sacredheartattack, here's your file as a 2017 version so most can view it.
Thanks John! Much appreciated...
Stuart - Thank you as well. The time you obviously put into reading and responding to my post is wonderful. I can't thank you enough.
That's what the forum is for! Helping others out with advice.
I've never noticed much outside noise when down there. I will be checking into that soon.
Get yourself a sound level meter, or even an app on a smart phoned for very rough estimates, and measure the real levels in and around the house at various times of day. If you haven't moved in yet, or only recently, you might not yet be aware of some periodic noises, such as aircraft flying overhead at certain times or under certain weather conditions, if there's an airport fairly close by... or trains that only run on certain days or at certain times... or the neighbor that only mows his lawns on Saturdays... etc. Try to build up a "profile" of noises that might be a problem, each time you are there at the site.
But the biggest issues will likely be things within the house fittest, such as footsteps on the floor above, things dropped on the floor, doors opening and closing, fans, pumps, water lines, etc. Since those are all "structure borne" noise (vibrations present in the building structure itself), they are hard to isolate. Anything that is in direct contact with the building structure is a potential source of trouble, and here too you might not have experienced the full range of those if you only just moved in, or even more so if you haven't moved in yet. Something as simple as a vacuum cleaner sitting on the floor humming away, and the business end of that scraping across the floor...
You mentioned this space many times.
Yup! Because its important if you have it!
7' 10" is to the bottom of the joists. I just went and measured. 12" joists, 16" on center. This adds a whole foot to my height.
Excellent! That's good news! Assuming that you don't need much extra isolation, of course... That extra height is very useful, acoustically.
I assumed I would be hanging drywall below them in the live space. Are you suggesting leaving these open?
If at all possible, yes! Those joists are also useful, all by themselves, as they do produces some diffusion up there, but that extra foot of space is the best. As I mentioned previously, most musical instruments need space to sound good, and especially space above. Drums, for example, sound lousy under a low ceiling, but can sound great in the same size room with a much higher ceiling. Also, if you have a low ceiling then your drum overhead mics are suspended just a few inches below that, so you get major comb filtering happening at the mic, and things sound dull and even phasey. But with a higher ceiling, there can be several feet above the overheads, so no reflections, no comb filtering at the mic, and nice clean, airy, bright sound. So anything that you can do to increase the room height is A Very Good Thing!
Of course, if it turns out that you need to isolate your room, then that's a great pity, because you would lose that space, and a bit more. The only good news in that case is that you could get really good isolation, because you have a 12" air gap up there... Small consolation, though.... it would be better to have that air as part of your room, not part of your isolation system...
I was only somewhat aware of the ratios you mentioned. I will dig into the boards for info on them, but any specific articles you can point me to that will shorten my search would be awesome.
Here's a couple of tools that can help entertain you for a few hours!
Use one of these Room Ratio calculators to figure out the best dimensions for your room:
http://www.bobgolds.com/Mode/RoomModes.htm
https://amcoustics.com/tools/amroc
Both of those are very good, and will help you to decide how best to build your room. They give you tons of information that is really useful to help figure out the best dimensions, as well as other aspects of your room.
Here's something I wrote a while back on room, modes, that might be helpful for you. It's sort of long and convoluted, but I think it explains the issues reasonably well, if you can stick with it to the end!
------------
Room ratios is a whole major subject in studio design. It works like this: The walls of your studio create natural resonances in the air space between them, inside the room. (This is totally different from the MSM resonance of the walls themselves: this is all about what happens INSIDE the ROOM, not what happens inside the walls. Two totally different things.)
So you have resonant waves inside the room. We call those "standing waves" or "room modes". Those "modes" (resonances) occur at very specific frequencies that are directly related to the distances between the room boundaries (walls, floor, ceiling). They are called "standing waves" because they appear to be stationary inside the room: they are not REALLY stationary, since the energy is still moving through the room. But the pressure peaks and nulls always fall at the exact same points in the room each time the wave energy passes, so the "wave" seems to be fixed, static, and unmoving inside the room. If you play a pure tone that happens to be at the exact frequency of one of the "modes", then you can physically walk around inside the room and experience the "standing" nature of the wave: you will hear that tone grossly exaggerated at some points in the room, greatly amplified, while at other points it will sound normal, and at yet other points it will practically disappear: you won't be able to hear it at all, or you hear it but greatly attenuated, very soft.
