ProSoundWeb Community

Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => LAB: The Classic Live Audio Board => Topic started by: Luke Geis on December 08, 2017, 11:37:37 pm

Title: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Luke Geis on December 08, 2017, 11:37:37 pm
Not by much.

So I recently had the joy of taking in a new inventory of JBL SRX-812p's and an M32R mixer!!! I have had the Behringer X32R for about the last 4 years and absolutely love it. It sounds great, does everything I can think of that I need it to do and is the ultimate stealth rig. So I decided I would buy into the Midas line as well to " up the game " a little bit. I wanted and needed a small format, hard surface to mix on that I figured may as well utilize current inventory. So the M32R was the natural choice.

The first thing I did was make the two units work together so I could do an A/B comparison. There is a very slight difference that I tried testing blindly and objectively. The interesting thing is that under test conditions they act very much like a double slit experiment; the results can be determined without actually viewing anything. In other words I ran a single pink noise generator through both units and measured the RTA of the pink noise through both units. No difference. The RMS output according to the RTA is the same. When you listen to them however, you can hear a very slight difference.

So what are my impressions? Well, the same as everyone else who has done the same thing. The X32 has a brightness to it that is different and not as sweet as the M32. The X32 has a lack of low mids and fullness that the M32 seems to have. The M32 just sounds fuller, bigger and the highs are sweeter. The difference is so slight though that you would be hard pressed to tell unless you were able to listen back to back through the same PA. To be honest, unless you were told which one was which first, you would only know that the two sounded so close, that they could be the same unit and you were only creating a difference in your mind.

What is different for sure is overall build quality. The M32 has MUCH better faders and knobs than the X32. The M32 is heavy and substantial for its size. There may not be much difference between the two, but the M32 does sound sweet and works very well and for the $1,800 price tag that you can acquire an M32R for, it is hard to beat. The Stage box is en route to me and I will again do the same test just to confirm that it is not the internal vs external systems that sound different. If you have Midas money, get it. If you have a budget, then the X32 is not going to hurt you in any way that the average punter can tell.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Robert Lofgren on December 09, 2017, 09:37:35 am
And you get a 10yr warranty as well :-)
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Ivan Beaver on December 09, 2017, 11:52:27 am
The best way to see any difference in amplitude/phase between 2 units is to do a dual transfer function of them together.

This is like a normal dual transfer function for system alignment, except the 2 inputs are the devices in question, not one of the inputs being the reference.  This can go for mics, speakers etc.

You will instantly see if there is any difference in response.

An RTA is not the best way to do this.  It lacks resolution and is prone to outside interference
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Kevin Maxwell on December 09, 2017, 12:32:36 pm
Another difference?

Aren’t the Aux outputs, the balanced ¼” jacks on the M32 mixers the same as the XLR outputs? But on the X32 they are different then the XLRs.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 09, 2017, 01:47:41 pm
Another difference?

Aren’t the Aux outputs, the balanced ¼” jacks on the M32 mixers the same at the XLR outputs? But on the X32 they are different then the XLRs.

If I understand your question correctly the answer is no, the 1/4 inch outputs are physically and electrically separate  feom the XLR connections on both mixers. There is no difference between brands in this regard.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Kevin Maxwell on December 09, 2017, 02:27:30 pm
If I understand your question correctly the answer is no, the 1/4 inch outputs are physically and electrically separate  feom the XLR connections on both mixers. There is no difference between brands in this regard.

Sorry that was a typo I meant to say that they are the same as the XLR. Not at. Meaning that on the M32 they are the same level and quality as the XLR outputs on the M32. On the X32 the aux outputs (1/4" TRS) are not the same as the XLR outputs on the X32

From what I have experienced, the M32 aux outs are different then the X32 aux outs. The X32 aux outputs are lower in level then the M32. I will try to find a link.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 09, 2017, 04:16:47 pm
Sorry that was a typo I meant to say that they are the same as the XLR. Not at. Meaning that on the M32 they are the same level and quality as the XLR outputs on the M32. On the X32 the aux outputs (1/4" TRS) are not the same as the XLR outputs on the X32

From what I have experienced, the M32 aux outs are different then the X32 aux outs. The X32 aux outputs are lower in level then the M32. I will try to find a link.

Ah, I get where you're going with this...

I've not done a side by side but using both an x32 and m32 to drive the same PA I've not noticed any significant difference in audible level with the same metered level... As in if there's a difference it's less than 3dB in my observation.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Corey Scogin on December 09, 2017, 04:49:50 pm
I've not done a side by side but using both an x32 and m32 to drive the same PA I've not noticed any significant difference in audible level with the same metered level... As in if there's a difference it's less than 3dB in my observation.

The max output level of the 1/4" vs XLR outputs is different on the X32 but the same on the M32.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on December 09, 2017, 06:50:56 pm
The best way to see any difference in amplitude/phase between 2 units is to do a dual transfer function of them together.

This is like a normal dual transfer function for system alignment, except the 2 inputs are the devices in question, not one of the inputs being the reference.  This can go for mics, speakers etc.

You will instantly see if there is any difference in response.

An RTA is not the best way to do this.  It lacks resolution and is prone to outside interference

+1

One problem though, that i sometimes have comparing digital devices via transfer ... comparing mixers, processors, etc...
is when there seems to be a clocking issue between reference and measured channels....

Do you see that often?
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Brian Adams on December 09, 2017, 07:28:43 pm
I've done a small holiday tour for the last few years with an X32 and 2 X32 racks for monitors, using the X32 racks for a digital split. This year I decided to patch in a DL32 on an analog split, mostly so I could have more freedom with channel gain. It definitely sounded better than last years shows. I can't say if it was due to the Midas preamps in the DL32, the fact that I had to re-gain every channel, the slightly different mics on toms and overheads, or that the artist finally got herself a set of molded ears, but there was a noticeable difference in the sound this year. I didn't change a whole lot from last year to now, but the DL32 was the biggest hardware change for me. It's hard to say how much of an impact that had, or if I'd have had the same result with an S32 in its place.

I could have taken one of my M32's out this year instead of an X32, but I decided not to. I wouldn't have been using the preamps in it anyway, so I figured I'd save the wear and tear on it. The M32 definitely looks and feels better than an X32 though.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Scott Helmke on December 10, 2017, 09:13:53 am
One problem though, that i sometimes have comparing digital devices via transfer ... comparing mixers, processors, etc...
is when there seems to be a clocking issue between reference and measured channels....

Do you see that often?

Yeah, I can never quite get the phase trace to line up at the high frequency end of the scale. That's to be expected when you have different devices with different internal clock speeds and/or latency.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Diogo Nunes Pereira on December 11, 2017, 03:47:04 am
Sitgesf

Enviado desde mi XT1032 mediante Tapatalk

Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Jim McKeveny on December 11, 2017, 09:11:23 am
The M32 definitely looks and feels better than an X32 though.

^^^This is the essential difference.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 11, 2017, 09:56:38 am
^^^This is the essential difference.

The two boards may share a number of things in common, but it will only make sense that higher quality components will result in the perceived or real differences being discussed. Even if identical with the exception of form factor this will be the case.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Daniel Levi on December 11, 2017, 02:24:15 pm
iirc the differences are:

New input and output stages based on the PRO series consoles.
PRO series microphone pre-amp inc. the special clipping mode MIDAS are known for (X32 preamps are supposedly a dynacord design used in the original MIDAS Venice (short faders) consoles).
All input and output sockets replaced with genuine Neutrik connectors vs. the gerneric ones in the X32 (aside from the Ethercon connectios which are Neutrik on both) .
Midas in house designed PRO faders instead of the cheaper X32 in house designed faders which also have a rated lifespan of ~1,000,000 cycles compared to I think ~250,000 on the X32.
New case design and buttons.
Daylight viewable display compared to the normal one in the X32.
Now 10Yr warranty instead of 3yrs on the X32 and supposedly the extra level of support that comes with buying Midas.

AND... The most important, it's a Midas (which to some people matters)

I think that is all although there might be some other internal enhancements that aren't currently noticeable or enabled.

I personally think they were very clever with the X/M32 changing enough so that the M32 is no seen so much as an X32 with a Midas badge but a better designed and engineered product that would be expected from a product bearing the Midas name. 
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 12, 2017, 11:30:52 am
There was a time when I embraced anything Midas analog or digital, even though the human interface could, at times, seem just a bit strange. I'm also glad to see that Behringer has produced what appears to be a decent quality series of mixers based on the X-32 design. However, they're all still Behringer products in the end, and my views haven't and won't change, taking Midas off of my short list forever.

And clever is correct. Behringer has taken their own philosophy of "re-engineering" other manufactures products and brought that "re-engineering" in house. Taking an X-32 putting it into a nicer enclosure and using higher quality components may make for a more solid product that can retail for a higher price, but in the end it's still a Behringer X-32. Disguised Behringer product is still Behringer product. Very clever indeed.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 12, 2017, 01:43:01 pm
There was a time when I embraced anything Midas analog or digital, even though the human interface could, at times, seem just a bit strange. I'm also glad to see that Behringer has produced what appears to be a decent quality series of mixers based on the X-32 design. However, they're all still Behringer products in the end, and my views haven't and won't change, taking Midas off of my short list forever.

And clever is correct. Behringer has taken their own philosophy of "re-engineering" other manufactures products and brought that "re-engineering" in house. Taking an X-32 putting it into a nicer enclosure and using higher quality components may make for a more solid product that can retail for a higher price, but in the end it's still a Behringer X-32. Disguised Behringer product is still Behringer product. Very clever indeed.

Bob, it could be the other way around, the M-32 was designed first and then Behringer spent the time and money to make it cheaper and call it the X-32.

The reality is we don't actually know.

And back when EV-Telex owned Midas/KT, they were buying Dynacord mixers and rebadging them as Midas Venice...
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: John L Nobile on December 12, 2017, 02:15:02 pm


And back when EV-Telex owned Midas/KT, they were buying Dynacord mixers and rebadging them as Midas Venice...

Thanks for clearing that up for me Tim. The first time I used a Venice I thought to myself "no way was this made by Midas".
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: John Chiara on December 13, 2017, 12:33:34 am
There was a time when I embraced anything Midas analog or digital, even though the human interface could, at times, seem just a bit strange. I'm also glad to see that Behringer has produced what appears to be a decent quality series of mixers based on the X-32 design. However, they're all still Behringer products in the end, and my views haven't and won't change, taking Midas off of my short list forever.

And clever is correct. Behringer has taken their own philosophy of "re-engineering" other manufactures products and brought that "re-engineering" in house. Taking an X-32 putting it into a nicer enclosure and using higher quality components may make for a more solid product that can retail for a higher price, but in the end it's still a Behringer X-32. Disguised Behringer product is still Behringer product. Very clever indeed.

Bob,
I know your feeling about Behringer...it's almost a moral/political standard for you. We all need to choose how we live that out in the real world. My world ...in many, many different places...is X32 world...and I have to say for the better since the days of beat up analog boards with minimal or shitty outboard gear. It has become a standard that all kinds of touring bands are familiar with and can interface with, which makes everything easier. If someone else had done it first, it might have been and A+H or Soundcraft...but alas...it wasn't. Local colleges around here chose to go with other digital consoles for their classes...and we get interns who are less than agile in the clubs..which are 90% X32.
It is kind of like curren politicians can...we might not agree with stuff, but the ability to get things done is admirable as a process.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 14, 2017, 07:20:36 am
John,
I gave Behringer credit where credit is due. I may go back much further than most people in my relationship with their products, and none of my experiences have been gratifying, satisfying, or for that matter very pleasant at all. At one time, when people would ask if a particular device would help their overall sound, I would recommend buying used "B" hardware off of Ebay, telling those people to try it and if it's a solution then toss the hardware and buy the real deal.

As a part of my recording system I use an Xtouch. It provides motorized faders for my use with Cubase. I bought it because it was cheap. It works most of the time, but I don't use the recording system that often, so I can't vouch for dependability. Will I buy anything else Behringer? No, or will I recommend anything Behringer based on my experiences, principles, and historical past. They hit a home run with the X-32 series and it's offspring, I'll give them that, but that's as far as I go.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: John Chiara on December 15, 2017, 01:47:18 am
John,
I gave Behringer credit where credit is due. I may go back much further than most people in my relationship with their products, and none of my experiences have been gratifying, satisfying, or for that matter very pleasant at all. At one time, when people would ask if a particular device would help their overall sound, I would recommend buying used "B" hardware off of Ebay, telling those people to try it and if it's a solution then toss the hardware and buy the real deal.

As a part of my recording system I use an Xtouch. It provides motorized faders for my use with Cubase. I bought it because it was cheap. It works most of the time, but I don't use the recording system that often, so I can't vouch for dependability. Will I buy anything else Behringer? No, or will I recommend anything Behringer based on my experiences, principles, and historical past. They hit a home run with the X-32 ex emoseries and it's offspring, I'll give them that, but that's as far as I go.

I guess I'm an exception. I have a number of German made pieces..a bunch of Chinese...and I've used the DCX and DEQ2496 units since they came out.. never a problem.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Steve Payne on December 15, 2017, 09:19:11 am
I guess I'm an exception. I have a number of German made pieces..a bunch of Chinese...and I've used the DCX and DEQ2496 units since they came out.. never a problem.

John, your experience is indeed the rare exception.  Congratulations.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 15, 2017, 11:03:50 am
I guess I'm an exception. I have a number of German made pieces..a bunch of Chinese...and I've used the DCX and DEQ2496 units since they came out.. never a problem.

We had a bunch of the active DI (that looked a little like BSS).  I'm not sure any of them are still working.

The original German-made compressors?  They had no working issues but the allegations of IP theft (and the price tag at the time) meant that dbx was still the preferred option.  The cheap made in China compressors were more of a problem and I never opened one up to see if the PC boards were the same, but wrote off Behringer as a brand choice.

FWD to today and we have no need for 90% of their outboard gear and now Behringer buys the companies who own the IP they want to acquire.  Not exactly a paradigm shift but close...

Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 15, 2017, 11:43:23 am
Bob,
I know your feeling about Behringer...it's almost a moral/political standard for you.
This is a tell for how long you have been in the industry. For many of us, forget the "almost".
Quote
We all need to choose how we live that out in the real world. My world ...in many, many different places...is X32 world...and I have to say for the better since the days of beat up analog boards with minimal or shitty outboard gear. It has become a standard that all kinds of touring bands are familiar with and can interface with, which makes everything easier. If someone else had done it first, it might have been and A+H or Soundcraft...but alas...it wasn't. Local colleges around here chose to go with other digital consoles for their classes...and we get interns who are less than agile in the clubs..which are 90% X32.
It is kind of like curren politicians can...we might not agree with stuff, but the ability to get things done is admirable as a process.
Politics has nothing to do with this, it's just bidness.... At this point in their corporate evolution there are no longer lots of low hanging fruit, category killers from small companies to "be inspired by", so they have been pretty much operating like a normal (albeit very large) industry player for years now.
======
On topic the X32 and M32 should sound almost identical. One well reported difference is a soft limiter in the Midas mic preamp front end that the X32 lacks... This could easily make an audible difference when pushed hard.

JR 
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Loren Miller on December 15, 2017, 03:34:28 pm
The amount of publicity and interest that is generated by the m/X32 comparison is pure genius. I don’t know if it was intentional or they walked into it accidentally, but wow I hope someone got a promotion. It also seems to play into the “enemy/feud” rhetoric that is sadly en vogue right now.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 15, 2017, 03:45:54 pm
The amount of publicity and interest that is generated by the m/X32 comparison is pure genius. I don’t know if it was intentional or they walked into it accidentally, but wow I hope someone got a promotion. It also seems to play into the “enemy/feud” rhetoric that is sadly en vogue right now.

As mentioned up-thread, some of us took (and a few still take) umbrage at the apparent theft of the intellectual property of Mackie and dbx, even though in subsequent legal proceedings the courts held that there was no culpability on the part of Behringer.  It was just too damn obvious that PC boards had been copied (right down to the OEM label) but for whatever legal reasons, Behringer was able to continue selling these products.

Some of us have a very long memory and particularly for those who make their living creating hardware IP, that memory is unforgiving.  For 10 years or more I would not let my boss purchase *anything* Behringer.

FFWD to the current economic/business expectations and the company now owns 2 X32 and 1 M32 and some accessories.

I fully understand the issues that Bob and JR and some other users have with the historic practices of what is now MusicTribe (or whatever the bullshit name is this quarter).  The fiscal realities of competition at the local/regional level dictates that we have to minimize our cost basis or we'll be losing business.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Adam Kane on December 15, 2017, 05:01:54 pm
John, your experience is indeed the rare exception.  Congratulations.

Indeed. Every Ultra-Drive (DCX2496) we installed went belly up and made the frying egg sound. Great units when they worked though. We had a few other pieces of gear that failed enough to give us a bad taste in our mouths, and we never used them for installations again.

Last year, I figured I'd try to use a Beheringer line mixer for a budget installation in a school. Feature-wise, it fit the bill. The price was right and I figured not much could go wrong with a little 1U rackmount line mixer. Put it in, and 2 months later the power supply crapped itself. Ate the $$ and put an Ashly in there knowing it would likely not need to be touched ever again.

We do use a few of their powered mixers for rental SOS systems and they have held up surprisingly well.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: William Schnake on December 15, 2017, 09:55:29 pm
... The fiscal realities of competition at the local/regional level dictates that we have to minimize our cost basis or we'll be losing business.

Truer word were never spoken or written.  Every year our business grows.  As an owner, I have to make every penny count and make sure that we are as profitable on every job as we can be.  We have artist that come through that want either an X32/M32 and other that want a Pro1/2 or a SC48.  Any more it is more X32/M32 with newer national acts simply because that is what their Engineer is use to and has spent the most time on.

As far as the past history with Behringer I, like Bob, had horrible experiences and when I could afford to do it I move to dbx 160a compressors.  However having spent significant festival time on the X32/M32 I think that they are as good as anything in the sub $6,500 price range.

Bill
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Spenser Hamilton on December 16, 2017, 06:14:44 pm
I for one welcome our new insect overlords.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 16, 2017, 09:06:00 pm
I for one welcome our new insect overlords.
It will be robots not insects...

JR
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 17, 2017, 09:52:53 am
Back in the very early 80's, before many Behringer users had been born, I had designed an RS-232 interface for small computers. The interface was simplistic, based on a 555 chip, and the software was written using basic. There was no internet as we know of today, this site didn't exist, and the majority of my product was sold at ham fests and via word of mouth. The product worked as intended, shipped with or without a case, and worked on anything that had an RS-232 port capable of running basic. The software was shipped on cassette tape. The manual was written by my wife.

Fast forward about a year and I was approached by a company known for their very low cost HAM radio accessories, and often suspect design processes. I sent them one of my products to evaluate as requested, they rejected the product, and in less than 6 months had their own interface that came in an aluminum case.

Their interface was an almost direct copy of mine, but made with very cheap inferior components. The program was not re-written or improved, and only text and comments were changed within the program to reflect their name. This company was not a US company and boarders the USA. I had little recourse because I had not patented the product. However, this was the beginning of my extreme distaste for people and companies who are willing to "appropriate" the work or intellectual property of others. Re-designing a product type to make it better, additional features, etc. is all part of the game, but direct replication with minor cosmetic changes in appearance is not. Behringer did not exist at that time, but even to this day their name brings thoughts of the theft of my own product to mind. And I would imagine many other older members of this board who share a similar experience feel exactly the same way I do.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 17, 2017, 09:55:30 am
And it will be robots
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: William Schnake on December 17, 2017, 12:09:36 pm
And it will be robots
...but robots built on human exo-skeletons.

Bill
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 17, 2017, 01:16:13 pm
...but robots built on human exo-skeletons.

Bill

I was thinking "robotic insects".
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 17, 2017, 09:11:11 pm
Like in the movie with Kirsty Alley and Gene Simmons.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Chris Hindle on December 18, 2017, 12:29:44 pm
Like in the movie with Kirsty Alley and Gene Simmons.
Gene should REALLY stick to music.......... ;D
Did like those Clamp-Ons/Kling-Ons, whatever you called them...
Chris.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Scott Mullane on December 20, 2017, 04:09:55 am
It will be robots not insects...

JR

Robots build by Behringer. 😂
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: drew gandy on December 20, 2017, 10:20:15 pm

Their interface was an almost direct copy of mine, but made with very cheap inferior components. The program was not re-written or improved, and only text and comments were changed within the program to reflect their name.


Wow, I can certainly understand the bitter taste in your mouth.  Thank you for sharing this. 

I've got a couple questions:

A) Have you ever evaluated how much money you lost because of their treachery? 

B) Did you evaluate how much more profit they were able to make because of the cheaper parts? 

C) Did your market entirely dry up? 
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 21, 2017, 07:35:23 am
Drew,
There is a huge market for this type device, which has changed drastically over the many years since I first designed my rudimentary code reader. The current day code readers are still pretty much based on an interpretation of the sound the morse code makes when heard by the human ear. The sound at the speaker is nothing more than a short or long electrical impulse, those impulses then passed through the serial port after conversion by the 555 timer, and the text then displayed on the computer screen.

My design was fairly accurate and the interface could be "tuned" reading code up to about 40wpm, which is fairly fast. Today the ability to read code using one of these type devices is limitless.

I have no idea how much I may have lost in potential income. I was in the middle of a career path change, didn't have enough money to fight the theft, and pushed it all aside. I stopped manufacturing the boards after that, but still have one of my proto types hanging around to remind me of the mistakes in trust I made back then. And to think, Behringer wasn't even a name at that time. If I can find the interface I'll post a picture.
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 21, 2017, 10:06:52 am
Robots build by Behringer. 😂
In fact the robot overlords will build themselves....

Humans will be unnecessary.

JR
Title: Re: The X32 and M32 do sound different, but........
Post by: William Schnake on December 21, 2017, 10:16:11 am
In fact the robot overlords will build themselves....

Humans will be unnecessary.

JR
Zager and Evans In the Year 2525.

In the year 5555 Your arms are hanging by your side
Your legs got nothing to do, some machine is doing that for you...

Merry Christmas....

Bill