# Your Hollywood Strings Template - Please Share



## IFM (Nov 4, 2010)

Hello everyone. Currently there are multiple threads out there about HS setups, issues, etc. What I was hoping to start, as someone suggested something similar, is a thread where we can have a list of your basic HS template and how you are running it (Play Standalone, VEPro server/stand alone, Bidule, etc.). A brief system spec might help too. 

Thanks
Chris o-[][]-o


----------



## Colin O'Malley (Nov 4, 2010)

I'm using HS primarily on 2 relatively modest slave pcs (XP 64 Professional SP2, Intel Q8200 2.33 Ghz, 8 gigs of ram per machine). I have both bow change and slur legato (monster versions not light) loaded for everything along with all the shorts and run building I need. Based on my experience I know I could get down to one pc for HS with a newer machine with more RAM. These pcs are about 2 years old. 

I only use one mic position for HS. I jump back and forth between the mids and mains. I am using Intel SSD Drives as well, which to me is very important for load times and performance My SATA drives were not cutting it for the monster legatos. 

I'm running PLAY standalone and routing audio via lightpipe back into my mac/Logic. I tried all sorts of hosts on both mac and pc (bidule, cubase, reaper, VEPRO, FL studio, Logic). I can't beat the performance of PLAY standalone routing audio over light pipe. Play is rock solid for me in this configuration on a pc. I'm not using multiple instances of Play standalone, but I am loading more than 16 instruments per PLAY instance (usually around 24-32) 

Colin


----------



## JohnG (Nov 4, 2010)

I'm doing the same as Colin. Using PLAY standalone is really the best for me, as it uses all cores and eliminates software conflicts, confusion about memory / cpu / other resource priorities, and other similar issues.

Like Colin, I'm using ADAT lightpipe out and MidiOverLAN for midi signals.

One slave, 24 gigs' RAM, PCIe SSD setup, i7 950.

Works great with a single mic position, even with a big template and a lot of notes flying around. Hoping / expecting a bit of improvement as HS' software improves over time.


----------



## IFM (Nov 4, 2010)

Please don't forget to put, if you have time, what articulations you are loading. Do you start with just a few and add or just load as much as the computer can take?


----------



## Colin O'Malley (Nov 4, 2010)

Here is violin 1 to give you an idea of what I load. I load similar patches for all instruments (with the exception of the playable runs, which I just load for violins/violas. Also basses I don't need multiple legatos). If memory is tight I'll load the violins legato slur + port NI legato 3 times (skipping the sm and bc legato versions). RAM footprint stays the same this way and I can still write 3 part harmony for the legatos, which is the way I'm used to working with LASS (div A B C) 

1 Violins legato slur + port Ni
1 Violins legato slur + port sm Ni
1 Violins legato bc slower
1 Violins Sus 13 DB 4th pos
1 Violins Trill HT/WT Ni
1 Violins Trem Ni
1 Violins Stac Slur
1 Violins Stac on Bow RR x 9
1 Violins Spic RR x 9
1 Violins Marc Shrt RRx4 LS
1 Violins Rep Runs Script
1 Violins Spic Runs smooth
1 Violins Pizz RRx4

Colin


----------



## Ashermusic (Nov 4, 2010)

Thomas_J @ Thu Nov 04 said:


> That's a great set of articulations, Colin. I would do almost exactly the same.
> 
> Here's some good advice for all HS users: Run an instance of PLAY in the sequencer for the tempo syncing patches such as the runs and the measured tremolos. Also don't forget the "Stac Slurred" short notes in the violins! They can add some more life to your fast staccato passages because of the pitch variance. The Repetitions For Runs patches are really good for fast ostinatos, and layered with the slurred staccs they can really breathe life into your strings passages.



Personally, I don't like the portamento but then I don't generally like it when real string players do it, except for special circumstances.


----------



## Ashermusic (Nov 4, 2010)

Thomas_J @ Thu Nov 04 said:


> Hey Jay, I think you may be confusing pitch variance with portamento (glissando/slides). The articulations I was suggesting are all used to give a more natural feel to faster passages. There's no sliding going on in these. As far as sliding goes I'm not a big fan of that either, so I'm with you there



Understood. After trying them both, I just prefer the ones without the "portamento" added and when I want some of that, I can click on the script. But it is subjective and a matter of inches, not feet.

BTW, one of my top requests is for those buttons to be automateable.


----------



## IFM (Nov 4, 2010)

Let me ask everyone this: Are you setting up your sequencer with one track per articulation or are you doing one track per group? What I mean by that is what I have been doing is playing a part, say a 1st violin passage, how I would imagine it, then changing the channels on selected notes/data to the proper articulation's channel. I think cubase has the most elegant solution though.

Chris


----------



## Brobdingnagian (Nov 4, 2010)

JohnG @ Thu Nov 04 said:


> One slave, 24 gigs' RAM, PCIe SSD setup, i7 950.



How are you faring with the PCIe SSD?

-B


----------



## stevenson-again (Nov 5, 2010)

i use program changes or occasionally meta events such as score markings converted to program changes to affect articulation switches. when i get back to HS again i can use plogue to convert the program changes to midi channels, similar to logics cable switcher.

the beauty of this arrangement is that one logic song can play different templates, provided they are setup consistently. plus i can use the midi multis in logic with the articualtions labelled.

so therefore 1 track per instrument and program changes affecting the articulation switch.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Nov 5, 2010)

Very helpful points made. Thanks to all for sharing a working set up with HS. With SSD drives just not big enough at this point - I am thinking of updating one of my older xp64 quad machines to a new i7 (latest) / 24 ram - and get a second license of HS to run the 'shorts' on it. Because of 'resources' - I feel I am greatly under-utilizing much of HS.

In building this next slave update (will be W7 64 bits) - anyone have suggestions on sample drives (speed)? With other libraries I'll have on that slave - this drive(s) will need to be at least 1 TB.


Many thanks.


----------



## Ian Livingstone (Nov 5, 2010)

good plan Rob on putting the shorts on your 2nd licence, as you'll find the legato patches need 512 or better still 1024 (23ms) latency to work smoothly, wheras that's not good for Spics and Stacs

Ian


----------



## Jack Weaver (Nov 5, 2010)

Thanks guys. A special shout out to Colin for his specificity and TJ for the ideas for the short and more tempo-oriented articulations on the master machine. 

Yeah, having the two licenses really helps. 

I'm loving HS now that it's moved over to a Vista64 slave. So far TJ _was _right - get a PC. 
In this case 'PC' doesn't mean Politically Correct. :D 

.


----------



## Rob Elliott (Nov 5, 2010)

Jack Weaver @ Fri Nov 05 said:


> Thanks guys. A special shout out to Colin for his specificity and TJ for the ideas for the short and more tempo-oriented articulations on the master machine.
> 
> Yeah, having the two licenses really helps.
> 
> ...




Is there EVER a better option for ANY puter in our studios than a PC? o 


(flame away)


----------



## Jack Weaver (Nov 5, 2010)

> (flame away)




Please.....no! >8o 


.


----------



## tripit (Nov 5, 2010)

Colin O'Malley @ Thu Nov 04 said:


> I'm using HS primarily on 2 relatively modest slave pcs (XP 64 Professional SP2, Intel Q8200 2.33 Ghz, 8 gigs of ram per machine).



Sorry for steering OT, but a quick question to Colin: 

Hey Colin, one of of PC slaves is almost the exact same as yours. I've been using it for LASS. I've been toying with moving the LASS over to my Mac and putting HS on that machine. How much do you think you can run on just one of your HS slaves? I'm trying to figure out if it might be worth the move.


----------



## Alex Temple (Nov 5, 2010)

I have a single mic position running from on an OCZ vertex SSD, which I use while composing. I haven't really tested so far for multi-mic position mixdowns, but I'm hoping that for offline bounces everything will work smoothly when running the other mic positions from other standard HDDs. I have Play running in six instances of VE Pro (with another four for other VSTs), which is set to use one thread per instance. Each instance is loaded with the patches I need the most for a given instrument with a few channels left over for project-specific articulations. These are all running on my main DAW alongside my sequencer. 

Specs: i7 930 @ 3.4 GHZ, 24GB RAM.

