Jump to content

Basic sound kit plans


Anatole
 Share

Recommended Posts

After much research, I've started to piece together a kit plan. I'd be keen to hear your thoughts, given how useful this forum has been throughout!

Budget: this is relatively limited, probably in the region of £3k ($3.7k at the current terrible exchange rates).

What is this for: This is for my film production company. We have professional sound recordists on any decent budget project, but the lower stuff we need to do in house. We shoot a wide range of projects, ranging from narrative to documentary. 70% indoors. Situations include indoor dialogue in quiet environments, both for short films and interviews; vox pops in noisier places; and events, sometimes with speakers miked up and other times not. 

Current kit: We currently own a Zoom H6, NTG-3, 2x Sony UWP-D11 wireless lavs, Rode aluminium boom pole, Rode windshield and 2x Tentacle Sync boxes. However we have several issues at it stands. H6 physical build isn't great, with the headphone jack currently broken; H6 audio quality is also an issue – not just pre-amps, but crucially dynamic range, so we end up peaking if there's an unexpected laugh etc.; H6 can't properly do timecode; and NTG-3 is distinctly average indoors, so it's effectively become a backup for our lav mics. The boom pole is pretty crap.

What we need: A highly reliable and versatile setup which performs better for both indoor dialogue and for noisier environments. We also need timecode capability. Since users will often be less experienced, I don't think we'll be mixing on the fly and instead will probably work of ISOs or potentially an auto-mix on the less critical projects. We also won't need that many tracks – again we'll probably only encounter those situations where we can afford to get a specialist with their own kit on the project.

---

Current plans:

Recorder. So currently I'm looking at a used recorder, due to the low budget. Options include the Zaxcom Maxx or a Sound Devices 744t @ £1800 including bag and cards.

Handheld mic. Additionally we're looking at a handheld cardioid mic for vox pops in noisy environments. Everybody seems to suggest the Beyer M58 but I'm not sure whether we'd want to have an omnidirectional mic, especially since this will only be used when there's a lot of background noise. Something like the Sennheiser MD46 looks relatively suitable. Cost is around £150 new.

Indoor boom mic. I've been looking specifically at the MKH8000 series. Glen Trew apparently recommends the MKH8040. Something like that looks great for the quietest locations, but I'm concerned that off-axis pick up might be too great. There are situations I can imagine where the handheld mic might not be suitable and we'd like to crack out the boom mic. In an ideal world, we'd get an MKH8060 and MKH8040 perhaps (both at around £650 new)... but that would probably blow our budget. Unfortunately Sennheiser doesn't seem to be selling the capsules on their own anymore, so we can't really take advantage of modularity to cut down on cost. 

So the boom mic is probably the thing I'm most uncertain about.

Miscellaneous. At present we're looking at a new boom pole, 2m with internal coiled cable, e.g. Ambient Recording QXS-550 @ £205. Then additionally a Rycote windshield – though these seem pricey (@ £300). Also a Tac!T filter cable @ £40. And miscellaneous other TRS and XLR cables, coming to an extra £50.

So total cost would be £3200 which is a bit over budget.

---

What does everybody think? In particular, what should I be doing about the indoor boom mic selection? Am I allocating funds correctly?

Big thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps a mixer would suit your needs better than a new multitrack recorder. Much of my work these days is documentary style for television, and we go straight to camera from the mixer. Boom hard left, radios hard right. The multitrack is usually left in the car. You can source a 2nd hand sqn or 442 for well under 1k. 

You can always break out the h6 at times where you need isos. With the mixer in front, your dynamic range will increase, as will sound quality. A couple of 2nd hand g3s should come in at around 500 pounds. 

MKH50 for indoors as suggested by RPSharman, and invest in some good wind protection for this and the lavs. If the wind is hitting your mics, everything else falls down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that there should just be built in room in any budget for someone professional to handle sound. The times where your non pro in house guy messes up will cost you a lot more than the cost of a good person with their own proper gear will cost. It is also assurance that the job will be done right and you won't lose your client. If your clients can't afford the basics of sound and picture then you may consider going after clients that handle their budgets better. 

Every company I've ever worked for that had in house gear that they used for the so called "smaller projects" had beat up, poorly cared for, barely useable gear, which is how equipment gets when in the hands of non professionals, and these companies always seem to learn the lesson of having a pro on board, but still try to be cheap and have me use their gear, which of course is a liability once again. 

I strongly recommend that any project that needs sound should have a proper budget for sound. You'll get burnt along the way if you don't encourage your clients to do this. It's easy, just add it as an à la carte item. "You need sound, ok it's this much" and use a quote from your usual guys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your gigs are infrequent, also consider renting pieces to try them out.

I agree with the others, for in-house gear you really can't go wrong with a good used SD 442, MKH50, and find a couple good condition used Lectros - UCR411 Rx, maybe even LMa Tx's with Sanken COS-11D capsules. A boom, 2 wireless lavs, a 442 feeding hard wired to your camera plus backup recording on your H6. That'll get most jobs done well, if you have someone who understands mic placements and gain staging well enough to get it right, and a bit of mixing. For bigger jobs you can rent what you need, but in that case you'd need someone mixing anyway.

But ultimately, we need to work harder to educate clents. "Sound" isn't something to be not paying for in their video projects, even if it's part of an "inclusive" price rather than a line item, it can't be free. The bid neds to at least cover the cost of good gear. The only reason they believe it's optional is because these "production companies" let them believe it's something they can just scratch off the bid without losing quality. Good gear costs money, trained techs cost money, and poor equipment or poor quality work hurts the project's quality and your professional reputation. So you end up buying good stuff anyway, then including it for free, to save your reputation. Your best honest way forward is to understand the value and technical challenge of good audio well enough to explain it to a client well enough that they don't mind including it in the project pricing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general we do push hard to get external sound recordists. And usually at the very least, we'd end up using somebody externally who's at early stages in their sound career.

I know full well how important it is to get professionals on the team. Unfortunately the reality is, when you're a young production company like we are, you can't have the luxury of constantly turning down work. We'd definitely wouldn't exist now if we did that. 

There are also cases where we're either doing work effectively pro bono for charities or working on our short films etc., and I really don't want even to ask our sound recordists to do those for free. 

And I have been bitten by these decisions - we have ended up with poor audio or we have lost audio on a couple of occasions. Nonetheless I still fundamentally wouldn't change our approach - hire an experienced professional for the critical work, and someone less experienced (but without their kit) for the lower end stuff where in the very worst case we can redo the shoot. 

And also if we can get a kit decent enough to support budding sound recordists along the way, then I think that's a good thing to do too. 

Back onto topic...I had originally been thinking about the MKH50 but oddly it's a lot more expensive new in the UK than the 8050. I know handling noise is bad on the 8050, but does the 50 justify its 80% higher price?

We have an Alexa mini which has terrible audio inputs / monitoring. I'm not sure how realistic it is to run the mixer directly. What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Alexa mini will have perfectly good audio if fed properly from your 442. You can add the pro module to make connecting easier. You can get an 8060, but I'd avoid the 8050. It's harder to keep quiet in a zeppelin as well as a traditional mount. It'll be fine in a stand for interviews, but doesn't make sense to have 2 mics.

This is another perfect example of false economy, however, that people blow all their budget on a fancy camera and have nothing left to make the rest of the project professional. Unless you bought it to rent out, or you own a drone company. I can assure you a good-sounding short, or charity shoot, shot on a consumer DSLR will be WAY more effective than a poor-sounding project shot on an Alexa. If you have the money for an Alexa, you really ought to re-think your approach of hiring students using in-house gear. You only have one chance to make a good first impression, and your free client will never hire you for paid projects later if you look unprofessional or deliver poor quality. But to each their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going deeper into the "hire a sound guy" topic; Recording or mixing sound on small shoots seems like a really easy job that any PA or in house guy can do. While technically it may appear simple (clip on a mic, hold a boom, push a button), what really makes it difficult is the experience of hearing and judging whether something sounds right or not. Therefore working with sound-wise inexperienced or insensitive people will save you money in the beginning, but likely bring irreversibly insufficient quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I come from a more visually based background but have always had a desire for excellent sound, and I agree fully with RPSharman regarding the Alexa Mini. Obviously, the camera you buy depends on your needs, but poor sound quality with a slightly better image is far worse than good sound quality with a slightly worse image.

