Old 08-02-2019, 03:48 PM   #41
Regisfofo
Human being with feelings
 
Regisfofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: France
Posts: 175
Default

Thanks a lot for that video John! Watched it after I made my mix and it learned me a lot! Hope you've got some time to give us some feedback

Well talking about feedback, here is mine :
1) Really nicely done, great "deepness", huge drums, great drum/bass relationship. Maybe a little too much compression punch on the snare to my taste.
Guitar a little too stuck to speaker wich cause a little ear tiring especially with headphones. Found it hard to hear the guitar solo especially at his begining.
Did you noticed the huge low mid resonance on one of the floor tom mic ? I saw you did nothing about it in your video, did you left that intentionately ?

2) Three elements jump out too much IMHO : Kick Snare and Vocal. Voice is really too loud. Kick and Snare to compressed to my taste. I like the cymbals tone

3) Too Noisy. There's a harsh mid resonance with guitar distortion. Guitars take too much space. The drums seem too far away, they lack a little power. The organ at the end is not needed IMO.

4) That's a Reverb! A bit long IMO especially on the snare. too much kick sub, it feels a bit long too.
Guitar solo jump out nicely.I like the voice too. rythm Guitars too stuck to the speaker IMO (I'm not really a LCR guy . Nice guitar tone, gritty in a good way.

5) Kick and snare really to upfront. The Kick seems to be clipping. Not a fan of the gate effect during fills.
guitare too far away. Guitar solo hard to listen to. cymbales kind of disapeared.

6) Voice is really nice, upfront. guitars are a little too muffled and far away. Guitar solo is nice.I really like kick and bass sound.

7) Drums seems too crushed and far away, therefore, kind of lack of power. Some elements really upfront don't mix with the other (voice/ shaker/ bass). Voice lack some short ambiance treatment IMO (room/ slapback delay)

8) Punchy! Maybe too much on the snare. Bass a little muddy/ long with no attack/ masks kick too much?. I like the Guitar solo. Globaly too much compression to my taste but I really like the frequency fullness! Punch made me like it very much to the first listening, but feel a little tiring the second time.

9) I like the voice's placement.guitars a little too close IMO, but sound good.
All Drums (but snare) seems too far away against the guitar. I can't hear the kick.
Too much shaker IMO.

10) too much kick, too long, way too much sub resonance in it IMO. I like the roomy guitars
Guitar solo cannot be heard though.

11) drum too crushed, snare especially... cymbals are really pumping too much they seems too noisy.
I like kick/Bass.

12) Very roomy, too much rumble in the low end. Cymbals are pumping, they take too much space. Globally too compressed to my taste,

13) drum muffled and too gated. Guitars and organ seems to have a blanket on them. Too much kick and snare. Voice seems a little thin.

14) Sides guitar are out of phase, they almost disapear when summed to mono. I like the balance except that the snare is a little bit too loud/compressed for my taste. Reverb on drums is a little weird/boingy.

15) Bass sound muddy. drums and guitar sound kind of muffled. Centered guitar at the end seems strange, like alone, not playing with the others. Riffs lack some power, it is too quiet for me.

16) Vocal, Bass shakers are too upfront. The guitar sound is too harsh. Modulation on drums sound a little unatural.

17) That one is mine. Lack of power in the bass frequencies, way too much cymbals and shakers. And sure, that Phaser is kind of funny at the end

18) Nice balance ! I like this version very much except for the vocal reverb that is too long IMO and the bass distortion that sound a little too obvious / distracting.
Regisfofo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2019, 06:12 PM   #42
jelloman
Human being with feelings
 
jelloman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Hudson Valley of NY
Posts: 60
Default

I was number 11...

I knew that I had pretty much booted the cymbals, especially the hi-hats...I tried several things to "fix it in the mix" and of course none of them worked, and most of them just added to the issues...I was out of time and could not do what I know would have been the correct thing to do and re-work the mix...

This was also the first time I tried to master to a set LUFS level, and apparently I did it completely wrong...I need to study up on setting LUFS with a limiter...

This was a seriously fun and interesting thing to do, and it's opened up a number of areas for me to work at improving...I'm looking forward to next month's contest to see if I can fix some of my issues...
__________________
Better technician than musician
jelloman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2019, 07:41 PM   #43
Tiny Tortoise
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jelloman View Post
setting LUFS with a limiter...
I'm not a fan of this, but most limiters (including all of Reaper's stock JS limiters) do a linked make-up gain to whatever you set the threshold to i.e. threshold at -6 limits peaks to -6dB and boosts the output by 6dB back to 0dBFS peak, and typically have an adjustable output ceiling to trim it back down.

One way to get to your target is you can render an unlimited mix file, then analyse it using SWS loudness tool or any other loudness meter, to find the integrated LUFS reading. You use that figure to set your limiter to whatever number would push your level to -13LUFS, and then you use an output trim (or master output fader to) of -1dB to bring it back to -14 LUFS, peak at -1dBFS. Alternatively, you can hit the limiter first, render and analyse the loudness, then adjust to bring it back to your target.

As an example, let's just say you end up with a mix loudness of -17.3LUFS, before limiting.
-17.3 + 13 = -4.3
you can set your limiter threshold to -4.3, then output trim -1dB, then render your final limited result and you're good to go.

If your LUFS reading is above -13, e.g. let's say it's -11.2LUFS:
-11.2 + 13 = 1.8
You can trim it down by (in this case) 1.8dB before hitting the limiter at a 0dB threshold, and then trim the output by -1dB.
Tiny Tortoise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2019, 12:33 AM   #44
Dyl
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jelloman View Post


This was also the first time I tried to master to a set LUFS level, and apparently I did it completely wrong...I need to study up on setting LUFS with a limiter...

This was a seriously fun and interesting thing to do, and it's opened up a number of areas for me to work at improving...I'm looking forward to next month's contest to see if I can fix some of my issues...

Me too with the mastering to a set level, well mastering at all!
I've got enough work to do with my mix (7) but I did enjoy trying too.
I followed this link for my level setting, it's pretty straightforward and yet I still messed it up. Take a look though, it's the clearest example I've seen on how to set LUFs.
https://www.masteringthemix.com/blog...d-lufs-reading
Dyl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2019, 08:50 AM   #45
PVinKC
Human being with feelings
 
PVinKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Kansas City, MO USA
Posts: 12
Default

Hey Tony Tortoise,

Thanks for the critique. Not sure what you mean by loudness unless my early version was the one that got used. I submitted a late entry that was LUFS -14 and FLAC. My first entry was not metered and MP3...first time and I didn't read as well as I should have.

As for the kick...I'm not boosting any low end but the HP is set fairly low. Don't recall using an aggressive gate but maybe. I seem to recall a lot of bleed that needed attention. This was done while working on other projects.

The guitars however couldn't be panned further left and right. So no idea how they could sound thin?

Very puzzling indeed!
PVinKC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2019, 11:47 AM   #46
jelloman
Human being with feelings
 
jelloman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Hudson Valley of NY
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny Tortoise View Post
I'm not a fan of this, but most limiters (including all of Reaper's stock JS limiters) do a linked make-up gain to whatever you set the threshold to i.e. threshold at -6 limits peaks to -6dB and boosts the output by 6dB back to 0dBFS peak, and typically have an adjustable output ceiling to trim it back down.

One way to get to your target is you can render an unlimited mix file, then analyse it using SWS loudness tool or any other loudness meter, to find the integrated LUFS reading. You use that figure to set your limiter to whatever number would push your level to -13LUFS, and then you use an output trim (or master output fader to) of -1dB to bring it back to -14 LUFS, peak at -1dBFS. Alternatively, you can hit the limiter first, render and analyse the loudness, then adjust to bring it back to your target.

