Razer Reinforces Audio Business by Acquiring Majority of THX Assets

[R-T-B]

This is what I have to say about razer audio:

This is continuously offered to me by my MOUSE DRIVERS. And yes, as expected from Razer, the "never" button does not work.

I will never buy a Razer audio product based on this alone.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Tell me how and I'll do an honest comparision.

FooBar2000 is the place to start. I would try these first:
http://skipyrich.com/wiki/Main_Page

Then move on to these:
http://www.foobar2000.org/components/tag/DSP

 

[Prima.Vera]

Foobar is good. But I used it complementary with my sound card settings. Also we are talking about hardware vs software. And Foobar is only good for music. For movies or games, what you do?

 

[RejZoR]

"I've played Stellar Overload which is on Unreal Engine 4. I have zero problems with how it sounds."

There is a difference between having zero problems and having amazing sound. I frankly wouldn't care if it was all done in software, if the environmental effects attached to traced sound were actually good. But they aren't. They are dull, without a single hint of any kind of presence, no actual depth. Which makes me wonder if software solution done on CPU is really up to par even compared to what Creative offered on X-Fi through a dedicated processor. I couldn't care any less if it's all outputted through the rears of angels, it all sounds like dull crap even before it hits the DACs. Which confuses me that you're denying this and you're stating that SNR makes such huge difference, but actual effects, the actual way how sounds are perceivable, that is somehow irrelevant. Ugh!?

 

[rtwjunkie]

I've had ZERO problems with X-Fi and SB Z drivers. And frankly, SB Live! and Audigy 2 drivers weren't bad, just the panels were that typical Asian BMP crap. But other than that, it worked just fine.

Have to totally agree. It may not be the top quality I got back in the day from Diamond, but I've had zero problem with SB-Z drivers and the SB-Z hardware. A lot of people like to claim that AC1150 just as good as or almost as good as a soundcard, but I call bullshit on their very dulled down ears. It's true that 1150 is much better than old integrated sound, but I am able to tell the difference on my systems very easily between the quality and the fullness of the sound between an AC1150 and a SB-Z.

 

[R-T-B]

"I've played Stellar Overload which is on Unreal Engine 4. I have zero problems with how it sounds."

There is a difference between having zero problems and having amazing sound. I frankly wouldn't care if it was all done in software, if the environmental effects attached to traced sound were actually good. But they aren't. They are dull, without a single hint of any kind of presence, no actual depth. Which makes me wonder if software solution done on CPU is really up to par even compared to what Creative offered on X-Fi through a dedicated processor. I couldn't care any less if it's all outputted through the rears of angels, it all sounds like dull crap even before it hits the DACs. Which confuses me that you're denying this and you're stating that SNR makes such huge difference, but actual effects, the actual way how sounds are perceivable, that is somehow irrelevant. Ugh!?

It's similar to the tubes vs transistors arguement. Tubes are technically worse on paper, but they add harmonic distortion that makes the instrument slightly "different" each play, so people think that sounds more alive. Creative muddied up your audio with some dynamic effects, and you liked it because it provided variety, regardless of it's digital correctness.

That makes perfect sense to me. What does not is why we can't do the exact same thing on the cpu. My bet is we can, but creative and co. have it all patented to hell, so no one sane will touch it.

 

[RejZoR]

Omg lol, Creative didn't "muddy up" the sound and "I liked it", the environment did that lol. You know, the acoustic properties of the sewer for example. I'm getting a feeling you people don't really understand what I'm talking about. At all.

 

[R-T-B]

Omg lol, Creative didn't "muddy up" the sound and "I liked it", the environment did that lol. You know, the acoustic properties of the sewer for example. I'm getting a feeling you people don't really understand what I'm talking about. At all.

From a mathmatical correctness to the source perspective, any change is muddying it up. That doesn't mean it can't be used well or sourced from the environment. My point clearly went over your head.

 

[Frick]

FooBar2000 is the place to start. I would try these first:
http://skipyrich.com/wiki/Main_Page

Then move on to these:
http://www.foobar2000.org/components/tag/DSP

Those just seem to be mixers and equalizers, in software. I thought you said my onboard soundcard had DSP's I could enable?

