Archive for October, 2012

complexity rating _no_

You may and may not recall that I built a little optical theremin.

Basically, I’ve been trying to develop an electronic instrument project that could be built, in a workshop environment, at nwcMUSIC at Norwescon. It had to be really simple, but functional. And I can – what you can see in this picture totally works! It could be simplified further just by swapping those three resistors with one of similar value.

But the output is really, really quiet. Sure, I could – and did – add a matching impedance stage and hook it up to my amp, and that worked, but we can’t do that in a workshop.

So I wanted to add a pure amplification stage, using an amplifying transistor. I hooked all that up and: silence. After a few minutes, I realised that I was attempting to amplify a signal with a lower-power source than what I had to begin with. That won’t work.

And I could fix it, either by adding an impedence-matching voltage transformer (complexity rating no) or a second power stage, but it would take it well above my complexity limit for a one-hour workshop.

That won’t work either

So then I thought, “all these components are rated 40v, let’s just double the input power to 18v and see what happens.” And what happens is fire.

Or, at least, a surprisingly enthusiastic outbreak of magic blue smoke. And now nothing works, and now the little battery-powered air filter I built is running.

And that’s why there’s no DIY project today.

See you next week. XD

the same model as music: post-scarcity, part seven

The Motley Fool has discovered 3D printing. Hat tip for the pointer to L. S. McGill at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, who has already been talking about this, and has important extension commentary.

You can actually read L. S. McGill’s article and get the idea about Motley Fool’s commentary, tho’ I’d recommend listening to the analysis – at least, the first chunk, before you get into the extended David Gardener sales pitch. You’ll know when you get there.

One point the Motley Fool analysis makes is that the future of manufacturing is the same model as music and film. He calls it the destruction of the economies of scale, ending the advantages of factories, and moving manufacturing per se to the end user. He even talks about Star Trek‘s replicators.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt on “23rd century”: I presume food replicators

He further gets that there’ll be “legitimate” download sites for designs, ala iTunes, and alternate sites, such as Pirate Bay.

It kind of astounds me that the same analyst who can get that right, and make that parallel, is not actually able to take a look at what’s actually happening in those comparison businesses.

In particular, how we’re all scrambling to find viable business models that have nothing to do with recordings, and how to build a new recording model that actually pays something to artists, because there’s an entire generation that sees no value in paying for music. (To wit, parts one, two, three, four, five, and six. Parts one and two both talk about the disregard for purchasing music, the rest start to talk about new approaches.)

Regardless, though, it’s about trying to find a way to make a post-scarcity model work. But that seems invisible to this guy. Don’t get me wrong: I’m for this future. A post-scarcity model in manufacturing? Sign me the fuck up. But there are huge ramifications, and this guy doesn’t understand – or at least doesn’t talk about – the fallout.

It won’t be going for coffee.

The good news for us in creative industries is that music, art, maybe movies, certainly performance – all these have alternate paths, many of which we’ve talked about in parts three through six. Bryan Kim at Hipset also recently posted an article on crowd patronage, expanding on one particular method I discussed in part three.

But I think manufacturing will have an even harder time with this than musicians and artists. Product designers may not, but that’s going to be a much smaller chunk of economic input and activity, compared to the mass-manufacturing stage; we’ve seen that in the rust belt. Replication of physical product was never the high cost point of music – but he doesn’t seem to understand how problematic that makes his comparison.

What happens to all those people when factory jobs are mostly just gone? What happens with all the money they don’t make anymore?

The post-scarcity environment won’t look anything like our current economy. Just ask some of those musicians you’re referencing – and that’s the upside, for producers. Ask the American “rust belt” for the down.

Maybe it really will look like Star Trek, eventually. I sure hope so. I even kinda think so – or, at least, that it could – and that’ll be awesome. But you’ll see your financial world torn apart, on the way there. Be ready for that – or, at least, as ready as you can be. It’s a great destination, but one hell of a bumpy road.

This is Part Seven of Music in the Post-Scarcity Environment, a series of articles about, well, what it says on the tin. There are no barriers to availability now, and copying is free. What’s a musician to do now?

record archeology for the lulz

As most of you know, I run nwcMUSIC, a geekmusic festival held as part of the Norwescon science fiction convention. It’s new, this’ll be our third year.

We have concerts during the evening, but during the daytime, we have participatory programming, including an intentionally silly talent contest (Cascadia’s Got Talent, which is really Cascadia’s Got a Gong Show, and if you want to look up The Gong Show, go ahead, I’ll wait.)

Back? Good. Cascadia’s Got Talent actually gives out prizes! Terrible, terrible prizes. But I have a rule: we give junk as awards, not garbage. Anything given away has to be what it says it is, and has to work, even our terrible, terrible vacation tours to Beautiful Downtown Kent’s Historic Warehouse District.

(For the record: it’s a pair of Metro ride-free tickets. BUT IT WORKS.)

We usually end up giving away a couple of albums, too. The one I’ll never beat was Slim Whitman: Yodelling, but I’m pretty happy with this year’s finds so far:

Nothing says Dream Along like The Stars and Stripes Forever on Steel Drum

I think Musical Treasures of Holland speaks for itself. Still in shrink wrap! But Dream Away with the US Navy Steel Band is something special. Monophonic TRUE HIGH FIDELITY. And you’ll enjoy the monophonic recording even more played back on both speakers of a stereo unit!

On the back of the album, they printed the microphones used, tape deck used, record master etching lathe model, and crossover circuit specs.

It still sounds like it was recorded in a washroom, but that’s not important. I think I kinda love these guys. <3

The album is visually pristine. It’s also been played, a lot – somebody loved this album. Side 1 played fine, but side 2… side 2 wouldn’t track, on my turntable. The tonearm just kind of slid across, hopping from groove to groove.

At first, I was hugely disappointed, but then I started screwing with tracking and skating controls – putting more and different weights and skews on the turntable’s pickup arm, basically – and it would play for a bit, faintly.

And then the needle would clog. Now, if you’ve never used a turntable, they work this way: a tiny artificial diamond is attached, facing down, at the base of a very small rigid metal rod. This diamond rests in the etched grooves in the vinyl (or other material) album service. Changes in the width and height of the groove create vibrations in the small rigid metal rod, which are converted via very small magnets attached to the rod and the tonearm head into very small electrical currents, which form the analogue sound signal.

(So really, records recorded early enough – off live etching techniques – are literally captured soundwaves. Think about that, it’s awesome. But I digress.)

A modern turntable pickup “needle.” Originally? Actually needles.

A needle clogging refers to the gem and metal rod picking up so much cruft from the album being played that it gets lifted out of the sound channel and can’t pick up anything anymore.

I cleaned this album conventionally before putting it on the turntable. The surface looks pristine. The grooves were filled with gunk, somehow. Not in a visible way, but in a way enough to clog the turntable needle.

It may disturb you to know that I fixed it. Quadrupled the tracking weight, skew and antiskating boosted to unhealthy levels; it probably wouldn’t’ve worked as well in a stereo recording, but I managed to use the needle on my turntable to clean out the grooves.

Which, as it turned out, smelt of cigarette smoke. The album itself didn’t. The record sleeve smells fine. But the gunk coming out… kind of like cigarette smoke.


And only on one side! Side 1 was fine! I don’t get that part. Side 2… well, it took a lot of work. I was cleaning and clearing the needle four to six times every song, the first couple of times through.

Honestly, it felt like archeological excavation. It really did. Every time, I’d get a bit more sound. A faint fuzzy noise would slowly resolve into distinct instruments. New background instruments would appear. One track, I’m pretty sure, was recorded live; you can now just faintly hear what sounds like audience, in the background, a couple of times.

Or something that sounds like that, anyway.

And now? It plays fine. It still sounds like the classic Old Record – lots of crackle, tho’ not nearly so much as it originally had – but entirely listenable. It works now. And so, it’ll be a prize at nwcMUSIC’s Cascadia’s Got Talent.

All of which is a really long excuse to post this awesome graphic:


Originally on Retronaut

Have a good weekend, guys. See you Monday!

studio buildout part 7: Jeff Bohnhoff on room conditioning

Hey, DIYers! Today we have something special for you.

This series has always been about sharing information and people doing things. It’s part of the punk aesthetic, it’s part of particpatory culture, it’s part of maker culture, it’s part of the filk aesthetic – and a part I really like.

So I’m really pleased to feature this post by Jeff Bohnhoff, who will be writing about room conditioning. I’ll let Tony Fabris of the band Vixy & Tony introduce him for you, since he does such a good job of it:

Jeff and his wife Maya have been in rock and folk music all their lives, and have been producing record albums for more than 30 years, so they know a thing or two about both home studio and pro studio recording. Jeff works at Apple as part of the support team for their flagship pro audio recording product, “Logic,” so he knows a thing or two about audio recording software.

He’s produced dozens of amazing-sounding albums, both for himself and for others, so he knows how to get good sound. He also happens to be a brilliant parodist, and Jeff & Maya’s parody albums are characterized by hyper-accurate reconstructions of classic pop songs. He also taught me how to play guitar.

Now, without further ado: Jeff Bohnhoff.

The Sound of Your Studio
by Jeff Bohnhoff, Mystic Fig Studios

So, the topic du jour is acoustics. Specifically, the sound of your studio.

We recording engineers have a natural tendency to geek out over gear – whether we purchase it, make it, or improvise it from inexpensive bits and pieces. Gear is fun, and it’s an important part of making good recordings, but it’s only part of the picture, and not even the most important part.

In fact, better mics, preamps, etc. may lead to worse sounding recordings. “What?!” you say, “how can that possibly be? That Jeff, he’s CRAZY!” Well, okay, guilty as charged, but I stand by the statement. Here’s my reasoning:

When you put a microphone into a room and record something, the acoustic signature of the room is like a fingerprint that covers everything you record. It cannot be removed with any amount of EQ or processing – believe me, I’ve tried. Sound recorded in a bad room is like a white napkin handled by your mechanic after he’s swapped out the oil pan on a ’62 Rambler. The fingerprints are greasy, and will not wash out. Period.

The sad truth is, that your room probably sounds bad. Probably really bad. Most bedrooms, garages, dens, etc simply were not designed to be acoustically pleasing. With the availability of relatively inexpensive, good quality recording gear, this is the main difference between most home studios and commercial facilities. Good facilities have rooms that are designed from the ground up to sound good; everything from the dimensions of the room, the construction methods, to the materials and treatments on the floor, walls and ceiling are designed to eliminate room resonances, slap-back, bass build up, and so on.

So, assuming you are recording in your spare bedroom, why does using better gear – especially a better mic – often lead to worse sounding recordings? A better (i.e. more sensitive) mic “hears” more detail, and picks up more spatial information from the room it’s in. It’s typically more accurate, and does a better job of revealing everything about the source you’re recording and the room it’s in, flaws and all – sort of like the way your HD TV lets you see every pore and blemish on the face of your favorite reality star on Lifestyles of the Vacuous and Incredibly Boring.

Okay – we’ve established the problem, now what’s the solution? Unfortunately, there is no easy, complete solution or panacea. However, there are some practical steps you can take to improve things. First some ideas that involve no modification to the room:

  1. Understand the pick up patterns of your microphones and how positioning affects the sound.

    Most mics have a cardioid pattern. This means they are most sensitive directly in front of the mic, with lobes that extend part way around the back, and almost no pick up directly behind the mic. The shape somewhat resembles a heart, which is where the “cardio” in the word cardioid comes from.

    Cardioid pick up pattern. You’ll see this on many microphone spec sheets.

    The advantage of this pick up pattern is that it hears less of the room than most other patterns, and so can be more useful in challenging acoustical environments. The downside is that cardioid mics exhibit “proximity effect,” which a bass and low mid frequency emphasis when the source is closer to the mic.

    This can be a problem because many small rooms sound very congested and bassy to start with, so even though getting closer to the mic means the source ls louder relative to the room sound (taking the room more out of the sonic picture), the closer you get to the mic, the more low and low-mid cruft you have to deal with.

    Hypercardioid mics (not terribly common) pick up even less sound from the side (but slightly more directly from the rear), but exhibit an even stronger proximity effect than cardioid mics. Omnidirectional mics, as the name implies, pick up equally well in all directions. This means they “hear” the room very well. On the plus side, they have no proximity effect at all. Mics with a figure-8 pick up pattern hear from the from and back equally well, or close to it, with little or no pick up on either side. In my opinion, these are the hardest to use in a challenging room. They “hear” a lot of the room, and they exhibit a fairly strong proximity effect.

    The key here is to experiment with your mics, and find the best pattern and distance from the mic to minimize the problems with your room. This will vary from room to room, mic to mic and even song to song. You may find that singing a foot or more away from a cardioid mic works best for you, or perhaps singing a few inches from an omni mic will work better in other cases. Just remember that the closer you are to the mic, the more source and less room will be recorded. Likewise, the narrower the pick up pattern, the more source and less room, but getting too close may result in too much low mid and bass. Experiment!

  2. Understand your room.

    Rooms do not sound uniform at all positions. If you set your mics up, and just can’t get a sound you like, try other positions in the room. You just may find a location that sounds good, or at least better. If that means contorting yourself into the corner by the bookshelf while standing on one foot, well this is for art, buddy, so suck it up!

  3. Isolate yourself from the room.

    Get some heavy quilts or drapes and some mic stands, and make a tent. Set your mics up inside the tent. This will certainly not give a very lively sound, but it may be better than the sound of the room, and you can have a friend over and tell scary stories in your tent. My favorite is the one about the recording engineer with a hook for a hand, but I digress…

If you can’t tame your room with mic choice or positioning, then you may want to treat it, to make it sound better. This is a complex issue, and before I say anything more, I feel compelled to offer a huge disclaimer.

I am not an expert on this subject, and may well be full of crap. Debates on how to properly treat a room rage in many corners of the internet, among real, trained acoustic engineers, so-called experts, and people who have no idea what they’re talking about, but have access to a working keyboard and an internet connection. I make no pretense at being an acoustician, so I will not be offering pat solutions and miracle cures. Quite honestly, just raising awareness that this is an issue at all is my main goal here.

With all those caveats in mind, I would like to mention some of the issues that many rooms exhibit, and will offer some general ideas on how a home recording engineer might deal with them, and links to some resources for further, more authoritative, information. I’ll be looking at two basic strategies for dealing with acoustic problems: absorption and diffusion.

The principle of absorption is that you mechanically trap sound waves, usually with some sort of material that causes friction, and converts the energy of the sound wave into heat. Absorption is great if the room is just too live. You usually want to avoid overdoing it though, or your room will sound as dead as the annual Christmas party at the office of Q.R. Fishwell, CPA.

Bass absorption panels for Mystic Fig Studios, unmounted

Diffusion, on the other hand, works by breaking up the waveform and dispersing it non-linearly back into the room. This can deal with phase issues, room modes and comb filtering, without overly deadening the room. The downside is that diffusors are relatively expensive to buy, and are generally harder to build than absorbers.

As with absorbers, the lower the effective frequency you want to deal with with, the larger the diffusor needs to be. One of the common types you will see is a “skyline” diffusor. These use “wells” of various heights (based on prime number sequences) to break up waveforms. They are also known as “primitive root diffusors.”

This page has a calculator that lets you plug in a frequency range you want to control, and a number of columns and rows of wells, which are 2″ x 2″ wood, cut to various heights.

The calculator gives you a grid that shows what height each 2″ x 2″ block (in reality 1.5″ x 1.5″, because lumber and math apparently had a disagreement at some point in the past) should be in each position to diffuse the range of frequencies you entered into the formula.

This page has some images of diffusers built using this method. These things don’t take a huge amount of skill to build, but it’s a bit tedious and time consuming.

One possibly easy to get source of diffusion is bookshelves. (But they have to be full of books – you do read, don’t you?) It works especially well if the depths of the books are different, sort of a faux skyline diffusor. Place the shelves opposite the sound source for most effect.

Skyline diffusor

Let’s look at some of the problems a typical room might exhibit:

Bass buildup: Bass frequencies tend to collect in corners, and where the walls meet the ceiling and floor. It’s especially problematic in smaller rooms, because you just don’t have the space to get the mics or speakers all that far away from the corners and edges where the bass is being accentuated.

This problem can be treated with bass traps, which are treatments designed to absorb low frequencies. Here’s the thing: when it comes to bass, physics is working against us. Because bass frequencies are long, it takes a lot of thickness to properly absorb them. Most of the foam based treatments you can buy are pretty much useless below 250 Hz or so.

However, it’s not that hard to build some good bass traps yourself. I built a bunch for my studio using instructions from a video I found on Youtube. These traps use Corning 703 rigid fiberglass insulation as the basic material. You won’t find it at your local mega-lumber yard / home store. The best place is from a commercial insulation supplier. Chances are you won’t be the first studio or home theater DIY’er to darken their door, and they’ll be happy to help you.

Rigid fiberglass comes in 24″ by 48″ by 2″ sheets. Each trap uses two sheets, for a thickness of 4″. The fiberglass is laid over a frame built of 1″x 2″ pine that’s covered with a sheet of cheap fabric. You then cover the fiberglass with some nice fabric (something that tastefully matches your studio decor). You end up with something that sort of looks like a very firm mattress. I mounted mine straddling the joint where the ceiling meets the wall behind my monitors and straddling the joints from floor to ceiling in the room’s corners.

Bass traps at Mystic Fig Studios (click to enlarge)

Flutter echoes: These are “sproingy” metallic sounding echoes, especially noticeable with sounds that have sharp transients, like hand claps. These are generally caused by reflections between the floor and ceiling. The cure is to put some absorbers and/or diffusors on the ceiling.

One approach to absorbers would be to build something like the bass traps, but using Corning 701, which is less dense than the 703, and perhaps only using one 2″ sheet. Unless the flutter is really bad, you probably would aim to cover only 40-50% of the ceiling, in a checkerboard pattern. (I know they’re rectangles, but you get the picture.)

If you want to buy something, then the commercial studio foam from the usual suspects is pretty good for dealing with flutter echoes. Note that when I say foam, I don’t mean the stuff that keeps the shipment of vintage Superman comic books you just bought on eBay safe. Sound waves just laugh at that stuff as they pass effortlessly through it. If you have outfitted your studio walls with egg cartons, take 30 seconds to hang your head in shame, and then go immediately and take it down. Go ahead, I’ll wait…

My point is that if you use foam, there is simply no substitute for the stuff that is designed specifically for sound treatment. If you want to go the DIY route, then rigid fiberglass is your friend.

Excessive ambience: By this I mean general undesirable reverberation from the sound bouncing around the room in a broad range of frequencies. Unless your room is tiled, or has very dense wood paneling, this is probably not your main problem, but even a small room may have excessive amounts of bad reverberation – the kind that makes what you record sound boxy and indistinct.

A bit of absorption and/or diffusion on the walls is a cure for this. Again, homemade absorbers and/or diffusors as described above will probably take care of it, or if you like, some commercial studio foam.

Comb filtering: a hollow sound caused by some frequencies being canceled and others being emphasized as the sound bounces around a room. If you graph the frequency response, it shows closely spaced peaks and valleys, and looks like a comb.

Frequency buildup and cancellation in a comb-filtered pattern

Comb filtering was the bane of my audio life for years.

By necessity, I track vocals and acoustic instruments in an isolation booth. (I live on the flight path for a large airport, I’m only about 500 yards from a railroad line, there’s a busy road nearby, and I have neighbors who like to use lawnmowers and other loud tools at the most inconvenient times.) My booth does an excellent job of keeping all those external noises out of my recordings.

Unfortunately, it also has a very boxy, unpleasant acoustic signature, caused to a great extent by the comb filtering that results from non-random reflections causing narrow bands of frequency cancellation and emphasis. It’s impossible to fully deal with the frequency imbalance with EQ, because there are narrow peaks and valleys all up and down the spectrum. I have spent many happy hours playing “whack-a-mole” with comb filtered vocals recorded in that booth. As soon as I thought I had dealt with one problem frequency, another would pop up.

I have to confess that I never found a completely satisfactory DIY solution to this. Getting the room as dead as possible seemed to be the most effective solution for me. In a typical booth, diffusors are problematic, because effective ones eat up too much space. Finally, I ended up purchasing a set of eight stand-mounted tube traps, that flood the area with random reflections that completely eliminate the comb filtering. This is not a cheap solution by any means, but it really does work.

Room modes: based on the geometry of the room, it may resonate at certain frequencies. The smaller the room, the higher the frequencies tend to be, and therefore more apparent. Room modes are fairly predictable based on the dimensions of a given room. This site and this site both show how to calculate the modes for a room. Once you know what frequencies your room wants to reunite at, you can build absorbers and diffusors that cover that range.

Keep in mind that the above is a simplification. But if you take some basic steps to treat your recording space scientifically – i.e. not by gluing random stuff to your walls – you will certainly improve the quality of your recordings a lot.

Here are some links to information from people who know way more about this than I do:

Jeff Bohnhoff is a musician, audio engineer, and record producer from California. His and Maya Bohnhoff’s latest CD is Grated Hits; their albums can be purchased online at CD Baby. Follow them on Twitter or on Facebook.


This post is part of The DIY Studio Buildout Series, on building out a home recording studio.

the big thing

First: Wednesday’s DIY post is going to be special. We have a guest appearance by Pegasus-award-winner Jeff Bohnhoff, of Jeff and Maya Bohnhoff. Jeff has been performing for 30 years, and has recorded and engineered literally dozens of albums from the studio he built in California.

Jeff brings far more experience and theory to it than I have, but is still delivering an affordable approach to the topic. If you’re into DIY and home recording, you will want to read this column.

As for me; Anna and I are back from VCON! Being all the way out in Surrey, it was Far Far Away times this weekend – I mean, I had to take a bus to the Skytrain – but the hotel was nice, and we brought home the usual collection of books (via a Friday morning run into Vancouver proper), bagels (courtesy Geri, who drive two dozen out to us all the way from Kitsilano, omg thank you!) and cider! Yum.

Lots of kaiju programming this year, which we thoroughly enjoyed, and the El Rons were funny as usual. We had to leave too early to make the Turkey Readings, though! So sad. I love acting those out. Schedule those before Sunday afternoon next year, guys! Some of us have to catch trains. ;_;

There was an extended panel on the pulp aesthetic which talked I quite enjoyed as well; I have a theory now that a lot of what broke the Action Hero Scientist – alive in well in the 1930s, mostly dead by the early 1950s – was the Nazi movement and World War II. Seriously, I mean it; that whole Ubermench/superman thing was entirely the point, and I think they threw it out of fashion for decades.

Before you say Jonny Quest: Jonny Quest tried to square the circle. He had two dads (and no mom: exploitable), effectively; Race was the physical half of the adventurer, Dr. Quest (Sr.) was the scientist half, and Jonny, the child of both, was of an age where he wasn’t either yet, but had the potential to be both. It’s a nice finesse, and I think has a lot to do with why it works. (Despite all its very, very, many problems.)

(And before you say Superman qua Superman: I think Superman survived because he isn’t human. But even with that, he went from “super-evolved/optimised super-man,” the pinnacle of ubermench achievement, to, effectively, “otherworldly demigod.” It’s a different category.)


Strangely, I saw no music programming on the grid. At opening ceremonies, a couple of different people asked what was up with that, and it turns out that their music lead had had to drop out on short notice before the convention, as had a couple of their music pros, so: no filk! But they also said that spontaneous filk was welcome.

And since, as Anna put it, she “can’t take me anywhere,” I found VCON Programming Head after opening ceremonies. Her first words to me were, “NO MORE CHANGES,” so I said, “Just gimmie a room, whaddya got?” She hesitated until I added, “You don’t have to do anything. Just give me a room.”

So she did and I, um, kinda, fixed the hotel printer (you’re welcome, Sheraton Surrey) and Doctor Who-ed my way through VCON Ops for supplies. And that’s how there were eight hours of filk programming and notices and wayfinding signs, and if I’d had any of my own equipment around (or wanted to fight the hotel’s systems some more) there also would’ve been branding, because that’s the kind of shit I do.

Then I went back to the restaurant, finished dinner, and had dessert. Custard. It was lovely.

Actually, creme brulee. Not so different.

I have to admit, I love Doctor Whoing my way through an organisation. And I love that fannish organisations tend to make it easy. “Hi, I’m the Musician. I desperately need gaffers tape and a marker of substance. What’ve you got?” XD

Friday night was a bit thin and only ran two and a half hours, but Saturday filled the Cypress Room. Hopefully everyone had a good time – we were going until something like 1:30 so that’s certainly a good sign. I certainly did. (Overdid it a bit, to tell the truth – my voice on Sunday was a tad… gritty.)

Sadly, I missed the Battlestar Galactica fan club party! I got there literally 30 seconds before they closed. I wish I’d got up there earlier, guys! I honestly didn’t expect Saturday filk to run so late. Thanks for the cupcake, though; it was yummy. ^_^

Anyway, that’s what I did. I hope you had a good weekend, and tell anyone interested in studio DIY about Jeff Bohnhoff’s guest post on Wednesday; they’ll want to give it a look. See you next time!

Return top

The Music