Go Back   UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com > UG Community > The Pit
User Name  
Password
Search:

Reply
Old 05-18-2014, 06:33 AM   #9861
john_latchem
Isaac Vs UG
 
john_latchem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Basement
I know the whole colour-drop thing is played out as all hell, but this is the only shot of the ~100 I took on Friday that didn't make me want to vomit.

Latchem72, on Flickr
__________________
Watching: South Park
Playing: State of Decay
Reading: Dan Simmons - Olympos
Listening: Hopsin, Seth Sentry
PSN/XBL/facebook/Steam : Latchem72
Origin/Twitter: JLatchem72

Last edited by john_latchem : 05-18-2014 at 06:38 AM.
john_latchem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2014, 05:24 AM   #9862
Diamond Dave
1984
 
Diamond Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
back to the Zoo









__________________
$100AUD Super Strat Build

Kasabian - Fire fan video/uni work. Watch it!

Jackson Dinky with TB-11 + SH-1 Pickups & Gotoh Floyd Rose
Washburn D10S
Dunlop 535Q Crybaby
Fulltone OCD
MXR 6 Band EQ
Laney VC15
Hayden 2x12
Diamond Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2014, 02:21 PM   #9863
Dave_Mc
Chirp and Swirl
 
Dave_Mc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Northern Ireland
Hopefully you people can help me, because I have no clue about cameras

What's a decent entry-level DSLR? Already have a (several years old) non-SLR digital camera, with zoom etc., and I get the feeling (could be wrong) that to get any big improvements you have to step up to a DSLR... is that right?

If so, what's a decent entry level one? Or are they even a sensible purchase? Budget is sort of flexible, but at the same time cheaper is better (as long as it's worth the money i.e. not a false economy).

I've seen the Nikon D3200 and new(ish) 3300 seem to get a good rep as a starter DSLR, and the Canons seem to have a good rep too.

Any help you can give me is much appreciated
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemurflames
I had a Blackstar. I felt like I was lied to by Chappers, that fat ****.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc8995
Rob Chappers would tell you he couldn't tell a cat from a dog if it would get him more hits on youtube.


Dave_Mc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2014, 04:15 PM   #9864
Diamond Dave
1984
 
Diamond Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
What's a decent entry-level DSLR? Already have a (several years old) non-SLR digital camera, with zoom etc., and I get the feeling (could be wrong) that to get any big improvements you have to step up to a DSLR... is that right?

not necessarily, digital sensor quality has increased a lot since your current camera came out and a lot of things take pretty good images. The main reason you would want a DSLR is because it gives you control over the images.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
If so, what's a decent entry level one? Or are they even a sensible purchase? Budget is sort of flexible, but at the same time cheaper is better (as long as it's worth the money i.e. not a false economy).

I've seen the Nikon D3200 and new(ish) 3300 seem to get a good rep as a starter DSLR, and the Canons seem to have a good rep too.

at the moment most people would agree that the entry level Nikon's you mention there are better than the equivalent Canon models at this point in time. Some might argue that Canon have nicer upgrade options but its all a bit suggestive really unless you're looking at the ultra-expensive 1DX, 5D MkIII or D4S, D800 sort of options.

you definitely get good bang for buck with the D3200 though, that's what I started with and still have.
__________________
$100AUD Super Strat Build

Kasabian - Fire fan video/uni work. Watch it!

Jackson Dinky with TB-11 + SH-1 Pickups & Gotoh Floyd Rose
Washburn D10S
Dunlop 535Q Crybaby
Fulltone OCD
MXR 6 Band EQ
Laney VC15
Hayden 2x12

Last edited by Diamond Dave : 06-25-2014 at 04:17 PM.
Diamond Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2014, 05:03 PM   #9865
Dave_Mc
Chirp and Swirl
 
Dave_Mc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Northern Ireland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamond Dave
(a) not necessarily, digital sensor quality has increased a lot since your current camera came out and a lot of things take pretty good images. (b) The main reason you would want a DSLR is because it gives you control over the images.


(c) at the moment most people would agree that the entry level Nikon's you mention there are better than the equivalent Canon models at this point in time. Some might argue that Canon have nicer upgrade options but its all a bit suggestive really unless you're looking at the ultra-expensive 1DX, 5D MkIII or D4S, D800 sort of options.

(d) you definitely get good bang for buck with the D3200 though, that's what I started with and still have.


(a) That's what I was wondering, thanks

(b) All the same, I reckon the extra control etc. you get with a DSLR might be handy. Kind of scared I might kick myself if I don't go with the SLR, considering last time I didn't go with one and even then wasn't sure if I did the right thing.

