Like

Does Sony suck balls?

 

Anonymous
 
I've been looking for a receiver for quite a long time now. Ive been hearing that the best receiver brands are Denon, Marantz, Harmon Kardon, Onkyo and Yamaha. I believed it. But ive also been doing some research on Sony receivers. Most people tell me its not worth it, but i am not convinced. I went to a local Sony shop and listened to a few. They all seem pretty amazing. The proce is low. For example i heard the Sony STRDA3000ES 7.1 CH Receiver. It was absolutely amazing. It has 150 watts per channel for as low as $550. Am i missing something here. Is Sony worth getting?
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 317
Registered: Mar-05
The ES series are the only decent receivers that Sony makes, and I have to say that they are indeed attractive looking and very easy to setup/use, those are the two things that Sony excels at.

However for the money I'd say you could probably do far better with the Marantz 8400 which uBid is auctioning off for around or under the same price, with full Marantz warranty.

Also I am not sure how seriously I'd take the 150 wpc rating, personally.

BTW, did you listen to any other receivers that shop has besides the Sonys? What were they, and how'd they compare, to your ears?
 

Anonymous
 
Well, the Sony definately has a good warranty of 5 years. It was a sony store, so there were no other name brands. The Marantz does sound good, ive heard it before at a friends house. Hes had it for two months and has had no problems. He decided to add some more speakers. But the receiver couldnt handle all of it.That is why i am searching for a more powerful receiver for a lower price. The onkyo receivers are probably my second favourite. But i would still go with a Sony, its certainly money-saving.
 

Anonymous
 
Ive listened to Yamaha receivers, but they kinda sound distorted. Not the best Sound thats for sure. Denon is a great brand. I love them. they sound great, but the price is pretty high for the good ones. How is the Marantz 8400 better than the Sony. The sony is more powerful. There at about the same price, but i think id like to try something different. Ive never had much experience with sony, i might be missing out. Great reviews on the ES.
 

Silver Member
Username: Touche6784

Post Number: 335
Registered: Nov-04
anony, the sony may have more power advertised, but sony fudges their power ratings more so than marantz. so in reality the marantz has more power. it also most likely has a better power supply, and DACs. would never pick a sony over a marantz even with less power. look through this forum and you will rarely see a sony being picked over almost any other hifi brand.
 

Taper
Unregistered guest
the sony digital amps starting with the es 2000 and above (not the es 1000) are probably the best imaging of receivers in their price range. They are becoming very popular in the taping community due to there ability to create a wide, deep and tall soundstage. Some people may not like them due to there neutral sound, but if you are into imaging, chances are you'll be impressed with this line of digi-amps. If you want to get some user reviews check out one review on nickspicks.com or the oade taper board.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Virus5877

West Lafayette, Indiana USA

Post Number: 48
Registered: Apr-05
Digi amps suck. Sorry, all you followers of them, but they distort waaaay too much! The sony ES series is alright, but like Chris said, get the marantz, you'll be happy. One other brand to look at would be Harman kardon. They have very underrated power numbers (check the lab tests!) and they are some of the cleanest receivers on the market. I'll reiterate Chris:

"you will rarely see a sony being picked over almost any other hifi brand"

everybody on this forum can't be wrong! don't get the sony.
 

Anonymous
 
Hmm, I guess your right. The Marantz 8400 is my number 1 choice right now, but in the Harmon Kardon receivers, which ones would you reccomend?
 

Silver Member
Username: Dmwiley

Post Number: 557
Registered: Feb-05
Anonymous, the correct advice is simple: choose the amp that sounds best to you. None of these wise posters can tell you that. Their advice should be considered for reference purposes only. "everybody on this forum can't be wrong! don't get the sony" Don't believe it.
 

Silver Member
Username: Touche6784

Post Number: 337
Registered: Nov-04
i also agree with dale. take the advice from here with a grain of salt. we all have our own agenda that we would like to convince other people to agree with. of course most of us are just trying to help, but in the end you have to make the decision youself and you have to audition the stuff yourself. if sony makes you happy, go for it. but i think we would like to see you buy something more worth your money. the AVR 7300 i think would be HKs equivalent reciever to the marantz 8400.
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 320
Registered: Mar-05
anonymous,

I'd be curious which model of Marantz your friend had, I have a hard time believing it was second-tier-from-the-top like the 8400.

Of course choose whatever pleases YOUR ears, that's always the final judge---goes without saying really.

One little guideline I often use for reference when shopping for most electronic devices is weight: the heavier it is generally the better quality it is, usually due to a better power supply. This theory of mine was recently reinforced when shopping for a blender, I got a KitchenAid one that turned out to be an absolute powerhouse.
 

Silver Member
Username: Paul_ohstbucks

Post Number: 777
Registered: Jan-05
That Sony has a .6% THD which is absolutely miserable.....ouch! Im not saying that alone is the make or break spec, but I wouldnt be a bit suprised if the construction isnt every bit as miserable.

Any 'real' receiver will have a THD of .04% or less. I'll also put money on the fact that the Sony is the lightest 150WPC receiver on the market.
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 332
Registered: Mar-05
Anon,

one other thing: you may want to take a good look at Sony's 5 year warranty. I find that many warranties these days are not worth the paper they're printed on because they're so full of legal preconditions and fudge factors.

For a solid state device I would think that the chances of needing warranty service is very small, it's an issue that brick and mortar shops often bring up to keep you from buying online.
 

Unregistered guest
Like Gillete means razor blades, Xerox means photocopy, SONY means television. Other than that I'd be suspiciuos about any thing made by Sony. I'm returning back a new Sony DVD player and replacing it for an LG. BTW, my TV is Sony.
 

Silver Member
Username: Dmwiley

Post Number: 567
Registered: Feb-05
Chris is absolutely right. His is the only advice worth serious consideration here. Paul complains about.6% distortion but in other forums, his reference speakers are Cerwin Vegas. Give me a break.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Chitown

Post Number: 13
Registered: Apr-05
As everyone has said you want to listen to the amps and see what sounds good. I have, however been thorougly disappointed at Sony for the past 6 years. A number of their even high end products (in the DVD player line) plus other electronics I have bought have failed on me and some of my clients. It is a shame for what used to be a grand name in electronics.

 

Anonymous
 
Ok, thanks for all the advice. Thanks for telling me the downs of this receiver. Besides, they arent in stock at the store anymore. It must be a sign. Ok, well im in search for a new receiver, any suggestions for not over $600.
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 337
Registered: Mar-05
Here you go:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=39794%26item%3D5772161581

My guess is that it'll probably go for around $400-500.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Jet2001

Post Number: 47
Registered: Mar-05
The reason they are not in stock anymore is not because it was a bad productline. Sony is coming out with their new ES Digital amp line. ES 2100,3100,5100...and I'm not sure if the 9100 is coming out or not, haven't heard.

The THD is .09%, not .6%. Now that isn't the .04% that many of the analog receivers have now, but I wouldn't consider that a make or break spec. This was Sony's first run at digital amps. The bugs were present in the beginnig, but they have been worked out.

Biggest decision for you, Anonymous, is if you like the sound coming from a digital amp or not. From what I've read it's either a love it or hate it relationship. Go to a place where you can hear the digital amp side by side with the analog. If that store doesn't have the Sony model you are looking for, check out the Harmon Kardon DPR2005.
 

Anonymous
 
Everything has just changed.I have won a receiver. the TX-SR 502 Onkyo receiver. I have Jbl Northridge E 90 floor standing speakers as front and was lookin for a new receiver for them. Since now ive got this receiver, does anyone know what sub-woofer i should buy not over $300?
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 358
Registered: Mar-05
Hsu STF-1, $300 plus shipping from ascendacoustics.com will do fine if you are in a smallish room. Or if you're mainly doing HT and want to save some bucks, the Dayton 10" sub for partsexpress.com goes for $145 shipped.

With the 502 I would definitely set the e90s on "small" mode.
 

Silver Member
Username: Paul_ohstbucks

Post Number: 817
Registered: Jan-05
After personally soundtesting more subs over the weekend, and doing more research, I'd recommend saving longer and waiting until you can buy a better sub. If anything, HSU has a sub in the $600 range that would be 'much' better. Save longer, and forget the notion of skimping on a sub.

Once you buy it, you'll always have it, and if you skimp now for the sake of buying something quicker...you'll always be stuck with something 2nd best. If a good sub is only $300 over budget, isnt it worth saving a short while longer so you can own something that you'll truly appreciate?
 

Anonymous
 
What do you mean by setting the E90's on small? Does the Onkyo receiver not have enough power to run the speakers? Paul i think ill follow your advice and save up. Yuor definately right. Id rather save up and get a good sub, then get one and it end up being crappy just for the price.
 

Silver Member
Username: Paul_ohstbucks

Post Number: 825
Registered: Jan-05
Anon,
The reason is because many of DVD movie soundtracks are designed with subs in mind, and have very deep low frequencies that will tax normal speakers. You'll find that if you turn it loud enough, you may bottom-out your woofers during loud low frequency bursts.

I've learned from experience, and once you bottom them out for the first time, you'll be wary of cranking it again. Thats the main reason that I finally went to a sub.....

While watching the incredibles at moderate volume....."pop, pop...wham!!" and my whole system shut down. The popping was the voice coil slapping the maginet. Right then and there, I knew it was time for a sub, and it was only a matter of time until I found one that met my needs.

If you're on a tight budget, these links might be of interest to you........
http://www.svsubwoofers.com/reviews_mitchell.htm
The first link is a 'face-off' review done by none other than Ecoustics. A cheaper SVS dusted a more expensive HSU.
http://www.svsubwoofers.com/subs_pb12_isd.htm
There are good subs available in the $500-600 that will dwarf anything in the <$300 market.

I've recently just completed an extensive search, and based on reading dozens of unbelievable reviews, and listening to a bunch of subs in person, I took the 'leap of faith' and ordered a SVS on the web.

Good luck.
 

Silver Member
Username: Petergalbraith

Rimouski, Quebec Canada

Post Number: 473
Registered: Feb-04
While watching the incredibles at moderate volume....."pop, pop...wham!!" and my whole system shut down.

That sucks. I've never had that happen, even at reference levels... What crossover frequency are you going to use?
 

Silver Member
Username: Paul_ohstbucks

Post Number: 827
Registered: Jan-05
Heck,
I dont know. That's the fun part, and I'll determine that when the sub arrives. I'll probably start 'by the book' at around 80hz and experiment until I find the sweet spot.

As for the Incredibles, that's one 'incredible' soundtrack(pun intended). As usual, I had my fronts set to large, and frequency range set to wide, and anything at -15 or louder on the dial would bottom them out. I had to keep the volume under -20 to keep from clanking.......Heh

The incredible lows were just too much for them to handle. As I said earlier, right then and there I knew a sub was in my future. I never once bottomed them out in 20years, but once I upgraded receivers recently coupled with a demanding DVD soundtrack, things quickly changed.
 

Silver Member
Username: Petergalbraith

Rimouski, Quebec Canada

Post Number: 475
Registered: Feb-04
My mains are set to large and my sub to LFE+L/R. I've never had anything bottom out the mains (not even The Incredibles). If they did, I'd set them to small with cut-off at 40 Hz to protect them from the low stuff that they can't reproduce anyway. But... I'm getting different mains in a few weeks, and those go to 33 Hz (-3 dB), so even that idea would be out.
 

Anonymous
 
Oh, i see what you mean, but im not going to be using it for movies or theater, its simply being used for music.
 

Silver Member
Username: Petergalbraith

Rimouski, Quebec Canada

Post Number: 478
Registered: Feb-04
The E90 are rated down to 36Hz at -3dB. You would benefit from a sub on some types of music, but not all. It could actually muddy the music if you picked too cheap a sub. Since the speakers are not ultra-efficient at 91 dB (but reasonably efficient), then a smallish sub should be able to keep up with them on music content. The Hsu STF-1 would be a good choice or the Part Express sub listed earlier.
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 360
Registered: Mar-05
Anonymous,

I'm basing my speaker setting recc regarding the 502 on what I've often read about Onkyo notoriusly overrating their RMS numbers, as well as the e90s' size which usually requires more quality power to sound their best.

Paul is right, if you can afford to spend $500-600 instead of <$300 all the better---if you can't though the $145 shipped PartsExpress sub can serve as a temporary stopgap.
 

Silver Member
Username: Paul_ohstbucks

Post Number: 832
Registered: Jan-05
Peter,
There are a lot of variables that go into bottoming out a speaker. You can spend several hundred on a sub which is designed specifically for that purpose, and even bottom that out if you arent careful.

Actually, this thread is really getting interesting.

Try hooking up a 130/WPC amp, unhook your sub, and send the LFE into your mains while cranking it to 'reference levels' while watching the incredibles, and let me know how you make out.
On the other hand, a small speaker rated down to 45hz probably wouldnt even attempt those low signals because they would simply fly below the radar as if the signal didnt even exist. It's kinda hard to slap voice coil into the magnet when small speakers virtually dont move. A 15"er...whoah...that cone might pump in and out by a full 2+ inches. Sure....the 'relative' clearance has to be considered, but it's an interesting topic for me just the same.

All I can say is that every situation is unique, and maybe massive woofers rated down to 24hz are easier to bottom out because they have much more play when you drive them hard with low frequencies?? Also the fact that they actually attempt to recreate signals below their capability comes into play. Send the LFE into a tiny speaker, and you'll get nothing, not even a whimper.

All I know is that after 20 years, that was the first, and last time I would deal with that issue because 'daddy' has a beast of a sub on the way:-)
 

Silver Member
Username: Petergalbraith

Rimouski, Quebec Canada

Post Number: 486
Registered: Feb-04
I spent about 8 months with an 5.1/7.1 receiver before getting the sub, so LFE was redirected to main speakers. The thing is "theater reference" SPLs for these speakers is at -17 dB on the dial of a 50W per channel h/k avr-325, so there's lot of headroom to spare.

The speaker isn't small by any means (125 lbs; 2'x2'x3') and holds a 15" woofer.

Usually, when you send low frequencies to a woofer that isn't rated as low, it'll still move quite a lot (why wouln't it? You'll feeding power to it...) but won't produce much sound. The danger of bottoming out is greater because you can't even hear that you're headed for trouble.

Anyway, I guess I'm got headroom on my side...
 

Anonymous
 
If you were me would you buy the Marantz SR-8400? Im thinking of using the Onkyo Tx for just theater and buying a seperate receiver just for the music. I had in mind the Marantz Sr-8400. Its sellin very low.what do you think? Will the TX-Sr 502 really pump enough power into these speakers, or should i buy a new receiver?
 

Silver Member
Username: Petergalbraith

Rimouski, Quebec Canada

Post Number: 496
Registered: Feb-04
The ubid prices for the 8400 are out of this world. If I were in the US and shopping right now, that's what I'd get!
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 375
Registered: Mar-05
Anonymous,

You bet I would, it's taking me a colossal amount of self-restraint (a.k.a. threat of a divorce) NOT to buy one of those UBID sr8400s right NOW!

If you can afford $400-500 right now it's an absolute no-brainer.
 

Silver Member
Username: Paul_ohstbucks

Post Number: 837
Registered: Jan-05
Your receiver also plays a big role in bottoming out. My old Pioneer surround receiver could never bottom out my speakers and I've been through more than my share of demanding DVD soundtracks through the years.(moreso in recent years because they keep improving)

Generally speaking, an entry level 50WPC may do many things(clipping..etc, etc), but bottoming out large speakers isnt one of them. For that, you need power which is something you dont have. Bottoming has nothing to do with headroom, because it's caused by power. You do realize that bottoming out is a function of overpowering speakers with something they physically cant handle, right?? You might be confusing Bot-out it with clipping.
 

Anonymous
 
Ok, maybe i should tell you my entire home theater ensemble. So first of all ive got the Jbl- E90's as front speakers. I've got the Vintage Technics SB-L200 loudspeakers, which are very old as surround sound. Information on those speakers can be found here: http://www.vintagetechnics.com/loudspeakers.htm

Are there any other speakers i should buy for this?

Is this a good ensemble at all?
 

Silver Member
Username: Petergalbraith

Rimouski, Quebec Canada

Post Number: 500
Registered: Feb-04
Paul,

I thought I was clear enough... How can I bottom out speakers when loud is -20 dB? ;-)
Of course I'm not feeding them enough power to bottom out, that's my point. Headroom means what's left between what I listen at and what I can listen at.

As for my entry level 50 WPC (Thanks for the nice compliment!), h/k have headroom and are rated conservatively. In an independent review, it was driven to 2x107 W into 8 ohms. So yeah, I've got power. I just don't happen to need it. That's what I meant by having headroom on my side. :-)

And if I wanted to go full tilt... I've got a 2x120W (into 8 ohms; 2x240 into 4 ohms) power amp which I sometimes use on the mains, as well as a Carver M4.0t on long term loan (around 2x200W into 8 ohms and 2x350W into 4 ohms). So, technically, I could get close to bottom out the speakers. 20 years ago, I'd sometimes use the 2x120W power amp and the speakers in large rooms (as a DJ), up to max power (it has Watt LED indicators), and I've never had a problem. Of course, my speakers are rated at 100W continous and 400W peaks. They are difficult to push past their limit, and you'd be well past 115 dB if you did.
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 396
Registered: Mar-05
Anonymous,

For e90s I would definitely go with the best quality power I could get, which means the 8400 over the Onkyo hands down.

If you're doing HT then definitely buy a JBL center speaker---the largest one you can afford, because this is the real workhorse speaker for HT. I'd keep the old Technics speakers as surrounds unless you start doing SACD/DVD-A surround music. For now just invest in the receiver, center channel and subwoofer.
 

Anonymous
 
Ok, so heres what ive got in mind right now. So far ive got the TX-SR 502, the Jbl E100's as front speakers, the Vintage Technics SB-L200 loudspeakers as surround sound and im thinking of adding the Jbl EC35? What do you think. Do i get a pair? For the sub im still not sure. Im going to have to invest for the receiver. So im stuck with the Onkyo for now. If i used this ensemble will it actually work fine with the receiver or should i not risk it?
 

Silver Member
Username: Petergalbraith

Rimouski, Quebec Canada

Post Number: 520
Registered: Feb-04
Earlier you said you had E90. Now it's E100?

If you actually have the JBLs then by all means get a EC35 center to timbre-match them. They seem to sell under $200 so you won't be breaking the bank. If you don't have any JBL speakers yet, then you can look at others too.

If your front 3 speakers are strong and well-match, the rear ones won't matter too much for movies. You might want to replace them eventually for multi-channel music.
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 408
Registered: Mar-05
Well since you already have the Onkyo then by all means try it out first on the e100s (when'd you decide to go up from the e90?) and see how you like it. Who knows, might be ok if you don't listen at extremely high volumes, and who knows, you might even decide you don't need a sub.

Sometimes it just takes some good old fashioned trial and error, my friend.
 

Anonymous
 
Ok, sorry i meant the E90's. was about to get the E100s but found a much better deal. So far everything sounds ok, but not that great, how i would like it to be. Does anyone have any suggestions for a receiver not over $500, which will only be used for music. ONLY FOR MUSIC. please tell me if youve got an idea. I was thinking Marantz, but i belive i can get something less expensive, for it will only be used for music. So fprget about the movie features.
 

Silver Member
Username: Petergalbraith

Rimouski, Quebec Canada

Post Number: 529
Registered: Feb-04
You seem to be matching a $500 receiver with a $500 pair of speakers. That balance is a little off to me... You could do with less. Still, if you have $500 burning a hole in your pocket you won't regret a Marantz SR8400 from ubid. Otherwise, look at a Nad or h/k 2-channel integrated amplifier (for stereo music only).
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 442
Registered: Mar-05
Anonymous,

I second Peter. Check out Harman Audio on eBay for some great deals on both the 2-channel HK3480 and their other AVRs well under $500: the 130, 135, 230, 235, 330, and 335. You might even be able to swing the 430 for under $500.
 

