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
Improving sound quality Studio Headphones
Old 12th May 2006
  #1
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

Improving sound quality

I've been recording daily for about a year now and I still can't get my recordings up to par. I have a Digidesign 002 clocked to a Rosetta 800 with a few different preamps running in a 2.0Ghz Mac G5.

When I record(48k 24-bit depth) it seems like the sound quality of my stuff just isn't "up there." It's almost as if my recordings are literally at some lower definition. In Pro Tools I have it clocked through ADAT at 48k and everything seems to be hooked up just fine. But today I recorded a song for a woman using samples from my Motif ES8, piano via Ivory, and vocals through a Soundelux E47/Great River MP-2NV. And once I bounced the format down to 44.1k 16-bit and put it on a cd and listened in my car the mix just seemed to lack SOMETHING...The quality just wasn't as good as commercial stuff. Also, the samples sounded noticeably better than the vocals in the recording

I know the samples are high quality and very processed, but what MAKES them so high quality and processed? I can't figure out where the weak link in my chain is. I'm recording a great singer, through a great mic, through a good(?) preamp, in a good room. This same situation applies to recording instruments. I try recording my friend's $3000 Taylor guitar, but the sound just isn't "there." I've thought it could be mastering, but I've had songs mastered by a pretty well-known engineer, and the songs sounded better, but still almost as if they were recorded on some lesser format than commercial stuff. Is the problem my converter....what? Thanks for any help/suggestions, guys!
Old 12th May 2006
  #2
Lives for gear
 
DeeDrive's Avatar
 

With all of the great stuff you've got, it kind of sounds like operator error. Not trying to be rude or anything, but it looks like you've got some pretty killer gear there. Can you post a sample of your recordings? That would make it a lot easier to tell what was going on.

You're not going to get much of a response without having something for us to listen to, cus "quality" is a pretty broard term.
Old 12th May 2006
  #3
Lives for gear
 

I know that feeling well - when your sampled sounds are obviously higher quality than your own recordings. Your gear shouldn't be the weak link - although i don't see any mention of a great compressor? That might be a missing link?

You have to solve all the issues at every point in the chain:

room noisefloor
room acoustics
mic placement
performance
preamp gain structure
compressor gain structure
A/D gain structure
EQ
Effects


For vocals and guitars, controlling dynamics can be an issue. When you are playing short samples, the best sounds have been captured and usually nuked with compression and limiting. They are also carefully trimed, so gating, noise reduction and/or fader automation might help to get your recorded sounds more consistent with your sampled sounds.

There's an aesthetic expectation too. If you have a lot of midi stuff with tight timing, there are some sounds that just don't work well alongside them. With real drums and guitars, you can get away with a much looser and more dynamic performance, because there isn't this juxtaposition against impossibly perfect machines.

Maybe you just need to rough up the timing and dynamics of your sampled stuff.
Old 12th May 2006
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

http://cherryhillrecording.com/zip/ohsam.zip

DeeDrive, you're probably right-it is usually always my error when it comes to recording. But I'm just wondering if there's something I'm missing or flat-out doing wrong. I live in a small town in northern california and there are maybe only one or two guys here who really know what they're doing, so all of my recording knowledge has been gained from forums like this or countless magazines.

One time I was helping a friend record piano at our college and the big recording engineer in town was there and showed me that when you're screwing microphone shockmounts on, they should be held while your twist the boom arm to avoid stripping the threads. That never occurred to me until he showed me. I was also able to watch another guy record drums. Just by watching him set up everything in person in an hour taught me so much more than if I had just read about it somewhere.
Old 12th May 2006
  #5
Lives for gear
 
ArcCirDude's Avatar
 

Everything Kiwiburger said. Plus, how are you dithering down to 16/44?
Old 12th May 2006
  #6
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

I have an L2 on Hi Res CD Master last on my Master Fader, and I'm using Pro Tool's Tweakhead Conversion Quality after I bounce
Old 12th May 2006
  #7
Lives for gear
 
