Subwoofer (REL) high level connection wiring depends on amp topology: how can that work?

[jsilvela]

When I bought my REL sub I used the high level connection as the instructions recommended. My amp was class AB, and that was the first case explained in the instructions.
The high level cable has 3 wires: black, red, yellow.
For an AB amp, you connect the red and yellow wires to the red binding posts of the left and right speaker-outs respectively, and the black wire to the black binding post of either right or left speaker-outs.
OK, I thought. Smart. We’re getting the signals from both stereo channels and adding or somehow combining them at the sub.
I assumed the black wire was “zero”, or “ground”, but not necessarily electrical ground. The yellow and red wires, then, would be carrying the signals offset from the black wire.

Later I got a Hypex NCORE amp by Audiophonics. (Oh I had had my eyes on Hypex NCORE…)
And I read the REL instructions again, as I knew the wiring depended on amp topology.
For class D amps and differential amps, the wiring instructions differ from the class AB case: the red and yellow wires are connected to the red binding posts, as before, but the black wire is left loose, not connected to anything.

I did not understand this. I still don’t. In a differential or a class D topology, the speaker connections still work the same, no? A voltage applied to the binding posts, then carried by the cable to the speaker. The voltages of the binding posts relative to ground are immaterial, what matters is the voltage difference between the red and black posts, right?
For class AB, I had assumed the yellow and red wires carried the signal offset from “zero” (black wire). I would not expect it to work without the black wire: if I fed the amp a mono signal, the left and right red binding posts would be carrying the same offset voltage, so … no signal between the red and yellow wires, is what I thought.
I cannot understand how class D could do things any differently.
But my assumption about the red and yellow wires must be incorrect. They must be carrying the signal *between* them, but i can’t understand how.
However, for a mono-block amp, the instructions suggest to connect red and yellow wires to the same red binding post, and black to the black binding post (all on the same monoblock, with a second sub connecting the same way to the other monoblock).
I'm totally mystified.

I read a bit more, and found the REL uses the black wire to try to “match ground” between the sub and the amp. And that many class D amps have the black speaker bindings offset above ground, hence the reason to avoid the black wire connection.
This intrigued me but also kind of scared me.
In my understanding, the amp and the sub should both have their chassis connected to electrical ground. So, why should we further match the “ground” of the signals? And if the sub wants the black wire at ground level but my class D amp keeps its black binding posts at a fixed offset from ground, would I create a short if I connected the black wire? Accident waiting to happen?

I read somewhere that Hypex NCORE modules have their black binding posts at ground level. But even then, I decided not to use the high level connection until I understood it, and instead I use an RCA splitter out of my preamp.
This is working just fine so I'll keep it, but I’m still curious about the high level connections without the black wire.
Can someone clarify?

 

[jsilvela]

Reference: https://rel.net/blog/2018-01-04/how-to/how-to-connect-my-rel/

 

[RF Air]

The Red and Yellow Wires are for Right Channel and Left Channel and are not summed. Signal of each Channel (L&R) can be used for single Sub Mono or divided to each channel if you operate 2 Subs that are paired as Left and Right Channels with Main Speakers.

The Grounding or Black Wire is used for Class A (AB) Amplifiers because they are configured to operate with conventional Ground as a Reference to Signal. Some Class D Amps are configured without this conventional grounding and can vary the reference that results in an offset for Voltage Reference. REL recommends that the Signal Red and Yellow Wires should connect independently of the Ground reference since this can cause a Signal Reference that is offset to a Voltage that exceeds the Subwoofer Circuitry design. This link will explain it better for you.

https://relsupport.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115004486607-Class-D-Amp-Connection-Methods

Signal information from the Amp is still provided as an Analog AC Voltage with the Red and Yellow Wires. Consider that each Chassis of both Amp and Sub Components are Grounded by a Neutral for House Current connection and are grounded by the Chassis Earth Ground which is typically the same grounding reference point in most Household Circuits. However the Signal Circuitry operates independently of the supplied wall current, therefore Signal from the Amp will be independent of a Voltage Reference Neutral as well. It's a Class D Amplifier dilemma that has changed the standard of how Speaker/Component Signal was typically and empirically referenced to "Ground".

 

[jsilvela]

https://relsupport.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115004486607-Class-D-Amp-Connection-Methods

Signal information from the Amp is still provided as an Analog AC Voltage with the Red and Yellow Wires. Consider that each Chassis of both Amp and Sub Components are Grounded by a Neutral for House Current connection and are grounded by the Chassis Earth Ground which is typically the same grounding reference point in most Household Circuits. However the Signal Circuitry operates independently of the supplied wall current, therefore Signal from the Amp will be independent of a Voltage Reference Neutral as well. It's a Class D Amplifier dilemma that has changed the standard of how Speaker/Component Signal was typically and empirically referenced to "Ground".

Thank you! That link helps, but I still don't quite get it.
For a class D, the black binding post may float 10-15v above electrical ground, so better not to connect the black wire. OK, got it.

But according to what you say:

The Red and Yellow Wires are for Right Channel and Left Channel and are not summed. Signal of each Channel (L&R) can be used for single Sub Mono or divided to each channel if you operate 2 Subs that are paired as Left and Right Channels with Main Speakers.

then I would imagine that for a class D amp, I could connect just the yellow or just the red wire. Then I would get bass for only one of the speakers, right or left.
But electrically, how would it work to have a single wire connected? I'm missing something here.
And, if we did need two wires to "close" the electrical circuit, and we were to use the yellow-red connected to left and right binding posts as per the REL instructions,
would not a mono signal fed equally to left and right amp channels produce a zero signal from red-yellow?

I'm sure I'm being dense here, sorry...

 

[RF Air]

Not all, it's a bit confusing at times. Assuming you are producing a Stereo 2 Channel Output for the Subwoofer, Red and Yellow are the two channels for Right and Left Channel. We are talking about the 2 Signals that is independently produced for 2 Channel that will be reproduced on a Single Subwoofer. Each Channel has it's own specific program and the Subwoofer will reproduce the information of both (Stereo) channels.

The signal is sort of like what you could expect from a Coax Cable, Signal is on the conductor as a Voltage. The Subwoofer Circuitry will use both channels to create the program output as it is processed for two channels that combine as amplified output to the subwoofer Speaker Driver. Remember it is purely Signal at a very low level from the Amplifier that is Driving your L&R Speakers because it's impedance is very high due to the resistive circuit designed in the Subwoofer's Circuitry.

We "Float" this Black Wire by not connecting it to the circuit with the Class D Amplifier due to the "offset reference grounding" that may in fact be a voltage instead of a true 0 Volt Neutral Ground. The Signal could ride on the offset reference voltage if you "close the circuit" with connecting the Black wire. The Electrical "Ground" that you are referring to close the circuit is not applicable since Voltage "Signal" is fed to a Circuit in the Subwoofer that will process the source from your amp into an Amplified Signal for the Subwoofer Amplifier/Driver.

 

[Sancus]

There's no benefit to high level connections on subs so I would ignore them.

 

[jsilvela]

Not all, it's a bit confusing at times. Assuming you are producing a Stereo 2 Channel Output for the Subwoofer, Red and Yellow are the two channels for Right and Left Channel. We are talking about the 2 Signals that is independently produced for 2 Channel that will be reproduced on a Single Subwoofer. Each Channel has it's own specific program and the Subwoofer will reproduce the information of both (Stereo) channels.

The signal is sort of like what you could expect from a Coax Cable, Signal is on the conductor as a Voltage. The Subwoofer Circuitry will use both channels to create the program output as it is processed for two channels that combine as amplified output to the subwoofer Speaker Driver. Remember it is purely Signal at a very low level from the Amplifier that is Driving your L&R Speakers because it's impedance is very high due to the resistive circuit designed in the Subwoofer's Circuitry.

We "Float" this Black Wire by not connecting it to the circuit with the Class D Amplifier due to the "offset reference grounding" that may in fact be a voltage instead of a true 0 Volt Neutral Ground. The Signal could ride on the offset reference voltage if you "close the circuit" with connecting the Black wire. The Electrical "Ground" that you are referring to close the circuit is not applicable since Voltage "Signal" is fed to a Circuit in the Subwoofer that will process the source from your amp into an Amplified Signal for the Subwoofer Amplifier/Driver.

Thank you!
I have drawn a diagram. I think I get it. If we connect only say the red wire from the high level cable, we still get a "closed" circuit via the common ground.
If we do this in a class D amp with a 10v offset, the sub must have circuitry to figure that the signal is offset above ground and not being fed a "0 hertz wave".
And, if we had the amp referenced to ground, the black wire could help reduce ground loops.

OK, I think I see. Still too fancy and risky in my opinion. I wonder if some sub owners have fried their amp or their sub using the black wire.
Going to keep using the RCA connection

 

[jsilvela]

There's no benefit to high level connections on subs so I would ignore them.

Agree, agree, was just curious.

 

[RF Air]

There's no benefit to high level connections on subs so I would ignore them.

For the REL Subwoofer, The High Level Connection is the Primary connection design for Audio Input. The LFE is handled separately as an independent circuit with discrete controls for level and crossover. The results are astonishing with the independent circuits because you can calibrate your Subs for the different program material for the source playback. 2 Channel Audio or any Home Theater setting is optimally balanced by this REL design. I use Two REL S-Series Subs for Stereo Fronts with my Home Theater KEF Ref Speakers driven by McIntosh Amps. This set-up works great for me.

The other benefit of High Level is the Frequency Range you receive is Full Spectrum vs. the LFE which is a limited Low Frequency Range. There is an ambiance of sound that is derived by the full Spectrum that has the benefit of a well defined Stage that I have tested for myself on several systems. I can only speak of the REL Subs on this issue. The Velodyne Reference Subs that I replaced could never compete with the REL's, and I was impressed by the sound of the Velodyne's I have owned in the past.

 

[jsilvela]

The results are astonishing with the independent circuits because you can calibrate your Subs for the different program material for the source playback.

This does not require the high level connection necessarily. At least in the REL T/5x, there are two RCA line level inputs. One LFE as you mention. The other uses the very same filter, phase control and volume knob as the high-level connector.

The other benefit of High Level is the Frequency Range you receive is Full Spectrum vs. the LFE which is a limited Low Frequency Range.

Again, the RCA that is NOT marked LFE uses the same filters and controls as the high level.
If you're using an RCA splitter from the preamp, as I am, the amp and the sub will get the exact same spectrum.

The LFE, yes, defeats the REL filters, assuming you'll go with those from your AVR/AVP. And also defeats the phase selector, which I find strange.
I have not played with the LFE input on my sub yet (only had it a short while).

From the videos I've seen, John Hunter says the main benefit of the high-level vs. the line level that feeds to the same circuits is that the high level incorporates the "signature sound" of your amp. This sorta doesn't make much sense to me, unless you're using a tube amp or other such euphonic-distorting amp...

 

[Berwhale]

There's no benefit to high level connections on subs so I would ignore them.

I guess it would be useful for connecting a sub to a stereo integrated amp without a dedicated sub or pre-amp output. I think many modern integrated amps include these outputs, but I managed to find a current example that doesn't in a few seconds of Googling...

Cambridge Audio AXA25 Integrated Stereo Amplifier

25 Watts Power per Channel – performance at all volumes, ideal for smaller rooms Slim Timeless Design – classic hi-fi width, with Lunar Grey aluminium trimTone & Balance Controls – fine-tune sound to compensate for room dynamics Front Aux Input – 3.5mm socket to easily connect compatible devices

www.cambridgeaudio.com

My REL Quake has always been plugged into an AVR, so i've never used the high level connection myself.

 

[RF Air]

This does not require the high level connection necessarily. At least in the REL T/5x, there are two RCA line level inputs. One LFE as you mention. The other uses the very same filter, phase control and volume knob as the high-level connector.


Again, the RCA that is NOT marked LFE uses the same filters and controls as the high level.
If you're using an RCA splitter from the preamp, as I am, the amp and the sub will get the exact same spectrum.

The LFE, yes, defeats the REL filters, assuming you'll go with those from your AVR/AVP. And also defeats the phase selector, which I find strange.
I have not played with the LFE input on my sub yet (only had it a short while).

From the videos I've seen, John Hunter says the main benefit of the high-level vs. the line level that feeds to the same circuits is that the high level incorporates the "signature sound" of your amp. This sorta doesn't make much sense to me, unless you're using a tube amp or other such euphonic-distorting amp...

I see your situation better. I was speaking from my experience with my S-Serie Subwoofers that has a different Input configuration from the T/5x. I have purchased two of the T5's and have found them to be a remarkable Sub Performer. They are not part of my AV system (gave them as gifts to family).

The Signature Sound that John refer's to is part of the physics philosophy of developing a sound that allow's the Main Speakers and Subwoofer to perform as a unified device which is highly noted if you are running Two Subs to match a pair of Front Speakers. The Full Signal Output application provides beneficial tones that can add to the sound spectrum performance of the Sub. The Sub will produce any Signal that is applied, which adds to octaves and other tonal information that can shape the sound output (or cancellation) with the performance of the Speakers. Again, John's videos explain it better, and I have found that the REL's deliver very well which I had to experience to fully understand.

 

[jsilvela]

I see your situation better. I was speaking from my experience with my S-Serie Subwoofers that has a different Input configuration from the T/5x. I have purchased two of the T5's and have found them to be a remarkable Sub Performer. They are not part of my AV system (gave them as gifts to family).

The Signature Sound that John refer's to is part of the physics philosophy of developing a sound that allow's the Main Speakers and Subwoofer to perform as a unified device which is highly noted if you are running Two Subs to match a pair of Front Speakers. The Full Signal Output application provides beneficial tones that can add to the sound spectrum performance of the Sub. The Sub will produce any Signal that is applied, which adds to octaves and other tonal information that can shape the sound output (or cancellation) with the performance of the Speakers. Again, John's videos explain it better, and I have found that the REL's deliver very well which I had to experience to fully understand.

I have a theory about the high-level inputs:
I think that if you have a full-spectrum RCA signal connected to the "low level input" (so labeled in the T/5x), you're getting the same benefits you cite for the high-level. As John Hunter has clearly stated, the low-level RCA input uses the same filters/volume/phase circuitry as the high-level. Not so the LFE input.

But the emphasis on high-level has some *strategic* advantages:
- 1. Doesn't alienate the owners of amps without a subwoofer-out by telling them the high-level input is "legacy".
- 2. For people connecting the sub to a cheapo AVR, it encourages them to keep the fronts defined as "Large", and bypass the AVR filters altogether.
- 3. For people who have Pre-Outs but not a Sub-out in their amp, using one of the Pre-outs will give either right or left channel only. The high-level combines both.

I think the reason REL advocate leaving the fronts set as Large on AVRs is to use the REL filters rather than those on the AVR. And I can understand that very well. I'm sure they have auditioned their subs connected to a variety of amps/AVRs, and the digital crossovers/filters may have been disappointing on more than a few.
I saw John Hunter call for "gradual" filters vs. steep filters in one of his videos.

Point 1 above is absolutely key. And I think REL are very smart here. They're basically the only ones catering to audiophiles who are not willing to part ways with their beloved amp. Others, you have the impression you're being told: ditch your legacy amp, get an AVR, high-pass your mains and get with the times already.

 

[RF Air]

I found this post from @JR449 which touches on the Full Range, High Level Input benefits/philosophy for the REL design. Every Manufacturer and Consumer has a preference for their own Signature Sound which is one of the "fun" fundamentals of the Audio/Video Hobby Enthusiast. It's like owning anything that performs, we each have a bias and our own individual values and goals.

Having talked with the lead designer of REL here is what he had to say about the new HT-range and how the design differs from other brands, thoughts about the specs etc.


DSP-based woofer designs can generate impressive specs. DSP can be used to flatten out curves and generate cool looking graphs and, as your question focuses on, deliver very good numerical LF extension results. But it comes down to what values each company is focusing on.

At REL, we're never willing to chase specs at the expense of audible performance. DSP too often, and maybe its simply the engineers that are using DSP chips, not DSP itself (although our experiences working with it suggests at least part of it is intrinsic to DSP itself) don't produce the fluidity and natural tracking of dynamics that a good analog circuit can. There's an aliveness to what the HT delivers that none of the competitors listed deliver. Whenever you're using DSP to, for example, deliver flatter, lower extension specs, something is being robbed to produce that figure.

I can tell you that, having listened extensively to at least one of the competitors you reference, our ability to seamlessly transition up through middle and upper bass regions--areas critical for the baritone male spoken word in dialogue--is streets ahead of the competition. And why is this important? Gosh as a theatre maven and someone who has worked a board in transfer studios aren't I most concerned about the big explosions that shake the room? Of course those matter and, if you actually spent any time listening to a well set-up HT/1205 for instance, you would know that both it and its quality competition handle these aspects almost identically. Both play enormously loud, frankly louder than most normal folks can handle in the average living or drawing room. Both go down deep and rattle things about.

But switching back to the other 1:48 minutes of the movie wherein actual human beings, or droids, or fictitious creatures are interacting with the spoken word reveals a fascinating difference. The Serie HT actually possess many of the aural cues that have made so many customers happy with their T/i and S progenitors-those "shiny boxes" you were on about ; >). Both T/i and HT have an ability to blend and meld almost seamlessly with the main speakers (or center and surrounds in a REL3D set-up, which is modelled on Dolby's own requirements that ALL speakers in a proper theatre be capable of full range sound deliver of lower 20's-20khz)).

In doing so (blending with and becoming one with the speakers being supported by a REL), all kinds of important aural cues are revealed that set physical context for a scene, allow echoes to die away in concert with the visual data your eyes are seeing on screen. In other words, to provide all the thousands of elements of decoding spoken word, space and context within a scene that delivers scale cues. This ability forms the very basis of great theatre sound and helps REL theatre owners to more fully immerse themselves in the full, rich tapestry of sound reproduction that is the very basis for deep enjoyment of great theatre. And please remember this, the big explosions and effects so many of us enjoy in a big scene cannot possibly take their proper place without the small, quiet set-up scenes that ALWAYS preface a big effects-laden scene (it HAS to, otherwise the whole damned movie is just loud and nothing stands out) and almost always culminates in a quiet, small dialogue rich scene for the same reason.

Bottom line? We know a great deal about the art of movie making and our goal is to deliver products that bring out ALL aspects of the movie-making art. Frankly, I'm more than willing to sacrifice a meaningless spec by a couple of Hertz to achieve this result. I hope this better helps you understand our goals and why we occasionally are willing to not follow the herd since they are almost never trying to get to the same place as are we.

 

[Sancus]

But the emphasis on high-level has some *strategic* advantages:
- 1. Doesn't alienate the owners of amps without a subwoofer-out by telling them the high-level input is "legacy".
- 2. For people connecting the sub to a cheapo AVR, it encourages them to keep the fronts defined as "Large", and bypass the AVR filters altogether.
- 3. For people who have Pre-Outs but not a Sub-out in their amp, using one of the Pre-outs will give either right or left channel only. The high-level combines both.

None of this is going to get you very good sound though. You really need a proper digital crossover and EQ system to wrangle subs into shape. If you go out of your way to avoid those things, you're pretty likely to have bad bass, often really bad.

I'm aware that traditional audiophiles don't like those things but that doesn't change reality. The REL philosophy is basically just dumb pseudoscience from top to bottom.

 

[jsilvela]

I found this post from @JR449 which touches on the Full Range, High Level Input benefits/philosophy for the REL design. Every Manufacturer and Consumer has a preference for their own Signature Sound which is one of the "fun" fundamentals of the Audio/Video Hobby Enthusiast. It's like owning anything that performs, we each have a bias and our own individual values and goals.

Very interesting, thank you!

None of this is going to get you very good sound though. You really need a proper digital crossover and EQ system to wrangle subs into shape. If you go out of your way to avoid those things, you're pretty likely to have bad bass, often really bad.

I'm aware that traditional audiophiles don't like those things but that doesn't change reality. The REL philosophy is basically just dumb pseudoscience from top to bottom.

My theory was not that it's a good or bad approach, but that the emphasis on high level is very core to the REL "philosophy", and that this philosophy has the benefit of not alienating people who don't want to stop using their Krell/Mac/tube-amp and get on the AVR/DSP bandwagon.
I've been learning a lot, in no small part thanks to you in the "What's the fuss ... " thread.
And I agree fundamentally that without DSP at some point in the chain, you are at the mercy of room modes.
But the DSP can be applied higher up the chain as with Audissey/Dirac/ PEQ produced with REW etc.
I.e. you can do those things even with a REL sub, as I am doing.

With respect, not here to defend or argue "ad hominem" statements on "traditional, dumb, pseudoscience". You made your point with your first response in the thread.

Performance can be derived in many different ways which is a reality. We can disagree without denigrating, and I can see your point of view is valid for you; with respect.

RF Air, if you don't mind me referencing myself: I opened a thread on subs called Why the fuss with subwoofer specs and brands? in the "general discussions" forum.
Sancus is being quite helpful and patient with a newbie like me, I'm learning a lot.
I would not take the previous statements as "ad hominem".

You're quite right. As you say one of the "fun" fundamentals of the Audio/Video Hobby Enthusiast.
Having learned quite a bit lately, I agree with Sancus in that I prefer some DSP to combat room modes and flatten response.
But DSP does not preclude using a REL.
Without the DSP, I have a strong room resonance at 39Hz that makes bass sound boomy and cheap.

This has been remarked by Floyd Toole and by Amir I think: DSP has gotten a bad reputation ages ago, for good reason as it was done ham-handedly.
But today we have easy ways to apply some surgical Parametric EQ filters, and we can also avoid EQ'ing above the Schroeder frequency.

RF Air, if you have stayed away from DSP and room correction, I would pose a *fun* challenge: measure your response, and if you have some significant room mode in LF, which is more than likely, get REW to generate an EQ profile. You can restrict the frequency range of the equalization, and you can edit the file produced by REW by hand to keep only a few of the PEQ, the biggest perhaps.
In my case, I've generated a profile with REW and kept it small: 4 parametric filters.
Then I apply via computer (in my case SoundSource on a mac).
And I have to say, this relatively surgical intervention is helping tame my room acoustics and get the best from my REL.

 

[RF Air]

Very interesting, thank you!


My theory was not that it's a good or bad approach, but that the emphasis on high level is very core to the REL "philosophy", and that this philosophy has the benefit of not alienating people who don't want to stop using their Krell/Mac/tube-amp and get on the AVR/DSP bandwagon.
I've been learning a lot, in no small part thanks to you in the "What's the fuss ... " thread.
And I agree fundamentally that without DSP at some point in the chain, you are at the mercy of room modes.
But the DSP can be applied higher up the chain as with Audissey/Dirac/ PEQ produced with REW etc.
I.e. you can do those things even with a REL sub, as I am doing.


RF Air, if you don't mind me referencing myself: I opened a thread on subs called Why the fuss with subwoofer specs and brands? in the "general discussions" forum.
Sancus is being quite helpful and patient with a newbie like me, I'm learning a lot.
I would not take the previous statements as "ad hominem".

You're quite right. As you say one of the "fun" fundamentals of the Audio/Video Hobby Enthusiast.
Having learned quite a bit lately, I agree with Sancus in that I prefer some DSP to combat room modes and flatten response.
But DSP does not preclude using a REL.
Without the DSP, I have a strong room resonance at 39Hz that makes bass sound boomy and cheap.

This has been remarked by Floyd Toole and by Amir I think: DSP has gotten a bad reputation ages ago, for good reason as it was done ham-handedly.
But today we have easy ways to apply some surgical Parametric EQ filters, and we can also avoid EQ'ing above the Schroeder frequency.

RF Air, if you have stayed away from DSP and room correction, I would pose a *fun* challenge: measure your response, and if you have some significant room mode in LF, which is more than likely, get REW to generate an EQ profile. You can restrict the frequency range of the equalization, and you can edit the file produced by REW by hand to keep only a few of the PEQ, the biggest perhaps.
In my case, I've generated a profile with REW and kept it small: 4 parametric filters.
Then I apply via computer (in my case SoundSource on a mac).
And I have to say, this relatively surgical intervention is helping tame my room acoustics and get the best from my REL.

I deleted the ad hominem statement, not trying to cause any issues. Obviously, if a poster wants to be negative, we can ignore the bias and leave it alone. Myopic views are common and everyone has their own bias, method and opinion. I have expressed positive results with my REL experience and can respect other opinions if they are not continuing a thread to denigrate or foster contrived negativity.

DSP is a great tool and it will continue to grow and be the basis for many users to define and advance their performance equipment. I have been more "organic" with my approach to use a physical set-up to create an optimal Reference performance for my equipment; with the given design of the equipment, like REL's onboard tuning adjustments. I will introduce REW later once I have replaced my AVR-Processor Unit. But like a musician (as a musician) who uses different instruments, amplifiers and set-ups to create a signature sound, I have the same approach with my Home Theater - Audio/Visual system.

I like your ideas @jsilvela and will be challenged to challenge myself with the new onboards for REW. It's great fun to "reinvent" or dial in the benefit of our music and theater.