| Pages:
1
2
3
4 |
arsene
Oud Junkie
Posts: 366
Registered: 5-19-2007
Location: Rotterdam, NL
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hey you guys!
First off - great thread, I just stumbled upon it now! This subject is very close to my heart as this was (supposed to be) my line of work before I
got into tax law (I know, it sounds weird - I'll explain later  ), and it's very
useful to have these discussions here, as nowadays so much is possible in terms of recording without breaking the bank.
Much has already been said but I read a few things I felt I could maybe add to.
First things first - the old cliché is definitely true: it's not the gear, but the skill that makes most of the difference. In other words, it's no
use owning a fully fledged Pro-Tools and SSL equipped studio if you don't know what you're doing. A good engineer will get great recordings with
minimal gear.
Having said that, if you have plans to take recording a step beyond just rough "demos for the band" it does pay to invest in something that at least
doesn't color your source (and that goes for every part of the chain).
Starting with the element closest to the source: the mic. I was very enthousiastic about the ruggedness and sound of the M3, and it may very well be
suited to studio work. It is indeed a bit noisy compared to most studio mics, in a live situation thats ok, but in the studio you want your sound as
clean as possible (like sazi said, the output is not as great as other studio mics).
But! I was very happy to see that fernandraynaud already posted the link to my favorite brand of hi-q "budget" mics: Oktava! And even better:
Oktavamod. Quick history: Oktava are basically Russian rip-offs of Neumann (seriously, sometime during the cold war, some capsules got switched in a
recording studio in East Berlin, and the rest, as they say, is history). So on their own they're already pretty solid. But there's this guy, Mike Joly
from Oktavamod (he didnt pay me to say this I swear!) who turns those russian tanks into BMWs! He cleans up the wiring, changes some things in the
dome, anyway a lot of technical stuff. I own two of his modded MK-319 (imo superior over the 219) and they're absolutely fantastic. Vocals, guitars,
trombone, violin, sax... and of course oud - it nails them. Plus they look cool too http://shop.sound7.be/WebRoot/StoreLFR/Shops/62056072/4880/F96C/366...
Granted, he's upped his prices a little since 2005 (when I had them modded) but it's still a good deal. An even better deal is if you could find a 319
(or 219) really cheap somewhere and send it to him to have it modded.
Anyway, I've recorded with a bunch of classic mics (including old AKG's and Neumanns). When Joly told me his 319 would rival the U87 he wasn't kidding
around, but I had to hear it for myself to believe it. I've bought and sold many mics, but the 319 has always remained! So, absolutely recommended.
As for mixers - if you're just going to track yourself (and maybe a friend or two) you really dont need them anymore. A lot of affordable and good
soundcards come with multiple ins. the EMU series are good bang for the buck. I'm a fan of Focusrite though. At home I use a simple Saffire 6. Two
ins, two outs. Nothing fancy. Awesome pre-amps. That's it, you really don't need more unless you're recording an ensemble at once - and they have
products for that as well.
The DAW is completely up to you - whatever you feel comfortable with and whatever has, for you, the easiest learning curve. Remember it's all about
the creative process, not about the data process! There's tons to choose from, Cubase, Logic (apple only), Pro Tools or Sonar (Win only) to name a few
of the classic ones - or there's new stuff like Ableton Live, etc. That's just something you'll have to figure out by downloading demos, etc.
Last but not least: monitors. Not the light emitting ones you're looking at now, but speakers I mean. I dare say that if you HAVE to skimp on
something to save money, don't skimp on microphone or speakers. I could write a book why decent studio monitors are important, but many have written
better books before me, so let me just say that if you want to make sure you got the right sound, you need speakers that tell you the truth. So no
hi-fi speakers (they are like salesmen, they make it sound so nice, but once you take it home it's lost all its sheen) and no headphones either (near
impossible to get the right EQ, however can be useful when checking for stereo imaging). Decent monitors needen't have you apply for a third mortgage
- my brother recently got a pair of M-Audio BX8 D2 and I was astonished at how great these sound - very balanced and amazing stereo imaging! Another
nice option are the Samson Rubicon ribbon monitors. And also the Samson resolv 65a do an excellent job, if you can get a pair second hand (they're
discontinued) for a good price you've more then you'll need for a while! And of course there's the budget KRK or Genelecs... But for the money I'd
rather get the big M-Audios than a small Genelec. (if you can afford the big ones... by all means! I'm a fan of ADAM also).
Then you're basically done. In this day and age, unless you have tons of money lying around, you really dont need huge analog gear anymore. Don't get
me wrong, I'm a sucker for analog myself (great, big analog synths that create that fat, lush bearded Greek style sound are my guilty pleasure) but
consider this: they are prohibitely expensive, they take a lot of effort -and money- to take care of, they can be a hassle when recording, (usually)
no saving option!! (very important for me ), etc etc etc... Sure, they may be
more fun! But will you still be smiling when the repairman asks you 3000€ just to repair a voice chip (happened to a friend of mine's Yamaha CS80...
ouch. Meanwhile I'm Vangelis-ing away with Arturia's virtual version! But I'm getting side-tracked here).
Anyway, my point is, you can make amazing music with half-decent gear, but unfortunately also the other way around In the end what counts is your skill - most importantly: mic placement, room
acoustics, the use of EQ and compression (or even better: knowing when not to use it). You nail that, heck, you can record great tracks on your iPhone
(with the very handy app FourTrack, which is, as the name suggests, a fully fledged 4-track recorder!).
Well I may have lost some points along the way, but I hope this helps with the creation of your home studio...
But let's not kid eachother... That analog fetish is here to stay, whether we like it or not.. all we can do is convince ourselves from time to time
we have enough and we are happy with what we have... but G.A.S. is a serious affliction and one day, when you will be least expecting it, it will rear
it's ugly - but oh so warm sounding - head again...
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
One more thing: you don't have to nail everything at once, and you won't anyway. I think that luck (or fortune) plays a role. You don't give luck a
chance if you buy everything at once from one source.
Oktava mics sound very good to begin with, unless you get a very bad one. Unfortunately word gets around, but there are still some bargains left, and
Mk-219s look ugly, which is a blessing. Arsene is right, monitors are key. But if you can't spend over $600 for a set, you might be better off
starting with decent headphones. With mic emulation available as VSTs in the DAW, you can even manage with less than ideal mics.
So take your time, start out with what YOU understand. This is important. You have to build your studio by YOUR OWN wits, or you won't know how to
take advantage of what you have. So read and apply what you learn, and when you understand a lot about e.g. monitors, that is the moment to shop for
them, not when you would be relying on a salesman's word. It takes years to truly learn any specialized skill. Enjoy the journey.
What you need to start is just a pair of decent heaphones, a computer with enough memory and disk space, a software DAW + some friends with VST
plugins, a simple stereo in/stereo out interface with mic inputs or external preamp(s) and a couple of condenser mics. Cheap mics are OK for now. If
you play keyboards, you need MIDI in/out. We have a saying in software development: don't bother to make it perfect the first time, you will redo it
anyway. Same with studio gear. All along the way remember that a pro could make a commercial CD using a 4 track and some kitchen utensils, so get GOOD
at using what you have.
|
|
|
arsene
Oud Junkie
Posts: 366
Registered: 5-19-2007
Location: Rotterdam, NL
Member Is Offline
|
|
Fernandraynaud, well said, 95% in agreement, except for the headphones: I'd still get (budget) monitors over headphones - the M-Audio Bx5 for example
are excellent and come in at around 250€ a set (from memory, I think it was sth like that).
But this is absolutely key what you said: "start out with what YOU understand. This is important. You have to build your studio by YOUR OWN wits, or
you won't know how to take advantage of what you have." and "get GOOD at using what you have".
