Quantcast
Reverb: Tips and Techniques - Page 2 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Reverb: Tips and Techniques
Old 16th February 2009 | Show parent
  #31
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
[quote=babyface_finsta]I've had really cool pointers shared by some of the top engineers... I have to say no one has broken it down like this... EXCELLENT... appreciate your follow-up reply!

That's alot of ground there! I'll do my best to be clear.

- Are you programming beats in double time? Or am I just confused...

Doesn't really matter. Finding those ms marks are just assigning key rhythmic places. At 60bpm you have a quarter note ever 1000ms, eighth every 500ms etc. At 120bpm you have your quarters every 500ms, eighths at every 250ms. The place values are still the same. I may have also mistyped in my original post, I was kind of ill when I wrote it.


- Did you mean to say "the difference between 216 and 250"?

Yes. I mistyped.

And... does this apply just to compressing the reverb or Group, Master Bus Compression or @ the Mastering stage?

I was particularly thinking about the mastering stage/ master bus. But anytime you compress a group that involves dry elements and reverb elements, the reverb will jump out more.


- Can you elaborate on Ft vs Room Size and how this translates to ms (and when you earlier said a Small Rooms is like a quarter of a second)... or maybe a link that I can read up on this...

In literal terms there are many factors in how long a reverb will tail out for. Too many to consider really. My home studio for example is basically 10x8 ft, and the reverb tails somewhere around 1/10th of a second. It's just a ball park, but if I'm envisioning a 10x10 room, the tail will be about 100ms. The same is true in reverse. If my decay time is 250ms, my room is probably close to 25x25ft.

Still, there's a million things to think about. If you want realism, sound moves at apprx. 1ft. per 1ms. You can use this to consider predelay, decay time, and room size - as they are all related. But I usually go by feel on this one. If I want realism, I'll track real reverb in real space, you know.


- What are the benefits of using Decay/Density vs... EQ and Filtering... for clarity and presence

Same as choosing a bright microphone as opposed to eqing brightness into the sound. Your reverb processor is generating a NEW SOUND, based on the dry sound. Decay and Density are parts of that new sound. Like any sound source, your best bet will be to get it as close as possible before bringing in the after effects. Decay and Density are very textural controls, whereas EQ and Filtering are tonal. That being said of course, if you find a texture you like, but it doesn't have the clarity you need, and eq could be the way to go.


- Kinda get the gist of what your saying... I guess envisioning the Drums at the other end of the room, the vocalist center stage, and 75%... is throwing me off... Can you give an example with the drums behind the lead vocalist... Maybe I'm confused once again....

I didn't explain that well. Diffusion is how much the sound echoes break up. This is indicative of some hybrid between the shape of the room and the distance the source is from the listener. If the listener is at the far end of the venue, and the drummer is all the way up against the opposing wall, that would be 100% diffusion. Realistically, your listener is probably in the middle of the venue. The drummer is probably at the back of stage, close to the wall. Since your listener is halfway closer, the diffusion is half as much, or 50%. The vocalist is probably closer, maybe only 40% diffused. The average of the drums (farthest from listener) and vocalist (closest to listener) is 45% diffusion, which would be a good setting for reverb processor to create that scenerio. But this all works in conjunction with predelay and density - because a room can be short, and highly diffuse. Or it could be not particularly diffuse, but the source could be far away which makes the sound diffuse more - so all the settings need to be working together.

- How does all this play out, when using Parrallel Compression... and Tricks/Tips or things to look out for....

I tend not to use parallel compression in general. I've never used it on reverb before. As I said, I tend to leave my reverb uncompressed. Less is more, unless you want some very full ambience. Maybe if you want some very boomed out drums like in early 90s pop music you would drop some parallel compression on the reverb. It will make the sound like it is coming from in a metal tank.


- Do you reply more on the use of reverb or panning to frame your mix....

