>Do you think a DAT ads dithering when recording SPDIF from AW8? > >If so this could explain why the DAT version "sounds better" to my ears than the bounced version? Ha ha! This is something that mystified me for some time. I always noticed when I mixed to DAT the playback from that always sounded better than the original monitor mix. I did some searching and found an essay on the web which I think is a "must read" for everyone involved in digital audio. http://www.digido.com/jitteressay.html Here is an excerpt germaine to this discussion: ""Playback from a DAT recorder usually sounds better than the recording, because there is less jitter. Remember, a DAT machine on playback puts out numbers from an internal RAM buffer memory, locked to its internal crystal clock. A DAT machine that is recording (from its digital input) is locked to the source via its (relatively jittery) Phase Locked Loop. As the figure above illustrates, the numbers still get recorded correctly on tape, although their timebase was jittery while going in. Nevertheless, on playback, that time base error becomes irrelevant, for the numbers are reclocked by the DAT machine!"" So, for some time, I have been doing my final mixes to DAT, transferring the DAT back to the computer with Wavelab or SoundForge, then burning to CD. The result is audibly superior than if I had kept everything in the computer. Now keep in mind that my transfers take place over AES/EBU with seperate 75 ohm coaxial lines for wordclock. Anyway, it was some time before I could admit I was doing this, as some people looked at me as though I was crazy. Whether or not this bears any relevance to the discussion of bouncing within Logic? I can't say. Randall