The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
How many tube mics make sense?
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #31
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle ➡️
It seems like a strange inquiry to me.
maybe from today's perspective and depending on situation...
i'd like to mention again though that in many european broadcasting studios, the huge majority of mics being used for recording orchestras - up until the mid-90's in some cases - were tube mics! and i'm not necessarily just talking about a trio or quintet of m50's but pretty much any model from neumann, gefell, akg, schoeps (of lomo if we're looking further east).

Quote:
I tend to think of the relationship of the source and the mic as a couple, if the sound is hard or bright i can soften it with mic choice and then preamp choice and then compressor choice.
yep: it's about matching things - i'd like to add the room, arrangement, desired sound aesthetics, genre, preference and taste as criteria to consider and in terms of gear, converters...

Quote:
let the source tell you what it needs, then find the solution through you intimate knowledge of your present signal chains.
...which is what you essentially mentioned here already (so quoted for emphasis).
Old 2 weeks ago
  #32
Quote:
Originally Posted by crille_mannen ➡️
I always prefer tube mics on vocals so at least 1 [. . .]

Pairs are always nice [. . .]
First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?
- S.R. Hadden | John Hurt, Contact. 1997
Nice to have a minimum stated - thanks, @ crille_mannen !

I suppose there are a number of microphones where owning one is absolute perfection - but two is too many? Maybe the Josephson C700S?

Yet I am inescapably attracted to pairs. . .be they SDC, LDC, ribbon or moving coil.

For some specific mics - the Heiserman H47Tube, for me - three seems not too many. . .though I expect to pause at two. Anticipating other flavor acquisitions, my very nature will drive me toward pairs.


Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah ➡️
[. . .] in many european broadcasting studios, the huge majority of mics being used for recording orchestras - up until the mid-90's in some cases - were tube mics! and i'm not necessarily just talking about a trio or quintet of m50's but pretty much any model from neumann, gefell, akg, schoeps (of lomo if we're looking further east). [. . .]
Thanks, D. I didn't know that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle ➡️
It seems like a strange inquiry to me.
I tend to think of the relationship of the source and the mic as a couple [. . .] let the source tell you what it needs, then find the solution through you intimate knowledge of your present signal chains. [. . .]
Thanks, @ GreenNeedle - I think we think somewhat similar [1]. But have you noticed a high-water mark on the number of tube mics you've ever wanted in a mix?


Pick a number, any number.

Ray H.

[1] . . .with perhaps vastly different workflows. You also have a lot more experience. Off topic: My present signal chain has mostly been high-end mics into a Pro Tools MRTX, and everything else ITB. I'm expanding this to include a couple Grace Design m103 channel strips.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #33
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayHeath ➡️
First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?
- S.R. Hadden | John Hurt, Contact. 1997
Nice to have a minimum stated - thanks, @ crille_mannen !

I suppose there are a number of microphones where owning one is absolute perfection - but two is too many? Maybe the Josephson C700S?

Yet I am inescapably attracted to pairs. . .be they SDC, LDC, ribbon or moving coil.

For some specific mics - the Heiserman H47Tube, for me - three seems not too many. . .though I expect to pause at two. Anticipating other flavor acquisitions, my very nature will drive me toward pairs.




Thanks, D. I didn't know that.




Thanks, @ GreenNeedle - I think we think somewhat similar [1]. But have you noticed a high-water mark on the number of tube mics you've ever wanted in a mix?


Pick a number, any number.

Ray H.

[1] . . .with perhaps vastly different workflows. You also have a lot more experience. Off topic: My present signal chain has mostly been high-end mics into a Pro Tools MRTX, and everything else ITB. I'm expanding this to include a couple Grace Design m103 channel strips.
Hey Ray, nope never a specific amount. I simply choose the tube mics based only on if the source tells me to. And if i owned different tube mics i may make those choices more often.
I find in digital i am more often looking to NOT have the defined highs. So i love ribbons and dynamics. There is usually a sound or 2 that i will use a 47/67 on and its usually vocals. I have 2 km 56s that will often end up on piano or gtrs etc but they are very rich and soft sounding.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #34
Gear Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by elegentdrum ➡️
How would others trim it down?
With quality tube mic preamps. Capsule-jfet-tube-output. You do put a fet in between the capsule and tube but that will save thousands. Does that really matter when the rest of the recording chain is transistors as well?
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #35
Lives for gear
 
bambamboom's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayHeath ➡️
have you noticed a high-water mark on the number of tube mics you've ever wanted in a mix?