In my 1st Violins, I have the following loaded:

legato slur + port LT 12
Detache
Marc Sus 9 RR 4th pos.
Sus NV NV VB MV Ni
Marc Short
Staccatissimi
Spiccato
Stac Slur
Sus KS Ni
Stac on Bow
Spic runs smooth
Slur runs LT
Rep runs
Repetitions TS
Pizz

The other instruments follow a similar setup (except the cellos, which have some of the power-system legato patches too). For all short articulations I choose either tight or loose - I don't use the two alongside each other for the same articulation.


----------



## Colin O'Malley (Nov 6, 2010)

Tripit

Regarding your question about running HS on 1 older pc:

If you steered away from monster legatos for some or all of the instruments (Alex's template is a really good example to follow) I think you could load a good sized HS template on 1 older pc. RAM wise I wish i had more than 8 gigs in my HS pcs. If you can get 12 gigs or more I think that would help. SSD's also. Maybe 2 smaller ones vs. 1 huge expensive one OR do SSD for legatos only. Run short notes etc from regular SATA. LASS works great within Logic 64 bit now, so it made sense for me to free up my pcs for HS.

Colin


----------



## tripit (Nov 6, 2010)

Colin O'Malley @ Sat Nov 06 said:


> Tripit
> 
> Regarding your question about running HS on 1 older pc:
> 
> ...



Thanks Colin. The MB only allows up to 8 gig, but I do have an SSD. Until I upgrade one of my other even older PC's it might have to do.


----------



## Dan Mott (Nov 7, 2010)

Here's my template.

Template - Strings

*1st Violins* Instance 1
Legato BC + Slur NI *(powerful system)*
Shorts MOD Speed *(For easy change of patch/speed)*
Spiccato
Tremolo
Trills
Pizz

*2nd Violins* Instance 2
Legato BC + Slur NI *(powerful system)*
Shorts MOD Speed
Spiccato
Tremolo
Trills
Harmonics
Pizz

*Violas* Instance 3
Legato BC + Slur NI *(powerful system)*
Shorts MOD Speed
Spiccato
Tremolo
Trills
Pizz

*Celli* Instance 4
Legato BC + Slur NI *(powerful system)*
Shorts MOD Speed
Spiccato
Tremolo
Trills
Pizz

*Basses* Instance 5
Legato + Slur NI *(powerful system)*
Shorts MOD Speed
Spiccato
Pizz 


That's pretty mcuh all I need which meets my needs.

All the mod speeds are in the tight folder. I did some experimenting (some obsessive compulsive experimenting) and I find that I only need the short tight because you can make the tight samples sound exactly like the loose ones by dragging your midi data bars forward. I'd rather do this option than select loose and tigh togethert because as I said, I'd rather adjust the notes by dragging instead of using the loose samples. This makes it easy and more flexible for me. Try it your self, I mean... I cannot notice any difference other then if you choose loose, you cannot adjust by note length because they are all set loose.


----------



## JohnG (Nov 8, 2010)

Brobdingnagian @ 4th November 2010 said:


> JohnG @ Thu Nov 04 said:
> 
> 
> > One slave, 24 gigs' RAM, PCIe SSD setup, i7 950.
> ...



Hi B and all -- I am sorry to say that I am not totally clear exactly how great the PCIe SSD is. At first, I was totally disappointed because I was still getting clicks and pops. I made a number of changes all at once owing to a misunderstanding of what my problem actually was. 

Things are great now, but the SSD's contribution is hard to measure. 

The reason I can't be too specific about what made the difference is that I was using Bidule as a host and rammed through a number of gyrations in an attempt to get things working -- moved to 44.1 instead of 48k, added memory to 24GB instead of 12, turned off Hyperthreading and a bunch of other OS tweaks that I dug up in various places. All to no avail because I was not using Bidule properly!

The most important change was to ditch Bidule (at least for HS) and use PLAY in standalone. I had too many problems trying to work out assigning processors to various VST instances within Bidule. There may be some deal with hardware versions / sound cards etc. and Bidule -- still sorting that out because I like Bidule. 

In the mean time, I am using just one big PLAY instance and it appears to be working very well indeed. PLAY uses all cores and doesn't require any assigning and everything is working much better now after a long slog. 

However, it's quite difficult to specify what part of the improvement is attributable to the drive, because I made so many changes in such a hurry.


----------



## adg21 (Sep 25, 2011)

Don't shoot me, but I'm not hearing a huge amount of difference between the different types of legato transitions....
I'll put it another way, I'm suffering from patch overload here as there are so many...and I can't load them all

I get the principles, I've read the manual, and I get the concept of

'normal'
SM
slower
slower SM 

and why there are of the different versions. But putting voices aside (3,6,12 - because that's more a resource issue) do you just pick the one you liked the sound of and roll with it.

(I am referring to the patches that are just slur legato and bow change, as don't use port much)


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson (Sep 26, 2011)

Colin I notice you load the Sustain patch. I always thought that Legato has replaced sustain patches. In what circumstances do you use the sustain if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## DavidAdeyemi (Sep 26, 2011)

Thank you to the original poster and to the rest of you posting-this thread is very informative and useful.

Using only mains for strings. I have tried mains+mids (only) so much great material to experiment with.

I will be back to this thread-often.

Mr. Adeyemi


----------



## Rob Elliott (Sep 26, 2011)

Jeffrey Peterson @ Mon Sep 26 said:


> Colin I notice you load the Sustain patch. I always thought that Legato has replaced sustain patches. In what circumstances do you use the sustain if you don't mind me asking?




If I might....

I LOVE the 13 (layer) downbow sustains for so many things. Of course there is no 'real' legato but they just SOUND GREAT. I have found the LASS solos doubled give me the legato transitions and 'character' sometimes desired. Mix to flavor of course.

Not sure why the HS sustains sound - IMHO - so much 'richer' than the powerful legato patches. Just something I have noticed.


----------



## Dan Mott (Sep 26, 2011)

Because I'm a nut.

IMO. The powerful legato patches sound the same as the sustain patches, though in the powerful system patches, I'm sure that the sustain sample in it is an up bow because it sounds exactly like the up bow sus 13 patch. 

I do notice a difference in programming though. For me, the CC data is really steep at the bottom and way less at the top for the sus 13s. The powerful legato patches sustain note is not as steep from top to bottom which is why I personally perfered the patch, but since I have no idea how to trigger just the 'sustain' sample in the big system patch, I have turned to the sustain RR patch.

Rob, maybe you think the sustains sound richer because you are choosing the 4th position and not keyswitching to 4th postion in the powerful system patch? 

Also, the vibrato reacts to the CC data different to the powerful system patches too. However what I do like about using just the sustains is that you don't have to worry about noticeable volume changes between the sustains and legato. I notice ever since I used the library and still since the update, that when using the powerful system patches, the volume dips after the first note when goin from sustain to legato which then you need to compensate for this and change your CC curves. With just using the sustains, this problem doesn't happen and it seems as though that the volumes are correct. I loaded all the sustains and made a small progression and I didn't need adjust any volumes because it sounded quite right, although I think I turned the violas up just a tad.

The annoying thing about using sustains and legato is that you have them on different channels and that is really frustrating. It's just really tedious when swapping from channel to channel just for that. I wish there was an option to keyswitch. I'd have to say the the perfect patch for me would be, for example - Violas - Long powerful System - Sus Leg RR - Keyswtich. Also the powerful systems are not RR at the moment, but the lite ones are.

Peace


----------



## adg21 (Mar 27, 2012)

Colin O'Malley @ Thu Nov 04 said:


> If memory is tight I'll load the violins legato slur + port NI legato 3 times (skipping the sm and bc legato versions).


Is this how it works? Do I save on resources by loading the same legato patches rather than variants?  Does this go for any PLAY library?


----------



## antoniopandrade (Mar 27, 2012)

Great thread! Lots of good info here.

Hey guys, I'm running HS Diamond on my i7 3930k w/ 32 GB RAM on 2x 120 SSDs (Crucial M4's). I run just the main mics and these articulations:

Violins-Cellos: (separated through 2 PLAYS instances running in 1 instance of VEPro 5)

1. Legato bc+slur+port ni (powerful system)
2. Sustain KSFP (powerful system)
3. KS patch (contains a bunch of articulations like trem, trill, detache, etc)
4. Shorts MOD
5. Spicc RRx9
6. Pizz
7. OPEN (i.e. Col Legno)
8. Runs

Basses: (on another PLAY instance within the same VEPro instance that the violins-cellos are in)

Articulations are the same as above except there are no runs.

