The Stephen Desper Thread

[Glenn Greenberg]

Mr. Desper:

I know you're a bit distracted right now dealing with Mr. Wheeler's (unfounded) tirades, but if it's at all possible, I'd really appreciate it if you could reply to my query on page 13.

(By the way, I'm planning on sending you the Friends/20/20 two-fer as well as Sunflower/Surf's Up.)

Oh, one last question--do I also need to send blank discs to make the copies, or do you provide those?

Thanks!

[Robert Wheeler]

Mr Desper,

Ok, thank for your detailed reply. If your 360Surround device really was the business, then I commend you on your independant style of invention and production. I will say that I said "ropey" and not "dopy".

Your reply prompts some further questions, and prehaps some further probing on questions that I feel remain inadequately addressed.

I had already read the webpage that desribes the procedure. The question I feel I have to ask is, are you effectively remastering each disc from scratch through you system? Are you not holding an iso and just reburning it? And does that actually require manual mastering, or is that something you can leave running in the background? Even if you are treating each disc individually, I suspect that you have the same legal standing, being it in or against your interest.

I feel there is a difference between copying from your cd to your own computer. That is covered within the Home Recording Act, and is fair use.

As I understand it, in America, when a cd is played on the radio, one of the two major mechanical music licensing companies act to recover fees from airplay and pass it on to the licence owners. So those dudes get paid. To the best of my knowledge it is not illegal to play a cd on the radio. There maybe restrictions against this marked on the disc itself, but by andlarge they are not applicable, andas the vast majority of records held by radio station are promos, and most stuff is held digitally off disc anyway, it is not an issue. Also, record companies are by and large one hundred percent behind their recordings being played on the radio, because it shifts more records.

By the way, in the UK at least, over the last two years cd sales have been way way way down.

I find your reasoning over you rates for this service to be a little confusing. You say you've retired from the business, but you need to protect your rates, but at the same time, its still not really clear how much work you are doing on this. Are you really remastering the same record over and over again everytime you get an order?

Both the formats I referred to, Dolby Pro Logic and SQ were actually analog. I've got a healthy set of decent vinyl that I've hunted down over the last few years. I am familiar with the analog sound. I think Dobly Digital AC3 is a pretty aweful format. i know the differnce between a digital piano and a real piano, and I'd take a real piano any time. You made some assumptions about what I think, Mr Desper. I don't remember bringing numbers into it either.

I'm interested in how the software availible on the Spatializer website differs from the hardware version. I know your hardware analog version is heavily refined, but would it be worth me buying the winamp pluging anyway, as it theoretically based on the same technology, or is it really not worth the bother?

The real problem is, sometimes you talk like you are mastering, and sometimes like you are copying. So what exactly are you doing? Are you copying or mastering? I was quite suprised when you said that I don't understand becasue "mastering is an artform" because generally, this whole process has been describesd as "copying" or "transfering" through your device. All of a sudden mastering comes into it. It is very easy to get confused.

Even if you are carrying out a full remastering of every disc from scratch, I doubt the legal basis in taking money for it. At the end of the day comes night, and my whole involvemnt in this discuss came from somebody posting a message regarding your service, to which I replied "thats sound illegal to me". Even if you have gone to great lengths to remain with in the law, I think you're on seriously shakey ground. Even if you think it is not a scam, (and if your shares still have any value then I doubt you need that sort of money) the chances are, even when working on such a small scale, a legal authority would not view in such a way.

As  I said originally, I think your work with the Beach Boys was awesome, and I know you had major contributions to the  Spring album as well. If you really are doing it as a labour of love, then fairplay, but it is vey unfortunate that you are charging money for the service, as I seriosuly doubt the legality. On the surface, unfortunately it appears as crass profiteering on past glories.

[Jason]

Mr. Wheeler....are you trying to ruin this for everyone? Mr. Desper's input on this board is valued by every member who posts here, and these posts of yours and your buddies on the blueboard and your posts here are extremely disrespectful and rude. I know many people here wouldn't like it if Mr. Desper decided never to post here again after this sickening display of disrespect.

Mr. Desper, this Smiley Smile poster is on your side.