As an example, let's just say you end up with a mix loudness of -17.3LUFS, before limiting.
-17.3 + 13 = -4.3
you can set your limiter threshold to -4.3, then output trim -1dB, then render your final limited result and you're good to go.

If your LUFS reading is above -13, e.g. let's say it's -11.2LUFS:
-11.2 + 13 = 1.8
You can trim it down by (in this case) 1.8dB before hitting the limiter at a 0dB threshold, and then trim the output by -1dB.
Thanks for this!
__________________
Better technician than musician
jelloman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2019, 07:18 AM   #47
Tiny Tortoise
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PVinKC View Post
Not sure what you mean by loudness unless my early version was the one that got used.
I just brought up the submission batch rrp to refresh my memory of your mix, and after soloing the side/difference channel it does appear to be your previously mentioned MP3 mix--you can hear some FFT processing artefacts in the side-channel treble that MP3s tend to have.

An absence of guitars on the side channel also means that your guitars are panned mono in this particular mix, which accounts for the "small and contained" comment, but I wouldn't say they sound particularly thin.

As far as the kick goes, a low corner frequency LPF is pretty much as good as a strong low frequency boost if you ask me. The only real difference is in the specific shape of the EQ curve and its phase response, and output level.
Tiny Tortoise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2019, 08:02 AM   #48
PVinKC
Human being with feelings
 
PVinKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Kansas City, MO USA
Posts: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny Tortoise View Post
...An absence of guitars on the side channel also means that your guitars are panned mono in this particular mix, which accounts for the "small and contained" comment...
Hmmm...I guess I don't understand how the guitars wouldn't be in the sides? I have them panned 100% left and right with the width set at 100%.

Does Reaper have a stock plugin that lets you place signals in the sides or middle? I must surely be missing something here.
PVinKC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2019, 08:53 AM   #49
Tiny Tortoise
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Default

It might be worth resetting the panning on all of your guitar tracks again, and redoing the panning by ear to make sure. Would it be fair to assume you haven't duplicated any of the guitar tracks?

btw when I say side channel, I'm using that term in the context of mid/side or sum/difference. You can check this using the mono button on the master track. If you right click it, you have a list of monitoring options for this button: L+R, L-R, L, R. L+R is the sum (mid), L-R is the difference (side). The sum includes everything that's in phase between the left and right channels, the difference includes everything that's out of phase between the left and right channels.
Tiny Tortoise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2019, 09:15 AM   #50
PVinKC
Human being with feelings
 
PVinKC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Kansas City, MO USA
Posts: 12
Default

Yeah you're right I haven't duplicated any tracks at all. I felt the tracks that came with the project were more than enough to build a decent mix with.

I'm going to check out the L-R option for the mono button for sure.

I hit up Kenny Joya's videos and found that Reaper does have plugins that let you encode and decode mid/side content. Thinking about playing with those to have more control over the center and sides.

Currently I use a PARENT channel that everything goes into that feeds the main fader. I'm thinking about encoding everything and sending to a center and/or side bus that then feed into the parent and decode (mix) the two back into one stereo channel that feeds the main slider...
PVinKC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2019, 09:56 AM   #51
Tiny Tortoise
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 14
Default

mmm if you're having issues with making what's supposed to be stereo content actually stereo, then I'd suggest keeping your processing as minimal as possible until you've found the cause for the mono sound. That's a tried and true method for every type of troubleshooting and it saves a lot of time and headaches. It's only once you know exactly what's going on and how to control it, that you should bother to start messing with additional tools or plugins. Just my 2 cents
Tiny Tortoise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2019, 01:09 PM   #52
alexandre
Human being with feelings
 
alexandre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5
Default

I accidentally found out about this contest and enjoyed mixing this song very much. Drums were not so easy to mix because the direct drum mics did not sound very nice to me, so I mixed in quite a lot of room and overheads. This made the cymbals sound too loud. Maybe a deesser would have helped. The amount of guitar mics was confusing.

