• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Mackie CR3-X Powered Monitor Review ($100/pair)

hardisj

Major Contributor
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 18, 2019
Messages
2,907
Likes
13,641
Location
North Alabama
Full review at my site:
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/mackie_cr3x/

Mackie CR3-X Powered Monitor Review
  • Friday, May 14, 2021
1579173787_1532178.jpg



Foreword / YouTube Video Review
The review on this website is a brief overview and summary of the objective performance of this speaker. It is not intended to be a deep dive. Moreso, this is information for those who prefer “just the facts” and prefer to have the data without the filler.
However, for those who want more - a detailed explanation of the objective performance, and my subjective evaluation (what I heard, what I liked, etc.) - please watch the below video where I go more in-depth.



Information and Photos

Mackie’s CR3-X is a compact powered 2-way speaker featuring a 3-inch mid/woofer and 0.75-inch dome tweeter. At only $100/pair, they are one of the best-selling “budget” monitor speakers. They feature a stereo 1/8-inch input, Balanced TRS and Unbalanced RCA inputs. Unlike the PreSonus Eris E3.5, there are no adjustable low-frequency or high-frequency tonal balances available on these Mackie speakers. The below is from the manufacturer’s website:
CR-X monitors are designed to meet the needs of modern musicians, content creators, video production, and beyond. Stunning looks, studio-quality sound, and convenient features make these the best choice for anyone that wants professional sound without breaking the bank.​
MSRP is about $100 USD for a pair.
DSC01844.JPG


DSC01845.JPG





CTA-2034 (SPINORAMA) and Accompanying Data
All data collected using Klippel’s Near-Field Scanner. The Near-Field-Scanner 3D (NFS) offers a fully automated acoustic measurement of direct sound radiated from the source under test. The radiated sound is determined in any desired distance and angle in the 3D space outside the scanning surface. Directivity, sound power, SPL response and many more key figures are obtained for any kind of loudspeaker and audio system in near field applications (e.g. studio monitors, mobile devices) as well as far field applications (e.g. professional audio systems). Utilizing a minimum of measurement points, a comprehensive data set is generated containing the loudspeaker’s high resolution, free field sound radiation in the near and far field. For a detailed explanation of how the NFS works and the science behind it, please watch the below discussion with designer Christian Bellmann:


The reference plane in this test is the tweeter. A single RCA input was used and the volume was set to about 3/4 max. The port was open (not stuffed). All settings were at default (0; no HF or LF adjustments were made).
Measurements are provided in a format in accordance with the Standard Method of Measurement for In-Home Loudspeakers (ANSI/CTA-2034-A R-2020). For more information, please see this link.
CTA-2034 / SPINORAMA:
CEA-2034%20--%20Mackie%20CR3-X.png


Early Reflections Breakout:
Early%20Reflections.png


Estimated In-Room Response:
Estimated%20In-Room%20Response.png


Horizontal Frequency Response (0° to ±90°):
SPL%20Horizontal.png


Vertical Frequency Response (0° to ±40°):
SPL%20Vertical.png


Horizontal Contour Plot (not normalized):
Mackie%20CR3-X_Horizontal_Spectrogram_Full.png


Horizontal Contour Plot (normalized):
Mackie%20CR3-X%20Beamwidth_Horizontal.png


Vertical Contour Plot (not normalized):
Mackie%20CR3-X_Vertical_Spectrogram_Full.png


Vertical Contour Plot (normalized):
Mackie%20CR3-X%20Beamwidth_Vertical.png




Additional Measurements

On-Axis Response Linearity
Mackie%20CR3-X%20FR_Linearity.png

“Globe” Plots
These plots are generated from exporting the Klippel data to text files. I then process that data with my own MATLAB script to provide what you see. These are not part of any software packages and are unique to my tests.
Horizontal Polar (Globe) Plot:
This represents the sound field at 2 meters - above 200Hz - per the legend in the upper left.
Mackie%20CR3-X_360_Horizontal_Polar.png



Vertical Polar (Globe) Plot:
This represents the sound field at 2 meters - above 200Hz - per the legend in the upper left.
Mackie%20CR3-X_360_Horizontal_Polar.png



