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
2" Tape is dead long live Pro Tools!!! Dynamics Processors (HW)
Old 15th October 2002
  #61
Lives for gear
 
sonic dogg's Avatar
ATTA-WAY TED!!!

Any of you pro-toolers and digitalists ever really listen to early sun recordings? early motown recordings? ever feel your eyes get all smokey whilst listening to a perfect musical turn of a single note?I'm sure ya have and I do understand that the INDUSTRY is fueling all this tape/computer animosity in the name of PROFIT...What it all boils down to is making music...and as Ted stated...music aint supposed to be perfect...it lacks life in its perfection...and there is and always will be an art to taking a track to its humanly perfect place and then leaving it there to bask in its imperfect glory...hell i'd much rather hear a slightly skewed guitar that has fire and excitement and purpose than one that just is perfect.............peace
Old 15th October 2002
  #62
Lives for gear
 
Steve Smith's Avatar
 

Quote:
- Drum punch ins & especially outs are a royal PITA on tape IMHO
Punching , weather on analog tape, DTRS, RADAR, whatever, is totally a learned skill... if you are not a tape guy, it sucks, If you are, not being able to punch like that sucks balls. I am only a quasi tape guy, and I HATE not being able to rewind, punch in and out.. Yes I know you can use quickpunch, but that is a pita as well... This is totally a preference, rather than a feature IMHO.
Old 15th October 2002
  #63
"- Drum punch ins & especially outs are a royal PITA on tape IMHO

(drum punch OUTS) "That's one advantage with a DAW."

Jules


"Nonsense! (I figure as long as everyone else is being loud on this thread, I can too...)"

Dave Martin

Ooops! My bad, I meant to say 'with DIGITAL'....

It's my experience that I can't do just what I want on 2" in the heat of the session without leaving a hole in the cymbal tracks whatever brand of machine. (of course I have had punch outs which didnt leave a hole, but the whole affair is frought on tape and not - on digital)

With DIGITAL (my clarification) you dont need to do any 'plate spinning tricks' like inserting leader or screwing around chopping different takes together on different tape reels. You can just nail the **** on the fly see if it will work there and then & move on....

This type of chatter may draw out the infamous Mixerman BTW.

Old 15th October 2002
  #64
Lives for gear
 
Steve Smith's Avatar
 

You mean the one, the ONLY????

Times like these I like to walk outside and scram his name, just to see if anyone hears me
Old 15th October 2002
  #65
Moderator emeritus
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Jules
"-

It's my experience that I can't do just what I want on 2" in the heat of the session without leaving a hole in the cymbal tracks whatever brand of machine. (of course I have had punch outs which didnt leave a hole, but the whole affair is frought on tape and not - on digital)

With DIGITAL (my clarification) you dont need to do any 'plate spinning tricks' like inserting leader or screwing around chopping different takes together on different tape reels. You can just nail the **** on the fly see if it will work there and then & move on....
Inserting Leader? Chopping tape? Nah, I'm talking about punching drums. Seriously, Jules - it's simply a matter of practice, and of knowing where you can and can't punch drums. For instance, you don't want to punch while the drummer is on the cymbals (as a matter of fact, I don't do that even with digital - it's audible) - you want to go in preferably before he goes to them, and you don't want to punch out while cymbals are ringing - the sound is going to change, analog or digital. With the drummers I tend to use out here, I know that if he's playing along with the track before I punch in, the hat will be hit the same way, the toms will be ringing the same, and the overall sound of the kit will match up going in and out. You know right away if it's going to work - if it did, you move on; if not, try again, punching in a bit earlier and out a bit later...

A bunch of guys on this forum will have experience of punching in single words (and sometimes single syllables) on 2" machines; compared to that, drums are easy. Where's BT? Let him tell you...

While I don't claim to be an expert at it (it's been years since I worked with a 2" machine on a serious level), I've played on literally hundreds of sessions where we were (for budgetary reasons) were punching our way to the end of the song - the band plays along and the engineer gang punches everyone. No problem. And if the click is saved, punching out is not a problem either - I've been on too many sessions where it worked to believe otherwise.

