Old 08-23-2011, 06:20 AM   #1961
powerfuran
Human being with feelings
 
powerfuran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Italy
Posts: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocksteady View Post
I haven't made it all the way through the thread but I'm getting ready to purchase some studio monitors. Did we ever get to that monitor buying guide promised to us at the very beginning of this thread?
This must be telepathy! I have been thinking the exact same thing for the past couple weeks when I was home and realized that my room really lacks monitors. Suggestions are welcome.
__________________
Twitterrrrrr
"I'm a part of history, afterall"
powerfuran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2011, 08:16 AM   #1962
ckichuk
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5
Default When is it good enough

I’ve read this thread from its beginnings and I thank YEP for his initiation and insights. My thanks also to all who have contributed.

I have put months into learning the basics of recording and then actually recording some original music. I have used a mix of loops and my own recordings. I think the final product sounds good. I have had a couple of producer/studio owners listen and their input is that the product could be significantly improved if I were willing to bring the project into their professional studio and spend several thousand dollars. They specifically mentioned the use of a drum machine versus a studio drummer. I know I used drum loops but I think the songs sound good. My goal for the music for it to be is radio playable and sell-able.

I have no doubt that the product would be improved if I followed their advice but here is my concern. As I have spent time learning about and listening to audio at a more professional level I have noticed that I have lost my more naive appreciation of music. I now hear more errors or even am distracted from the overall appreciation of a song by a specific technical excellence.

The bottom line question – at a certain point is it worth throwing time and money at a song to achieve an incremental level of excellence that perhaps only music professionals will be able to hear or appreciate? And of course the ancillary question – how do you know when you’ve reached that point?

Input please.
ckichuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2011, 03:16 PM   #1963
curtisfranklin
Human being with feelings
 
curtisfranklin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Huntington Beach
Posts: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tls11823 View Post
Enjoy the fruits of somebody else's labor - I know I did.
https://stash.reaper.fm/v/3107/wdyrsla_061709.pdf
THANKS!
curtisfranklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2011, 08:26 AM   #1964
Smurf
Human being with feelings
 
Smurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,173
Default

You can grab the the first 2 years of in PDF form + all the extras from HERE and HERE...
__________________
Yep's First 3 Years in PDF's
HP Z600 w/3GHz 12 Core, 48GB Memory, nVidia Quadro 5800, 240GB SSD OS drive, 3 480GB SSD Sample/Storage drives, 18TB External Storage, Dual 27" Monitors
Smurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2011, 08:27 PM   #1965
Garrick
Human being with feelings
 
Garrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Wellington
Posts: 4,622
Default

Thanks Yep and others. Two years ago my knowledge of recording was near to nothing. This thread was a really great introduction.

thanks again
Garrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 07:35 PM   #1966
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucifer1306217 View Post
...But what of the Joe Blow who started this whole thread, he of the Squier Strat and the Peavy amp? How is he to know whether he would hear a bigger improvement from Lace Sensor pickups, or from a vintage tube amp, or from a modern modeling half-stack, or from buying a $3,000 Les Paul, or an original Ross compressor pedal, or from a POD vs a V-AMP vs a Johnson J-Station vs actually buying a real tube amp? For that matter, does he even really know for sure what "his sound" would be, even if he could have it for free if he simply named it right now?
Replying with more thoughts later, on this last topic in particular. Apologies if it just confuses things....

Really, that is exactly what this thread was never meant to be about, and I'm sorry that it ever got into that stuff.

Frankly, there are vast oceans of places on the web to debate that kind of stuff. There is no need for another gear thread, especially not for a place for guitar players to argue over pickups.

If the guitar player cannot achieve "his sound", I recommend guitar lessons or guitar forums, not audio engineering. If he would prefer to buy pickups and amps, there are plenty of places where people argue over such things.

Last edited by yep; 08-31-2011 at 07:56 PM.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 07:48 PM   #1967
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by reapercurious View Post
...but if i put on any commercial song, it sounds perfect...
I seriously doubt that your whole post is accurate. Frankly, if you have read this whole thread all the way through (or any other good recording primer), and if random commercial recordings still sound "perfect", then you're not getting it.

There are very, very few "perfect" recordings in the history of the world. Maybe fewer than 20, surely not more than 100. Dave Brubeck's "Take Five" is one that comes to mind. Nothing on the current top 40 that I know of is.

This is not just personal opinion. If you ask the engineers, producers, artists about virtually any record made long enough ago to have some perspective (say more than two years ago), they can tell you at least five things that they wish they could do differently.

I hate to tell anyone to go back to the beginning of the thread, but if you cannot hear at least some of those flaws and imperfections, then you are flying blind, trying to do things yourself. If a good sauce means you can't tell when a steak is over-cooked, then you're not going to cut it as a chef.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 07:52 PM   #1968
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marah Mag View Post
Fear of sounding like ass is a creativity & productivity killer.

And there are worse things people can say about your recordings. And better things people can say about a record than that it "sounds good." Believe it or not.

I believe one of the keys is to not try so hard.
Amen to all of the above.

When you are 70 years old, and have made 900 records, you might finally crack the code and make one for the ages, a perfect recording that is perfectly perfect and will never be topped.

But if you skip the 899 records in-between, you'll never get there, and you'll also have skipped a bunch of pretty damn good records that might have made a lot of people happy.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2011, 08:25 PM   #1969
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocksteady View Post
I haven't made it all the way through the thread but I'm getting ready to purchase some studio monitors. Did we ever get to that monitor buying guide promised to us at the very beginning of this thread? I just like to seek the advice of my peers so I know what I'm hearing when I hear what I've never heard before.
Not sure I ever specifically promised a "monitor buying guide". If so, I probably over-promised.

