Well done, thanks. Nice to see this comparison done. I hadn’t purchased a Cloudlifter for my SM7b, simply based on the gain I found my Apollo offered as well. Didn’t seem necessary. Save yourself some cash for another UAD plugin. 🙂
Channel 3 noise floor is consistently higher. Not only can you hear it, you can see it in the file...and this should come as no surprise to anyone. With digital gain, it doesn't matter at all that it's mathematically clean, what you're doing is adding gain to the inherent noise floor in the analog front end of the Apollo. I can say with a fair degree of certainty that the analog front end of the Apollo is surface mount off the shelf opamp ICs. Although they perform well in most situations, they crap out at higher gain levels and at those higher gain levels, they also pick up noise from the rest of the Apollo box. No interface that complicated can be silent - you trade functionality with inherent noise, there's no way around this. The Cloudlifter channel has a lower noise floor because the Apollo front end doesn't need to work as hard. Half of the gain is being done outside the interface, so you would expect the inherent noise to be lower in this channel. The question then becomes, is the Cloudlifter cleaner? And from this example, we can see that it is. Why? I suspect that the quality of component choice is higher. You can put a lot of preamp into a $150 box that only has input and output. There are discrete opamps that retail for $75 that will outperform any UA interface on any signal. Interfaces are a trade off, there's no way around this. The differences in this example may seem small to some, but stack up acoustics and backing vocals on a track, all with eq and dynamics....and you'll very quickly run into all manner of denoising problems. The Cloudlifter is there to present the interface with a manageable a signal. There are very few interfaces that are equipped to handle very large gains cleanly. It was a problem 20 years ago, and remains a problem today.
So in my case where i have the Gold Mike SPL pre amp, before my apollo 8p, i would experience lower hiss noise in my recordings if i had the cloudlifter before going into the Goldmike?
Hi Matt! Thank you for the video. Nice and factual - I like it! I think fetheads and cloudlifters are mislabled as problem-solvers. Thry can be, especially for old ribbon mics. But to what it does, is it makes the mic and an actual preamp work together differently. Without a cloudlifters you have to push the preamp more, which pushes the transformers, tubes or whatever way more. With the cloudlifter you’re pushing the front end more. So to me that comparison would be more beneficial - a colourful preamp with either gain from a cloudlifter in front or gain from the preamp itself. The other thing a fethead or a cloudlifter can help with, is if you have a console or a studio thats by default normalized to phantom power on every channel. Put a fethead in front of a ribbon and it doesn’t pass it through. That can make for a faster workflow/setup and you get to the cleaner gain stages of your console. Thanks!
I already have a cloudlifter I am using, and I am buying an Apollo twin interface, and i will still use the cloudlifter. I use studio quality cables...
This raises a question of what the CL or a splitter does to the impedance. I’ve used my sm7b into Neve1073 Unison on my Apollo x8. I needed to push the preamp to 65-70db for the gain I like. Same thing with WA-73 outboard preamp. I use the CL and it definitely doesn’t hurt. I’ll keep using it but it might not be necessary. I have the Royer boosters for my ribbons and I think they are very helpful on most things.
True. My custom splitter uses 1:1 transformers, so there's negligible change to impedance (in fact, they effectively null against the original). The CL does affect impedance, however.
I've just got the microphone and been testing it with my Apollo Twin Quad. For what I hear, a Cloudlifter is completely unnecessary. I do Voice Overs and the V76 plugin can give enough gain to record my voice with a healthy headroom for the processing in post. I'm glad I didn't pull the trigger on a device that I don't need. The mic is awesome.
It appears looking at your experiment that the Cloudlifter does help looking at gain levels at around 10 minute mark. Raw signal level low and the digital gain does not appear to match the cloud lifter. Also, its a better experiment with a voice that can hit some good notes to get a better idea. For talk radio, I dont think it matters. But for me recording acoustic guitar with an SM57 it appears to help or vocals with an SM7/Cloudlifter I can hear the shine/boost. Keep asking questions!
Thanks for the great comment! I cut about 20 minutes out that included some additional passes and settings, but settled on a more concise version. I'll make the wav files available for null test in the description, if you'd like. Surprisingly, the digital can actually provide even more gain than Cloudlifter if we want. For example, we could set the gain at 25dB and still get insane levels of gain (over 90dB, if desired, depending on the plugin). For non-Apollo use I highly recommend Cloudlifter. It's REALLY quiet, clean gain!
Absolutely. The SM7 needs as much gain as some ribbons, so they're pretty similar. There's nothing technically cleaner than digital gain, but Cloudlifter was surprisingly clean.
It is. The SM7b is similar to some of my ribbons as far as output goes, so you can expect similar results - clean, quiet gain. Work on ribbons? Works great. Needed for ribbons? I think we can confirm you can achieve something similar without it. I would call Cloudlifter extremely useful for non-Apollo setups.
OK, Right in my wheel house. I bought a CL for a SM7b for a client as it was needed (I had to max my input and it was not clean enough for me) and forgotten as part of my rear panel input Apollo 8 TB Black vocal chain with a 610B pre, then a LA2a, EQP1A and an 1176 I forget they are there until I need an in your face vocal chain. All at the ready for when needed. Small project room...Lost my voice to “The West Coast Drought” Now to watch your analysis...
That chanell strip worked! I feel I was hook winked by UAD’s 610 pre’s advert...humm It ain’t broke so I now know of this option as it’s all about the voclal talents consistency and controll and or “NEEDINESS” looking back and my client at the time bought it for me and left it not by mistake. He bought his own clone of my system. Mildly confused. Keep up the good work. Thinking...
@@MattHepworth You have really good content that many of us can relate to in real time daily application also for the near future purchasing. Thanks for your clear spot on demos and is it true or nots comparisons. Maximum Respect ~ Loo
Nice comparison Matt and always great to see/hear you. I often need to use a FetHead for soft spoken word into an sm7b, so I can record hotter (~24LU) and not bring up the noise. If I try with the Apollo pres alone, I always end up with more noise. Maybe it’s my Silverface pres, but I find the Apollo a little noisy and not the cleanest pres!
I was having great luck with my apollo solo a cloud lifter and shure sm7b and then last week ... my input signal is SO low even when I boost the preamp level *halp me*
so that is to say.... I don't need one. But a performer/customer might think there is a difference and be happier paying more for your service. If you can afford 150 because you think it will make a difference on a 100 mic for your rig I say save up and get a better rig/mic. Stock preamps on most modern interfaces seem to have plenty of gain. I will say for less busy quiet material you can extend what a 57 can do....remove the cloud as it were thus making a dynamic more sensitive without increasing noise using the better circuit for the initial preamp chore over the interface...So cool trick . but maybe edging on esoteric and so yeah great... get one for each of your Behringer channels... Ha! If they were not priced at very very close to some very new usb interfaces by motu ,ssl and ua audio have out, I would say try it. I have one and will still plop it on a 57 and have never thought it was a detriment.....but only about 5 items down the list of what is next for what I can do without.
I was not sure what the cloud lifter was suppose to be doing in the signal chain I. The first place. I will re watch the clip in case I missed it. Also we wonder what the differences would be when stacking many track with or without the CL device
I have an Apollo Solo interface and want to buy sm7b. Sometimes I will use it not really close to my mouth. Is there sense to buy some tool like Triton Fethead to have a buffer? In case if I will have a possibility to work closely with mic, I will reduce the gain (to avoid noise) and, I will rise it, if the mic will be on some distance from me.
I think whatever's more convenient for you. There's not a need, no, since we can easily add another 20dB of noiseless digital gain with Apollo's Console, but it's nice to have something like the Cloudlifter or Fethead for simplicity in some circumstances.
@@MattHepworth oh wow you even take notes on which mic you used for the vid? Guessing you have more mics for regular recording! I really appreciate your reply!
For singing, right up on top of the SM7, a cloudlifter is pointless with an Apollo (there is plenty of clean gain). For talking/radio show or youtube content, where host or guest might get a bit far from the mic at times, it can make sense to get some extra gain before noise in the analog realm. However, I suspect the word-of-mouth "YOU GOTTA HAVE THE CLOUDLIFTER TO USE AN SM7!" on youtube is due to noobs using 'preset' vocal processing that brings up the noise via compression, but neglecting to compensate with an expander.
I watched the social media marketing of the "cloudlifter" & decided it was just another piece of gear to modify the signal so close to the source. That from a much cheaper piece of gear that promises noise-free, distortion-free, gain for the people who can't gain stage properly. I saw it as a newbie-targeted money grab by exploiting their lack of gain-staging ability.
I have a fet head, works much better than the cloud lifter with the 7B, the cloud lifter still had a lot of noise and there was a whole bunch of wires that needed to be connected to it. I wanted more of a cleaner and neater workflow.
very similar....if you could say the same phrase for each treatment it would be easier to compare. Keep the syllables, cadence and energy the same and maybe I could tell a difference. Otherwise, your splitter comparison method is nice!!
@@MattHepworth Hey Matt, thx for the tips! How did you make your custom splitter? I would like to have the possibility to make one myself. Thanks for your recommendations
I have several and they were built by Whirlwind years ago. All are 1:1 Jensen transformers and the effectively null on each split. There's also a Thru. The Thru will also null against the splits, but requires 3dB attenuation to do so (such is the penalty of so many splits).
Digital gain (channel 3) was noisier in every comparison. So outside of the cloud lifter, a good reminder to get reasonable gain going in, BUT if a newb is reading this, it's ALWAYS better to not clip than to get a little excess noise, so err on the safe side.
Interesting. I'll see about posting the original Wav files. Digital gain adds zero noise and the Cloudlifter adds less noise than boosting the pre, but not zero.
The noise isn’t *from* the digital gain probably. I would imagine the signal to noise ratio is worse the lower the original gain is though (in other words, lower voltage traveling through the mic cable = proportionally more noise - if that makes sense).
The noise isn’t *from* the digital gain probably. I would imagine the signal to noise ratio is worse the lower the original gain is though (in other words, lower voltage traveling through the mic cable = proportionally more noise - if that makes sense).
The noise isn’t *from* the digital gain probably. I would imagine the signal to noise ratio is worse the lower the original gain is though (in other words, lower voltage traveling through the mic cable = proportionally more noise - if that makes sense).
The noise isn’t *from* the digital gain probably. I would imagine the signal to noise ratio is worse the lower the original gain is though (in other words, lower voltage traveling through the mic cable = proportionally more noise - if that makes sense).
Well done, thanks. Nice to see this comparison done. I hadn’t purchased a Cloudlifter for my SM7b, simply based on the gain I found my Apollo offered as well. Didn’t seem necessary. Save yourself some cash for another UAD plugin. 🙂
Thank you!
Thanks. I've been looking for a technical comparison for sometime, especially since I was told by Universal Audio that a cloudlifter wasn't necessary.
Glad to help!
I was told the same, but have had a hard time doing anything without coloring the sound too much...
Channel 3 noise floor is consistently higher. Not only can you hear it, you can see it in the file...and this should come as no surprise to anyone.
With digital gain, it doesn't matter at all that it's mathematically clean, what you're doing is adding gain to the inherent noise floor in the analog front end of the Apollo. I can say with a fair degree of certainty that the analog front end of the Apollo is surface mount off the shelf opamp ICs. Although they perform well in most situations, they crap out at higher gain levels and at those higher gain levels, they also pick up noise from the rest of the Apollo box. No interface that complicated can be silent - you trade functionality with inherent noise, there's no way around this.
The Cloudlifter channel has a lower noise floor because the Apollo front end doesn't need to work as hard. Half of the gain is being done outside the interface, so you would expect the inherent noise to be lower in this channel. The question then becomes, is the Cloudlifter cleaner? And from this example, we can see that it is. Why? I suspect that the quality of component choice is higher. You can put a lot of preamp into a $150 box that only has input and output. There are discrete opamps that retail for $75 that will outperform any UA interface on any signal.
Interfaces are a trade off, there's no way around this. The differences in this example may seem small to some, but stack up acoustics and backing vocals on a track, all with eq and dynamics....and you'll very quickly run into all manner of denoising problems. The Cloudlifter is there to present the interface with a manageable a signal. There are very few interfaces that are equipped to handle very large gains cleanly. It was a problem 20 years ago, and remains a problem today.
Thanks for the comments!
So in my case where i have the Gold Mike SPL pre amp, before my apollo 8p, i would experience lower hiss noise in my recordings if i had the cloudlifter before going into the Goldmike?
Turn your gain down 25dB and see how much the hiss decreases. That's the amount you'll have, roughly, with the Cloudlifter.
Hi Matt! Thank you for the video. Nice and factual - I like it! I think fetheads and cloudlifters are mislabled as problem-solvers. Thry can be, especially for old ribbon mics. But to what it does, is it makes the mic and an actual preamp work together differently. Without a cloudlifters you have to push the preamp more, which pushes the transformers, tubes or whatever way more. With the cloudlifter you’re pushing the front end more.
So to me that comparison would be more beneficial - a colourful preamp with either gain from a cloudlifter in front or gain from the preamp itself. The other thing a fethead or a cloudlifter can help with, is if you have a console or a studio thats by default normalized to phantom power on every channel. Put a fethead in front of a ribbon and it doesn’t pass it through. That can make for a faster workflow/setup and you get to the cleaner gain stages of your console.
Thanks!
I already have a cloudlifter I am using, and I am buying an Apollo twin interface, and i will still use the cloudlifter. I use studio quality cables...
If you already have it then DEFINITELY use it! Still has some benefits.
What are some good studio cables that are five stars if not close to it? I only want 4.8 out of five stars or better as far as studio cables.
I like Mogami Core Plus, Silver, and Gold.
@@MattHepworth are those cables pretty thick and are they quiet and do they get rid of noise?
Thanks, Matt - you always do great work, and your videos are always helpful too!
Thanks, Dave! Anything you'd like to see done just let me know!
This raises a question of what the CL or a splitter does to the impedance. I’ve used my sm7b into Neve1073 Unison on my Apollo x8. I needed to push the preamp to 65-70db for the gain I like. Same thing with WA-73 outboard preamp. I use the CL and it definitely doesn’t hurt. I’ll keep using it but it might not be necessary. I have the Royer boosters for my ribbons and I think they are very helpful on most things.
True. My custom splitter uses 1:1 transformers, so there's negligible change to impedance (in fact, they effectively null against the original). The CL does affect impedance, however.
I've just got the microphone and been testing it with my Apollo Twin Quad. For what I hear, a Cloudlifter is completely unnecessary. I do Voice Overs and the V76 plugin can give enough gain to record my voice with a healthy headroom for the processing in post. I'm glad I didn't pull the trigger on a device that I don't need. The mic is awesome.
Very cool. Thanks for the comment!
It appears looking at your experiment that the Cloudlifter does help looking at gain levels at around 10 minute mark. Raw signal level low and the digital gain does not appear to match the cloud lifter.
Also, its a better experiment with a voice that can hit some good notes to get a better idea. For talk radio, I dont think it matters. But for me recording acoustic guitar with an SM57 it appears to help or vocals with an SM7/Cloudlifter I can hear the shine/boost.
Keep asking questions!
Thanks for the great comment! I cut about 20 minutes out that included some additional passes and settings, but settled on a more concise version. I'll make the wav files available for null test in the description, if you'd like. Surprisingly, the digital can actually provide even more gain than Cloudlifter if we want. For example, we could set the gain at 25dB and still get insane levels of gain (over 90dB, if desired, depending on the plugin). For non-Apollo use I highly recommend Cloudlifter. It's REALLY quiet, clean gain!
Always good info, thanks Matt. I tried a Dynamite device, which is similar, and got (shocker) similar results. Apollo is so clean.
It is clean indeed! Thank you!
I don't use a Cloudlifter for dynamics usually, but it is nice for ribbon mics.
Absolutely. The SM7 needs as much gain as some ribbons, so they're pretty similar. There's nothing technically cleaner than digital gain, but Cloudlifter was surprisingly clean.
Isn’t it useful on ribbon microphones ? (not a participant of the giveaway)
It is. The SM7b is similar to some of my ribbons as far as output goes, so you can expect similar results - clean, quiet gain. Work on ribbons? Works great. Needed for ribbons? I think we can confirm you can achieve something similar without it. I would call Cloudlifter extremely useful for non-Apollo setups.
@@MattHepworth Would you be interested in doing a similar video for ribbons? I can send you several to use.
@@JRRSHOP02 Sure, let's discuss! Eric has my email. Matt Hepworth
Nice work Matt!
Thank you!
so should i buy a cloud lifter? I'm planning to purchase the sm7b and apollo twin x. I'm using it for vocals.
I would say no. Just use a similar signal chain to what I use in the video.
been looking for this vid forever thank you!
Awesome. Glad to help!
If I have a very simple home studio. Instead of using Apollo, I’m using PreSonus Studio 24c connected to my SM7b. Would I need a cloud lifter?
Hi there. Because you have a max of 50dB gain with the Studio 24c, I think the Cloud Lifter would be very helpful.
Thank you so much man, this video is exactly what I was looking for!
Awesome! Thank you!
Excellent comparison, thank you for posting this video!
Thank you!
Just ordered the Apollo solo with the sm7b, hopefully you right and I won't need that CL :P! btw nice video! thanks!
Thank you! I think you'll be happy with it!
OK, Right in my wheel house. I bought a CL for a SM7b for a client as it was needed (I had to max my input and it was not clean enough for me) and forgotten as part of my rear panel input Apollo 8 TB Black vocal chain with a 610B pre, then a LA2a, EQP1A and an 1176 I forget they are there until I need an in your face vocal chain. All at the ready for when needed. Small project room...Lost my voice to “The West Coast Drought” Now to watch your analysis...
That chanell strip worked! I feel I was hook winked by UAD’s 610 pre’s advert...humm It ain’t broke so I now know of this option as it’s all about the voclal talents consistency and controll and or “NEEDINESS” looking back and my client at the time bought it for me and left it not by mistake. He bought his own clone of my system. Mildly confused. Keep up the good work. Thinking...
Thank you!
@@MattHepworth You have really good content that many of us can relate to in real time daily application also for the near future purchasing. Thanks for your clear spot on demos and is it true or nots comparisons. Maximum Respect ~ Loo
@@AntarcticGuitarEnthusiast Thanks so much!
Nice comparison Matt and always great to see/hear you.
I often need to use a FetHead for soft spoken word into an sm7b, so I can record hotter (~24LU) and not bring up the noise. If I try with the Apollo pres alone, I always end up with more noise.
Maybe it’s my Silverface pres, but I find the Apollo a little noisy and not the cleanest pres!
Thanks, Dan!
Agree with you. I do same thing. Fethead helps bring up signal with no additional noise for sure
Nice! Thank you.
Thanks!
hello , i have questions about this cable it's good cable XLR : mogami gold studio-15 xlr microphone cable for Shure SM7B
That's the cable I use, actually. I think they're a very good value. High quality.
Hey Matt. I hope you are doing alright! Keep your head up :)
Thank you! Big (life) changes going on that have pulled me away for a short time, but there's more video content in the works.
Thanks Matt!
I was having great luck with my apollo solo a cloud lifter and shure sm7b and then last week ... my input signal is SO low even when I boost the preamp level *halp me*
Do you think the Cloud Lifter may have stopped working?
so that is to say.... I don't need one. But a performer/customer might think there is a difference and be happier paying more for your service. If you can afford 150 because you think it will make a difference on a 100 mic for your rig I say save up and get a better rig/mic. Stock preamps on most modern interfaces seem to have plenty of gain. I will say for less busy quiet material you can extend what a 57 can do....remove the cloud as it were thus making a dynamic more sensitive without increasing noise using the better circuit for the initial preamp chore over the interface...So cool trick . but maybe edging on esoteric and so yeah great... get one for each of your Behringer channels... Ha! If they were not priced at very very close to some very new usb interfaces by motu ,ssl and ua audio have out, I would say try it. I have one and will still plop it on a 57 and have never thought it was a detriment.....but only about 5 items down the list of what is next for what I can do without.
I was not sure what the cloud lifter was suppose to be doing in the signal chain I. The first place. I will re watch the clip in case I missed it. Also we wonder what the differences would be when stacking many track with or without the CL device
It adds ~25dB of clean gain to the signal before hitting the preamp. Nice to have, but not 100% necessary.
I have an Apollo Solo interface and want to buy sm7b. Sometimes I will use it not really close to my mouth. Is there sense to buy some tool like Triton Fethead to have a buffer?
In case if I will have a possibility to work closely with mic, I will reduce the gain (to avoid noise) and, I will rise it, if the mic will be on some distance from me.
I think whatever's more convenient for you. There's not a need, no, since we can easily add another 20dB of noiseless digital gain with Apollo's Console, but it's nice to have something like the Cloudlifter or Fethead for simplicity in some circumstances.
@@MattHepworth preamp plug-in, you mean?
No, just an EQ or any other plugin like I show in this vid.
Thank you for the great tutorial
I'm glad it was helpful!
it works great for me
lol. It helps. Facts.
I now have an unopened cloud lifter for sale!!
loved it! thx :). Now the burning question from me is which mic did you use to record this video? haha
I have to look at my notes!
@@MattHepworth Oh I just meant the mic you used on the camera hahaha like your shotgun/boom mic. It's smooth :)
@@dkijc Yeah, I'll have to check my notes. It's probably either my 90s AMR SDC, or Slate ML-2.
@@dkijc Checked my notes. It was the AMR ERC-12. Thanks!
@@MattHepworth oh wow you even take notes on which mic you used for the vid? Guessing you have more mics for regular recording! I really appreciate your reply!
I have a question and please guys don't make fun of me: If I have a TUBE microphone, that means I cannot use a cloudlifter? (because of phantom power)
Totally fine, but probably not needed.
Interesting comparison!!
For singing, right up on top of the SM7, a cloudlifter is pointless with an Apollo (there is plenty of clean gain). For talking/radio show or youtube content, where host or guest might get a bit far from the mic at times, it can make sense to get some extra gain before noise in the analog realm. However, I suspect the word-of-mouth "YOU GOTTA HAVE THE CLOUDLIFTER TO USE AN SM7!" on youtube is due to noobs using 'preset' vocal processing that brings up the noise via compression, but neglecting to compensate with an expander.
That's an interesting idea about presets being the issue. Sounds plausible.
maybe in some cases anyway.
I watched the social media marketing of the "cloudlifter" & decided it was just another piece of gear to modify the signal so close to the source. That from a much cheaper piece of gear that promises noise-free, distortion-free, gain for the people who can't gain stage properly. I saw it as a newbie-targeted money grab by exploiting their lack of gain-staging ability.
I have a fet head, works much better than the cloud lifter with the 7B, the cloud lifter still had a lot of noise and there was a whole bunch of wires that needed to be connected to it. I wanted more of a cleaner and neater workflow.
Interesting. I haven't tried one.
very similar....if you could say the same phrase for each treatment it would be easier to compare. Keep the syllables, cadence and energy the same and maybe I could tell a difference. Otherwise, your splitter comparison method is nice!!
It's actally the same take compared by using a custom splitter, so you're actally getting the exact same for each of the A/B sections.
@@MattHepworth Hey Matt, thx for the tips! How did you make your custom splitter? I would like to have the possibility to make one myself. Thanks for your recommendations
I have several and they were built by Whirlwind years ago. All are 1:1 Jensen transformers and the effectively null on each split. There's also a Thru. The Thru will also null against the splits, but requires 3dB attenuation to do so (such is the penalty of so many splits).
@@MattHepworth No doubt! Well done.
@@MattHepworth Saw that when watching your complete shoot out. Obviously the way you did it.
Digital gain (channel 3) was noisier in every comparison. So outside of the cloud lifter, a good reminder to get reasonable gain going in, BUT if a newb is reading this, it's ALWAYS better to not clip than to get a little excess noise, so err on the safe side.
Interesting. I'll see about posting the original Wav files. Digital gain adds zero noise and the Cloudlifter adds less noise than boosting the pre, but not zero.
The noise isn’t *from* the digital gain probably. I would imagine the signal to noise ratio is worse the lower the original gain is though (in other words, lower voltage traveling through the mic cable = proportionally more noise - if that makes sense).
The noise isn’t *from* the digital gain probably. I would imagine the signal to noise ratio is worse the lower the original gain is though (in other words, lower voltage traveling through the mic cable = proportionally more noise - if that makes sense).
The noise isn’t *from* the digital gain probably. I would imagine the signal to noise ratio is worse the lower the original gain is though (in other words, lower voltage traveling through the mic cable = proportionally more noise - if that makes sense).
The noise isn’t *from* the digital gain probably. I would imagine the signal to noise ratio is worse the lower the original gain is though (in other words, lower voltage traveling through the mic cable = proportionally more noise - if that makes sense).
8:44 8:49
Thanks for this. You deserve more subs. +1 wih me
Thank you so much!
@user-zm3tf1rw8e
1 секунду назад
Hello) Please tell me Does apollo twin or apollo solo work with the program Nvidia ShadowPlay?
Unfortunately, I'm not sure. That's not something I've heard of.