Dedicated hardware profile for audio in XP?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hello everyone,

Unfortunately, I now have to use the same computer for both internet access
and audio work.
So, I guess the logical solution is to create two different hardware
profiles in windows XP..or is it adequate just to create two different
"accounts" (audio and internet) for the same hardware profile?

I would like to have the internet access *completely* turned off when I'm
working, and free as much RAM as possible for audio apps and files when
using the audio profile/account. I've done some basic tuning menitoned in
the www.musicxp.net site, but since I'm not very familiar with windows'
inner workings, I'm a bit unsure about my "regedit/msconfig" actions.

Can you guys give me any pointers on how I should configure the two
different hardware profiles?
How do I setup my computer in a way that my internet connections are
completely disabled, but *only* when I'm using the audio work
profile/account?

Thanks for all the answers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Tommi M." wrote ...
> Unfortunately, I now have to use the same computer for both
> internet access and audio work.

OK. But what problem(s) are you encountering when you do this?

> So, I guess the logical solution is to create two different hardware
> profiles in windows XP..or is it adequate just to create two different
> "accounts" (audio and internet) for the same hardware profile?

Creating different profiles *may* have some value (although maybe
not worth the effort) Creating different accounts likely won't solve
any significant problems.

> I would like to have the internet access *completely* turned off when I'm
> working,

Use a profile to completely disable the network port, and unplug
the cable.

> and free as much RAM as possible for audio apps and files when using the
> audio profile/account.

I use a utility called "EndItAll" to kill off all those superfluous
background processes (including anti-virus) when I am using the
computer to record, but rarely find it necessary when just editing.

Of course, disabling firewall, anti-virus, etc software while connected
to the internet is NEVER advisable.

> I've done some basic tuning menitoned in the www.musicxp.net site, but
> since I'm not very familiar with windows' inner workings, I'm a bit unsure
> about my "regedit/msconfig" actions.

Are you chasing phantoms? I wouldn't "fix" anything I couldn't prove
was broken.

> Can you guys give me any pointers on how I should configure the two
> different hardware profiles?

It comes back to "what problems are you seeing"?

> How do I setup my computer in a way that my internet connections are
> completely disabled, but *only* when I'm using the audio work
> profile/account?

Completely disable any networking (all the way to the interface
hardware) in the "audio profile". Those who are using invasive
ISPs like AOL may find all sorts of insidious stuff installed all
over their system. Better to use an old junker computer for internet
access and save your good system for real work.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <cptm91$c5b$1@phys-news1.kolumbus.fi> tomppaaREMOvE@kolumbus.fi writes:

> Unfortunately, I now have to use the same computer for both internet access
> and audio work.

Why? You can get a whole computer for $300 and a keyboard/mouse/video
switch for $20. Is your audio not worth a $300 investment?

> So, I guess the logical solution is to create two different hardware
> profiles in windows XP..or is it adequate just to create two different
> "accounts" (audio and internet) for the same hardware profile?

This seems like it would be such a logical solution, but I really
don't know how much true separation you get by doing this. Hardware
profiles only choose which drivers are active, and that really only
makes a difference if there's a confilct. I don't know that it
actually improves performance by not having a driver loaded, other
than perhaps a bit of memory saved. I'd be curious to hear if there's
any real data or valid facts about this.

> I would like to have the internet access *completely* turned off when I'm
> working

You might try installing Zone Alarm, even the free version. That has
an icon on the task bar from which you can pop up a menu with the
choice "Stop all Internet activity" which they recommend when you're
away from your computer. Perhaps that will do what you want, though
the program of course is still active, shutting the door to whatever
is trying to get in. Some people don't like Zone Alarm because
apparently it's difficult to completely de-install. I don't know. I
installed it and don't see any reason to get rid of it.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>
>> I would like to have the internet access *completely* turned off when I'm
>> working
>
>You might try installing Zone Alarm, even the free version.

Even easier would be to unplug the ethernet adapter going to your
cable or dsl modem while recording.I would be willing to bet nobody
could infiltrate your session if the cable is unplugged.

Randall

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Randall Shawver" <rshawve2@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:d106s09hc03ivop0uq3lt9qh1tq093t27t@4ax.com...
>
> >
> >> I would like to have the internet access *completely* turned off when I'm
> >> working
> >
> >You might try installing Zone Alarm, even the free version.
>
> Even easier would be to unplug the ethernet adapter going to your
> cable or dsl modem while recording.I would be willing to bet nobody
> could infiltrate your session if the cable is unplugged.
>
> Randall


Zone Alarm will remain active (and continue logging, if chosen) any
time the PC boots, even if "Block All Internet Activity" is selected.

Unplugging a wire will also not stop the software and hardware from
being active.

Buy a dedicated PC... as Mr. Rivers mentioned, it's *cheap* these days.

DM

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <10s617lhus3vtd5@corp.supernews.com> rcrowley7@xprt.net writes:

> > Unfortunately, I now have to use the same computer for both
> > internet access and audio work.
>
> OK. But what problem(s) are you encountering when you do this?

I'm not the one who asked the question, but I can certainly understand
the risks, most of which are brought on by yourself - because of the
ease, it's tempting to download and install some software that might
conflict with the DAW's smooth working. It's also easier to get a
virus when you're connected. But those things can be avoided mostly by
self-control. If you restrict your Internet activities to downloading
upgrades to your installed software and exchanging audio files, you're
probalby safe.

I don't believe that just by being connected, stuff can creep in by
itslef, but I'm told that it can happen - primarily as a result of
having software installed that attracts the nasties.

> Use a profile to completely disable the network port, and unplug
> the cable.

In my case, I wouldn't want to disable the network port because I'd
want my HDR24/96 to be able to talk to the computer and it's on the
same router as the Internet service. I suppose I could install a
second network card just for the Internet, but then I wouldn't be able
to access the HDR from any computer on the network (not that I would
need to, but it's a potential issue).

> Completely disable any networking (all the way to the interface
> hardware) in the "audio profile". Those who are using invasive
> ISPs like AOL may find all sorts of insidious stuff installed all
> over their system. Better to use an old junker computer for internet
> access and save your good system for real work.

I agree. So what would my network topology be if I wanted the studio
computer to be able to talk to the junker that's connected to the
Internet full time, but that wouldn't connect the studio computer to
the Internet? That way, I could download stuff to the junk computer,
then transfer it over the internal network to the studio computer.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1103291094k@trad...
>
> In article <cptm91$c5b$1@phys-news1.kolumbus.fi> tomppaaREMOvE@kolumbus.fi
> writes:
>
>> Unfortunately, I now have to use the same computer for both internet
>> access
>> and audio work.
>
> Why? You can get a whole computer for $300 and a keyboard/mouse/video
> switch for $20. Is your audio not worth a $300 investment?

Of course it is, but this is the situation I'm facing currently.

>> So, I guess the logical solution is to create two different hardware
>> profiles in windows XP..or is it adequate just to create two different
>> "accounts" (audio and internet) for the same hardware profile?
>
> This seems like it would be such a logical solution, but I really
> don't know how much true separation you get by doing this. Hardware
> profiles only choose which drivers are active, and that really only
> makes a difference if there's a confilct. I don't know that it
> actually improves performance by not having a driver loaded, other
> than perhaps a bit of memory saved. I'd be curious to hear if there's
> any real data or valid facts about this.

>> I would like to have the internet access *completely* turned off when I'm
>> working

> You might try installing Zone Alarm, even the free version. That has
> an icon on the task bar from which you can pop up a menu with the
> choice "Stop all Internet activity" which they recommend when you're
> away from your computer. Perhaps that will do what you want, though
> the program of course is still active, shutting the door to whatever
> is trying to get in. Some people don't like Zone Alarm because
> apparently it's difficult to completely de-install. I don't know. I
> installed it and don't see any reason to get rid of it.

I have the free Zone alarm, but the point is, provided that I use Zone alrm
to fulfill the desired task, that I want it to be always "on" for the web
profile, and always "off" (internet locked) when using the computer for
audio work. There isn't an option in Zone Alarm which would allow me to
"stop all internet access" automatically on startup for audio profile, but
at the same time let the secured programs freely to the net when using the
internet profile/account.

My intentions are:

- to free as much RAM as possible for my audio applications, which is
achieved by
turning off all unnecessary web/whatever services that run in the background
etc.

-To disable the whole internet connection but only for the audio
profile/account from windows.

