Quantcast
how to get the lowest latency? - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
how to get the lowest latency?
Old 31st January 2009
  #1
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
how to get the lowest latency?

hi...sorry if this has been answered before, but i need some answers/ opinions on some stuff relating to a new music system i am speccing out

i am looking at getting a mac pro (either quad or octo core) running logic studio , and may also need to upgrade my audio interface.

i will be mainly recording guitar & bass at home (along with the odd vocal)

at the moment i have a MOTU828 mk1 connected to a musical fidelity xp-100 preamp then to Mackie hhr824s. The XP-100 is an amazing bit of kit - it sounds WAY better connecting the MOTU's main outs via unbalanced phonos to the XP-100 than it does going directly to the mackies via balanced cables - which makes little sense, but is undeniably better - more depth, better soundstage, clearer top end. however, i am considering getting a new audio interface (for various other reasons) and connecting it directly (via balanced cables) to the mackies (partly to free up some cash through selling the XP-100, which doesn't have anything else connected to it anyway.

so.....firstly, the interface i buy needs to have very good quality outputs so that i don't get a drop in quality from what i've got at the moment.

also, i am aiming to get some guitar amp simulation software (either guitar rig, pod farm or revalver). i like the look of pod farm but i don't want to use the cheap little interfaces that you get with it to record through as i am not convinced that they will be very good, considering the cost of them (about Β£40 for the gx-1). i already have a focusrite platinum trakmaster with a digital out board and would like to use this mainly when recording, so the mic preamp quality of the new interface is not a priority (but the OUTPUT quality IS) so...i will not be able to use the zero latency monitoring of the line6 device whilst recording (ToneDIrect - which lets you hear the amp model whilst recording) and will instead need to monitor through Logic with Pod Farm loaded up on that channel as a plug-in.

so....i need ultra-low latency in my system whilst recording. as far as i can make out (correct me if i'm wrong please) achieving low latency depends on several factors: how powerful your processor on your mac is - so that you can set the buffer setting as low as possible without sending cpu usage of all other plug-ins through the roof; and also how short the real world audio delay actually is at that buffer setting - which i'm presuming is down to the audio interface's processing power/speed.

so..if i can set the buffer on the mac to, say, 64....will all the different audio interfaces produce different latencies? i'm presuming they do.

if so...can anyone reccomend one that will give me very low latency?

i only really need 2 analog in, 2 out, spdif in/out (ideally optical in/out and wordclock in/out too). i need a main volume control (feeding the mackies) and ideally a unit that can be used in standalone mode (without mac on) so that i can connect a PS3's optical outs to it without having to turn the mac on, whilst connecting the hdmi out to my big lcd monitor to carry the picture.

i have been looking at various interfaces, but it seems that as soon as i get to ones with some of the features i want, they also have loads of ins and outs that i dont need (and cost a fortune).

i have a reasonable budget but dont really want to spend too much on the interface (Β£600 tops). shortlist so far includes apogee duet (but dislike the breakout cable/ no spdif) MOTU traveller (too many ins & outs) and RME fireface 400. there is also a new Lexicon one (ionix u42s) that looks ideal - simple, ergonomically appealing, has spdif, but is USB.

in summary:
1. what is most important to achieving low latency - mac or interface?
2. are there any interfaces with very good line outs/DA conversion, but which dont have a nillion ins & outs?
3. with a USB interface can i still achieve low latency (6ms or less)?
4. does anyone have any experience with the ones i've named above?
5. how good is the line6 hardware for recording guit/ bass?
6. would the MOTU828 mk1 be able to achieve low latency with a newer, faster mac?
7. if i'm using a digital input into the interface (from the trakmaster) will i get as much latency? (as i will not be doing any AD conversion)
8. would i be better off getting something like the RME Digiface which has no analog ins at all, but has several digital ins, and analog outs only? i could then potantially add other external preamps with digital (optical) outs at a later date

any help/ suggestions welcome!
Old 31st January 2009
  #2
Lives for gear
 
MonoBrow's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I try to keep this short.

