 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Forums - Computer music & technology
Subject: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
Viewing all 12 messages - View by pages of 10: 1 2
Original Message 1/12 11-Dec-98 @ 11:01 PM - 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?!?
Hello,
Finally taking the plunge and getting rid of my old studio setup. You know the score, aging Seck Mixer, multi-track tape machine, Roland sampler, VFX synth, Quadraverbs, Atari computer etc. Want to know if its possible to have all this on a PC with a MIDI keyboard, mastering to CD-R, working entirely in the digital domain.
Been thinking about getting a fast PII 450 PC computer with Cubase VST, Yamaha SW1000XG, Gigasampler 1.5 etc. Anyone out there know if this is a good set up and what further equipment I would need. Do I need another sound card and which one? Is this setup a pure digital affair or is there some analogue pathway still creeping in somewhere? How do the Cubase, Yamaha card and the Gigasampler integrate together ?
Julian
Finally taking the plunge and getting rid of my old studio setup. You know the score, aging Seck Mixer, multi-track tape machine, Roland sampler, VFX synth, Quadraverbs, Atari computer etc. Want to know if its possible to have all this on a PC with a MIDI keyboard, mastering to CD-R, working entirely in the digital domain.
Been thinking about getting a fast PII 450 PC computer with Cubase VST, Yamaha SW1000XG, Gigasampler 1.5 etc. Anyone out there know if this is a good set up and what further equipment I would need. Do I need another sound card and which one? Is this setup a pure digital affair or is there some analogue pathway still creeping in somewhere? How do the Cubase, Yamaha card and the Gigasampler integrate together ?
Julian
Message 2/12 12-Dec-98 @ 06:12 AM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
well, as long as you get a stable vst, the interaction with the card should be a snip... BUT..... can those sounds be recorded direct to h/d from the synth?.... dunno... but it's an issue for burning..
next, giga sampler... dunno how efficient it is... in theory tho it all should work...as long as: you can get all the midi routing sorted.. and still retain reliable clock stability whilst record/playbac....: and... the audio tracks & s/w sampler need to be able to play simulteaneously using the cards drivers.... it's no use if you get "this device is in use.." messages.....it'd be alot less strain maybe to go with the rolnd (unless itsa pile'o'crap to you)... and route that back into your card for mastering & it'll also appear in the final output too whilst your composing.... might be a thought as you're familiar with it, and all that.....if you're goping to buy gigasampler, it's alot..... i mean ?..... well, it's about 700 dollars or something... which is the price of a P2 300 pretty well loaded... if you see what i mean.... however if it is the ...ahem... unofficial version, then you cant loose out financialy if it turns out that it's all a tad unstable... remeber you want excellent clock.... anyways... there's some thoughts... see the way i figure it with your kitlist you may want to do a variety of tunes, and record from a mic.... in that case i'd say a small mixer like the Folio or summat, , and the sampler, (or an upgrade),,, cos the mixer'll be better to get mic'd up and you may want phantom power (you never know?.... i mean, if it's going to digital, you might decide to hire or buy at some point a real shit hot vocal mic ... it'll need phantom more than likely.......
next, giga sampler... dunno how efficient it is... in theory tho it all should work...as long as: you can get all the midi routing sorted.. and still retain reliable clock stability whilst record/playbac....: and... the audio tracks & s/w sampler need to be able to play simulteaneously using the cards drivers.... it's no use if you get "this device is in use.." messages.....it'd be alot less strain maybe to go with the rolnd (unless itsa pile'o'crap to you)... and route that back into your card for mastering & it'll also appear in the final output too whilst your composing.... might be a thought as you're familiar with it, and all that.....if you're goping to buy gigasampler, it's alot..... i mean ?..... well, it's about 700 dollars or something... which is the price of a P2 300 pretty well loaded... if you see what i mean.... however if it is the ...ahem... unofficial version, then you cant loose out financialy if it turns out that it's all a tad unstable... remeber you want excellent clock.... anyways... there's some thoughts... see the way i figure it with your kitlist you may want to do a variety of tunes, and record from a mic.... in that case i'd say a small mixer like the Folio or summat, , and the sampler, (or an upgrade),,, cos the mixer'll be better to get mic'd up and you may want phantom power (you never know?.... i mean, if it's going to digital, you might decide to hire or buy at some point a real shit hot vocal mic ... it'll need phantom more than likely.......
Message 3/12 12-Dec-98 @ 04:19 PM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
Another thought is to scrap the gigasampler idea and get the E-mu ASP card. I just stuck one in my computer... and let me tell you.. this card kicks the ass of alot of professional samplers. You get 64 voice polyphony, 32 part multi-timbral, up to 14 simultaneous effects and realtime tweaking of filters and envelopes just like in "real" samplers. And since it uses the SounfFont 2.1 sample format, you can download thousands of samples for free off the net. And it uses up to 32 megs of your system ram for storing the samples. Plus, you got a decent little hard disk recorder thrown in too. All for $500. This card would go great with the sw1000xg (if you have enough PCI slots... make sure you get a motherboard with alot of PCI slots). Use the APS as your sampler and the sw1000xg as a synth/ROMpler. I never liked the idea of useing a software sampler... would put too much strain on the system if you're useing the same machine as a sequencer... and forget about useing realtime effects on your samples.
Message 4/12 12-Dec-98 @ 06:06 PM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
Thanks for taking the time to answer my question. Just to fill in a bit more detail, I reckon that by the time I sell off my old gear, I'll probably have about £2800 to burn on the latest studio set up. Hence the reason for basing it around a PC. Plus the added advantage of having just one box (no-one will no that I'm music mad!); hey maybe I could install a pool table with the added space!!
One question that's just come up is regarding EQing. Under the combination of Yamaha card/Cubase/Emu card or Softare sampler with Cubase VST, will I be able to EQ each track simultaneously during playback?
Should I sell my Alesis compressor? Does the Yamaha SW1000xg or the EMU card have a noise gate compressor built in?
What about the software synthesisers out there? Such as the Generator and Reality? Can I run those simulataneously with Cubase VST, Yamaha synth card, EMU sampler card/Gigasampler? Am I going to get hardware/software conflict problems.
I believe the Yamaha SW1000xg gives you 12 mono tracks for H/D recording. Does adding the Emu card allow for more audio tracks?
There is a rumour I have heard about a new software sampler arriving soon which, probably hype spued out by an over eager salesman, that supposedly will redefine the way people do sampling (his words not mine!). Anyone know what this is could be? He couldn't remember the name.
Julian
One question that's just come up is regarding EQing. Under the combination of Yamaha card/Cubase/Emu card or Softare sampler with Cubase VST, will I be able to EQ each track simultaneously during playback?
Should I sell my Alesis compressor? Does the Yamaha SW1000xg or the EMU card have a noise gate compressor built in?
What about the software synthesisers out there? Such as the Generator and Reality? Can I run those simulataneously with Cubase VST, Yamaha synth card, EMU sampler card/Gigasampler? Am I going to get hardware/software conflict problems.
I believe the Yamaha SW1000xg gives you 12 mono tracks for H/D recording. Does adding the Emu card allow for more audio tracks?
There is a rumour I have heard about a new software sampler arriving soon which, probably hype spued out by an over eager salesman, that supposedly will redefine the way people do sampling (his words not mine!). Anyone know what this is could be? He couldn't remember the name.
Julian
Message 5/12 12-Dec-98 @ 07:16 PM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
He may be refering the Reaktor, which is a software sampler coming from the same folks that made generator. My feelings in regards to software samplers or synths is this - if you have a dedicated computer for each piece of software you want to run... than fine... go for it. But really, just forget about running Generator or Reality at the same time you're running VST or Cakewalk. The timing will just go to shit, and your software sampler or sequencer will start breaking apart and getting static. Generator, or just about any other software synth, will use almost all your CPU power on its own, which leaves nothing for VST to work with. And it really doesnt matter how fast a computer you have. I have a PII 450, and running Cakewalk and Generator simultaneous was all but impossible. However, the software synths can be VERY nice tools for the creation of sounds you can later dump into a sampler, such as the E-mu APS card.
As far as I know, both the APS and sw1000xg have compressors and EQ and just about everything else you could imagine in the way of effects. But no, there isnt any easy way to mix the output of two cards simultaneously, unless you use something like the mixer in cakewalk or VST to handle your mixing.
And yes, adding the E-mu card will give you several more tracks for mixing in addition to the sw1000xg. The 32 internal midi channels used by the sampler can be independantly mixed down, and then you have 4 analog inputs and outputs, and 4 digital ins and outs. And you can apply effects to any of these channels in realtime. And since it's all handled by hardware on your card you wont have to worry about your systems performance being dragged down. Check out www.emu.com to read up on the APS. I really like this card, in case you couldnt tell.
As far as I know, both the APS and sw1000xg have compressors and EQ and just about everything else you could imagine in the way of effects. But no, there isnt any easy way to mix the output of two cards simultaneously, unless you use something like the mixer in cakewalk or VST to handle your mixing.
And yes, adding the E-mu card will give you several more tracks for mixing in addition to the sw1000xg. The 32 internal midi channels used by the sampler can be independantly mixed down, and then you have 4 analog inputs and outputs, and 4 digital ins and outs. And you can apply effects to any of these channels in realtime. And since it's all handled by hardware on your card you wont have to worry about your systems performance being dragged down. Check out www.emu.com to read up on the APS. I really like this card, in case you couldnt tell.
Message 6/12 13-Dec-98 @ 01:37 PM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
I second astro's comments about trying to use software synths and samplers. I have Generator and Vaz Modular.
Forget about trying to run them alongside a seqencer.
I have a PII 266 with 128 megs RAM and even then a not too complex generator patch uses all available CPU at just a 22Khz sample rate with 1 or 2 voices.
Nice idea but in practice...limited to creating simple patches and sampling them.
Astro please stop going on about the bloody EMU APS.
Not like it's the first sound card ever invented that takes samples ! Even a lowly SB does this. TB cards have been doing it for years. My TB Pinnacle has a sampler like a cut down Kurzweil K2000 on board.
Can the EMU read sample disks for its big brothers the EMU samplers, like the new Pulsar cam supposedly read AKAI disks?
AFAIK the SW1000 doesn't have dynamics and EQs on each channel, it has 5 available FX processors and these have EGs no doubt but I don't know about compressor/limiter/gate, and not one for each channel. For this the DS2416 card would be much better...and properly integrated into the latest sequencer updates unlike the 1000.
Having said that, any XG module (I have two) is great for the backing parts on your tracks....you'll want something else for drums and analogue leads/pads/basses/weirdness.
Forget about trying to run them alongside a seqencer.
I have a PII 266 with 128 megs RAM and even then a not too complex generator patch uses all available CPU at just a 22Khz sample rate with 1 or 2 voices.
Nice idea but in practice...limited to creating simple patches and sampling them.
Astro please stop going on about the bloody EMU APS.
Not like it's the first sound card ever invented that takes samples ! Even a lowly SB does this. TB cards have been doing it for years. My TB Pinnacle has a sampler like a cut down Kurzweil K2000 on board.
Can the EMU read sample disks for its big brothers the EMU samplers, like the new Pulsar cam supposedly read AKAI disks?
AFAIK the SW1000 doesn't have dynamics and EQs on each channel, it has 5 available FX processors and these have EGs no doubt but I don't know about compressor/limiter/gate, and not one for each channel. For this the DS2416 card would be much better...and properly integrated into the latest sequencer updates unlike the 1000.
Having said that, any XG module (I have two) is great for the backing parts on your tracks....you'll want something else for drums and analogue leads/pads/basses/weirdness.
Message 7/12 13-Dec-98 @ 03:03 PM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
Thanks for the advice. It seems software synths won't be that practical for my purposes.
Though I am curious about the quality of sounds from both the Yamaha and EMU cards. I am used to not working with any synths and layering just using samplers: my own Roland S750 (used for the synthy sounds as well as sampling) and my mate's S1000 akai. I always found most of my synthesizers to have thin and static sounds and in alot of my stuff I'm trying to re-create real instruments. This is what appeals to me about the Gigasampler. I've heard its got some big fat sounds. Maybe buy some Giga and Akai format sound library CDs.
Is there a difference between the CPU power used up by software synths (such as Reality and Generator) and a software sampler (such as Giga) which doesn't have to calculate sound waves on the fly. Can anyone verify this?
Thanks Rodsta! I am beginning to veer towards getting the Yamaha DSP24/16 with Cubase VST/24 and a Gigasampler. I'm a greedy bastard! and if I'm spending close to three grand, I want better than what I got now.
I thought the best way was to lay down each track individually dry on to an audio track, then treat them with individual effects during playback via the Yamaha DSP? Surely this won't tax the computer much while still getting that ultimate big studio sound. In this way I can get away from buying any pure synth cards. Is this practical? Ideally, I'd want to do all my mixing/effects work in 24-bits, only dropping down to 16-bits to master. Is this achievable? I think with this one track at a time method, I'd be able to record some of the software synth sounds to audio track (with PII 450 computer) using (Rebirth, Generator or Reality) with one sound/track at a time. I know its long winded but end results should be good. Right or wrong? Or will I get no polyphony?
What about all those other software utilities such as the TC/Native reverbs, EQs etc. Steinberg Spectralizer, Hyperprism, Timeworks stuff etc. Has anyone used these to enhance their tracks?
Julian
Though I am curious about the quality of sounds from both the Yamaha and EMU cards. I am used to not working with any synths and layering just using samplers: my own Roland S750 (used for the synthy sounds as well as sampling) and my mate's S1000 akai. I always found most of my synthesizers to have thin and static sounds and in alot of my stuff I'm trying to re-create real instruments. This is what appeals to me about the Gigasampler. I've heard its got some big fat sounds. Maybe buy some Giga and Akai format sound library CDs.
Is there a difference between the CPU power used up by software synths (such as Reality and Generator) and a software sampler (such as Giga) which doesn't have to calculate sound waves on the fly. Can anyone verify this?
Thanks Rodsta! I am beginning to veer towards getting the Yamaha DSP24/16 with Cubase VST/24 and a Gigasampler. I'm a greedy bastard! and if I'm spending close to three grand, I want better than what I got now.
I thought the best way was to lay down each track individually dry on to an audio track, then treat them with individual effects during playback via the Yamaha DSP? Surely this won't tax the computer much while still getting that ultimate big studio sound. In this way I can get away from buying any pure synth cards. Is this practical? Ideally, I'd want to do all my mixing/effects work in 24-bits, only dropping down to 16-bits to master. Is this achievable? I think with this one track at a time method, I'd be able to record some of the software synth sounds to audio track (with PII 450 computer) using (Rebirth, Generator or Reality) with one sound/track at a time. I know its long winded but end results should be good. Right or wrong? Or will I get no polyphony?
What about all those other software utilities such as the TC/Native reverbs, EQs etc. Steinberg Spectralizer, Hyperprism, Timeworks stuff etc. Has anyone used these to enhance their tracks?
Julian
Message 8/12 13-Dec-98 @ 05:48 PM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
Rodsta: I fully realize the APS is not the first card to act as a sampler. I even owned a TB Pinnacle for a short period of time. I just think the APS does a much better job of acting as a sampler than any other card. Ecspecially for its price. Sorry.. I just got my APS and I happen to be rather proud of it. I'll try to no get carried away with my advice from now on.
Julian: I still think you should stear clear of software samplers as well as software synths. Like several of us have already mentioned, software synths are great if you just want to sample their output. But Gigasampler... the thing fucking costs $700. For that much you could get a new Akai s2000. Or for $200 less you could get a soundcard that has more sampling abilties than Gigasampler. The people that make Gigasampler even admit its not meant to be used at the same time you're useing a sequencer. And the performance of gigasampler is still going to be dependant on the performance of your computer. I'd rather have hardware that I can be confident will always work. Gigasampler's big claim to fame is that it can use samples a gigabyte long. Now... when was the last time you felt the need to use a 1000 megabyte sample?!?!
Julian: I still think you should stear clear of software samplers as well as software synths. Like several of us have already mentioned, software synths are great if you just want to sample their output. But Gigasampler... the thing fucking costs $700. For that much you could get a new Akai s2000. Or for $200 less you could get a soundcard that has more sampling abilties than Gigasampler. The people that make Gigasampler even admit its not meant to be used at the same time you're useing a sequencer. And the performance of gigasampler is still going to be dependant on the performance of your computer. I'd rather have hardware that I can be confident will always work. Gigasampler's big claim to fame is that it can use samples a gigabyte long. Now... when was the last time you felt the need to use a 1000 megabyte sample?!?!
Message 9/12 14-Dec-98 @ 08:31 AM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
Sorry Astro!!
The makers of GIGA basically say it needs a dedicated powerful fast computer. Forget it and take Astro's advice, use a sampling soundcard or a hardware sampler...maybe keep that Roland (Roni Size uses 'em doesn't he?) or update.
If you are trying to recreate real instruments then I guess your choice is a sampling device or maybe a soundcard like the SW1000XG. It has lots of acoustic samples that can be fattened up with the F/X. Also of interest to you it takes a monophonic physical modelling daughtercard, this could be a fascinating area to explore for your lead acoustic sounds, and cheaper than more powerful alternatives like a Z1.
With the audio/MIDI+audio sequencers, yes a lot of the time a good idea is to lay down the tracks dry and apply the f/x. You could feasibly run a soft synth with a simple patch and record a track at a time as audio and load into the sequencer. Poly will be low if the patch is complex even on a PII 450. Some of these soft synths do have simple onboard recreations of analog sequencers you could use instead of cubase, then capture their output to a wave file.
For dance, as Kilo has said, I can't see any point in 24 bits.
The software plugins you mentioned are really great and can give you very professional sounding quality. The main problem is CPU usage. The solution is to apply the CPU-sapping effects offline (not in real time) one track at a time and load the new file with effects back into the sequencer. With a fast CPU this becomes a bit less of an issue. If you get the DSP factory it takes over the mixing and effects in hardware if you want. You can still use Cubase's virtual digital mixer and effects, and the DSP 2416's real ones, giving you the best of both worlds..the flexibility of software and speed of hardware.
Lastly if you're going to buy a new computer and are serious about getting the most out of VST, at least check out a Mac.
The makers of GIGA basically say it needs a dedicated powerful fast computer. Forget it and take Astro's advice, use a sampling soundcard or a hardware sampler...maybe keep that Roland (Roni Size uses 'em doesn't he?) or update.
If you are trying to recreate real instruments then I guess your choice is a sampling device or maybe a soundcard like the SW1000XG. It has lots of acoustic samples that can be fattened up with the F/X. Also of interest to you it takes a monophonic physical modelling daughtercard, this could be a fascinating area to explore for your lead acoustic sounds, and cheaper than more powerful alternatives like a Z1.
With the audio/MIDI+audio sequencers, yes a lot of the time a good idea is to lay down the tracks dry and apply the f/x. You could feasibly run a soft synth with a simple patch and record a track at a time as audio and load into the sequencer. Poly will be low if the patch is complex even on a PII 450. Some of these soft synths do have simple onboard recreations of analog sequencers you could use instead of cubase, then capture their output to a wave file.
For dance, as Kilo has said, I can't see any point in 24 bits.
The software plugins you mentioned are really great and can give you very professional sounding quality. The main problem is CPU usage. The solution is to apply the CPU-sapping effects offline (not in real time) one track at a time and load the new file with effects back into the sequencer. With a fast CPU this becomes a bit less of an issue. If you get the DSP factory it takes over the mixing and effects in hardware if you want. You can still use Cubase's virtual digital mixer and effects, and the DSP 2416's real ones, giving you the best of both worlds..the flexibility of software and speed of hardware.
Lastly if you're going to buy a new computer and are serious about getting the most out of VST, at least check out a Mac.
Message 10/12 05-Jan-99 @ 08:23 PM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
Might want to consider the Pulsar, especially if you have a considerable library of s2000 samples. Pulsar includes 2 sample player devices, and in any Pulsar project you can use multiple sample player devices, along with all the different soft synths. All this runs on the DSP board, so the only real system resources used is RAM for holding the samples. Note that you can't create your own samples in Pulsar yet, just play back Akai compatible sample sets. Pulsar integrates pretty damn well with VST from what I understand (I've been on Cakewalk for a long time, but I might switch now). The software synths are excellent and you can have several running at once. The mixer is great and there's plenty of EQ and effects, though the reverb isn't out yet (supposed to be soon). I've only had mine a few weeks, but I absolutely love it
Message 11/12 07-Jan-99 @ 02:07 AM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
I have upgraded my mobo and cpu to ABITBH6/Celeron ,overclocked to 450 no prob.I have 128 SDRAM,2 drives etc.
The next big issue for me is to replace my soundcard, a Synth/Sampler DtD DSP type_MaxiHSP64.
OK,it was very cheap,i lrearned a lot,but i need to know now about offline FX processing,so i can be sure that i will be able to record midi to Wav,and Vocals from my Folio without any pops or jumps.
I am just doing demo quality;all music done in midi,vocals recorded over.
So,i still need a good Sampler card,but i may start using an external synth as it has FX,so no more cpu hassle there.
I still need a rock solid sequencer that converts midi to wav no problem,and records wavs from the folio no problem.My present sequencer QuartzAudioMaster has its own Plug-Ins which are cool,i need to know about hassles using FX in real time and how to add FX offline.
I,m looking around at APS or Project Studio,but i get the feeling that ALL these cards have trouble actually synching and recording 6 minute songs error-free!
I can,t afford a Roland V,not sure if a soundcard stays in sync with it anyway;;;;
Can anyone help me find a card or gear to hook up to my PC that will let me record DtD without errors?
Thanks Carey(mutant)
The next big issue for me is to replace my soundcard, a Synth/Sampler DtD DSP type_MaxiHSP64.
OK,it was very cheap,i lrearned a lot,but i need to know now about offline FX processing,so i can be sure that i will be able to record midi to Wav,and Vocals from my Folio without any pops or jumps.
I am just doing demo quality;all music done in midi,vocals recorded over.
So,i still need a good Sampler card,but i may start using an external synth as it has FX,so no more cpu hassle there.
I still need a rock solid sequencer that converts midi to wav no problem,and records wavs from the folio no problem.My present sequencer QuartzAudioMaster has its own Plug-Ins which are cool,i need to know about hassles using FX in real time and how to add FX offline.
I,m looking around at APS or Project Studio,but i get the feeling that ALL these cards have trouble actually synching and recording 6 minute songs error-free!
I can,t afford a Roland V,not sure if a soundcard stays in sync with it anyway;;;;
Can anyone help me find a card or gear to hook up to my PC that will let me record DtD without errors?
Thanks Carey(mutant)
Message 12/12 12-Jan-99 @ 06:27 PM - RE: 100% digital recording on PC - myth ?
Alright then !
Thanks for all the advice everyone's been giving me. It helped to unravel some of the mysteries of PC digi recording.
I've dug deep in my pocket and splashed out:
Pentium PC450 128Mb RAM with 2x7Mb 7200rpm hard discs.
Cubase VST, plug-in effects etc.
Yamaha CDRW4416 CDR drive (has to be bought ! Lots of money though)
Yamaha SW1000XG
AKG C1000S mic with Behringer 802a mixer
MIDI 76key master keyboard (my VFX has broken down yet again!)
Now I've still got my old P200 still kicking about, so I plan to put a SoundBlaster Live card in there and play about with some of the sofware synths.
For sampling, I think what Rodsta said is practical. My Roland S750 is just too good! I am going to upgrade the memory to its max of 18Mb RAM.
I think I've covered all of the basics. With all this gear for less than I thought I'd be spending, I feel spoilt. Wonders of modern technology!
Julian
Thanks for all the advice everyone's been giving me. It helped to unravel some of the mysteries of PC digi recording.
I've dug deep in my pocket and splashed out:
Pentium PC450 128Mb RAM with 2x7Mb 7200rpm hard discs.
Cubase VST, plug-in effects etc.
Yamaha CDRW4416 CDR drive (has to be bought ! Lots of money though)
Yamaha SW1000XG
AKG C1000S mic with Behringer 802a mixer
MIDI 76key master keyboard (my VFX has broken down yet again!)
Now I've still got my old P200 still kicking about, so I plan to put a SoundBlaster Live card in there and play about with some of the sofware synths.
For sampling, I think what Rodsta said is practical. My Roland S750 is just too good! I am going to upgrade the memory to its max of 18Mb RAM.
I think I've covered all of the basics. With all this gear for less than I thought I'd be spending, I feel spoilt. Wonders of modern technology!
Julian
Viewing all 12 messages - View by pages of 10: 1 2
There are 12 total messages for this topic
Reply to Thread
You need to register/login to use the forum.
Click here to Signup or Login !
[you'll be brought right back to this point after signing up]
Back to Forum
