[shagrathborgir]

No offense but this is insanely hard to read. Please use proper spacing with punctuation and don't rely so heavily on ellipses.

My response to what I can divine you to be potentially saying:

- No, there is no right or wrong way to do this in any sort of objective manner. There are many ways to connect these two components together.

- The Yamaha cannot be fully bypassed unless you remove it from the equation - it will always have signal going into it, and coming back out of it. It cannot behave as a purely analog in-out device, because of the DSP functionality. You would need something much more basic to achieve that.

- Using the analog outputs of the Creative card uses the Creative card's DAC. Using the digital outputs of the Creative card does not use the Creative card's DAC. The Creative card is still acting as a source device and audio interface when outputting via digital, so it's not reasonable to say it has "no benefit" - it's the only reason you're getting a DTS encoded output, for example.

- The signal has to be converted to analog *somewhere* - where it's done is really dependent on the gear involved and what you're after. I wouldn't be so quick to jump on the "this costs more its always better no matter what because it costs more" bandwagon though - high end sound cards (like the Creative) have top-shelf DACs and output sections, and I would be surprised if it isn't using comparable or better components than the Yamaha. That said, differences between DACs tend to be extremely subtle (if even discernible in normal listening), so I wouldn't get too wrapped up in that either.

- Running the DTS: Interactive package to convert stereo music to a 5.1 output, and then relying on the Yamaha's DSP to mix that up to 7.1 is certainly not likely to win anyone's favor as being "untouched" or "unadulterated" - a lot of processing is going on for that signal to be output on a 7.1 speaker system. That doesn't mean you can't like how it sounds, but it's certainly not native reproduction by any means. You shouldn't lose anything with either approach though - you're inputting the same signal, and just changing how it is being output at runtime.

ok,sorry for my writing!
you said,there are many ways to connect these two components,there are only the ways listed by me,plus dolby digital,but from what I know,dolby digital is even more compressed!
is there a difference in titanium hd and zxr when speaking of dts and optical out???I have used 3 or 4 creative sound cards with optical out,and every one of them seem better than the previous,from what I can remember.
from what I see,both of them are using Burr Brown dac's,but can't find the info on what Burr Brown model is used on the yamaha!still,the yamaha amp is more complex than a sound card!
my goal is to send the purest audio signal to the yamaha whit the creative titanium hd,or with onother card,if there's something better out there.maybe changing the stock opamp's will bring me better audio quality!
from what I remember,my first creative card had analog outputs,not rca,but 3x3.5 jack and my other amp had multi ch input.
since you know more than I do,what would you do,and how would you use what I have,or what would you change?thank you!
So,is there something better out there for optical (xonar,auzentech),than titanium hd?is there something better with analog out than titanium hd?

 

[obobskivich]

you said,there are many ways to connect these two components,there are only the ways listed by me,plus dolby digital,

Hence, "many ways" - there isn't just a singular way to plug everything together.

but from what I know,dolby digital is even more compressed!

Dolby Digital uses a somewhat smaller bitpool than DTS, but you can't compare Dolby and DTS bitrates to mp3 or similar bitrates, because the encoders are much more sophisticated in what they're doing.

is there a difference in titanium hd and zxr when speaking of dts and optical out???I have used 3 or 4 creative sound cards with optical out,and every one of them seem better than the previous,from what I can remember.

There should be no difference apart from the processing features that a given card can apply - the Titanium has CMSS with the X-Fi proprietary extensions (that almost nothing uses), while the ZxR has SBX. But both support the DTS: Interactive package.

from what I see,both of them are using Burr Brown dac's,but can't find the info on what Burr Brown model is used on the yamaha!still,the yamaha amp is more complex than a sound card!

Complexity doesn't necessarily mean quality. The Yamaha has a lot more "stuff" going on - this isn't to say it is bad, just that I wouldn't expect it to be across-the-board superior to a high end soundcard. The ZxR (and iirc Titanium HD) use TOTL DACs, the Yamaha may or may not - like you said, it's more complex, and they may have had to cut down some parts in order to get a certain price point or whatever other goal.

my goal is to send the purest audio signal to the yamaha whit the creative titanium hd,or with onother card,if there's something better out there.maybe changing the stock opamp's will bring me better audio quality!

Changing the opamps will do nothing for the digital out. If your goal is "purity" (which is, by itself, impossible to quantify) then the TOSlink connection sending out bitperfect (or as close as you can realistically get) PCM is probably the best choice. However this assumes the Yamaha is the best place for this signal to be decoded and processed - it may or may not be.

from what I remember,my first creative card had analog outputs,not rca,but 3x3.5 jack and my other amp had multi ch input.

The X-Fi should have multi-ch out as well, but I don't know if that specific Yamaha has multi-ch input. Multi-ch analog would be more ideal since there isn't an added compression process to get an AC-3 or DTS bitstream, but depending on the material you're playing back on the PC, that AC-3 or DTS bitstream may not be a problem at all (e.g. if you're playing a DVD that's equivalent to what the DVD already has - just bitstream the DVD's digital audio).

since you know more than I do,what would you do,and how would you use what I have,or what would you change?thank you!
So,is there something better out there for optical (xonar,auzentech),than titanium hd?is there something better with analog out than titanium hd?

I would probably go with TOSlink - it will eliminate any potential ground loops between the PC and receiver (it doesn't sound like you have one but it never hurts to be safe), it can send out a high quality digital signal, and you can engage Dolby Digital Live or DTS: Interactive when you want 5.1 from a non-native source (e.g. for gaming) which analog stereo wouldn't allow. Replacing the card I'd only consider if it is malfunctioning - it's no slouch, as soundcards go, and sounds like its working.

Side note: Auzentech is defunct and their products are not receiving driver updates as a result. I'd pass on them.

 

[shagrathborgir]

thank you!First of all,I use my sound card for music only,no gaming,no movies!70% of that is in flac format!The yamaha a730,cost 700 euros,it is aventage series and it has better components than the rx-v series.yamaha receivers are well known and every year awarded for the best receiver in this or that price range!my older yamaha receiver had milti ch input,but it seems that now,only the expensive ones have that.for example,the 830 does not have and the first one that have multi ch input is a1030,so the 3rd one on it's range.still,creative doesn't make multi ch out so we'll have to pass that!
At the moment I'm using TOSlink with dts!
"PCM is probably the best choice." well,pcm also bypass the sound card dac's and it was the worst audio in testing!
I know that changing the opamps is only for analog,but I found this:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/sound-blaster-x-fi-titanium-hd-review,11.html
and when I'll have some money for this,maybe I'll try,just to see how analog,which uses the entire sound card,will sound with better components!
So,for the moment,there's no better option than crative titanium hd and optical out!

 

[Waro]

Hello guys, I've read that the strong amplifier of the SoundBlaster Z can't be configured for low impedance headphones. My question is if it's possible to connect low impedance headphones to the output for active 2.1 sound systems to get an acceptable, not too loud volume out of the headphones?

 

[PurpleAngel]

  Hello guys, I've read that the strong amplifier of the Sound Blaster Z can't be configured for low impedance headphones. My question is if it's possible to connect low impedance headphones to the output for active 2.1 sound systems to get an acceptable, not too loud volume out of the headphones?

 
Chances are if you connect a low impedance headphone to the SB-Z's headphone jack, you might get a bloated (louder, less detailed) bass.
I plugged my 40-Ohm ATH-A900X headphones into a SB-Z and the sound quality was still decent.
 
Not sure how the active 2.1 speakers setup has anything to do with headphones?
Do you mean connect the headphone directly to a 2.1 speaker setup's headphone jack and the 2.1 is connected to the SB-Z?
Chances are the SB-Z's headphone jack is better to use, over the 2.1 setups headphone jack.
 
The SB-Z's headphone jack has a 22-Ohm output impedance.
Chances are the 2.1 computer speaker set has a headphone jack with an even higher output impedance.
 
Hopefully you disabled the motherboard's on-board audio, in the BIOS, when you installed the SB-Z.

 

[Waro]

I thought one could maybe connect the headphone to the 3,5 mm jack next to the headphone jack, that's meant for active 2.1 systems. This output shouldn't get the massive 600 Ohm amplification.
 
Is the external controller of the Zx able to control the volume independently from Windows, or does it change the Windows volume? That could be an additional way of lowering the volume for low impedance headphones.
 
Quote:

 
Hopefully you disabled the motherboard's on-board audio, in the BIOS, when you installed the SB-Z.

 
I didn't buy it, but maybe will.
 
I would use it with Sennheiser PC 360 or Sennheiser G4ME ONE, does anyone have experiences with it? Is it too loud?

 

[paulguru]

I bought AD700X
 
plugged to 40ohm output ZXR was a disaster !!!
4% volume on "normal gain" mode and sometimes its still too high

 

[PurpleAngel]

 
I thought one could maybe connect the headphone to the 3,5 mm jack next to the headphone jack, that's meant for active 2.1 systems. This output shouldn't get the massive 600 Ohm amplification.
Is the external controller of the Zx able to control the volume independently from Windows, or does it change the Windows volume? That could be an additional way of lowering the volume for low impedance headphones.
I didn't buy it, but maybe will.
I would use it with Sennheiser PC 360 or Sennheiser G4ME ONE, does anyone have experiences with it? Is it too loud?