1. what is most important to achieving low latency - mac or interface?
To get a Pci-e interface.


2. are there any interfaces with very good line outs/DA conversion, but which dont have a nillion ins & outs?
Rme Multiface.


3. with a USB interface can i still achieve low latency (6ms or less)?
Maybe but not at big projekts.Usb isnt really known for low latency.


4. does anyone have any experience with the ones i've named above?
Not me.


5. how good is the line6 hardware for recording guit/ bass?
Dunno.


6. would the MOTU828 mk1 be able to achieve low latency with a newer, faster mac?
Dunno.


I would get a rme Multiface with the pci-e card.It will last long and the drivers are great.It can go as low as 32samples ( 0.7ms).
I run a Multiface 1 with the pci card and it has been flawless for years,converters are nice and i am happy with it.
Old 1st February 2009 | Show parent
  #3
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
another idea

thanks for the reply. however, after looking at the rme pci-e system it looks a little over=specced (too many ins & outs that i'll never use). so i have a couple more queries....

1. are there any very simple pci-e soundcards that have very low latency, but only a limited number of ins & outs (has to include digital)?

2. are there any interfaces that allow you to connect multiple digital outs into a mac (eg: if i had several external preamps with on-board converters, using a combination of spdif coaxial, spdif optical etc..) there doesn't seem to be anything that i can find that will let me input multiple spdif signals simultaneously, whilst clocking them all from wordclock sends)

3. also, would the following idea work? (in terms of getting low latency/ good quality)

a preamp with digital out into the built-in optical in of a mac pro/ optical out of mac pro into DAC (eg: apogee mini-dac), then into mackies. this seems like a great solution if the latency will end up low, as it gives me excellent audio outs, and allows me to use a dedicated preamp to feed the digital input (will never need to record more than 2 tracks at once, more often than not it will only be one).

anyone tried this?
Old 1st February 2009 | Show parent
  #4
Gear Addict
 
frankie c's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
latency

I have a RME Multiface II and a pci-e card...i get .6 milliseconds...cant get better than that...u get what u pay for!!!
Old 1st February 2009 | Show parent
  #5
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankie c ➑️
I have a RME Multiface II and a pci-e card...i get .6 milliseconds...cant get better than that...u get what u pay for!!!
what is your round trip latency at 44.1?
Old 1st February 2009 | Show parent
  #6
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Matt Tech
before jumping to assumptions i would at least check out
the 50 buk toneport gx.
i was given one as a present for helping someone.
i didnt really need it to be frank n was highly HIGHLY sceptical.
youll have to form your own opinion of course.
but its surprised me..considring 50 buks.
pm me if you want to hear some vocals ive done useing it.
someone on the reaper forum told me actually its ada is very good.
all i can say is try one or a ux1 or ux2.
certainly ive had no latency probs. run your own tests n make sure you can return it for refund if not happy.
theres a load of guitar sounds in these boxes.
great for ruffing out ideas. plus bass etc etc.
in summary be open minded n try one cos i feel line6 is a company to watch.
i knew zilch about them, n was surprised by the value for money.
but dunno if right for you.

ps..if i remember there is a line6 forum at line6.com n loads of patches etc.
you could do worse than ask for others opinions on the forum.
note in gx gearbox you can use it as just a normal sound device by bypassing the
guitar n bass models etc. clean pass thru type of idea.
in fact i'll throw out a likle challenge..lol...
do a blind test tween a gx (on pass thru as a regular sound device)
and a higher priced sound device.
record some vocs useing an external pre into the gx n then reapeat
into higher priced sound device. post blind files n ask the normal consumer if they can hear a difference.
(oh i forgot ...there are also some mic pre models you can play with/settings.
on the reaper forums in the collab section is a xmas song called "chestnuts" if you can find it...
where the lead vocs used a gx if i remember.)
Old 3rd February 2009 | Show parent
  #7
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
thanks for input so far. i'm not discounting the line 6 interfaces till i've tried them, but i would like a Mac/ soundcard that COULD do low latency software monitoring through the plugins (within Logic) if required.....eg: if line 6 interface turns out to produce poor recordings of the DI signal (wwell...poorer than my focusrite trakmaster/ digital out).

