# Lets talk PC Audio



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

This has been tried before, this is my latest attempt and educating people on PC audio do's and donts, and clearing up a lot of myths surrounding the subject.

Out of arrogance i'm going to sticky this, because i think its worth it. 



*Dedicated vs Onboard + Analogue sound quality*


Spoiler



This is an age old debate, and a good point to start.
The short version is this: onboard sound has most of the features of high end cards these days. you get EAX 2.0, 5.1 and 7.1 sound, dolby digital encoding (and DTS) on some motherboards, and even HDMI audio built into some onboard VGA.

The only real area they differ is analogue audio quality. If you have high end speakers or good headphones, you WILL hear a sound difference.

Just so you know, a budget dedicated card (for example, those budget X-fi cards) can often sound just as bad as onboard. do your research before 'upgrading'



*Analogue Vs digital*


Spoiler









Expanding on above, digital audio (usually via HDMI or SPDIF) does NOT differ in quality between sound cards. it relies 100% on the decoder in your speakers or amplifier, to determine how good it sounds. If you use digital audio for stereo, or your onboard has dolby digital or DTS encoding capabilities, dont bother with a dedicated card.

To answer a question asked in another thread, analogue can sound better than digital, if the DAC's in the sound card are better than the DAC's in your digital receiver. You'd have to test that, but usually you'd not notice a difference except on extremely high end speakers.

As Frederik S says here, the only time digital should vary at all from one sound card to another, is if its incredibly bad quality, or just broken.


Frederik S said:


> On some motherboards the implementation of S/PDIF is so bad that the sound quality is impaired. But generally digital is digital so no quality difference.





*DDL/DTS  encoding*
as stated above, these are technologies to let you get 5.1 audio over a single digital cable (optical or RCA connections using SPDIF), instead of the normal limit of 2.0 audio. Not all cards have this, but lately even onboard solutions can. So yes, in this case onboard can in fact do something cheap dedicated cards cannot.



*SPDIF vs HDMI*


Spoiler








SPDIF is an older method of getting 5.1 sound over a connection originally designed for stereo (2 channel) audio only. It uses compression to do this, but helps you bypass the digital to analogue conversion process in your sound card. Most older home cinema speakers/receivers use this, so its a good way to use those speakers on PC.
 SPDIF only allows stereo or an encoded stream - which really means stereo or encoded (Compressed) 5.1 only.

HDMI is a new cable you should all be familiar with, that uses both video and audio on the one cable. I havent got personal experience with HDMI receivers i cant cover that perfectly, but i can say this:

Without a receiver with a HDMI input, you are stuck at stereo. The HDMI specs do not allow you to send the audio to your TV or monitor, and output it back out of the TV as SPDIF. If you think it does, test it yourself. You'll find out it doesnt work. (thanks DRM!) 

Basically, you need to have the HDMI source go like this
PC -> Audio receiver -> TV, or you're stuck at stereo from the TV speakers, just like SPDIF.

The main advantage of HDMI over toslink is one less cable (well, its not really since you have to add a second one once you add a receiver), and upto 8 channels of un-compressed audio. It WILL sound better, with really high end speakers.



*How to setup 5.1 sound*


Spoiler



First of all, make sure your sound card software, AND windows is set to 5.1.

Here is how to setup your sound card in windows:









its really simple, but some sound card software does NOT change this in windows, and can cause weird behaviour. make sure they match up.

here is my auzentechs Cmedia based software (Realtek is very similar, and not worth showing)





In this image you can see the 'input' and output are seperate.
if i had input to stereo but output to 5.1, this would give me stereo sound, spread out over my speakers. For example, i would hear an MP3 played back, play out of all speakers.
If i set it properly to 5.1 (6 channel) on both as below:





Then audio only comes out where its supposed to. MP3's are only stereo, so the sound will only come out of my front left and front right speakers (and probably the sub too, due to bass redirection)

Creative soundcards have a CMSS3D option that does the same as what i said above with the upmixing - its BAD. yes it gives your MP3's that surround feel, but it destroys positional audio in games. ever wondered why you can never tell where enemies are firing from, even with 5.1? thats why.

When it comes to true positional surround sound, you do not want ANY upmixing. period.

If you are setting up digital audio for surround sound, its pretty much the same, heres a screenshot of my realtek onboard and auzentech set up to use it. Note how the realtek treats it as a seperate sound source/soundcard, while the auzentech/cmedia disables the analogue outputs to do it (notice how its greyed out - but i still had to select 5.1 input at the top)

When selecting your sound card in windows, apps or games it can vary based on what i said above. If i wanted windows to use the digital on my auzentech, i have to set it to come out the analogue outputs because that stream is being encoded and moved to the optical port - whereas on the realtek its treated as an entirely different sound card, and therefore you need to choose the optical output













*Positional audio Vs Surround sound*


Spoiler



This does need to be briefly mentioned, even though it is touched upon in the other sections:

Surround sound is kind of misleading, as any sound that surrounds you is surround sound. This could be 5.1 surround sound, upmixed stereo sound, or even virtual surround sound.

TRUE surround sound is positional audio, where each output device (Speaker, subwoofer, etc) has its own dedicated sound stream. Front left only plays audio that is to your front left, and so on. A good example of this is with movies, how voices only come from the center speaker unless they are trying to make it sound like someone is 'behind' you, or to the side.


*Fake surround sound *


Spoiler








As shown in my Cmedia/auzentech screenshot above, virtual surround sound exists. Basically, it gets 6 (or more) channels of audio, and then mixes it back into a stereo stream using audio effects to make you think there is more than just two speakers. Kind of how like muffling a sound can make it seem further away, only more advanced.

This is fine in many cases, if you only have stereo inputs to your device (speakers or headphones - but if you have true multi channel inputs, for gods sake use true surround sound and not this fake crap.



*EAX in the modern gaming world*


Spoiler



Some people seem to think EAX is all important, fancy, and required for all sorts of sound features like positional audio, reverb effects, audio occlusion and surround sound in general. None of this is true.
EAX may have added those features in on top of Directsound3D, but it is not the only way to do so, and the death of EAX will not stop those features from existing in games today.
The only reason people think these features were tied in, was smart marketing on creatives part - they DISABLED all those features on soundcards that didnt support EAX, just to make it seem like EAX did more than it really did.
A good analogy there would be games designed for Nvidia graphics that dont allow anyone on ATI/AMD or intel graphics to go above 800x600 resolution. We wouldnt accept that there, which is why no one liked it in the audio market, and creatives monopoly got toppled.




And a bonus: 16 bit audio vs 24 bit
read this to see that some people think 24 bit audio aint worth it. arguments abound on this one. Sticking your audio straight to 24 bit in the windows control panel may not actually give you better audio, test it and see for yourself.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> Dedicated vs Onboard   Analogue sound quality



You may wish to add that this also uses CPU cycles, whereas dedicated soundcards use less or none, depending on the application.


----------



## Wile E (Mar 7, 2011)

If your on-board supports DTS or DDL encoding over optical or digital, there may still be benefits to using a sound card or a different HDMI enabled audio device (such as modern ATI and nV gfx cards). Optical/coax connections still cannot do multi-channel PCM or any of the HD audio formats like Dolby TrueHD or DTS Master Audio without loss of quality.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

Jack Doph said:


> You may wish to add that this also uses CPU cycles, whereas dedicated soundcards use less or none, depending on the application.



thats not true any more, hardware acceleration via soundcards is basically dead. its all done in software nowadays (and its no performance loss at all, with multi core systems)



Wile E said:


> If your on-board supports DTS or DDL encoding over optical or digital, there may still be benefits to using a sound card or a different HDMI enabled audio device (such as modern ATI and nV gfx cards). Optical/coax connections still cannot do multi-channel PCM or any of the HD audio formats like Dolby TrueHD or DTS Master Audio without loss of quality.



those are features you get by going HDMI, not by getting a soundcard. if you have a modern video card, you already have a HDMI sound device capable of those features. no need for a sound card at all then.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> thats not true any more, hardware acceleration via soundcards is basically dead. its all done in software nowadays (and its no performance loss at all, with multi core systems)



As a composer where latency matters, I can tell you that it does matter.
Not a great deal for the average user, true, but when ASIO et al comes into play, there is a difference.
I even did a test with my own on-board sound compared to my X-Fi Elite Pro and after sampling a 4 minute track, the on-board timing was out by nearly 2 seconds.
The only way to compensate for this is by increasing the input buffer - do-able but highly annoying, as it depends on the length of the track you're working with.

Again, not really an issue if you're an average user, but for more dedicated sound or music related work, this makes a difference you can notice.
RFI from other mobo components are also more noticeable in ob-board than they are in a dedicated card..


----------



## Frizz (Mar 7, 2011)

Jack Doph said:


> As a composer where latency matters, I can tell you that it does matter.
> Not a great deal for the average user, true, but when ASIO et al comes into play, there is a difference.
> I even did a test with my own on-board sound compared to my X-Fi Elite Pro and after sampling a 4 minute track, the on-board timing was out by nearly 2 seconds.
> The only way to compensate for this is by increasing the input buffer - do-able bu highly annoying, as it depends on the length of the track you're working with.
> ...



With newer gen systems, you don't need to go looking for sound cards for ASIO and almost 0 latency, you can pretty much download software that would allow you to use ASIO on your motherboard. I was using this to record drum tracks on my UD7 without a sound card or audio interface before and it worked exceptionally well but of course the sound quality itself wasn't as good.


----------



## HookeyStreet (Mar 7, 2011)

Nice arrogantly stickied thread


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

randomflip said:


> With newer gen systems, you don't need to go looking for sound cards for ASIO and almost 0 latency, you can pretty much download software that would allow you to use ASIO on your motherboard. I was using this to record drum tracks on my UD7 without a sound card before and it worked exceptionally well but of course the sound quality itself wasn't as good.



True, but that doesn't help with the input lag.
And, as you pointed out as well, the result isn't of the best standard either.
It is true, however, that on-board sound of today, is far better than it used to be. Good enough for most applications in fact.
Just not for music creation purposes, unless we're talking really simplistic stuff I suppose?


----------



## Wile E (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> thats not true any more, hardware acceleration via soundcards is basically dead. its all done in software nowadays (and its no performance loss at all, with multi core systems)
> 
> 
> 
> those are features you get by going HDMI, not by getting a soundcard. if you have a modern video card, you already have a HDMI sound device capable of those features. no need for a sound card at all then.



Not everbody has a modern sound card, or HDMI capable audio gear. These people can only get the most of their otherwise great surround setups via analog thru a sound card. I am one of those. 

Found a couple of other things to comment on as well:

I think the HDMI 1.4a standard does allow audio to go from tv to a supported receiver. Not sure in what capacity, or how exactly it works tho.
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/hdmi_1_4_faq.aspx#14

That article on 24bit is completely full of shit. First, it does not add noise at low volumes. Second, sure, not a lot will benefit from 24bit in today's loudness wars material, Most stuff is pushed to the walls, but you most certainly do hear a difference in properly mixed and mastered material if you have good enough equipment. I suggest finding a rip of the DVD Audio portion of NIN's With Teeth dual disc release, and listening thru an amped set of Grado SR225i's or some good, detailed IEMs, like RE0's. On the flip side of that, the DVD-A rip of The Downward Spiral shows no audible difference at all. The only benefit it had was the addition of a true 5.1 mix. lol.

I do agree with the sentiment that it is useless for the average listener on normal equipment, with cookie cutter major label garbage. So while, not typically able to be taken advantage of, posting it as a fact is misleading.


----------



## Fatal (Mar 7, 2011)

So what would be most important in order to have great sound? The receiver, the speakers or the sound card? I have crap PC speakers and a old receiver so don't know where I should start.   Or is it a combination of all three.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

Jack Doph said:


> True, but that doesn't help with the input lag.
> And, as you pointed out as well, the result isn't of the best standard either.
> It is true, however, that on-board sound of today, is far better than it used to be. Good enough for most applications in fact.
> Just not for music creation purposes, unless we're talking really simplistic stuff I suppose?



no, this really wasnt inteded with music recording and creation in mind. More about playback and gaming, than input and recording.

Then again, ASIO isnt anything about hardware either - its just the drivers being designed with low (near zero) latency involved. i've seen ASIO softmods out there for cards before, mostly older creatives.




Fatal said:


> So what would be most important in order to have great sound? The receiver, the speakers or the sound card? I have crap PC speakers and a old receiver so don't know where I should start.   Or is it a combination of all three.



all of them, if you run analogue. sound card comes out of the picture if you run digital.


----------



## Fatal (Mar 7, 2011)

That's the answer I was afraid of lol! It looks like I have a lot to upgrade then.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

Fatal said:


> That's the answer I was afraid of lol! It looks like I have a lot to upgrade then.



i dont think its off topic to ask for advice here, what receiver do you have? is it capable of decoding dolby digital and DTS?


----------



## Frizz (Mar 7, 2011)

Jack Doph said:


> True, but that doesn't help with the input lag.
> And, as you pointed out as well, the result isn't of the best standard either.
> It is true, however, that on-board sound of today, is far better than it used to be. Good enough for most applications in fact.
> Just not for music creation purposes, unless we're talking really simplistic stuff I suppose?



Simple is all I know at this point , although I wouldn't think it would be a good idea to do actual compositions without an audio interface that would just be silly.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

randomflip said:


> Simple is all I know at this point , although I wouldn't think it would be a good idea to do actual compositions without an audio interface that would just be silly.



True. But, with all the marketing hype of today, those new to music creation on a PC level might get a different idea about the capabilities of on-board sound.
As most new upstarts tend to be cash-strapped, saving big dollars on a decent soundcard might be enough to suade them from said purchase, if they believe said hype 

EDIT: simple is fine. I'm just referring to hardware capabilities here. ANY creation is good mate, regardless of opinion


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

Jack Doph said:


> True. But, with all the marketing hype of today, those new to music creation on a PC level might get a different idea about the capabilities of on-board sound.
> As most new upstarts tend to be cash-strapped, saving big dollars on a decent soundcard might be enough suade them from said purchase, if they believe said hype



you really think someone in the audio creation or recording industry is going to read THIS and treat it as gospel, when those topics never came up? I find that hard to beleive. anyway, now that we've covered it in the thread those people who got here by looking up an unrelated topic have their answer - for recording or audio creation, get a high end studio card with low latency ASIO support.


----------



## Fatal (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> i dont think its off topic to ask for advice here, what receiver do you have? is it capable of decoding dolby digital and DTS?



Its KENWOOD VR-8070 7.1 pretty old bought it a while ago seems like ages.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> you really think someone in the audio creation or recording industry is going to read THIS and treat it as gospel, when those topics never came up? I find that hard to beleive. anyway, now that we've covered it in the thread those people who got here by looking up an unrelated topic have their answer - for recording or audio creation, get a high end studio card with low latency ASIO support.



No, it's not about those in the recording industry at all. Those that are, rarely use a PC anyway.
I'm simply referring to composition, to whit the PC is a great tool


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

Wile E said:


> Not everbody has a modern sound card, or HDMI capable audio gear. These people can only get the most of their otherwise great surround setups via analog thru a sound card. I am one of those.
> 
> Found a couple of other things to comment on as well:
> 
> ...





As you pointed out to me, i missed this post so i'll comment on it now.

If HDMI 1.4a finally allows us to output our sound from the TV, awesome. Its useless for most however, because it means we need to go get a new TV to make it work.

That article is something i linked to out of interest, because i saw many similar articles saying how 24 bit is worthless. You say you've noticed a difference on some very high end hardware, which contradicts that article. i'll edit the post to reflect that.




Jack Doph said:


> No, it's not about those in the recording industry at all. Those that are, rarely use a PC anyway.
> I'm simply referring to composition, to whit the PC is a great tool



I honestly have next to zero knowledge in that area. Its not something i ever expected to come up as a discussion in this thread, hence not covering it at all.


----------



## Frizz (Mar 7, 2011)

Anyone here have any opinions towards the Crystallization effect or similar? I am having mixed feelings about it at the moment, sometimes it can be a bit too much for some sound effects but it also makes a number of them sound much more refined and clear.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

randomflip said:


> Anyone here have any opinions towards the Crystallization effect or similar? I am having mixed feelings about it at the moment, sometimes it can be a bit too much for some sound effects but it also makes a number of them sound much more refined and clear.



Its really no more than an equaliser. 
From what i read, Creatives crystaliser compresses the sound into ranges that speakers can more easily handle - as a not quite accurate, simplified explanation, it moves the bass up into a higher frequency and the treble lower, so that cheap speakers are less likely to distort. This can result in 'better' sound, by working around common flaws in cheap speakers/headphones, but overall audiophiles dislike it, especially with decent quality equipment.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> I honestly have next to zero knowledge in that area. Its not something i ever expected to come up as a discussion in this thread, hence not covering it at all.


NP mate. Perhaps I was being a bit picky myself about it.
Music is rather dear to me and the amount of crud about audio fidelity that floats around is quite astonishing (not saying you're part of that crowd at all - I spotted you in the Logitech section )



randomflip said:


> Anyone here have any opinions towards the Crystallization effect or similar? I am having mixed feelings about it at the moment, sometimes it can be a bit too much for some sound effects but it also makes a number of them sound much more refined and clear.



This has its place in some areas - it *can* enhance the effect where some of the audio in question may be less than decent, but an already decent sound needs no crystallisation


----------



## Wile E (Mar 7, 2011)

randomflip said:


> Anyone here have any opinions towards the Crystallization effect or similar? I am having mixed feelings about it at the moment, sometimes it can be a bit too much for some sound effects but it also makes a number of them sound much more refined and clear.



I hate it. Use high quality source material, like 320 mp3/aac, q7 ogg vorbis, or flac, on decent equipment, and it actually makes things sound worse. It is really only intended for low bitrate, crappy sources.


----------



## Frizz (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> Its really no more than an equaliser.
> From what i read, Creatives crystaliser compresses the sound into ranges that speakers can more easily handle - as a not quite accurate, simplified explanation, it moves the bass up into a higher frequency and the treble lower, so that cheap speakers are less likely to distort. This can result in 'better' sound, by working around common flaws in cheap speakers/headphones, but overall audiophiles dislike it, especially with decent quality equipment.





Jack Doph said:


> This has its place in some areas - it *can* enhance the effect where some of the audio in question may be less than decent, but an already decent sound needs no crystallisation





Wile E said:


> I hate it. Use high quality source material, like 320 mp3/aac, q7 ogg vorbis, or flac, on decent equipment, and it actually makes things sound worse. It is really only intended for low bitrate, crappy sources.



 the answer is now clear *turns it off*


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Wile E said:


> I hate it. Use high quality source material, like 320 mp3/aac, q7 ogg vorbis, or flac, on decent equipment, and it actually makes things sound worse. It is really only intended for low bitrate, crappy sources.



Provided it's not the dreaded joint-stereo 
Otherwise, absolutely true


----------



## Wile E (Mar 7, 2011)

Bah, don't get me started on joint stereo. lol.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

Wile E said:


> Bah, don't get me started on joint stereo. lol.



in before mailman posts a picture of a boombox filled with weed.



at least we got the audio experts in the one place, so now people can get 3-4 simultaneous answers to any questions they may have, with high odds of accuracy in the responses.


----------



## m4gicfour (Mar 7, 2011)

Well nothing's a magic bullet, after all. Crystallizer was meant to "enhance" low quality audio, and it perceivably does that, even if it does so by an understanding of equipment and human hearing rather than actually increasing quality.

As for the article, Mussels you definitely do have an understanding of most of the things involved, just be careful about how you state things. Audiophiles tend to be a nitpicky bunch. If you have the patience to refine this and admit when you may be wrong or misinformed, I see this becoming a great resource.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Wile E said:


> Bah, don't get me started on joint stereo. lol.



You & me both mate XD

I even complained to a radio station once, because I caught them out using a crappy joint-stereo MP3 instead of the proper CD


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

m4gicfour said:


> Well nothing's a magic bullet, after all. Crystallizer was meant to "enhance" low quality audio, and it perceivably does that, even if it does so by an understanding of equipment and human hearing rather than actually increasing quality.
> 
> As for the article, Mussels you definitely do have an understanding of most of the things involved, just be careful about how you state things. Audiophiles tend to be a nitpicky bunch. If you have the patience to refine this and admit when you may be wrong or misinformed, I see this becoming a great resource.



thats the plan. i mostly have to be careful when editing based on peoples comments, because i can guarantee people will disagree as to whats right... and then its either guesswork or research to figure out who's right, and what to say.


----------



## Frizz (Mar 7, 2011)

Just another question guys while I have you all here 

Should I even bother with turning on EAX and playing with the Graphic Equalizer from my sound card's driver/software? lol ...


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

randomflip said:


> Just another question guys while I have you all here
> 
> Should I even bother with turning on EAX and playing with the Graphic Equalizer from my sound card's driver? lol ...



Yes!
Because.. your ears are NOT like those of the sound engineer.
Use the EQ to suit YOUR hearing 

EDIT: or your equipment


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

randomflip said:


> Just another question guys while I have you all here
> 
> Should I even bother with turning on EAX and playing with the Graphic Equalizer from my sound card's driver? lol ...



I use my EQ to boost bass for my headphones, as they're a bit lacking. EQ comes down to personal choice, but the goal should be to make as little change as possible to get the sound you want. No point boosting the bass to max for one song, only to find bad company 2 machine gun fire just made you sterile from the subwoofer shakin your janglies apart.


as to EAX, it depends on the games. while EAX is nothing fancy in itself, some games (warcraft III comes to mind) dont let you get surround sound without EAX, so its better to enable it in those.


----------



## Wile E (Mar 7, 2011)

I don't bother with EAX except in games. As for EQ, I use them to correct output of equipment, as most equipment is not perfectly linear.


----------



## m4gicfour (Mar 7, 2011)

randomflip said:


> Just another question guys while I have you all here
> 
> Should I even bother with turning on EAX and playing with the Graphic Equalizer from my sound card's driver/software? lol ...



I'd say, if you have the ability to use EAX, use it. For the games that support it, it does help. Now I wouldn't bother going out and buying anything so you can use EAX, but if you've already got it, it does sound good.

EDIT - Yeah, as wile E said; just in games.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

see what i meant about 4 answers to each question? we even line up with our opinions! (mostly)


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> see what i meant about 4 answers to each question? we even line up with our opinions! (mostly)



Ain't that grand?
XD


----------



## Frizz (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> I use my EQ to boost bass for my headphones, as they're a bit lacking. EQ comes down to personal choice, but the goal should be to make as little change as possible to get the sound you want. No point boosting the bass to max for one song, only to find bad company 2 machine gun fire just made you sterile from the subwoofer shakin your janglies apart.
> 
> 
> as to EAX, it depends on the games. while EAX is nothing fancy in itself, some games (warcraft III comes to mind) dont let you get surround sound without EAX, so its better to enable it in those.





Jack Doph said:


> Yes!
> Because.. your ears are NOT like those of the sound engineer.
> Use the EQ to suit YOUR hearing
> 
> EDIT: or your equipment





Wile E said:


> I don't bother with EAX except in games. As for EQ, I use them to correct output of equipment, as most equipment is not perfectly linear.





m4gicfour said:


> I'd say, if you have the ability to use EAX, use it. For the games that support it, it does help. Now I wouldn't bother going out and buying anything so you can use EAX, but if you've already got it, it does sound good.
> 
> EDIT - Yeah, as wile E said; just in games.



And just like that I am educated , time to start playing around with what I've got.


----------



## m4gicfour (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> see what i meant about 4 answers to each question? we even line up with our opinions! (mostly)



Hey man, Active thread. _Very_ active thread. When I replied (both times) there were no replies, now there's at least two or three in between my post and what I was replying to. Have to think that can only be a good thing, so long as things stay on-topic, accurate, and civil


----------



## Ra97oR (Mar 7, 2011)

The most important thing is, the sound is as good as the source files is. You are just going to suffer more if you use more detailed equipment for listening to high compression files.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

randomflip said:


> And just like that I am educated , time to start playing around with what I've got.



Enjoy it you shall 



Ra97oR said:


> The most important thing is, the sound is as good as the source files is. You are just going to suffer more if you use more detailed equipment for listening to high compression files.



nail <-> head
Absolutely!
I wish more people could truly understand what that really means.


----------



## m4gicfour (Mar 7, 2011)

Ra97oR said:


> The most important thing is, the sound is as good as the source files is. You are just going to suffer more if you use more detailed equipment for listening to high compression files.



98Kbit MP3 is a no go on my Onkyo TX-Sr876 w/ polk audio 7.1

Just NO FRAKKIN WAY MAN!

Audio is a gateway drug. You buy a good reciever, you need good source. You get good source, you need good speakers, you get good speakers you need good source Files. 

I just need another hit man.... Just gotta get my fix!


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

m4gicfour said:


> 98Kbit MP3 is a no go on my Onkyo TX-Sr876 w/ polk audio 7.1
> 
> Just NO FRAKKIN WAY MAN!



Ye gods man!
You might even feel ill using flac!
XD


----------



## Ra97oR (Mar 7, 2011)

m4gicfour said:


> 98Kbit MP3 is a no go on my Onkyo TX-Sr876 w/ polk audio 7.1
> 
> Just NO FRAKKIN WAY MAN!



Trust me, its worse on my HA5000 + AD1000PRM combo. It kills, literally. I stayed away from youtube just for that reason.


----------



## m4gicfour (Mar 7, 2011)

Ra97oR said:


> Trust me, its worse on my HA5000 + AD1000PRM combo. It kills, literally. I stayed away from youtube just for that reason.



I believe it


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Ra97oR said:


> Trust me, its worse on my HA5000 + AD1000PRM combo. It kills, literally. I stayed away from youtube just for that reason.



Question: do you use headphones at all?
If so, what do you use?


----------



## Ra97oR (Mar 7, 2011)

Jack Doph said:


> Question: do you use headphones at all?
> If so, what do you use?



Read the thing you just quoted.

Here a picture of it


----------



## Wile E (Mar 7, 2011)

Ra97oR said:


> Trust me, its worse on my HA5000 + AD1000PRM combo. It kills, literally. I stayed away from youtube just for that reason.



Hell, it's murder on my Forte's in-built headphone amp thru my Grado SR225i's. I can't imagine how awful it would be if I grabbed a real HP amp and something like a nice set of PS1000's.


----------



## m4gicfour (Mar 7, 2011)

All I know is I cannot let my father learn that such things exist. He already has like 5 sets of headphones, and a house filled with pro audio equipment. I mean, how many mixing boards do you need? Well this one is _portable_ and this one has  _effects_ and this one has lots of _channels_


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Ra97oR said:


> Read the thing you just quoted.
> 
> Here a picture of it
> 
> http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/8707/img5756g.jpg



Sweet 
I could do with that for my Beyerdynamics 

BTW.. Thanks Mussels.
Thoroughly enjoyable & highly informative 
About time someone did this!


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

jack, use edit/multi quote instead of double posting. its neater. i'll merge that last double post for you.

edit: done, went on a merging spree in the thread. let me know if i merged posts i shouldnt have.


----------



## Swamp Monster (Mar 7, 2011)

Wile E said:


> That article on 24bit is completely full of shit. First, it does not add noise at low volumes. Second, sure, not a lot will benefit from 24bit in today's loudness wars material, Most stuff is pushed to the walls, but you most certainly do hear a difference in properly mixed and mastered material if you have good enough equipment.
> 
> I do agree with the sentiment that it is useless for the average listener on normal equipment, with cookie cutter major label garbage. So while, not typically able to be taken advantage of, posting it as a fact is misleading.



+1
Mussels, please read text in your link again, actually they say that 24-bit has *lower* noise floor than 16-bit.

Well, it was a problem when first 24-bit ADC's sppeared, as I have heard(signal to noise ratio was bad), but it was long time ago and not true anymore.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 7, 2011)

Swamp Monster said:


> +1
> Mussels, please read text in your link again, actually they say that 24-bit has *lower* noise floor than 16-bit.
> 
> Well, it was a problem when first 24-bit ADC's sppeared, as I have heard(signal to noise ratio was bad), but it was long time ago and not true anymore.



i linked to it because it was something i knew squat about.


i also wrote that post in all of 10 minutes, its a miracle i only cocked up the last part.


edit: utterly simplified the comment i made regarding that link.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Mussels said:


> jack, use edit/multi quote instead of double posting. its neater. i'll merge that last double post for you.
> 
> edit: done, went on a merging spree in the thread. let me know if i merged posts i shouldnt have.



Thanks man.
I tried, but with this crap 3G internet.. it just wouldn't let me.
*mumblegrumblediscontent*


----------



## Frederik S (Mar 7, 2011)

24-bit does not matter at all for playback purposes. 16/24-bit just defines the dynamic range, 16-bit allows for each sample to be between 0 dB and 96 dB. 24-bit has a dynamic range of 144 dB. Unlike the sample rate higher does not equal better here. Normal music has a dynamic range of around 1 dB (severely compressed popular music) to 15 dB (high quality recordings of orchestral pieces). So it is nowhere near the theoretical limits. 

Sampling rate is however important since the more samples you have the closer you can get to the original waveform.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

Frederik S said:


> 24-bit does not matter at all for playback purposes. 16/24-bit just defines the dynamic range, 16-bit allows for each sample to be between 0 dB and 96 dB. 24-bit has a dynamic range of 144 dB. Unlike the sample rate higher does not equal better here. Normal music has a dynamic range of around 1 dB (severely compressed popular music) to 15 dB (high quality recordings of orchestral pieces). So it is nowhere near the theoretical limits.
> 
> Sampling rate is however important since the more samples you have the closer you can get to the original waveform.



There's a lot of truth in that statement, even if classical music still represents the widest dynamic range (at times of more than 100db) - engineers will use compression to limit this, just to satisfy the average listener so the sound can still be heard in a bad acoustic environment (eg. in a car etc.).


----------



## twilyth (Mar 7, 2011)

Jack Doph said:


> There's a lot of truth in that statement, even if classical music still represents the widest dynamic range (at times of more than 100db) - engineers will use compression to limit this, just to satisfy the average listener so the sound can still be heard in a bad acoustic environment (eg. in a car etc.).



I think you need dynamic range compression for a lot music - especially classical.  Otherwise, you can get blown out of your chair by some of the transitions.


----------



## Jack Doph (Mar 7, 2011)

twilyth said:


> I think you need dynamic range compression for a lot music - especially classical.  Otherwise, you can get blown out of your chair by some of the transitions.



And .. what's wrong with that?
XD
For example.. In Tchaikovsky's Symphony #6, some of the widest acoustic range ever is recorded (from PPPPPP to FFFFFF), because it *needs* to be like that.
When you listen to it in concert, you *do* get blown away by that sheer effect.
Why not enjoy as much of the real experience at home?


----------



## Frederik S (Mar 7, 2011)

15 dB is a lot since the volume doubles with every 3 dB. So you will feel the intensity transitions in classical even if it is compressed somewhat. Plus from a mixing point of view you want to mimic the effects of the concert hall and thus level the volume of the different instruments to some degree.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Mar 7, 2011)

good writeup mussles!


----------



## Ra97oR (Mar 7, 2011)

To check your musics dynamic range use: http://www.pleasurizemusic.com/es/es/download

Might surprise you how even some song when you think sound more dynamic have less range than a "less dynamic" song


----------



## Praetorian (Mar 7, 2011)

Words are useless. Just download from the nets some 24bit/96Khz classical music, from Bethoven, Mozart, etc, and compare it with the original 16bit/44.1Khz.

Some samples here:
http://01688cb.netsolhost.com/samplerdownload/


----------



## Robert-The-Rambler (Mar 7, 2011)

*That little program is cool*



Ra97oR said:


> To check your musics dynamic range use: http://www.pleasurizemusic.com/es/es/download
> 
> Might surprise you how even some song when you think sound more dynamic have less range than a "less dynamic" song



Pretty much confirmed my suspicions about what recordings are subject to peaks past clip which is evidence of an overzealous engineer. Sometimes I am not convinced that high dynamic range recordings are always going to sound good.


----------



## entropy13 (Apr 16, 2011)

Can you setup something with 4 speakers? I tried it before, I haven't tried it with my new system yet though. Even if I set it up in "Quadrophonic", the sound only goes out in the "primary" pair. The test sound in Windows itself works, but using the Realtek testing produces no output from the other two speakers. And of course any other program just makes it a 2.0 system.

Another thing, does the age of the two speakers have anything to do with this though? Those speakers (USB 1.1) were from a system that was brand new when Windows 98 was brand new too.


----------



## slyfox2151 (Apr 16, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Can you setup something with 4 speakers? I tried it before, I haven't tried it with my new system yet though. Even if I set it up in "Quadrophonic", the sound only goes out in the "primary" pair. The test sound in Windows itself works, but using the Realtek testing produces no output from the other two speakers. And of course any other program just makes it a 2.0 system.
> 
> Another thing, does the age of the two speakers have anything to do with this though? Those speakers (USB 1.1) were from a system that was brand new when Windows 98 was brand new too.



this is completely irrelevance to the thread. 


easiest option is to use speaker fill in windows sound options under advanced, if you want/need more help i suggest you create a new thread,


----------



## Mussels (Apr 17, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Can you setup something with 4 speakers? I tried it before, I haven't tried it with my new system yet though. Even if I set it up in "Quadrophonic", the sound only goes out in the "primary" pair. The test sound in Windows itself works, but using the Realtek testing produces no output from the other two speakers. And of course any other program just makes it a 2.0 system.
> 
> Another thing, does the age of the two speakers have anything to do with this though? Those speakers (USB 1.1) were from a system that was brand new when Windows 98 was brand new too.



a stereo audio source only puts out stereo audio. i covered that in the original post.


----------



## m4gicfour (Apr 17, 2011)

Mussels said:


> a stereo audio source only puts out stereo audio. i covered that in the original post.



There are ways around this for certain specific programs with very advanced audio setup features, but for 99.5% of the time, having two seperate stereo audio devices makes stereo only.

*Unless of course he was talking about those USB speakers that are analog and have a 3.5mm jack, only using the USB for power...* then it would be considered a single audio device, with multiple channels. Then he may have a problem we could actually help with.


----------



## entropy13 (Apr 20, 2011)

m4gicfour said:


> *Unless of course he was talking about those USB speakers that are analog and have a 3.5mm jack, only using the USB for power...* then it would be considered a single audio device, with multiple channels. Then he may have a problem we could actually help with.



Yes, the USB is only used for power. The speakers have 3.5mm jacks 



slyfox2151 said:


> this is completely irrelevance to the thread.
> 
> 
> easiest option is to use speaker fill in windows sound options under advanced, if you want/need more help i suggest you create a new thread,



How was my question irrelevant? It was still about PC audio, albeit more on the hardware side. Although the problem is more on the software side as anything I try in the Windows setup as well as in the Realtek menus change nothing.

Besides, I'm not really that fussed about it that I have to make a new thread. Look at this reply, and how long it took for me to do so.


----------



## caleb (Apr 20, 2011)

m4gicfour said:


> There are ways around this for certain specific programs with very advanced audio setup features, but for 99.5% of the time, having two seperate stereo audio devices makes stereo only.


Stereo is stereo 100% of time.


----------



## slyfox2151 (Apr 20, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Yes, the USB is only used for power. The speakers have 3.5mm jacks
> 
> 
> 
> ...



sorry i worded what i was going to say wrong 

very tierd that night 





my point is, Music is almost always encoded in 2.0.   left and right channels only.

if you want sound to come out of more then 2 speakers then you need to "UPMIX" the sound. you can either play exacly the same audio out the front left speaker as the back left.... or your upmixing device may select what sounds it wants to play out the speaker.


technologies such as Dolby Pro Logic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_Pro_Logic upmix 2.0/2.1/5.1/6.1 sounds to 5.1/6.1/7.1. for example on the Logitec Z-5500s control pod, you can use Pro Logic to upmix from 2.0 to 5.1 or you can output the same sound from the front speakers as the back, Stereo x2.

the easiest option is to plug the front and rear speakers into Front OUT on your motherboard/sound card. this will play the same sound from Left Front as Left Rear.



EDIT:
2.0 and 2.1 are effectivly the same thing, the difference here is low frequency sounds are passed to a subwoofer... or larger speaker to better handle the sound. your speakers should handle this automaticaly.


----------



## entropy13 (Apr 20, 2011)

slyfox2151 said:


> sorry i worded what i was going to say wrong
> 
> very tierd that night
> 
> ...



Where did I say I was playing music? My LCD monitor is bigger than our TV, hence I'm looking at ways to use a spare pair of speakers while watching something.

Anyway, the board came with an installer for THX Tru Studio PRO, so I might as well try it out now. (edit: lol it's not doing anything much, I still need to use the Realtek one to setup something).


----------



## slyfox2151 (Apr 20, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Where did I say I was playing music? My LCD monitor is bigger than our TV, hence I'm looking at ways to use a spare pair of speakers while watching something.
> 
> Anyway, the board came with an installer for THX Tru Studio PRO, so I might as well try it out now. (edit: lol it's not doing anything much, I still need to use the Realtek one to setup something).



well you may not have said music specificaly... but it dosnt mater as it sounds like the audio your trying to play is encoded as 2.0. my advice still stands as it is.

as i said, if you are not looking for positinal audio then just use  front out on the speakers, connect both the Front and Rear inputs to the front ouput on your sound card.


----------



## entropy13 (Apr 20, 2011)

Oh well, no problems encountered while setting it up. Just tested it with a couple of random DVDs. The only issue here is that the newer pair have built-in volume control on the speakers themselves (well one of the speakers anyway) while the older one doesn't.


----------



## m4gicfour (Apr 20, 2011)

caleb said:


> Stereo is stereo 100% of time.



 That's what I get for the quick reply, and I dyslexified mussels's post from saying stereo source(like it says) to stereo output (like I read it).

I meant 2.0 output. Some programs can use two seperate 2.0 devices (that is, two seperate sound cards - like two sets of true USB speakers would appear to be) as a single 4.0 device (with 4 discrete channels). VirtualDJ comes to mind... It's not positional audio, but it can use quite a few different audio devices with different streams. There's nothing to stop i.e. Games from doing the same, and actually using positional audio, if someone were to code an API to do it. Of course there would be the issue of differing latency and such... My point is simply that it's possible, and programs DO exist which do this.

 I wonder if Virtual Audio Cable is capable of making two 2.0 outputs appear as a single 4.0 device...

Not that this part is relevant to the discussion at hand 

@entropy: set the volume knob so they're at the same level (and leave it there) as the speakers without, and control volume with the PC


----------



## entropy13 (Apr 20, 2011)

m4gicfour said:


> @entropy: set the volume knob so they're at the same level (and leave it there) as the speakers without, and control volume with the PC



The knob is already at max and the older speakers are still louder. 

Good thing they're the "rear" speakers (the ones with the volume control I ticked as the "front speakers"). 

So there, volume control is here in the PC itself.


----------



## m4gicfour (Apr 20, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> The knob is already at max and the older speakers are still louder.
> 
> Good thing they're the "rear" speakers (the ones with the volume control I ticked as the "front speakers").
> 
> So there, volume control is here in the PC itself.



Oh that sucks. I don't know about your sound device, but some (creative for sure) have per-channel volume control. Check the software, even though it's a longshot, you might be lucky.


----------



## Funtoss (May 5, 2011)

well detailed information!! gosh this helped me so much i got more bass and more BETTER sound from my speakers now, and also know what 5.1 is! :L


----------



## Mussels (May 5, 2011)

Funtoss said:


> well detailed information!! gosh this helped me so much i got more bass and more BETTER sound from my speakers now, and also know what 5.1 is! :L



exactly what i wanted to hear. even if only you benefited from this thread, then it was worth it.


----------



## Wile E (May 6, 2011)

Mussels said:


> exactly what i wanted to hear. even if only you benefited from this thread, then it was worth it.



I have to agree. The more light we shed on PC audio, the more likely we will be to get more high quality hardware.


----------



## imperialreign (May 8, 2011)

Wile E said:


> I have to agree. The more light we shed on PC audio, the more likely we will be to get more high quality hardware.



Agreed as well.  There's been too much muddying the waters over the last few years by manufacturers.  The audio market is growing, thanks heavily to the HD TV and home entertainment growth, but there are too many un-informed customers out there being had by the "specifications wars" going on right now.


----------



## claylomax (Aug 21, 2011)

Do the settings in Vista sound properties have to match my sound card drivers? I mean when you click in Windows sound playback/speakers/properties/advanced and there are a bunch of options to choose from like: 16/24 bit combined with different sample rates; in my card drivers I can only select the sample rate. I just want to get the most of the card as I'm a noob when dealing with the sound in Windows. I use it for gaming (speakers) and music (speakers and headphones) as the onboard sound on my mobo is really bad (not even a Realtek), the sound leans to one speaker and I get crackling noise when the computer boots. Thanks. EDIT: I use Foobar2000.


----------



## claylomax (Aug 21, 2011)

Anybody?


----------



## Mussels (Aug 21, 2011)

those settings are the same. they automatically sync up.


----------



## claylomax (Aug 21, 2011)

So I can leave the windows settings to whatever and then change my sound card settings, right?


----------



## Mussels (Aug 21, 2011)

claylomax said:


> So I can leave the windows settings to whatever and then change my sound card settings, right?



they're the same thing. changes in one will affect the other, unless you're talking about two different sound cards.


----------



## claylomax (Aug 21, 2011)

All right then. Another question though, how about the GX button? Is it a substitute of EAX? Can I use it with any game?


----------



## Mussels (Aug 21, 2011)

claylomax said:


> All right then. Another question though, how about the GX button? Is it a substitute of EAX? Can I use it with any game?



i dont know the feature first hand, but likely it just turns on their EAX 2.0 emulation, to make it appear like a creative card (with only EAX 2.0 support)


----------



## m4gicfour (Aug 21, 2011)

Mussels said:


> they're the same thing. changes in one will affect the other, unless you're talking about two different sound cards.



_should_ affect the other. I've seen a few (likely driver issues) where they didn't. It's good practices to check that the change hit both, especially if it doesn't behave the way it should for how you have it set.


----------



## MilkyWay (Aug 22, 2011)

I also noticed that my headphones sound marginally worse on the front audio panel connector. Via onboard on my motherboard.


----------



## m4gicfour (Aug 22, 2011)

Some sound devices use different DACs/OpAmps on the front vs Rear connectors. It may well be that they sound better on one because there is better hardware wired to that connector. Now, on an onboard chip... who knows.


----------



## Mussels (Aug 22, 2011)

MilkyWay said:


> I also noticed that my headphones sound marginally worse on the front audio panel connector. Via onboard on my motherboard.



you're effectively using an extension lead when you do that, so yeah, it can lower quality. i've had antec cases where they shared a ground on the front panel jacks with the rest of the case, so you'd get all sorts of feedback noise - especially from moving the mouse on USB, you could HEAR it move.


----------



## m4gicfour (Aug 25, 2011)

OHAI. I liek mai S/PDIF wireless plox. KTHXBAI


----------



## niko084 (Sep 13, 2011)

random said:


> Simple is all I know at this point , although I wouldn't think it would be a good idea to do actual compositions without an audio interface that would just be silly.



You would be correct I work with Ableton Live and Sonar Producer, I used to use a soft modded Creative card using hacked EMU ASIO drivers, it functioned and that was about it... Get your 10th effect in and your 4th synth and you can say goodbye.. Click click pop pop... Humph..

Moved to a Saffire Pro14, problems all gone.
Latency gets even more important when live mixing through Ableton, sucks when you enable an effect on your mixer and you don't hear the change for a 1/2 second, really ruins the mix.

Outside of that however it means fairly little as long as it's not ridiculous.


----------



## Meizuman (Sep 20, 2011)

Would it be better to just skip sound cards altogether and take the sound out of my Radeon via HDMI? Then get a decent multi-channel amplifier and be done with it.

I've been using few different sound cards, Audigy SE, Live! 5.1 (loved the kxproject driver) and now I bought ESI Prodigy 7.1 HiFi just to find out that all the nice features are only supported in XP and there is loads of interference when using a USB mouse. Surfing the web is just interference to my ears. The card makes annoying background noise all the time. Volume control works like ass. With this card, windows volume is 10-step, at 10 (0-100) volume is at max, at zero or muted, sound still plays. Cards own control panel works but everything should be done from there.

Add to that... Sidewinder X6 volume knob in Win7 is like playing slots, you never know if the volume goes to max, to min, or just freeze, mostly it just bounces up and down.

My head is about to explode because of the thing that no component/peripheral that I buy, will work as they should. How much money do I have to pour in the crappiness of todays consumer electronics industry that I can get what I want? Seems no amount will be enough.

/rant


----------



## naoan (Sep 20, 2011)

Q : Do you think that software player has any effect on SQ at all?


----------



## repman244 (Sep 20, 2011)

Yes


----------



## naoan (Sep 20, 2011)

Cool, which one do you recommend?


----------



## Octopuss (Sep 20, 2011)

Does anyone around own the new revision of Auzentech X-Fi Forte?


----------



## D4S4 (Sep 20, 2011)

naoan said:


> Cool, which one do you recommend?



winamp + realtek x-fi drivers if applicable. then you have to go to output options in winamp and set the nullsoft directsound output to use anything that says (realtek x-fi) next to it, depends on how your speakers are connected.

this only goes for onboard audio, generally i have found the primary sound driver option to sound the worst so try to use anything other than that.

edit - good thread btw


----------



## Mussels (Sep 21, 2011)

Meizuman said:


> Would it be better to just skip sound cards altogether and take the sound out of my Radeon via HDMI? Then get a decent multi-channel amplifier and be done with it.
> 
> I've been using few different sound cards, Audigy SE, Live! 5.1 (loved the kxproject driver) and now I bought ESI Prodigy 7.1 HiFi just to find out that all the nice features are only supported in XP and there is loads of interference when using a USB mouse. Surfing the web is just interference to my ears. The card makes annoying background noise all the time. Volume control works like ass. With this card, windows volume is 10-step, at 10 (0-100) volume is at max, at zero or muted, sound still plays. Cards own control panel works but everything should be done from there.
> 
> ...



if you go digital (HDMI or SPDIF) then the soundcard is out of the equation, and quality all comes down to the decoder/speakers.




naoan said:


> Q : Do you think that software player has any effect on SQ at all?



yes. i use winamp, but i dont use any software tweaks or equalisers. they're only there to make up for a crappy soundcard (EG, bass boost makes up for its lack of clarity in bass by just making it louder)



D4S4 said:


> winamp + realtek x-fi drivers if applicable. then you have to go to output options in winamp and set the nullsoft directsound output to use anything that says (realtek x-fi) next to it, depends on how your speakers are connected.
> 
> this only goes for onboard audio, generally i have found the primary sound driver option to sound the worst so try to use anything other than that.
> 
> edit - good thread btw




primary sound driver just uses whatever your default is in windows, so it wont sound any different at all. personally i found the modded realtek drivers made no difference - even with the Xfi drivers installed and crystalliser tweaked, my auzen still sounded better at default settings.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 21, 2011)

naoan said:


> Cool, which one do you recommend?



Foobar2000


----------



## naoan (Sep 21, 2011)

I give up on winamp a long time ago, currently using AIMP since it has multiple tabs and lightweight.



repman244 said:


> Foobar2000



I don't like the UI  Might change my mind if the SQ difference is big.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 21, 2011)

naoan said:


> I don't like the UI  Might change my mind if the SQ difference is big.



There are almost endless combinations of UI's, you can change/modify it yourself actually. That's why I love it.
Plus it has ASIO support for my card.

I wouldn't worry about SQ that much, the difference is minimum (if there is any at all).


----------



## claylomax (Sep 21, 2011)

I also use Foobar2000, it can play .mpc with no need for plugins.


----------



## naoan (Sep 21, 2011)

repman244 said:


> There are almost endless combinations of UI's, you can change/modify it yourself actually. That's why I love it.
> Plus it has ASIO support for my card.
> 
> I wouldn't worry about SQ that much, the difference is minimum (if there is any at all).



You're right, I could not really notice unless with headphone. I'd stick with AIMP.


----------



## twilyth (Sep 21, 2011)

naoan said:


> You're right, I could not really notice unless with headphone. I'd stick with AIMP.



I love AIMP - it's perfect right out of the box.  It comes with a couple decent skins, I love the way in manages playlists - although it's not completely intuitive, if you can find some cheese at the end of a maze, you can probably figure it out.  And the tag editor is nothing short of kick ass.  I can point it to a 30gig sub-directory with mixed media files and it will rename only the audio files based on the template I give it.  For really huge directories it could take 30-60 minutes, maybe a bit more, but it doesn't choke and works perfectly.  I fuckin' love AIMP.


----------



## BumbleBee (Sep 21, 2011)

I like Foobar2000.


----------



## D4S4 (Sep 21, 2011)

Mussels said:


> even with the Xfi drivers installed and crystalliser tweaked, my auzen still sounded better at default settings.



you can't compare auzentech soundcard with realtek's chip on a mobo - it really made a small difference in my case, switching from primary to anything else gave me a bit more gain, less "mud" in the bass and a bit clearer high end. this is pretty noticeable in the music i listen to (tech/prog house, techno, etc.), altough combined effect is in the same class as eg. 128kbit/s mp3 vs 320kbit/s mp3.


----------



## Octopuss (Oct 16, 2011)

Has anyone ever had microphone problems with X-Fi based cards? Maybe it's chip-related, I don't know. I have Auzentech X-Fi Forte (after two RMAs it finally works), and I just can't make the mic to work. To be more specific, it does work, but it's terribly quiet even if I pump the volume to 100%, put the mic virtually inside of my mouth, and yell like mad. There is the usual mic boost option, but that's the catch: when I check it, speakers start to produce terrible noise which almost breaks windows (and tbh the voice is not that ideal, volume-wise either). Anyone has any idea?
Basically there is something completely wrong with sensitivity of the mic input on the card.
Ironically enough, when I use onboard Realtek, it works perfectly. Arrrrgh!


----------



## samual (Nov 8, 2011)

According to me,If you are on board to support DTS or DDL encoding than the optical or digital, may still be enabled using a different HDMI sound card or audio device (such as modern ATI and NV GFX card) benefits. Optical / coaxial connection is still not do anything like a multi-channel PCM or Dolby TrueHD or DTS Master HD audio without loss of quality audio formats.


----------



## Martine (Jan 18, 2012)

I have the Logitech X-530 speakers. Does it make a difference if I use an onboard sound card or a dedicated sound card (<50$) for gaming and DVD movies?
P.S.Yeah I know, I am lazy. I have too many things going on right now so I don't have the time to research.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 19, 2012)

Martine said:


> I have the Logitech X-530 speakers. Does it make a difference if I use an onboard sound card or a dedicated sound card (<50$) for gaming and DVD movies?
> P.S.Yeah I know, I am lazy. I have too many things going on right now so I don't have the time to research.



not really, they're too low end. IMO with those speakers they have background hiss even when not connected to anything, so i doubt you'll notice much difference between any soundcards unless your onboard is REALLY bad.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 19, 2012)

Well i am using-

Asus xonar dx digital out/ Yamaha dsp a5/ 5x sony 110w satelites/ pioneer 110watt sub.

My system sound very nice now, even though i know some people would say using the onboards digi out it would sound just as good, but i don't know.


----------



## Wile E (Jan 20, 2012)

tigger said:


> Well i am using-
> 
> Asus xonar dx digital out/ Yamaha dsp a5/ 5x sony 110w satelites/ pioneer 110watt sub.
> 
> My system sound very nice now, even though i know some people would say using the onboards digi out it would sound just as good, but i don't know.



Digital out doesn't always sounds as good. Depends on what has the better DACs. Your sound card or your receiver. And Spdif can't do uncompressed multi channel. 

If my choices are onboard digital out or analog outs from a higher quality sound card, I'll go sound card every time. It's the same for 2 channel and compressed multi-channel, but it's better in uncompressed multi-channel.


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 20, 2012)

tigger has the world's most expensive passthrough lol


----------



## Wile E (Jan 20, 2012)

Shit, I missed that. Yeah, using the digital out of the sound card is totally pointless.


----------



## OneMoar (Jan 20, 2012)

I used to use winamp then I tried foobar now I use 
http://www.aimp.ru/ 
and its the best _music_ player since winamp 3.x


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 20, 2012)

Its ok guys, i understand the derision, but my amp does not have a 6 channel input or i would have been using the analogue out from my card to the amp. I am trying to get another amp that has the 6ch inputs. But anyway my sound setup sounds fooking sweet either way so deride away 

Which has the best DAC btw, the amp or the soundcard, anyone know?


----------



## H82LUZ73 (Jan 20, 2012)

tigger said:


> Its ok guys, i understand the derision, but my amp does not have a 6 channel input or i would have been using the analogue out from my card to the amp. I am trying to get another amp that has the 6ch inputs. But anyway my sound setup sounds fooking sweet either way so deride away
> 
> Which has the best DAC btw, the amp or the soundcard, anyone know?



Brown Burrs dacs are the best,Just make sure you get a amp with the newer chips.As for sound card why not use the HDMI from your video card? I use mine to the Onkyo a/v.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 20, 2012)

My amp does not have HDMI or i would have tried it, i guess i need a new amp that has a 5.1 ana input. or maybe a seperate DAC then connect my soundcard digi out to that, then to the ext decoder input on my amp?


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 20, 2012)

you can have 10 receivers with the same Burr-Brown DAC and they will all sound different. it's not the chip it's how the company implements it.


----------



## BumbleBee (Jan 21, 2012)

twilyth thought I should post this. 

this is the cheapest way I know to hook up a pair of passive speakers to a computer.

Dayton Audio DTA-1










there is also the Dayton Audio DTA-100a

you can hook up either Class T-Amp to a sound card or DAC.


----------



## techguy31 (Feb 2, 2012)

BumbleBee said:


> twilyth thought I should post this.
> 
> this is the cheapest way I know to hook up a pair of passive speakers to a computer.
> 
> ...



Nice, I should buy this and a pair of bookshelf instead of desktop speakers.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Aug 2, 2012)

Ever since MS dropped HAL support, and considering the craptastic driver support overall on sound cards and the price, performance and scant selection of 5.1 PC speakers, I honestly don't know why most PC gamers with any kind of sound budget at all even bother sticking with internal PC sound.

For around $450 you can get a pretty good entry level HT receiver with Burr Brown DACs and fairly decent 5.1 speakers with floor standing fronts and an 8" sub. The only caveat is, you need to shop for the receiver in the few months following the Superbowl to get the best prices ($150). 

Decent speakers however can be had at good prices quite often, like the Jamo S426 HCS 3 mated to their SUB 210. Fry's has the S426 HCS 3s for $200 and will match net price on the sub for $100. I just got those speakers for my Yamaha RX-V371, which also has Burr Brown DACs.

If you have deep pockets though, Wolfson DACs are da bomb, but only found on higher end receivers.


----------



## OneMoar (Aug 2, 2012)

Frag Maniac said:


> Ever since MS dropped HAL support, and considering the craptastic driver support overall on sound cards and the price, performance and scant selection of 5.1 PC speakers, I honestly don't know why most PC gamers with any kind of sound budget at all even bother sticking with internal PC sound.
> 
> For around $450 you can get a pretty good entry level HT receiver with Burr Brown DACs and fairly decent 5.1 speakers with floor standing fronts and an 8" sub. The only caveat is, you need to shop for the receiver in the few months following the Superbowl to get the best prices ($150).
> 
> ...



1.  most people do not  want spend time messing with the amp  to manage the volume/inputs
2. no matter how good the amp is the quality will only be as good as the input you are feeding into it 
3.HAL != direct sound and direct sound was a stupid idea to begin with and I am not sorry to see it gone creative can go fk them selves with there proprietary api's and bullshit 
and a 8 inch sub ? rofl
theres two 10's sitting under my chair
and a 12 behind me


----------



## Rockfella.killswitch (Nov 26, 2012)

I have the Asus Xonar DX and no optical out on the motherboard. Should i use the digital out of the DX or ana if i buy the Edifier S730 (Digital 2.1 speakers!)

Thanks.


----------



## BumbleBee (Nov 26, 2012)

use analog out on the DX.


----------



## Rockfella.killswitch (Nov 26, 2012)

Does this mean if i connect digital speakers using toslink from the DX i'll get inferior sound?


BumbleBee said:


> use analog out on the DX.


----------



## BumbleBee (Nov 26, 2012)

yeah not to mention your sound card won't be doing much other than passing the audio to the Edifier S730.

a mini-jack (3.5mm) to RCA cable should do it. connect it to the Front jack on the DX if I remember.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 26, 2012)

Rockfella.killswitch said:


> Does this mean if i connect digital speakers using toslink from the DX i'll get inferior sound?



not so much that - more that using digital makes your sound cards analogue redundant.

cheap onboard sounds exactly the same as high end audio, through digital connections.


----------



## BumbleBee (Nov 26, 2012)

this is the cable you need







connect the black end to the Front jack on the DX and the Red and White ends to the Edifier S730 sub.


----------



## Rockfella.killswitch (Nov 26, 2012)

Oh.. so what's the use of buying a dedicated sound card with digital out like the DX? I want to use the "Dolby Digital Live" of the DX which i've not been able to use yet. I think i can only use it with dogotal speakers?


Mussels said:


> not so much that - more that using digital makes your sound cards analogue redundant.
> 
> cheap onboard sounds exactly the same as high end audio, through digital connections.



I got this cable. So analogue connection will make use of the sound card? 


BumbleBee said:


> this is the cable you need
> 
> http://www.aeromodelismovirtual.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17661&stc=1&d=1292542397
> 
> connect the black end to the Front jack on the DX and the Red and White ends to the Edifier S730 sub.


----------



## BumbleBee (Nov 26, 2012)

your sound card can process music a lot better than those speakers. you don't have 5.1 speakers so Dolby Digital Live doesn't matter. 

yes.


----------



## Rockfella.killswitch (Nov 26, 2012)

Then what speakers would truly utilize the full potential of my DX?


BumbleBee said:


> your sound card can process music a lot better than those speakers. you don't have 5.1 speakers so Dolby Digital Live doesn't matter.
> 
> yes.


----------



## BumbleBee (Nov 26, 2012)

yes. in stereo. 

Dolby Digital Live is used for sending 5.1 to a receiver with speakers like this.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 26, 2012)

Rockfella.killswitch said:


> Then what speakers would truly utilize the full potential of my DX?



the most expensive ones in the world, of course.


what we're saying is: you bought an expensive sound card for its better analogue outputs. at least try them, before going digital (since digital makes the expensive card completely redundant)


while digital will be a pure, unaltered signal, the analogue may sound better to you.


----------



## Rockfella.killswitch (Nov 26, 2012)

I am ruling out speakers completely. I'll go for this maybe...

Audio Technica ATH-M35



Mussels said:


> the most expensive ones in the world, of course.
> 
> What we're saying is: you bought an expensive sound card for its better analogue outputs. at least try them, before going digital (since digital makes the expensive card completely redundant)
> 
> While digital will be a pure, unaltered signal, the analogue may sound better to you.


----------



## BumbleBee (Nov 26, 2012)

analog is going to sound better because the DAC section inside the Edifier S730 was probably an afterthought.


----------



## Rockfella.killswitch (Nov 27, 2012)

So analog speakers can utilize dx's dac?


BumbleBee said:


> analog is going to sound better because the DAC section inside the Edifier S730 was probably an afterthought.


----------



## BumbleBee (Nov 27, 2012)

Rockfella.killswitch said:


> So analog speakers can utilize dx's dac?



what do you mean? all speakers are analog.


----------



## Rockfella.killswitch (Nov 27, 2012)

I mean a good set of 2.1 speakers that'll do justice to my sound card 


BumbleBee said:


> what do you mean? all speakers are analog.


----------



## Millennium (Nov 27, 2012)

I have a Xonar DX and I have to say that if you have a decent (£500+) system you would benefit from a decent DAC. I went for a new one, Micromedia MyDac, but you can get something Cambridge Audio for example for maybe £100, and it should beat the crap out of most sound cards. You deserve it!


----------



## BumbleBee (Nov 27, 2012)

Rockfella.killswitch said:


> I mean a good set of 2.1 speakers that'll do justice to my sound card



the sound card isn't that good


----------



## Rockfella.killswitch (Nov 27, 2012)

BumbleBee said:


> the sound card isn't that good


----------



## SaltyFish (May 28, 2013)

Mussels said:


> Without a receiver with a HDMI input, you are stuck at stereo. The HDMI specs do not allow you to send the audio to your TV or monitor, and output it back out of the TV as SPDIF. If you think it does, test it yourself. You'll find out it doesnt work. (thanks DRM!)



I've seen optical outputs on the back of many TVs. What exactly is the point of it?


----------



## cadaveca (May 28, 2013)

SaltyFish said:


> I've seen optical outputs on the back of many TVs. What exactly is the point of it?



HDMI passes optical to TV, then TV optical-out to stereo for audio. Most TV's only support 2-channel SPDIF though. It's more meant for those that have receivers that don't do HDMI, and video devices that don't offer coaxial audio output.

Nice necro, BTW>


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (May 29, 2013)

Question for you all. My file server has a ALC892 audio chip, so I can split the communication devices and speakers to separate channels. My main rig also has the ALC892, can I basically gaurentee that I will be able to split them into separate channels as well? If So I might just sell my HT Omega Striker sound card.


----------



## Mussels (May 29, 2013)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Question for you all. My file server has a ALC892 audio chip, so I can split the communication devices and speakers to separate channels. My main rig also has the ALC892, can I basically gaurentee that I will be able to split them into separate channels as well? If So I might just sell my HT Omega Striker sound card.



i'm really not understanding the question. please try asking again, in a different way.


----------



## trog69 (Feb 16, 2014)

Since the title to this thread was "Let's talk pc-audio", I'd like to remark on what I've found so far in my search for better sound via my PC.

I'm a retiree and an avid PC gamer. For years I was quite happy with the very inexpensive Logitech 5.1 powered speaker system. Then, after upgrading to a 680ftw GPU, I decided that I missed my past audio obsessions, so I started shopping. First, I got lucky twice on the first day, finding a refurbished Sony 7.1ch receiver, and a Polk Audio 12", 300watt powered subwoofer, both of them for $300 delivered-and an added 3year warrantee on the receiver included! Then I hit Craigslist looking for used speakers and again got very lucky. The ad was for a pair of vintage KEF dual-8"driver mini-towers. When I arrived, I found out that the gentleman was an amateur speaker repair guy, and regularly sold repaired speakers. So, I left his house with the pair of KEFs and a pair of B&W 601 se's for $400 total. So, I'm now sitting in front of both sets sitting on my very large desktop, and all for less than $800 for cables, speaker wire,etc.

What is curious, to me anyway, is that I couldn't find much of anyone who replaced their sound card/PC speakers with a receiver/bookshelf speakers. And old receiver will work, as long as you're happy with stereo only. This Sony is HDMI-capable, but since I'm only interested in stereo, SPDIF works fine, as would RCA jacks.

Another thing I learned was that today's digital receivers pretty much all have great sound, because they all use the same circuit boards. The price differences between my $150 refurb.($230 regular price) and a $600 Denon or Yamaha or...is the added features for HT use, primarily. Some of the higher-end receivers/amplifiers have separate mono-amps for each channel, so upping the price, but from what I've read at many HT/music enthusiast websites, you'd be hard-pressed to actually hear the difference. So, rather than spending more for a receiver when the cheaper one has the features you want, I would heartily recommend you look at better speakers, because they definitely do NOT sound the same. hehe.

Here's a pic of the setup. Sub and receiver under the desk.


----------



## qubit (Feb 16, 2014)

@trog69 Those are some great speakers you've got there. I recommend that you try a Creative X-Fi sound card with them if possible, as the sound is just amazing. I'm talking about without any post-processing effects, too. They're discontinued now, but if you can find a decent one on Amazon or eBay they're well worth it.

Don't pay over the odds for it though (should be around $50-$80) and don't fall for one of the cheap Creatives that are labelled X-Fi, but don't actually use the X-Fi chipset.


----------



## trog69 (Feb 16, 2014)

Thanks, qubit. I already have a X-fi card installed. The receiver also has a DAC built-in, as most do nowadays. I cannot stress enough just how great this sounds in near-field. I'm planning on upgrading the sub to a SVS or Hsu brand 10", perhaps running both, though I have an idea that the Polk Audio may get its butt handed to it from either one of those other subs. I still am very pleased with the Polk's sound, at $150. 

I didn't mention it in the OP, but I tried the Klipsch Pro-media 2.1 system, and I have a friend that gave me his Klipsch 4.1 system since the speakers are the same. While it was an upgrade from teh Logitech cheapos, it left me wanting. The satellites sounded great, but the bass, even after replacing both 6.5" woofers, was muddy and weak for music, and underwhelming for gaming. 

I'm also now looking to replacing the receiver with a good 2 channel amp/pre-amp, and giving the receiver to the grandkids along with some bookshelf speakers I have laying around. Too many multi-channel options makes it difficult for me to bypass them, and the manual is less than helpful in that regard. It seems they just assume that the user is familiar with all the various means of multi-channel outputs, and other sound altering stuff. I just want a good amp that runs 2 channel sound, with none of the extras that I'd never use.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Feb 16, 2014)

One of my powered speakers died  so at the moment i am using a sony ipod dock/radio that has aux in, wired to a pair of tannoy speakers.

All i did was unplug one of the speakers while it was on, plugged it back in, and nothing, it would not power on.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 16, 2014)

i just want a HDMI receiver + 5.1 setup so i never have to buy a soundcard again, and can stay in the wonderful problem free world of HDMI audio... until they replace HDMI a week after i buy it all, anyway.


----------



## trog69 (Feb 16, 2014)

tigger said:


> One of my powered speakers died  so at the moment i am using a sony ipod dock/radio that has aux in, wired to a pair of tannoy speakers.
> 
> All i did was unplug one of the speakers while it was on, plugged it back in, and nothing, it would not power on.


Ouch. Sounds like you shorted it out. Any time you mess with speaker plugs while powered up has the chance of doing that. If they're older than 2 years, you might not have recourse via warrantee, since most powered speakers' warrantees are 2years electronics, and usually 5 years for the speaker itself.


----------



## trog69 (Feb 16, 2014)

Mussels said:


> i just want a HDMI receiver + 5.1 setup so i never have to buy a soundcard again, and can stay in the wonderful problem free world of HDMI audio... until they replace HDMI a week after i buy it all, anyway.


For 5.1, the world is your oyster. Just about any of the better known brands will work just fine. I forgot to mention this to qubit, but I did try the X-fi sound card and then on-board via the mobo, and I did not hear a difference. Now, I might have the cheaper X-fi card, but I did ask about it in a couple of high-end HT forums, and most agreed that on-board was just fine for stereo sound. The difference would only be in measurements too small for the human ear to detect. I'm listening to some blues via on-board sound right now, and it's crystal clear and lush.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 16, 2014)

trog69 said:


> For 5.1, the world is your oyster. Just about any of the better known brands will work just fine. I forgot to mention this to qubit, but I did try the X-fi sound card and then on-board via the mobo, and I did not hear a difference. Now, I might have the cheaper X-fi card, but I did ask about it in a couple of high-end HT forums, and most agreed that on-board was just fine for stereo sound. The difference would only be in measurements too small for the human ear to detect. I'm listening to some blues via on-board sound right now, and it's crystal clear and lush.



my headphones sound massively different between my various realtek onboards, and my Z5500s.

my z5500's also sound crap on optical vs analogue (no bass at all), so there CAN be a large difference depending on your setup. headphones that need more power? onboard may not cut it. sound system without the ability to redirect bass on digital? same again.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Feb 16, 2014)

trog69 said:


> Ouch. Sounds like you shorted it out. Any time you mess with speaker plugs while powered up has the chance of doing that. If they're older than 2 years, you might not have recourse via warrantee, since most powered speakers' warrantees are 2years electronics, and usually 5 years for the speaker itself.



They are powered monitors, it was the mains plug i pulled out and replaced.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 16, 2014)

For that room size... those speakers are huge...  And you could use some housewife tool also...

My five cents... Modern receivers are nice indeed... But still I am an old school person I use dedicated amps via analogue sound route... And I do not use 5,1, coz in small rooms it is a waste honestly... you will hear mostly the first sound, then it will reflect from the small room etc...(like battle scene it will be a mishmash) surround needs a proper calibration and measuring, and sound deadening on the walls like in cinema - thick curtains...

But For stereo, yeah thats a matter of taste... One always pair the amplifier with speakers for better performance, you must... , but if it is an active one... skip it all...

Domestically SPDIF has only gains when fighting ground loops or similar problems, but driver wise, I haven't seen a fully working SPDIF out without some rare pops, cracks and other anomalies, I have build several DAC's myself and no matter what source I use from the PC - Realtek, Creative, CMI or Asus the damn digital signal acts bonkers on hardware interrupts, only working digital audio driver that is polished enough is in HDMI, so take that as a rule.

Gain from X-Fi and some others are that they incorporate DTS neo and dolby THX bla bla bla licenses for sound processing via SPDIF, but those are for poor taste movie guys...



Mussels said:


> my z5500's also sound crap on optical vs analogue (no bass at all)



Basing on old good math your dac inside there has a smaller output cap that limits subsonic freqs from passing through... its a simple DC protection well a bit overkill I guess and seconds the preamp probably is low voltage railed/thirsty. The Analogue signal just has its full voltage swing, that is already larger and thus kicks the end amp in the face better.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 16, 2014)

Ferrum Master said:


> Gain from X-Fi and some others are that they incorporate DTS neo and dolby THX bla bla bla licenses for sound processing via SPDIF, but those are for poor taste movie guys...



my realtek onboard has DTS encoding (and with modded drivers, so can almost all of them) - works well enough for gaming, for music thats was a guaranteed bass killer.


----------



## XSI (Feb 16, 2014)

you say digitall sounds the same. then i dont understand why my old realtek sounds worse on digital than my x-fi digital i use same receiver. And if i enable dts connect and dts neo encoder on x-fi the difference is huge.


----------



## jcgeny (Feb 16, 2014)

tigger said:


> One of my powered speakers died  so at the moment i am using a sony ipod dock/radio that has aux in, wired to a pair of tannoy speakers.
> 
> All i did was unplug one of the speakers while it was on, plugged it back in, and nothing, it would not power on.


a lot of electric things can do that too : monitors...
it s better to do plugging when all is cold instead of after a full day of work .

heat and dilatation make big changes in electronic components ...]"8

receiver + hdmi are the top , big speakers can also be found for the same price as a [very expensive] headphone but quality is not the same .
you can also have a little tv tuner hdmi or some tv internet box hdmi with the receiver
and have a good sounds for music or movies .
i took jamo and they are very good for very low price
7.1 is also better than 5.1 because of sound from the sides , that is not so expensive but can be a very cool plus with movies like avatar or games


----------



## qubit (Feb 16, 2014)

trog69 said:


> Thanks, qubit. I already have a X-fi card installed. The receiver also has a DAC built-in, as most do nowadays. I cannot stress enough just how great this sounds in near-field. I'm planning on upgrading the sub to a SVS or Hsu brand 10", perhaps running both, though I have an idea that the Polk Audio may get its butt handed to it from either one of those other subs. I still am very pleased with the Polk's sound, at $150.
> 
> I didn't mention it in the OP, but I tried the Klipsch Pro-media 2.1 system, and I have a friend that gave me his Klipsch 4.1 system since the speakers are the same. While it was an upgrade from teh Logitech cheapos, it left me wanting. The satellites sounded great, but the bass, even after replacing both 6.5" woofers, was muddy and weak for music, and underwhelming for gaming.
> 
> I'm also now looking to replacing the receiver with a good 2 channel amp/pre-amp, and giving the receiver to the grandkids along with some bookshelf speakers I have laying around. Too many multi-channel options makes it difficult for me to bypass them, and the manual is less than helpful in that regard. It seems they just assume that the user is familiar with all the various means of multi-channel outputs, and other sound altering stuff. I just want a good amp that runs 2 channel sound, with none of the extras that I'd never use.



I know what you mean about good bass. Speakers without sound really weak. As far as the other components go, it looks like you're seriously into your hi-fi and multichannel sound. For me, I've always been happy with a decent amp, decent eq options and great speakers or headphones.




XSI said:


> you say digitall sounds the same. then i dont understand why my old realtek sounds worse on digital than my x-fi digital i use same receiver. And if i enable dts connect and dts neo encoder on x-fi the difference is huge.


The difference you hear is from the output stage which is analog and different analog circuitry can sound very different indeed, with expensive components and good design making a big difference.

EDIT

Just reading your post again, it sounds like your using the digital output from your sound cards to your amp? In that case there will be zero difference between the two as the output data is the same. It sounds like some eq/processing options may be enabled on the X-Fi card which will change the sound noticeably.


----------



## Kursah (Feb 16, 2014)

I still enjoy my Auzen, but want to get rid of it. I like the Aune T1 for what it is but am considering selling it as it just doesn't fit my needs. I'm thinking of simplifying and going onboard digital to my Denon AVR. When I run RCA from my Aune T1 to my Denon I get a fuzzy power sucking distortion from the Aune's HP amp unless I power on the Denon. Then it goes away. Same thing happened when I had the FiiO E9 hooked up too. That and the Aune T1 gets pretty darn warm (the whole thing, not just the tube). While it does sound good, it's not quite suiting what I want. I wish my Denon AVR had some RCA outputs so I could run them to my FiiO E9....alas apparently those aren't common on the mid-range model for 2012-13 lol.

I'm not sure what direction to go yet...part of me still wants to keep the T1, but I don't want to have it AND the Denon on all the time. Especially if I want to listen to speakers and no HP's. The Denon's HP out is pretty decent, but it does lack the overall lower end punch the E9 can provide with the same EQ from my X-Fi. 

I guess I need to decide what I wanna do. I'm  kinda thinking find a USB DAC with spdif output? Thoughts?
I wish I knew more about the DAC in my Denon...I think it's a CS but I am not sure..it's an AVR-1613. Overall I am soooo glad I purchased it!


----------



## trog69 (Feb 17, 2014)

Kursah said:


> I still enjoy my Auzen, but want to get rid of it. I like the Aune T1 for what it is but am considering selling it as it just doesn't fit my needs. I'm thinking of simplifying and going onboard digital to my Denon AVR. When I run RCA from my Aune T1 to my Denon I get a fuzzy power sucking distortion from the Aune's HP amp unless I power on the Denon. Then it goes away. Same thing happened when I had the FiiO E9 hooked up too. That and the Aune T1 gets pretty darn warm (the whole thing, not just the tube). While it does sound good, it's not quite suiting what I want. I wish my Denon AVR had some RCA outputs so I could run them to my FiiO E9....alas apparently those aren't common on the mid-range model for 2012-13 lol.
> 
> I'm not sure what direction to go yet...part of me still wants to keep the T1, but I don't want to have it AND the Denon on all the time. Especially if I want to listen to speakers and no HP's. The Denon's HP out is pretty decent, but it does lack the overall lower end punch the E9 can provide with the same EQ from my X-Fi.
> 
> ...


Hah. I ordered the FiiO E9, and they sent me the E17 Alpen instead, not that I'm complaining, since I planned on going with both of them eventually. That was before I went nuts and chucked the idea of a headphone amp and went with the A/V receiver and bookshelf speakers instead. The sound from the E17 is great, so I wonder if there would even be a need for the E9. Would it produce a louder output? That seems to be the only reason why I'd pair them. I admit that I'm fairly ignorant about DACs and all that.


----------



## BumbleBee (Feb 17, 2014)

Kursah said:


> I still enjoy my Auzen, but want to get rid of it. I like the Aune T1 for what it is but am considering selling it as it just doesn't fit my needs. I'm thinking of simplifying and going onboard digital to my Denon AVR. When I run RCA from my Aune T1 to my Denon I get a fuzzy power sucking distortion from the Aune's HP amp unless I power on the Denon. Then it goes away. Same thing happened when I had the FiiO E9 hooked up too. That and the Aune T1 gets pretty darn warm (the whole thing, not just the tube). While it does sound good, it's not quite suiting what I want. I wish my Denon AVR had some RCA outputs so I could run them to my FiiO E9....alas apparently those aren't common on the mid-range model for 2012-13 lol.
> 
> I'm not sure what direction to go yet...part of me still wants to keep the T1, but I don't want to have it AND the Denon on all the time. Especially if I want to listen to speakers and no HP's. The Denon's HP out is pretty decent, but it does lack the overall lower end punch the E9 can provide with the same EQ from my X-Fi.
> 
> ...



receivers are mass produced value boxes with cookie cutter designs.

try moving the Denon receiver away, if that doesn't work try another pair of RCA interconnects.

if you can fix that.. a Schiit Modi and pair of these will work

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0002KRCUE/?tag=tec06d-20


----------



## BumbleBee (Feb 17, 2014)

if I wasn't clear

buy those RCA splitters and plug them into the back of the Aune T1/Schiit Modi analog output. run one pair of RCA interconnects to the Fiio E9 and the other to the Denon AVR-1613 analog inputs.

try creating some distance between the Denon AVR-1613 and Headphone Amplifiers, try plugging them into different outlets. order a different brand of RCA interconnects.


----------



## trog69 (Feb 17, 2014)

That's a very handy little gadget, BumbleBee. I bookmarked it in case I or someone I know find a need for it, like running two subs with one LFE input or output, depending on the source. Thanks.


----------



## remixedcat (Feb 17, 2014)

my setup:

Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro 80 with a Fiio E7


----------



## XSI (Feb 20, 2014)

qubit said:


> Just reading your post again, it sounds like your using the digital output from your sound cards to your amp? In that case there will be zero difference between the two as the output data is the same. It sounds like some eq/processing options may be enabled on the X-Fi card which will change the sound noticeably.



Nope, same receiver, same audio player, no e/q setting changed. Only difference one is spdif another is toslink. 
realtek digital--> to receiver 
or x-fi digital connection to receiver.
its sounds louder and better on default. 
as i said if i check xfi crystaliser and dts encoding its absolutely different sound, but i understand this part. 
i don't get why the difference is on default


----------



## Mussels (Feb 20, 2014)

XSI said:


> Nope, same receiver, same audio player, no e/q setting changed. Only difference one is spdif another is toslink.
> realtek digital--> to receiver
> or x-fi digital connection to receiver.
> its sounds louder and better on default.
> ...



if you were using SPDIF passthrough from existing media (which will never get touched), then they'd sound the same. stuff like pre-set equaliser settings can still adjust SPDIF, for non pre-encoded audio.


----------



## BumbleBee (Feb 20, 2014)

there are three types of chips

1) digital transmitters - encodes and transmits digital data
2) digital receivers - handles incoming digital data
3) digital converters - converts digital data to analog signal

there are any number of explanations why it could sound different. maybe the sound card is using a different digital transmitter or the sound card is doing some kind of reclocking.

in any case it's more complicated than "all digital is the same"


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Mar 16, 2014)

I have (and have discussed in a few threads), the common problem of not being able to get 5.1 pass through to my AVR from my HDMI port on my HD7970. That is to say I CAN get the AVR recognized as an HDMI device, but it won't actually pass the 5.1 signal through to the speakers when originating from my video card's HDMI port.

Last it was discussed it was left at someone's assumption that the AVR does not support 5.1 pass through. I get 6 instances of AMD 5.1 HDMI Audio showing up in my sound devices panel, but none ever show as ready for use. I can use either my AVR or TV as HDMI devices, but they're only configurable for stereo.

Quite an annoying dilemma. I'd accept that my entry level Yamaha AVR doesn't support 5.1 pass through (if that indeed IS the case), if AVR manufacturers just told us which of their AVRs DO, but they don't seem to. Thus I've been settling with DPL II for gaming via an optical audio cable.

One person here said he got HDMI 5.1 to work with his AVR, but went to using DTS with a sound card because the multi channel PCM from his GPU resulted in unacceptable flaws in the positional audio. So it appears getting acceptable multi channel PCM from a GPU is very hit and miss.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 17, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> I have (and have discussed in a few threads), the common problem of not being able to get 5.1 pass through to my AVR from my HDMI port on my HD7970. That is to say I CAN get the AVR recognized as an HDMI device, but it won't actually pass the 5.1 signal through to the speakers when originating from my video card's HDMI port.
> 
> Last it was discussed it was left at someone's assumption that the AVR does not support 5.1 pass through. I get 6 instances of AMD 5.1 HDMI Audio showing up in my sound devices panel, but none ever show as ready for use. I can use either my AVR or TV as HDMI devices, but they're only configurable for stereo.
> 
> ...




it needs to support LPCM lossless 5.1

i nearly bought a 5.1 HDMI sound system the other day from sony, only to find bured in the manual that the 'blu ray' internal channel supports it, and the HDMI inputs do not.


pretty much all the cheap ones are on par with SPDIF - stereo only unless its compressed dolby.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Mar 17, 2014)

This might be useful to some people-

List of older av amps that support LPCM

http://www.avforums.com/threads/list-of-older-av-receivers-that-accept-lpcm.983908/


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Mar 17, 2014)

Thanks guys, at least that helps reassure me I've not botched the setup. Going forward though, how does one come up with info on whether AVRs, new ones we shop for, support multi LPCM?

I assume the list you posted tigger was made by amassing info from people whom owned and used those AVRs for said purpose?

It seems the only way to tell if a current or recently made model of AVR supports multi LPCM is to ask people that are presently using them that way, or buy from a store that has 30 day return privileged with no restocking fee that allows that type of return.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Mar 18, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> Thanks guys, at least that helps reassure me I've not botched the setup. Going forward though, how does one come up with info on whether AVRs, new ones we shop for, support multi LPCM?
> 
> I assume the list you posted tigger was made by amassing info from people whom owned and used those AVRs for said purpose?
> 
> It seems the only way to tell if a current or recently made model of AVR supports multi LPCM is to ask people that are presently using them that way, or buy from a store that has 30 day return privileged with no restocking fee that allows that type of return.




I reckon hi-fi shops might know about LPCM support or they should do if they are selling the stuff. Normal stores selling AVR's might not have a clue though.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Mar 19, 2014)

tigger said:


> I reckon hi-fi shops might know about LPCM support or they should do if they are selling the stuff. Normal stores selling AVR's might not have a clue though.


Kind of counter productive don't you think to ask a Hi Fi shop when the unit needs to be multi channel like your typical Home Theater AVR? One of our oldest Hi Fi shops in the area told me the other day they don't even carry headphones anymore, and in the past when I've asked them about AVRs they say they deal with stereo amps, not home theater.

Hi Fi shops seem to be hard to find anymore, and it doesn't make sense to me that they'd have any better idea of modern multi channel AVR design than those specializing in selling them. What needs to happen is better integration of PC and HT, and that includes not just labeling which HDMI ports to use for PC, but also whether lossless multi LPCM is supported.

Like I said, it comes back to trial and error, buying at a shop that has flexible return privileges.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Mar 20, 2014)

Frag Maniac said:


> Kind of counter productive don't you think to ask a Hi Fi shop when the unit needs to be multi channel like your typical Home Theater AVR? One of our oldest Hi Fi shops in the area told me the other day they don't even carry headphones anymore, and in the past when I've asked them about AVRs they say they deal with stereo amps, not home theater.
> 
> Hi Fi shops seem to be hard to find anymore, and it doesn't make sense to me that they'd have any better idea of modern multi channel AVR design than those specializing in selling them. What needs to happen is better integration of PC and HT, and that includes not just labeling which HDMI ports to use for PC, but also whether lossless multi LPCM is supported.
> 
> Like I said, it comes back to trial and error, buying at a shop that has flexible return privileges.



Most of the better hi-fi shops in my area do audiophile stereo setups, and muti channel Avr setups too, so i am only going by the shops in my area.  A lot of people nowadays have hi end 5.1 setups in their living rooms now, so imo it is stupid for hi-fi shops to ignore this market.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 20, 2014)

tigger said:


> Most of the better hi-fi shops in my area do audiophile stereo setups, and muti channel Avr setups too, so i am only going by the shops in my area.  A lot of people nowadays have hi end 5.1 setups in their living rooms now, so imo it is stupid for hi-fi shops to ignore this market.



around here they hire salesmen, not audio specialists. i've asked many stores about cheap 5.1 sound systems that do 5.1 LPCM audio, and every time i've been directed to systems that dont bloody work without pre-compressed audio (Dolby digital/DTS)

i ask them a second time, and they assure me its the same thing.


----------



## BumbleBee (Mar 20, 2014)

tigger said:


> Most of the better hi-fi shops in my area do audiophile stereo setups, and muti channel Avr setups too, so i am only going by the shops in my area.  A lot of people nowadays have hi end 5.1 setups in their living rooms now, so imo it is stupid for hi-fi shops to ignore this market.



different stores that's why.

in Toronto one store sells Plasma televisions, AVR, 5.1 speakers, bluray players, pre/pros and another store sells luxury speakers, monoblocks, integrated amplifiers, turntables, cartridges and D/A converters.

a home theater enthusiast and audiophile are different. in a home theater I prefer 2-way bookshelf or towers with ribbon tweeters (RAAL), multiple subwoofers and dipolar surround channels. in a listening room I prefer 3-way towers with soft dome tweeters or other easy on the ears and no subwoofer.

also I probably wouldn't use tubes in a home theater


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Mar 20, 2014)

BumbleBee said:


> different stores that's why.
> 
> in Toronto one store sells Plasma televisions, AVR, 5.1 speakers, bluray players, pre/pros and another store sells luxury speakers, monoblocks, integrated amplifiers, turntables, cartridges and D/A converters.
> 
> ...



I'm pretty sure there is audiophile 5.1 setups, one of the shops i was talking about sell some pretty high end gear, Krell, Meridian etc but still does what i would call audiophile 5.1 setups.

For example this-
http://www.harmankardon.com/EN-CA/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?PID=AVR 1565

And these-
http://www.homecinemachoice.com/news/article/dali-epicon-51-review/15988

I'm pretty sure this would be a pretty nice combo.


----------



## BumbleBee (Mar 20, 2014)

for $31,000 you could get a large JBL Synthesis array hell even with half that budget I would be happy with some Salk Soundscapes and SVS Cylinders.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Mar 20, 2014)

BumbleBee said:


> for $31,000 you could get a large JBL Synthesis array hell even with half that budget I would be happy with some Salk Soundscapes and SVS Cylinders.


I understand what you're saying, but though the JBL are nice, personally I would take the Dali's. Lets face, there is a hell of a lot of personal taste via looks or sound in audiophile equipment.


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Mar 27, 2014)

tigger said:


> A lot of people nowadays have hi end 5.1 setups in their living rooms now, so imo it is stupid for hi-fi shops to ignore this market.


I know what you mean and agree, but it seems ever since the big box stores things have changed. One of our most respected stores for HT and Hi Fi was Magnolia Hi Fi, but since they've been bought out buy Best Buy, they're just a smaller chain that pushes higher end gear and the philosophy is the same, get it out the door, make the sale. They don't care if their employees know about advanced HT/PC integration, even things that for some aren't considered advanced.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 27, 2014)

I did some testing and I think my HT|Omega card is shot (tons of noise on it).   Are there any decent 5.1/7.1 DACs out there that won't break the bank?  It must support stereo surround.


----------



## BumbleBee (Apr 28, 2014)

I don't think it's shot.

audio 101.. power and signal.

a sound card is just a power supply modulated by a signal. computers use switching mode power supplies which are very noisy and there is a lot of interference inside a case going on. The little "EMI shields" Asus and Creative put on their cards are more decorative than anything.

external D/A converters have better grounding/shielding and can use linear power supplies and all types of output stages.

you will need to buy a receiver.


----------



## BumbleBee (Apr 28, 2014)

you could try something like this

http://www.allaboutadapters.com/hddodtsdihdo.html

I posted this on GN a couple weeks back. a lot cheaper than a receiver


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 28, 2014)

That's only HDMI in.  The only HDMI I have is on the HD 5870 which is intended more for video than audio.  Pretty sure I can't even tell the card on only send audio. 

This is the only decent external one I found at Newegg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829102035

I moved FP Audio from the Striker 7.1 card to the Realtek integrated and blew the Striker off.  I'm thinking it sounds better but who knows how long that will last...


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 28, 2014)

BumbleBee said:


> I don't think it's shot.
> 
> audio 101.. power and signal.
> 
> ...



Does the isolated onboard sound on certain asus boards, like mine, do anything or is it just for show?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Apr 28, 2014)

What is the best way to burn in a now audio device, headset specifically. I saw in a tou review for qpad qh 90 sonething about burn in.,Then i read somewhere else a while ago that running what noise for a good amount of time is a good way of doing it. 

Anyone have any input?


----------



## BumbleBee (Apr 28, 2014)

tigger said:


> Does the isolated onboard sound on certain asus boards, like mine, do anything or is it just for show?



are you talking about the SupremeFX cards that come with some motherboards or something else? I remember Biostar or Asrock had a motherboard called the HiFi edition or something with output capacitors lol



MxPhenom 216 said:


> What is the best way to burn in a now audio device, headset specifically. I saw in a tou review for qpad qh 90 sonething about burn in.,Then i read somewhere else a while ago that running what noise for a good amount of time is a good way of doing it.
> 
> Anyone have any input?



just use them like any other pair of headphones.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 29, 2014)

BumbleBee said:


> are you talking about the SupremeFX cards that come with some motherboards or something else? I remember Biostar or Asrock had a motherboard called the HiFi edition or something with output capacitors lol
> 
> 
> 
> just use them like any other pair of headphones.




Yeah the SupremeFX III thats onj my board, with its isolation and funky red line.


----------



## BumbleBee (Apr 29, 2014)

probably not.

if you want to shield something you want to use copper, nickel or steel.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 29, 2014)

I can


BumbleBee said:


> probably not.
> 
> if you want to shield something you want to use copper, nickel or steel.



I can understand why they have isolated the onboard sound from the rest of the board, maybe it does make a differance.


----------



## BumbleBee (Apr 29, 2014)

nevermind I thought you were talking about this







I would put money on it being decorative


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 29, 2014)

BumbleBee said:


> nevermind I thought you were talking about this
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Won't it isolate it from any emi or other electrical interference created by other components on the board? If it is properly isolated it's kinda like a seperate sound card is it not.


----------



## BumbleBee (Apr 29, 2014)

just because it has it's own board doesn't mean it's not susceptible to the soup inside the case or the noisy power.

sorry.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 29, 2014)

J


BumbleBee said:


> just because it has it's own board doesn't mean it's not susceptible to the soup inside the case or the noisy power.
> 
> sorry.



Just wondering, no need to be sorry.


----------



## Frick (Apr 3, 2015)

Found a Creative SB X-Fi named 0460, which assumedly is an X-Fi Platinum, in a computer someone gave me, and ye gods my ass cheap Logitech Z523 (bought for about €30) speakers is suddenly very nearly ok. The downside is that White Stripes does not sound as thrashy as they used to.


----------



## remixedcat (Apr 3, 2015)

How can Logitech speakers sound "ok" hahahaha?

mine, no matter what still sound like a buffalo taking a dump on chewbacca's head.


----------



## Mussels (Apr 3, 2015)

remixedcat said:


> How can Logitech speakers sound "ok" hahahaha?
> 
> mine, no matter what still sound like a buffalo taking a dump on chewbacca's head.



my z5500's still sound better than my car audio, so i consider them ok


----------



## Frick (Apr 3, 2015)

remixedcat said:


> How can Logitech speakers sound "ok" hahahaha?



By upgrading the soundcard. 

Yeah they're sort of crappy, but they're ok. It's hard to dial back on sound quality, so actually I'm sort of afraid to upgrade.


----------



## remixedcat (Apr 3, 2015)

I even hooked em up to my DAC/Amp and they still sound like shit.

When I can afford it I'm gonna just get active monitor speakers like the KRKs or somethin.

or even go the AV reciever+ speakers route if I wanna take a break from headphones.

Been itchin for more audio stuff lately but I hate being broke from being screwed over so much


----------



## Ferrum Master (Apr 3, 2015)

remixedcat said:


> KRKs



I recommend to avoid them as plague...


----------



## remixedcat (Apr 3, 2015)

why?


----------



## Ferrum Master (Apr 3, 2015)

remixedcat said:


> why?



Had too many patients in repair from them... Their active amps are relict gainclones from 90, most of them suffer from ground loops and noises, and most bizarre thing they have a black epoxy coating inside... that tends to conduct, thus cause all sort of funny things including blown tweeters, noise, crackling(see the pics). Also their SPL is curved as a camels back... really don't deserve any kind of credit. They are besides with Behringer in my worst PA equipment counterfakers, pardon manufacturers.


----------



## remixedcat (Apr 3, 2015)

@BumbleBee


----------



## BumbleBee (Apr 4, 2015)

remixedcat said:


> @BumbleBee



Jesus has a problem with his pair hehe

you get what you pay for.

since the last time I went shopping.. Emotiva, Adam and Focal have come out with multiple lines of Active Monitors.

http://www.adam-audio.com/en/pro-audio/products
https://emotiva.com/products/emotiva-pro/powered-monitors-0
http://www.focalprofessional.com/en/


----------



## Mussels (Apr 4, 2015)

THE BEE HAS BEEN SUMMMOOOONNEEEEEEED


i'm glad that i can enjoy quality audio, but don't require it. i lack the funds to reach bee levels of audioness.


----------



## BumbleBee (Apr 4, 2015)

lots of new headphones out too...

Oppo PM-3 ($399)
Audeze EL-8 Open back ($699)
Audeze EL-8 Closed back ($699)
Fostex TH-600 ($599)
Fostex TH-500RP ($699)
Sony MDR-Z7 ($529)

my HD600 still great lol


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Apr 4, 2015)

Question if I have on board realtek with the creative options not loaded for it yet I use the hdmi out of my 7970 and its audio into a suround proccesor am I right thinking its purely the gpus audio tech in use?


----------



## Mussels (Apr 4, 2015)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Question if I have on board realtek with the creative options not loaded for it yet I use the hdmi out of my 7970 and its audio into a suround proccesor am I right thinking its purely the gpus audio tech in use?



yes. the motherboards audio is not used.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Apr 4, 2015)

I do get ckicks and noise on startup and occasionally but mostly its quite good with four towers im saving for a base unit


----------



## remixedcat (Apr 4, 2015)

BumbleBee said:


> Jesus has a problem with his pair hehe
> 
> you get what you pay for.
> 
> ...




The emotiva ones look like the more decent price of the three


----------



## Ferrum Master (Apr 4, 2015)

Mussels said:


> T. i lack the funds to reach bee levels of audioness.



It just a matter of your experience... it actually doesn't cost that much to get a proper analog setup(with no digital parts and not with a integrated IC at the end). There are many stars in the ol' good early eighties, like some models of Fishers, Yamaha, Sanyo, Kenwoods, Quads that during that time didn't cheap out on most components for the sake of more bling, also the same with bookshelf or florstanding speakers, they look ugly maybe, you can redo the case, repaint etc as you wish, just keep the internal volume and acoustic shelf system same. They are available at local garage/ad sales for a rubbish price, replace caps, certain opamps and jacks and the thing will blow out of water many modern solutions, and the sellers usually doesn't understand what is it, as usually it belonged to an elder who had kicked the bucket recently and others hurry to clean up the space, harsh but true. So if you wish something it usually ain't only solvable with a lot of dough and actually this way is more fun. Opening up some old pieces bring many revelations and the level sophistication is sometimes astonishing it screams - expensive.

Audio quality perception to one is subjective... but one thing is sure... crap means crap to everyone  I understand that many sympathize to active speakers, as there is less hassle, but most of them have circuitry that I've replicated when I was only 12 and if it is a DSP based power amp solution their quality is usually worse than an very old Realtek dynamic wise... and IF not - it costs an arm an leg, just because it is costly to maintain level of quality - imagine Pagani Zonda...


----------



## Frick (Apr 23, 2015)

Got a half height Xtreme Fidelity for very cheap, and it turns out that is a Xtreme Audio, which is a rebranded Audigy SE/Audigy Value/SB Live! 24 bit. Better than on board, but ... blergh.


----------



## GoldenX (Oct 19, 2015)

I have just changed to a SB Live! 24 bit that I had lying arround. I recommend using the support pack driver by Daniel_K.
It's A LOT better than on board, not great but at least .flac files sound like they should, plus my headphones are inexpensive.


----------



## trog69 (Oct 19, 2015)

I have an SVS PB-2000 as the sub for this PC's sound system, and even in this tiny room, which causes havoc with LF sounds, it is phenomenal. Powerful and sublime. It makes already great sounding bookshelf speakers come alive, almost 3D now. I can't recommend SVS enough. Best customer service, too.


----------



## AsRock (Oct 19, 2015)

trog69 said:


> I have an SVS PB-2000 as the sub for this PC's sound system, and even in this tiny room, which causes havoc with LF sounds, it is phenomenal. Powerful and sublime. It makes already great sounding bookshelf speakers come alive, almost 3D now. I can't recommend SVS enough. Best customer service, too.



Typically in good audio comes with good speaker matching to, so maybe you should note the speakers that you use as well.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Oct 22, 2015)

Well... I will be sentimental... I am just drunk... I hope @silentbogo will like it...  @BumbleBee also,  OTL tube ones is my fetish sound wise..  the juice... Just like Iron Maiden is... . I haven't got the voltage regulator board - LR8 that I drawed... To finish the puppy... But that is the taste, like one likes more blondes... Or brunetes etc...










I am using my Ti HD as sauce then as speaker... Celestion vintage 30. Yes a guitar speaker for home... It is is the most boring - linear speaker... But sensitive 100db as paper gets... I can tam its working spectrum from 200-300 to 2KHz.... And let him sing in my heavy music taste.... I play around different setups... And... Each style of music asks for for different setup... If one fits for all, it really fits for no one. Syphonic/metal, jazz/soul dnb etc new style shit... You cannot have from any world.


----------



## silentbogo (Oct 23, 2015)

Nice setup. Makes me wanna make a tube amp myself.

I'm not too preferential about my audio - been using these homemade bluetooth headphones for almost a year now. Getting solid 10-12 hours of Metal  with a new battery. Since then I've fixed the sound quality with better caps and extended a PCB antenna through the head mount, so now I can listen music even when I'm working downstairs.


----------



## Dethroy (Oct 23, 2015)

These (the A-200s) are going to be my next purchase. I wish I could find any decent english review/article for you guys - but there seems to be none.

Headphone wise I am still in love with my Sennheiser HD 598 + Essence STX (blows every Creative soundcard out of the water) combo.


----------



## trog69 (Jan 31, 2016)

AsRock said:


> Typically in good audio comes with good speaker matching to, so maybe you should note the speakers that you use as well.


 VERY SORRY FOR NOT FOLLOWING UP HERE BEFORE NOW. 

You're absolutely correct. I have a very large L-shaped desktop, so not only is my PC sitting up here, but two sets of bookshelf speakers

B&W 601se, and a pair of vintage KEF C-40 dual 8" driver mini-towers ( I have them upside down, as the tweets were too high up. )

I have everything connected to a brand-new z99 gaming system, and I ditched the sound card, altogether. The DAC in this Sony 7.1ch cheapo is good enough for me. The sound is incredible. although I admit that it is only setup for near-field enjoyment. 

I have lots of speakers to play around with, and though I have 3 competent center channel speakers, I haven't used any, and the setup is 2.1 stereo. That's because with the speakers arrayed in front and slightly to my sides, I get plenty of situational sound that I can hear enemies coming up behind me just fine. I haven't found a need for surround sound as yet.


----------



## GamerGuy (Mar 1, 2016)

I'd of late swapped out my soundcards in my various rigs in favor of an external DAC/amp combo/stack. Only rigs with soundcards now are my HTPC rig (Auzentech X-Fi Forte) and my main gaming rig (with a set of Logitech Z5500) since no simulated surround on headphones can ever match physical 5.1 speaker system. I have a set of Klipsch PM2.1 and Focal XS Book which I'm keeping for use next time when I shift back to my house.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 1, 2016)

i need to update my system specs, i upgraded my audio setup pretty severely a while back


----------



## Frick (Aug 31, 2016)

So I got this sound bar thing from a friend. Aura ... something something. The bass box is wireless, and the upgrade from the Logitechs is massive. I'm ruined for life now. 

EDIT: I think it's this one.

EDIT: Gaaawwwwddddddddd Tom Waits - Oily Nights.

EDIT: I miss a volume knob. The steps between the volumes is way to big. I need to turn down the volume on the computer way down, otherwise one step is to low and the next is to loud.


----------



## HarvesterOfSorrow (Apr 30, 2021)

Hey, I was curious if TPUs audio experts could tell me which is better: SoundBlaster G6 or Asus Z97 Pro Gamer onboard SupremeFX?


----------



## freeagent (Apr 30, 2021)

I use my GPU for sound on my AVR these days.. it sounds pretty good. I let the AVR do the decoding though. I use the onboard to drive my desk speakers and headphones.. its not bad..


----------



## TheLostSwede (Apr 30, 2021)

Necro thread!


----------



## AsRock (Apr 30, 2021)

TheLostSwede said:


> Necro thread!



.....

Anyways same here, been using AVR's though video cards for many years now, never had that crackle sound what some complain about or any other audio issue really.

Last time i used SupremeFX was back in x38 days and it was not all that bad.


----------



## freeagent (Apr 30, 2021)

Whoops.. 

I only have myself to blame.


----------



## WhiteNoise (May 20, 2021)

I use a dedicated DAC, preamp, and 3 amps.


----------



## Rockfella.killswitch (Nov 28, 2021)

Just a simple Xonar DX optical out to FiiO K5 pro RCA to KaliAudio LP6.


----------



## The red spirit (Nov 28, 2021)

Topping D10 DAC + AIWA NSX-V70 Hi-Fi system. Not monitors or anything fancy, but I got speakers for free and DAC was at reasonable cost.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Jul 28, 2022)

_FreeBSD + bit-perfect mode + vchans disabled_ gives the best sound of all DAC/software setups I've heard. 
It gives bit-perfect sound in all audio apps, including Firefox, DeaDBeeF, YouTube and mpv video player (for movies/series).

Windows and FreeBSD produce a different sound in bit-perfect mode. You'd expect them to produce exactly the same sound, but apparently there are implementation differences, or maybe FreeBSD's monolithic kernel is simply faster than windows' hybrid kernel, maybe windows doesn't have a kernel implementation, maybe windows doesn't have programmers who understand audio. They don't sound the same on the same hardware and speakers, which is strange. FreeBSD in _standard_ mode still sounds better than windows + _bit-perfect _Foobar2000.

Also the audio from iPad or a MacBook Pro is less good than the sound from FreeBSD. FreeBSD has an independent implementation of OSS4 which can be seen as the best sound architecture currently in existence.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 28, 2022)

How did you measure it?


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 30, 2022)

Yep, you were talking out of your arse, I knew it.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Jul 30, 2022)

Octopuss said:


> How did you measure it?


I'm only seeing your message now. You can verify this yourself, install FreeBSD on decent hardware, and enable bit-perfect mode, also disable vchans. (I can give you more exact instructions if you wish). You will hear that your audio hardware suddenly has a purer and more open sound than anything you have ever heard before on this hardware. You can measure the differences yourself, but personally I hear this directly and according to the doctor of my work I have exceptionally good hearing.

Many people have had similar experiences:

https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/is-it-me-or-is-sound-really-great-on-freebsd.63393/
https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=95824.0
https://linuxreviews.org/OSS
https://lobste.rs/s/moflv5/freebsd_audio_from_perspective_happy


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/amsvh/_/c0idtp7

https://www.boucek.me/blog/from-mac-to-freebsd/


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/airpods/comments/t6j21h

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-it-s...-poor-audio-quality-from-their-headphone-jack
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/253607372
Etc.


----------



## MarsM4N (Jul 30, 2022)

Wouldn't surprise me at all. _**_ Microsoft gave a crap about audio quality after they chopped *DirectSound* on WinVista and later editions.

On Windows your only chance for better sound quality is a compatible *ASIO* driver from the manufacturer of your DAC/soundcard (if provided).
Or you could try out the universal _*Asio4All*_ driver (or some other universal ASIO driver) & see if it does anything.


----------

