The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Gonna hafta take back all the mean things I've said about the ST450...
Old 4th January 2019
  #1
Gonna hafta take back all the mean things I've said about the ST450...

I bought a secondhand Soundfield ST450 a couple of years ago, just as Rode was taking over the company and got a killer deal on it. I was less-than-impressed with it for a while - mostly I was just using the onboard M/S decoder. It sounded OK, but never held a candle to the Schoeps or Neumann km100-y stuff I usually use.

A few months ago, I started using the B-Format recordings in post - I never had time to fool around with it before, but for one particular recording it was necessary - and I was instantly more impressed with the sound of it using the Surroundzone plug-in; but it still didn't quite beat the alternate km130 pair on most things.

Today I was working on a choir recording. I had thrown up the Soundfield as a safety, since there were lots of changes of ensemble, moving solo positions, even some antiphonal stuff. I expected the km130's to win most of the time, but with the plug-in, it was pretty close.

So I went and downloaded the Harpex plug-in on a lark, just to try it out. Never realised what a difference the Ambisonic plugin could make. It really sounds like a completely different microphone than the one from the M/S recordings I had made with it. Looks like I'm going to end up ponying up the bread for this plug-in. Nice job Harpex!

Haven't had a chance to put it up against the Schoeps (it always loses there), but will do soon and report back at some point.
Old 4th January 2019
  #2
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobAnderson View Post
I bought a secondhand Soundfield ST450 a couple of years ago, just as Rode was taking over the company and got a killer deal on it. I was less-than-impressed with it for a while - mostly I was just using the onboard M/S decoder. It sounded OK, but never held a candle to the Schoeps or Neumann km100-y stuff I usually use.

A few months ago, I started using the B-Format recordings in post - I never had time to fool around with it before, but for one particular recording it was necessary - and I was instantly more impressed with the sound of it using the Surroundzone plug-in; but it still didn't quite beat the alternate km130 pair on most things.

Today I was working on a choir recording. I had thrown up the Soundfield as a safety, since there were lots of changes of ensemble, moving solo positions, even some antiphonal stuff. I expected the km130's to win most of the time, but with the plug-in, it was pretty close.

So I went and downloaded the Harpex plug-in on a lark, just to try it out. Never realised what a difference the Ambisonic plugin could make. It really sounds like a completely different microphone than the one from the M/S recordings I had made with it. Looks like I'm going to end up ponying up the bread for this plug-in. Nice job Harpex!

Haven't had a chance to put it up against the Schoeps (it always loses there), but will do soon and report back at some point.
Good to know thanks for the heads up.
Old 4th January 2019
  #3
Lives for gear
 

Not sure if you have the original or MKII version.
FYI the MKII version’s preamp/processor is quieter and has better phase accuracy.
I have the original version and yes it’s not as good as my MKH 8040’s via Gordon preamps but
still quite good. I also have a Soundfield DSF-1 and it’s pricey but definitively measures up in quality to my MKH’s plus Gordon’s.

FYI, I find that Surroundzone sounds quite close to Harpex when the “Envelopment” control in Harpex is set to “0”. You might also want to try the newer free Soundfield Rode plugin
(an improvement over Surroundzone).
Both Harpex and the Soundfield Rode plugin have
a display that shows what direction the sound is coming from which is very helpful in tweaking the virtual “pointing” and “stereo angle” adjustments.
Yes Harpex is excellent, but be cautious when using Harpex for “near-spaced” decodes (eg A-B or ORTF”) or “shotgun” decode, sometimes I have gotten unpleasant artifact sounds.
Old 4th January 2019
  #4
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobAnderson View Post
I bought a secondhand Soundfield ST450 a couple of years ago, just as Rode was taking over the company and got a killer deal on it. I was less-than-impressed with it for a while - mostly I was just using the onboard M/S decoder. It sounded OK, but never held a candle to the Schoeps or Neumann km100-y stuff I usually use.

A few months ago, I started using the B-Format recordings in post - I never had time to fool around with it before, but for one particular recording it was necessary - and I was instantly more impressed with the sound of it using the Surroundzone plug-in; but it still didn't quite beat the alternate km130 pair on most things.