I suppose that was also the point of my long, long post
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I myself would always prefer good headphones like the Beyerdynamic DT-880 over budget monitors. In the long run we need both, good heaphones
and good monitors. If I only have money for one of these, I would definitely start with the headphones.
I think a further good tip is to choose a DAW software with a good community ... that's one of the reasons, I chose Reaper ... I found countless good
tips in their forum, including where to get good free VSTs and VSTIs. For Windows users Reaper is the best start: it's free in the beginning and fully
funtional and you get free tutorial videos, that explain step by step, how to start. Not to forget a detailled biiig manual in PDF ... did I mention
it's free?
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
Mehran
Oud Junkie
Posts: 210
Registered: 4-27-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hey guys. So much information im struggling to get through it all!
A little question though! As predominantly a saxophonist, ive never really had to think about recording or amplification however with the oud ive
realised im gonna need a microphone at some point for live performances. Im also (and probably more) interested in home recording (looking to upgrade
my microphone from my 1990 apple mac microphone).
However, from what ive read im still unclear whether mics for the studio can be used well for performing live, and vice versa. In other words guys, I
aint got a clue.
The two mics that im thinking about were previously mentioned, the Audio Technica AT2020and the Rode M3. Im more inclined to the AT2020 because it looks like it has a better bass response than the M3, but i could be reading the frequency
response curves wrong.
Do either of these mics stand up to both home recording and live performance? Would one these mics provide any major advantages over the other in both
the recording vs. live context.
Many thanks
Mehran
|
|
|
arsene
Oud Junkie
Posts: 366
Registered: 5-19-2007
Location: Rotterdam, NL
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hi Mehran,
In principle, there's no law that says which mic to use in which occasion: if it sounds good for that particular performance, it probably is good.
I've seen many a vocalist recording in a studio with SM57s and it sounded wonderful for their voice.
Having said that, there are some general pointers to keep in mind when choosing a mic. First, studio sessions are (usually) quiet enough that you can
use a very sensitive mic (most condenser mics would fall in this category). Especially if you're recording at home, chances are you'll be playing
every track separately, so since you're the only source (apart from car horns and birds outside perhaps ) you can use a nice, sensitive mic with a broad response to really get all those nice harmonics. You'd ideally go for
the best ratio of output level and noise level - since oud is not the loudest instrument around, and especially if you're playing solo oud, you want
to get a good, clean level (from your examples, the AT2020 is probably the better choice, as the M3, while having a nice sound, doesn't quite have the
lowest noise levels).
There's nothing against using condenser (sensitive) mics live. Especially if you're playing solo or with just one or two instruments more, this might
be the best option as you can get a nice full sound out of it. If you're part of a big ensemble however, this might give feedback problems so many opt
for dynamic mics (like Shure, or beyerdynamic to name a few) or pick-ups in their oud. Keep in mind such a situation you don't need a full sound at
all, that would just conflict with the other instruments. Oud is not a bass instrument, so you'd ideally want to get rid of anything under 90Hz (or
even higher) anyway. Even in the studio you should probably cut everything below 70 or 80Hz (or higher), you'll see it will sound cleaner and less
"busy"... with instruments like oud, guitar etc, a lot of rumble and noise sits in those lower regions and you don't need those for a good sound
anyway. In a busy mix, even a bass guitar is usually cut below 60, 70 or even 80hz! Even if you're recording solo oud you really don't need anything
under 50 - 60 hz.
I myself use the M3 for live situations but almost always use a large condenser for studio purposes.
But don't make your choice based on sheets and specifications. Many music shops (at least here in NL) offer the possibility to come test their mics,
so the best way to proceed is probably to take your oud and head on to the nearest store, grab some mics and a pair of headphones and start listening
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by arsene  | | In a busy mix, even a bass guitar is usually cut below 60, 70 or even 80hz! Even if you're recording solo oud you really don't need anything under 50
- 60 hz. |
Yes, but we should keep in mind, that an arabic oud is two tones deeper than the guitar. The deep C goes down to around 65 Hz. So for solo oud we
shouldn't cut the bass above 60 Hz. And most mics don't go that deep. That's why the AKG C3000 is my favorite oud recording mic. On the stage I would
only use it for solo oud, because it's extremely sensitive.
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
ultragroove
Oud Maniac
Posts: 68
Registered: 1-9-2010
Location: Naumburg, Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: Athar Kurd
|
|
i agree with aymara and would say that the lowcut/highpass filtering is always applied after the recording (... in the signal chain...). the goal is
always to capture the full range of frequencies. many tube preamplifier use sub-bass frequencies to produce overtones for making the bass part more
stronger without making the bass signal itself louder. after that the recorded signal is probably filtered around/below the frequency of the
base-note to avoid problems with low/low mid frequencies in the mix (the "mud").
... so a high sensitive mic with a big membrane and a nice (tube) microphone-pre-amplifier is my choice for recording ouds.
sorry for that really bad english. 
greetings from germany too.
falk
|
|
|
antonis
Oud Lover
Posts: 24
Registered: 11-29-2010
Location: Greece
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hello everybody,
just found this thread.
This is my probelm.
I used a couple of years ago the G track usb mic ( http://www.samsontech.com/samson/products/microphones/usb-microphon... ) to do some recording i wanted. After that i bought the tascam us-144 sound card and some headphones to get more serious but at that period i dindnt
have any time so the whole project fall apart before i buy a new xlr mic.
Now i have all the free time in the world so i would like to start playing again with my toys!
Though, i'm stuck with a usb mic that i cannot connect to the sound card. Do you know any way to connect a usb mic to xlr in (cable or something)? Or
i should buy a new mic?
Thanks
|
|
|
Mehran
Oud Junkie
Posts: 210
Registered: 4-27-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
An interesting question that came to my mind as well.
I would also really like to know the answer to this, because audiotechnica do a USB version of the AT2020 which im considering.
|
|
|
arsene
Oud Junkie
Posts: 366
Registered: 5-19-2007
Location: Rotterdam, NL
Member Is Offline
|
|
USB mics have built in soundcards, so they're perfect for quick recordings of ideas on the road, etc. If you want to take advantage of, for example,
the nice pre-amps in a certain soundcard or because the sound card has higher quality AD converters, you should probably get a mic with a proper XLR
connection... you´ll be much more flexible that way, cause youre not stuck to the mic´s internal sound card.
|
|
|
David.B
Oud Junkie
Posts: 640
Registered: 9-5-2009
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: Renaissance
|
|
The Blue Yeti Pro uses both : XLR and USB.
The connectivity USB female -> XLR male seems to not exist yet ... But I don't know if it's possible : On the Yeti, XLR vehicles analogue and USB
vehicles digital. To me, you can't use G track and AT 2020 without going through the audio interface into the microphone. What you have is already
digital, the best is to work on it with your computer 
Sorry if I'm saying stupid things, my knowledge about this topic is brand new (a couple of days).
By the way, I read a little bit about microphones and this is so huge that I focused on one small insignificant trademark ... Neumann
In a way, it's not useless to know the best in order to understand the worst
I guess the M 149 Tube must perfectly fit to the oud (with a good tube preamplifier off course). And I'd like to know more about your recording
Falk.
Does anyone used the U 87? As an international reference I just wonder.
At last I'm really curious about the TLM 103 D. The digital solution is really interesting ... Here I'm still stuck about something : How one should
connect the DMI-2 to the audio interface? It's AES/EBU, XLR output. Does it mean this connectivity is necessary? -> 
At last, I guess an AES/EBU input is necessary on the computer, as it is written :
'Computer for
Recording System with AES/EBU Input & Remote Control Software'
How does it look like? Same as the external audio interface for the computer, or PCI audio interface is the only way?
