Jump to content

Main problem with the industry is...


Poker99

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I think most people really don't give a flying {censored} about music. The only people that seem to care about music are musicians or a few odd people that love music without playing an instrument. The average person just turns on the radio and listens to whatever is popular and says this is obviously the best band in the world because they're so good that they made it on the radio. Not to mention if there is a "good" band out there usually the record label bends them over and forces them to do whatever they think is going to make them sell records, which doesn't always turn out to be good music.

 

Really, if you want to hear good music, you're not going to find a whole lot on the radio. You're going to have to go search for it, and unless you like a specific genre like punk or metal, good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

One of the biggest misconceptions about the music industry is that

it's about music.

We all know Hunter said it best:

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench,

a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free,

and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side."

- Hunter S. Thompson

 

Monica

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

One of the biggest misconceptions about the music industry is that

it's about music.

We all know Hunter said it best:

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench,

a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free,

and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side."

- Hunter S. Thompson


Monica

 

 

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

The "problem" is the audience. They are too passive and lazy and will accept whatever is at the end of their remote.

 

 

Or maybe it's the gazillion bands putting out mediocre CDs for which no demand exists just because they can, who think they're all great and anyone who doesn't recognize their genius is nothing more than an unthinking, unenlightened mindless clod who doesn't know what's good and will just lap up anything that is fed to them (except the stuff their band produces, of course).

The fact is, there are more styles and kinds of music to choose from than ever before in the history of recorded music. People aren't avoiding it because it isn't available. They avoid it because a huge amount of it is poorly written, poorly produced and poorly performed {censored}, produced by a generation of self esteem babies who have been told they are great not because of anything they have achieved, but merely because they are alive. If you don't believe it, watch the early in the season episodes of American Idol and see how many truly awful singers who are not only convinced of their greatness, but who are utterly shocked, crushed or angered when they are turned away, and the utter denial they suffer when their illusion gets challenged.

 

Maybe some of it is well produced and well written and performed, but it is just self -indulgent and not resonating with the masses. Who's fault is that?

 

I'm not a passive consumer of music, I'm an active seeker, and very little of what I hear is worth the time it takes to listen to it, let alone buy it. I learned my lesson and quit making CDs. Whether they are good or bad is irrelvant. They aren't selling that well, and only an egotistical fool would continue to produce a product that few people want to buy. Now, I could blame the public, but it isn't their fault I write and record music that doesn't have broad appeal.

 

It may be fashionable among the delusional elites to blame the consumer for their lack of taste. But as long as mediocre musicians write mediocre music and perform it with mediocre bands, or even great bands write decent music that is inaccessable to the mainstream but continue to blame the audience for their lack of success, they will continue on in obscurity.

 

 

Just my $.02.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Or maybe it's the gazillion bands putting out mediocre CDs for which no demand exists just because they can, who think they're all great and anyone who doesn't recognize their genius is nothing more than an unthinking, unenlightened mindless clod who doesn't know what's good and will just lap up anything that is fed to them (except the stuff their band produces, of course).

The fact is, there are more styles and kinds of music to choose from than ever before in the history of recorded music. People aren't avoiding it because it isn't available. They avoid it because a huge amount of it is poorly written, poorly produced and poorly performed {censored}, produced by a generation of self esteem babies who have been told they are great not because of anything they have achieved, but merely because they are alive. If you don't believe it, watch the early in the season episodes of American Idol and see how many truly awful singers who are not only convinced of their greatness, but who are utterly shocked, crushed or angered when they are turned away, and the utter denial they suffer when their illusion gets challenged.


Maybe some of it is well produced and well written and performed, but it is just self -indulgent and not resonating with the masses. Who's fault is that?


I'm not a passive consumer of music, I'm an active seeker, and very little of what I hear is worth the time it takes to listen to it, let alone buy it. I learned my lesson and quit making CDs. Whether they are good or bad is irrelvant. They aren't selling that well, and only an egotistical fool would continue to produce a product that few people want to buy. Now, I could blame the public, but it isn't their fault I write and record music that doesn't have broad appeal.


It may be fashionable among the delusional elites to blame the consumer for their lack of taste. But as long as mediocre musicians write mediocre music and perform it with mediocre bands, or even great bands write decent music that is inaccessable to the mainstream but continue to blame the audience for their lack of success, they will continue on in obscurity.



Just my $.02.

 

 

It is obviously not the only factor, but most of the people I've met (and I'd wager to bet that most of the masses are this way) don't diligently search for anything beyond what is presented to them via the major media outlets. I personally listen to a handful of bands that are "big" and plenty more that would never make it close to that status. I never said anything about an umpopular artist whining about not being accepted. I listen to a lot of music and have played with many musicians that will never be accepted on a large level. I never heard them wine and bitch. They loved creating to music to create music. Also, let it be known I am not speaking about my music in regard to this. If people like it, cool, if not, cool as well. Something would be wrong if everyone liked it. I don't know where you injected that into the conversation aside from your own prejudices.

So, the question is, how do these proclaimed mediocre bands get signed? That is a part of the factor as much as the lazy consumer. It is presented to them and they blindly take it. But who presents it and why? And why do people buy it if it's not good and people have so many other choices to choose from?

Also, as far as older or "classic" music goes, we are able to look at those catalogs as they are now in a condensed format. Let us not forget there was plenty of crap then as there is now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Music, for the most part, has become an entirely commercial process -

like a big fast food form of art. Real talent takes time and effort to cultivate

and that's not efficient for capitalizing. So they've reduced music down to

the simplest forms that almost anyone can create and targeted its focus

on the largest number of people, its appeal the biggest lowest common

denominator. Popular music now appeals to the lowest elements because

that appeals to the most people - not the rareified elite who want and can

conceive of something more. Most of the popular stuff now appeals to

people's egos and basest instincts and serves as a sort of anaesthesia

to keep them preoccupied and numb and being good producers and

consumers. It comes down to what is the cheapest stuff to produce

that will sell to the biggest number of people - and so it caters to this

"dumbing down" we are seeing in all areas of life. The state of the art is

Wal-Mart. If you can't conform to that and accept being exploited then

you are out. Anything that means quality and innovation and something

from the higher ground is just out. The industry is not interested in it

and not going to support it. For a woman there's no value except how

you can commercially exploit your sexuality. Personally that's why I started

this other project designing guitars and basses, hoping this will make my

main income - then I can just do what I want with music to make myself

happy and to hell with the ugly masses. I think the answer is to not even

try to reach that pop world anymore but to find a small business way to

do your own thing with integrity - and accept that it's going to be a

smaller more rareified audience. But with the internet you can do a lot

to find your smaller target audience and it's best to just stick to that.

 

Monica

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Music, for the most part, has become an entirely commercial process -

like a big fast food form of art. Real talent takes time and effort to cultivate

and that's not efficient for capitalizing. So they've reduced music down to

the simplest forms that almost anyone can create and targeted its focus

on the largest number of people, its appeal the biggest lowest common

denominator. Popular music now appeals to the lowest elements because

that appeals to the most people - not the rareified elite who want and can

conceive of something more. Most of the popular stuff now appeals to

people's egos and basest instincts and serves as a sort of anaesthesia

to keep them preoccupied and numb and being good producers and

consumers. It comes down to what is the cheapest stuff to produce

that will sell to the biggest number of people - and so it caters to this

"dumbing down" we are seeing in all areas of life. The state of the art is

Wal-Mart. If you can't conform to that and accept being exploited then

you are out. Anything that means quality and innovation and something

from the higher ground is just out. The industry is not interested in it

and not going to support it. For a woman there's no value except how

you can commercially exploit your sexuality. Personally that's why I started

this other project designing guitars and basses, hoping this will make my

main income - then I can just do what I want with music to make myself

happy and to hell with the ugly masses. I think the answer is to not even

try to reach that pop world anymore but to find a small business way to

do your own thing with integrity - and accept that it's going to be a

smaller more rareified audience. But with the internet you can do a lot

to find your smaller target audience and it's best to just stick to that.


Monica

 

 

Look, commercial music is as different from artistic music as commercial art is from fine art. I don't know why so many musicians have such a hard time grasping that simple concept. No one is going to stop you from making art. But if you're going to put it in the marketplace to sell it, it had better be marketable. Insulting the public because they aren't buying fine art is not only condescending, it's delusional. It's not called the music business for nothing. The whole point of it is to sell as many units to as many people as possible. It isn't rocket science. Blaming the audience for not buying high art is like blaming them for not buying haut couture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think they should all be blamed for one thing - de-evolution baby!:freak:

It's tedious and it means more and more bad music. Time for this

world to either evolve or die. I'm bored with it and I don't want to

entertain those stupid people. I don't just blame them for buying bad music,

I blame them for taking up oxygen, period. I don't agree with you at all

that commerical greed is a valid motive for music. If that's the driving force

it's no longer art, it's just bad business. This isn't music, it's devo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

most of the people I've met (and I'd wager to bet that most of the masses are this way) don't diligently search for anything beyond what is presented to them via the major media outlets.

 

Perhaps, but that is rapidly changing. There is no one 'major media outlet' anymore.

 

I listen to a lot of music and have played with many musicians that will never be accepted on a large level. I never heard them wine and bitch.

 

That's good. But I was referring to the many guys here who seem to be convinced that the public isa bunch of morons if it isn't buying into what they like.

 

I don't know where you injected that into the conversation aside from your own prejudices.

 

Gee, I dunno...maybe when you said this: "

The "problem" is the audience. They are too passive and lazy and will accept whatever is at the end of their remote."

So, the question is, how do these proclaimed mediocre bands get signed?

The answer is, many of them aren't signed. But that doesn't stop them from flooding the market with their stuff.

Do you realize that more independent and DIY CDs get made and injected into the market worldwide every week than used to be made in an entire year during the 50s and 60s? This isn't counting major label stuff.

And why do people buy it if it's not good and people have so many other choices to choose from?

Who says what sells is bad? You, or the people who buy it? The fact is, the majority of indie and DIY CDs don't sell more than 1200-2000 or so copies.

The public votes with their pocketbooks. You seem to be under the assumption that popular = mediocre. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. It doesn't matter. The public likes what it likes. Calling them lazy and mindless sheep as some here do is counterproductive. The public is bombarded daily with all sorts of things that they don't buy. That's the nature of business.

Also, as far as older or "classic" music goes, we are able to look at those catalogs as they are now in a condensed format. Let us not forget there was plenty of crap then as there is now.

I'll agree that there was plenty of equally crappy stuff then as now, but for sheer volume, nothing compares to what is out there today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

most of the people I've met (and I'd wager to bet that most of the masses are this way) don't diligently search for anything beyond what is presented to them via the major media outlets.


Perhaps, but that is rapidly changing. There is no one 'major media outlet' anymore.


I never said there was. But one must focus attention.


I listen to a lot of music and have played with many musicians that will never be accepted on a large level. I never heard them wine and bitch.


That's good. But I was referring to the many guys here who seem to be convinced that the public isa bunch of morons if it isn't buying into what they like.


Well, it's all subjective.


I don't know where you injected that into the conversation aside from your own prejudices.


Gee, I dunno...maybe when you said this: "

The "problem" is the audience. They are too passive and lazy and will accept whatever is at the end of their remote."



Well, that was just an objective remark on what I've seen from today's music consumer.


So, the question is, how do these proclaimed mediocre bands get signed?


The answer is, many of them aren't signed. But that doesn't stop them from flooding the market with their stuff.


Do you realize that more independent and DIY CDs get made and injected into the market worldwide
every week
than used to be made in an entire year during the 50s and 60s? This isn't counting major label stuff.



So, why do you care? The cream will rise to the top by your philiosophy.


And why do people buy it if it's not good and people have so many other choices to choose from?


Who says what sells is bad? You, or the people who buy it? The fact is, the majority of indie and DIY CDs don't sell more than 1200-2000 or so copies.

