The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Audio Interface - Low Latency Performance Data Base
Old 23rd February 2021 | Show parent
  #4741
Gear Head
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dor ➡️
I tested my RME HDSPe AIO Pro under OSX and Windows 10. I have my card in a Sonnet TB3 Echo Express SE I chassis. Windows 10 seems to have a 1ms advantage over OSX. I haven't tested RTL with the card installed directly in the PC's PCI-E slot but since Thunderbolt has direct access to the PCI-E bus there shouldn't be a performance hit. RME has confirmed this as well.

OSX (10.15.7)
32: 159 sample/3.605 msec
64: 223 samples/5.057 msec
128: 351 samples/7.959
256: 607 samples/13.764 msec
512: 1119 samples/25.374

Win 10 (20H2)
32: 111 samples/2.517
64: 175 samples/3.968
128:303 samples/6.871
256:559 samples/12.676
512:1071 samples/24.286

D
that's awesome, so there is actually a way to have the very powerful PCI-E cards from RME as an external box
Old 23rd February 2021 | Show parent
  #4742
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
 
18 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC ➡️
One thing worth mentioning is that these numbers may not extrapolate as well to zen3 and m1 processors.

I've done a little bit of testing with an m1, kinda waiting for more native options to test it further, and have been using a 5950x (holy crap it's good!) for about a month now.

From what I've seen so far, these processors are not losing as much CPU overhead when moving to lower buffer sizes. Looking at the numbers in the test, we see that differences at the 128 sample buffer are not as extreme as they are at the 32 sample buffer.

The reason I think this is relevent is roughly speaking, I would put the m1 performance as somewhere in the ballpark of a 48 sample buffer that is the same as 128 on tenth gen intel. The 5950x is astonishing in LL performance. The 16 sample buffer is to me slightly better than 10th gen intel at 128. It's unreal how good it is for low latency. Diva, devine 16 voices at 192k and the 16 sample buffer!

But all of those processors have very marginal differences as you move up to 256 and above (per core at least). Meaning that what makes the 5950x so special isn't that it's fully 2.6x more powerful than a 7980xe, rather it's 2.6x more powerful at 32 samples than the 7980xe. And even more than 2.6x more at 16 (like maybe 4ish).

In any case, it looks like in the post intel world (who knows, maybe they catch up or start using TSMC too), that CPU differences at low buffers are likely to be more marginal. If that's true, then lower RTL's will end up carrying a heavier weight in this test.

If anyone in the Denver area has an AIO or TB RME interface I would love to see if we can compare.

I think this is all worth mentioning because even the m1 is an impressive leap over 10th g intel. The 5950x is frankly hard to believe that it's real. I think that a lot of people are going to be upgrading their computers in the next year or two when these performance levels become more known, and I expect Apple to have better stuff in the near future than m1.
Do you know if you can stack two or three of the AIO Pro in the taller Sonnet SE boxes?

That would be a dream interface for me.
Old 23rd February 2021
  #4743
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 10 years
You can use multiple RME devices as long as they are supported by the same driver. So your software will see both units as a single large device.

Per the RME website, Up to 3 cards of the HDSPe series can be used simultaneously, in any possible combination.

https://www.forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=5036
Multiple RME cards into one PC: possible?

The following devices are also supported by the driver that supports the HDSPe AIO Pro:
Digiface
HDSP 9632
HDSP 9652
HDSP AES 32 PCI
HDSP MADI, HDSPe AES
HDSPe AIO
HDSPe MADI
HDSPe RayDat
MADIface
MADIface USB
Multiface
RPM
Old 24th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4744
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC ➡️
One thing worth mentioning is that these numbers may not extrapolate as well to zen3 and m1 processors.
That has been the norm for many years , with some respective platform advances bringing improvements in that lowest latency performance area.

I understand the current systems are better at low latency , some interfaces will present results at 032 that are not indicated in the current charts, but I have to maintain consistency as best I can.

Unless I retest all 50 plus interfaces on a current system, the comparative performance on the default reference systems will have to be retained.

As to the rest , eye on the ball, I am not getting into AMD vs Intel vs M1 on this thread, there are enough dedicated threads where those subjects are getting thrashed out.

Old 24th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4745
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mege ➡️
You can use multiple RME devices as long as they are supported by the same driver. So your software will see both units as a single large device.

Per the RME website, Up to 3 cards of the HDSPe series can be used simultaneously, in any possible combination.
Just a side note, yes any RME PCIe card in any combination that uses the same respective driver. Its worth noting that they have separate entries/tabs in Total Mix , they don't combine into one large single/combined I/O instance.

Easy enough to navigate, but worth mentioning.

Old 24th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4746
Lives for gear
 
Psychlist1972's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT ➡️
Just a side note, yes any RME PCIe card in any combination that uses the same respective driver. Its worth noting that they have separate entries/tabs in Total Mix , they don't combine into one large single/combined I/O instance.

Easy enough to navigate, but worth mentioning.

This is really good to know. I've been concerned that I'd have no other options should my MOTU stuff (long since out of production) stop working some day. I have 96 in/96 out on that, all 1/4" balanced, across four units.

The RME stuff is expensive, but they are one of the only other companies I've seen with that kind of analog IO on board.

Pete
Old 24th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4747
Lives for gear
 
Monkey Man's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Same boat as you, Pete, as you might remember (24 I/Os with PCI-424 card).
Old 24th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4748
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT ➡️
That has been the norm for many years , with some respective platform advances bringing improvements in that lowest latency performance area.

I understand the current systems are better at low latency , some interfaces will present results at 032 that are not indicated in the current charts, but I have to maintain consistency as best I can.

Unless I retest all 50 plus interfaces on a current system, the comparative performance on the default reference systems will have to be retained.

As to the rest , eye on the ball, I am not getting into AMD vs Intel vs M1 on this thread, there are enough dedicated threads where those subjects are getting thrashed out.

Oh yeah, I'm not at all criticizing or devaluing your work here. It's just something I thought people may consider looking at options.

FWIW, I had most, if not all of the last 4-5 intel generations and my take is that scaling from your system to those has likely been pretty good for all of them. They did get faster and faster, but the ratio of X plugins at 128 to the same plugin at 32 hasn't seemed to have changed much.

It only seems to be now changing with these SOC processors.
Old 24th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4749
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychlist1972 ➡️
This is really good to know. I've been concerned that I'd have no other options should my MOTU stuff (long since out of production) stop working some day. I have 96 in/96 out on that, all 1/4" balanced, across four units.

The RME stuff is expensive, but they are one of the only other companies I've seen with that kind of analog IO on board.

Pete

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkey Man ➡️
Same boat as you, Pete, as you might remember (24 I/Os with PCI-424 card).
For tons of IO and a pretty good driver, the Presonus Quantum line deserves a look. Up to 4 can be aggregated by the UControl panel- so you could use 2 4848's to get to 96 IO, or mix in some of the other ones if some built in Pre's were desired.

The Lynx TB interfaces can also be aggregated.
Old 24th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4750
Lives for gear
 
Psychlist1972's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC ➡️
For tons of IO and a pretty good driver, the Presonus Quantum line deserves a look. Up to 4 can be aggregated by the UControl panel- so you could use 2 4848's to get to 96 IO, or mix in some of the other ones if some built in Pre's were desired.

The Lynx TB interfaces can also be aggregated.
Thanks! Great to know on both of those.

These companies tend not to blast in big old letters that you can aggregate their interfaces natively. For me, that's a huge selling point.

Lynx was always a good player here. I'll check those out as well, although I'm good with my MOTU stuff at the moment, and if we change something in Windows that makes them no longer work, I know who I can yell at

Pete
Old 24th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4751
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx ➡️
Do you know if you can stack two or three of the AIO Pro in the taller Sonnet SE boxes?

That would be a dream interface for me.
I have no idea, I'm also wondering if they can be aggregated by the RME driver if I had 2 AIO's and an HDSPe AES or MADI that were each in their own TB-PCIe box with TB daisy chained. I have each one in a different room, and a setup where it's needed to combine or un-combine rooms...

Does anyone know with the ARC, does it stop (or can be made to stop) at 0dBFS? IE go no higher than 0dBFS. I've been using the older TC monitor controller with SPDIF I/O and it's annoying that it goes 12dB above 0dBFS (and clips unless the source has peaks at -12dBFS).

Last edited by RyanC; 24th February 2021 at 07:39 PM..
Old 24th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4752
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC ➡️
Oh yeah, I'm not at all criticizing or devaluing your work here. It's just something I thought people may consider looking at options.
Hey Ryan,

All good, I didn't take it in that way at all , just noting the dynamics involved to address the change of reference system.

Quote:
I have no idea, I'm also wondering if they can be aggregated by the RME driver if I had 2 AIO's and an HDSPe AES or MADI that were each in their own TB-PCIe box with TB daisy chained. I have each one in a different room, and a setup where it's needed to combine or un-combine rooms...
That is an interesting question, in theory you would think that all the devices would be seen as being native to the system via the TB controller , but anything TB and in theory is a minefield to be honest. I am currently navigating some TB curves on the latest controllers that were not present on the earlier.

