May 08, 2007 05:13 pm I don't "hate" or "refuse" to use PT. I just can't afford it.
Why does everyone here hate pro tools?
Posted on May 08, 2007 05:12 pm
m4ca
Member Since: Jul 31, 2006
i've read maybe 4 topics within the first few pages, where someone tlks about pro tools, and people bash it for whatever reason.
i use pro tools 7.3 the la test version, and i have been using pro tools for about 2 years now, and i have never encountered a crash, or a bug, or a freeze up..
i read someone say that some plug ins aren't compatible.. well if you search around you can find a VST to RTAS plugin for pro tools to let you use tho's VST plugs, even tho i think the RTAS plugs supplied and built for pro tools are much better quality and do more..
so whats the real reason you guys (like dbmaster)hate and refuse to use pro tools?
[ Back to Top ]
May 08, 2007 05:13 pm I don't "hate" or "refuse" to use PT. I just can't afford it.
May 08, 2007 05:26 pm i don't agree with their propritetary business philosophy (much like apple) sure you get better stability, but the simple fact as a consumer buying a product, i don't like the manufacture saying "you've gotta use our stuff only"...so say you get a harmless m-box and get 100 projects under your belt before you decide you need a bigger system...you're pretty much forced to upgrade to another pro-tools system..and for a **** load more money.
sure it's a good program, but i view them (as a company) as a bunch of greedy elitests....
take the OMF feature discussed in an earlier thread...that **** is stock in Sonar, but they want 500 bucks for the 'privlidge'.
wanna go from LE to TDM or god forbid HD, you better have some serious cash on hand...
and track limiting? wtf is up with that?
May 08, 2007 05:32 pm i still haven't heard a good reason why it's superior. the only thing i hear is 'industry standard.' but cubase seems to do everything anyone would ever want to do, so.
just seems like a lot of money for a name. like designer jeans or something.
May 08, 2007 05:35 pm Not everyone hates ProTools, I don't even hate ProTools, but I won't ever buy it because I don't like their business tactics and quite honestly, it cannot do one little thing that I have ever needed that my current setup can do for far less money.
What I do hate is the stereotypical ProTools user, that, if you don't have ProTools they look at you as a lower life form...but then, I hate gear snobs of any type.
ProTools is a fine piece of software and does the job just fine, but it doesn't do anything that a ton of other setups can do for far less money with just the same quality.
May 08, 2007 05:38 pm and they just can't get their heads around what MIDI sequencers need....the only other worse sequencer than PT is Reason.
i sequence on nearly every project i do, so havin' a good, efficent, and intuitive sequencer is a must.
May 08, 2007 05:45 pm I don't hate things...
People on the other hand...
May 08, 2007 05:49 pm you can always get a used mbox which comes with pro tools software for under 300.
someone said something about track limitations..
i think it comes with 32 tracks..
how many tracks do you guys typicley use?
i mean to mic a drum set, maybe 8 mics.. so 8 tracks
then micing guitar cabs 1 or 2 mics , were at 10 tracks
the bass, you could plug as a DI, were at 11 tracks..
vocals/doubles maybe 4 or 5 tracks you should be fine..
right now your under 20 tracks...
they give you 32.. so what do you guys use for over 32 tracks?
May 08, 2007 05:52 pm from what i've noticed the more track you use, not just pro tools but in other audio software it takes up a lot of memory and will cause your program to go slow.
i'm not saying its their reason but i'm saying its one reason.
May 08, 2007 05:56 pm my first 'big' rock mix had around 50 tracks...
15 on drums
2 bass
6 guitars
6 guitar overdubs (doubble)
3 main vocal takes (to pick the best parts)
4 back up vocal takes (various members of the band)
2 stereo keyboard/fx
then there's all my reverb returns, mults, and other stuff...it's quite typical
i think the latest Avenged Seven-Fold album had a track count around 120
hell queen ran up atleast 48 on their later stuff.
a high track count is not a requirement for good sound, but i like knowing it's there if ya need it, i just don't get why they put a cap on it.
May 08, 2007 06:23 pm m4ca, you have summed at track usage in the simplest of situation, 1 or 2 mics for guitar...OK, what about multi takes to cut, paste, mix and match from, what about possible multiple layers of synthesizer lines, room mics, and much, much more possible.
I don't often use over 32, but like forty said, why have it? Oh, yeah, thats right, so they can sucker you into spending thousands the first time you need more than 32.
May 08, 2007 06:27 pm If layering (as in Sonar) is counted as a track then I would go over 50 easy. Not sure if layering counts toward track count though. If you haven't used these feature before, you should check it out. Very handy.
May 08, 2007 06:27 pm when digidesign tech support put me on hold for 6 hours did it for me...
May 09, 2007 04:57 pm 8 on drums plus two bus tracks = 8
Two guitars doubled and panned = 4-8
Bass = 1
Lead Vox doubled = 2
Backup Vox Doubled = 2
Backup Vox 2 Doubled = 2
Solo = 1
That is a simple rock mix to me. Get some synth going, maybe some intro tracks and some routing and I hit 32 easy.
May 09, 2007 05:15 pm I've never used pro tools, nor even seen it. I've been on the cheap side, building parts as I need, and upgrading as I need.
I like the flexibility to change what I want, when I want.
My ESI ESP1010 was 300$, while the 002 8 input was 1800? plus, I was using n-track, and now reaper. 72$ for ntrack, 40$ for reaper.
Bundles of great plugins with reaper, plus the free community.
I couldn't even begin to start thinking of pro-tools route.
I don't doubt that pro-tools is the way to go for hi-end music dev, but I'm not there, and I don't align myself with the idea that I have to be there to produce good quality product.
I'm thinking just because you hear of some people bad-mouthing pro-tools, that everyone hates it. A lot of the people who just aren't going to go that route don't say much at all, quietly going about their alternative route.
Also, I've got around 20 tracks on a project I'm doing now, and that's without aux percussion, any vocals, or lead guitar. I expect to add 10 to 20 more tracks covering the mentioned parts.
May 09, 2007 05:45 pm I think the MAIN benefit of Pro Tools, is because it is pretty much the Pro industry standard, you can do something on your LE at home and bring that session to a studio and have it integrate seemlessly. So basically moving sessions and staying compatible.
With that being said there are a host of drawbacks to PT as well as some niceities. I've been at my friends house and seen it crash numerous times in the same session to the point where he has to restart the computer. Also, I don't think it handles mp3s (maybe you have to pay extra???).
May 09, 2007 07:08 pm A friend has reported that auto updating to the latest Mac release (including Quicktime) has killed his Pro Tools and all previous projects.
Sounds like a mess.
I agree with Dan, it's the attitude of the Pro Tools users (including the guy above) that's the real problem.
May 09, 2007 07:14 pm Everything everyone said here....
If I had the money for PT, I'd buy Nuendo.
PT has just had some serious promotion going on. I'm sure they sponsor a whole bunch of people....All over the music press.."Oh, when we go on the road we track in PT...then take it to the studio..." Right, and these young bands just went out and bought a suite of PT? No, they didn't. The idea is that everyone who reads the magazine does.
Good marketing, but not a huge jump in technology.
IIt's good, but not that good.
May 09, 2007 11:00 pm In my case I have been known to reach above the 80 track mark. I have also been past 100. I can record unlimited tracks with Sonar and as many at one time as my hardware will allow. And for the price I can't even buy one bit of PT kit to do that for less then 6 times what my entire rig cost.
As well its all been stated above, but I do not dig proprietary robbery. And I honestly have been using Cakewalk products for years and have never had a complaint from clients who know I don't use PT and know I can do their project cheaper because of that simple fact. To have a PT rig that would compare to what I have here would cost me in excess of 60 grand. Do I really need it to be a professional? I don't think so.
Take a look at just a single core system. 8 grand and that doesn't even include an audio interface or pluggins. What kind of fool would buy into that?
No I don't hate PT, used it before and will probably use it again. I just won't own it.
May 10, 2007 06:58 am i don't hate pro tools. i hate you!
(i'm drinking and that's a joke.)
but no, seriously.
May 10, 2007 09:22 am I don't hate pro-tools either, just always been a cubase user since my atari st days so why not stick with that? Actually i have logic too, but i only bought that because it was cheap and now i'm selling it.
I did consider pro-tools last year when i was buying a new rig, but i'm not mad keen on the pres in the 002, so i thought better of it. They're not crap, they just have a sound i'm not so keen on.
May 10, 2007 10:59 am Atari ST....that takes me back...