The peaks and nulls fall at different places in the room for different frequencies. So the spot in the room where one mode was deafening might turn out to be the null for a different node.
Conversely, if you have a mode (standing wave) that forms at a specific frequency, then playing at a slightly different frequency might show no mode at all: for example, if a tone of exactly 73 Hz creates a standing wave that is clearly identifiable as you walk around the room, with major nulls and peaks, then a tone of 76 Hz might show no modes at all: it sounds the same at all points in the room. Because there are no natural resonances, no "room modes" associated with that frequency.
That's the problem. A BIG problem.
Of course, you
don't want that to happen in a control room, because it implies that you would hear different things at different places in the room, for any give song! At some places in the room, some bass notes would be overwhelming, while at other places the same notes would be muted. As you can imagine, if you happen to have your mix position (your ears) located at such a point in the room, you'd never be able to mix anything well, as you would not be hearing what the music REALLY sounds like: you would be hearing the way the room "colors" that sound instead. As you subconsciously compensate for the room modes while you are mixing, you could end up with a song that sounds great in that room at the mix position: the best ever! But it would sound terrible when you played it at any other location, such as in your car, on your iPhone, in your house, on the radio, at a club, in a church, etc. Your mix would not "translate".
And you also don't want major modal issues in a tracking room, for similar reasons: As an instrument plays up and down the scale, some notes will sound louder than others, and will "ring" longer. The instrument won't sound even and balanced.
OK, so now I have painted the scary-ugly "modes are terrible monsters that eat your mixes" picture. Now lets look at that a bit more in depth, to get the
real picture, and understand why they look bad, but aren't so bad in reality.
So let's go back to thinking about those room modes (also called "eigenmodes" sometimes): remember I said that they occur at very specific frequencies, and they are very narrow? This implies that if you played an E on your bass guitar, it might trigger a massive modal resonance, but then you play either a D or an F and there is no mode, so they sound normal. Clearly, that's a bad situation. But what if there was a room mode at every single frequency? What if there was one mode for E, a different mode for D and yet another one for F? In that case, there would be no problem, since all notes would still sound the same! Each note would trigger its own mode, and things would be happy again. If there were modes for every single frequency on the spectrum, and they all sounded the same, then you could mix in there with no problems!
And that's exactly what happens at higher frequencies. Just not at low frequencies. Because of "wavelength"...
It works like this: remember I said that modes are related to the distance between walls? It's a very simple relationship. Remember I said the waves are "standing" because the peaks and nulls occur at the same spot in the room? In simple terms, for every frequency where a wave fits in exactly between two walls, then there will be a standing wave. And also for exactly
twice that frequency, since two wavelengths of that note will now fit. And the same for
three times that frequency, since three full waves will now fit in between the same walls. Etc. All the way up the scale.
So if you have a room mode at 98 Hz in your room, then you will also have modes at 196 Hz (double), 294 (triple), 392 (x4), 490(x5), 588(x6), 686(x7) etc., all the way up. If the very next mode in your room happened to be at 131 Hz, then there would also be modes at 262 Hz(x2), 393(x3), 524(x4), 655(x5), etc.
That's terrible, right? There must be
thousands of modes at higher frequencies!!! That must be awful!
Actually, no. That's a GOOD thing. You
WANT lots of modes, for the reasons I gave above: If you have many modes for each note on the scale, then the room sounds the same for ALL notes, which is what you want. It's
good, not bad.
But now let's use a bit of math and common sense here, to see what the real problem is.
If your room has a mode at 98Hz, and the next mode is at 131 Hz, that's a difference of 32%! 98 Hz is a "G2". So you have a mode for "G2". but your very next mode is a "C3" at 131Hz. That's five notes higher on the scale: your modes completely skip over G2#, A2, A2#, and B2. No modes for them! So those four notes in the middle sound perfectly normal in your room, but the G2 and C3 are loud and long.
However, move up a couple of octaves: ...
There's a harmonic of your 98Hz mode at 588 Hz, and there's a harmonic of your 131 Hz mode at 524 Hz. 524 Hz is C5 on the musical scale, and 588 Hz is a D5. They are only two notes apart! Not five, as before.
Go up a bit more, and we have one mode at 655 and another at 686. 655 is an E5, and 686 is an F5. they are adjacent notes. Nothing in between! We have what we want: a mode for every note.
The further up you go, the closer the spacing is. In fact, as you move up the scale even higher, you find
several modes for each note. Wonderful!
So at high frequencies, there is no problem: plenty of modes to go around and keep the music sounding good.
The problem is at low frequencies, where the modes are few and far between.
The reason there are few modes at low frequencies is very simple: wavelengths are very long compared to the size of the room. At 20 Hz (the lower limit of the audible spectrum, and also E0 on the organ keyboard), the wavelength is over 56 feet (17m)! So your room would have to be 56 feet long (17 meters long) in order to have a mode for 20 Hz.
Actually, I've been simplifying a bit: it turns out that what matters is not the
full wave, but the
half wave: the full wave has to exactly fit into the "there and back" distance between the walls, so the distance between the walls needs to be
half of that: the half-wavelength. So to get a mode for 20 Hz, your room needs to be 56 / 2 = 28 feet long (8.5M) . Obviously, most home studios do not have modes at 20 Hz, because there's no way you can fit a 28 foot (eight meter) control room into most houses!
So clearly, the longest available distance defines your lowest mode. If we take a hypothetical dimensions as an example (typical of a very small home studio), and say the length of the control room is 13 feet (4m), the width is 10 feet (3m), and the height is 8 feet. (2.5M) So the lowest mode you could possibly have in that room, would be at about 43 Hz (fits into 13 feet or 4M perfectly). That's an "F1" on your bass guitar.
The next highest mode that you room could support is the one related to the next dimension of the room: In this case, that would be width, at 10 feet / 3M. That works out to 56.5 Hz. That's an "A1#" on your bass guitar. Five entire notes up the scale.
And your third major mode would be the one related to the height of the room, which is 8 feet /2.5M, and that works out to 71 Hz, or C2# on the bass guitar. Another four entire notes up the scale.
There are NO other fundamental modes in that room. So as you play every note going up the scale on your bass guitar (or keyboard), you get huge massive ringing at F, A# and C#, while all the other notes sound normal. As you play up the scale, it goes "tink.tink.tink.BOOOOM.tink.tink.tink.tink.BOOOOOM.tink.tink.tink.BOOOOOM.tink.tink...."
Not a happy picture.
There are harmonic modes of all those notes higher up the scale, sure. But in the low end, your modes are very few, and very far between.
So, what some people say is "If modes are bad, then we have to get rid of them". Wrong! What you need is MORE modes, not less. Ideally, you need a couple of modes at every single possible note on the scale, such that all notes sound the same in your room. In other words, the reverberant field would be smooth and even. Modes would be very close together, and evenly spread.
So trying to "get rid of modes" is a
bad idea. And even if it were a good idea, it would still be impossible! Because modes are related to walls, the only way to get rid of modes is with a bulldozer! Knock down the walls...
That's a drastic solution, but obviously the only way to get a control room that has no modes at all, is to have no walls! Go mix in the middle of a big empty field, sitting on top of a 56 foot (17 M) ladder, and you'll have no modes to worry about....
Since that isn't feasible, we have to learn to live with modes.
Or rather, we have to learn to live with the LACK of modes in the low end. As I said, the problem is not that we have too many modes, but rather that we don't have enough of them in the low frequencies.
Obviously, for any give room there is a point on the spectrum where there are "enough" modes. Above that point, there are several modes per note, but below it there are not.
There's a mathematical method for determining where that point is: a scientist called Schroeder figured it out, years ago, so it is now known as the Schroeder frequency for the room. Above the Schroeder frequency for a room, modes are not a problem, because there are are lots of them spaced very close together. Below the Schroeder frequency, there's a problem: the modes are spaced far apart, and unevenly. (The Schroeder frequency is a bit more complex than just that, since it also considers treatment, but this gives you an idea...)
So what can we do about that?
All we can do is to choose a "room ratio" that has the modes spaced out sort of evenly, and NOT choose a ratio where the modes are bunched up together. For example, if your room is 10 feet long and 10 feet wide and 10 feet high (3m x 3m x 3m), then
all of the modes will occur at the exact same frequency: 56.5 Hz. So the resonance when you play an A1 on the bass, or cello, or hit an A1 on the keyboard, will by tripled! It will be three times louder. The nulls will be three times deeper. That's a bad situation, so don't ever choose room dimensions that are the same as each other.