The first diagram page 10 of the pdf file -> http://www.neumann.com/img/Linkgraphics/Solution-D_E.pdf
|
|
|
David.B
Oud Junkie
Posts: 640
Registered: 9-5-2009
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: Renaissance
|
|
First of all, about the Neumann TLM 103D Digital Microphone System -> http://www.prosoundnetwork.com/article/neumann-tlm-103d-digital-mic...
OK, I made a mix of what everyone wrote and I think I've found something suitable for me. Great advices here!
While I was searching I found this app -> http://www.ear-machine.com/myMicSoundIntro.html
I think it would be interesting if someone wanted to add samples of oud. 
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Google for "usb xlr adapter" ... that might help.
| Quote: |
Or i should buy a new mic?
|
If you want maximum sound quality, I think the answer is: Yes. I might be wrong, but I don't think the Samson can compete with a good large condensor
like the AKG C3000 or the Rode NT2A.
And I don't think, it makes much sense talking about Neumann ... the topic is CHEAP recording studio, not pro
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
antonis
Oud Lover
Posts: 24
Registered: 11-29-2010
Location: Greece
Member Is Offline
|
|
Thank you,
I googled for an adapter and I think the following (someone's elses post) sums it up: "It is digital data, not an audio signal, that emerges from the
USB plug on the microphone. Into what XLR socket would it be of any use to feed that data?"
So I guess my question was pretty stupid.
Anyway, since that's the case, i'm selling my Samson G track, wich I have hardly used. If anyone is interested send U2U.
http://www.samsontech.com/samson/products/microphones/usb-microphon...
Attachment: GTrack.pdf (653kB)
This file has been downloaded 226 times
|
|
|
David.B
Oud Junkie
Posts: 640
Registered: 9-5-2009
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: Renaissance
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Aymara | | And I don't think, it makes much sense talking about Neumann ... the topic is CHEAP recording studio, not pro |
You might be right, but I've got serious problems to make myself understood, I'm not kidding (at work, with teachers ...).
Tony wrote :
What you can read (and listen to) on the link :
"Listen for yourself. You'll be surprised by the timbral similarity between the OktavaMod MK-219 PE and Neumann M 149. Notice the authoritive lower
midrange presence and smooth, sibilance-free top end.
SOUND FILE: Neumann M 149
SOUND FILE: OktavaMod MK-219"
What Arsene wrote :
| Quote: Originally posted by arsene | | Anyway, I've recorded with a bunch of classic mics (including old AKG's and Neumanns). When Joly told me his 319 would rival the U87 he wasn't kidding
around, but I had to hear it for myself to believe it. I've bought and sold many mics, but the 319 has always remained! So, absolutely recommended.
|
And he is not the only one to compare "cheap" mikes to the Neumann U87 (Press, forums ...).
Also you wrote :
| Quote: Originally posted by Aymara | | HERE I found interesting sound samples, where you can compare AKG's studio reference for vocals, the C414, with AKG's C3000B.
|
I started to read about "cheap" mikes, but how is it possible to ignore "pro" mikes in this context? In other words, I took the problem upside down :
which mike is the best for oud (in my opinion), and which "cheaper imitation" to buy?
And now everything becomes subjective : Falk is for a "cheap" tube solution, which is already more expensive in comparison with a transistor solution.
Also the digital solution by Neumann seems to be the future, and you can plug the mike directly in you audio interface (S/PDIF) without preamp. If
"cheap" means "save money", here we are! And last but not least, you save the sound :
"In contrast, analog signal processing is characterized by
limited precision, error accumulation, a lack of redundant
signal information, and no possibility to include error
correction procedures. In the analog signal transmission
chain, every processing step is thus associated with a
deterioration of signal quality. This results in a progressive
decrease in dynamic range, due to the introduction
of noise voltages and nonlinear distortion."
OK, the TLM 103 D is not the "cheapest" mike, but pretty soon other brands are going to offer their own digital solution (maybe Blue? China ...).
I maybe wrong, but if you are a neophyte like me, it might be interesting to read and listen to the references, otherwise you'll think a Sony ECM
DS70P sounds good enough Then be realistic and buy what you can buy by
comparing.
Does it make sense?
There is another approach to choose a mike :
This approach is objective and I regret there's no oud sound file in the collection 
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Yes, you're right, it makes sense to compare "budget" mics with the pros to explain, how good or bad they are.
| Quote: |
... which mike is the best for oud (in my opinion), and which "cheaper imitation" to buy?
|
In my opinion it's the C3000B, in Fernand's opinion it's the Oktava ... it's a matter of taste, even if money wouldn't count.
| Quote: |
... I regret there's no oud sound file in the collection
|
I posted MP3s of the C300B on page 2 of this thread. It would be nice to hear further oud recording samples ... especially the Oktava
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
David.B
Oud Junkie
Posts: 640
Registered: 9-5-2009
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: Renaissance
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Aymara | | I posted MP3s of the C300B on page 2 of this thread. It would be nice to hear further oud recording samples ... especially the Oktava |
Definitely!
But he uses a "big tube Russian Oktava" and not the OktavaMod MK-219 PE, don't you Tony? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6DAUYlPZtM&feature=related)
I've got another mike in my mind which is supposed to "imitate" the AKG C 12, but it's already a pro mike ...
|
|
|
David.B
Oud Junkie
Posts: 640
Registered: 9-5-2009
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: Renaissance
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by David.B | | OK, the TLM 103 D is not the "cheapest" mike, but pretty soon other brands are going to offer their own digital solution (maybe Blue? China ...).
|
Here we are -> http://www.bluemic.com/spark_digital/
199,99 $ + a computer or an iPad!
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
An iPad is a No-Go. You need a computer with low latencies for home recording. Download the free Latency Checker to find out, if your PC or Notebook is suitable as a DAW.
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
David.B
Oud Junkie
Posts: 640
Registered: 9-5-2009
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: Renaissance
|
|
Latency !?
The audio comes to the computer (iPad) directly converted.
It's an USB mike with a pro capsule, I do not say "it's the best mike", but we arrive at something pro and really affordable. That's good news
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Yes, latency. If you only want to record single tracks, it doesn't matter, but we're talking here about digital audio workstations, where you usually
record multiple tracks, e.g. oud and percussion or two or more oud tracks. And then you need a PC without latencies.
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
David.B
Oud Junkie
Posts: 640
Registered: 9-5-2009
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: Renaissance
|
|
Of course... my purpose is not to use an iPad, it's just to explain the principle of digital.
Also, Michael Joly is already changing the analog model -> http://www.oktavamodshop.com/product_info.php?cPath=1_46&produc...
|
|
|
David.B
Oud Junkie
Posts: 640
Registered: 9-5-2009
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: Renaissance
|
|
At last, I've been thinking a lot about stereo vs. mono, and Tony D'Amato put words on my feeling, as a listener:
"But mono, believe it or not, is better for certain kinds of music. Mono sound really isn't as isolated as stereo. By not being able to pinpoint
images, it blends much more easily. Stereo pinpoints to where it isolates so much information it isn't natural. That's also true of digital sound. It
pinpoints its images to such a degree that it's almost alien to the ambiance it sits in. This was never true of mono sound. Not bad mono, but good
mono sound was great for jazz."
|
|
|
David.B
Oud Junkie
Posts: 640
Registered: 9-5-2009
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: Renaissance
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Aymara |
Yes, latency. If you only want to record single tracks, it doesn't matter, but we're talking here about digital audio workstations, where you usually
record multiple tracks, e.g. oud and percussion or two or more oud tracks. And then you need a PC without latencies. |
About the Spark Digital:
1- you can record single tracks, only.
2- you can use the headphone jack (for zero-latency) in real-time monitoring, only, and that's why I am off topic.
OK, I make too much digression, I want to delete, but it would make no sense in the thread...
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4 |
|
![[*]](images/xmbprobrown/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