May 10, 2007 11:13 am i rocked the Comadore 64 WITH a modem and external floppy drive baby! i still remember playin' "paperboy" on that thing OOooOoo and "test drive"
May 10, 2007 11:24 pm The Atari 1040 ST was the shiznit for sequencing. I never had one lick or trouble with that bugger at all. The midi i/o was flawless and easy to lock to external hardware. Although it was cumbersome and cluncky looking in those days it still was better then the tiny window on most hardware sequencers if they had one at all.
Aside from that you could play a couple of really cool games on it. With and 8Mhz processor and 1 MB of ram it flew. I had an external 20MB hard drive on it as well. I think I paid under a grand for it with the external drive, which in those days was a deal.
May 11, 2007 10:31 pm Dont hate it.. I just feel like I dont need it. Shoot I'm still using Cakewalk 9.0 :))
I'd rather put my bucks into the best mics, mic pre's, and converters. Garbage in = garbage out no matter what application you use.
:)
May 11, 2007 11:51 pm What they all said. The proprietary business
is ridiculous, what with the exponentially
rising costs to upgrade, and the fairly steep
cost to begin with. If I had unlimited money
and resources, I might get it, but uhh . . . .
The thing is, now you've got Pro Tools users
over there, and everybody else on the other side
of an increasingly higher fence. Its inevitable
that bad feelings (class differences?) will
enter into the picture.
May 12, 2007 12:36 am But the funny thing is there are no class differences these days. Sonar,Cubase and logic are right smack up there. Sonar has even stepped far beyond the norm of what most expect from there DAW. They are still the only one with a native 64 bit audio engine which can actually run in a 32 bit OS environment and utilize the 64 bit chip even if the OS does not. Their pluggins and synths are as well set up to cross over when others have not even tried yet. I know where my money is better spent and I will continue to spend it there.
May 12, 2007 05:03 am true, but i can tell ya here, in nashville, the general trend is people tracking in nice studios, then bringing 'em to a cheaper place (like mine) to mix...and guess what if you do a single punch-in in a session...you're pretty much forced to use the same program you tracked in so the timestamp still works....
say you're a jazz band and you setup a 16 track tracking session....you let the computer *read "tape"* roll from start to finish and nobody screws up, you can easily move the original .wav files to any platform.
the problem starts as soon as someone says "lemme do that part again"...you loose your timestamp.
now you're forced to mix in a different but 'compatible' studio...well in one of america's 'music cities' EVERY damn place runs a PT system of some sort (usually HD)
so here, i'm forced to work WITH PT just because every paying client has PT tracks....which i'm sure was digidesign's idea in the first place.
i fall in the 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em' group...if i wanna make money, i gotta be PT compatable.
NOW, if your town is not run by PT, then yes you can use damn near any app your little heart desires and get away with it. oh, the envy.
May 13, 2007 03:25 am I still have my atari ST actually, tucked away in the hall cupboard. It has 4mb INSIDE - meaning a large bump on the top where the vent is. Crazy.
And yeah, WYD, i rocked paperboy with the 64 too. We even tried to do some music on the 64, can't recall what the program was called, just crazy stupid bleeps and noises. Good though, wish i still had that.
..and no, i don't want an emulator!
May 14, 2007 11:26 am dude i still remember the music to paperboy...
derww da deeee-dee dah dah, derw-da-derw-da dee derw dommy-derw da dahh.
haha that was hard to transcribe!
May 15, 2007 09:26 pm WYD, if they export as OMP you can still have the time on the track. I do it all the time in Sonar and did it in Cakewalk as well.
May 16, 2007 01:40 am no way! wtf is OMP? is this a cross platform thing? i've NEVER heard of it before...
May 16, 2007 02:49 pm 32 tracks is simply a tag on PT. Once you start mixing down tracks, your track number becomes infinate. Digidesign just happens to be the big dog on the block, has been for years. Just about every major studio across the country uses PT as a vital part of their set up. With that knowledge in mind, why not make it easier, and less expensive, on yourself and work with tools that are somewhat compatible to the Profefssionals.
I really think it's about taste. I've used almost all of the music production software and each one is powerful in it's own right. I read on this forum years ago, "It's not about the gear, it's the ear." Which is very true, the issue arises when you want other people to appriciate what you do, which means sound quality, which is achieved by powerful tools and exceptional engineering.
Regardless of which tools you choose, let's not forget the human element in this equation. Some folks are great no matter what system they use, where as some need all the help they can get. But eventually, all roads lead to PT.
Always Musically,
EmSee
May 16, 2007 09:11 pm My bad WYD, its OMF.
I can't type worth **** these days.
May 16, 2007 10:27 pm yeah i know omf ok....did ya see that Digidesign charges ya 500 bucks fer that there handy feature...
May 16, 2007 10:35 pm Yep, how embarrassing is that. Everyone else simply gives it away and makes it native in their apps.
But nooooo, not the almighty Digi.
But ya, .omf files I have been using for a long time now. I actually started using them before they were really being put into other apps. It was simply a software converter that saved all the important info out of a file and then kind of zipped it up. Now OMF is getting more popular.
May 16, 2007 10:36 pm i've never had to use it.....so it saves all your timestamps, edits, crossfades (?) what about automation?
May 17, 2007 05:18 pm WYD, I'll answer that when I get home a bit later. But in short id does most of the above.
May 17, 2007 05:49 pm I totally disagree that all roads lead to PT. 90% of the home recording world has no intention to go pro and is much better served by the simpler and cheaper packages.
The only home user who needs pro tools is one with a very clear intention of going pro in the future, that's a pretty small subset.
May 17, 2007 07:00 pm This is an old definition but still applies today.
The OMF file supplies the following data and information:
* Tracks.
* Clip positions—an OMF file's EDL edit resolution can be either frame accurate or sample accurate. SONAR can read either, but always writes sample accurate. The clip position is specified in absolute samples.
* Slip edits.
* Fades and crossfades (as destructive edits)—SONAR renders any fades when it writes OMFs, creating separate clips for any fade-ins or fade-outs. SONAR slip-edits the original clip to make room for the fade-in and fade-out clips. If you export to an audio program that supports slip editing, the user can delete the fade clips and roll out the original clip to return to the original raw audio (without fades) if desired.
* Sample rate and audio bit depth.
The OMF file does NOT supply the following data and information:
* Volume and pan envelopes—OMF does actually support limited automation. However, as with Nuendo and most other OMF host programs, Gains and Pans are ignored (on both read and write) in SONAR as they are only supported on MONO tracks (OMF limitation).
* Plug-in effects.
* MIDI data.
* Tempo.
May 17, 2007 11:25 pm Well oddly enough, I've worked in plenty of Pro studio's. And many of them, probably at least 50% don't have PT at all. I consider my studio Pro as well, and I don't use PT either. So I don't think going pro requires PT at any level really. Unless you are only going to work with clients who actually believe the crap Digi spouts that PT is the only Pro DAW out there.
If I were to make any high dollar improvements here it would be to add a couple of MOTU interfaces or a Radar digital system.
May 18, 2007 04:13 pm yeah Radar is pretty popular out here too...
thanks for the info Noize! i can't believe OMF dosn't do basic fader volume and pan settings....i guess it gets hairy when automation comes into play.
May 18, 2007 09:34 pm Ya, for the most part automation can be transfered pretty well, but some protocols just are different that way. I suppose that they figure if you are transferring stuff you are either going to finish the panning and volume automation there or just are simply going for more tracks then back.
May 23, 2007 07:54 am I love working on pro tools HD, just wouldn't buy it due to the intitial cost and constant upgrading....
Dec 15, 2007 01:28 pm I'll be honest here...
In my quest to locate a pro studio and do some serious recording, I am sick of all these cats that are using Pro Tools. Because... everybody goes out and gets this software and claims "I have a studio". And I have heard nothing but crap as the end result.
I'm sure that Pro Tools is capable of doing great things...but I am tired of weeding through everybody that uses it...and doesn't know how.
Dec 16, 2007 12:51 pm The question was "Why does everyone here hate pro tools?" and the answer is "Sonar"
Lol But seriously I believe if someone sat down and compared the two, dollar for dollar and feature for feature Sonar would win hands down.
Dec 16, 2007 02:08 pm Say it with me now.
=Sonar Rools=
Dec 16, 2007 02:11 pm ok ok ...let me see if I get the pronunciation right there Noise:
S...S ... Ubuntu ... S sss Studio... :)
It's not that it's free... more along the lines of 'priceless' :)
Dec 16, 2007 02:14 pm I'm not even gonna go there mister Linux. You and your penguin can keep saying Ubuntu all you want. To me it sounds like a naughty word in a foreign language.
