Hey Guys,

Been awhile since I've posted...I heard the Linn Acurate system yesterday but before I got out and spend $7K, I want to see how well my old Accuphase DC 90 and DC 91 DAC compare..More specifically I want to test out my DAC and play FLack thru the digital input.

I have tested it this morning and it's off to a very good start..Not as good as the CD but promising..

I ripped a couple of songs using Flacer and played back with Singbird..These were not the newest versions...Flacer was a powerpc version not Intel.

I've heard Rip Station is supposed to be great but have been unable to find it for the Mac.

If the Mac does not have the best Flac software I suppose I could use a PC that I have.

Any suggestions greatly appreciated.

Why not Apple Lossless? Basically the same thing.

Why not Apple Lossless? Basically the same thing.

joke?

If not, I hope you are...I compared Apple LossLess (which I have my entire CD library on), to a couple of Flac tests and with my system (Wilson WP7's, Watchdog Sub, CJ 140 Tube and Shindo preamp,) both thru the Accuphase DC91 DAC the difference was night and day.

The Flac so far sounds really good but I am looking for the best possible Flac solution, (hopefully via Macintosh) sound to avoid having to get the Linn system..unless I have to that is...

Either you've screwed up somewhere, or the software or hardware you're using screwed up somewhere. Apple Lossless and FLAC are absolutely identical sonically if they are decoded properly. But note that it really is possible that there is something screwed up in your processing chain. Getting bit-perfect audio right is not trivial.

So let's try and narrow it down. When you conducted those listening tests, what hardware and software did you use for Apple Lossless playback? for FLAC playback?

Don't know who has 'the best possible Flac solution', but I don't know how one bit-perfect lossless codec can be night and day different from another. If that were true, I'd highly recommend AIFF which has no lossless compression at all for you to "hear". Also, the FLAC and Apple Lossless are simply storage formats - the signal going to your DAC is an identical PCM stream. Your DAC would have no way of knowing how it was stored, let alone the ability to produce a different sound from them. Keep in mind that the paucity of Flac for Mac software is likely a matter of there being absolutely no redeeming value in having one lossless codec over the other and iTunes with Apple Lossless is free. Hard to compete with that unless there is an advantage, which there isn't.

I also have a MacPro and understand your dilemma.
If you can I suggest to use a Windows machine and this software that is well worth the cost for it's ability to rip, get quality metadata and album covers: http://www.dbpoweramp.com/

For a Mac you might try: http://sbooth.org/Max/
Or if you have (or want to get) Roxio Toast 9 you can try that.

Either you've screwed up somewhere, or the software or hardware you're using screwed up somewhere. Apple Lossless and FLAC are absolutely identical sonically if they are decoded properly. But note that it really is possible that there is something screwed up in your processing chain. Getting bit-perfect audio right is not trivial.

So let's try and narrow it down. When you conducted those listening tests, what hardware and software did you use for Apple Lossless playback? for FLAC playback?

I played the Flac tests using Fluke through iTunes as well as another Flac player..Differences were dramatic as said.

But I will re encode the test in Lossless and makes sure set up was optimal.

for a MAC you want to use www.sbooth.org/max

I have an all digital system and it is what I use

This is the streaming device I use
http://www.modwright.com/pdf/TransporterMusicServer.pdf

It was far superior to the Linn in my home

I also have a MacPro and understand your dilemma.
If you can I suggest to use a Windows machine and this software that is well worth the cost for it's ability to rip, get quality metadata and album covers: http://www.dbpoweramp.com/

For a Mac you might try: http://sbooth.org/Max/
Or if you have (or want to get) Roxio Toast 9 you can try that.

Thank you, will look into this.

I learned today that the digital connection via the cable I bought has a Toslink on the other end. According to my high end guru, the coaxial connection is superior to it...More work to do now...

I would prefer to stay in the Mac realm but will consider PC's if I must.

I will add that during tests today at the high end dealer near my house. I compared the Linn Acurate to a dCS Purchini and it was very close..Really as much personal preference as anything, at least that was my first take on the comparison. Not bad for a $7K Linn (plus computer) to do this well against a $20K CD/Dac..

The journey continues..

I use SONOS connected to my Cambridge DacMagic into my McIntosh (not Macintosh) PreAmp.
SONOS allows me to play my all of FLAC music and anything else in my iTunes Folder from my Macintosh iMAC. I can also play Sirius, Rhapsody, Pandora through SONOS as well.

Works well. Nice solution and I can control the whole thing with my iPhone.

This is the streaming device I use
http://www.modwright.com/pdf/TransporterMusicServer.pdf

It was far superior to the Linn in my home

That is a very interesting unit...Will look into it for sure..

This is all giving me a headache...spent a few hours comparing and listening to the dCS purcini to the Linn Acurate...it was interesting until we put on an LP and that was the end of the day , just listening to vinyl over tubes...just no comparison and made the differences between the Linn and the dCS seem meaningless as the vinyl recordings completely blew away the best results from both of them.

I learned today that the digital connection via the cable I bought has a Toslink on the other end. According to my high end guru, the coaxial connection is superior to it...More work to do now...

Not much work there, just use a 75 ohm video cable. SPDIF digital is built around the video standard, so by definition, a standard video cable is a digital cable and vice versa. So hopefully your guru isn't trying to sell you an expensive 'digital' cable when you probably have them lying around unused. Unless they're purposely deviating from the standard which would be bad. Also, while coax is marginally better as a connection, unless the optical receiver/transmitter is very poor (very high jitter) or the optical cable is bad (lots of correction going on), the difference will be slim to none. I spend hours doing direct A/B of this and *think* I heard *some* differences *maybe*. But then, I knew which was which.

I'll put this delicately, but consider the idea, if you're just learning these things now, that you might be a bit susceptible to the placebo effect because you'd assume that FLAC was better than Apple Lossless when, by definition, it is not.

I played the Flac tests using Fluke through iTunes as well as another Flac player..Differences were dramatic as said.Well, again, if there are any differences at all then something is flat wrong. There is absolutely no reason that Apple Lossless should sound any different than FLAC. So there must be some sort of additional processing going on with either of the two formats, extra processing that shouldn't be there, that is affecting sound quality. If I had to guess I'd say that the Apple Lossless playback is being attenuated, and the FLAC is not.

Now, having said that---if you can't figure out what the problem is, then who cares? You can convert your files back and forth between FLAC and Apple Lossless as many times as you want without a single bit lost. So if for some reason FLAC is just sounding better, use a program like Max (linked above) to convert everything from Apple Lossless to FLAC and enjoy. You won't have lost a thing, and you haven't spent a dime, and you'll benefit from the apparently superior playback processing that FLAC is providing somehow.

This is all giving me a headache...spent a few hours comparing and listening to the dCS purcini to the Linn Acurate...it was interesting until we put on an LP and that was the end of the day , just listening to vinyl over tubes...just no comparison and made the differences between the Linn and the dCS seem meaningless as the vinyl recordings completely blew away the best results from both of them.

If you record an album to a CD-R or music file properly, it will sound virtually identical to the vinyl and if you record a CD digital master to vinyl, it will sound....like vinyl, if you want to chew on that factoid for a bit. If you're having a hard time swallowing the sound of CD over vinyl, I suggest a Meridian surround preamp as Tri-field makes CD sound very much like vinyl. Of course, that does require a center and is helpful to have a couple of rears for ambience.

Well, again, if there are any differences at all then something is flat wrong. There is absolutely no reason that Apple Lossless should sound any different than FLAC. So there must be some sort of additional processing going on with either of the two formats, extra processing that shouldn't be there, that is affecting sound quality. If I had to guess I'd say that the Apple Lossless playback is being attenuated, and the FLAC is not.

Or maybe some of the iTunes EQ or compression/leveling features got engaged somehow or the files are actually AAC or something like that.

Now, having said that---if you can't figure out what the problem is, then who cares? You can convert your files back and forth between FLAC and Apple Lossless as many times as you want without a single bit lost. So if for some reason FLAC is just sounding better, use a program like Max (linked above) to convert everything from Apple Lossless to FLAC and enjoy. You won't have lost a thing, and you haven't spent a dime, and you'll benefit from the apparently superior playback processing that FLAC is providing somehow.

Alchemy! :)

Noone is trying to sell me anything...but I do appreciate the advice.

If you think vinyl is going to sound as good as it does after being recorded to CD, then while I really appreciate you posting in this thread, we'll just have to disagree on much of the differences that are very apparent to me. Including the differences between Flac and Lossless which I confirmed today...

Thanks for the posts.

Not much work there, just use a 75 ohm video cable. SPDIF digital is built around the video standard, so by definition, a standard video cable is a digital cable and vice versa. So hopefully your guru isn't trying to sell you an expensive 'digital' cable when you probably have them lying around unused. Unless they're purposely deviating from the standard which would be bad. Also, while coax is marginally better as a connection, unless the optical receiver/transmitter is very poor (very high jitter) or the optical cable is bad (lots of correction going on), the difference will be slim to none. I spend hours doing direct A/B of this and *think* I heard *some* differences *maybe*. But then, I knew which was which.

I'll put this delicately, but consider the idea, if you're just learning these things now, that you might be a bit susceptible to the placebo effect because you'd assume that FLAC was better than Apple Lossless when, by definition, it is not.

You cannot connect a 75 ohm coaxial cable to the Mac I am using or any Mac that I know of. There is only a 3.5mm headphone jack that outputs analogue for headphones or digital if it's a digital cable with Toslink on the other end.

Hi

There is something to be said about DE-compressing the lossless files... Some Algorithms are not as efficinet as others in this phase. The one in which we are actually interested when playing music. Various schemes can be used but the OS and the processor do work and depending on the OS it needs to continue to perform some other duties, the most basic of these being basic Computer housekeeping.. I am not certain they are all the same when it comes to that... I have read that Vista does a good job on this front... The processing and the efficiency of the de-compressing process could account for a perception of one sounding better than the other, the bits in the Audio files are not changed but the way they are delivered to the DAC could be..

I work in a different environement and have experienced how some codecs tax processors ( G729 in VOiP for example compared to G711...) I am not implying that G729 is lossless by the way, simply drwaing a comparison to the processing required. If the OS is not tuned to allow it to dedicate itself to the task at hands, de-compressing the Audio Stream and passing it to the output without, devoting a good portion of processing cycles to other duties then we may have a not smooth transfer of the bits, even when they are all there and what they should be, to the Audio processes... There is much to study in this field so I would take a diferent approach.. rather than , as I have done in previous posts, postulating that all lossless format would sound the same reagrdles of the hardware AND software involved..

You cannot connect a 75 ohm coaxial cable to the Mac I am using or any Mac that I know of. There is only a 3.5mm headphone jack that outputs analogue for headphones or digital if it's a digital cable with Toslink on the other end.

You can use a USB audio card to change to coax, but given you're streaming from a computer, the toslink gives you total electrical isolation and that probably trumps any other differences.

If you think vinyl is going to sound as good as it does after being recorded to CD, then while I really appreciate you posting in this thread, we'll just have to disagree on much of the differences that are very apparent to me.

Perhaps, but the reality is that CD is much more transparent than vinyl, no matter how much you prefer the vinyl flavor. CD, if you set the levels well, will do a great job of capturing the sound of vinyl. Not 100%, but maybe 95-98%.

Including the differences between Flac and Lossless which I confirmed today...

There are only two options here. As Dr Grant mentioned, you have something set wrong, or you are living a placebo event.

PS - I know that didn't come off well, but that's just reality. You can do what Dr Grant suggested and transfer the files to FLAC which would bypass any bad settings you have in iTunes, as well as potentially addressing the placebo effect, but after that, I'm also at the limit of how helpful I can be. The rest is up to you.

I appreciate the posts..Just to get something clear from a couple of the posters...Are you guys suggesting that Apple LossLess is as good as any other compression in Flac?

There are not many settings in Apple Lossless that I could get wrong, and both computers i have encoded with are rather new and I doubt the differences I can easily hear are attributed to either of those factors.

The differences I do hear in Flac to Apple lossless are gigantic..Have you guys heard comparisons on your own? And are you really saying they are truly identical?

I am not as technically knowledgeable as any of the members who have posted here. But I am an avid listener of music and while I have significant investments in gear including cable,etc., my approach has been one in which I would love to be proved wrong and simpler (cheaper!) solutions are as good or better...For the most part I have not experienced this.

My whole reason for even attempting to encode in lossless is to do as I just stated. To use a much less expensive solution, in which I already have quite an investment and would prefer keeping.

What are you using (software?) to pull or push the files to your DAC?

What are you using (software?) to pull or push the files to your DAC?

