Quantcast
"Summing" inside a "legacy" Metric Halo 2882 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
"Summing" inside a "legacy" Metric Halo 2882
Old 5th February 2009
  #1
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
"Summing" inside a "legacy" Metric Halo 2882

Ok.

It's about time I got over my fear of this.

Since I'm not really ready to go 2d, I figured I'd see what all the fuss was about. Halo guys used to talk about the pseudo-secret of "summing" inside this box, although the explanation sounded a little fuzzy to me at the time. The new 2d Mixer makes this much easier, but I assume it's really done with the same hardware architecture in regards to "firewire sends."

I am running a "regular" 2882, with Mio console version 2.2f15. I write and mix in Logic 8.

Can someone explain the concept a bit from scratch? Is this done through stemming some sends from Logic into the internal mixer somehow? How is the output "mix file" done- does it record back into mio's recorder? Or back into the logic session? Can I setup to monitor things this way while recording and mixing?

Most importantly, what is the theory as to why it is supposed to sound so good? Is it 80-bit mixing?

Do I need to update my mio software?

Bear with me; I'm a bit hazy on the whole thing and how it's done without going to 2D.


Henry Robinett, would love for you to chime in. Was going to PM you but thought I'd post here for everyone's benefit and also hoping one of the MH fellows would contribute to the thread. This has been a wonderful box and I'm looking forward to getting into it deeper if it really will make things sound even better.
Old 5th February 2009
  #2
Audio Alchemist
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by astronmr20 ➑️
pseudo-secret of "summing" inside this box, although the explanation sounded a little fuzzy to me at the time. The new 2d Mixer makes this much easier, but I assume it's really done with the same hardware architecture in regards to "firewire sends."
I can understand it sounds fuzzy to you, that's what bull**** usually sounds like when you try to figure it out.

Digital summing is simply adding numbers. A computer does that quite well, in fact that's one of its prime reasons for existing. Logic Pro has a 32 bit floating point engine which is more than adequate for adding numbers without causing any problems to the data (and therefore the sound).

There's really no such thing as bad sounding digital summing unless the engine is flawed, which it is not in this case. If you go ahead and test various DAWs then make sure to set the pan law identically, check dithering or noise shaping.

If you avoid unintentional clipping you can't really improve digital summing in a meaningful manner as long as it's a 32 bit floating point system or similar. It's basically adding numbers and no matter how many times you try to add 1 +1 it should still give you 2. You can consider rounding errors in the extreme decimals but it is of purely theoretical value to actual sound. It would be similar to dropping a hair from your head on the floor at a rock concert and claiming you could hear it. If you somehow find a way to change the outcome of digital summing you should be highly suspicious as to why, since digital summing can't magically invent data or improve on the existing data.

What so many people seem to get confused about is that fact that analog can sound subjectively better, wider and louder. This is primarily due to the harmonics, distortion, phase changes, transient reduction, slew rate, etc.

In comparison digital summing is simply adding numbers but not adding any character or width to the sound. This had lead to a rather pathetic boom in emulation software which still can't replicate analog very well. Some people get an analog summing mixer, which can be a good idea. For instance the Tube Tech SSA2B. Not because it's actually "summing" better than digital but because it adds some analog character to the individual tracks, despite what Tube Tech claims on their website. In fact you can hear almost no difference between 16 analog processed tracks thru a summing mixer but summed digitally, and 16 analog processed tracks processd and summed in the analog summing mixer. This beyond a doubt proves that the benefit is primarily in the individual analog treatment, not the analog summing itself. Naturally the analog master bus can add extra character but that is not the point of the matter.

