Dear Authors,

thank you for addressing the comments of the two reviewers, your paper has improved in both clarity and quality.
Please follow the new suggestions by Reviewer#1 which are minor and technical edits of the text and figures, and which are needed before publication.

I paste here Rev#1 comments for completeness:

"l.20 and 22: Capitalization should be consistent (VanDieland vs. Vandieland)
l.83: I have never seen the term ``turbidite thrust system'', and I frankly do not understand what it is supposed to mean. As far as I can see, the cited paper (Gray and Foster, 2004) also does not use this term
l.88: contain + s
l.107: employed instead of deployed?
l.333: The sentence starting with ``Looking'' should, as far as I can see, not be part of the itemized list any more
l.400: crustal thickness (-es)
l.406: since the relationship between Poisson's ratio and vp/vs is not discussed, this statement is confusing. Best reformulate to vp/vs.
l.427: should be a lower case k in ka
l.428 and before: check for consistency in having ``vp/vs'' italized or non-italized
l.434/517/521: more Vandielands with lower case d..
l.439: should be southeast Australia I guess
l.782: spelling of modified

Figure 9: Why are the RF traces for stations BA13 and BA17 cut off at 0s, whereas the ones for the permanent stations (Figures 7+8) are not? Is this simply a plotting artefact, or does it indicate differences in the processing? (same for the Supplementary Figures)
Figure 10: caption needs to be updated; it describes stars and octagons, but the figure shows circles and triangles. One reference is misspelled (Shibutani)
Figure 12: This is a nice composite figure. However, the color scale seems to indicate that all shown velocities (or velocity differences) are vp, while the shown crustal velocities are vs from ambient noise tomography, hence vs (if I understand correctly). This should be indicated, ideally with a second scale bar for these velocities.
Figures S5-S8: can Moho picks be shown, just as in Figures 7-9?
Figure S9: what are the pink stars and the numbers associated to them? This is not mentioned in the caption. Also, it is not mentioned what red triangles (L1 to L15) are. Please clarify!"

Dear Authors,
thank you for addressing the comments of the reviewer, anyways the part of figure 9 where the observed+synthetic RF are plotted does not look nice enough to be shown in the main text as is. Please consider to show the RF (at least the observed) starting at -5 s; please change the lines 295-298 referring to the best-family rather than to the superior results achieved by using the shorter time window [since what has been cut is pre-signal noise]. In case you have not the possibility to show the RFs starting at -5s, please move the panels containing the RFs to the supplementary material, and move lines 295-298 in the caption of that figure.

thank you and kind regards,

Irene Bianchi