Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Post Production of Tapers Recordings  (Read 16284 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15750
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #45 on: March 18, 2008, 12:33:05 PM »
I remember way back in the cassette days of the '80s, I knew this big trader who always made copies through a really nice EQ. He felt every recording needed some adjustment in tone, and also tried to take more tape hiss out that Dolby did not already remove. I found his recordings sounded great on his home system, but not always on others, and certainly not mine. I had to spar with him in the beginning to let me copy his masters directly, deck to deck, which required re-routing his cables.

My position was, if they need EQ, I have tone controls on my playback gear to dial it in to my tastes.

I think a similar thing goes for post editing. Every single recording does not need a bunch of post work. Other than tracking, a good recording should be left alone and post work should be used only to salvage an otherwise unsatisfactory recording.

I stayed with a guy in Boulder for awhile in 85 that used to do that on all the tapes he copied
I have to agree that they might have sounded good on his home stereo but not on others

I rarely if ever EQ any of my recordings in post... only on playback
also what sounds good one day may not another even on the same system
your mood at the time can play a big factor in what you perceive

Thein lies the very real and too often overlooked danger.  Where the objective fixing ends and the subjective sweetening starts is invisible to the tweakist.  That's why I know better than to trust my skills or tools enough to comit the eq to digits even though I understand that in the right hands, there could be an objective benefit for most end listeners.

Thanks for the intersting discussion all.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline aegert

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #46 on: March 19, 2008, 07:53:36 AM »
So, Aegert,...
please tell me that the MOTB project doesn't just go ahead and eq/change all of the recordings that you all are processing?!?!

Do you like the releases?

Most people do... And yes all are edited... Some have little or no eq or processing some have a lot... It is dependent on what the show/ tape  needs..

We archive all the raw transfers they are safe and sound... But we make each recording as best as it can be... We reduce claps where needed, patch, eq, compress, bring levels up to listening levels for the broad community, correct speed, manage dolby issues... the list goes on...

I respect everyones opinions on what they want to listen to.. Mine is clearly stated in this thread and most everyone who transfers and seeds shows these days is editing in one form or another. You don't have the benefits of hearing the raw vs. the edit.. but if you did in motb's case I am confident you would prefer to listen to the edited source.

There are a lot of others I can't speak for... We are down to 3 editors now because of that..,  It is not hard to edit but it can be tedious long... THere are many people releasing 3-4 shows a week... all edited.. we do one to 2 a month when we are cranking... Why? I get complaints form tapers all the time... Its because we have 5 people pouring oiver every version of a 24bit edit listening in highend headphones, car stereo's and on nice DAWS with great speakers.. We all who qc that work pull no punches. We some times re do an edit 4-5 times to get it right... Or as right as we can.. THese are imperfect sources...

So when you ask that question think to yourself did you like the release? If so maybe editing is not that bad... But remember we use the lightest hand here.. very minor moves either way all with the sole purpose of moving the complete dynamic range and I mean complete up to listening levels....

As I said before we archive RAW transfers in 6 locations, bake tapes when needed and qc all work...

A :D
B&k 4022's > Grace Lunatec V3 > Self Built  Neutrik/ Mogami XLR to TRS > Korg MR1000

Schoeps CMT44's > Self Built Neutrik/ Tuchel 2 ch Snake > Switchcraft Phantom to T-power Adapters > Grace Lunatec V3 > Sound Devices 722

www.motb.org

The bus came by and I got on....

Offline datbrad

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2302
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #47 on: March 19, 2008, 12:23:55 PM »
After reading the MOTB website, I now see a huge difference in the positions taken on this thread regarding post work between recording aging cassettes and reels and cleaning them up for release as digital files, and taking digital sources and tweaking every one. I fully support the idea of polishing up old analog sources when needed, and I think based on the statements on the MOTB site, they are doing that with the best gear available using people with sincere desires to get the best out of these old analog sources.

This is off topic, but I do take exception with the stated premise on the MOTB site that all GD OTS recordings were inferior to FOB recordings, as that is simply not true, particularly once FOB had to be a stealth job '85 on, with stands kept at or below head height to get away with it. Often, I was able to enjoy the more ambient recording from the OTS that may have not had quite the thrust of the "mouth of the beast" as they call the "sweet spot", but was also without any distinct chatter or other racket commonly recorded FOB with low mics. It is hard to enjoy the difference in the sound of the music when you are hearing the details of the converstations occuring in the seats directly around the rig with mics down at 5'10" in the row.

Back on topic, to me digital recordings made from the audience using a simple pair of ambient mics, specifically the ones being made today, should not be run through a mill of tweaks in an audio editing program habitually. They should certainly be repaired when very much needed to make them listenable, but otherwise left alone, IMO.

« Last Edit: March 19, 2008, 10:56:05 PM by DATBRAD »
AKG C460B w/CK61/CK63>Luminous Monarch XLRs>SD MP-1(x2)>Luminous Monarch XLRs>PMD661(Oade WMOD)

Beyer M201>Luminous Monarch XLRs>PMD561 (Oade CMOD)

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15750
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #48 on: March 19, 2008, 12:35:32 PM »
one more..

Who is the audience? This group at TS are not ordinary listeners.  We can work both a tone control and the volume knob if needed and actually sit down & listen to music.  How many people do that anymore? music is wallpaper to most. If I make a disc for my mom she just wants it to sound good in her car.  Either it does and she's happy or it doesn't and she tosses it.   I don't have a problem with accommodating her enjoyment of the music even if I keep an unaltered version for my enjoyment (a vastly different experience to be sure).  But I note on her disc that it's altered and not original just in case it gets into someone else's hands. I don't want that version displacing or masquerading as the unmodified one.  As long as both are available, everyone is happy.

It's a good thing we can have both. This debate reminds me a bit of the 'restoration' of Buddhist temples.  European conservators come in with grant money to keep them from collapsing to the ground and to keep the plaster from falling off the walls. Some of them feel they should only secure the structure to prevent further collapse.  The majority of them feel they should also clean the layers of soot from millennia of butter-lamps like European renaissance frescoes to restore their beauty, but they all prefer to leave the missing sections missing, keeping everything 'true' to the original, historic work.  The value to them is preservation of rare, historic masterpieces.  The idea of changing or repainting these works is totally contradictory to their training and the values of their profession. The local people want nothing to do with that.  The temple isn't a historic artifact, but a living, breathing thing to them and they want it shiny, repainted and whole.  In their minds, not doing so is an affront and highly disrespectful to their culture and the particular deities that are portrayed.  They want all the cracks patched, the missing arms replaced on the statuary and the damaged or missing portions of the murals repainted and it is completely unimportant to them if the new 'restored' version differs from the original.  The goals and values of the two groups are very, very different and neither completely understands the other.  And in the case of those temples, there is no alternate copy.  All alterations are to the original recording.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline aegert

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #49 on: March 19, 2008, 03:46:53 PM »
As before everyone is entitled to there opinions and I respectfully disagree with your positions. This is the way we do things. We do get complaints rarely but for the most part we get only thanks and positive response from the tapers and the downloaders...

All the tapers we do this for feel the releases sound better than the tapes... And for sure much better than any previous treatment of the the tapes... It is hard to say which any detractors would like better given the fact they haven't heard the raws...

Again I would respectfully disagree with the statement that the mission or any other statement at MOTB is not in line with the statements here. Everything described here is light clean up. We are not doing stereo expansion, we are not adding reverb we are not squashing any recordings... If our stuff is not for you no problem, no offense taken or implied I'm sure.

Vote with your bandwidth

We should just agree to disagree... :-)

A :-)
B&k 4022's > Grace Lunatec V3 > Self Built  Neutrik/ Mogami XLR to TRS > Korg MR1000

Schoeps CMT44's > Self Built Neutrik/ Tuchel 2 ch Snake > Switchcraft Phantom to T-power Adapters > Grace Lunatec V3 > Sound Devices 722

www.motb.org

The bus came by and I got on....

Offline esteyes

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 217
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #50 on: March 23, 2008, 06:32:58 AM »
here is my humble opinion... or at least the way i tape.

i try to make my recording sound as if you were in the sweet spot. i use 3 mics most of the time and am _generally_ able to make a tape that puts each artist in the band exactly where they stood when they played ONSTAGE.

then i work on tonal quality. i want my recording to sound like what i heard in the sweet spot. for me, indoors, the PA is more of a detriment than a help. so i choose mics accordingly.

my ears are my ears. not yours. so i make what i make. and i send it out unaltered. if you want to "fix" it, i have no problem. AS LONG AS YOU ARE _FIXING_ IT FOR YOU. other people may not hear it your way thru their playback systems. SO DON'T EQ IT AND PASS IT ON, UNLESS you make notes and pass them on as well. but, still, DON'T DO IT. let the listener adjust to suit his/her style.

we must also understand that many folks these days do not know what good sound sounds like. well maybe they are good listeners but they may not have had the opportunities of us older folks. they did not grow up going to the orchestra, or live plays, or a family member or friend that could really play an instrument so that they clearly understand what things TRULY sound like (esp unamplified 20 rows back). and with the cheapening of audio systems, where is good sound anymore... so don't try to fix it by adjusting recordings, we must try to educate them to choose better playback devices chosen AFTER they spend time learning the sound of real music.

i think everyone hears things differently. i think we must make the best recordings for ourselves first. i mean aren't they really for you first?? then share them. if you hear many of the same pointed comments about your recording, then you must look to your rig and your methods if it important to please these people. check your hearing, check your monitor system, etc... otherwise, screw'em and enjoy your fruits of your labors.

neil

as far as MOTB goes, they document what they do. try it. if you don't like it don't go there again. but remember one of the key things from the dead was tolerance. all this crap that deifies the dead's music is BS. it was all about the interplay between the band and the audience and the being there. everything else is just watching the movie. a good movie it may be, but...
Neil Sturtevant
San Marcos, CA
AKG 451's + CK1/CK8/CK9
AKG 460's + CK61/CK63 or A60M + CK1/CK8/CK9  or MK46/CK1X/CK8X
Sennheiser K3U + MKE-2, ME20, ME40, ME80, ME88
Sennheiser MKH 110/2 x2 + MKH 110/1 powered via custom battbox
Busman BSC1-K1/K2/K3/K4
Shure FP33 or Sony DMX P01
Korg MR1000 or Sony M1
stealth: M1 > MKE-2/ME 20/ME40 in the hat
all cabling LINK (made in Germany) balanced or balanced miniature w/ Neutrik ends

making custom cables and serviceable (non-epoxy) ultraflush right angle cables plus other custom projects

Offline cybergaloot

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4079
  • Gender: Male
  • Poohbah!
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #51 on: March 23, 2008, 12:20:18 PM »

we must also understand that many folks these days do not know what good sound sounds like. well maybe they are good listeners but they may not have had the opportunities of us older folks. they did not grow up going to the orchestra, or live plays, or a family member or friend that could really play an instrument so that they clearly understand what things TRULY sound like (esp unamplified 20 rows back). and with the cheapening of audio systems, where is good sound anymore... so don't try to fix it by adjusting recordings, we must try to educate them to choose better playback devices chosen AFTER they spend time learning the sound of real music.


I agree with this. I think part of the problem is that there is tendency for modern PA mixes to over emphasize the bass and drums. Often vocals are way down in the mix. I call it "the rock mix" or, at its worst, "the disco mix" and it drives me up the wall as a blues fan. There are plenty of soundmen who know the difference but I think they are often driven by other people to give them that rock mix they are so used to. Drums way out front and bass that rattles your fillings. Now that's what many people expect to hear. Go into your friend's houses and see how many of them have the bass cranked on their stereos. How many of them show off their new system by cranking the bass and turning the volume to 11? And don't get me started on the mix for movies on DVD.

I went to one show in an actual theatre where the soundman tried to make the singer sound like his mental image of what a blues singer should sound like. He took the singer's somewhat nasal tone and squashed it by cutting the high end while cranking the lower end of the EQ. What you ended up with was soulless muck. I had talked with the soundman quite a bit before the show and he was a nice guy but I really wanted to thump him on the head during the set and say "WTF do you think you're doing?" How many people in the audience thought the guy couldn't sing as a result?
--
Walter

Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects. Will Rogers

this>that>the other

Offline ghellquist

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 477
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #52 on: March 24, 2008, 08:10:05 PM »
Just my two cents on the issue, I´m not really a taper person, recording acoustical classical music.

Well, of course everyone tweaks the recordings. You select microphones, you place them in the room and in relation to each other, you run them through your favourite preamp, and through your AD converter. Each of these modifies the sound some way. Setting levels is one way to compress things, many of the boxes compresses a bit towards 0dB full scale and many limits so you will not get digital distortion when going above 0dB.

So once at home I do postprocess. The originals are of course archived.

I always add gain as I never allow levels to get close to 0dB FS when recording. I don´t like the sound of my equipment close to full out. Generally I add different amounts of gain to different parts of the show - a very quiet piece might get a little more to pull it up a little, applauds often gets a little less gain as the mics often stand among the audience.

Genarally I remove the dead time between movements and between pieces. Fade-ins and fade-outs of the room noise instead of instantly going from digital black to room noise. In between movements I tend to add a bit of room noise instead of going to total black.

Often a highpass filter, which may vary during a concert. Perhaps a bus passed and the very low frequency noise of that can be removed just there as no bass instruments played just then. I like to decrease audience noise as well, coughing and squeeky floors, paper rustling and things dropped or doors closed. Just reduced enough to not be the main attraction anymore.

So once all this is done, it might take a slight bit of other tools. These are difficult to use and easy to abuse. Here I´ve come to rely on my monitors and headphones and mostly on my ears but this is the part where I thread real carefully. Less is more and real carefully are the words.

Things that may come in are very slight EQ changes, most often 1 or 2 dB down, rarely more. Some of my mics has a rise in the high frequencys to compensate for far-away recordings that I like to temper a bit. Sometimes the room has very pronounced "modes" or tones that it likes to amplify. This might come from mic placement, example is that sounds may bounce on a hardwood floor or walls and amplify a few frequencys. At most a few dB-s down to decrease the problem but not to remove it. Less is more.

A very small amount of reverb sometimes is what the recording requires in order to be enjoyable. Just enough to make the room less dead, but never enough to be heard. Preferrably this should have been done at the recording by having an extra set of reverb mics further back in the room or by moving the main mics, but when recording with an audience to two microphones this is not always possible.

Finally, on a select few recordings, a very small amount of compression on the stereo bus. Setting on the compressor to a ratio of 1.1 or 1.2, extremely small compared to most other usages. It can sometimes melt together sounds but it may as easily destroy more than it saves.

Anyway, your choices will vary, but no recording is totally faithful -- it always has inherent choices. Electing to not post-process means that you are more limited in how to record in the first place, which may be a good thing from some aspects but not always. It will probably force you to go what I think is too hot into the preamp / AD which creates "distortion" (meaning modifying the signal).

Gunnar

Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #53 on: March 24, 2008, 11:28:22 PM »
Just my two cents on the issue, I´m not really a taper person, recording acoustical classical music.

Well, of course everyone tweaks the recordings. You select microphones, you place them in the room and in relation to each other, you run them through your favourite preamp, and through your AD converter. Each of these modifies the sound some way. Setting levels is one way to compress things, many of the boxes compresses a bit towards 0dB full scale and many limits so you will not get digital distortion when going above 0dB.

So once at home I do postprocess. The originals are of course archived.

I always add gain as I never allow levels to get close to 0dB FS when recording. I don´t like the sound of my equipment close to full out. Generally I add different amounts of gain to different parts of the show - a very quiet piece might get a little more to pull it up a little, applauds often gets a little less gain as the mics often stand among the audience.

Genarally I remove the dead time between movements and between pieces. Fade-ins and fade-outs of the room noise instead of instantly going from digital black to room noise. In between movements I tend to add a bit of room noise instead of going to total black.

Often a highpass filter, which may vary during a concert. Perhaps a bus passed and the very low frequency noise of that can be removed just there as no bass instruments played just then. I like to decrease audience noise as well, coughing and squeeky floors, paper rustling and things dropped or doors closed. Just reduced enough to not be the main attraction anymore.

So once all this is done, it might take a slight bit of other tools. These are difficult to use and easy to abuse. Here I´ve come to rely on my monitors and headphones and mostly on my ears but this is the part where I thread real carefully. Less is more and real carefully are the words.

Things that may come in are very slight EQ changes, most often 1 or 2 dB down, rarely more. Some of my mics has a rise in the high frequencys to compensate for far-away recordings that I like to temper a bit. Sometimes the room has very pronounced "modes" or tones that it likes to amplify. This might come from mic placement, example is that sounds may bounce on a hardwood floor or walls and amplify a few frequencys. At most a few dB-s down to decrease the problem but not to remove it. Less is more.

A very small amount of reverb sometimes is what the recording requires in order to be enjoyable. Just enough to make the room less dead, but never enough to be heard. Preferrably this should have been done at the recording by having an extra set of reverb mics further back in the room or by moving the main mics, but when recording with an audience to two microphones this is not always possible.

Finally, on a select few recordings, a very small amount of compression on the stereo bus. Setting on the compressor to a ratio of 1.1 or 1.2, extremely small compared to most other usages. It can sometimes melt together sounds but it may as easily destroy more than it saves.

Anyway, your choices will vary, but no recording is totally faithful -- it always has inherent choices. Electing to not post-process means that you are more limited in how to record in the first place, which may be a good thing from some aspects but not always. It will probably force you to go what I think is too hot into the preamp / AD which creates "distortion" (meaning modifying the signal).

Gunnar

You know its funny you mention classical music recording, it got me thinking. One of the best recordings I have ever heard of a classical orchestra was a pair of spaced SM57 Shure mics.. LOL.. I guess it only goes to show you its better to spend the most amount of time on placement and the least amount of time on post production. And when you do almost anything can sound good.

It also reminded me of the Beatles recordings.. And how good they sounded.. Back then eq was not really as powerful as it is today. They might have had treble and bass controls on some of the early consoles. If they were lucky. But look what careful placement of a microphone can do.. I have to remind my self of that every time I do sound for a band. Mic placement first knob tweak second. I know its harder for you guys taping shows because you cant always get what you want :) As far as placement is concerned but some times you just might find with more careful placement you get what you need :)

for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

Offline bdasilva

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1358
  • Gender: Male
  • Use to be a Fishhead
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #54 on: March 25, 2008, 12:50:53 PM »
I recorded a show that had a 180KW generator 20' behind the stage... With Adobe Audition you can take a sample of the sound... and remove just that sound from the recording. While you are doing it.. you can monitor "keep just the sound" and see how much of the source material you might be loosing or "remove the sound" and hear how good it is not to hear the whine over your recording. At first it seems heavy handed but its not. Heavy handed is running your show thru a multiband compressor plugin to dig the vocals out of the mix.
Cad E300S set.. AT822  AKG C 414 B-XLS/ST  
Dorsey-Mod MK-012 w/ O, C, H and RED L/D Caps
Superlux S502 ORTF   LSD2
Silverpath  Cables> 
Tascam DR-680MKii    DR- 680 (X2)   Tascam DR-40     Sound Devices USBPre    SONY  PMD-M10   Zoom F8

"Buy a Taper a Drink... Prime the Pumps of live Music"


               On the "music" side of the "Music Business"

easy jim

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #55 on: March 25, 2008, 12:55:12 PM »
Heavy handed is running your show thru a multiband compressor plugin to dig the vocals out of the mix.

QFT

Offline Dede2002

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1217
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #56 on: March 25, 2008, 03:32:33 PM »
Heavy handed is running your show thru a multiband compressor plugin to dig the vocals out of the mix.

QFT

I'm trying to learn as much as I can in this board. Not about taping only.
So this is my question at this time: what is QFT?
(Please PM if the response is not allowed for under 18 years old people  ;D ;D ;D)
Mics..........................SP-CMC-8, HLSC-1 and HLSO-MICRO
BB and Preamps........MM Micro bb / MM Custom Elite bb / Church 9100
                              
Recorders...................Tascam DR-100MKIII, Marantz PMD 620 MKII, Edirol R-09

Offline bdasilva

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1358
  • Gender: Male
  • Use to be a Fishhead
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #57 on: March 25, 2008, 03:36:29 PM »
Quoted For Truth...

Quite F#ckin True
Cad E300S set.. AT822  AKG C 414 B-XLS/ST  
Dorsey-Mod MK-012 w/ O, C, H and RED L/D Caps
Superlux S502 ORTF   LSD2
Silverpath  Cables> 
Tascam DR-680MKii    DR- 680 (X2)   Tascam DR-40     Sound Devices USBPre    SONY  PMD-M10   Zoom F8

"Buy a Taper a Drink... Prime the Pumps of live Music"


               On the "music" side of the "Music Business"

Offline Dede2002

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1217
  • Gender: Male
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #58 on: March 25, 2008, 03:44:30 PM »
Quoted For Truth...

Quite F#ckin True

I was quite sure about the "F"  ;D
Thanks ;)
Mics..........................SP-CMC-8, HLSC-1 and HLSO-MICRO
BB and Preamps........MM Micro bb / MM Custom Elite bb / Church 9100
                              
Recorders...................Tascam DR-100MKIII, Marantz PMD 620 MKII, Edirol R-09

Offline evilchris

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 943
  • Gender: Male
  • Audio, ergo sum.
    • dimwell.net
Re: Post Production of Tapers Recordings
« Reply #59 on: March 25, 2008, 04:08:20 PM »
Despite taping since 2001, I'm still a n00b compared to the vast majority of folks around here.

When I release a show, however, I do a few simple things:
- Normalize (I'm almost always too conservative with my levels, so as to avoid clipping)
- Modest, if any, EQ (to take out boomy bass or shrill highs)
- Fade in/out at the beginning/end.

Sometimes, I'll take out the crowd cheering before an encore if it'll let the whole show fit onto one disc.  Otherwise, what you hear is what I pulled.
nothing > nada > R-09

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.097 seconds with 39 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF