Featured Sponsor Listings

EMU0404 USB - best source in the world!

Mar 25, 2009 at 7:03 AM Post #31 of 49
Quote:

Originally Posted by KONAKONA /img/forum/go_quote.gif
tl;dr

I have the PCI version, and last I checked it wasn't that good, to say the least. But hey, read rule #4.
smily_headphones1.gif



you're saying you found it not very good? or popular consensous found it not very good?
confused.gif
 
Mar 25, 2009 at 7:09 AM Post #32 of 49
Well I didn't find it very good, but not for SQ; I needed something with 2 completely separate analogue outputs and it only had one. :\

Doesn't matter how good the SQ is if it won't do what I need it to. More importantly, OP has the USB version.
 
Mar 25, 2009 at 7:11 AM Post #34 of 49
Yes obobskivich, you can go as far as saying that all expansive DACs are snake oil based on pure objectivist's view.

See, when DAC is operating in lesser bit and rate, the number got worse due to lowered sample rate and bit.

RightMark Audio Analyzer test : E-MU 0404 USB loopback bal 16b 44k

But as we all know, virtually everyone cannot distinguish 16bit and 24bit at all (go hydrogen forum)


In full seriousness, it is nothing more than number game and it does mean nothing about sound quality we can discern.
 
Mar 25, 2009 at 7:13 AM Post #36 of 49
Quote:

Originally Posted by wnmnkh /img/forum/go_quote.gif
KONAKONA, PCI version and USB version are completely different. USB version is much better.


Cool so all the loose ends are tied up then. I'll be out of the thread now, bye guys!
 
Mar 25, 2009 at 7:16 AM Post #37 of 49
Quote:

Originally Posted by wnmnkh /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Yes obobskivich, you can go as far as saying that all expansive DACs are snake oil based on pure objectivist's view.

See, when DAC is operating in lesser bit and rate, the number got worse due to lowered sample rate and bit.

RightMark Audio Analyzer test : E-MU 0404 USB loopback bal 16b 44k

But as we all know, virtually everyone cannot distinguish 16bit and 24bit at all (go hydrogen forum)


In full seriousness, it is nothing more than number game and it does mean nothing about sound quality we can discern.


yeah, basically what I was getting at, my point isn't that the "devices" are indifferent, I mean the actual digital-to-analog conversion stage (the single chip, or series of chips) are likely "identical" (they either convert it right or wrong), its the analog output stages most of us likely squabble over (in terms of what we "percieve" or "hear")
 
Mar 25, 2009 at 7:30 AM Post #38 of 49
Quote:

Originally Posted by wnmnkh /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Yes obobskivich, you can go as far as saying that all expansive DACs are snake oil based on pure objectivist's view.


True that. Really, as long as you don't mess it up in the I/V stage it should be good. There's some things one can improve, like using clocking or directly connecting to I2S or going off a passive I/V stage (debatable, but it eliminates part count which IMO is good
wink.gif
).

I guess the point is I'm a definite believer in the law of diminishing returns. If you want your DAC encased in gold great, but don't say it helps the audio.

Quote:

I agree with obobskivich.

If you don't like him, just don't bother or put him on ignore list. There is no need of whines and rages to be shown.


It was an offhand remark that went too far obviously. I wasn't intending to turn this into a witch hunt, but it kind of went that way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by obobskivich
yeah, basically what I was getting at, my point isn't that the "devices" are indifferent, I mean the actual digital-to-analog conversion stage (the single chip, or series of chips) are likely "identical" (they either convert it right or wrong), its the analog output stages most of us likely squabble over (in terms of what we "percieve" or "hear")


Yeah, that's what I'm getting at. Some prefer entirely discreet, some demand opamps, and some like me prefer passive. At some point we're all going to have to come to our own conclusions. Mine was instilled in me by my dad and boiled down to one and one not so well known concepts. First: keep it simple stupid. Second: There's multiple ways to skin a cat, finding the way the cat likes is the problem.
 
Mar 25, 2009 at 11:31 AM Post #39 of 49
lol, megafight, I can just see all those ignore lists growing.
 
Mar 25, 2009 at 11:43 AM Post #40 of 49
Quote:

Originally Posted by wnmnkh /img/forum/go_quote.gif
KONAKONA, PCI version and USB version are completely different. USB version is much better.


False. See:

RightMark Audio Analyzer test : E-MU 0404 USB loopback bal 16b 44k

vs:

RightMark Audio Analyzer test : [MME] E-DSP Wave [EC00]

The latter is my emu 0404 PCI, tested with balanced TRS cables. The measurements are statistically insignificant, and in several areas the PCI performed (albeit insignificantly) better than the USB version. It's safe to say that SQ-wise they're identical. That being said, the USB version does have more features and a direct headphone out, so it may be worth the extra expense (that and, well, it's USB).
 
Mar 25, 2009 at 10:25 PM Post #43 of 49
Quote:

Originally Posted by royalcrown /img/forum/go_quote.gif
False. See:

RightMark Audio Analyzer test : E-MU 0404 USB loopback bal 16b 44k

vs:

RightMark Audio Analyzer test : [MME] E-DSP Wave [EC00]

The latter is my emu 0404 PCI, tested with balanced TRS cables. The measurements are statistically insignificant, and in several areas the PCI performed (albeit insignificantly) better than the USB version. It's safe to say that SQ-wise they're identical. That being said, the USB version does have more features and a direct headphone out, so it may be worth the extra expense (that and, well, it's USB).


If you say those numbers are insignificant, then you don't need to spend $$$$ on DACs (since upper ones only show very, very little improvements, even less than PCI -> USB on 0404)
 
Mar 25, 2009 at 10:27 PM Post #44 of 49
Quote:

Originally Posted by wnmnkh /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If you say those numbers are insignificant, then you don't need to spend $$$$ on DACs (since upper ones only show very, very little improvements, even less than PCI -> USB on 0404)


which is a topic of heated debate, whether or not a DAC can be "more perfect" by being "better" (and what is "better" ?)
 
Mar 26, 2009 at 12:26 AM Post #45 of 49
In my own experience, I absolutely love the 0404 USB when it's running from my desktop, or when I use it as an analog microphone preamp into my Olympus LS-10's line input, not attached to a computer. On all the laptops I've tried, it's been a disaster - and I need to retract my last posting about turning off the Aspire One's video acceleration to eliminate clicks and pops.

Note that on the desktop, I didn't have to futz with anything at all - it Just Works, and it works damn well.

Even more annoying is that there has been little progress in making a fully-functional Linux driver for the critter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top