Pick a number, any number.
The high water mark is as many tracks as your system supports.

The right number will vary infinitely based on the song, the taste of the artist, the producer and yourself.

I'd suggest you forget about it and just use your ears. You're creating unnecessary complexity in this line of thinking.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #36
Gear Guru
 
kennybro's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
I have this weird premonition that I could conjure up a decent recording if all I had was tube mics.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #37
Gear Guru
 
kennybro's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by gravyface ➡️
Feeling terribly inadequate right now. I have zero tube mics in the stable.
iSK 2B is quite decent for the price, if you want to step in lightly. Only thing is they always seem to be out of stock. Shipment probably stranded in the Suez Canal right now.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #38
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennybro ➡️
I could conjure up a decent recording if all I had was tube mics.
Most of the pros and semi-pros here could make tube or no-tube recordings that would defy the ability of most pros and semi-pros to identify which is which.

I have made reasonably good recordings using mics I actively hate and would never choose.

So maybe there is no answer to the thread question. And there is good reason for that.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #39
Quote:
Originally Posted by elegentdrum ➡️
That will be $200,000 [. . .] How would others trim it down?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams ➡️
With quality tube mic preamps. Capsule-jfet-tube-output. You do put a fet in between the capsule and tube but that will save thousands. Does that really matter when the rest of the recording chain is transistors as well?
This is clearly a correct answer for a lot of people.

However, while loving both great solid-state mics and great tube mics, I have an aversion to the configuration: capsulejfetvalvepreampaphobia. Popular transformer/tube microphone preamps just don't fit me somehow?

So, I suppose I'd have to call up a few dudes like @ jjblair to rent some time. . .

What's in your mic locker?

I count 16 original flavors.


He is approaching Howard Johnson's for tube mics,

Ray H.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushman ➡️
Most of the pros and semi-pros here could make tube or no-tube recordings that would defy the ability of most pros and semi-pros to identify which is which. [. . .]
On someone else's recordings, I'm betting that I could almost never tell with certainty what mics were used.

There are exceptions. Frank Sinatra not only looked cool - the only thing that truly matters - singing into a Neumann, he sounded better than with that gaudy Shure.


Ray H.

Of course, when we are creating the art ourselves - well, we are more likely to be inspired by a great U47 than by a gold-plated dive-bar mic.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Oldone's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushman ➡️
So maybe there is no answer to the thread question. And there is good reason for that.
Sounds reasonable.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #42
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambamboom ➡️
[. . .] I'd suggest you forget about it and just use your ears. You're creating unnecessary complexity in this line of thinking.
Well, that's the thing: Using my ears, I'm reaching a limit above which additional tube mics cease to contribute compelling value. The results I get from high-end, solid-state SDC mics [especially] don't strike my ears the same way. There, I've not reached any corresponding limit.

I can now make a couple tube mics on a simple ballad strike my ears as great every single time. The source is always calling for that, at least as one option. But as the track count grows. . .I meet diminishing returns.

Maybe this tube mic limit has to do with my aesthetic preferences? the complexity of the tunes and arrangements on which I'm working? or maybe the rooms in which I track? or maybe it's my limited access to a wide variety of tube mic flavors? and to some extent, it has to be my lack of experience and skill. Maybe all of the above and more?

I'm not looking for the solution to be articulated and solved as if it were a complex system of simultaneous equations. . .
. . .just wondering about the experiences of others, and seeking nontrivial examples where some maximum number of tube mics are effectively being used - creatively, contributing extra value to each track and to the finished mix.
Some of those answers, I've gotten.

Even the chit-chat not addressing those questions directly has been a surprising and informative delight.

But the path for me does go beyond 'let the source tell you what it needs' into a dance between the artist [wretched, though I may be] and the art. . .where there are infinite possible and exquisite solutions.

Ray H.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #43
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayHeath ➡️
Well, that's the thing: Using my ears, I'm reaching a limit above which additional tube mics cease to contribute compelling value. The results I get from high-end, solid-state SDC mics [especially] don't strike my ears the same way. There, I've not reached any corresponding limit.

I can now make a couple tube mics on a simple ballad strike my ears as great every single time. The source is always calling for that, at least as one option. But as the track count grows. . .I meet diminishing returns.

Maybe this tube mic limit has to do with my aesthetic preferences? the complexity of the tunes and arrangements on which I'm working? or maybe the rooms in which I track? or maybe it's my limited access to a wide variety of tube mic flavors? and to some extent, it has to be my lack of experience and skill. Maybe all of the above and more?

I'm not looking for the solution to be articulated and solved as if it were a complex system of simultaneous equations. . .
. . .just wondering about the experiences of others, and seeking nontrivial examples where some maximum number of tube mics are effectively being used - creatively, contributing extra value to each track and to the finished mix.
Some of those answers, I've gotten.

Even the chit-chat not addressing those questions directly has been a surprising and informative delight.

But the path for me does go beyond 'let the source tell you what it needs' into a dance between the artist [wretched, though I may be] and the art. . .where there are infinite possible and exquisite solutions.

Ray H.
Would it be helpful to further define what the tube mic brings? You can get texture from a lot of things.
Is it the distortion or transient smear? Is it brightness? The reedy thing?
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #44
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambamboom ➡️
(...)You're creating unnecessary complexity in this line of thinking.
i disagree: imo discussions on this site often suffer from a lack of complexity and get dominated by the latest hype (or oldest myths)...

---

getting back to the original question: i never got to use more than ca. two dozens of tube mics but another poster here (daniel dettwiler @ idee und klang) has an amazing collection of tube mics and afaik uses up to four dozens on some recordings.

i do have some experience using huge mic setups consisting of sdc's and/or mini-mics though (100+ mics) and what i can tell is that not all mics (from those three manufacturers i got to try) fare equally well...

...which leads me to guess that 100+ tube mics would lead to a rather fuzzy sound; besides, i'm almost sure that a few of them would not operate up to specs or would cease to do so which for me is reason enough not to use too many tube mics at the same time (and is my answer to ray's question), at least not in high pressure situations where reliability, redundancy and speed of use are king!

Last edited by deedeeyeah; 2 weeks ago at 09:37 AM..
Old 2 weeks ago
  #45
Lives for gear
 
YRLK's Avatar
I think it depends on whether or not one has experimented with a Townsend Sphere, to be honest.

I have two tube mics—one very pricey. One fairly affordable. The 47 I have with the old style capsule does offer something the Townsend can’t quite achieve; however, for C12’s and C800G, and others, it would be tough to justify purchasing those for me because I think the models really are excellent when used correctly.

Really though, doesn’t it come down to preference and physical needs?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #46
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
How many tubes does it take to screw in a lightbulb? And would the lightbulb count as one?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #47
Gear Guru
 
100+ tube mics does sound rather Fet-ish...
Chris
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #48
Gear Guru
 
kennybro's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle ➡️
Would it be helpful to further define what the tube mic brings? You can get texture from a lot of things.
Is it the distortion or transient smear? Is it brightness? The reedy thing?
After using a huge variety of tube mics over many decades, it would be my opinion that different tube mics bring different characteristics; just like mics in general bring variety. I've never really noted any unique, easily identifiable set of collective characteristic that come from tube mics in general.

And I guess that the premise of this thread assumes that tube mics sound "like this," and when does the threshold of too much "this" get reached? So, I would reject the premise from the jump. "This" does not exist, IMHO.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #49
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennybro ➡️
After using a huge variety of tube mics over many decades, it would be my opinion that different tube mics bring different characteristics; just like mics in general bring variety. I've never really noted any unique, easily identifiable set of collective characteristic that come from tube mics in general.

And I guess that the premise of this thread assumes that tube mics sound "like this," and when does the threshold of too much "this" get reached? So, I would reject the premise from the jump. "This" does not exist, IMHO.
I agree to some extent conceptually.
That said the tube circuit in the mic does have specific ways of transferring sound that others dont.
I mean it is a category. To my ears all (That i have heard) ribbons fall under an umbrella, as do dynamics and fet condensers, so do tube mics. They differ in their respective categories from there. I have not used the Royer tube ribbons.
I think that is how Ray is hearing things too.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #50
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle ➡️
(...) the tube circuit in the mic does have specific ways of transferring sound that others dont.
I mean it is a category. To my ears all (That i have heard) ribbons fall under an umbrella, as do dynamics and fet condensers, so do tube mics. They differ in their respective categories from there. (...)
no doubt there are technical categories - however, they do not necessarily result in audible difference which we could clearly attribute to one of these categories, so sticking to categories can become more of a habit that a meaningful way to differentiate between sonic landscapes.

to illustrate: one can come as close as wanted to an original u67 by using a tlm67 and a tube preamp - reason i mentioning this example is 'cause i can more easily (and cheaply) rent additional tlm's than u's in good shape - which is what i did on several occasions.

i didn't meticulously compare mics side by side but results were good enough that from listening to the tracks, no one could tell which mic/signal chain was used on what singer (or instrument of a horn/sax section, guitar combo etc.)
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #51
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle ➡️
Would it be helpful to further define what the tube mic brings? You can get texture from a lot of things.
Is it the distortion or transient smear? Is it brightness? The reedy thing?
I’ve a pronounced proclivity toward ultra-clean ingest [Schoeps, MTRX, Grace Design m103, and the like], and don’t even own a transformer/tube preamp. And I do also like many things brighter than most here.

In my environment, the Heiserman H47 brings attributes - like the distortion, transient smear and perhaps ‘the reedy thing?’ - that expand beauty, interest, intrigue and fascination. . .for me, anyway. Where it works for me - in very many places - the charm is stunning. I love this mic and its swappable capsules so much that I ordered another one.

But my disposition toward ultra-clean pushes back as an arrangement grows more dense. Then, increasing the number of concurrent tracks - where tube/transformer magic strikes my fancy - meets resistance. The extra weight is lost on me.


Sparse arrangements yield more inviting opportunities.

Ray H.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #52
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah ➡️
[. . .] (daniel dettwiler @ idee und klang) has an amazing collection of tube mics and afaik uses up to four dozens on some recordings. [. . .]
Yes. Dan impresses the heck out of me. If he is doing it, then I must be doing something wrong!

Ray H.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #53
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennybro ➡️
[. . .] I've never really noted any unique, easily identifiable set of collective characteristic that come from tube mics in general. [. . .]
Yeah. My environment is limited to pristine-ultra-clean vs. H47tube. . .a pretty big jump to my ears. I don't have much gear in-between those two extremes.


Thanks for the perspective,

Ray H.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #54
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayHeath ➡️
If he is doing it, then I must be doing something wrong!
not necessarily: regardless of gear and level of expertise how to use it, there remains a sphere which is very personal and which largely eludes critical observation...


Quote:
Originally Posted by RayHeath ➡️
(...) my disposition toward ultra-clean pushes back as an arrangement grows more dense. Then, increasing the number of concurrent tracks - where tube/transformer magic strikes my fancy - meets resistance. The extra weight is lost on me.

Sparse arrangements yield more inviting opportunities.
i read this as some kinda cultural manifesto although i'm not quite sure whether i get it?! - I have (fortunately!) already relatively early withdrawn from the cultural-theoretical considerations of adorno although i like some of his work (such as 'minima moralia')...



p.s. there is some (rare) gear which imo can bridge the gap between the realms of ultra clean digital audio and fuzzy logic of tube gear such as the crane song hedd which (besides being an excellent converter) is a copy of the spl spectralizer: both tools can get used to add 2nd and 3rd order harmonics without converting to analog/leaving the digital domain - meanwhile: mind the gap!

Last edited by deedeeyeah; 2 weeks ago at 08:23 PM.. Reason: p.s. added - as so often...
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #55
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNeedle ➡️
[. . .] I mean it is a category. [. . .] I think that is how Ray is hearing things too.
Very much so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah ➡️
no doubt there are technical categories - however, they do not necessarily result in audible difference which we could clearly attribute to one of these categories, so sticking to categories can become more of a habit that a meaningful way to differentiate between sonic landscapes.

[. . .] results were good enough that from listening to the tracks, no one could tell which mic/signal chain was used on what singer (or instrument of a horn/sax section, guitar combo etc.)
At my level of skill, I often [not always] eschew moving coil mics. They frequently go against my aesthetic vision and preferences. . .particularly, when in my hands.

I love my AEA A440 - and want a second one - but I don't feel comfortable using ribbons [even allowing for the brighter Royer options] end-to-end across all instruments in a dense recording. . .at least not for the stuff I'm working on.

And to extend D's thought on 'who can tell', I can only tell when I am the artist working on my art. . .but then I can tell for sure.


Thanks guys,

Ray H.


EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah ➡️
[. . .] i read this as some kinda cultural manifesto although i'm not quite sure whether i get it?! [. . .]
No cultural manifesto - just observing how resources map to music arrangement goals for my tastes and skillset. Given my inclination toward ultra-clean, I am more successful applying more tube mic tracks in [at least, concurrently] sparse arrangements than in dense arrangements. . .roughly speaking.

Last edited by RayHeath; 2 weeks ago at 08:25 PM.. Reason: No cultural manifesto
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #56
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayHeath ➡️
I often [not always] eschew moving coil mics. They frequently go against my aesthetic vision and preferences. . .particularly, when in my hands.
if you ever find the time but don't want to waste too much money, i encourage you to get a beyer m201tg which i think could help to change your mind regarding the use of moving coil mics (or at least give you another tool for use on some rare occasions) - a few dynamic mics imo have a condenser-like quality while at the same time add a character which reminds of the sonic footprint of some compression already being applied...

[which is something i don't think i can get from any condenser mic, unless we're talking tube mics (which add all sorts of weird stuff when driven hard though, all of which is far from 'clean' according to my ears)]

...and while i consider many (if not most) clips posted by manufacturers pretty much useless, beyer seems to be an exception (at least some of the tracks):

https://www.beyerdynamic.de/m-201-tg.html



Quote:
No cultural manifesto - just observing how resources map to music arrangement goals for my tastes and skillset. Given my inclination toward ultra-clean, I am more successful applying more tube mic tracks in [at least, concurrently] sparse arrangements than in dense arrangements. . .roughly speaking.
i see - too bad :-)
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #57
Lives for gear
 
bambamboom's Avatar
 
2 Reviews written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayHeath ➡️
Yeah. My environment is limited to pristine-ultra-clean vs. H47tube. . .a pretty big jump to my ears. I don't have much gear in-between those two extremes.
OK, so this is very telling, I now understand some of the earlier comments better.

A lot of the posts so far (by several posters) show a lack of experience with a broad number of professional microphones and professional tracking and mixing scenarios.

It's a matter of perspective (or lack thereof more precisely).

No offense intended. This is just not a conversation that comes up in professional circles, because pros know that not only the type of microphone but how it is used, the source it is picking up, etc has a drastic effect on the resulting sound.

On top of this one tube mic can sound radically different from another not just in the response that it is tuned to, but in terms of the role the tubes play in the equation.

There are a ton of variables at play in reality, but it seems the the OP's reality is limited to only a few variables as a result of the scenario for use. This appears to be why the OP feels that this is a relevant question but others don't see it the same way.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #58
Lives for gear
 
DougS's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah ➡️
... results were good enough that from listening to the tracks, no one could tell which mic/signal chain was used on what singer (or instrument of a horn/sax section, guitar combo etc.)
Never bought into this line of thinking. Not because I question if its literally true, but because its not the point.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #59
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougS ➡️
Never bought into this line of thinking. Not because I question if its literally true, but because its not the point.
what's the point then?

i don't think i'm adhering to a specific 'line of thinking'*: all i was trying to achieve was a roughly/mostly similar sonic footprint of the mics being used and since i couldn't get an entire set of identical mics, i was looking for mics which have some components in common (capsule, basket and body in this case; dunno about the innards) and then tried to match their sound - i think i succeeded so i truly don't get what should be wrong with this maybe crude but pragmatic and effective approach.

also, does it really make an enormous difference whether one is hitting a tube inside the mic or inside a preamp? not technically but sonically? i think not necessarily... - i used an old reussenzehn 4-channel tube mic preamp btw.




[*i admit that if in doubt, i rather use a fet (or even a digital mic) and run the signal through tube mic pre or a tube emulation which i think offer a higher level of control and versatility - so yeah, i'm more with draghi than some else's theories: 'whatever it takes']
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #60
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambamboom ➡️
OK, so this is very telling, I now understand some of the earlier comments better. [. . .]
No offense taken.

I think you perhaps still misunderstand my query, my background, and my experiences [including with a variety of tube mics] - as likely do others. That is likely my fault.

My initial post noted the big 5 as exemplary for the focus of the query [1]. My cordial reply to @ kennybro was a clarification of my current environment.

It seems fitting that professional circles should be more deeply offended by my jokes than by the subject matter of this thread.

Well, I'm not a great communicator. BTW, I think you are indeed a truly talented communicator - and always enjoy reading your posts!


Sorry I let you down on this one,

Ray H.

[1] The big five represents a clear variety of flavors, to be sure. Of these, I've only never seen/used a C12. The ELA M251E is my favorite. . .and a matched pair is on my buy list.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 98 views: 44542
Avatar for nst7
nst7 14th February 2014
replies: 57 views: 20416
Avatar for gpiccolini
gpiccolini 12th May 2016
replies: 2704 views: 403853
Avatar for Diogo C
Diogo C 30th October 2015
replies: 1331 views: 225618
Avatar for drBill
drBill 2 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