Runs absolutely perfectly fine, on low latency 256ms, no hiccups, no pops or clicks. Still haven't pushed it to the limits, but pretty close, all legato patches playing lines at the same time.

All of this nets about 13GB of RAM usage. My HB template runs about 9GB of RAM usage totalling 22GB. On the other hand, ALL of my kontakt instruments together net around 10-12GB of RAM (SSDs + low pre-load buffer settings in K5 = awesome). I feel that if PLAY implemented pre-load buffer sizes, that would be tremendous for us to be able to manage our resources better. But I'm still pretty happy with the template. It takes a while to load (always BEFORE the Kontakt instruments) but it's stable.


----------



## autopilot (Mar 27, 2012)

Loving this thread.


----------



## clonewar (Mar 28, 2012)

antoniopandrade @ Tue Mar 27 said:


> Hey guys, I'm running HS Diamond on my i7 3930k w/ 32 GB RAM on 2x 120 SSDs (Crucial M4's). I run just the main mics and these articulations...



I've recently built a new DAW with almost the exact hardware specs as you.. Since you have 240 GB of SSD space, you must only have one or two mics of HS Diamond on SSD? Have you had any issues with PLAY/HS updates? 

Also, what DAW software do you use and do you run it in 64 bit?

Thanks!

Mike


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 28, 2012)

I think I have posted this a bunch of times so sorry if it is not helpful:

On an Intel Core i7-950 Quad Core, 3.06 GHz (3.33 GHz Max Turbo) 24 GB RAM

For Vln 1, Vln 2, Vla, Vlc, DB each, mid mics

1. Legato slur+port ni (powerful system) 
2. KS patch (contains a bunch of articulations like trem, trill, detache, etc) 
3. Shorts MOD 
4. Pizz 
5. Runs


----------



## gsilbers (Mar 28, 2012)

does the KS patch a one that HS provide or u created it yourself?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 28, 2012)

gsilbers @ Wed Mar 28 said:


> does the KS patch a one that HS provide or u created it yourself?



it is provided. You cannot create your own KS patches in Play.


----------



## JohnG (Mar 28, 2012)

JohnG @ 4th November 2010 said:


> I'm doing the same as Colin. Using PLAY standalone is really the best for me, as it uses all cores and eliminates software conflicts, confusion about memory / cpu / other resource priorities, and other similar issues.
> 
> Like Colin, I'm using ADAT lightpipe out and MidiOverLAN for midi signals.
> 
> ...



I now have PLAY (and Kontakt and everything else) hosted in VE Pro, which is an adjustment to what I was doing previously. It has been more stable and frankly easier to navigate and tweak than trying to put 100k samples into a single instance of PLAY. Besides, it houses Kontakt for other string libraries and even some old FX from EWQLSO strings.

Totally stable; using a 256 buffer.


----------



## adg21 (Apr 15, 2012)

I'm about to build a more scaled down template to better fit the RAM in my system. 

What's the deal with loading 2 or more of the same patch? Do I save RAM by doing that? What is at play here? It seems to show the same amount for each instance in PLAY.


----------



## MacQ (Apr 15, 2012)

In Kontakt you can load a bunch of instances of the same patch without an additional RAM hit, if the sample data is identical. I BELIEVE the same is true for Play, though of course voices still do take CPU to process. Also, disk speed is crucial, as the architecture of these samplers are all designed with hard disk streaming in mind, and are only loading EXTREMELY small fragments of the sound before calling the disk. 

If you consider what 32k is in the context of a 24-bit 44,100Hz sound file ... less than 2 tenths of a second. And people have lower buffers than that, and are streaming incredibly high voice counts. We basically live in that magical future where people have orchestras at their fingertips. 

In 5-8 years time, people could have an EWQL Hollywood Orchestra suite running on a single machine (hopefully completely turn-key with pre-built templates for all major sequencers), for a commodity-level price. Wow.

~Stu


----------



## JohnG (Apr 15, 2012)

MacQ @ 15th April 2012 said:


> In Kontakt you can load a bunch of instances of the same patch without an additional RAM hit, if the sample data is identical. I BELIEVE the same is true for Play...



Yes, PLAY does the same thing. 