Also, I have a 744t that I'll sell to you for cheaper than £1800. PM me if you're interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$100,000 camera package

$3,000 for sound package

Something doesn't make sense here.  Try budgeting closer to $15,000 and you could put together a decent basic sound kit of two lavs, boom and mixer/recorder.  I don't think you'll find too much assistance from this forum in building a "kind of good enough" kit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go with Zoom F4 (which likely will be a better fit for your needs than the Zoom F8) and Audix SCX-1 HC, which will leave plenty of room in your budget for upgrading your lavs (to Oscar SoundTech 801) and all the various other bits and bobs you'll want. (btw, a 2m boom pole seems incredibly short! I'd buy a mid length one instead, or if you're getting a 2m one, get a long one as well so you've got options for when it is needed)

Get a Sony UTX-P03 too to go with your Sony wireless to use for vox pops. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boom Mic: Used, Sennhesier mkh416p, Rycote softy (not basket) and cables - lots available used, (AK47 of microphones - leave the exotic stuff).

Boom pole: Used, Carbon, Panamic if you can find 1.

RX: Used, Wisycom dual RX (MCR42s), probably compatible with your current Sony TX, compatible with most analogue TX, very versatile so can be integrated into a larger sound kit (when you hire a sound operator) for things like a camera hop.

TX: What you are currently using until you can get better. Sanken Cos-11 capsules for whatever system you are using. 

Talk to your local rental house about Zaxcom recorders if really want to go that way. For me personally it was important to be able to hire the same kit that I own so I went with Sound Devices (633) as all the rental houses have these and they can be serviced in Europe. In your position I would go for the Zoom F4. Separate mixer recorder set ups (eg 744+442) mean a biggish bag, lots of cables and more batteries - as weight lifting goes it is 'high quality' but the weight is not necessary in this day and age. 

I run NP1 batteries with a hawkwood battery shoe and stacking 'Dtap' connectors but if I needed to replace these tomorrow I would probably go for a camera battery with a 'Dtap' O/P. The cables are cheap and easy to make, you wont need a 'shoe'/'sledge' to get the power out and you may already have something like these for your camera. The Tracer LiFePO (or LiPo) batteries (deben) also look like a good deal as they include a charger.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of sounding like I'm beating you up.. I'm not here.. But.. I'm still reeling at your quote..

"And I have been bitten by these decisions - we have ended up with poor audio or we have lost audio on a couple of occasions. Nonetheless I still fundamentally wouldn't change our approach"

Isn't this the very definition of insanity?  Doing the same thing, over and over, yet expecting a different result, and not learning from it??  If you won't learn from your own mistakes, why are you here asking what we think?

 

Sorry.. not meaning to be harsh.

-Richard

 

 

On 10/23/2016 at 6:57 AM, Christian Spaeth said:

Going deeper into the "hire a sound guy" topic; Recording or mixing sound on small shoots seems like a really easy job that any PA or in house guy can do. While technically it may appear simple (clip on a mic, hold a boom, push a button), what really makes it difficult is the experience of hearing and judging whether something sounds right or not. Therefore working with sound-wise inexperienced or insensitive people will save you money in the beginning, but likely bring irreversibly insufficient quality.

Best reply EVER!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're asking in the wrong forum. This is a gathering place for people who got into sound because they appreciate it, can hear the difference between a clean track and one that says 'amateur production', and have spent the time [and made the mistakes] to learn how to do it right. 

From the choices you've made, it seems like you're much more concerned with picture. That's not intended as an insult. But to get the answers you want based on the assumptions you've made, you'd be better off asking in a camera forum. 