I have not used anything close to a majority of the monitors out there. I'm still on the old NS10s, and I am POSITIVE that those are not the best monitors out there for the money these days. I supplement them with a Tivoli Audio PAL for checking mono/small-speaker sound, and a big old expensive set of Technics 3-way loudspeakers with 15" woofers to check the lows and "loud" sound. I also have a surround system with EMU PM5 monitors and a subwoofer that I mostly use for watching movies, plus my car, earbuds, headphones, etc.

You want monitors with a very clear and accurate midrange at high volume. You will not usually be using them at high volume, if you take my advice, but it is important to be able to get them to sound ear-smackingly loud, painful even, at the peaks, like a drum kit, and still be clean and un-clipped. Otherwise you will start squashing your sound just to get it loud enough to sound like the source material.

I hate recommending gear, since there is almost certainly something better and cheaper than whatever impressed me four years ago or whatever, but in the low/mid-priced active monitors I have heard, I like the folded-tweeter ADAMs, the JBL LSR series, and the 8"-woofer Mackies.

I have heard other, cheaper, smaller monitors that sounded great and that I could work on in a pinch (for example the PM5's or even the little Tivoli Audio PAL), but they are not loud enough and do not have enough low-end extension to actually sound like a drum kit or a bass rig... you end up compressing the raw tracks just get a satisfying volume out of them.

I usually try to mix and monitor at low levels for a bunch of reasons referenced earlier in the thread, but I still do want a speaker system that is capable of sounding like the actual drum kit or Ampeg 8x10 or whatever.

Almost any purpose-made studio monitor is likely to be better than almost any non-audiophile hifi or computer speaker, and vastly better than a rehearsal-space PA system.

I hate talking about gear and what to buy, because frankly it's getting better and cheaper way faster than I can keep track of, and also because I never want to give the impression that you need "X" to make good recordings-- you don't.

I would rather have good monitors than anything else, if I had to pick, but good monitors really only means something that you can trust. Listening on lots of different speakers can make up for mediocre monitors, but it's time-consuming and imprecise.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2011, 09:45 PM   #1970
flmason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yep View Post
If the guitar player cannot achieve "his sound", I recommend guitar lessons or guitar forums, not audio engineering. If he would prefer to buy pickups and amps, there are plenty of places where people argue over such things.
Well... when we are constantly told that the reason the band doesn't sound live like it did on the recording... and we like the recorded sound better... Ya know, because of all the things you can do in the studio you can't do live...

Seems one would *have* to start investigating what goes on "in the studio".

Currently I believe, for example, that things like wide double tracking have many a guitarist searching for a sound that can't be made in one pass. And so it may not even be a question of pickup x vrs. y, but rather "studio process A or B".

Not the same concept, since you could do this live, but consider Roger Mcquins comment about his Ricky sound. Clearly lessons woundn't have made a difference, and this is also something that a guitar board wouldn't discuss because it's more along the lines of a Gearslutz discovery, LOL!

Quote:
""The 'Ric' [Rickenbacker guitar] by itself is kind of thuddy," he notes. "It doesn't ring. But if you add a compressor, you get that long sustain.

To be honest, I found this by accident. The engineer, Ray Gerhardt, would run compressors on everything to protect his precious equipment from loud rock and roll. He compressed the heck out of my 12-string, and it sounded so great we decided to use two tube compressors [likely Teletronix LA-2As] in series, and then go directly into the board.

That's how I got my 'jingle-jangle' tone. It's really squashed down, but it jumps out from the radio. "
Clearly recording technology and "the sound" can be linked at the hips.

Seems to me the entire chain is part of "the sound".

Now maybe it shouldn't be... perhaps the whole topic of "audio engineering" shouldn't exist. If the artist is expected to achieve it all, fine, that's how it was before recording.

So then ideally we should be demanding that the recording manufacturers come up with a recording system that records and plays back exactly what we hear in the room, without any need for tweaking.

Something like a perfect mic that you just put where the listener would be and the... *play*.

Would be much more "honest" paradigm. But seems to me that "good, honest" music started disappearing the day the first "studio technique" that could be defined as a "trick" occurred.

As some famous producer once said, "The studio is the instrument".


Last edited by flmason; 09-01-2011 at 09:51 PM.
flmason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2011, 10:08 PM   #1971
Marah Mag
Human being with feelings
 
Marah Mag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Here
Posts: 3,000
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yep View Post

I'm still on the old NS10s
That's what i use too. When their amp dies, I will sell them on eBay & buy the actives that have 'replaced' them.

I'm half looking forward to that, but for the cost.
Marah Mag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2011, 10:15 PM   #1972
Marah Mag
Human being with feelings
 
Marah Mag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Here
Posts: 3,000
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flmason View Post

Seems to me the entire chain is part of "the sound".
That seems obviously true, except to the extent that it's not true.

That's why the quotes around "the sound" are appropriate.



Quote:
So then ideally we should be demanding that the recording manufacturers come up with a recording system that records and plays back exactly what we hear in the room, without any need for tweaking.

Something like a perfect mic that you just put where the listener would be and the... *play*.
And like you say, that would be "ideal." But is it necessarily desirable?

In any case, off hand, it seems that the only way to get a recording of something to sound exactly like the something itself is when that something is itself generated electronically.

For example, renders of my tabla samples sound exactly like they sound coming out of Kontakt - but they never sound like someone's playing em live in the room no matter how loud I turn em up.

Last edited by Marah Mag; 09-02-2011 at 12:09 AM.
Marah Mag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2011, 11:12 PM   #1973
flmason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 642
Default

@Marah - Oh I kinda figured the quotes around "the sound" were meant to add a mocking emphasis to the phrase. My impression is that Yep thinks of "the talent" at times the way Slipperan seems to, LOL!

Guess my point is, when we are talking a recording, I'm not sure you can disconnect "the sound" from the recording process.

I hear two directions in this sort of discussion. On the one hand it's said, "Get the artist to get thier sound in the room, that must occur first!". On the other hand the first thing people will say abour recording electric guitar is, "Tell the guitarist to back off the gain."

Well, if the artist has the sound he wants in the room, but the distortion level's relationship to the mic sucks, and the amp settings have to change... well then the first proposition falls apart, because we are going to change the artists settings for him.

So objectively, it's true... unless you it's not... (the usual weasel clause, LOL!)

Point is, as illustrated by the Roger Mcquinn quote... sometimes, unbeknownst to the artist even... "the sound" is hiding in some studio process... except when it's not.

So any guitarist that isn't "finding the sound", given the mass of publications out there touting "in the studio", may well feel compelled to look into that magical place's processes to see if the delta lies therein.

This is why I get up on a soapbox about "objective definitions of sounds".

For example, if I run a spectral analysis on EVH's eruption... I get a curve that's relatively flat out to about 5.2khz... then it cuts off fairly sharply.

Well, that's an objective EQ target I can at least aim at. Granted... it doesn't define which harmonics are present and 100 other things, but it illustrates the point...

If we *really* know what the definition of the sound we want is, in analytical terms, we can go about recreating it with whatever we have on hand, or at least know why we are missing the mark.
flmason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 12:36 PM   #1974
Marah Mag
Human being with feelings
 
Marah Mag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Here
Posts: 3,000
Default Sound & Style: Electronic is the new acoustic.

People invoke the idea of "the sound" so often and in so many ways it's hard to keep track of what they're talking about. Maybe it's just me.

A lot of the time what gets called 'sound' might be more usefully considered 'syle' (though useful for what purpose IHNFI.)

I propose a study to try to determine properties of sound & style. I know this thread isn't about guitar sound, but neither is this post.

We get 4 guitarists, say Page, Hendrix, Clapton, and the guy from Fall Out Boy (can't recall his name, though I like their records, so I'll just call him TGFFOB.)

We have them separately make basic 2-part guitar instrumental recordings of a well-known song that's not associated w any of em: Satisfaction, an/the archetypal gtr composition.

We require 2 versions: one using a newly bought, reasonably set-up, mid-line version of their electric gtr of choice; another version using a gtr of a different type (eg Strat vs LP vs etc), chosen at random from the collective collection of the Reaper community.

Finally, we require that their performances be recorded in my bedroom using 2 decent mics, optimally positioned to capture the sound of the gtrs -- completely unplugged, no amps, no plugins, just 'acoustic' electric guitar -- like in a power failure. That is also the only sound Jimmy, Jimi , Eric, & TGFFOB will be monitoring as they record.

We get Andy Wallace to mix these (blind) and a random Reaper user to master them (blind) for mp3 at 'Maximum bitrate/quality'. We put all 8 versions on Soundcloud.

We then ask critics & fans around the world to ID the playas. We ask not only for their answers, or guesses, but to tell us how & why they came to their conclusions.

Then we publish the results in SOS under the title: Sound & Style: Electronic is the new acoustic.

Last edited by Marah Mag; 09-02-2011 at 10:18 PM.
Marah Mag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 12:52 PM   #1975
Sigilus
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flmason View Post
re the sound...
Why do your recordings sound like ass?

If you get the artist to dial in their "Sound" in the room, and it sounds like ass when you record it, is that your fault? Probably not if you have a crisp recording of ass sound. Maybe that's what the artist wants to hear.

Maybe it isn't. Maybe you let them get their "Sound" in the room, then record the DI line instead and "fix" it for them. Presumptuous? Maybe. Maybe not.

The recording is meant to be an accurate depiction of the performance. The gear played will change the performance, but shouldn't affect the quality of recording.
Sigilus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2011, 09:28 PM   #1976
flmason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenneth R. View Post
Why do your recordings sound like ass?

If you get the artist to dial in their "Sound" in the room, and it sounds like ass when you record it, is that your fault? Probably not if you have a crisp recording of ass sound. Maybe that's what the artist wants to hear.

Maybe it isn't. Maybe you let them get their "Sound" in the room, then record the DI line instead and "fix" it for them. Presumptuous? Maybe. Maybe not.

The recording is meant to be an accurate depiction of the performance. The gear played will change the performance, but shouldn't affect the quality of recording.
I'd argue differently. So might Les Paul. Since the advent of multipass, and ultimately multitrack techniques, and then post processing and mastering, whether a recording is supposed to be an accurate "photo" or not is debateable.

Geez, even as far back as Sun Studios in Memphis, slapback tape echo was being used. So "recording as accurate snapshot" went out the windows long ago in commercial music.

Reminds me of the old saw, "cameras never lie"... until you read Ansel Adams books on the subject and realise they do nothing but!



So's would seems there's different schools of thought. I've run into guys that patently love "the live sound with give and take man..."... just the sort of thing classical players would call "sloppy playing". Have also met the opposite type. Consider Tom Sholz of Boston. Reputedly did over 100 takes of one drum part.

Comes down to "what works" no?

And if we want to call ourselves "engineer" rather than "eff with it until it sounds decents" seems we should be trying to quantify what works and why (IMHO) otherwise about all we have is a catalog of things that we tripped over. "Ah yeah, when I set the gain on the LA2A to 7 it gets "phat""... and so on. Well WTF is "fat" exactly, and why does it get phat at 7... If I know, then maybe I don't have to have an LA2A. We can dispense with the tone mojo associated with device X and say... Well, when the 4th harmonic is accentuated it gets "phat" and I can do that with any number of methods"... then we have understanding.

Of course, nothing wrong with experimentation either. That's where new comes from often. Just sayin' that if we want it to trancend tone mojo mythology into craft then knowing the real underpinnings has some value.

In any event, who's job it is to come up with "the sound"? I can't say. Depends on "what sound" you're aiming at I guess. I've heard some good midi files run through soundfonts get to 90%, leading me to believe the composition and orchestration are a big part of it. On the other hand, we've all been told there are numerous stars who "can't sing" or whatever and the studio "fixes it".

My own opinios is, as the artist, the composer, the whatever... I should know enough about all phases so that I know where various "the sounds" come from.

For example, some genres like SRV style blues are over in a direction over by Karbo's camp, fingers over equipment. Other genres I'd say are in the "equipment, production and post" camp. Any number of commercial hits probably fall therein.

So's like all serious answers, would seem it starts with..."Well it depends on..."



P.S. Why do my recordings sound like ass? Simple. I'm trying to make do with a lack of talent and skill and seriously cheap equipment. Simple as that.
flmason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2011, 05:48 AM   #1977
Sigilus
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,763
Default

You might consider carefully which of the two: lack of talent, or lack of equipment, carries the weight.
Sigilus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2011, 02:37 PM   #1978
flmason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenneth R. View Post
You might consider carefully which of the two: lack of talent, or lack of equipment, carries the weight.
Well, for some genres it might not even matter, LOL! Consider early delta blues or punk. Both didn't fit either requirement in thier earliest incarnations by some accounts, LOL!

I've been considering it since I was 12, am now 48. In some decades I've considered it to the point of sleeplessness and quiting, LOL! I have no real ego about the matter, so I do believe I know when I'm commiting performance errors vrs. the equipment isn't giving me what's required.

Example... missed notes or timing...*me*...

Timbre isn't what's required... equipment.

Sure there's some overlap, but let's face it. Not much anyone can do with say (for an extreme example) a Squier Affinity Strat with 3 single coils to make it sound like an Ibanez with Evolution humbuckers using only playing technique.

You can hint around that the player sucks all you want, with there *are* equipment issues.

Folks who don't believe this must have either never been through the hell of looking for tone, found it early on, are involved in a genre where it's not to critical, or are just oblivious to it, LOL!

Now electric guitar in particular is a real PITA. Can't say why in technical terms, but having dabbled with recording technology from the 70's to present, one thing has occured over and over again. Way easier to get a passable tone micing acoustic instruments than electric guitar.

I'd never encountered "fizz" until I mic'ed an amp.

So from my experience, the belief or attitude that it's all just the player is very misplaced.

Sure, there's huge variance in player ability, but normalize for that and then consider just how many guitars, amps, effects there are. And how many permutations/combinations of said hardware is. Been my experience there are way more ways to happen into "sounds like ass" combinations than "sounds awesome" combinations.

Heck a purusal of Youtube or the local Guitar Center on Sat. should demonstrate that, LOL!

So anyway, any reasonable adult should be able to honestly say which of the two is occuring at any point.

Geezus, just watch this vid. Chuck Berry is getting ballistic when the recording guy tinkers with his settings... This speaks volumes about the "talant" v. "engineer" thing.

First, the engineer though knowing what will record well, must not be a player, or he'd know that the response the player percieves can be critical.

Second, clearly Chuck, despite his years of playing, never noticed that the engineers had to make compensations.

Which leads us to #3, the whole music making/recording process is loaded with pitfalls, pratfalls and inaccuracies and adjustments. To say it's just any one thing strikes me as low probability, except when it really is just one thing.

Fourth, speaking emmpircally, the worst genres to try to engineer seem to be the most distorted ones. For whatever reasons, seems mics pick up on the additional harmonics in some completely different way than our ears, and reproduction equipment doesn't seem to help any.

So in the end the whole thing is one big rat's nest wherein you either manage to find something that works or you done with respect to tone and playing response. If you're lucky and find it early, chances are you playing will grow exponentially. If not, looking for it and fighting it will likely hold you back for a long time.

Just my experiences though. What do I know right? I clearly never found it within the context of the systems I've owned.

Bottom line: Which carries the weight. Like all serious answers it begins with, "It depends..."

Could be either or both in any given case.
flmason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2011, 02:58 PM   #1979
flmason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marah Mag View Post
People invoke the idea of "the sound" so often and in so many ways it's hard to keep track of what they're talking about. Maybe it's just me.

A lot of the time what gets called 'sound' might be more usefully considered 'syle' (though useful for what purpose IHNFI.)

I propose a study to try to determine properties of sound & style. I know this thread isn't about guitar sound, but neither is this post.

We get 4 guitarists, say Page, Hendrix, Clapton, and the guy from Fall Out Boy (can't recall his name, though I like their records, so I'll just call him TGFFOB.)

We have them separately make basic 2-part guitar instrumental recordings of a well-known song that's not associated w any of em: Satisfaction, an/the archetypal gtr composition.

We require 2 versions: one using a newly bought, reasonably set-up, mid-line version of their electric gtr of choice; another version using a gtr of a different type (eg Strat vs LP vs etc), chosen at random from the collective collection of the Reaper community.

Finally, we require that their performances be recorded in my bedroom using 2 decent mics, optimally positioned to capture the sound of the gtrs -- completely unplugged, no amps, no plugins, just 'acoustic' electric guitar -- like in a power failure. That is also the only sound Jimmy, Jimi , Eric, & TGFFOB will be monitoring as they record.

We get Andy Wallace to mix these (blind) and a random Reaper user to master them (blind) for mp3 at 'Maximum bitrate/quality'. We put all 8 versions on Soundcloud.

We then ask critics & fans around the world to ID the playas. We ask not only for their answers, or guesses, but to tell us how & why they came to their conclusions.

Then we publish the results in SOS under the title: Sound & Style: Electronic is the new acoustic.
Certainly an interesting idea.

More telling experiments might be:

1) Get said guitar gods to all play through the same low end guitars and recording equipment and have average guy mix it. Then have mixer god mix it. Compare the differences and see how much of it lies with mixer god.

2) Same as above but start upgrading equipment a piece at a time until the sound changes to "pro" or "commercial". Compare differences to find out how much lies with which combinations of hardware.

3) Same as (1) and (2) but compare two songs. One that requires serious technique and one that doesn't. Say "Surfing with the Alien" vrs. "All the Small Things". Try to determine how much has to do with composition.

And so on.

Assuming that we have largely been talking about the popular music if the last 60 years or so, this thread is absolutely about guitar music. Electric guitar is the very symbol of "Rock" in all it's variants, the single most influential music of our era.

Right after vocals it's a huge determinant of a recordings final qualities.

Granted, a recording of Gregorian Chant could sound like ass, and assuming the thread was originally about separating recording defects from playing defects, then sure guitar tone isn't in the picture.

On the other hand, guitar tone, or any other part (vocal tone, drum tone, etc.) is so closely tied to each genre, I don't know how you can escape the overlap.

Are Nashville sounds not partly defined by "twangy" guitars? Is LA Metal not partly defined by it's guitar sound, and so on?

And were not in part, all those tone either made in the studio, or tweaked to work in the studio?

Finding "It" quite possibly could be the search for a recipe of all parts.

All of us in here are by now aware of how things sound different in a mix than in isolation.

So to the extent that "the sound" relies on masking or whatever, finding the sound is as much a mixing issue as anything else. Be it the mix of instruments live, or by multitracking and mixing at the board.

I'd say it's a bit like cooking. You end up having to know which and how much of each ingredient to use.

In the end, looking back over it from an old guys perspective, it's a whole lot more like work than I'd have thought as a kid. Not very enjoyable when everything is a search for what works and there seems to be more ways to make suck than great.
flmason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2011, 07:23 PM   #1980
yep
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flmason View Post
Well... when we are constantly told that the reason the band doesn't sound live like it did on the recording... and we like the recorded sound better... Ya know, because of all the things you can do in the studio you can't do live...
This is a dead thread that should be locked, un-stickied, and allowed to die the natural and dignified death of old internet posts. It's latter pages are increasingly not worth reading, and demean the forum by being stickied at the top.

I am impressed and happy that it lasted as long as it did. Most forum-discussions on the topic of recording technique last only 5 or 10 posts before they get hijacked by gear-discussions or guitar-players.

Discussions of gear are not without value. Some gear is certainly better than others. But the point of this thread, from the very first post, was expressly to discuss gear-independent techniques.

That discussion of good practice has increasingly become a sideline to rambling feuds about whatever. The downside for the forum is that people might click on the last post in the stickies, thinking that's that most relevant and up-to-date info, and just find pages and pages of garbage.

It had a good run. Now it's the same junk that people argue about everywhere. I'm not a mod, and I can't un-sticky it. I wish people would let this thread die, and find somewhere else to argue about guitars.
yep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2011, 09:29 PM   #1981
steadyrev
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: JAMAICA
Posts: 492
Default

Maestro Yep, your fans here and elsewhere have asked you to put your wisdom in writing!
Do the book, Please?
steadyrev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2011, 10:47 PM   #1982
Smurf
Human being with feelings
 
Smurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,173
Default

OK, I am with yep on this one, and tho I had hoped that it would make it until Dec to get 3 full years in I guess that is not to be.....shame...

Anyway, who would have thought that when I started backing up the thread on 12-02-2008 that it would have lasted this long, and STILL be immensely helpful! I have learned a TON of new techniques & ways of viewing/approaching a recording situation. I also learned how easy it is to go off on tangents that contribute absolutely nothing to the task and hand, and have found that to be just as important...

So, here it is my Final Entry in the series/collection, and links to the first 2 years...


Third Year

Second Year

First Year


Thanks to everyone that contributed, and a HUGE Thank You to yep for creating the thread in the first place!
__________________
Yep's First 3 Years in PDF's
HP Z600 w/3GHz 12 Core, 48GB Memory, nVidia Quadro 5800, 240GB SSD OS drive, 3 480GB SSD Sample/Storage drives, 18TB External Storage, Dual 27" Monitors
Smurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 07:02 AM   #1983
shoyoninja
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yep View Post
This is a dead thread that should be locked, un-stickied, and allowed to die the natural and dignified death of old internet posts. It's latter pages are increasingly not worth reading, and demean the forum by being stickied at the top.

I am impressed and happy that it lasted as long as it did. Most forum-discussions on the topic of recording technique last only 5 or 10 posts before they get hijacked by gear-discussions or guitar-players.

Discussions of gear are not without value. Some gear is certainly better than others. But the point of this thread, from the very first post, was expressly to discuss gear-independent techniques.

That discussion of good practice has increasingly become a sideline to rambling feuds about whatever. The downside for the forum is that people might click on the last post in the stickies, thinking that's that most relevant and up-to-date info, and just find pages and pages of garbage.

It had a good run. Now it's the same junk that people argue about everywhere. I'm not a mod, and I can't un-sticky it. I wish people would let this thread die, and find somewhere else to argue about guitars.
May I suggest just a simple clean up?

The thread is really usefull... I found it less than a year ago and it helped me quite a lot. This info is valuable and it would be a shame if it was wasted or hidden for such a small problem as off-topic posts.

Once its clean, it would be ok to lock and keep it sticked...

Yep would you be ok with that?
Mods, can it be done?
shoyoninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 08:06 AM   #1984
Gizzmo0815
Human being with feelings
 
Gizzmo0815's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoyoninja View Post
May I suggest just a simple clean up?

The thread is really usefull... I found it less than a year ago and it helped me quite a lot. This info is valuable and it would be a shame if it was wasted or hidden for such a small problem as off-topic posts.

Once its clean, it would be ok to lock and keep it sticked...

Yep would you be ok with that?
Mods, can it be done?
In this particular case, I feel like it's warranted. If the mods could get together with Yep, and make a pact to keep the thread free of detritus and unrelated posts it's one of the most valuable resources on the internet for recording, tracking and mixing information. It's Yep's thread, and it's a really GREAT thread...but there has been a lot of off-topic discussion that doesn't belong here. To let the thread continue in this manner OR to let the thread die would be a bit of a tragedy. Can we get a mod to consider looking at this thread as a special case for cleaning up?
Gizzmo0815 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 09:12 AM   #1985
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
In this particular case, I feel like it's warranted. If the mods could get together with Yep, and make a pact to keep the thread free of detritus and unrelated posts it's one of the most valuable resources on the internet for recording, tracking and mixing information. It's Yep's thread, and it's a really GREAT thread...but there has been a lot of off-topic discussion that doesn't belong here. To let the thread continue in this manner OR to let the thread die would be a bit of a tragedy. Can we get a mod to consider looking at this thread as a special case for cleaning up?
Would likely be much easier and more effective to:

1. Add links to Smurf's already cleaned PDFs to the very first and last posts. Yep can edit the first one he made to add them.

2. Then lock it and keep as a sticky.

I really don't see devs/moderators having the time to read/confirm/deny/decide/delete nearly 2000 posts.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 09:19 AM   #1986
Ollie
Super Moderator (no feelings)
 
Ollie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: On or near a dike
Posts: 9,834
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Would likely be much easier and more effective to:

1. Add links to Smurf's already cleaned PDFs to the very first and last posts. Yep can edit the first one he made to add them.

2. Then lock it and keep as a sticky.

I really don't see devs/moderators having the time to read/confirm/deny/delete nearly 2000 posts.
That sounds like a plan. Indeed, sifting through 50 pages and deciding what is useful discussion and what not would be quite a task for some quiet hours. I'll look into this later but it seems the PDFs are the way to go.
Ollie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 10:21 AM   #1987
shoyoninja
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Would likely be much easier and more effective to:

1. Add links to Smurf's already cleaned PDFs to the very first and last posts. Yep can edit the first one he made to add them.

2. Then lock it and keep as a sticky.

I really don't see devs/moderators having the time to read/confirm/deny/decide/delete nearly 2000 posts.
Sounds great.
shoyoninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 11:50 AM   #1988
pipelineaudio
Mortal
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ckichuk View Post
The bottom line question – at a certain point is it worth throwing time and money at a song to achieve an incremental level of excellence that perhaps only music professionals will be able to hear or appreciate? And of course the ancillary question – how do you know when you’ve reached that point?

Input please.
As per my usual whacky advice, I would honestly and seriously suggest going to your local dragstrip for some insight into this question.

Getting a car from 15 to 13 is easy. 13 to 12? A lot trickier. 12 to 11.5? Some money. 11.5 to 11 flat? REAL money. 11 flat to 10.8? Hoo buddy, you may seriously consider not using this one as a daily driver anymore. 10.8 to 10.6? Start emptying that wallet...etc

This is an issue with a familiar theme in many a hobby. Being able to live with a song AS a song, and not the sum of its individual components will go an extremely long way towards making any decision you make easier to live with
pipelineaudio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 11:59 AM   #1989
Gizzmo0815
Human being with feelings
 
Gizzmo0815's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollie View Post
That sounds like a plan. Indeed, sifting through 50 pages and deciding what is useful discussion and what not would be quite a task for some quiet hours. I'll look into this later but it seems the PDFs are the way to go.
Awesome! Thanks for the input Ollie. I would hate to see this thread die as it's one of the best resources on the net for this topic.

- Gizz
Gizzmo0815 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 07:52 PM   #1990
flmason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yep View Post
This is a dead thread that should be locked, un-stickied, and allowed to die the natural and dignified death of old internet posts. It's latter pages are increasingly not worth reading, and demean the forum by being stickied at the top.

I am impressed and happy that it lasted as long as it did. Most forum-discussions on the topic of recording technique last only 5 or 10 posts before they get hijacked by gear-discussions or guitar-players.

Discussions of gear are not without value. Some gear is certainly better than others. But the point of this thread, from the very first post, was expressly to discuss gear-independent techniques.

That discussion of good practice has increasingly become a sideline to rambling feuds about whatever. The downside for the forum is that people might click on the last post in the stickies, thinking that's that most relevant and up-to-date info, and just find pages and pages of garbage.

It had a good run. Now it's the same junk that people argue about everywhere. I'm not a mod, and I can't un-sticky it. I wish people would let this thread die, and find somewhere else to argue about guitars.
What is the big deal with this? I mean really, it's all good, right? It's about getting good recordings, LOL!

I truly cannot understand the sentiment expressed here. There seems to be some almost religious undertone to it. It's a thread on a BBS on the internet, LOL! Or perhaps it's just, well, some sort of snobbery. "This thread is so important we must not dirty it up with, ya know, practical issues facing players who want to record"?

As for the guitar discussions... it's not about guitars, at least not for me, since I seem to be the guilty party here...

It's about what techniques take guitar (or any other track for that matter) from "Gutiar Center or Saturday (or the living room) and make it sound like a commercial recording?"

Seems like a great are to dig into, quite related to the original title, no?

Consider there two vids of a well know blues man. One, to my ears, despite the great licks, sounds like Guitar Center Saturday tone. The second, same guy, still not in a mix, sounds more commercial and tight. But of course it seems to be part of a lesson CD or something. And of course you're all familiar with this dude's commercial work. (Billy Gibbons).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvlHZXe3H7U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHtPYZRVeGI

Seems to me it's a great topic with lots of applicability.

Ah well, guess I should give up. Even Galileo and Copernicus got exiled, and they were even correct, LOL! So's I got good company.

What is it you people are into if not music? And doesn't that generally mean instruments and vocalists? And is there not a long taxonomy of the studio techniques for each? Nothing says it has to get into, "Tube Screamer vrs. Muff Pi"... but it might come down to things like "500 ms delay on left 250 on right is typical for shred"... or similar for vocal etc.

I truly don't know how you can separate the two completely.

And if as some suggest, "Equipment isn't important", well then all that leaves is technique, so might as well explore all of them.

Whatever, just a thread on a BBS on the net.

Last edited by flmason; 09-12-2011 at 07:58 PM.
flmason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 08:01 PM   #1991
Marah Mag
Human being with feelings
 
Marah Mag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Here
Posts: 3,000
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flmason View Post
Ah well, guess I should give up. Even Galileo and Copernicus got exiled, and they were even correct,
I bet their first scientific theories read like ass.
Marah Mag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 08:03 PM   #1992
shoyoninja
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flmason View Post
What is the big deal with this? I mean really, it's all good, right? It's about getting good recordings, LOL!

I truly cannot understand the sentiment expressed here. There seems to be some almost religious undertone to it. It's a thread on a BBS on the internet, LOL! Or perhaps it's just, well, some sort of snobbery. "This thread is so important we must not dirty it up with, ya know, practical issues facing players who want to record"?

As for the guitar discussions... it's not about guitars, at least not for me, since I seem to be the guilty party here...

It's about what techniques take guitar (or any other track for that matter) from "Gutiar Center or Saturday (or the living room) and make it sound like a commercial recording?"

Seems like a great are to dig into, quite related to the original title, no?

Consider there two vids of a well know blues man. One, to my ears, despite the great licks, sounds like Guitar Center Saturday tone. The second, same guy, still not in a mix, sounds more commercial and tight. But of course it seems to be part of a lesson CD or something. And of course you're all familiar with this dude's commercial work. (Billy Gibbons).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvlHZXe3H7U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHtPYZRVeGI

Seems to me it's a great topic with lots of applicability.

Ah well, guess I should give up. Even Galileo and Copernicus got exiled, and they were even correct, LOL! So's I got good company.

What is it you people are into if not music? And doesn't that generally mean instruments and vocalists? And is there not a long taxonomy of the studio techniques for each? Nothing says it has to get into, "Tube Screamer vrs. Muff Pi"... but it might come down to things like "500 ms delay on left 250 on right is typical for shred"... or similar for vocal etc.

I truly don't know how you can separate the two completely.

And if as some suggest, "Equipment isn't important", well then all that leaves is technique, so might as well explore all of them.

Whatever, just a thread on a BBS on the net.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9v5e...layer_embedded
shoyoninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 08:14 PM   #1993
flmason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoyoninja View Post
Yes, seen it before. Still sounds like a cheap instrument with a great player on it. It in no way sounds like the commercial release of the same, LOL!

And *that* is the point I've been trying to make here.

Sure it's Joe, playing his butt off. I'll never get there. But I tell ya what. Had his real rig not have fostered those techniques in the first place, that song may not have ever gotten written.

I mean, yeah, I can sit down a play Van Halen riffs on a 12 string acoustic, but it's not the same thing, LOL!



What I get out of this is even Joe can't make a Pignose, RP200 and Peavey 30 sound like his album on the spot. Though obviously he can play the notes. His playing isn't "fixing" the equipment's basically cheesy tone. He's just playing with amazing skill... on crappy sounding stuff.

I feel it completely supports my stance that technique cannot overcome things beyond a certain point.

(Though I know I was supposed to go, "Oh My God, you can sound great on crap gear! But honestly, it sounds like great playing with crap sounds.)

FWIW, there's been many a hit that didn't require this level thing, though admittedly, would love to possess that level of ability. And as many more hits that I'll be honest, when I put the phones on and try to hear what the players are playing, sometimes I can't make out the parts it so mixed together.

Thanks for the vid.

A quick P.S. - What would really be valuable is to know what's impossible vrs. what can be reasonably pursued. Can't think of a good example of the top of my head, let's just say, "trying to make a single coil sound like a humbucker with EQ" vrs. "Emulating a tone know with an equalizer".

But you get the idea.

Last edited by flmason; 09-12-2011 at 08:20 PM.
flmason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2011, 09:00 PM   #1994
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
And if as some suggest, "Equipment isn't important", well then all that leaves is technique, so might as well explore all of them.
For what Yep wanted to get across it simply isn't in context. Even though I participated in some of the wanking as a responder I can't disagree with his intentions. I will say its slightly unrealistic to expect such on a public forum that contians a public reply button but nevertheless I agree with his original intention. It really should be a book or a blog of which I consider being a opportunity of sorts.

We really shouldn't focus on both at the same time; they are two completely different subjects. If both marry and result in something incredible, that's great but they should really remain separate because when combining them each clouds the golden nuggets of the other and lowers the value of both like I'm doing right now, dammit. I made a new thread hear so we can pickup and not screw this one up any more, lets see if it lasts: http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=87834

Now lets get this puppy PDF'd and locked.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.

Last edited by karbomusic; 09-12-2011 at 09:07 PM.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2011, 07:15 AM   #1995
danielg
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 42
Default

Separating the disciplines IMO, does not necessarily serve the final aim.

When tracking, I make decisions based on how things might be mixed. During mixing, I'm mindful of what might happen in mastering. When working on arrangements I'm thinking about mixing and tracking, and sometimes might make decisions based on the gear/instruments that I know myself or the artist has available. Songwriting sessions or writing new parts during recording can be triggered by gear and studio sounds.

After recordings-that-do-not-sound-like-ass come creative decisions based on project values and larger concerns.

To me it's all part of the same process, regardless of official roles, and it seems that the trend of being just an AE or just a Mix Engineer, or even just a songwriter is on the wane. The finished song is the final aim after all, and indeed, that then brings new concerns.

So I guess this is why there has been so much spillover in this thread. This thread and the focus of the original topic is invaluable of course, but I think it's not at all unreasonable that it has been prone to tangents. The quality of a lot of the posts has been excellent, so naturally we all want to put something in.

I can imagine that when talking about brush technique, the tangents of hair density, canvas stretching, pigment viscocity and brush-grip are bound to come up.

...not trying to undermine anyone here, it won't hurt to lock this thread if that's the consensus. Just saying that to me it really is all good. I find the tangents useful as well as the main. I just scan more quickly if a block of posts don't interest me. This particular forum is overall constructive and helpful. Some other forum threads become so full of contradiction and hostile opinion so as to be almost useless. This one seems much more like sharing ideas.

Yep, with all respect, I think you should stop worrying about this thread, pull up a sock and publish something. My guess is that you'd have enough readers here alone to make it worthwhile. Ebook or otherwise, get something out there sir! I mean it's written already isn't it? A series of blog posts would be well worthwhile at the least.

If there's more to discuss, something like "WDY Productions SLA" might give more room conceptually. Everything can be umbrella'd under good production right?

Last edited by danielg; 09-13-2011 at 07:20 AM.
danielg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2011, 09:39 AM   #1996
shoyoninja
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flmason View Post
(Though I know I was supposed to go, "Oh My God, you can sound great on crap gear! But honestly, it sounds like great playing with crap sounds.)
But what matters is not Satriani playing or the tonal quality of the equipment.

Is the WHOLE thing great or crap?
shoyoninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2011, 12:08 PM   #1997
BenK-msx
Human being with feelings
 
BenK-msx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Whales, UK
Posts: 6,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flmason View Post
if "Equipment isn't important", well then all that leaves is technique, so might as well explore all of them.
the idea was to focus on what can be done with your EAR not your GEAR. first principles. the thread is not called 'why wasn't your 5th commercial album critically acclaimed?' its about setting the foundations of the skills required so you can then bugger about with gear and know what you're doing.

shame as this was in 'best thread ever' territory .

any new readers please head to the start and enjoy from there or grab the pdfs which are hopeful sin-kakka.
__________________
JS Super8 Looper Template & intro | BCF2000 uber info Thread | Who killed the Lounge?
BenK-msx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2011, 12:54 PM   #1998
Sigilus
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,763
Default

Yes, I would LOVE to see Yep publish a book, which I WOULD buy! Or, if the thread were condensed to pertinent questions and suggestions/ideas by just about anyone not obsessed with gear-itis. That in a PDF form would be amazing.

That said, the discussion need not end just because someone would like to derail the topic. There is always more ground to cover.
Sigilus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2011, 01:24 PM   #1999
BenK-msx
Human being with feelings
 
BenK-msx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Whales, UK
Posts: 6,009
Default

in reply to Kenneth and an appropriate 2000th reply...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smurf View Post
OK, I am with yep on this one, and tho I had hoped that it would make it until Dec to get 3 full years in I guess that is not to be.....shame...

Anyway, who would have thought that when I started backing up the thread on 12-02-2008 that it would have lasted this long, and STILL be immensely helpful! I have learned a TON of new techniques & ways of viewing/approaching a recording situation. I also learned how easy it is to go off on tangents that contribute absolutely nothing to the task and hand, and have found that to be just as important...

So, here it is my Final Entry in the series/collection, and links to the first 2 years...


Third Year

Second Year

First Year


Thanks to everyone that contributed, and a HUGE Thank You to yep for creating the thread in the first place!
^^^
if amazon shipped kindles with this on, musicians would read alot more.
__________________
JS Super8 Looper Template & intro | BCF2000 uber info Thread | Who killed the Lounge?

Last edited by BenK-msx; 09-13-2011 at 01:33 PM.
BenK-msx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2011, 02:13 PM   #2000
faun2500
Human being with feelings
 
faun2500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,053
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danielg View Post
I feel like I've turned up right at the end of a really great party. At least we have a faithful transcript of the event. Thanks for this thread everyone.
hahah, This is exactly how i feel now. What happened here?
__________________
newloops.com - Crazy deals on audio samples and sound banks!

http://bit.ly/free-sample-packs- Totally Free High Quality Sample Packs
faun2500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.