The public votes with their pocketbooks. You seem to be under the assumption that popular = mediocre. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. It doesn't matter. The public likes what it likes. Calling them lazy and mindless sheep as some here do is counterproductive. The public is bombarded daily with all sorts of things that they don't buy. That's the nature of business.



I thought that's what this whole thread was about. I'm not the only person that has raised it either. And your "point" doesn't make sense. If there are so many crappy bands out there that no one wants to listen to, then how do they even factor into the equation?


Also, as far as older or "classic" music goes, we are able to look at those catalogs as they are now in a condensed format. Let us not forget there was plenty of crap then as there is now.


I'll agree that there was plenty of equally crappy stuff then as now, but for sheer volume, nothing compares to what is out there today.

 

But who says it's crap? You, or the people who buy it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But who says it's crap? You, or the people who buy it?

 

That's the point. The vast majority of indie and DIY Cds aren't selling in any kind of measurable quantities. I'm just saying that maybe it's because they're crap, or not accessible to the public's taste, and not because the public is stupid. :):wave:

If there are so many crappy bands out there that no one wants to listen to, then how do they even factor into the equation?

 

They factor hugely, because they are flooding the alternative outlets to the point that wading through them to find anything decent is getting more and more time consuming and less fruitful. The average listener doesn't want to have to wade through crap to find something they like.

 

I go to itunes and browse, and last night I went to just one genre, clicked on one of about 50 sub-genres, and spent an hour listening to clips. In that hour, I didn't even get through all the bands and artists under the letter A, most of whom I had never heard of, and most of whom were just not very good, from a performance, writing or production standpoint. Imagine that scenario x 26 (the number of letters in the alphabet) x 50 (the number of sub genres in that category) x the number of main genres on that site x the number of online music sites. It's no wonder the passive consumer just buys what they can get at WalMart or Sam Goody. The way alternative distribution works today, anyone who makes a CD can get it into the marketplace. Trying to find something good is pretty much the equivalent of having a semi truck trailer dump a load of CDs on your lawn and you having to go through all of them to find something you like. After awhile, when maybe one out of 20 is something you might be interested in, you just get overwhelmed and give up. It's just easier to go to the record store and find something you've heard that you can find easily. That isn't the public being lazy, it's the public not wanting to have to work to buy a band's product, just as they don't want to have to work to buy any product.

 

You mentioned cream rising to the top. That's not necessarily the case these days. In that truckload of CDs, there might be some real gems. But I'll never know because I'm just not going to take the hours and hours required to find them among all the thousands and thousands of other voices shouting to be heard. It is entirely possible for quality to be edged out by sheer volume of material.

 

Here's an example. If I offer free downloads, but you have to go to my site, then transfer to another site, then sign up, then enter a code, then wait for a few minutes to download the song, then have to download a special player to play it, how long are you going to do that? Does it mean a person's lazy if they don't jump through all the hoops? Well, searching indie and DIY music is just as inconvenient. People just don't have the time or the inclination to wade through CD after CD they've never heard of in hopes of finding something good. Most of it proves to be a waste of time. It's no wonder they are attracted to the tried and true.

 

I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm just saying it's what is. Blaming the public because everyone and their dog is making CDs, many of them which shouldn't be made, is just hubris.

 

Of course, it's just my opinion. YMMV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

People just don't have the time or the inclination to wade through CD after CD they've never heard of in hopes of finding something good.

 

 

I do. That's how I've found some of my favorite stuff. But I really love music, so it means a lot to me. And it doesn't take that long. You just have to be smart about it. Plus, I don't expect what something that I will like just to be there without having to search. That'd be foolish to think that way...... and I am very picky about music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do. That's how I've found some of my favorite stuff. But I really love music, so it means a lot to me. And it doesn't take
that
long. You just have to be smart about it. Plus, I don't expect what something that I will like just to
be there
without having to search. That'd be foolish to think that way...... and I am very picky about music.

Well, I'm more like you, and I have found some good stuff wading through sites online, stuff that I even cover both with my band and as a single. But I'm blessed with more time, as I am a construction supervisor and it's slow right now, and my kids are all about grown.