I've tried a couple and all sound really good...I am not using any special Flac encoders. (I am using iTunes for the Lossless and can connect wirelessly or just plug out from Mac directly into Dac)

Most recently I downloaded 'Fluke' which allows Flac files to be played in iTunes, yet I have not been able to get it to do so wirelessly. My main purpose is not for wireless for this but it would be a nice option to have as well.

The wireless would be through Apple Extreme which is connected to the dac with the aforementioned Toslink cable..

My comparisons were not done wirelessly, btw

Thank you for the posts guys!

I've tried a couple and all sound really good...I am not using any special Flac encoders. (I am using iTunes for the Lossless and can connect wirelessly or just plug out from Mac directly into Dac)

Most recently I downloaded 'Fluke' which allows Flac files to be played in iTunes, yet I have not been able to get it to do so wirelessly. My main purpose is not for wireless for this but it would be a nice option to have as well.

It is true that all lossless files put out the exact same bitstream to your DAC, so there allows the possibility that iTunes settings are off. Make sure Equalizer is clicked off. Make sure streaming setting (preferences/advanced) is set to "large". Make sure you are on Apple Lossless and not AAC or MP3. Make sure you have error correction on if your CDs are less than pristine. Make sure Sound Enhancer and and Sound Check are 'off' (preferences/playback).

It is true that all lossless files put out the exact same bitstream to your DAC, so there allows the possibility that iTunes settings are off. Make sure Equalizer is clicked off. Make sure streaming setting (preferences/advanced) is set to "large". Make sure you are on Apple Lossless and not AAC or MP3. Make sure you have error correction on if your CDs are less than pristine. Make sure Sound Enhancer and and Sound Check are 'off' (preferences/playback).

Very good!

Equalizer was 'On' set to 'flat', Sound Enhancer was 'On' and sound check was 'On'.

Sounds better already...Thank you..now I can do some fair tests..

Nice improvement already..

Can't imagine why I cannot play Flac flles wirelessly yet can when plugged in dorectly to dac..Might be an intentional limitation of the freeware 'Fluke'...I have no idea but am looking into this as well.

Thanks for the post.

Hopefully that will do it. Soundcheck will digitally lower the volume of louder CDs, reducing resolution and volume, making the sound seem much lower quality. Not sure about the Flac over wireless thing, though if this fixes it, you wouldn't have to worry about it.

Hopefully that will do it. Soundcheck will digitally lower the volume of louder CDs, reducing resolution and volume, making the sound seem much lower quality. Not sure about the Flac over wireless thing, though if this fixes it, you wouldn't have to worry about it.

I was just thinking the same thing..

I have not used iTunes much for anything other than background music...I remember the Sound Check option but it's been so long I forgot about it.

Yes, dramatic difference..

Embarrassing...!

To be fair to 'Flac' I do want to find the best encoder I can, such as RipStation for PC..supposedly reads the files over and over to reduce error's etc. The Flac example I am using is admittedly was admittedly from a very old codec...Searching now for something better I can try..

In the settings for importing CD in iTunes, using Lossless the only options are 'Automatic', is this correct?

I was just thinking the same thing..

I have not used iTunes much for anything other than background music...I remember the Sound Check option but it's been so long I forgot about it.

Yes, dramatic difference..

Embarrassing...!

Hey, at least your hearing is intact and you're not hallucinating!

In the settings for importing CD in iTunes, using Lossless the only options are 'Automatic', is this correct?

Yes, because you can't adjust the bit rate or sample rate on a lossless codec.

Hey, at least your hearing is intact and you're not hallucinating!

Yes, because you can't adjust the bit rate or sample rate on a lossless codec.


LOL..yes I am sitting here listening and toggling between sound check on and off and getting a good chuckle..

This is the streaming device I use
http://www.modwright.com/pdf/TransporterMusicServer.pdf

It was far superior to the Linn in my home

That looks just about like this... well exactly like this because Logitech makes it now :) :
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/speakers_audio/wireless_music_systems/devices/3163&cl=us,en

That looks just about like this... well exactly like this because Logitech makes it now :) :
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/speakers_audio/wireless_music_systems/devices/3163&cl=us,en

what are you talking about?????

Modwright takes the Transporter re-builds the analog output stage, the power supply, and tube rectifies it. You should spend time reading and learning.

Oh my goodness, Logitech is ripping of ModWright! Someone call the FTC! :D

sorry to the OP. I was trying to help you with streaming devices. PM me if you would like further help.

posts deleted

this has got to stop: it makes AVS look bad and makes more grey hair on old moderators

Well hey, overall this thread is a success, because we've helped controlit get to the bottom of at least some of his audio quality issues.

what are you talking about?????

Modwright takes the Transporter re-builds the analog output stage, the power supply, and tube rectifies it. You should spend time reading and learning.

I apologize, I see what your saying :o

Are you guys suggesting that Apple LossLess is as good as any other compression in Flac?In terms of maintaining the exact encoded data they are identical. They act in a similar fashion to compressing files on your hard drive. Your text documents don't change letters when they are compressed and then uncompressed, right? This is NOT like sampling digital data from an analog source and it's NOT like mp3 (or other lossy format) encoding which has to 'intelligently' throw out data for the compression. Some lossless formats offer greater compression (at the expense of CPU cycles during the encode process). Typically decoding of compressed formats require _very_ few CPU cycles because the formats need to be decompressed on small portable players (with small CPUs). Also, you'll want to consider compatibility across your various systems. For example, my files need to play on my car system, PS3, theater, PC, ipod, etc., etc.

Greg

I don't agree with you on the part of the lossless files requiring few CPU cycles.. CPU efficiency was not the design priority for lossless algorithms.. It is however a priority for mp3 as is high compression .. I do not have specific numbers but there are difference in processing requirements across these and OSes and the underlying middleware could make a difference in what one hears

I don't agree with you on the part of the lossless files requiring few CPU cycles.. CPU efficiency was not the design priority for lossless algorithms.. It is however a priority for mp3 as is high compression .. I do not have specific numbers but there are difference in processing requirements across these and OSes and the underlying middleware could make a difference in what one hears

Any modern day CPU would not even see a load when playing back audio files, when you say "middleware" are you saying that the CPU can affect the sound?

Well, Apple Lossless is generally more compute intensive than FLAC, but it still requires only a fraction of a modern CPU's resources to decode in real time. If there are audible differences it's going to be due to unintended sonic processing like John helped controlit track down here.

Can anyone suggest a Flac encoder for the Mac, I was told Linn has Ripstation on their site but can't find a Mac version..

I suggested one to you earlier in the thread

www.sbooth.org/max

Can anyone suggest a Flac encoder for the Mac, I was told Linn has Ripstation on their site but can't find a Mac version..

I posted this earlier in the thread :
I also have a MacPro and understand your dilemma.
If you can I suggest to use a Windows machine and this software that is well worth the cost for it's ability to rip, get quality metadata and album covers: http://www.dbpoweramp.com/

For a Mac you might try: http://sbooth.org/Max/
Or if you have (or want to get) Roxio Toast 9 you can try that.

I want to reiterate how much better the Modwright Transporter is than the Linn piece and costs much less. But you should make whatever decision is best for you...

I want to reiterate how much better the Modwright Transporter is than the Linn piece and costs much less. But you should make whatever decision is best for you...


... and what a more careful reader focker is now :D

I posted this earlier in the thread :
I also have a MacPro and understand your dilemma.
If you can I suggest to use a Windows machine and this software that is well worth the cost for it's ability to rip, get quality metadata and album covers: http://www.dbpoweramp.com/

For a Mac you might try: http://sbooth.org/Max/
Or if you have (or want to get) Roxio Toast 9 you can try that.

CD Ripper appears to be for PC? I can't find a Mac version for it..

Downloading Soundbooth now..Thank you both for suggesting it.

I am not running out to buy the Linn piece until I am done with my own research and it proven to sound much better than what I already own. I much prefer using iTunes for many reasons..

Here's what I've done so far tonight.

I encoded one track..not the best of test songs but it's the one I used for now..

Patti Smith -Smells Like Teen spirit from the album Twelve. Wish I could find it on vinyl!

I encoded it with xAct and Flac'er and played them both back with COG.

I then compared them to Apple LossLess in iTunes as well wtih the original CD on an Accuphase DC 90 transport. They all were run into the Accuphase DC 91 Dac.

Although I do not understand all the settings in xAct, I did the best I could..

So far the differences in both Flac recordings is so minor as I am not certain I could identify them from eachother in a blind test.

Compared them only briefly to LossLess out of iTunes..Differences are not easy to pin down and there are differences in output volumes perhaps...

Finally compared them all to the original CD and there is less difference than I would have expected. The CD does sound better to me and different but not so much better and so much different either.

This test really was interesting as the dealer did a very similar test playing (this same track) with the Linn and a dCS Porchini ($20K CD/Dac). The Linn held it's own and the differences were perhaps greater than with my test (maybe) but I also preferred the dCS playing the original CD.

But none of it mattered that much as I am not buying a $20K CD Player or any CD player. The Linn sounded great but in fact, so does my Accuphase dac with a $20 cable and I am able to use it all in iTunes.

I suppose I will learn more about Flac encoding and find perhaps a better test track, etc.

But bottom line is...I am very satisifed with Lossless and the convenience of iTunes.

If I want to hear music at it's best, I have a few thousand records I inherited from my father who was an avid music enthusiast, in addition of probably a thousand records I collected from back in the day.

CD Ripper appears to be for PC? I can't find a Mac version for it..

What I was trying to say when I said this >>If you can I suggest to use a Windows machine and this software << was that if you can use a Windows machince then the dbpoweramp software is really the best way to go. If you can't use a Windows machine then the only two good FLAC options I know of for a Mac are sbooth and Toast.

What I was trying to say when I said this >>If you can I suggest to use a Windows machine and this software << was that if you can use a Windows machince then the dbpoweramp software is really the best way to go. If you can't use a Windows machine then the only two good FLAC options I know of for a Mac are sbooth and Toast.

I would really need a great reason to use a PC..much rather not..

I just downloaded Soundbooth and am encoding as we 'speak'..Not certain of the best settings yet but I really do like the interface..

Thanks again for suggesting it..Will post later if it sounds any different than the other encoders I have tried.

In terms of maintaining the exact encoded data they are identical. They act in a similar fashion to compressing files on your hard drive. Your text documents don't change letters when they are compressed and then uncompressed, right? This is NOT like sampling digital data from an analog source and it's NOT like mp3 (or other lossy format) encoding which has to 'intelligently' throw out data for the compression. Some lossless formats offer greater compression (at the expense of CPU cycles during the encode process). Typically decoding of compressed formats require _very_ few CPU cycles because the formats need to be decompressed on small portable players (with small CPUs). Also, you'll want to consider compatibility across your various systems. For example, my files need to play on my car system, PS3, theater, PC, ipod, etc., etc.
You're certainly correct about the lossless formats containing the same data. I've done some testing comparing ALAC and FLAC, and as you say, the properly decoded file is identical.

However, I have found that sending ALAC to my Squeezebox clearly sounds worse than FLAC.

I believe this is because the Squeezebox can handle FLAC files natively, whereas ALAC has to be decoded by the server and streamed as PCM. (if I remember correctly)

As I use a low-power server for my music (a QNAP) it must not be doing the conversion "properly" / losslessly.

I have also found that FLAC compression is best left at 5 with the Squeezebox as some tracks had problems at either lower or higher compression levels — 5 is the least cpu intensive.


Things may not be the same with the Transporter, but it's something to consider. I realise it's not what was causing the issue in this case, but there are certainly cases where it's preferable to use one lossless format over another, even if they should sound the same.



As for rippers/encoders, even though my computer is a Mac, I go through the hassle of dual-booting Windows and running dBpoweramp for my CD ripping/encoding/file conversion. I find it produces the best results, and haven't been able to find anything comparable for OSX.

Wonder if Toast 10 pro would be a major improvement I don't know anyone who has tried
it.

I have not heard huge differences in the 3 different formats I've tested..Maybe there are some settings that might make a difference....I like Soundbooth best so far for interface although I am not able to get album art yet..

album art is easy to get

go up top and there will be a dropdown and one of the items says get album art. It then searches amazon for the artwork. It is very easy. There is also a forum on sbooth's site if you need help.

Did you know about the Widgets "Amazon Album Art" and "Harmonic"? Try them! :)

faberryman, I received another reply from a DAC company and will send you a PM.

faberryman, I received another reply from a DAC company and will send you a PM.

Doug, please use PM and not my thread to communicate messages to other members.

No need to post in this thread.

Thanks.