The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Do microphone level mixers w/ EQs exist? (without preamps)
Old 21st October 2018
  #1
Here for the gear
 

Do microphone level mixers w/ EQs exist? (without preamps)

This is undoubtedly a newbie question that isn't entirely console based, but one that is technical enough that I haven't been able to get an answer at all, so I defer to the pros.

I have a multi mic setup that I'm trying to cost effectively deal with if possible, but it's not looking promising yet. At this point, it looks like I'll have to get a good idea of how to approach the recording and then have to rent a studio with a serious console. But I want to exclude some ideas in my head as being impossible before I do that.

I only need to record one TRACK at a time, but I need 4-8 mic inputs.

I have become a convert to the school of "Microphone Preamps make a HUGE difference if you have a good one." But now we're talking $1-2K per channel, and at minimum I'm look for 4 channels and possibly up to 8 here.

So now this poses a serious application problem here. In order to introduce the mic pre after something has been amplified to line level, it needs to be attenuated, which is going to introduce its own distortion and or gain.

So ultimately, the purest way to get the microphones amplified goes full circle back to a console with the pres you choose, per channel.

HOWEVER, there seems to be one or two ways out of this that I can see.

1. There are A/Ds that are able to manipulate mic level signals (summing, EQs etc) which can output to one mic pre.
2. There are analog mixers that are capable of doing summing and EQ at mic level and outputting mic level which can go to one mic pre.
3. Attenuating a line level back to mic level on a mid level mixer out will be a clean enough signal to send through a serious mic pre.

I may be new to recording but I'm not new to amplifier and sound theory. I am very wary of any amplification or attenuation of the signal not done through the mic pre first. Which has me wary of #3 .

So I'm asking if #1 or #2 exist, and I would lean on #2 being preferred if it does. Both of these presume hardware exists to do EQ and summing on mic level.

It is my understanding that getting to line level is not a requirement of these functions, but merely a convenience as not all inputs are line level, but most hardware is designed around it, and so, mic level is the odd level out, and so, typically we amplify to the standard of line level.

Not that mic level precludes the ability to EQ or sum.

So ultimately, if I can EQ and sum on an analog mixer, without using an onboard pre (that is, mixing AT mic level), then output mic level to one really good mic pre, then I can avoid having to book studio time and can do this stuff at home.

I assume using this approach there's lots of reasonable mid tier stuff I can use. I believe this is called a "sub mixer?"

Appreciate anyone with this knowledge to school me, thanks!
Old 22nd October 2018
  #2
My advice: If you're starting out, get a good little mixer with good quality preamps. I don't know what your budget is so can't recommend one now. Learn to work with that mixer, and then move to bigger things (better microphones, seperate mic preamps).

But if you want to dive right in: Speck Electronics Xsum is an example of a piece of gear you can use, if you only want to record the mix (one channel) from multiple microphones. It's very good (clean) for the money, but there are other summing amps with line level control.
Analogue mixers are cheap, secondhand, but if you want quality you'll pay a little extra. Pay attention to the headroom, and do a search here on the forum for summing boxes?

From your post it seems you're overthinking it a bit: you want to use mic preamps later in the chain. But if you're recording you would always start with: microphone into preamp. Those two are inseperable. You can then combine the output of multiple mic preamps into one other unit (summing the signals). Which is the purpose of a mixer, of course, but summing boxes (passive (without preamp) or active (with intergrated output amp) are just one stage of that, done really well (if you have the right one )

If you want to use mic preamps for later in the chain (at the end of a passive summing stage, for example); that is also possible. Some people do this to add the character of that preamp (when driven harder). For this you could (optional) use a n attenuator, to lower the amplitude of the signal a bit, before entering the AD converter input. Oversteering the AD input with a signal that's too hot will result in clipping and mostly an ugly sounding distortion. Most mic preamps take line input signals, and will bump those up, the more gain you apply.
The greyed out part is optional you can have a chain like this:

microphones -> microphone preamps -> summing/mixer (-> passive summing -> (mic) preamp)) -> attenuator (optional) -> AD converter/tape machine input

Good luck!
Old 22nd October 2018
  #3
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reptil View Post
My advice: If you're starting out, get a good little mixer with good quality preamps. I don't know what your budget is so can't recommend one now. Learn to work with that mixer, and then move to bigger things (better microphones, seperate mic preamps).

But if you want to dive right in: Speck Electronics Xsum is an example of a piece of gear you can use, if you only want to record the mix (one channel) from multiple microphones. It's very good (clean) for the money, but there are other summing amps with line level control.
Analogue mixers are cheap, secondhand, but if you want quality you'll pay a little extra. Pay attention to the headroom, and do a search here on the forum for summing boxes?

From your post it seems you're overthinking it a bit: you want to use mic preamps later in the chain. But if you're recording you would always start with: microphone into preamp. Those two are inseperable. You can then combine the output of multiple mic preamps into one other unit (summing the signals). Which is the purpose of a mixer, of course, but summing boxes (passive (without preamp) or active (with intergrated output amp) are just one stage of that, done really well (if you have the right one )

If you want to use mic preamps for later in the chain (at the end of a passive summing stage, for example); that is also possible. Some people do this to add the character of that preamp (when driven harder). For this you could (optional) use a n attenuator, to lower the amplitude of the signal a bit, before entering the AD converter input. Oversteering the AD input with a signal that's too hot will result in clipping and mostly an ugly sounding distortion. Most mic preamps take line input signals, and will bump those up, the more gain you apply.
The greyed out part is optional you can have a chain like this:

microphones -> microphone preamps -> summing/mixer (-> passive summing -> (mic) preamp)) -> attenuator (optional) -> AD converter/tape machine input

Good luck!
I'm certainly overthinking it a bit, but I am saying if such a thing is available and was designed properly, it's going to be way ahead of attenuating the signal and then reamplifying it.

I'll look into summing boxes.
Old 22nd October 2018
  #4
Even if there was a way to EQ and sum a mic-level signal passively, you’d end up losing more signal in the process. 2>1 mic combiners exist, but I’m not aware of any that combine more than 2 inputs passively (and also, impedance issues come into play).

The thing you’re hoping for doesn’t exist. Buy 4-8 of the best preamps you can afford... it’s not going to make THAT much of a difference.
Old 22nd October 2018
  #5
Lives for gear
 
bowzin's Avatar
It might be easier to talk more about what you hope to achieve or gain, or what workflow you're talking about. I'm not following what it is you want the "goal" to be here. You want to... record a mic and then "try out" various preamps? Or you want to "reamp" a recorded part through various preamps? Or...?

Not sure I understand, but... I wouldn't do any processing at mic level. Use a "mic level to line level converter" which is simply a good clean-style preamp for clean/transparent gain up to line level. Then process at line level (eq, compression, etc. assuming you're wanting to mix outside the box? I also wouldn't recommend that. Inside The Box is the way to go if you're just starting out).

And if you want to then run it through some different preamps, since you're at line level just use a Samson S-Patch patchbay and route the clean-gained line-level signal to any number of outboard preamps that can accommodate line level input signals. There are lots of preamps that can handle a line-level signal. For example the new Aurora Audio GTP1 which was just announced, and many of the CAPI preamps have a line/mic level switch, etc. It's a somewhat rare feature, but you're seeing it more and more. Let the preamp handle it, six in one hand a half dozen in the other. Same thing.

Not sure I'm understanding because I see no point to what is suggested, just keep it simple I say. Plug into a good preamp, then plug into another, and you'll have a favorite. If you don't have a favorite, then they're close enough it doesn't matter to you anyway.

"So ultimately, the purest way to get the microphones amplified goes full circle back to a console with the pres you choose, per channel."

Look hard at a 500-series rack. This might be what you're after. For example, look at these products that include some mixing/summing elements:

Workhorse - Radial Engineering

MCM8 II | Heritage Audio

SixPack - Radial Engineering

Cranborne Audio 500ADAT - ADAT expander, summing mixer, & 8-slot 500 series rack
Old 22nd October 2018
  #6
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bowzin View Post
It might be easier to talk more about what you hope to achieve or gain, or what workflow you're talking about. I'm not following what it is you want the "goal" to be here. You want to... record a mic and then "try out" various preamps? Or you want to "reamp" a recorded part through various preamps? Or...?

Not sure I understand, but... I wouldn't do any processing at mic level. Use a "mic level to line level converter" which is simply a good clean-style preamp for clean/transparent gain up to line level. Then process at line level (eq, compression, etc. assuming you're wanting to mix outside the box? I also wouldn't recommend that. Inside The Box is the way to go if you're just starting out).

And if you want to then run it through some different preamps, since you're at line level just use a Samson S-Patch patchbay and route the clean-gained line-level signal to any number of outboard preamps that can accommodate line level input signals. There are lots of preamps that can handle a line-level signal. For example the new Aurora Audio GTP1 which was just announced, and many of the CAPI preamps have a line/mic level switch, etc. It's a somewhat rare feature, but you're seeing it more and more. Let the preamp handle it, six in one hand a half dozen in the other. Same thing.

Not sure I'm understanding because I see no point to what is suggested, just keep it simple I say. Plug into a good preamp, then plug into another, and you'll have a favorite. If you don't have a favorite, then they're close enough it doesn't matter to you anyway.

"So ultimately, the purest way to get the microphones amplified goes full circle back to a console with the pres you choose, per channel."

Look hard at a 500-series rack. This might be what you're after. For example, look at these products that include some mixing/summing elements:

Workhorse - Radial Engineering

MCM8 II | Heritage Audio

SixPack - Radial Engineering

Cranborne Audio 500ADAT - ADAT expander, summing mixer, & 8-slot 500 series rack
More or less I'm seeing if there is a way around the per channel cost of 500 series and related micpres by avoiding the amplification on a per channel level, if hardware exists to do these basic manipulations at mic level.

At this point I suspect injecting the flavor of a specific pre will actually be okay after attenuating the line level signal or using a mic level out from a mixer.

I suppose at a meta level I'm debating the accuracy of modern mainstream pres to amplify a signal to line level with almost no distortion vs the efficiency of any hardware to modify a mic level signal.

If the distortion added modifying the signal at mic level is larger than the distortion to amplify then attenuate the signal from a mainstream pre, then that negates that idea.

What I'm addressing is that the amplification from mic level to line level, does seem to be a pragmatic issue, not that this seems impossible or technologically limited. But I have to find people that are much more versed in this than I am, because it seems that maybe 90% of people don't even know what the mic pre actually does, outside of that they "need it."

I ran into this issue with Tube Buffers, which many many people were certain "did nothing." But pulled up some shootout results, actual recordings with reamps, and it absolutely made a change to the sound, and one that I was looking for.

So I try to ignore people who can't answer the actual technical question and instead try and redirect to orthodoxy. I already know it's a standard practice to amplify to line level before manipulating the signal.

I am trying to get a concrete answer if such hardware exists to manipulate at mic level that is as precise. Or if such a thing is technically impossible. At this point, I believe this is a question for hardware designers themselves far outside the ability of posters themselves to actually answer.

So I will report back.
Old 22nd October 2018
  #7
Lives for gear
 
bowzin's Avatar
Ok, I think I understand you better, you're asking if there's a way to "manipulate" a microphone signal after the microphone but before a traditional preamp. You want to manipulate the signal at mic level. What do you mean by manipulate? Like typical analog mixer stuff, like EQ, panning, level control? There's nothing I'm aware of that would do this, and I see absolutely zero benefit to doing it that way.

It's a very weak, and very high impedance signal. Like 0.001 volts. It's too delicate to manipulate. You need to make the signal more robust, and that's what the preamp can do. You'd be losing more tone trying to manipulate delicate mic level signals than you would using a clean preamp to bring it to line level. Also on one hand there are zero products designed to work at mic levels, and on the other hand every piece of gear available today that can work at line levels.

If you only need to record one track at a time, it wouldn't be a bad idea to get both a clean preamp (or maybe use your interface's preamps) and one "color" preamp like all these Neve and API clones out here that sound really good. No need to try and capture the mic level signal, to "reamp" it back later into different preamps. You'll lose more than you gain. Gain staging will be a nightmare, your interface won't like it, etc. Just use a decent-to-good solid clean preamp to record with, and then you can run that signal out of your interface and into other gear, either preamps or whatever. There's very few preamps I've come across recently that are "bad". Even the cheap ones are pretty good, because IC-based preamps have improved dramatically, including on headroom which is where they used to tick me off. But now they're very usable.

Some dirt cheap but good quality gear that is out right now:

Focusrite ISA One - really good clean'ish preamp, TONS of usable, quiet gain. Also lots of other cool features, like a really good headphone amp for example, a good DI, etc.

GAP/Warm Audio/Heritage Audio preamps, or lots of others - color preamps with input and output transformers, can dial in either very little harmonic content and saturation or can overdrive it really hard to get all kinds of textures.

Klark Teknik EQP-KT - really cheap, and has an input transformer, output transformer, Pultec-style inductor-based EQ circuit, and two tubes in the output gain stage. This is a really cheap way to add a lot of "tone" in that you get transformers, very nice EQ, and some tubes in the signal path. Also the other Klark Teknik or Warm Audio or GAP products are very nice, and very affordable so worth checking out if you want to add some excitement to sterile signals.

Hope that helps, good luck.
Old 22nd October 2018
  #8
Lives for gear
 
12tone's Avatar
 

These might be handy for what you're looking for:
Louder Than Liftoff announces MISTER FOCUS Collection
Old 22nd October 2018
  #9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickerz View Post
This is undoubtedly a newbie question that isn't entirely console based, but one that is technical enough that I haven't been able to get an answer at all, so I defer to the pros.

I have a multi mic setup that I'm trying to cost effectively deal with if possible, but it's not looking promising yet. At this point, it looks like I'll have to get a good idea of how to approach the recording and then have to rent a studio with a serious console. But I want to exclude some ideas in my head as being impossible before I do that.

I only need to record one TRACK at a time, but I need 4-8 mic inputs.

I have become a convert to the school of "Microphone Preamps make a HUGE difference if you have a good one." But now we're talking $1-2K per channel, and at minimum I'm look for 4 channels and possibly up to 8 here.

So now this poses a serious application problem here. In order to introduce the mic pre after something has been amplified to line level, it needs to be attenuated, which is going to introduce its own distortion and or gain.

So ultimately, the purest way to get the microphones amplified goes full circle back to a console with the pres you choose, per channel.

HOWEVER, there seems to be one or two ways out of this that I can see.

1. There are A/Ds that are able to manipulate mic level signals (summing, EQs etc) which can output to one mic pre.
2. There are analog mixers that are capable of doing summing and EQ at mic level and outputting mic level which can go to one mic pre.
3. Attenuating a line level back to mic level on a mid level mixer out will be a clean enough signal to send through a serious mic pre.

I may be new to recording but I'm not new to amplifier and sound theory. I am very wary of any amplification or attenuation of the signal not done through the mic pre first. Which has me wary of #3 .

So I'm asking if #1 or #2 exist, and I would lean on #2 being preferred if it does. Both of these presume hardware exists to do EQ and summing on mic level.

It is my understanding that getting to line level is not a requirement of these functions, but merely a convenience as not all inputs are line level, but most hardware is designed around it, and so, mic level is the odd level out, and so, typically we amplify to the standard of line level.

Not that mic level precludes the ability to EQ or sum.

So ultimately, if I can EQ and sum on an analog mixer, without using an onboard pre (that is, mixing AT mic level), then output mic level to one really good mic pre, then I can avoid having to book studio time and can do this stuff at home.

I assume using this approach there's lots of reasonable mid tier stuff I can use. I believe this is called a "sub mixer?"

Appreciate anyone with this knowledge to school me, thanks!
[bold added]

Old 22nd October 2018
  #10
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12tone View Post
These might be handy for what you're looking for:
Louder Than Liftoff announces MISTER FOCUS Collection
That's cool as hell, but I don't think I'm that picky.
Old 22nd October 2018
  #11
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bowzin View Post
Ok, I think I understand you better, you're asking if there's a way to "manipulate" a microphone signal after the microphone but before a traditional preamp. You want to manipulate the signal at mic level. What do you mean by manipulate? Like typical analog mixer stuff, like EQ, panning, level control? There's nothing I'm aware of that would do this, and I see absolutely zero benefit to doing it that way.

It's a very weak, and very high impedance signal. Like 0.001 volts. It's too delicate to manipulate. You need to make the signal more robust, and that's what the preamp can do. You'd be losing more tone trying to manipulate delicate mic level signals than you would using a clean preamp to bring it to line level. Also on one hand there are zero products designed to work at mic levels, and on the other hand every piece of gear available today that can work at line levels.

If you only need to record one track at a time, it wouldn't be a bad idea to get both a clean preamp (or maybe use your interface's preamps) and one "color" preamp like all these Neve and API clones out here that sound really good. No need to try and capture the mic level signal, to "reamp" it back later into different preamps. You'll lose more than you gain. Gain staging will be a nightmare, your interface won't like it, etc. Just use a decent-to-good solid clean preamp to record with, and then you can run that signal out of your interface and into other gear, either preamps or whatever. There's very few preamps I've come across recently that are "bad". Even the cheap ones are pretty good, because IC-based preamps have improved dramatically, including on headroom which is where they used to tick me off. But now they're very usable.

Some dirt cheap but good quality gear that is out right now:

Focusrite ISA One - really good clean'ish preamp, TONS of usable, quiet gain. Also lots of other cool features, like a really good headphone amp for example, a good DI, etc.

GAP/Warm Audio/Heritage Audio preamps, or lots of others - color preamps with input and output transformers, can dial in either very little harmonic content and saturation or can overdrive it really hard to get all kinds of textures.

Klark Teknik EQP-KT - really cheap, and has an input transformer, output transformer, Pultec-style inductor-based EQ circuit, and two tubes in the output gain stage. This is a really cheap way to add a lot of "tone" in that you get transformers, very nice EQ, and some tubes in the signal path. Also the other Klark Teknik or Warm Audio or GAP products are very nice, and very affordable so worth checking out if you want to add some excitement to sterile signals.

Hope that helps, good luck.
On this method I could theoretically attenuate after its summed and then go through the pre. I imagine this is more stable than cascading them.

You are one of two people out of maybe 30 that understand what I'm getting at. So I appreciate it.

I could probably come up with some experiment to see if the cascading or the attenuation add any appreciable noise opposed to straight through the mic pre.
Old 22nd October 2018
  #12
Lives for gear
 
bowzin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickerz View Post
On this method I could theoretically attenuate after its summed and then go through the pre. I imagine this is more stable than cascading them.

You are one of two people out of maybe 30 that understand what I'm getting at. So I appreciate it.

I could probably come up with some experiment to see if the cascading or the attenuation add any appreciable noise opposed to straight through the mic pre.
Summed from where? Are you talking about analog summing? With analog summing, you send a ton of outputs from (preferably very high quality) DA outputs at line level from your DAW, into a "summing box" which is just a bunch of analog inputs with resistors that sums to only two outputs. Because of all the resistors, the outputs need to be gained up again, so you run the two outputs through any preamps of your choice. I would highly recommend against going this route, but if you're dead set, look at the Roll Music Folcrom.

In general I'd really try to keep it simple, unfortunately there's no way to really "hack" or cheat the system and that is doubly-true for proper gain staging. The mic-level stuff is just too weak of a signal to do anything usable with, ESPECIALLY so if you're worried about noise floor and no distortion and good clean signal. I'd just stick with the norms for now, I promise you that is the way to go. Pinky swear.

Talk more about your actual practical goals here, I'm still not sure I understand, do you want to have 1 mic to try with a bunch of different preamps, or just buy ONE really good preamp, and have everything go into that in a usable/practical way, or...? Talk more about your goals in this area, and I bet there are much more "tried and true" ways to accomplish it, and perhaps even "hack" it a little bit with some super-under-the-radar gear that's out here now a days.

From personal experience any time I get too deep into a rabbit hole and can't find any info or anyone else doing it a certain way, it's a signal I'm doing something probably wrong, not creative, just wrong and I'll pay for it later either monetarily by re-buying stuff or buying stuff I didn't need or pay for it with bad results or overly-complex workflow. You can get killer home studio stuff today without spending an arm and a leg, keep an open mind! Good luck.
Old 23rd October 2018
  #13
There is considerable difference between enforcement or embrace of orthodoxy for its own sake and the common sense, practical wisdom of learning both the technical fundamentals as well as the real world best practices of a given discipline that one is attempting to gain expertise within.
Old 23rd October 2018
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Xander's Avatar
Your issue is going to be noise, period. You cannot manipulate mic level signals and then amplify them to line level and get a clean result. This is because the components used to manipulate audio signals in the analog world all add small amounts of noise. It's called Johnson noise, Nyquist noise, or thermal noise.

Johnson–Nyquist noise - Wikipedia

When your signal is at line level, the signal is high enough that the signal to noise ratio is acceptable. If your signal is mic level, your signal to noise ratio is now 30-60 dB worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickerz View Post
I only need to record one TRACK at a time, but I need 4-8 mic inputs.
If you want to record multiple mics summed down to a single track, you need a mixer with preamps. It's that simple.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickerz View Post
HOWEVER, there seems to be one or two ways out of this that I can see.

1. There are A/Ds that are able to manipulate mic level signals (summing, EQs etc) which can output to one mic pre.
If such a device exists, I guarantee that the A/D box has mic preamps in it to boost to line level before A/D conversion. And if there is a mic output, it is just an attenuated output from line level.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickerz View Post
2. There are analog mixers that are capable of doing summing and EQ at mic level and outputting mic level which can go to one mic pre.
See the issue of noise in my first paragraph


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickerz View Post
3. Attenuating a line level back to mic level on a mid level mixer out will be a clean enough signal to send through a serious mic pre.
Sure you can do this if you want to add color from a specific preamp. But it will likely not be a "magic bullet" and you may be disappointed in the results if you're expecting a huge change in sound from just the mixer output.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickerz View Post
I may be new to recording but I'm not new to amplifier and sound theory. I am very wary of any amplification or attenuation of the signal not done through the mic pre first.
You're wary of it for a very good reason!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickerz View Post
It is my understanding that getting to line level is not a requirement of these functions, but merely a convenience as not all inputs are line level
It is a requirement insomuch that the noise levels added by analog components are too high to run mic level through them and get an output with an acceptable S/N ratio.

Which gear are you referring to that has inputs other than line level? If there are inputs on gear that are labeled mic level, it's because they are inputs to mic preamps. Which boost the signal to line level. Because noise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickerz View Post
So ultimately, if I can EQ and sum on an analog mixer, without using an onboard pre (that is, mixing AT mic level), then output mic level to one really good mic pre, then I can avoid having to book studio time and can do this stuff at home.
You can go ahead and try that with a cheap mixer and an outboard mic pre. Plug your dynamic mics into the line level inputs on your cheap mixer, and then plug the outputs of the mixer into a preamp. It will work! I hope you enjoy the sound of white noise though.
Old 23rd October 2018
  #15
Gear Head
 

Shure used to make a few half rack sized mixers that sum 5 mic channels into 1 mic level out (maybe model m68 but I’m sure there were others). There’s no EQ and they don’t sound very good but it accomplishes part of your intended task. I bought a pair of these mixers at a pawn shop for $20.

I’m not sure capturing this signal somewhere and then “reamping” through a nice mic pre later will have pleasing results. The only use I’ve found for them is as a single channel “dirt box” that can make hip hop ad libs/doubles sound pretty cool.

They basically ruin everything else I’ve ever run through them.

If, after reading this, you still think one would help you on the road to audio nirvana let me know. I’ll mail one of them to you.
Old 23rd October 2018
  #16
Lives for gear
No, there is no such thing as processing at the mic level (mV).
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