 
The SB-Z's headphone jack does not just output "600-Ohm" amplification.
The voltage output is that ever you set the volume controls to.
I test the SB-Z with headphones from 32-Ohm to 600-Ohm, so using 50-Ohm Sennheiser headphones will not be a problem.
So if you decide to set all the volume controls to max, using lower impedance (Ohm) headphones, chances are you would damage your ear drums, before damaging the diaphragms in the headphones.
 
The Front Speaker Jack can connect to a 2.0 or 2.1 speaker setup and can somewhat drive headphones
but it's still better to use the dedicated headphone jack, for headphones.
 
The SB-Zx ACM module's volume knob is not directly tied to the Windows volume controls.
 
The Sennheiser HD558 (& HD598) uses the same 50-Ohm driver as the PC360, PC363 & Game Zero headphones.
I believe the G4ME One uses the 150-Ohm driver? (also used in the older HD555, HD595)
 
You might consider buying a used HD558 and used SB-Z.
Retail version of the SB-Z comes with a microphone.

 

[Waro]

Thanks for all the answes!
 
One last thing: Does it lower sound quality to lower the volume with the ACM? I've read that lowering the volume with external parts like this or for example a volume knob directly at the headphone (like the Sennheisers have) can affect sound quality?

 

[PurpleAngel]

  Thanks for all the answes!
 
One last thing: Does it lower sound quality to lower the volume with the ACM? I've read that lowering the volume with external parts like this or for example a volume knob directly at the headphone (like the Sennheisers have) can affect sound quality?

 
I've heard the same thing, the module's effect on sound quality might be minor and might only with certain headphones (maybe a given Ohm range??)
I just think it's better to get the cheaper SB-Z, without the ACM module.

 

[Luckbad]

Regarding the ACM module, I measured into the DBpro with and without the ACM module, and the objective specs were slightly worse with the ACM than straight out the back. However, at max volume on the ACM, it was almost identical--it only seems to impact much if you reduce the volume.
 
Objective Measurements: http://www.basshead.club/measurements/zxr/acm_comparison.html
 
Additionally, for anyone who is interested in a Sound Blaster ZxR, I've had to put mine up for sale because some of my other gear isn't selling and I need to make rent next month.
 
I'm going back to the X-Fi Titanium HD until I can afford a ZxR again.
 
... aaaaaaand the X-Fi Titanium HD is also up for grabs now. Anything that I can sell is going.

 

[obobskivich]

WRT low impedance cans on the Z and ZxR (and let me qualify: I don't have a Z, I have a Recon3D, which is essentially the same thing): I've had no problems with Grado, Audio-Technica, Fostex, Ultrasone, or even my 12-ohm Sony MDR-F1. It is not "too loud" on any of them - I have very usable range on the ACM's pot (at least up to 12 o'clock). The ZxR has a "low gain" mode, and I run the Windows/ZxR control panel (I have them linked) volume at around 65%, and then adjust on the ACM accordingly. On the Z you can't turn things up nearly that high (because the system/driver volume control is all you have). I've never noticed anything deleterious about the ACM (and while I really appreciate seeing RMAA numbers, they mostly confirm that - sure you can say "it affects the signal" but it's to such a miniscule amount), nor other passive volume controls that I've used (like the Sennheiser one, I forget the model # - it isn't horribly expensive and gives you independent L/R sliders).

Some specific points I wanted to respond to:

Chances are if you connect a low impedance headphone to the SB-Z's headphone jack, you might get a bloated (louder, less detailed) bass.

Based on what?

I thought one could maybe connect the headphone to the 3,5 mm jack next to the headphone jack, that's meant for active 2.1 systems. This output shouldn't get the massive 600 Ohm amplification.

Yeah you should be able to do that with easy-to-drive headphones, but don't be surprised if it sounds thin with some cans either. With ATs or Grados I wouldn't expect problems. You will also give up the "Headphone" mode using the front L/R output - whether or not this has any impact on your listening is variable (it won't matter at all for music, it may matter for gaming).

Is the external controller of the Zx able to control the volume independently from Windows, or does it change the Windows volume? That could be an additional way of lowering the volume for low impedance headphones.

No - it's a passive volume control. You will have the Windows volume control, the adjustments in the drivers, the adjustments in given applications, and then that outputs to the ACM. You can set everything in Windows at 100% and then adjust with the ACM, but IME that tends to leave too little room on the control for easy-to-drive cans (low impedance does not always mean easy to drive, just to point that out).

Regarding the ACM module, I measured into the DBpro with and without the ACM module, and the objective specs were slightly worse with the ACM than straight out the back. However, at max volume on the ACM, it was almost identical--it only seems to impact much if you reduce the volume.

Can you provide more information about how you tested this? e.g. what volume/gain setting was the card set to, where on the dial was the ACM for the results you posted, etc

I'm not trying to dispute/refute/whatever your results - just want clarification. Thanks again for doing that - I'm not surprised to see a slight loss (it's just a passive pot), and it's nice to see the loss is slight at that.

 

[Luckbad]

The posted measurement was at -4dB in RMAA (not sure of the Windows volume setting) without ACM.
 
It was also at -4dB in RMAA at 75% pot on the ACM, so the percentage in Windows increased.
 
At 100% volume pot, the ACM measured almost exactly the same as without it.
 
In both cases, almost all of the ratings were "Excellent." 2 were "Very Good" without the ACM, and 3 were "Very Good" with it (Noise Level got 10dB worse, but still at inaudible levels).
 
It's actually pretty remarkable. I couldn't really tell a difference until the measurements injected placebo into my ears.

 

[PurpleAngel]

:Based on what?

 
The SB-Z's headphone jack has a 22-Ohm output impedance, so there is a slight chance any lower impedance headphone plugged into it, might get a bloated bass.
I plugged a lot of low impedance headphones into a SB-Z and they sounded fine to me.
So I like to warn people that there might be a slight chance of an impedance issue with using the SB-Z's headphone jack.
I'm guessing people would not even notice or even have a bloating issue.
Guess I'm just trying to cover myself when advising people about sound cards, cover any minor issue they might have.

 

[obobskivich]

The posted measurement was at -4dB in RMAA (not sure of the Windows volume setting) without ACM.

It was also at -4dB in RMAA at 75% pot on the ACM, so the percentage in Windows increased.

At 100% volume pot, the ACM measured almost exactly the same as without it.

In both cases, almost all of the ratings were "Excellent." 2 were "Very Good" without the ACM, and 3 were "Very Good" with it (Noise Level got 10dB worse, but still at inaudible levels).

It's actually pretty remarkable. I couldn't really tell a difference until the measurements injected placebo into my ears.

Awesome. Thanks for the extra info.

The SB-Z's headphone jack has a 22-Ohm output impedance, so there is a slight chance any lower impedance headphone plugged into it, might get a bloated bass.
I plugged a lot of low impedance headphones into a SB-Z and they sounded fine to me.
So I like to warn people that there might be a slight chance of an impedance issue with using the SB-Z's headphone jack.
I'm guessing people would not even notice or even have a bloating issue.
Guess I'm just trying to cover myself when advising people about sound cards, cover any minor issue they might have.

Output impedance will have an interaction with a transducer's frequency response *if* the transducer is fairly reactive (this is true for both speakers and headphones). So if you take something like a Sennheiser HD 600, changing output impedance will change frequency response (and it impacts bass because that's where the roller-coaster is; on many IEMs it impacts the HF instead). This is true of any amplifier and Zout configuration - the HD 600 will always respond to that, and their sound will change (in some cases pretty dramatically) from amplifier to amplifier. However if you have something that's fairly non-reactive (the hyperbolic extreme is a PM, which looks like a resistor to the amplifier, but something like a Grado or AT is also pretty non-reactive) the FR change in response to changes in Zout will be very minimal (if at all). There isn't a clear-cut "right or wrong" to matching Zout to a load - the IEC specification is for 120ohms, but not everyone targets that (both amp makers and headphone makers). It can also have an arguable effect on the transducer's Q (and subsequent argument about "is that audible?"), but again there isn't a clear-cut "right or wrong" because different designers aim at different targets (so you have some headphones that really are designed on the assumption of being plugged into 120ohm output, and that's "as the designer intended" wrt their FR/voicing), and then after you sort that, arguments about how different people like their sound (in other words, there isn't some sort of "objective truth" of how the system should sound; there are variables that can interact with each other to influence the sound, but that doesn't tell us "this is better than that"). None of this adds up to "higher output impedance = a bloated bass" (and what exactly are we specifying as "bloated"?) though, especially because not all loads will respond in the same way. Nor does it mean "higher output impedance = can't be used with low nominal impedance"; that's (amplifier) marketing run amok.

This isn't saying "it makes no difference" either - it *may* make a difference, and then the question of preference comes into play. Different people will interpret their experiences differently. So some people may like the result, some may not, and there's certainly a degree of external influence in that discussion where "it increased the bass [in a specific situation]" becomes "it makes the bass bloated everywhere" can start to make sense. But I think that's too broad of a generalization for all situations - it really depends on the specific equipment as to what can be expected, but ultimately the listener has to be the judge of whether or not the end-result sounds good or bad to them.

** I have edited this post a few times for clarity and to add information **