You get the same problem for dimensions that are multiples of each other: a room 10 feet high (3m) by 20 feet wide (6m) by 30 feet long (9m) is also terrible. All of the second harmonics of 10 feet will line up with the 20 foot modes, and all of the third harmonics will line up with the 30 foot modes, so you get the same "multiplied" effect. Bad.
In other words, you want a room where the dimensions are mathematically different from each other, with no simple relationship to each other.
That brings up the obvious question: What ratio is best?
Answer: there isn't one!
Over the years, many scientists have tested many ratios, both mathematically and also in the real world, and come up with some that are really good. The ratios they found are named after them: Sepmeyer, Louden, Boner, Volkmann, etc. Then along came a guy called Bolt, who drew a graph showing all possible ratios, and he highlighted the good ones found by all the other guys, and predicted by mathematical equations, plus a few of his own: If you plot your own room ratio on that graph, and it falls inside the "Bolt area", then likely it is a good one, and if it falls outside the "Bolt area", then likely it is a bad one. Sort of.
So, there are no perfect ratios, only good ratios and bad ratios.
It is impossible to have a "perfect" ratio in a small room, simply because that would require enough modes to have one mode for every note on the musical scale, but that's the entire problem with small rooms! There just are not enough modes in the low end. So you can choose a ratio that spreads them a bit more this way or a bit more that way, but all you are doing is re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic, in pleasant-looking patterns. The problem is not the location of the deck chairs; the problem is that your boat is sunk!: Likewise for your studio: the problem is not the locations of the modes: the problem is that your room is sunk. No matter what you do with the dimensions, you
cannot put a mode at every note, unless you make the room bigger. It is physically impossible.
But that does not mean that your room will be bad. That's the common perception, and it is dead wrong.
All of this leads to the question you didn't ask yet, but are probably heading for: What can I do about it?
Here's the thing: Modes are only a problem if they "ring". The wave is only a problem if the energy builds up and up and up, with each passing cycle, until it is screaming, and then the "built up" energy carries on singing away, even after the original note stops. That's the problem. If you stop playing the A1 on your guitar, and the room keeps on playing an A1 for a couple of seconds, because it "stored" the resonant energy and is now releasing it, then that's a BIG problem! The room is playing tunes that never were in the original music!
If a mode doesn't ring like that, then it is no longer a major issue. (It is still an issue for other reasons, just not a major one....)
So how do you stop a mode? You can't stop it from
being there. But you
CAN stop it from "ringing". You can "damp" the resonance sufficiently that the mode dies away fast, and does not ring. You remove the resonant energy and convert it into heat: no more problem! In other words, it's not good if you own a large angry dog that barks all the time and bights your visitors, but it's fine to own a large angry dog with a muzzle on his mouth, so he cannot bark and cannot bight!
You do that with "bass trapping". A bass trap is like the dog muzzle. It doesn't get rid of the problem, but it does keep it under control. You use strategically placed acoustic treatment devices inside the room that absorb the ringing of the mode, then it cannot ring. There are several ways to do that, with different strategies, but the good news is that in most rooms it is possible to get significant damping on the modes, so that they don't ring badly, and don't cause problems. Note that bass trapping does not absorb the
mode: it just absorbs the
ringing. Some people don't understand this, and think that the bass trapping makes the modes go away: it doesn't. All it does is to damp them. The modes are still there, and still affect the room acoustics in other ways, but with good damping, at least they don't "ring" any more.
And that is the secret to making a control room good in the low end! Choose a good ratio to keep the modes spread around evenly, then damp the hell out of the low end, so modes cannot ring. It's that simple.
The smaller the room, the more treatment you need. And since those waves are huge (many feet long), you need huge bass trapping (many feet long/wide/high/deep). It takes up lots of space, and the best place for it is in the corners of the room, because that's where all modes terminate. If you want to find a mode in your room, go look for it in the corner: it will be there. All modes have a pressure node in two or more corners, so by treating the corners, you are guaranteed of hitting all the modes.
As I said, there is no single "best" ratio, but there are good ones. You can use a "Room Mode Calculator" to help you figure out which "good ones" are within reach of the possible area you have available, then choose the closest good one, and go with that. And stay away from the bad ones.
Arguably, Sepmeyer's first ratio is the "best", since it can have the smoothest distribution of modes... but only if the room is already within a certain size range. Other ratios might be more suitable if your room has a different set of possible dimensions. So there is no "best".
But that's not the entire story: So far, all the modes I have mentioned are only related to two walls across the room, opposite from each other. I mentioned modes that form along the length axis of the room (between the front and back wall), others that form along the width axis (between left and right walls), and others that form on the height axis (between floor and ceiling): Those are the easiest ones to understand, because they "make sense" in your head when you think about them. Those are called "axial modes", because they form along the major axes of the room: length axis, width axis, height axis.
However, there are also other modes that can form between
four surfaces, instead of just two. For example, there are modes that can bounce around between all four walls, or between the front and back walls as well as the ceiling and floor: those are called "tangential modes". And there are other modes that can form between all
six surfaces at once: they involve all four walls plus the ceiling and the floor. Those are called "oblique modes".
The complete set of modes in your room consists of the axial modes, plus the tangential modes, plus the oblique modes.
That's what a good room mode calculator (a.k.a. "room ratio calculator") will show you. There are bad calculators that only show you the axial modes, which is pretty pointless, and the good ones show you all three types. The ones I listed above are both "good" ones.
However, modes aren't that important, despite all the hype they get: Modes are just one aspect of room design, but there are many more. It's wise to choose a ratio that is close to one of the good ones, or inside the Bolt area, but
you do NOT need to go nuts about it! There's no need to nudge things around by millimeters or smalls fractions of an inch, hoping to get a "better" ratio. Just stay away from the bad ones, get close to a good one, and you are done. End of story.
----------
So there you have it! "Everything you ever wanted to know about modes, but were afraid to ask"!
Now, back to your room, and your questions...:
The asymmetry I mentioned is more my lack of vocabulary. I mean I don't want a cube room. I know the idea is not to have walls facing each other,
That's actually a bit of a myth... sort of.. with some truth behind it... but not really...
If you have parallel walls, then you run the risk of getting a different type of "resonance", completely unrelated to modes. This type is called "flutter echo", and it's basically just a bunch of higher frequency sound waves bouncing back and forth between two parallel surfaces. If you clap your hands sharply when you are between two acoustically reflective surfaces, then you an hear it as a sort of "zingy" sound. One way of dealing with that is, indeed, to angle the walls. And that will, indeed, totally kill the flutter.... however, you have to angle them a total of about 12° or more to achieve that. It could be 6° on each side, or 9° on one wall and 3° on the other: as long as the total is above 12°, you should be OK. But angling walls is complex, and wastes space. And contrary to popular belief, angling walls does NOT get rid of modes! It just changes the mode from one frequency to another, or one type to another... but it is still there. Angling kills flutter, but does nothing for modes. In fact, it does nothing for anything else either! Even worse, angling walls eats into the room space. Losing space is not a good idea, in general...
It turns out that the best shape for a control room, is a simple rectangle. Period. Depending on the design concept that you choose (eg. RFZ, NER, FTB, CID, MY, etc.), you might need to angle OTHER large surfaces inside the room, such as the front faces of your flush-mount speaker modules (sometimes called "soffits"), but the room itself can still be rectangular.
There's another issue here too: those room mode calculators only work for rectangular rooms. If you add more walls, or angle walls, or change the shape much in any way, then you can no longer use those simple calculators to figure out the modal response. You then need to resort to much more complex methods for figuring them out, such as FEM/FEA or BEM...
So, I would suggest that you keep your final inner room rectangular. The decide on the design concept you want to use (I recommend RFZ!), and angle inner surfaces as needed to achieve that.
so what I was looking for is something along the lines of "this is a room shape you should go for".
Ok: "Rectangular". There, that was easy!
Also be aware, I hope to have enough space in this room for "not live" instruments. I would like to fit a few keyboard type instruments in this space, as well as an area for an artist to listen and be able to play a guitar for example (with the signal going to a mic'ed up cabinet in the live room).
No problem. Your space is plenty big enough for that. You have the luxury of a really nice sized control room: it has the potential to be great.
I am basing this on one post I saw about how to handle HVAC. It's a very preliminary thought.
HVAC is a big part of studios. And HVAC is big, all by itself! Most people don't realize just how big it is... And especially for studios. Isolating a room properly for recording or mixing implies making it completely air-tight... but of course, people need to breathe! So you need HVAC. But chopping holes in your isolation walls to run the ducts through, also destroys the isolation! So you need to build "silencer boxes" that stop the sound getting through, but allow the air to get through. You also have to figure out how MUCH air you need to get through, then design the whole system so that the right amount of air moves slowly... because if it moves too fast, it makes noises that get picked up by your mics and get into your mix. So you have to design the system to move the right volume of air flow at the right velocity of air flow while passing through ducts that stop the sound from getting through and all while keeping the static pressure low enough that your fans and AHU are not overworked.... and at the same time providing enough capacity to deal with the sensible heat load and the latent heat load, and also ensuring that the air moves smoothly through the entire room, .... That's all!
Simple!
There's lots to figure out with HVAC. It's a large part of the overall studio design. I often spend as much time designing the HVAC system as I do designing all the rest of the studio...
I will be of course discussing all of this with an HVAC specialist
Hopefully you can find one who has some knowledge of HVAC for studios... it' a bit different from HVAC for houses, offices, shops, schools, etc.
This is super interesting to me, especially with the issues of the size of the space...I could build a booth towards the front, which would help cut the size of the room down.
Right. It makes sense all around. Also, since your live room is on the other side, you might be able to put a window or door through to the live room as well, so it has access both ways, or at least sight lines both ways. Musicians do like to be in visual contact when they are playing together: it helps to keep things "tight".
This actually surprised me! I would think bare concrete would be too reflective.
The general "rule" in studios is simple: hard floor, soft ceiling. There's a number of reasons why a hard floor makes sense, both practical reasons and also acosutic reasons, as well as psycho-acoustic reasons. One of those is that your brain uses the floor as a reference to understand the acoustics of the room, and it uses the floor, rather than the walls or ceiling, for a very simple reason: wherever you go in life, always, everywhere, your ears are the exact same height above the floor. Thus, your brain is very accustomed to "hearing" the floor, as it's always there, a the same distance: it knows what "floor" should sound like. And if the floor is NOT there, it has to work harder to figure things out. Even worse, if there is no floor but there is another hard surface in the room (such as the ceiling, or a wall), then your brain tries to use that as though it were the floor... Psycho-acoustics is the science that deals with how we humans perceive sound, rather than with how the sound actually is. Mics and ears work very differently. It's important that your studio should provide a great psycho-acoustic experience, so your sessions are pleasant, non-fatiguing, natural, easy on the ears, etc. A hard floor is part of the key to that. Look around at pictures of pro studios from around the world (especially John's studios, right here on the forum). How many do you see with thick pile carpeting on the floor?
Pretty much all of them have hard, sold, rigid, reflective floors. Rugs are used when there is a need to change the acoustic response for some reason, or even for simple practical reasons: the spikes under a drum kit don't dig into slid concrete very well! They do much better with a rug....
So, plain old concrete is a great studio floor surface. If your concrete is in reasonably good shape, then you could consider polishing it, or staining it, for a nice visual effect. But if it is cracked, flaky, or just plain ugly, then you could consider laying laminate flooring, ceramic tiles, linoleum, or something else that will still give it a hard, solid, rigid surface... and without taking up too much height! Keep it thin...
You're correct here. After I read your responses I did a little more pricing. I did plan on building the walls myself (with a little help from some experience friends). So I will save on building the walls. Cutting out flooring will help as well. Like I said though, I can go much higher on my budget if I need to. Im going to spend the next couple days measuring and pricing.
Right. They key to estimating the true cost of building a studio, is to take the figure you first though of, multiply it by a random number between 2 and 10, divide by a small fraction, add in yesterday's date, them sum all that with the total GDP of a small country... that should get you in the ball park!
It always turns out to be more expensive than you imagined. There's so much that you probably haven't considered yet, and it all adds up...
One thing that might help: if you don't have the budget to do it all at once, then just do one room for now and use that to make money, so you can then do the other room a year or so down the line. Eg, build just the control room for now, and make money mixing stuff tracked elsewhere. Or just build the live room, and rent it out as a rehearsal space, as well as tracking stuff to be mixed elsewhere.
Thanks again for all you put into this! I would be more than happy to continue talking with you on this!
- Stuart -