The computer is stored in a place which makes unplugging the ethernet cable
too much of a hassle, the goal is to configure this by software settings.
Even if it was easy to unplug the cable, that'd leave room for
forgetfulness...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 17 Dec 2004 23:45:09 -0500, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers)
wrote:

Two great questions (that have also been puzzling me for a while):


>I don't believe that just by being connected, stuff can creep in by
>itself

And:

> So what would my network topology be if I wanted the studio
>computer to be able to talk to the junker that's connected to the
>Internet full time, but that wouldn't connect the studio computer to
>the Internet? That way, I could download stuff to the junk computer,
>then transfer it over the internal network to the studio computer.

Great questions, well framed, and could I add another?

Are various Windows versions variously fragile?

Thanks much,

Chris Hornbeck

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Chris Hornbeck wrote:
> On 17 Dec 2004 23:45:09 -0500, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers)
> wrote:
>
> Two great questions (that have also been puzzling me for a while):
>
>
>
>>I don't believe that just by being connected, stuff can creep in by
>>itself

Maybe. Nothing can "creep in by itself", the real question is how
little of your help does it need?


> And:
>
>
>>So what would my network topology be if I wanted the studio
>>computer to be able to talk to the junker that's connected to the
>>Internet full time, but that wouldn't connect the studio computer to
>>the Internet? That way, I could download stuff to the junk computer,
>>then transfer it over the internal network to the studio computer.


Some routers let you isolate blocks of IP addresses. Note, though, that
a virus on your internet machine may affect other machines.


> Great questions, well framed, and could I add another?
>
> Are various Windows versions variously fragile?


I think even Microsoft acknowledges that ME was pretty bad.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Tommi M. (tomppaaREMOvE@kolumbus.fi)
in article <cptm91$c5b$1@phys-news1.kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> Unfortunately, I now have to use the same computer for both internet access
> and audio work.

XP can dual boot out of the box.
Some 3rd party options are:
BootMagic (via Partition Magic)
System Commander

There are ample online resources for this sort of approach.
I recommmend using at least two physical drives (os + data...).
I've been satisfied with System Commander for years.

In addition, Norton Ghost can be a very, very useful utility, regardless
of which approach you take to solve your stated problem. I never boot
without it.

Regards,
-Brian

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <cpvv7t$s51$1@phys-news1.kolumbus.fi> tomppaaREMOvE@kolumbus.fi writes:

> I have the free Zone alarm, but the point is, provided that I use Zone alrm
> to fulfill the desired task, that I want it to be always "on" for the web
> profile, and always "off" (internet locked) when using the computer for
> audio work. There isn't an option in Zone Alarm which would allow me to
> "stop all internet access" automatically on startup for audio profile, but
> at the same time let the secured programs freely to the net when using the
> internet profile/account.

So you do what God gave you a mouse for - you click on the button and
turn off Internet traffic when you're using the computer for audio.
Or, if you don't need the Ethernet port for anything while you're
using it as an audio computer, you turn that off in the Audio profile.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Brian Takei" <btakei@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:MPG.1c2d76d2daacf6d99897e1@news.chi.sbcglobal.net...
> Tommi M. (tomppaaREMOvE@kolumbus.fi)
> in article <cptm91$c5b$1@phys-news1.kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> > Unfortunately, I now have to use the same computer for both internet access
> > and audio work.
>
> XP can dual boot out of the box.
> Some 3rd party options are:
> BootMagic (via Partition Magic)
> System Commander
>
> There are ample online resources for this sort of approach.
> I recommmend using at least two physical drives (os + data...).
> I've been satisfied with System Commander for years.
>
> In addition, Norton Ghost can be a very, very useful utility, regardless
> of which approach you take to solve your stated problem. I never boot
> without it.
>
> Regards,
> -Brian


Dual booting sounds like the cure.... but I've been scared to death
by the invasiveness of some of the Norton stuff.

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http/www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http/www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>
>
>Dual booting sounds like the cure.... but I've been scared to death
>by the invasiveness of some of the Norton stuff.

Norton and Mcafee products sometimes do not get along.I have seen
cases when using both, that a pc will go to the blue screen after
installing Mcafee when Norton internet securities is already
installed, or refuse to boot at all.It is rare, but can happen.

Keep in mind that Windows XP service pack 2 installs a windows
firewall, which you can access through control panel/security center/
windows firewall.

I have been working in tech support for a while now, and service pack
2 has caused more problems than it has resolved, especially for
internet applications. It also disables ethernet cards on occasion,
and disables some of the necessary local services in administrative
tools.If using XP ,stay away from service pack 2, if possible.

Randall

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <it98s016t00b1uoh4975lcn4fu77ne9pov@4ax.com> rshawve2@tampabay.rr.com writes:

> I have been working in tech support for a while now, and service pack
> 2 has caused more problems than it has resolved, especially for
> internet applications. It also disables ethernet cards on occasion,
> and disables some of the necessary local services in administrative
> tools.

This may be what you're describing. I've heard that SP2 improves
security by turning off things that have become necessary for the
smooth Internet expeience to which we have become accustomed. But then
security is a necessary inconvenience.

I prefer my inconvenience to be not visiting porn web sites, not
intentionally installing spyware or turning on features that "phone
home" and not opening e-mail that's obviously not relevant to me. I
check my system periodically and have never found a virus.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Randall Shawver (rshawve2@tampabay.rr.com)
in article <it98s016t00b1uoh4975lcn4fu77ne9pov@4ax.com> wrote:
>
> David Morgan wrote:
> >Dual booting sounds like the cure.... but I've been scared to death
> >by the invasiveness of some of the Norton stuff.
>
> Norton and Mcafee products sometimes do not get along.I have seen
> cases when using both, that a pc will go to the blue screen after
> installing Mcafee when Norton internet securities is already
> installed, or refuse to boot at all.It is rare, but can happen.

I'd be scared to install Norton Internet Security too (but if I ever
decided to, I would definitely Ghost the system first).

Ghost is a product in a totally different ballpark. In essence, it is a
dos* utility designed to do 1 thing, and it does it very well. Ok, 2
things: backup AND restore whole partitions or drives (aka. 'imaging').
It can run directly from a bootable floppy.

And it's fast -- on my DAW (2ghz p4), just now it took 17 minutes to make
a backup image of my largest system partition (ntfs), packing 9 gig of
'used' space into about 5 gig of image files.

So, just for kicks, I could spend the rest of the day experimenting with
what happens when I delete random DLL files and registry keys, and maybe
even go hogwild and install Norton Internet Security. Then, I could boot
from a floppy and start the restore process, go downstairs for a
sandwich/beer, then come back to a system that is exactly the way it is
right now. No kidding.

-Brian

* p.s. I currently use Ghost 2003, but the latest version apparently
also has fancy stuff like a "Hot imaging" app that runs in the background
in Windows, so you might do some due diligence before installing/using
the fancy stuff. But to be honest, I'd be more worried about not having
Ghost (or some reliable imaging utility), than what this new fancy stuff
does.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <MPG.1c2e4cc86665c0749897e3@news.chi.sbcglobal.net> btakei@sbcglobal.net writes:

> Ghost is a product in a totally different ballpark. In essence, it is a
> dos* utility designed to do 1 thing, and it does it very well. Ok, 2
> things: backup AND restore whole partitions or drives (aka. 'imaging').
> It can run directly from a bootable floppy.

What do you "ghost" to when your system is fairly large? Another hard
disk installed in the computer? That could be a handful of DVDs, or a
whole stack of CDs.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Brian Takei" <btakei@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:MPG.1c2e4cc86665c0749897e3@news.chi.sbcglobal.net...
> Randall Shawver (rshawve2@tampabay.rr.com)
> in article <it98s016t00b1uoh4975lcn4fu77ne9pov@4ax.com> wrote:
> >
> > David Morgan wrote:
> > >Dual booting sounds like the cure.... but I've been scared to death
> > >by the invasiveness of some of the Norton stuff.
> >
> > Norton and Mcafee products sometimes do not get along.I have seen
> > cases when using both, that a pc will go to the blue screen after
> > installing Mcafee when Norton internet securities is already
> > installed, or refuse to boot at all.It is rare, but can happen.
>
> I'd be scared to install Norton Internet Security too (but if I ever
> decided to, I would definitely Ghost the system first).
>
> Ghost is a product in a totally different ballpark. In essence, it is a
> dos* utility designed to do 1 thing, and it does it very well. Ok, 2
> things: backup AND restore whole partitions or drives (aka. 'imaging').
> It can run directly from a bootable floppy.

Ghost is probably the worst of all. It won't allow you to make changes
and virtually cannot be turned off or removed without serious registry
editing. I wish you luck... not in restoring anything, but in attampting to
streamline your OS while it's in place.

