A good friend of mine just stopped through. She's hyper intelligent and way hooked on didj. While she was here she was telling me she wanted to work on computer modeling to create specs for the perfect didj which could then be replicated with machines using CNC technology. I hear this kinda talk so much and I see so many different approaches to crafting. I think that if someone has a deep enough relationship to didge that the guidance in building them will be intuitive rather than scientific modeling but whatever, a thousand monks a thousand religions right? My response to her rather than trying to change her concept or method was to encourage her that in order to scientificly create the perfect didj that it was first necessary to determine what is the perfect note.
-
Re: the perfect didj
Fri, December 7, 2007 - 5:00 PMa 440 dude...just kidding. honestly our whole system is based on arbitary frequencies...from what i understand any ways.. and a 440 is the most modern representation of that. by arbitrary i mean there is no reall conection or relation to some universal fundemental, organic, celctial natural...real. i always like the idea of a didj tuned to some harmonic of mars the moon or earth......perhaps the perfect key does not flash the light green on our chromatic tuners computers....
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sat, December 8, 2007 - 12:59 AMHey Chad, send your friend my contact info on here on something. I've done a *lot* of thinking about exactly the same thing - computer modeling and how to produce an instrument based on that model. I've done some work on the computer modeling aspect of it, and a lot of thinking about the production aspect of it. Even looking into buying a CNC mill and/or lathe.. but I haven't yet. In any case, It sounds like we're right on the same page - it would be interesting to chat with her on the subject :) -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sat, December 8, 2007 - 2:17 PMHmm. Computer modeling is an interesting idea but didgeridoos will be what they are. It's exciting to try a didge you've never played before and find out what it can do and where it's coming from and what it's telling you. Seems like computer modeling would take that away. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sun, December 9, 2007 - 12:25 AMUnfortunately, I'm cursed with the desire to try and understand how things work. Why does a particular didge have a certain attribute? Could you make a didge with a certain combinations of attributes? What kinds of trade-off have to be made to get certain characteristics? etc.. Plus, the fact that I'm a programmer doesn't help much. It's a curse, I tell you :).
On a less facetious note, I do understand what you're saying. One of the interesting aspects of didgeridoos is how different one instrument can be from another, and how certain didges "speak" to different people, and even how they can speak differently to different people. But that's exactly what piques my scientific curiousity. What is it that makes those didges so much different than each other?
I don't see how investigating the didgeridoo in a scientific manner could be a bad thing. Modeling a didge in a computer will never compare with picking up a didge and playing it, obviously. But understanding the principles behind it would give a didge builder a very powerful tool to allow them to build didgeridoos with specific characteristics.
I expect most didge makers develop a kind of "intuitive sense" as to how to design/build a didge with certain characteristics. But there are two problems. First, is that even with an "intuitive sense", it's still an in-exact science, because the underlying physical phenomenon isn't totally understood. Second, I expect this "intuitive sense" takes a lot of time, and a lot of trial and error to develop.
Note, I have nothing but respect for didgeridoo makers who have developed the skill to design a didge with certain characteristics. I am in no way belittling their accomplishment. Personally? I don't have even close to the amount of knowledge that most didge builders have about designing didges. But being the science type that I am, my approach to gaining that type of knowledge is a very scientific approach. And being a programmer.. well, computer modeling is right up my alley.
"different strokes for different folks" seems to sum it up well :). Everyone does things differently. I am drawn towards the scientific approach to understanding the physical properties of didges. That's who I am. I respect that not everyone has that mindset. Heck, I'm glad not everyone has that mindset. We need diversity, not lots of little clones who all think alike. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sun, December 9, 2007 - 10:47 AM
at this piont there isn't cnc technology that can mill long tubes, you would have to peice small peices together and unfortanatly the robotic arms that are talented enough to do this presicion, perfect glueing are very expensive...so you'll have to sell allot of hand crafted tubes first. my projection would be that in 185 years of selling hand crafted didjeridoo in north america you could save up enough to expand operation into a completly robotic sytem. shit by then we will even have robots to play them for us. fucking cool. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sun, December 9, 2007 - 11:38 AMThe CNC aspect, for me at least, is a way to precision build instruments for research purposes. It would obviously have to be made of smaller pieces, and it would involve a lot of "hand" work still. It wouldn't be a practical way of producing them for sale.
You can go about it the other way also, which may be easier. You could use a CNC lathe to shape some wood to the bore profile that you want, and then split the shaped bar of wood, and use it as a positive template for a fiberglass composite. It would still have to be made up of smaller pieces, of course. The only problem is that the "cheap" hobbyist CNC lathes that you can get for <$1000 aren't big enough to do a reasonably sized bell for the didge. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Mon, May 19, 2008 - 6:00 AMYou don't need your own CNC machine... there are plenty of jobbers out there who will do it on contract. All you need is a CAD file with the shape of the half-didjs. Glueing and coating will still be by hand.
I want to do this really for real!
Joy -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Mon, May 19, 2008 - 9:42 PMHi Joy, and all,
I have written about 3 essay posts for this topic, but never posted them. Go figure, here is another attempt.
This is actually a very deep and important subject. HuMan and his/her relationship with machines.
Do you know that people fought and died to try to prevent automatic looms and cotton machines and lotsa other machines at the turn of the century?
Fought and died for the right to work in a stinking dust filled killer enviroment with back breaking labor.
Would you do the same today?
Was this progess?
Do you grow your own cotton and pick the seeds and comb the fiber and spin and weave and knit and sew your own?
What about the printing press?
Grow, dry, pickle and preserve your own food?
My point is that some automation has been in fact been good for mankind, and in fact has helped elevate civilization to the point where even the common folk have the time to learn to read and recreate, and consider phiisophical questions such as these......
From a different perspective, what are didgeridoo?
I would propose that they are musicall instruments, and as such I consider them to be art forms.
And I believe art from a human origin can only be hand made.
So what is hand made?
Certainly, such fine split and hollow instruments as we have played are hand made. Or are they?
A chainsaw is usually used to cut the log.
An electric angle grinder is used to shape the wood, sanders and bandsaws and glue and sealers and all sorts of machines and products of machines are used to create the final "hand crafted" instrument.
Frankly, I love to make didjes, but as I get older, it gets harder on my back to bend over that log with the grinder........ maybe if I had something to hold the grinder for me? Maybe a remote control? Would that still be hand made?
Instinctivly I reject a CNC made didj, but I accept a grinder machine that is human controlled.
A bit of a quandry heh?
Just food for thought, I'd really love to hear more discussion of this.
peace and respect,
robert
-
-
Re: the perfect didj
Tue, May 20, 2008 - 8:43 AMif tool usage of any sort makes something not art, and a paintbrush is a tool, then only finger painting is real art. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: the perfect didj
Tue, May 20, 2008 - 9:56 AMGood point Chad.
I started wondering, "What is the generally accepted definition of Art"?
From Wikki:
"Generally art is a (product of) human activity, made with the intention of stimulating the human senses as well as the human mind; by transmitting emotions and/or ideas. Beyond this description, there is no general agreed-upon definition of art. Art is also able to illustrate abstract thought and its expressions can elicit previously hidden emotions in its audience."
So it would seem that man can use a machine to create art. Actually I can accept a CNC machine being just a tool to create art sculture, why not a didj?
What happens if 100 copies of that didj are created by the machine? Is it no longer art because it's no longer unique? Is that why we want handmade, one of a kind sticks, each with it's own imperfections?
Like casting a bronze statue and the mold is broken?
HHhmmm.... need to think........ -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Tue, May 20, 2008 - 11:47 AMI think one of the keys in the definition is the use of the word intention.
What is the maker's intention in creating a didge? Are they trying to make a functional instrument with the appearance only being a secondary concern? Or are they making the didge with the intention of it "stimulating the human senses"? Personally, I don't consider the didges that I create to be pieces of art.. the functionality of the didges that I make is paramount - the appearance is a secondary concern.
The tools used are irrelevant, IMO. Even with CNC, a human still has to design whatever is being produced.. So what was that human intention when creating the design?
In response to your comment about uniqueness... What if 100 art prints are made from an original painting? Does that make the original painting "not art"? What about the prints? Are they art?
Or what if an artist creates multiple copies of a painting (their own painting, not someone else's)? Are they not art because they're not unique?
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: the perfect didj
Tue, May 20, 2008 - 12:46 PMIn some ways fingers, hands, etc. ARE tools.
In custom knifemaking, there has been discussion of what determines "hand made", "custom made", and "bench made". There will probably never be an absolute definition when opinions define things, but here is what most agreed with.
"Hand Made" is using no ELECTRIC tools
"Custom Made" is basically anything goes as far as production is concerned
"Bench Made" is something in between (to be defined by whoever claims that's what it is) :-)
Probably best to just state what things are and forget labels!
Allan
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sun, December 9, 2007 - 12:02 PMkind of an ironic topic
the "imperfections" in a didg are what give it character....to me anyway
I tried a Hall Crystal didg many years ago (made of glass)......it was too "perfect"......for me
I think what's perfect for one person could be less so for someone else
my imperfect 2 cents worth..... -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sun, December 9, 2007 - 3:17 PMIt's only a matter of time when split hollows can be mass produced in China anyway. Then you can but a didge at walmart for $50, just like cheap Korean guitars. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sun, December 9, 2007 - 5:54 PMI can go to a mall 10 minutes from my house and buy a $35 teak didge that was made in Indonesia or some such. And they sound exactly like a $35 didge. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Mon, May 19, 2008 - 10:38 PMBen, remember that whenever you purchase something, you are saying "Yeah, cool, do this".
Buying a Bali didj you are casting your lot with that industry. You will have become a part of everything they are.
It's not just about your out of pocket expense.
I'm thinking there may be other options you might want to explore.
Just my perspective ya know.......no offense intended....
peace,
robert -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Tue, May 20, 2008 - 8:46 AMthank you for pointing this out Robert. I always say that your most effective voting is every penny you spend. I think of it as investing in the world that we're creating.
-
Re: the perfect didj
Tue, May 20, 2008 - 9:59 AMI think you missed my point :D
I have seen and played these $35 teak didgeridoos at the mall, and they sound and play like a $35 teak didgeridoo (aka crap). My point (in a roundabout fashion) is that you get what you pay for. If someone is "mass producing" didgeridoos, and can sell them for $50, then the didge either sucks (i.e. the crappy teakwoods at the mall), or it is exactly like every other didge of that "model" (i.e. created using CNC or mold techniques). Even if it was a good player, something is lost if there are 100s of other didges out there that are exactly like yours.
-
-
-
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sun, December 9, 2007 - 5:32 PM>I tried a Hall Crystal didg many years ago (made of glass)......it was too "perfect"......for me
Did you consider that it might have been the shape of the bore that gave it a boring sound, rather than the fact that it was "perfect"? Aren't those didges mostly cylindrical, with a bit of a flare at the end? That would indeed make for a fairly boring didge. Plain cylindrical bores in general don't give an interesting sound. But that's because of the shape of the bore, not because the bore is "perfect", or because of the material the instrument is made of. Have you ever played a bad euc didge? (I'm assuming the answer is "yes"). Did you judge all euc didges based on that single bad example of one?
There will always be a place for termite hollowed didges. It's just not possible to get that amount of intricate bore detail manually. They do have a distinct sound that you can't get with any other type of didge construction.
>I think what's perfect for one person could be less so for someone else
Definitely. I would go so far to say that there is no "perfect" didge for anyone. The concept of "perfect" doesn't make much sense when you are talking about something that is subjective and aesthetic. Being subjective, different people will like different didges more or less. Being aesthetic, there is no absolute "perfect". Could you ever say that a certain painting was "perfectly beautiful"? The end goal isn't to make a perfect didge that everyone likes. It's the ability to make a didge that *one* person likes.
The computer modeling and CNC aspect of it is purely for "scientific investigation" - to be able to build a bore to precise dimensions, so you can do some mathematical calculations, to be able to understand how the shape of the bore affects how it plays.
For example, say you had a plain piece of PVC, and you somehow put a "bulge" of a certain size in the middle of it. In comparison with the plain piece of PVC, how would the altered didge compare? How is the pitch affected? The pitch of the toots? Would the toots be easier or harder to play? Would it have more or less backpressure? Would the vocals be more muffled or come through clearer?
That's a bit of a simplistic example, because the actual bores would be more complex than just a pvc pipe with a bulge, but that's the general type of question that I want to investigate. That type of knowledge can then be applied to any type of didge construction, regardless of the construction technique or material. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sun, December 9, 2007 - 5:47 PMWow. Two essay length posts in a single topic. People are going to think I'm obsessed or something :). This is really only a minor side-project for me. Something that I have thought about a lot, and really like the idea of, but is not anything that I've done a whole lot with (yet). I may, at some point, but right now, It's mostly only an idea rattling around in my head.
I guess it just irks me when people don't see value in the scientific process - or in understanding the whys and hows of didge design.
-
-
Re: the perfect didj
Mon, December 10, 2007 - 6:06 AMWell, the CNC part may be a little overkill IMO. I do like the idea of computer modeling used to map say the infamous "singing didge" then making this available as cardboard or wooden disc templates like shown in the Didgeridoo Phenomenon book.
Allan -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Mon, December 10, 2007 - 12:40 PMYeah, you don't absolutely have to use CNC. The German guys demonstrated that you could do it manually. But I think CNC would be less work (although still quite a bit). Plus, CNC is funner *grin*. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Mon, December 10, 2007 - 11:03 PMIf I saw the picture of the theoretical bulge I could give you approximate answers to all of the questions you listed there. Some of that is from having tuned over 300 didges but I'd say I really started developing my deeper understanding of didge largely from getting together with a lot of other didge players and seeing and handling their didjeridu. I remember that at the first JT Didgefest people would go around complimenting crafters with acknowledgements of "nice didge" but then that second year it was the more common "nice mouthpice" that really seemed to herald a new level of awareness. Simply playing more instruments and being mindfull of their characteristics will build a real knowledge that may rival the 'virtual intimacy' of didj comprehension available through hypothethic modeling via computer. I dunno man. One of these things is not like the other. But both have their place. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Tue, December 11, 2007 - 5:25 PMi think the perfect didj would clean my house for me, sweep up my shop, change the oil in my truck after it converted it to run on water, it would replace my expensive tellephone that zaps with harmful waves and give me ulimited free calls to any where in the universe, all the while radiating me and the folks i'm communicating to with positive waves... it pour out rice and vegitarian chilli on comand, it would look cool, and smell great, it would make all my neighbors happy and healthy, and of course it would clean up the environment and bring about world peace. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Tue, December 11, 2007 - 6:21 PMAnd it would still be cheaper then a didjshop!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: the perfect didj
Wed, December 12, 2007 - 9:09 PMi am the friend chad talks about... i'm up here at matty's place right now...
it seems if you play one of mattys or chads or tylers didjs it'll be perfect enough...
the software ive heard about is still fairly crude... what's out there doesn't deal with bends or twists, or the acoustics of the material. each vocal tract is different, as is each playing style.
a cnc machine is not needed ... as long as i can make hollow conical segments i can make an approximation of certain ideal functions. I posit that certain mathematical functions for didj shapes will produce interesting sounds. and i might be happy to see the golden ratio pop out somewhere in the solution. but maybe a cnc is the best... i saw the way they make baseball bats on tv and it was awful fast. it's clear it has to be accurate to a millimeter or less, and account for any coatings on the inside
there are iterative ways to improve, back-solving for certain characteristics ... artificial evolution of images is something ive experimented with in the past... we can breed our didjs on a virtual ranch
this is a 'mass customization' approach-- rather than making a mold and copies of a single didj, we can make a multiplicity of different experimental didjs. they can only be evaluated by actually being played, so there must be a way to manifest them into physical reality. some of them will be extraordinary and will become the parents and grandparents of even more remakable designs. automated manufacturing will save an enormous amount of labor, and the best designs can be cloned.
this philosophy takes didj making further into the scientific realm, but in no way does it replace hand crafted didjs. like an angle grinder a computer is just another tool in the hands of great artisans -- it is my honor to play didjs that have been informed by the experience of millenia
joy -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Wed, December 12, 2007 - 9:19 PMoops... sorry matty i spoofed you...
