Ah yes .. I'm guessing the original was to avoid an overflow, since I recall changing another one of these in RMML/jEmplode for the same reason. I don't know how similar our two versions are anymore, but I have a similar line in my parseXingHeader and parseVBRIHeader. I can't recall now if I changed the second one TO the broken way as an overflow fix. I'll just upcast it to a double .. I think that will keep it from getting screwed up.

Thanks Peter ... ms