Chris Smalt wrote:

Andrew wrote:

I am talking about straight playback in a program like peak or wavelab
with no processing.

These programs also have a playback engine with a sound of its own.

What do these playback engines do to the samples sent them
that gives them a characteristic sound?


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Chris Smalt wrote:

Andrew wrote:

I am talking about straight playback in a program like peak or wavelab
with no processing.

These programs also have a playback engine with a sound of its own.

What do these playback engines do to the samples sent them
that gives them a characteristic sound?


Bob BRBR

Nothing. They all generate the same string of numbers to a converter.

Except of course for Pro Tools, which uses a secretl algorithm to make
everything sound thin and collapse the stereo image.

Carry on.

-R

What do these playback engines do to the samples sent them
that gives them a characteristic sound?

Nothing. They all generate the same string of numbers to a converter.


That's one way they might do it. Some have a playback volume slider.
Is that processing disabled when set to 0? Is dither being applied all
the time? Never? Or only when the fader isn't at 0? Or does the user
have to specify whether dither is on or off? Is the user aware of this?
And the list goes on.


Chris

snip

Human p[erception is a funny thing. How about that green flash in Hawaii
that
occurs at the instant of sunset?

But by all means, worship at the church or temple of your choice.

-R

Don't know about Pro Tools vs. Nuendo (still mixing analog here), but that
green flash is real! It's got nothing to do with Hawaii, though. I saw it
many times at sea in the Navy, and occasionally from the beach in San Diego.

Jeff Maher
Garage Mahal Recording
Austin, Texas

That's one way they might do it. Some have a playback volume slider.
Is that processing disabled when set to 0? Is dither being applied all
the time? Never? Or only when the fader isn't at 0? Or does the user
have to specify whether dither is on or off? Is the user aware of this?
And the list goes on.

The list of what? Things that may or may not be going on in a DAW? Well you
can imagine anything you want and postulate any number of things. But get
real, if you're not changing the amplitude of a signal why would there be any
processing? What on earth would it be? Multiplying by 1? It's not like
you're running through analog electronics that will color the sound whether
you're using them or not.

And we're not talking about using faders or adding dither anyway. The question
pertains to whether a given DAW just can't accurately record and spit back a
string of numbers. I'm a longtime user of Protools and have tested and
discussed this to death and know beyond the shadow of a doubt that Pro Tools
will accurately spit back the bits that it records. If someone's Nuendo system
can't, then I'm guessing it's broken.

You know, this is pretty much the basic skill set for any DAW.

-R

(R Krizman)
someone said but that
green flash is real! It's got nothing to do with Hawaii, though. I saw it
many times at sea in the Navy, and occasionally from the beach in San Diego.

I saw it too, and it was obvious to me what caused it.

And that subject's being covered a couple of threads away...



Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Fox And Friends/Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

R Krizman wrote:
That's one way they might do it. Some have a playback volume slider.
Is that processing disabled when set to 0? Is dither being applied all
the time? Never? Or only when the fader isn't at 0? Or does the user
have to specify whether dither is on or off? Is the user aware of this?
And the list goes on.

The list of what? Things that may or may not be going on in a DAW? Well you
can imagine anything you want and postulate any number of things. But get
real, if you're not changing the amplitude of a signal why would there be any
processing? What on earth would it be? Multiplying by 1? It's not like
you're running through analog electronics that will color the sound whether
you're using them or not.

And we're not talking about using faders or adding dither anyway. The question
pertains to whether a given DAW just can't accurately record and spit back a
string of numbers. I'm a longtime user of Protools and have tested and
discussed this to death and know beyond the shadow of a doubt that Pro Tools
will accurately spit back the bits that it records. If someone's Nuendo system
can't, then I'm guessing it's broken.

I thought the question was whether ProTools can record to a file without
coloring the sound. (or Nuendo but the question "was why does nuendo
sound better" at the beginning of this thread?

If you find this thread boring or annoying then why not move on to
another one?

You know, this is pretty much the basic skill set for any DAW.

