|
|
|
04-15-2018, 05:45 PM
|
#41
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fetidus
Are you willing to run it?
|
I don't feel like changing my computer's configuration right now especially since I won't be using the Realtek device (because of its limitations). Maybe Pipeline will?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fetidus
And everyone in every DAW forum who asks for advice building DAWs would get a chorus of recommendations to get a motherboard with that chip. I'd buy one myself for my next build. And it WOULD be a big deal because there are a lot of scenarios where I would love to ditch my audio interface and not bring it with my rig or laptop sometimes... that would be very liberating. And for beginners, you'd be lowering the cost of entry to usable DAWs... they wouldn't HAVE to buy an interface to have a usable machine, etc., etc.
|
Would people really want to base their computer-purchasing decisions around an onboard audio device with no mic preamps, no balanced i/o, no hardware control over the direct monitoring (Realtek devices ALC892 and on do have this, but you need to fiddle with the sound card app to use it), no MIDI interface, no instrument DI, and so on? I get that it's appealing as a "fall-back device" but I think we can probably chalk it up to "the ALC982 drivers work well and it sounds decent enough" and just move on.
For the cost of a separate mic preamp, you can get an interface that has them included...
Last edited by JamesPeters; 04-15-2018 at 05:54 PM.
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 05:46 PM
|
#42
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 635
|
@karbomusic Gotcha, you were focusing on one issue on your response.
And BTW, I agree that Prime95 is great for determining overall system stability (I always test a new system with Prime95), but as for DAW stability itself with a low-latency audio driver, a great test is hitting the system hard with DAWbench and loading it to the max before you get dropouts. It's also a way that I make sure that my system is still performing optimally over time. I'll periodically run DAWbench (actually, my own variation of it that uses different plugins), especially after a big OS patch or major point release of my DAW programs, and make sure my system still works great. Sometimes some really interesting things are revealed.
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 05:50 PM
|
#43
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 635
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters
I don't feel like changing my computer's configuration right now especially since I won't be using the Realtek device (because of its limitations). Maybe Pipeline will?
|
Understood, would be great if someone else who has the same chipset would be willing to run the test. I'm constantly dealing with people who want recommendations about DAWs and I would LOVE to give them the heads up to gravitate toward a specific chipset, etc. Plus I need to build another DAW for my studio this year, so before I do, I'll run the test myself if I have to (or maybe I'll call the guys at ADK, they probably already have tested it, come to think of it...)
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 05:53 PM
|
#44
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fetidus
I'm constantly dealing with people who want recommendations about DAWs and I would LOVE to give them the heads up to gravitate toward a specific chipset, etc. Plus I need to build another DAW for my studio this year, so before I do, I'll run the test myself if I have to (or maybe I'll call the guys at ADK, they probably already have tested it, come to think of it...)
|
I added more to my post. I wouldn't get too excited about it. It's fine, a far cry from onboard devices of 10+ years ago, and you can make do with one if you have to. I wouldn't base a DAW around it though.
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 06:01 PM
|
#45
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 635
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters
Would people really want to base their computer-purchasing decisions around an onboard audio device with no ... and so on?
|
Not to belabor this, but yes, they would. There are huge numbers of usage scenarios where ALL that is needed is low-latency reliable DA converters/drivers, and that's it.
Everyone from laptop composers to DJs to portable post production folks, etc... lots of scenarios where they don't need input or preamps, etc... JUST simple low-latency DA for their DAW. It's one reason why some folks buy overpriced Macbook pros because the onboard audio output doesn't totally suck for basic output needs. I have four laptops in my studio, one of them a Macbook Pro JUST for that kind of purpose. Now tell folks they can get a cheap Windows machine with great built-in low-latency performance for audio output and they can finally ditch OSX, their audio interface, and/or take all *their* studio needs in one box/laptop.
'Nuff said, and I don't mean to go OT. But note to self, I will definitely research this chipset more in the future! :-)
Last edited by fetidus; 04-15-2018 at 06:12 PM.
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 06:26 PM
|
#46
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
I haven't seen Realtek devices with just line ins/outs on laptops. It tends to be just headphone out / "mic in" (low quality) on a single combo jack. Good luck finding anything else on a laptop. It's all about saving space and cutting weight these days.
Anyway, a Behringer UMC204HD costs about $80 and provides so much more functionality and similar audio quality, and works well at reasonably low latency. People can use laptops with something like this and actually have a headphone amp they can turn the volume control up/down with. Among other things.
Don't fixate on the ALC897. It's already "old". Newer ones have better audio quality. I don't remember their names though. (Compare spec sheets.)
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 07:07 PM
|
#47
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 635
|
@JamesPeters -- last post I'll make on Realtek (I don't want to go too far OT) -- but I did a little digging around, and I read about a few people in various forums that seem to get some good latency results out of Realtek chips like you on various DAWs, even as far back as 2010. Fascinating. Couldn't find something more definitive with DAWbench, but the anecdotal info seems to correlate with what you've experienced. And BTW, some of those Realtek chips are capable of many features, and on some motherboards they are configured with 7.1 outputs. So it might be a very viable direction, definitely worth more research. I'll stop here on this thread, but thanks for bringing it up, amazes me more and more what has happened in technology in the last decade! Okay, now back to the OP! :-)
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 08:19 PM
|
#48
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
Surround output doesn't help if you want more inputs, a mic preamp, or a line in versus a "mic in" on a laptop. I'm sure it'll be of benefit to someone for DAW work, but these devices have enough other practical limits for most DAW work. I haven't seen any Realtek device with more than 2 unbalanced inputs.
So if someone only needs 2 unbalanced line ins, they don't mind fiddling with their sound card utility for direct monitoring, they don't mind the headphone amp isn't very loud, and also they don't mind using a desktop instead of a laptop (again, good luck finding a Realtek device with normal "line" onboard audio i/o on a laptop; I've already looked), I'd say go for it. Unless a person spends $600+ for an interface, it's probably going to be in this range for sound quality.
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 08:26 PM
|
#49
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
I can’t get wasapi to run at 44k in reaper. In exclusive mode, it says device closed. I couldn’t find another application using the card, not sure what’s going on
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 08:31 PM
|
#50
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters
I haven't seen Realtek devices with just line ins/outs on laptops. It tends to be just headphone out / "mic in" (low quality) on a single combo jack. Good luck finding anything else on a laptop. It's all about saving space and cutting weight these days.
|
Mine is individual jacks, but I heard combos are getting more common
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 08:47 PM
|
#51
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio
Mine is individual jacks, but I heard combos are getting more common
|
What's your laptop brand and specific model #? I'm curious now.
As for not being able to run WASAPI in 44.1KHz, I didn't have that problem.
Are you sure you have a Realtek device in your laptop?
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 09:22 PM
|
#52
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 09:52 PM
|
#53
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
That site seems to have an older driver listed (6.0.1.7592, 15-Oct-15). Newer drivers directly from Realtek may work with your laptop, so you probably want to try them.
I know the 64-bit ASIO driver is a relatively new thing for the ALC892, and the last version I'd tried (it's been updated 2x since then at least) wasn't reporting latency accurately to Reaper. That, plus the fact you mentioned WASAPI was giving you some grief...yeah I'd try newer drivers and see if that helps.
Click here
Oh also I can't confirm you have any specific Realtek "HD Audio Device" such as the ALC892. It's one of those in that "series" but that's all I can tell by the driver on the Sager site for that model of laptop (it's a driver pack for all the Realtek "HD Audio" devices in that "series").
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 09:57 PM
|
#54
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
HDAUDIO\FUNC_01&VEN_10EC&DEV_0892&SUBSYS_15586780& REV_1003
HDAUDIO\FUNC_01&VEN_10EC&DEV_0892&SUBSYS_15586780
Those are what comes up under device ID
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 10:03 PM
|
#55
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
I can't find an exact driver on the realtek site and searching for asio on that site yields no results. I'm going to try an asio driver from the reaper facebook group real quick...last one I tried worked fine in oblique but couldn't be seen by reaper
I have a Radial AV DI box that provides 1/8" stuff so that should be decent for testing, if I get a driver to work
|
|
|
04-15-2018, 11:02 PM
|
#56
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
Those numbers mean nothing to me, sorry. You won't be able to tell in device manager. If it doesn't say in the specs for your system, or in the BIOS, you probably won't know.
No, there is no specific driver package for your specific Realtek device. Download the package for "HD Audio Devices" from that link. (Whichever "R2.82" from 2017/7/26 file that makes sense for your OS.) It'll install the appropriate driver. If you don't see ASIO in Reaper after that, do what I mentioned earlier in the thread.
|
|
|
04-16-2018, 03:11 AM
|
#57
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3,649
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fetidus
I'm trying to find the latest DAWbench numbers, but it looks like the DAWbench forum is down.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fetidus
BTW, I have no idea where Vin/TAFKAT has gone -- he's the guy who came up with DAWbench, but his forum is apparently down right now. He might have some really valuable info for you that can fill in the gaps of those interfaces.
|
Forum is closed but Vin is very actively continuing testing and posting regularly at Gearslutz.
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/musi...l#post12811489
|
|
|
04-16-2018, 08:10 AM
|
#58
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NA - North Augusta South Carolina
Posts: 4,294
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio
the onboard soundcard on many laptops are realtek. The latency is crazy low
|
I would definitely not use a Realtek for that....
|
|
|
04-16-2018, 08:53 AM
|
#59
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
I just remembered how to find out what your device is. In the sound card application, the thing in your system tray that has all the settings for the device, there is an about page. On that page it will state the name of the device.
|
|
|
04-16-2018, 09:02 AM
|
#60
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 635
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella645
|
Cool, thank you! Vin is a great guy -- he was instrumental in bringing key performance issues to the attention of many different DAW developers. And his benchmarks are now used by various publications and professional DAW builders to validate performance. Glad to see he's still active! He'd be the perfect person to ask about the Realtek drivers (and any other drivers) and I bet he's already tested them. I would definitely defer to Vin on these kinds of issues, he's probably done more testing than ANYONE in the entire DAW community.
|
|
|
04-16-2018, 09:08 AM
|
#61
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 635
|
BTW, for anyone who is interested in contacting Vin (the guy who came up with DAWbench), then the link in the above post will take you to his thread at Gearslutz. Vin's username is TAFKAT so you know what you're looking for. Just post there, and you'll get an earful on critical issues re: this thread! Thanks again to Stella645 for finding him!
|
|
|
04-16-2018, 09:20 AM
|
#62
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Polandia
Posts: 3,578
|
This is some crazy PCI-like rtl numbers for 2nd gen 6i6. Really looks like USB is nowhere as limiting as some Internet People say.
|
|
|
04-21-2018, 10:36 PM
|
#63
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
DAMN! The Behringer 204HD has some REALLY good latency numbers! Hopefully the 202HD (for 60 bucks) has the same drivers.
I updated the table with it, I'm about to run DAWbench on it
|
|
|
04-21-2018, 11:06 PM
|
#64
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
Well, it ran 320 something RXC's in the DAWBench ReaXC test at 64 samples before it started crackling, gonna check my SWW card on the same test now
RME HDSPe got 149 at 64
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 07:14 AM
|
#65
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 635
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio
Well, it ran 320 something RXC's in the DAWBench ReaXC test at 64 samples before it started crackling, gonna check my SWW card on the same test now
RME HDSPe got 149 at 64
|
Those are great numbers for the Behringer, did you run the RME HDSPe numbers yourself or copy them from Vin's chart? Note that DAWbench numbers are only relative to each other ON THE SAME SYSTEM. Vin has a default testing config. If you have a more powerful, more recent, or overclocked system, compared to the baseline system used on Vin's numbers, then you'll get totally different results. But in any case, 320 is nothing to sneeze at for sure.
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 09:57 AM
|
#66
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
It was just from his numbers. If theyre different between computers, then the relevant issue is the computer, not the interface. In any case, 300 plus RXC's is much more than I'd need for the intended purpose
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 11:40 AM
|
#67
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 635
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio
It was just from his numbers. If theyre different between computers, then the relevant issue is the computer, not the interface. In any case, 300 plus RXC's is much more than I'd need for the intended purpose
|
All I'm trying to say is that the number you quoted on the RME is out of context from your test of the Behringer, because they were tested on *different* systems.
However, that's still a great number, no doubt. What it does say is that the Behringer driver on *your* system is very, very usable, and absolutely should handle a good load, assuming the actual RTL is not padded too much with a safety buffer.
The essence of DAWbench is to quantify how well a driver and system work *together* at a specific RTL (the measured/true RTL of course, including all safety buffers). So it is important to have the full picture when reporting the numbers. The main testing has been done by Vin/TAFKAT on a specific configuration he has set up (he's a professional DAW builder), so the numbers he's published are in the *same* context, ergo, which allows us to compare the driver performance directly, because we can eliminate the common factor of his system specs.
So on *your* system, at a similar RTL, the RME would likely surpass the performance of the Behringer by a large margin, since there is no USB driver that beats the HDSPe driver, including RME's own USB driver. So we won't know for sure about the comparison unless you test the RME under the same circumstances on the same system as your Behringer.
But for all *practical* purposes of this thread, the number you posted from the Behringer, in a vacuum of other data, still does, at the very least, suggest that the Behringer driver is indeed VERY usable, which is really cool. It proves once again the enormous strides systems have made in recent years, and it's very exciting to see the cost of entry to good performance has become so affordable. Thank you for sharing that info!
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 12:02 PM
|
#68
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
Way way back in the day, when we were all at the crossfade forum, Tafkat, I think that's Vin, was pretty clear about the goals: be able to, in front of real world customers, on the studio clock, run the plugins you needed at the round trip latency you need to have a seamless recording session.
Back then, drivers were the be all end all. Computers weren't anywhere near as powerful, and getting something to run nicely at 256 samples (and at an RTL somewhere decent from those 256 samples) was quite a challenge.
A rule of thumb was also that the lower the RTL at a given buffer size, the less munchy and crashy the drivers were. Weird how that went hand in hand, but as all the testing was going on, Tafkat pointed out that the care in the drivers to get the RTL that low was the same care needed to get them stable and efficient as well
No doubt my RME PCI would run better with this system, but its a laptop so I can't stick that card in here to tell, but in reality, the test and the point of all this in the first place : Can I run the stuff I want at the latencies I want.
Crazily, today the answer is "yes" even with crappy behringer stuff. The surprising thing is that this Behringer could run what I need at 64 samples, where other, much more expensive interfaces had trouble with my same workload at 256 samples. Now that's bizzarre
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 12:11 PM
|
#69
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 635
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio
Crazily, today the answer is "yes" even with crappy behringer stuff. The surprising thing is that this Behringer could run what I need at 64 samples, where other, much more expensive interfaces had trouble with my same workload at 256 samples. Now that's bizzarre
|
Yes, it is crazy, and awesome. Things have indeed changed, and while I think DAWbench is still very relevant today, particularly in comparing/testing/validating, in the end, what really matters is this question: DOES IT DO WHAT I NEED? And miraculously, we've probably passed a threshold where these days even "crappy Behringer stuff" (as you say!) can do the job! It's pretty freaking great that you got those numbers.
And let's also be honest about the performance of those Behringer converters... they're probably just fine for most applications... converter tech has come along so far in recent years, that even cheap i/o rivals what studios were using on Grammy-winning recordings of yesteryear. To me, this is the ultimate democratization of creative content -- ANYONE can access the basic tools... and it really boils down to the talent, skill, hard work and creativity of the end-user. Amazing.
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 01:14 PM
|
#70
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
Behringer UMC204HD is right in line for sound quality of other interfaces that cost $200-$300. Drivers work well. It's a no-brainer if you need a small interface with a couple mic preamps and a headphone amp.
I can tell a difference in sound quality compared to my Steinberg mr816X but I wouldn't have a problem working with it.
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 01:39 PM
|
#71
|
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 2,128
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by brainwreck
Isn't that crazy? These $1 audio chips (or whatever they cost) often provide better latency than audio interfaces built specifically for the purpose of low latency audio. Last I tested on my laptop I was getting around 4 ms with the onboard audio. Why can't these audio interface manufacturers get their drivers together? The game seems more about selling the latest shiny boxes than about audio performance.
|
Wow. That's fucking crazy. How crazy is the Dynamic Range, SNR, THD, Frequency Response of those $1 chips? How are their fucking preamps?
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 01:51 PM
|
#72
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
All I know is from realtek or soundblaster stuff a million years ago, and they were noisy, nasty nasty things, but who knows now. If I could get working drivers, I'd test them here
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 04:35 PM
|
#73
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,859
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyz Aster
Wow. That's fucking crazy. How crazy is the Dynamic Range, SNR, THD, Frequency Response of those $1 chips? How are their fucking preamps?
|
Those $1 chips are good enough to mix with, and that is all that really matters. I doubt that most people could discern a difference from any prosumer audio interface. And with probably just about any mic preamp in front I bet that these $1 chips would handle 2 track recording more than fine enough for a mobile live recording situation, assuming that it has a line input. Most of the best recordings ever made were done with tape, and the limitations of dynamic range, noise, and thd don't mean crapola.
__________________
It's time to take a stand against the synthesizer.
Last edited by brainwreck; 04-22-2018 at 04:42 PM.
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 04:44 PM
|
#74
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,859
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio
If I could get working drivers, I'd test them here
|
What problems are you having with drivers?
__________________
It's time to take a stand against the synthesizer.
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 05:28 PM
|
#75
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
I can get the asio drivers to show up in Oblique, but not reaper, not really sure why, maybe my laptop is just weird
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 06:17 PM
|
#76
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio
I can get the asio drivers to show up in Oblique, but not reaper, not really sure why, maybe my laptop is just weird
|
It's possible you only have a 32-bit asio driver for your Realtek device. That is assuming that you are using 64-bit Reaper and it's not showing up. That test utility only uses 32-bit asio drivers. I thought I mentioned this already earlier in the thread.
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 06:46 PM
|
#77
|
Mortal
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wickenburg, Arizona
Posts: 14,047
|
How do I tell if the driver is 32 bit?
|
|
|
04-22-2018, 07:39 PM
|
#78
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,738
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella645
Zoom UAC 44.1k USB2.0
64 = 5.480
128 = 8.383
192 = 11.285
256 = 14.188
My USB3 measured exactly .001ms better at all settings which makes me wonder if my USB3 is working at full speed as I've seen other reports of around .3ms difference.
I also tried the DI and while I can obviously increase gain until it clips, I couldn't detect any input clipping at 25% gain while giving the guitar a damn good thrashing!
These are not hot pickups though.
|
Why would you assume that USB3 should naturally lower the latency? RME have been proving for years that the average latency performance of other USB2 interfaces was never a limitation of USB2 and it's bandwidth.
|
|
|
04-23-2018, 05:01 AM
|
#79
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio
How do I tell if the driver is 32 bit?
|
The asio folder with all the drivers in the archive would have one with the number 64 in its name.
If you didn't install the drivers as I had, and you have never seen these files, you can always do a portable install of Reaper 32 bit and see if it detects the driver.
|
|
|
04-23-2018, 05:24 AM
|
#80
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 270
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by emwhy
Crazily, today the answer is "yes" even with crappy behringer stuff. The surprising thing is that this Behringer could run what I need at 64 samples, where other, much more expensive interfaces had trouble with my same workload at 256 samples. Now that's bizzarre
|
Don't dump on the Behringer stuff just yet even though it's easy given that company's history. I use their UMC 1820 and it works quite well. In fact I traded in a Focusrite 18i20 because it was never stable on my system and the Behringer was and sounds great with the pseudo Midas preamps. Most of these mid priced units use the same D/A A/D converters from Cirrus Logic these days anyway.
BTW Behringer just did an entire driver update for the UMC series (version 4.38) and it's a big improvement over the 3.29 version running on Windows 7-10. I can get down to 32 samples (they have even lower buffer settings now including 16 and 8) and it's stable on both Reaper and SONAR even with bigger projects.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:32 AM.
|