Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER Feature Requests

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-27-2008, 07:13 AM   #41
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

+1 for additional panning modes as Tallisman described.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2008, 02:30 AM   #42
griz lee
Human being with feelings
 
griz lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: in a hotel room near you
Posts: 1,175
Default yes

oh yes please. I'd love to be able to craft my stereo image without the need for additional tools.

+1
griz lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2008, 10:20 AM   #43
bederk
Human being with feelings
 
bederk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 135
Default

bump it up!
bederk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2008, 09:19 AM   #44
tweeksound
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 173
Default

According to "Bitter" (lovely plug), the chanmix2 plug is not bit transparent.
It's doing something much more than simply reversing left and right it seems.
When there is no audio on the track that it is effecting, it is in error mode (higher bits over 56 are in 100% use.)

If the plug seemed to treat the audio just the same as regular stereo and kept it as a 24 bit file at full left and right switch, I would not mind using it.

But what it seems to be doing on the bit scope is worse than any other plug I've used.

++1 for an integrated power pan
tweeksound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2008, 10:37 AM   #45
Frizzo
Human being with feelings
 
Frizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: at work
Posts: 21
Default

++1 for seperate panning ;-)
Frizzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2008, 10:03 AM   #46
tweeksound
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 173
Default

I found the way to switch left and right.

Did someone mention a way to split the 2 channels of stereo to 2 mono channels?

I know there's the long hand way of doing that. i might just do that.
But the shorter way would be cool too!

Thanks!
tweeksound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2008, 04:18 PM   #47
sir
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 28
Default

++1, with the choice between panning controls.


extra points if there's an option to automatically switch to dual panning mode when a track contains stereo content
sir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2008, 05:17 PM   #48
Winfield
Human being with feelings
 
Winfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Underground Bunker
Posts: 705
Default

Watching Tallismans mock up really made me realise that my mocking about with chanmix was really tedious.
So ++1

-W
__________________
"if DAWs are religions, REAPER is atheism" - The big J
__________________
Windows 10x64 | Asus Z170-a i7, 32GB ram | RME-Digiface USB
Winfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2008, 05:46 PM   #49
zappsunzorn
Human being with feelings
 
zappsunzorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Virginia Beach VA
Posts: 2,274
Default

Take a look at this plugin. http://www.terrywest.110mb.com/channel.html

I am kind of on the fence with this one.
zappsunzorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2008, 06:40 PM   #50
blakflag
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 41
Default

Honestly I'd rather see effort spent toward full surround panning, which this seems to be a limited subset of. The power pan is just stereo spread which would correlate to distance, correct?
blakflag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2009, 04:22 AM   #51
Julio
Human being with feelings
 
Julio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 204
Default

+1

Oh, yes please! Integrated power panning and surround panning are things that would really do the business.
Julio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2009, 04:28 AM   #52
LOSER
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Julio View Post
+1

Oh, yes please! Integrated power panning and surround panning are things that would really do the business.
I don't really see the point in surround panning without surround rendering (or at least mutlichannel wave) .
LOSER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2009, 05:15 AM   #53
zappsunzorn
Human being with feelings
 
zappsunzorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Virginia Beach VA
Posts: 2,274
Default

My best guess is that when, and if (and I think it is very likely), we get true surround sound capability we will get dual (and more) panning. I think that will go hand in hand with improvements in reaper working with video.

That is my best guess I don't see this added before we get 5.1/7.1 etc
zappsunzorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2009, 02:53 PM   #54
Julio
Human being with feelings
 
Julio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 204
Default

Let’s hope so, folks.
Julio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 12:20 PM   #55
Spyrow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zappsunzorn View Post
My best guess is that when, and if (and I think it is very likely), we get true surround sound capability we will get dual (and more) panning. I think that will go hand in hand with improvements in reaper working with video.

That is my best guess I don't see this added before we get 5.1/7.1 etc

That's the reason I came here.
Because multichannel support is going to be added in Reaper 3 so I would like to see multipanners implemented.
I don't care much about multichannel at the moment but I would LOVE TO GET RID of all the tedious Chanmix2 plugins in all my stereo channels.

Soo... BUMP!!!

I think the way to go is ala Cubase, like said. Optional of course, so you can choose whatever you want.

I've been mixing last weeks with C4.5 and the ability to control width & position with one click (up-down for width and left-right for position) is superb to find the perfect blending for a track.

Last edited by Spyrow; 01-28-2009 at 12:30 PM.
Spyrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 04:34 PM   #56
_Devin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 340
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jakerock View Post
With due respect...
I personally like the "modular" nature of Reaper.
If I need EQ... Insert it. If I need Dual panners, insert it.
If not...

Best, J
I'm kind of sitting on the fence with the current feature, but I do have to agree with this sentiment. Cubase gives you built in (crap)EQs, panners, extras, etc... because they limit you to like 3 inserts for LE, 4 inserts for SL, 5 inserts for SX and 20 inserts for Nuendo, (dramatization, but something like that, it's pay-to-play). Reaper let's you have as many inserts as you want, so it's not like you're wasting a precious insert slot on it. That being said, I'm going to +0.5 this FR.
__________________
Since it looks like everyone else is doing it ;) :) :P :

AMD Phenom X4 9500 @ 2.2ghz, Gigabyte MA770-DS3, 4 x 1gb Corsair DDR2-800 CAS4(running CAS5 because raising DIMM voltage beyond JEDEC specs is teh suck), Samsung Spinpoint F1, M-Audio Audiophile 192, ATI Radeon 3400 GPU, and a beautiful Antec Earthwatts 430w PSU... and of course... the latest, greatest version of Reaper with a non-commercial license.
_Devin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 05:01 PM   #57
Spyrow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 522
Default

I don't agree with you in dual panners.

There is things like EQ's where you can choose from many, you can buy third party EQ's, etc.
I don't like the fact that Cubase has built-in EQ's, I don't like them, I don't use them, I will get rid of them if I could.

But there are certain things that you CAN'T CHOOSE from many.
I mean, what's the point of having to insert a plugin to invert the phase??
Can I choose between several "top of the notch" phase inverters??
No, they all do the same, invert the phase.

In the same point, I think dual panners are needed to be integrated, I don't want to have to insert a plugin, because there is no need for that flexibility, there is need for usability.

I just want them right there, where I can see and use them as fast as possible, because I use them a lot.
Spyrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 05:45 PM   #58
_Devin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 340
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyrow View Post
But there are certain things that you CAN'T CHOOSE from many.
I mean, what's the point of having to insert a plugin to invert the phase??
Can I choose between several "top of the notch" phase inverters??
No, they all do the same, invert the phase.
That just shows how little you know about phase inversion. I have a top of the line vintage hardware phase inverter that weighs over 300lbs. I guarantee you that no plugin can match it for sheer sound quality.


joking, joking, joking....


But SRSLY, I did +0.5 this, I'd prefer the main interface to be as uncluttered as possible, but IMHO this is a reasonable request(although it doesn't make me cream my pants vs. the current panner), hence +0.5.
__________________
Since it looks like everyone else is doing it ;) :) :P :

AMD Phenom X4 9500 @ 2.2ghz, Gigabyte MA770-DS3, 4 x 1gb Corsair DDR2-800 CAS4(running CAS5 because raising DIMM voltage beyond JEDEC specs is teh suck), Samsung Spinpoint F1, M-Audio Audiophile 192, ATI Radeon 3400 GPU, and a beautiful Antec Earthwatts 430w PSU... and of course... the latest, greatest version of Reaper with a non-commercial license.
_Devin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 05:54 PM   #59
Spyrow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 522
Default

Well, I was actually answering more to the guy you quoted than to you

As you, I'd prefer the main interface to be as uncluttered as possible, but having mono panners in stereo channels is the opposite to uncluttered.
Because I can't use them, I have to leave them centered, so they are useless, and they are there, just like the Cubase EQ's.
I would like to be able to exchange them for a useful dual panner.

It's not adding a dual panner, it's exchanging the mono-panner for a dual-panner (and maybe quad-panners or more for multichannel?)
Spyrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 05:55 PM   #60
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _Devin View Post
I'm kind of sitting on the fence with the current feature, but I do have to agree with this sentiment. Cubase gives you built in (crap)EQs, panners, extras, etc...
I once again have to be the voice of reason and practicality. Cubase's built in EQ1 and ReaComp are near identical from about 50hz to about 12-13k, at least in a band for band comparison null test I did.

Let's please keep the voodoo out of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyrow View Post
I don't like the fact that Cubase has built-in EQ's, I don't like them, I don't use them, I will get rid of them if I could.
You never have to even see them, let alone use them. It would be the same in Reaper if ReaEq were built into every channel.

I wish we could discuss these FR's in a realistic and mature manner. The fact of the matter is you actually can "get rid of" the Cubase eq's simply by permanently hiding them in the inspector, the channel strips and in the mixer. Anyone who actually uses the full application knows that.

Cubase LE 'aint Cubase, like GarageBand 'aint Logic.

So much unnecessary and just plain incorrect info clogging up what's a potentially useful and practical FR for stereo panners.

Last edited by Lawrence; 01-28-2009 at 06:07 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 05:59 PM   #61
Spyrow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 522
Default

Nobody said that ReaEQ is not crap too

haha,

joking of course, it's a useful EQ to have.
Spyrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 06:01 PM   #62
_Devin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 340
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Cubase's built in EQ1 and ReaComp
Yes, epic amounts of reason and practicality in comparing an EQ to a compressor
__________________
Since it looks like everyone else is doing it ;) :) :P :

AMD Phenom X4 9500 @ 2.2ghz, Gigabyte MA770-DS3, 4 x 1gb Corsair DDR2-800 CAS4(running CAS5 because raising DIMM voltage beyond JEDEC specs is teh suck), Samsung Spinpoint F1, M-Audio Audiophile 192, ATI Radeon 3400 GPU, and a beautiful Antec Earthwatts 430w PSU... and of course... the latest, greatest version of Reaper with a non-commercial license.
_Devin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 06:06 PM   #63
_Devin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 340
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyrow View Post
Nobody said that ReaEQ is not crap too

haha,

joking of course, it's a useful EQ to have.
Exactly, what does me talking about Cubase's built-in EQs on every channel have to do with ReaEQ? Having said that, I fundamentally like ReaEQ, but almost never use it.
__________________
Since it looks like everyone else is doing it ;) :) :P :

AMD Phenom X4 9500 @ 2.2ghz, Gigabyte MA770-DS3, 4 x 1gb Corsair DDR2-800 CAS4(running CAS5 because raising DIMM voltage beyond JEDEC specs is teh suck), Samsung Spinpoint F1, M-Audio Audiophile 192, ATI Radeon 3400 GPU, and a beautiful Antec Earthwatts 430w PSU... and of course... the latest, greatest version of Reaper with a non-commercial license.
_Devin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 06:08 PM   #64
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _Devin View Post
Yes, epic amounts of reason and practicality in comparing an EQ to a compressor
Of course you know I meant ReaEq. I hope you figured out that was a typo.

There are great FR's here and they often get sidetracked by the need for people to slam things that they apparently don't really use or even really know how to use.

While some of those things being slammed out of hand would be great ergonomic additions to Reaper... if not for the extreme unproductive hatred.

Fact remains... all of the past and future whining about Cubase built-in eq's is baseless since you can simply turn them off and never see them. If Reaper had them I'd like the option to turn those off (or on) also.

Last edited by Lawrence; 01-28-2009 at 06:13 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 06:23 PM   #65
_Devin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 340
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
I wish we could discuss these FR's in a realistic and mature manner.
So me giving a +0.5 is immature, because I'm not showing the same enthusiasm for this that you are? Is your sarcastic little comment "I hope you figured out that was a typo." not immature? Rush Limbaugh fan much?
__________________
Since it looks like everyone else is doing it ;) :) :P :

AMD Phenom X4 9500 @ 2.2ghz, Gigabyte MA770-DS3, 4 x 1gb Corsair DDR2-800 CAS4(running CAS5 because raising DIMM voltage beyond JEDEC specs is teh suck), Samsung Spinpoint F1, M-Audio Audiophile 192, ATI Radeon 3400 GPU, and a beautiful Antec Earthwatts 430w PSU... and of course... the latest, greatest version of Reaper with a non-commercial license.
_Devin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 06:34 PM   #66
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _Devin View Post
So me giving a +0.5 is immature, because I'm not showing the same enthusiasm for this that you are? Is your sarcastic little comment "I hope you figured out that was a typo." not immature? Rush Limbaugh fan much?
Sigh.

It had nothing to do with enthusiasm or your +0.5. I was correcting a statement that was incorrect but spoken as fact. Someone said they wished they could get rid of the EQ's. I told them they can as any Cubase user already knows.

Someone else said the EQ's were crap. I mentioned that they are near identical to ReaEq since I actually took the time to test them rather than spout my biases as if they were fact.

Yes, it is immature in my view to bash something without knowing how it works. Just like the immature people bashing Reaper without even really trying it.

If facts are a problem for some people I'll just stop. One day I'll learn to just keep my mouth shut and let people believe whatever they want. Many seem much happier that way.

One day... I'm trying...

Please forgive me. Carry on.

Sincerely, please accept my apology and let's just move on.

Last edited by Lawrence; 01-28-2009 at 06:42 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 06:49 PM   #67
Spyrow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
SSomeone said they wished they could get rid of the EQ's.
I've been using Cubase 4 since a year or so almost everyday.
I don't use the built-in EQ's.
So I don't want them to be there.
Even the buttons in the mixer to show them.
I don't want to have a bunch of buttons I don't want to see because, you know what? I love when I can see 64 mixer channels in a 19" screen with Reaper. And that's mainly because there are just the indispensable buttons, no extras.
That's my personal preferences.
Respect it.

And there is no reason for you to start the discussion about how great the EQ's of Cubase are or to convince us that is great to have them integrated when the only thing to discuss here is Dual panners for Reaper.
Actually I don't care a shit about Cubase and what they do.
I am not going to the Cubase forum to tell them, "hey please, remove the EQ's"
I just want Dual panners in Reaper so the day I could run my own studio (instead of working for others) I could use Reaper and be happy.
Spyrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 07:07 PM   #68
_Devin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 340
Default

Maybe since Lawrence possesses such an ability level that he may talk down to me and Spyrow, perhaps he'd care to post some audio of just what magnificent things this FR is capable of? I'm willing bet all 3 of us are at the amateur to semi-pro level, you don't see me and Spyrow throwing our egos around. If you're going to be a condescending dick in every sentence, you should be prepared to post L337 audio.
__________________
Since it looks like everyone else is doing it ;) :) :P :

AMD Phenom X4 9500 @ 2.2ghz, Gigabyte MA770-DS3, 4 x 1gb Corsair DDR2-800 CAS4(running CAS5 because raising DIMM voltage beyond JEDEC specs is teh suck), Samsung Spinpoint F1, M-Audio Audiophile 192, ATI Radeon 3400 GPU, and a beautiful Antec Earthwatts 430w PSU... and of course... the latest, greatest version of Reaper with a non-commercial license.
_Devin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 07:19 PM   #69
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

???????????

Whatever. Not the first time I had an apology shit on. Did I say the Cubase EQ's were great? I don't recall that.

Did I bring Cubase EQ's into this thread? I don't recall that either.

Take care.

Last edited by Lawrence; 01-28-2009 at 07:27 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2009, 07:59 PM   #70
Tallisman
Human being with feelings
 
Tallisman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: in the middle of the icecube.
Posts: 7,403
Default

Lawrence! thanks for not biting and responding to the dick comment.
_Devin that was uncalled for, and IMHO underscoring the speak of immaturity.

Pull this one out of the fire fellas or we'll call it a thread.
thanks.

.t
__________________
.t

_____________________________
http://jomei.bandcamp.com <--My Middle Son.

http://tallisman.bandcamp.com <--Me.

"Excuse me. Could you please point me in the direction of the self-help section?"
Tallisman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2009, 03:28 AM   #71
Spyrow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Did I say the Cubase EQ's were great? I don't recall that.

Did I bring Cubase EQ's into this thread? I don't recall that either.

Take care.
I said a comment about Cubase EQ's because I don't like them and AS I DONT USE THEM: yes, I would like them to be removed.
That was a personal comment to explain a thing about flexibility and usability to Devin, we have nothing to do here with Cubase, nothing.

You said that that comment was unnecessary and incorrect info and I didn't like that.
There is no way to discuss that here, and it's my personal preference, I'm sorry if it hurts you but you have to respect it.

Ok, you edited one of your last comments and added an apologize, that was kind.
I'm sorry too if I was rude answering you, let's forget about this. We are forgetting the real discussion: Dual panners.


Oh, and take care you too
Spyrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2009, 07:52 AM   #72
labyrinth
Human being with feelings
 
labyrinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 2,248
Default

Would be a great version 3 addition.
__________________
www.res-ref.com | Resonant Reflections
iMac 3.2 GHz (i5 4570)/16GB RAM | OSX 10.10 (Yosemite) | Interface: Focusrite 18i6
labyrinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2009, 09:35 AM   #73
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
I'm sorry too if I was rude answering you, let's forget about this.
Please. Let's do.

Last edited by Lawrence; 01-29-2009 at 09:37 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2009, 10:11 AM   #74
semiquaver
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,923
Default

Talisman's point about being able to see at a glance is to the point. I think a basic design quibble I have with reaper is that a lot of the visual material in the gui does not tell you much, and a lot of important things are hidden, sometimes requiring several commands to reveal. To get the whole picture you need both the mixer and the main window open - so you are seeing faders and pan pots twice - because one is vertical and the other is horizontal it is a pain to find your place...

yep to narrow your stereo spread you have to touch the track press f then 'add' then select the plug press enter make your adjustment. To adjust once in place, touch the track press f select the plug and tweak...

The lousey Intuem has a really nicely designed mixer which adds knobs and sliders for the plugs to the channel strip itself - very cool - this might be a solution...
semiquaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2009, 07:12 AM   #75
Svitogor
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9
Default

power panners would be grate

+1
Svitogor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 12:09 AM   #76
Switch
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia.
Posts: 119
Default

+1

Integrated/optional, just like the pan laws are now.
Switch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 07:22 AM   #77
airon
Human being with feelings
 
airon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Berlin
Posts: 11,817
Default

Inevitable when surround panners come.

+1
__________________
Using Latch Preview (Video) - Faderport 16 setup for CSI 1.1 , CSI 3.10
Website
"My ego comes pre-shrunk" - Randy Thom
airon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 01:25 PM   #78
One flew over
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 130
Default

+1
Every modern pro DAW should have it.

As a comment on sstillwell's reply on the previous page, I would say it's about efficiency. I tend to use dual panning on most of the stereo sources when I mix, and I know many of my colleagues do the same.
I know it's possible to achieve the same result today, but it's not efficient. IMO, tools you use a lot should be close at hand. That old "don't blame the tools" argument is nothing but weak and gives me the impression that you don't do this for a living. It would be similar as telling a carpenter to use a hand drill when he knows there's a power drill just around the corner.
One flew over is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 02:31 PM   #79
Lokasenna
Human being with feelings
 
Lokasenna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 6,551
Default

I'm pretty content with the same old panning fader we've had since the dawn of time, but I'll add my ++1 to this for two reasons:

- Stereo flipping on the track panel takes a few steps out of duplicating a stereo guitar chain and swapping it around for L and R guitar parts

- Having a right-click option to split the panner, and whatever preferences you want to set defaults, adds no clutter to the interface at all.

Even if I never had a use for it, there's no need for dual panners to take up any more room than the panner does already. At worst, the existing pan fader would have to be a touch thicker to accommodate two sliders. 4 pixels? Big whoop.
__________________
I'm no longer using Reaper or working on scripts for it. Sorry. :(
Default 5.0 Nitpicky Edition / GUI library for Lua scripts / Theory Helper / Radial Menu / Donate
Lokasenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2009, 04:46 AM   #80
myreligionisnoise
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 118
Default

++1.

But made OPTIONAL.
myreligionisnoise 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 01:12 AM.


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