And by the way, the Metric Halo cards sound really great and have some amazing functionality. But I'd love to hear a real life explanation from MH as to why you should be using it as an alternative way of digital summing instead of your DAW. I can only assume it would be relevant if you're using a flawed mixing engine. But then you should change your DAW, not fiddle around with this subject. Since you're already using Logic Pro, there's no reason to do this in the first place.
Old 5th February 2009 | Show parent
  #3
Lives for gear
 
A440's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
The reason summing works so well with the 2d card added, is that you can build your own console and add 'character' plugins which will allow you to emulate different console/summing flavours...also you get an excellent channel strip and reverb. Whether the actual 80 bit console adds any sonic avantage in itself is, as you can see, debatable.

Looking forward to seeing a bit of fur fly. Where's the man eating popcorn smiley when you need it?
Old 5th February 2009 | Show parent
  #4
Audio Alchemist
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by A440 ➑️
The reason summing works so well with the 2d card added, is that you can build your own console and add 'character' plugins which will allow you to emulate different console/summing flavours...
That's pretty cool, and certainly a sort of explanation as to why you would want to do this. Still, the actual summing isn't going to improve.

The only benefit from doing this in the MH instead of your DAW would be the onboard DSP, as I see it.

if that was the intention from MH I'll take my bull**** remark back at once :-D
Old 5th February 2009 | Show parent
  #5
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Thanks lagerfeldt, and when I first heard of this I suspected as much, too. That is the intention as I understand it, though, to use the onboard DSP "mix engine" to sum the audio tracks/ busses/ stems, etc, as I understand it.

With 2d and +DsP, supposedly there is a big difference even when folks are not using the character plugs on their busses or individual tracks routed to the MH mixer. Therefore I assumed, if the phonemona are happening in that way, it will also apply to non-2d boxes such as mine.

I'm going to rouse the MH guys and a couple of users I know of on Gearslutz. Originally was going to PM those folks but would like to keep this discussion out in the open for everyone's benefit.

Not trying to start any static, but I have read from people that they swear by it. perhaps they can explain...



BRB.
Old 5th February 2009 | Show parent
  #6
Lives for gear
 
AdamJay's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt ➑️
That's pretty cool, and certainly a sort of explanation as to why you would want to do this. Still, the actual summing isn't going to improve.

The only benefit from doing this in the MH instead of your DAW would be the onboard DSP, as I see it.

if that was the intention from MH I'll take my bull**** remark back at once :-D
MH has never explicitly marketed summing as a feature. They've only mentioned it (and not in their own press releases or publication) as a "capability".

Users have remarked on its summing capabilities, and more often than not Character is the reason they're enjoying it: In their own words: Users talk about Mobile I/O and 2d
Old 5th February 2009 | Show parent
  #7
Audio Alchemist
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #8
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I don't know technically what the deal with the Metric Halo summing is. There is unquestionably a difference and a marked improvement. What it is, I have no idea. Character? Well I heard an improvement before character. Can I be fooled by assuming that it's the routing of mono everything out of the DAW, into the Metric Halo boxes makes a difference? Maybe as to cause, -- I don't know. I do know it sounds better.

astronomer20 -- this sounds really lame but I don't really know, rather I don't really remember how I did it pre-2d! I seem to recall that I was limited to 8 stems. Is that right? 8 stereo pairs?

First assigned your stems to DAW 1-18 (?) from you DAW - Logic? DP? They can be mono or stereo.

I would do Console Connect.

You know -- do you have specific questions? I like setting up the MH box at unity and using the DAW mixer to set levels.

Although the Box is digital, it is also external hardware. When you get the 2d, you can, with Character, mock it up like an analog summing device.

But your ears are what it's all about, Alfie. Let me know what you think.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #9
Audio Alchemist
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett ➑️
I don't know technically what the deal with the Metric Halo summing is. [...] Can I be fooled by assuming that it's the routing of mono everything out of the DAW, into the Metric Halo boxes makes a difference? Maybe as to cause, -- I don't know. I do know it sounds better.
But your ears are what it's all about, Alfie. Let me know what you think.
It's called placebo. It can happen to all of us.