anyone got any experience/ latency readings with any current interfaces/ soundcards with a recent mac pro (or even imac) and logic? just trying to get ideas of what can be achieved.

it's just hard deciding where i'm best off spending my money (and it'll be a good three grand the way i'm going...)
Old 4th February 2009 | Show parent
  #8
Gear Maniac
 
Nash_Dred's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Matt,

Something a lot of people don't consider when trying to get the lowest possible latency out of their audio system is sample rate. Remember that buffer size is represented in samples, not milliseconds. Since, at higher sampling rates, there are more samples per second, each sample represents a smaller portion of time. In short, the higher your sample rate, the lower your latency.

The math works like this: Buffer Size / Sample Rate = Buffer-Induced Latency

So at a buffer size of 128 samples...

44.1kHz = 2.9ms Buffer-Induced Latency

88.2kHz = 1.5ms Buffer-Induced Latency

176.4kHz = 0.7ms Buffer-Induced Latency

In fact, you can set your buffer to 1024 samples at 192kHz and still get just under 6ms of Buffer-Induced Latency. There are many advantages to using higher sample rates, the only real disadvantages being CPU strain and track count (depending on your choice of DAW of course). Judging from what you've said about your setup and goals, you shouldn't have any problem sampling at 176.4 or at least 88.2.

Since almost all low-to-mid-range interfaces these days (including most of the ones mentioned in this thread) use the same or similar AKM converters, it's doubtful that conversion quality is going to be a real issue for you. Cheap Asian converters have actually come quite a long way. I would go with a PCIe interface that is capable of higher sample rates. If you're really concerned with conversion quality then get a PCIe card with S/PDIF and Apogee Rosetta 200 (or better yet the Benchmark ADC-1 and DAC-1).

Hope this helped!
Old 4th February 2009 | Show parent
  #9
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nati_Dred ➑️
Matt,

Something a lot of people don't consider when trying to get the lowest possible latency out of their audio system is sample rate. Remember that buffer size is represented in samples, not milliseconds. Since, at higher sampling rates, there are more samples per second, each sample represents a smaller portion of time. In short, the higher your sample rate, the lower your latency.

The math works like this: Buffer Size / Sample Rate = Buffer-Induced Latency

So at a buffer size of 128 samples...

44.1kHz = 2.9ms Buffer-Induced Latency

88.2kHz = 1.5ms Buffer-Induced Latency

176.4kHz = 0.7ms Buffer-Induced Latency

In fact, you can set your buffer to 1024 samples at 192kHz and still get just under 6ms of Buffer-Induced Latency. There are many advantages to using higher sample rates, the only real disadvantages being CPU strain and track count (depending on your choice of DAW of course). Judging from what you've said about your setup and goals, you shouldn't have any problem sampling at 176.4 or at least 88.2.

Since almost all low-to-mid-range interfaces these days (including most of the ones mentioned in this thread) use the same or similar AKM converters, it's doubtful that conversion quality is going to be a real issue for you. Cheap Asian converters have actually come quite a long way. I would go with a PCIe interface that is capable of higher sample rates. If you're really concerned with conversion quality then get a PCIe card with S/PDIF and Apogee Rosetta 200 (or better yet the Benchmark ADC-1 and DAC-1).

Hope this helped!
cheers for that - very interesting. so are you saying that the soundcard/ interface involved only plays a minor role in latency time? (and that many of them produce very similar results). i must admit i tend to use 44.1 sample rate, although, as you say...that may change with an octocore.

i have been looking at the RME HDSP AIO and that seems to be a fairly straightforward piece of kit - it will allow the spdif input from my focusrite (or take a blanced line input from any other preamp i choose to buy later) and if i get the additional balanced breakout cable,, i'm presuming it will yield decent audio out quality. the only thing that slightly worries me is plumbing it's line outs straight into my mackies and relying solely on software volume control from within the mac. is this a good idea?

anyone got one of these cards? good/ bad experiences (eg: latency/ dac quality)
Old 4th February 2009 | Show parent
  #10
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
interface (well drivers for) play a HUGE role in low latency ability.

you could have a stellar firewire interface that can get lower latency than a crap PCI/PCIe.

firewire has an added .75 ms

known low latency products (due to high quality drivers) ang good hardware chipset.

RME
Lynx
Motu
Echo
SSL


Scott
ADK
Old 4th February 2009 | Show parent
  #11
Lives for gear
 
FULL-DUPLEX's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Mixtreme or Mixpander...
Old 5th February 2009 | Show parent
  #12
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
thanks again. anyone got any thoughts on the idea of preamp (focusrite trakmaster...or audient Mico or similar) into optical input of mac pro, then using an external dac (such as a second hand musical fidelity x-ray, or meridian) connected to the optical out.

basically, has anyone tried this sort of thing (using the mac's native soundcard/ digital ins+outs)?

would give me great quality ins & outs, and no more than i actually need...but will latency be an issue with this.....?
Old 13th February 2009 | Show parent
  #13
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
I used to have one of those mk828's. Its a good piece of equipment. All I used to achieve 3ms of latency was a cheap ass fire wire card from wherever and as short as possible firewire cable. Every foot of firewire seems to add A 1/2 ms or so of latency from what i've come to find.
Old 13th February 2009
  #14
Deleted 1a30a04
Guest
Hey Matt,
What host application are you using? I used to have a Motu back
in the day .. and if I remember correctly, the unit has a built-in
mixer that routed the audio inputs to the monitor output without
going through the host application at all. It was (in effect) zero
latency.
This is also the way PT HD works .. the onboard core mixer app
does the mixing and sends it right back out ..

jeff
Old 13th February 2009 | Show parent
  #15
Lives for gear
 
uncle duncan's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I was going to say the same thing. One of the new Motu interfaces has zero latency monitoring of inputs with plugins that can either be printed with the recording or only used for the monitoring. You can treat your vocal or guitar with compression, reverb, whatever, and get a great headphone mix without affecting what you're recording.
Old 13th February 2009 | Show parent
  #16
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FULL-DUPLEX ➑️
Mixtreme or Mixpander...
I have one of these and cannot go below 64 samples with a Q6600. it's a great card for what it does but I don't think it can be considered a low-latency card.
Old 14th February 2009 | Show parent
  #17
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmarkham ➑️
Hey Matt,
What host application are you using? I used to have a Motu back
in the day .. and if I remember correctly, the unit has a built-in
mixer that routed the audio inputs to the monitor output without
going through the host application at all. It was (in effect) zero
latency.
This is also the way PT HD works .. the onboard core mixer app
does the mixing and sends it right back out ..

jeff
thanks for the reply. the thing is.. i want to be able to play guitar/bass through effects (pod farm or amplitube/ ampex svx etc..) whilst recording without too much latency (but without using the cheap line6 interfaces). strangely enough i had never even tried my current (old, outdated) setup until the other day, as i just presumed it would fall down. tried the following:

guitar > focusrite trakmaster > digital out > motu828 mk1 > g4 867 > cubase vst 5.0 (!)

guess what? hardly any noticeable latency at all, even at 512 buffer.

what the f***? had to take it up to 1028 to get any problems at all ...even when effects loaded up on the channel (and no, i wasn't using the zero latency monitoring on the 828 at all)

i had previously tried the mac pro at work with the digidesign 003 rack (in protools) and found a noticeable delay at 512, and an acceptable (but not great) performance at 256. i had also tried an imac with a sound canvas usb interface and that was appalling, even at 64 samples (in logic).

so i had started to obsess about latency, thinking i'd need some new interface/ card. it seems not. unless of course there is some difference between the old asio drivers for cubase and newer ones for core audio.

i must also say that i compared recording though the digital out board of the focusrite, and using the unbalanced line out (into a line in of the 828) and there was NO difference. so that was a waste of Β£100 (for the digital board). then i started to doubt even the point of the instrument input of the focusrite, and compared it with the line input of the 828 (i know this should be worse quality, but i just wanted to check..). in this case, however, there was a distinct loss of clarity/ top end.....presumably due to the impedance mismatch. so it's not ALL nonsence!

i really should have learnt by now as i had performed similar comparisons when i had my old 02r setup (comparing the digital outs of lexicon pcm80/ tc 2000 with their analogue counterparts and discerning no noticeable difference). but still i persist......sigh
Old 25th February 2009 | Show parent
  #18
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
I have a multiface II with expressCard34, which works great with my macbook pro (2.16Ghz processor, 2GB RAM). I have yet to complete the round trip latency test but –*using ableton live –*I came up with these numbers:

at a (simulated in LIVE) CPU load of 80%, the overall latency was 9.98 ms. this was with the sample buffer set to 156 samples (@44.1kHz sample rate). playing drums with lots of software instruments, 156 samples was the lowest buffer I could get without causing audio hickups. (I also tried at higher sample rates, but my processor couldn't handle it well. so the gain I got from using the higher sample rate was nullified by having to up the sample buffer!).

anyway, surprisingly, the almost 10ms latency actually is acceptable, even as a drummer (dealing with lots of attack and short/sharp sounds and needing immediate feedback when hitting the pads on my eDrum kit).

for what it's worth, I also tested with a 14 samples buffer (again at 44.1Khz sample rate) and the overall latency was 3.54ms. I figure that is the driver's latency since I didn't actually send an audio signal through (it would just crackle).

anyway, here are all my stats that I got (the "test tone" is LIVE's test to check when audio signals pass through without crackle):

Built-in audio Input/Output (2.16GHz MacbookPro w/ 2GB RAM):
lowest sample buffer allowed: 14 samples @44.kHz
input latency: 1.13ms
output latency: 1.41ms
overall latency: 2.54ms

test tone at 80% simulated CPU usage:
at sample buffer: 128 samples @44.1kHz:
input latency: 3.72ms
output latency: 3.99ms
overall latency: 7.71ms


Native Instruments Audio Kontrol 1:
lowest sample buffer allowed: 14 samples @44.kHz
input latency: 4.87ms
output latency: 6.12ms
overall latency: 10.8ms

test tone at 80% simulated CPU usage:
at sample buffer: 192 samples @44.1kHz:
input latency: 8.71ms
output latency: 10.2ms
overall latency: 18.9ms


RME-Audio Hammerfall DSP Multiface II (ExpressCard32)
lowest sample buffer allowed: 14 samples @44.kHz
input latency: 1.77ms
output latency: 1.77ms
overall latency: 3.54ms

test tone at 80% simulated CPU usage:
min sample buffer: 156 samples @44.1kHz:
input latency: 4.99ms
output latency: 4.99ms
overall latency: 9.98ms


hth

Last edited by pirco; 25th February 2009 at 07:25 PM.. Reason: text formatting
Old 27th February 2009 | Show parent
  #19
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
craziness... so the built in one comes out the best? did i read that right?

so maybe adc/dac route is the one, rather than bothering with a soundcard at all
Old 27th February 2009 | Show parent
  #20
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
well yes, you read that right, but these are just statistical numbers based on the latency test in ableton live. the truth is that nobody (professionally, at least) would accept the sound quality of the built-in sound card. plus, in a real-world set-up, the latency actually goes up.

as a matter of fact, I started my return-loop latency tests (RTL test: recording sounds from output 1 straight back into input 2) and driver error compensation for the built-in soundcard needs to be set to 20 milliseconds!! so you end up with 27.7ms latency!

