Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The court did not err in admitting the tape of the drug transaction between the defendant and a confidential informant. Audibility of tape recordings is a preliminary question to be decided in the trial court's discretion (see, People v Lubow, 29 N.Y.2d 58, 68; People v Robinson, 158 A.D.2d 628). Even though certain portions of the tape were unclear, the audible portions demonstrated that the defendant sold the drugs to the informant, and, therefore, it was not an improvident exercise of the trial court's discretion to admit the tape (see, People v Maderic, 142 A.D.2d 892, 894; People v Godley, 130 A.D.2d 791, 793).
Further, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions, including those contentions raised in his pro se supplemental brief, and find them to be without merit. Kunzeman, J.P., Balletta, Miller and O'Brien, JJ., concur.