 

Anyway, interesting discussion. I always like to hear what other guys here think, even if we don't always agree.:cool::)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The sad thing is, only a minority of artists have the chance to really get heard. You can't get some decent fanbase if you don't have a marketing force behind you, except in some really rare cases.

 

Doesn't mean your stuff isn't good.

 

People are so easily influenced, you can make most of them believe something "is tha {censored}" if you put enough money behind it.

 

Hey some of them even believe the world was created in 7 days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I have no doubt about that, I just find their music lacking somehow. It doesn't rock enough and yet is shallow and bleurgh. I think they were very poor song-writers in general. Even Black Sabbath beats them there WITHOUT the simplistic yet insanely memorable riffs and stoner goodness. Robert Plant is a bone-head, Jimmy Page is overrated. That's not to say I don't think they've written only bad songs, at their best I love Led Zep...Rock N' Roll, Immigrant Song, No Quarter, but OVERALL...I find them kinda {censored}ty. I dislike most of the first two albums and at least half of each album thereafter.


Gimmee Deep Purple or Black Sabbath...anytime! Deep Purple has Led Zep beat on EVERY front.

 

 

 

Not for me. Page, while not the greatest player, created a few of the greatest rock solos ever-stairway and whole lotta love. He also created so many great guitar parts that I could spend an hour naming them. He has a legacy that the guitarists in Sabbath or DP can't come close to. I saw sabbath once and had a hard time staying for the whole set, but that's just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

The fact is, there are more styles and kinds of music to choose from than ever before in the history of recorded music. People aren't avoiding it because it isn't available. They avoid it because a huge amount of it is poorly written, poorly produced and poorly performed {censored}, produced by a generation of self esteem babies who have been told they are great not because of anything they have achieved, but merely because they are alive. If you don't believe it, watch the early in the season episodes of American Idol and see how many truly awful singers who are not only convinced of their greatness, but who are utterly shocked, crushed or angered when they are turned away, and the utter denial they suffer when their illusion gets challenged.


Just my $.02.

 

 

 

I'm amazed that people enter a contest to find the next singing sensation who have never so much as recorded their own voice on a cassette and listened to it. That's the only explanation for people who think they can sing but are really tone deaf. It's like me entering a tap dance competition without ever having danced tap. It does make for some funny moments. My wife cringes at Simon's rebuffs, but I figure they got it coming for being so arrogant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, I'm more like you, and I have found some good stuff wading through sites online, stuff that I even cover both with my band and as a single. But I'm blessed with more time, as I am a construction supervisor and it's slow right now, and my kids are all about grown.


Anyway, interesting discussion. I always like to hear what other guys here think, even if we don't always agree.
:cool::)

 

Indeed. It's a combination of things obviously. There is no one right answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There are some really great bands out there. I don't think that's ever changed. The best music happening today is happening on the local, or indie level. I'm not talking about indie, the genre, but rather the raw, unsigned talent playing small bars across the country.

 

There will always be more talent than there is room for success. There is only so much space on the airwaves...population can support so many radio stations, etc. Not saying that what is successful now can be considered talent, but hopefully you get the point. Lots of young bands I've seen have this idea that if they're good enough, they're just going to "make it". The saying "The cream always rises to the top" couldn't be any less true than it is in the music world. So many more factors are important past talent, and luck is a big part of it. But if your band isn't exceptional to begin with, you're not even at the starting line.

 

Record Labels spend a lot of money on their bands in effort to see a return on their product. The only problem is, the masses are usually fickle and it's really hard to predict what they're going to do. It's hard to apply a formula to how your market's going to react to any given product. So, when a band finally does succeed....it has to pay for the losses of it's ten failed predecessors, and put some scratch in the suits' pockets.

 

This is where, I believe, the labels have formed their formula. With today's rock market, even the most successful bands are playing much smaller venues than mega rock bands of the past. Bands like AFI and Panic are playing 2000 seaters like the House of Blues, rather than filling up Madison Square Garden like Zep used to do (for 3 nights in a row, not to mention). I believe the conclusion the labels have come to is that it's more profitable to have 6 out of 10 bands be semi successful, than to have 1 out of 10 be mega successful. And the way they've come to do this is to take less risks by signing bands that sound exactly like other bands that have already been successful. This is how the market's grown so stagnate.

 

So in summary, music is still progressing, but at a very underground (and underpaid) level. If you want the good stuff, you really have to dig nowadays. My two cents.

 

-Trey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

There are some really great bands out there. I don't think that's ever changed. The best music happening today is happening on the local, or indie level. I'm not talking about indie, the genre, but rather the raw, unsigned talent playing small bars across the country.


There will always be more talent than there is room for success. There is only so much space on the airwaves...population can support so many radio stations, etc. Not saying that what is successful now can be considered talent, but hopefully you get the point. Lots of young bands I've seen have this idea that if they're good enough, they're just going to "make it". The saying "The cream always rises to the top" couldn't be any less true than it is in the music world. So many more factors are important past talent, and luck is a big part of it. But if your band isn't exceptional to begin with, you're not even at the starting line.


Record Labels spend a lot of money on their bands in effort to see a return on their product. The only problem is, the masses are usually fickle and it's really hard to predict what they're going to do. It's hard to apply a formula to how your market's going to react to any given product. So, when a band finally does succeed....it has to pay for the losses of it's ten failed predecessors, and put some scratch in the suits' pockets.


This is where, I believe, the labels have formed their formula. With today's rock market, even the most successful bands are playing much smaller venues than mega rock bands of the past. Bands like AFI and Panic are playing 2000 seaters like the House of Blues, rather than filling up Madison Square Garden like Zep used to do (for 3 nights in a row, not to mention). I believe the conclusion the labels have come to is that it's more profitable to have 6 out of 10 bands be semi successful, than to have 1 out of 10 be mega successful. And the way they've come to do this is to take less risks by signing bands that sound exactly like other bands that have already been successful. This is how the market's grown so stagnate.


So in summary, music is still progressing, but at a very underground (and underpaid) level. If you want the good stuff, you really have to dig nowadays. My two cents.


-Trey

 

 

Not to regress in this conversation again (hehe), but AFI and Panic are no Led Zeppelin. I'm a young guy and given the choice, I'd pay $200 to see Zep before I'd pay $30 to see AFI or Panic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Ultimately, the public decides what will be a hit. All the marketing and promotion in the world isn't going to save an act that the public doesn't dig. True, major label muscle can get an act into rotation on Clear Channel and MTV, but it can't guarantee a hit.

 

 

I can't say I agree with this

 

I really don't think the public is as dumb as the industry thinks, they just don't have a lot of choice because of the industry. To find good music you've got to do a little hunting for and most people either don't have enough time or desire to do that. That's not to say that that good music doesn't come out of the industry but for me it's getting harder and harder to find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I can't say I agree with this


I really don't think the public is as dumb as the industry thinks, they just don't have a lot of choice because of the industry. To find good music you've got to do a little hunting for and most people either don't have enough time or desire to do that. That's not to say that that good music doesn't come out of the industry but for me it's getting harder and harder to find.

 

 

That's kind of what I was saying.... except I guess I was being harsher on the consumer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I can't say I agree with this

 

 

Well, there have been threads on here before that have discussed the difference between "active" and "passive" fans. I'm pretty sure that all of us on these forums are "active" fans, meaning we will go out of our way to find stuff that we like--whether it's the obscure classic rock band, the old blues guy or the cool new group. Major labels are targeting the "passive" fans, the people who aren't obsessed with music like we are. But those "passive" fans still have preferences, and plenty of bands and songs just don't connect. Before deciding to invest megabucks on promoting a band, a major label will do a lot of testing in smaller radio markets. If a song gets a green light from smaller market testing, it will eventually find its way on to Clear Channel and MTV. But for every major label-pushed song that makes it on to commercial radio, there are hundreds that get weeded out. The music business is a gamble at every level. Even a huge label is only a few "misses" away from getting devoured.

 

If there was such a thing as a guaranteed hit, the music biz would look totally different than it is today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...