There are no spinning plates, just a knowledge of how to make the machine do what you need.
Old 15th October 2002
  #66
Lives for gear
 
Knox's Avatar
 

it's funny . . . . I thought Jules was joking around . . . . as I punch in drums a lot. You just have to pick your punch in points well, as Dave says
Old 15th October 2002
  #67
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
For instance, you don't want to punch while the drummer is on the cymbals (as a matter of fact, I don't do that even with digital - it's audible)
It can be done perfectly inaudibly (in ProTools at least). As long as you are NOT in Destructive record mode (that is to say punch mode) - proTools actually records from the second you hit play. Then you punch-in whereever you like. You might hear the punch in where you do it, but after the punch-in take is over you can go back and change the punch in point. You can change it later or EARLIER than your actual punch in and find the perfect spot to make an inaudible transition (and then make the appropriate cross-fade). Its one of the great things about tracking with lots of channels of ProTools TDM. You can miss the punch and you didn't really miss it. If you can't do this - you are missing out (and 2" can't do it - many DAW programs can't either).
Old 15th October 2002
  #68
One with big hooves
 
Jay Kahrs's Avatar
I don't have a problem punching drums on analog. Unless the drummer sucks, but then it's a total drag on tape or a DAW. I also try not to punch drums unless we cut to a click. Like Dave said, pick the punch in and out points and just do it. I also don't have a problem punching words on 2" unless it's a small, fast word and then I usually need to punch two at a time.
Old 15th October 2002
  #69
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Unless the drummer sucks,
Unfortunately - in my neck of the woods - its really rare that the drummer doesn't suck.
Old 15th October 2002
  #70
Moderator emeritus
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Paul Turpin


It can be done perfectly inaudibly (in ProTools at least). As long as you are NOT in Destructive record mode (that is to say punch mode) - proTools actually records from the second you hit play. Then you punch-in whereever you like. You might hear the punch in where you do it, but after the punch-in take is over you can go back and change the punch in point. You can change it later or EARLIER than your actual punch in and find the perfect spot to make an inaudible transition (and then make the appropriate cross-fade). Its one of the great things about tracking with lots of channels of ProTools TDM. You can miss the punch and you didn't really miss it. If you can't do this - you are missing out (and 2" can't do it - many DAW programs can't either).
But Paul, that takes time, and interferes with the groove of the session. Besides, even using quick punch, it's usually audible when you punch, and even when you slide the punch point around, to where it's least offensive, you will probably have to do a crossfade to make it the evidence go away. I don't know how often you have to track a whole rhythm section doing 10 songs in 3 hours - it's not uncommon here. And I'm playing bass while I do it. Give me a tape transport with a footswitch and we can make it work. But if I have to stop and put both hands on the PT rig to slide around the punch point until it's inaudible, it's going to keep me from keeping the session going at full speed. I can go back a few measures, punch in again, and we're ALL going on to the next song. When speed isn't of the essence, I could see why you might want to record a drum set into PT, but when you have players who can actually play the song and engineers who are used to working linearly, the editing capabilites that you're talking about aren't that important. I figure that my guys can play it faster than I can edit it together

I talked to the Radar guys at AES about how nice it would be to be able to slide a punch point earlier - it's not going to happen anytime soon, but then, I don't mind committing to a punch. If I screw it up, I'll punch it again.

It's not that I'm not anti-DAW - this evening I'm mixing stems into PT from Radar and DA78, and this morning I was tracking vocals into PT. But interestingly enough, it feels more musical to track vocals into Radar, or even to tape than it does into PT. I don't necessarily mean that it sounds less musical, but it's certainly more like 'work' than music. Maybe it's simply that you have to watch what you're doing in PT rather than simply listening to it. Whatever the reason, you can betcher ass that I'm not going to tracks a full rhythm section into it any time soon. There's not enough fun there.
Old 15th October 2002
  #71
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
but when you have players who can actually play the song and engineers who are used to working linearly
Well - these are the key words. I am very used to working non-linearly - my first system was SoundTools2 - stereo only in 1987. Sadly the players in my sessions often can't play the songs or maybe even their instruments well. But since they are the client rather than the session artist or musician - there's not a lot I can do about it except accept the gigs from the better clients when I can. In addition - I quite enjoy computer tweaking of any kind - including ProTools. If I'm playing on a session - I try to get my partner to engineer. Usually I make the band do another take rather than punch-in. Often as not the whole take is better. If not - I edit them.

Quote:
But Paul, that takes time, and interferes with the groove of the session.
It doesn't take me much time at all. Also - if you duplicate the tracks and mute everything on the earlier take after the point you need to punch and then use input mode on the new copy whilst erase the old take on the new one AND mute the old one right after you punch if you punch early - THEN no one hears the punch. Yes - that's a lot of crap to do, but I can do it really fast with keyboard shortcuts and proper groups. Maybe for some that's a pain - but it doesnt intefer with the groove of my sessions.

It sounds like you should keep doing things your way - and I should keep doing things my way. I love it when two opposing opinions are both right. It all depends on what you're used to (and what your average client is like and what they are used to).

yuktyy
Old 15th October 2002
  #72
Lives for gear
 
Steve Smith's Avatar
 

Quote:
If I screw it up, I'll punch it again.
Long live the engineer


When I first started into this mess ( not that I am that old now) A good friend of mine and a mentor if I have one at all told me that " if you can punch, the artist will love you.." I know that it is not as required anymore, much like being able to play or sing isn't required to make a record.... I think this is my biggest sorrow with the advent of PT and DAW's in general.. Now do not get me wrong, I am a PT user, and the fact is that the facility I run would not exist if I had to spend high end analog dollars to start it up ( and I am grateful) but I for one wish I had to " get it right the first time " more often, I would be a better engineer for it, the the players I work with would have to get better to pull it off. I don't like blanket statements, but the ability to edit tune and generally polish a turd to a super shing has, I fear made many a player really lazy, and you can hear it all over the place.

I am not looking to start a flame war, i value the tools I have, and there are things I am really glad I have PT for.. it is just that tracking is not one of them.. I just do not work well that way.. some do, and I applaud them, as long as the job gets done, right?



Quote:
I love it when two opposing opinions are both right. It all depends on what you're used to (and what your average client is like and what they are used to).
Totally agree!!!
Old 15th October 2002
  #73
Lives for gear
 
drundall's Avatar
 

Neither of these formats suck, people suck.
I was pretty much a diehard analog guy and now I'm recording most projects to HD. Why, because of drummers who can't play and singers who can't sing. I use different mics, use more room sound, and sneak in some tube compression. The bands comment on how it sounds very analog(!). The good guys should go straight to 2" with no edits or punches, but those guys (& girls) are getting fewer and further between. The industry is driving this scenario, then the labels complain about how music is so uninspired today. So instead of looking for great performances we're left looking for the coolest flavor-of-the-day plugin.

Sorry for the rant, I must have a gas leak in the house
Old 15th October 2002
  #74
Having spent 20+ years as a full time studio cat, one way to piss me off is to tell me how punch ins 'should be done' . I have done my fair share of 'Goldfinger' punching on 2" (Studers. Telefunkens, Otari, 3M on downwards!) - fact.

But not to dwell on this Achilles heel (that some are enjoying kicking!), the proof of my point is in the posts above from Knox & Dave Martin (although I am unclear whether Dave is talking about Digital or 2" now) They both refer to picking a point further down the tape that better 'suits' a punch out.

Digital (in my case a DAW) allows me to get in & out pretty much where the f**k I want without over running on to some more 'technically convenient' point in the song and I find this a plus point over 2".

grudge

Hope that my point is clear now.

heh
Old 15th October 2002
  #75
Lives for gear
 
e-cue's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Dave Martin

I don't mind committing to a punch. If I screw it up, I'll punch it again.
That's not to say you don't have to have the same attitude in a DAW. I commit often, but if the drummer sucks, I'll drag back my punch and crossfade any exsistance of a punch in the same time it would take for a 2" machine to rewind even if I had an autolocate point set in. If anything Protools has made me a better puncher because I enjoy visually seeing how tight my F12 (or #3's) hit's are. And hell, why even punch if I can click on the exact sample I want to punch on?

And BTW, if you are going to do that silly 'trick' were you transfer from protools to 2" and BACK to pro tools, please bias your freaking machines... If I have to BNR ****ty tape hiss out of one more of these sessions...*shakes fist* I've been known to add tape hiss, vinyl noise, hospital ambience, and all kinds of other crap into my mixes for 'vibe', but I like the control over it. If you add salt to soup, you can't take it out.
Old 15th October 2002
  #76
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

you know... its always ASSUMED that anyone who uses a DAW, uses it to perfect the soul out of a recording. its just not true. i will edit MINUTE things like a string squeak that bothers the guitarist [and believe me.... i have RETRACKED guitars just to get weird anomolies out per request of the artist, still no better than before... not that i really care about them] or one weird snare hit.
Old 15th October 2002
  #77
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

oh yeah... i forgot to mention. i am mixing a folky singer/songwriter right now and did some edits that have NOTHING to do with perfection but everything to do with arrangement that would of been nearly IMPOSSIBLE on tape to do. my client was jawdropped the entire mix session with what i could do in the mix stage to better enhance the song.
Old 15th October 2002
  #78
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Dave Martin
Well, jon's definition of 'real' apparently means that someone is paying for it, as opposed to doing demo or spec deals for friends. And I can even see that most 2" projects would be 'real' by that standard, since tape costs are so high (compared to the costs of hard disk recording or even DTRS machines).
Dave (and AJ too) -- please take my words at face value.

I do demo or 'at cost' deals pretty rarely, but when I do, it's not unusual for me to pull out a used reel of 2". Marginal additional cost = zero. If the artist is talented and likely to give a good live performance, and I'm engineering and think 2" will help the project, then I do it.

The one person who really expressed well what I feel on this topic is Ted. Thanks again, man.
Old 15th October 2002
  #79
Lives for gear
 
Knox's Avatar
 

ok Jules . . . now, about your hair cut lol
Old 15th October 2002
  #80
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by e-cue
And BTW, if you are going to do that silly 'trick' were you transfer from protools to 2" and BACK to pro tools, please bias your freaking machines... If I have to BNR ****ty tape hiss out of one more of these sessions...*shakes fist* I've been known to add tape hiss, vinyl noise, hospital ambience, and all kinds of other crap into my mixes for 'vibe', but I like the control over it. If you add salt to soup, you can't take it out.
That IS silly. First, because if you want the 2" sound, better to track to it directly, then xfer to PT for editing...or xfer your PT tracks over to 2" and leave it there for the mix.

Second, because anyone using a 2" machine who doesn't know what out-of-bias sounds like or how to rectify that has no business using analog.

Third, because tape hiss is never a problem in my experience, at least with modern tape formulations. Sounds like pseudo-engineers or assistants with little analog tape experience did the xfers.
Old 15th October 2002
  #81
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

personally if i used tape... i would track to it, run it immediately to some DAW in sync, and do subsequent ODs on a new reel with the playback happening off the DAW to keep the tapes as pristine as possible.

jon, its fine you have your preference... but its rude to belittle someone who does things differently than you do by saying its not 'real' or calling then 'psuedo-engineers'... sounds to me like you are a gear snob, not a gear slut.
Old 15th October 2002
  #82
Jax
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by 2" Tape sucks!

and if you like playing around with old tape that's totally ok the clowns will not eat you when you are sleeping.
HEY! That's a reference to my old signature which looked like this:

Jackson Burks
Cauldron Audio
:eek: Can't sleep! Clowns will eat me!! :eek:

Cool!
Old 15th October 2002
  #83
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by alphajerk
personally if i used tape... i would track to it, run it immediately to some DAW in sync, and do subsequent ODs on a new reel with the playback happening off the DAW to keep the tapes as pristine as possible.

....its rude to belittle someone who does things differently than you do by saying its not 'real' or calling then 'psuedo-engineers'... sounds to me like you are a gear snob, not a gear slut.
Alphajerk,

Having pristine tapes is not all that important to me for certain music genres, like rock. For orchestral work, maybe a bit more. I guess there goes your gear snob theory.

I'm not sure I'm a gear slut either....more of a performance and sound slut, I suppose. It's the result that matters to me, and I will simply do anything to get it.

Now, about this belittling business. Many experiences and skill sets along the road to becoming a complete, well-rounded engineer simply cannot be acquired in a home studio environment alone. Most of the well-known engineers today started out as assistants apprenticing under their mentors in high-end situations.

Acknowledging this reality is not done to belittle you, AJ. You may read that between the lines and interpret things in that direction, but it was not my goal.

The fact is, there are many people who call themselves engineers, who are not necessarily competent in the situations they find themselves in -- including most of us, myself included, at one time or another, along this road.

This is a hard business, like any other. I have seen visiting engineers throw assistants out of the studio for far lesser things than not knowing how to align a tape machine. Like many of you, I have seen assistants, and engineers, replaced midway through a project because they weren't good enough or even nice enough to deal with (often though, lack of experience or competence and insecure behavior go hand-in-hand). There are far fewer well-rounded, talented, experienced people than wannabes, psuedos and hacks in this business, and that's just a fact of life, part of being real on this forum about what really happens rather than pretending it doesn't.

Hey, Jules is getting good post mileage out of this thread!
Old 15th October 2002
  #84
Jax
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
by drundall
Neither of these formats suck, people suck.
New bumper sticker for GSz only!

grggt heh heh
Old 15th October 2002
  #85
Jax
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by e-cue
I've been known to add tape hiss, vinyl noise, hospital ambience, and all kinds of other crap into my mixes for 'vibe', but I like the control over it. If you add salt to soup, you can't take it out.
Oxymoron of the day: "hospital ambience"

heh heh heh
Old 15th October 2002
  #86
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 

jon... im afriad you are VERY wrong. the fact is there are MANY MANY MANY gifted and talented people out there. i dont know where you think you have the stronghold on talent.

you have ego... which is not necessarily associated with talent. most very talented people i know have very little ego.

i also didnt specify you were belittling me directly... possibly the projects you get are just poorly executed... maybe thats a product of your location or the projects you get. but to have the gall that EVERY DAW project is similar to what you get is just an absurd assumption.
Old 15th October 2002
  #87
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

AJ, I was not talking about myself. May I suggest you actually read my post and respond to it rather than to what you imagine that I wrote.

BTW, I'd be interested to meet/hear some of the most talented people you are referring to. Maybe we don't have the same standards, because incredible talent seems very rare to me, but I am always looking for genius people, whether engineers, assistants or artists.
Old 15th October 2002
  #88
FX smörgåsbord user
 
Charles Dye's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon

Many experiences and skill sets along the road to becoming a complete, well-rounded engineer simply cannot be acquired in a home studio environment alone.
Jon,

I've thought a lot about this topic, and I feel the exact opposite is the truth. There aren't many engineering skills that I can think of that can't be mastered in the home studio. With the possible exception of recording a symphony orchestra. (Though the other day I mixed a song that included a 32 track string section recorded entirely in a home studio...yeah, I was pretty amazed too.)

I've never really believed in the mystery that seems to surround engineering. I feel that anyone who is willing to make the commitment to learning, and has the patience to keep trying different approaches, can become an engineer.

Which engineering skills and experiences were you referring to?
Old 15th October 2002
  #89
Moderator emeritus
 

Quote:
Originally posted by jon

BTW, I'd be interested to meet/hear some of the most talented people you are referring to. Maybe we don't have the same standards, because incredible talent seems very rare to me, but I am always looking for genius people, whether engineers, assistants or artists.
Hay, jon - the next time you're in the US, drop by Nashville and give me a call. I'll be happy to show you some incredibly talented musicians...
Old 15th October 2002
  #90
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

With pleasure, Dave! I wasn't really referring to studio musicians...there are good ones here, too, though I wouldn't be surprised if there were more of them or even better ones in Nashville. I love that area BTW...my great-grandma (bless her soul) had a wonderful old farm an hour out of Nashville...fireflies, horses, BBQs...great childhood memories.

Charles, how did you come up -- as an assistant apprenticing under a master or in a large studio, or via a different path?

I did the DIY route, learning on the road as an artist, promoter, tour manager, FOH engineer and in various studios all the way to building my own small, then large studio, but along the way I have come to a number of conclusions.

You wrote "I feel that anyone who is willing to make the commitment to learning, and has the patience to keep trying different approaches, can become an engineer."

I agree with that statement and feel that it does not contradict my previous post. Where we disagree is about how that person can ideally learn.

There are many ways of doing things, practices, and experiences....that are encountered when working on a big session in a really good studio with the best people...that are not experienced by the DIY home studist alone, even from reading the internet.

Critically, there are many things one can simply not hear as well, nor record as well, in a typical non-purpose built home control room/studio due to acoustics, size, and monitoring -- typical problems encountered in small studios.

Then there is functional engineering. There are many formats and machines that one does not find in a typical home studio, and competence on a wide range of them, not just ProTools, is a given for a well-rounded freelance engineer.

Working with the best people, rooms, acoustics, monitors and gear, hearing and understanding what the top standards are and where you can go with them, is a critical step that the DIY home studist does not usually have the opportunity to experience deeply.

That you would suggest that the guy at home reading the internet and trying to make his home stuff sound like the big boys has somehow an advantage, or an even chance, of mixing the hits or becoming a great engineer in his domain of choice over the guy actually seeing and doing it with the best of them....does some disservice to the hopeful home studists who read that -- even if you might be the exception to the rule, which is why I ask how you came up.

Maybe it depends on how you would define a real engineer.

I can't help but be reminded of the DigiWorld demos I saw you do in Paris at Mega Studio a couple years ago, where we met and talked. You are a very personable, nice fellow, and a good mixer. Yet I have to call 'em like I hear 'em...and your mandate from Digi did appear that day to try to fool the more incredulous people in the room. And at that time, I was still one of the kool-aid drinkers and so normally not against your message.

In particular, there was the courageous attempt to prove to the audience that PT mixing sounded better than using high-end analog consoles. You played successful mixes that you did all in PT, including the Ricky Martin track, followed by the unsuccessful ones (which you had beat out) done by other guys on large-frame consoles. This all on the Studio A bigs at Mega.

Now, I don't have a problem with you and Digi trying to show that an exception can be the rule. That was fun and enjoyable. The problem for me was that you played the PT mixes back with noticeably more compression and at significantly louder levels than the analog console mixes. Not kosher. Yet, the higher levels and compression were not enough to hide the lesser sonics of the PT mixes. Not to me, who had left behind analog mixing temporarily as an all-in-PT mixer at that time, nor to my friends and assistants also present for that demonstration.

That was followed by your demo which attempted to convince the public that the more plug-ins they used on their tracks, the better their stuff would sound. I'll skip the details.

Again, while I felt your mixes were well-done and did a good job of serving the song -- which I agree is key and more important than pure sonics and which I complimented you on after the presentation -- the louder volume trickery did not hide the lesser sonics of the PT mixes. I mentioned that to you afterwards, and you replied that SSL's had a horrible crunch and did not sound as good to your ears as mixing in PT. It was at that point that I realized to what extent you were in deep with Digidesign. Your presentation also served to confirm my growing suspicion at that time regarding Digi's mix-in-the-box dream I had bought into and had been trying to justify the merit of to myself.

Again, you are a really likeable person and Digi has a good spokeperson and ally in you. But as a fellow engineer who is not bound to Digidesign or to that market in the way that you are, I feel compelled to state what I hear and think and hope you do not take it personally.

Since we met, I have since gone down the SSL/Studer/big studio route and developed a studio similar to the one we met in. But I have said this several times before, and will say it again now: If mixing in ProTools with plug-ins ever sounds anywhere near as good to my ears as does mixing on the SSL J series or a similar-level analog console, I will sell it all and switch to ProTools, or whatever gear can do it better, in a hot minute. I am not bound to a particular piece of gear or way of working, only to the pursuit of excellence. And this, out of passion for sound and music, not for money or the desire to have a large studio cost structure around my neck. I'm an artist at heart and would love to get the same results at home. Despite what the cynics will say, I do mean that sincerely. Now flame on, have fun, and best to all.
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
kilon / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
2
kieran kelly / Music Computers
4
bcgood / Music Computers
15

Forum Jump
Forum Jump