------------------------
i am the friend chad talks about... i'm up here at matty's place right now...
it seems if you play one of mattys or chads or tylers didjs it'll be perfect enough...
the software ive heard about is still fairly crude... what's out there doesn't deal with bends or twists, or the acoustics of the material. each vocal tract is different, as is each playing style.
a cnc machine is not needed ... as long as i can make hollow conical segments i can make an approximation of certain ideal functions. I posit that certain mathematical functions for didj shapes will produce interesting sounds. and i might be happy to see the golden ratio pop out somewhere in the solution. but maybe a cnc is the best... i saw the way they make baseball bats on tv and it was awful fast. it's clear it has to be accurate to a millimeter or less, and account for any coatings on the inside
there are iterative ways to improve, back-solving for certain characteristics ... artificial evolution of images is something ive experimented with in the past... we can breed our didjs on a virtual ranch
this is a 'mass customization' approach-- rather than making a mold and copies of a single didj, we can make a multiplicity of different experimental didjs. they can only be evaluated by actually being played, so there must be a way to manifest them into physical reality. some of them will be extraordinary and will become the parents and grandparents of even more remakable designs. automated manufacturing will save an enormous amount of labor, and the best designs can be cloned.
this philosophy takes didj making further into the scientific realm, but in no way does it replace hand crafted didjs. like an angle grinder a computer is just another tool in the hands of great artisans -- it is my honor to play didjs that have been informed by the experience of millenia
joy -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Thu, December 13, 2007 - 12:51 AMAh, hey Joy. I remember bumping into you at JT. Standing around talking a bit at the food stand.. at a couple of the workshops.. dancing to the Tinkers.. :)
>what's out there doesn't deal with bends or twists, or the acoustics of the material. each vocal tract is different,
>as is each playing style.
Yep. he equations that I've seen only take into account the profile of the bore. The bends and the material make very little difference, as long as there aren't sharp bends, and the material is sufficiently rigid. (although the interior surface can certainly make a difference, and it's hard to take that into account)
>a cnc machine is not needed ... as long as i can make hollow conical segments i can make an approximation
>of certain ideal functions.
Yeah, I've thought about that aspect of it as well. I've built a didge out of conical sections made of leather. But I wasn't able to get very good precision with that particular method. Decent.. but not great.
>there are iterative ways to improve, back-solving for certain characteristics ... artificial evolution of images
>is something ive experimented with in the past...
I've read some papers on something very similiar to this, where they calculated a trumpet bore profile to match a known impedence curve. Not exactly the same thing, but very similiar. They tried a variety of methods -- genetic algorithms surprisingly didn't work very well. The bores that they produced were too eratic. I don't know what fitness function they were using to evaluate the individuals though. If I recall correctly (and I may not), the best method was some form of hill-climbing algorithm.
>this is a 'mass customization' approach--...
Exactly :). We need a way to create precise one-off prototypes that can be played and evaluated. The real "problem" for me is figuring out what the heck the calculated or real impedance curve of a didge actually means. If you showed me the impedance curve of a didge, I could tell you what the approximate frequencies of the drone and toots are (which are very easy to see, of course).. but other than that, I wouldn't have a clue of the playing characteristics of the didge. Theoretically, you should be able to determine just about any aspect of the playing characteristic of a didge just by its impedance curve.. but the trick is figuring out what to look for.
