[gaboo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eagle_Driver This assumes that you're using a 16/44.1 audio file and having the Audigy resample that to 16/48. And sure, it doesn't do that resampling right. And even 16/48 files that aren't resampled will sound rather mediocre on the Audigys due to the fact that they roll off the highs quite noticeably.

I'm not sure how to read this. For 16/44.1 that is an understatement. The resampling transforms the high frequency information in lower frequency distortion. The famous udial example shows this by exaggerating the high frequency component and the "aliens" can be heard.

For 16/48 & 16/44.1 there is also a driver problem with the Creative drivers, at least on my Audigy 2. I'm not sure exactly what happens, but I get "tubby" sound, and a collapsed soundstage. There is a 15 & 1/2 bits precision bug in the 10K2 DSP. It can be corrected with DSP snippet. The Kx drivers do this. I don't know about the Creative ones. When the bug is corrected, the 16/48 signal should pass unmolested. I didn't use the Kx drivers, so I cannot say if that's the only issue at 16/48. It is also possible that the Creative drivers themselves have a bug.

The situation is bit complicated to put in one sentence, so here is my A2 "effect" matrix:

bits/rate aliens tubby
16/44 yes yes
16/48 no yes
16/96 no no
24/44 yes no
24/48 no no
24/96 no no

I can ABX both the aliens and tubby effects (I get 7/7 on each). I prefer to use 24/48 on the Creative drivers, because it is easier on the CPU.

Quote:

The result? The Audigy2's only sound good with native 24/96 audio files (or lesser files resampled in software to 24/96) - and only if all DSP effects (EQ, EAX, speaker positioning) are disabled.

24/96 is not the only magic bullet, but it is one of them.

EDIT: I forgot to say this. The "tubby" effect is *much* worse than the "aliens" one. It is instantly obvious with almost any music, the "aliens" require special samples to be heard well.

Quote:

The AV-710 may use 24/96 - but only when used in stereo-only mode. If you have a 4.1, 5.1 or 7.1 setup, then you'll be limited to 16/48 maximum with that card. If anything, the DAC used for multichannel mode is even worse than the one on the Audigys. Thus, if you want full 24/96 support in multichannel mode, then you'll have to spend more money. Oh, by the way, it's very disappointing that the new Audigy4 Pro still lacks native hardware support for 16/44.1. 16/44.1 files still get resampled to 16/48 in hardware. And you'll still have to spring for the most expensive version of that card just to get full ASIO 2.0 support at 24/96; otherwise, cheaper versions of that card lack full ASIO 2.0 compliance by supporting ASIO output only at 16/48.

Yeah, it looks like anyone buying the Audigy 4 will still need another card for music. On a side note: my TBSC works fine in the same box with the 1212m, but it causes instant BSOD on boot on the box with A2. I don't even get to install the drivers. If anyone here still believes the EMU drivers are on the same level with the Creative consumer one's, my answer is NOT in my box.

EDIT: I forgot to say this. The "tubby" effect is *much* worse than the "aliens" one. It is instantly obvious with almost any music, the "aliens" require special samples to heard well.

 

[Talonz]

Rumor has it that the new PCI-E card will be called the Sound Blaster Zenith, and it will be a complete redesign.

 

[juni0r]

I consider myself as a pretty reliable source for gaming (I've competed and won a $2000 CDN Day of Defeat tournament and I work with/for Team 3D, arguably the model for professional gaming teams) and I can say that without a doubt headphones are much more important for gaming. I have used Audigys without EAX and the difference is minimal in positioning. Any headphone with a good soundstage (i.e. HD 590 or HD 555/595) blows away speakers, and the only way that headphones even fall slightly short of realistic is in direct frontal positioning which is not even a problem considering that you have visual cues for frontal positioning. 7.1 Speakers with EAX may be brilliant for flat directional positioning but they are completely inadequate for depth perception and vertical positioning and therefore fall far short in the grand scheme of gaming compared to headphones.

 

[gaboo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by juni0r I consider myself as a pretty reliable source for gaming (I've competed and won a $2000 CDN Day of Defeat tournament and I work with/for Team 3D, arguably the model for professional gaming teams) and I can say that without a doubt headphones are much more important for gaming. I have used Audigys without EAX and the difference is minimal in positioning.

IMO EAX does not add much if anything to sound positioning that isn't already provided by Direct Sound 3D (DS3D). EAX is an extension that adds environmental effects, e.g. fancy reverbs. From what I understand on this issue the EAX effects are "fake", not simulated from the sound path, i.e. the reflected sound waves are not calculated from the source though the reflecting path, and added at the destination, but the effects are simply applied at the source and directly propagated to the destination. If anyone knows more about this, please enlighten us.

Quote:

Any headphone with a good soundstage (i.e. HD 590 or HD 555/595) blows away speakers, and the only way that headphones even fall slightly short of realistic is in direct frontal positioning which is not even a problem considering that you have visual cues for frontal positioning. 7.1 Speakers with EAX may be brilliant for flat directional positioning but they are completely inadequate for depth perception and vertical positioning and therefore fall far short in the grand scheme of gaming compared to headphones.

The fokes at Aureal knew this too well. The Vortex 2 chip has a dedicated are of the silicon for doing 3D calculations related to the human head, thus directly applicable to headphones: HRTF (Head Related Transfer Function), ITD (Interaural Time Difference) and ILD (Interaural Level Difference). Too bad Creative bought the technology only bury it. They also bought Sensaura, which has similar tech, but I don’t think there is any hardware implementation, it is all done in software. The Sensaura website is still up, maybe Creative is going to do something useful with it, but I’m setting my hopes too high.

 

[juni0r]

Aureal A3D. Something so damn good that it was barred from many amateur and pro gaming leagues (at least in Half-Life related games)...haha

 

[gaboo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by juni0r Aureal A3D. Something so damn good that it was barred from many amateur and pro gaming leagues (at least in Half-Life related games)...haha

Are you serious? I'm not following the pro gaming "scene".

 

[Enverxis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imyourzero I'm not refuting your statement, but I don't see how it's possible. With a 7.1 surround setup, you have 7 different locations from where the sound of an enemy can originate. With headphones, you only have 2 (left and right). I understand how headphones can do *some* positioning (esp. the ones with a nice soundstage) but I don't understand how headphones can be completely accurate when trying to convey to the user that a sound is in front of, behind, above, or below them. I just don't see how they would be able to do 3D sound as well as a surround speaker setup (where the entire purpose of multiple speakers is better positioning and sound location accuracy).

alot of it is different sounds in the game, ie in Call of Duty, even with Stereo headphones plugged into an Audigy running EAX 3 you get a really good idea of where the enemy is because of all the different sounds that are made from different surfaces (grass, wood, metal) and such. Whereas in say CS theres only 2 noises (ground and water). My Speedlink Medusa's produce amazing positioning in Call of Duty that I know where the enemies are all the time, giving me a nice little advantage ... plus im a crack shot with the MP44

.
Generally, coming from experience when you hear a sound you generally swish around a bit to see where which direction the sound trails from, and then you determine where the enemy is, alot of calculation for an FPS gamer but you get it done in less than half a second so theres not much to worry about, thats why Stereo Headphones prove effective for gaming.

 

[Asmo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enverxis alot of it is different sounds in the game, ie in Call of Duty, even with Stereo headphones plugged into an Audigy running EAX 3 you get a really good idea of where the enemy is because of all the different sounds that are made from different surfaces (grass, wood, metal) and such. Whereas in say CS theres only 2 noises (ground and water). My Speedlink Medusa's produce amazing positioning in Call of Duty that I know where the enemies are all the time, giving me a nice little advantage ... plus im a crack shot with the MP44 . Generally, coming from experience when you hear a sound you generally swish around a bit to see where which direction the sound trails from, and then you determine where the enemy is, alot of calculation for an FPS gamer but you get it done in less than half a second so theres not much to worry about, thats why Stereo Headphones prove effective for gaming.

I've always prefered headphones over surround sound for accurate positioning in online-gaming also. A 5.1 setup is not that bad, but I always found I had to have the volume up very high to be able to hear every small detail (footsteps, a gun re-loading, etc) with headphones, I get that extra detail without excessive volume.

 

[juni0r]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gaboo Are you serious? I'm not following the pro gaming "scene".

Apparently, in Half-Life engine games, A3D set in certain ways can make you hear farther than people who don't use it: double the distance by default, the size of the whole map when tweaked.

 

[Chastity]

Greetings and salutations to everyone.

Some may know me as Chastity over of 3DSS, and I just caught this thread, while I'm reviewing the Audigy4 Pro as I type. I think you'll be surprised what this card can do. In a nutshell, think of it as a cross between the A2ZS and the 1820M. When you look at the board, you can tell EMU did the design work, especially with the components. And yes, they use the same DACs as the 1212M / 1820M, the CS4398. In fact it uses 4 of them for 8 channels, so no ghey hi quality fronts and crappy rears and such.

I posted a pic of the DACs over in the Audigy section of the forum, and if you like, I can answer some questions here as well. I also listed the DSP version over there too.

I'll be working on our review over the 4 day weekend, so feel free to list things you'd like see tested and/or reviewed. No, I didn't RMAA it yet, that's tomorrow. But I can tell you from just listening to them, the VIA Envy24 cards are in trouble. (if you can pay the pricetag).

Chastity
Moderator - 3DSS.com

 

[Mr.Radar]

Creative may finally have gotten something right, and made the ultimate card for everyone (except A3D fans). Do you have an EMU 0404 or 1212m to compare it to? And, most importantly, can you measure if it is bit perfect (all it requires is a home theater recevier with digital in)?

 

[dallasstar]

It's still crap:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1729928,00.asp

 

[Chastity]

Radar: The SPDIF can be set to 48, 96, or 44.1 stereo, so you can output 44.1 DTS Audio (either .wav or .dts). Too bad it isn't auto-detecting, but at least you can do it. I'll confirm it tomorrow. (I must sleep, I have to work tomorrow)

Dallasstar: I am surprised at that review. He must have spent a whole 5 minutes with the card on a pair of Z-560s.

The point is, I noticed right off the bat that it sounded as good when I am using my Soundstorm to my Pioneer VSX-D811S, which uses AKM4586 DACs. I'll do more comparisons later, but I can say that my initial impression is that my Revo 7.1 had been outdone. I was listening to the card on a set of Klipsch 5.1 Ultras (which I am also reviewing, along with the GigaWorks G500). The Pioneer has Quintet IIs on them, which I use as a basis to compare MM units.

Alas, I don't have a 1212M to compare to, but I'll see if something can be arranged. The headphone port is rated 200 mV at 300 Ohm, so it should handle my HD580s decently. Noise is very low, unlike previous Audigys.

More in the review. Time for bed. If you're on Freenode IRC, pop in to #3DSoundSurge, if I'm on.

 

[lan]

If it still resamples, that sucks.

RMAA from extremetech is bad for a modern implementation of 24bit 192khz DAC.

At such a high price, getting the Audigy 4 doesn't make sense gaming wise. You might as well use that money on a faster CPU, more memory, etc.

 

[ixeo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan If it still resamples, that sucks.

word. Chastity, i think thats the first thing you can find out and let us know.. if it does i won't even bother reading the review