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
Tags: , , ,

Playing Live with PreRecorded Tracks Audio Interfaces
Old 3rd June 2007
  #61
Lives for gear
 
AlexLakis's Avatar
 

It seems people love to dig up old posts of mine on this matter...

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearBit View Post
Yeah screw the people that actually took time out of their lives and spent money to come out and see you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GearBit View Post
Over time it is possible that they all will be home sucking on eggs ....or at someone elses show who plays for them.
Hey, what kind of artist would I be if I wasn't a self-centered ego-maniac?

You should've quoted my whole paragraph, tho, I thought it was a good one!

I greatly respect the time and effort fans make to come out and see a show. But if they don't like what they hear, I don't expect them to stay! Besides, it's kind of hard to be in a room full of people and not be "playing for them." What I meant was that I'm not a performing artist because other people want me to be. I'm a performing artist because I want to be, and I'm gonna do whatever it is I want to do in my performance. I don't perform as a full-time job, I perform for fun. I certainly write songs for the fans, but when I'm on stage performing them, I'm doing that for my release and mental health. If there are fringe benefits for fans, all the better!

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearBit View Post
Dude, you might want to drop that "100% lame" quote. It doesn't sit well with all of the disclaimers.
Okay, fine. 99% lame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearBit View Post
Under what catagory do NIN fall under?
Quote:
Originally Posted by trident fan View Post
do you think nin is a rock group?
I've seen NIN several times, and their shows always rock.

Trent wrote and programmed all that electronic music by himself starting out. If he was touring right after Pretty Hate Machine with just himself, a vocal mic, maaaybe a guitar, and a computer behind him playing everything else, that's what I would expect to see. It is what it is.

So, I guess to find the answer to that question, you'd have to ask the performing artist: Are you a rock band? Well, are you?

With a band like NIN which bridges the gap between electronica and rock, it would really depend on the song and execution. For example, I wouldn't necessarily expect NIN to perform "The Perfect Drug" without some kind of click/syncing/sampling stuff going on. It would be nice if they didn't, tho! It would be nice if they re-arranged the song to be in a rock band format, if they're trying to play as a rock band! And if you're gonna play something like "March of the Pigs," f*ck all that foo-foo sh*t; Just rock it out!
Old 3rd June 2007
  #62
Lives for gear
 
amost's Avatar
 

Go to a Shania Twain concert and mute the band - I'm just sayin'...
Old 3rd June 2007
  #63
Lives for gear
 
themaidsroom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by seaneldon View Post
the following is 100% opinion:

if i wanted to hear a band's cd i'd buy the cd.

a live show is supposed to be way less sterile and scientific than a recording. it's supposed to be different and exciting, and i think it's a huge crock of **** when any band has the nerve to rely on a click and use prepared tracks. it's all an illusion. if they sound "good" because of this, they're lying to you. strip a band down to amps and drums in a room with a ****ty PA, if they still sound good, THAT'S a great live show. not this crap you're describing.
i agree 100%
i saw jeff buckley sing at sine, through a pa found on the street, 30 times, dented 58,
no reverb, goosebumps

it is bubblegum being sold as mozart , to quote mr. cohen, that has destroyed
this business: if they can't blow you away live, they suck, move on




be well


- jack
Old 3rd June 2007
  #64
Gear Addict
 
Farview's Avatar
 

My band does this. We only have drums, guitar and vocals, so we fly in bass. There are two or three songs that have some keys that get flown in as well.

All the vocals are live and we will adlib a bit, we juts can't change the arangement.


We've done it a couple different ways. We have used a CD player, ipod, and a laptop. It all works the same, I (drummer) get a click in my phones (in-ears, whatever) and the backing tracks go to the front of house.

If something screws up, I shut off the backing tracks and we just play through the song without bass.
Old 3rd June 2007
  #65
Gear Maniac
 
CommunityMart's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by amost View Post
Like I say I ain't bragging on playing with tracks. These are bigger venues, not humongous though and generally the audience doesn't have an idea. Occasionally a guitarist in the audience'll ask someone..."who's playing bass?" Busted.