>this philosophy takes didj making further into the scientific realm, but in no way does it
>replace hand crafted didjs. like an angle grinder a computer is just another tool in the
>hands of great artisans -- it is my honor to play didjs that have been informed by the
>experience of millenia
You said it much better than I could :)
Ben -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Thu, December 13, 2007 - 11:07 PMBen, the materials, wall thickness, and bends actually have alot more to do with the sound qualities than you'd think. For my crafting I've found that oak is just too dense and has too harsh of sound reflection to easily make into sweet sounding sticks. Alder and maple are both softer woods that add a bit of warmth to the tone and make much more pleasing instruments. I use different wall thicknesses at different points in the instrument, usually thinner up top to give better response and thicker through the center to support the power and then just a bit thinner again near the bell for more punch on some sticks. I can usually make quite a bit of adjustment to dial in a stick after my original glue up and first coats inside and out. Examples: If a stick is just a bit too high I can hollow out the top end a bit more to lower the pressure in the top and drop the fundamental. I can usually drop a stick by 30 cents or so with this method, however, increasing the interior diameter at or near the top will cause a greater distance between the fundamental and the trumpet so if I want to keep my trumpet pegged where it's at while lowering my fundamental I'll add a mouthpiece extension to make the stick a few inches longer which will drop the fundamental while leaving the trumpet alone. To raise the pitch of the fundamental I can either re-pour the interior to decrease my bore size in the top end which will draw the trumpets closer to the fundamental or chop length off the mouthpiece end to raise it while leaving the trumpet alone. Understanding how didges re-act in real life through relationship might give truer results than theoretical modeling, and can help me know how to adjust to time place and circumstance more easily. There are other factors that a computer simply can't interpret, such as the feeling one gets from simply handling an instrument, which can be heavily affected by aesthetics of bends or artwork, or history of ownership. Ondrej is so adamant that the action of playing didj is a straight projection and that any curve to the stick at all is going to cause it's own responses rather than the direct and intentional actions of the player so he can already know that he doesn't like the nuances of a stick even before he picks it up. I like some curviness myself with the sticks I make but before I started crafting I wasn't at all into sticks with bends or strange features, just straight tapers. Our expectations are a big part of our discoveries and the human component is absolutely necessary to make any didj do anything so it shouldn't be overlooked.
Even though it's already 11pm my enthusiasm for discovery will see me re-visit my shop this evening to hollow and glue up a very high pitched instrument. I know the qualities I'm asking from it but I'll still be surprised to hear it and discern where my tuning efforts will find the best results. For me this is a difference between art and craft. As a cobbler I'd take tracings and measurements along with all the clients choices and I'd start out on a project knowing exactly what the end product was to be. That was life as a craftsman. As an artist the process of creation and the influences present shape and affect the end result. I like the balance of having the knowledge of a craftsman but operating as an artist. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Sun, December 16, 2007 - 9:47 AMthe idea of the perfect didj is infinite, and it is not just the didj that makes it "perfect" but the relationship between the player and the intrument and it is a gift that maybe there is no math for this equation, and that perfection itself is something fluid and everchanging. maybe. -
-
Re: the perfect didj
Tue, May 20, 2008 - 10:47 AMWe said Tara, your perceptions are always refreshing.
A gift that there is no math calculation for this relationship between player and instrument.
Indeed.
namaste,
robert
-
-
Re: the perfect didj
Wed, December 19, 2007 - 10:00 AMI dunno, Chad, the oak didg you made me is pretty freakin' sweet! Also I recall from my luthier days that maple varies a lot, from fairly soft and light to waaay hard and heavy. Maybe the Oregon (bigleaf?) is the former?
-
-
Re: the perfect didj
Wed, December 19, 2007 - 1:13 PMyour Oak didge has thick enough walls to deaden the sound quite a bit which is what it takes for a good sound there. The up side of that besides good sound is that it really contains the power, the downside is that it's a freakin' heavy beast. (How do you shoot it Steve?). You're right that the Oregon Bigleaf Maple is of the softer variety. At the moment, the Bigleaf Maple is one of my favored woods but I'll be experimenting with oil finishes over the next few months and who knows what I'll end up with? Something as simple as a finish change can affect wood selection, wall thickness, and overall bore shape and instrument style. Different tools and different materials will yield different results. It'll be a whole long process of experimentation. The epoxied bore instruments I've been crafting have a hard sound that is explosive and awesome for rock and roll. Oils may sourly disappoint me but I gotta try to know, and if I can find an oil that I can harvest and also get my shop set up on hOMe hydropower then I'll be as green as it gets and that's an admirable goal. Another goal of mine for 2008 is to get big stage exposure for Doonooch, Jeremy Donovan, Lewis Burns, and Ondrej. I'll be meeting up with a promoter to share ideas and hopefully plant some seeds for didjeridu to enter the bigtime in the entertainment world. It's about time.
-
-
-
-
-