One must load the patches in the same instance of PLAY to avoid overlap -- I don't think it works if you try to load, say, V1 legato and V1 sus in separate instances. But, if you load a bunch of patches that use the same sample info in a single instance of PLAY, the program will share the samples and there won't be needless redundancy.

I put all my V1 patches in a single instance of PLAY, V2 in another instance, and so on.


----------



## adg21 (Apr 15, 2012)

So if I load V1 Legato 4x I'll use no more RAM than if I'd just loaded 1? That's really good. I should have done that instead of loading too many variants in my last template.


----------



## JohnG (Apr 15, 2012)

I think it's better than that, even; some of the sustained patches (legato, sus, BC and so on) seem to use the same sample sets, so that little additional RAM is soaked up by adding different articulations.

This isn't always the case -- sometimes there are extra samples in one patch that aren't in another, but the sharing seems to be quite extensive for the same instrument (v1, for example).


----------



## Jaap (Apr 15, 2012)

JohnG @ Sun Apr 15 said:


> MacQ @ 15th April 2012 said:
> 
> 
> > In Kontakt you can load a bunch of instances of the same patch without an additional RAM hit, if the sample data is identical. I BELIEVE the same is true for Play...
> ...



It also works if you load them in separate instances actually. At least when using VEP.
Never tried it if you load for example different PLAY's in Cubase or whatever, but I guess that will work also, but within VEP it works.


----------



## antoniopandrade (Jul 23, 2012)

Just thought to revive this thread, since I've been using HS more often in the past few weeks. What other template solutions has everyone come up with for HS? I find that as RAM and SSD streaming bottlenecks keep getting raised, we can have some pretty flexible templates going! Maybe even multiple mic position setups (gasp!). How has your HS setup evolved though from release?


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 23, 2012)

I'm going to be finally getting into my HS. Who is using multiple mic positions? Which one's. Seems that using 2 positions, either close-outrigger, or mid-outrigger (plus reverb) can get the best sounds. Will that esentially double my needed ram ?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 23, 2012)

jamwerks @ Mon Jul 23 said:


> I'm going to be finally getting into my HS. Who is using multiple mic positions? Which one's. Seems that using 2 positions, either close-outrigger, or mid-outrigger (plus reverb) can get the best sounds. Will that esentially double my needed ram ?



Yes, it will.. I use only the mids and I think it sounds great.


----------



## antoniopandrade (Jul 23, 2012)

I use the main mics. One thing I've noticed is that it is difficult to get presence for a strong lead line out of the violin legatos. Maybe enhancing those with a close mic would do the trick. What I do now and works beautifully is layering CS2's Violins I or II with the lead HS Vln line. The measured aggressiveness really provides a nice touch to HS lush, open sound.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 23, 2012)

antoniopandrade @ Mon Jul 23 said:


> I use the main mics. One thing I've noticed is that it is difficult to get presence for a strong lead line out of the violin legatos. Maybe enhancing those with a close mic would do the trick. What I do now and works beautifully is layering CS2's Violins I or II with the lead HS Vln line. The measured aggressiveness really provides a nice touch to HS lush, open sound.



Actually, frequently I blend in Kirk Hunter's Concert Strings II in a similar way.


----------



## jamwerks (Jul 23, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Mon Jul 23 said:


> Yes, it will.. I use only the mids and I think it sounds great.



I knew you were going to say that! :cry: Thanks for the info.

On Nick's video walkthrough, the best sounds imo came from either of the two combos I mentioned above. Too bad EW hasn't done a premix: close-mid-ambient. That would make the library much more usable, and that should be able to be done (bounce each sample with a set mix) almost automatically with a little sw knowhow.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 23, 2012)

jamwerks @ Mon Jul 23 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Mon Jul 23 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, it will.. I use only the mids and I think it sounds great.
> ...



Personally when it comes to strings, I am just not a close mic fan. I think strings need air and also close mics pick up too much of aspects of the sound that I consider less pleasant. And Nick told me that he and TJ did in fact more often use just the mids.


----------



## odod (Nov 18, 2021)

it's OPUS time now, what is your latest template ? Please share


----------



## muziksculp (Nov 18, 2021)

This is thread qualifies to be in a new Antiques Category of the Forum.


----------