Unregistered guest
I'd like to go back to the original post that started this thread and address a few things. First, the very wise person who stated that "your own ears" are the real gold standard is absolutely right. No matter what we elitists and lunatics think, or what something looks like on paper, what makes an individual happy is the best of all possible choices. That being said, I DO have a personal (lunatic) agenda of my own, and my personal feeling is that neither Sony nor anyone else has yet perfected a listenable digital amp so far. The new ES line (1100, 2100 and 3100) consists of two alalog amp sections (the 1100 and 2100) and the one dig, which is the 3100. It, like the 3000 before it, still not only sounds odd to me, but has insufferably high THD of .6 or .7 per cent, I forget which. Back in the late 70's Sherwood's labs did a study (which broke the company in the end, which is why it is dimestore stuff today) which indicated that the average human ear begins to notice THD at .2 per cent. This was subsequently confirmed by Bell Labs. Assuming this to be true (and my ears tell me it is) then the Sony digital amps, including the newest one, are all running around 3 times the threshold of human ability to notice, let alone tolerate, THD! I wouldn't call this an advance. On the other hand, I have one of those goofy looking little Kenwood RFU-6100 wireless surround speaker amps, rated at 50 wpc w/1.0 per cent THD @ 1000 hz, which means probably 25-30 watts 20 hz -20 khz, w/maybe .1 % THD, which still works fantastically well for the SURROUNDS! This is where the digital amps shine, and the Kenwood "thing" proves it can be done better than Sony has in its "washing machine" styled Big Mutha model (which, if it were not rated at full power, might yield a decent THD at about 120 wpc, which is what the 2100 is rated at!). Also, the ES line has been every bit as finely-crafted and wonderful in performance in MOST years, as the other high-enders such as Marantz, H-K, Yamaha, etc. (all of which, except Marantz, also make "department store" lines as well as high end stuff. All Sony non-ES stuff falls into that area with one exception: the middle-of-the-road DB series, which was created for venues not felt to be appropriate for the ES line and yet not Best Buy or Circuit City league.
I am the proud and happy owner of a Sony V444ES receiver (120 wx 5 channels @.05 % THD), the finest of a long line of Sony ES stuff that I've owned in additon to separates by Rotel, Yamaha and AudioSource. For all-in-one purposes the "V" series (a direct descendent of the legendary Sony DA777ES "holy grail" model), I would put up against ANY of the Rotel separates I have owned. It is good looking, clean
sounding, very uncolored and detailed, with a fantastically deep and unnervingly realistic soundstage, both in stereo and surround sound. So there. I have spoken. So let it be written. So let it be...uh....hmmm...
 

Silver Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 845
Registered: Mar-05
> That being said, I DO have a personal (lunatic) agenda of my own, and my personal feeling is that neither Sony nor anyone else has yet perfected a listenable digital amp so far.

AJ, have you ever listened to the Harman Kardon DPR-2005? Just curious. I figure if *anybody* can come up with a truly excellent digital amp it'd be HK.

I did listen to the JVC RX-F10 and found it very impressive especially given its $230 pricepoint. It was only about 15 minutes though so don't know if I would get listener fatigue over extended periods at high volume like some people have charged about digital receivers.
 

Paul C.
Unregistered guest
For what it's worth, I've recently won a DPR2005-Z from the Harmon site on E-Bay for less than 50% MSRP. For anyone interested, I will try to report back quickly what the SQ of the DPR2005 is to my ears. Am a long time HK user and have the AVR 510 and 310 currently using them as pre/pros in my systems. (Also greatly appreciate them as receivers in their own right...HK amp staging is the real deal.)

I have very neutral and revealing speakers in my Main system and have always enjoyed the analog side of sound. But room/location problems made it difficult through the years to achieve smoothly integrated Bass. With the passage of time it has become easier to use digital connections/paths almost exclusively for the greater Bass Management that is offered.

Planning to trial the new receiver for at least a month or so...unless I simply do not like the Digi-amp sound. In that case it will be sold and I will continue on to the 635. But I'll try to post some impressions of the SQ as soon as possible after it arrives no matter which way it goes.
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Facebook

Shop Related Deals

Directory

Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us