Which is why in some cases your ears and brain actually aren't the best way of evaluating things. Do tests and use your ears. Then be critical and look at the math too. If two files null then they are identical no matter what your brain tells you. And 1+1 still equals 2.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #10
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt ➑️
It's called placebo.
Are you sure about that?

I've heard some of henry's mixes.. he did a side-by-side once with bounces directly from inside Logic, and a few that were done "inside" the halo using console connect if I remember, and it indeed sounded "wider" with the panning done inside the halo.


I know.. to me it doesn't make any sense either since we are not really talking about signal flow when it's virtual, however, i've heard folks swear by it, and I'm sort of hoping to set up my own little test.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #11
Audio Alchemist
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by astronmr20 ➑️
Are you sure about that?
If there was an actual difference it was caused by something else, like different settings. Otherwise, yes it is placebo.

Quote:
I've heard some of henry's mixes.. he did a side-by-side once with bounces directly from inside Logic, and a few that were done "inside" the halo using console connect if I remember, and it indeed sounded "wider" with the panning done inside the halo.
He didn't have the correct pan law setting. I mentioned the importance of this in my first post.

Unless you have the knowledge to perform a real test you will quickly draw the wrong conclusions based on inadequate testing methods.

I don't want to insult anybody, but think of it like this:

To a pre-historic civilization in the middle of the jungle a flashlight will seem like magic. They will try to explain it in many different ways but none will be correct.

You're trying to explain to them what's inside: a battery, a lightbulb, etc. and how it works. But there's a pretty good chance they will still see it as magic and keep making up their own explanations because it does not fit with their perception of the world.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #12
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt ➑️
Absolutely.

I don't want to insult anybody, but think of it like this:

To a pre-historic civilization in the middle of the jungle a flashlight will seem like magic. They will try to explain it in many different ways but none will be correct.

I'm trying to explain what's inside: a battery, a lightbulb, etc. and how it works. But there's a pretty good chance they will still see it as magic and keep making up their own explanations because it does not fit with their perception of the world.


He didn't have the correct pan law setting. I mentioned this earlier in my post.

Lagerfeldt, I understand your position on this already.. you made it clear. I don't need any metaphors.


What pan law setting? Are you talking about Logic 8?

Sorry.. I know a bit about pan laws, but not heard of anyone wanting to change them in Logic 8.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #13
Gear Guru
 
SWAN808's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt ➑️
I can understand it sounds fuzzy to you, that's what bull**** usually sounds like when you try to figure it out.
he he
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #14
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Lagerfeldt,

The biggest difference between an MIO and most DAWs is precision of interim calculations, and how the sums are handled internally. The benefits of 80 bit summing are most apparent in 2 contexts:
- when there's dsp being applied before or with the sum (as in the aforementioned character plugs, or complex chains).
- when there are a ton of tracks, and/or submixed or grouped tracks (ie 2 stage summing).

Let's start with the first case, and let me offer a familiar example. If you open up a TDM session, and raise/lower the gain with any plugin you want in successive non-integer steps (e.g. up 1 dB, then down 1dB), the output stops nulling with the source almost immediately, and each successive round trip calculation gets worse. By contrast, in Logic or most native DAWs these days, you can do this all day and all night, and the source keeps on nulling. This is because sufficient precision (32 bit float) is maintained throughout the audio engine for the task at hand. This is pretty well understood and easily duplicated, so that's the first distinction.

Try the same experiment with an equalizer set to reciprocal curves (e.g. an RIAA curve). At this point the plug/method starts to matter more. The TDM version may even null BETTER than the 32 bit float version in some cases, because both systems are starting to bang the rails, and the effects of anti-imaging filters begin taking a toll on the data's integrity. For whatever reason, the MIO filters and mixer null better in this case, suggesting some benefit for the greater precision.

The benefit comes from preserving the precision all the way through the chain, from input to output. 64 bit floating point systems like Sonar and soundBlade sound better as process hosts, because they're able to pass 64 bit words to the next plug in the chain, which pushes the calculation error waaaaaaaay down in the noise weeds, far below where we'll later truncate or dither our way back to ear-depth (16 or 24 bit fixed AES words).

In digital, error is analogous to noise in analog: it's always there, so the game is keeping it well-below the signal of interest. All DSP brings error, with the exception of simple bit shifts (multiply/divide by 2), which merely scales the existing error according to magnitude of the shift. In practice, most vanilla plugs do bad things to the output in fixed point systems. Floating point plugs are more gentle with the error-floor on the order of a 48 bit fixed system, but at the end of the day the noise floor is still a bit closer to ear/gozinta depth than a 64 bit float or 80 bit fixed point system. With every successive process, error is always added (if only magnifying or distorting the existing error in the captured signal). These errors are cumulative. They add up, so chains of complex processes always have a greater error/signal than simpler ones, including repeated roundings up or down of a more precise calculation. So there are 2 paths of error to be concerned about...
- the inherent error of each calculation step (precision of original calculation - e.g. some plugs work at 64 bits internally and pass 32 or 24)
- the accumulated error of all calculation steps (each rounding/truncation, added to the next increases the sum of the error in the mix).
It's easy to measure this phenomenon in TDM vs native systems as mentioned, because we can store and compare 24 bit WAVs to 32 bit CAFs directly through nulling, so none of this is new or surprising. The benefits of higher precisions still are less obvious: we can't compare easily because there's no intermediate format or method... we can indirectly do it in a 64 bit DAW, but those who've invested in 32 bit technology can call "voodoo" because the comparison or experiment is only apparent in the higher precision system, with steps that preserve that precision.

When mixing many tracks, the sum gets bigger and bigger. Each sample has a remainder that matters as well. So the exponent grows as well. 32 bit float systems do a great job with this, and have plenty of dynamic range. But as numbers get larger, steps get bigger and precision lags. The difference between a 64 bit sum and a 32 at the output is going to depend mostly on how you round or get down at the outputs... the more tracks, or alternately the more SUBMIXES (which are effectively plug-ins, and additional truncation/error opportunities) you need to manage a complex mix, the greater the benefit.

It's important to remember these benefits are TINY. And the losses in any system, 24 bit TDM or native 32 float, can be managed and minimized by the operator to insignificance. Precision's not a magic bullet. Rather it's a tool that can make gain changes a literal "free lunch" (long strings of gain reciprocal changes always null to source), make submixes and complex mixes more useful in all contexts because they're lossless within the high precision mixer, and when properly engineered, allow fully reciprocal general DSP, like eq and such. To the extent one is careful in method and tools, these benefits are attainable in a native 32 bit system. They're just more accessible, and less dependent on tactics in higher precision systems like the MIO.

-d-
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #15
Lives for gear
 
MonoBrow's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett ➑️
quote deleted by mod
Nice attitude.Are you 100% sure about the difference? Maybe it was the different panning..or inserted plugins.This is actually a nice discussion so please......calling somebody names isnt really needed or wanted.

Last edited by Geert van den Berg; 9th February 2009 at 10:37 PM.. Reason: deleted the post above, so the quote had to go as well...
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #16
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fluxpod ➑️
Nice attitude.Are you 100% sure about the difference? Maybe it was the different panning..or inserted plugins.This is actually a nice discussion so please......calling somebody names isnt really needed or wanted.
On the example I posted, there were inadvertent differences in panning and some other factors. But that's not the ONLY thing I've mixed and compared with the boxes, you know?

My objection comes with the tone, presumed arrogance. Not with questioning the results.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #17
Lives for gear
 
MonoBrow's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett ➑️
On the example I posted, there were inadvertent differences in panning and some other factors. But that's not the ONLY thing I've mixed and compared with the boxes, you know?