Dec 16, 2007 02:19 pm it probably is... :)
Dec 16, 2007 03:51 pm =Sonar Rules=
Forbiden Forest had THE coolest C-64 music in it . I looked it up the other day... still cool !
Dec 16, 2007 07:26 pm I think you can get it on a free download these days for PC. I think it is the first version only though. But not sure.
Dec 17, 2007 11:59 am ok, so this is slightly off topic, but WYD, you said Reason has the worst sequencer you've used earlier (i've seen others say similar things also). That was like 8 months ago or something, but do you still stand by that? I personally really like the Reason sequencer, and I wonder what you think makes it difficult to use. There's only two things it doesn't do that I wish it did, and those are kind of related. I'll give it a minute and tell later what it is, cuz I would like to hear your response first.
Dec 17, 2007 09:41 pm As stated before, you can get into Pro Tools LE for not too much cash. LE with the Music Production Toolkit can really supercharge your rig. And you get some great plugins with it. Also, you aren't locked into Digi's interfaces with HD. You can run Lynx, Apogee, etc. Yeah, they're expensive, but great converters cost money.
I like the other programs, but for editing purposes I love Pro Tools and I feel that I'm the most efficient with it. I used to run Cubase SX, and it was no doubt a great program. But after using Digi's products, especially HD, I don't see myself changing anytime soon.
One last thing, someone mentioned the Mac updates messing up Pro Tools, and in fact, it does. Digidesign hasn't updated the software for the constant updates for OSX. I just keep mine at a solid version and everybody's happy.
Jan 06, 2008 02:26 am I work as an audio engineer, and the problem is that whenever someone sends me something to mix they send me a PT session or when i record something to mix it elsewhere they ask for a PT session, and although i hate digidesign because they have the market grabbed by the balls, something is for sure, PT is the industry standard so we have to cope with it.
Jan 06, 2008 02:39 am I love how these old posts pop up from time to time.
I work as an intern recording engineer in a studio that uses primarily Nuendo now, just recently switching from Pro Tools HD a few months ago, and it frustrating trying to work with files in PT format now, because PT files only work with PT. Other clients have sent us files from Ableton Live, Audacity, Cubase, and I've even brought some of Sonar files in to work with, and though they all take some fooling with, they can all work with Nuendo, but PT is it's own beast. PT has become such a monster that it keeps the 250,000$ system around, which was traded for a 7,000$ system that, in my opinion, blows PT out of the water. I don't hate PT, I hate the limitations they put on everything they and DigiDesign do. It's frustrating to deal with their formats because they're SO proprietary.
Jan 06, 2008 06:28 pm Funny thing is I have been using Sonar and Cakewalk products for a long time. I always managed to find a way around it even before OMF was integrated into Sonar, for free I might add. Not an extra cost as it is in PT. I now send projects back and forth with almost any other format either in a project form, OMF form or as a simple time stamped set of wav or aiff files. I know weveral people who are now using FLAC and it seems to work great for them. And I have no complaints either.
Now with Sonar 7 being able to be modified and customized to suit you will find many people jumping ship on the old standard.
And ya, I love it when old dead threads keep getting revived.
Jan 06, 2008 06:49 pm The ONLY feature pro tools has that I really, REALLY want is the ability to mix everything on a nice big board with motorized faders and tons and tons of inputs and everything... but at the same time I don't exactly have $100,000 to blow for a project studio.
Jan 06, 2008 07:38 pm Funny enough I can do the same thing in Sonar. Been able to do that for a long time now. And in 7 PE the automation function's and controller acceptance is huge. I can send a project out and if they have access to a fully automated set up they simply record it all into the project and send it back. Then if I don't like it or need to change it I'm a few clicks away and its done. Then when I send it back all their gear reflects the changes in automation I made. So for the most part I can do everything that PT can do with Sonar. Nothing is missing at all.
And if I want my mixer panel to look like PT I can do that too. But I wont cause I like it as I have it now.
Jan 06, 2008 08:08 pm Really? That's pretty sweet... but where would one find a nice board?
Jan 06, 2008 08:33 pm Tascam makes a couple pretty good budget priced control boards. Not automated faders but they send automation. Mackie is probably the cheapest for fully automated faders that I know of. I should take that back as Yamaha also has a nice line with full automation as well. I think that you will find it mostly in digital mixers these days though. They are not cheap by any means though.
I use macro's in Sonar to lock my computer keyboard keys to function as up and down buttons for doing automation here. Otherwise I will simply draw it in when I need it. For another alternative I use Tuna's Radium 49 knobs and sliders for doing it as well. I've been debating on buying a motorized fader board from the likes of J.L. Cooper or another maker like that. CME had a nice fader board a few years back as well.
I don't really have the need for a full on desk with automated faders here as I do it all in Sonar anyway. But a dedicated controller would be nice to have.
Jan 07, 2008 07:20 am I've long wanted a large console desk that works both as an analog desk, and as a midi controller that I can mix on. I hate mixing via mouse.
Jan 07, 2008 08:51 am I'm with you on that one Loki. It's why I drug my feet sooooo long on getting into the digital realm.
Jan 07, 2008 08:53 am Johnny was a hard sell on digital for his first couple years on HRC...I remember it well...
Damn hippies. :-D
Jan 07, 2008 11:40 am [quote]May 09, 2007 07:14 pm
Everything everyone said here....
If I had the money for PT, I'd buy Nuendo.[/quote]
Ahem....
Jan 07, 2008 11:41 am Actually, if I had the money for PT, I'd buy Nuendo AND A PRS guitar....
Jan 07, 2008 09:20 pm The thing is now that most of the desk's for digital automation are pretty small. There are some big ones but you better be prepared to spend some big cash.
The Yamaha digital desk's and the Mackie ones are pretty fair priced. The new Mackie Control is nice with the expansion modules. but Yamaha has a very nice digital desk that is killer as well.
Jan 07, 2008 09:40 pm I don't like PT just because it is so expensive. I am simply unwilling to pay that much when there are so many viable options out there. Beyond that, I have no idea. I have heard some nice productions on PT and some poor ones. I can say that about most every DAW out there.
I admitedly have a tude about PT. I get a strong sense that 'they' are the big boy on the block and are living more on name than about sharpening their pencils and offering a truly competitive product. Greed is not a beautitude in my books.
Jan 07, 2008 10:47 pm Well said oh wandering one.
How are things going out there? Haven't seen ya around as of late.
Jan 07, 2008 11:10 pm Pro Tools LE and cubase and whatever else operate rather the same... Host based systems. IMO, not really expensive...
Now Pro Tools HD... you know, the stuff that is expensive, Native, or hardware driven is far superior than most (i don't have experience with a DSP supported Nuendo so I can't comment)
I know it's "all digital" but it's in the Mix Engine. The algorithms used and hardware acceleration can handle the wordlength of the complex math it takes to be most accurate.
It does translate into better sound but that's all out the window with a poor engineer on a great rig compared to a great engineer on a lesser rig.
The Bottom Line: They all record music so find what's best for you.
My 2 cents
Jan 09, 2008 06:01 am about the analog console with midi automation, they actually exist a clear example is the SSL but i dont even want to know the price of that monster.
Jan 10, 2008 10:15 pm Ya, I don't mention SSL or Neve or the like here because most wouldn't even have the cash to pop for one channel strip from those bad boys.
But ya, I utilize a place in Minneapolis that has an older SSL with full auto on it. Its cool to sit back after a few barley pops and watch the faders moving as you listen.
Jan 11, 2008 09:11 am Hello Noise!
Things are about the same here. Still an old fart trying to find something to do everyday to bring in a buck. Been an office manager for an engineering staffing firm now for about nine months. Looks like it will be sold here real quick. It was a real mess. My participation was to help get it stabalized for sale. Same old crap. At least I knew what I was doing this time instead of coming in one day and being told it was sold. At some level I am getting used to it. Have no idea what my next gig will be. I'm sure I'll find something to keep myself busy.
Jan 12, 2008 01:47 am Yes, I'm sure you will as well. You're a stand up kind of guy. And someone will want you're talents for something.
I know Tuna is having a hard time finding something other then a fast food gig. But he is after all still a kid in my book. He should just go back to cooking at the local greasy spoon down the road for awhile.
Jan 12, 2008 01:59 pm Yup, either end of the age scale is about the same thing, unless you get yourself planted real solid in something. I have made some euntrapranurial (figger out that mispelled nightmare) friends. I'm not entirely on my own in finding things to muck around with. I a wierd sort of manner it has been a lot of fun.
|
Related Forum Topics: |
If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.