Tracking if possible. I set my microphones up to capture the appropriate space, and then make sure my panning and reverb compliment my original frame. I'd say tracking is first, panning is second, and reverb is third.

_ Any thoughts on applying delay to verb and vice versa?

I find a touch of reverb compliments a delay very well. Many delays come with reverb settings, which is convenient. I would use delay with reverb only if I want a very large vast wide sound. The delay will blend with the reverb and sound like echo, which generally exists in the grand canyon, the pope's grand hall, and other things which are grand. Stone castles and stuff.

Any audio your particularly proud of, that I/we can check out?

At the moment I don't know what's up and out. But I have a song called "Fight On" that I'll post somewhere soon that has interesting space.

Thanks again for your insight!

No problem, if you ever have a question on a particular mix feel free to post it up and I'll give it a listen.
Old 16th February 2009 | Show parent
  #32
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
In regards to decay time. I was talking to an acoustic design guy recently and mentioned this topic off hand. He said that decay time has a somewhat exponential increase with size. Meaning a 50 x 50 ft room will have much longer than a half second decay time. And shape and wall material has a lot to do with decay time as well. I'm walking a bit into uncharted territory with decay time when going for realism.

Remember, this is specifically my approach to reverb. I don't really go for realism. I don't think reverb generators sound real. So I don't go for realism. I go for reverb as a musical element. I strongly believe that realistic ambience depends on the tracking.

Here are three basic approaches to reverb:

1). Reverb as an instrument (my approach).

2.) Reverb as a natural sense of space (an excellent approach, but one best left for tracking in my oppinion).

3.) Complimentary reverb (use reverb generators to enhance the natural reverb captured during tracking).

Great acoustic capture probably combines all three of the above. Knowing what kind of room will generate what kind of reverb and how that will play to the song being recorded in a musical way is what makes for brilliant engineering.

If anyone has any other approaches to reverb feel free to chime in. It's a fascinating and important aspect of mixing.
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #33
Lives for gear
 
skiroy's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
This is excellent post. One stupid question. When you put a reverb plugin on a send I know the wet should be to max but what about the dry setting? Should it be all the way down,with the Wet all the way up?

Also I have breverb which the time goes down to only 500ms,when I hear people saying they set time any where from .2-1.5s for vocals. Im really intrested in Altiverb. Anyone that has both is there one that is better for vocal apps? I ask because many say they have both but from what I hear about Altiverb its the issh. So If you had Altiverb why even use breverb?
Old 18th February 2009 | Show parent
  #34
Lives for gear
 
skiroy's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiroy ➑️
This is excellent post. One stupid question. When you put a reverb plugin on a send I know the wet should be to max but what about the dry setting? Should it be all the way down,with the Wet all the way up?

Also I have breverb which the time goes down to only 500ms,when I hear people saying they set time any where from .2-1.5s for vocals. Im really intrested in Altiverb. Anyone that has both is there one that is better for vocal apps? I ask because many say they have both but from what I hear about Altiverb its the issh. So If you had Altiverb why even use breverb?
bump
Old 18th February 2009 | Show parent
  #35
Lives for gear
 
erwinor's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiroy ➑️
This is excellent post. One stupid question. When you put a reverb plugin on a send I know the wet should be to max but what about the dry setting? Should it be all the way down,with the Wet all the way up?
Wet= 100%
Dry= 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by skiroy ➑️
Also I have breverb which the time goes down to only 500ms,when I hear people saying they set time any where from .2-1.5s for vocals. Im really intrested in Altiverb. Anyone that has both is there one that is better for vocal apps? I ask because many say they have both but from what I hear about Altiverb its the issh. So If you had Altiverb why even use breverb?
The time setting could be anywhere in combination with the size of the room.
There are situations that i have use much longer times .

The setting of 200ms is more like an ambi setting so if you really want times lower than what the Breverb offers, you could use a gate after the reverb to tame the tail more.
Old 18th February 2009 | Show parent
  #36
Lives for gear
 
Eloheim's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiroy ➑️
This is excellent post. One stupid question. When you put a reverb plugin on a send I know the wet should be to max but what about the dry setting? Should it be all the way down,with the Wet all the way up?
If you're using it as a send you want 100% wet (and no dry). Then its like the dry level is set via the fader on the original channel, and the wet level, or FX level, is set via that channel's send amount. Sorry if that doesn't make sense but the "FXed" reverbed sound is the "wet," and the original unaffected sound is the "dry." Usually I see a single "wet/dry" setting so I'm not sure if you're is different. (So 100% wet would be reverbed only, and 100% dry would be not reverbed at all.)

Ever used a plug with a "mix" knob on it? Wetness is the same thing. The wetter it is the more affected the sound. 50% wet/50% dry would be equal amounts of each. So if ur using the reverb plug on the original channel (ie, NOT a send), then you'd wanna use the Wet/Dry knob, but otherwise you should probly have it 100% wet.

(That said, some plugs may be affected by, maybe we say, how hard you drive them, so if that's the case, and also if you're generally taking artistic liscence, these "rules" could be void.)

And please correct me if I'm wrong anyone!tutt
Old 18th February 2009 | Show parent
  #37
Lives for gear
 
skiroy's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Thankx guys.
Old 18th February 2009 | Show parent
  #38
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
The only time you want to use the dry sound mixed in with the wet sound is when you are using a NEGATIVE PRE-Delay. This is a weird effect, and requires the sound to be moved around a bit. However, you would use the dry setting coming out of the reverb in this instance.

I have heard great things about altiverb, and I've heard it on mixes. It sounds good, but I have yet to use it in my own application. I've played with Breverb a bit, but didn't like the sound.
Old 22nd February 2009 | Show parent
  #39
Lives for gear
 
six_wax's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Storyville:

Really, really killer offering in this thread my friend. Really generous of you, and much appreciated!

Old 22nd February 2009 | Show parent
  #40
Lives for gear
 
six_wax's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
p.s. What types of verb do you prefer for what sources? Any thoughts on choosing different types of algorithms?

p.p.s As a far-less-important aside, what boxes/plugins do you prefer?
Old 23rd February 2009 | Show parent
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
My tastes in reverbs are actually pretty boring and predictable with one exception. I'm a big fan of pretty much the whole lexicon series, the cheaper ones have a certain thuddy sound on drums, the high end guys are like love for strings and vocals. The Bricasi M7 is up on my list of reverbs to try, I've heard it's the truth. As far as plugs go, I'm not terribly discriminant. There are basically three things I really look for. One is "metallic" sound. I use the waves rverb pretty often, but my only grievance with that is that "metallic"ness. I need a wide control range. And I need a defined tail. Rverb is nice for a quick use. TL Space is very good, especially if you have a good ir library. The Voxengo one is pretty good too. I'm going to check out altiverb, and a few others pretty soon.
Old 23rd February 2009 | Show parent
  #42
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by six_wax ➑️
p.s. What types of verb do you prefer for what sources? Any thoughts on choosing different types of algorithms?

p.p.s As a far-less-important aside, what boxes/plugins do you prefer?
Hey, no problem. Hopefully someone will feel inspired to post a thread on there take on reverb, or really anything else. As long as he/she feels confident in their results

Any whose. I choose algorithms based on several things. How epic of a sound I want. If I want something grandiose I'll go for a hall or a church, but if I want something where the reverb is playing the background, I'll probably go for a room or a plate. The trashiness of plates tend to work well on drums, and can be cool for vocals (I tend to go for room though). Some processors have "resonant space" settings or something equivalent, which always provides an interesting sound in case the mix needs a little spice. Or, I'll envision where everything is being played and work from there.

All in all, I'm generally a "room" algorithm type of guy.
Old 14th August 2009 | Show parent
  #43
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
I consider myself a beginner and I have a question regarding sends.
I've learned that you get better results by sending and feeding the reverb with 100% of the signal and then adjust the wet level inside the reverb.