Old 25th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4753
Lives for gear
 
Monkey Man's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychlist1972 ➡️
Thanks! Great to know on both of those.

I'll check those out as well, although I'm good with my MOTU stuff at the moment...
Indeed, thank you Ryan.

Like Pete, I'm good with MOTU. Committed to using the company's hardware and software in the late '90s and will never change unless absolutely-necessary.

Pete and I will have the MOTU AVB option, no doubt, to fall back on should our AudioWire (PCI-based) systems not be viable in AS land.
Old 25th February 2021
  #4754
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 10 years
The Motu AVB units can send 128 channels bidirectionally to your host computer if interfacing via thunderbolt (I believe it's 64 via USB). All connected AVB units are addressable via the internal routing matrix. You can select any channels from the connected physical i/o as well as outputs from the internal virtual-mixer to send to your host-computer.

As regards connecting PCIe RME units to a host computer via Thunderbolt, you can place multiple units into the one expansion chassis (eg Netstor or Sonnet units with 3 PCIe slots), or you can daisy chain individual units (eg Sonnet SE 1 units with 1 PCIe slot) one after the other. In this type of setup, the Thunderbolt protocol is simply externalising PCIe lanes via your Thunderbolt cables.

Both of these approaches give you quite a flexible setup, although the packetized network approach of AVB gives you more options than the simpler point-to-point Madi/ADAT/AES options (available via the non-AVB PCIe RME cards). The greater flexibility of the ethernet packet-based networking approach is however, more confusing to initially setup and manage should you want to change routings etc...
Old 25th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4755
Gear Nut
 
tonejunkee's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Have you looked into the Black Lion Audio mod? The quality jump is substantial and Babyface is one of their most popular mods
Old 25th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4756
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
I don't think that you need stacking. The ufx+ can do 188I/O, 12 inbuilt, 64 Madi, 16 adat (plus aes). Probably "cheaper" and easier to handle
Old 25th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4757
Lives for gear
 
throbert's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburban Studios ➡️
The Motu AVB units can send 128 channels bidirectionally to your host computer if interfacing via thunderbolt (I believe it's 64 via USB). All connected AVB units are addressable via the internal routing matrix. You can select any channels from the connected physical i/o as well as outputs from the internal virtual-mixer to send to your host-computer.

As regards connecting PCIe RME units to a host computer via Thunderbolt, you can place multiple units into the one expansion chassis (eg Netstor or Sonnet units with 3 PCIe slots), or you can daisy chain individual units (eg Sonnet SE 1 units with 1 PCIe slot) one after the other. In this type of setup, the Thunderbolt protocol is simply externalising PCIe lanes via your Thunderbolt cables.

Both of these approaches give you quite a flexible setup, although the packetized network approach of AVB gives you more options than the simpler point-to-point Madi/ADAT/AES options (available via the non-AVB PCIe RME cards). The greater flexibility of the ethernet packet-based networking approach is however, more confusing to initially setup and manage should you want to change routings etc...
People confuse AVB and Dante as computer IO. There are expensive NIC cards for this but they
introduce quite a bit of latency. Best to network multiple units using an appropriate switch and then address the matrix through one of the units via thunderbolt or USB as stated by Suburban Studios using your browser.
Old 27th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4758
Lives for gear
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by citrusonic ➡️
UA should legitimately be embarrassed at their RTL numbers considering they have a whole Thunderbolt lane to work with. BLA modded Ensemble Thunderbolt is in the mail and set to touch down here next week. Apollo x8 on Craigslist as of last night. even at higher sample rates during mixing i think the bad drivers bottleneck my system.
I asked about the low latency performance of UAD interfaces a couple of times in their Facebook groups. I was told to just monitor through UA Console with UAD plugins if I wanted low latency performance...
Problem is, I was wanting to monitor through Slate VMS mic emulations and other non-UAD plugins, so yeah...

Drew from UA said that "we have not optimized our driver for a native workflow" which makes it seems like they could be deliberately making the low latency performance terrible... Perhaps to force people to be further reliant on their ecosystem?
Old 28th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4759
Gear Addict
 
darkwavo's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by soapmak3r ➡️
I asked about the low latency performance of UAD interfaces a couple of times in their Facebook groups. I was told to just monitor through UA Console with UAD plugins if I wanted low latency performance...
Problem is, I was wanting to monitor through Slate VMS mic emulations and other non-UAD plugins, so yeah...