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

If the legality of the service bothers you, call the cops, man.  Let the authorities decide.  Otherwise, please leave us alone.  I figure I should owe Steve a lot more than 25 bucks, I've probably learned more from what he's used his time to describe on the Boards than I did from a college I paid 40,000 dollars to attend.

[the captain]

For the record, I did invite Mr. Wheeler to post in this thread because I didn't think it was fair for him to criticize the service on the blueboard when he had an opportunity to discuss it with Mr. Desper here.

That said, I think the positions have been established, and whether either of the two of them feels it necessary to continue, that's up to them. I'd rather discuss something else, and I can say I GREATLY value the technical and historical insight Mr. Desper has provided here.  Maybe everyone can just go their separate ways again.

[Jason]

Luther, for the record, you have much more integrity than Mr. Wheeler.

[Stephen W. Desper]

Hi Stephen,

My dad picked up a Sunflower LP, Brother Records/Reprise Records 6382, RS 6382, printed in Canada. I was just wondering if this was "as good as" the US LP release which you have said is the best way to hear the album. Do you know if LPs printed in Canada use the same masters as the US ones, in general?

 As I recall, Canada did not have LP pressing plants for EMI product.  They just took the actual LP from American presses.  So the Canadian copy would be the same as American releases.  You can check the matrix number to see if your copy is from the original run or a later run.  Look at the land between the label and the last grooves. In the land will be some writing by hand; perhaps 31008  scratched with a stylus. RS-6382 is the earlist matrix ID I know of. Also look for the Arisan logo.  It looks like an oval and letter "A" combined.  

Your other question about sending blanks is a good one.  I should make that clear in the offer.  As you may know, CD cutters seem to work better with some brands of blanks than others.  I've found the brand that works best for my cutter and I'll be using that one.  How much are they anyway?  All of seven cents or so?  ~swd

[Glenn Greenberg]

Your other question about sending blanks is a good one.  I should make that clear in the offer.  As you may know, CD cutters seem to work better with some brands of blanks than others.  I've found the brand that works best for my cutter and I'll be using that one.  How much are they anyway?  All of seven cents or so?[/b]  ~swd

So that means YOU provide the blanks, right?  I don't have to include them?

[Stephen W. Desper]

Before I answer Mr. Wheeler, let us try to keep this impersonal.  I think Mr. Wheeler is doing a good job at that.  It's nothing personal between Wheeler and myself in this discussion. His input is valued by me.  Thanks. 

Mr Desper,

Ok, thank for your detailed reply. If your 360Surround device really was the business, then I commend you on your independant style of invention and production. Thanks. I will say that I said "ropey" and not "dopy". I wondered about the word.

Your reply prompts some further questions, and prehaps some further probing on questions that I feel remain inadequately addressed.

I had already read the webpage that desribes the procedure. The question I feel I have to ask is, are you effectively remastering each disc from scratch through you system? Are you not holding an iso and just reburning it? And does that actually require manual mastering, or is that something you can leave running in the background? Even if you are treating each disc individually, I suspect that you have the same legal standing, being it in or against your interest. The only difference between me making a copy for someone, and asking them to compensate me for my time, and this offer is the postal service. I suspect that the legal standing is up to interpertaion, usually done in a court of law. If someone like BRI objects, then I quite. But as you can see from the comments here on this board, it would be a bad PR move for them with the fans. Besides we are talking such small numbers here.  Perhaps the best thing is to just have each fan call me and we discuss terms privately. Forget the Internet. To me the bottom line of the legal argument is, did I take some income away from The Beach Boys or the record company?  I don't see how I did by requiring proof that the person to whom the copy will be sent supply an original CD that they bought.  My copy doesn't replace another copy they would have bought. They don't want another regular copy so they are not going out and buying one. What they want is the copy improved by me.  Actually, if they do not have the required twofer at this time but want me to make an "improved" copy for them, they would need to go and buy the CD.  That would actually increase the income to the record company.  So it's a good thing for the record company, the fan and me.  Don't you agree? 
I feel there is a difference between copying from your cd to your own computer. That is covered within the Home Recording Act, and is fair use.  Don't confuse distribution and coping. I am not distributing anything.  I am making a one for one copy. ( see subchapeter C 1003 (a) of Copyright Law of The United States of America
and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code)  Read it yourself.

I would also cite Section 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

"Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use, the factors to be considered will include the following:

* the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes." 

This re-mastered copy is for educational comment, historical comparison, and critical judgement. It is not for my profit. My charge is for a service, not a product -- and believe me, there is no profit being realized by me . . . that's for certain. My time is worth more to me than making copies of CD's for people. But as a fan, I want my fellow fans to hear and comment. So how is this done?  By making a copy.  How else? 

Suggest you read this very interesting article entitled:  Copying music to CD: the right, the wrong, and the law - CD-recordable devices, copyright law - includes related articles on the Recording Industry Association of America and the fair use doctrine

As I understand it, in America, when a cd is played on the radio, one of the two major mechanical music licensing companies act to recover fees from airplay and pass it on to the licence owners. So those dudes get paid. To the best of my knowledge it is not illegal to play a cd on the radio. There maybe restrictions against this marked on the disc itself, but by andlarge they are not applicable, andas the vast majority of records held by radio station are promos, and most stuff is held digitally off disc anyway, it is not an issue. Also, record companies are by and large one hundred percent behind their recordings being played on the radio, because it shifts more records.

By the way, in the UK at least, over the last two years cd sales have been way way way down. AND LP sales are way, way, way up!

I find your reasoning over you rates for this service to be a little confusing. You say you've retired from the business, but you need to protect your rates, but at the same time, its still not really clear how much work you are doing on this. Are you really remastering the same record over and over again everytime you get an order?  If, as a fan, you want to accept the terms of my offer, then do so.  If you don't, then move on. No one is holding a gun to your head.

Both the formats I referred to, Dolby Pro Logic and SQ were actually analog. I've got a healthy set of decent vinyl that I've hunted down over the last few years. I am familiar with the analog sound. I think Dobly Digital AC3 is a pretty aweful format. i know the differnce between a digital piano and a real piano, and I'd take a real piano any time. You made some assumptions about what I think, Mr Desper. I don't remember bringing numbers into it either. Glad to know you are analog aware.  Good man!

I'm interested in how the software availible on the Spatializer website differs from the hardware version. I know your hardware analog version is heavily refined, but would it be worth me buying the winamp pluging anyway, as it theoretically based on the same technology, or is it really not worth the bother?  That you will have to decide for yourself. It depends on your standards of excellence.  I had a falling out with the company over some of the software versions of my invention. I did not approve of the sound. But they went ahead and released what they thought would sell.  I sold most of my interest at that point. I prefer the early analog chips we made, but have move so far ahead from those early patents that I don't even call what I'm now doing anything like Spatilaizer(R).   

The real problem is, sometimes you talk like you are mastering, and sometimes like you are copying. So what exactly are you doing? Are you copying or mastering? I was quite suprised when you said that I don't understand becasue "mastering is an artform" because generally, this whole process has been describesd as "copying" or "transfering" through your device. All of a sudden mastering comes into it. It is very easy to get confused.  I guess it could be confusing to someone who does not have insight into the industry. I apologize.  Mastering is a selected form of making a copy. The copy is a transfer from one form to another.  The mastering industry came about during LP times. An LP is a mechanical means of signal storage as opposed to the magnetic storage of tape.  Record production first goes to tape and then to the LP.  Mastering engineers had to make the tape product work for the mechanical product. As time passed, mastering also included conforming one song to another so that there was a consistent "sound signature" to the CD or LP and also consistent with other CD or LP releases.  Also true for cassettes which are mastered seperately.  Now days most of mastering is the final sound signature to make the CD sound good on many playback systems of the real world. This is highly specialized and is not an act of engineering as much as an art form. Take your CD to ten mastering houses and you will get ten different sounding CDs.  It's art.  ====  A copy is a duplicate of an original.  You try to make one resemble the other.  So, I am not making a straight or duplicate copy as much as a re-mastered copy.  I'm not mastering because I'm not working with the pre-master, master tapes. I'm taking an alreeady mastered CD and modifying it.  I would call that "re-mastering" for lack of a better term.  OR, I'm making a copy with some modifications.  It's all kind of nebulous, but I think we all understand each other. 
Even if you are carrying out a full remastering of every disc from scratch, I doubt the legal basis in taking money for it. At the end of the day comes night, and my whole involvemnt in this discuss came from somebody posting a message regarding your service, to which I replied "thats sound illegal to me". Even if you have gone to great lengths to remain with in the law, I think you're on seriously shakey ground. Maybe, but I want the fans to hear what should have been released, even if I get called on the carpet. Even if you think it is not a scam, (and if your shares still have any value then I doubt you need that sort of money) the chances are, even when working on such a small scale, a legal authority would not view in such a way. Undoubtedly. What is with you and this scam issue?  If I offer to return your money if you don't like the copy, what kind of scam is that?  Do you think I don't have faith in what I'm doing and believe the fans are stupid? Believe me, it's a challange to please them. They have high standards. And, who knows, they may reject my ideas altogether and this whole exercise is a bust.  There's always an "if" in l i f e. 

As  I said originally, I think your work with the Beach Boys was awesome, and I know you had major contributions to the  Spring album as well. If you really are doing it as a labour of love, then fairplay, but it is vey unfortunate that you are charging money for the service, as I seriosuly doubt the legality. On the surface, unfortunately it appears as crass profiteering on past glories.  Thanks for your observation.  On the surface maybe to the uninformed.  Crass?  re: unfeeling, uncouth, crude. To the contray, the whole reason is to bring to the real Beach Boy fan a touch of sound he/she has been denighed by the, shall we say, crass record companies who should have know better, in my opinion. Profeteering?  That would be offering at an unrealistic price, say $100 per song.  As far as I'm concerned, the service charge is for my expertise, which has value. Although you have said some nice things about my past engineering work, you now seem to feel that my expertise is worth little.  I'm not giving my experience away for free. That's the way it is. Take it or leave it.  ~swd

[Stephen W. Desper]

So that means YOU provide the blanks, right?  I don't have to include them?

Right. You supply a self-addressed return envelope with stamps and your CD.  You get in return your CD and a copy.  I supply the blanks.   ~swd

[Stephen W. Desper]

COMMENT TO ALL --

Note that my offer is "coming in February"

At this point in time there has been so much confusion raised of issues unresolved, that I thiink I'll retract my offer pending more research on my part. I wish to take more time to consider some of the points raised by others.

Thanks for your continuing interest.  Somehow, someday, we will get this done my fellow fans. But for now, no one wins.

Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper   

 

[R]

Stephen - Thank you for your input on this (and other) boards.

 Unfortunately, the way of the internet seems to be "there's always one"

Thanks again for spending some time here, WE really appreciate it.

[SurferGirl7]

I am glad that Mr. Wheeler is not running you off the board Mr. Desper. I don't know much about the technical stuff you talk about, but I have read this thread everytime someone posts. This thread is by far my all time favorite. I learn something everytime I have read anything in here.

[cortez]

Thanks Stephen
 Your remarks and input are invaluable. I do hope you are able to complete the offer. But if you can't at least this episode may spur someone in the bb's camp to consider a release of Sunflower and Surf's Up that is closer to the original intent.

[Glenn Greenberg]

Happy now, Mr. Wheeler?

[Stephen W. Desper]

Now throughout this piece, I've tried to make the photos fit the format a little better, but I don't know how.  So you will just have to put up with the oversized pictures. Sorry about that. To see all of the photos in larger size, just click on the thumbnail photo and it will get larger.  It's not my ego that is making them so big, it's my computer skills or non-skills. 
Nevertheless, let's continue . . .
===========================================

Way back almost forty years ago, I worked with the guys when they looked like this >   We were all a lot younger then, but still professional about the production of music.  Move the big photo over to see Dennis.  This is the touring Beach Boys of the day.  Brian stayed at home so this promo photo does not include him.  But he was there at the studio.

 I had been working at MGM when the opportunity came to me for the Beach Boy job.  I was also a young guy, but don't let my frail frame fool you.  I was a roady too and lifting equipment twice a day.  I've never been muscular, but I am strong. 
And about those glasses.  I have always needed thick lenes.  Back then they were heavy.  I tried rimless glasses, half-rims, light weight, wire and other types, but I was always hitting things in my work and breaking the frames.  I'd hit mic booms, or run into something while up on rigging, or under a stage stringing cables for a show.  One day I ask Brian how he liked those big horn rim glasses he had and he said they were strong frames.  I decided to get me some.  Those are what you see.  They were good for my work, but hid my face.

These photos were taken at the mixdown for "Do It Again" at Capitol Records tower.  I believe that was an 8-track session. The way I record could have expanded that to twelve or so inputs.

I like all the notes in my shirt pocket.  What a nerd!  Actually, I was mixing and getting ready for a tour. The papers are notes of To-Do things.     

I wonder where that head of hair went to?  It was thick back then. Needs combing. Those side burns are so thick it makes me look like I'm wearing a wig! 



What am I doing here?  That's the monitor section of this console.  Must be adjusting echo return or something like that. 

  See that little dome thing, that's the talk-back mic. Those are the four AUX returns and routing switches below the mic. The two big knobs are for monitor volume and studio volume at playback.  Note to you computer nerds of today, back then we called speakers, monitors.  Still do of course.

Right above the sliders you can just see the EQ knobs and the switches under the knobs. The switches were levers that selected frequency and the knob, dB amount of boost or cut.  You had five frequency bands at +/- 12 dB.   

This is my serious look. Must be time for a take.  If you move the big photo around you wlll see out-of-focus 2-Track Ampex 440s on one side and a 4-Track 3M machine on the other side.    I usually ran two master machines at the same time to avoid the safety copy from being one generation down. That may be Don Henderson's sholder next to me.  He was a Capitol staff engineer who was quite the whiz with editing scissors.

 I think Don is getting some levels here.  My attention is on the "Do It Again" drum sound machine. We may have just gotten it set up at this time. 

So here's a good shot of the Phillips Ambisonic Unit. That's what it was oringinally designed to be used for.   

If you're looking on the big photo, you will need to slide it over to see the unit.  I imported this unit with some question by management as to "why?"  But soon they were amazed at what it did and ordered a second unit for backup.  It was very expensive.  As you can see the unit has a tape loop that runs at 30 IPS. The guide wheels and heads were all mounted on a very flat machined plate. Each guide and head was attached to a bracket that had alignment pins that fit into the backing plate. Each head and guide wheel could be attached to the plate with one allen screw.  It looks like I have an allen wrench in my hand, so must have been moving the heads into place for the "Do It Again" drum effect.  The heads could be spaced anywhere around the loop.  The erase head was at the top of the loop. The record head and four playback heads were movable. The four little black knobs were the mixer for the playback heads. the other knobs were for EQ and regeneration of the signals to other heads or such.  Now you may wonder what's so special about this.  Back then the only tape delay was from a tape recorder -- 7.5 or 15 IPS.  Maybe a little slower or faster if you used a VSO.  There were no digital delays. This unit could give you a delay of less than 5 milliseconds.  It could spread out a mono signal. It could double a vocal. We used it on the road to double the live sound.  No one else could do that! For "Do It Again" the four Playback heads were close together with no regeneration. Thus one snare slap would repete five times but blend together for that drum sound you hear on the song.  By the way, I used the unit on the road and reproduced the same "Do It Again" drum sound at live performances -- real time! 

So here we are at the mix time. Watching the levels. You can see that some of the I/O modules are narrow and some wide.  This is what is called a mixed format console.  At this time Capitol was phasing out consoles that used the big gain knobs. Some of the older union engineers did not like the sliders and so consoles had some I/O modules with knobs and some with sliders.  A mixed group.  If the engineer wanted to use knobs to ride gain (because that's the way he did it) then the knobs were there for him -- maybe six knobs and the rest sliders.  At the time, sliders were something new.  Old timer's resented them. But as channels grew in number, the console had to contain them and the way to make the I/O module smaller was to use sliders.  No automation here. That was years away.  The buttons at the top are channel assignment buttons. They were very colorful.  I don't think anything is going on at the moment -- must have been a posed shot.  I see the meters are not dancing. 

Here is another shot of about the same thing.

So we got the mix done and you all know the story about the stereo master falling off the deck of my Corvette on the way somewhere. I found this old photo of that infamous car taken somewhat later during the time of Surf's Up at the first house I bought in LA.  Still the same car so thought I'd include a shot. By the time of Surf's Up everyone had grown a beard and longer hair -- bell bottoms, etc.


I found this shot of the back of the mixing booth at the house. You can see the 3M 16-Track.  That's David Ispas looking on.  He built the big monitor enclosure described in my book.  Now in this shot the hair is about the length at the time of "Sunflower."  Also you can see the ID tape lengths hanging in front of the tape machine.  These were placed over and above the I/O modules to identify what was where for each song.  That's an acoustic wall at the back. Not much room. 

Hope you all had some fun with taking this little trip back to those times.  Sorry I don't have any photos with the guys in the studio, but this was a mixdown and usually they were not around all that much. Brian and Carl would be hanging, but usually came in for playbacks. Later in the day Carl or Brian would get into it more.   

If you want to copy any of these photos and print them for a collection, be my guest.  I think the image hosting I use will keep them here for 60 days. Then they are gone. I think the best way to get a print is to call up "properties" and copy over the image to WORD. Then size it there and make your print.  I tried it and it worked for me.   

Oh Yes, there's one more I want to post here. It's been on Ebay selling for several hundred dollars.  Talk about a scam.  This photo is not signed by the group personally as the Ebay ad says, it was a double print of image and signature.  I have a whole box full of these things.  Print it out for your own collection.

That brings us to the present.  Here is what I look like now at 64. Thinning gray hair, but no horn rims.

<img src="[url]http://img7.picsplace.to/img7/8/thumbs/Steve_Desper_Portrait_043.JPG" alt="Image Hosting by PicsPlace.to" >[/url]

Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper

===================
===================
===================

These photos would not enlarge so here are the big photos.



and

[Stephen W. Desper]

Happy now, Mr. Wheeler?

  It's not him, it was what someone said over at the blueboard about digital copies of what I am proposing ending up on Ebay.  I don't like bootlegs as it corrupts the industry and robs the artist of his dues.  The poster made a good point that I wish to take under advisement and discuss with my lawyers.  ~swd

[Glenn Greenberg]

Happy now, Mr. Wheeler?

  It's not him, it was what someone said over at the blueboard about digital copies of what I am proposing ending up on Ebay.  I don't like bootlegs as it corrupts the industry and robs the artist of his dues.  The poster made a good point that I wish to take under advisement and discuss with my lawyers.  ~swd

I see.  I stand corrected.

Sorry--I'm just very disappointed.  I was going to send out my CDs to you on Monday.

[Stephen W. Desper]

Happy now, Mr. Wheeler?

  It's not him, it was what someone said over at the blueboard about digital copies of what I am proposing ending up on Ebay.  I don't like bootlegs as it corrupts the industry and robs the artist of his dues.  The poster made a good point that I wish to take under advisement and discuss with my lawyers.  ~swd

I see.  I stand corrected.

Sorry--I'm just very disappointed.  I was going to send out my CDs to you on Monday.

Yes, I'm disaappointed too.  There has to be some way to do this for the select few who wish to hear.  I just need to find the way without hurting the artist or myself in the process.  ~swd

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

Those pictures and commentary are just wonderful.  Thank you so much.

[Robert Wheeler]

That's mighty gentlemanly of you to say so. I don't think it is a personal thing either. I don't know you personally, so how could it be personal . My reaction was my honest reaction and impression gained from your webpage.

It is obvious that you make some great and informative posts here, and I wouldn't want that to stop for a moment. I came here to post as my name came up, and as I read a post from yourself that said I would be welcome to post. I'm sure that you appreciate that I wouldn't post a toned down or sanitized version of my opinion.

All the best

Rob Wheeler

Before I answer Mr. Wheeler, let us try to keep this impersonal.  I think Mr. Wheeler is doing a good job at that.  It's nothing personal between Wheeler and myself in this discussion. His input is valued by me.  Thanks.

[c-man]

Hi Mr. Desper, thanks so much for sharing the above wonderful photos.  There's a  photo in David Leaf's book, "The Beach Boys and the California Myth", of Brian, yourself, and some other individuals in the control room of some large studio that I'm hoping you can identify for us.  Also, maybe you can ID the others in the photo.  If you have the book, it's on page 74.  If not, I guess I'll have to try and post it!

Thanks,
C-Man

[Reverend Joshua Sloane]

Great pictures and words. Thank you very much for those.

[king of anglia]

Mr. Desper,
Surely it's not your problem if copies of the decoded Sunflower and Surf's Up end up on Ebay? Ebay are normally quite quick at ending illegal or bootleg auctions.

[andy]

Awesome pictures. Thank you