Welcome!
Just a few a ground rules first...

Promotion, advertising and link building is not permitted.

If you are keen to learn, get to grips with something with the willing help of one of the net's original musician forums
or possess a genuine willingness to contribute knowledge - you've come to the right place!

Register >

- Close -
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Resolved and unresolved chords in the harmonized scale.

  1. #1
    Did I say that out loud ? joeyd929's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,100

    Resolved and unresolved chords in the harmonized scale.

    Any thoughts on the concept of the harmonized scale only have two tonalities? Resolved or unresolved. Everything either points to the I or the V within this concept. I should add that this is musical fact, so I am not really looking for a debate over the validity of these facts, rather, I am looking for anyone that understands and/or uses this awesome little musical tool. Any1 ???
    Last edited by joeyd929; 03-07-2013 at 02:40 PM. Reason: left something out

  2. #2
    Registered User JonR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Twickenham, UK
    Posts
    4,959
    That's not so much a fact, as a theory, or principle. AFAIK, it's a simplification of Schenkerian analysis, known as the "Ursatz":
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_structure
    http://www.schenkerguide.com/about.php
    - the idea being that music has two "poles", essentially: tonic (resolved) and dominant (unresolved); everything else being some kind of passing stage between the two, or a substitute for one or the other.
    I wouldn't call that two "tonalities", because that's a term reserved for keys ("major" and "minor" are the two tonalities in western music). Two opposing "functions" is more like it, IMO.

    I wouldn't pretend to understand Schenkerian ideas beyond that (even if I've got the simplification right ), but I'm sure I "use" such ideas all the time, as all composers do, intuitively. As I see it, the principle is about something that is automatically present in all tonal music, beneath the level of a composer's consciousness.
    It's a little like asking who uses the concept of modes? A lot of folk and rock musicians do, without understanding anything about the theoretical details of the concept.
    IOW, we all now how "tonic" and "dominant" sound, even if we don't know the terms, and even if we're not musicians. As musicians we know how to use I and V chords, even if we don't know what "I" and "V" mean. We hear their effects in almost any song we learn, right from the beginning. With a song in key of C, we know it doesn't sound right if we stop on a G; we have to go back to C to make it sound "finished". That's how much that "grammar" of music is ingrained in our subconscious.

  3. #3
    Did I say that out loud ? joeyd929's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by JonR View Post
    That's not so much a fact, as a theory, or principle. AFAIK, it's a simplification of Schenkerian analysis, known as the "Ursatz":
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_structure
    http://www.schenkerguide.com/about.php
    - the idea being that music has two "poles", essentially: tonic (resolved) and dominant (unresolved); everything else being some kind of passing stage between the two, or a substitute for one or the other.
    I wouldn't call that two "tonalities", because that's a term reserved for keys ("major" and "minor" are the two tonalities in western music). Two opposing "functions" is more like it, IMO.

    I wouldn't pretend to understand Schenkerian ideas beyond that (even if I've got the simplification right ), but I'm sure I "use" such ideas all the time, as all composers do, intuitively. As I see it, the principle is about something that is automatically present in all tonal music, beneath the level of a composer's consciousness.
    It's a little like asking who uses the concept of modes? A lot of folk and rock musicians do, without understanding anything about the theoretical details of the concept.
    IOW, we all now how "tonic" and "dominant" sound, even if we don't know the terms, and even if we're not musicians. As musicians we know how to use I and V chords, even if we don't know what "I" and "V" mean. We hear their effects in almost any song we learn, right from the beginning. With a song in key of C, we know it doesn't sound right if we stop on a G; we have to go back to C to make it sound "finished". That's how much that "grammar" of music is ingrained in our subconscious.
    The concept is meant to be utilized as another form of chord substitution. Simply put, as we all know, the I III and VI are all considered C (using C scale to illustrate) The III is CMajor9 and the VI is CMajor6.

    The concept explores the idea that the II IV and VII can be viable substitutions for the V chord.

    The II is DFAC the IV is FACE and the VII is BDFA

    Against the V chord, Dminor7 can be viewed as G9sus4 and the FMajor7 can be subbed for G13sus4, while the VII is obviously a G9 chord. I say suspended because I follow the rule that an 11 chord has a #11 within the dominant chord. So I would use these as suspended chords.

    The entire concept is guided by the fact that the II IV V and VII all have F in them. F against C is unresolved if you think about it. So, in all reality, a I VI II V chord progression can produce some interesting bass lines if you juggle the numbers...The 1 6 2 5 progression would follow this pattern. I is resolved VI is resolved II is unresolved and V is unresolved.

    As long as the progression follows this pattern, (resolved,resolved, unresolved, unresolved) you can play the II IV V and VII interchangeable, just as the I III and VI can be used interchangeable.

    So a I VI II V an virtually be a III VI VII V or perhaps a VI III IV VII. I did the math on spreadsheet and there are 72 possible combinations of the 1 6 2 5 progression with this logic. The main place this can be a useful tool is when arranging melody and chords because it gives the opportunity to find more possibilities with the required melody note on top but it can also be great as chord subs for progressions. As I said, the bass lines can produce some interesting movement.

    Some sound better than others but with 72 combinations of "resolved resolved unresolved unresolved" it has endless possibilities if you factor in all the possible chord inversions available. The late great Linc Chamberland used this concept. Anyway, I posted the 72 combinations of 1 6 2 5 here. This can also be used for the II V I progression as well. There are 36 combinations for the II V I. Here are the 72 combinations of 1 6 2 5 that follow the "R R U U" logic.

    1 6 2 5 6 1 2 5 3 6 2 5 6 3 2 5 1 3 2 5 3 1 2 5
    1 6 5 2 6 1 5 2 3 6 5 2 6 3 5 2 1 3 5 2 3 1 5 2
    1 6 2 7 6 1 2 7 3 6 2 7 6 3 2 7 1 3 2 7 3 1 2 7
    1 6 7 2 6 1 7 2 3 6 7 2 6 3 7 2 1 3 7 2 3 1 7 2
    1 6 2 4 6 1 2 4 3 6 2 4 6 3 2 4 1 3 2 4 3 1 2 4
    1 6 4 2 6 1 4 2 3 6 4 2 6 3 4 2 1 3 4 2 3 1 4 2
    1 6 4 5 6 1 4 5 3 6 4 5 6 3 4 5 1 3 4 5 3 1 4 5
    1 6 5 4 6 1 5 4 3 6 5 4 6 3 5 4 1 3 5 4 3 1 5 4
    1 6 5 7 6 1 5 7 3 6 5 7 6 3 5 7 1 3 5 7 3 1 5 7
    1 6 7 5 6 1 7 5 3 6 7 5 6 3 7 5 1 3 7 5 3 1 7 5
    1 6 4 7 6 1 4 7 3 6 4 7 6 3 4 7 1 3 4 7 3 1 4 7
    1 6 7 4 6 1 7 4 3 6 7 4 6 3 7 4 1 3 7 4 3 1 7 4
    Last edited by joeyd929; 03-07-2013 at 05:45 PM.

  4. #4
    Registered User Color of Music's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    417
    Just to add:

    He didn't mention subs (not that it was necessary), but not only is it the I and V (the "Matriarch" relationship, from Classical onwards - in FH only) - meaning that the in-between chords aren't necessarily in-between - ii and even IV most certainly both VIIs - have a V sound (depending on context, of course), but even without it:

    ii-V-I: Dm7-G7-CMaj7; IV-V-I (especially, if the fifth scale degree is the bass note) F(/G)-G7-CMaj7, but IV by itself: F-G7-CMaj7; and lastly another V obviously: G13sus-G13b9-CMaj7 = V-V-I (Notice, F/G (IV/V =/= V/IV a SD) = G9sus (V) as mentioned above). And as he said, it's intuitive. And there are songs that don't end on I. Train's Something More: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWIrE6vYYKg 3:34- ends on iv (Fm), but you'll work it out to where it ends on I (C). Sometimes, I think it's intentional - on the composer's part as if to say: "Tell me where I'm going." Then, perhaps, that when you get the curve ball (Deceptive/Half Cadence, usually in the middle of a song) As did the Train tune. Yet, it wasn't that hard to get there (although the previous times we heard I-iv-I, the second I ended up being D; sounding like it was ping-ponging between two keys, but the IV was the determining factor (G = IV in D, but also V in C)

    I know you (OP) didn't ask for a theoretical explanation, but I hope this helps you understand why the I/V relationship is very essential regarding music - even with tunes/genres/styles that are more liberal regarding its usage. Everything from The Circle of Fifths/Fourths (regarding keys/"diatonic" progressions) to Cadences. I think I dubbed these as the "Parent chords," because that's how strong they are. Leave I, you wanna go back to it. How? Bring in the V or something like it (ii/IV/VII/bVII). (ii-I, IV-(iv)-I, VII-I, bVII-I, V-V-I (Btw, one VII is diminished (major keys) while the other is major (minor keys)

    As JonR says: it's all apart of understanding the language which can be a burden to some since it's very broad, yet very specific. Like people in the production field, since many just want their tracks to sound good (or what they think sounds good to them). Of course, one shouldn't ignore the "If it sounds good, it is good," statement; however, what you think sounds good, may actually sound bad. (And most often, it's not realized until one comes back with fresh ears) And even the ones to try to simplify it (like JonR and myself) know that it's impossible!

    Lastly, given his last sentence: this is also why it's stressed ad nauseum to listen to music. If it's ear-training, or just trying to grasp why this chord was used instead of that one, why this riff sounds like it does, etc, but especially the ear-training part since this is how music gets into our subconscious! (ie: How are we able to hum tunes without hearing them? (whether we can carry a tune or not? IOW, "I can't get this song outta my head!")

  5. #5
    Did I say that out loud ? joeyd929's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Color of Music View Post
    Just to add:

    He didn't mention subs (not that it was necessary), but not only is it the I and V (the "Matriarch" relationship, from Classical onwards - in FH only) - meaning that the in-between chords aren't necessarily in-between - ii and even IV most certainly both VIIs - have a V sound (depending on context, of course), but even without it:

    ii-V-I: Dm7-G7-CMaj7; IV-V-I (especially, if the fifth scale degree is the bass note) F(/G)-G7-CMaj7, but IV by itself: F-G7-CMaj7; and lastly another V obviously: G13sus-G13b9-CMaj7 = V-V-I (Notice, F/G (IV/V =/= V/IV a SD) = G9sus (V) as mentioned above). And as he said, it's intuitive. And there are songs that don't end on I. Train's Something More: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWIrE6vYYKg 3:34- ends on iv (Fm), but you'll work it out to where it ends on I (C). Sometimes, I think it's intentional - on the composer's part as if to say: "Tell me where I'm going." Then, perhaps, that when you get the curve ball (Deceptive/Half Cadence, usually in the middle of a song) As did the Train tune. Yet, it wasn't that hard to get there (although the previous times we heard I-iv-I, the second I ended up being D; sounding like it was ping-ponging between two keys, but the IV was the determining factor (G = IV in D, but also V in C)

    I know you (OP) didn't ask for a theoretical explanation, but I hope this helps you understand why the I/V relationship is very essential regarding music - even with tunes/genres/styles that are more liberal regarding its usage. Everything from The Circle of Fifths/Fourths (regarding keys/"diatonic" progressions) to Cadences. I think I dubbed these as the "Parent chords," because that's how strong they are. Leave I, you wanna go back to it. How? Bring in the V or something like it (ii/IV/VII/bVII). (ii-I, IV-(iv)-I, VII-I, bVII-I, V-V-I (Btw, one VII is diminished (major keys) while the other is major (minor keys)

    As JonR says: it's all apart of understanding the language which can be a burden to some since it's very broad, yet very specific. Like people in the production field, since many just want their tracks to sound good (or what they think sounds good to them). Of course, one shouldn't ignore the "If it sounds good, it is good," statement; however, what you think sounds good, may actually sound bad. (And most often, it's not realized until one comes back with fresh ears) And even the ones to try to simplify it (like JonR and myself) know that it's impossible!

    Lastly, given his last sentence: this is also why it's stressed ad nauseum to listen to music. If it's ear-training, or just trying to grasp why this chord was used instead of that one, why this riff sounds like it does, etc, but especially the ear-training part since this is how music gets into our subconscious! (ie: How are we able to hum tunes without hearing them? (whether we can carry a tune or not? IOW, "I can't get this song outta my head!")
    I am merely suggesting that these are just another set of options to use, here is an excerpt from the Linc Chamberland article explaining this concept in better detail, which I may not have done... Here is the quote..

    ******************* To sum this up we could say that the Ionian scale contains two different sounds sound with Fs and sound without Fs. I like to call the CMaj7, Emi7, Ami7 (1,3,6 chords) Resolved and the Dmi7, FMaj7, G7 Bmi7b5 (2,4,5,7) Unresolved. Remember that Resolved and Unresolved are just words to differentiate between the sounds. We could use the words black and orange. If the 4 of key (F tone in the key of C) is being played it is Unresolved no matter which other tones in the key are being played with it. If the 4 is not being played, itís a Resolved. This means our scale only has two sounds out of the 7 chords. Example Progressions: Key of G
    Ami7,D7,GMaj7 (2,5,1) (2 bars of Unresolved and 1 bar or Resolved) has the same function as D7,CMaj7,Bmi7 (5,4,3) or Ami,F#mi7b5,Emi7 (2,7,6) or CMaj7,D7,GMaj7 (4,5,1) """end quote ******************

  6. #6
    Registered User Color of Music's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    417
    Believe you me, I got it and looking at your grid, I extracted the (semi) Circle progression (4-b7(7),-3-6-2-5-1) I bet you didn't notice! I guess my post was more about relationships in general (as that is what you asked about) and substitutions bring in a bigger scope; however, the matriarch relationship remains or at least the subconscious effort to more often than not end on I.

  7. #7
    Did I say that out loud ? joeyd929's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Color of Music View Post
    Believe you me, I got it and looking at your grid, I extracted the (semi) Circle progression (4-b7(7),-3-6-2-5-1) I bet you didn't notice! I guess my post was more about relationships in general (as that is what you asked about) and substitutions bring in a bigger scope; however, the matriarch relationship remains or at least the subconscious effort to more often than not end on I.
    Exactly however, III and VI are still I

  8. #8
    Registered User Color of Music's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyd929 View Post
    Exactly however, III and VI are still I
    No! That are related to I; that's why they can substitute for each other. Like ii/IV and V and both VIIs. I get what you mean though.

    Em =/= C although CM7 and CM9 are very close to Em and Em7. This is the reason you can play an Em chord in place of C because it still has the C sound, but again it's better to have it the C extended. In the case where you can use iii in place of the extended I is when walking to the IV. C-Em-F-G7 (I-iii-IV-V). As you can see, E is the leading tone in the F Major scale (essentially, VII-I in that sense). However, that's just for those two isolated chords (Em-F); it's different when look at it in relation to C (though the degrees "appear" to be the same: I-iii-IV =/= [I] VII(minor)-I.

    You're probably speaking more along the lines of common tones (which is the beginner method of understanding relationships - FH) which is the basis of substitutions. (ie: this is why I/vi/iii (with iii - factors to be aware of: extended Is, what's the melody doing) and ii/IV and V/vii + bVII. (And as we both have said and done: ii/IV/V and both VIIs (half dims included - ii and vii) can be lumped together - essentially, giving four variations of the dominant function.

    Even coming from the angle of CTs, it's still about relationships. I can see where speaking about inversions can trip people up. Half-dims (6/5) = minor added sixths while m7s (6/5) = added major sixths. However, depending on context, neither is true. IOW, I can still call a C6 an Am7, but I need to make note or hope the performer knows I mean the appropriate inversion. However, I can't call an Am7 a C6 even if I have the C6 voiced like an Am7. They aren't symmetrical.

    I can however, do this with a diminished chord and these (along with augmented chords) are trouble! Many mistake the bb7 as 6. This is incorrect despite it sounding like 6. (ie: Cdim7 = C-Eb-Gb-Bbb - not - C-Eb-Gb-A because if we put the major sixth (C-A) on the bottom, we get a half-dim (as mentioned above) - A-C-Eb-Gb.

    But getting back to the initial point: other than the aug/dim triads and dim7, just because they're related doesn't mean they're the same. (ie: Dm7 =/= F6; it's similar - same notes, shares the function, but two different chords) Akin, to modes being totally distinctive from one another despite using the same seven notes - ie: Dorian =/= an "inversion" of Locrian; despite m7b5 (6/5) ending up a m6: B-D-F-A/D-F-A-B - D to D vs. B to B. (HM - ii/vii sharing the dominant function)

    In conclusion, it's very easy to fall into the common tone trap, but doing so tends to fog one's vision regarding relationships think that every relationship will always work out. they will if you consider the other factor in most cases, but there are other times when they won't. I'm saying just be aware of that - even if it's just: "This note chord doesn't sound good, so I won't use it." However, that certainly puts you in the trap of "throwing things at the wall until something sticks!" The more endowed you become on this subject, this less you should be doing that. I didn't say to totally abandon it, but this is like improvising in front of an audience! Hopefully, you do know what you're doing, or if you don't fake it (clearly, I do not advise this); however, there are people who will be able to tell if you are faking it!

  9. #9
    Did I say that out loud ? joeyd929's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Color of Music View Post
    No! That are related to I; that's why they can substitute for each other. Like ii/IV and V and both VIIs. I get what you mean though.
    They are related to the I because they ARE the I. Eminor7 is the same as CMajor9 and Aminor7 is CMajor6. Still all I. It is a matter of perspective I guess. Eminor7 is EGBD. CMajor 9 is CEGBD. Aminor7 is ACEG. CMajor6 is CEGA. It is about common tones I guess but the fact of the matter is Eminor7 is the same as CMajor9 and Aminor7 is the same as CMajor6. It is a much more simplified way of thinking about it.

    Just as the II IV and VII are all the same as the V chord. All music resolves from the V to the I. (I IV V or I VI II V or II V I) Always the V to the I. Even Classical music follows this. After years of studying all angles of chord/scale relationships, this seems, at least to me, to be the most practical way of approaching chords, especially for the purpose of improvising.

    I try to keep it simple....Major, minor, and dominant. Three types of chord triads....Augmented and diminished are considered dominant. Anything added to these chord triads are simply color tones when you go beyond the 7th, or flatted 7th. If I see a chord listed as C7#5b9#11, it is still simply a C dominant chord...1 3 5 b7 and whatever additional colors are added after that..

    As far as diminished chords, it is just a sub for a 7b9 chord, heck, it is a 7b9 chord... I am convinced that the harmonized scale has two different tonalities...Resolved and unresolved.... (think Csus to CMajor) As the article indicated...In C for this point....Chords with F leading to chords without F. The II V I progression is "Unresolved" to "Unresolved" to "Resolved".

  10. #10
    Registered User Color of Music's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    417
    It's true that longer progressions lead to more tension chord (aka taking the scenic route), but with the case of Circle Progressions - you have a series of UR movements; however, that is in isolation. Yet, when you look at the CP as a whole, all the stuff in-between is U mean that when looked at from this POV, you're taking the scenic route.

    Secondary Dominants are a more than applicable example. C-A7-Dm. Without the A7 (V/ii), you simply have I-ii (if in the context of C major), but also VII-i (in the context of D minor), and/or bVII (in the context of D major) In Cm, however, that A turns into a half-dim (v/ii - clarify this) - Cm-Am7b5-Dm7b5-G7 (i-v/ii-ii-V).

    But again, it depends on what angle: As a whole or in isolation because you do get differences with each view - no matter how obvious or subtle. Take the Cm progression: RUUU, but OTOH, R-U-R (because of the chord I just left, but U because of where I'm going - ii-V) and clearly the cadence UR (V-I).

    Why am I on this chord? Where was I? Where am I going? Those are the questions when dealing with tension and resolution (regardless if color (diatonic/altered tones) are used and they become part of the question when answering. Why'd the b5(#11) move to 5? Why'd the b9 move to 1 or 9?

    So, it's not just functions, but the desired movement, too. Essentially, if I wanna go to a friend's house - there are many routes I can take; however, to get there the fastest, I'll usually find one or two paths and stick with them unless I take the scenic route. (I ---> V ---> I) However, there are all the possible combinations in-between still leading from Point A to B.

    Beginners stick with the usual path (I-IV-V-I) as do endowed musicians and composers, (I-IV-V-I, but with subs and prolongation) but all of us try to end up in the same place most of the time - even if we don't on purpose!

  11. #11
    Registered User JonR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Twickenham, UK
    Posts
    4,959
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyd929 View Post
    The concept is meant to be utilized as another form of chord substitution. Simply put, as we all know, the I III and VI are all considered C (using C scale to illustrate) The III is CMajor9 and the VI is CMajor6.

    The concept explores the idea that the II IV and VII can be viable substitutions for the V chord.

    The II is DFAC the IV is FACE and the VII is BDFA

    Against the V chord, Dminor7 can be viewed as G9sus4 and the FMajor7 can be subbed for G13sus4, while the VII is obviously a G9 chord. I say suspended because I follow the rule that an 11 chord has a #11 within the dominant chord. So I would use these as suspended chords.

    The entire concept is guided by the fact that the II IV V and VII all have F in them. F against C is unresolved if you think about it.
    Understood. The 4th is the whole source of the instability of the major key, the one note that is dissonant against the tonic triad.
    IMO, the above all makes good sense.
    I guess some would object to lumping subdominant and dominant functions together, but I've always thought there's a lot of overlap there, at least when you extend the chords, as you're saying.
    It's very common in modern pop, rock and jazz for cadences to mix perfect and plagal cadences by using V7sus chords of various kind, which obviously blur the boundary between V and IV chords.
    Quote Originally Posted by joeyd929 View Post
    So, in all reality, a I VI II V chord progression can produce some interesting bass lines if you juggle the numbers...The 1 6 2 5 progression would follow this pattern. I is resolved VI is resolved II is unresolved and V is unresolved.
    Yes, that's pretty conventional jazz practice, to treat I-vi as essentially one thing ("tonic") and ii-V as essentially another thing ("dominant").

  12. #12
    Did I say that out loud ? joeyd929's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by JonR View Post
    I guess some would object to lumping subdominant and dominant functions together, but I've always thought there's a lot of overlap there, at least when you extend the chords, as you're saying.
    Yeah, as far as "lumping" sub dominant and dominant functions, all I can say is that this would be just another example of how sometimes knowledge can interfere with musical creativity. My sister in-law is a classically trained musician and one thing I noticed about her and many other "trained" musicians is that they let this knowledge become a roadblock of sorts. "You can't do that" does not exist in my musical vocabulary.

    I think some of the best musicians play the way they do because nobody ever told them that they could not. Nothing stifles creativity more than being taught that you can not do something. If a bass player is hitting a G note, other than ones own conscience, there is really nothing stopping a person from using Dminor7 or FMajor7 to produce the 9th suspended or 13th suspended. Conscience is a good thing, when taken in moderation.

    What it really comes down to is this. "do you like the way it sounds" If you do like the way it sounds, then musical logic or theory and it's rules should not stop someone from playing a particular thing.

Similar Threads

  1. Harmonized scale
    By joeyd929 in forum Music Theory
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-01-2008, 03:34 PM
  2. Harmonized scale
    By joeyd929 in forum Music Theory
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-30-2007, 11:02 PM
  3. Harmonizing a Scale and Chords involved in a Scale
    By Relaxation in forum Guitar Technique
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-18-2007, 10:11 PM
  4. harmonized mior scale
    By aaeolean in forum Getting Started
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-06-2004, 05:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •