The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Does protools hd have a naturally wider stereo image more headroom than say cubase4
Old 13th November 2012
  #121
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

was that using AU or VST in Reaper?
Old 13th November 2012
  #122
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

for Free-G i used the VST in Reaper because the AU seemed a bit buggy when entering a text value.
Volt is AU in both, but that seemed a bit buggy in Logic...still nulls though so its just a gui thing i suspect...
i have noticed strange behaviors in both DAWs when entering text values in some plug ins so i really don't know what's up with that stuff...
but the functionality is always consistent...ie...i always get out what i put in...
Old 13th November 2012
  #123
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

interesting. I'll have a whizz through the same sort of thing sometime tomorrow and see if i can confirm your results (for that be the science way !!)
Old 13th November 2012
  #124
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

thanks for that, and thanks again for helping me understand my errors with the 'summing' stuff...
i really want to be able to speak of these things 'correctly' and someday maybe understand some of it...
i know you are a smart guy and i respect that so i feel like **** for facepalming you, but really i thought it was funny at the time...(the face is my fav, though)
i actually think everything is funny almost all the time...that's my problem......so no harm meant and don't think of me as too much a dick...
Old 13th November 2012
  #125
Lives for gear
 
jrhager84's Avatar
 

Nobody thinks of you as a dick. ;-)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777
Old 13th November 2012
  #126
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

well, i've got to try harder then...

i know you know i'm right so you don't have to play these games unless you really want to and then it's fine by me but as long as you know that i know that's all i want you to know...
Old 13th November 2012
  #127
Lives for gear
 
jrhager84's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stinkyfingers View Post
well, i've got to try harder then...

i know you know i'm right so you don't have to play these games unless you really want to and then it's fine by me but as long as you know that i know that's all i want you to know...
Um...... What?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777
Old 13th November 2012
  #128
Lives for gear
 
stinkyfingers's Avatar
 

well, i knew idaho had a lot of potatoes, but i didn't know you were one of them...
Old 13th November 2012
  #129
Lives for gear
 
jrhager84's Avatar
 



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777
Old 13th November 2012
  #130
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DISCERN View Post
Its been tested. A bunch of files level matched and panned with identical pan laws within different daws. A null test proved they were identical. Even the newer 64bit fixed point mix engines produced the same identical file as 32bit floating and 48 bit fixed point. These tests however, were done without plugins. Thats a can'o'worms all to itself and would prove very hard to determine where the difference (if any) may lay. Workflow, and familiarity influences the final mix.

Both good and bad mixes have been made on the same SSL.
Both good and bad mixes have been made in Protools
Both good and bad mixes have been made in Nuendo
Both good and bad mixes have even been made on wackie mackies.

Sometimes gear scutiny is a good thing, at other times its nothing but a path to being sidetracked. Just use what works for you, and what you think sounds the best in your hands. Science doesn't support a definate "best sounding" anything... because science supports that everyone hears things differently.
Yea.
Old 13th November 2012
  #131
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
for the record, editing what someone said and putting it as a quote is the ultimate in disrespect in my book. Childish. It's the sort of thing someone might do when they can't debate with the adults anymore.
interesting..wasnt you the only person in this thread doing such things? or what are you talking about? is it possible that your nickname was chooses with care?


Quote:
So how do you determine what is the issue with the "summing, and which is the "truncation"? or should we just assume that if things null, they're BOTH the same? with gain changes and so on...I'm not claiming just a "faders at zero" null he
you are talking weard.. i cant help when you dont want to understand that summing in a daw is only the most primitve part of the involved code and that there are many other factors that can lead to a differnt user experience regarding the sound quality.. Whe it would be so easy they really would sound the same and would´nt have seen any improvements since the early 90´s..

its pretty useless to ask you something because a you ignore all relevant question or just dont understand them, but anyway.

Do todays version of daw´s sound better in the mix as theire 1999 versions?
Yes or No ?



Quote:
So, if I ditch any dither on export, I've ditched the sound of my DAW?

Come on...you've got to try harder than that. For someone who claims to have "clients" in a troubleshooting role, you're not very good at it.
You allways need to be insulting ..thats typical for people that fight an already lost cause.. But dont worry.. i am very good in troubleshooting.
And regarding daws.. after your standards they are all "broken". What is a real stupid term for something that is just not ready developed yet.

Quote:
Start from first principles...so, you say two DAWs don't sound the same. Why? Is it summing? some will say yes, some will say no. So you isolate the summing, test that, come to a conclusion. Add the next factor in, and so on until you a) find a difference, or b) conclude there IS no difference.

just suddenly claiming "I can tell any mix done in ableton, cos I recognise the synths" is a) irrelevant and b) confusing to others who haven't grasped the issue. I notice you've not refuted that point.
You again do it , intentionally missquoting and laying words in my mouth..
you grab for straws.. sorry..

easy question..what do you tell your customers when they ask you whether protools 10 sounds better than earlier versions or not?

will you tell them that this is bull**** because its not possible to sound any better than older versions ?
Or what would you say when this actual question pops up?




Quote:
There's people that believe all sorts out there...doesn't make any of them clever or right!
To exclude the possibility that they are right or that any myth might hold some truth or that they are victims of bugs or other interfeerences, seems to be a little unwise in the audio world..
But true..there are people out ther that sell goldplated power sockets.. do you have such mambo jambo in your studio too? or the good ol video cable from vovox or alike? have you?
Old 13th November 2012
  #132
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
It's a start.



Absolutely. But I've never seen or heard one of these guys who can magically "hear" the muddiness of a DAW consent to actually proving it. I'd have more respect for someone who did!
with a lot work i proved 2 audio bugs to ableton.. booth are gone now.. booth were in the program for many years.. many people claimed the program to sound muffeled..but only after they installed a permanent log routine, to monitor the program, it was possible to create the necessary prove (log files)..

Its a complex thing to prove such subtile changes in the audio quality especially when you dont know what triggers them..just that it regulary happens in a session..but samplerate conversions are good enough now that you dont get it immediately when one track of 30 decides to get an untransparent playback in the middle of the night.. Most people dont get it all.. I do hear that early.. but than i still dont know what has caused it.. i can report the issue, but prove it?

But now the bug is gone.. the witch is dead..

Sofar my ears was always proven right.. and at times there was 3 engineers working on finding the cause of a problem i was the only one in the room to hear.. I just sayed that dont sounds good enough for an ssl axiom, and i was right.. the clock was jittered.. and than the 3 guys had to swarm out and find the bad boy that has caused that.. In short..when i hear that something is wrong..something is wrong.. just what and where and how to prove it is the difficult task..

However.. again i say that i dont claim that nuendo is any better than protools or the other way around.. I just opt for differences to be possible in a complex and dynamic mix scenario and allways faster computers..Progress is possible, and bugs are possible. Would be stupid to exclude that. I also dont exclude that they just sound the same.

I only exclude that ableton live is in its version 8 as good as the top daw´s.. it sounds a little grainy and truncated when you ask me.. at least its pretty useless to record emt plates with it.. you very well just can use a plug in with ableton live.. it has the marvelous tendency to make analog sources sound like plug is.. when beeing under load... On the typical 2 tracks null test it nulls as all the others..but on a few tracks in the mix..it sounds a little dull..

What brings me to the theory that they resort to samplerate conversion whenever their processtimings glitch..so where others would break the playback they just cover the one or two missing samples with theire dynamical samplerate conversion.. that never produces a click.. thats the hint.. sometimes they click with perfect cut zero crossing files.. other times it dont clicks even with crossfadings disabled on files you intentionally add a dc offset.. they really have elastic audio

that actually says that theire SRC is allways active and only working transparent aslong input and output samplingrate match.. what is probably under load an object of fluctuations by process timing errors.. so they somehow invented software internal jitter ..or something that fx the audio in similar ways like the error correction of a dat recorder on a bad tape..

Thats just a hinch.. whatever it is.. i hope they got rid of it in the upcoming version because i personally like the program for my private music for its pattern orientated workflow. It just dont sounds very good.. you need a lots of plug ins to make it sound..

Ableton live is the living prove that not all daws do sound the same..
Old 13th November 2012
  #133
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
interesting..wasnt you the only person in this thread doing such things? or what are you talking about? is it possible that your nickname was chooses with care?
I'm sorry...what? I've never quoted anyone, but changed what they wrote to "blah".



Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
you are talking weard..
You're WRITING weird!

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
i cant help when you dont want to understand that summing in a daw is only the most primitve part of the involved code and that there are many other factors that can lead to a differnt user experience regarding the sound quality.. Whe it would be so easy they really would sound the same and would´nt have seen any improvements since the early 90´s..
Come on then - explain it. So far all I've seen is that you seem to have a "secret DAW" that you say doesn't work very well, but won't say which.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
its pretty useless to ask you something because a you ignore all relevant question or just dont understand them, but anyway.
Anyway indeed. I could say the same of you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
Do todays version of daw´s sound better in the mix as theire 1999 versions?
Yes or No ?
I can honestly say I don't know. I've not sat down and done a blind A/B. Neither has anyone else to my knowledge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
You allways need to be insulting ..thats typical for people that fight an already lost cause..
Let us just remember who was the one quoting someone else and replacing what they actually said with "bla" - that's "lala I'm not listening" territory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
But dont worry.. i am very good in troubleshooting.
Thank god...I was so worried!

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
And regarding daws.. after your standards they are all "broken". What is a real stupid term for something that is just not ready developed yet.
Is it? I don't think so. When 2 DAWs do something identically, and one doesn't and sounds "muffled" by comparison....isn't that one "wrong"?


Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
You again do it , intentionally missquoting and laying words in my mouth..
you grab for straws.. sorry..
Not really. You claimed " I can tell when a mix was done in Ableton". I said "because of the synths? that's not really proving anything.". You haven't replied to that. I'm not putting words in your mouth - if I wanted to do that, I'd just quote you and replace it with "bla" - that is ACTUALLY putting words in my mouth! Hypocrite.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
easy question..what do you tell your customers when they ask you whether protools 10 sounds better than earlier versions or not?

will you tell them that this is bull**** because its not possible to sound any better than older versions ?
Or what would you say when this actual question pops up?
I'd tell them I don't believe it does. Not that they'd ask me - I'm not selling them a DAW, it's kind of irrelevant to them which tools I use if I give them an end result they're happy with.

Why would someone hire me, then question my tools? Do you ask your mechanic about his spanner?

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
To exclude the possibility that they are right or that any myth might hold some truth or that they are victims of bugs or other interfeerences, seems to be a little unwise in the audio world..
But true..there are people out ther that sell goldplated power sockets.. do you have such mambo jambo in your studio too? or the good ol video cable from vovox or alike? have you?
I'm a big disbeliever in gold plated whatever, and the like. I see little point in an audiophile with sooper dooper speaker cable when the record he's listening to was made using bog standard stuff for monitoring.
Old 13th November 2012
  #134
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
with a lot work i proved 2 audio bugs to ableton.. booth are gone now.. booth were in the program for many years.. many people claimed the program to sound muffeled..but only after they installed a permanent log routine, to monitor the program, it was possible to create the necessary prove (log files)..

Its a complex thing to prove such subtile changes in the audio quality especially when you dont know what triggers them..just that it regulary happens in a session..but samplerate conversions are good enough now that you dont get it immediately when one track of 30 decides to get an untransparent playback in the middle of the night.. Most people dont get it all.. I do hear that early.. but than i still dont know what has caused it.. i can report the issue, but prove it?

But now the bug is gone.. the witch is dead..

Sofar my ears was always proven right.. and at times there was 3 engineers working on finding the cause of a problem i was the only one in the room to hear.. I just sayed that dont sounds good enough for an ssl axiom, and i was right.. the clock was jittered.. and than the 3 guys had to swarm out and find the bad boy that has caused that.. In short..when i hear that something is wrong..something is wrong.. just what and where and how to prove it is the difficult task..

However.. again i say that i dont claim that nuendo is any better than protools or the other way around.. I just opt for differences to be possible in a complex and dynamic mix scenario and allways faster computers..Progress is possible, and bugs are possible. Would be stupid to exclude that. I also dont exclude that they just sound the same.

I only exclude that ableton live is in its version 8 as good as the top daw´s.. it sounds a little grainy and truncated when you ask me.. at least its pretty useless to record emt plates with it.. you very well just can use a plug in with ableton live.. it has the marvelous tendency to make analog sources sound like plug is.. when beeing under load... On the typical 2 tracks null test it nulls as all the others..but on a few tracks in the mix..it sounds a little dull..

What brings me to the theory that they resort to samplerate conversion whenever their processtimings glitch..so where others would break the playback they just cover the one or two missing samples with theire dynamical samplerate conversion.. that never produces a click.. thats the hint.. sometimes they click with perfect cut zero crossing files.. other times it dont clicks even with crossfadings disabled on files you intentionally add a dc offset.. they really have elastic audio

that actually says that theire SRC is allways active and only working transparent aslong input and output samplingrate match.. what is probably under load an object of fluctuations by process timing errors.. so they somehow invented software internal jitter ..or something that fx the audio in similar ways like the error correction of a dat recorder on a bad tape..

Thats just a hinch.. whatever it is.. i hope they got rid of it in the upcoming version because i personally like the program for my private music for its pattern orientated workflow. It just dont sounds very good.. you need a lots of plug ins to make it sound..

Ableton live is the living prove that not all daws do sound the same..
So, given all that, we conclude Ableton WAS broken. Congrats on the problem solving.

Jitter - still, you're the only one talking about that. I thought we were talking about DAWs!

you must seriously have superhuman hearing though, if you're never wrong.
Old 13th November 2012
  #135
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
So, given all that, we conclude Ableton WAS broken. Congrats on the problem solving.

Jitter - still, you're the only one talking about that. I thought we were talking about DAWs!

you must seriously have superhuman hearing though, if you're never wrong.
sofar i never was wrong but i dont belive that i cant be wrong.. to the contrary....I allways questioned my senses too but sofar later prove by measurements or changelogs of software came to my ears aid in all critical cases..And there was some subtile stuff..

And not superhuman.. but trained in long studio and gear development sessions, they have been prooven to be my best measuring tool.. Its really training to know what to listen for.. for example when a customer dont hears the difference between mic pres..and you have some birds outside.. i ask him.. how many birds you hear outside in the recording.. and than he gets that he can answer that with the one preamp but not the other.. So when people state two things sound the same its pretty relative, some really dont get the differences.

But ok..there are also people that swear that a gold plated power plug does sound better than a normal one
Old 13th November 2012
  #136
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I'm sorry...what? I've never quoted anyone, but changed what they wrote to "blah".
you was altering my quotes by laying words in my mouth all the time..
And question my competence just because i dont see the last word on the issue spoken yet... which is just a carefull position on the topic and not an ignorant or stupid one..




Quote:
Come on then - explain it. So far all I've seen is that you seem to have a "secret DAW" that you say doesn't work very well, but won't say which.
i ve told loud and clear that i dont question nuendo and protools even while knowing that booth had theire own problems in the past... nobody is perfect and bugs happen..



Quote:
Let us just remember who was the one quoting someone else and replacing what they actually said with "bla" - that's "lala I'm not listening" territory.
opposite to you i wasnt changing the content of your words..just ve put it in a short version to safe some space..

Quote:
Thank god...I was so worried!
i know.. but that should´nt be your concern



I
Quote:
s it? I don't think so. When 2 DAWs do something identically, and one doesn't and sounds "muffled" by comparison....isn't that one "wrong"?
true.. but broken would say that it has worked before and got an inferior performance by whatever cause.. When the one daw is not as good as the other it can be just because the one company has better developers with a deeper knowledge. So higher or better developed.. Or just based on a different technology that might have some advantages but comes with a price..




Quote:
Not really. You claimed " I can tell when a mix was done in Ableton". I said "because of the synths? that's not really proving anything.". You haven't replied to that.
You was putting there words in my mouth.. i never have mentioned an ableton syntheziser.. i just sayed that its rather easy to spot an ableton only production.. dj´s around the world claim to be abel to do that..
And its not the syths..its the whole package.. theire samplerate conversion....the muffle eq.. whatever.. its a daw that has very much an own sound to it but synths? They havent even developed most of them.. why should theire synths be responsible for theire sound?

Quote:
I'm not putting words in your mouth - if I wanted to do that, I'd just quote you and replace it with "bla" - that is ACTUALLY putting words in my mouth! Hypocrite.
hypocryte? look at the little screenshot.. where is the "not" coming from in the quote you made from me?
Attached Thumbnails
Does protools hd have a naturally wider stereo image more headroom than say cubase4-screen-shot-2012-11-13-06.34.07.jpg  
Old 13th November 2012
  #137
Gear Addict
 
Mo Facta's Avatar
Jeez, you guys are insatiable.

Cheers
Old 13th November 2012
  #138
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
you was altering my quotes by laying words in my mouth all the time..
But you ACTUALLY altered my words. I've never intended to give you a position that you didn't state. If I misunderstood...either my fault or your English. Either way, no deliberate attempt to misquote you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
And question my competence just because i dont see the last word on the issue spoken yet... which is just a carefull position on the topic and not an ignorant or stupid one..
I questioned your competence because you don't seem to see the need to isolate variables, by continually referencing plugins etc as being relevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
i ve told loud and clear that i dont question nuendo and protools even while knowing that booth had theire own problems in the past... nobody is perfect and bugs happen..
Of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
opposite to you i wasnt changing the content of your words..just ve put it in a short version to safe some space..
Err....by replacing it with "bla" it actually means "I think what you've written is a load of hot air, a waste of space". That it's unimportant. But anyway - if that wasn't what you meant, I can accept that, but you should be aware that that's how it'll be read.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
You was putting there words in my mouth.. i never have mentioned an ableton syntheziser.. i just sayed that its rather easy to spot an ableton only production.. dj´s around the world claim to be abel to do that..
And its not the syths..its the whole package.. theire samplerate conversion....the muffle eq.. whatever.. its a daw that has very much an own sound to it but synths? They havent even developed most of them.. why should theire synths be responsible for theire sound?
Well, in this case I'm only interpolating from what you DID say then didn't clarify. I'd say that if someone were to use Ableton but only 3rd party synths and plugins, you wouldn't be able to pick it as an Ableton mix.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
hypocryte? look at the little screenshot.. where is the "not" coming from in the quote you made from me?
I think in this instance, that's me not understanding the English - it's not very clear what you mean, your English isn't really worded to make sense here. I've certainly not changed the words I quoted.

EDIT - Ah, I see what you mean - there's an extra "not" in there.

Well, there's no point me editing a word in then pretending you said it all along. So in this case either a) in copying and pasting brackets around the different pieces of your post, I've somehow managed to type "not" at a point which changes the meaning of what you said or b) you've realised you're saying the opposite of what you meant in your original post, and edited it after I quoted you.

At any rate, given that my next point followed your quote as it stood, it's fairly clear I wasn't trying to misquote anything...

And this really IS my last word on this! Mo up there is right..it's just daft...
Old 13th November 2012
  #139
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
But you ACTUALLY altered my words. I've never intended to give you a position that you didn't state. If I misunderstood...either my fault or your English. Either way, no deliberate attempt to misquote you.
delibrate or not it came over like intentionally ignoring the content,..

Quote:
I questioned your competence because you don't seem to see the need to isolate variables, by continually referencing plugins etc as being relevant.
again.. i only mentioned plug ins one time !! when i stated that i personally go sofar to even count the daw internal plug ins as part of a daw´s audio quality.. that was just a little side quote and you bang on that ever since..

but when you want.. plug in handling very well can be different inbetween differnt daws too.. that is another factor that can alter the soundquality in a mix.. but i am only mentioning that now.. all the rest regarding plug ins is made up by you and can count as missquoting and laying words in my mouth..





Quote:
Err....by replacing it with "bla" it actually means "I think what you've written is a load of hot air, a waste of space". That it's unimportant. But anyway - if that wasn't what you meant, I can accept that, but you should be aware that that's how it'll be read.
that was how it was ment because on two third of that post you was totally ignoring what i have said and a slightly insulting tone with it..

You started that !


Quote:
Well, in this case I'm only interpolating from what you DID say then didn't clarify. I'd say that if someone were to use Ableton but only 3rd party synths and plugins, you wouldn't be able to pick it as an Ableton mix.
When a mix is well performed and sounding good you probably dont get it that it is done with ableton.. especially when the final mix is done on an ssl console.. Or Like Robert Henke put it on one of his last albums.. "Was mixed and produced enirely with ableton live.. just the mastering was done in stems that was send thru vintage eq modules"

But there are many records out there that dont have such a special mastering treatment ans have ableton printed all over theire sonic signature.. and on theese records its easily possible to point with the finger at them and tell.. thats an ITB ableton production.

Thats not really possible in between logic or cubase or protools productions. maybe the weakest in that field logic.. i guess i could spot he logic plugs and theire a bit harder sound in an logic only production.. but would be rather guess work..



Quote:
I think in this instance, that's me not understanding the English - it's not very clear what you mean, your English isn't really worded to make sense here. I've certainly not changed the words I quoted.
maybe you quoted before i made an edit.. but it certainly looks like you beeing the hypocrate now

i think these null tests are the most stupid thing to evaluate sound quality.. in most cases they even do the nulling in the daw that is the test object.. so measuring the test object with itself.. sorry..thats so unscientivic that it stinks..

And always they just use the rendered output.. i dont wanna know how the daw renders.. i want to know how it sounds.. You would need to record the DA output and compare this files.. And that only works when theese files are recorded in a higher resolution with a reference AD again..

also the quick and dirty way to just use plug in sound sources..has a computer generated sound enough detail ? i dont think so..

By now i really dont have a nice opinion about people that refer to badly conducted null tests--
Old 13th November 2012
  #140
Lives for gear
 
projektk's Avatar
 

long ass thread, good work. my 2 cents on DAWs sounding different is only the conversion and outboard gear used to capture the sound can make it feel more naturally 3D. All a DAW does is help the producer, engineer, artist, etc save the music within a computers hard drive. Of course its more advanced that. 2 track recorder that comes with an OS. I think when using a DAW your objective should be for it to be as compatible as possible, what I mean is whether you need the files on OS X, Windows, Linux, and/or different DAWs.

If you decide to mix in the box a seperate session file would be wise just in case you need the original session to mix with outboard or if for some reason the fully loaded session won't open up anymore.

Sent from my LG-P925
Old 13th November 2012
  #141
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioconsult View Post
when nothing else helps panlaws help
Don't know if you're being sarcastic, but you do realize that if you change the pan law in a DAW the mix balances will be different.

-R
Old 19th November 2012
  #142
Gear Addict
 

HDX with BLA mod'ed convertors sure do!
REAPER? WTF? is this not the high end forum?
Old 30th November 2012
  #143
Gear Addict
 
Mo Facta's Avatar
Dude. Reaper is a VERY good DAW. I don't use it as my go to of choice but it sure can stand up to the best of them.

Don't knock it.

Cheers
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
initialsBB / So Much Gear, So Little Time
0
brandy / Mastering Forum
1
opus / So Much Gear, So Little Time
6
Riad / So Much Gear, So Little Time
41
rynugz007 / Music Computers
15

Forum Jump
Forum Jump