I would get so embarrassed, I'd be ashamed of myself.

Does that make sense?
Old 5th June 2007
  #66
Gear Nut
 

i was doing a live recording with a band fairly well known, in the charts right now -- and they're a pretty decent live band. they've all got pretty good chops. however, their label was insisting they use pre-recorded tracks on their singles -- percussion, vocal doubling, some guitar doubles -- to make it sound exactly like their album so the girls would scream even louder. needless to say they had massive issues because they were so used to doing everything themselves, and ended up not using the pre-recorded tracks (which, as i heard, incensed the label).

i recorded the same band a few months later, and they were using the pre-recorded tracks for good.
Old 5th June 2007
  #67
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CommunityMart View Post
I would get so embarrassed, I'd be ashamed of myself.

Does that make sense?


i would be beside myself with shame.
Old 2nd January 2008
  #68
Lives for gear
 
Dysanfel's Avatar
Technology has allowed me to rid myself of a band entirely, its just my voice, a lappy, and my guitars. Its far more intimate and just as effective.

Times have changed, its 2008 not 1988.
Old 2nd January 2008
  #69
Quote:
Originally Posted by seaneldon View Post
... it's a huge crock of **** ....




Down this road lies Ashlee Simpson and all that's ghastly and perverse and deceitful about modern music.

dfegad
Old 2nd January 2008
  #70
Gear Maniac
 

If a band wants backing vocals, or strings, or extra guitar sounds, or whatever, why don't they just get some real musicians to play?

Real live musicians are great!


Otherwise, why even bother playing at all? If they really want it to sound like the album, the band could just chill on stage and play their CD for the fans. They don't even have to bring instruments... saves on cartage costs.
Old 3rd January 2008
  #71
Gear Head
 
cppi's Avatar
 

Over the summer our truck was hired to track a large festival (FREEDOM FEST 07) for GMT Network out of Atlanta Ga. A HD truck with 12 hd cameras' 2 Jumbo Trons, over 100k in people, in Dallas Tx. 34 bands, over 25 hours of record time for broadcast releases. Out of 34 bands (4) did not use backing tracks! We had 82 lines back to the truck to track 48. The producer of the event left 16 tracks open for that. Some bands had stereo stems, some had mono and stereo tracks, nothing less than 8 tracks were sent to us. Any thing from stereo backing gtr's to fatten things up to strings parts, synth parts, vocal parts etc. I cant recall any bands using tracks for members not there, mostly to add and to fatten things up. I hate to admit it but 99% of them played well with them and it didn't sound canned. That might be because the bands knew how to play with the tracks. I came away with mixed emotions about this ...... I think it came down to how each of the bands used them with their preformances.
Old 4th January 2008
  #72
Lives for gear
 
CrankyRayHanky's Avatar
 

Exclamation

I understand the idea of a great raw band, a la SRV & Double Trouble. But let's not dismiss the idea that throwing up backing tracks and playing to clicks takes a lot of work and pays off huge--Joe Blow Ticketbuyer doesn't know and doesn't care how it's done! Entertainment...
Old 4th January 2008
  #73
Lives for gear
 

I kind of think about it like going to see the Royal Shakespeare Company and having two of the cast on video screens - I didn't pay to see videos (no matter how well they 'integrate' or how 'big,' 'amazing' or cost-effective it makes the show.

One of my lecturers put it best for me during a lecture on live music (guess which Cage piece we were referencing). He said
"The reason we go to see Symphony orchestras instead of buying the CDs and listening to the radio is to see someone sweat and burn calories, as well as to see something that may be original or inspired."

I would NEVER equate hearing a recording of the Rite of Spring to hearing a live performance, and I think the same ideal rings true for rock'n'roll as well. I'm disgusted by the sound of a clav instead of a celesta though (can anyone say amateur orchestra?), so I realise that I am a little extreme on all of this.

Even the biggest and best bands CAN play live without backing tracks. From Robbie Williams (20+ piece band) to Seasick Steve (Youtube him if you didn't see Jools) I nearly always find the best sets to be raw, energetic and spontaneous. There's nothing worse than the clip of Nirvana on Top of the Pops.

Didn't Monty Python get sued for playing all the parts in Life of Brian themselves? I feel that way about pre-recorded backing for rock'n'roll. But not Life of Brian. Strange, eh?

MohThoM
Old 4th January 2008
  #74
Gear Maniac
 

If a big corporation wants to produce a "live" concert, sell lots of tickets, and make large profits for their shareholders (in the short term) by using less musicians, and using click tracks and pre-recorded parts, that's their right... and everyone has the right to run their business how they want. But if they want to truly inspire audiences with great art, (rock, ballet, whatever...) they need to just provide the real deal. That will also insure audiences keep coming back for more... Live music, and it's unpredictability can be felt, with all it's inherent imperfections and amazing moments of beauty. That's what live concerts should be about!
Old 8th August 2008
  #75
Gear Addict
 
Eide's Avatar
 

Ok, bringing this thread back from sleep...

Agust 2008 - What is the latest regarding playing multitracked tracks off? Still Alesis HD24?

I would be so happy if zoom or roland or anyone of these had an purpose-made backing track machine... 4, 6 or 8 tracks... easy to use on a dark stage for a clumsy drummer... flash drive, or HD... 3 hours of internal memory, or more... other clever things like a built in bacup system, and maybe an headphone amp for the drummer...

something like that yes please.

I need to get a multi track player for a live show now basically. Is HD24 the only option?
Old 8th August 2008
  #76
Gear Addict
 
Eide's Avatar
 

Ok, these things from Edirol (Roland) has 4 outputs:

R-4

R-44

Apparently people are using it for playig live tracks. Anyone tried these?
Old 8th August 2008
  #77
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog View Post
Also, why would anyone choose minidisc over a simple CD player, doesn't the latter sound better?
Because on a CD you probably have a lot of songs/tracks. With minidisc, you can make it so it only has ONE song per disc. So things like playing the wrong song (i.e. Ashlee Simpson on SNL) can't happen. Unless the sound guy puts the wrong disc in. Versus some foreign CD player playing the wrong track. Or the same track twice. Or like my cars CD player, screws up on the current track and just skips to the next one.

It's done, the rules of competition make it so. The business side deems you to use minimal employees to stay afloat and maximize profits. To the extreme on some cruise ships I've been on. One player and a midi-ized laptop. Ask for something not in their midi library, and your SOL.

Not everyone can play to a click track IMO. The jazz band in HS, College, Army, and other places often took the A section an extra time unintentionally. Such things happen when you're trying to play from memory. Or the bass player would drop an entire measure. Despite being cheating to some extent, you've still got to be on the top of your game to be able to do it. Most drummers I know can't even keep a steady tempo, much less play to a click track. It's too easy to get out of phase with the pre-recorded stuff. There's no person there banging their head, tapping their foot, or marking time to keep the beat for you when things get a little blurred accoustically. Like fans screaming so loud that you can't hear anything. Even yourself playing, singing, or beating the snot out of metal trashcan lids.
Old 8th August 2008
  #78
Gear Nut
 

Well, I've had my experience with this...

Around late 90s I first encountered this obviously occuring with a few local Rap groups...they were using prerecorded tracks with main vox turned very low and adlibs...it made their show sound soo professional (ESPECIALLY for Rap). But I was confused about how I felt about it...well, honestly I talked **** about it.

Flash forward 7 years and when faced with my first solo performance since a teen, I opted to use backing tracks to help out. My backing tracks were adlibs and sound efx...All the complex parts were done live by me...

after the show, I got props from the audience, but several regulars (I frequented this venue alot) came up and commented on my backing tracks...saying they;d respect my show better sans the backing vox....They swore I didn't need them, blah blah blah.

mainly it's other musicians, producers, artists who sometimes seem to have a problem with this. Normal listeners just want a good honest show...And I assure you doing a show properly with backing tracks isn't always easy...it takes skill/practice to do this effectively...I don't see a problem when done as an additive/complement to the sound and not a way to cover your ass....

just my 2 cents
Old 8th August 2008
  #79
Gear Maniac
 

I'm the drummer for my band and we'll do this sparingly but only for when it really is necessary to the song. Out of 18 of our songs we only use it on 2 - we play hiphop/rnb but we keep it simple for the most part - live drums, keys, bass, singer, rapper. For one of the songs though we have a gothic sounding Latin choir track with some extra strings behind it - it's really part of the song and we're not going to hire a 60 piece choir to sit behind us in a clubtutt.

Other than that, if you're having a ton of vocal backing tracks, extra guitars, I think that's kinda pushing the limit like others have said, it shouldn't sound exactly like the CD. It's why we'll even change parts of songs live. Being hiphop and rnb probably about 1/3 of our album is mostly electronic, but it hardly ever is live. Live is an experience, keep it that way.
Old 8th August 2008
  #80
Gear Head
 

[quote=henryrobinett;727519]I can still remember a time when overdubbing was considered cheating. It still is considered cheating in jazz circles, though it's often done.

[quote=henryrobinett;726256]No one yet has responded to my question I posed twice regarding the difference between this and overdubbing in the studio. Why do some consider one cheating and the other not?

I'm a jazz musician. Jazz is built on the live performance model. For the last year or so I've been toying with the idea of using Ableton Live to augment some more convoluted tunes that would be impossible to play without adding a compliment of musicians we can't afford.


Henry,

I would be really interested to hear more about how Ableton is working out for you in a jazz context. Is your band playing mostly mostly electric or acoustic instruments?

Also, it's true about jazz musicians and overdubs. On The real McCoy, there's a place on either Passion Dance or Five by Four where Joe comes in kind of funny after Elvin's solo, but they keep it because the overall track was so great.

Finally regarding jazz and loops- Herbie Hancock recorded a great record in 1972 called Sexant. The first tune has the band playing over a sequenced loop of synthesizer sounds. It's a cool record.

Best,

John
Old 8th August 2008
  #81
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBadJohn View Post

Henry,

I would be really interested to hear more about how Ableton is working out for you in a jazz context. Is your band playing mostly mostly electric or acoustic instruments?

Also, it's true about jazz musicians and overdubs. On The real McCoy, there's a place on either Passion Dance or Five by Four where Joe comes in kind of funny after Elvin's solo, but they keep it because the overall track was so great.

Finally regarding jazz and loops- Herbie Hancock recorded a great record in 1972 called Sexant. The first tune has the band playing over a sequenced loop of synthesizer sounds. It's a cool record.

Best,

John
No where at the moment. The band is in stasis. We're not doing anything at the moment. I got too busy with other things. I'll get back to it. Live maybe the best avenue to start the ball rolling.

I don't know. I upgraded to Live 7 and still haven't done anything with it.

I know exactly the moment you're talking about on Real McCoy! Great record!

Sextant! I saw that band too. I didn't know there was a loop. Come to think of it they did have some Patrick Gleason (he was there) synth preparations.
Old 8th August 2008
  #82
Lives for gear
 

I incorporate a lot of sound effects and samples in my music, so I dont really have an option other than running those tracks and keeping a click going behind the band.

Similar situation with NIN im sure- unless you want to somehow setup all of those samples for the entire show onto some sort of pad controller... It seems like way too much work versus just playing the backing tracks behind the band..

I see no shame in that.

Like said before- use the backing tracks to Augment (add to) your line up.. but you should not be up there lip syncing to tracks of yourself, or having anyone pretend to be playing when the track is doing the work..

Anything you are physically capable of playing, you should be playing, if you dont have a bassist- there is no shame in running a backing track.
Old 8th August 2008
  #83
Lives for gear
 

I´ve been doing this "cheating" since the early nineties. First with a bunch of Akai samplers and internal sequencer, then with ADATs, MDs and upto now with HD24s. The HD24s are the best solution for me until today. I would not use anything optical because of fog on stage. Tapes are out of question but the modern equivalent of samplers might be pretty good for this task. There´s a bunch of workstation-like keyboards which might fit for what you need. But I have no expierience with this.

To all the cheating-shouters out there: go home, this is 2008 not 1978. The times are over when musicians had to proove that they are better than the next band on stage. The good songs are already written. Today a lot of what counts is sound. And these MT-machines help to deliver good sound to the people. And they want to hear good sound. Most people are bored from what another rock-trio is capable to deliver. All the bands with the better musicians already have played. Must of todays musicians can´t compete with them. Sound is our chance to bring music forward.
Old 9th August 2008
  #84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sqye View Post
and the audience LOVES it.

MOST OF THE TIME, they love a band that actually SOUNDS HUGE,
PRODUCED, AND RIGHT, AND LIKE THE RECORDING.
Not me, I hate when the band sounds just like the CD at a live show. I quess it depends on the kind of show to some extent. If its a jazz gig I wanna experience the players. I wanna hear a little something extra. I wanna see some extended jamming and musicianship. I like when a song goes off on a tangent and somehow makes it back, and most of all I wanna feel the ebb and flow of a live performance not a click track(even if it sounds good and is like the CD)....but thats me.

I can handle certain sound effects and stuff added for effect, I saw Pink Floyd do dark side and it was amazing. I wouldnt want to see buddy guy with B3 tracks though if ya know what I mean.


YMMV.

aloha
Old 9th August 2008
  #85
Gear Head
 

jensennman

If what you say is true about the best songs, and the best players all being in the past then music is dying. The way things sound is really important, but I don't think that you can replace music with sound. If you say "well, I'm into good sound" for example - O.K. good-sounding what? Good sounding music, right? I think that some of what you said is true. But, I also think that you are going too far in suggesting that "sound" is, or should be a replacement for good music (including good writing and good playing).

Best,

John

Last edited by BigBadJohn; 9th August 2008 at 08:16 PM.. Reason: eliminated quote
Old 9th August 2008
  #86
Quote:
Originally Posted by jensenmann View Post

To all the cheating-shouters out there: go home, this is 2008 not 1978. The times are over when musicians had to proove that they are better than the next band on stage. The good songs are already written. Today a lot of what counts is sound. And these MT-machines help to deliver good sound to the people. And they want to hear good sound. Most people are bored from what another rock-trio is capable to deliver. All the bands with the better musicians already have played. Must of todays musicians can´t compete with them. Sound is our chance to bring music forward.
wow.......maybe thats the reason I have only bought 10 CD,s in the last six years.

the last thing I wanna hear are mediocre musicians that have good sound. (especially if I am paying for it) Of course when I am listening to great musicians perform I would prefer great sound. When I say "that sounds good" it is a given that the playing/song is good. If what you are saying about todays musicians is true then they better start practicing or Im not listening to them and I am sure as hell not buying any of their music no matter how good the sound is.

Besides its not about proving that you are better as a musician. If you want to put music out there for people to listen too, with your message, gut feeling, your soul, for money or just for fun..whatever. You should at least have enough commitment to your craft and profession to be able to play it. Dont get me wrong, I agree good sound is very important, its just not a replacement for good playing/songwriting.

Like I said earlier , incorporating sound effects and such into your show to enhance or augment can be cool as long as it is not a replacement for playing. Again thats only my opinion and what I like personally.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBadJohn View Post
jensennman

If what you say is true about the best songs, and the best players all being in the past then music is dying. The way things sound is really important, but I don't think that you can replace music with sound. If you say "well, I'm into good sound" for example - O.K. good-sounding what? Good sounding music, right? I think that some of what you said is true. But, I also think that you are going too far in suggesting that "sound" is, or should be a replacement for good music (including good writing and good playing).

Best,

John
100%
Old 9th August 2008
  #87
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBadJohn View Post
jensennman

If what you say is true about the best songs, and the best players all being in the past then music is dying. The way things sound is really important, but I don't think that you can replace music with sound. If you say "well, I'm into good sound" for example - O.K. good-sounding what? Good sounding music, right? I think that some of what you said is true. But, I also think that you are going too far in suggesting that "sound" is, or should be a replacement for good music (including good writing and good playing).

Best,

John
Another
Old 9th August 2008
  #88
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Croaker View Post
Dont get me wrong, I agree good sound is very important, its just not a replacement for good playing/songwriting
Old 9th August 2008
  #89
Lives for gear
 

I think there is a place for both...I've worked with great bands on both sides and the common elements for great bands is great songs, effective playing, hard work and a bad attitude...that being said...the most effective way for bands that use click and sequences live is when it's used in spots rather than throughout the whole show...a show that is strictly run on click becomes draggy and boring with no spontaneity IMO...again, the creative use of tools available is the thing.

Nick

PS I can't believe no one has mentioned The Police...their whole show is completely run off a click...I didn't like this much as their greatness (to me) was about a band sounding like it was about to fall off the rails but didn't with this kick ass singer holding it down...the tempos on all their great recordings are all over the place ( not GITM) and it's beautiful.
Old 4th December 2009
  #90
Gear Head
 

This is my very first post on this board and I know I'm resurecting an old thread, but I found this thread because as a worship band drummer I'm looking for ways to incorporate loops that I can send out to the board from my little mixer at the drums, just to boost the overall sound and make it a little bigger and bring some consistency to the band.

I took some time to read through this whole thread and I have some thoughts about a couple of the issues, mainly about whether or not it's "cheating" to use backing tracks and that kind of thing.

I also play trumpet in an upscale wedding band. (trumpet is my main instrument) We currently have a catalog of almost 600 songs, all set up with clicks and backing tracks in fault tolerant laptop setup that runs into the board, so I'm familiar with playing to a click and using backing tracks - all of which were recorded by the members of the band in the bandleader's studio. We have 8 people on stage and all of us sing lead at some point, although we mainly have the four vocalists on the front line.

-- Our goal is to sound as much like the album recording live as possible
-- if you see us playing an instrument or singing on mic, it's going out through the PA
-- The backing tracks are used as augmentation - NOT as a replacement for us on stage

Using backing tracks allows us to do a couple of things. For one, there is NO WAY we could have such a large library of music at our fingertips without it. The "sequences" gives us the support we need and fills out the sound. We all read music so all of my horns charts are on Music Pad pros. We had to get rid of the paper books because they were simply taking up too much space and looked terrible.

Something to remember here is that the #1 job of any band is to please their audience and it's only the top end bands that really fall into the category of being performers as opposed to entertainers. For a wedding band this means being able to play virtually any song that is requested in virtually any style, and you have to sound good out front. The largest percentage of people never know the difference and have no clue that backing tracks are being used, nor would they care if they found out. All they know is that the band sounds dynamite out front and they are having a great time shaking their booties to it.

The ONLY people I have ever come across who have a beef with using sequences, click tracks and backing tracks are musician who have this psuedo-purist attitude about it. Come on - if you are going to act purist, why not be completley purist and demand that bands be 100% acoustic with no amplification as well? Better get rid of those stomp boxes!

So for all of you naysayers, you can go out and suck, like most bar bands do, or you can step forward and put some time into your gear and into the studio by producing some good backing tracks and use them to actually sound decent. You'll get hired more, you'll draw bigger crowds and as a side benefit to that, you'll make more money. Seems like a win/win to me, but what do I know?

To answer the original question, since this thread started in 2006 it's even easier for the average person to put together loops and that kind of thing. I'm probably going to do it using Garage Band on my iMac using a cowbell click panned clear to one side with the looped percussion and rhythm going out through my mixer to a direct box and then into the main board to be mixed in with the rest of the band. I have no qualms about doing this. My goal is for the worship band to sound great and full, and as a result create an environment for those in the congregation where they actually enjoy the service - the end result will be that people will attend more regularly and word will get out and the church will actually grow. Don't believe me? Look at Hillsong Unitited - part of the success of that church is due to their dynamite praise team. They use loops and a click by the way.
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Tomson / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
1
Arka / Rap + Hip Hop engineering and production
14

Forum Jump
Forum Jump