📜 [專欄新文章] Uniswap v3 Features Explained in Depth
✍️ 田少谷 Shao
📥 歡迎投稿: https://medium.com/taipei-ethereum-meetup #徵技術分享文 #使用心得 #教學文 #medium
Once again the game-changing DEX 🦄 👑
Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
Outline
0. Intro1. Uniswap & AMM recap2. Ticks 3. Concentrated liquidity4. Range orders: reversible limit orders5. Impacts of v36. Conclusion
0. Intro
The announcement of Uniswap v3 is no doubt one of the most exciting news in the DeFi place recently 🔥🔥🔥
While most have talked about the impact v3 can potentially bring on the market, seldom explain the delicate implementation techniques to realize all those amazing features, such as concentrated liquidity, limit-order-like range orders, etc.
Since I’ve covered Uniswap v1 & v2 (if you happen to know Mandarin, here are v1 & v2), there’s no reason for me to not cover v3 as well ✅
Thus, this article aims to guide readers through Uniswap v3, based on their official whitepaper and examples made on the announcement page. However, one needs not to be an engineer, as not many codes are involved, nor a math major, as the math involved is definitely taught in your high school, to fully understand the following content 😊😊😊
If you really make it through but still don’t get shxt, feedbacks are welcomed! 🙏
There should be another article focusing on the codebase, so stay tuned and let’s get started with some background noise!
1. Uniswap & AMM recap
Before diving in, we have to first recap the uniqueness of Uniswap and compare it to traditional order book exchanges.
Uniswap v1 & v2 are a kind of AMMs (automated market marker) that follow the constant product equation x * y = k, with x & y stand for the amount of two tokens X and Y in a pool and k as a constant.
Comparing to order book exchanges, AMMs, such as the previous versions of Uniswap, offer quite a distinct user experience:
AMMs have pricing functions that offer the price for the two tokens, which make their users always price takers, while users of order book exchanges can be both makers or takers.
Uniswap as well as most AMMs have infinite liquidity¹, while order book exchanges don’t. The liquidity of Uniswap v1 & v2 is provided throughout the price range [0,∞]².
Uniswap as well as most AMMs have price slippage³ and it’s due to the pricing function, while there isn’t always price slippage on order book exchanges as long as an order is fulfilled within one tick.
In an order book, each price (whether in green or red) is a tick. Image source: https://ftx.com/trade/BTC-PERP
¹ though the price gets worse over time; AMM of constant sum such as mStable does not have infinite liquidity
² the range is in fact [-∞,∞], while a price in most cases won’t be negative
³ AMM of constant sum does not have price slippage
2. Tick
The whole innovation of Uniswap v3 starts from ticks.
For those unfamiliar with what is a tick:
Source: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tick.asp
By slicing the price range [0,∞] into numerous granular ticks, trading on v3 is highly similar to trading on order book exchanges, with only three differences:
The price range of each tick is predefined by the system instead of being proposed by users.
Trades that happen within a tick still follows the pricing function of the AMM, while the equation has to be updated once the price crosses the tick.
Orders can be executed with any price within the price range, instead of being fulfilled at the same one price on order book exchanges.
With the tick design, Uniswap v3 possesses most of the merits of both AMM and an order book exchange! 💯💯💯
So, how is the price range of a tick decided?
This question is actually somewhat related to the tick explanation above: the minimum tick size for stocks trading above 1$ is one cent.
The underlying meaning of a tick size traditionally being one cent is that one cent (1% of 1$) is the basis point of price changes between ticks, ex: 1.02 — 1.01 = 0.1.
Uniswap v3 employs a similar idea: compared to the previous/next price, the price change should always be 0.01% = 1 basis point.
However, notice the difference is that in the traditional basis point, the price change is defined with subtraction, while here in Uniswap it’s division.
This is how price ranges of ticks are decided⁴:
Image source: https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf
With the above equation, the tick/price range can be recorded in the index form [i, i+1], instead of some crazy numbers such as 1.0001¹⁰⁰ = 1.0100496621.
As each price is the multiplication of 1.0001 of the previous price, the price change is always 1.0001 — 1 = 0.0001 = 0.01%.
For example, when i=1, p(1) = 1.0001; when i=2, p(2) = 1.00020001.
p(2) / p(1) = 1.00020001 / 1.0001 = 1.0001
See the connection between the traditional basis point 1 cent (=1% of 1$) and Uniswap v3’s basis point 0.01%?
Image source: https://tenor.com/view/coin-master-cool-gif-19748052
But sir, are prices really granular enough? There are many shitcoins with prices less than 0.000001$. Will such prices be covered as well?
Price range: max & min
To know if an extremely small price is covered or not, we have to figure out the max & min price range of v3 by looking into the spec: there is a int24 tick state variable in UniswapV3Pool.sol.
Image source: https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf
The reason for a signed integer int instead of an uint is that negative power represents prices less than 1 but greater than 0.
24 bits can cover the range between 1.0001 ^ (2²³ — 1) and 1.0001 ^ -(2)²³. Even Google cannot calculate such numbers, so allow me to offer smaller values to have a rough idea of the whole price range:
1.0001 ^ (2¹⁸) = 242,214,459,604.341
1.0001 ^ -(2¹⁷) = 0.000002031888943
I think it’s safe to say that with a int24 the range can cover > 99.99% of the prices of all assets in the universe 👌
⁴ For implementation concern, however, a square root is added to both sides of the equation.
How about finding out which tick does a price belong to?
Tick index from price
The answer to this question is rather easy, as we know that p(i) = 1.0001^i, simply takes a log with base 1.0001 on both sides of the equation⁴:
Image source: https://www.codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php
Let’s try this out, say we wanna find out the tick index of 1000000.
Image source: https://ncalculators.com/number-conversion/log-logarithm-calculator.htm
Now, 1.0001¹³⁸¹⁶² = 999,998.678087146. Voila!
⁵ This formula is also slightly modified to fit the real implementation usage.
3. Concentrated liquidity
Now that we know how ticks and price ranges are decided, let’s talk about how orders are executed in a tick, what is concentrated liquidity and how it enables v3 to compete with stablecoin-specialized DEXs (decentralized exchange), such as Curve, by improving the capital efficiency.
Concentrated liquidity means LPs (liquidity providers) can provide liquidity to any price range/tick at their wish, which causes the liquidity to be imbalanced in ticks.
As each tick has a different liquidity depth, the corresponding pricing function x * y = k also won’t be the same!
Each tick has its own liquidity depth. Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
Mmm… examples are always helpful for abstract descriptions 😂
Say the original pricing function is 100(x) * 1000(y) = 100000(k), with the price of X token 1000 / 100 = 10 and we’re now in the price range [9.08, 11.08].
If the liquidity of the price range [11.08, 13.08] is the same as [9.08, 11.08], we don’t have to modify the pricing function if the price goes from 10 to 11.08, which is the boundary between two ticks.
The price of X is 1052.63 / 95 = 11.08 when the equation is 1052.63 * 95 = 100000.
However, if the liquidity of the price range [11.08, 13.08] is two times that of the current range [9.08, 11.08], balances of x and y should be doubled, which makes the equation become 2105.26 * 220 = 400000, which is (1052.63 * 2) * (110 * 2) = (100000 * 2 * 2).
We can observe the following two points from the above example:
Trades always follow the pricing function x * y = k, while once the price crosses the current price range/tick, the liquidity/equation has to be updated.
√(x * y) = √k = L is how we represent the liquidity, as I say the liquidity of x * y = 400000 is two times the liquidity of x * y = 100000, as √(400000 / 100000) = 2.
What’s more, compared to liquidity on v1 & v2 is always spread across [0,∞], liquidity on v3 can be concentrated within certain price ranges and thus results in higher capital efficiency from traders’ swapping fees!
