3DSS review of Audigy 4

[davvy]

here it is

 

[davvy]

No surprises really. It is basically an Audigy 2 ZS with (much) better DACs. Still resamples 44.1kHz stuff.

Not a great review IMO. Quite rambly and much too positive.

Basically, it has taken Creative over 2 years to produce a card that sounds better than the Revo. And it costs 3 times as much ($299) and still resamples 44.1kHz. How sad is the computer soundcard market ?

All I can do is keep dreaming that their next product (the Zenith, rumoured to be due around March) will deliver what many of us want - a card that is equally good for gaming and music listening.

 

[Soundstorm]

http://www.3dss-forums.com/cgi-bin/w...fpart=all&vc=1

Discussion going on at 3DSS. There's some things not mentioned in the review unfortunately.

Quote:

Originally Posted by master I had a chance listen to A4. While it sound better than A2, but still my ears prefer EMU 0404/1212m over A4. Sadly but true.

No surprise there.

 

[Chastity]

"There's some things not mentioned in the review unfortunately."

sheesh... another person getting on my case about not mentioning that the opamp no longer stresses at over 77% master volume?

 

[wali]

Quote:

Originally Posted by davvy No surprises really. It is basically an Audigy 2 ZS with (much) better DACs. Still resamples 44.1kHz stuff.

Did you read the full review? I thought it in was in simple english.

 

[davvy]

Quote:

Did you read the full review? I thought it in was in simple english.

Thankyou for your question. Yes I did read the review.

Here is the first sentence from the "Technical Overview" section of the review:
Quote:

The heart of the card is the CA10200 ICT DSP, the same one as the A2ZS series, which uses the CA0102-ICT

I stand by what I said. I believe that the review is overly positive, almost to the point of ridiculousness.

I consider the Audigy 4 a cheap, stop-gap measure. Creative were probably embarrassed that two years after the release of the Revo they still didn't have a card that sounded better for music. But rather than do an expensive re-design of the fundamental architecture of the card (which would be expensive) they decided to slap high end DACs on the same old tired core. Even though the overall package is performing well below the potential of the DACs, it finally sounds better than the Revo. What a fantastic achievement - two years after the introduction of the Revo, Creative have released a card that sounds better (for three times the price).

So once again, those of us who like to listen to music as well as play the odd game and forced into a 2 soundcard solution unless we want to make significant compromises.

 

[SDA]

Have you actually heard the card, though? Or are you just basing this on how the Audigy's been in the past or (warning! incoming low blow!) how much you spent on your 1212m?

The review does strike me as quite positive overall, surprisingly so given how the Audigy has been in the past, but I don't have enough data on hand to say with any degree of certainty whether the review is too positive or the Audigy 4 is leaps and bounds ahead of what Creative traditionally offer in their consumer-class cards.

I will also say that it's going to be a PITA to get the amount of data that I'd like. Out of the people who don't mind spending that much on a sound card, few will have a good sound setup to do impressions with, fewer will have an E-MU on hand to make the comparison with, and fewer still will be completely unbiased by their impressions of the Audigy line. If you don't get what I mean with that last part, I'll restate it: if there are no or insignificant differences between the two, the placebo effect will likely grab hold of an awful lot of people. Since it's much easier to believe that the Audigy 4 Pro sucks than it is to believe that it's competitive with high-end sources, a lot of people will probably adopt this view even if only a few people who've made the comparison say the A4 is worse.

Maybe I should get one myself. I probably won't be satisfied otherwise. On the other hand, why do I care to begin with if I'm not really willing to spend more than $100 on a sound card?

 

[davvy]

Quote:

Have you actually heard the card, though? Or are you just basing this on how the Audigy's been in the past or (warning! incoming low blow!) how much you spent on your 1212m?

No I haven't actually heard the card. I do own both the Audigy 2 and the EMU 1212m. I have heard the opinions of others that the Audigy 4 doesn't measure up to the EMU in sound quality. Also the published specs and the measured RMAA results of the Audigy 4 are considerably inferior to the EMU.

In terms of cost, you could buy an EMU 1212m and an Audigy 2 for less than the price of an Audigy 4. That would give you a solution that was considerably better for 2-channel music listening and virtually as good for gaming. The only people that the Audigy 4 might represent a reasonable purchase for would be those who want high-quality multichannel sound for DVDs or DVD-audio (because the 44.1kHz resampling issues wouldn't apply) or people who for some reason need the breakout box.

I still maintain that the Audigy 4 is a fundamentally flawed attempt to paper over deficits in the core architecture by using expensive DACs. Hopefully the upcoming Zenith will be based on a fundamentally new architecture (while retaining some of the high-end components used in the A4) and will consign the Audigy 4 to its rightful place in the trash can.

 

[Soundstorm]

I would bet the Zenith will not use 4 CS4398 for its DAC. Premium quality DACs costs $$$ and 4 CS4398 alone would be $20+ in cost. It will probably still sound worse than the A4P or any EMU card.

 

[SDA]

NOTE: I'm not defending the Audigy 4. I've never even heard the thing. I'm merely, ehm, attacking attackers, I suppose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by davvy No I haven't actually heard the card. I do own both the Audigy 2 and the EMU 1212m. I have heard the opinions of others that the Audigy 4 doesn't measure up to the EMU in sound quality. Also the published specs and the measured RMAA results of the Audigy 4 are considerably inferior to the EMU.

Specifications mean nothing in this context (do you buy sound cards based on SNR?), and others' opinions can easily be explained by what I said.


Quote:

In terms of cost, you could buy an EMU 1212m and an Audigy 2 for less than the price of an Audigy 4. That would give you a solution that was considerably better for 2-channel music listening and virtually as good for gaming. The only people that the Audigy 4 might represent a reasonable purchase for would be those who want high-quality multichannel sound for DVDs or DVD-audio (because the 44.1kHz resampling issues wouldn't apply) or people who for some reason need the breakout box.

This is true. However, there's also the fact that a 1212m + Audigy 2 solution isn't exactly plug-and-play; there are a lot of pitfalls to be avoided, and I can see people paying a few extra bucks just not to deal with driver issues. Also, the combination of the two takes up three PCI slots. This could be an issue for those with SFF systems, Micro-ATX boards, or a lot of PCI cards.


Quote:

I still maintain that the Audigy 4 is a fundamentally flawed attempt to paper over deficits in the core architecture by using expensive DACs. Hopefully the upcoming Zenith will be based on a fundamentally new architecture (while retaining some of the high-end components used in the A4) and will consign the Audigy 4 to its rightful place in the trash can.

I'm sure you do maintain that. You're welcome to your opinion. I just find it amusing when people develop strong opinions about stuff they have no personal experience with.

By the way, you do realize that the 1212m is based on EMU10k1 too, right?

 

[davvy]

Quote:

I just find it amusing when people develop strong opinions about stuff they have no personal experience with.

I don't believe that personal experience is necessary in order to develop a strong opinion. To take an extreme example, I have no personal experience of nuclear weapons , but based on the observations and measurements of others I believe strongly that they are a bad thing.
Quote:

Specifications mean nothing in this context

I agree that specifications have to be taken with a grain of salt. This does not mean that they mean "nothing".
Quote:

This could be an issue for those with SFF systems

Where will the people with SFF systems put the breakout box of the A4 ?
Quote:

I would bet the Zenith will not use 4 CS4398 for its DAC. Premium quality DACs costs $$$ and 4 CS4398 alone would be $20+ in cost. It will probably still sound worse than the A4P or any EMU card.

You may be right. What I am (very optimistically) hoping for is that they will have a standard version priced at around $100 and a "pro" version priced at maybe $200 which will have the same DACs as the A4. There really is no reason that they can't produce a card for around that price that compares with at least the EMU 0404 (but has multichannel and gaming features).

 

[SDA]

Quote:

I don't believe that personal experience is necessary in order to develop a strong opinion. To take an extreme example, I have no personal experience of nuclear weapons , but based on the observations and measurements of others I believe strongly that they are a bad thing.

There are many, many excellent reasons that nuclear weapons are "bad things." You also won't find anyone arguing that they don't actually do anything. Let's be honest here: that extreme example was so extreme that it's utterly irrelevant.

With audio, especially where people disagree on something, personal experience IS necessary to develop an opinion as strong as yours. If one person with experience with both says X sounds as good as Y, and another says that that's not true, who are you to believe? You could say that the side with more proponents with actual experience is the one to believe, but if people will have an innate bias against X for some reason then you can't go by numbers alone.


Quote:

I agree that specifications have to be taken with a grain of salt. This does not mean that they mean "nothing".

They mean nothing in this context. And I repeat: do you buy sound cards by SNR? Do you choose op-amps by distortion or frequency response measurements?


Quote:

Where will the people with SFF systems put the breakout box of the A4

Outside the computer, if they feel like it. Ugliness certainly beats impossibility.

 

[Erukian]

Ok kiddies, settle down.

Back on topic. I own the E-MU 0404, AND the Audigy 2 ZS.

I can tell you, with absolute certianty that the 0404 beats the A2 in every aspect of sound except in games and 5.1 systems. and that's the only exception.

If the audigy 4 has the EMU 1212 dac's then it's a DAMN good card. Even w/ resampling, games/movies/music will sound great. AND with SSRC or PPHS resamplers (like chas suggested you use in the review) you get near e-mu class audio. With the 1212 dac on all 7.1 outputs, that's a friggin sweet deal. It's easy to say "oh it resamples like the sb-live" but FB2k's resampler proved that you can cover up that cut with a bandaid. Cheap solution but it works.

Plus, it's STILL the only card that can playback encrypted DVD-A and on 1212 DAC playing back non-resampled 24/192 stereo to your amp > cans has got to sound GREAT. It sounds great on my A2, but on the 1212 dac, it has to be mind blowing w/ my SR-80/HD-580's.

This card is not overpriced, it's for people who want the best blend between games/movies/music. Am I being overly positive? nope, i'm just trying to be the yang your your audigy ying. Sometimes i swear people in here bash the Audigy just to feel better about buying an EMU or 710 or whatever. Sure creative is a company that bought out most of it's competition, and i still hate them for buying Aureal (i loved my aureal 2). But bashing them on the SOLE premise that the Audigy resamples and that their an evil company doesnt work anymore, at least not for me.

 

[Asmo]

I just hope some of the credited people around here do a review for us.

 

[mEtal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by davvy In terms of cost, you could buy an EMU 1212m and an Audigy 2 for less than the price of an Audigy 4. That would give you a solution that was considerably better for 2-channel music listening and virtually as good for gaming. The only people that the Audigy 4 might represent a reasonable purchase for would be those who want high-quality multichannel sound for DVDs or DVD-audio (because the 44.1kHz resampling issues wouldn't apply) or people who for some reason need the breakout box.

OK, despite the many rambling points you have listed, I'll respond to this one. Remember that the A4 does come with a breakout box, so regardless if it is useful at all, it does justify the $250 price tag. To be fair in comparison to the EMU cards, we'd have to look at the 1820, which is $400! Not only that, the A4 has multichannel outputs and better gaming capability. That's not to say that the A4 can match the 1820's quality stereo outputs (or inputs), but these are different markets and with the A4 using atleast the same DAC's for it's multichannel outputs it's a pretty decent buy.

BTW, found it pretty cool that the reviewer also had a Headroom Supreme and Sennheiser HD580 on hand for the review...first time I've seen quality headphone equipment in a consumer soundcard review!