Which soundcard best for music playback
Bramante M Perkasa
I am currently using the old trusty SB AWE64Gold connected to a Marantzs
Amplifier. I do not mind the sound quality.
But I am getting sick of trying to get a motherboard with ISA slot
everytime I need to upgrade.
Can anyone recommend soundcard best for audio playback? I use it mainly
for playing MP3s, CDs, DVDs, and MIDIs. Although I also use my computer
for games, I do not mind if the soundcard really slows the computer
down, as long as the sound quality is top of the range (my AWE64Gold
also slows my computer down anyway).
Thank you for your help. Oh, and I don't care 'bout the price.
Regards,
Bramante M Perkasa
Arny Krueger
"Bramante M Perkasa" <per...@upnaway.com> wrote in message
news:3BBAC4...@upnaway.com...
Please see http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/compare/index.htm
Larry B
"Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:W8Du7.8345$sb3.268...@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
Hi Arny,
If and when do you think that the Audigy boards (esp Santa Cruz comparable)
will be included on the chart? They really do need to be there for the
comparisons to be current and valid.
Thanks so much. I know that evaluations like that can take forever to do!!!
Lar
Skoal
production cards.....
Frank
"Skoal" <cog...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:9pgrg7$17g$1...@siamese.noc.ucla.edu...
Arny Krueger
"Larry B" <lbbloc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:DIRu7.763$2p1....@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> If and when do you think that the Audigy boards (esp Santa Cruz
comparable)
> will be included on the chart? They really do need to be there for
the
> comparisons to be current and valid.
> Thanks so much. I know that evaluations like that can take forever
to do!!!
It's not forever but its about 16 hours of work per card. I just did
a DAC http://www.pcavtech.com/adc-dac/p3a/index.htm which is about
half as much work as a sound card, and it took about 8 hours. 15
minutes to install the product and collect the data, and about 7
hours and 45 minutes of analysis and HTML.
Well that's the problem. I have an Audigy, but the first generation
drivers seem to be really rough. I don't know whether to just run
with them, and then suffer the slings and arrows of doing the retest
when CL comes out with new drivers (which they might do yesterday or
next year) or do it now.
PCAVTech is still a labor of love. I've changed ISPs so now the ad
revenue pretty well covers the hosting fees. The web advertising
market is so depressed that it's almost not worth the trouble to
paste in the HTML for the ads...
Jamie Powell
> Got a better site? Do tell.
>
www.use-your-own-ears!.com ? :-)
Larry B
Can you give me an "unscientific" perspective on the card since you have
one? Do you think it can be better than the Santa Cruz (with better drivers)
or will probably be equivalent? I have read that the Santa Cruz drivers have
improved over time but that the 5.1 is still difficult to use.
If equivalent, then there may be no reason to wait for the better drivers
when the Santa Cruz is available now.
Thanks, Lar
Arny Krueger
"Jamie Powell" <jami...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:86c713b4.0110...@posting.google.com...
> www.use-your-own-ears!.com ? :-)
That would be http://www.pcabx.com/product/soundcard/index.htm
Paul Grammens
Arny Krueger <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote
>
> It's not forever but its about 16 hours of work per card. I just did
> a DAC http://www.pcavtech.com/adc-dac/p3a/index.htm which is about
> half as much work as a sound card, and it took about 8 hours. 15
> minutes to install the product and collect the data, and about 7
> hours and 45 minutes of analysis and HTML.
>
Well, thanks for doing all that work. It's great to be able to see hard
numbers and opinions based on them, rather than just the opinions of someone
with one card!
-Paul
Roj
<lbbloc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>If equivalent, then there may be no reason to wait for the better drivers
>when the Santa Cruz is available now.
One man's testing results on the Audigy (after suffering through the
drivers):
This is copied verbatim from a thread on ViaHardware. They were run by
Roger Adam who is active on several sound forums across the net. They
mirror Arny Krueger's preliminary findings.
** Begin Extract **
1Khz SNR 44Khz Analog to Digital: 83dB, 44K Analog Loop: 83dB, 44K
Digital to Analog: 89dB, Digital to Digital: 87dB, not bad, but surely
not a 100dB SNR creative claims.
FR 44Khz Analog to Digital: 30-20Khz -0.1/+0.28dB , 44K Analog Loop:
20-19Khz +0.12/-1.2dB , 44K Digital to Analog: 20-20Khz +0.09/-1.3dB ,
Digital to Digital: 20-20Khz +0.08/-0.76dB, pretty good here
DR 44Khz Analog to Digital: 85dB, 44K Analog Loop: 83dB, 44K Digital
to Analog: 89dB, Digital to Digital: 89dB, not bad, but surely not a
100dB SNR creative claims.
ZRSN 44Khz Analog to Digital: 81dB, 44K Analog Loop: 82dB, 44K Digital
to Analog: 87dB, Digital to Digital: 89dB, I expected judging by their
PR that the Digital to Digital should've be clean, well it wasn't.
Jitter 44Khz Analog to Digital: -98dB, 44K Analog Loop: -97dB, 44K
Digital to Analog: -99dB, Digital to Digital: -106dB, pretty good.
That was 44Khz testing, this card STILL samples at 48Khz but down
samples to 44.1Khz, couldn't test claim of 96Khz it kept crashing, I
believe a "true" 96Khz is non-existant even though it is spec'd that
way. I was amazed I could even test this much as it kept crashing in
testing, ran the TBSC through the test, just to verify the software
the SC ran ALL tests -- no hiccups. The Audigy sounds good, it is not
a clean as the TBSC, and surely the Platnum (which is the same card)
doesn't even compare remotely to low-end Professional solutions it is
priced against. It does, however, play games very nicely, though the
driver did crash a few games I ran it through, still it was due to the
infancy of the driver, judging by the sound in games it did great
there, positional audio worked great, as for the EAX extensions, the
features that creative is boasting over, it looks alot like the
wavetracing technology A3D employed in their latter cards, can't blame
creative for taking this as an implementation to the Audigy, as the
A3D stuff was ALWAYS better than theirs. Overall, I'd say the Audigy
was a really good gamers card, but the Audiophile or Musician would be
repulsed.
** End Extract **
In other words, it's big time "me too" but still doesn't catch up to
the Santa Cruz.
Further more, he goes on to say that while the ACPI issues are a thing
of the past, the PCI bus hogging **isn't**.
** Begin Extract **
Actually, the Soundblaster (and yes even the Audigy) line is a PCI
bus-hog, the card in this respect may not be to blame as creative's
driver "attaches" itself to the Secondary IDE enumerator, it then
proceeds to "reserve" bandwith for the card by producing null data
across the PCI bus (when not in use), not a very effieciently designed
driver.
** End Extract **
Roj
You Know Who ~
hobby) the fact is that I, in my innocence, didn't realize that most of
those cards are long out of production. I would have saved my time if a
note could be posted saying "no longer available".
Even consumer reports does that.
--
You know who~
TAV http://www.audiophilevoice.com/
Cats and audio links: http://you_know_who.home.att.net/cat.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
"There are two means of refuge from the miseries of life:
music and cats." -- Albert Schweitzer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Skoal" <cog...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:9pgrg7$17g$1...@siamese.noc.ucla.edu...
Skoal
relative to real music and perception.
Arny Krueger
> Except that few here know anything about how to interpret the 'hard
numbers'
> relative to real music and perception.
I've made a very strong try at helping people do that at
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/index.htm .
Frank
your own?
"Skoal" <cog...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:9pjqm9$tc$1...@persian.noc.ucla.edu...
You Know Who ~
I'll bet you do too.
If a site isn't helpful or could be more helpful, its better to let the
author know than to just be quiet.
--
You Know Who~
" It wasn't until late in life that I discovered how easy
it is to say 'I don't know'." W. Somerset Maugham
Help & Purgatory @ http://home.att.net/~You_Know_Who/
`````````````````````````````````````````````
"Frank" <nos...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9pl25v$smt$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
Nick White
wrote something
......and in reply I say!:
I tend to agree. Skoal has placed no other messages that I can see,
and does not even indicate (let alone offer to provide) alternative
information. It is amazing how rude people can be about others'
efforts to provide FREE information on the web. This is not even
really constructive criticism. Just complaint, and in a less than
pleasant tone.
>Skoal, instead of whining about other people's sites why not make
>your own?
>
Nick White --- HEAD:Hertz Music
(please remove ns from my header email address to reply)
....damn spam
!!
<")
_/ )
( )
_//- \__/
Nick White
<you_kn...@att.net> wrote something
I feel there is a difference between whining and decent criticism. I
also feel that criticism will be beter received from people who
provide other contributions
>Lots of people whine about things without being able to make them..... and
>I'll bet you do too.
>If a site isn't helpful or could be more helpful, its better to let the
>author know than to just be quiet.
>
>--
>You Know Who~
Larry B
"Roj" <rojthevorlon@vorlon_homeworld.com> wrote in message
news:0o6prtontfvvnniss...@4ax.com...
Roj,
Thanks a lot for your input. I see that you contribute/work for ViaHardware
and that you mention that the TBSC is NOT recommended for LP to CD
transfers. How critical is this '"above 18KHz resampling issue" (and, in
simple terms, *what* is it) and how do you think it will affect a transfer?
Thanks, Lar
You Know Who ~
I don't think it's critical. In theory, some LP's have sound above 18kz
(which is pretty close to the highest frequency anyone can hear; most folks
can't hear that high). Many LP's roll off the signal around 18k. You can
give it a try; but I doubt you would hear a difference.
Some issues of soundcards are, to my mind, somewhat mute when transferring
LP to CD. This is because you will only "hear" the soundcard as you
monitor, which does not affect what is actually sampled and taken to the
file. Most likely you will listen to the finished product on your home CD
player and not through your soundcard. Thus, the ability to convert a
signal from analog to digital is pretty much the only thing that matters.
While signal to noise ratios are often not as good as one would like in
theory, most phono outputs have a S/N ratio much lower or worse than any
soundcard!
--
You know who~
TAV http://www.audiophilevoice.com/
Cats and audio links: http://you_know_who.home.att.net/cat.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
"There are two means of refuge from the miseries of life:
music and cats." -- Albert Schweitzer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Larry B" <lbbloc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:wQDv7.7418$2p1.7...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Arny Krueger
>
> "Roj" <rojthevorlon@vorlon_homeworld.com> wrote in message
> news:0o6prtontfvvnniss...@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 04 Oct 2001 13:41:30 GMT, "Larry B"
> > <lbbloc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > >If equivalent, then there may be no reason to wait for the
better drivers
> > >when the Santa Cruz is available now.
> >
> > One man's testing results on the Audigy (after suffering through
the
> > drivers):
> >
> > This is copied verbatim from a thread on ViaHardware. They were
run by
> > Roger Adam who is active on several sound forums across the net.
They
> > mirror Arny Krueger's preliminary findings.
> > ** Begin Extract **
> > 1Khz SNR 44Khz Analog to Digital: 83dB,
86 dB
> > 44K Analog Loop: 83dB,
81 dB
> > 44K Digital to Analog: 89dB,
not working
>Digital to Digital: 87dB, not bad, but surely not a 100dB SNR
creative claims.
83 dB
> > FR 44Khz Analog to Digital: 30-20Khz -0.1/+0.28dB
44K Analog Loop: 20-19Khz +0.12/-1.2dB ,
+0.3 -1.5
44K Digital to Analog: 20-20Khz +0.09/-1.3dB ,
+0.37 -1.5
> > Digital to Digital: 20-20Khz +0.08/-0.76dB, pretty good here
not working.
> > DR 44Khz Analog to Digital: 85dB,
90 dB
>> 44K Analog Loop: 83dB,
88 dB
>> 44K Digital to Analog: 89dB,
91 dB
Digital to Digital: 89dB,
not working
>> not bad, but surely not a 100dB SNR creative claims.
> > ZRSN 44Khz Analog to Digital: 81dB,
90.5 dB
> > 44K Analog Loop: 82dB,
88.6. dB
> > 44K Digital to Analog: 87dB,
92 dB
> > Digital to Digital: 89dB, I
not working
> > expected judging by their PR that the Digital to Digital
should've be clean, well it wasn't.
NOT BIT PERFECT. No way!
> > Jitter 44Khz Analog to Digital: -98dB,
-100 dB
>44K Analog Loop: -97dB,
> > 44K Digital to Analog: -99dB,
-95 dB
> >Digital to Digital: -106dB, pretty good.
not working
> > That was 44Khz testing, this card STILL samples at 48Khz but down
> > samples to 44.1Khz, couldn't test claim of 96Khz it kept
crashing, I
> > believe a "true" 96Khz is non-existent even though it is spec'd
that
> > way.
My testing shows considerable evidence that the 96 KHz is upsampled
for the digital output, only. I see no evidence of a multimedia API
for 96 KHz or 24 bits.
> >I was amazed I could even test this much as it kept crashing in
> > testing, ran the TBSC through the test, just to verify the
software
> > the SC ran ALL tests -- no hiccups. The Audigy sounds good, it is
not
> > a clean as the TBSC, and surely the Platinum (which is the same
card)
> > doesn't even compare remotely to low-end Professional solutions
it is
> > priced against.
I totally agree.
> >It does, however, play games very nicely, though the
> > driver did crash a few games I ran it through, still it was due
to the
> > infancy of the driver, judging by the sound in games it did great
> > there, positional audio worked great, as for the EAX extensions,
the
> > features that creative is boasting over, it looks alot like the
> > wavetracing technology A3D employed in their latter cards, can't
blame
> > creative for taking this as an implementation to the Audigy, as
the
> > A3D stuff was ALWAYS better than theirs. Overall, I'd say the
Audigy
> > was a really good gamers card, but the Audiophile or Musician
would be
> > repulsed.
That would be the most charitable view that I can muster of the
Audigy that sits before me.
> > In other words, it's big time "me too" but still doesn't catch up
to
> > the Santa Cruz.
I have been working on my formal tests, and I think that in terms of
technical performance, the Santa Cruz will win.
Steven Mon
on the Audigy. They have a link on the front page under Recent Features.
Steven Mon
www.losertown.org
"Larry B" <lbbloc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:DIRu7.763$2p1....@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Skoal
industry...otherwise its expensive and hit and miss. In that sense, a
personal site, no matter how well intentioned and informed, will not meet
the expectations of users.
"Frank" <nos...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9pl25v$smt$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
Skoal
"Steven Mon" <s....@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:n9%v7.34104$WW.22...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Skoal
site. However, no psychoacoustical data are presented as to limits and just
noticeable differences in average hearing.
"Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:gWiv7.8892$zi5.2816807974@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
Larry B
<Snip> I have been working on my formal tests, and I think that in terms of
> technical performance, the Santa Cruz will win.
>
>
Thanks to everyone for their help. I have bought the TBSC and hope to have
my configuration up and running in about 2 weeks.
Lar
Arny Krueger
> > I've made a very strong try at helping people do that at
> > http://www.pcabx.com/technical/index.htm .
> These are excellent files, and arguably the greatest contribution
of the
> site. However, no psychoacoustical data are presented as to limits
and just
> noticeable differences in average hearing.
I try very NOT to tell people what to expect at www.pcabx.com
because I very strongly believe that many listening tests have their
results strongly affected by the listener's expectations. Therefore I
try, as much as possible, to not give people any expectations other
than the natural one that they will hear differences. I do tip my
hand a little at http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm .
I've presented data like about the thresholds for audibliity of
linear and nonlinear distortion at
http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/techtalk/FR/index.htm
http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/techtalk/THD/index.htm and
http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/techtalk/IM/index.htm . These
pages are hyperlinked out of every report at www.pcavtech.com . The
context at this site is measurements, so I think that giving some
people information about measurements and audibility is reasonable.
Arny Krueger
"Steven Mon" <s....@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:n9%v7.34104$WW.22...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
a review
> on the Audigy. They have a link on the front page under Recent
Features.
Actually, its
http://www.extremetech.com/article/0,3396,apn%253D8%2526s%253D1017%25
26a%253D14763%2526app%253D6%2526ap%253D7,00.asp
Yes, its a wonderful review. Shows what cubic dollars can do.