Let’s say if I provide liquidity in the range [1200, 2800], the capital efficiency will then be 4.24x higher than v2 with the range [0,∞] 😮😮😮 There’s a capital efficiency comparison calculator, make sure to try it out!
Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
It’s worth noticing that the concept of concentrated liquidity was proposed and already implemented by Kyper, prior to Uniswap, which is called Automated Price Reserve in their case.⁵
⁶ Thanks to Yenwen Feng for the information.
4. Range orders: reversible limit orders
As explained in the above section, LPs of v3 can provide liquidity to any price range/tick at their wish. Depending on the current price and the targeted price range, there are three scenarios:
current price < the targeted price range
current price > the targeted price range
current price belongs to the targeted price range
The first two scenarios are called range orders. They have unique characteristics and are essentially fee-earning reversible limit orders, which will be explained later.
The last case is the exact same liquidity providing mechanism as the previous versions: LPs provide liquidity in both tokens of the same value (= amount * price).
There’s also an identical product to the case: grid trading, a very powerful investment tool for a time of consolidation. Dunno what’s grid trading? Check out Binance’s explanation on this, as this topic won’t be covered!
In fact, LPs of Uniswap v1 & v2 are grid trading with a range of [0,∞] and the entry price as the baseline.
Range orders
To understand range orders, we’d have to first revisit how price is discovered on Uniswap with the equation x * y = k, for x & y stand for the amount of two tokens X and Y and k as a constant.
The price of X compared to Y is y / x, which means how many Y one can get for 1 unit of X, and vice versa the price of Y compared to X is x / y.
For the price of X to go up, y has to increase and x decrease.
With this pricing mechanism in mind, it’s example time!
Say an LP plans to place liquidity in the price range [15.625, 17.313], higher than the current price of X 10, when 100(x) * 1000(y) = 100000(k).
The price of X is 1250 / 80 = 15.625 when the equation is 80 * 1250 = 100000.
The price of X is 1315.789 / 76 = 17.313 when the equation is 76 * 1315.789 = 100000.
If now the price of X reaches 15.625, the only way for the price of X to go even higher is to further increase y and decrease x, which means exchanging a certain amount of X for Y.
Thus, to provide liquidity in the range [15.625, 17.313], an LP needs only to prepare 80 — 76 = 4 of X. If the price exceeds 17.313, all 4 X of the LP is swapped into 1315.789 — 1250 = 65.798 Y, and then the LP has nothing more to do with the pool, as his/her liquidity is drained.
What if the price stays in the range? It’s exactly what LPs would love to see, as they can earn swapping fees for all transactions in the range! Also, the balance of X will swing between [76, 80] and the balance of Y between [1250, 1315.789].
This might not be obvious, but the example above shows an interesting insight: if the liquidity of one token is provided, only when the token becomes more valuable will it be exchanged for the less valuable one.
…wut? 🤔
Remember that if 4 X is provided within [15.625, 17.313], only when the price of X goes up from 15.625 to 17.313 is 4 X gradually swapped into Y, the less valuable one!
What if the price of X drops back immediately after reaching 17.313? As X becomes less valuable, others are going to exchange Y for X.
The below image illustrates the scenario of DAI/USDC pair with a price range of [1.001, 1.002] well: the pool is always composed entirely of one token on both sides of the tick, while in the middle 1.001499⁶ is of both tokens.
Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
Similarly, to provide liquidity in a price range < current price, an LP has to prepare a certain amount of Y for others to exchange Y for X within the range.
To wrap up such an interesting feature, we know that:
Only one token is required for range orders.
Only when the current price is within the range of the range order can LP earn trading fees. This is the main reason why most people believe LPs of v3 have to monitor the price more actively to maximize their income, which also means that LPs of v3 have become arbitrageurs 🤯
I will be discussing more the impacts of v3 in 5. Impacts of v3.
⁷ 1.001499988 = √(1.0001 * 1.0002) is the geometric mean of 1.0001 and 1.0002. The implication is that the geometric mean of two prices is the average execution price within the range of the two prices.