(c) Thanks. That's the feeling I was getting from my (very limited) looking into it, but then I had a feeling that someone asked before in here and was recommended the Canons, but I might just have been misremembering

(d) Thanks. How about the 3300? There's not actually that much price difference (65 once you factor in those cashbacks which are on currently), and considering I probably won't be buying them too often I don't really want to be behind before I start. Maybe that's a silly way to look at it, though (as I said, I know nothing about DSLRs at all)- and of course, the other concern is that the extra cost required to get up to the 3300 might get you up to close to the price of the next highest model (5200 or 5300, I think). If you know, what do the 5200 and 5300 offer over the 3200 and 3300? And are they more complex to use for a total noob?

The other thing is, what about lenses? Far as I can tell, you can get either the 3200 or 3300 with just the body for 279 or 395 respectively or both with what looks (to my uneducated eyes) like a bog standard lens for 340 or 415 respectively, or the 3200 with the bog standard lens + a 55-200mm telephoto zoom lens for 430. The 3300 is available in the same pack according to the nikon website but doesn't seem to be in stock at currys (where I'd most likely buy).

I guess what I'm asking is should I just go with the bog standard lens pack, or is it better value (or more choice) to buy the body and buy lenses separately? Again, trying to keep the price down but also get good quality/value. The 3300 does look very expensive as just the body whereas the 3200 seems very cheap for just the body; however, factor in those lens packs and the prices close a bit and make the 3300 seem more attractive (or at least not anywhere near as much more expensive as with just the body).

(Those prices I quoted there don't include the cashback which seems to be 30 on the 3200 and 40 on the 3300.)

It actually won't be up to me, I'm asking on behalf of my sister as she's not on forums. So it'll be down to her. But I'll pass on what you've said, thanks very much for the help.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemurflames
I had a Blackstar. I felt like I was lied to by Chappers, that fat ****.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc8995
Rob Chappers would tell you he couldn't tell a cat from a dog if it would get him more hits on youtube.



Last edited by Dave_Mc : 06-25-2014 at 05:13 PM.
Dave_Mc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2014, 03:39 AM   #9866
Diamond Dave
1984
 
Diamond Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
(b) All the same, I reckon the extra control etc. you get with a DSLR might be handy. Kind of scared I might kick myself if I don't go with the SLR, considering last time I didn't go with one and even then wasn't sure if I did the right thing.

oh of course, I wasn't trying to dismiss "control" as being a minor benefit, its a very big deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
(d) Thanks. How about the 3300? There's not actually that much price difference (65 once you factor in those cashbacks which are on currently), and considering I probably won't be buying them too often I don't really want to be behind before I start. Maybe that's a silly way to look at it, though (as I said, I know nothing about DSLRs at all)- and of course, the other concern is that the extra cost required to get up to the 3300 might get you up to close to the price of the next highest model (5200 or 5300, I think). If you know, what do the 5200 and 5300 offer over the 3200 and 3300? And are they more complex to use for a total noob?

well the 3300 and 3200 are virtually identical, so you certainly won't "be behind" by any means if you got a 3200, but at the same time that's not to say that the 3300 is a waste of money lol. It does have 60fps video at 1080p which is nice and a couple of other little features.

the 5xxx cameras are very good too and give you access to a few extras that you probably won't find overly useful right now, but give you extra room to grow into the camera. As a matter of fact I'd probably say that if you can find a place clearing out D5100's for a similar price or cheaper than the D3xxx cameras I'd go for that instead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
The other thing is, what about lenses? Far as I can tell, you can get either the 3200 or 3300 with just the body for 279 or 395 respectively or both with what looks (to my uneducated eyes) like a bog standard lens for 340 or 415 respectively, or the 3200 with the bog standard lens + a 55-200mm telephoto zoom lens for 430. The 3300 is available in the same pack according to the nikon website but doesn't seem to be in stock at currys (where I'd most likely buy).

I guess what I'm asking is should I just go with the bog standard lens pack, or is it better value (or more choice) to buy the body and buy lenses separately? Again, trying to keep the price down but also get good quality/value. The 3300 does look very expensive as just the body whereas the 3200 seems very cheap for just the body; however, factor in those lens packs and the prices close a bit and make the 3300 seem more attractive (or at least not anywhere near as much more expensive as with just the body).

(Those prices I quoted there don't include the cashback which seems to be 30 on the 3200 and 40 on the 3300.)

It actually won't be up to me, I'm asking on behalf of my sister as she's not on forums. So it'll be down to her. But I'll pass on what you've said, thanks very much for the help.

lenses are kind of like stomp boxes, you'll always want more. I have the trio of cheap Nikon lenses that most people end up with pretty quickly, which is the 18-55mm kit lens, the 55-200mm (which is the lens from the twin lens pack, but I bought it separately later on) and the 35mm f1.8.

the 18-55mm is slow, but covers a very useful range and is very sharp. It's worth getting in the pack if you want wide angles because the only other options to go as wide or wider than 18mm get far more expensive very quickly. If you have any interest in taking sports or wildlife/going to the zoo photos at all you will definitely need something longer than 55mm, which is where the 55-200mm comes in. It's also pretty slow (high f numbers means less light comes in means slower shutter speeds means harder to take sharp photos in low light situations) but generally takes nice images and is good value, especially in the twin pack as it will be a bit cheaper. The 35mm 1.8 is your general purpose lens, which gives you much much better low-light capability than the others at what's known as a "standard" focal length which essentially means you get a similar field of view to how people see. It's also what's known as a "prime" lens, which means no zooming in or out. This may sound like a rip-off, but its highly regarded as a great way to teach yourself how to look for shots and how to frame things.

hope that isn't too much to make sense of or too much lingo or anything, but to summarise: the basic body and lens kit is pretty good value and covers a lot of general applications. IF however you know you're going to want to zoom in on things, you're definitely going to be better off going straight for the twin lens kit to save a bit of money down the track. The third option is to just buy the body and the 35mm 1.8 and learn how to use the camera with that simple setup.

as for what's right or wrong, well I don't know really, its entirely up to what you're trying to achieve with your camera. Like the tone is in your fingers, the picture is in your eye.
__________________
$100AUD Super Strat Build

Kasabian - Fire fan video/uni work. Watch it!

Jackson Dinky with TB-11 + SH-1 Pickups & Gotoh Floyd Rose
Washburn D10S
Dunlop 535Q Crybaby
Fulltone OCD
MXR 6 Band EQ
Laney VC15
Hayden 2x12
Diamond Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2014, 01:14 PM   #9867
Dave_Mc
Chirp and Swirl
 
Dave_Mc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Northern Ireland
Thanks very much for the very detailed answers

I think I pretty much understand what you're saying, so that's good

I've noticed bridge cameras... they seem to be sort of in-between point and click and slrs, right? good zoom lenses but you can't swap lenses, far as I can tell. They're a bit cheaper than slrs but again I'm kind of scared I'd kick myself to not go for the slr...

I noticed the 3300 has an ISO of up to 12800 whereas the 3200 only has up to 6400 (seems to also be that difference on the 5300 versus 5200)- does that make much difference? I'm always wary that when you know a little you tend to home in on the few specs you understand and maybe don't see the wood for the trees

Also LOL I asked this question in the chat thread in Guitar Gear and Accessories and they seemed to be saying the Canons were better on the entry level

Does where the thing is made matter that much? I noticed on Wikipedia that the dearer Nikons and Canons seemed to be made in Japan (that's rarely a bad thing but I have no idea how relevant it is for cameras, after all most consumer electronics stuff now isn't made in the west/japan), but the Nikons seem to be very dear before they're MIJ. The Canons seemed to be a bit cheaper in that respect (but not all the wikipedia camera model pages listed where the things are made so I couldn't get info on every single model).

I actually took a quick look into currys (electronics chain here) as I was out at a shopping centre- they only had a couple of entry level SLRs All they had were the 3200 and canon eos 100D and 1200D (IIRC). I probably should've asked one of the sales asistants to demonstrate but I didn't really have time.

Thanks again for your help.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemurflames
I had a Blackstar. I felt like I was lied to by Chappers, that fat ****.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc8995
Rob Chappers would tell you he couldn't tell a cat from a dog if it would get him more hits on youtube.


Dave_Mc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2014, 08:45 PM   #9868
Diamond Dave
1984
 
Diamond Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
I've noticed bridge cameras... they seem to be sort of in-between point and click and slrs, right? good zoom lenses but you can't swap lenses, far as I can tell. They're a bit cheaper than slrs but again I'm kind of scared I'd kick myself to not go for the slr...

yeah, to me you sound interested enough for it to definitely be worth going the whole hogg, I wouldn't worry about a "bridge" camera, they're really just point and shoots shaped like a DSLR.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
I noticed the 3300 has an ISO of up to 12800 whereas the 3200 only has up to 6400 (seems to also be that difference on the 5300 versus 5200)- does that make much difference? I'm always wary that when you know a little you tend to home in on the few specs you understand and maybe don't see the wood for the trees

if they were better cameras, maybe. The ISO number represents the sensitivity of the camera's sensor and is part of the "exposure triangle" balancing act that gives you photos that aren't too bright or too dark. The thing is though, on these entry level cameras you're not going to be able to use an ISO much higher than about 3200 or so anyway. The reason for that is as the sensor sensitivity goes up, it captures more noise to the point where your whole photo is riddled with grain and looks like shit.

so the fact that it goes higher is probably pretty insignificant, BUT it may suggest that its cleaner than the D3200 at the same ISO which might be worth checking out because that's definitely an advantage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
Also LOL I asked this question in the chat thread in Guitar Gear and Accessories and they seemed to be saying the Canons were better on the entry level

well its pretty suggestive really and changes a lot, a few years ago that was definitely true, but the D3100 and up saw a pretty big jump in image quality on the low end whereas the 1100D is pretty unremarkable. Its really the same argument as Strats vs Les Pauls. I will say however that I'm hardly an expert, I just did a loooot of reading all over the internet to try and make sure I didn't buy the "wrong" camera, but I came to the conclusion that it really didn't matter, you just have to pick a side and get started.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mc
Does where the thing is made matter that much? I noticed on Wikipedia that the dearer Nikons and Canons seemed to be made in Japan (that's rarely a bad thing but I have no idea how relevant it is for cameras, after all most consumer electronics stuff now isn't made in the west/japan), but the Nikons seem to be very dear before they're MIJ. The Canons seemed to be a bit cheaper in that respect (but not all the wikipedia camera model pages listed where the things are made so I couldn't get info on every single model).

well obviously they make the higher quality stuff in Japan, but your cheap camera isn't going to fall apart on you so I wouldn't worry about it.
__________________
$100AUD Super Strat Build

Kasabian - Fire fan video/uni work. Watch it!

Jackson Dinky with TB-11 + SH-1 Pickups & Gotoh Floyd Rose
Washburn D10S
Dunlop 535Q Crybaby
Fulltone OCD
MXR 6 Band EQ
Laney VC15
Hayden 2x12
Diamond Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2014, 10:35 AM   #9869
Dave_Mc
Chirp and Swirl
 
Dave_Mc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Northern Ireland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamond Dave
(a) yeah, to me you sound interested enough for it to definitely be worth going the whole hogg, I wouldn't worry about a "bridge" camera, they're really just point and shoots shaped like a DSLR.


(b) if they were better cameras, maybe. The ISO number represents the sensitivity of the camera's sensor and is part of the "exposure triangle" balancing act that gives you photos that aren't too bright or too dark. The thing is though, on these entry level cameras you're not going to be able to use an ISO much higher than about 3200 or so anyway. The reason for that is as the sensor sensitivity goes up, it captures more noise to the point where your whole photo is riddled with grain and looks like shit.

(c) so the fact that it goes higher is probably pretty insignificant, BUT it may suggest that its cleaner than the D3200 at the same ISO which might be worth checking out because that's definitely an advantage.


(d) well its pretty suggestive really and changes a lot, a few years ago that was definitely true, but the D3100 and up saw a pretty big jump in image quality on the low end whereas the 1100D is pretty unremarkable. (e) Its really the same argument as Strats vs Les Pauls. I will say however that I'm hardly an expert, I just did a loooot of reading all over the internet to try and make sure I didn't buy the "wrong" camera, but I came to the conclusion that it really didn't matter, you just have to pick a side and get started.


(f) well obviously they make the higher quality stuff in Japan, but your cheap camera isn't going to fall apart on you so I wouldn't worry about it.


(a) Thanks That's pretty much what I suspected- and they're dear enough that it's not that much more to get up to the entry level SLRs, so I suspect it makes more sense to go with an SLR.

(b) Thanks. Yeah, that's the answer I was getting in G G&A about the ISO as well.

(c) That's a good point. I'll bear that in mind, too.

(d) Yeah in G G&A they were saying that they wouldn't bother with the Canons without the "i" in the model designation (they're mostly in the USA so the model names are different ). I think the 1100D doesn't have the "i" in the American naming system, if I were to get a Canon (and decided not to pay extra to get above the entry level ones) it'd likely be the 100D, which they were saying was pretty good (it doesn't have an "i" either, but they were saying that's just a quirk of the way they're named ).

(e) Yeah that's sort of the feeling I'm getting too. I'm guessing that virtually any SLR will be a big step up from what I already have, and one of the better or more well-regarded entry level ones (either the nikon 3200 or 3300 or canon eos 100D) should be pretty decent, I haven't read much wrong about any of them, really. The only decisions are whether to go with nikon or canon, and whether it's worth paying a bit more to get to the higher end entry level ones/lower mid-range level ones. Or whether it'd be better to have an extra lens versus the slightly better camera with only the one lens.

(f) Thanks. Yeah that's nice to know

Thanks again for all your help.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemurflames
I had a Blackstar. I felt like I was lied to by Chappers, that fat ****.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc8995
Rob Chappers would tell you he couldn't tell a cat from a dog if it would get him more hits on youtube.



Last edited by Dave_Mc : 06-27-2014 at 10:37 AM.
Dave_Mc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2014, 11:53 AM   #9870
john_latchem
Isaac Vs UG
 
john_latchem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Basement
Hit a vintage car show on the weekend, static cars don't exactly make thrilling subjects, but there were a few photogenic motors there:








EDIT: uploaded the wrong version of the 2nd photo.
__________________
Watching: South Park
Playing: State of Decay
Reading: Dan Simmons - Olympos
Listening: Hopsin, Seth Sentry
PSN/XBL/facebook/Steam : Latchem72
Origin/Twitter: JLatchem72

Last edited by john_latchem : 07-08-2014 at 02:55 PM.
john_latchem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2014, 12:39 PM   #9871
johntomg93
Registered User
 
johntomg93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
I don't have any pictures but I do have a question. So my girlfriend is into photography I was wondering what a cool gift would be to get her for her camera. Something fairly inexpensive between $0-120. She already has a pretty nice camera, a stand and a case for it. Is there something creative I could do. Thanks for the help in advance.
johntomg93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2014, 06:28 PM   #9872
Kelvjy
Rocker
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bristol, UK
Johntomg93, Filter set ? Mini home studio ?

John_Latchem - Lovely E-Type and Porsche

__________________
Tumblr
Twitter
500px
Kelvjy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2014, 02:51 AM   #9873
ali.guitarkid7
A techno beat
 
ali.guitarkid7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lacrimosa soos a mal naaier
Quote:
Originally Posted by johntomg93
I don't have any pictures but I do have a question. So my girlfriend is into photography I was wondering what a cool gift would be to get her for her camera. Something fairly inexpensive between $0-120. She already has a pretty nice camera, a stand and a case for it. Is there something creative I could do. Thanks for the help in advance.

Maybe a custom leather case with something engraved?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickman411
We're all the best except for Ali.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadsmileyface
yeah russia is pretty shit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veronicuh
This is extremely serious.
ali.guitarkid7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2014, 03:13 AM   #9874
Diamond Dave
1984
 
Diamond Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by johntomg93
I don't have any pictures but I do have a question. So my girlfriend is into photography I was wondering what a cool gift would be to get her for her camera. Something fairly inexpensive between $0-120. She already has a pretty nice camera, a stand and a case for it. Is there something creative I could do. Thanks for the help in advance.

do you know much about her current setup?

there's definitely potential there to get a lens depending on what she has already. I would think most photographers would admit to loving any sort of new lens

and seeing as I'm here, like some other people around here recently I'm having a go with some film photography too. Using my Dad's old Pentax Spotmatic F, the meter doesn't work but this thing is pretty awesome. I know its cliche but I do love the way old stuff was made, everything just fits, clicks and turns beautifully.

does anyone have a favourite way of transferring film to a computer? I'm guessing negative scans would be the most effective way to do it.
__________________
$100AUD Super Strat Build

Kasabian - Fire fan video/uni work. Watch it!

Jackson Dinky with TB-11 + SH-1 Pickups & Gotoh Floyd Rose
Washburn D10S
Dunlop 535Q Crybaby
Fulltone OCD
MXR 6 Band EQ
Laney VC15
Hayden 2x12
Diamond Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2014, 11:15 AM   #9875
JustRooster
Organ Donor
 
JustRooster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
ISO 400 film in mid-day because screw the haters:


__________________

Roostyalcatraz

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spud Spudly
Heck I killed a grizzly with a telecaster. Tex-Mex pickups too. Imagine what I could have done with twang kings or something like that.

JustRooster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 01:54 AM   #9876
Diamond Dave
1984
 
Diamond Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Dad redoing the putty on some windows and wanted me to take photos:











full album: Windows Home Edition

its winter and overcast a lot here at the moment and because I dislike the flat colours I've turned into a full-blown black and white *****. I like it though.
__________________
$100AUD Super Strat Build

Kasabian - Fire fan video/uni work. Watch it!

Jackson Dinky with TB-11 + SH-1 Pickups & Gotoh Floyd Rose
Washburn D10S
Dunlop 535Q Crybaby
Fulltone OCD
MXR 6 Band EQ
Laney VC15
Hayden 2x12
Diamond Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:02 AM.

Forum Archives / About / Terms of Use / Advertise / Contact / Ultimate-Guitar.Com © 2014
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.