 

[RejZoR]

From a mathmatical correctness to the source perspective, any change is muddying it up. That doesn't mean it can't be used well or sourced from the environment. My point clearly went over your head.

Not only you don't understand what I'm talking about, you also don't understand audio effects processing.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Foobar is good. But I used it complementary with my sound card settings. Also we are talking about hardware vs software. And Foobar is only good for music. For movies or games, what you do?

The Windows NT 6.# and newer audio stack allows adding DSPs to apply effects. The thing is, I don't think many exist or I simply can't find them. VSP-11 (might not work in NT6) and DFX are two examples.

I don't use any DSPs at all--advantage of not skimping on speakers/headphones.

Those just seem to be mixers and equalizers, in software. I thought you said my onboard soundcard had DSP's I could enable?

Your onboard likely has its own DSPs you can enable through the drivers (e.g. Realtek has Realtek Manager). Windows' generic audio driver (only used in the absence of another audio driver) has DSPs as well by way of "Enhancements" tab:
1) "Sound" in control panel
2) Right click on the playback device you're using.
3) "Enhancements" tab
I only use Speaker Fill which mixes stereo sources to stereo surround. CMSS-3D is a mix of all of those enhancements, I imagine.

 

[eidairaman1]

Have to totally agree. It may not be the top quality I got back in the day from Diamond, but I've had zero problem with SB-Z drivers and the SB-Z hardware. A lot of people like to claim that AC1150 just as good as or almost as good as a soundcard, but I call bullshit on their very dulled down ears. It's true that 1150 is much better than old integrated sound, but I am able to tell the difference on my systems very easily between the quality and the fullness of the sound between an AC1150 and a SB-Z.

Using a ZXR, course i've always put sound cards in my rigs. SB PCI 512, SB XFi. Now this lol.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Here's 20 minutes of 5.1, 24-bit, 96 kHz Stellar Overload recorded using Audacity on Realtek AC1150:
https://mega.nz/#!yYIFjTbS!z-HW66fH-itXNsuj38w9QInxDbW5PJWqne0_CDeuQlQ

The game sounds good through Klipsch Pro Media Ultra 5.1 via Realtek AC1150 and Razer Carcharias via Schiit Modi 2/Magni 2 audio stack.

 

[R-T-B]

Not only you don't understand what I'm talking about, you also don't understand audio effects processing.

Again, I am speaking purely from a source accuracy perspective. This differs entirely from what an end user wants in gaming. Please stop assuming I don't get it, I do.

 

[RejZoR]

Here's 20 minutes of 5.1, 24-bit, 96 kHz Stellar Overload recorded using Audacity on Realtek AC1150:
https://mega.nz/#!yYIFjTbS!z-HW66fH-itXNsuj38w9QInxDbW5PJWqne0_CDeuQlQ

The game sounds good through Klipsch Pro Media Ultra 5.1 via Realtek AC1150 and Razer Carcharias via Schiit Modi 2/Magni 2 audio stack.

Sorry, but that's 20 minutes of pointless sound recording. And yet again, proving my point you don't understand it. Jesus. If you don't see the image, sound recording is pointless because there is no visual environment context to it. You could be running through forest, through cave and through metallic structure and it all sounded the same. I can only assume from sound where you were walking in a game. Which to me sounded exactly the same environment through entire 20 minutes. Footsteps had the exact same tone through entire recording and environments probably changed, yet sound didn't. EAX based games always had vast variations of environmental effects to the sound in given area depending on its type and size. There is a huge difference between individual sounds "sounding good" and awesome immersive sound that truly connects with the graphically represented world. With EAX sound and visuals always felt connected. With current software crap, it feels like it's there just because it has to be, but they put like zero effort into it. It's just there and it's all meh.

Here's a proper difference between software crap and EAX 4.0:

Pay attention to environmental effects and how they align with the environment you're actually in. Especially pay attention to difference in environmental effect on sound as the player steps through the bulkhead door into a different room with different acoustic properties than the last one. You couldn't sense anything like this in your recording and I assume you did walk through different areas that should change acoustic properties.