Reversible limit orders
As the example in the last section demonstrates, if there is 4 X in range [15.625, 17.313], the 4 X will be completely converted into 65.798 Y when the price goes over 17.313.
We all know that a price can stay in a wide range such as [10, 11] for quite some time, while it’s unlikely so in a narrow range such as [15.625, 15.626].
Thus, if an LP provides liquidity in [15.625, 15.626], we can expect that once the price of X goes over 15.625 and immediately also 15.626, and does not drop back, all X are then forever converted into Y.
The concept of having a targeted price and the order will be executed after the price is crossed is exactly the concept of limit orders! The only difference is that if the range of a range order is not narrow enough, it’s highly possible that the conversion of tokens will be reverted once the price falls back to the range.
As price ranges follow the equation p(i) = 1.0001 ^ i, the range can be quite narrow and a range order can thus effectively serve as a limit order:
When i = 27490, 1.0001²⁷⁴⁹⁰ = 15.6248.⁸
When i = 27491, 1.0001²⁷⁴⁹¹ = 15.6264.⁸
A range of 0.0016 is not THAT narrow but can certainly satisfy most limit order use cases!
⁸ As mentioned previously in note #4, there is a square root in the equation of the price and index, thus the numbers here are for explantion only.
5. Impacts of v3
Higher capital efficiency, LPs become arbitrageurs… as v3 has made tons of radical changes, I’d like to summarize my personal takes of the impacts of v3:
Higher capital efficiency makes one of the most frequently considered indices in DeFi: TVL, total value locked, becomes less meaningful, as 1$ on Uniswap v3 might have the same effect as 100$ or even 2000$ on v2.
The ease of spot exchanging between spot exchanges used to be a huge advantage of spot markets over derivative markets. As LPs will take up the role of arbitrageurs and arbitraging is more likely to happen on v3 itself other than between DEXs, this gap is narrowed … to what extent? No idea though.
LP strategies and the aggregation of NFT of Uniswap v3 liquidity token are becoming the blue ocean for new DeFi startups: see Visor and Lixir. In fact, this might be the turning point for both DeFi and NFT: the two main reasons of blockchain going mainstream now come to the alignment of interest: solving the $$ problem 😏😏😏
In the right venue, which means a place where transaction fees are low enough, such as Optimism, we might see Algo trading firms coming in to share the market of designing LP strategies on Uniswap v3, as I believe Algo trading is way stronger than on-chain strategies or DAO voting to add liquidity that sort of thing.
After reading this article by Parsec.finance: The Dex to Rule Them All, I cannot help but wonder: maybe there is going to be centralized crypto exchanges adopting v3’s approach. The reason is that since orders of LPs in the same tick are executed pro-rata, the endless front-running speeding-competition issue in the Algo trading world, to some degree, is… solved? 🤔
Anyway, personal opinions can be biased and seriously wrong 🙈 I’m merely throwing out a sprat to catch a whale. Having a different voice? Leave your comment down below!
6. Conclusion
That was kinda tough, isn’t it? Glad you make it through here 🥂🥂🥂
There are actually many more details and also a huge section of Oracle yet to be covered. However, since this article is more about features and targeting normal DeFi users, I’ll leave those to the next one; hope there is one 😅
If you have any doubt or find any mistake, please feel free to reach out to me and I’d try to reply AFAP!
Stay tuned and in the meantime let’s wait and see how Uniswap v3 is again pioneering the innovation of DeFi 🌟
Uniswap v3 Features Explained in Depth was originally published in Taipei Ethereum Meetup on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.
👏 歡迎轉載分享鼓掌
the reasons are as follows 在 無待堂 Facebook 的精選貼文
❗️重要:電檢處告示並不代表導演團隊立場
《佔領立法會》及《理大圍城》遭電檢處多番為難❗️
(Please scroll down for English)
香港電影、報刊及物品管理處要求《佔領立法會》及《理大圍城》片首加上聲明,我們要澄清這聲明並非創作人的意願。
《佔領立法會》及《理大圍城》一直為外界爭議度非常高的電影,導演團隊一直為真實紀錄各社會運動而不惜冒著各種風險,電影帶來的回響及反應大家有目共睹。
但!
香港電影、報刊及物品管理處(簡稱電檢處)卻利用各種手段,逼使導演們需要作出非本人意願的聲明!如果不跟從指引,電檢處便可以利用行政手段令放映無法進行!
電檢處要求作出之聲明如下:
《佔領立法會》:
「影片紀錄2019年7月1日立法會綜合大樓受到示威衝擊的嚴重事件,當中有部分描述或行為,根據現行法例可能會構成刑事罪行。」
《理大圍城》:
「影片紀錄2019年11月在香港理工大學及周邊地點發生的嚴重事件,當中有部分描述或行為,根據現行法例可能會構成刑事罪行。此外,影片部分內容或評論亦可能未獲證實或有誤導成份。」
影意志表示強烈不滿電檢處以下行為:
1.以保障各方為由,實屬保障自己之實來強逼修改影片
2.要求影片開首作出聲明,但不願表明此為電檢處要求
3.以不知明原因推翻由電檢處發出的證明書
4.未能按時發出證明書,並將責任推卸於申請者
以下為影意志與電檢處之洽商經過:
7月中時,影意志為舊版本影片申請電檢證明書。
8月7日(國安法生效約一個月後)
影意志首次收到電檢處通知,表示需要在電影片頭加入由電檢處發出之警告字眼。影意志清楚表示此字句並不是出自導演團隊意願,並不會修改影片。電檢處表示,若不跟從指引,有機會令行政程序時間增加。
9月3日(國安法生效約兩個月後)
影意志重新遞交申請,並於新版本影片中加入電檢處要求之字句,及標明此字句為電檢處要求。
9月8日
影意志收到電檢處通知,表示影片開首有不屬於此影片之告示字眼,要求刪改。影意志表示此要求不合理,電檢處不能在未執行檢視工作前便要求申請者進行更改;但對方亦一貫作風,以會引致檢視工作延誤等為由而要求進行修改。
9月9日
影意志立即按電檢處要求遞交新版本。
9月15日
影意志致電查詢電檢進度,對方則回應未能於本星期批核證明書。影意志表明早於9月3日已遞交申請,理應9月17日收到證明書;電檢處解釋因為9月11日才正式收到更新版本影片,當作9月14日才正式開始工作,故最快只能於9月21日發出證明書。(影意志:申請表已列明9月3日為申請日期,但因為電檢處內部審查緩慢而將責任推卸。)
9月18日 下午6時40分 (辦公完結時間為下午6時)
電檢處通知影意志需在片頭加上其提供的告示字句,並於9月21日當日交回新版本,否則未能於放映當日發出證明書;影意志重新要求要標示電檢處是發出告示者,並且需於放映當日收到證明書。電檢處回覆,告示並不能標明是電檢處發出,並且只能按照他們要求作出更改。
同時,影意志被告知原有舊版本的電檢證明書不能使用,因為新舊版本不可同時擁有兩張證明書(影意志不明所以,但對方亦無法列出清晰原因)
9月21日
直到放映前兩小時,影意志才收到電檢處發出的證明書,而《理大圍城》被評為III級,需作出退票手續。為觀眾帶來不便,影意志深感抱歉。
影意志及香港紀錄片工作者不希望為業界帶來錯誤先例,但亦不想真相任由香港政府扼殺、及默許歷史被政權改寫!為了能順利放映,影意志暫時接受此條件,但一定會繼續上訴!請大家廣傳此消息!多謝大家一直支持香港電影;煩請以後看電影出現奇怪告示,請大家不要誤會導演們!
*註1:在香港舉行之所有公開放映,需獲得由香港電影、報刊及物品管理處發出的核准證明書,方可進行放映活動;否則,實屬違法。
__________
❗️Disclaimer: The opinion expressed in the statement issued by The Office for Film, Newspaper and Article Administration (OFNAA) does not reflect the views of the director and the production team.
The Tug of War with the OFNAA over “Taking back the Legislature" + "Inside the Red Brick Wall".
Although “Taking back the Legislature" and "Inside the Red Brick Wall" have not shied away from controversy, yet the production crew have always strived to objectively capture every social movement against all odds, and the films have received a wide swath of responses since their release.
Nevertheless, the OFNAA has gone out of their way to coerce the directors into making statements against their wills. When failed to oblige, they could face having their works barred from screening by the OFNAA with whatever administrative reasons they might come up with.
Therefore, Ying E Chi hereby express our strong discontent to the following actions of the OFNAA:
1. Force the films to be edited under the pretext of protecting everyone, but in fact, only to protect their own interest
2. Request an announcement to be made at the beginning of the film, yet refused to be declared as the one who demanded the announcement
3. Overturn the previous certificate issued by the OFNAA with unspecified reason
4. Fail to issue the certificate on time as promised, whilst shifting the responsibility to the applicant
The statement required by the OFNAA is as follows:
“Taking back the Legislature”:
“This film records the serious incident of the storming of the Legislative Council Complex on 1 July 2019. Some of those depictions or acts may constitute criminal offences under prevailing laws.”
“Inside the Red Brick Wall:
“This film records the serious incidents at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University and nearby areas in November 2019. Some of those depictions or acts may constitute criminal offences under prevailing laws. Some of the contents of or commentaries in the film may be unverified or misleading.”
Here is how the negotiation between Ying E Chi and the OFNAA unfolds:
Mid-July
Ying E Chi filed an application for a Certificate of Approval for the old version of “Taking back the Legislature" + "Inside the Red Brick Wall".
7/8/2020 (A month after the National Security Law was enacted)
The first time Ying E Chi were notified by the OFNAA that a warning issued by them must be added at the beginning of the film. Ying E Chi then categorically declared that since the content of the warning does not reflect the will of the director, the films will not be edited as a result. The OFNAA responded by saying the administrative procedure might be delayed if their instructions have not been followed.
3/9/2020 (About 2 months after the National Security Law was enacted)
Ying E Chi handed in the application again with a new version of the films including the warning statement as requested, indicating that the warning is issued by the OFNAA.
8/9/2020
Ying E Chi were informed by the OFNAA to remove the statement at the beginning of the film as it does not belong to the film. Ying E Chi responded by calling out the absurdity of such request, as the OFNAA ought not to ask the films to be edited before they even review the whole film. Yet again the OFNAA demanded the changes to be made since it might cause a delay in the reviewing process.
9/9/2020
As a result, Ying E Chi submitted a new version at the first instance at the request of the OFNAA.
15/9/2020
Ying E Chi phoned in to enquire about the application procedure, since the application was made on the 3 Sep, so the Certificate of Approval should be issued on 17 Sep. However, the OFNAA replied that the Certificate of Approval would in fact not be granted this week for they claimed to have received the updated version on 11 Sep, so they could only have begun the reviewing process officially on the 14th, and thus the earliest time the certificate could be issued would be 21 Sep. (Note: Despite the official application date listed on the application form was 3 Sep, the OFNAA still tried to avoid the responsibility caused by their sluggish bureaucratic process.
18/9/2020 6.40pm (Office Hour ends at 6pm)
The OFNAA informed Ying E Chi that a statement PROVIDED by them must be included at the start of the film, and the new version must be handed in on 21 Sep, otherwise the Certificate of Approval would not be issued on the day of the screening. Ying E Chi again requested to indicate the OFNAA as the one who issued the statement, and that the certificate should be granted on screening day. The OFNAA, however, rejected to be identified as the one who issued such a statement, and insisted that all amendments can only be made subject to their approvals and requirements. At the time, Ying E Chi were informed that the Certificate of Approval obtained for the old version of “ Taking back the Legislature" + "Inside the Red Brick Wall" could no longer be used, as there cannot be two certificates for both old version and the updated version. (Ying E Chi, are deeply confounded by this sudden decision, but the OFNAA has failed to offer any clarifications.)
21/9/2020
Not only have Ying E Chi just received the certificate on the day of the screening from OFNAA, but at the same time we have been notified that "Inside the Red Brick Wall” has been classified as a Category III Film, and therefore need to make the refund arrangements.
We are profoundly sorry about the inconvenience caused.
It is not the wish of Ying E Chi and Hong Kong Documentary Filmmakers to set the wrong example for the industry, yet we would hate to have the truth to be buried by the Hong Kong Government or to let those in power rewrite the history. Ying E Chi have compromised for this instance in order to facilitate this screening, we, nevertheless, will keep on protesting, so please spread the words and make our story known. Thank you for continuing to support Hong Kong films, and from now on please do not be misled by any bizarre statements in movies and misunderstand the directors.
*Note: Under the Film Censorship Ordinance (Cap 392), a film intended for exhibition in Hong Kong at any public place has to be submitted to the Office for Film, Newspaper and Article Administration for prior approval. Failing to comply with such requirement may constitute a criminal offence.
the reasons are as follows 在 Jessie Chung锺潔希 Facebook 的最佳貼文
小帮手:精彩快看~
🤩为什么《红楼梦》在大马首度以话剧演出你非看不可?
📚古代长篇巨作《红楼梦》如何呈现于舞台?
🔖为什么《红楼梦》话剧一票难求;赞誉不绝,场场爆满?
🏵精致的古风道具布置和精美雅致大气有诚意的古代服装有多亮眼?
😍最新3D科技绝美LED背景视觉影像到底有多真实?
❤🌷邀你同享视听觉盛宴,这次你绝不能错过!
由知名艺人锺洁希领衔主演林黛玉,男主角为全球万里挑一,犹如贾宝玉再现的——林霆坚。<别说爱错>的领衔主演——美籍导演浪漫王子李安田,与<音乐盒>话剧的领衔主演——魅力型男马杰飞也会重磅加盟🏹🏹🏹✨🌟
星音符剧团特邀美国音乐人李安生量身打造动人心弦的主题曲《心念》和插曲《黑夜将残的炉光》。为您演绎一场刻骨铭心、至真至爱、荡气回肠的爱情故事💯💞💦
💥必看10大重点💥
✨《红楼梦》在大马首度以话剧演出
✨《红楼梦》根据史实和原著改编
✨知名艺人锺洁希与多位资深演员同台,演员阵容多达26人
✨男主角为全球万里挑一的林霆坚,为寻找贾宝玉剧组发动了全球《寻找贾宝玉》的活动
✨最新3D科技绝美LED背景视觉影像
✨星音符特邀美籍音乐制作人为《红楼梦》话剧操刀,由女主角锺洁希演唱插曲《黑夜将残的炉光》,并与男主角林霆坚深情对唱主题曲《心念》
✨逼真的音效与专业背景音乐配搭
✨精致的古风道具布置
✨精美雅致大气有诚意的古代服装
✨为癌症患者筹款贡献一份爱
想要购买话剧入门票🤩?请点击这里 :
📲📲📲https://wa.link/lck748
【联络号码】016-336 6701
📅🗓️《红楼梦》话剧演出13场,演出日期如下🏹🏹🏹
[第一场] 24/07/2020(五)【满座】
[第二场] 25/07/2020(六)【满座】
[第三场] 26/07/2020(日)【满座】
[第四场] 31/07/2020(五)7pm【满座】
[第五场] 01/08/2020(六)7pm【满座】
[第六场] 02/08/2020(日)7pm【满座】
【另加5场】➕➕➕➕
[第七场] 07/08/2020(五)8pm【满座】
[第八场] 08/08/2020(六)7pm【满座】
[第九场] 09/08/2020(日)7pm【满座】
[第十场] 15/08/2020(六)7pm【满座】
[第十一场] 16/08/2020(日)7pm【满座】
【加场再加场】➕➕➕➕
[第十二场] 22/08/2020(六)7pm
[第十三场] 23/08/2020(日)7pm
【地点】星音符剧场
获取更多最新资讯,请守住洁希脸书或联络Symphony Theatre 负责人Ms. Tan 016-3366701。
🤩 Why must you watch the first stage play adaptation of “The Dream of Red Mansions” in Malaysia?
What does this ancient, lengthy masterpiece “The Dream of Red Mansions” look like on stage?
Why is it so hard to get a ticket for the stage play “The Dream of Red Mansions”? Why is it so highly acclaimed and well-attended?
🏵 Just how dazzling are the exquisite ancient stage design and props and the elegant, refined, majestic authentic period costumes?
The beautiful, lifelike backdrops, made with the latest 3D technology, just how real are they?
Enjoy this feast of the senses for yourself! This is something you mustn’t miss!
This stage play stars well-known artist Jessie Chung as Lin Daiyu and lead actor Terry Lim, a one-in-a-million Jia Baoyu lookalike who dominated the worldwide audition for the role. Also starring are lead actor of “Meant to Be”, the romantic, princelike American director Paul Lee and lead actor of “Music Box”, the charismatic heartthrob Jeffrey Beh! 🏹🏹🏹
Symphony Theatre also invited American musician John Zoe Lee to compose the emotional theme song “Hearts Apart” and soundtrack song “A Dying Light in the Night” for the stage play. Come and enjoy a performance of an unforgettable, passionate, and heart-rending love story.
💥10 reasons why you must watch: 💥
✨This marks the first public performance of the stage play “The Dream of Red Mansions” in Malaysia.
✨ “The Dream of Red Mansions” is based on the original historical novel.
Well-known artist Jessie Chung takes the stage with 26 experienced actors.
✨Lead actor Terry Lim, a one-in-a-million actor who portrays Jia Baoyu, was chosen through a worldwide search for a Jia Baoyu lookalike.
✨Stage backdrops created through the latest 3D technology for stunning, lifelike environments.
✨Symphony Theatre invited an American composer to create the soundtrack for “The Dream of Red Mansions”, while lead actress Jessie Chung performed the soundtrack song “A Dying Light in the Dark” and the theme song, “Hearts Apart”—an emotional duet—with lead actor Terry Lim.
✨Accompanied by realistic sound effects and professional background music.
✨Stage design incorporates exquisite ancient Chinese elements and props.
✨Actors wear elegant, refined, majestic and authentic period costumes.
✨Show your love through fundraising for cancer patients.
Want to purchase tickets? 🤩 Visit the following link:
https://wa.link/1zlg05
Contact number: 016-336 6701 (Representative Ms. Tan)
The show is a fundraiser organized by the Malaysian Naturopathy Association (MNA) to help cancer patients in need. Stay tuned on Jessie’s Facebook for more updates and information!
13 shows have been scheduled; the performance dates are as follows: 🏹🏹🏹
1st show: Friday, July 24, 2020 [Full House]
2nd show: Saturday, July 25, 2020 [Full House]
3rd show: Sunday, July 26, 2020 [Full House]
4th show: Friday, July 31, 202, 7 p.m. [Sold Out]
5th show: Saturday August 1, 2020, 7 p.m. [Sold Out]
6th show: Sunday, August 2, 2020, 7 p.m. [Sold Out]
[Additional shows]
7th show: August 7, 2020, 8 p.m. [Sold Out]
8th show: August 8, 2020, 7 p.m. [Sold Out]
9th show: August 9, 2020, 7 p.m. [Sold Out]
10th show: August 15, 2020, 7 p.m.[Sold Out]
11th show: August 16, 2020, 7 p.m.[Sold Out]
[Further added shows]
12th show: August 22, 2020, 7 p.m.
13th show: August 23, 2020, 7 p.m.
Venue: Symphony Theatre
For more news and information, stay tuned on Facebook or contact Symphony Theatre representative Ms. Tan: 016-3366701