Old 03-04-2013, 03:04 AM   #41
heda
Human being with feelings
 
heda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,186
Default

check this plugin to mix with headphones http://www.112db.com/redline/monitor/
just if totally necessary.. I prefer mixing without headphones.
heda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 09:40 AM   #42
sostenuto
Human being with feelings
 
sostenuto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: St George, UT _ USA
Posts: 2,654
Default Hmmmmm

Nice to see affordable tools to help make compromise solutions work as well as possible. Redline Monitor, Focusrite VRM, or xxxxx seem to offer some help when a proper monitor setup is not possible ??

If some of the experienced pros here could do excellent mixes using tools like these, their comments would be interesting ..... especially with their daily exposure to studio acoustics and monitors to provide a solid baseline.

Tom B
sostenuto is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 09:32 AM   #43
FKAB
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 615
Default

A lot of times I find myself Reapering way past midnight so use of headphones is sometimes necessary, kids asleep, cat asleep on the sofa, who growls when I'm above conversation level. Sometimes I want to record a guitar track, sometimes I'm learning some mixing techniques. When would be an ideal time to use the likes of Isone? At the tracking stage or at the mixing stage? Also, I'll probably get laughed at, but could Isone be used on a previously done headphone mix? I tried it, and it "seems" ok!
FKAB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 10:26 AM   #44
tls11823
Human being with feelings
 
tls11823's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Harrisburg, PA USA
Posts: 1,386
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FKAB View Post
When would be an ideal time to use the likes of Isone? At the tracking stage or at the mixing stage? Also, I'll probably get laughed at, but could Isone be used on a previously done headphone mix? I tried it, and it "seems" ok!
I generally only use it during the mixing stage, but suppose it wouldn't hurt anything to use it during tracking. And there's no reason you couldn't use it to check (and possibly readjust) something that you mixed previously. Getting another perspective can never be a bad thing.

To be clear, I usually switch between using headphones with Isone and my monitors. My monitors are OK but not great and my room isn't perfect, so it's nice to get a different perspective. I just need to be sure to bypass Isone when going through my monitors, or it will muck things up.

Another nifty feature of Isone is to be able to listen in different simulated environments, such as "the other room", "laptop", "crappy speakers", etc. It's really a powerful and useful tool for the ridiculously low price.
__________________
We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about.
--Charles Kingsley... or maybe Albert Einstein... definitely somebody wiser than myself--
tls11823 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 11:36 AM   #45
IXix
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: mcr:uk
Posts: 3,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tls11823 View Post
I just need to be sure to bypass Isone when going through my monitors, or it will muck things up.

Another nifty feature of Isone is to be able to listen in different simulated environments, such as "the other room", "laptop", "crappy speakers", etc.
Behold my awesome Isone Toolbar!



Well, mostly Isone, the button on the left opens SPAN. The others enable/disable Isone and switch presets. I'll put the necessary stuff in the stash soon.

I love it that REAPER lets me set up stuff like this.
IXix is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 12:22 PM   #46
FKAB
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 615
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tls11823 View Post
I generally only use it during the mixing stage, but suppose it wouldn't hurt anything to use it during tracking. And there's no reason you couldn't use it to check (and possibly readjust) something that you mixed previously. Getting another perspective can never be a bad thing.

To be clear, I usually switch between using headphones with Isone and my monitors. My monitors are OK but not great and my room isn't perfect, so it's nice to get a different perspective. I just need to be sure to bypass Isone when going through my monitors, or it will muck things up.

Another nifty feature of Isone is to be able to listen in different simulated environments, such as "the other room", "laptop", "crappy speakers", etc. It's really a powerful and useful tool for the ridiculously low price.
Thanks tls. I'm in demo mode atm, sounds like a purchase.
FKAB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 01:01 PM   #47
tls11823
Human being with feelings
 
tls11823's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Harrisburg, PA USA
Posts: 1,386
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IXix View Post
Behold my awesome Isone Toolbar!

Now that's slick! I may have to steal that idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IXix View Post
I love it that REAPER lets me set up stuff like this.
Are you telling me that simple is not god? (Sarcastically referencing another thread.)
__________________
We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about.
--Charles Kingsley... or maybe Albert Einstein... definitely somebody wiser than myself--
tls11823 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2013, 12:06 PM   #48
IXix
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: mcr:uk
Posts: 3,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tls11823 View Post
Now that's slick! I may have to steal that idea.
Help yourself
http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.p...49#post1135749
IXix is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 03:52 PM   #49
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IXix View Post
Or for a lot less cash and possibly better results, http://www.toneboosters.com/tb-isone/
Not the same product

VRM models several well known speakers/monitors based on their freq curves in 3 types of rooms. The work of setting it up is done for you.

With tb-isone how would you know when you match any room and/or specific speaker in that room?
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 02:26 AM   #50
IXix
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: mcr:uk
Posts: 3,360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by imispgh View Post
Not the same product

VRM models several well known speakers/monitors based on their freq curves in 3 types of rooms. The work of setting it up is done for you.
True, and no doubt it does that very well but does it have any way to calibrate to the users physiology? If not, then it's very much hit and miss whether it will provide good results for any particular user.

Quote:
With tb-isone how would you know when you match any room and/or specific speaker in that room?
You don't, it's very generalised. I haven't had chance to compare the two but I know someone who has and Isone gave them a better experience. YMMV as they say on the internet.

Anyway, I'm not a ToneBoosters rep. Just trying to be helpful by pointing out an extremely affordable option for people like me ie. broke and stuck on cans.
IXix is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 07:29 AM   #51
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IXix View Post
You have to calibrate it to suit your head/ears. It doesn't take very long and once you know what settings work for you, you can make presets with different speaker/room properties.
Get the VRM Box. No need to worry about settings
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 08:56 AM   #52
Sasha
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 34
Default

Depends on which medium you want it to sound the way you like it. I am no fan of studio monitors that sound flat so that it can be leveled to be play on everything from a Mp3 ipod to a high end stereo installation. Mp3's suck anyway, and I don't intend to write music so that it sounds good as a crappy Mp3. I have cheap PC stereo speakers which I use as monitors and two headphones, one for mids and highs and one specifically for bass. If I like it, then it's good. I don't really care what other people think about my mix. If they don't like it, let them do the EQ'ing on their player.
Sasha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 09:42 AM   #53
ronmac
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasha View Post
Depends on which medium you want it to sound the way you like it. I am no fan of studio monitors that sound flat so that it can be leveled to be play on everything from a Mp3 ipod to a high end stereo installation. Mp3's suck anyway, and I don't intend to write music so that it sounds good as a crappy Mp3. I have cheap PC stereo speakers which I use as monitors and two headphones, one for mids and highs and one specifically for bass. If I like it, then it's good. I don't really care what other people think about my mix. If they don't like it, let them do the EQ'ing on their player.
That would be fine if EQ was the only monitoring issue. What about effects level and position, stereo imaging, instrument and voice balance......
ronmac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 09:56 AM   #54
Swamp Ape
Human being with feelings
 
Swamp Ape's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Asheville NC
Posts: 1,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasha View Post
Depends on which medium you want it to sound the way you like it. I am no fan of studio monitors that sound flat so that it can be leveled to be play on everything from a Mp3 ipod to a high end stereo installation. Mp3's suck anyway, and I don't intend to write music so that it sounds good as a crappy Mp3. I have cheap PC stereo speakers which I use as monitors and two headphones, one for mids and highs and one specifically for bass. If I like it, then it's good. I don't really care what other people think about my mix. If they don't like it, let them do the EQ'ing on their player.
I don't understand this. You don't want your music to sound good on all players? You don't want your music to be played as mp3s, but you only use cheap pc speakers to mix? If people think it sounds crappy, it's their job to fix it for you? What happens when you go to play it on a "high end stereo installation" and it sounds awful? I find this mentality baffling.
Swamp Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 10:12 AM   #55
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasha View Post
Depends on which medium you want it to sound the way you like it. I am no fan of studio monitors that sound flat so that it can be leveled to be play on everything from a Mp3 ipod to a high end stereo installation. Mp3's suck anyway, and I don't intend to write music so that it sounds good as a crappy Mp3. I have cheap PC stereo speakers which I use as monitors and two headphones, one for mids and highs and one specifically for bass. If I like it, then it's good. I don't really care what other people think about my mix. If they don't like it, let them do the EQ'ing on their player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronmac View Post
That would be fine if EQ was the only monitoring issue. What about effects level and position, stereo imaging, instrument and voice balance......
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swamp Ape View Post
I don't understand this. You don't want your music to sound good on all players? You don't want your music to be played as mp3s, but you only use cheap pc speakers to mix? If people think it sounds crappy, it's their job to fix it for you? What happens when you go to play it on a "high end stereo installation" and it sounds awful? I find this mentality baffling.
lol. I think we have a case of "My way or no way" going on here y'all. I have total respect for Sasha's attitude, and had it myself at one time. But as I got more serious about the engineering side of music, and started actually getting chances to get paid for it, instead of only as a musician, I had some rude awakenings regarding monitoring issues, mix choices, etc.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 10:23 AM   #56
XITE-1/4LIVE
Human being with feelings
 
XITE-1/4LIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Somewhere Between 120 and 150 BPM
Posts: 7,323
Default

I use Phone mixing to match my onstage monitors, and then also my 6 way IEMs.
For mastering though I prefer a well treated room and old out dated Blue Sky 2.1s.
Actually think the Room treatment is most important, a good Bass trap goes a long way.
Here's I match cabinets and IEMs though. An ancient Scope DSP Plug in capable of good 3D, and multiple driver imaging.
[IMG]http://img441.**************/img441/1209/cancontrol.jpg[/IMG]

Uploaded with **************
XITE-1/4LIVE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2013, 04:22 PM   #57
ripgtr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 120
Default

I use headphones to mix, and master, because I have to. No way I can crank up speakers at night, with a kid sleeping, etc.

I have found the biggest issue is reverb. When you get it set right on headphones, it is too much. This is the one big thing I haven't been able to do on phones and get it right.

I do have decent monitors (20/20 bas) and will check on them at lower volume when I can. Plus, burning test cds and listening in the car or on a stereo. I have gotten where I can do a pretty decent mix on cans, with the exception of verb. Plus, I like verb and have always liked a dash too much.
ripgtr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2013, 04:54 PM   #58
kindafishy
Human being with feelings
 
kindafishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ripgtr View Post
I use headphones to mix, and master, because I have to. No way I can crank up speakers at night, with a kid sleeping, etc.

I have found the biggest issue is reverb. When you get it set right on headphones, it is too much. This is the one big thing I haven't been able to do on phones and get it right.

I do have decent monitors (20/20 bas) and will check on them at lower volume when I can. Plus, burning test cds and listening in the car or on a stereo. I have gotten where I can do a pretty decent mix on cans, with the exception of verb. Plus, I like verb and have always liked a dash too much.
I see the mixing late at night argument a lot when it comes to reasons to mix with headphones, but I'm not convinced.

A prevailing opinion when it comes to mixing levels is that you shouldn't be listening at loud levels to mix, so unless your child/partner/roommate/etc is sleeping in the same room you mix in, headphones don't really solve a real problem. Maybe this is the case for you? It certainly isn't the case for everyone who makes this statement. I mean, can the television be on in the next room? If yes, then you can mix on monitors in the next room.

It does makes sense to adjust the volume the odd time here or there to check particular frequencies at different levels, but this might not be as effective to do in headphones anyway.

I mix with headphones during some stages of mixing just to concentrate and tune out everything around me, but it's usually when I'm doing pre-mix editing or just for a second or two to get a different perspective here and there. Never when making any critical balance, frequency or positioning decisions.
kindafishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 04:02 PM   #59
ripgtr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kindafishy View Post
I see the mixing late at night argument a lot when it comes to reasons to mix with headphones, but I'm not convinced.

A prevailing opinion when it comes to mixing levels is that you shouldn't be listening at loud levels to mix, so unless your child/partner/roommate/etc is sleeping in the same room you mix in, headphones don't really solve a real problem.
The TV generally doesn't bother him, unless we are watching something he really likes or is has music in it, that he likes.
I have tried a couple of times and he wakes up and comes in and says "what are you listening to?".
ripgtr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2013, 09:46 AM   #60
eddie_bowers
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 26
Default

I'm new at this, but have been doing everything so far with headphones.
One of the main reasons is that although monitors don't have to be loud, playing the same parts over and over can drive anyone who's not in the room and involved in the process insane.

I know I will need to test the mix in different listening environments, but it seams to me that headphones are the primary way people consume music today (second only to the car stereo).
So isn't how it sound in headphones important?
eddie_bowers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2013, 09:53 AM   #61
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie_bowers View Post
I'm new at this, but have been doing everything so far with headphones.
One of the main reasons is that although monitors don't have to be loud, playing the same parts over and over can drive anyone who's not in the room and involved in the process insane.

I know I will need to test the mix in different listening environments, but it seams to me that headphones are the primary way people consume music today (second only to the car stereo).
So isn't how it sound in headphones important?
How it sounds in headphones is definitely relevant, maybe even a great idea to test a mix with crappy earbuds and tiny cell-phone speakers. But even if you are mixing for a primarily headphone and car audience, there are elements in a mix that are not represented accurately with headphones (in my opinion, like panning, phase issues, and reverb. And for me, even at low volume, using headphones for more than 30 minutes at a time starts to affect my ability to hear things as accurately, and THAT messes up my mixes quite a bit.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2013, 02:08 PM   #62
Timothy Lawler
Human being with feelings
 
Timothy Lawler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,483
Default

If it sounds good through speakers in my monitoring room it sounds good through headphones too. Doesn't always work the other way around for me though.

When I mix with headphones everything sounds rich and clear. Every detail stands out, the dynamics are varied without being excessive, controlled without squashing. Everything has its own place in the mix's soundstage and EQ balance. And then I listen with speakers and none of that is working. It's so unfair!
__________________
Website
Youtube
Timothy Lawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2013, 05:33 PM   #63
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy Lawler View Post
If it sounds good through speakers in my monitoring room it sounds good through headphones too. Doesn't always work the other way around for me though.

When I mix with headphones everything sounds rich and clear. Every detail stands out, the dynamics are varied without being excessive, controlled without squashing. Everything has its own place in the mix's soundstage and EQ balance. And then I listen with speakers and none of that is working. It's so unfair!
Please look in to the VRM Box
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2013, 05:39 PM   #64
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by imispgh View Post
Please look in to the VRM Box
It's interesting software, but if you want to hear a mix in a good listening environment, I still think you are better off investing in making your actual listening environment better. And for my preferences, when my mixing space was not ideal, I had MUCH better luck using the IK Multimedia ARC system though monitors in my average room than through any emulation software in headphones.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 06:46 AM   #65
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
It's interesting software, but if you want to hear a mix in a good listening environment, I still think you are better off investing in making your actual listening environment better. And for my preferences, when my mixing space was not ideal, I had MUCH better luck using the IK Multimedia ARC system though monitors in my average room than through any emulation software in headphones.
Have you tried the VRM?

Nonetheless I have stated that good monitors set up well in a treated space is the preferred option.

Also the VRM is an outstanding second option to verify things. Have you seen the list of monitors emulated? Auratone, Yamaha 50M, Adam, Genelec, KRK, Rogers, Stirling and Quested? If you get the mix right on most or all of them using the studio setting you have a good mix.
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 07:23 AM   #66
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by imispgh View Post
Have you tried the VRM?

Nonetheless I have stated that good monitors set up well in a treated space is the preferred option.

Also the VRM is an outstanding second option to verify things. Have you seen the list of monitors emulated? Auratone, Yamaha 50M, Adam, Genelec, KRK, Rogers, Stirling and Quested? If you get the mix right on most or all of them using the studio setting you have a good mix.
Actually, yes I did try it. Like I said, it's a cool product. But also like I said, when I still had a sub-average mixing environment, I had much better and more consistently balanced mixes using my monitors and the IK ARC system than I did with any of the room emulation approaches with headphones. I realize that this was my specific experience, and always encourage people to find what works best for them. But the VRM did not end up to be what worked best for me.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 07:43 AM   #67
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
Actually, yes I did try it. Like I said, it's a cool product. But also like I said, when I still had a sub-average mixing environment, I had much better and more consistently balanced mixes using my monitors and the IK ARC system than I did with any of the room emulation approaches with headphones. I realize that this was my specific experience, and always encourage people to find what works best for them. But the VRM did not end up to be what worked best for me.
I get "to each his own" etc.

However I do have to say that your response concerns me. Not so much that you can't be right but because odds are you are not and others, especially the young or inexperienced, can come away thinking somehow your situation is in any way normal or normally acceptable.

At the risk of sounding like an elitist (and possibly turning people off - which is exactly the opposite of what I want to do) I caution people to do their homework. MOST people these days making music, mixing etc listen to crap on crap in crap. They have no actual EXPERIENCE in listening to an actually well recorded song in a properly treated room on proper equipment which has been properly set up. The room treatment by some method being key. If you have never run tests from the listening seat for the usual HORRIBLE situations that occur below 300hz and not treated them or the first order reflection points (comb filtering issues) then you are in no way properly informed. NOW having said this does this mean you will become great at what you do? No. What it does mean is you have an informed reference point.

I strongly suggest people run sweeps or pink noise from their seats, observe the waterfall plot etc and see what their room and set up is really doping. Then do an experiment by creating a filter on your master channel that reverses all the bumps you see (below 300hz) and raises the softer nulls (trying to counter deep nulls can hurt your amp). Try , within reason to get the resulting waveform flat from 30hz up. Also use a mirror to find the first order reflection points and put a blanket of some other absorbing material there temporarily. After you do this listen to your music. Listen to songs that most feel are universally well recorded. (I suggest something from the Trinity Sessions from Cowboy Junkies. The reason is that it is an incredibly well recorded album made in a church. The freq extremes are excellent, every instrument is exceptionally clear, you can hear they are in a church and the imaging is also excellent. By the way this whole album was made with ONE stereo mic and a DAT machine. It shows you how the right set up and equipment with minimal nonsense can do). What you should listen for is the freq extremes, any areas that no longer stick out or are now actually clearer, tightening up of the imaging - side to side and front to back. Again the issue is not that you LIKE what you hear. But that you now know what accurate is. I assure you that most of you will have your eyes (ears) opened and learn something from this. if anyone wants to be talked through it please let me know.(Note-if your monitors are not good this experiment will work but you need to understand you are hearing a relational improvement but NOT an example of how good it can actually be. And by good I do not necessarily mean expensive)

If having done this you understand and want to permanent value of this then you need to consider your budget and space. For bass traps etc are the way to go. However they take up space and are not cheap - even if you make your own. That is because you may need quite a few. The next option is to use a parametric EQ to apply that filter permanently. As a last resort you can keep the master filter but remember to kill it when rendering. Lastly you have to treat all first order reflections. Floor, ceiling, walls to the side and behind. (This is a bit less important if you listen nearfield and those surfaces are somehow far away). Cheap Sonex or similar looking panels will do. Carpets or even thick moving blankets etc can work.

Now on the VRM Box. Again it is far better to use this device than not have the right set up. (Yes you can as stated above still make good mixes but the odds are against you. That would require you are either lucky or educated enough on what things can or are supposed to sound like and the difference between that and your own system. Basically KNOWING your monitors). And again - while the right set up is preferred - using this device is massively to your benefit as a back up check. It is so cheap and gives you so many options it is borderline foolish not to use it. No it is not perfect but it gives you many monitor choices. So many I guaranty that in flipping between them you find something that one of them tells you that you would not find otherwise. And no I am not affiliated with the company.

I also encourage people to play their mixes in cars. (VRM doesn't simulate that). It's a very popular listening environment. Fact is these days if it doesn't sound good on a handheld device or car then to most it is not worth it. But keep in mind each car/system is different. AND they are usually littered with issues like your room. (Run those tests in a car sometime and see how things look. Keep in mind though that the glass is causing a lot of comb filtering issues in the mids and highs you may not see visually)

Lastly Ricjie43 - what didn't you like about the VRM? Did you try all the monitor options? Is it just a general dislike for headphones? (Which I am very sympathetic to. I went out of my way to get a great room to avoid having to use them except as the second reference I referred to). Are you using one of the headphones it was designed for? Like the Sennheiser 280s? Did you mix or listening to any universally known well recorded song not sound great to you on at least one of the choices? (For example I like the Adams). One song that I like to use is Morph the Cat from Donald Fagen. It has extremely wide range - especially that bass. Is it possible that you prefer your set up etc and not the VRM because it is personal taste or you have a hearing issue? (And I mean that seriously. Not being sarcastic. Quite often people how no idea they have a hearing issue or even that their ears could stand a flushing). Because I would suggest that if your system somehow sounds better than ALL of the VRM choices on the right headphones that your personal preference is steering you in the wrong direction. Not for yourself but if you make music or mix for others.

Last edited by imispgh; 04-20-2013 at 07:48 AM.
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 07:56 AM   #68
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by imispgh View Post
I get "to each his own" etc.

However I do have to say that your response concerns me. Not so much that you can't be right but because odds are you are not and others, especially the young or inexperienced, can come away thinking somehow your situation is in any way normal or normally acceptable.

At the risk of sounding like an elitist (and possibly turning people off - which is exactly the opposite of what I want to do) I caution people to do their homework. MOST people these days making music, mixing etc listen to crap on crap in crap. They have no actual EXPERIENCE in listening to an actually well recorded song in a properly treated room on proper equipment which has been properly set up. The room treatment by some method being key. If you have never run tests from the listening seat for the usual HORRIBLE situations that occur below 300hz and not treated them or the first order reflection points (comb filtering issues) then you are in no way properly informed. NOW having said this does this mean you will become great at what you do? No. What it does mean is you have an informed reference point.

I strongly suggest people run sweeps or pink noise from their seats, observe the waterfall plot etc and see what their room and set up is really doping. Then do an experiment by creating a filter on your master channel that reverses all the bumps you see (below 300hz) and raises the softer nulls (trying to counter deep nulls can hurt your amp). Try , within reason to get the resulting waveform flat from 30hz up. Also use a mirror to find the first order reflection points and put a blanket of some other absorbing material there temporarily. After you do this listen to your music. Listen to songs that most feel are universally well recorded. (I suggest something from the Trinity Sessions from Cowboy Junkies. The reason is that it is an incredibly well recorded album made in a church. The freq extremes are excellent, every instrument is exceptionally clear, you can hear they are in a church and the imaging is also excellent. By the way this whole album was made with ONE stereo mic and a DAT machine. It shows you how the right set up and equipment with minimal nonsense can do). What you should listen for is the freq extremes, any areas that no longer stick out or are now actually clearer, tightening up of the imaging - side to side and front to back. Again the issue is not that you LIKE what you hear. But that you now know what accurate is. I assure you that most of you will have your eyes (ears) opened and learn something from this. if anyone wants to be talked through it please let me know.(Note-if your monitors are not good this experiment will work but you need to understand you are hearing a relational improvement but NOT an example of how good it can actually be. And by good I do not necessarily mean expensive)

If having done this you understand and want to permanent value of this then you need to consider your budget and space. For bass traps etc are the way to go. However they take up space and are not cheap - even if you make your own. That is because you may need quite a few. The next option is to use a parametric EQ to apply that filter permanently. As a last resort you can keep the master filter but remember to kill it when rendering. Lastly you have to treat all first order reflections. Floor, ceiling, walls to the side and behind. (This is a bit less important if you listen nearfield and those surfaces are somehow far away). Cheap Sonex or similar looking panels will do. Carpets or even thick moving blankets etc can work.

Now on the VRM Box. Again it is far better to use this device than not have the right set up. (Yes you can as stated above still make good mixes but the odds are against you. That would require you are either lucky or educated enough on what things can or are supposed to sound like and the difference between that and your own system. Basically KNOWING your monitors). And again - while the right set up is preferred - using this device is massively to your benefit as a back up check. It is so cheap and gives you so many options it is borderline foolish not to use it. No it is not perfect but it gives you many monitor choices. So many I guaranty that in flipping between them you find something that one of them tells you that you would not find otherwise. And no I am not affiliated with the company.

I also encourage people to play the mixes in cars. (VRM doesn't simulate that). It's a very popular listening environment. Fact is these days if it doesn't sound good on a handheld device or car then to most it is not worth it. But keep in mind each car/system is different. AND they are usually littered with issues like your room. (Run those tests in a car sometime and see how things look. Keep in mind though that the glass is causing a lot of comb filtering issues in the mids and highs you may not see visually)

Lastly Ricjie43 - what didn't you like about the VRM? Did you try all the monitor options? Is it just a general dislike for headphones? (Which I am very sympathetic to. I went out of my way to get a great room to avoid having to use them except as the second reference I referred to). Are you using one of the headphones it was designed for? Like the Sennheiser 280s? Did you mix or listening to any universally known well recorded song not sound great to you on at least one of the choices? (For example I like the Adams). One song that I like to use is Morph the Cat from Donald Fagen. It has extremely wide range - especially that bass. Is it possible that you prefer your set up etc and not the VRM because it is personal taste or you have a hearing issue? (And I mean that seriously. Not being sarcastic. Quite often people how no idea they have a hearing issue or even that their ears could stand a flushing). Because I would suggest that if your system somehow sounds better than ALL of the VRM choices on the right headphones that you personal preference is steering you in the wrong direction. Not for yourself but if you make music or mix for others.
Ha ha, I guess we are even then.... because your response to me concerns me, so here goes.....lol
This is definitely a "to each their own" situation. I agree with the importance of proper room treatment! That's why I now do have a properly treated room and have no use for any room correction software, emulations, etc. But you and I are discussing tools to help mixers do better mixes while dealing with less-than-great listening environments. The best way to put it is that I did not get lucky, and yes I did try VRM's many different monitor emulations. Have YOU tried the ARC system, or even researched it. In my opinion, it's really just a different approach to the same end that VRM does. But ARC does not try to artificially create rooms and monitors, but instead you analyze the frequency response of your actual room, and the software makes attempts at correcting what comes out of your monitors to TRY to give you what it would sound like in a better room. Is it perfect? Of course not. But when I worked with VRM, and then with ARC, I got better mixes 100% of the time. And this was referencing in cars, home stereos, ear-buds, many sources.
So I appreciate your "concern" and all, but I am not a novice, nor am I haphazard or sloppy. Before I got better acoustic treatment and needed "help" with my mixes, the ARC system just did a better job for me. So in regards to your warning that I am off base with my ears, I'll remind you again that I am not suggesting for people to trust their inadequate acoustics more than something like VRM, no way. That's why I reached out for additional tools like VRM and ARC. And yes, I mix for others, and even master music for other mastering engineers, so I am fairly confident that my ears are doing ok. Thanks for the info though.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 07:59 AM   #69
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 23,853
Default

Quote:
However I do have to say that your response concerns me. Not so much that you can't be right but because odds are you are not and others, especially the young or inexperienced, can come away thinking somehow your situation is in any way normal or normally acceptable.
Or some of us including Richie are not young and inexperienced, have proper listening environments which are completely acceptable. I think the VRM thing is cool but it was created to make up for less than ideal situations and to target bedroom studios and people on the go and it say's that right on the VRM web page:

Quote:
There’s no substitute for mixing on high-quality monitors in a well treated room, however sometimes this ideal scenario is not possible;
Actually, I think the people on the go mix on a train part is just a marketing addition but YMMV.

Of course the product has value but I'm not sure I'd sell it as hard as you seem to be. There are a multitude of professionals here that can mix their arses off without that box. If you had some other intention, sorry but I think you might be underestimating some of the posters here.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 08:09 AM   #70
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Or some of us including Richie are not young and inexperienced, have proper listening environments which are completely acceptable. I think the VRM thing is cool but it was created to make up for less than ideal situations and to target bedroom studios and people on the go and it say's that right on the VRM web page:



Actually, I think the people on the go mix on a train part is just a marketing addition but YMMV.

Of course the product has value but I'm not sure I'd sell it as hard as you seem to be. There are a multitude of professionals here that can mix their arses off without that box. If you had some other intention, sorry but I think you might be underestimating some of the posters here.
Ha ha, thanks sir. And once again, here we are chasing each others virtual tail again.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 08:11 AM   #71
ngarjuna
Human being with feelings
 
ngarjuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,298
Default

There is no model that exists today that can take a speaker 1" or so from your ears and make it sound like you're in a room with speakers. The number of subtle variables at work in a listening environment are far beyond the code inside of that little box. It sounds absolutely nothing like listening through speakers much less the particular speakers it claims to "model". I would evaluate the claim that any headphone enhancing product can make headphones suitable for mix decisions (much less more suitable than your "average to poor" listening environment) with great skepticism. If you're going to mix through headphones (and obviously there are some who do despite the wealth of advice against such a practice) then just do it; as you check your mixes on more and more environments you'll start to see the ways your cans are failing you. At which point your headphone mixes will get a smidge better as you learn how to guess about what they may (or, more specifically, may not) be telling you. But it's still not comparable to having a decent room with a decent set of speakers (which is a lot more economical than it used to be). Trying to convince the "young or inexperienced" that a $99 box can defy the laws of physics is the most "concerning" part of this discussion to me.
__________________
cheers,
@ngarjuna
Gist
ngarjuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 08:41 AM   #72
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
Ha ha, I guess we are even then.... because your response to me concerns me, so here goes.....lol
This is definitely a "to each their own" situation. I agree with the importance of proper room treatment! That's why I now do have a properly treated room and have no use for any room correction software, emulations, etc. But you and I are discussing tools to help mixers do better mixes while dealing with less-than-great listening environments. The best way to put it is that I did not get lucky, and yes I did try VRM's many different monitor emulations. Have YOU tried the ARC system, or even researched it. In my opinion, it's really just a different approach to the same end that VRM does. But ARC does not try to artificially create rooms and monitors, but instead you analyze the frequency response of your actual room, and the software makes attempts at correcting what comes out of your monitors to TRY to give you what it would sound like in a better room. Is it perfect? Of course not. But when I worked with VRM, and then with ARC, I got better mixes 100% of the time. And this was referencing in cars, home stereos, ear-buds, many sources.
So I appreciate your "concern" and all, but I am not a novice, nor am I haphazard or sloppy. Before I got better acoustic treatment and needed "help" with my mixes, the ARC system just did a better job for me. So in regards to your warning that I am off base with my ears, I'll remind you again that I am not suggesting for people to trust their inadequate acoustics more than something like VRM, no way. That's why I reached out for additional tools like VRM and ARC. And yes, I mix for others, and even master music for other mastering engineers, so I am fairly confident that my ears are doing ok. Thanks for the info though.
Thanks for the response

I am familiar with the ARC and actually do something similar. I measure it and hand adjust it with a Parametric EQ from Behringer. I should have explained myself better but my issue was never with the ARC. I think I keyed on the "average room" part and your not listing the monitors meant you used only the ARC to compensate for all the room issues and had not so great monitors. Having said that it appears we are actually in agreement on the equipment/room/set up etc. Curious - what about first order reflections and comb filtering? Do you absorb or diffuse those points? (From what I know or can see the ARC nor any other system deals with those issues)

I am still curious about why the VRM wasn't to your liking. Not as a first choice but double check? What about it didn't you like enough for it to be a net positive?
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 08:51 AM   #73
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Or some of us including Richie are not young and inexperienced, have proper listening environments which are completely acceptable. I think the VRM thing is cool but it was created to make up for less than ideal situations and to target bedroom studios and people on the go and it say's that right on the VRM web page:



Actually, I think the people on the go mix on a train part is just a marketing addition but YMMV.

Of course the product has value but I'm not sure I'd sell it as hard as you seem to be. There are a multitude of professionals here that can mix their arses off without that box. If you had some other intention, sorry but I think you might be underestimating some of the posters here.
We are actually in agreement - I think. I am in no way suggesting the VRM is a first choice. Good set up, equipment and a treated room is. IF however all of that cannot be done to at least an acceptable level then I think the VRM should be the next choice. Again not perfect but given the monitor choices are so wide and the cost so cheap it seems like the wise 2nd fiddle. (And like I said even if you have a great environment I think it is a killer second opinion device. Again because of all the monitors it has. And that includes the Auratone and PC speakers

And yes of course people can mix their posteriors off without it. But they probably have a stellar environment or have learned the hell out of their poor system. And they probably have multiple monitors to try which offsets the VRM. Having said that how many of them, if they tried it, might not see the value added for the price????

As for underestimating the posters. You may be right. Not of most people who mix and make music in general but of the slice that come here. And I say that because I would imagine those who come here are more motivated, open minded, interested and as a result better informed than most.

(Most people, in most fields, are barely competent and usually situationally ethical. Literally MOST musicians have crap systems in crap rooms and have no idea how much better their stuff could sound. It amazes me sometimes. But not any different I suppose than people who do landscaping for a living whose own yards look like crap or mechanics whose cars run like crap)
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 08:53 AM   #74
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

I have great monitors, and have settled into a good environment. But about your last question......

Quote:
Originally Posted by imispgh View Post
I am still curious about why the VRM wasn't to your liking. Not as a first choice but double check? What about it didn't you like enough for it to be a net positive?
....and it was answered for me so eloquently by this illustrious forum member.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by ngarjuna View Post
There is no model that exists today that can take a speaker 1" or so from your ears and make it sound like you're in a room with speakers. The number of subtle variables at work in a listening environment are far beyond the code inside of that little box. It sounds absolutely nothing like listening through speakers much less the particular speakers it claims to "model". I would evaluate the claim that any headphone enhancing product can make headphones suitable for mix decisions (much less more suitable than your "average to poor" listening environment) with great skepticism. If you're going to mix through headphones (and obviously there are some who do despite the wealth of advice against such a practice) then just do it; as you check your mixes on more and more environments you'll start to see the ways your cans are failing you. At which point your headphone mixes will get a smidge better as you learn how to guess about what they may (or, more specifically, may not) be telling you. But it's still not comparable to having a decent room with a decent set of speakers (which is a lot more economical than it used to be). Trying to convince the "young or inexperienced" that a $99 box can defy the laws of physics is the most "concerning" part of this discussion to me.
I have consistently had bad results using headphones for anything more than tracking and for specific referencing; like listening for a glitch or checking bass. Maybe this is how my ears work with my work, who knows? But I tested the VRM (owned by a friend/associate) and determined that it had zero use for my work and pleasure. As I said, before I got better treatment, I got unusually more consistent results (as in 100%)with ARC and my good monitors but in below average environment than with VRM. And my results were echoed by some friends/engineers who have impeccable ears and amazing mixing/listening environments. If VRM works for you, awesome. If it is a great double-check for you, I am happy for you. I just can't help sell it because I saw no value in it for my needs.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 08:56 AM   #75
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ngarjuna View Post
There is no model that exists today that can take a speaker 1" or so from your ears and make it sound like you're in a room with speakers. The number of subtle variables at work in a listening environment are far beyond the code inside of that little box. It sounds absolutely nothing like listening through speakers much less the particular speakers it claims to "model". I would evaluate the claim that any headphone enhancing product can make headphones suitable for mix decisions (much less more suitable than your "average to poor" listening environment) with great skepticism. If you're going to mix through headphones (and obviously there are some who do despite the wealth of advice against such a practice) then just do it; as you check your mixes on more and more environments you'll start to see the ways your cans are failing you. At which point your headphone mixes will get a smidge better as you learn how to guess about what they may (or, more specifically, may not) be telling you. But it's still not comparable to having a decent room with a decent set of speakers (which is a lot more economical than it used to be). Trying to convince the "young or inexperienced" that a $99 box can defy the laws of physics is the most "concerning" part of this discussion to me.
Do you mean no model or no perfect model? Have you tried the VRM Box with headphones made for it and tried all the monitors? As for getting the code right I would imagine they are far closer than not. All they have to do is run sweeps and test the hell out of the result at the listening position in a proper room and set up. Surely not years ago - but now they can see it all - or at least damn close. They can see volumes, phase shifts, delays etc. Now having said this the headphones you use, even if they are the ones they used in the design, are not perfect, each hum,an hears different and the design as you say is not perfect.

Like I said the VRM is not the best choice. The right system, set up and room is. But even for it's imperfections it is far better than crap, set up wrong in an untreated room.

Have you tried the device?
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 08:57 AM   #76
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by imispgh View Post
(Most people, in most fields, are barely competent and usually situationally ethical. Literally MOST musicians have crap systems in crap rooms and have no idea how much better their stuff could sound. It amazes me sometimes. But not any different I suppose than people who do landscaping for a living whose own yards look like crap or mechanics whose cars run like crap)
THIS is funny because until 3 years ago when my spine gave out, my "day job" when I had to was as a professional gardener/landscaper. My gardens were not up to par because I was too busy working, not because I had overlooked it. But yes, I have always modernized the old phrase "Cobblers have holes in their shoes" with "Mechanics drive junkers". But not like "Musicians have crap recording systems". lol fer sure.
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 09:00 AM   #77
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by imispgh View Post
Like I said the VRM is not the best choice. The right system, set up and room is. But even for it's imperfections it is far better than crap, set up wrong in an untreated room.
... or use some other "helper" software. VRM is not the only option out there ya know.....

Are you SURE that you are not on a commission from Focusrite.....?
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 09:05 AM   #78
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
I have great monitors, and have settled into a good environment. But about your last question......


....and it was answered for me so eloquently by this illustrious forum member.....



I have consistently had bad results using headphones for anything more than tracking and for specific referencing; like listening for a glitch or checking bass. Maybe this is how my ears work with my work, who knows? But I tested the VRM (owned by a friend/associate) and determined that it had zero use for my work and pleasure. As I said, before I got better treatment, I got unusually more consistent results (as in 100%)with ARC and my good monitors but in below average environment than with VRM. And my results were echoed by some friends/engineers who have impeccable ears and amazing mixing/listening environments. If VRM works for you, awesome. If it is a great double-check for you, I am happy for you. I just can't help sell it because I saw no value in it for my needs.

Why did it have zero use for work or pleasure? (And again I agree your set up etc is far better choice).

I keep pushing because I keep getting none specific responses on that other than the better choice being your system. Which given its description I completely agree with. And - while I completely get the VRM would not be someone's cup of tea to be so dead set against it just seems a bit over the top. Zero use just seems a bit much which usually indicates far more subjectivity than objectivity. For example if you agreed that others could get the same benefits I described but your personal choice is that you dislike headphones that much or are fine with missing the benefits you could get that response would make sense to me. It's like saying that if you had access to all of the other monitors you wouldn't see the benefit in using them.

Evminitors. How is having access to them for $100 not value added? (Assuming of course you don't have access to the ACTUAL monitors like an Auratone, PC speakers, and the list of popular monitors)

Last edited by imispgh; 04-20-2013 at 09:21 AM.
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 09:20 AM   #79
imispgh
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richie43 View Post
... or use some other "helper" software. VRM is not the only option out there ya know.....

Are you SURE that you are not on a commission from Focusrite.....?
No not on commission. Another device could come out that does better and I would buy it. And to your and other's points I would rather have the other monitors to try for real.

I have this pet peeve for ignorance. (And I in no way mean you at all). I am simply playing the odds. Most people are ill informed and like I said barely competent at what they do. Couple that with their vocalizing their opinions or "expertise" and I get a bit pumped up. I get very engaged when I think others,especially the open minded, young, truly interested in excellence etc, are given bad information and misled. That just perpetuates mediocrity or worse. The part that bothers me the most is intent. Not knowing or doing right AND not knowing it is understandable. Not having the desire to make sure you are squared away and/or not doing something about it when you find out you are not AND then knowingly passing that attitude and bad information to others is just intolerable. No matter what you do at work or play. (Within reason of course. Too much of a drive to "perfection" causes it's own problems. And of course in many this excellence etc is more subjective than objective)

(Yes I know this sets me up to be an arrogant ass. Trust me people who meet me face to face and work with me usually see that while there is a touch of truth to that in person I am really someone who tries and usually succeeds to walk the talk and cares very much for not just others achieving excellence but does everything he can to help them get there and enjoy it. Improvement,achieving excellence or being world class AND not enjoying the experience is a sad and deplorable situation).
imispgh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2013, 09:31 AM   #80
richie43
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 8,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by imispgh View Post
Why did it have zero use for work or pleasure? (And again I agree your set up etc is far better choice).

I keep pushing because I keep getting none specific responses on that other than the better choice being your system. Which given its description I completely agree with. And - while I completely get it would not be someone's cup of tea to be so dead set against it just seems a bit over the top. Zero use just seems a bit much which usually indicates far more subjectivity than objectivity. For example if you agreed that others could get the same benefits I described but your personal choice is that you dislike headphones that much or are fine with missing the benefits you could get that response would make sense to me. It's like saying that if you had access to all of the other monitors you wouldn't see the benefit in using them.

Evminitors. How is having access to them for $100 not value added? (Assuming of course you don't have access to the ACTUAL monitors like an Auratone, PC speakers, and the list of popular monitors)
Oh my.....
I am not being extreme, but of course I am being subjective; that's what we all do when we make decisions based on our own opinions and needs. VRM had zero use for me because I consistently did better mixes without it. It was a waste of my time and money. Of course someone else may get more use from it, but my not wanting it at all does not make me extreme or reactionary; I just don't want to use it. And you keep talking about it with language like "It's like saying that if you had access to all of the other monitors you wouldn't see the benefit in using them...." VRM does not give you access to any monitors, it is emulation software. See ngarjuna's well-iterated response (again!). VRM was not worth anything FOR ME and MY WORK. Besides, when I was struggling to finance more treatment for my room, it was also a time when $100 was better spent toward better mics, cables, preamps.... maybe food for the family...lol. I can't stress enough the part about IF IT WORKS FOR YOU-AWESOME. VRM was not a good option for me, my mixes did not gain from using it, therefore I did not buy it. But if it makes you feel better, I do own a Focusrite Scarlett that I use for a quick and dirty mobile interface for quick and dirty mobile recording, so if you want to tell your Focusrite reps that are secretly paying you for promo and sales that you sold it to me, I will gladly lie and corroborate the story so you get a bonus.....
__________________
http://soundyaudio.com/ The Sounds of the Hear and Now
richie43 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 12:53 PM.


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