And another with UT99:

Pay attention how reverberation changes depending on room size and type. Large halls reverb a lot more than small ones, however the drainage pipe in the end sounds entirely differently than the small cubicle section before, despite both being small rooms, but they arent' shaped the same and they affect the sound differently.

Thief 3 Deadly Shadows:

If you don't hear the difference...

Again, I am speaking purely from a source accuracy perspective. This differs entirely from what an end user wants in gaming. Please stop assuming I don't get it, I do.

I'm not assuming, I'm SEEING. Source accuracy means that if you're standing in a sewer within a game, it should sound like one. With all the fancy software environmental effects, it just doesn't. It all sounds exactly the same dull and generic and doesn't give sensation you're in any kind of environment. This is all I'm going about for 3 pages now.

 

[R-T-B]

I'm not assuming, I'm SEEING. Source accuracy means that if you're standing in a sewer within a game, it should sound like one.

You still aren't getting what I'm saying. I get that. That's one perspective. I'm explaining the other one, where source accuracy is what's "in the file." I think you'll find this is the more common usage of the term. What you should be saying is perhaps "environmental accuracy" and I agree it's important, and at the moment, tragically dead since XP. We really don't disagree here, it's just semantics.

And going back to the point I was really trying to make before we got caught up in that...

There is no techincal reason a CPU can't do that and more that I know of... and by that, I mean EAX grade audio processing. I wish someone would just right a decent audio processor for it. I'm pretty sure patent law is why this doesn't happen though. The only ones that exist use shitty workarounds to get around that (like Realtek).

 

[FordGT90Concept]

If you don't see the image, sound recording is pointless because there is no visual environment context to it.

I disagree. The sound should take you there in your mind's eye. It's unadulterated. That said, the FLAC conversion screwed up the channel mappings so it isn't reflective of the game; however, even with that being true, I can hear the 3 basic surfaces in the game (soil, metal, and water), I can also hear the one time I was in a cave (late recording), when I was flying, and obviously the combat at the end where I died and quit recording. You can also easily distinguish surfaces have foliage from those that don't.


Emulated EAX sounds terrible. I prefer no EAX over hardware EAX. EAX always stood out to me as being excessive, over the top, and unnatural. If they dialed it back to 3, it would probably be okay. Add in the hardware cost of doing EAX though, I'd argue it's not worth it.

There is no techincal reason a CPU can't do that and more that I know of... and by that, I mean EAX grade audio processing. I wish someone would just right a decent audio processor for it. I'm pretty sure patent law is why this doesn't happen though. The only ones that exist use shitty workarounds to get around that (like Realtek).

I think the reason why it isn't being done is that ray tracing for light very closely coincides with sound tracing. The engine needs the full width and breadth of all the surfaces in the map and then it has to bounce light and sound waves off of these surfaces and see what comes back to the player. EAX sounds artificial because it doesn't do that--it cuts corners just like games do with visuals. I think it could happen eventually (likely does happen in animated movie development already) but for that to reach consumers and occur in real-time, it's still a long ways off.

And frankly, most developers would rather put that energy into the visual side of things than the audio side.

 

[RejZoR]

It sounds excessive because you're so used to bland dull sound, not because it is excessive by itself. Also your argument of cutting corners is funny. Of course it's "cutting corners". Why would they go full blown sound tracking if you're calling simple environmental effects as pointless... Graphics didn't go from basic 3D into CryEngine over night either. It evolved. Sound was doing the same. But then it regressed for 15 years at one point. But oh well, I feel like talking to a brick wall here even with the best arguments...

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Most of the difference with EAX is in echos and, again, they were excessive. Think of a cathedral: sounds carry a long way by design but they don't particularly echo because there's a lot of stuff that absorbs the sound wave. EAX, in my estimation, fails to take that into account hence, it is excessive.

The only thing EAX did well was taking the harshness off of that dripping sound. My guess is that the drip was through a wall which the game engine didn't take into account but EAX did. That comes across as an oversight by Epic more so than anything. Considering that engine is a decade an a half old, I suspect it is fixed in UE2, UE3, or at least UE4.