Drew from UA said that "we have not optimized our driver for a native workflow" which makes it seems like they could be deliberately making the low latency performance terrible... Perhaps to force people to be further reliant on their ecosystem?
Agreed.
It’s likely.

Which are the top three interfaces / connection type
With regard to working and monitoring directly in the DAW without the need for a separate mixer app??
So which have the best latency performance for ease of experience when making and mixing multitrack music?
Old 28th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4760
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkwavo ➡️
Agreed.
It’s likely.

Which are the top three interfaces / connection type
With regard to working and monitoring directly in the DAW without the need for a separate mixer app??
So which have the best latency performance for ease of experience when making and mixing multitrack music?
I’ve been using Apollo’s for a bit and like them a lot for my flow. But I just broke down and bought a 4848. Really want to check out the performance and conversion for my self. I’m a Mac user so I guess a little OT for this thread maybe. But I plan on picking up a M1 mini as they evolve a bit. My need for DSP will be less. But mainly just want to have all my synth and sampler outputs connected to interface. I’m currently looking to see how I can keep using my d box for monitoring and it looks like picking up another quantum with spdif prob the way to go. Anyways, I should receive soon.
Old 28th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4761
Gear Addict
 
darkwavo's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by szyam ➡️
I’ve been using Apollo’s for a bit and like them a lot for my flow. But I just broke down and bought a 4848. Really want to check out the performance and conversion for my self. I’m a Mac user so I guess a little OT for this thread maybe. But I plan on picking up a M1 mini as they evolve a bit. My need for DSP will be less. But mainly just want to have all my synth and sampler outputs connected to interface. I’m currently looking to see how I can keep using my d box for monitoring and it looks like picking up another quantum with spdif prob the way to go. Anyways, I should receive soon.
Interesting. I’d like to know how that quantum stands up to the Apollo. I know the presonus interfaces get great latency performance.
Old 28th February 2021 | Show parent
  #4762
Gear Head
 
paulnajar's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
“Not optimised” means will not receive audio in without console running. Audio out yes. With console running on a recent model iMac Logic reported over 5ms rtl at 32 sample buffer. YMMV

IMO it’s a waste of a Thunderbolt connection. Apollo is only a good choice if you wish to track with UAD plugins. Even if you only wish to mix with UAD there are better value ways to get more UAD DSP
Old 1st March 2021 | Show parent
  #4763
Lives for gear
 
The thing with the UAD interfaces that bothers me as a UAD interface owner, is that with thunderbolt, they could have the best of both worlds...Great low latency performance at low sample buffers, for tracking through native plugins, and great low latency performance through UA console, regardless of the buffer settings.
Yet they appear to have chosen to not bother with great lower latency performance for native plugins.
Old 1st March 2021 | Show parent
  #4764
Gear Addict
 
darkwavo's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by soapmak3r ➡️
The thing with the UAD interfaces that bothers me as a UAD interface owner, is that with thunderbolt, they could have the best of both worlds...Great low latency performance at low sample buffers, for tracking through native plugins, and great low latency performance through UA console, regardless of the buffer settings.
Yet they appear to have chosen to not bother with great lower latency performance for native plugins.
Interesting. So you “have” to use console with a UA interface to achieve low latency monitoring .
Seems really distracting for song making .
And also punching in to a take must be a pain.
Old 11th March 2021 | Show parent
  #4765
Gear Maniac
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by throbert ➡️
People confuse AVB and Dante as computer IO. There are expensive NIC cards for this but they
introduce quite a bit of latency. Best to network multiple units using an appropriate switch and then address the matrix through one of the units via thunderbolt or USB as stated by Suburban Studios using your browser.

I can't speak to AVB. This is not true for Dante PCIe interfaces. The latency is low, and most importantly completely stable even if running 40 or 120 channels of audio. To each his own, but I run PCIe interfaces by preference - they go in slot one and are directly connected to the CPU. No bridge chips, no USB, just straight into lanes connected to the CPU.
Old 11th March 2021 | Show parent
  #4766
Lives for gear
 
throbert's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by niversen ➡️
I can't speak to AVB. This is not true for Dante PCIe interfaces. The latency is low, and most importantly completely stable even if running 40 or 120 channels of audio. To each his own, but I run PCIe interfaces by preference - they go in slot one and are directly connected to the CPU. No bridge chips, no USB, just straight into lanes connected to the CPU.
I'm pretty sure you're right in that there is Enet PCIe cards available only for Dante, but Dante feels overly complicated and restrictive compared to AVB and AVB doesn't require as much gear as Dante does and it seems weird that the matrix only allows you to patch as many channels as you have physical IO on the device you're using, or at least that's what I'm getting from it. Anyways my initial attraction to or I began to take Enet audio more seriously when considering it for stage mix/personal monitoring. It's been around though for quite some time in one protocol or another.
Old 11th March 2021 | Show parent
  #4767
Gear Maniac
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by throbert ➡️
I'm pretty sure you're right in that there is Enet PCIe cards available only for Dante, but Dante feels overly complicated and restrictive compared to AVB and AVB doesn't require as much gear as Dante does and it seems weird that the matrix only allows you to patch as many channels as you have physical IO on the device you're using, or at least that's what I'm getting from it. Anyways my initial attraction to or I began to take Enet audio more seriously when considering it for stage mix/personal monitoring. It's been around though for quite some time in one protocol or another.
Dante provides an any-any patch capability for all I/O connected to the network. You can mult any source to any number of destinations. I'm not sure what is missing, there's not much point to patching to something that doesn't exist in a physical patch bay. My Dante network is simple. I plugged the cables into a switch. That's it. It can be complicated, but it doesn't have to be. But one uses Dante because one wants access to Dante equipment. I have multiple vendors on my network. They all work seamlessly. AVB has a weak ecosystem for what I want to do. I'm sure it works great for some. Others chose Ravenna. But like all tech - it solves a problem, but its only useful if you have the problem it solves. I did.
Old 12th March 2021 | Show parent
  #4768
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by niversen ➡️
Dante provides an any-any patch capability for all I/O connected to the network. You can mult any source to any number of destinations. I'm not sure what is missing, there's not much point to patching to something that doesn't exist in a physical patch bay. My Dante network is simple. I plugged the cables into a switch. That's it. It can be complicated, but it doesn't have to be. But one uses Dante because one wants access to Dante equipment. I have multiple vendors on my network. They all work seamlessly. AVB has a weak ecosystem for what I want to do. I'm sure it works great for some. Others chose Ravenna. But like all tech - it solves a problem, but its only useful if you have the problem it solves. I did.
I am glad it’s working out for you.

I was looking at Dante when I wanted to turn my spare Mac Mini into a multichannel FX box. I found pages upon pages of text and several videos telling me about all the marvelous things Dante can do, but not a single step-by-step guide for how to accomplish my goal. To begin with, it wasn’t clear whether or not I needed a switch/router or if I can directly connect two computers via ethernet. I read conflicting opinions. There was no authoritative info on what kind of latencies to expect and if they were going to be consistent or arbitrary. It was not clear which software I was supposed to install and if it was free to use.

After following numerous links and trying to understand what folk in the videos were talking about, I gave up.

I decided to follow a more conventional route and bought a RME Digiface USB which is now connected to my Digiface 1 via ADAT pipes. I couldn’t be happier - the RME Totalmix software puts almost no strain on the CPU and the setup is 100% stable.

Dante may work just as well or even better. However, I do think the way Dante is presented and marketed leaves a lot to be desired.
Old 12th March 2021 | Show parent
  #4769
Gear Guru
 
Muser's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
RME do the Digiface Dante unit. from what I remember, what's good about it is that it connects via USB and rides the Dante latency down to the RME USB driver speeds. which I think means, though the latency is not as low as a PCIe Dante card, it's lower than many cases where your computer has no PCIe card slot.
Old 12th March 2021 | Show parent
  #4770
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tui ➡️
... I was looking at Dante when I wanted to turn my spare Mac Mini into a multichannel FX box. ...
Dante may work just as well or even better. However, I do think the way Dante is presented and marketed leaves a lot to be desired.
Sorry to be so late to the party; but for posterity's sake...

- Yes, you can can directly connect two Ethernet computers' ports without a switch, but using a switch/router is better for sanity and setting IP addresses.

- As @ Muser points out above, the best/lowest Dante latency is accomplished with the Dante PCIe card, 2nd place is the RME Digiface Dante USB, and a distant 3rd is the Dante Virtual Soundcard (DVS) that would use your native Ethernet interface.

- As for multichannel audio FX across a network, it seems to me that AudioGridder is the best answer to that requirement. Bonus points because it's free.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 2341 views: 391870
Avatar for didier.brest
didier.brest 1 week ago
replies: 61 views: 11007
Avatar for Transistor
Transistor 21st February 2015
replies: 486 views: 128938
Avatar for blackcom
blackcom 14th September 2020
replies: 119 views: 26304
Avatar for LarsErik
LarsErik 2nd February 2020
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