Old 07-05-2020, 09:38 AM   #1
Jae.Thomas
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,447
Default TCP Fx list discussion

Hi!

So, wayyyy back in 2005 I used Samplitude. It was from there, Pipelineaudio introduced me to reaper and the folks around at that time. I knew him from the Vegas forums.

Don't really need to go too far into the history

but two things I really wanted was

- comparisonics colors
and
- a list of FX on the TCP that can be bypass, etc...

Anyway

We now have the FX list possibilities in the latest dev builds.

So maybe we can have a discussion about it here, since it will likely span some builds.

doppelganger is an awesome scripter who made a script for this:

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=210987

I really appreciate how you don't have to adjust the track height to see everything. You can easily bypass/offline, open the window floated or the fx chain, and it exists regardless of your zoom level (even if you can't see much, it's ALWAYS there).

This is really what I "need"

but really really love the idea of having them done natively, as I feel like not only will this possibly be more stable, less resource hungry (I really don't think dopp's script does anything too intensive anymore tho), and I LOVE the idea of having parameters and GUIs and all sorts of things optionally available on the TCP when needed.


If you look at the two side by side, we have different situations:



with the native one in the dev builds, we see you don't have to lose horizontal space. For the dopp version, you don't need to lose vertical space.

I think the ultimate thing would be to have something which could be manipulated to take up either...

so you can have a layout which has the inserts to the left side, and a layout which has is underneath.

That might look messy if track one has it on the left, and track two has it.. on top or underneath...

also, take a look at how Dopp's version has the instruments (vsti and vst3i) colored differently.


but I think it would be beneficial to look at what dopp has done here. I am positive implementing this will be great, and the reaper folks will make it fit right in great, but I think we should just make sure we do it mindfully
__________________
WEAR A FUCKING MASK.
Jae.Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2020, 11:16 AM   #2
ferropop
Human being with feelings
 
ferropop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Winnipeg, CANADA
Posts: 911
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill View Post
Hi!

So, wayyyy back in 2005 I used Samplitude. It was from there, Pipelineaudio introduced me to reaper and the folks around at that time. I knew him from the Vegas forums.

Don't really need to go too far into the history

but two things I really wanted was

- comparisonics colors
and
- a list of FX on the TCP that can be bypass, etc...

Anyway

We now have the FX list possibilities in the latest dev builds.

So maybe we can have a discussion about it here, since it will likely span some builds.

doppelganger is an awesome scripter who made a script for this:

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=210987

I really appreciate how you don't have to adjust the track height to see everything. You can easily bypass/offline, open the window floated or the fx chain, and it exists regardless of your zoom level (even if you can't see much, it's ALWAYS there).

This is really what I "need"

but really really love the idea of having them done natively, as I feel like not only will this possibly be more stable, less resource hungry (I really don't think dopp's script does anything too intensive anymore tho), and I LOVE the idea of having parameters and GUIs and all sorts of things optionally available on the TCP when needed.


If you look at the two side by side, we have different situations:



with the native one in the dev builds, we see you don't have to lose horizontal space. For the dopp version, you don't need to lose vertical space.

I think the ultimate thing would be to have something which could be manipulated to take up either...

so you can have a layout which has the inserts to the left side, and a layout which has is underneath.

That might look messy if track one has it on the left, and track two has it.. on top or underneath...

also, take a look at how Dopp's version has the instruments (vsti and vst3i) colored differently.


but I think it would be beneficial to look at what dopp has done here. I am positive implementing this will be great, and the reaper folks will make it fit right in great, but I think we should just make sure we do it mindfully
What theme are you using? (sorry!)
ferropop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2020, 11:25 AM   #3
Jae.Thomas
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,447
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ferropop View Post
What theme are you using? (sorry!)
goddammit. haha.

Nova 2.0.3 dark

__________________
WEAR A FUCKING MASK.
Jae.Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2020, 11:36 AM   #4
Reflected
Human being with feelings
 
Reflected's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill View Post
Hi!
doppelganger is an awesome scripter who made a script for this:

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=210987

I really appreciate how you don't have to adjust the track height to see everything. You can easily bypass/offline, open the window floated or the fx chain, and it exists regardless of your zoom level (even if you can't see much, it's ALWAYS there).

This is really what I "need"

but really really love the idea of having them done natively, as I feel like not only will this possibly be more stable, less resource hungry (I really don't think dopp's script does anything too intensive anymore tho), and I LOVE the idea of having parameters and GUIs and all sorts of things optionally available on the TCP when needed.


If you look at the two side by side, we have different situations:

+1
yes I like to see more in less space.
+

I would add that I want a wet/dry knob option on every fx... (like we have for sends)

I think that wet/dry knob is one of the most used knobs, even more than panning knobs, and I dont want to open any effect or window to control it.
__________________
Thanks devs for adding the abillity to use single click to change a single velocity And single right click to remove a single note without dragging.
much appreciated.
Reflected is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2020, 11:48 AM   #5
jrengmusic
Human being with feelings
 
jrengmusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Indonesia Raya
Posts: 669
Default


I just put it right here
__________________
JRENG! | M E T R I C
jrengmusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2020, 01:37 PM   #6
Delucci
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 225
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrengmusic View Post

I just put it right here
+1
I think this setup is optimal. I like doppelgangers script a lot but I think fx list on the right side of the track would be better.
Delucci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2020, 02:37 PM   #7
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 3,168
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill View Post
I think the ultimate thing would be to have something which could be manipulated to take up either...

so you can have a layout which has the inserts to the left side, and a layout which has is underneath.
The 'params' area, which is what all this is using, is fully WALTER-able, so what you are suggesting can be done. The wrinkle is that embedded FX also share this space (the way the space is shared out is automatic and not themable) and they get more and more useful the more space you give them.
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2020, 08:33 AM   #8
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

I have been at work all week, but next day off is to experiment with this stuff, I finished the TCP on my v6 theme last week, then they added this, which is extremely useful to me, so I will investigate how hard it is to have multiple layouts for these.
From quick testing it looks like FX parameters and FX list together is zero themable, they are where they are and you deal with it, by that I mean they are all grouped and you define where the group goes, hopefully the FX list gets broken off in to its own WALTER stuff at some point.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2020, 02:08 PM   #9
USR
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 61
Default

The great thing about insert slots in ProTools is that they get really compact when a track is short, so you can easily see the overview of what plugins are used on each track.

USR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2020, 02:16 PM   #10
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 9,380
Default

The only way they are useful to me is if they are easy to display, easy to hide and don't take up much room.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 11:03 AM   #11
Triode
Human being with feelings
 
Triode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 762
Default

It's worth mentioning that Pro tools doesn't have pixel-continuous vertical track zoom. Instead the available track heights are based around the specific slot "layouts" pictured in the posts above at small track heights.
Just mentioning since this has a bearing on how it works. Trading size flexibility for visual uniformity.
__________________
Mixing / Brush and Beater Drums Online: www.outoftheboxsounds.com
Triode is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 11:10 AM   #12
Funkybot
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,769
Default

I feel like this would work a lot better if...

1. Inserts and Track Parameter Controls were kept separate with separate commands to show both

2. Keep the Track Parameter Controls where they currently are

3. Inserts were shown in a dedicated Walter-able "Insert Bin" within the TCP. Themes could add this to the left or right-hand sides of the TCP. For instance, I may only want to show the bin on the right-hand side, but to the left of the meter, only when the track width exceeded 180px's for example. A themer might decide they may want it always visible on the left.

Not sure that's the direction Justin and Schwa see for this, but I feel like it's the "have your cake and eat it to" approach that doesn't break existing workflows and still allows for Reaper levels of flexibility.
Funkybot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 11:14 AM   #13
Jae.Thomas
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,447
Default

would be neat to be able to drag and drop and FX from the browser or another track into the exact slot you need in the TCP
__________________
WEAR A FUCKING MASK.
Jae.Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 03:55 PM   #14
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

Anybody know how to get the scrollbars working in your own theme, I have literally no idea, it just doesnt work on my theme.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 04:07 PM   #15
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

If you use bottom attach, the scrollbars barely work at all, if you don't use bottom attach it doesn't really work at all.

I will see if this moves on, right now its a quick fix that is not that usable for me personally.

As you can see in this gif, the responsiveness has its own mind, the scrollbars seemingly appear and stuff at will.

__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!

Last edited by Win Conway; 07-07-2020 at 04:28 PM.
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 05:07 PM   #16
mawi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 739
Default

Works fine for me.


I suspect it's your fxparm WALTER code.
mawi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 05:18 PM   #17
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mawi View Post
Works fine for me.


I suspect it's your fxparm WALTER code.
yeah not so much, did you notice that mine stays in a single column
Yours is responsive and adds columns, IE you have no control over it in the WALTER.
Yours is actually still changing width and columns randomly too, rather than just keeping scrollbars.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 05:37 PM   #18
mawi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 739
Default

I only noticed that your fxparm goes over the tcp and thought that's where the bug is (an invalid height and width in WALTER for the fxparm). Your FXparameter field is also responsive but has only one column. I don't know if this makes a difference if you have only one column, or more. I have not tested that.

Last edited by mawi; 07-07-2020 at 05:43 PM.
mawi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 06:41 PM   #19
Delucci
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 225
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill View Post
would be neat to be able to drag and drop and FX from the browser or another track into the exact slot you need in the TCP
Yes, I hope to see this in MCP too. Would be nice to use slots as you wish in the track. For example: I'd like to use kramer tape in every track in the 5th slot.
Delucci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 07:39 PM   #20
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mawi View Post
I only noticed that your fxparm goes over the tcp and thought that's where the bug is (an invalid height and width in WALTER for the fxparm). Your FXparameter field is also responsive but has only one column. I don't know if this makes a difference if you have only one column, or more. I have not tested that.
Your set up would be fine too if it didnt go to two columns randomly the taller the TCP gets, i might try your layout.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 08:00 PM   #21
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mawi View Post
I only noticed that your fxparm goes over the tcp and thought that's where the bug is (an invalid height and width in WALTER for the fxparm). Your FXparameter field is also responsive but has only one column. I don't know if this makes a difference if you have only one column, or more. I have not tested that.
Here's an example with your set up.
As you can see as the height is made larger the FX slots change width in the first instance, that shouldn't happen, then after that they start to go from dual rows in to one tall column, which is just weird, it should just keep adding rows.
Unfortunately there is no way to attach it to achieve this that I can find.

__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 09:47 PM   #22
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

Latest build seems to size much better here.

__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2020, 11:26 PM   #23
Ericson
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 89
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gpunk_w View Post
Latest build seems to size much better here.


Lools nice, what scripts do you use to resize with a click?
Ericson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2020, 12:28 AM   #24
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

TCP Height is just SWS actions.
TCP width is This used with SWS CA.
I may simplify it to a bunch of specific widths and heights combined though.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2020, 12:42 AM   #25
Pink Wool
Human being with feelings
 
Pink Wool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill View Post
would be neat to be able to drag and drop and FX from the browser or another track into the exact slot you need in the TCP
Definitely!
Pink Wool is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2020, 01:10 AM   #26
cool
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sunny Siberian Islands
Posts: 375
Default

Guys, does anyone know how to change the width of the FX buttons? I tried all possible options, but all is useless.
I’m probably missing something.

Now my set tcp.fxparm code will look like this:
Code:
 set tcp.fxparm      w>299 trackpanmode<4 [789 23 970 560 1 0 1 0] [0]

As I understand it, this data is not enough for full size control?


.
cool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2020, 06:57 AM   #27
mawi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gpunk_w View Post
Here's an example with your set up.
As you can see as the height is made larger the FX slots change width in the first instance, that shouldn't happen, then after that they start to go from dual rows in to one tall column, which is just weird, it should just keep adding rows.
Unfortunately there is no way to attach it to achieve this that I can find.

All right, I get you now. You got that right.
mawi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2020, 07:04 AM   #28
DarkStar
Human being with feelings
 
DarkStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 18,675
Default

That behaviour has happened ever since we had Parameter knobs

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=37761
__________________
DarkStar ... interesting, if true. . . . Inspired by ...
DarkStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2020, 09:25 AM   #29
chip mcdonald
Human being with feelings
 
chip mcdonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NA - North Augusta South Carolina
Posts: 4,037
Default

FR from 2006 almost fulfilled...


https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...9&postcount=22


Right click (now with maybe shift, since many plugins today use right click) to assign to a knob would be a nice implementation.
__________________
]]] guitar lessons - www.chipmcdonald.com [[[
WEAR A FRAKKING MASK!!!!
chip mcdonald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2020, 09:36 AM   #30
Jae.Thomas
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,447
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chip mcdonald View Post
FR from 2006 almost fulfilled...


https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...9&postcount=22


Right click (now with maybe shift, since many plugins today use right click) to assign to a knob would be a nice implementation.
I think this has a bit more to do with fx inserts being on the track - I thought that the parameters on the TCP was fulfilled a long time ago?

Glad to have all of it in there tho
__________________
WEAR A FUCKING MASK.
Jae.Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2020, 09:42 PM   #31
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkStar View Post
That behaviour has happened ever since we had Parameter knobs

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=37761
And is exactly why the TCP fx slots should be TCP extended, like MCP extended, that responsive behaviour is actually really bad for the workflow with a lot of plugins (I do a ton of bass design, some of those chains are huge while resampling)

Don't get me wrong, what is there is a huge improvement over just the FX button on the TCP, but it isn't optimal.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2020, 03:51 AM   #32
puddi
Human being with feelings
 
puddi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 375
Default

I'm glad we have this but I think having a dedicated section for the FX next to the TCP á Pro Tools (or Dopp's fxlist script) would make for a much cleaner and organized look. It would probably also be more easily expandable for future add-ons.
__________________
☐ Area Selection
puddi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2020, 12:27 AM   #33
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

The TCP effect context menu needs to have an update for availability, for instance you cant get to your folders or even JS plugins.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2020, 07:52 AM   #34
Stevie
Human being with feelings
 
Stevie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Urkrain/Russia
Posts: 218
Default

This is amazing
+1 for separation Sends from Fx
Stevie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2020, 01:10 PM   #35
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

This whole design seems a little strange right now.
You can define the sends position with tcp.sendlist, but the inserts position is always governed by the the combined tcp.fxparm and always uses the really strange responsive code.
It makes no sense to do a vertical list in the TCP when it is mostly not very tall, but if you do a horizontal list, and then change size it does the whole weird response thing, it just doesnt act very nicely.
It should be split in to the following really..
set tcp.sendlist
set tcp.fxlist
set tcp.fxparm

Also why do you have to have set show sends visible in TCP for the slots to stay permo visible for inserting FX, shouldn't it do that when FX is made visible ? that seems strange to me too.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!

Last edited by Win Conway; 07-16-2020 at 01:16 PM.
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2020, 01:38 PM   #36
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

I would even go as far as saying that for FX inserts, the responsive stuff is unusable, I can see how it is still perfectly usable for FX parameters because it is just a list of parameters and you can read the name, so the illusion of ordering being changed is not so important, but when it is FX inserts, it becomes increasingly impossible to second guess what order they are in when you change track height as it goes from single row multi column to single column multi row if there arent too many effects, but if there are too many effects it will go to dual row multi column, it has to be separated out to make sense really.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2020, 02:08 PM   #37
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,244
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gpunk_w View Post
It should be split in to the following really..
set tcp.sendlist
set tcp.fxlist
set tcp.fxparm
+1 Agreed
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2020, 04:23 PM   #38
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

seems to me that
tcp.fxparm.margin
mcp.fxparm.margin
are broke and do nothing
do the sendlist versions exist in TCP, because they do nothing either, the MCP sendlist margin does seem to work.

Not sure if this is bug or the margin have been removed by design in favour of this font with multiple parameters stuff that there is no docs for yet ?

Set.tcp.sendlist.font is not available either by the looks of things.
__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!

Last edited by Win Conway; 07-16-2020 at 04:44 PM.
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2020, 05:10 PM   #39
Win Conway
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,734
Default

The rendering of the send meter is a bit wonky too, as you can see here, I haven't used the meter_bg image and just let Reaper render the meter, it has a pixel row missing at the bottom and a few missing along the top.



Even if you use the meter_bg image and make it the exact same size as the tcp.sendlist and use pink lines, it still doesn't fit fully, it adds a single empty pixel row top and bottom, you can see in this image.




The ideal solution for this at some point in the future would be the ability to split the sends into the same as the volume/pan/width controls etc, so...
set tcp.send.label
set tcp.send.label.color
set tcp.send.label.font
set tcp.send.label.margin
set tcp.send
set tcp.send.fadermode
This way we could use our own knob stack and make the send fit entirely in to a theme.

It would obviously need one extra parameter to set Drag n Drop area, but the Drag n Drop area would be better suited to the size of the current dial, and the adjustment of the send would be better suited to be the size of the entire meter which is currently Drag n Drop area.

__________________
Stop posting huge images, smaller images or thumbnail, it's not rocket science!

Last edited by Win Conway; 07-16-2020 at 05:48 PM.
Win Conway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2020, 04:18 AM   #40
cool
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sunny Siberian Islands
Posts: 375
Default

I completely immersed myself in this. TCPFX even allowed me some innovation and rethinking of the FX buttons. Very cool!

But, there are still things that make this feature not perfect:
1. I really miss the ability to change the color of the text in embed FX.
2. Separate tcp.sendparm.margin to align the text of the sends.
3. As I understand it, master.tcp.fxembed is not deployed yet? WALTER takes data from the code for a tcp.fxembed, and master.tcp.fxembed does not make changes.
4. Double click (or click + shift) for Sends and FXparams to reset settings to defaults would be very helpful.
5. Adding Tcp_extmixbg.png would help to arrange the effects more neatly and combine them into one coherent block.

Thank! (although I'm not sure if I'm writing in the correct thread )





/

Last edited by cool; 07-22-2020 at 05:24 AM.
cool 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 01:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.