Today I was working on a choir recording. I had thrown up the Soundfield as a safety, since there were lots of changes of ensemble, moving solo positions, even some antiphonal stuff. I expected the km130's to win most of the time, but with the plug-in, it was pretty close.

So I went and downloaded the Harpex plug-in on a lark, just to try it out. Never realised what a difference the Ambisonic plugin could make. It really sounds like a completely different microphone than the one from the M/S recordings I had made with it. Looks like I'm going to end up ponying up the bread for this plug-in. Nice job Harpex!

Haven't had a chance to put it up against the Schoeps (it always loses there), but will do soon and report back at some point.

I agree about the Harpex being superior. What do you mean about M/S?

I've had good experiences regarding your KM's with using 'SHOTGUN' pointing and focusing the 'beam' at the sounds that were deficient in the KM's. Sometimes I'll do a mono shotgun and move the proximity 'dot' towards the location but usually I do a 2 channel shotgun to maintain a L/R balance.
Old 4th January 2019
  #5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folkie View Post
Not sure if you have the original or MKII version.
FYI the MKII version’s preamp/processor is quieter and has better phase accuracy.
I have the original version and yes it’s not as good as my MKH 8040’s via Gordon preamps but
still quite good. I also have a Soundfield DSF-1 and it’s pricey but definitively measures up in quality to my MKH’s plus Gordon’s.

FYI, I find that Surroundzone sounds quite close to Harpex when the “Envelopment” control in Harpex is set to “0”. You might also want to try the newer free Soundfield Rode plugin
(an improvement over Surroundzone).
Both Harpex and the Soundfield Rode plugin have
a display that shows what direction the sound is coming from which is very helpful in tweaking the virtual “pointing” and “stereo angle” adjustments.
Yes Harpex is excellent, but be cautious when using Harpex for “near-spaced” decodes (eg A-B or ORTF”) or “shotgun” decode, sometimes I have gotten unpleasant artifact sounds.
Hi Folkie! Happy New Year!

Haven't tried the Rode version of the plug-in - perhaps I should. Not 100% clear yet on what the "Env" control does, but it certainly makes a difference in my perception of the ambience retrieval. Comparing the Surroundzone2 vs. Harpex, it felt like a thin veil was being lifted - a bit more clarity and sharpness to the image, with better reproduction of the reverberation too.

I've got the MK2 version - it sounds good, but putting it head-to-head with a pair of Schoeps never works in its favour.

The other features of the Harpex - where it tries to emulate near-coincident and spaced-pair arays - are not as successful IMHO.
Old 4th January 2019
  #6
Quote:
Originally Posted by emenelton View Post
I agree about the Harpex being superior. What do you mean about M/S?

I've had good experiences regarding your KM's with using 'SHOTGUN' pointing and focusing the 'beam' at the sounds that were deficient in the KM's. Sometimes I'll do a mono shotgun and move the proximity 'dot' towards the location but usually I do a 2 channel shotgun to maintain a L/R balance.
Haven't tried the shotgun feature yet. I'm not 100% sure I understand what you're saying about the km's here. To clarify my initial post: I was recording a group for whom I typically find a pair of km130's usually does the trick. In this case, I clamped my 450 to the stand as a backup, and now am comparing the two in post.

Usually, when I am ising the Soundfield, I am really using the stereo out on the decoder, which outputs from its on-board Mid/Side matrix. I am only now beginning to play with the B-format files in post.
Attached Thumbnails
Gonna hafta take back all the mean things I've said about the ST450...-20181208_211625.jpg  
Old 4th January 2019
  #7
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobAnderson View Post
Haven't tried the shotgun feature yet. I'm not 100% sure I understand what you're saying about the km's here. To clarify my initial post: I was recording a group for whom I typically find a pair of km130's usually does the trick. In this case, I clamped my 450 to the stand as a backup, and now am comparing the two in post.

Usually, when I am ising the Soundfield, I am really using the stereo out on the decoder, which outputs from its on-board Mid/Side matrix. I am only now beginning to play with the B-format files in post.
It does work sometimes to bring out instruments that are too quiet with only your KM pair by using the shotgun feature in HARPEX.
Old 4th January 2019
  #8
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobAnderson View Post
Hi Folkie! Happy New Year!

Haven't tried the Rode version of the plug-in - perhaps I should. Not 100% clear yet on what the "Env" control does, but it certainly makes a difference in my perception of the ambience retrieval. Comparing the Surroundzone2 vs. Harpex, it felt like a thin veil was being lifted - a bit more clarity and sharpness to the image, with better reproduction of the reverberation too.

I've got the MK2 version - it sounds good, but putting it head-to-head with a pair of Schoeps never works in its favour.

The other features of the Harpex - where it tries to emulate near-coincident and spaced-pair arays - are not as successful IMHO.
Yes, Harpex is unique.

You may also want to try to feed your A-format straight into Harpex using the generic A-format input. It could sound more lively and less restraint. That is, if you have access to the direct output of the mics.

Your experience is the reason why I would like to invest in the ST450 (which seems the best mic among the Soundfields), but totally want to avoid their pre-amp/processors.
Old 4th January 2019
  #9
Lives for gear
 

BTW, I am planning to publish here on GS a comparison of several ways of processing A- or B-Format from my SPS200 through a large variety of plug-ins. The differences are not small... Now, I only have to find the time....
Old 4th January 2019
  #10
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucas_G View Post
Yes, Harpex is unique.
Why? What's Harpex doing that the SurroundZone is not? This is a mathematical operation after all.
Old 4th January 2019
  #11
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
Why? What's Harpex doing that the SurroundZone is not? This is a mathematical operation after all.
When trying the two side by side the difference is blinding
Old 5th January 2019
  #12
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
Why? What's Harpex doing that the SurroundZone is not? This is a mathematical operation after all.
Yes, David, it is.a mathematical operation, but Harpex have elevated it into something of different magnitude. They say on their website:

Technology
Unlike traditional ambisonic decoders, Harpex is an active matrix processor for sound field recordings. This allows Harpex to do some unique things.

Surround decoding for cinema and television
Harpex can produce surround decodings with far greater channel separation than what is possible with passive matrixing, which in turn leads to a much larger sweet spot, allowing sound field recordings to be used in large venues like movie theaters, even supporting modern 3D surround formats like Dolby Atmos, IMAX and Auro 3D. Another advantage of the higher channel separation is the virtual elimination of phasing - an unpleasant sound coloration that changes as listeners move inside the listening space
.

Now this could have been all marketing humbug, but as soon as you listen to it, you'll be blown away... jaw on the floor, difference of night and day, blows everything out of the water, etc... Normally such comments are ridiculously used for subtle differences, but in this case the difference with all the other plugins is NOT subtle.

David, do you own a Soundfield yourself? If so, then please try it and report back. The Blumlein is so terribly good!
Old 5th January 2019
  #13
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucas_G View Post
Yes, David, it is.a mathematical operation, but Harpex have elevated it into something of different magnitude. They say on their website ...
I didn't learn anything from that. The equations for decoding are well known and published.

Quote:
David, do you own a Soundfield yourself? If so, then please try it and report back. The Blumlein is so terribly good!
We had an SPS200 for awhile and a MkV on demo. I didn't try with the Harpex plugin at the time, not sure it was available.

But marketing language for a mathematical operation does not speak to me.
Old 5th January 2019
  #14
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emenelton View Post
I agree about the Harpex being superior. What do you mean about M/S?

I've had good experiences regarding your KM's with using 'SHOTGUN' pointing and focusing the 'beam' at the sounds that were deficient in the KM's. Sometimes I'll do a mono shotgun and move the proximity 'dot' towards the location but usually I do a 2 channel shotgun to maintain a L/R balance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
I didn't learn anything from that. The equations for decoding are well known and published.


We had an SPS200 for awhile and a MkV on demo. I didn't try with the Harpex plugin at the time, not sure it was available.