My objection comes with the tone, presumed arrogance. Not with questioning the results.
I guess lagerfeld didnt adressed you personally.I used metric halo interfaces for classic recordings too and always liked them but a real difference in pure summing....i dont know.If you take the included plugins into concern ok but this isnt the topic of this thread.I am guilty myself for hearing improvement which was due to some differences in signal flow i just forgot about.
Anyways if somebody has the time to really test this out i would like to see the results.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #18
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I'm just not concerned with straight summing experiments. For me it's stupid. Nobody mixes with all faders and unity, no plugs, and pans hard L/R. For me this doesn't prove anything.

I can get a mix as good as I can get it in DP or Logic. But as soon as I put into Metric Halo, regardless, it sounds way BETTER, immediately. Any number of factors. Straight out with no plugs or with; with or without character. But I'm NOT talking SUMMING ENGINES. I'm talking that Metric Halo 2882/2d or ULN-2/2d make a tremendous improvement, as a massive PLUGIN to you DAW when you sum with it.

Can you see the distinction?
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #19
Lives for gear
 
MonoBrow's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett ➑️
I'm just not concerned with straight summing experiments. For me it's stupid. Nobody mixes with all faders and unity, no plugs, and pans hard L/R. For me this doesn't prove anything.

I can get a mix as good as I can get it in DP or Logic. But as soon as I put into Metric Halo, regardless, it sounds way BETTER, immediately. Any number of factors. Straight out with no plugs or with; with or without character. But I'm NOT talking SUMMING ENGINES. I'm talking that Metric Halo 2882/2d or ULN-2/2d make a tremendous improvement, as a massive PLUGIN to you DAW when you sum with it.

Can you see the distinction?
Ofc i can.And i would love to know why this improvement is happening.I feel the same about Mixing in my scope rig but i cant point out why.
This thread is about summing tho....which i feel is a really deep topic on why numbers beeing processed more precisly on a sequencer or the metric halo.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #20
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
So is my post about SUMMING. Just not about the purity of summing engine experiments, which I think miss the points entirely when they're done.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #21
Lives for gear
 
MonoBrow's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I agree.2 different questions.The summing engine question is imo more scientific and the overall sound picture is more...personally based and dependent on what plugins are inserted,panning,and fader positions.
Id like to get answers for both.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #22
16942
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett ➑️
I'm just not concerned with straight summing experiments. For me it's stupid. Nobody mixes with all faders and unity, no plugs, and pans hard L/R. For me this doesn't prove anything.

I can get a mix as good as I can get it in DP or Logic. But as soon as I put into Metric Halo, regardless, it sounds way BETTER, immediately. Any number of factors. Straight out with no plugs or with; with or without character. But I'm NOT talking SUMMING ENGINES. I'm talking that Metric Halo 2882/2d or ULN-2/2d make a tremendous improvement, as a massive PLUGIN to you DAW when you sum with it.

Can you see the distinction?
Henry, respectfully, Lagerfeldt is correct, digital summing is digital summing.

I don't doubt that you hear an "improvement" if you say so, as that is entirely a subjective statement. And neither of us I'm sure are trying to impugn the quality of your ears.

But as Lagerfeldt stated, if all the settings were exactly the same in the DAW i.e. Logic and the MH console, the resultant bounces would be virtually identical.

If you like the sound and the workflow, well, you like it and that is fine.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #23
Gear Guru
 
SWAN808's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Interesting that Dave Davis has just done a long explanatory post on summing and everyone has kept on talking regardless....
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #24
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Hopefully I did not start a war here...

But I have heard henry's examples and heard from other engineers- very experienced ones-- that summing "inside" the MH's engine sounds better.

I don't have 2D or +dsp, so of course, at most I'd probably be doing this at unity.

I'm worried that people who discount this perhaps are missing that something could be happening. SWAN, I'm not exactly talking about DAW summing...

I'm interested to hear what lagerfeldt has to say about pan laws-- it sounds like he was aware of Henry's test and thought that had something to do with it in regards to Logic?