DM

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
> "Brian Takei" <btakei@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:MPG.1c2e4cc86665c0749897e3@news.chi.sbcglobal.net...
>
>
>> Ghost is a product in a totally different ballpark. In essence, it is a
>> dos* utility designed to do 1 thing, and it does it very well. Ok, 2
>> things: backup AND restore whole partitions or drives (aka. 'imaging').
>> It can run directly from a bootable floppy.
>
>
> Ghost is probably the worst of all. It won't allow you to make changes
> and virtually cannot be turned off or removed without serious registry
> editing. I wish you luck... not in restoring anything, but in attampting to
> streamline your OS while it's in place.


That depends completely on how you use it. Install on a spare workstation somewhere, create a bootable CD-ROM with the DOS app and appropriate LAN drivers and you've got a pretty useful tool.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"David Morgan \(MAMS\)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> ("David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
<mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com>)
in article <rn4xd.1867$hc7.867@trnddc06> wrote:
>
> "Kurt Albershardt" <kurt@nv.net> wrote in message news:32jt2qF3nl57tU2@individual.net...
> > David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
> > >
> > > Ghost is probably the worst of all. It won't allow you to make changes
> > > and virtually cannot be turned off or removed without serious registry
> > > editing. I wish you luck... not in restoring anything, but in attampting to
> > > streamline your OS while it's in place.
> >
> > That depends completely on how you use it. Install on a spare workstation
> > somewhere, create a bootable CD-ROM with the DOS app and appropriate
> > LAN drivers and you've got a pretty useful tool.
>
> True enough... though my exposure was in trying to install a couple of audio apps
> on a friend's PC who had an entire Norton suite installed and running.

<snip>

> I guess I just have a bad taste in my mouth since the very first time I installed
> it on a surfing box and watched how badly it slowed down my system - through
> to incidents like the one above.


David, were these problems you experienced attributable to Ghost?
If so, which version?

-Brian

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Brian Takei" <btakei@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:MPG.1c2e939dc15a667f9897e4@news.chi.sbcglobal.net...
> "David Morgan \(MAMS\)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> ("David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
> <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com>)
> in article <rn4xd.1867$hc7.867@trnddc06> wrote:
> >
> > "Kurt Albershardt" <kurt@nv.net> wrote in message news:32jt2qF3nl57tU2@individual.net...
> > > David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Ghost is probably the worst of all. It won't allow you to make changes
> > > > and virtually cannot be turned off or removed without serious registry
> > > > editing. I wish you luck... not in restoring anything, but in attampting to
> > > > streamline your OS while it's in place.
> > >
> > > That depends completely on how you use it. Install on a spare workstation
> > > somewhere, create a bootable CD-ROM with the DOS app and appropriate
> > > LAN drivers and you've got a pretty useful tool.
> >
> > True enough... though my exposure was in trying to install a couple of audio apps
> > on a friend's PC who had an entire Norton suite installed and running.
>
> <snip>
>
> > I guess I just have a bad taste in my mouth since the very first time I installed
> > it on a surfing box and watched how badly it slowed down my system - through
> > to incidents like the one above.
>
>
> David, were these problems you experienced attributable to Ghost?
> If so, which version?
>
> -Brian

From the portion you quoted, no... they weren't. I just took offense at the
invasiveness and burden the A/V protection imparted on my first PC used
for surfing. (8 Years ago?)

Ghost was the culprit I ran into on a friend's PC, which seemed to take a
picture of the OS and re-start it with that same configuration regardless of
what we attempted to disable or remove in the prior boot. Since we simply
gave up on optimizing for audio, we never got deep enough to start ripping
through the registry.... and again, this was about three years back.

He had so many anti-virus peripheral applications and OEM 'system tools'
installed that the two biggest problems were "Go-Back" and "Ghost". **I could
actually be confusing the two.** The end result was to simply let the system
be, due to the problems caused by OEM tools, and make it strictly a 'fun' box
as far as audio was concerned.

I wanted to wipe out the whole darned thing and start over, but he had purchased
the box with a great deal of software included that he had lost the install discs for
and perhaps had a pice or two that he <cough-cough> could not replace at all
which would have left some of his more valuable files orphaned after restoring
any back-ups.

Just another reason or two that I recommended a second box to dedicate
to audio, or a dual boot approach. I hope I didn't mislead with the reference
to Ghost when the more serious problem may have been "Go Back". I just
don't use anything but the OS tools and never have problems which I can't
repair.

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http/www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http/www.artisan-recordingstudio.com