|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
Quote:
Quote:
They need to be understood without some ancient tape jockey babbling about headroom and frequency response.
Hi, all. I think I just recognized myself, there!
Actually, I completely agree with the 16/24 argument, but I think that, sometimes, we assume that better equipment makes better recordings, without acknowledging the difference made by the skill of the operator.
In my view, the differences between 16/24 are hard to detect, whilst the skill of the operator makes a huge difference. Some of us who remember working with tape, when you had a noise floor you could measure on the VUs and nothing was tracked without a compressor to preserve the s/n ratio without switching in the Dolbys, are quite happy to stick with 16 bit.
Just sayin....
ROG.
I've worked in both worlds, tape and digital - in many formats. I don't have measurement equipment at home that is precise enough to show the difference between 16 and 24 bit. What I do know is that since switching over to 24 bit, I've not had to wring my hands about trying to maximize the input range of my A/D for every track. I can be quite sloppy with it, and when I then go back and boost those low-level recorded signals, they are still doggoned clean sounding. This is not the case when doing the same practice with 16 bit. I can indeed start to hear hiss if I take a recording that I made perhaps 25 dB down in 16 bit, then boost it up 20 dB. Try that experiment for yourself.
-Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
Quote:
Quote:
They need to be understood without some ancient tape jockey babbling about headroom and frequency response.
Hi, all. I think I just recognized myself, there!
Actually, I completely agree with the 16/24 argument, but I think that, sometimes, we assume that better equipment makes better recordings, without acknowledging the difference made by the skill of the operator.
In my view, the differences between 16/24 are hard to detect, whilst the skill of the operator makes a huge difference. Some of us who remember working with tape, when you had a noise floor you could measure on the VUs and nothing was tracked without a compressor to preserve the s/n ratio without switching in the Dolbys, are quite happy to stick with 16 bit.
Just sayin....
ROG.
I always find these 16/24 discussions amusing. I started out with a Tascam Portastudio 144 in 1979 (4-track/cassette). You want to talk about noise floor? 
I agree with ROG - the gear will not make you a better operator. It will, however, remove a lot of the sonic obstacles that plagued the "good old days".
Regards,
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021 |
And don't forget that 0 on your digital meters is about 18dB hotter then 0 on an analog desk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366 |
Quote:
I can indeed start to hear hiss if I take a recording that I made perhaps 25 dB down in 16 bit, then boost it up 20 dB. Try that experiment for yourself.
Scott.
The first thing I ask myself is - why would someone with your obvious knowledge and experience want to record anything 25db down?
One thing you must remember is that you have a theoretical dynamic range of your digital recording medium, but an actual one based on the noise floor from the inherent noise in the signal chain. If, for example, you put a cheap mic in front of an old Marshall tube amp, your dynamic range is, I think the technical term is "shot-to-hell". Even just a good mic through an expensive pre-amp will have a noise floor higher than the digital medium. The experienced engineer will will know how to minimize these problems and get the best results out of the available gear.
You'll notice that I agreed with the main 16/24 argument in my earlier post. I was just making the point that we encourage people to up-grade more often than we tell them to get some specialized training.
ROG.
Last edited by ROG; 06/08/12 11:16 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 618
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 618 |
I remember my home studio. I would mix down to a DAT Recorder. This was around 1990? I'd send the audio synced with midi from my Atari ST right to the DAT machine. It took some time to get used to setting levels. Many of my first mixes were full of distortion. What an ugly sound it was. I remember it sounding like blown speakers. I started to use a compressor/limiter to help me keep it even.
Wayne,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
Quote:
I remember my home studio. I would mix down to a DAT Recorder. This was around 1990? I'd send the audio synced with midi from my Atari ST right to the DAT machine. It took some time to get used to setting levels. Many of my first mixes were full of distortion. What an ugly sound it was. I remember it sounding like blown speakers. I started to use a compressor/limiter to help me keep it even.
Wayne,
That was the old 16 bit Audio Engine.
Today, all audio recording programs are using the 32 bit engine. No more digital "thwack" from overruns, which is another way of saying digital clipping.
--Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,126
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,126 |
Quote:
... I think I just recognized myself, there!
Actually, I completely agree with the 16/24 argument, but I think that, sometimes, we assume that better equipment makes better recordings, without acknowledging the difference made by the skill of the operator.
In my view, the differences between 16/24 are hard to detect, whilst the skill of the operator makes a huge difference. Some of us who remember working with tape, when you had a noise floor you could measure on the VUs and nothing was tracked without a compressor to preserve the s/n ratio without switching in the Dolbys, are quite happy to stick with 16 bit.
Rog,
Hoping that the analog chops we worked so hard to acquire could be translated to digital audio processing is common to most of us oldsters. 
______________________________________________________________
In Linux, audio information is transmitted from one application to another for special-purpose processing, and the bit depth of the transmitted files can be 32 bit, or 64 bit. Files can even be encoded as 32 or 64 bit floating point.
I had not grasped the significance of this until reading Scott's description of "quantization noise" :
"What 24 bit recording does do is give you a better signal to quanitization noise ratio than lower bit depths.
For every bit depth there is an additional 6 dB of SQNR. You can go off and google and wikipedia this to get the complex math but I'll try to keep it simple here.
Here's the way to think about this. Let's pretend you have a pure sine-wave at a fixed peak-to-peak voltage. Let's pretend that we take this signal and we amplify it so that the the peak-to-peak voltage is the same as the peak-to-peak voltage that the A/D converter can handle. You can quantize this into 16 bits, or 2^16 values, or one of 65,536 possible values. The sine wave will have very tiny little stairstepped voltage values into which the wave is encoded.
Now, let's take the same signal, and quantize it into a 24 bit A/D converter, which has one of 16,777,216 possible values. As a result, the stair-steps are WAY smaller with 24 bit A/D conversion than with 16 bit conversion.
The 'stair-steppy-ness' of the signal is the quantization noise. Yet another way to think about this is to think of the smallest possible signal that can be encoded, a signal so quiet that the A/D converter switches between the lowest possible value at zero and the next highest value. It switches back and forth between 0000000000000000 and 0000000000000001. When those values eventually get sent back to D/A conversion, that twitching between the two values tweaks the output D/A and generates an unintended analog output noise: Quantization noise. (For those of you that know binary formats, and the difference between signed and unsigned stuff - bear with me here, just trying to make a point)
For a 24 bit recording, if we adjust the signal down so that the switching back and forth occurs between 000000000000000000000000 and 000000000000000000000001, the lowest two values, and as it goes back to D/A the tweak is much smaller and hence the quantization noise is much smaller. In fact the quantization noise will be roughly 48 dB lower than the 16 bit quantization noise.
Note - no magic with the dynamic range occurs.
The big benefit to recording with 24 bit recording over 16 bit is that one doesn't really have to worry nearly as much about using the full dynamic range of the A/D converter in order to get a nice signal to quantization noise ratio, and the little stair steps that occur in the digitized data are peanuts in comparison to 16 bit.
In other words, you can be quite a bit less careful about it, and just get on with recording."
Thank you, Scott! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366 |
Quote:
In other words, you can be quite a bit less careful about it, and just get on with recording.
Oren.
You don't think that good practice once learnt, is something which becomes second nature? Once we start to tell people it's ok to be careless about one thing, we then have to specify HOW careless and to differentiate between that and the things that DO need attention.
Start of the slippery slope?
ROG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
Quote:
Quote:
I can indeed start to hear hiss if I take a recording that I made perhaps 25 dB down in 16 bit, then boost it up 20 dB. Try that experiment for yourself.
Scott.
The first thing I ask myself is - why would someone with your obvious knowledge and experience want to record anything 25db down?
One thing you must remember is that you have a theoretical dynamic range of your digital recording medium, but an actual one based on the noise floor from the inherent noise in the signal chain. If, for example, you put a cheap mic in front of an old Marshall tube amp, your dynamic range is, I think the technical term is "shot-to-hell". Even just a good mic through an expensive pre-amp will have a noise floor higher than the digital medium. The experienced engineer will will know how to minimize these problems and get the best results out of the available gear.
You'll notice that I agreed with the main 16/24 argument in my earlier post. I was just making the point that we encourage people to up-grade more often than we tell them to get some specialized training.
ROG.
Rog,
It's not that I make recording at low levels a matter of practice, but allowing plenty of room does make for less hassles during mixing, not having to apply attenuation in the box to each track, so that when I sum the tracks, I'm not summing to something that's overdriving.
It's just a matter of convenience, I suppose. When I think back to when I had only 16 bit available, I spent a lot of time worrying about maximizing the A/D for each recorded track, and then dialing down from there inside the box.
I do almost no worry of that now and just get on with recording the next track and on to mixing. It's been a very rare occurrence when my songs have summed to the point where I have to go in and adjust gains of individual tracks down - and my 2 channel mixdowns sound very clean.
That wasn't the case in my previous 16 bit life.
I will say that my mixdown 'process' is much less structured than most here, as I don't really have a mixer paradigm in the DAW that I use and I'm fine with it being that way.
Hopefully this is making sense.
-Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,251 |
This has been a very informative thread.
Thanks guys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,366 |
Scott.
Forgive me if I appeared to be critical of your recording technique. In threads like this, I tend to court controversy, which is a character flaw I find difficult to throw off!
At the end of the day. it's the final mix which we're judged on, not the way we got there.
I learnt my recording in the 60s and 70s, when attention to detail such as levels throughout the signal chain was essential, bearing in mind the equipment we had. Old habits die hard. I have to say, though, there's no way I would want to go back to tape and enormous mixers with no automation.
BTW, if you like maths, which you seem to have a good grasp of, try factoring in the fact that quantization noise is frequency sensitive - it gets scary!
ROG.
Last edited by ROG; 06/09/12 02:30 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
Rog,
No harm no foul. Your question was valid. Please understand that I still care about gain staging and so forth and I do still use most of the A/D available range when I record - I just worry less about it now. It used to make a difference. Now, with the limited time I have for this hobby, I spend less time worrying about it and it's none for the worse as a result.
Regarding maths, I learned this stuff about 10-12 years ago in the EE-638 Digital Signal Processing class at Purdue University. I was the only mechanical engineer in the course. The professor was Michael Zoltowski - great guy who knows a shed load of information about DSP. His specialty is spread spectrum communications. I bugged him a great deal with my questions about applications to audio for music purposes.
My favorite moment in the class was the exercise we went through to show how sending this stair-stepped digitized signal through the D/A filter actually DOES result in a smoothed analog signal (up to a certain frequency) through the superposition of each bit's impulse response through the D/A filter stage.
That was an eye opener for me.
Last edited by rockstar_not; 06/09/12 07:32 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,126
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,126 |
Quote:
You don't think that good practice once learnt, is something which becomes second nature? Once we start to tell people it's ok to be careless about one thing, we then have to specify HOW careless and to differentiate between that and the things that DO need attention.
Start of the slippery slope?
ROG,
Music as art has intrigued me, and the science of music is fascinating, but the craft of making music - from composition to performance to recording to post production - is what really puts the frost on my pumpkin.
In that context, the care with which a craftsperson approaches an audio project is paramount; the defining quality of the experience, for me. (not that you'ld automatically know that from some of the doo-doo I've generated - but we're all entitled to our mistakes... )
So "yes" to good practice as second nature, and "no" to slippery slopes, analog or digital! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last Chance! The Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® Special Ends Today (May 31, 2026) at 11:59pm PDT!
Time really is running out! Save up to 50% on Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® upgrades and receive a FREE Bonus PAK—only when you order by 11:59 PM PDT today!
We've added many major new features and new content in a redesigned Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®!
Version 2026 introduces a modernized GUI redesign across the program, with updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, and a new Dark Mode option. There’s also a new side toolbar for quicker access to commonly used windows, and the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, making it easier to customize your workspace.
Another exciting new addition is the amazing new AI-Notes feature, which can transcribe polyphonic audio into MIDI. View the results in notation or play them back as MIDI, and choose whether to transcribe an entire track or transcribe specific parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®.
There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, and much more!
Upgrade your Band-in-a-Box for Mac® to save up to 50% on most Band-in-a-Box® 2026 upgrade packages!
Plus, when you order your Band-in-a-Box® 2026 Mac upgrade during our special, you'll receive a Free Bonus PAK of exciting new add-ons.
If you need any help deciding which package is the best option for you, just let us know. We are here to help!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 Mac Special Offers Extended Until May 31st!
Good news- we've extended our Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® special offers until May 31, 2026!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 is packed with major new features, enhancements, and an incredible lineup of new content! The program now sports a sleek, modern GUI redesign across the entire interface, including updated toolbars, refreshed windows, smoother workflows, a new dark mode option, and more. The brand-new side toolbar provides quicker access to key windows, while the new Multi-View feature lets you arrange multiple windows as layered panels without overlap, creating a flexible, clutter-free workspace. We have an amazing new “AI-Notes” feature. This transcribes polyphonic audio into MIDI so you can view it in notation or play it back as MIDI. You can transcribe an entire track (all pitched instruments and drums) or focus on individual parts like drums, bass, guitars/piano, or vocals. There's an amazing collection of new content too, including 202 RealTracks, new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two RealDrums Stems sets, and much more!
There are over 100 new features in Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®.
When you order purchase Band-in-a-Box® 2026 before 11:59 PM PDT on May 31st, you'll also receive a Free Bonus PAK packed with exciting new add-ons.
Check out the Band-in-a-Box® for Mac packages page to find the best package for you.
Holiday Weekend Hours
It's Victoria Day Long Weekend in Canada. Our Customer Service hours are:
Saturday, May 16: Closed
Sunday, May 17: Closed
Monday, May 18: 8:00am - 4:00pm
Regular hours resume Tuesday, May 19th!
Today's the Last Day of the Band-in-a-Box 2026® for Mac Special!
Order before 11:59pm PDT today (May 15, 2026) to save up to 50% off your Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® upgrade and receive a FREE Bonus PAK loaded with great new Add-ons to use with this new version!
Don't wait - order today!
Check out all the new features in the redesigned Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac - Special Offers End at 11:59pm PDT on Friday, May 15th, 2026!
Order before 11:59pm PDT on Friday, May 15th and SAVE up to 50% on most Band-in-a-Box® version 2026 for Mac Upgrade packages... and that's not all! With your version 2026 for Mac purchase, we'll include a Bonus PAK full of great new Add-ons FREE! Upgrade to the 2026 49-PAK to receive even more NEW Add-ons including 20 additional RealTracks... that's 222 NEW RealTracks available with version Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac!
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac® today for as little as $49! Check out the Band-in-a-Box® packages page for all available purchase options.
Learn more about the Free Bonus PAK and 49-PAK here.
If you have any questions about which package is the best option for you, just let us know. We're here to help!
202 New RealTracks Released with Band-in-a-Box 2026!
With Band-in-a-Box® 2026, we've released 202 incredible new RealTracks (in sets 468-488) in a variety of genres—featuring your most requested styles!
Jazz, Funk & World (Sets 468-475):
Our new jazz, funk & blues RealTracks include a groovin’ collection of RealTracks and RealDrums! These include more requested “soul jazz” RealTracks featuring artists Neil Swainson (bass), Charles Treadway (organ), Brent Mason (guitar), and Wes Little (drums). There are new “smooth jazz” styles (4), which include a RealTracks first: muted trumpet, as well as slick new smooth jazz brushes options for drums. Blues lovers will be thrilled—there are more “classic acoustic blues” styles, including guitar (5), bass (4), and drums (10) with blues master Colin Linden, featuring understated and tasty background acoustic soloing, plus brushes drums and acoustic bass. There are also new electric blues RealTracks, including electric blues with PG favorite Johnny Hiland (3) and soulful electric slide guitar from Colin Linden (4). If you love funk & gospel, there are great new options this year, including gospel organ (3) from Charles Treadway, as well as new funk, tango, and rock ’n’ roll drums (3) and bass (1). And for big, bold arrangements, we have uptempo soul horns (4) featuring a three-part hip horn section with options for a full mix or stems of each individual horn — plus an accompanying rhythm section (4) of drums, bass, guitar, and electric piano!
Rock & Pop (Sets 476–482):
Our new rock & pop RealTracks bring a powerful mix of requested favorites, fresh genres, and modern chart-inspired styles! We have more of our popular “Producer Layered Acoustic Guitars (15)” featuring Band-in-a-Box favorite Brent Mason. We’ve continued our much-requested disco styles (10), and added new Celtic guitar (5) with a more basic, accessible approach than our previous Drop-D or DADGAD offerings. There are also highly requested yacht rock styles (17), inspired by the smooth, polished soft-rock sound of the late ’70s and early ’80s — laid-back grooves, silky electric pianos, warm textures, elegant harmonic movement, and pristine production aesthetics. Fans of heavier styles will love our new glam metal (13), capturing the flashy, high-energy sound of ’80s arena-ready guitar rock. We also have a set of rootsy modern-folk rock (18), with a warm, organic sound combining contemporary folk textures and driving acoustic strumming. And we’ve added lots of new modern pop styles (16) — the kinds of sounds you’re hearing on the radio today, featuring exciting new drums, synths, and cutting-edge RealTracks arrangements.
Country, & Americana (Sets 483–488):
Our new country & Americana RealTracks deliver a rich collection of acoustic, electric, and roots-inspired styles! We have new country pop (9) with legendary guitarist Brent Mason. There is also a potpourri (14) of bouzouki, guitars, banjo, and more, perfect for adding texture and character to contemporary acoustic arrangements. We’ve added funky country guitar (5) with PG favorite Brent Mason, along with classic pedal steel styles (5) featuring steel great Doug Jernigan. There are more country songwriter styles (8) that provide intimate, rootsy foundations for storytelling and modern Americana writing. Finally, we have “background soloing” acoustic guitar (12) with Brent Mason — simpler, but still very tasty acoustic lines designed to sit beautifully behind vocals or act as a subtle standalone solo part.
Check out all the 202 new RealTracks (in sets 468-488)!
And, if you are looking for more, the 2026 49-PAK (for $49) includes an impressive collection of 20 bonus RealTracks, featuring exciting and inspiring additions to add to your RealTracks library. You'll get new country-rhythm guitar styles from PG Music favorites Johnny Hiland and Brent Mason, along with modern-pop grooves that capture today’s radio-ready sound! There are also new indie-folk styles with guitar, bass, 6-string bass used as a high-chording instrument, acoustic guitar, and banjo. Plus, dedicated "cymbal fills" RealDrums provide an added layer that work very well with low-key folky styles with other percussion.
The 2026 49-PAK is loaded with other great new add-ons as well. Learn more about the 2026 49-PAK!
2026 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK for Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®!
With your version 2026 for Mac Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition or PlusPAK purchase, we'll include a Bonus PAK full of great new Add-ons for FREE! Or upgrade to the 2026 49-PAK for only $49 to receive even more NEW Add-ons including 20 additional RealTracks!
These PAKs are loaded with additional add-ons to supercharge your Band-in-a-Box®!
This Free Bonus PAK includes:
- The 2026 RealCombos Booster PAK:
-For Pro customers, this includes 27 new RealTracks and 23 new RealStyles.
-For MegaPAK customers, this includes 25 new RealTracks and 23 new RealStyles.
-For UltraPAK customers, this includes 12 new RealStyles.
- MIDI Styles Set 92: Look Ma! More MIDI 15: Latin Jazz
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 46: Piano & Organ
- Instrumental Studies Set 24: Groovin' Blues Soloing
- Artist Performance Set 19: Songs with Vocals 9
- Playable RealTracks Set 5
- RealDrums Stems Set 9: Cool Brushes
- SynthMaster Sounds Set 1 (with audio demos)
- iOS Android Band-in-a-Box® App
Looking for more great add-ons, then upgrade to the 2026 49-PAK for just $49 and you'll get:
- 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums with 20 RealStyle.
- FLAC Files (lossless audio files) for the 20 Bonus Unreleased RealTracks and RealDrums
- MIDI Styles Set 93: Look Ma! More MIDI 16: SynthMaster
- MIDI SuperTracks Set 47: More SynthMaster
- Instrumental Studies 25 - Soul Jazz Guitar Soloing
- Artist Performance Set 20: Songs with Vocals 10
- RealDrums Stems Set 10: Groovin' Sticks
- SynthMaster Sounds & Styles Set 2 (sounds & styles with audio demos)
Learn more about the Bonus PAK and 49-PAK for Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac®!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums57
Topics86,438
Posts805,130
Members40,121
| |
Most Online64,515
Apr 8th, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean