does in much heavier modulated grooves, so the above phenomenon is much more evident.
2. The moment the needle touches down the groove (any groove), skating force appears opposing the already existing a/s force; both attached somewhere higher in the cart’s body. This very moment look at the stylus from the front with a magnifier and very bright light and (this is very crucial) with one eye in perfect line into the vertical plane passing from the cantilever (the other eye closed) and watch if this very instant, the cantilever gets pulled a tiny bit inward (spindle wise) or pushed a tiny bit outward and remains in this angled position during play.
a. If it is angled outwards, that means that the skating force is too much higher than a/s. This is because stylus is constrained in the groove, but tonearm is pushing inwards due to higher skating force than the opposing a/s force. So we must increase a/s so much as to equalize the skating force, in order cantilever to reach again its initial orientation (normally 90 degree) relatively to cart body.
b. If it’s angled towards the spindle, the anti-skate force is too high, so we must degrease it.
c. If it touches down nicely in the groove and cantilever's vertical plane appears to be constantly at the same exact orientation as before touched down (normally 90 degree angle to the cart body), then a/s is O.K.
Prime Sign/10"3DR/Finite Element(FE) platform/SOTA's Total Eclipse/Lyra Titan/VPI Ring/WW Silver Eclipse 8 Ph.C/Groove+ SRX MkII Ph. St./Moon 740 Pre/Moon 820 PSU/ATC 100 Active Speakers/AQ Niagara IC/WW Silver Electra AC,FE Ref Rack/RPG Room Treatm.
User avatar
Votan
Senior Member
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 4:59 pm
Location: Greece, Larisa.

Re: Modified mechanical anti-skate

Postby Mr_Putty » Mon Mar 11, 2019 4:30 pm

Golear,
I’ve thought about a lemo that could be rotated as well. It could be useful to fine tune a/s setup. As could some extra wire to adjust the length of the loop. My experience is that there will usually be too much a/s from start to finish based on just the (stock) wire, if it’s a smooth loop shape above the arm. That’s why I removed some turns of the wire. I stopped untwisting the wire when I got a tiny amount of outward push on the arm (10.5 inch) at the outer record groove. I can add more a/s with the mechanical device if I need too. The inner a/s with just the wire agrees with the Soundsmith method very nicely. I use a second pivot, but before that I found that my azimuth setting and a/s had no ideal compromise and were in conflict at different places on a record. (Based on trial and error listening to about four records that I had a good feeling for.) Now the VPI creation of the second pivot made perfect sense. It removes the azimuth error caused by the wire mechanics if adjusted correctly. And permits a more reliable a/s setting based on the listeners liking. Of course the gimbal bearing does not need this degree of user tweeking, but that is not what I have. For the a/s expiermenter I suggest you also consider a lubricant on the mechanical moving parts and consider what a different thread material might do to sound. And don’t forget the knot used on the thread. You can secure the thread with one of the round rubber weights, bypassing the loop completely.
Mr_Putty
Senior Member
 
Posts: 462
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 11:44 am

PreviousNext

Return to Support Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

x