Harmonic Distortion
Harmonic Distortion at 86dB @ 1m:
Mackie%20CR3X%20--%20Harmonic%20Distortion%2086dB%20%40%201m.png


Harmonic Distortion at 96dB @ 1m:
Mackie%20CR3X%20--%20Harmonic%20Distortion%2096dB%20%40%201m.png


Near-Field Response
Nearfield response of individual drive units:
Mackie%20CRX3.5I%20--%20Nearfield%20%40%2015cm.png





Dynamic Range (Instantaneous Compression Test)

The below graphic indicates just how much SPL is lost (compression) or gained (enhancement; usually due to distortion) when the speaker is played at higher output volumes instantly via a 2.7 second logarithmic sine sweep referenced to 76dB at 1 meter. The signals are played consecutively without any additional stimulus applied. Then normalized against the 76dB result.
The tests are conducted in this fashion:
  1. 76dB at 1 meter (baseline; black)
  2. 86dB at 1 meter (red)
  3. 96dB at 1 meter (blue)
  4. 102dB at 1 meter (purple)
The purpose of this test is to illustrate how much (if at all) the output changes as a speaker’s components temperature increases (i.e., voice coils, crossover components) instantaneously.
Mackie%20CR3-X_Compression.png


Based on my results above, it is obvious the output is strictly limited. These are not designed to play with a lot of output and instead are best used as computer speakers at moderate volume levels.


Long Term Compression Tests

The below graphics indicate how much SPL is lost or gained in the long-term as a speaker plays at the same output level for 2 minutes, in intervals. Each graphic represents a different SPL: 86dB and 96dB both at 1 meter.
The purpose of this test is to illustrate how much (if at all) the output changes as a speaker’s components temperature increases (i.e., voice coils, crossover components).
The tests are conducted in this fashion:
  1. “Cold” logarithmic sine sweep (no stimulus applied beforehand)
  2. Multitone stimulus played at desired SPL/distance for 2 minutes; intended to represent music signal
  3. Interim logarithmic sine sweep (no stimulus applied beforehand) (Red in graphic)
  4. Multitone stimulus played at desired SPL/distance for 2 minutes; intended to represent music signal
  5. Final logarithmic sine sweep (no stimulus applied beforehand) (Blue in graphic)
The red and blue lines represent changes in the output compared to the initial “cold” test.
Mackie%20CR3-X_Long_Term_86_Compression.png

Mackie%20CR3-X_Long_Term_96_Compression.png








Parting / Random Thoughts

If you want to see the music I use for evaluating speakers subjectively, see my Spotify playlist.
  • Subjective listening varied between 0.50 to 2 meters. Subjective listening was conducted at 80-95dB at these distances. Higher volumes were done simply to test the output capability in case one wants to try to sit further away.

The CR3-X exhibits a “smiley face” or “v-curve” response with a peaky midbass around 100Hz and a very bright sounding treble. The midrange is very recessed and the enclosure is the source of strong resonances. Certainly not something I would consider useful in mixing or monitoring as the ideal response for those situations should obviously be an uncolored, neutral (flat) speaker response on-axis. Though, not as drastic as the response of the PreSonus Eris E3.5 I tested. You can view a comparison of their on-axis response below.
Mackie%20vs%20PreSonus.png

However, if you adjust the Eris E3.5’s tonal balance controls and port stuffing as I had recommended then this is the comparison:
Mackie%20vs%20PreSonus%20adjusted.png





You may be trying to choose between these speakers and the PreSonus Eris E3.5 I have also reviewed. My suggestion as to which to buy boils down to this:
  • No matter what speaker you buy STUFF THE PORT. It doesn’t help you get any lower. In fact, it only serves to provide a resonant bump ~ 100Hz and results in a steeper roll off.
  • If you don’t plan to adjust tonal balance knobs on the PreSonus then get the Mackie. Easy choice.
  • I think it is a coin toss between the Mackie CR3-X and the adjusted PreSonus E3.5. Though, I’d probably lean toward the Mackie as it still has a more neutral response (especially with the port stuffed).
  • If you are placing these near a wall the PreSonus’ tonal controls may prove useful enough (by lowering the boosted bass as you put the speaker near a wall) and make the decision to go that route easier. Though, I would recommend putting the tweeter axis above the listening position and even turned off axis; otherwise the treble is too much.
If you have DSP then make the adjustments to the E3.5 I recommended (port stuff, tonal knobs) and go with the PreSonus.


DSP Suggestions

If you have the means, I recommend using EQ to help flatten out the response and achieve a more neutral response, as a set of monitor speakers should provide. Doing so will help immensely and is necessary in my humble opinion. I have provided an example created via REW software’s auto-EQ program based on a standard miniDSP. It is provided in a screenshot below. If you need help understanding how to use this, I encourage you to check out NoAudiophile’s page here which also has other DSP suggestions for various speakers. It is a great resource for this type of thing.

Mackie%20CR3-X%20REW%20EQ.png




Support / Contribute
If you like what you see here and want to help me keep it going, please consider donating via PayPal here. Donations help me pay for new items to test, hardware, miscellaneous items and costs of the site’s server space and bandwidth. All of which I otherwise pay out of pocket. So, if you can help chip in a few bucks, know that it is very much appreciated. Alternatively, if you are interested in purchasing these speakers, please consider using my B&H affiliate link found on my site. It yields me a small commission at no additional cost to you and allows me to keep doing what I am doing.

You can also join my Facebook and YouTube pages if you would like to follow along with updates.
 
Last edited:

pierre

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
726
Likes
1,807
Location
Switzerland
Thanks @hardisj for the data.

Here is a simple EQ starting at 300hz (and ending at 16k):

The score is 2.3 and goes up to 4.7 with EQ. The freq response on axis is really bad but possibly works ok-ish at low volume.

First the EQ:
Code:
EQ for Mackie CR3-X computed from ErinsAudioCorner data
Preference Score 2.3 with EQ 4.7
Generated from http://github.com/pierreaubert/spinorama/generate_peqs.py v0.8
Dated: 2021-05-15-09:29:32

Preamp: -1.3 dB

Filter  1: ON PK Fc  4665 Hz Gain -5.06 dB Q 0.29
Filter  2: ON PK Fc  3805 Hz Gain +1.86 dB Q 1.11
Filter  3: ON PK Fc 11892 Hz Gain -3.36 dB Q 1.03
Filter  4: ON PK Fc  6707 Hz Gain +1.77 dB Q 2.88
Filter  5: ON PK Fc  4864 Hz Gain +1.23 dB Q 10.96
Filter  6: ON PK Fc  1209 Hz Gain +3.46 dB Q 4.97
Filter  7: ON PK Fc   544 Hz Gain +1.32 dB Q 1.13
Filter  8: ON PK Fc  1120 Hz Gain -1.40 dB Q 11.20
Filter  9: ON PK Fc  3738 Hz Gain -2.92 dB Q 12.00
Filter 10: ON PK Fc  3276 Hz Gain +1.39 dB Q 12.00
Filter 11: ON PK Fc  1902 Hz Gain -1.61 dB Q 12.00
Filter 12: ON PK Fc   825 Hz Gain +1.25 dB Q 8.24
Filter 13: ON PK Fc  7569 Hz Gain +0.40 dB Q 12.00
Filter 14: ON PK Fc 11486 Hz Gain -0.75 dB Q 0.53
Filter 15: ON PK Fc 10728 Hz Gain +1.63 dB Q 7.27
Filter 16: ON PK Fc  4985 Hz Gain +0.59 dB Q 3.01
Filter 17: ON PK Fc  1349 Hz Gain -0.89 dB Q 12.00
Filter 18: ON PK Fc  1669 Hz Gain +1.36 dB Q 12.00
Filter 19: ON PK Fc  7672 Hz Gain +0.69 dB Q 7.79
Filter 20: ON PK Fc  2665 Hz Gain -1.14 dB Q 12.00

filters0.png

filters2.png
filters1.png


All parameters of the score improve:
Code:
         SPK FLT
-----------------
NBD  ON 0.66 0.39
NBD  LW 0.55 0.29
NBD PIR 0.44 0.39
SM  PIR 0.21 0.85
SM   SP 0.54 0.90
LFX       67   64
LFQ     0.27 0.27
-----------------
Score    2.3  4.7
-----------------
 
Last edited:

Maiky76

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
346
Likes
2,674
Location
French, leaving in China
Full review at my site:
https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/mackie_cr3x/

Mackie CR3-X Powered Monitor Review
  • Friday, May 14, 2021
1579173787_1532178.jpg



Foreword / YouTube Video Review
The review on this website is a brief overview and summary of the objective performance of this speaker. It is not intended to be a deep dive. Moreso, this is information for those who prefer “just the facts” and prefer to have the data without the filler.
However, for those who want more - a detailed explanation of the objective performance, and my subjective evaluation (what I heard, what I liked, etc.) - please watch the below video where I go more in-depth.



Information and Photos

Mackie’s CR3-X is a compact powered 2-way speaker featuring a 3-inch mid/woofer and 0.75-inch dome tweeter. At only $100/pair, they are one of the best-selling “budget” monitor speakers. They feature a stereo 1/8-inch input, Balanced TRS and Unbalanced RCA inputs. Unlike the PreSonus Eris E3.5, there are no adjustable low-frequency or high-frequency tonal balances available on these Mackie speakers. The below is from the manufacturer’s website:
CR-X monitors are designed to meet the needs of modern musicians, content creators, video production, and beyond. Stunning looks, studio-quality sound, and convenient features make these the best choice for anyone that wants professional sound without breaking the bank.​
MSRP is about $100 USD for a pair.
DSC01844.JPG


DSC01845.JPG





CTA-2034 (SPINORAMA) and Accompanying Data
All data collected using Klippel’s Near-Field Scanner. The Near-Field-Scanner 3D (NFS) offers a fully automated acoustic measurement of direct sound radiated from the source under test. The radiated sound is determined in any desired distance and angle in the 3D space outside the scanning surface. Directivity, sound power, SPL response and many more key figures are obtained for any kind of loudspeaker and audio system in near field applications (e.g. studio monitors, mobile devices) as well as far field applications (e.g. professional audio systems). Utilizing a minimum of measurement points, a comprehensive data set is generated containing the loudspeaker’s high resolution, free field sound radiation in the near and far field. For a detailed explanation of how the NFS works and the science behind it, please watch the below discussion with designer Christian Bellmann:


The reference plane in this test is the tweeter. A single RCA input was used and the volume was set to about 3/4 max. The port was open (not stuffed). All settings were at default (0; no HF or LF adjustments were made).
Measurements are provided in a format in accordance with the Standard Method of Measurement for In-Home Loudspeakers (ANSI/CTA-2034-A R-2020). For more information, please see this link.
CTA-2034 / SPINORAMA:
CEA-2034%20--%20Mackie%20CR3-X.png


Early Reflections Breakout:
Early%20Reflections.png


Estimated In-Room Response:
Estimated%20In-Room%20Response.png


Horizontal Frequency Response (0° to ±90°):
SPL%20Horizontal.png


Vertical Frequency Response (0° to ±40°):
SPL%20Vertical.png


Horizontal Contour Plot (not normalized):
Mackie%20CR3-X_Horizontal_Spectrogram_Full.png


Horizontal Contour Plot (normalized):
Mackie%20CR3-X%20Beamwidth_Horizontal.png


Vertical Contour Plot (not normalized):
Mackie%20CR3-X_Vertical_Spectrogram_Full.png


Vertical Contour Plot (normalized):
Mackie%20CR3-X%20Beamwidth_Vertical.png




Additional Measurements

On-Axis Response Linearity
Mackie%20CR3-X%20FR_Linearity.png

“Globe” Plots
These plots are generated from exporting the Klippel data to text files. I then process that data with my own MATLAB script to provide what you see. These are not part of any software packages and are unique to my tests.
Horizontal Polar (Globe) Plot:
This represents the sound field at 2 meters - above 200Hz - per the legend in the upper left.
Mackie%20CR3-X_360_Horizontal_Polar.png



Vertical Polar (Globe) Plot:
This represents the sound field at 2 meters - above 200Hz - per the legend in the upper left.
Mackie%20CR3-X_360_Horizontal_Polar.png



Harmonic Distortion
Harmonic Distortion at 86dB @ 1m:
Mackie%20CR3X%20--%20Harmonic%20Distortion%2086dB%20%40%201m.png


Harmonic Distortion at 96dB @ 1m:
Mackie%20CR3X%20--%20Harmonic%20Distortion%2096dB%20%40%201m.png


Near-Field Response
Nearfield response of individual drive units:
Mackie%20CRX3.5I%20--%20Nearfield%20%40%2015cm.png





Dynamic Range (Instantaneous Compression Test)

The below graphic indicates just how much SPL is lost (compression) or gained (enhancement; usually due to distortion) when the speaker is played at higher output volumes instantly via a 2.7 second logarithmic sine sweep referenced to 76dB at 1 meter. The signals are played consecutively without any additional stimulus applied. Then normalized against the 76dB result.
The tests are conducted in this fashion:
  1. 76dB at 1 meter (baseline; black)
  2. 86dB at 1 meter (red)
  3. 96dB at 1 meter (blue)
  4. 102dB at 1 meter (purple)
The purpose of this test is to illustrate how much (if at all) the output changes as a speaker’s components temperature increases (i.e., voice coils, crossover components) instantaneously.
Mackie%20CR3-X_Compression.png


Based on my results above, it is obvious the output is strictly limited. These are not designed to play with a lot of output and instead are best used as computer speakers at moderate volume levels.


Long Term Compression Tests

The below graphics indicate how much SPL is lost or gained in the long-term as a speaker plays at the same output level for 2 minutes, in intervals. Each graphic represents a different SPL: 86dB and 96dB both at 1 meter.
The purpose of this test is to illustrate how much (if at all) the output changes as a speaker’s components temperature increases (i.e., voice coils, crossover components).
The tests are conducted in this fashion:
  1. “Cold” logarithmic sine sweep (no stimulus applied beforehand)
  2. Multitone stimulus played at desired SPL/distance for 2 minutes; intended to represent music signal
  3. Interim logarithmic sine sweep (no stimulus applied beforehand) (Red in graphic)
  4. Multitone stimulus played at desired SPL/distance for 2 minutes; intended to represent music signal
  5. Final logarithmic sine sweep (no stimulus applied beforehand) (Blue in graphic)
The red and blue lines represent changes in the output compared to the initial “cold” test.
Mackie%20CR3-X_Long_Term_86_Compression.png

Mackie%20CR3-X_Long_Term_96_Compression.png








Parting / Random Thoughts

If you want to see the music I use for evaluating speakers subjectively, see my Spotify playlist.
  • Subjective listening varied between 0.50 to 2 meters. Subjective listening was conducted at 80-95dB at these distances. Higher volumes were done simply to test the output capability in case one wants to try to sit further away.

The CR3-X exhibits a “smiley face” or “v-curve” response with a peaky midbass around 100Hz and a very bright sounding treble. The midrange is very recessed and the enclosure is the source of strong resonances. Certainly not something I would consider useful in mixing or monitoring as the ideal response for those situations should obviously be an uncolored, neutral (flat) speaker response on-axis. Though, not as drastic as the response of the PreSonus Eris E3.5 I tested. You can view a comparison of their on-axis response below.
Mackie%20vs%20PreSonus.png

However, if you adjust the Eris E3.5’s tonal balance controls and port stuffing as I had recommended then this is the comparison:
Mackie%20vs%20PreSonus%20adjusted.png





You may be trying to choose between these speakers and the PreSonus Eris E3.5 I have also reviewed. My suggestion as to which to buy boils down to this:
  • No matter what speaker you buy STUFF THE PORT. It doesn’t help you get any lower. In fact, it only serves to provide a resonant bump ~ 100Hz and results in a steeper roll off.
  • If you don’t plan to adjust tonal balance knobs on the PreSonus then get the Mackie. Easy choice.
  • I think it is a coin toss between the Mackie CR3-X and the adjusted PreSonus E3.5. Though, I’d probably lean toward the Mackie as it still has a more neutral response (especially with the port stuffed).
  • If you are placing these near a wall the PreSonus’ tonal controls may prove useful enough (by lowering the boosted bass as you put the speaker near a wall) and make the decision to go that route easier. Though, I would recommend putting the tweeter axis above the listening position and even turned off axis; otherwise the treble is too much.
If you have DSP then make the adjustments to the E3.5 I recommended (port stuff, tonal knobs) and go with the PreSonus.


DSP Suggestions

If you have the means, I recommend using EQ to help flatten out the response and achieve a more neutral response, as a set of monitor speakers should provide. Doing so will help immensely and is necessary in my humble opinion. I have provided an example created via REW software’s auto-EQ program based on a standard miniDSP. It is provided in a screenshot below. If you need help understanding how to use this, I encourage you to check out NoAudiophile’s page here which also has other DSP suggestions for various speakers. It is a great resource for this type of thing.

Mackie%20CR3-X%20REW%20EQ.png




Support / Contribute
If you like what you see here and want to help me keep it going, please consider donating via PayPal here. Donations help me pay for new items to test, hardware, miscellaneous items and costs of the site’s server space and bandwidth. All of which I otherwise pay out of pocket. So, if you can help chip in a few bucks, know that it is very much appreciated. Alternatively, if you are interested in purchasing these speakers, please consider using my B&H affiliate link found on my site. It yields me a small commission at no additional cost to you and allows me to keep doing what I am doing.

You can also join my Facebook and YouTube pages if you would like to follow along with updates.

Hi,

Here is my take on the EQ.

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:


Score no EQ: 2.2
With Sub: 5.0

Spinorama with no EQ:
  • Bad
Mackie CR3-X No EQ Spinorama.png

Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the top end.
Mackie CR3-X 2D surface Directivity Contour Only Data.png

Mackie CR3-X LW Better data.png

EQ design:
I have generated one EQ. The APO config file is attached.
  • The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
  • The second, labelled Erin is his EQ for comparison purpose
  • The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose, probably in the near field so no Score EQ this time (I checked it would be very close to the LW anyways)

Score EQ LW: 4.7 still mediocre
with sub: 7.5

Score EQ Erin: 4.0
with sub: 6.8

Code:
Mackie CR3-X APO EQ LW 96000Hz
May172021-171143

Preamp: -0 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 50.5 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.25
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 95.5 Hz Gain -2.72 dB Q 3.34
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 118 Hz Gain -7.32 dB Q 0.9
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 2111 Hz Gain -4.16 dB Q 1.1
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 3765 Hz Gain -3.58 dB Q 9.59
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 9080 Hz Gain -1.45 dB Q 4.59
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 11123 Hz Gain -4.15 dB Q 0.59
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 17119 Hz Gain -5.18 dB Q 1.97

Mackie CR3-X EQ Design.png


Spinorama EQ LW
Mackie CR3-X LW EQ Spinorama.png


Spinorama EQ Erin
Mackie CR3-X Erin EQ Spinorama.png


Zoom PIR-LW-ON
Mackie CR3-X Zoom.png


Regression - Tonal
Mackie CR3-X Regression - Tonal.png



The rest of the plots is attached.
 

Attachments

  • Mackie CR3-X APO EQ LW 96000Hz.txt
    444 bytes · Views: 46
  • Mackie CR3-X 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    Mackie CR3-X 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    254.5 KB · Views: 50
  • Mackie CR3-X 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    Mackie CR3-X 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    467.6 KB · Views: 87
  • Mackie CR3-X Normalized Directivity data.png
    Mackie CR3-X Normalized Directivity data.png
    463.5 KB · Views: 83
  • Mackie CR3-X Raw Directivity data.png
    Mackie CR3-X Raw Directivity data.png
    780.3 KB · Views: 90
  • Mackie CR3-X Reflexion data.png
    Mackie CR3-X Reflexion data.png
    237.5 KB · Views: 104
  • Mackie CR3-X LW data.png
    Mackie CR3-X LW data.png
    255.1 KB · Views: 119
Top Bottom