Power star mini - copy of BDSv3

[Glen Trew]

Wow. So much to respond to, but I’m afraid I gotta do it.

I stayed out of this discussion until Ron made the claims, "Inside they are very different" and "...exclusive PSC filters will ensure you of clean, quiet recordings in the field". As explained in my response, both of these statements are untrue and needed to be clarified. My original post was not to complain about being copied, but to refute claims that the copy was not a copy. Now there are a few more things posted on this public forum that need to be clarified on the same forum. I generally like to keep my posts efficient and short, but I’m afraid with this one, short might not be possible...

Robert, there is no remorse for my post. Judging from some of the responses, it was evidently needed, and, to the best of my knowledge, accurate.

Vin, I agree entirely… There’s no reason that discussions of conflicting information should not be public on this forum when it involves equipment that people in this forum are considering, as long as accurate information is the goal.

Dan, the word “stole” was not used prior to your post. The term “rip-off”, offensive as it may be, was appropriately and accurately used to describe the process of copying the BDS box, as the PSC version is clearly a direct copy of the established iconic design. Again, while the legality is debatable, the claims by Ron Meyer that the copy is “very different on the inside” are inaccurate and confusing to the end users, as evidenced by some of the responses.

As stated earlier, yet denied by Ron Meyer, the PSC housing is identical to Remote Audio’s design of the BDSv3. The exterior dimensions are the same, as is the layout, though thinner metal was used to make room for the slightly longer circuit board.

David, the switches, components and active circuitry used in the BDSv3 (and previous versions, for that matter) are unique to the Remote Audio design, and not shared by Hawk-Woods, as you suggest, who, respectably, have unique and original design features of their own. Interestingly, the only reason the remotely activated switch circuit was used in the BDSv3 was to allow it to be reliably remote controlled with the RM remote meter, a feature the PSC copy does not have. In other words, there was no reason for the PSC copy to use this circuit except for the ease of copying. So, no, the PSC copy was not a “natural design choice” as you assumed. You said that you believed my response was “an instance of jumping to conclusions”, but this is also not the case. As simple as the BDSv3 design is, it is a refined balance of function, need, size, and cost. I have been intimately involved in the conception, design, and building of the BDSv3, and fully understand what is involved in the creative and practical design process, as well as other considerations such as the choice to use or not use so-called “exclusive filters”. Ron’s written account and detailed knowledge of the BDSv3 design, combined with the physical evidence, supports the related claims in my earlier post, without the need for the Latvian-made spy camera you suggested. The statements in my original post are intentional, accurate, and true, to the best of my knowledge.

Oleg, it’s interesting that you mentioned the PSC timecode slate (“IntelliSlate”), because one of the nicest guys our industry has ever known, timecode slate pioneer Michael Denecke, years ago expressed to me with angered disappointment that PSC, backed by LSC, ripped-off the inner workings of the Denecke slate design for the PSC IntelliSlate. Mike’s words to me: “Inside, it’s a Denecke slate”. Mike is no longer with us to corroborate this, but I know he made these feelings known to others as well. At least the PSC IntelliSlate had some unique exterior control features and a hole to store a dry-wipe marker.

Also, Oleg, to your statement wondering if the Remote Audio MEON was designed in-house: I designed every feature and function of the first MEONs, and spec’d the internal battery pack that is made for the MEON by the Saft battery company in France. I hand-assembled the first several at my bench at the Remote Audio shop (one of these is still working in my cart after four years). Since then, the MEON continues to be very nicely refined by the Remote Audio staff, all in-house, and continues to be assembled all in-house. The MEON chassis was originally made by the same California metal fabrication company that we used for the BDS and other Remote Audio chassis (the same company we introduced to Ron Meyer of PSC a few years ago, who also began using them). In the last two months, all of the Remote Audio metal work has been moved to a Tennessee plant for more control and better precision.

To Ron’s comment that I was making up my own facts, everything in my post was true and accurate.

Question to Ron about his last post, stating “…[PSC] have been using this same Switchcraft power connector in several of our products for nearly 25 years.” If this is true, I find it very interesting because one of the reasons we chose this connector is that it seemed unique among anything related in our industry, in that it has a 2.5mm pin and a normally open switch to ground that can only be activated by a long shank mating plug (the more commonly used 2.1mm plug will not go in, and even if it did, would not be long enough to activate the ground connection). The only manufacturer in our industry I am aware of to use this connector since the BDS box was designed is Zaxcom, who consulted me about this connector before using it. Of course, we could have overlooked something from PSC, and, if so, would you please tell us what your uses were?

Ron makes reference to the PSC M4mkII that had an NP-1 slot and two power outlets of only 200mA (which is why the fuses kept blowing), stating that it was introduced 12 years ago, claiming it was introduced two years before the Remote Audio brand was in existence. This was probably an honest mistake, but the truth is that the BDS name and the Remote Audio brand were introduced 14 years ago on the first mass-produced BDS box, well before the M4mkII was introduced, though the BDS layout was designed and built one year prior to that under the Trew Audio name.

For some reason Ron states that PSC has been making power supplies since 1986, where he was an employee. This group may find it equally irrelevant that I started building professional audio distribution amplifiers and power supplies in 1977 at the CBS affiliate where I worked as an engineer. These were built from scratch, down to shooting and etching the boards in our film processing lab. One of these DAs is installed in my production sound cart today, and still working. The list of such things goes on, but equally boring.

Since many in this group are, understandably, not technically inclined to understand the details, and want to believe that a tiny, 69-cent "exclusive filter" will magically solve their noise problems (who wouldn't want that?), I decided to explain that the claim was untrue, which it is.

Another reason to make this information public: Technically un-savy sales people also read and hear of these claims, and are happy to pass them along to their customers in order to make more sales. This would be fine if the information was correct, but its not. Disappointingly, some sales people want to believe these claims so badly that they ignore evidence to the contrary, continuing to mislead their customers. In support of this statement (names withheld): At NAB a year and a half ago, I was showing the soon-to-be-released BDSv3 to the sales manager of one of the larger film/video sales companies in the US. His only question, "Does it have filters?". When I said, "No", and went on to explain why, he was unimpressed and skeptical. Then, a person who is largely considered by this group to be one of the most respected names in wireless microphone manufacturing overheard the conversation, stepped up and said, "That's right..." and went on to support my explanation. The sales manager's response was, "Really?!" and seemed to be shocked to hear from this person that filters in a power distro box do not have the claimed effect on audible noise problems associated with a shared power source in an ENG audio rig. Sadly, it didn't seem to matter, because the same sales manager continues to tout the virtues of a filter in a box.

Hopefully, the readers of this group are now adequately and accurately informed about the topic. But if more info is needed, ask away!

Best,

Glen Trew

[Dre Rivera]

I want to start off by saying i respect both companies for what they do and for the products they have brought to the field. Both companies make great products. With that being said.

I am confused as to why PSC would do some thing already done by Remote audio. I understand the reason for putting their own version of a power distro box out in the market, But why use the same design another company already used. I mean the BDSv3 did come out significantly earlier. I don't think the people at PSC went this whole time without noticing the BDSv3 as they designed their mini. Didn't they stop for a second and say, "hey this is the same design as the BDSv3 lets do something else." I feel like PSC, being such a great company and having had designed so many good products would have designed it differently. Or Even would have tried to make and even better design. I personally don't like the way the connectors sit on the front of the BDSv3 and prefer the BDSv2 with the connectors on the side, but that's just my preference.

I originally made the post after browsing through the PSC site and seeing the Mini. the first thing that came to mind was its a BDSv3. I was confused as to why they didn't make their own unique design. Although i hadn't seen the inside. Its the same housing, connectors are in the same location and they both distribute power. This makes me ask, how different can the really be?, besides adding LEDs.

I've been using a BDSv2 on my over the shoulder rig for quite some time now and I have yet to have any issues with the box regarding "unwanted switch mode noise and RF interference from your power lines." I also haven't heard from anyone i know using BDS units to have this issue. So was there really a demand for this "exclusive Silent Power Technology?"

Although PSC has made many good high products, I really feel like they took the easy route on this one and desided to copy the BDSv3 add LED's, lower the price a bit and call it a night.

dre

[Jeff Wexler]

Quoting myself: "My overall advice regarding this PSC vs. RemoteAudio 'discussion' is that we need to take it down a notch, possibly encourage both Glen Trew and Ron Meyer to have a private conversation about all of this, and let the rest of us just get on with it."

I am retracting my advice, big time, as this is a necessary discussion that needs to be public --- thank you to all, most notably Glen Trew, for hanging in there and continuing to post on this issue.

Personally, I really feel that Glen's last post, lengthy for sure but impeccably clear, professional and personal, is the last word on this specific topic (PSC PowerStar Mini vs. BDSv3). Kudos as well to Dre Rivera for commenting on why PSC didn't come up with their own design when coming out with a product that does exactly the same thing an established and existing product does.

I also think it is important that Glen points out the relationship of the SALES people in this whole thing (Oleg should be pleased) regarding, in this case, the filters in use in the distribution box. When a manufacturer is able to control the flow of information in relation to a perceived necessary feature or problem solving function (in the absence of a public forum like this group), sales people will often pass on this erroneous info the potential customers. There are numerous analogies in other arenas, simple example in the food industry with the proliferation of notices on packages "Contains 0 Trans-Fats" on products that would never have trans-fats in the first place.

-  Jeff Wexler

[soundtrane]

A while ago, when i thought i needed another BDS cable, I looked into the connector. The reason being - some 30 odd $ plus shipping plus customs duty.

Eventually I did not need to make the cable at all. I just decided to go another way.

I found quite easily the connector in question - made by Switchcraft, with different sizes (lengths) available on their website. I don't know if the BDS connectors are Switchcraft or not, but I am pretty sure the Swithcraft ones should do the job if ever one needs to replace one on a BDS cable...

-vin

[soundtrane]

http://www.switchcraft.com/ProductSummary.aspx?Parent=479

I guess this is it. S761K i think...

Now, it's another thing about ease of availability...

-vin

[Solid Goldberger]

I think the criticism of the locking connectors is pretty irrelevant here.  I would never consider buying a battery distribution system without lockin connectors of some kind, and I much prefer the ones on the BDS to the Hirose connectors on the hawk-woods system (which I'd imagine would be just as difficult to find outside a professional source).

I love my RA BDSv3, would change nothing about it beyond the cost of the accessories. The remote seemed awesome until I saw that it was the same price as the bds itself.

E.

[soundtrane]

<<Although PSC has made many good high products, I really feel like they took the easy route on this one and desided to copy the BDSv3 add LED's, lower the price a bit and call it a night.

dre>>

Great, then can we change the face of this thread, or start a new one?

Dre - if you were happy with the BDS (any version of it) --- BUT ---- given a chance ---- you would want ---- ?

Oleg - if you feel that the shape of the box (BDS/PSC) - could you then SUGGEST a better shape?

If there can be a better battery distribution system that is the result of the outcome of all this in this thread, why not?

It is up to Remote Audio or PSC to pay heed to what is mentioned here, and they can decide how to incorporate the changes if they accept them as valid.

And if there is ANOTHER manufacturer who wants to take all the suggestions, and build a completely different power dist, why not...

What i hate to see here is just a raking up of information from the past, slander (whether true or not - yes, Senator - an oxymoron here), and baiting of any kind.

I hope I have made myself clear without hurting anyone.

-vin

(sitting here thousands of miles away, and getting a hundredth of the rental people get in the US, while having to pay up to 3 times the cost when buying anything, i should be really worried if i have ended up in the really really wrong business... maybe i have, but i have no choice now. too old to die, and too young to rock and... )

[Derek H]

It's been said already but I tend to agree with the "jeez, did you have to make it look exactly the same" sentiments others have stated..

For example look at the Battery Bud, same product more or less, but with a different design..  No problems.  I actually prefer the Buds (version II just came out, has 5 outputs instead of 3, 6A polyfuse, also no filters, v1 had filters) for their cable and switch orientation..  Switch on top, cables out the bottom, nothing on the sides.  Just like a wireless receiver, so for my bags I find it's easier to place the thing.  Just my personal preference.  That said, the RM for the new BDS is a nice workaround for placement issues.  Perhaps a cheaper version sans voltage/amp meter and just an on/off switch would be a nice alternative

Regarding RF chokes and filters, the only time I've had trouble with DC noise in a sound bag was with the 1st generation Zaxcom stereoline transmitter, but this problem was well documented in the user manual, along with the solution:  Special cable with big-ass cap across the leads.  Was able to DIY the appropriate cable and this solved the problem, mostly.  Still the noise was there but barely present in comparison and only at very low levels.  This was when I was using the PSC Alphamix with internal distro system.. When I switched to a 302 with the Battery Bud (v1, same cables tho) the noise totally disappeared at normal operating levels.  Not sure what made the difference between mixers or if the Battery Bud's filters actually took care of the remaining noise.  Apparently with all the 2nd gen Zax stuff this is no longer an issue.

Say what you will about the expensive Hirose parts (12-15 bucks per connector) but I find that if you make one of those well it will last.  Whereas I've had few of the solder-on Switchcraft parts (not molded) go bunk on me..

[Ron Meyer]

I feel the need to respond to Glen Trew’s latest post.  I feel his anger, resentment and yes, the passion for his products coming through loud and clear.  Believe me, I fully understand what it feels like when suddenly you have competition, be it in one product category or many.  No one would become a manufacturer in this small specialized business unless they have a serious passion for what they do and what they create.  It’s a small dedicated industry where change comes in increments based mostly on customer feedback from the field.  I will be the first to admit that I have felt just like Glen many, many times in the past and I am certain that I will feel the same way many more times in the future.  When Remote Audio came into being, it worried me.  When they started building Beta snakes that were very similar to ours,  it hurt!  In later years when Remote Audio started to enter the power supply/power distribution business with their nickel/iron car battery, I was hurt yet again.  Over the past few years Remote Audio and other competitors have ramped up their competiting products with PSC.  And as they have, I have had to react to these new products in a competitive way.  I have had to go back to the drawing board and come up with an improvement to our own product range and put it on the free market to let the customers decide which product they will chose to use.    I know I am not alone in this situation and I am not trying to be flippant.  Competition hurts in any shape or form, I know it, I get it, I’ve been there.  It’s how you deal with it that matters.

                                                                                                                         

Product design for use in our very specialized industry always requires three things:             

1.  Small as possible for portable use.       

2. Light weight as possible for portable use.         

3.  Low current consumption for maximum battery run time.   

To this end, I decided to go with a similar box shape as our competitor.    I will say this, there are very limited ways you can make a sheet metal box with all the PCB mounted connectors coming out one side while trying to keep the box as small as humanly possible.  I also am quite aware that coming to market with a product that offers similar features in a larger box would be a huge mistake.  To quote John Tatooles “why are your boxes so big” is a statement that is both accurate and always in the back of my mind ……Thanks John!  In an industry where form follows function sometimes the simplest shape is all that is needed.  If we took Glens comments further, we would all have to admit that the Shure FP32 and/or SQN mixers started it all.  Every ENG style mixer since then is rectangular, has its inputs on the left, outputs on the right, etc, etc,  Did all these manufactures “rip off’ Shure?  While the box design is important, the price, feature set, durability and after sale customer support are even more important.  I think everyone will agree that both companies offer all of the above.

If I had brought out a box that offered the same exact feature set as Remote Audio’s box, then Glen would be fully justified.  But the reality is I added several items to my feature set and I use several different components not found in his box.  These include:

FILTERS……..yes I know that Glen and I will never agree on the use of filters so I think we all should just agree to disagree.  Glen justifies his feeling about this through his inter-action with a dealer and other manufacturer.  I get it, and I know he is not just trying to make his point, but he and others truly believe that filters are unnecessary and that all noise faults are caused by ground loops.  In my experience ground loops are only partially to blame.  I have had to solve many, many noise issues over the years for customers.  Sometimes I have found ground loops and sometimes I have found issues where various kinds of filters have helped eliminate noise problems be it RF or intermodulation noise.  The bottom line is that I feel filters are necessary and Glen does not.  I include these filters in all of our power products and Glen does not.  If he has been successful in selling his product that way, then good for him.  I certainly have been successfull in selling my products designed my way.

LEDs  Our box contains six LEDs that are used to monitor the six individual outputs.  These LED’s may or may not ever be used.  If you never have a piece of equipment go bad or never have a shorted power cable, then you will likely never use this feature.  But here at PSC we feel the LEDs make for a more complete product.  For example, if one of the outputs becomes shorted, the LED will light up RED.  This will save valuable time sorting through your bag to find which cable is connected to which output.  Additionally, the LED can be used to test a suspected shorted cable even without another piece of gear being plugged into that cable such as a radio mic receiver.  Is it the cable or radio mic receiver?  Unplug the receiver and if the led stays lit, it’s the cable.  Simple trouble shooting feature you can use in the field.  Yes you may never need this feature, but if you do, you will thank us for including it in our design.

POWER SWITCH RED LED  Our box offers another additional feature in that if the main polyfuse ever is blown, the power Switch will light up RED rather than the usual GREEN alerting the operator of the overloaded Main polyfuse.  Without this feature, you really won’t know in the field if it’s the polyfuse, a bad NP-1 holder, a dead NP-1 battery or a host of other things that can go wrong.  You may never need this feature either, but if you do, you will be glad we thought of it.

PROPER SIZED POLYFUSES  This is another area where our box is different.  We used Little Fuse brand part # 16R250.  This RoHS approved part is rated at a full 16 volts so it will operate safely from a well charged Lithium battery.  I have nothing to hide by using this part.  It was carefully picked by me based on its operating specifications which are:  16 volts dc, 2.5 amp hold, 0.022 to 0.053 Ohm resistance, RoHS approved, etc.  I already mention the reasons behind our polyfuse value selection process in an earlier post so I won’t repeat myself here. I do not know what part Glen uses in his box though from the photo, you can see that it is a different part.  Scouts honor!

REVERSE POLARITY PROTECTION DIODE    I have no idea what diode Glen used in his design.  This diode is only an important part when and if you ever hook up a battery or external power supply that is wired with reversed polarity.  But, if you do, this one diode must work in order to protect any connected equipment that does not have its own reverse polarity protection (most equipment does these days).  I choose to use a Schottky (low forward voltage drop) power diode made by ST Microelectronics.  I have nothing to hide with using this part. It is their part number STPS1545FP and its specifications are as follows:  Average forward current = 15 amps, Surge Current = 220 Amps, 45 volt rating.  Forward voltage drop is a low 0.57 Volts.  As you can see, it in conjunction with the polyfuse, it WILL stop a reverse polarity connection from damaging some or all of your equipment.  As I said that the beginning of this paragraph, I have no idea what diode Glen used.  I am sure he made a good choice as well.

Now I want to talk for a minute about Mike Denecke and our IntelliSlate.  Glen, you may have spoken with Mike shortly after we came out with our IntelliSlate (about 16 or 17 years ago).  BUT, your comments referencing his alleged comment about our unit being a Denecke Slate inside is both disheartening and slanderous.    Mike was a talented guy and using him in this way is in poor taste. 

Here is a little history for everyone so you won’t continue to slander me in a public format. 

When we came out with our IntelliSlate it was a big step up from the Denecke slate at that time.  The Denecke slate was a “dumb” slate (note that the term “dumb” refers to any time code device that is only capable of reading code, not generating and running on its own………I don’t want anyone to think that I am being sarcastic in any way)  Our IntelliSlate was considered a “smart” time code device as it could be used as a simple reader or as a master generator or it could be set to read, then jamb sync and then continue running code on its own.  Hence the name “IntelliSlate” as in “Intelligent”or smart.   

While I am sure that initially Mike Denecke was quite upset that we came out with the IntelliSlate, and he may have said some things to you about it,  he eventually calmed down after he found out that we did NOT use ANY of his circuitry in any WAY, SHAPE or FORM.  Our Slate was developed in conjunction with Noriyuki Electronics in Holland.  They made and commercially sold many different time code readers, generators and other time code products.  The most famous of their time code products was their “Script Boy” used by script assistants all over the world.  Noriyuki had been introduced to us from Ivan at Coherent Communications.  Ivan was Noriyuki’s importer in the USA for a few years.  I should also mention that Ivan was the true first inventor of the time code slate.  His product was absolutely the best there ever was, but was heavy and expensive compared to the later Denecke slates.  Noriyuki made developing our slate an easy task as they commercially sold two chips.  One chip (NOIYUKI # NK57-148) was a complete time code generator on a chip.  Their other part (sorry I can’t remember the #) was a complete time code reader on a chip.  These two parts were commercially available and had absolutely nothing to do with Mike Denecke’s circuitry.  In addition to the white board Lexan writing surfaces on our IntelliSlate, and the pen holder Glen sarcastically mentioned, our IntelliSlate also featured a built in Comtek receiver port, direct input keyboard for setting time code, user bits, frame rate, etc, etc.  It was in fact a whole different animal than the Denecke Slate of that time period.  Mike Denecke went on to make vast improvements in his product range in subsequent designs.  In later years, Mike and I got along just fine and he in fact called me when he was being sued over the use of electro-luminescent back lighting on his latter slates.  The guy who invented it, had previously tried to sell it to both Mike and I for use on our slates.  I passed on purchasing the technical rights to use the technology (one of my bigger regrets)  I am not sure what Mike did.  Though Mike never liked the fact that PSC built a time code slate, he got over it, was friendly to me, and went on to build much better products in the long run.    Lastly,  I would also like to add that LSC (then ASC) had absolutely nothing to do with the IntelliSlate so please stop slandering them.

In summation I would like to say that our PowerStar Mini offers several different features and uses several different parts in its construction than does that of the BDS box.  I do believe there are in fact about 18 additional components in our unit to facilitate these additional features.  Yes these parts are small and yes they are inexpensive, but they function as intended in our design.  These additional 18 parts may not seem like much, but when competing with a box that has maybe 15 to 20 parts total, then it puts it in perspective. 

While this discussion could go on indefinitely, I hope this settles a few things.  I never intended for this product to be perceived as a personal attack on Glen or anyone else from Remote Audio.  If it was taken that way, then I offer my apologies.   

Respectfully,

Ron Meyer

Professional Sound Corp.

[Jack Norflus]

I personally like the Battery Bud design with the connectors on the bottom. It makes for a better bag set-up.

http://www.reddingaudio.com/cabletechniques/cbletekmain.php

[bigmaho]

I own and use products from both corners in this match.  I'm glad they are both there and doing what they do best!  One quick comment though.  I checked out Glen Trews Remote Audio Hot Strip and Ron Meyer's Power Star and found them very different beasts.  The Hot Strip seems to just be a 12v distribution buss while the Power Star looks like an ac-dc supply, battery charger and distribution buss.  Very different device.  I currently use the Power Max Ultra and I'm looking to slim down my cart and take a few pounds off.  I like what I see in the Power Star (but Glen, if you have a competing product let me know!)

I have to admit, when I first saw the PSC version of the mini power dist I thought they had bought the rights to the Trew Audio device.  After reading these posts it does seem they are somewhat different,  but in looks alone it does appear to be a copy so I understand Glen's dismay.

Billy Sarokin

[dfisk]

I want to add my thoughts as someone who as sold all kinds of production audio products to many of you, which included products from PSC and Remote Audio.

What I don't like seeing is someone saying "PSC makes crap" or "Remote Audio makes crap". I've sold tons of products from both companies, and I can safely say neither of them make crap. I knew that I could count on both PSC and Remote Audio to make quality products and provide great customer support when I needed it. I had many products on the shelves that were very similar in design and functionality, and it was my job to know as much as I could about each and every one of those products to help the customer make the best decision, but ultimately, the decision is made by the end user. I think in this situation, the customers will speak with their hard earned dollars on which product they think will work best for them.

[Glen Trew]

I’m looking forward to fading out of this thread, but I first want it known that I enjoy and respect competition, and value the good relations I have with nearly all of my competitors. Ethical competition is good for everyone, including the competitors. It is good motivation to excel and create useful designs, and get them to market as efficiently as possible, which is good for consumers. My responses in this thread were to try to clear up misleading information, (which I am not inclined to let go unchallenged), and should not be confused as an adverse reaction to honest competition.

When the PSC copy of the Remote Audio BDS system was announced a couple of  months ago, there were a lot people who were confused (like Billy Sarokin wrote), and assumed that it was the Remote Audio BDS marketed by PSC, under license. Therefore, even before this thread began, I had planned to explain that it was an unauthorized copy. But the confusion and misinformation had already started to grow, and, therefore, so did the points of discussion. Those who know Ron Meyer know he is about as nice a person as you will ever meet, and a knowledgeable engineer. But the claim that the PSC box was not an intentional copy was misleading on several levels. Now, at least on this group, I think this is better understood.

For more discussion about power distro systems, I suggest starting another thread.

Best to all,

Glen Trew

[RJBerto]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread. Are the np-1 cups compatible between the remote audio BDS and the PSC version?  They both say on the front of the unit "1&2 -, 3&4 +"

[soundtrane]

RJBerto - your question does not have to resurrect this thread - since it has nothing to do with what was being discussed here. Just saying. you could have started a new thread. 

[RJBerto]

I suppose you're right. 

[Matthias Richter]

where have I been end of 2010?! Missed this interesting thread back then but thanks to RJBerto found it now ...