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
"More Me" Headphone Amps & Latency Free Monitoring?
Old 24th March 2011
  #1
Lives for gear
 
Quint's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
"More Me" Headphone Amps & Latency Free Monitoring?

I've been looking at picking up a Presonus HP60 headphone amp for location tracking. I like it because it comes with the "more me" feature which is cool. The thing is that, for this to work, you have to feed the amp an overall stereo mix in addition to each of the individual "more me" lines.

Now the individual "more me" lines I have no problem with. I can just mult each line out of my patchbay from the preamp outs to the Presonus. The problem I'm having trouble with is the overall mix. How are you guys doing this with the HP60 or something similar while still achieving latency free monitoring?

Of course I can always use the software mixer on my Audiofire converters to send an overall mix back out to the headphone amp but now there will be latency between it and the individual, pre-conversion mults I took from the patchbay.

How are you guys using headphone amps like these while still achieving latency free (pre conversion) monitoring?
Old 24th March 2011
  #2
Lives for gear
Mute the tracks being recorded in the DAW. (Or route them so they appear in the control room mix but not in the performer's monitor.)
Old 25th March 2011
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Quint's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by M4-10 View Post
Mute the tracks being recorded in the DAW. (Or route them so they appear in the control room mix but not in the performer's monitor.)
I'm not sure what you're referring to? I want and need the overall mix to appear in the performers headphones (especially due to the topology of "more me" headphone amps). I don't see how anything your suggesting applies to my situation or takes care of the latency issue. Please tell me otherwise if I'm not understanding what you're saying. I'm trying to direct monitor everything prior to conversion (unless somebody can tell me a way to do this where latency is unnoticeable), including the stereo mix. Basically, I need an affordable and easy to way have a simple stereo mix appear in the performer's headphones that doesn't involve a full blown mixer as I want to be able to use this for remote recording.
Old 25th March 2011
  #4
Lives for gear
It might help to clarify...

How many performers? Any prerecorded tracks (are you doing overdubs)? And do any performers need more than one microphone in their "more me" mix?
Old 25th March 2011
  #5
Lives for gear
I think the first response is in fact correct.

I'm assume you are overdubbing.

Tracks that are already recorded will have no latency. They go to the stereo mix.

By sending the tracks being recorded to the headphones BEFORE the computer they will also have no latency.

But if the tracks being recorded are also in the stereo mix, the preformer will here that latency as a delay.

The solution is for ALL parties to listen to the tracks in record in low latency, as in sourced before the computer.

If you are tracking fresh, the headphones should be sourced from the console before the computer.
Old 25th March 2011
  #6
Lives for gear
 
Quint's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffmo View Post
I think the first response is in fact correct.

I'm assume you are overdubbing.

Tracks that are already recorded will have no latency. They go to the stereo mix.

By sending the tracks being recorded to the headphones BEFORE the computer they will also have no latency.

But if the tracks being recorded are also in the stereo mix, the preformer will here that latency as a delay.

The solution is for ALL parties to listen to the tracks in record in low latency, as in sourced before the computer.

If you are tracking fresh, the headphones should be sourced from the console before the computer.
Sorry if I wasn't totally clear. What I need this for is to track a four or five piece live band. I totally understand what you're saying about latency with overdubs and, I agree, that's not a problem at all for me to do what you're suggesting. I already do it that way as we speak. Overdubs present no problem for me in this scenario but I'm concerned with tracking, not overdubbing.

What I'm talking about is remote tracking a live band. I would prefer to not go "low latency" and would rather direct monitor (analog; no latency) prior to conversion during tracking. Since this is for remote recording I won't have my console available so I'm looking for a simple, affordable solution to achieve what I'm asking about. As for sourcing the headphone monitoring through the computer, I know that some performers are very aware of subtle latency delays, as am I, so I want to avoid all of that if at all possible.

Basically, what I'm asking is how are people doing full band remote tracking with "more me" headphone amps like the HP60 while also providing direct headphone monitoring so as to have zero latency?

All the "more me" headphone amps appear to require some type of composite stereo mix (in addition to individual musician line feeds) and my conundrum is on how to achieve this prior to conversion (for zero latency purposes) without spending a boatload on some sort of fancy summing device that would literally only get used for remote tracking.
Old 25th March 2011
  #7
Lives for gear
 
bitman's Avatar
Long story as short as I can make it.

16 mics come in from the tracking room and plug into a 16 channel splitter.
One split goes to 16 pres and to the DAW running 1024 ASIO buffers (huge latency).

The other split is only the first 8 channels + 2 track goes to 8 lesser preamps then to 3 ATI 4 x 16 distribution amps to mult out 10 channels to 6 behringer 1202 mixers

That results in a mixer at each play station with VOX,GUIT1,GUIT2,BASS,KICK,SNARE,OH and OTHER + 2track (The first 8 mics and 2track) in all at zero real time latency.

In the DAW, SONAR auto aligns the incoming signals with the pre recorded stuff by way of a fixed ASIO latency compensation value.

We can run all plugs all the time this way with no latency worries because we monitor the mic signals before conversion.

And everyone can mix their own cue mix which is 1000% faster and 1000000 times less frustrating for everyone.

All gear was DIY (splitter) or eBay purchased ATIs and 1202s to keep costs way down.
Old 25th March 2011
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Quint's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitman View Post
Long story as short as I can make it.

16 mics come in from the tracking room and plug into a 16 channel splitter.
One split goes to 16 pres and to the DAW running 1024 ASIO buffers (huge latency).

The other split is only the first 8 channels + 2 track goes to 8 lesser preamps then to 3 ATI 4 x 16 distribution amps to mult out 10 channels to 6 behringer 1202 mixers

That results in a mixer at each play station with VOX,GUIT1,GUIT2,BASS,KICK,SNARE,OH and OTHER + 2track (The first 8 mics and 2track) in all at zero real time latency.

In the DAW, SONAR auto aligns the incoming signals with the pre recorded stuff by way of a fixed ASIO latency compensation value.

We can run all plugs all the time this way with no latency worries because we monitor the mic signals before conversion.

And everyone can mix their own cue mix which is 1000% faster and 1000000 times less frustrating for everyone.

All gear was DIY (splitter) or eBay purchased ATIs and 1202s to keep costs way down.
At my place it's no problem but I'm concerned with remote tracking where I won't have the ability to set up cue mixes through my board. My MCI weighs 500 lbs and won't be going with me on remote tracking jobs.

For remote tracking I don't really want to cart around a whole additional set of "auxillary" preamps just to achieve direct headphone monitoring. I know that plenty of people set up headphone mixes through their daw but I'm looking for a solution to avoid that as latency, in my experience, causes problems with musician's ability to achieve the proper "feel". I'm really trying to find a true zero latency solution.
Old 25th March 2011
  #9
Gear addict
 
a zombie's Avatar
 

aviom is cool, but live it would probably not work..
Old 25th March 2011
  #10
Gear nut
 

It's being used live all the time..

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Gearslutz.com App
Old 25th March 2011
  #11
A salesmen friend of mine introduced me to the Aviom system when it first came out, like 15 years ago. He was selling it as a live system at the time, FWIW. For me, I decided it was nothing I wanted to get into, so I am speaking with never trying it. I mention this merely from getting the words right out of an Axiom sales person's mouth that this is indeed a live use system.

Back to the original point, why not use a splitter box as someone else already mentioned and run the split signals to the headphone amp, maybe via a smaller, portable mixer? In that situation, the mixer would really be a monitor desk, but give you good control. Of course, to get all the sub groups and/ or aux sends you might need, the board would have to be something bigger and better. Hmmm... A MixWizard 14:4 would probably work in this case. That mixer will drop into a rack and sounds pretty good, certainly well enough for monitor mixes. Maybe that is a plan which adds too much extra expense. Oh yeah, of course you'd need way more mic cables as well, but I am thinking you already know this.
Old 25th March 2011
  #12
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quint View Post
At my place it's no problem but I'm concerned with remote tracking where I won't have the ability to set up cue mixes through my board. My MCI weighs 500 lbs and won't be going with me on remote tracking jobs.

For remote tracking I don't really want to cart around a whole additional set of "auxillary" preamps just to achieve direct headphone monitoring. I know that plenty of people set up headphone mixes through their daw but I'm looking for a solution to avoid that as latency, in my experience, causes problems with musician's ability to achieve the proper "feel". I'm really trying to find a true zero latency solution.
My simple solution would be to buy or rent something like an Allen and Heath Mixwiz for band tracking. Its small, sounds dscent and does what you ned.

Essentially the key to solving your problem is to send the cue mix before the DAW. The most direct way to do that is from the AUX sends on a desk or some sort.
Old 25th March 2011
  #13
Lives for gear
 
RonT's Avatar
 

1. Split the signals DAW/Mixer (easily done with a patchbay)
2. Record the Raw DAW tracks
3. Mix the signals going to the mixer (Pre DAW)
4. Send the cue mix to the band (HP60 or "B"Word HA8000)

Done!

This mixer can be bought for around $300 and will do everything that you want/need. Plus it is light and sounds more than decent for a cue mixer.
Nady CMX-16A 16-Channel Stereo Mic/Line Mixer



You need a mixer for zero latency monitoring. It is what it is. Don't have to be a big expensive one but you need some form of a mixer. You said 4 peice band so I am assuming:

Drums 4-8 mic
Bass 1 mic
Guits 1-2 mic
Singer 1 mic
Stage mics 1-2
Misc. ins 1-2 line inputs

Sum that up to 16 DAW inputs....

So you want to mix those 16 signals and send them to the artist "Pre DAW" but Post Mix?

So you need a small rackable "Mixer" with 16 inputs!

You want to give each artist at least a mix A/B?
Drummer might need more Bass.....?
Singer might need more Guits........?

So this small rackable "Mixer" has to have at least 2 submixes?

Your Headphone AMP has to have an input 1+2 for easy switching between these 2 submixes and individual level for each person recieving the cans?

The HP60 is good for this or the "B"Word HP80000


Old 25th March 2011
  #14
Lives for gear
One concern about "more me"...

I have the ART Headamp 6. The left and right inputs are balanced XLR, and on any channel either side can be muted, and there is a mono button. So two separate mono mixes if desired... so far so good.

The auxiliary inputs for each channel (the "more me" part) are unbalanced stereo. This means you need signal on both conductors, otherwise the "more me" only comes out one ear (unless the headphone channel is in mono). I ended up making some cables that are TS (with both conductors attached to the tip) on one side and TRS on the other. Bit of a pain in the butt. I wish the "more me" was a mono input.

Other headphone amps may vary, but check if this is a concern.
Old 26th March 2011
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Quint's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
As for using a mixer, I guess I was just hoping to avoid using a full blown mixer for remote tracking. I was hoping there was some kind of elegant, affordable rack mount solution that would take care of this without me having to lug a mixer around, even if it's relatively small. Of course there's summing mixers but I didn't really want to buy one of those either because I don't need the bells and whistles that those provide.

I really just need a rack mount box that I can put between my patchbays and headphone amp that allows me to bring in at least eight channels and sum those channels back out to my headphone amp. No eq, no panning, no nothing. Just straight sum and individual volume control of the inputs. Maybe not even volume control if the headphone amp has basic mix capability like the HP60. Basically, it would do what my converter's software mixer does, but in the analog domain. Better yet, a headphone amp that also had this capability would be perfect.

All of your responses are telling me what I knew was a solution but just one I wanted to avoid if possible. Thanks for your help anyway. If anyone does come up with a solution like I've been looking for let me know.

Meanwhile, it looks like I'm going to be stuck giving latent headphone mixes or I'm going to be buying a mixer of some kind.
Old 26th March 2011
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Quint's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puffer Fish View Post
A salesmen friend of mine introduced me to the Aviom system when it first came out, like 15 years ago. He was selling it as a live system at the time, FWIW. For me, I decided it was nothing I wanted to get into, so I am speaking with never trying it. I mention this merely from getting the words right out of an Axiom sales person's mouth that this is indeed a live use system.

Back to the original point, why not use a splitter box as someone else already mentioned and run the split signals to the headphone amp, maybe via a smaller, portable mixer? In that situation, the mixer would really be a monitor desk, but give you good control. Of course, to get all the sub groups and/ or aux sends you might need, the board would have to be something bigger and better. Hmmm... A MixWizard 14:4 would probably work in this case. That mixer will drop into a rack and sounds pretty good, certainly well enough for monitor mixes. Maybe that is a plan which adds too much extra expense. Oh yeah, of course you'd need way more mic cables as well, but I am thinking you already know this.
The mixwizard is probably exactly what I would get for this if were to get a mixer. I'm just really trying to avoid doing this if possible. I want my entire remote tracking setup to reside in one 16 space rack where the only other things I have to bring are a computer, mics, cables and stands.
Old 26th March 2011
  #17
Lives for gear
 

I understand your frustration as I've been following this thread while several responders, while well meaning, seemed to miss the point lol.

However, they're not wrong - if "near zero latency" is unacceptable (I don't blame you on that one) - a mixer or a higher-quality headphone distro is hard to avoid.

However, some multi-channel preamps have one or two busses seemingly for this very purpose. You could look into that. A splitter feeding ad and a small rackmount mixer (you don't need to buy a $3000 neve for this - I've seen $300ish options) would give you a stereo mix to work with. Or a headphone system that allows performers to dial in their own mix would eliminate the need for the more-me scenario. A caveat, though, the vast majority of those higher end headphone systems are digital and introduce a small latency - normally in the 1.5-3ms zone. That'd kill the deal right there if you need *truly* zero latency.

At 2-3ms I have a hard time believing someone's really going to find it to damage their performance, considering the equivalent few feet away from a speaker it equates to, but it's your call.
Old 26th March 2011
  #18
Lives for gear
This is of course subject to very inflammable opinion, but the MixWiz pres record quite well.

I've done a lot of commercially released projects with 2 MWs, and am currently recording a lot of national acts for a PBS TV series this summer.

Unless you have very good pres, having a MixWiz is a good way to go. By using the pres in the Mixwiz through the direct outs you eliminate the need for a splitter.
Old 26th March 2011
  #19
Lives for gear
 
Quint's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcb4t2 View Post
I understand your frustration as I've been following this thread while several responders, while well meaning, seemed to miss the point lol.

However, they're not wrong - if "near zero latency" is unacceptable (I don't blame you on that one) - a mixer or a higher-quality headphone distro is hard to avoid.

However, some multi-channel preamps have one or two busses seemingly for this very purpose. You could look into that. A splitter feeding ad and a small rackmount mixer (you don't need to buy a $3000 neve for this - I've seen $300ish options) would give you a stereo mix to work with. Or a headphone system that allows performers to dial in their own mix would eliminate the need for the more-me scenario. A caveat, though, the vast majority of those higher end headphone systems are digital and introduce a small latency - normally in the 1.5-3ms zone. That'd kill the deal right there if you need *truly* zero latency.

At 2-3ms I have a hard time believing someone's really going to find it to damage their performance, considering the equivalent few feet away from a speaker it equates to, but it's your call.
At 2-3ms I probably wouldn't worry about it. The problem is that's difficult to achieve and I would rather have no latency and allow my converters some breathing room to work at higher buffers, especially since I tend to record at 96k. Addtionally, firewire isn't known for having the fastest latency out there either so this scenario kind of dictates that I use a truly zero latency setup.

As for splitter boxes, my splitter boxes are my half normalled patchbays. I just need the right piece of equipment to feed those signals into for headphone monitoring. Additionally, I agree on the multi channel preamp boxes. They seem to have that function for that exact purpose but I'm already setup with really nice preamps and just need some kind of box to accomplish my headphone monitoring goals. I know there are line mixers out there but none of them seem to have what I'm looking for.

I did find this mentioned in another thread:
DOD Electronics Sound Reinforcement - SR606
ftp://ftp.dod.com/pub/PDFs/Manuals/SR/SR606Manual.pdf

It looks like maybe it could work but the manual left me a little unsure of its total capability and there is little info out there on this particular unit. Maybe they don't make it anymore and, if so, is there anything else out there like it? I'd like something that sums and also had some sort of direct outs that I could use to then send on to the individual musician's inputs on their respective channels of the headphone amp.
Old 26th March 2011
  #20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffmo View Post
This is of course subject to very inflammable opinion, but the MixWiz pres record quite well.

I've done a lot of commercially released projects with 2 MWs, and am currently recording a lot of national acts for a PBS TV series this summer.

Unless you have very good pres, having a MixWiz is a good way to go. By using the pres in the Mixwiz through the direct outs you eliminate the need for a splitter.
I have used my mixwizard for recording before and I thought it did very well, as did a lot of other folks. I think my studio preamps do better, but I never expected otherwise. I can tell you that the preamps on my mixwizard blew away the preamps on my Firepods. It was no contest. So I only go line in to the firepods.

If these are paying gigs with enough of a budget, someone suggested renting a mixwiz--that's a thought. Or look for one used--I found my 16:2 for several hundred dollars less than new and the mixer was only used once, I think. I still had plastic wrapped around it from the manufacturer. I know, I found a very good deal, but I have seen A LOT of them for sale. The 14:4, which would probably be better for what you are talking about tend to not come up for sale used as often, as you may already know. Of course with the 16:2, you could still do three left/ right mixes from the aux sends and then one more from the stereo bus. Four is a reasonable number for many rock combos.

Oh yes, regarding keeping everything in 16 rack spaces, I use a Gator pop-up rack for my live rig with the mixwiz 16:2 right on top. That rack is 12 spaces and I fit a lot of stuff in there. In fact, I can't imagine anymore being in the rack because it is very heavy. Check them out in case you have not seen them before--they are totally worth considering: Gator Cases | Products - Pop-Up Console Racks
Those boxes seemed like the best of the bunch compared to what other companies had to offer when I did my searching. The casters are really solid and of a larger diameter so they roll well over bumps and cracks in pavement. They are a good depth as well, so pretty much any rack device for audio will fit with room to spare. I keep my rig hooked up so that all I need to do is plug in mic cables and sends to the board--all the equalization, compression and so on remains wired up from show to show--very convenient.
Old 26th March 2011
  #21
Lives for gear
 
Quint's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Guys, I really need a non-"Mix Wizard" type of solution. I'm just not willing to go that route. I need a simple rack mountable line mixer, preferably 1u. Just to reiterate what it is that I need:

Option 1
1) 8 or more mono inputs
2) volume knobs for each input
3) direct outs for each input to pass individual inputs back out in addition to the stereo mix (it's possible there may not be anything that has this feature)

+

4) "More me" headphone amp

OR

Option 2
A headphone amp with a mix matrix inside of it that sums all of the inputs into a stereo mix and then allows you to tailor each headphone output (minimum 5 outputs) as a combination between the overall summed stereo mix and each channels respective input, thus allowing a "more me" scenario without the need of a summing device (for a stereo mix) prior to and in addition to the headphone amp.
Old 27th March 2011
  #22
Lives for gear
Not to seem a wiseass.....but this is what PTHD was designed for.

Plug into a more me hub and go. No question of who is hearing what in what time frame. Just works.

If this is what you need, I would look at just doing it. Find a used core card and the best converter you can afford. Sell your other rig.

I may be wrong, but I can't think of anything that is really going to do what you want properly without crazy wiring splits and obtuse signal flow.

But...back to your other idea.

Roland M-240 24 ch. line mixer - $225.00 - Drumcore Message Board

Its an old Roland 24 channel line mix. 24 in, has I think 2 auxes.

But its 4 spaces. I haven't seen anything else like it made in years. Its essentially a line only console in a rack.

In a one space...maybe some digital piece. I dunno.







Quote:
Originally Posted by Quint View Post
Guys, I really need a non-"Mix Wizard" type of solution. I'm just not willing to go that route. I need a simple rack mountable line mixer, preferably 1u. Just to reiterate what it is that I need:

Option 1
1) 8 or more mono inputs
2) volume knobs for each input
3) direct outs for each input to pass individual inputs back out in addition to the stereo mix (it's possible there may not be anything that has this feature)

+

4) "More me" headphone amp

OR

Option 2
A headphone amp with a mix matrix inside of it that sums all of the inputs into a stereo mix and then allows you to tailor each headphone output (minimum 5 outputs) as a combination between the overall summed stereo mix and each channels respective input, thus allowing a "more me" scenario without the need of a summing device (for a stereo mix) prior to and in addition to the headphone amp.
Old 28th March 2011
  #23
Lives for gear
 
Quint's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffmo View Post
Not to seem a wiseass.....but this is what PTHD was designed for.

Plug into a more me hub and go. No question of who is hearing what in what time frame. Just works.

If this is what you need, I would look at just doing it. Find a used core card and the best converter you can afford. Sell your other rig.

I may be wrong, but I can't think of anything that is really going to do what you want properly without crazy wiring splits and obtuse signal flow.

But...back to your other idea.

Roland M-240 24 ch. line mixer - $225.00 - Drumcore Message Board

Its an old Roland 24 channel line mix. 24 in, has I think 2 auxes.

But its 4 spaces. I haven't seen anything else like it made in years. Its essentially a line only console in a rack.

In a one space...maybe some digital piece. I dunno.
I understand what you're saying about PTHD but I literally only use the computer as a digital tape machine. I can't justify the cost of PTHD just for headphone mixes and I've also never been that impressed with the conversion quality of the HD units compared to other stuff out there, especially for the price. What I maybe could justify would be a different set of converters that have zero latency hardware mixing prior to conversion. I know there are a few models out there that can do this but I forget which at the moment.

Multing won't kill me. I was just hoping to avoid it. Unless someone comes up with a unit that satisfies my needs it looks like I'm just going to be getting a HP60, a simple eight to sixteen channel line mixer and using my patchbay to achieve the needed mults.
Old 5 days ago
  #24
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by M4-10 View Post
One concern about "more me"...

I have the ART Headamp 6. The left and right inputs are balanced XLR, and on any channel either side can be muted, and there is a mono button. So two separate mono mixes if desired... so far so good.

The auxiliary inputs for each channel (the "more me" part) are unbalanced stereo. This means you need signal on both conductors, otherwise the "more me" only comes out one ear (unless the headphone channel is in mono). I ended up making some cables that are TS (with both conductors attached to the tip) on one side and TRS on the other. Bit of a pain in the butt. I wish the "more me" was a mono input.

Other headphone amps may vary, but check if this is a concern.
Hi, I need a headphone amp for monitoring while tracking vocals, guitars so I wanted to ask does Art Headamp 6 has enough volume ? Thanks
Old 5 days ago
  #25
Here for the gear
What type of preamps? If 500 series get one of the racks with a built in mixer. Radial makes a 8 by 2 and I thinks some others do as well. Dishes done. If not a little mixer may be the only answer.
Old 4 days ago
  #26
Lives for gear
 
omegaomega's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quint View Post
I've been looking at picking up a Presonus HP60 headphone amp for location tracking. I like it because it comes with the "more me" feature which is cool. The thing is that, for this to work, you have to feed the amp an overall stereo mix in addition to each of the individual "more me" lines.

Now the individual "more me" lines I have no problem with. I can just mult each line out of my patchbay from the preamp outs to the Presonus. The problem I'm having trouble with is the overall mix. How are you guys doing this with the HP60 or something similar while still achieving latency free monitoring?

Of course I can always use the software mixer on my Audiofire converters to send an overall mix back out to the headphone amp but now there will be latency between it and the individual, pre-conversion mults I took from the patchbay.

How are you guys using headphone amps like these while still achieving latency free (pre conversion) monitoring?
You will not have any latency if you just send a stereo mix out to the headphone amp (without the track currently recorded, that is).
In fact, you will get exactly what the talent will need to listen in order to perform correctly and in time.
I don't even mention the few samples of "latency" your DAC will induce, this doesn't even count (in this case).
Try it and see, it's really simple, as long as you can mult your preamps outs on your patchbay before entering the interface you'll be fine.
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
volde / Low End Theory
11
chessparov / Q & A with Alphajerk
15

Forum Jump