[BlackbeardBen]

Of course not. If I have heard plenty of crummy onboard audio chips? Certainly. At my home there are 2 laptops with Conexant onboard chips, I've heard 3 other different Conexant models, not to mention the plethora of Realteks, IDTs, VIAs, etc, etc, etc.
 
Stop giving bad advices.

No, it is not bad advice. The Conexant 20585 codec/chip solution as implemented on the ThinkPad T510 (with my current drivers: 4.95.48.50) is superb as far as onboard sound goes and except for the rolloff in the frequency extremes (the bass rolloff is slightly more pronounced), good at any price. Until you try it with a decent amp, you have no clue what you're talking about. Like I said, the voltage swing isn't very large (not even really enough for Grados), but amp'ed it's excellent. I cannot, however, say anything about the microphone input.

Again, it's due to having very low prices for entry level soundcards, that by themselves are miles ahead of the best of the worst (onboard)

Honestly, using onboard and being on Head-Fi seems kind of a paradox.

Sorry, but I've tried a plethora of different digital sources (too many mid-to-high-end CD players to name - heck, I don't even remember them all), although my experience with computer DACs is much more limited. I find this particular implementation of this particular chip to be as good (again, excepting the rolloff in the frequency extremes) as any other competent digital source as I've heard. If there's re-sampling being done, it's done very well - I can't tell.

Then again, you'll probably definitely write me off as a skeptic to not be trusted. I'm one of those crazy speaker guys anyway, not to mention that I spend most of my time here in the sound science forum...

If you're wondering what I use in combination with the audio out; it's an iBasso PB1 feeding Sennheiser HD 600s (sometimes my Schiit Asgard and/or feeding Alessandro MS1is). I've also spent time auditioning the HD 800, T1, K701, DT 880 and more with it (amp'ed, of course), and it has performed more or less flawlessly other than the rolloff.

 

[Roller]

Quote:

Quote:

Of course not. If I have heard plenty of crummy onboard audio chips? Certainly. At my home there are 2 laptops with Conexant onboard chips, I've heard 3 other different Conexant models, not to mention the plethora of Realteks, IDTs, VIAs, etc, etc, etc.
 
Stop giving bad advices.

No, it is not bad advice. The Conexant 20585 codec/chip solution as implemented on the ThinkPad T510 (with my current drivers: 4.95.48.50) is superb as far as onboard sound goes and except for the rolloff in the frequency extremes (the bass rolloff is slightly more pronounced), good at any price. Until you try it with a decent amp, you have no clue what you're talking about. Like I said, the voltage swing isn't very large (not even really enough for Grados), but amp'ed it's excellent. I cannot, however, say anything about the microphone input.


Quote:

Again, it's due to having very low prices for entry level soundcards, that by themselves are miles ahead of the best of the worst (onboard) Honestly, using onboard and being on Head-Fi seems kind of a paradox.

Sorry, but I've tried a plethora of different digital sources (too many mid-to-high-end CD players to name - heck, I don't even remember them all), although my experience with computer DACs is much more limited. I find this particular implementation of this particular chip to be as good (again, excepting the rolloff in the frequency extremes) as any other competent digital source as I've heard. If there's re-sampling being done, it's done very well - I can't tell.

Then again, you'll probably definitely write me off as a skeptic to not be trusted. I'm one of those crazy speaker guys anyway, not to mention that I spend most of my time here in the sound science forum...

If you're wondering what I use in combination with the audio out; it's an iBasso PB1 feeding Sennheiser HD 600s (sometimes my Schiit Asgard and/or feeding Alessandro MS1is). I've also spent time auditioning the HD 800, T1, K701, DT 880 and more with it (amp'ed, of course), and it has performed more or less flawlessly other than the rolloff.

 
I'll definitely not write you off, as opinions are meant to be discussed and ideas exchanged. And I certainly respect each and everyone's background. I myself am more of a computer guy, which have been increasingly more interested in audio, from many years from now, even if the jump into proper *-Fi was took rather racently.
All forums are interesting, being interested in learning things is always a good thing.
 
The thing is, proper amping doesn't make up for the flaws that are present at the source in the first place. Because, it's not just about a sound quality point of view, it's also, like you pointed, the fact that onboard audio solutions have an even harder time to drive headphones, even if they're relatively easy to drive.
You do have gear that's revealing of flaws in the sound chain, which makes me even more surprised that you find your Conexant chip acceptable. Still, it does hardware resampling, which isn't exactly one of its good features, which is shared among most onboard chips.
 
Just so you get my point of onboard audio vs dedicated solution: Going internal, you can get a Xonar DG for less than $30, and if going external, you can get a X-Fi Go! Pro for little over $30. Now, any of these will surpass all onboard alternatives out on the market. Given the very little amount of money (in Head-Fi terms) for which any of these dedicated solutions can be had, there's really no point in advising people to stay with onboard. Now, praising some of its relatively rare redeeming features (for what they are), is a different matter.

 

[BlackbeardBen]

 
Quote:

 
I'll definitely not write you off, as opinions are meant to be discussed and ideas exchanged. And I certainly respect each and everyone's background. I myself am more of a computer guy, which have been increasingly more interested in audio, from many years from now, even if the jump into proper *-Fi was took rather racently.
All forums are interesting, being interested in learning things is always a good thing.
 
The thing is, proper amping doesn't make up for the flaws that are present at the source in the first place. Because, it's not just about a sound quality point of view, it's also, like you pointed, the fact that onboard audio solutions have an even harder time to drive headphones, even if they're relatively easy to drive.
You do have gear that's revealing of flaws in the sound chain, which makes me even more surprised that you find your Conexant chip acceptable. Still, it does hardware resampling, which isn't exactly one of its good features, which is shared among most onboard chips.
 
Just so you get my point of onboard audio vs dedicated solution: Going internal, you can get a Xonar DG for less than $30, and if going external, you can get a X-Fi Go! Pro for little over $30. Now, any of these will surpass all onboard alternatives out on the market. Given the very little amount of money (in Head-Fi terms) for which any of these dedicated solutions can be had, there's really no point in advising people to stay with onboard. Now, praising some of its relatively rare redeeming features (for what they are), is a different matter.

Does it in fact do resampling?  Bit-perfect methods (i.e. kernel streaming, WASAPI) obviously don't work with it, but I believe that's a result of the implementation.  I've heard unconfirmed reports that with a single audio stream and no sound effects set, Windows 7 actually leaves audio untouched (in fact, 16-bit 44.1 KHz through 24-bit 192 KHz options are given in the default shared mode format selection for the Conexant chip).  Of course, that doesn't eliminate the probability of hardware resampling, which plagues even many (most?) discrete consumer sound cards.  It really just means that the chipset can take those as input, so you move from software to hardware implementation...  I guess I can't imagine an integrated solution not resampling then, unless things have changed dramatically in the last few years (and in the realm of integrated audio chips, I would not be surprised at all).
 
Anyway, hardware resampling is like an extra DAC-ADC step, which when done properly should be inaudible.  That's not to say that the Conexant does it properly, but it certainly isn't obvious if it doesn't.
 
Anyway, I have a uDAC to use anyway, and I don't always - just whatever happens to be more convenient at the moment.  It's a relatively good source as long as you don't turn the volume past 1 o'clock or so, because clipping plagues it past that point (I do admit, it is very poorly designed in that respect).
 
Again, amplified there are no audible sonic flaws other than the frequency rolloff.  Everything is crystal clear and all the depth and realism that I would expect is there.
 
I do agree that with most onboard chips it's better to upgrade sooner or later, but it all depends on how much you spend on the rest...  There's plenty of people here that are looking for budget <$50 or whatever setups, and there's no real justification for a DAC/amp at that point.  And with how good this Conexant chip sounds to me, I can't really see any justification at all for upgrading unless you absolutely need piece of mind for no resampling (or more gain).

 

[Roller]

Quote:

 

Does it in fact do resampling?  Bit-perfect methods (i.e. kernel streaming, WASAPI) obviously don't work with it, but I believe that's a result of the implementation.  I've heard unconfirmed reports that with a single audio stream and no sound effects set, Windows 7 actually leaves audio untouched (in fact, 16-bit 44.1 KHz through 24-bit 192 KHz options are given in the default shared mode format selection for the Conexant chip).  Of course, that doesn't eliminate the probability of hardware resampling, which plagues even many (most?) discrete consumer sound cards.  I guess I can't imagine an integrated solution not resampling, then, unless things have changed dramatically in the last few years (and in the realm of integrated audio chips, I would not be surprised at all).
 
Anyway, resampling is like an extra DAC-ADC step, which when done properly is inaudible.  That's not to say that the Conexant does it properly, but it certainly isn't obvious if it doesn't.
 
Anyway, I have a uDAC to use anyway, and I don't always - just whatever happens to be more convenient at the moment.  It's a relatively good source as long as you don't turn the volume past 1 o'clock or so, because clipping plagues it past that point (I do admit, it is very poorly designed in that respect).
 
Again, amplified there are no audible sonic flaws other than the frequency rolloff.  Everything is crystal clear and all the depth and realism that I would expect is there.
 
I do agree that with most onboard chips it's better to upgrade sooner or later, but it all depends on how much you spend on the rest...  There's plenty of people here that are looking for budget <$50 or whatever setups, and there's no real justification for a DAC/amp at that point.  And with how good this Conexant chip sounds to me, I can't really see any justification at all for upgrading unless you absolutely need piece of mind for no resampling (or more gain).

Curiously, lower end audio solutions, onboard or discreet, seem to have issues with bit-perfect playback, but should be able to start some form of output, specially since there are players with rather strict output settings (which in this case is a good thing).
 
The single audio stream without system sounds refers to Windows XP, Windows 7 can be forced to leave the audio stream untouched. There has been some evolution on the onboard audio domain, but due to the (very) budget nature of it, it's nothing relevant.
 
About resampling, that's actually something that I'm still pondering on whether it's a good thing or not. On one hand, there's the whole thing of having playback of the exact content that's being played, but on the other there's the sound aliasing management that can help sound to some degree.
 
It's unfortunate about gear that starts clipping like that. Have you tried other Nuforce products, like Icon HD or HDP?
 
Not being familiar with the iBasso PB1, I wonder if it smooths the sound on some level, which could help mask some of the flaws of the onboard chip.
 
You have to agree that with simple examples like the ones I mentioned for both desktop and laptop alike, there's no reason to stay with onboard audio. There is a palpable improvement over onboard audio.

 

[mikes1711]

I do apologise for bumping a very old tread by I couldn't resist from chipping in. This is my first post on the head-fi forum although I have been lurking for a good couple of years before I decided to register. 

 
First of all I have to admit that I'm getting tired of reading Roller's constant praises on Creative kit. Are you on their payroll? You're promoting their soundcards with such conviction and vigor it's hard to believe it all comes out of your good intentions to help and provide an objective advice to fellow forum members. Instead all your opinions are so biased that I find it difficult to give them any credibility. I've used pretty much every single card from Creative over past 20 years and I can safely say it's all junk compared to Asus or M-Audio. This is my opinion however it many people here will agree with me. Right now, similar to BlackbeardBen, I use Essence ST (The PCI version with less jitter and lower noise) in my desktop PC and I also use a Lenovo T410 at work which sports Conexant 20585. 
 
I totally agree with BlackbearBen, the Conexant 20585 is an excellent little chip and the SQ is definitely above average. I use HD 600, 595, 555 and AKG 701. I was considering getting a DAC for my laptop but after testing a few units ( including Ibasso D2, Fiio E7, Nuforce uDAC etc.) I came to a conclusion that the difference is so marginal that it just doesn't justify the cost. My amp is Fiio E9- and it is capable of driving HD 600 just fine. So in my opinion a properly amped high end phones will work very well even with an onboard sound chip like Conexant. Just make sure you stick to high bitrate tracks...
 
That's just my 2 pence added to the discussion ( long overdue and probably irrelevant at this stage). 

 

[Roller]

Quote:

I do apologise for bumping a very old tread by I couldn't resist from chipping in. This is my first post on the head-fi forum although I have been lurking for a good couple of years before I decided to register. 

 
First of all I have to admit that I'm getting tired of reading Roller's constant praises on Creative kit. Are you on their payroll? You're promoting their soundcards with such conviction and vigor it's hard to believe it all comes out of your good intentions to help and provide an objective advice to fellow forum members. Instead all your opinions are so biased that I find it difficult to give them any credibility. I've used pretty much every single card from Creative over past 20 years and I can safely say it's all junk compared to Asus or M-Audio. This is my opinion however it many people here will agree with me. Right now, similar to BlackbeardBen, I use Essence ST (The PCI version with less jitter and lower noise) in my desktop PC and I also use a Lenovo T410 at work which sports Conexant 20585. 
 
I totally agree with BlackbearBen, the Conexant 20585 is an excellent little chip and the SQ is definitely above average. I use HD 600, 595, 555 and AKG 701. I was considering getting a DAC for my laptop but after testing a few units ( including Ibasso D2, Fiio E7, Nuforce uDAC etc.) I came to a conclusion that the difference is so marginal that it just doesn't justify the cost. My amp is Fiio E9- and it is capable of driving HD 600 just fine. So in my opinion a properly amped high end phones will work very well even with an onboard sound chip like Conexant. Just make sure you stick to high bitrate tracks...
 
That's just my 2 pence added to the discussion ( long overdue and probably irrelevant at this stage). 

Basically you're saying that source is irrelevant to you, and your point was taken in account
 
I also like how you put Asus next to M-Audio, which is kind of offensive to M-Audio, but that's going off-topic.
 
So, that Conexant onboard audio chip is above average. In that case, what exactly is average? The dirt cheap onboard audio chips that roam desktop and notebook computers alike?
 
Overall, it's great that you find proper amping and high quality tracks to be enough for your listening pleasure. Although, for others, that just isn't nearly enough, and there's no need to go on DACs costing many hundreds or thousands of dollars, since there is already a big enough leap of quality on budget DACs compared to onboard audio chips, despite their constant, yet quite slow paced evolution.
 
Tired of listening to my opinions on Creative hardware? That's really an issue of yours, just like how people do recommend the Asus Essence STX blindly, then quite some people end up returning it and actually getting a lower Asus card (yes, an Asus card, not Creative, in the event you decide to come up with another plot), this for users who don't go through the trouble of swapping opamps.
 
But then again, we could go over your headphone pickings, which would make your listening preferences taken in account on this whole discussion, and there's no need for that, as I don't judge you for what you like.
 
EDIT: Since apparently you're throwing accusations at me, you should know that I feel Creative cards have their specific target, and are not for everyone, mind you. I've always said that if gaming is a consideration, a Creative card is a must, mainly because onboard audio chips have little to no gaming features, and the only competition at the present time is Asus, which has high quality cards, but with a gaming feature set close to onboard audio chips. That was very clear from the start whenever soundcards and gaming was discussed. I could go on how the Titanium HD and the STX has different sound signatures, which appeal to different people, or how the fact that having multiple components all integrated on the same board affect audio negatively, but that is of no consequence to you, since you're tired of reading my praises and whatnot, despite me always explaining exactly why I feel the way I feel about such matters.

 

[trog]

Well a good sound card/DAC which is a step up from the highest end onboard ALC89X definitely helps but given a fixed budget i would look to as good an audio set up my $$ could land then start looking at improving it later cos i see lots of peeps online praying their $200++ sound card would vastly improve their Logitech/Creative boxed PC Speakers 

 

[Roller]

Quote:

Well a good sound card/DAC which is a step up from the highest end onboard ALC89X definitely helps but given a fixed budget i would look to as good an audio set up my $$ could land then start looking at improving it later cos i see lots of peeps online praying their $200++ sound card would vastly improve their Logitech/Creative boxed PC Speakers 

Wait, you're talking about Logitech and Creative speakers? If so, then I most certainly agree, as most PC speakers are rubbish at best
 
Still, improving source will only get you so far, as the output devices, be it speakers or headphones, do limit things themselves. A $5000 DAC won't make you hear heavenly notes if you're plugging a pair of $50 speakers/headphones