[Before other forum members accuse me of trolling... think about it. The OP wants what he'd consider usable sound for what we'd consider an impossible budget, using what we'd consider untrained operators. It's possible his definition of 'usable' sound is a lot less than anything we'd ever accept... and a bunch of DPs or shooter/editor/producers might be able to understand his goal better.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jay Rose said:

You're asking in the wrong forum. This is a gathering place for people who got into sound because they appreciate it, can hear the difference between a clean track and one that says 'amateur production', and have spent the time [and made the mistakes] to learn how to do it right. 

From the choices you've made, it seems like you're much more concerned with picture. That's not intended as an insult. But to get the answers you want based on the assumptions you've made, you'd be better off asking in a camera forum. 

[Before other forum members accuse me of trolling... think about it. The OP wants what he'd consider usable sound for what we'd consider an impossible budget, using what we'd consider untrained operators. It's possible his definition of 'usable' sound is a lot less than anything we'd ever accept... and a bunch of DPs or shooter/editor/producers might be able to understand his goal better.]

+1 to Jay and John!

Every time I read a post like this it makes me cringe. Bottom line is your final product will only be as good as its sound, not the picture. The people who are or will be successful know this already. I get work from film school students who want to ace their final projects. Even they understand there's no shortcuts or simple tricks with sound. It's a craft that takes years to learn and a lifetime to master. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Anatole has said the company will hire a recordist / kit for the decent budget stuff so what's to complain about. They've already bought a camera (as a production outfit - not a camera team) so why not get some basic sound recording gear that can be used on small projects and as ADDITIONAL items on proper projects? Maybe invest in some in-house avid/lightworks/ fcp/ pt/ nuendo too?

I absolutely agree with Robert in suggesting getting an MKH50 - superb and bulletproof and an excellent investment. The 50 is easier (with onboard cut and hpf) than the 8050, and the tighter pattern will be more useful than the 40 for most purposes. Perhaps look for a good condition one secondhand (which is a decent plan for most high cost items where wear isn't a great issue).

I'd also look for a (decent SH) MKH416PH. A workhorse that will last forever (use your ntg3 until you grab a bargain). And the Bayer for voxpops.

The new zoom F4 might be a decent absolute budget recorder to consider. A more versatile option could be to pick up a second hand SD552 which seems to go for about 1200 quid in uk. Only 2 recording tracks and TC IN only but a heavy duty mixer with direct outs and multiple output options including AES. If you considered upping the company investment I'd probably look to get a SD633 but that's beyond your original post.

I agree get a good carbon fibre pole. Personally I wouldn't put an internally coiled one into unskilled hands, and it must be much longer than 2m! If you are doing a fair amount of 'short' booming I might consider getting one of those new rode 3 piece carbon fibre micro poles (in ADDITION to a proper pole) which could double as a pretty interview stand when attached to a heavy base such as a Canford S139. I would also weigh up what much of your work actually is and build up items to have 'in house' to offer to outside recordists as well as self use: quality/smart mic stands (like the K&M 26200), table stands, boom caddy, pop screen ... The best thing you could do here (and in general) is ask two or three of your 'most regularly hired' outside recordists to guide you in what they would like you to buy as 'house items' - they may even suggest you get carpets, acoustic panels or an acoustic table - only they can really suggest things to make their life easier and your quality to go up.

Finally, a couple of pairs of good headphones; good windshielding (I'd personally invest in a top full kit with new jammer, but supersofties and the new bubblebee with fur also to consider); full cabling options for gear plus 10m looms and yet more cables plus dedicated cables for regular setups - so the hired in guy/gal can have the option to go straight to 'plan A' ; battery setup for gear and options again (hirose, xlr4) for an outside bod to make use of it.

Again - assuming you're being honest in your statement to 'hire whenever possible' - the first and last suggestions to what you eventually look for should be to your most experienced regular freelancers, and they should understand that you are looking to augment, enhance and not REPLACE their own hire kit(s).

Best of luck,

Jez Adamson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for the advice from many of you! Particularly big thanks to Jez, Daniel and several others.

I understand the concern that some of you raise, and it's also one that I'm very aware of myself. Without failure, the first person we hire on set is always the sound recordist – even prior to the DoP.

We would of course much rather focus on work where the entire team is made up of professionals but sometimes that's just not possible. It's tempting to revert to such phrases as "Sub-par work gets you sub-par clients" (John) but in reality running a business is much more complex than that.

Quote

You only have one chance to make a good first impression, and your free client will never hire you for paid projects later if you look unprofessional or deliver poor quality.

RPSharman – perhaps it's the case that we're doing projects for charities because we actually want to do some genuine pro bono work rather than try to glean work off them in the future? But that's our choice to support a cause, and I certainly would not want time and time again to ask our sound recordists to work without charge. That, to me, would be unfair and exploitative.

I'd rather not engage in a debate on the business front – for a start I haven't offered much information about my business, so many of the comments are rather too speculative. Suffice to say, this is not a typical case of a production company not prioritising sound.

Quote

Something doesn't make sense here.  Try budgeting closer to $15,000 and you could put together a decent basic sound kit of two lavs, boom and mixer/recorder.  I don't think you'll find too much assistance from this forum in building a "kind of good enough" kit.

Jesse – perhaps this is the issue that a lot of you have missed. If we wanted (naively) to replace a sound recordist on all our shoots, we'd put together a £15k package. We're not trying to do that. Why do we have a £70k in camera equipment? Because we don't want to have to choose our DoPs on the basis of what cameras they own. 

Quote

And I have been bitten by these decisions - we have ended up with poor audio or we have lost audio on a couple of occasions. Nonetheless I still fundamentally wouldn't change our approach

Richard – you're right, this was poorly worded. What I meant is that at the low end, we inevitably have to do a lot of shoots which help us meet our fixed costs, but which fundamentally are much less critical than the bigger projects that we do.

This is what I meant: for every project I make the judgment of the degree to which failure is serious. Any decent sized project, failure with sound is totally critical and screws us completely. For a basic interview with a crew of two, if in the worst case we lose the sound, we can shoot it again. Of course this happens rarely, and we have conversely lost sound when using a professional recordist. But the most we can do is take the necessary precautions and hire the best people we know, when we can.

If somehow a project is important to our reputation and it's budget is too low to afford a professional sound recordist, then we simply won't take it on. 

Quote

This is another perfect example of false economy, however, that people blow all their budget on a fancy camera and have nothing left to make the rest of the project professional.

Quote

I come from a more visually based background but have always had a desire for excellent sound, and I agree fully with RPSharman regarding the Alexa Mini.

RPSharman and Joseph: this is not a zero-sum game. Do you treat your investment in your equipment in the same sort of way that you treat your ordinary expenses, such as travel expenses? Of course not.

I have certainly not indicated that we're spending the production budget of a single project on a camera. We are a production company, and we produce several projects every month. If we didn't have the camera we'd be hiring it in every single time. This was an investment.

It is simply a fact that it's been a good purchase, and that we will make our money back on it in the first couple of years. Above all, it allows us to approach our DoPs on the basis of their actual ability rather than on the basis of what kit they own. So in general we're very much concerned about the quality of the crew and try to avoid any other superficial measure.

Sound is different. As I've said, most good cinematographers do not own an Alexa or similar. Most sound people do own their own equipment. So what's logical? Spend more money on camera equipment, so we can hire who we want for that; and spend less money on sound equipment but hire in a sound recordist more frequently.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure £3k only gets you a basic sound kit. We've budgeted a minimal amount for a reason – there's no point replicating the kit of our professional sound recordists. Simultaneously, if you spend too little then your equipment doesn't last, so it's wasted money.

And John – perhaps this is a professional sound forum, but you don't shoot down beginner sound recordists do you? I've been on professional camera forums, and people are very happy to help out those interested in filmmaking, from across the board.

On a camera forum, they do make it clear that a professional camera matters significantly less than a skilled operator. The same is entirely true of sound, and nowhere have I suggested otherwise.

If you think this conversation is below you, then please don't engage with it. But I find it extraordinary to suggest that I should go to a camera forum instead and ask about sound there. Would anybody in a cinematography forum send me here to ask about cameras?

Having browsed through this forum many times in the past, I'm also familiar with you individually as posters and that's why I'm here – to seek out your opinions, because I value them. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you want to stay under 3000 (incl TAX) and need to buy it all at once, I'd say get a Zoom F4/F8 (as you have tentacles already), a used MKH50 for indoor (keep the NZG-3 for outdoor) and two Sennheiser AVX (note that you'll have to compensate for the delay) or G3.

if you can stretch it a bit get a SD 744 or 633 instead of a zoom, a new MKH50 and 416 (they are very affordable at the moment in the UK) and better lavs for the wireless. don't forget wind protection, cables and other extras.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you want to stay under 3000 (incl TAX) and need to buy it all at once, I'd say get a Zoom F4/F8 (as you have tentacles already), a used MKH50 for indoor (keep the NZG-3 for outdoor) and two Sennheiser AVX (note that you'll have to compensate for the delay) or G3.
if you can stretch it a bit get a SD 744 or 633 instead of a zoom, a new MKH50 and 416 (they are very affordable at the moment in the UK) and better lavs for the wireless. don't forget wind protection, cables and other extras.
 

That's probably the list I'd recommend, too, with two exceptions:
I would consider to buy the mics new, and everything else used. Especially if you are considering the 744T, which is still an awesome machine, but re-sale value has dropped quite a bit, which means you can also get it fairly cheap.
A used 744T is not that much more expensive than an F8, so I'd go with the 744.
2nd exception: I would defintely go with Sennheiser G3. Sounds ok, and can easily be expanded or repurposed for IFB/scratch/hop whatever
(they are very affordable at the moment in the UK)

I don't think that's the case when you're actually based in the UK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that you've added some depth of context to your request, it makes more sense and it's becomes likely that folks here will understand your needs better.

My comments still stand as stated and have come from many years in the trenches including running businesses.

I would lean you toward Konstantin's thinking as it addresses your needs as you have outlined them.  As you are a professional production company that hires sound pros with top notch gear for the gigs that matter, I would agree that you should likewise have a much simplified kit comprised of fully professional gear.  His suggestion of a used 744T and a new MKH50 seems to right on target. Maybe also consider a couple of used Lectrosonics 200s over the G3. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would seriously consider recording on the alexa mini even though you can't monitor it from there, and feed it with a good mixer.  A SD 302 would be great for simple interview setups (boom/lav).  You could still run your zoom for redundancy if you felt it necessary, and the quality of that recording will go up significantly.

For minimal shoots with few people, I would try to keep the kit as small and simple as possible.  A SD 302, an mkh50, and a g3 with a sanken or dpa lav would be a good sounding, simple, and cost effective kit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's very useful – thanks so much all!

Running a mixer straight to camera would make life easier, though it does become more problematic if we want sound and camera to roam separately (e.g. at an event). Is it ok in that case just to monitor the audio off the mixer, given that the mini doesn't have sound out?

Mic wise it seems like the MKH50 is certainly the consensus. I only mentioned the 8050 because that's currently £630 in the UK, vs £1160 for the 50 – seems to be a pretty big disparity there! But if handling noise really is too problematic then that's probably not a good option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anatole said:

Running a mixer straight to camera would make life easier, though it does become more problematic if we want sound and camera to roam separately (e.g. at an event). Is it ok in that case just to monitor the audio off the mixer, given that the mini doesn't have sound out?

if you know what you're doing and have everything set up properly and nobody knocks the cable loose it's perfectly ok ; )
In other words: run a backup to your zoom.

but as soon as your moving around you probably want the sound independent form camera anyway these days, so a 744T makes more sense. you might still want to send a mono hop for scratch to the alexa in case the timecode gets messed up (the G3 will probably be rather low on levels since it doesn't have a hot output).

 

1 hour ago, Anatole said:

I only mentioned the 8050 because that's currently £630 in the UK, vs £1160 for the 50 – seems to be a pretty big disparity there! But if handling noise really is too problematic then that's probably not a good option.

I tried the 8050 next to the 50 and in my clumsy hands the 50 is much more forgiving and I wouldn't dare to use the 8050 on run and gun without some serious low cut filtering.

I see the MKH8050 for 625 plus VAT and the MKH50 for 875 plus VAT... most shops here in germany sell the 50 for 1300-1400EUR plus tax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...