The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Tonelux vs SSL
Old 10th February 2007
  #61
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H View Post
RoundBadge,
You don't mind giving up manual faders during mixdown, to gain external fader automation?

I usually automate in Pro Tools to handle some obvious hot/cold peaks/valleys, and also deal with pops/noise/mistakes/bleed/etc. that can't be edited out.

For the ebb & flow of the song (chorus versus verse, individual instrument emphasis, etc.), I am working the faders manually in real time during mixdown. I'm not sure I'd do it as well with automation in advance.....................but it would certainly let me relax during mixdown.

You're instead doing all fader moves with automation?

Just trying to learn.
I know what you mean..in a perfect world: an Icon/TLXthumbsup

Probably a combination of both..PT/ TLX auto.
maybe a command 8?
TBD.
.. for now,drawing little individual tweaks then the ebb/flow fun of the TLX faders.
we''ll see.
i'll be sure to post about my exploits here.
let the adventure begin
Old 10th February 2007
  #62
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwittman View Post
meaning D-A convertor?

right, you only need as many convertors as audio tracks you have...
William, when did you learn to talk like Yoda?
Old 10th February 2007
  #63
Lives for gear
 
Mind-Over-Midi's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToneLux View Post
William, when did you learn to talk like Yoda?

Wouldn't it be "Converters you need, only as audio tracks you have"?heh



Old 10th February 2007
  #64
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

In the end,

the converters you take

are equal to the tracks you've made.

-R
Old 10th February 2007
  #65
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToneLux View Post
William, when did you learn to talk like Yoda?
a break, ****ing give me
Old 10th February 2007
  #66
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKrizman View Post
Don't worry, you'll have plenty of resources because you won't be weighed down with all that burdensome SUMMING MATH.




Just kidding around. Actually, it sounds like an incredibly cool way to go, and I am very jealous.

So when you create those 32 auxes they don't pass any audio, right? they're just automation "handles" and once they're set up and linked to the Tonelux they can even be rendered invisible in the session, right?


-R
right.
although it's a plus to be able to EITHER ride the fader on the desk, physically, OR draw or trim onscreen.

I found for example that when running vocal options, I'd drag the onscreen volume line up or down that .5 dB to edit the automation data.
Old 10th February 2007
  #67
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwittman View Post
although it's a plus to be able to EITHER ride the fader on the desk, physically, OR draw or trim onscreen.
WW,
But for each track, you have to choose one or the other during mixdown.................correct?

So if you have the vocal aux connected to the external fader for a particular song, then you won't be able to ride the fader physically during that song's mixdown.

I wouldn't think you'd want to give up the ability to ride the faders on most tracks. Maybe just a mental block for me, now that I have gotten accustomed to using external faders. I certainly worked w/o them for a long time when mixing ITB.....................but I felt faders were a huge step forward in my mixing...........and a lot more fun.
Old 14th February 2007
  #68
theother
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by raal View Post
i'm sure you're tired of hearing this but if Tonelux gear had recall i would have jumped on it long ago.

IMHO Shadomix is the 'smartest' analog fader system out there. may have to get the minimum system just for the faders!
I absolutely agree!

Being a writer it's essential for me to go back to songs and continue where I left off.

If Tonelux had recall I would seriously consider it. (Looking for a new console right now)

I know Paul does not want to hear this, but still want him to know that there are people out there to whom recall is something essential.
Old 14th February 2007
  #69
Lives for gear
 
Tony Shepperd's Avatar
But Paul has already said that is never going to happen.
Old 14th February 2007
  #70
Registered User
 

What ever happened to grease pens and recall take sheets.
Have we gotten that lazy?
Old 14th February 2007
  #71
Lives for gear
 
Tony Shepperd's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdiggy View Post
Have we gotten that lazy?
Apparently.
Old 14th February 2007
  #72
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H View Post
WW,
But for each track, you have to choose one or the other during mixdown.................correct?

So if you have the vocal aux connected to the external fader for a particular song, then you won't be able to ride the fader physically during that song's mixdown.

I wouldn't think you'd want to give up the ability to ride the faders on most tracks. Maybe just a mental block for me, now that I have gotten accustomed to using external faders. I certainly worked w/o them for a long time when mixing ITB.....................but I felt faders were a huge step forward in my mixing...........and a lot more fun.
No.
Unless I'm misunderstanding you.
The vocal goes out of a PT fader (that's automated or not , your choice, but in my case NOT... it's set to '0') that goes to a desk channel, and then there's another onscreen AUX fader that relates to the automation data for that desk channel.
(it's much harder to describe than it is when you see it)

You can either automate EITHER related onscreen PT fader, or grab the physical fader and automate IT or not.
And if it's not clear, you can ride the physical desk fader and have that be writing automation dat into PT or you can write the data on the screen and have it ove the fader.

So you CAN always grab the fader at any time. and either have that written in or not, your choice.
Old 14th February 2007
  #73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdiggy View Post
What ever happened to grease pens and recall take sheets.
Have we gotten that lazy?
I was thinking the same thing....

That and.. WTF...

mix #1
vocal up
vocal down
all but lead vocal
instrumental only

... and call it a day.

If you are really worried mix to stems and you can probably work around any major changes you need. I know that it is in the clients hands but really.... at some point just freak'n commit will ya?
Old 14th February 2007
  #74
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwittman View Post
No.
Unless I'm misunderstanding you.
The vocal goes out of a PT fader (that's automated or not , your choice, but in my case NOT... it's set to '0') that goes to a desk channel, and then there's another onscreen AUX fader that relates to the automation data for that desk channel.
(it's much harder to describe than it is when you see it)

You can either automate EITHER related onscreen PT fader, or grab the physical fader and automate IT or not.
You're doing a much better job of explaining than I am. Sorry to be fuzzy on this.

I was trying to make the point that the desirable situation (at least for me) is to have both the physical faders and the automated faders post outboard processing. In this way, the compressors and effects (relative to the track levels) aren't altered by moving the faders.

In contrast, the Pro Tools faders, are of necessity pre outboard processing. For me, that creates all sorts of problems when I try to use them except for specific purposes:
- automate to handle some obvious hot/cold peaks/valleys, and
- automate to deal with pops/noise/mistakes/bleed/etc. that are easier to automate out than edit out.

So, if you only have one set of physical faders (post outboard processing) and these are available to you for either (1) physical movement or (2) automation, you have to choose one or the other for these faders. You can't do both simultaneously with one set of faders...............I don't think.

There is only one set of physical faders, correct?

Thus, where I have to decide if I either ride the vocal fader during mixdown, or automate the vocal fader, I'll almost always want to have the fader available to me for riding. Likewise for most other tracks. So, the capability to automate these faders would normally go unused.

I'm still not sure I explained that very well.

And.................maybe I've completely missed what the system provides. I'm describing what I think it does. Maybe I'm all wet.

In any case, thanks for trying to get me out of the ditch.
Old 14th February 2007
  #75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike H View Post
You're doing a much better job of explaining than I am. Sorry to be fuzzy on this.

I was trying to make the point that the desirable situation (at least for me) is to have both the physical faders and the automated faders post outboard processing. In this way, the compressors and effects (relative to the track levels) aren't altered by moving the faders.

In contrast, the Pro Tools faders, are of necessity pre outboard processing. For me, that creates all sorts of problems when I try to use them except for specific purposes:
- automate to handle some obvious hot/cold peaks/valleys, and
- automate to deal with pops/noise/mistakes/bleed/etc. that are easier to automate out than edit out.

So, if you only have one set of physical faders (post outboard processing) and these are available to you for either (1) physical movement or (2) automation, you have to choose one or the other for these faders. You can't do both simultaneously with one set of faders...............I don't think.

There is only one set of physical faders, correct?

Thus, where I have to decide if I either ride the vocal fader during mixdown, or automate the vocal fader, I'll almost always want to have the fader available to me for riding. Likewise for most other tracks. So, the capability to automate these faders would normally go unused.

I'm still not sure I explained that very well.

And.................maybe I've completely missed what the system provides. I'm describing what I think it does. Maybe I'm all wet.

In any case, thanks for trying to get me out of the ditch.
Yeah I think there is a pretty big gap between what you are asking and people are telling you.

This is really MUCH easier than you are thinking it is.

There are 3 things here

1) A physical fader that is passing audio like the good ol days and that could be used to write automation data (also like the good ol days) back to the DAW... it does both if you want (I think this is where you are getting confused)

2) A track output from the DAW. In some cases this would be a pre fader output from a virtual channel insert but it could be a post fader send at the end of the virtual channel strip (in which case you would probably not automate that channel fader)

3) A virtual fader some place in the DAW to control the physical fader

If you are using an insert on the channel to send your audio to the physical fader then you can use the same channel's virtual fader to control the physical fader.

If you are sending the audio out to the physical fader after the virtual fader (post fader) then you would probably want to have some other fader controlling the physical fader. This "other" fader could be an aux send or it could be a fader on another channel as long as the virtual fader you want to use for automation is "talking" directly to the physcal fader you are good to go.

In both cases above the full signal will come out of the DAW / DA converters unaffected by the volume changes of the virtual fader and can be sent to any external processing you wish. After processing the signal would go to the physical fader and that level would go up and down according to the levels set by the virtual fader ITB.

Hope that helps... because I don't think I could do anything more....

(just kidding)
Old 14th February 2007
  #76
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new View Post
Yeah I think there is a pretty big gap between what you are asking and people are telling you.

This is really MUCH easier than you are thinking it is.

There are 3 things here

1) A physical fader that is passing audio like the good ol days and that could be used to write automation data (also like the good ol days) back to the DAW... it does both if you want (I think this is where you are getting confused)

2) A track output from the DAW. In some cases this would be a pre fader output from a virtual channel insert but it could be a post fader send at the end of the virtual channel strip (in which case you would probably not automate that channel fader)

3) A virtual fader some place in the DAW to control the physical fader

If you are using an insert on the channel to send your audio to the physical fader then you can use the same channel's virtual fader to control the physical fader.

If you are sending the audio out to the physical fader after the virtual fader (post fader) then you would probably want to have some other fader controlling the physical fader. This "other" fader could be an aux send or it could be a fader on another channel as long as the virtual fader you want to use for automation is "talking" directly to the physcal fader you are good to go.

In both cases above the full signal will come out of the DAW / DA converters unaffected by the volume changes of the virtual fader and can be sent to any external processing you wish. After processing the signal would go to the physical fader and that level would go up and down according to the levels set by the virtual fader ITB.

Hope that helps... because I don't think I could do anything more....

(just kidding)
Thanks so much. I might actually have it now.

If:
(1) The physical faders can WRITE automation data back to the DAW in real time as I am riding them during mixdown, and
(2) I can then use that written automation data to control the physical faders the next time I play the song (instead of physically riding the faders), I am in business.

I missed the point that there is the capability to WRITE automation data back to Pro Tools HD with the physical faders.

Thanks again!
Mike
Old 14th February 2007
  #77
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdiggy View Post
What ever happened to grease pens and recall take sheets.
Have we gotten that lazy?

tutt No not lazy,but overwhelmed by insanely unrealistic schedules.
.. when your doing soundtracks or commercials/tv and you've got 10 clients ,a director,various producers involved calling for constant changes, fast recall is essential and can make or break your workflow with all the other projects you might be trying to juggle at the same time.
especially when competeing with other mixers who do everything inside PT
Old 14th February 2007
  #78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bdiggy View Post
What ever happened to grease pens and recall take sheets.
Have we gotten that lazy?
They went out with the ash trays built into the consoles.
Old 14th February 2007
  #79
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethrillfactor View Post
They went out with the ash trays built into the consoles.
Speaking of which, I just saw a certain famous "southern Brother"'s B3 from the 70's in the studio today, complete with cigarette burns and razor blade marks all along the top.

Long Live Rock -n- Roll!!
Old 14th February 2007
  #80
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
stike
Attached Thumbnails
Tonelux vs SSL-allmangedit.jpg  
Old 14th February 2007
  #81
theother
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new View Post
I was thinking the same thing....

That and.. WTF...

mix #1
vocal up
vocal down
all but lead vocal
instrumental only

... and call it a day.
Not if you are a writer like me and you deal with songs that are not finished and get changed later.
Old 14th February 2007
  #82
Quote:
Originally Posted by theother View Post
Not if you are a writer like me and you deal with songs that are not finished and get changed later.
But you are tracking ITB right? Because I am in your boat and while I am writing and adding parts I just mix the song to the internal 2 buss. I am only bringing the tracks out to hardware when I am mixing the finished product. Untill I go to mix my project is fully recallable because it is ITB so tracking is a breeze.

It's just like I used to do on hardware consoles for EVERY project. Build a rough mix for basic tracking and overdubs and then at the end I mix everything together.

I guess I am just a little shocked that people are so up in arms about not having full instant recall on the Tonelux. We worked for years (YEARS) without the ability to recall EQ and compressor settings. Work still got done and much of it was great sounding.

Many boards to this day don't have full recall abilities, I don't think the Tonelux should take a hit for a feature that people have come to expect only since the advent of DAW's.
Old 14th February 2007
  #83
theother
Guest
Maybe that works for you, but I like to mix as I go. I like to built my mix around the arrangement and the arrangement around the mix.

By staying ITB I get too much used to the sound of the plugins and this can be very misleading/difficult later when switching to the analog board/outboard and trying to replace them.

I don't want to criticize Tonlux for having no TR and I'm sure a lot of people are perfectly ok with that.

It's just that I wouldn't go down that route. I had an AMEK in the early 90s and sold it excatly for that reason. No TR. It was too frustrating to pick up a song I started earlier and not be able to get the same vibe going again.

That's one of the reasons I picked a SSL G+ as my next desk (which I've sold last year). But then AMEK Galileo, Rembrandt, 9098i, misc. Neves, Harrison, Euphonix, all had Recall.

So have the AWS, Duality and SSL XRacks.

I seriously have to think about a Duality. Seems to be the logical, if expensive choice for me.
Old 14th February 2007
  #84
Gear Maniac
 

i was under the impression that the tonelux models were recallable?



there are recall sheets on the website that you can print out right?

i dont really see the need. yeah its convenient but i dont think it would be worth the added price to have something implemented into it.
i dont understand how this is a deal breaker for some people.
"if it had recall i would buy it right now!"
hell even an ssl takes a few minutes to recall. the only difference is to save a mix you just hit a button as opposed to writing a few lines on some sheets of paper.
you still got to do that for all the rest of the gear in the room. this is just another 5-10 minutes depending on how big the console is.
Old 14th February 2007
  #85
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
hell even an ssl takes a few minutes to recall. the only difference is to save a mix you just hit a button as opposed to writing a few lines on some sheets of paper.
when it comes to TR...i guess, it works for some and not acceptable for others. Personally, recalling a session involves so much more than writing a few lines. I can waiste 2-3 hours a day recalling sessions when i was doing OTB on an analog console, also tried the Hybrid/summing system, it's defnitely is not my thang...too many limitations.
I guess, if you have an assistant 24/7 and you have the luxury of tackling 1 project at the time then recall is definitely not a big deal. But in my world, as a freelance, it's not unusual to work on 4-5 projects at the same time....so recall is not a luxury..it's a MUST.
Old 14th February 2007
  #86
Quote:
Originally Posted by theother View Post
Maybe that works for you, but I like to mix as I go. I like to built my mix around the arrangement and the arrangement around the mix.

By staying ITB I get too much used to the sound of the plugins and this can be very misleading/difficult later when switching to the analog board/outboard and trying to replace them.

I don't want to criticize Tonlux for having no TR and I'm sure a lot of people are perfectly ok with that.

It's just that I wouldn't go down that route. I had an AMEK in the early 90s and sold it excatly for that reason. No TR. It was too frustrating to pick up a song I started earlier and not be able to get the same vibe going again.

That's one of the reasons I picked a SSL G+ as my next desk (which I've sold last year). But then AMEK Galileo, Rembrandt, 9098i, misc. Neves, Harrison, Euphonix, all had Recall.

So have the AWS, Duality and SSL XRacks.

I seriously have to think about a Duality. Seems to be the logical, if expensive choice for me.
Well, I guess I just work in a completely different way than you do. It's all good, that's what makes the world go round as they say.

I will say this.... you are talking about switching to outboard gear to replace plugins. Unless you are using channel compression or all effects and EQ's on a TOTAL recall board you are writing some stuff down and resetting it anyway right? I don't know of any recallable 1176's out there so if you are using any patching at all then you are already at a point where you need to tweak to get back to where you were before.

Also, so the plugs sound different, I really don't think that would drastically change my tracking ideas or my song structure. Yes an 1176 plug in does not sound AS GOOD as the hardware but it SOUNDS LIKE the hardware.. at least enough that my decision to use a Neve preamp on the tracking session is not going to change.

I don't want you to think I am calling you out on this (as I said we all have different ways to work) but really I just don't see it as a deal breaker in any way and saying that it is hard to switch to hardware from a plugin seems... well... like laziness or a cop out. Sorry....

Just patch in the hardware and move on. The hardware sounds better, I could see having a problem if you were going in the other direction but stepping up from the plug to the hardware unit is such an improvement I don't see how it would hurt a mix. If you are saying it takes you time to tweak the settings... well... isn't that what MIXING is all about?

Again not calling you out so it's all cool, we just work very much alike until we start working very differently.
Old 14th February 2007
  #87
Quote:
Originally Posted by vudoo View Post
when it comes to TR...i guess, it works for some and not acceptable for others. Personally, recalling a session involves so much more than writing a few lines. I can waiste 2-3 hours a day recalling sessions when i was doing OTB on an analog console, also tried the Hybrid/summing system, it's defnitely is not my thang...too many limitations.
I guess, if you have an assistant 24/7 and you have the luxury of tackling 1 project at the time then recall is definitely not a big deal. But in my world, as a freelance, it's not unusual to work on 4-5 projects at the same time....so recall is not a luxury..it's a MUST.
It is just so interesting how much different we all work.

I did freelance for years and I never had a problem without total recall.... not ONCE. How you ask? Rough mix until I am ready for the real mix and then when it is the real mix I print a few different versions and maybe some stems if needed.

Tracking is tracking, mixing is mixing. The two only became one when we started talking about DAWs and REAL TOTAL recall (which never covered all outboard gear anyway so it is not really TOTAL recall by definition) .

For years I and many others in the industry worked perfectly fine without total recall for any session.

I will step out on a ledge and say that all the best 60's 70's and 80's NON total recall productions kick the snot out of many of today's total recall "tweak until you are blue in the face" sessions. In that regard it could be said that perhaps total recall is loosing some creativity and spontaneity in today's mixes? Not saying that is always true but I am saying that total recall was not mandatory for some of the best productions in history and I don't personally see it as mandatory now… but YMMV for sure.

It's all good.. different points of view.

Old 14th February 2007
  #88
theother
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by not_so_new View Post
I will step out on a ledge and say that all the best 60's 70's and 80's NON total recall productions kick the snot out of many of today's total recall "tweak until you are blue in the face" sessions. In that regard it could be said that perhaps total recall is loosing some creativity and spontaneity in today's mixes? Not saying that is always true but I am saying that total recall was not mandatory for some of the best productions in history and I don't personally see it as mandatory now… but YMMV for sure.

It's all good.. different points of view.

But back then we had 24 tracks max and mixing desks with 32 channels.

These days you have to deal with unlimited tracks from DAWs and 72-96 channels on a mixing desk. I really don't fancy writing everything down.

I only use less than 20 pieces of outboard when doing a mix and it's much less work than writing down every EQ, compressor, Aux send and level on a 72 channel mixing desk, don't you think?

I have to write all outboard down anyway, but at least with TR I don't have to sit down for hours doing the desk too.

For a small setup, ok. But I was thinking of getting a full blown 32 channel Tonelux with EQ+Compressor and to write it all down is just too much for me.

I still did not figure out how to configure a Tonelux mixer. Is there any proper information to be found to build lets say a big desk with max aux send per channel and EQ, compressor + faders etc.?
Maybe I'm a bit ******** but looking at the Tonelux webpage I don't have a clue how to build a proper mixing desk.
Old 14th February 2007
  #89
Quote:
Originally Posted by theother View Post
But back then we had 24 tracks max and mixing desks with 32 channels.

These days you have to deal with unlimited tracks from DAWs and 72-96 channels on a mixing desk. I really don't fancy writing everything down.

I only use less than 20 pieces of outboard when doing a mix and it's much less work than writing down every EQ, compressor, Aux send and level on a 72 channel mixing desk, don't you think?

I have to write all outboard down anyway, but at least with TR I don't have to sit down for hours doing the desk too.

For a small setup, ok. But I was thinking of getting a full blown 32 channel Tonelux with EQ+Compressor and to write it all down is just too much for me.
I think this is where the difference is between us.... Why do you have to write it down? That is my point. I am trying to understand how you work and why you would need to write it all down so you can come back to the exact point you were at when you left the session last.

When I am tracking a huge session I just do a rough mix…. takes me 15 minutes or so. Hell if it is on a DAW then I just set all the physical fasers on the desk to unity and then the whole mix will come up because the virtual faders are already set at their levels. My tracking session at that point would take as long to set up as it would to normal out the channel EQ's and get all the physical faders to unity on the desk. I want to have a great sounding rough for the "talent" to track to but that does not mean it has to be finished mix perfect. I would never write all the settings down from a tracking session. The only thing I will write down is the settings on the tracking equipment like preamp levels and such and I may might write down something cool that I have stumbled on to, a compressor setting or a crazy vocal effect etc..

When I am ready to mix…. I mix and then print mixes to "tape" whatever that may be. When I am done mixing I tell my clients that we are going to commit to this mix and take it all down so speak up because it is now or never.

That just seems worlds easier to me than worrying about settings from session to session. I trust my skills enough to make a good mix from scratch if I have to and I just assume that is where I have to start when working out of the box. It' is the price you pay in my book but the rewards are worth it.


Quote:
I still did not figure out how to configure a Tonelux mixer. Is there any proper information to be found to build lets say a big desk with max aux send per channel and EQ, compressor + faders etc.?
Maybe I'm a bit ******** but looking at the Tonelux webpage I don't have a clue how to build a proper mixing desk.
Yep the Tonlux stuff is pretty confusing at first. Best bet is to PM Paul or email from his web site. Ask if you can give him a call to answer a few questions.... he is always very accessible when I have tried contacting him.

You might also what to look here, it might help a bit... or it might just confuse you more..... lol

http://www.tonelux.com/testim.html

Good luck!
Old 14th February 2007
  #90
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
When I am ready to mix…. I mix and then print mixes to "tape" whatever that may be. When I am done mixing I tell my clients that we are going to commit to this mix and take it all down so speak up because it is now or never.

That just seems worlds easier to me than worrying about settings from session to session. I trust my skills enough to make a good mix from scratch if I have to and I just assume that is where I have to start when working out of the box. It' is the price you pay in my book but the rewards are worth it.
Well, i guess it's not as much the way we work but more about client's expectation. I have not once work on a project in the past few years where i did not have to recall the whole mix. Not because the original mix was bad but they wanted different version of the same song. Sometimes weeks after the project is finished. Yes i can always print stems but you never know what they need so it was not practical.
A lot of projects i do are also a '' work in progress '' so recalling the song where you left off is a must.
Theother also mention an interesting point....back in the days, the track counts arent's what they are today....i get session from artists with 60 tracks and more ALL the time.
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