Skar 12 inch subwoofer shallow mount

I recently got a job as a mail carrier and my 2016 Honda Civic EXT was approved for the route because my legs are long enough to reach over the console sitting in the passenger side however after some practice I quickly realized that was a no go, extremely uncomfortable.
I found a product with lots of great reviews and tons of install videos on YouTube and the company promotes that you can install yourself.. it does look easy enough.. I ordered a mount for the passenger side that connects to the seat so you don’t have to drill there but you are required to mount the “quick connect into the firewall below the break pedal” How do I identify where it is safe to drill and avoid break lines/gas lines or anything else that may be hiding out under there? It does come with an offset mount just in case you can’t drill directly below the pedal. But if anyone could help me declare or identify where I can mount this thing safely would be so helpful and greatly appreciated!
I attached the manual it’s not too long.

​
https://preview.redd.it/n3fdjeflry2b1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=449c1b32645c08ea77fea76c9b4fd131556acb6b
The redesigned 2023 Toyota Sequoia shares the same platform as the Tundra, and just like its pickup truck sibling, it’s equipped with a solid rear axle, which unfortunately sacrifices interior space for more articulation, towing stability and durability. The SUV now comes with a hybrid powertrain that combines a twin-turbo 3.5-liter V-6 engine with an electric motor for a total of 437 horsepower and 583 pounds-feet of torque; standard are a 10-speed automatic transmission and, on the TRD Pro variant, four-wheel drive. This sounds like good news for towing, so we tested how well the Sequoia’s new setup performs while hauling a trailer.
​
Towing With the 2023 Sequoia TRD Pro
​
For the 2023 model year, Toyota has changed pretty much everything in the Sequoia. Rather than going toward a unibody design for better use of space and efficiency, the automaker opted for a body-on-frame construction and a solid rear axle. This layout allows Toyota to keep the independent front suspension and precise rack and pinion steering while adding significant stability for towing and hauling heavier loads.
​
With a towing capacity of 9,020 pounds, the 2023 Sequoia TRD Pro sits pretty high on the list of full-size SUVs. This variant of the SUV also comes equipped with a receiver hitch, four- and seven-pin wiring connectors, and a trailer brake controller. Toyota requires that a weight-distribution hitch be used for loads over 5,000 pounds; it also recommends 100% front-axle load restoration. For more information, check out the owner’s manual or our guide.
​
The Trailer
For this test, I towed a twin-axle flatbed trailer loaded with a modified 1999 Jeep Cherokee that resulted in a total weight of 7,850 pounds. The trailer sits quite low, but adding the Jeep raised the center of gravity significantly, making the trailer less stable and therefore better for a towing test.
​
Tow Route
The route started at roughly 4,500 feet of elevation and, with some steep climbs, peaked at just over 6,200 feet. The route included a short freeway section, and the remainder mostly consisted of four-lane roads with 45 mph to 55 mph speed limits and grades approaching 10%.
​
How Well Does the 2023 Sequoia TRD Pro Tow?
​
Connecting the Trailer
While I do have access to a weight-distribution hitch with built-in sway control, I prefer to do towing tests without. (For my day job, I am a product engineer for Progress Mfg. Inc. in Utah, makers of the Equal-i-zer hitch and Fastway Flash ball mounts.) Using a standard ball mount provides more feedback on how well the tow vehicle can tow without additional anti-sway aids. In this case, I used a Fastway Flash Scale ball mount to get a proper tongue weight when loading the Jeep onto the trailer. I ended up with 800 pounds of tongue weight, which was a little more than 10% of the total weight.
​
Hooking the Sequoia to a trailer was easier than with a Lexus LX 600. The Sequoia’s hitch cover simply pulls off without having to undo any push pins or hand screws, and though the receiver design is the same as the Lexus’, the body cladding is such that access to the hitch-pin hole is much easier. Also, the Sequoia’s 2-inch receiver requires a long-span hitch pin, and the width it must span is actually larger than the width of Ford’s 3-inch receiver. Additionally, the wiring only required connecting the 7-pin plug and performing a simple light and brake check; everything worked perfectly.
​
Towing Performance
Entering the freeway via an uphill on-ramp posed no problems for the Sequoia. Its 583 pounds-feet of torque comes on strong at low rpm, which makes the drive feel effortless, and the 10-speed automatic shifts smoothly and finds the right gear without a fuss. Over expansion joints, the Sequoia remains planted.
​
On crowded divided highways, the Sequoia has no problem keeping up with traffic, and the brakes are strong. The suspension certainly feels stiffer than the previous generation’s, but this leads to a more stable ride when towing. Much like entering the freeway, climbing steep grades posed no issues. While I was testing in cold weather, it was still nice to have a full set of gauges that included oil pressure, oil temperature and transmission temperature.
​
Heading back down the grade was fairly easy, as well. The transmission downshifts to provide engine braking with light pressure on the brake pedal. When using cruise control, the vehicle is more aggressive with the engine braking. I did, however, smell the brakes and stop midway down the grade to let them cool for a few minutes. As the Sequoia had less than 5,000 miles on the odometer, this could still be part of the break-in process, but I wasn’t expecting the brakes to heat up that much.
​
Final Thoughts
​
Toyota claims that the hybrid system is optimized for performance and that fuel mileage is just an added benefit; that is definitely the vibe I had while testing. Power always seems to be on-hand when needed, and I observed 12.6 mpg over 220 miles of driving, with about 40 miles towing and 180 miles mixed city/highway driving.
​
Even with the Sequoia’s body-on-frame construction and solid rear axle, there are trade-offs. The SUV has a rougher ride on the road when hauling an empty trailer, and the solid axle sometimes has a noticeable sideways movement over bumps and dips. However, if you’re in the market for an SUV that can seat up to eight and tow a good-sized camper or boat, then the 2023 Sequoia just might be what you’re looking for.
​
Source: cars

My 12"x36" Jet metal lathe (1980s variety) has a bastard spec thread mount - 60 mm x 8 threads per inch. Obviously no one makes semi-finished back plates for that, so I had to make my own. Fortunately I also have a 12" Logan lathe which simplified the process, but I still made a duplicate of the spindle nose so I could check the thread before removing it from the Logan.
Made it in two parts because I'm too cheap to machine that down from solid stock. MIG welded them together and machined it smooth enough.
This is a little 5" independent 4-jaw chuck to complement the 8" on the Logan, as well as the 6" 3-jaw scroll chuck on the Logan and a 6" 4-jaw scroll chuck I'm planning next for the Jet (I made a second threaded section while I was at it), plus a collet chuck for one or both of them eventually. And I'm sure I'll add a 6-jaw and...
The magic of making my own tools from raw stock will never grow old.

Looking to run 2 12 inch subs in my 06 civic si. I’m looking for tight accurate punchy bass. Other than the built in amp within the RF, what differences would these two prefabs have? Any recommendations for which one to go with for my needs? Any other subs I should be looking at? Thanks!!

The Armistice & Prelude to the Battle of Boston
After the Battle of Cambridge and its subsequent capture, a six-week armistice was established, during which both sides prepared for the highly anticipated Battle of Boston. Winfield Scott, the commanding general who recognized the strategic importance of Boston in bringing an end to the war and achieving an American victory, mobilized troops from Vermont as well as the coastal regions of Connecticut and Rhode Island. These forces were deployed to Charlestown, Roxbury, and the recently captured Cambridge, fortifying the city fronts. With Britain's entry into the war, Rear Admiral Charles Stewart of the U.S. Navy grew concerned about potential efforts to liberate Massachusetts Bay and thus issued orders to send additional ships to the region.
As the United States geared up to launch an offensive on Boston, the region of New England, just like the rest of the nation, utilized the armistice period to diligently prepare for the impending battle. With reports indicating that the U.S. had assembled an army exceeding 18,000 troops, General Churchill, the commanding officer of the New England army, faced the urgent task of mobilizing a force of comparable size. He swiftly gathered troops stationed along the Vermont Border and in New Hampshire, deploying them to Boston. Additionally, Churchill coordinated with the Connecticut and New Hampshire militias, urging them to contribute their own forces to the defense of the state. In a voluntary show of support, Massachusetts also dispatched its militia to bolster the defense of Boston, the capital and largest city within the state.
Despite the arrival of additional troops from the North to support the defense of Boston, the Yankee forces were limited to a mere 10,000 soldiers. Their smaller numbers and inferior technology prompted Churchill to seek assistance from the British, who had originally planned to focus on liberating Vermont from American control. Churchill dispatched Major General Joseph K. Mansfield to Canada, urging the Commander-in-Chief of the British Forces in North America, Richard Downes Jackson, to send an army to Boston for support. Although Jackson had made efforts to establish a standing army in Canada after the Rebellions of 1837-1838 and had concerns about the implications of the War of 1839, his forces were still not strong enough to venture into New England at that time. However, he did manage to send a contingent of British regular army units and locally raised, numbering a combined 5,000.
Despite the armistice technically scheduled to end on April 12, 1843, Winfield Scott chose to postpone his invasion. He opted to deploy troops onto ships loaded at the Massachusetts Bay with the intention of executing a flanking maneuver from two sides of Boston. Scott believed this strategy would confuse and divide the Yankee Forces, making it easier for American forces to capture the city. Meanwhile, Churchill's forces remained on edge, anticipating an imminent American attack.
In the War of 1839, two commanding generals led the opposing forces. General Winfield Scott, on the left, commanded the United States forces, while General Sylvester Churchill, whose on the right, led the New England forces.
The Battle Of Boston
On Monday, April 17, 1843, Major General John E. Wool, under the orders of his superior, Winfield Scott, deployed vessels filled with soldiers to the ports of Boston. Yankee troops, during the armistice, swiftly noticed the gradual accumulation of troops and ships in Massachusetts Bay, allowing them to discern the intentions of Wool and the U.S. forces. Reacting promptly, the army, numbering nearly 3000, mobilized as the Yankees rushed to fortify the Boston ports and impede the entry of the ships. They strategically utilized established forts and defensive structures surrounding the ports to obstruct any attempts at access, while the soldiers positioned themselves in anticipation of the imminent arrival of the ships.
As the ships approached the ports, rowboats were launched to ferry the soldiers to land. A multitude of rowboats were deployed, and amid the gunfire from the opposing Yankee troops, a handful of boats met their demise. Nevertheless, undeterred by these challenges, the U.S. forces persevered and eventually reached several ports in Boston, including the Boston Harbor and Long Wharf. Upon disembarking, the American troops encountered fierce resistance from the Yankees. The defenders, familiar with the terrain and benefitting from defending their homeland, held their ground with resolute determination. They had meticulously prepared strategic positions and fortified their strongholds, impeding the advance of the U.S. troops.
With the arrival of more rowboats, carrying additional troops to the scene, the battle grew more intense. Despite the increasing number of enemy soldiers, the Yankees' familiarity with the area and their determination to defend their city presented significant challenges. The conflict was marked by chaos and intensity, with gunfire reverberating and smoke enveloping the battlefield. Despite initial setbacks and encountering strong resistance, the American troops displayed resilience. They fought bravely, steadily advancing and refusing to retreat. Gradually, they gained a foothold in the captured ports, establishing temporary strongholds amidst the tumult.
However, the Yankees were unwilling to surrender Boston easily. They launched counterattacks, employing guerrilla tactics and surprising the American positions. The U.S. troops found themselves engaged in fierce skirmishes, fighting street by street and block by block to maintain their position. The situation grew increasingly dire for the American forces as the Yankees launched a coordinated offensive, further heightening the intensity of the conflict.
The captured ports became fiercely contested, with the Yankees employing all available resources to push back the invaders. Reinforcements continued to arrive for both sides, escalating the intensity of the battle and further complicating the situation for the Americans. Despite their valiant efforts, the American troops faced mounting challenges and gradually found themselves pushed deeper into Boston. Fueled by an unwavering determination to defend their city, the Yankees fought ferociously, seemingly without bounds. The U.S. troops were forced into a defensive stance, regrouping and strategizing to minimize further losses while eagerly awaiting their own reinforcements. Nevertheless, as additional troops arrived from the Massachusetts Bay, the army managed to fend off further defeats, slowly reclaiming lost ground over the course of a week-long period.
The illustration captures the moment of Winfield Scott's triumphant entry into Boston. It portrays him leading his marching troops through the billowing smoke of artillery fire, symbolizing the continuous breach of fortifications. In the distance, Wool's forces are depicted, highlighting the chaotic scene within the city of Boston. The illustration also features U.S. ships stationed at the Massachusetts Bay, representing the blockade they have established, effectively sealing off the bay, from trade, while also serving to transport additional troops to aid in the invasion.
The streets of Boston transformed into a chaotic battleground, consumed by the fury of an ongoing battle. The U.S. forces clashed fiercely with the Yankees, fiercely defending their positions while launching relentless offensives, showcasing an unwavering resolve. For a span of two grueling days, the narrow alleys and barricaded streets of Boston echoed with the sounds of brutal gunfire. Each inch of the ground became a fiercely contested territory as the U.S. forces strategically advanced, employing a range of tactics to penetrate the Yankee defenses. Nevertheless, the Yankees, deeply entrenched and fortified within the city, offered staunch resistance, refusing to retreat to the advancing forces.
However, the Yankee troops could only hold on for a limited time as the U.S. forces eventually dislodged them, pushing them into a retreat through the streets of Boston. Once the Yankees were finally dislodged, the U.S. troops began to make significant progress in capturing Boston. Winfield Scott, recognizing the heavy casualties suffered by both sides during the intense street combat of the past two days, reorganized his troops.
Understanding the importance of minimizing casualties while ensuring success, Scott adjusted his plan to adopt a more cautious approach. He believed that slowly advancing into Boston, as originally intended, would be the most effective strategy. This involved a careful plan of bombardment and gradual advances to weaken the defenses and compel a surrender, and by implementing this calculated approach, Scott aimed to reduce the loss of lives and secure victory.
During the period spanning late April to early May, the U.S. Army, under the leadership of Winfield Scott, made significant progress in their endeavor to capture Boston. Operating from the city's northern region, Scott's forces successfully seized prominent structures like the Massachusetts State House, Quincy Market, and Faneuil Hall. However, their attempts to join forces with John E. Wool's army and advance collaboratively were thwarted by the formidable resistance of the Yankee troops, who effectively impeded their movements. Despite these setbacks, Scott and the U.S. troops maintained an advantage in the battle.
In contrast to the successes of Scott's forces, John E. Wool's attack from the Massachusetts Bay yielded less favorable results. Although Wool's army successfully gained control of the coastal areas, their progress beyond that point was severely restricted. The formidable Yankee troops posed a significant challenge, effectively impeding Wool's forces from making substantial advancements into the heart of Boston., and despite their initial victories along the coast, the strong resistance encountered from the Yankees thwarted their momentum and hindered their ability to penetrate further into the city.
Depiction of the Battle of Boston, conveying General Winfield Scott rallied his troops on the left, urging them to press further into the city. Meanwhile, Yankee defenders on the right unleashed a barrage of artillery fire, determined to repel the invaders.
Despite the determined efforts of the Yankees in holding back Major General John E. Wool's invading forces and impeding Commanding General Winfield Scott's grand plan, the U.S. forces continued to advance into Boston, albeit at a slower pace. Sylvester Churchill, mindful of the heavy casualties suffered and the stretched-thin defenses across the northern and Massachusetts Bay region, grew increasingly concerned. Recognizing the urgency of the situation, Churchill dispatched Colonel George Wright to request additional reinforcements from Richard Downes Jackson, who had already provided troops to support the ongoing battle.
Although Jackson had a limited timeframe of less than two months to mobilize troops, he promptly responded to Britain's entry into the conflict by gradually dispatching additional units to Boston as requested by Churchill. His objective was to establish a fully equipped standing army capable of liberating Vermont from American control, as he believed the Yankees no longer required further reinforcements. However, upon receiving information from Wright about the dire situation, the Commander-in-Chief of the British Forces in North America adjusted his plan. He chose to postpone his campaign in order to deploy several units to accompany Wright back to Boston, as well as strengthen army.
As evening fell, Wright arrived with an additional contingent of nearly 4,500 troops, tipping the scales in favor of New England and its allies for the first time in the battle. The chaotic scene that greeted them showcased the ongoing struggle for Boston, characterized by the thunderous exchange of gunfire from both opposing sides. Recognizing the significance of the reinforcements, Sylvester Churchill wasted no time and swiftly instructed them to advance northward towards the position where Gaines and Scott's forces were stationed. This area had become the epicenter of the most intense fighting in Boston, where the allied forces were fiercely engaged.
From April 2nd to 8th, Scott and Wool, two American military leaders, embarked on a slow and cautious advance into the city of Boston. Meanwhile, the British forces under the command of Churchill, alongside their Yankee allies, employed traditional linear and artillery tactics to counter the American offensive. Their strategy aimed to create a formidable defense against the advancing American troops.
In response to the British tactics, William Rowan, leading a contingent of British and Canadian troops, adopted a different approach. They engaged in hit-and-run tactics, utilizing the urban environment to their advantage, much like their Yankee counterparts. By constantly shifting their positions and exploiting the city's features, Rowan's forces effectively frustrated the American attempts to gain ground.
Despite their efforts, Scott and his forces found themselves gradually losing territory over the course of six days. Faced with the prospect of defeat, Scott resorted to employing innovative tactics to prevent further losses and regain the ground they had surrendered. Their strategies included surprise attacks, ambushes, and other unconventional methods, aiming to turn the tide of the battle in their favor. Unfortunately, Scott's attempts to reverse the situation proved unsuccessful. Despite the setbacks, the American forces demonstrated resilience and an unwavering determination not to surrender. They refused to accept defeat and continued their resistance against the occupying British and Canadian troops.
Meanwhile, with less of a grasp on Boston than Winfield Scott and Edmund P. Gaines, Wool's forces would similarly suffer major blows in Boston, as the reinforcements allowed Yankee forces at the coast to focus on warding off Wool's army. As they lost gradual control over the parts they once captured, their woes would be further exasperated as the royal navy and yankee forces would recapture the port, in the Second Battle of the Massachusetts Bay. Gradually, as their presence weakened, as their troops pushed further towards the ports, and with no retreat in mind, as a result of the newly liberated bay, John E. Wool made the difficult decision to surrender. Churchill would take Wool and the army as prisoners, hoping to leverage them as a bargain for a treaty, to end the bloody conflict.
Sir William Rowan engages in discussions with a Yankee official to his left, while the combined British-Canadian forces march in unison down the streets of Boston, headed towards American forces in the north.
Despite the challenging circumstances and recent defeats faced by General Winfield Scott's army, he initially showed reluctance to surrender. However, the situation changed when news reached him of the Navy's defeat in the Second Battle of Massachusetts Bay, inflicted by the Royal Navy under Percival's command, and the surrender of General John E. Wool and his forces, who became prisoners of war. These developments, coupled with Scott's own army experiencing a string of defeats, ultimately led him to reconsider his position. Consequently, he dispatched a soldier to convey his willingness to enter into negotiations for surrender.
After three days of intense negotiations, on April 11th, 1843, Winfield Scott, representing the United States, finally agreed to surrender. The Treaty of Boston was subsequently signed, resulting in several concessions being made by both parties involved:

• The armistice lasted only two weeks, as both Churchill and the allied forces, as well as Winfield Scott and the U.S. forces, were determined to press on with the war following the Battle of Boston, despite its devastating effects. The allied forces sought to maintain their momentum and reverse the tide of the war, while the U.S. forces aimed to make up for their defeat in Boston.
• The American troops' withdrawal from Boston and the subsequent withdrawal of the remaining ships in the Massachusetts Bay.
• The liberation of John E. Wool's forces, as well as the release of captured Yankee and British-Canadian troops during the Battle of Boston and the Massachusetts Campaign.

Second Battle of Massachusetts Bay
In the initial engagement, the U.S. Navy strategically positioned itself in Narragansett Bay in collaboration with Commanding General Winfield Scott and Rear Admiral Charles Stewart, aiming to implement an effective blockade strategy. On February 9th, Rear Admiral Charles Stewart initiated the attack by unleashing a relentless naval bombardment with the goal of cutting off the supply lines to Boston and Quincy. The American fleet, led by Commodore Matthew C. Perry, utilized their superior firepower and extended range to overwhelm the enemy's defenses. After four days of intense fighting, Rear Admiral Percival, overwhelmed by the presence and firepower of the American Navy, ordered a retreat on February 13th, resulting in the establishment of a blockade of Massachusetts Bay.
Anticipating an attack on Boston, Winfield Scott and Charles Stewart capitalized on their position in the bay to embark U.S. troops onto ships in Massachusetts Bay. This strategic maneuver facilitated a two-pronged invasion strategy, positioning American forces to strike from both the Massachusetts Bay coastline and the flanks of Boston. The battle was initiated by U.S. ships in the bay, which deployed soldiers into Boston and maintained a continuous presence throughout much of the conflict.
With the Americans firmly established in Massachusetts Bay, Rear Admiral John C. Percival of the New England Navy collaborated with Sir Charles Adam, the Commander-in-Chief of the North America and West Indies Station, with the joint objective of regaining control of the bay and cutting off Wool's forces from receiving reinforcements. Their aim was to weaken the U.S. forces on the ground and facilitate their defeat.
On May 4th, the battle unfolded between Percival and Adam's forces against the U.S. forces, with the allied forces launching their attack from the Bays of Penobscot and Fundy, respectively. This three-day conflict was marked by Rear Admiral "Mad" Jack Percival initiating a relentless naval bombardment. A formidable fleet, comprising both Yankee and Royal Navy forces, including steam-powered warships armed with heavy cannons, arrived in the bay with the objective of liberating Massachusetts Bay from American presence. The naval bombardment unleashed a relentless barrage of cannon fire and explosive shells upon the enemy's ships and fortifications. Strategically positioned, the allied warships utilized their superior firepower, numerical advantage, and extended range to wreak havoc on the enemy's defenses.
Under the command of Rear Admiral John C. Percival, the Yankee forces fought fiercely against the American ships, employing a more aggressive strategy compared to their Royal Navy allies. The intense naval bombardment took a toll on the ships engaged in battle. After three days of relentless fighting, on February 7th, Rear Admiral Stewart ordered a retreat. The Yankee and Royal Navy vessels swiftly filled the void, finally liberating Massachusetts Bay and Boston from American presence in the waters. Additionally, this meant that Wool's forces were deprived of potential reinforcements, further weakening their position.
The depiction of the Second Battle of Boston portrays an American vessel succumbing to the overwhelming barrage of cannon-fire unleashed by both the Royal Navy and Yankee vessels.

I am looking to buy this setup from Facebook marketplace but the amp seems way overkill for the two dv12’s. Would it be possible to tune the amp down low enough to now blow the subs?

I scored this beautiful 3pc Catalina Maple off marketplace. Only problem is there’s nothing to attach the 12” rack Tom to the mount on the kick, so I put up a tom from my Tornado kit for the time being. None of the music stores in my area had something that would work so I have to order one. Does anyone have a recommendation on what would work best with this specific drum?
Removing the kick mount entirely in favor of a cymbal mount could be another possibility, though I’d prefer using the kick mount if I can since I already have it.
Here’s what I’ve been looking at: Gilbatrar Universal — https://www.sweetwater.com/c1146--Tom_Stand?highlight=SC-USS&mrkgadid=&mrkgcl=28&mrkgen=gpla&mrkgbflag=1&mrkgcat=drums&percussion&acctid=21700000001645388&dskeywordid=92700073377673525&lid=92700073377673525&ds_s_kwgid=58700007313046885&ds_s_inventory_feed_id=97700000007215323&dsproductgroupid=1796897475348&product_id=SC-USS&prodctry=US&prodlang=en&channel=online&storeid=&device=m&network=u&matchtype=&adpos=largenumber&locationid=9003813&creative=538553018770&targetid=pla-1796897475348&campaignid=14238686158&awsearchcpc=&&&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIsbLOq5qq_wIVk6jICh1dWAL3EAQYASABEgKIXvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
Gretsch GTS: https://www.amazon.com/Gretsch-G1-1205GTS-12-Inch-Percussion-Lugs/dp/B00I9FL836/ref=asc_df_B00I9FL836/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=652431627070&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=828865283508159481&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9003813&hvtargid=pla-832289435450&psc=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI44b_ypqq_wIVV_nICh1cSwdmEAQYBiABEgI7_PD_BwE
Gretsch Tom holder w/ clamp (hoping to not spend this much unless I absolutely must): https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/GT-STCR--gretsch-drums-tom-holder-with-clamp
Any feedback on these or alternative recommendations are much appreciated. Thank you fellow drummers!