The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Avid HDX Benefits?
Old 1st October 2017
  #1
Gear Nut
 

Avid HDX Benefits?

I'm looking for a low latency tracking setup for Pro Tools. I don't run into issues with mixing as much as tracking.


1. I understand it will assist with AAX-DSP plugins, but does it also assist running Pro Tools HD? (Otherwise I why not stick with UAD?)

2. I read on here "You will also have more latency with a HDX system than a HD Native system when using the native plugs, just as you did with a TDM and RTAS plugs." is this true?

3. Can I run an HDX card directly into an Avid HD Native Thunderbolt Core or that redundant?


I apologize for such basic questions, but a lot of Avid's info is comparing it to the previous HD systems or just using buzz words.

I just don't see the benefits of HDX other than AAX-DSP?

Last edited by ThePrez; 1st October 2017 at 06:49 PM..
Old 1st October 2017
  #2
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

The big advantage is if you want to run a lot of i/o channels. The very lowest latency is an analog feed of the source signal which eliminates the latency of the converters and computer altogether. A little mixer for monitoring can be your best friend!
Old 1st October 2017
  #3
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
The big advantage is if you want to run a lot of i/o channels. The very lowest latency is an analog feed of the source signal which eliminates the latency of the converters and computer altogether. A little mixer for monitoring can be your best friend!
Thanks.

Do you have an answer to this question...

I understand it will assist with AAX-DSP plugins, but does it also assist running Pro Tools HD?
Old 2nd October 2017
  #4
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

It isn't the same as a TDM system with a ten-year-old computer.

Pro Tools 11 and later run dual buffers and turn off any plug-ins that aren't passing audio. The net result is that native is now very very powerful compared to the past. A lot of people I know switched to HD Native because they aren't recording large numbers of inputs at the same time and are mostly mixing. HDX is a higher-end solution than 10HD and earlier were. I would buy an HD Native system and then add an HDX card if I ran into problems.
Old 2nd October 2017
  #5
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
It isn't the same as a TDM system with a ten-year-old computer.

Pro Tools 11 and later run dual buffers and turn off any plug-ins that aren't passing audio. The net result is that native is now very very powerful compared to the past. A lot of people I know switched to HD Native because they aren't recording large numbers of inputs at the same time and are mostly mixing. HDX is a higher-end solution than 10HD and earlier were. I would buy an HD Native system and then add an HDX card if I ran into problems.
Thanks, so when you say they switched to "HD Native" do you mean they got a Avid HD Native Thunderbolt device or they just run HD on their computer and use the I/O of their choice?
Old 2nd October 2017
  #6
Lives for gear
 
Nowak's Avatar
HDX all the way if you want to track live with minimal latency without headaches.

You can set up aux sends for fx, cues. Load channels with eqs etc.

Again, all without headaches.
Old 2nd October 2017
  #7
Gear Nut
 

I can track with all AAX-DSP plugins, except for 1 native plugin sometimes... Auto-Tune (there is a UAD version if that helps, but I don't own UAD currently.)

But when it comes to mixing though, I will have to use native, as I can't mix with completely AAX-DSP plugins.

So this is kind of where I am at when I'm deciding? Thanks!
Old 2nd October 2017
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Nowak's Avatar
When I was still using PT10 with my TDM rig, I switched over to Native playback engine with my Apogee Duet for mixing a few times. It worked amazingly well.
Old 2nd October 2017
  #9
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePrez View Post
Thanks.

Do you have an answer to this question...

I understand it will assist with AAX-DSP plugins, but does it also assist running Pro Tools HD?
It means you can basically forget about needing to mess with buffer sizes when tracking.

It doesn’t require an external software mixer like UAD, so there’s no confusion between what’s being recorded and what’s simply in input.

It does take some of the strain off the computer - the mixer operates on the cards - meaning it’s very reliable for tracking.

Yes - native plugs on input will have slightly higher latency than on a native system, but when mixing this simply doesn’t matter.

If you only mix - I’d probably stay native (I actually bounce mixes between my laptop and an HDX rig).

For tracking - I’d rather not use anything else.
Old 2nd October 2017
  #10
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePrez View Post
Thanks.

Do you have an answer to this question...

I understand it will assist with AAX-DSP plugins, but does it also assist running Pro Tools HD?

The HDX card runs the entire audio engine on the DSP chips. When running as a mixer and DSP plugin environment, your computer is merely an interface providing mouse , keyboard input and visual monitor output.
All audio tasks stay on the HDX card including routing and mixer summing.
You can insert native processing plugins which will then utilise the host computer CPU to crunch the numbers and that will then be spit back into the DSP mixing engine-hence a little bit of extra latency.
While tracking though, even if your session is using native plugins on playback tracks, when you go into record mode- those new record armed tracks will utilise purely the DSP engine and allow the lowest latency record monitoring available.
This means that your playback buffer can be 1024 samples but your record enable tracks will still allow you 0.7ms real time latency.
Meaning you get the best of both worlds.
When recording, only trying to monitor through native plugins will give you a more traditional latency count as the audio has to go from the AD converter-> HDX card->host CPU->HDX card-> DA converter.

There is ZERO need to ever monitor through native plugins.
Old 3rd October 2017
  #11
Couple of corrections (sorry - not intending to be a smartarse).

When you go into record enable with native plugins on a record track, the native plugins go into bypass unless they’re preceded by a DSP plugin. Now - I think this is meant to mean the latency drops to near-zero, but to be honest I’ll just deactivate them - I’ve had funny issues with latency before and it’s just good practice now.

Which means you can’t monitor through the native plug unless you force it to.

Normally you wouldn’t want to monitor through native plugs, but sometimes you might - there’s no DSP autotune for example, and many guitar amp sims are native only - and the latency can still be set “good enough” for plugins which alter the sound so much to be usable - AT has a specific low latency mode for example, as do others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyMac View Post
The HDX card runs the entire audio engine on the DSP chips. When running as a mixer and DSP plugin environment, your computer is merely an interface providing mouse , keyboard input and visual monitor output.
All audio tasks stay on the HDX card including routing and mixer summing.
You can insert native processing plugins which will then utilise the host computer CPU to crunch the numbers and that will then be spit back into the DSP mixing engine-hence a little bit of extra latency.
While tracking though, even if your session is using native plugins on playback tracks, when you go into record mode- those new record armed tracks will utilise purely the DSP engine and allow the lowest latency record monitoring available.
This means that your playback buffer can be 1024 samples but your record enable tracks will still allow you 0.7ms real time latency.
Meaning you get the best of both worlds.
When recording, only trying to monitor through native plugins will give you a more traditional latency count as the audio has to go from the AD converter-> HDX card->host CPU->HDX card-> DA converter.

There is ZERO need to ever monitor through native plugins.
Old 3rd October 2017
  #12
Lives for gear
 

Yes, that's why I said native plugins on playback tracks and not record enabled tracks;-)

Thought I was being clear with that issue but maybe not.
Old 3rd October 2017
  #13
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyMac View Post
Yes, that's why I said native plugins on playback tracks and not record enabled tracks;-)

Thought I was being clear with that issue but maybe not.
Sorry, I was addressing these two points:
"There is ZERO need to ever monitor through native plugins."
(sometimes there is)

and
"You can insert native processing plugins which will then utilise the host computer CPU to crunch the numbers and that will then be spit back into the DSP mixing engine-hence a little bit of extra latency. "

(there's no actual extra latency on playback - I know YOU know this but that's not how it reads!)
Old 3rd October 2017
  #14
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
there’s no DSP autotune for example, and many guitar amp sims are native only - and the latency can still be set “good enough” for plugins which alter the sound so much to be usable - AT has a specific low latency mode for example, as do others.
Great stuff guys, and yes... Auto-Tune is my biggest worry.

Any feedback on tracking through Auto-Tune with HDX? How about Auto-Tune Live?

I just emailed Antares a few days and they said they have no plans for a Auto-Tune AAX-DSP, so I can't plan on that.

Also I will be mixing with native mainly, so I'm glad to hear the HDX can still have benefit there for me.
Old 3rd October 2017
  #15
Regular AT8 in low latency mode and AT live are about the same thing. They’re generally fine for tracking live - it’s not like tracking with an in-line compressor, the sound is changed too much to worry about stuff like phasing.

I’ve never had an issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePrez View Post
Great stuff guys, and yes... Auto-Tune is my biggest worry.

Any feedback on tracking through Auto-Tune with HDX? How about Auto-Tune Live?

I just emailed Antares a few days and they said they have no plans for a Auto-Tune AAX-DSP, so I can't plan on that.

Also I will be mixing with native mainly, so I'm glad to hear the HDX can still have benefit there for me.
Old 3rd October 2017
  #16
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Regular AT8 in low latency mode and AT live are about the same thing. They’re generally fine for tracking live - it’s not like tracking with an in-line compressor, the sound is changed too much to worry about stuff like phasing.

I’ve never had an issue.
AT8.1 low latency is 220 samples, AT live is 0. I use both too, but if the session has a fair amount of accumulated latency, and it's problematic to route around it and keep the vocal mix intact I think it's worth having both.

Also- IMO AT live does the hard tune thing better than 8.1.
Old 3rd October 2017
  #17
Lives for gear
 

at live is based off of at7 algorithm…

at 8 is something else entirely.

i much prefer the sound of at 7/live.

ej
Old 3rd October 2017
  #18
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePrez View Post
Great stuff guys, and yes... Auto-Tune is my biggest worry.

Any feedback on tracking through Auto-Tune with HDX? How about Auto-Tune Live?

I just emailed Antares a few days and they said they have no plans for a Auto-Tune AAX-DSP, so I can't plan on that.

Also I will be mixing with native mainly, so I'm glad to hear the HDX can still have benefit there for me.
I would strongly recommend you try a modern native system before committing to HDX. Once you are tracking through native plugins in a DSP system the latency is actually higher than a native rig to start with.

Not giving the other guys here a hard time, but many people have not tried native on a computer newer than a cheesegrater mac pro and native stability, power and overall effectiveness have come a long way in the last 6 years.

What computer are you using?

For me on a 5960x hackintosh, and combined with track freeze/commit for VI's, I have no problems tracking even a full band with 6 headphone feeds etc on top of a fully produced VI based track at the 32 sample buffer. A large session in HDX will accumulate 32 samples of latency just through normal plugin use (AAX-DSP plugs are are all few samples here and there). And there really are no *good* DSP reverbs and delay plugs so it's nearly impossible to maintain an all dsp mix.

Horses for courses but IMO it makes more sense for my workflow and for my freelancers to have a high power native system, and then also have a interface or all analog level headphone foldback option. In my case, I'm using focusrite Red 8 Pre with PT, so the option is always there to make the headphone mixes without having to go through PT...although nobody is using it so far- 32 sample buffer is low enough that *fix* that latency I think you just need to go all analog foldback.
Old 3rd October 2017
  #19
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ejsongs View Post
at live is based off of at7 algorithm…

at 8 is something else entirely.

i much prefer the sound of at 7/live.

ej
Yeah they are def different. I tend to like 8 for 'clean' sounds but for the hard AT it's just not that hard. I like manual in 8...
Old 3rd October 2017
  #20
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
I would strongly recommend you try a modern native system before committing to HDX.
Wow thanks everyone!

One last specific question, so if Auto-Tune Live native on a channel would completely negligate any benefits of HDX? Or would it still be better than a high powered native rig.

Last edited by ThePrez; 3rd October 2017 at 09:44 PM..
Old 4th October 2017
  #21
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
AT8.1 low latency is 220 samples, AT live is 0. I use both too, but if the session has a fair amount of accumulated latency, and it's problematic to route around it and keep the vocal mix intact I think it's worth having both.

Also- IMO AT live does the hard tune thing better than 8.1.
Just record enabled AT8.1 and AT live in my HDX system. You're right - it's 220 and 0 samples, but as soon as you enable the DSP plugin before it, that goes to 240 and 138 samples (with a native 64sample buffer, the lowest HDX offers).

So I stand partially corrected with a native system on paper you'll be right, in practice of course you've got additional IO buffers. I don't know what the UAD AT adds.

For hard tuning I'd usually use EFX actually...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ejsongs View Post
at live is based off of at7 algorithm…

at 8 is something else entirely.

i much prefer the sound of at 7/live.

ej
I never really used 7 - I tried a few times, but preferred v6! and I prefer 8 to 6 now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Yeah they are def different. I tend to like 8 for 'clean' sounds but for the hard AT it's just not that hard. I like manual in 8...
I really only use manual on finished productions - even if I use "auto" mode I'll scan it in to manual and edit anything not quite right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
I would strongly recommend you try a modern native system before committing to HDX. Once you are tracking through native plugins in a DSP system the latency is actually higher than a native rig to start with.

Not giving the other guys here a hard time, but many people have not tried native on a computer newer than a cheesegrater mac pro and native stability, power and overall effectiveness have come a long way in the last 6 years.
Personally I have - and whilst I'm perfectly happy tracking with UAD for single or maybe a few mics, as soon as you get into band work - it gets confusing what you're monitoring, and HDX makes much more sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
For me on a 5960x hackintosh, and combined with track freeze/commit for VI's, I have no problems tracking even a full band with 6 headphone feeds etc on top of a fully produced VI based track at the 32 sample buffer. A large session in HDX will accumulate 32 samples of latency just through normal plugin use (AAX-DSP plugs are are all few samples here and there). And there really are no *good* DSP reverbs and delay plugs so it's nearly impossible to maintain an all dsp mix.
Well, there's nothing wrong with the stock PT delay for tracking purposes, and for reverbs there's Space and Revibe - both are what I'd consider "good" if not my preferred choices.

But - for tracking, I'll usually have the UAD plate up. bit of pre delay isn't an issue really is it?

I still prefer the safety net of having DSP assisted tracking - no native system has yet convinced me otherwise (and I do occasionally track natively).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePrez View Post
Wow thanks everyone!

One last specific question, so if Auto-Tune Live native on a channel would completely negligate any benefits of HDX? Or would it still be better than a high powered native rig.
If you're only tracking a single person at a time - I think your best option is a UAD based system, then you have the option of low latency AT, proper cuemixing and the downsides aren't significant. If you're running a proper tracking space - my money is still on HDX, but it does depend on your clients and what they're used to, what they expect - if you're competing with rooms running TDM they'll expect that level of integration. If you're running your own shop where you can decide workflow, it's really up to you and what you're comfortable with.

HDX is a big investment, and it's not the only game in town. Personally I'd argue it's the BEST game in town - but possibly not always the best way to invest for some users.
Old 4th October 2017
  #22
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Just record enabled AT8.1 and AT live in my HDX system. You're right - it's 220 and 0 samples, but as soon as you enable the DSP plugin before it, that goes to 240 and 138 samples (with a native 64sample buffer, the lowest HDX offers).
Ok, so if you have a Native plugin first in your chain followed by DSP plugins, there won't be addition latency other than the normal amount from the Native plugin. But it when you starting intertwining between Native/DSP in your chain, things get messy?

And lets say I have a session loaded with AAX-DSP plugins and I open it without a HDX connected, will give the same error like UAD and make the plugins inactive or will it switch them to the AAX-Native versions?

Quote:
If you're only tracking a single person at a time
I'm usually tracking more than 1. And your point about the UAD mixer is why I've stayed away from it. UAD is temping and is a good value, but I already own a lot AAX-DSP (Softube, PlugAlliance) plugins and with UAD I would be re-buying plugins I already own.
Old 4th October 2017
  #23
Each DSP plugin adds a few samples of latency - but it is minimal. I’ve not measured round trip - all I can say is that I a) avoid having native (well, really any) plugins on record enabled tracks unless there’s a good reason to (like autotune or an amp sim) and b) when I have had to, it’s never been an issue.

Regarding switching - yes it substitutes out. If for some reason there’s no native version available it’ll be inactive (but that’s more a legacy thing - I can’t think of anything other than HEAT that isn’t native as well as dsp).

As I’ve said - I genuinely wouldn’t want to track a larger ensemble without HDX - I’d rather go back to a TDM rig than go fully native - but it seems that’s not the only viewpoint, and that it is possible to give a good cuemix without a dsp system. So really - it’s a personal choice I think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePrez View Post
Ok, so if you have a Native plugin first in your chain followed by DSP plugins, there won't be addition latency other than the normal amount from the Native plugin. But it when you starting intertwining between Native/DSP in your chain, things get messy?

And lets say I have a session loaded with AAX-DSP plugins and I open it without a HDX connected, will give the same error like UAD and make the plugins inactive or will it switch them to the AAX-Native versions?



I'm usually tracking more than 1. And your point about the UAD mixer is why I've stayed away from it. UAD is temping and is a good value, but I already own a lot AAX-DSP (Softube, PlugAlliance) plugins and with UAD I would be re-buying plugins I already own.
Old 4th October 2017
  #24
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Personally I have - and whilst I'm perfectly happy tracking with UAD for single or maybe a few mics, as soon as you get into band work - it gets confusing what you're monitoring, and HDX makes much more sense.
Not trying to nitpick here, but even the trashcans are dated or have some reason where they don't perform as well as hacks for low latency/audio. The best I've seen on the logic audio benchmark is around 250 tracks- My machine maxes out at 238 tracks @ 88.2 @ 32 sample buffer. Which in my tests does scale to double the tracks at half the buffer so the equivalent of 468 tracks at a 16 sample buffer. It's just playback in logic there, so not a real stress of the buffer...

In any case nobody using a real mac has experienced a state of the art native machine IMO since about 2012.
Old 4th October 2017
  #25
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Not trying to nitpick here, but even the trashcans are dated or have some reason where they don't perform as well as hacks for low latency/audio. The best I've seen on the logic audio benchmark is around 250 tracks- My machine maxes out at 238 tracks @ 88.2 @ 32 sample buffer. Which in my tests does scale to double the tracks at half the buffer so the equivalent of 468 tracks at a 16 sample buffer. It's just playback in logic there, so not a real stress of the buffer...

In any case nobody using a real mac has experienced a state of the art native machine IMO since about 2012.
Maybe. I wouldn't want to run a hack either for a professional studio!

I know....herd mentality, trash cans are overpriced, etc etc. But a) the perception of no corners cut is very important and b) pro level tech support on the end of a phone line is also very important to a high end studio.

And again - those are things that might not be worth the extra expense to many. But for a high end studio (or high end anything, you don't see graphics studios running hacks either) - they are.
Old 4th October 2017
  #26
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Maybe. I wouldn't want to run a hack either for a professional studio!

I know....herd mentality, trash cans are overpriced, etc etc. But a) the perception of no corners cut is very important and b) pro level tech support on the end of a phone line is also very important to a high end studio.

And again - those are things that might not be worth the extra expense to many. But for a high end studio (or high end anything, you don't see graphics studios running hacks either) - they are.
Yeah I get it, hacks have become more common over here except for things like TV stations and big production companies etc. I guess I wouldn't expect to find one at oceanway, but I wouldn't be all that surprised if there was.

I just keep a whole backup computer, haven't needed it. This is a typical week for us...maybe not as high end as you, but Jerimih, Jadakiss, Ghostface, Sony-ATV, Ca$hmoney etc never asked to see the machine room.

Personally I feel safer with it- I have hot swap front panel drive bays for all my drives, everything cloned out including the boot SSD (also in a quick swap bay) No need to waste time on hold for tech support, much easier to roll back OS updates etc...I'm not regularly invoicing labels though (thank god, they gotta wait for some depreciation I guess to actually write the check).

Ironically the last computer problem I had was a apple keyboard that bit the dust...
Attached Thumbnails
Avid HDX Benefits?-screen-shot-2017-10-04-12.16.10-am.jpg  
Old 4th October 2017
  #27
I was thinking more label/engineer clients, not the artists themselves. Unless of course they’re the same thing. And those would all be vocal sessions/mixing, not the multi-performer sessions we’ve been talking about, right? As i said, I wouldn’t buy hdx if all I tracked were single performers.

Honestly, I’ve still never really seen someone using a hack in the flesh - lots about them online and I know of a few production room owners running them maybe, but when so many producers are laptop based it’s not feasible, and the studios I work out of also run genuine Macs.

I don’t have a strong personal opinion about how good or not good they are - for every struggle, I hear of a flawless system - I just know I a) want to spend the minimum of time on computer maintenance and b) I want to be able to show that if there is a session stopping computer issue, it’s not because we’ve cut corners. And fortunately I have the budget available to support that.

As far as redundancy goes, admittedly I think I’d be stuck if the main computer went down on one of the largest sessions - strings or big band or something. For a vocal session, I could simply switch to my laptop; I could probably do that too on a band session, since the whole HDX rig hangs off a TB cable. There’s be compromises, but hopefully I’d struggle through!

Heck my desk power supply went down once...I managed to struggle through that one for a few weeks with a monitor controller and outboard preamps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Yeah I get it, hacks have become more common over here except for things like TV stations and big production companies etc. I guess I wouldn't expect to find one at oceanway, but I wouldn't be all that surprised if there was.

I just keep a whole backup computer, haven't needed it. This is a typical week for us...maybe not as high end as you, but Jerimih, Jadakiss, Ghostface, Sony-ATV, Ca$hmoney etc never asked to see the machine room.

Personally I feel safer with it- I have hot swap front panel drive bays for all my drives, everything cloned out including the boot SSD (also in a quick swap bay) No need to waste time on hold for tech support, much easier to roll back OS updates etc...I'm not regularly invoicing labels though (thank god, they gotta wait for some depreciation I guess to actually write the check).

Ironically the last computer problem I had was a apple keyboard that bit the dust...
Old 5th October 2017
  #28
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I was thinking more label/engineer clients, not the artists themselves. Unless of course they’re the same thing. And those would all be vocal sessions/mixing, not the multi-performer sessions we’ve been talking about, right? As i said, I wouldn’t buy hdx if all I tracked were single performers.

Yeah I've only had a couple artist/eng/label clients and I can respect the difference, people have their expectations...on some level it doesn't matter if there are alternatives that even were better, if they don't like it. I do record a lot of bands and multi mic stuff with no issues, just don't have much in the way of high profile clients there.

In any case all this is a bit OT- my point is from a investment amortization perspective- right now with apple set to release x299 imac pro's and mac pro's really soon- it may be a good idea to wait a little a weigh the value/ROI. OTOH used HDX cards are getting pretty cheap these days...

I will say that if you go over to tonymac, nearly everyone in a x79 x99 or (already) x299 thread is a studio guy, many with multi room studios etc...
Old 5th October 2017
  #29
scaled I/O and scaled DSP
AAX-DSP plugs
fixed latency
more native CPU cycles available
Old 6th October 2017
  #30
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Yeah I've only had a couple artist/eng/label clients and I can respect the difference, people have their expectations...on some level it doesn't matter if there are alternatives that even were better, if they don't like it. I do record a lot of bands and multi mic stuff with no issues, just don't have much in the way of high profile clients there.

In any case all this is a bit OT- my point is from a investment amortization perspective- right now with apple set to release x299 imac pro's and mac pro's really soon- it may be a good idea to wait a little a weigh the value/ROI. OTOH used HDX cards are getting pretty cheap these days...

I will say that if you go over to tonymac, nearly everyone in a x79 x99 or (already) x299 thread is a studio guy, many with multi room studios etc...
I can agree with all of that!
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump