[Corak]

dparrish,

Thanks for the cable hint. I muted CD-Audio already but I was planing to remove the cable anyway. I just removed the CD-Audio cable and I also disconnected the Firewire port from the Audigy. I will need this slot for the new yet to come card anyway.
I'm not good with audiophile terms yet, but the signal certainly didn't get worse.

The hissing however didn't change at maxed volumes.

I didn't make up the praise of the analogue outs. I found a praise in the AVS forum but I'm having a hard time refetching it. Will add link when I find it again.

The Audigy certainly doesn't sound too bad to me. I have no popping, crackling problems or any incompatibilities whatsoever. Everything works flawlessly you might say.
But I'm still hoping for more...
Everyone ear's are different so maybe I hear more differences. If it's money-back nothing can go possibly wrong.

Other interesting stuff on AVS / elsewhere:

Audigy vs. Audiophile 2496
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...audio+analogue
[Interesting post from (soundfx) on Delta 410 vs. Audiophile 2496]
http://www.midiman.net/products/m-audio/delta410.php
This seems to be the former "Delta Theater". Might be an interesting option instead of the A2496. I have yet to research what advantages this will bring compared to pure software decoding with WinDVD, PowerDVD. If I only save CPU time by this it's not worth it.

Audio Lee:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...audio+analogue
Paul_Seng:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...alog+out+clean
(No difference Audigy / Audiophile 2496, but probably no good output)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...e&pagenumber=2
(about Delta Theater)

Difference Audigy vs. Audiophile 2496
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e....de%26rnum%3D1

Someone (Rickd) who thinks the Audiophile 2496 is better than the Arcam DVD player
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...alog+out+clean

gemini8026:
http://headwize.powerpill.org/ubb/sh...ophile;audigy;
[Audigy vs. Audiophile 2496, is in HUGE favor of the A2496]

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...light=dio+2448
[shows that the Dio2448 is a very BAD choice]

Ken: Thanks for your input on this also!

Oh well this is a tough choice. The RME Digi96/8 PRO is also still very interesting. Will need more info on this one though.

 

[markl]

"quote: that means even if you have no particular use for SACD at the moment, you'll still get better Redbook CD performance off an SACDP.

Sorry but this is utter hogwash. In my own experience I've found dedicated CD players to sound significantly better on Redbook than similarly priced SACD players."

Notice that I said "in general". Yes there are exceptions to the rule. But why do people spend outrageous amounts on external DACs? Because those DACs have better DA convereters that are designed to a higher standard than regular CDPs. An SACDP has better DACs than a CDP in order to be able to play back SACDs. This has benefits for the playback of regular Redbook CDs. I stand behind my statement that *in general* a SACDP will outperform a *comparably-priced* CDP on regular old CDs. Sure there are exceptions to this rule...

But ask yourself this question-- who will buy your CD-only player in 2 years time? Answer: no-one. If you are in the market for a CDP, you are best served by buying into SACD or DVD-A.

markl

 

[aos]

Quote:

Originally posted by SumB Sorry but this is utter hogwash. In my own experience I've found dedicated CD players to sound significantly better on Redbook than similarly priced SACD players.

I don't think a general conclusion can be made from anecdotal evidence. However, from my casual browsing of the DAC chip datasheets, one can see that some of the cheaper ones don't have DSD and PCM parameters in the same caliber. Or rather, if the DSD playback is so much below the best chips, Redbook slides down by similar amount. So in some models it cannot match sound quality of a decent dedicated player in PCM mode, but can do it in SACD mode.

But higher end chips don't follow that pattern and should have excellent sound both ways.

 

[Vertigo-1]

Quote:

Notice that I said "in general". Yes there are exceptions to the rule. But why do people spend outrageous amounts on external DACs? Because those DACs have better DA convereters that are designed to a higher standard than regular CDPs. An SACDP has better DACs than a CDP in order to be able to play back SACDs. This has benefits for the playback of regular Redbook CDs. I stand behind my statement that *in general* a SACDP will outperform a *comparably-priced* CDP on regular old CDs. Sure there are exceptions to this rule...

Well then, one could very well just simply go and buy one of these "exceptions" now, couldn't they?

Quote:

But ask yourself this question-- who will buy your CD-only player in 2 years time? Answer: no-one. If you are in the market for a CDP, you are best served by buying into SACD or DVD-A.

I don't think I'd ever base my electronics purchases over what will happen in the future, and especially not on SACD's immediate future. Besides a good player would be something I'd settle in with for quite a while. Unless one just has to run with the latest and greatest, a CDP's lifespan isn't something I'd worry about. It's not as if the next wave of players is suddenly going to render my CDP useless. The player can still play good music well into the future. Mechanical issues aside, whether or not I care to spend any more money in the future for supposed improvements is the question. I want immediate sound quality improvements, not "how many formats can the thing support".

I've already had my taste of SACDs. I'll come back to it when 50% or more of the CDs on shelves out there today are replaced by hybrid SACDs. And that's certainly going to take more than 2 years. Or when Sony releases a SACD player who's redbook playback completely smokes everything below and at its price range.

I don't know what game Sony is trying to play really with SACDs. On one hand they go and try to turn every CD into hybrid SACDs. On the other hand they go and discontinue every single SACD player they have in existence in the U.S. except for the XA777ES, and even that player seems to be headed towards extinction.

 

[lini]

corak: Maybe you should go a different route. That your Audigy shows a considerable amount of hiss is caused by hf/rf interference inside the computer. So adding an external dac or a usb sound device (maybe the new Xitel HiFi-Link? for 50 US$ it seems worth a try...) would make more sense to me. As far as I know there shouldn't be a problem with having both the Audigy and a usb sound device installed. Another thing: As far as I know, there is no sacd-compatible sound card, yet. For now, only a few dvd-a-compatible cards have been released...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

[Corak]

Quote:

Originally posted by lini corak: Maybe you should go a different route. That your Audigy shows a considerable amount of hiss is caused by hf/rf interference inside the computer. So adding an external dac or a usb sound device (maybe the new Xitel HiFi-Link? for 50 US$ it seems worth a try...) would make more sense to me. As far as I know there shouldn't be a problem with having both the Audigy and a usb sound device installed. Another thing: As far as I know, there is no sacd-compatible sound card, yet. For now, only a few dvd-a-compatible cards have been released... Greetings from Munich! Manfred / lini

I'm also in Munich btw. so best greetings back to you lini.

Actually the hissing isn't that bad that it really bothers me. I only hear it as mentioned when I turn up the volume a lot. In 99.9% of all recordings I will be well below the limit I found (software master 75%, creek obh-11 at 2 o'clock) to avoid any hissing.
I assume when I am below this setting there should be no audible negative impact on audio?!

This Xitel HifFi-Link sure looks very elegant.
It's DAC doesn't seem to beat an Audiophile2496 though.
http://headwize.powerpill.org/ubb/sh...45&srch=xitel;
I also don't like the fact that they are trying to hide specs.

I guess it will take quite a while (~ 2 years) before SACD or DVD-A really has serious impact so it's probably not worth bothering about it too much in this point of time anyway.

I'm really looking for a versatile solution. I want to leverage the new card also for Home Theater (DVD) purposes. I can be sure this will work with any M-Audio product. That's a big plus.

I just experimented with the lossless compression formats today. FLAC (open source) with the Monkey Audio GUI is really nice. Highly recommended

 

[markjia]

Corak,

I have the Audiophile 2496 + Art DI/O and a Soundblaster Live, and I'd say the difference btw the 2496 and Live is VERY drastic, and well worth it (even without the Art DI/O).

But if you're willing to spend $500, you might want to consider upgrading your headphone amp and get an Art DI/O. The Creek is a decent amp, but could be improved upon. The MG Head OTL would be a good choice. You could also add an Art DI/O to improve the sound from the Audigy.

This way, if you decide to get a seperate CDP, than you could still use the system. You could also add the Audiophile 2496 at a later date.

The source is very important, but so is the amp (more so in my opinion). You have a pretty good set of headphones, and you should better exploit them with a better amp.

 

[Ricky]

The Audiophile 2496 is a serious audio card, the Audigy is still a gaming card, better that others, but still a consumer gaming card.

The Audigy resamples everything to 48 KHz, even if you use its digital outputs. The Audigy is not a real 24/96 card, internally it still works at 16/48. Its drivers are quite crappy. From an audio quality point of view, the cheaper Turtle Beach Santa Cruz performs similarly or even better.

The Audiophile is a real 24/96 card, doesn't resample audio, locks to external SPDIF signals, and is IMO comparable to many CDPs.

Will you hear an audible improvement over the Audigy? I don't know, only you can tell. But its undoubtfully a quite better card.

 

[markl]

but Ricky this was the card that you reco-ed over a $1K+ SACDP? Are you back-pedaling? That's actually OK because back-pedaling's the only way you can go...

markl

 

[Ricky]

Quote:

Originally posted by markl but Ricky this was the card that you reco-ed over a $1K+ SACDP?

I never did such thing. If you read the related thread, maybe you'll find out what I recommended this card for. Again, you are intentionally falling into gross inaccuracies, distorting my words (I believe there is another name for that), just in order to discredit me, in a very unelegant and cheapish way.

Quote:

Are you back-pedaling? That's actually OK because back-pedaling's the only way you can go...

Read what I already wrote. I'm afraid you're the one that is actually discrediting yourself with such comments.

 

[lini]

Ricky: >The Audigy resamples everything to 48 KHz, even if you use its digital outputs.

This is not correct.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

[Alex Nikitin]

Just to add some info on RME cards-

I use several RME Digi96/8PAD and PST in the lab and at home. In my experience these are excellent cards with very stable drivers, nice Digicheck software and good sound for analogue in-out. However to get the best out of these cards I did modify them somewhat - replaced input/output opamps and removed output CMOS switch. After these mods RME works very impressively and provides true 18-19 bit resolution on analogue IN-OUT loop. Sound is excellent and the output of the card can drive a pair of headphones directly with very good results - comparable to OBH-11 standard on my Grados 60's at home. I use OBH-11SE with this card at home and happy with the sound. On a technical side - the card provides proper bit-perfect digital inputs and outputs, both optical and coaxial, for 32, 44.1 ,48, 88.2 and 96 kHz with upto 24 bit resolution + analogue in/out with about 0.0003% THD for 0 dB and >105 dB dynamic range. For the price it is very good.

One note - RME is not suitable for games - I use a second cheap Crystal-based card in my home computer for gaming

.

 

[Ricky]

Quote:

Originally posted by lini Ricky: >The Audigy resamples everything to 48 KHz, even if you use its digital outputs. This is not correct.

The Audigy can pass digital 24/96 signals without resampling. However, the core of this card still works at just 16 bit / 48 KHz, and is incapable of true recording or playback at a different sampling rate and resolution.

http://www6.tomshardware.com/video/0...rratec-04.html

http://www.3dsoundsurge.com/reviews/...Audigy-p3.html

 

[lini]

Ricky: The S/P-DIF bypass also supports other modes like 16bit/44.1kHz.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

[Ricky]

Quote:

Originally posted by lini Ricky: The S/P-DIF bypass also supports other modes like 16bit/44.1kHz.

That' doesn't contradict anything I have said, or that the Audigy resamples to 48 KHz everything it plays or records, even if you use its digital outputs.

I wouldn't call bypass "playback", it's just bypass.