ArcCirDude's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope209
I have an L2 on Hi Res CD Master last on my Master Fader, and I'm using Pro Tool's Tweakhead Conversion Quality after I bounce
Ok. Not familiar with the Pro Tools conversion but you are probably good. It has been only in the last year that most software programs have added decent filtering for sample rate conversion. Before, programs like Logic had no filtering and the aliasing on conversion was irritatingly apparent.
Old 12th May 2006
  #8
Lives for gear
 

I'd agree that you likely need to address the room acoustics and placment issues. No matter how good you are and how good the equipment is, if the tape (showing my age here) is catching all the garbage of the room AND you can't hear to mix properly due to ringing and modal issues, you'll not get it right.
Old 12th May 2006
  #9
Lives for gear
 
max cooper's Avatar
 

Hey, know what I recommend?

Book a good studio with a good engineer for a day or two. Go in with you and whoever else you usually record and track one song. You don't even have to finish it there, although it would be good to at least get a rough mix.

Because I think you just need to shake up the way you're doing things. Watch someone else do it. Could be the best money you've spent so far. It doesn't matter how long you've been doing it, or how good you are, we all get in a rut sometimes, and there are ways to break out of 'em.

Can't hurt!
Old 12th May 2006
  #10
Lives for gear
 

Have you noticed that the Ivory piano is bigger than the sum of everything else in the whole mix?

The problem here is a basic one. You will become a little frustrated when I tell you what the problem is, because this is something that most engineers only learn by experience and since you have only been recording for one year you have not had time to go through this yet. So don't blame yourself for any of this!

Sound field consumption, a critical thing in the recording process

One of the most important things in recording and mixing is how to consume the sound field most efficiently. Even though you have the gear and the talent, a badly consumed sound field will result in a non-professional sounding mix. Consuming the sound field efficiently is something that many engineers underestimate or don't focus good enough on, mostly because engineers don't understand the importance of it and how big this task really is. But if you ask a professional engineer how he processes for instance the drums, you will soon get it... It's not too uncommon that professionals use unique combos for unique kick drums and snares with a certain serial number! Why? Because they are fully aware of how inefficient the consumption of the sound field becomes if any of those are badly captured and badly processed. Everything that takes up a lot of dB in a mix needs to be good sounding. In your case Hope 209, that's true, your piano sounds great! Here's the next problem. Consuming the sound field efficiently also means having a good understanding of what elements should take up a lot of dB and what elements should take up less. In this particular case we can enjoy a beautiful sounding piano and that's cool, keyboardists like me we love this track, because these days pianos sampled this well is rather unusual... (well done Synthogy!) But the recording engineer might become frustrated about the overall mix compared to the reference CD and start asking questions. Hope 209, what you are really asking yourself here is, why are all instruments except the piano inefficiently consumed in the sound field? By asking yourself that question you automatically have defined what efficient consumption of the sound field means and then you have made the conclusion that it doesn't sound the way you want it to sound. The problem is just that you are not aware of this inefficiency and that's what I'm writing about now.

-=The 3 lies=-

Lie nr 1. A recording engineer can't succeed if he doesn't focus equally much on everything in the mix.

Wrong. The first decision a professional recording engineer does when he gets a project is this: What is the most important element of this mix? Then he might spend half of his available time only on making that element right. He knows the priorities well and acts accordingly to consume the sound field most efficiently.

Lie nr 2. The quality of a mix is determined by the worst component in the signal chain.

Wrong. The worst component in the signal chain is critical only when it is critical for efficient sound field consumption.

Lie nr 3. It's not about the gear, instruments or the session artists, it's about the mixing engineer.

Wrong. It's a cute comment, but it's also very misleading. High quality gear and instruments as well as high quality session players is needed when that's critical for efficient sound field consumption. Don't underestimate the importance of a good vocalist and a good drummer as well as the importance of high quality gear surrounding these.

Final guidelines for you Hope209:

- Mute all tracks in your mix except the drums. You will notice how the mix dissapears. This is because you have not consumed the sound field efficiently when it comes to the drums. Think about upgrading your drum kit as well as how to process the kick drum and the snare drum more efficiently. Increase the volume. Forget cheap shortcuts.

- Mute all tracks in your mix except the vocals. Pay attention to what happens, the vocals sound flat and dead. This is because you have not consumed the sound field efficiently when it comes to the vocals. Use a better mic, m/s miking technique and a better reverb. Warm it up with some compressors. Increase the volume.

- Mute all tracks in your mix except the piano. Pay attention to the sound of it compared to the rest of the sounds in the mix. It is rich and natural sounding because the AD converter used in the sample process is better than your Digi 002 + Rosetta 800. Think about upgrading your AD converter if you record directly ITB. A component that is connected to all critical components in the consumption of the sound field and sets the size/room/resolution of the sound field itself also sets the max sound quality level. A such component is extremely important for a good overall mix. I assume you want the best... Lower the volume on the piano.

- Think about how to distribute the signal more efficiently in the sound field. Check for mono compatibility now and then, think about using m/s miking a lot more, skip recording the pseudo channel in pseudo stereo sources... This takes a while to become good at, but it is extremely important!

- Bass guitar?!
Where is this very important building block for a good base foundation, in your mix? Don't forget the importance of a beautiful bass line.

- Riding the faders and knobs
All faders and knobs can be moved and automated. Use this opportunity to maximize the efficiency of the sound field consumption.

- Pre-condition your mix in the mastering phase
In order to get the best loudness/clearity level of the final product you can pre-condition the material. Some engineers use multiple analog compressors for this.

- Mix at different volume levels
In order to better understand your mix it's useful to vary the mix volume as you are mixing. In this way you can easier notice things you have over-done or not have done much enough

- Use multiband compressors and EQ effects
These two effect types are the most important effects in mixing, since they are so tightly coupled with efficient sound field consumption. The difference between a professional and a non-professional mixer is in the use of these two effects, simply because a professional knows how to use them to maximize the efficiency of the sound field consumption.

I think you get the idea now... Sorry for being rather straight forward, but I did it to save some lines of text and not to be rude or anything... Some of this information can be found in the book "The Mixing Engineer's Handbook" by Bobby Owsinski, so I recommend you read it if you haven't. Good luck!
Old 12th May 2006
  #11
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

Thanks for all the help guys

The room I track in has been treated with Auralex and is pretty dead. Where my monitors and computer are, I have it treated with Realtraps, so I wonder how bad my room really is. I am also using two sets of monitors(one +sub) and headphones.

I think I will try to go with my friend into the nicest studio in town.

RainbowStorm, thanks for all the advice man. It'd be great if I could just look at my setup and go well "blah blah blah" needs to be improved, but in fact is it's just me heh.

A couple things about the Rosetta...when it's selected as the clocking source in Pro Tools, but I have a dither on my master fader and PT is set to tweakhead conversion down to 44.1 16-bit after bouncing, is the Rosetta doing the conversion/dithering or is Pro Tools? Also I did a test earlier this morning where I bounced a 15-second clip down where it was clocked internally in the 002, and then another clip clocked by the Rosetta...i have pretty inexperienced ears but I could barely(if at all) hear any difference. I thought the Rosetta 800 was top o' the line conversion...no?
Old 12th May 2006
  #12
Lives for gear
 
DeeDrive's Avatar
 

Just listened to "oh sam"

The biggest problem I hear here is the drums. Good sounds, but they sound really dead and uninteresting. Samples maybe?

If they are samples, you need a real drummer that can bring some life to the tracks, and make sure you use room mics when recording a drum set.

I really like the sounds you have going on here though, the piano is nice and natural sounding, and the guitar is very nice also.

Definetely get new drum sounds though, the gated snare sound is particularly obnoxious sounding. The overdubbed crashes really sound phoney too.

But don't be too hard on yourself, these are really great sounding tracks you got. I think on the recording side, you're doing very well, you might want want to work on adding more instruments to fill up the sound, and "arranging" the song a little more. I didn't hear any bass guitar, (i think), just adding this piece would do wonders for your tracks.
Old 12th May 2006
  #13


I think the problem may be that everything is a little disjointed in the mix and each element is very static. The snare and High hat don't vary at all - even when the song seems to demand it.

The other think I notice is that the reverb on the vocal track seems to dissapear when the singer crescendos, so it ends up sounding smaller instead of bigger.

You've been recording for a year, how long have you been making music?



-tINY

Old 12th May 2006
  #14
Lives for gear
 
andychamp's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope209
http://cherryhillrecording.com/zip/ohsam.zip(...) That never occurred to me until he showed me.
It did occur to me, but that's more out of sheer laziness than regard for the threadsheh
Old 12th May 2006
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

I didn't write this song, only engineered and produced it. Drums and guitar were samples off of my Motif ES8. Drums are pretty cheesy, but in the interest of time, we recorded 'em.

Song structure could use work, but even if I took all the samples out and focused only on piano and vocals, it seems like the recording quality of the vocals isn't there.

Tiny, what do you mean by static? I used the UAD Plate 140 on the vocals, not quite sure why it disappears.

I've been playing piano for 10 years, guitar for 6
Old 12th May 2006
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Jason Poulin's Avatar
 

I'll tell you that my recordings improved 50% after treating my room acoustics.

If I had to restart all over again, it would be one of the first things I would invest in.



It's more important than gear IMO


Jason
Old 12th May 2006
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

I scoured the internet for months and now I have my room treated with 7 Realtraps and my monitors have been properly aligned.
Old 12th May 2006
  #18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope209
I've been recording daily for about a year now and I still can't get my recordings up to par. I have a Digidesign 002 clocked to a Rosetta 800 with a few different preamps running in a 2.0Ghz Mac G5.

When I record(48k 24-bit depth) it seems like the sound quality of my stuff just isn't "up there." It's almost as if my recordings are literally at some lower definition. In Pro Tools I have it clocked through ADAT at 48k and everything seems to be hooked up just fine. But today I recorded a song for a woman using samples from my Motif ES8, piano via Ivory, and vocals through a Soundelux E47/Great River MP-2NV. And once I bounced the format down to 44.1k 16-bit and put it on a cd and listened in my car the mix just seemed to lack SOMETHING...The quality just wasn't as good as commercial stuff. Also, the samples sounded noticeably better than the vocals in the recording

I know the samples are high quality and very processed, but what MAKES them so high quality and processed? I can't figure out where the weak link in my chain is. I'm recording a great singer, through a great mic, through a good(?) preamp, in a good room. This same situation applies to recording instruments. I try recording my friend's $3000 Taylor guitar, but the sound just isn't "there." I've thought it could be mastering, but I've had songs mastered by a pretty well-known engineer, and the songs sounded better, but still almost as if they were recorded on some lesser format than commercial stuff. Is the problem my converter....what? Thanks for any help/suggestions, guys!
What makes you think that the sound isn't there?

I'm guessing the answer is "Becuase when I listen back, I don't hear it."

Unless your are brutally destrying your signal through your engineering techniques, I'm going to guess monitoring environment problems. You can have great monitors and a perfectly treated room, but there's significantly more to it than that.

If pre-recorded CDs sound great in there that still doesn't mean it's not a monitoring problem. Having heard CDs before and after a room tuning, I can tell you there's something beyond great.

Now, compar a CD tracking with a misleading environment, then mixed with the same problems compounding the situation and then mastered. The mastering helps a lot, but there are still fundamental problems.

One thing to try. Track with no EQ, just watch levels and then send the files to someone else to mix. Compare your mixes with those mixes and the other persons mixes with pre-recorded CDs. IF their mixes sound great, then you know the sounds were there and that either you're not hearing the truth in your room or you're doing somehtign that leads to results that you don't like.
Old 12th May 2006
  #19
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

I've had two projects mixed outside of my place and the results WERE a little better. Great suggestion, mike, but I don't think I have the funds available right now to get something mixed. Maybe I could post some completely dry mixes on here and see what you guys think.

Here's a sketch of my room. I have two realtraps I haven't put up yet, too. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v347/Wrx07/room2.jpg
Old 12th May 2006
  #20
Gear Guru
 
Glenn Kuras's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Poulin
I'll tell you that my recordings improved 50% after treating my room acoustics.

If I had to restart all over again, it would be one of the first things I would invest in.



It's more important than gear IMO


Jason

DING! Give this man a prize! You really do have to have nice gear and good players, but without a good sounding room all is lost..

Glenn
Old 12th May 2006
  #21
Gear Guru
 
Glenn Kuras's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope209
I scoured the internet for months and now I have my room treated with 7 Realtraps and my monitors have been properly aligned.
Maybe it is not enough or our tracking room is not tuned right. You said you just had foam in it right? Or did I mis something.. Sorry I am into this kind of late.

glenn
Old 12th May 2006
  #22
Lives for gear
 
s_sibs's Avatar
 

A couple comments. Keep in mind that I listened to the song on AKG 271 headphones.

1) The piano sounds great...but you might want to lessen the width of the piano or tilt it to one side or the other especially when there are drums and guitars in the arrangement. The piano wide spread like this is great for a piano + vocal arrangement but overpowers the mix in this case.

2) The drums samples sound...well, like drum samples - especially the cymbals. I'm not saying that to be negative. In your original post you mentioned not sounding "commercial". You'll rarely find drum sample of this quality making it the final mix. Maybe invest in something like BFD or DKFH...samples that don't sound like samples.

3) The track is really crying for a bass guitar.

4) The vocal sound, in general, sounds good. Maybe it was overcompressed when mixed? When the songs' intensity increases, the vocal seems to suffer. Was the UAD Plate 140 used on an aux bus or inserted? The verb doesn't seem very wide in the mix...almost mono to me.

5) The acoustic guitar samples, again, probably wouldn't make it on the final version of a "commercial" song. Seems to be a little out of rhythm in places also.

So, there are just small things that make the difference in this song being "commercial". I'd suggest redoing the drums with something like BFD if you couldn't afford to hire a real drummer and maybe hire a guitarist and redo the acoustic gtr. Oh yeah, and hire a bass player to play a bass line.
Old 13th May 2006
  #23
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

I track drums in a very large live room and use the dead room for close-up vocals and electric guitar. I think the dead room might be a little boxy, but when close mic'ing I don't think it's too horrible.

The samples on this song were done strictly for arrangement purposes.

I spent a good deal of time on john sayer's site, but even after the realtraps, I think my control room still needs work.
Old 13th May 2006
  #24


Static - not dynamic. the drums and guitar don't breathe. The snare is always the same and always in the same spot.



-tINY

Old 13th May 2006
  #25
Gear Addict
 

for me things are the opposite. its more important how the tracks play against each other.im a throw the faders up and get going kinda person. if you solo eveything and make every track sound pretty when you put them together you end up with track volume wars. that tonky tom sound may not work solo but in a fill in the full mix its magic. its just a game.
Old 13th May 2006
  #26
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope209
I scoured the internet for months and now I have my room treated with 7 Realtraps and my monitors have been properly aligned.
Room acoustics is very important, but that's not your problem, I can tell that from listening to your mix. It's not about your monitors either. It's REALLY not in the dithering either.

You know it's a combination of things. If you want me to point on where your focus should be to solve this problem I can tell you that. I already told you the importance of efficient consumption of the sound field. That is a big layer on top of each process, so for you it might feel a little advanced right now. I'll simplify it so that you can more easily target the biggest problem here.

Your biggest problem is in the tracking phase. Completely skip the Yamaha Motif for the acoustic sounds, with your gear it is REALLY "expensive" to track acoustic tracks with that keyboard, I think you can't afford it! Secondly, focus on how to capture an instrument most efficiently. I already recommended m/s miking and I do it again. M/s miking will take your mixes to the next level. Don't underestimate the importance of pre-processing in the tracking phase.

From listening to your mix I notice that this kind of material needs a very professional mastering engineer, don't underestimate how much a really good mastering engineer could transform the quality of your song. For a professional this kind of mixing material is not very unusual in terms of sound quality. You know, not everybody out there have perfect gear when they record and mix, but somehow they still make good sounding hits... Put in the hands of the wrong mastering engineer it will become loud and bad sounding. You should really think about taking your stuff to another mastering engineer, that knows how to deal with a sound field like this. Either he knows how to deal with this or he doesn't, but don't underestimate the potential...

I have to go to the studio right now... I hope I have given some new insight into your "problem". I think this phase is very good for you as a recording engineer. I think it will result in a big step forward for you!
Old 13th May 2006
  #27
Lives for gear
 
Matthew Murray's Avatar
 

I don't have much to add here except to commend those who have given such well thought out suggestions to Hope. It's really heartening to see a thread like this with such honest, proactive and constructive advice being offered all at once... Okay, sorry for the interruption.
Old 13th May 2006
  #28
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

Yes, thank you all very very much for all the great help and suggestions. It would be so easy to blame something on a piece of gear but ultimately it comes down to me and I'm still pretty new to this game.

I think the main thing that is going to help my mixes and the quality of my recordings is...TIME. The first time I recorded a full drum kit it was very intimidating and the results were mediocre at best. But after mic'ing different kits a few dozen times with the same gear, my results have improved. Not because I got "better" gear but because I got to know my gear WELL. I think the same goes for mixing. It just takes time, experimenting, and a whole lotta screwing up. Being crunched for time and having to work on multiple projects in a short amount of time forced me to use different approaches to mixing and in doing so I discovered new techniques to use.

I spent a lot of time thinking about what monitors to get to make my stuff sound better, but ultimately I decided it doesn't matter how good the monitors are, it's all up to how well I know them and how I can get them to translate. I think the same also applies to my room...

RainbowStorm, sorry I've heard the term mid-side recording, but I'm not all to sure what it is...

Thanks again everybody
Old 13th May 2006
  #29
Lives for gear
 

I haven't listened to the song but I would suggest that you rethink your mixing technique if you aren't getting the result you want. For instance...

If the lead vocal is emotional and to be featured prominently, start your mix there. Bring the vocal up solo to about -12/-15 and create a warm interesting space around it with reverb and delays. Pretend it's an acapella mix and don't eq anything unless you absolutely hear something nasal or irritating. Natural is the key word here. Hi-Pass the vox around 50hz or so.

Inserting a high quality very short reverb on the vox track can add warmth and help define it. This is hard with plugins. A good hardware verb is probably needed.

Once you get that done bring in the piano. Hi-pass it in anticipation of the bass line and drums coming in. Don't touch anything else until the vocal and piano sound good by themselves. Don't touch anything else until you can close your eyes and hear the piano on a soundstage in a different place from the vocal. Now...

Bring in the Kick drum, snare and the bass track only. Forget about hats and percussion. Mix those tracks in to create a low and midrange bed around the vox and piano. If it 'aint "groovin" slide the bass a little up or back. Once you get the Kick and Bass eq where you want it (try something new) send them both to a mono group and compress them together. Setting are subjective, make it sound good. They should both be well defined.

And so on and so on...

Thing is, mixing the same way every time is not always a good idea. Sometimes a song calls for a different approach. Experiment. If you don't like the result you have now flip the script and approach it in reverse, or from the middle, or from a wacky angle.

Lawrence
Old 13th May 2006
  #30
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence

Thing is, mixing the same way every time is not always a good idea. Sometimes a song calls for a different approach. Experiment. If you don't like the result you have now flip the script and approach it in reverse, or from the middle, or from a wacky angle.

Lawrence
Great advice, I couldn't agree more... There is a related rule that goes:

"Diving blindly into a mix is a recipe for disaster."

Every mix is new and needs a custom approach. One reason for this is that the result of the tracking phase is always different. All intruments were not equally well tracked. This is very important to pay attention to before you start mixing. Analyze the feel of each track, the sound quality of each track and so on. By doing so you prepare yourself for using this material to consume the sound field most efficiently. By diving blindly into a mix you just start moving those faders and soon you might have lost the most important dBs... By having the same approach on every mix you easily throw away valuable dBs... Decisions automatically end up bad when they are never made.

For more information about m/s miking you can read the following book:
"The New Stereo Soundbook" by Ron Streicher and Alton Everest
http://www.stereosoundbook.com/
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
JOHN / High end
29
JOHN / So much gear, so little time
3
jononone / So much gear, so little time
0
Scoobz / So much gear, so little time
10
nodell / Music Computers
1

Forum Jump
Forum Jump