Hoping someone from MH can chime in.... but I seem to remember their stance is pretty neutral on this. As in... they don't market the box in this regard and don't make any claims, but rather refer one to their users.

I might give them a call and see if I can get Brian or BJ "off the record."
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #25
Audio Alchemist
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Davis ➑️
It's important to remember these benefits are TINY. And the losses in any system, 24 bit TDM or native 32 float, can be managed and minimized by the operator to insignificance. [...] To the extent one is careful in method and tools, these benefits are attainable in a native 32 bit system.
Thank you for the details.

As we probably agree the "benefits" are academic or highly theoretical, especially if you consider the procedure you have to go thru first.

When some people claim to hear massive changes it is due to different pan law settings or other procedures which makes an A/B test incorrect. Or placebo, of course.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #26
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I couldn't care less

Never did I refer to the null test or any of that pure summing bull****. The fact of the matter is I can mix until I'm blue in the face in Logic or DP. I can get the quality as good as I can. Then I can take that I sum it through the Metric Halo -- and it improves, sometimes dramatically. Nothing about trying to be scientific. It's like an analogue board. You can't and WOULDN'T try to be scientific because you can't. I've never tried because those tests mean nothing to me. I'm not trying to PROVE anything. It's the ears for me. But AS SOON AS I put the Metric Halo box inline the sound improves. Character plugs? Yup, maybe. Pan laws. I suppose. I COULDN'T CARE LESS about the null test. I'm not doing that.

I'm not positing why. I'm not SAYING the summing engine is better, or different. That is not at ALL what I'm saying.

This reminds me of all those people insisting that there was no difference between 44.1 and 96k because of some lame assed theory and not being able to hear above some bull**** frequency. I COULDN'T CARE LESS. It's what I hear. And I COULDN'T CARE LESS that you want to invalidate it by placebo or that I'm imagining things. But don't INSIST what I hear is wrong. You can question or posit a theory as to why or what might be happening. But don't insist you know what's going on with MY HEARING. Because you don't. Until you're in my f***ing head, you have no idea and no right to so insist.

Astronmr20 wanted to know how to do this in order to improve his mixes, or masters, I suppose. I can tell him that. I can't tell him why it works. I can't and won't tell him it's the improved summing engine. 80 bit wide? Maybe. I have no F***ing idea. And I don't care. I COULDN'T CARE LESS! LOL.

I just like that it works.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #27
Lives for gear
 
The Beatsmith's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett ➑️
Listen asshole
LMAO
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #28
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Beatsmith ➑️
LMAO
Listen, that was out of line and out o character and improper. I apologize.

However I respect everyone and anyone until that respect chain is broken. If I perceive I'm being talked down to, disrespected, made to feel inferior or stupid I'll charge full force, and I won't respect you back.

There are ways of conveying meaning without putting a poster down. I can imagine this was far from his intent, but it happened nonetheless. I rarely put people down. You can look through my 6k+ posts to prove this point out, and almost never have I attacked unprovoked.

Once again, I apologize.
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #29
Audio Alchemist
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
Apology accepted and I can assure you I didn't intend to patronize you or anybody else in this thread, though it may have come out that way apparently.

Since I very rarely get called names I actually found it kind of funny, though somewhat surprising. :-)
Old 6th February 2009 | Show parent
  #30
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt ➑️
Apology accepted and I can assure you I didn't intend to patronize you or anybody else in this thread, though it may have come out that way apparently.

Since I very rarely get called names I actually found it kind of funny, though somewhat surprising. :-)
Yes! And from ME, I actually found it surprising too! LOL.
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 55 views: 32380
Avatar for IM WHO YOU THINK
IM WHO YOU THINK 13th October 2020
replies: 1296 views: 181868
Avatar for heraldo_jones
heraldo_jones 1st February 2016
replies: 21348 views: 1725072
Avatar for easyrider
easyrider 1 minute 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