But marketing language for a mathematical operation does not speak to me.
Harpex utilizes a completely different mathematical process than other Ambisonic
decoders. For the technical details, see

https://harpex.net/harpex.pdf
Old 5th January 2019
  #15
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emenelton View Post
When trying the two side by side the difference is blinding
I don’t hear a blinding difference.
As I noted in another posting above, to
my ear, Surroundzone sounds closest to
Harpex when “Envelopment” in Harpex is set
to “0”. ( Harpex defaults to “1”). When it’s set to “1”
or “2” I agree they clearly sound different.

Last edited by Folkie; 5th January 2019 at 05:38 AM..
Old 5th January 2019
  #16
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucas_G View Post
Yes, Harpex is unique.

You may also want to try to feed your A-format straight into Harpex using the generic A-format input. It could sound more lively and less restraint. That is, if you have access to the direct output of the mics.

Your experience is the reason why I would like to invest in the ST450 (which seems the best mic among the Soundfields), but totally want to avoid their pre-amp/processors.
Unlike the SPS200, the ST450 outputs all signals via a single multichannel cable with Lemo connectors so no easy way to capture the “A” format (capsule feeds). I supposed you could if
you built a special breakout cable.

The ST450 is not the best Soundfield mic.
The DSF-1 (and DSF-2 Broadcast version) are
the best (and more expensive) Soundfield mics. They are quieter and have better phase accuracy than any of the analog Soundfields. As I mentioned above the DSF-1 is on par with
my MKH 8040/8050/30’s paired with Gordon
preamps. If you can afford it, I would definitely go for the DSF-1 unless you need the portability of the ST450 (you can power the ST450 with an external battery). I own a ST450-original version and previously owned a MKV.
The DSF-1 is definitely a step up in quality from
the rest of the Soundfields.
Old 5th January 2019
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobAnderson View Post
Haven't tried the shotgun feature yet. I'm not 100% sure I understand what you're saying about the km's here. To clarify my initial post: I was recording a group for whom I typically find a pair of km130's usually does the trick. In this case, I clamped my 450 to the stand as a backup, and now am comparing the two in post.

Usually, when I am ising the Soundfield, I am really using the stereo out on the decoder, which outputs from its on-board Mid/Side matrix. I am only now beginning to play with the B-format files in post.
Hi Rob,
Once or twice I have added a “shotgun” decode
of my DSF-1 to a “main pair” Blumlein decode
to boost the vocal soloists level. The soloists were
approximately 6ft in front and 8ft to 20ft to the right of my main mic stand.
Old 5th January 2019
  #18
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
I didn't learn anything from that. The equations for decoding are well known and published.


We had an SPS200 for awhile and a MkV on demo. I didn't try with the Harpex plugin at the time, not sure it was available.

But marketing language for a mathematical operation does not speak to me.
Yes, David, but apparently they did a whole new kind af mathematical operation that really recolutionized the sound. I will really try to make time some day and let you guys hear the differences between Harpex and a bunch of other plugins...
Old 5th January 2019
  #19
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Folkie View Post
Unlike the SPS200, the ST450 outputs all signals via a single multichannel cable with Lemo connectors so no easy way to capture the “A” format (capsule feeds). I supposed you could if
you built a special breakout cable.

The ST450 is not the best Soundfield mic.
The DSF-1 (and DSF-2 Broadcast version) are
the best (and more expensive) Soundfield mics. They are quieter and have better phase accuracy than any of the analog Soundfields. As I mentioned above the DSF-1 is on par with
my MKH 8040/8050/30’s paired with Gordon
preamps. If you can afford it, I would definitely go for the DSF-1 unless you need the portability of the ST450 (you can power the ST450 with an external battery). I own a ST450-original version and previously owned a MKV.
The DSF-1 is definitely a step up in quality from
the rest of the Soundfields.
Hello Folkie, I believe you that the DSF-1 is even better than the ST450, but its price is beyond my reach. However, I guess that for large studio's that do recordings for film, it is still a wise choice.

Yes, I know that there is a special adapter going into the Soundfield preamps, but I would urge anyone who posesses such a unit to make a special adapter that enables the recording straight into a normal pre-amp, followed by the Harpex plugin. You wont believe the improvement.
Old 6th January 2019
  #20
Lives for gear
 
surflounge's Avatar
how difficult is it to mix to stereo live using the DSF-1?
Would headphones work or do you need monitors in separate room while performers play.
Old 7th January 2019
  #21
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by surflounge View Post
how difficult is it to mix to stereo live using the DSF-1?
Would headphones work or do you need monitors in separate room while performers play.
I don’t carry a monitor set up on location so
I have to rely on headphones. I use David Clark
headphones-very accurate sounding except slightly weak in the base. Also extremely comfortable!
As to mixing live to stereo, it is fine.
I don’t use a computer, so I am limited to the controls on the preamp-processor which allow you to “rotate” the mic and continuously vary the stereo width (0-180deg) and mic pattern (omni to
fig 8).
On the box you can’t “tilt” the mic except there is a control that allows changing from side-fire to end-fire which is equivalent to a fixed 90 deg tilt.
Except for the headphone output, the other
outputs (B-format and stereo/MS) are all AES digital so you need to be prepared.

I record B-Format on one SD788 (to allow unlimited choices later) and a stereo decode on another as backup.

Does this answer your question?
Old 7th January 2019
  #22
Lives for gear
 
surflounge's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folkie View Post

Does this answer your question?
thank you very much. Suppose you are using power from electricity on site, not batteries for the unit?
Old 7th January 2019
  #23
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by surflounge View Post
thank you very much. Suppose you are using power from electricity on site, not batteries for the unit?
Unlike the ST450 which with the right connector
(4 pin Hirose), and supplying 7W at 10-18V, can run on battery, the DSF-1 is AC only (uses
standard detachable IEC cable).

What uses are you considering for the DSF-1?
Old 7th January 2019
  #24
So I rendered some side-by-side files for listening, volume corrected for same peak value (not loudness - sorry). I discovered that the Harpex has nearly a 2 dB higher peak value than the Surroundzone - which may account for the "night-and-day AHA!" when AB'ing the two (corrected in these examples). Both plug-ins are set for Blumlein, which I don't think is the ideal decoding of this, but it is the only way I could guarantee a true comparison - there is no number value for polar patterns in the Harpex.

If I had improvements to suggest to their UI, it would be numerical values for polar pattern and a knob or slider for angle. It is a bit of a PITA to have to type in angular values.

Also included for contrast are the Binaural decoding from the Harpex and the km130 main pair, which were the mic's I was "actually" using for the recording. They have a bit of sonic advantage, having gone through good preamps and converters.
Attached Thumbnails
Gonna hafta take back all the mean things I've said about the ST450...-km130-st450mkii.jpg  
Attached Files

Surroundzone2-Blumlein.wav (8.87 MB, 300 views)

Harpex-Binaural_KU100-diffuse.wav (8.87 MB, 296 views)

Harpex-Blumlein.wav (8.87 MB, 295 views)

km130-AB.wav (8.87 MB, 300 views)

Old 7th January 2019
  #25
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobAnderson View Post
So I rendered some side-by-side files for listening, volume corrected for same peak value (not loudness - sorry). I discovered that the Harpex has nearly a 2 dB higher peak value than the Surroundzone - which may account for the "night-and-day AHA!" when AB'ing the two (corrected in these examples). Both plug-ins are set for Blumlein, which I don't think is the ideal decoding of this, but it is the only way I could guarantee a true comparison - there is no number value for polar patterns in the Harpex.

If I had improvements to suggest to their UI, it would be numerical values for polar pattern and a knob or slider for angle. It is a bit of a PITA to have to type in angular values.

Also included for contrast are the Binaural decoding from the Harpex and the km130 main pair, which were the mic's I was "actually" using for the recording. They have a bit of sonic advantage, having gone through good preamps and converters.
Thanks Rob for this comparison. I think the Harpex here is only a bit better than the Surroundzone, and that is a bit of a surprise to me. Can it be that the ST450 was still processed by the Soundfield preamplifier? Getting rid of that chain makes a very profound difference...
Old 7th January 2019
  #26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucas_G View Post
Thanks Rob for this comparison. I think the Harpex here is only a bit better than the Surroundzone, and that is a bit of a surprise to me. Can it be that the ST450 was still processed by the Soundfield preamplifier? Getting rid of that chain makes a very profound difference...
I don't have any way around the Soundfield preamp. I don't doubt that being able to bypass it would be an improvement on every level - not only for the Harpex.

I only downloaded the Harpex on a lark after I started editing this recording. The B-Format outputs were recorded to a MixPre6, so not an ideal situation by any stretch - it was really just setup as an afterthought for safety.

I wish I had a comparison of the on-board M/S decoder with the B-Format outputs - I'll look through my archives to see if I recorded anything this way. Either one of these plug-ins is a massive improvement over that.
Old 7th January 2019
  #27
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobAnderson View Post
I don't have any way around the Soundfield preamp. I don't doubt that being able to bypass it would be an improvement on every level - not only for the Harpex.

I only downloaded the Harpex on a lark after I started editing this recording. The B-Format outputs were recorded to a MixPre6, so not an ideal situation by any stretch - it was really just setup as an afterthought for safety.

I wish I had a comparison of the on-board M/S decoder with the B-Format outputs - I'll look through my archives to see if I recorded anything this way. Either one of these plug-ins is a massive improvement over that.
The SPS200 has only become a good tool by using good preamps followed by the Harpex. The 4 caps by Haun in Germany are certainly not bad, but the 4 larger caps in the ST450 are so much closer to each other, that I am still contemplating to update to the ST450. However, I would first make sure that I would get the cabling to go straight from the ST450 into some good preamp. Otherwise the advantage of the better mic gets lost in the Soundfield preamp.
Old 7th January 2019
  #28
Lives for gear
 

BTW, I get nearly always better results by choosing 100 degrees Blumlein for speaker reproduction and sometimes even 105 or 110 degreed for headphone reproduction... Complete heresy of course, but I would advise you to try it out.
Old 7th January 2019
  #29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucas_G View Post
The SPS200 has only become a good tool by using good preamps followed by the Harpex. The 4 caps by Haun in Germany are certainly not bad, but the 4 larger caps in the ST450 are so much closer to each other, that I am still contemplating to update to the ST450. However, I would first make sure that I would get the cabling to go straight from the ST450 into some good preamp. Otherwise the advantage of the better mic gets lost in the Soundfield preamp.
I'm not sure you can do a simple bypass - in addition to powering the capsules, there is also an on-board heating element to counter condensation from temperature fluctuations (I guess for those truly using this for field recording). Also not sure what the output impedance for the capsules is. I'm guessing it's low-Z balanced, but can't say for sure.

It's a 12-pin lemo connector. I'd have to see if one can simply make XLR tails and go directly into a regular mic amp.
Old 7th January 2019
  #30
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobAnderson View Post
So I rendered some side-by-side files for listening, volume corrected for same peak value (not loudness - sorry). I discovered that the Harpex has nearly a 2 dB higher peak value than the Surroundzone - which may account for the "night-and-day AHA!" when AB'ing the two (corrected in these examples). Both plug-ins are set for Blumlein, which I don't think is the ideal decoding of this, but it is the only way I could guarantee a true comparison - there is no number value for polar patterns in the Harpex.

If I had improvements to suggest to their UI, it would be numerical values for polar pattern and a knob or slider for angle. It is a bit of a PITA to have to type in angular values.

Also included for contrast are the Binaural decoding from the Harpex and the km130 main pair, which were the mic's I was "actually" using for the recording. They have a bit of sonic advantage, having gone through good preamps and converters.
Have to admit the 2 Blumleins sound quite similar.

Last edited by emenelton; 7th January 2019 at 11:24 PM..
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

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


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

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump