[Roller]

Quote:

Where does it say this?

Please show me the light, master. My misguided biased ways have led me astray.

 

[music_man]

i was just wondering if i was actually correct in my statement. it does not matter what card you use if all you are running is toslink to a dac. assuming the card can transmit bit perfect? probably not if people think different toslink cables sound different. than i suppose different cards would sound different to them. what do you guys think is the best card just to run toslink out then?

 

[jackmccabe]

Yes they will al sound the same as they provide bit-perfect output.

 

[music_man]

i'd like to hear someone elses response to my question. mr. mccabe, you are obviously a "science guy" and not an audiophile. i do not wish to mince words with you, you are entitled to your opinion. it just so happens that i am in the boat with most of the folks here and not you. i am guessing to some people it makes a lot of difference. or perhaps it indeed does not. i don't know.

 

[zoso947]

Quote:

Wow you are now just getting plain silly.
All I have asked is that you provide one shred of evidence that there is a difference and you take it as a personal insult and evade my request.

 
http://www.stereophile.com/features/368/index.html

You may skip to page 9.
 

 

[kalston]

Quote:

 By my understanding, it has to do with EAX.  EAX 5.0 supports up to 128 individual sound files at once.  Without EAX support you are limited to openAL processing; which will give the same audio processing performance on any card
 

 
Neither my onboard nor my Xonar support EAX any higher than 2.0, and I wasn't only talking about games using EAX, anyway. Some of them are using OpenAL or some proprietary engine and still exhibit the problem. I don't know exactly where it's coming from, could be drivers for all I know... 
 
In any case, the difference is huge and could probably be shown by simply recording (even using a crap mic) what's coming out of the speakers. 
 
Quote:

 
http://www.stereophile.com/features/368/index.html

You may skip to page 9.
 

"Posted: Nov 1, 1993"
Am I the only who thinks that hardware has evolved quite a bit since then, effectively making this article, interesting maybe, but irrelevant nowadays?

 

[zoso947]

Quote:

"Posted: Nov 1, 1993"
Am I the only who thinks that hardware has evolved quite a bit since then, effectively making this article, interesting maybe, but irrelevant nowadays?

The mechanics of digital audio haven't changed all that much since the Red Book standard was published in 1980.  Advances in things like jitter rejection have come along, but the "ZOMG it's just 1's and 0's people!" philosophy hasn't changed much since then either.
 

 

[Willakan]

As I stated earlier, looking at studies on the audibility of jitter, the amount of jitter emerging from any vaguely competent piece of digital kit is pretty insignificant. (when the lowest amount audible on test with trained and non-trained listeners was 30ns, and that was listening to square waves...and 30ns is a helluvalot of jitter).
 
The Stereophile article is, like much of Stereophile, profoundly unscientific. I'll take peer-reviewed studies on the subject over a few subjectivists with a 'scope.
 
Making out that everyone who refutes differences on the scale that many report (I'm NOT saying that onboard sound is all you need, there is space to expand above that, but not into the $10,000 dollar region) is someone who shouts "ITS JUST ONES AND ZEROS" and then sticks their fingers in their ears is highly misleading.
 
As for the superior positioning people are reporting with X-Fi cards, that can be explained by software differences. The DSPs and number of channels that these support makes them capable of providing improved effects in games. As for music, that is likely just to be the better SNR of such cards, along with a whole other slew of improved specs over onboard.
 
But onboard sound has come on a lot - the sound card fell from grace and became a niche product because onboard audio was beginning to make it obsolete . Are there still advantages to have with soundcards? Yes, especially with very high quality ones such as the Xonar Essence ST/X. Is the best onboard audio still horrible? Nope - although I'd still take a Benchmark over the chip on my motherboard.

 

[tom2011]

if you connect it to digital output you will not hear deference

 

[jackmccabe]

The thing is I have actually performed rigorous testing (with my ears) on multiple dac's with a vast range in price and performance and drawn my conclusion.
You on the other hand provide not a shred of evidence other than because you say so and you come across as rude, unreasonable and ignorant.
I understand it is difficult to question what you think you "know", I myself was a cable, amp and dac believer and after performing several listening tests I became a skeptic of high-end audio.
 
Also I cannot understand why you regard your opinion more highly than scientific measurements and rigorous tests, are you really that arrogant?
I mean what seems more reasonable basing your ideas on tests performed without bias and scientific measurements or believing in something that can't be heard under controlled circumstances or even measured.
 

 

[jackmccabe]

You are the only one I have offended.
Why would I offend any one, is it because I provided my objective view that is backed up by science and results from tests I have performed.
I have actually provided tests and measurements, you have provided nothing, you are clearly a troll and I don't know why I bothered responding.
This will be the last time I respond to your posts.
Thank you.

 

[Mkubota1]

Quote:

"Posted: Nov 1, 1993"
Am I the only who thinks that hardware has evolved quite a bit since then, effectively making this article, interesting maybe, but irrelevant nowadays?

You are not the only one. 

 
The comments (and follow-ups) of the original poster are exactly why it's important to choose our words carefully when describing differences we hear and recommending gear. 
Quote:

Quote:Originally Posted by cuad /img/forum/go_quote.gif

But how do you explain it? I can hear the difference between good and bad headphones, or good and better, hooked up to any card. And I can hear the difference between my laptops noisy onboard and my Realtek ALC889, but I can't hear the difference between my ALC889 and my Titanium HD. Not with highs. Not with lows. Not with positional audio. Nothing.

 
Money spent in some areas makes more of a difference than in other areas.  The difference between a $200 headphone and a $400 one will be much greater than the difference between a $200 DAC and a $400 DAC. That's not to say that the more expensive headphone will necessarily sound better- but you will easily hear some difference.  Diminishing returns comes much earlier on some parts of the chain than on others.  I agree with the original poster- that switching headphones and hearing a difference right then and there is not the same as listening to one thing for a few days, and then switching and maybe hearing some differences.  Also, the material that you are listening to (genre or recording, not format) is critical in hearing differences.  That is partly why one guy might say, "Hell yeah, I hear a difference," and another says, "Not so much."
 
Quote:

What I do now is sometimes I hear something from a song that I think is new. Then, I immediately switch back to my ALC889 and listen for it, but I have always found the same sounds, same tones, same everything. Just last night, I was listening to a CD and I thought it sounded bad so I went to switch my headphones from my onboard to my Titanium HD. To my surprise it was already plugged into the HD.
 
But still, there are a lot more people saying that they hear a difference between sound cards. Where is it coming from?

 
I remember reading an article on CNET's Audiophiliac where Steve Guttenberg talks about reviewing some new piece of equipment and discovering something in a recording that he has never heard before with his older gear.  And then someone commented that, with much cheaper stuff, they've heard what SG says he finally heard.  And unlike what cuad did, SG did not have the honesty to go back to his older gear and see if he really did miss something that the new equipment managed to 'reveal'.
 
 

 

[zoso947]

 
Quote:

 
I'll take peer-reviewed studies on the subject over a few subjectivists with a 'scope.

 
A convenient stance, due to the issue of no such studies existing(comparing a low-quality source with a high-quality one).  "Science" cannot not explain why migraines occur.  And yet they do.  I'm going to go out on a limb and say the area of psychacoustics is considerably less studied.  So in the end we are talking about religion, not science.  The ancient Egyptians didn't understand the Sun, so they called it the eye of Ra.  I can only assume that one day we will better understand the relationship between the ears and brain.  In the meantime, I will decide for myself what I am and am not capable of hearing.
 
 

 

[Roller]

Quote:

 
A convenient stance, due to the issue of no such studies existing(comparing a low-quality source with a high-quality one).  "Science" cannot not explain why migraines occur.  And yet they do.  I'm going to go out on a limb and say the area of psychacoustics is considerably less studied.  So in the end we are talking about religion, not science.  The ancient Egyptians didn't understand the Sun, so they called it the eye of Ra.  I can only assume that one day we will better understand the relationship between the ears and brain.  In the meantime, I will decide for myself what I am and am not capable of hearing.
 

 
Agreed. But be careful because you might have someone falling on you with the whole "science proves that things are this or that way"

 

[zoso947]

 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mkubota1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I remember reading an article on CNET's Audiophiliac where Steve Guttenberg talks about reviewing some new piece of equipment, and then discovering something in a recording that he has never heard before on his older gear.  And then someone commented that, with much cheaper stuff, they've heard what SG says he finally heard.  And unlike what cuad did, SG did not have the honesty to go back to his older gear and see if he really did miss something that the new equipment managed to 'reveal'.
 

Please tell me how to unhear things, because some of the people in my office are really loud and annoying.