-R

RickK wrote:

That's one way they might do it. Some have a playback volume slider.
Is that processing disabled when set to 0? Is dither being applied all
the time? Never? Or only when the fader isn't at 0? Or does the user
have to specify whether dither is on or off? Is the user aware of this?
And the list goes on.

The list of what? Things that may or may not be going on in a DAW? Well you
can imagine anything you want and postulate any number of things. But get
real, if you're not changing the amplitude of a signal why would there be any
processing? What on earth would it be? Multiplying by 1? It's not like
you're running through analog electronics that will color the sound whether
you're using them or not.

And we're not talking about using faders or adding dither anyway. The
question
pertains to whether a given DAW just can't accurately record and spit back a
string of numbers. I'm a longtime user of Protools and have tested and
discussed this to death and know beyond the shadow of a doubt that Pro Tools
will accurately spit back the bits that it records. If someone's Nuendo
system
can't, then I'm guessing it's broken.

You know, this is pretty much the basic skill set for any DAW.

-R



I just transferred all this stuff to an HD rig to mix & I think you got
blinders on dewd. I know which files were tracked in PT and which with Nuendo.
I like 'em both but I could tell they were'nt the same & just because you claim
it ain't so....it ain't so.



My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

I thought the question was whether ProTools can record to a file without
coloring the sound. (or Nuendo but the question "was why does nuendo
sound better" at the beginning of this thread?

If you find this thread boring or annoying then why not move on to
another one? BRBR

Every A/D converter outputs its own version of the truth. But once the
converter translates audio into a string of numbers, Pro Tools will record
those numbers accurately--that is, without adding any coloration. If you prefer
the sound of one platform over another, it's for other reasons.

If that's not true it should be very easy to demonstrate. Probably in less
time than it would take to type some ill-informed response.

-R

mondoslug wrote:


just because you claim
it ain't so....it ain't so. BRBR

Hey, if I claim it ain't so it is too so.

-R

RK wrote:

mondoslug wrote:


just because you claim
it ain't so....it ain't so.

Hey, if I claim it ain't so it is too so.-R





aah, It's becoming more clear now.





My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

R Krizman wrote:

I saw it too, and it was obvious to me what caused it.

Were you on Maui?

--
ha

R Krizman wrote:

I saw it too, and it was obvious to me what caused it.

And that subject's being covered a couple of threads away...


And what thread is that?

The one where Paul Stamler is off the coast of Maui in a copy of Thor
Heyerdahl's raft, waving his shirt of many threads?

Or is it the one where Al Franken (and who is he, anyway?) is trying to
out-fox the news? Or it it fox-out?

--
ha

R Krizman wrote:

I saw it too, and it was obvious to me what caused it.

And that subject's being covered a couple of threads away...


And what thread is that?

The one one about the guy who used to make flashy green glass bongs of
course.... g




Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Fox And Friends/Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

And what thread is that?

The one one about the guy who used to make flashy green glass bongs of
course.... g

I'm not reading the Tommy Chong thread. Am I missing more ignorant political
diatribes?

-R

R Krizman wrote:

I'm not reading the Tommy Chong thread. Am I missing more ignorant political
diatribes?

No, it's all about PeeTea and Nwendoh.

--
ha

LeBaron & Alrich wrote:
Andrew M. wrote:


If you find this thread boring or annoying then why not move on to
another one?


Because every once in a while on this forum somebody who has been
somewhere often and done something seriously doesn't want ignorance
spread among those who could be reading but have little basis for
comparison. Mythology is fun unless it starts screwing up people's
understanding of how things work.

--
ha

I still want to know if ProTools or Nuendo is doing something to files
as they are recorded to disk. It's important for me to know for my
business. Just as knowing that a Studer 2" sounds different than an
Otari 2" and that Neve and SSL consoles sound different,etc. Is this
mythology?

I am not understanding your position that ignorance is being spread.

I am not understanding your position that ignorance is being spread.

I'm not understanding that, either. Another way of looking at it might be: "How
can two DAW's NOT sound different from each other?" Maybe it's my (admitted)
ignorance of software programming, but if you've got even a few lines of code
that handle the instructions for recording the waveform (or playing it back,
for that matter - but IIRC this thread was originally about the recording part
of it), I can't imagine that two completely different companies would have
identical code in their software - that difference could/would/should make a
difference in how each one sounds, yes? Might be a small difference, might be a
large one.

Does that make sense or am I off in thinking in this manner?

NeilH

(NeilH011)
Might be a small difference, might be a
large one.

Is it possible the ASIO driver for the 001 and the Digi DAE might actually
affect the data stream coming from hardware to software?


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Fox And Friends/Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

I still want to know if ProTools or Nuendo is doing something to files
as they are recorded to disk. It's important for me to know for my
business. Just as knowing that a Studer 2" sounds different than an
Otari 2" and that Neve and SSL consoles sound different,etc. Is this
mythology?

I am not understanding your position that ignorance is being spread.


So I'm telling you, since you need to know for your business, that Protools is
not "doing something" to the files as they are recorded. What would it do?
Add 2 and 2 and change the answer to 5? Your analog analogies are completely
irrelevant and the fact that you would bring those up tells me, with all due
respect, that you need to deepen your technical understanding of the whole DAW
thing before anything I could say to you would count as an explanation. I
recommend you go to recpit.prosoundweb.com and look for Nika's forum and spend
several days reading around in there and asking questions. Also go to
3Daudioinc.com and purchase Lynn Fuston's Awesome DAW-SUM CD, which compares
workstations. It doesn't address your specific question, but it's good fuel
for discussion and will further your understanding of all this by a quantum
leap.

There are a million reasons why one thing may sound different from another.
You need to weed out all the variables to reach an informed conclusion.

Or you can just continue to believe what you believe and base your actions
accordingly. Absolutely no skin off my nose.

-R

Is it possible the ASIO driver for the 001 and the Digi DAE might
actually
affect the data stream coming from hardware to software?

In what way? At what point? After it's already a stream of numbers, or
earlier, when the little bytes are still being hatched from monkey eggs?

-R

RickK wrote:

I'm not understanding that, either. Another way of looking at it might be:
"How
can two DAW's NOT sound different from each other?" Maybe it's my (admitted)
ignorance of software programming, but if you've got even a few lines of code
that handle the instructions for recording the waveform (or playing it back,
for that matter - but IIRC this thread was originally about the recording
part
of it), I can't imagine that two completely different companies would have
identical code in their software - that difference could/would/should make a
difference in how each one sounds, yes?

No.

You can use a pencil, a calculator, or an abacus and 2 plus 2 will still come
out as 4. It's really not brain surgery. It's just simple mathematical
calculations, which is the one thing computers do quite well by design. As
long as they are powerful enough and calculate out to a fine enough
resolution,
there is no reason to think that the results would be different.

I've mentioned before the Awesome-DAWSUM CD at the 3daudioinc.com site, which
I
helped to create. We imported the same audio files into dozens of different
DAWs and mixed them in an identical fashion, along with some analog
platforms.
The results are too complex to summarized here, but it might be astonishing
to
you that many of the DAW's, by different manufacturers, yielded bit-identical
results.

-R


Say what you will, believe what you will - the bottomline(according to me) is
that Nuendo & PTLE using 001 as the front end.....sound different.



My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

You are TELLING me that it
just is(that the bits from the converter go niceley to disk)


Yup. That's what I'm telling you. You can believe me or go research it
yourself.

If you find anything out in your search, let us know.

-R

Say what you will, believe what you will - the bottomline(according to me)
is
that Nuendo & PTLE using 001 as the front end.....sound different.


Then I would pick the one that sounds best and go with that.

-R

R Krizman wrote:

I've mentioned before the Awesome-DAWSUM CD at the 3daudioinc.com site,
which I helped to create. We imported the same audio files into dozens of
different DAWs and mixed them in an identical fashion, along with some
analog platforms. The results are too complex to summarized here, but it
might be astonishing to you that many of the DAW's, by different
manufacturers, yielded bit-identical results.

Seems to me that anybody wishing to learn more about this subject,
anybody curious about how these types of tests are done, anybody wishing
to review the results of these folks' labor, should get that
Awesome_DAWSUM CD thing from Lyyn Fuston's site and get into studying.

If, thereafter, one has cogent queries, bring 'em on.

But don't do that if you wish to maintain uninformed prejudices based on
non-rigorous subjective testing that has nothing to do with science.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

The DAWSUM CD specifically deals with DAW's mix buses according to the
web site. That is a different discussion.


LeBaron & Alrich wrote:

R Krizman wrote:


I've mentioned before the Awesome-DAWSUM CD at the 3daudioinc.com site,
which I helped to create. We imported the same audio files into dozens of
different DAWs and mixed them in an identical fashion, along with some
analog platforms. The results are too complex to summarized here, but it
might be astonishing to you that many of the DAW's, by different
manufacturers, yielded bit-identical results.


Seems to me that anybody wishing to learn more about this subject,
anybody curious about how these types of tests are done, anybody wishing
to review the results of these folks' labor, should get that
Awesome_DAWSUM CD thing from Lyyn Fuston's site and get into studying.

If, thereafter, one has cogent queries, bring 'em on.

But don't do that if you wish to maintain uninformed prejudices based on
non-rigorous subjective testing that has nothing to do with science.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

Hank wrote:

R Krizman wrote:

I've mentioned before the Awesome-DAWSUM CD at the 3daudioinc.com site,
which I helped to create. We imported the same audio files into dozens of
different DAWs and mixed them in an identical fashion, along with some
analog platforms. The results are too complex to summarized here, but it
might be astonishing to you that many of the DAW's, by different
manufacturers, yielded bit-identical results.

Seems to me that anybody wishing to learn more about this subject,
anybody curious about how these types of tests are done, anybody wishing
to review the results of these folks' labor, should get that
Awesome_DAWSUM CD thing from Lyyn Fuston's site and get into studying.

If, thereafter, one has cogent queries, bring 'em on.

But don't do that if you wish to maintain uninformed prejudices based on
non-rigorous subjective testing that has nothing to do with science.


I'm not sure if this is directed at me or not but this thread did not start
about the summing argument...that's another issue altogether. I have no
prejudices one way or the other about either Nuendo or PTLE. It was just an
observation by me about the differences in sound between Nuendo & PTLE using a
common front end ........that I feel is ABSOLUTELY true.......to my ears.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"











My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

Is it possible the ASIO driver for the 001 and the Digi DAE might actually
affect the data stream coming from hardware to software?

That I couldn't say, but I guess it's possible... if you think about it,
there's got to be different variations of the sets of instructions that tell
the software what to do with the incoming signal... could be in the driver,
could be in the software itself. One set of instructions might be translated
(in a very simple manner, of course) as: "Take this signal and do THIS with
it", another DAW's set of instructions might translate to: "Take this signal
and do THAT with it"; and the difference between the 'this' & the 'that' may be
all it takes to alter the sound.

Someone who knows programming must know this stuff for sure... aren't there at
least couple of codeheads on this NG? I wonder if they could shed some light
on this.

NeilH

NeilH011 wrote:

Is it possible the ASIO driver for the 001 and the Digi DAE might actually
affect the data stream coming from hardware to software?

That I couldn't say, but I guess it's possible... if you think about it,
there's got to be different variations of the sets of instructions that tell
the software what to do with the incoming signal... could be in the driver,
could be in the software itself. One set of instructions might be translated
(in a very simple manner, of course) as: "Take this signal and do THIS with
it", another DAW's set of instructions might translate to: "Take this signal
and do THAT with it"; and the difference between the 'this' & the 'that' may be
all it takes to alter the sound.


No.

Software can affect sound negatively if and only if some sort of math error
is coded into things. These errors are well-known and easily
avoidable.

Won't matter. The register interface on a soundcard expects a stream of
X sample rate, Ybit depth, on time and under budget. Anything different
simply won't work. That is all* a driver does - shuttle buffers.

*And set settings, but that's not germane.

Someone who knows programming must know this stuff for sure... aren't there at
least couple of codeheads on this NG? I wonder if they could shed some light
on this.

Nope. The only thing that'll make things sound differently are bugs. I'd
be extremely curious to see exactly what's up with Andy's system(s), but I
can't see 'em from here


NeilH


--
Les Cargill

You can use a pencil, a calculator, or an abacus and 2 plus 2 will still come
out as 4. It's really not brain surgery. It's just simple mathematical
calculations

Yes, but you can write that "4" in various styles of handwriting & fonts - ever
think of that? Doesn't make the math wrong if you do so, just looks different
to your eye.

The results are too complex to summarized here, but it might be astonishing
to
you that many of the DAW's, by different manufacturers, yielded bit-identical
results.

Bits are one thing, samples are another... did they yield sample-identical
results, too? Or are you referring to bitrates per sample, and you measured
each & every sample to determine the results?

I dunno, but it seems to me that saying that something yielded bit-identical
results as something else, and therefore they must sound identical, is somewhat
akin to saying that two analog waveforms that yield amplitude-identical
results will sound exactly the same, is it not?

Clearly there's a difference in sound between various DAW's, otherwise many
people from amateurs to pros are suffering from auditory hallucinations.

So, Rick, tell me why every digital playback system sounds the same - when I
can play back the same stereo mixdown file on the same PC through Soundforge,
or Windows Media Player, or imported back into CubaseSX, through the same
convertors, & monitors, and to me they each sound a little bit different? Am I
insane?

They're all just playing back the same 1's & 0's, right?

NeilH

NeilH011 wrote:

Someone who knows programming must know this stuff for sure... aren't there at
least couple of codeheads on this NG? I wonder if they could shed some light
on this.

I guess I qualify as a codehead. The relevant instruction
is "move" (maybe broken into a "load/store" pair). There
may be a lot of variation in the code surrounding that
operation but the work will eventually be done by that
operation. There aren't any signifigant variation on that
operation.

If you start mixing and applying gain you can begin to run
into variation but in any reasonably designed DAW the
variations should not be anything as obvious as people are
reporting unless the DAW is seriously broken. The effects
of the numerical operations involved are relatively simple
and very well understood. It would take work to screw it
up.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

NeilH011 wrote:

You can use a pencil, a calculator, or an abacus and 2 plus 2 will still come
out as 4. It's really not brain surgery. It's just simple mathematical
calculations

Yes, but you can write that "4" in various styles of handwriting & fonts - ever
think of that? Doesn't make the math wrong if you do so, just looks different
to your eye.


Style doesn't matter here. All that matters is the "4".

The results are too complex to summarized here, but it might be astonishing
to
you that many of the DAW's, by different manufacturers, yielded bit-identical
results.

Bits are one thing, samples are another... did they yield sample-identical
results, too? Or are you referring to bitrates per sample, and you measured
each & every sample to determine the results?


If you get the same file from two different systems, they'll bit-for-bit
compare - fc /b in a DOS box...

I dunno, but it seems to me that saying that something yielded bit-identical
results as something else, and therefore they must sound identical, is somewhat
akin to saying that two analog waveforms that yield amplitude-identical
results will sound exactly the same, is it not?

Clearly there's a difference in sound between various DAW's, otherwise many
people from amateurs to pros are suffering from auditory hallucinations.


These might actually be auditory hallucinations, of a gentle sort. Ever
put a mix down, thinking it rawked, then listen back 24 hours later and
it was awful? insert story about defeated EQ improving
sound here

You have to take ABX type steps to control all the variables.

So, Rick, tell me why every digital playback system sounds the same

But not every playback sounds the same - that's a different sort of subject.


- when I
can play back the same stereo mixdown file on the same PC through Soundforge,
or Windows Media Player, or imported back into CubaseSX, through the same
convertors, & monitors, and to me they each sound a little bit different? Am I
insane?

If you hit the same converts with the same input, you'll get the same
waveform, within the limits of the D/A conversion chain.

Is it possibel that various software is mucking with things? Yup. Is that
goofy? Extremely.

Capture the results of these outputs using S/PDIF and see if there
really are differences.


They're all just playing back the same 1's & 0's, right?

NeilH


--
Les Cargill

Les Cargill wrote:

NeilH011 wrote:


So, Rick, tell me why every digital playback system sounds the same

But not every playback sounds the same - that's a different sort of subject.


I meant "not every *converter* in playback".

snip


--
Les Cargill

So, Rick, tell me why every digital playback system sounds the same

But not every playback sounds the same - that's a different sort of
subject.

I meant "not every *converter* in playback".

OK, and I wasn't referring to different convertors... otherwise I'd be bringing
up differences in the various other DAW's I've used, all of which happened to
be with different types of convertors; but that would be irrelevant, I think it
would be hard to find someone who wouldn't agree that different convertors will
impart different characteristics to the sound. I was referring, in that
instance, only to playing back the same file on three different applications on
the same PC through the same convertors, etc.

In that type of comparison, I can hear a small difference between them... I
can't say that's it's an enormous difference, or a difference that I could, in
a blind test, say: "That's the Cubase one!", or even that any one of them
sucks, it's just that there's some slightly different characteristics to each.

NeilH

NeilH011 wrote:

So, Rick, tell me why every digital playback system sounds the same

But not every playback sounds the same - that's a different sort of
subject.

I meant "not every *converter* in playback".

OK, and I wasn't referring to different convertors... otherwise I'd be bringing
up differences in the various other DAW's I've used, all of which happened to
be with different types of convertors; but that would be irrelevant, I think it
would be hard to find someone who wouldn't agree that different convertors will
impart different characteristics to the sound. I was referring, in that
instance, only to playing back the same file on three different applications on
the same PC through the same convertors, etc.

In that type of comparison, I can hear a small difference between them... I
can't say that's it's an enormous difference, or a difference that I could, in
a blind test, say: "That's the Cubase one!", or even that any one of them
sucks, it's just that there's some slightly different characteristics to each.

NeilH

Can you capture the output via s/pdif and compare the files? You'll
have to get the levels really close... if a single track at nominal
in both packges shows a difference, yer onto something. Getting two
mixes thae close might not be all that possible, although...

Set a single-sample transient at the start to slate 'em by.

FWIW, I've done this 'tween N-track and Cool96. No diff.

--
Les Cargill

Mondoslug1 wrote:

Say what you will, believe what you will - the bottomline(according to me) is
that Nuendo & PTLE using 001 as the front end.....sound different.

I would think that you, of all people in this thread, would beat it to
Lynn Fuston's site and order that product and try your "test" again in
the light of stuff you might learn if your mind were open and your eyes
were shut.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

R Krizman wrote:

You are TELLING me that it
just is(that the bits from the converter go niceley to disk)

Yup. That's what I'm telling you. You can believe me or go research it
yourself.

If you find anything out in your search, let us know.

And that about sums it up, folks.

--
ha

Bob Cain wrote:

It would take work to screw it up.

And Murphy's assistant is a workaholic, I'm told.

--
ha

Hank wrote:

Mondoslug1 wrote:

Say what you will, believe what you will - the bottomline(according to me)
is
that Nuendo & PTLE using 001 as the front end.....sound different.

I would think that you, of all people in this thread, would beat it to
Lynn Fuston's site and order that product and try your "test" again in
the light of stuff you might learn if your mind were open and your eyes
were shut.

Well I should do that but isn't that CD about "summing"? Which repeating
myself, is not the topic at hand.



My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

Your "sums it up" joke confirms that you aren't understanding what this
thread is talking about. Take some time and get down off of your high
horse. THe CD you referred me to (DAWSUM) has NOTHING to do with the
original intent of this thread. Your comments (all of them on this
thread) have offered nothing constructive. Your insult to me was
unnecessary. Be sure and pull your head out of your ass before insulting
someone. THe BS you smell may be your own.

Problem: Why do two workstations sharing the same front end (literally)
record different sounding files? (the summing bus, EQ or other
processing in the program has NOTHING to do with this so don't even
bring it up)



LeBaron & Alrich wrote:
R Krizman wrote:


You are TELLING me that it
just is(that the bits from the converter go niceley to disk)


Yup. That's what I'm telling you. You can believe me or go research it
yourself.


If you find anything out in your search, let us know.


And that about sums it up, folks.

--
ha