Topic: RESEED: Round 2: V3/Oade-warm-mod-UA5 comparison

[Brian Skalinder]

Anyone?  I haven't given a thorough listen on my home stereo yet...but will in the next couple days.  Sixteen downloads so far and a few more coming, most of whom I suspect are from this board.  Let's hear what you all have to say!

[Todd R]

Where is this download available?

[Brian Skalinder]

Where is this download available?

It's on bt.etree.org.  There's a thread in the Kickdown section with the .torrent URL, too, I think.

[Tim]

Todd, they finally put dsl way up in them hills... jump on this and give your opinion!

[phishn]

I like source A better.  It sounds clearer, the highs are more distinguished, and the bass is deeper(but the drawback is that the bass seems to "last" longer).  Source B seems flatter but not as crisp.

[RobC]

I liked source A better also.
the difference between the 2 boxes could be heard on this compairison much more than the last one.

I thought that the highs were much better in source A
and it almost sounded like source A was recorded from a closer location than source B,  had more of the "in your face" sound that I love to hear in live tapes.  

Source A seemed to have the fuller sound accross the board that I sometime hear after turning up the levels to bounce close to zero instead of -6.

Although I did like source A better,  source B sounded very good except for the few seconds right after hearing source A.

I'm guessing that source A = V3 because I liked it better,  but I did that the last time too and was wrong.

[jpschust]

downloading it now, looking forward to listening and analyzing.

[Brian]

well i'm sticking with the same methods i used last time. I think source A is definitely the V3 because to my ears i hear more room sound.  Source B sounds a little muddy on the low end and sounds much farther away  than source A.  also the guitars, especially chuck's sound a little more colored in the low mids leading me to believe even more so that B is the w-mod. Source A sounds  better to me and it saddens me to say so since i own a w-mod, so i hope i'm wrong;D although the crispiness/clarity of the guitars in source lead me to believe otherwise.

[DaryanLenz]

This is cake, at least I hope so...

Surce A...much brighter!  The high end is extremely well defined and clear.  Clarity was the key to this source sounding good.  I should also add that I felt a lot more air, less humid if you wil in this source.

Source B...darker sounding, with a very big well rounded bass.  The high end was not pronounced as much, but still there.  This feels like the air was thicker, and that time moved slightly slower.  This sounds very much like what a mini-me would havfe reproduced to me, but with a lot less top end definition which led to the "back-of board effect" here.  

Source A to my ears was clearly the V3, which I recognized almost immediately...again, I hope!  Source B is the wmod for sure.  The warm mod to my ears, or at least source B, is very apogee sounding with worse a/d's.  This leads to that effect I was talking about earlier I think, as the pre is just not that "fast" to my ears, and the sound does not seem to be as well defined at all.  

Just my ears, we all hear very diferently

The sound as a whole I thought was very good on both sources, and I actually after listening tonight prefer source A, but probably only with these mics  I really don't think schoeps mics need a colored pre, most others do!

Playback:

B&w dm 305's
mirage sfx-8 sub
onkyo $$ reciever
sek'd prodif plus digi out to digi in on the reciever
canare lv-77s coax cable

If I am right, why Doug would compare the v3 and wmod is beyond me?

D

[phishn]

"Source A seemed to have the fuller sound accross the board that I sometime hear after turning up the levels to bounce close to zero instead of -6."  Very interesting..I have been trying to figure out why my Boston Phish source sounds so loud.....perhaps you revealed something I didn't notice.

[BCostigan]

Damn....I guess I'm going out on a limb here but I'd say

SOurce A = w-mod
Source B = v3


I preferred source B myself.......


Source A seemed a bit too warm and the low end seemed exaggerated.

Source B was tight and seemed more linear (sp?) .  It also, I thought, had more of an up front sound...source A just seemed a bit louder (higher levels)

I only listened through headphones so I may be way off.

 

[chase]

i will second daryan's thoughts

A = V3
B = UA-5

i think the levels were a tad lower in B, producing the further away sounding effect.

[Matt Quinn]

a- v3
b- UA5

I'd love to hear this same comp run with a set of AKG's or DPA's. I think the classic Schoep's boom hurts the UA5 tape a lot more than the v3 tape.

[jpschust]

im going with the a- v3, b-ua5.  the first has that very bright sound... that being said i think im actually more a fan of the ua-5 in this case.  i dont think the sound fits moe particularly well.  i think it might fit someone like yonder mountain or someone with some more in their highs a bit better.

[teamakg]

i prefer A and am hoping it's the wmod UA5 seeing how i run one.  

[DaryanLenz]

I agree, I don't think the schoeps do the ua-5 much justice due to the low end!  The presence factor could be the levels as well, maybe I will bump them up and see if that makes much difference this evening!

D

[Brian Skalinder]

Alright - FWIW I did this comparison blindly as well, just as you all.  I'll start telling people privately which is which shortly.  Here's my take:

A Comments
Overall punchier than B, I think contributing to the in-your-face feeling RobC mentions.  Highs kinda jumped out at me, but I found them a bit spitty and a little harsh, fatiguing to me after a while.  I don't hear as smooth a transition from highs into mids as I do on B.  Mids and vocals more up front, but again not as defined/detailed and there's something - maybe something missing? - here in the low mids resulting in a stridency I found fatiguing.  More prominent low end but fuzzier and not as rich and defined as B.

B Comments
Overall smoother and richer, more detailed, more integrated across the range from high to low, if that makes sense .  Crisp, clean, smooth highs - they don't stand out nearly as much to me as on A.  Meatier/fuller mids and vocals, although not as up front as A.  Lows again not as prominent, but tighter, smoother, more detailed, somehow...broader and deeper.

Individual Responses
RobC - I hear you on the in-your-face sense, the up-front feeling on source A.

Daryan/Chase - we definitely have different playback systems and/or ears!  For the most part, I hear things differently than you describe them, though it may easily be chalked up to the difficulty of translating what our ears hear into the written word.

BCostigan - I think we're in agreement, here.

Tube - I'd love to hear this comp with DPAs/AKGs, too - maybe I can hook up with someone in the Cleveland/Columbus/Pittsburgh areas to try it out.  When you say the Schoeps boom hurts the UA5 source, which do you mean: A or B?

Jonny - looks like we're in the minority here on preferring B over A.

STL-Taper - I definitely agree on what you're hearing in the low mids on B (or not hearing in the low mids on A), but not so much on the muddiness of the low end.

Bottom Line For Me
Personally, I prefer B.  While I appreciated the punchy, in-your-face feeling of A initially, I found the - to me - exaggerated highs and lows fatiguing and really enjoyed listening much more to the richer, smoother sound of B.

Playback Gear
PC >
Waveterminal 2496 >
Airhead 'phone amp >
AKG K501s headphones

and

Toshiba SD-2900 (cheapo DVD/CD player with digi-out) >
Sony E9000ES (basically acting as DAC) >
Rotel RTC-950AX preamp >
Adcom GFA-555 power amp >
Magnepan MMGs / Pinnacle Babyboomer sub

[Matt Quinn]

"When you say the Schoeps boom hurts the UA5 source, which do you mean: A or B?"

B. The bass in source A is damn near perfect to my ears.

Overall, I'd say I *very* slightly prefered source A.

[DaryanLenz]

I agree, the difference is not 1000 dollars at all.  I found source a to be fatiging after awhile as well, but initially I definately liked it better.  I listened several more times late last night, and I found source B to be one that kind of grows on you while a initialy leaps out as the better one.  I really can't put what I hear in words btw!

D

[Todd R]

My opinion:  Timmy Tucker came from a long line of geeks.

Oops, that's a fact.

I find both sources to be pretty close to one another and I'll say again after I heard the first comp done by Craig T:  congrats to those who've gotten the wmod UA5, definitely a nice piece of gear and great for the money.

That said, I give my nod to source B.

I find source A to have more low end, but to me it is not as defined.  I prefer the low end of B, which is tighter and more defined to my ears, though less in your face.

Though A has more low end, I still find it brighter.  This might be why a lot of folks find it to be more detailed, since the detail it provides is easier to hear.  Same as I often hear folks (non-tapers) say about the DMic-20--more detailed, due I think to the greater emphasis on the mids.

Overall, though, I like B better.  I find it to have slightly more upper mid and high end detail.  The upper mids on source A have a bit more of an edge or harshness to them, so like Brian I find A to be a bit more fatiguing.

Along with more high end detail, I find more soundstage detail with source B.  Easier to relax into a coherent, stable soundstage with B, something I don't get as clearly with A.

So that's it for me.  Though they're close, I like the tight low end of B, the more refined and better detailed upper mids and highs of B, and the better soundstage detail of B.

So B it is, though I don't know which is which.  I'll have to say B is the V3 since that's what I own, so it'd be nice to think that I like what I have.

Thanks Brian for putting this together.

-Todd

Oh, BTW, playback system:
Sony CD diskman with optical out (only player to read the CDRW disk I put the tracks on)
Audio Alchemy DTI+ jitter reducer
Audio Alchemy DAC
AMC cvt1030 tube preamp (with Tesla Telefunken-knockoff tubes)
Acurus A100 amp
Maggie MMG speakers
Pinnacle babyboomer sub

[Brian Skalinder]

[snip]I find more soundstage detail with source B.  Easier to relax into a coherent, stable soundstage with B, something I don't get as clearly with A.[snip]

Yes!!  I struggled to find the words to express this in my post, and just couldn't put it together.  Thanks for the detailed response, Todd and all...let's hear more feedback!

[mizary]

Ok...  I don't know which one I like better...

Upon first listening I did like A much better...  Very detailed, crisp sound.  detailed highs and more bass than B.

However I agree that the difference is only noticable when you switch from A to B.  After a couple seconds B sounds great.

I think B is more listenable...  Smoother sounding...  But I would rather own the source A pre+a/d (if A and B cost the same and I could only own ONE pre/ad).  I think it's more transparent...  If you want a recording to sound a particular way you can always tweak it in post.  I think source A would give you more flexibility for post production work...

However this is the real world...  I have never gotten around to tweaking a recording in post... It's alot of work...  I would rather get something semi transparent but listenable, like source B.

Then there is cost... If B is the UA5 you also get a nice savings...  For me, for the $$$ and the purposes I would be using it for (taping random bands) I would go with the UA5...

However if I had my own band and wanted to start recording our shows to sell or give away...  I would want the v3, mainly because I would want as transparent as a sound as possible to start with - before tweaking the heck out of it.  

Although what do I know...  I am listening to this on my PC though $10 headphones!  

Actually the $10 headphones are pretty nice... little sony earbuds.  I forget the model # - but they were highly respected in the world of earbud headphones.  They are grey and silver.

I missed the first comp...  Glad I got to hear this one...  keep up the good work Brian...  you are an asset to ts.com and the taping community in general!  +T (like you really need another!)

--mizary

--mizary

[phishn]

FYI, if you're wondering how a warm mod sounds with Phish..check this bt out.  One note of interest..even though my levels were peaking around -1, they seemed to be to high with the warm mod.  I reduced the levels by 2 db in this source and the bassy washout went away.  Guess I should aim for -3 db peaks with this setup.

  http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=1004

[Brian Skalinder]

I believe I've contacted everyone who posted feedback with the source info.  Anyone still wanting to chime in on this one, or shall I reveal the sources?

[dmonterisi]

go ahead and reveal it, the poll results are very interesting...people really want to like the v3 and hear all sorts of different things.  nobody seems to be pulling for the underdog.

[phishn]

I'm pulling for the underdog and so are my tapes..

[Brian Skalinder]

go ahead and reveal it, the poll results are very interesting...people really want to like the v3 and hear all sorts of different things.  nobody seems to be pulling for the underdog.

Definitely interesting poll results, Damon.  And while people may be pulling for the V3, that's the beauty of the blind comparison - no one knows while listening.

These comps reveal (not surprisingly) what most of us already know - we all have different ears/brains.  I can't fathom some of the things others are hearing...just doesn't make any sense to me based on my listening.  Thank goodness we have lots of gear to choose from to satisfy all those different ears!

[Brian Skalinder]

Well, the poll results speak for themselves - pretty much 50/50 so far across the board with respect to preference and guesses at which source is which.

FWIW, of the people who responded with feedback in the post - thanks everyone! - looks like 7 preferred source A and 3 preferred source B.

And now, the answer - if you don't want to know, don't scroll down!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A = Oade-warm-mod-UA5
B = V3

[dmonterisi]

this comp proves once again, and for all time that the V3 rules your face!  just kidding of course...as brian says, this comp proves everyone hears different things and that playback may influence what you hear in recordings way more than the pre/ad/cables etc.  nice work brian.

[Brian]

IMO
this comp proves again that there is not a $1000 quality difference in sound between the two units....my main point in the last comp.  I prefer the more in your face sound of source A(w-mod) but i do also understand how some people can enjoy the smoothness of source B over time. both sources are good in their own ways.

Brian

[Brian Skalinder]

IMO
this comp proves again that there is not a $1000 quality difference in sound between the two units....my main point in the last comp.  I prefer the more in your face sound of source A(w-mod) but i do also understand how some people can enjoy the smoothness of source B over time. both sources are good in their own ways.

And then there are people like me to whom the comp "proved" there is $1,000 worth of difference.  The greater detail, more coherent soundstage, and smoother, richer, more natural sound across the board make the V3 well worth the extra $800 I paid for it.  The UA5's exaggerated low and (especially) high end became fatiguing very quickly for me and I found it downright unpleasant after only a short while.

Thank goodness we have all this gear from which to choose!  

[dmonterisi]

plus, there doesn't need to be $1000 worth of sonic difference, i think there is what a $750 or $800 difference in street price on these two?  i haven't run a ua-5, but there are a lot of flexibility, ergonomic and field use options and characteristics that the v3 gives you over the ua-5...solid build and construction, metering, m/s matrixing on the fly, analog out as well as digital to be used with outboard a/d.  plus, the ua-5 is not long-term field tested while grace products are...so, to me there is a substantial increase in value in the v3, including the fact that i like it's sound...whether it's worth 750-800 depends person to person, but i'm happy with the 1400 i spent on the v3 and if others are happy with the performance they get based on the money they spent on a wmod ua-5, well, good for them.  everybody's happy.

[Brian]

you guys are right.....honestly, i'm just jealous cause i don't have a V3. catching the upgrade bug and i'm sort of getting tired of all the post production EQ on the lows i have to do with my recordings, but i know i should upgrade the mics first.  possibly a much brighter mic to balance out the warmness of the w-mod ua5....suggestions?

[jpschust]

interesting, i listened to like 3 other sets of tapes with the v3 and it was tremendously bright to me, but if it can do what it did for set b, im happy.  i feel like b was much more listenable over time.  a was driving me nuts after about 5 minutes.  way too bright for me.

[Nick Culbreth]

you guys are right.....honestly, i'm just jealous cause i don't have a V3. catching the upgrade bug and i'm sort of getting tired of all the post production EQ on the lows i have to do with my recordings, but i know i should upgrade the mics first.  possibly a much brighter mic to balance out the warmness of the w-mod ua5....suggestions?

i think that your low end problems might be caused by the oktavas - maybe you should look into some different mics.  i'm not sure what kind of budget you'd be working with but there is a great deal on a set of 481s in the used gear section which would be a great upgrade imho.  i started off w/ a set of mc012s and upgraded to 481s and the difference was night and day.

[phishn]

"The UA5's exaggerated low and (especially) high end became fatiguing very quickly for me and I found it downright unpleasant after only a short while."  

This is one reason why I run a warm mod ua-5.  It depends on your mics too...i run AKG 391's which are very crisp but relatively flat.  The warm mod ua-5 adds in what the AKG 391's are missing.

[Brian Skalinder]

"The UA5's exaggerated low and (especially) high end became fatiguing very quickly for me and I found it downright unpleasant after only a short while."  

This is one reason why I run a warm mod ua-5.  It depends on your mics too...i run AKG 391's which are very crisp but relatively flat.  The warm mod ua-5 adds in what the AKG 391's are missing.

Good point, it definitely depends on the complete combo of gear being run.  I've really liked the wmod-UA5 recordings I've heard with some other mics, especially Gefells.

[teamakg]

just thought i'd throw this out there.  tomorrow night i'll be running 480->UA5(wmod) and my buddy will be running 480->V3.  we'll both be running off the same stand.  here's the catch.  we'll be stack taping dmb so start flaming away.  so if anyone would be interested i'll make up another comp disc.
george

[Kindguy]

480>warm UA-5 rocks IMO

[Brian Skalinder]

just thought i'd throw this out there.  tomorrow night i'll be running 480->UA5(wmod) and my buddy will be running 480->V3.  we'll both be running off the same stand.  here's the catch.  we'll be stack taping dmb so start flaming away.  so if anyone would be interested i'll make up another comp disc.
george

Definitely interested, stack tape or otherwise, George.  Someone Else on here was hoping to get a listen to this comp with AKG/DPAs.  Let's hear it!

If Jesse remembers to take his pmod to work, tomorrow night I'll be doing a pmod v. wmod.

[BCostigan]

Definitely interested, stack tape or otherwise, George.  Someone Else on here was hoping to get a listen to this comp with AKG/DPAs.  Let's hear it!

If Jesse remembers to take his pmod to work, tomorrow night I'll be doing a pmod v. wmod.

Now that's what I really want to hear!!  Oh and of course I want to hear the plain digi mod vs a warm and or p-mod as well!

[BCostigan]

Also.....as for the V3 being "worth" a $1000 more.......

I think this comp wasn't the best guage for value.  I think it's pretty safe to say that:

w-mod=Minime
p-mod = V3


w-mod tends to be more earthy and rounded...warm.

The p-mod, like the V3, tends to be flat, have a lot of presance and maybe a bit much on the high end for some.


I think a great comp for the cost vs sound argument would be putting a w-mod vs minime and a p-mod vs V3.

Again.......a 1000 thanks to Brian for the great comps so far!   Truly an amazing learning tool!

[dmonterisi]

 like the V3, tends to be flat,

i definitely diagree with this statement.

[Sean Gallemore]

From reading this therad I've gathered that using moody mics and a moody preamp don't jive well

EDITED: for grammar

[dmonterisi]

From reading this therad I've gathered that using moody mics and a moody preamp doesn't jive well

i think i agree with you...if by moody, you mean colored?  that's why i've liked the v3 with the neumanns, you get no additional coloration to the natural coloration of the mics...it's the most natural sounding to me...whether it's the coloration of the neumanns, schoeps, akg's, you get to hear all the character that your mics bring and that's all the color i want.

[Brian Skalinder]

Having some cable problems right now, but if I can get 'em resolved (crossing fingers), I'll do both wmod v. pmod and pmod v. V3 tomorrow night.  The Oade Bros folks themselves told me wmod = V3, but...perhaps they're wrong or I misunderstood.  At any rate, hopefully I'll find out tomorrow if the pmod is closer to the V3 than the wmod.  

[dmonterisi]

dood, you got a sherpa to lug all that shit around?

[Sean Gallemore]

by moody, I meant colored, character, non-flat responses, etc.  A clashing of egos between the ua-5 and the bright/dark/muddy schoeps

[F.O.Bean]

i would be willing to send ya my 481's to do some more comps... ;)i think alot of ppl would like that comp....it seems that most ppl over here run schoeps and akg's.....

[save]

can't wait to hear the pmod vs. v3 comp

[danmorgan]

i would be willing to send ya my 481's to do some more comps... ;)i think alot of ppl would like that comp....it seems that most ppl over here run schoeps and akg's.....

...Where's the Neumann love, Bean?....

[teamakg]

everything went smooth last night.  everything should be converted very soon.  then look for the 480's wmod vs. V3 comp.
george

[dklein]

Lagging behind as usual.  Had to wait a couple of days before I had the house to myself without a sleeping child upstairs.

I don't know if anyone else did this, but I boosted the amplitude on source B by 3.5/3.3 dB (left/right) to raise it to the same level as source A.

One thing I learned selling audio equipment is that louder almost always wins, so any fair comparison has to have the source levels matched.  You can try and do it with the volume knob on playback but it's tough to do.

I find it totally interesting that we can't even get consensus on something as simple as which source was 'brighter'.  This has to be a by-product of the level differences between the sources and what we're each doing with the volume knob.

Now one could argue that whichever source had the amplitude changed has been thru destructive processing.  I did it both ways, boost B to match A, cut A to match B so that both 'raw' sources got a chance against the adjusted source.  Observations were the same.

It was also interesting to hear that most people tend to be attracted to tonal qualities more than anything else.  While the V3 was too bright in the last comparison, I found that in this comparison, I appreciated the extra hf on the v3.

Overall, I did prefer the v3 in this test.  It seemed a little more refined - easier to separate and follow the individual instruments and seemed to have a bit more detail.

Did I hear $1000 difference? - no, but at the same time I know the pleasure of owning and touching a really nicely crafted piece of gear and the UA-5 is not such a thing.  Still, I think it does an excellent job sonically.

At this point I'd say I have a feel for the differences between v3 and w-mod and am more curious about the various UA-5 mods vs. stock

Thanks again for putting it together Brian.

david

[Nick in Edinboro]

FWIW, my copy is now up on the archive....  Don't think it touches Brians but figured I'd post here if anyone wanted to hear another source from the show from almost an identical location.

Should've probably pumped the volume a bit more in post but didn't bother, just crank it and it sounds pretty good IMHO

http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=8721

[creekfreak]

by moody, I meant colored, character, non-flat responses, etc.  A clashing of egos between the ua-5 and the bright/dark/muddy schoeps

exactly, I have heard people call schoeps, bright, thin, clear, neutral, muddy, tubey, warm, dark, dank, stinky, etc, etc, etc. Which one is it guys? Can't be bright and dark...can't be muddy and clear. After running a pair for 100+ shows, I can say several things. Schoeps are very accurate, they are bright and very detailed but with a low end color that is hard to explain. With certain gear the low end can sound egagerated and too warm. I don't think its the mic that is making that sound, but the outboard pre and or A/D. Hence the reason I love the V3 with the schoeps. It tightens everything up and sounds like the mic is suppose to sound.

[Sean Gallemore]

stinky?

maybe I'll be able to understand all these terms when I'm ready to buy schoeps in 10 years

[creekfreak]

stinky?

maybe I'll be able to understand all these terms when I'm ready to buy schoeps in 10 years

hehe, I was joking somewhat, but I have heard it all when it comes to schoeps.

[Brian Skalinder]

FWIW, I've re-seeded this torrent over on bt.etree in case anyone's interested:

Tracker entry
.torrent file

[kgreener]

darn Brian, I missed this post earlier this week, any chance it will be back up?  I just tried and it seems to be down.  If not, no biggie, just thought I'd ask.

thanks man!

Keith

[Brian Skalinder]

darn Brian, I missed this post earlier this week, any chance it will be back up?  I just tried and it seems to be down.  If not, no biggie, just thought I'd ask.

It's still up on BT, though I'm firewalled at work.  If you're firewalled, too, you're outta luck.  I'll send a CDR copy if you can't get the d/l - just PM me your addy.

[kgreener]

Thanks Brian.  I'm at home, not firewalled, but I see no peers or seeds, so I guess there's no one sharing right now.  That's cool, hopefully it'll come back up sometime.

thanks!

[Brian Skalinder]

Thanks Brian.  I'm at home, not firewalled, but I see no peers or seeds, so I guess there's no one sharing right now.

Huh...that's odd.  My original seed is definitely still up.  If you continue to have trouble getting, just holler.

[kgreener]

Hey Brian, I tried off & on all weekend but still no luck.  I didn't want to bother you so I thought I'd wait til Monday to let you know.   BTW, I can successfully torrent many other shows.

No big deal, just thought I'd give it a try.

Thanks man!

Keith

[Brian Skalinder]

Hey Keith - do me a favor and give it one more go, I've fired up a seed here at home (no firewall) instead of at work (firewalled.  If it works right away, great, if not pop back another message and I'll snail mail.  Looks like someone's d/ling right now, I'm guessing it's you...

[kgreener]

Brian,

That wasn't me earlier, but I'm on now, thanks man!  I'm pulling 20-21 kb/s now so I'm moving along.  Hopefully this will be up for a bit so I can grab it all.  I'll keep mine up & running too, well after I complete it.

Thanks again, you da' man!

Keith

[Brian Skalinder]

Comp re-hosted by request.  Having trouble with bt.etree.org, so this one's over on www.easytree.org, now:

Tracker entry
.torrent file

You may need to login to EasyTree to get this one, not sure.  BTW, I may or may not have switched the sources around, so...cheating on this thread to find out which is which won't help! 

[pfife]

Amazing how evenly split they responses are...

[ashevillain]

thanks Brian! +t

[jbraveman]

Brain when are you going put your schoeps vs dpa comp that you've got squirreled away? 

[Brian Skalinder]

Brain when are you going put your schoeps vs dpa comp that you've got squirreled away?

Doh!  Completely forgot.  Either that, or I just didn't like the outcome of the comp.    I know I have both our SHTR sources here somewhere...lemme see what I can do.  Thanks for the reminder!

[bagtagsell]

i can't get this to download.  Any help, I am logged in.

edit: I got it working.  Went through IE instead of firefox

[Brian Skalinder]

i can't get this to download. Any help, I am logged in.

Seeding away just fine on my end.  Did you download the .torrent file before or after logging in?  I believe EasyTree now generates customized .torrent files based on one's EasyTree login (or some such).  Maybe try d/ling the .torrent file again now that you're logged in?