I see all of you doing the opposite (wet 100% in the reverb and adjusting by sending for instance, 10%) and I assume that's the way to go

My question is why?
Old 14th August 2009 | Show parent
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kembaah ➑️
I consider myself a beginner and I have a question regarding sends.
I've learned that you get better results by sending and feeding the reverb with 100% of the signal and then adjust the wet level inside the reverb.

I see all of you doing the opposite (wet 100% in the reverb and adjusting by sending for instance, 10%) and I assume that's the way to go

My question is why?
Well, let's knock out a quick terminology issue. What you are really asking is whether or not a reverb effect should be used as an insert or a send effect. Insert effects (or in-line effects) are best for something where you want the whole signal to change, and retain none of the original signal. Like an eq. It's rarely necessary to eq a signal, and then mix in the original uneq'd signal. Send effects (or side-chain effects) are effects where you want a blend of the original and the dry (the phrase side-chaining is often used to mean "keyed to another signal's side chain" so we usually say "Send" to avoid confusion). Reverb is almost always something you want as a send effect, because you are essentially generating a second signal based on and working with the first.

Many reverb processors have a wet to dry ratio built in so that they CAN be used in line. And there is certainly no law against using reverb in line. The general reason to use it as a send is (A) so you have individual control over the sound of the reverb, and it can be processed like it's own signal, and, (B) so that multiple sound sources can easily contribute to the same reverb sound and appear as if they are all in the same reverb space.
Old 20th August 2009 | Show parent
  #45
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
Great reply, makes perfectly sense. Thanks!
Old 20th August 2009 | Show parent
  #46
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
You're welcome.

And since this thread has just been bumped, I'll add a couple of things.

The subject of mono reverbs came up on this forum recently - so I started playing with them again. I had basically written off mono reverbs. Now that I've been using them again, I have to say my eyes are open. Mono reverbs are great for creating depth and retaining a strong central image.

I've also been using delays more. I've done mostly Hip Hop oriented projects up until recently. Hip Hop vocals tend to come in SUPER dry - dead space. So they tend to need a bit of reverb (imo) to come back to life. However, now that I'm getting music that is recorded in actual reverberant spaces, I'm finding delays to be much more fulfilling. They seem to accentuate the room sound, without conflicting with it.
Old 1st October 2009 | Show parent
  #47
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Hi instead of posting a new topic, I thought I would bump this one instead?

I have been having a little trouble with designing my reverb I was wondering if anyone might be able to push me in the right direction. I want a specific sound for my tracks, and actually I have a clip of exactly the sound I am after...

YouTube - The Thrillseekers - The Last time

Because of this song I bought a Lexicon Pcm-90 (Although he used a PCM-80 w/Delay)

TBH I haven't been able to get close..
Old 1st October 2009 | Show parent
  #48
wreckingstuff
Guest
This is a really positive thread... Big up Storyville
Old 1st October 2009 | Show parent
  #49
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelConway ➑️
Hi instead of posting a new topic, I thought I would bump this one instead?

I have been having a little trouble with designing my reverb I was wondering if anyone might be able to push me in the right direction. I want a specific sound for my tracks, and actually I have a clip of exactly the sound I am after...

YouTube - The Thrillseekers - The Last time

Because of this song I bought a Lexicon Pcm-90 (Although he used a PCM-80 w/Delay)

TBH I haven't been able to get close..

I was about to say, there seems to be an interesting delay effect incorporate with a number of reverb effects. This is really some extremely creative and tasteful use of artificial reverbs. There is a good degree of automation on the some moments where the reverb seems to wash up - so off the bat you won't just "get that sound." It's going to require tailoring moment to moment.

The reverbs themselves are very clear, except when the engineer doesn't want them to be (an occasional white noisey woosh seems to come up).

One thing I distinctly notice is that there is a separate reverb on the snare drum - sounds like a tight plate reverb that is complimenting the actual decay of the snare. Also, the reverb on the synths are being generated post modulation, so when the high frequencies start morphing, it causes the reverb to change as well, which adds to the texture. The vocals are swamped with reverb and has a delay mixed into it. The delay itself is being fed through a filter that's being modified by an ascending saw LFO. There are also little ear candy percussion things happening that are WAY back in the stereo field that are drenched in reverb, which seems to enhance the overall sense of space.

Unfortunately, I don't think there's a simple answer for this one. I'll give it another listen when I can switch between studio monitors and nice headphones and see if that illuminates anything.

PS. thanks wreck.
Old 2nd October 2009 | Show parent
  #50
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
the one thing I do notice though.. and this could be totally something different is that the reverbs complement each other.. the synths to the drum kits to the vocals they all seem to glue together. Some other producers who also get this same effect are Above and Beyond the reverb use on their tracks is superb..

Do you think* that he may have side chained the VOX reverb with the vocal itself? so when the vocal cuts out the reverb raises in volume.
Old 2nd October 2009 | Show parent
  #51
Gear Head
 
Left to starve's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I preety much always cut mids on reverb, 500-1khz.
Old 2nd October 2009 | Show parent
  #52
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Different strokes......on the contrary I like to bump a molehill into the middle somewhere on a note that creates a tension in the music that I'm after and then take the overall level of the return down .......

And yet again, nice thread Storyville! Becoming one of the major sharers of actual goodness on here.....
Old 2nd October 2009 | Show parent
  #53
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Here is a remix I am working on right... I've been working on the VOX placement in the track all day and finding a nice balance w/ the reverb. Tell me your thoughts on what I can improve on those elements.. Everything else is at a rough mix down..but if you hear anything you would like to recommend I'd love to hear it. here is the link

Download remix start .mp3 from Sendspace.com - send big files the easy way
Old 2nd October 2009 | Show parent
  #54
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelConway ➑️
Here is a remix I am working on right... I've been working on the VOX placement in the track all day and finding a nice balance w/ the reverb. Tell me your thoughts on what I can improve on those elements.. Everything else is at a rough mix down..but if you hear anything you would like to recommend I'd love to hear it. here is the link

Download remix start .mp3 from Sendspace.com - send big files the easy way

Thanks Karloff - I listened to the track, and compared it to your thrillseekers reference. Two negatives that I caught - 1. The highs thrhoughout the track, especially on some of the percussion instruments sound brittle. Try using a different eq for high shelving, or widen the Q, or just ease up on it a bit. The other is that the vocal is a bit too hazy. I think the volume is ok, but you need more definition in the vocal to have it where it is. Personally, I boost the vocal up by 1db, keep the reverb where it's at, and do a more calculated sculpted of the eq curve to get defined.

I don't believe that the thrillseeker mix is a sidechained reverb - although this can be a cool effect. To me, it seems more deliberate. I think the reverb just has some fader riding doing the same idea, but in a more purposed way.

I recommend fader riding in general, both for vocals, and for reverb effects - as well as other things. With time you'll be able to fader ride your reverb output as quickly as it takes to set up the side chain.
Old 2nd October 2009 | Show parent
  #55
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Are there any EQ plug-ins that you would recommend for the Vox or to get a tamed percussion sound? Honestly I am doing more high shelf cutting then boosting. I know this is getting off topic but I really do appreciate the input
Old 3rd October 2009 | Show parent
  #56
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelConway ➑️
Are there any EQ plug-ins that you would recommend for the Vox or to get a tamed percussion sound? Honestly I am doing more high shelf cutting then boosting. I know this is getting off topic but I really do appreciate the input
Ok, I finally got a chance to listen to these on good speakers in an environment I'm familiar with.

First things first - your highs. On cheaper computer speakers the thrillseeker mix had comfortable highs, while yours seemed a bit brittle. On my monitors your highs do not seem brittle, but your low mids don't have the same fullness and detail that the thrillseeker mix has. Also, thrillseeker just has less highs in general, but I'm not sure I like that. Anyway, just to see what would happen and to test my ear, I threw my iTunes eq on and played around to see what would happen. I found two things of interest. 1. Boosting 125, while making things a bit muddy also seemed to breathe some life into the mix. That means you may have too much high passing happening, or something isn't happening there correctly. 2nd, when I boosted 500 the sense of space widened, but the lead synth became way too mid driven. Boosting 250 seemed to have a nice compromise between 125 and 500, but with WAY more mud. So re-evaluating your low mids should make things work out better. Also, a lot of your spatial content really needs this area to feel like actual space. 150-600 is where most of your space sound exists. For a plug-in, the UAD Cambridge is pretty smooth. Also, the UAD Pultec stuff is pretty good. I'm not really digging Waves REQ, especially for high end - but people seem to use it all the time. The Voxengo GlissEq ain't half bad - I feel like I can make larger moves with more transparency on the gliss than on waves.
Old 5th October 2009 | Show parent
  #57
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Thank so much for that input it really helped out with the mix!

So in order to head in the right direction what algorithm should I start with for that sort of reverb? I.E hall, plate, chamber ect.
Old 6th October 2009 | Show parent
  #58
Lives for gear
 
Storyville's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelConway ➑️
Thank so much for that input it really helped out with the mix!

So in order to head in the right direction what algorithm should I start with for that sort of reverb? I.E hall, plate, chamber ect.
That's very much a personal aesthetic. They have different textures, different tail countours, and in the whole mix they can be very subtle. Think of your reverb almost like a pad synth - where would you place your pad - where does it rise and fall, why would you choose a saw tooth based shape over say sampled strings. Your personality is already very much in your music, so trust your gut - don't hear it, feel it.

Traditional - and electronica is not bound by to tradition by any means - drums tend to work well with short plates, pads blend well with halls, vocals are often rooms or dark-medium plates (halls for ballads). Bass frequencies rarely have much or even any reverb on them - but no reason not to experiment. Also, different processors interpret what a "room" is in very different ways.

Texturally, plates sound like a thousand quick delays - it's a ripply sort of reverb, like a smoother version of a spring reverb. Halls are meant to be like syrup with one consistent decay. Rooms are like half way between the plate and the hall, with occasional time related bumps and dips. Chambers are similar but with different distribution.

Play with all the parameters in the reverb processor - diffusion, decay, size, etc. Because they all have a textural effect.

Lastly, your reference has multiple reverbs and delays that compliment each other and that move throughout the mix. If you want to get on the level of your reference think along the same lines.


Ps. When I originally started this thread, I had never used Altiverb. I give it an A. It's my favorite plug.

Post up your next version of the mix, I'd like to hear how it progresses!
Old 6th October 2009 | Show parent
  #59
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 10 years
sounds interesting
Old 6th October 2009 | Show parent
  #60
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 10 years
Very Interesting topic indeed!!!!

However, something caught my attention....
I ve seen written somewhere that the longer the pre delay, the farther the source stands from the listener...
I am confused/ disagree

If a source is a the other far end of the room, the direct sound (dry sound) and the reverberated reflections (the reverb) will arrive at the listener's ears at approximately the same time. This implies a short predelay.

If the listener is close to the source, he will hear the direct sound first and then the reverberated signals with a delay because it will take time for them to hit the back/side walls and so on... this implies a long predelay.

Does that make sense?
Because if i am not mistaking, this is the exact opposite of what has been said on this forum

thanks!
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 63 views: 23173
Avatar for stephent28
stephent28 8th December 2011
replies: 68 views: 8560
Avatar for RyanC
RyanC 23rd March 2011
replies: 206 views: 53290
Avatar for hanuman
hanuman 1 week ago
replies: 78 views: 7006
Avatar for Neodym
Neodym 4th June 2012
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