So here my notes:

1. roomy reverb on voc, snare could have a bit more body, guitars quite loud but solo guitar too soft and to much in background

2. nice guitar fills, voc very loud an weird eq, quite compressed, hammond barley hearable

3. phase problems on guitars, drums very soft, voc and delay nice

4. bass a bit loud, drums a bit undefined, guitars a bit too much mids

5. drums very distorted and muddy, bass very loud, hammond very loud, quite a lot of clipping

6. this is mine, I like the drums but cymbals are too prominent, guitars could be louder and hammond fills should drive the song more

7. not so well balanced, guitars very loud, drums very soft, no overheads, voc nice

8. voc very distorted, drums crushed but sound nice in a way, percussions a bit distracting

9. drums soft but nice overall, guitars loud, a bit more reverb on the vocals and more room on the drums would help, guitar solo very loud

10. kick has very much low end, snare toms and overheads are nice, delay fx on voc could be more subtile

11. drums an voc very distorted, extremely limited

12. heavily compressed, very dense, very agressive, phasey effect on vocals

13. drums sound muffled, no toms, eq on guitars nice but prominent

14. phase issues, loud guitars, levels not very balanced, vocals sound nice

15. balanced, drums a bit soft, bass a bit loud, overall nice sounding

16. unbalanced, voc extremely loud, phasey fx on drums and guitars

17. balanced, nice sounding, voc a bit distorted, percussions loud, a bit dense but good overall

18. missing low frequencies on the bass because of the distortion, quite long reverb on voc
alexandre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 03:17 AM   #53
DaveKeehl
Human being with feelings
 
DaveKeehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,812
Default

Thanks for leaving your feedback notes guys
DaveKeehl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 11:51 AM   #54
aftercutrecords
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 25
Default

ID 01: I thought it was a little beefy, a little thick on the low end. Could be my monitoring situation though. I'm pretty sure I voted for this one, because it's overall pretty tops. The guitars just sounded a little poofy to me and I would've liked more attack on the drums, and the lead guitar to stand out a little more. Still probably the best mix overall.

ID 02: This mix sounds pretty narrow, and the cymbals are kinda washy. The vocals lack depth. Overall this mix sounds kind of blanketed. I would spread out guitars a little more, and scoop out those drums a tiny bit more, especially from the overheads. There's some kinda low woofy resonance that's kinda consistent in the Overheads or rooms that I hear. But everything else is very dry and narrow. I like what you did with the tambourine and the drum fill 1 minute and a half in sounds real big. The lead stands out pretty well, but it's still a little under the track because of how poofy everything else sounds to me.

ID 03: This just got really hyped in a weird way. Probably some kind of aggressive stereo effect. The keys / organ patch don't come through amazingly, but they blend well with the guitar. The problem is, there's a stereo effect but not a lot of stereo panning and separation, to my ears. It sounds narrow and artificially widened. But the vocals have a really cool thing going on. I like those best. I also like how the lead guitar came out more in the spectrum, although it falls below the bass often. The drums are very roomy but lack a lot of impact to my ears. They kinda blend in to the rest of the track. Maybe lower the bass guitar track, or scoop it out a little bit?

ID 04: I like how balanced this track sounds! The vocals sound really solid. This is a contender, in my opinion. Nothing really stands out as being wrong, but the kick and bass seem to be a little bit in conflict. The kick has a decay that poofs in the same area as the bass, which leads to a weird "you either hear kick or bass" feeling. But other than that, I dig this mix's lead guitar part the most. It sticks out the way I want!

ID 05: Very drum and bass focused. The guitars are narrow, the spatial effects are very narrow. I like the delay on the vocal. Overall, I'd probably sweeten things up a bit more (boost some highs, cut some low mids on the drums and bass, spread out the guitars a lot more, don't be afraid to let things hit harder). One special mention: The organ in this sounds really good. Unfortunately, the lead guitar is absolutely drowned. Overall, different sounding style. Sounds like it was mixed in the style of a dub reggae track (minus excessive reverbs), which is definitely an interesting take!

ID 06: Wow, that's pretty loud. The cymbals on the drums immediately stick out as VERY washy. The drums have a sick punch and nice low end, but the cymbals are just... loud and not very bright. They kinda muddy things up, especially compared to the guitars. I'd love this sound if it was just drums. Seriously. Those drums sound really good when it's just drums. But I'd clean it out and make some room for the other elements, especially guitars. The lead guitar is nicely audible, but it sounds almost lo-fi.
Overall, good mix! I like it. It just sounds a little poofy to me with aggressive roomyness. Lot of like, 300hz to my ears.

ID 07: I like the emphasis on the background guitar tracks. The drums are a little hard to hear except the occasional crack, and the bass is very prominent. Everything sits well, but it could probably use MORE room track and overheads, because it's not very bright. The vocals are usually real nice. Overall, this mix sounds like it's got a blanket on it, though. I like the lead guitar part though! It's definitely the best part of the track. Problem is, not a lot of content over 3k or below 100hz. But there's a TON of energy from 100hz to 300hz. That's where a lot of conflicts and masking is happening. Let some of the other elements come out a little! It'll sound less rough. There's plenty of room over 5k for stuff to have some character and movement.

ID 08: I like this one, although the bass is a little boomy between 100hz and 200hz. Otherwise, everything sounds great! In my opinion, nearly flawless. The lead guitar cuts through like a champ and has more than enough to express itself without being too out front. I know it sounds simplistic, but I like it!

ID 09: Very boxy sounding snare. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE 200hz on snare. But this has a little too much. I like the tambourine and aux in the mix, and the drum mix is mostly snare. The overheads sound okay, maybe kinda brittle, but it's definitely cleaner than some others. I like it, but that's just my preference. But it's kinda hard to hear kick. The lead guitar sounds REALLY good. I like it a lot, though it may be a LITTLE too out front. No one would really notice that, though. I prefer it. I just want more kick outta this, honestly.
aftercutrecords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 11:52 AM   #55
aftercutrecords
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 25
Default

ID 10: Nice instrument mix, but those vocals are canyon level verby. The guitars sound a little less aggressive than I would want, but that's a personal thing. I like your mix overall, though. I love that snare clarity! The lead guitar is very interesting, but it sounds like AM-radio-esque. Very filtered, and it fits into the space it has, but it's also weirdly thin and lo-fi. I don't know how I feel about it, but it's just a stylistic thing. Overall, I can dig it!

ID 11: My lord, those drums are very compressed. Actually, the whole mix is very compressed, but it's especially noticeable in the cymbals. This really does remind me of a lot of those crushed EPs you would get from bands at warped tour that would have these "compression to the point of whitenoise" things going on with the cymbals. I like the sound of the vocals, but it coulda done with some de-essing. Overall, once my ears settle into the pumpy nature of it, the mix is well balanced. It just doesn't get to breathe much because of the compression! You could lay off it a bit and it would probably be a way higher level sounding mix. Also, I really dig the lead. It's a little aggressive in the 2k range, but it's also very clear and strong. I love it.
Good mix, but maybe don't do so much compression on it overall?

ID 12: WOW It sounds really big on initial impact. The drums are cool, but then everything comes in and the compression turns the cymbals into white noise. A long string of "shhhhhhhhhhhh". The shell pieces themselves sound really impactful, and the balance of the mix is good, but it's also ironically lacking in the midrange, with a bump at 150hz and what sounds like 2 to 5k. You don't need a ton of this brightness, and it mostly masks stuff. Especially the rhythm guitars. They're getting swallowed up in the mess of cymbals and compression. Bass is a little out front for this style of mix, too. It would have made more sense to cut some of that 150hz on the bass and boosted it below the kick for this kind of aggressive mix, so it's more felt than heard in that boomy range. Everything is pretty cool, but again it feels kind of over-comped. Especially cuz the drums kinda disappear under the cymbals when everything kicks off.

ID 13: The guitars are a little quiet compared to the bass, and there's not a lot of high end between 3k and 8k. The cymbals sit VERY nicely over the mix, and the drums don't sound over compressed, but the toms got lost a couple of times. The vocals sit in a good way, but I would de-ess them a little more because the s's really do peak in a way that catches my attention. The lead guitar sounds really weak when it gets masked, but when it gets to the higher notes, it's a little better at sticking out. I think that's lower mid-range imbalance. EVERYTHING seems to have content from 100hz to like 300hz. Decent high end though. IT makes me pretty happy. But I would also do something about how dry the drums sound, as they could use some room. I like this mix a lot though, good job!

ID 14: WOW there's a smiley face on this track aside from the vocals. It sounds like a W to me, actually. What I mean is, there are three major peaks. A huge peak from 100hz to 200hz, a big peak between 800hz and 1.6khz, and a huge peak from 2.5khz and 5khz. In other words, the frequency imbalance between those peaks is really noticeable, especially when some instruments fall out. The lead guitar sounds totally audible, but also very muffled. Like it's not sitting right for clarity but pokes out in the places where other frequencies just aren't there. There's plenty of room in the 500hz section where the guitars could have some character, for example, but they sound kinda buried. I would say the best things are the drums, but the reverb sounds very "tile room" to me.

ID 15: Everything lacks clarity, but the punchiness of the drums is pretty good. Very bass heavy, but if that bass was turned down, everything else sounds really nicely balanced. I like it quite a bit, if you could just get that bass down. The lead guitar comes up beautifully, though it sounds tilted to the left a bit. Maybe it's some kind of widening? Yeah, I like the drums in this track but the bass drowns stuff a bit too much. Also, there is a huge hole from 400hz up to maybe 600hz? It's just empty there, and you can tell from the lack of guitar in the mix.


ID 16: This mix is all vocal. The drums sound like just a room track, no direct mics at all. Interesting choice, but then the tambourine is very direct. The bass sounds pretty boomy. This is another victim of the W sound, with major holes between peaks. It's lacking balance of frequencies. Curiously though, the lead guitar comes out well. Big peak at 2.5k but that's fine, at least it's audible. It sounds pretty good. This whole mix lacks guitar though, except the background guitar parts. Strange.

ID 17: VERY well balanced frequency wise. I like it. The cymbals aren't too crushed, but they're just edgy enough to sit above the mix and be well audible. The big problem is, it doesn't sound like everything has it's own space in the frequency spectrum in the 150hz to 300hz area. There's some clarity lacking in the low mids, but the highs and high mids are pretty tight. This is a good mix that, with some more time probably would have been hammered out. I like the lead guitar and how it punches through the mix. I like the drums. Everything is pretty well leveled, too. The shakers were surprisingly clear here, which no one else seemed to do. I like that! I love the flanger on the end!

ID 18: I like my track, but the bass is a little too grindy. The vocals may be a little too upfront I think, and the verb too far down. I probably could've used some more low end though, given that the song calls for it. It seems to be lacking, especially in the sub bass area. If I'd mastered it, I probably would've done some bass enhancement tricks. Also, during the solo the 250hz to 400hz range is very busy, as is 2.5khz. Wild stuff. Mine might've been a little too polished and not fat enough for this style!

Another great month of work, my friends. Good job to everyone involved!
aftercutrecords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 11:54 AM   #56
aftercutrecords
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 25
Default

Sorry about the multi post. I take feedback very seriously and I think everyone deserves a thorough breakdown of their mix. That means a couple hours invested from me, and a broken character limit for the forum post!
aftercutrecords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 02:38 PM   #57
Dyl
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 26
Default

Thanks to all the guys who provided feedback. Great opportunity for me to learn to better mix.
Thanks again.
Dyl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2019, 06:53 AM   #58
DaveKeehl
Human being with feelings
 
DaveKeehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,812
Default

The new multitrack is now live on the website. Go grab yours
DaveKeehl 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 08:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.