I'm not sure exactly why but I think this just shows that latency depends on many factors.

btw, I'm conducting these RTL tests with my RME Multiface II and the audio kontrol 1 as well as with the apogee duet that I should get next week or so. (and if my friend lends me his apogee ensemble, I'm planning on doing a comprehensive latency comparison between those 4 (5 incl. built-in soundcard) units).

anyway, I'll try to post those results soon.

thanks.
Old 28th February 2009
  #21
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Tech ➑️
hi.

in summary:
1. what is most important to achieving low latency - mac or interface?
2. are there any interfaces with very good line outs/DA conversion, but which dont have a nillion ins & outs?
3. with a USB interface can i still achieve low latency (6ms or less)?
4. does anyone have any experience with the ones i've named above?
5. how good is the line6 hardware for recording guit/ bass?
6. would the MOTU828 mk1 be able to achieve low latency with a newer, faster mac?
7. if i'm using a digital input into the interface (from the trakmaster) will i get as much latency? (as i will not be doing any AD conversion)
8. would i be better off getting something like the RME Digiface which has no analog ins at all, but has several digital ins, and analog outs only? i could then potantially add other external preamps with digital (optical) outs at a later date

any help/ suggestions welcome!
low latency = lynx aes16 pci or pcie , true 32 samples IO ASIO drivers stable at 80% cpu load
+ ls-adat
+ fast ADDA converter like: RME adi-8qs
and get a lucid genx192 or better, with 99.997% OFC or silver cables.

lynx has no midi,
or...
RME hdsp has second best ASIO drivers, 32buffer out, 32in + 32safe buffer = 64samples.
has one of the best Midi drivers too.
...
most Pro audio interfaces work at 128 samples IO,
most 48k/96khz converters have 1.55 ms. AD and DA each.
some 192khz chips have twice, some have half.

higher sample rate = converters go faster, latency lowers but plugins need x2 or x4 more CPU.
...
near 0 latency ::
sonic core DSP 14-dsp pci card
or the new xcite1
but only works with sonic core designed plugins.

could be others.
Old 28th February 2009 | Show parent
  #22
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Tech ➑️
thanks for the reply. however, after looking at the rme pci-e system it looks a little over=specced (too many ins & outs that i'll never use). so i have a couple more queries....

1. are there any very simple pci-e soundcards that have very low latency, but only a limited number of ins & outs (has to include digital)?

2. are there any interfaces that allow you to connect multiple digital outs into a mac (eg: if i had several external preamps with on-board converters, using a combination of spdif coaxial, spdif optical etc..) there doesn't seem to be anything that i can find that will let me input multiple spdif signals simultaneously, whilst clocking them all from wordclock sends)

3. also, would the following idea work? (in terms of getting low latency/ good quality)

a preamp with digital out into the built-in optical in of a mac pro/ optical out of mac pro into DAC (eg: apogee mini-dac), then into mackies. this seems like a great solution if the latency will end up low, as it gives me excellent audio outs, and allows me to use a dedicated preamp to feed the digital input (will never need to record more than 2 tracks at once, more often than not it will only be one).

anyone tried this?

try the emu 1212m
Old 25th March 2009 | Show parent
  #23
Lives for gear
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Downbelowu ➑️
I used to have one of those mk828's. Its a good piece of equipment. All I used to achieve 3ms of latency was a cheap ass fire wire card from wherever and as short as possible firewire cable. Every foot of firewire seems to add A 1/2 ms or so of latency from what i've come to find.
just a note: the length itself can't affect latency, it doesn't work like that. but what you were likely discovering is that longer BADLY MADE firewire cables may allow for more interference to mess with the data which in turn may have cause more errors in the digital transmission. Since the firewire communication protocol will resend error-laden data to a certain extent (try try again), it adds latency when there are errors.

you can use moderanly (a few feet) long firewire cables that are well shielded and well put together without any additional latency.

as they say, it's not the length that matters, it's the QUALITY ;-)

cheers,
Don
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 54 views: 8094
Avatar for clan
clan 23rd June 2004
replies: 184 views: 16590
Avatar for John The Cut
John The Cut 27th November 2005
replies: 124 views: 14319
Avatar for desotoslo
desotoslo 30th June 2008
replies: 2380 views: 410489
Avatar for didier.brest
didier.brest 4 weeks ago
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump