DW87
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2008
- Posts
- 61
- Likes
- 0
Anyone know how good the sound card (if its indeed a card) is in the PS3? Can anyone draw a comparison to anything the PC offers?
How good is the sound card in the PS3?
- Thread starter DW87
- Start date
little-endian
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 0
I suppose, you're referring to the analog output (L/R), the PS3 offers via Multi Out. Strictly speaking, your question cannot be answered because it is invalid in the first place. A PC by itself offers no sound at all. All depends on the used sound card in most cases.
I'd claim that the PS3 audio chipset should be pretty decent in terms of the audio quality. Most likely beyond on-board chipsets like AC97, used for pc-audio.
However, in practise this will be hardly of any interest since most of the PS3's audio features can be only used via S/PDIF or HDMI anyway, where the quality is determined by the used DAC (assumed that the data is 'bit perfect' which should be the case).
I'd claim that the PS3 audio chipset should be pretty decent in terms of the audio quality. Most likely beyond on-board chipsets like AC97, used for pc-audio.
However, in practise this will be hardly of any interest since most of the PS3's audio features can be only used via S/PDIF or HDMI anyway, where the quality is determined by the used DAC (assumed that the data is 'bit perfect' which should be the case).
obobskivich
Headphoneus Supremus
Quote:
Your answer cannot be used, because it is invalid and full of factual errors.
In the first place, a PC by itself does offer audio processing abilities, it merely requires some device to output these to the world, such as a codec or other audio processor. Having a discrete and separate processor is merely an upgrade that nearly all modern PCs contain.
As far as AC-97, its just a standard that specifies basic abilities of a codec or audio processor, and the majority of modern PCs are lightyears beyond it in processing ability and quality.
To compare the DSP ability of the PS3 to a modern personal computer, you'd get a pretty fair fight, both are capable of surround sound processing, dozens of voices/effects at once, and offer good quality output. Just because the PS3 prefers digital output, doesn't mean the internal processor isn't doing anything (to the contrary, its doing quite a bit, all its "not" doing is including the internal D/A in the chain).
As far as sound quality goes, its hard to say, as video games generally have low quality audio mixes (its hard to do cinematic grade work, when you're talking about free-form VR), however the PS3 is generally viewed as a competent blu-ray player, so that should give some insight to its audio quality as a transport, the issue of course is that its still limited by the quality of the disc transport (and if the PS1 and PS2 are any indication, that would likely be the lowest quality part in the entire unit)
| Originally Posted by little-endian /img/forum/go_quote.gif I suppose, you're referring to the analog output (L/R), the PS3 offers via Multi Out. Strictly speaking, your question cannot be answered because it is invalid in the first place. A PC by itself offers no sound at all. All depends on the used sound card in most cases. I'd claim that the PS3 audio chipset should be pretty decent in terms of the audio quality. Most likely beyond on-board chipsets like AC97, used for pc-audio. However, in practise this will be hardly of any interest since most of the PS3's audio features can be only used via S/PDIF or HDMI anyway, where the quality is determined by the used DAC (assumed that the data is 'bit perfect' which should be the case). |
Your answer cannot be used, because it is invalid and full of factual errors.
In the first place, a PC by itself does offer audio processing abilities, it merely requires some device to output these to the world, such as a codec or other audio processor. Having a discrete and separate processor is merely an upgrade that nearly all modern PCs contain.
As far as AC-97, its just a standard that specifies basic abilities of a codec or audio processor, and the majority of modern PCs are lightyears beyond it in processing ability and quality.
To compare the DSP ability of the PS3 to a modern personal computer, you'd get a pretty fair fight, both are capable of surround sound processing, dozens of voices/effects at once, and offer good quality output. Just because the PS3 prefers digital output, doesn't mean the internal processor isn't doing anything (to the contrary, its doing quite a bit, all its "not" doing is including the internal D/A in the chain).
As far as sound quality goes, its hard to say, as video games generally have low quality audio mixes (its hard to do cinematic grade work, when you're talking about free-form VR), however the PS3 is generally viewed as a competent blu-ray player, so that should give some insight to its audio quality as a transport, the issue of course is that its still limited by the quality of the disc transport (and if the PS1 and PS2 are any indication, that would likely be the lowest quality part in the entire unit)
little-endian
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 0
Quote:
Nice introduction from someone providing information based on half knowledge. Let's see ...
Quote:
This is an error in reasoning and hence wrong: A "PC by itself" (nice term, isn't it?) is an automat processing data. Nothing more and nothing less. It isn't actually aware of something like audio at all. It's the rendering device (usually a sound card) which creates the audio.
Quote:
One might debate here; of course, AC97 is no reference in quality but already above what was counted to "high end" many years ago. The demands increase but one should remember that the human's hearing capabilities can't be extended that easily (if at all one day).
Quote:
Except when dealing with game sound or resampling stuff, DSP capabilities aren't used at all by the PS3. For instance, when watching a movie from Blu-ray or DVD, the audio might be converted to PCM or forwarded as a "bitstream", but that's nothing too special and done by the CPU, driven by software.
Quote:
Except some tolerance existing when converting from lossy codecs to PCM, the sound is determined by the DAC only if correctly implemented. Disc transport is - despite many voodoo bla bla - not an issue at all. Better than error-free on the user-data level is simply not possible and if handled correctly by the DAC, jitter won't be an issue either as long as withing the tolerance of detecting it error-free.
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif Your answer cannot be used, because it is invalid and full of factual errors. |
Nice introduction from someone providing information based on half knowledge. Let's see ...
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif In the first place, a PC by itself does offer audio processing abilities, it merely requires some device to output these to the world, such as a codec or other audio processor. |
This is an error in reasoning and hence wrong: A "PC by itself" (nice term, isn't it?) is an automat processing data. Nothing more and nothing less. It isn't actually aware of something like audio at all. It's the rendering device (usually a sound card) which creates the audio.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif As far as AC-97, its just a standard that specifies basic abilities of a codec or audio processor, and the majority of modern PCs are lightyears beyond it in processing ability and quality. |
One might debate here; of course, AC97 is no reference in quality but already above what was counted to "high end" many years ago. The demands increase but one should remember that the human's hearing capabilities can't be extended that easily (if at all one day).
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif To compare the DSP ability of the PS3 to a modern personal computer, you'd get a pretty fair fight, both are capable of surround sound processing, dozens of voices/effects at once, and offer good quality output. Just because the PS3 prefers digital output, doesn't mean the internal processor isn't doing anything (to the contrary, its doing quite a bit, all its "not" doing is including the internal D/A in the chain). |
Except when dealing with game sound or resampling stuff, DSP capabilities aren't used at all by the PS3. For instance, when watching a movie from Blu-ray or DVD, the audio might be converted to PCM or forwarded as a "bitstream", but that's nothing too special and done by the CPU, driven by software.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif As far as sound quality goes, its hard to say, as video games generally have low quality audio mixes (its hard to do cinematic grade work, when you're talking about free-form VR), however the PS3 is generally viewed as a competent blu-ray player, so that should give some insight to its audio quality as a transport, the issue of course is that its still limited by the quality of the disc transport (and if the PS1 and PS2 are any indication, that would likely be the lowest quality part in the entire unit) |
Except some tolerance existing when converting from lossy codecs to PCM, the sound is determined by the DAC only if correctly implemented. Disc transport is - despite many voodoo bla bla - not an issue at all. Better than error-free on the user-data level is simply not possible and if handled correctly by the DAC, jitter won't be an issue either as long as withing the tolerance of detecting it error-free.
obobskivich
Headphoneus Supremus
what what fun, you wanna pick a fight
Quote:
I know, but talking about yousrelf isn't very polite
Quote:
A "PC by itself" is simply a computer, a computer is a device for processing data, period, doesn't matter what the data is, and it can't be aware of anything (period), meaning it can process audio, video, email, whatever the hell you want, all it does is read directions, perform operations, rinse and repeat, day in and day out, it doesn't make decisions, it doesn't discriminate, audio processing is no different, the reason we have a "sound card" is to offload processing labor from the primary computer (the CPU for you folks at home) and its primary memory, as processing audio is a highly recursive and repetitive process (constant load, op, and repeat cycles, very little actual math in its most basic form), which means a DSP can leverage its internal parallelism quite nicely, hence Creative and Aureal pushing sound cards in the '90's, and so on, now as far as actually giving us a codec (that'd be your AC'97) to take analog signals in, and put analog signals out is simply a convience to our ears and wallets, as digital speakers are quite expensive, quite large, and quite frankly, sound like crap, in other words, you're wrong on this count
Quote:
an integrated intel standard considered "high end"? I'd really love to know where you're getting this from, and what "demands increase human hearing", blah blah blah sounds about right
Quote:
this is one of those days I hate arguing with non-CS majors, who believe that software exists only for a CPU and discrete hardware is somehow unique and special, and not just another accessory co-processor, converting the exceptionally high bitrate data from Bluray, such as Dolby TrueHD, is exceptionally taxing of a modern GPCPU (however, PS3 does not use a GPCPU, it uses CBEA, which is essentially DSP-zilla, it'd still be wasteful to use though), while a purposed DSP can handle the task quite easily, leaving the main computer (the CPU you're mythically speaking of) more or less free (its actually quite involved, however thats probably beyond the scope of this discussion), the DSP power in PS3 is generally unleveraged for PCM to PCM or similar passthroughs, true, however I didn't say it was always used, I said it was comparable to something like EMU20k or CMI8788, it can handle surround decoding and processing, making the PS3 a suitable transport and suitable gaming device (as it can handle positional audio, probably better than CMI8788/AV200 to be quite fair)
Quote:
love how you're ignoring jitter and other issues that studios and production facilities spend thousands to combat, obviously just wasted money, eh? honestly the transport stage does matter, because you very likely won't even approach better than error free, let alone true error freedom, then you have to contend with other issues, for example error handling (which is one of the largest individual studies of computer science), does it throw exceptions elegantly, or does it make a ruckus? yes we could get into arguing that PS3 is crap if connected to a poor DAC and all that, all so that little endian can whip it out and whoop in the air, thats fine
my point was, the PS3 is a suitable transport for the various formats it supports, and the quality issues I'm talking about (you've obviously never touched an SCEA product, let alone owned one) have to do with the transport stages failing very early in the product life cycle, or having issues getting any read on perfectly functionting discs, not jitter or other "la la land concepts"
now, if you hadn't responded to an honest question like a total pr!ck, and then responded to an explanation like a total pr!ck, maybe you wouldn't be treated like a total pr!ck
Quote:
| Originally Posted by little-endian /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nice introduction from someone providing information based on half knowledge. Let's see ... |
I know, but talking about yousrelf isn't very polite
Quote:
| This is an error in reasoning and hence wrong: A "PC by itself" (nice term, isn't it?) is an automat processing data. Nothing more and nothing less. It isn't actually aware of something like audio at all. It's the rendering device (usually a sound card) which creates the audio. |
A "PC by itself" is simply a computer, a computer is a device for processing data, period, doesn't matter what the data is, and it can't be aware of anything (period), meaning it can process audio, video, email, whatever the hell you want, all it does is read directions, perform operations, rinse and repeat, day in and day out, it doesn't make decisions, it doesn't discriminate, audio processing is no different, the reason we have a "sound card" is to offload processing labor from the primary computer (the CPU for you folks at home) and its primary memory, as processing audio is a highly recursive and repetitive process (constant load, op, and repeat cycles, very little actual math in its most basic form), which means a DSP can leverage its internal parallelism quite nicely, hence Creative and Aureal pushing sound cards in the '90's, and so on, now as far as actually giving us a codec (that'd be your AC'97) to take analog signals in, and put analog signals out is simply a convience to our ears and wallets, as digital speakers are quite expensive, quite large, and quite frankly, sound like crap, in other words, you're wrong on this count
Quote:
| One might debate here; of course, AC97 is no reference in quality but already above what was counted to "high end" many years ago. The demands increase but one should remember that the human's hearing capabilities can't be extended that easily (if at all one day). |
an integrated intel standard considered "high end"? I'd really love to know where you're getting this from, and what "demands increase human hearing", blah blah blah sounds about right
Quote:
| Except when dealing with game sound or resampling stuff, DSP capabilities aren't used at all by the PS3. For instance, when watching a movie from Blu-ray or DVD, the audio might be converted to PCM or forwarded as a "bitstream", but that's nothing too special and done by the CPU, driven by software. |
this is one of those days I hate arguing with non-CS majors, who believe that software exists only for a CPU and discrete hardware is somehow unique and special, and not just another accessory co-processor, converting the exceptionally high bitrate data from Bluray, such as Dolby TrueHD, is exceptionally taxing of a modern GPCPU (however, PS3 does not use a GPCPU, it uses CBEA, which is essentially DSP-zilla, it'd still be wasteful to use though), while a purposed DSP can handle the task quite easily, leaving the main computer (the CPU you're mythically speaking of) more or less free (its actually quite involved, however thats probably beyond the scope of this discussion), the DSP power in PS3 is generally unleveraged for PCM to PCM or similar passthroughs, true, however I didn't say it was always used, I said it was comparable to something like EMU20k or CMI8788, it can handle surround decoding and processing, making the PS3 a suitable transport and suitable gaming device (as it can handle positional audio, probably better than CMI8788/AV200 to be quite fair)
Quote:
| Except some tolerance existing when converting from lossy codecs to PCM, the sound is determined by the DAC only if correctly implemented. Disc transport is - despite many voodoo bla bla - not an issue at all. Better than error-free on the user-data level is simply not possible and if handled correctly by the DAC, jitter won't be an issue either as long as withing the tolerance of detecting it error-free. |
love how you're ignoring jitter and other issues that studios and production facilities spend thousands to combat, obviously just wasted money, eh? honestly the transport stage does matter, because you very likely won't even approach better than error free, let alone true error freedom, then you have to contend with other issues, for example error handling (which is one of the largest individual studies of computer science), does it throw exceptions elegantly, or does it make a ruckus? yes we could get into arguing that PS3 is crap if connected to a poor DAC and all that, all so that little endian can whip it out and whoop in the air, thats fine
my point was, the PS3 is a suitable transport for the various formats it supports, and the quality issues I'm talking about (you've obviously never touched an SCEA product, let alone owned one) have to do with the transport stages failing very early in the product life cycle, or having issues getting any read on perfectly functionting discs, not jitter or other "la la land concepts"
now, if you hadn't responded to an honest question like a total pr!ck, and then responded to an explanation like a total pr!ck, maybe you wouldn't be treated like a total pr!ck
DW87
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2008
- Posts
- 61
- Likes
- 0
Thanks for the replies. By the way, by 'anything the PC offers' I meant in the sound card range, sorry if I wasn't too clear!
little-endian
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 0
Quote:
Absolutely not. What should I gain from that? For me, the privilege of forums (at least the potential) is to find knowledgeable people one hardly meets in real life, to learn from them and to share knowledge.
However, it is a waste of time to start discussions about facts.
Quote:
If your claim is that jitter of the source necessarily determines the final audio quality, the consulted half knowledge can be proven and hence is a fact. No need to feed the ... you know. If I misunderstood, you may forgive.
Quote:
I'm sorry to say, but your writing style is awfully hard to read, especially for a non native speaker. That's not too polite.
Besides that, I'm afraid we talk at cross-purposes. You're writing something in confusing sentences about DSP, I stick with the pure D/A-conversion for now. The DSP-capabilities of a PS3 are beyond my interest here, just to prevent wrong expectances.
Quote:
Compared with the equipment which was common some decades, an AC97 codec is indeed "high end". Taking such one into the past and the people would have kissed your feet, being equipped with such a quality. That this is not the end of the spectrum is beyond the need of discussion.
Quote:
Without software and hence without algorithm, no hardware does anything is this case. No need to be worried that I couldn't be aware of that.
Quote:
In the case of the lossless codecs, there are only correct implementations and faulty ones. The first will lead to the original PCM data. Assuming that, it is not really important who does the decompression task since the result will be the same. No need to discuss further here.
Quote:
I'm not ignoring jitter, I just say: It is not the transport's problem as long as the jitter stays within the tolerance according to the standard (S/PDIF for instance). It is the converter's task to handle it and the approach to reduce jitter at the source stage, is ... well in German we say "vergebliche Liebesmüh'" (according to a dictionary "forlorn hope"; I hope that gets to the point). Benchmark for instance is one of the few manufacturers that seems to be fully aware of it. Quality without voodoo. I greatly appreciate that.
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif what what fun, you wanna pick a fight
|
Absolutely not. What should I gain from that? For me, the privilege of forums (at least the potential) is to find knowledgeable people one hardly meets in real life, to learn from them and to share knowledge.
However, it is a waste of time to start discussions about facts.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif I know, but talking about yousrelf isn't very polite
|
If your claim is that jitter of the source necessarily determines the final audio quality, the consulted half knowledge can be proven and hence is a fact. No need to feed the ... you know. If I misunderstood, you may forgive.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif A "PC by itself" is simply a computer, a computer is a device for processing data, period, doesn't matter what the data is, and it can't be aware of anything (period), meaning it can process audio, video, email, whatever the hell you want, all it does is read directions, perform operations, rinse and repeat, day in and day out, it doesn't make decisions, it doesn't discriminate, audio processing is no different, the reason we have a "sound card" is to offload processing labor from the primary computer (the CPU for you folks at home) and its primary memory, as processing audio is a highly recursive and repetitive process (constant load, op, and repeat cycles, very little actual math in its most basic form), which means a DSP can leverage its internal parallelism quite nicely, hence Creative and Aureal pushing sound cards in the '90's, and so on, now as far as actually giving us a codec (that'd be your AC'97) to take analog signals in, and put analog signals out is simply a convience to our ears and wallets, as digital speakers are quite expensive, quite large, and quite frankly, sound like crap, in other words, you're wrong on this count |
I'm sorry to say, but your writing style is awfully hard to read, especially for a non native speaker. That's not too polite.
Besides that, I'm afraid we talk at cross-purposes. You're writing something in confusing sentences about DSP, I stick with the pure D/A-conversion for now. The DSP-capabilities of a PS3 are beyond my interest here, just to prevent wrong expectances.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif an integrated intel standard considered "high end"? I'd really love to know where you're getting this from, and what "demands increase human hearing", blah blah blah sounds about right |
Compared with the equipment which was common some decades, an AC97 codec is indeed "high end". Taking such one into the past and the people would have kissed your feet, being equipped with such a quality. That this is not the end of the spectrum is beyond the need of discussion.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif this is one of those days I hate arguing with non-CS majors, who believe that software exists only for a CPU and discrete hardware is somehow unique and special |
Without software and hence without algorithm, no hardware does anything is this case. No need to be worried that I couldn't be aware of that.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif , and not just another accessory co-processor, converting the exceptionally high bitrate data from Bluray, such as Dolby TrueHD, is exceptionally taxing of a modern GPCPU (however, PS3 does not use a GPCPU, it uses CBEA, which is essentially DSP-zilla, it'd still be wasteful to use though), while a purposed DSP can handle the task quite easily, leaving the main computer (the CPU you're mythically speaking of) more or less free (its actually quite involved, however thats probably beyond the scope of this discussion), the DSP power in PS3 is generally unleveraged for PCM to PCM or similar passthroughs, true, however I didn't say it was always used, I said it was comparable to something like EMU20k or CMI8788, it can handle surround decoding and processing, making the PS3 a suitable transport and suitable gaming device (as it can handle positional audio, probably better than CMI8788/AV200 to be quite fair) |
In the case of the lossless codecs, there are only correct implementations and faulty ones. The first will lead to the original PCM data. Assuming that, it is not really important who does the decompression task since the result will be the same. No need to discuss further here.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif love how you're ignoring jitter and other issues that studios and production facilities spend thousands to combat, obviously just wasted money, eh? honestly the transport stage does matter, because you very likely won't even approach better than error free, let alone true error freedom, then you have to contend with other issues, for example error handling (which is one of the largest individual studies of computer science), does it throw exceptions elegantly, or does it make a ruckus? yes we could get into arguing that PS3 is crap if connected to a poor DAC and all that, all so that little endian can whip it out and whoop in the air, thats fine ... |
I'm not ignoring jitter, I just say: It is not the transport's problem as long as the jitter stays within the tolerance according to the standard (S/PDIF for instance). It is the converter's task to handle it and the approach to reduce jitter at the source stage, is ... well in German we say "vergebliche Liebesmüh'" (according to a dictionary "forlorn hope"; I hope that gets to the point). Benchmark for instance is one of the few manufacturers that seems to be fully aware of it. Quality without voodoo. I greatly appreciate that.
obobskivich
Headphoneus Supremus
Quote:
no idea where you're going here, but I agree with what you're saying 100%, so I guess I forgive? (no clue really, if jitter can be corrected at some point, its "less of an issue") I was never talking about the PS3 as high jitter/low jitter, I was talking about the device's high failure rate (for some reason Sony just can't get a qualiy disc transport (usually the laser pickups) into the PlayStation series, they build some of the best CD, DVD, SACD, and Blu-Ray transports on earth, yet their foray into gaming consoles is notorious for early laser death)
Quote:
my point is that any "computer" can handle audio, so saying a lone PC can't do audio is incorrect, its an assumption based upon marketing, you simply need some form of device to provide digital or analog output, for digital or analog speakers, given that digital speakers are a pain, we convert that disjoint signal to a continuous one, and feed it into conventional analog amplifiers and speakers, the DSP capabilities of the PS3 simply handle this signal generation for you, and they're quite adept at it, which is where I'm saying "PS3 is equal to modern soundcards", as its capable of more or less the same processing loads (just from a different set of standards)
[QUOTE
Compared with the equipment which was common some decades, an AC97 codec is indeed "high end". Taking such one into the past and the people would have kissed your feet, being equipped with such a quality. That this is not the end of the spectrum is beyond the need of discussion. [/QUOTE] haven't the slighest how old you're talking here, I've never viewed AC97/DC97 as "high end", because in its day, very few used their computer as a respectable transport, it was just suitable for plucking along in Quake or Doom, and perhaps sound effects from time to time, however any "audio" equipment of the 1980's or 1990's was vastly ahead in quality (although I'm sure the 1880's would've appreciated it)
Quote:
my point has been mistook, it isn't about an algorithm being proper or not, its about the processing power required to extract that PCM data, you can have the best software in the world for decoding lossless, if you don't have suitable processing power behind it, you aren't going anywhere, its not one sided, hardware and software are symbiant, the PS3 happens to have the power to decode these codecs into PCM, however this is rarely leveraged, as the only way to output them is via HDMI (where they're passed off digitally), such a shame really
Quote:
I've never said the PS3 has to deal with jitter or not, again my issue with the transport is actual hardware failure, the computer that exists as the PS3 is amazing (to say the least), however the disc transport that is paired with it, is likely prone to failure (as the previous three generations have been)
the transport should try to minimize jitter where possible, however you are correct, it isn't the transport's primary concern, it just needs to keep things (as you said) "within tolerance" (the less jitter the better, of course)
ultimately my point is, the original poster's question is valid, and its quite rude to say otherwise, the PS3 is quite suitable as both a transport and an audio processor, you're just quite limited in terms of what you can have it do (well, in all reality, you aren't, excepting local storage of a music library, which I believe it can access via a local network anyways, and I know PSX is capable of local storage as a DVR of sorts, although it relies on EE and not CBEA, and has many other drawbacks)
| Originally Posted by little-endian /img/forum/go_quote.gif If your claim is that jitter of the source necessarily determines the final audio quality, the consulted half knowledge can be proven and hence is a fact. No need to feed the ... you know. If I misunderstood, you may forgive. |
no idea where you're going here, but I agree with what you're saying 100%, so I guess I forgive? (no clue really, if jitter can be corrected at some point, its "less of an issue") I was never talking about the PS3 as high jitter/low jitter, I was talking about the device's high failure rate (for some reason Sony just can't get a qualiy disc transport (usually the laser pickups) into the PlayStation series, they build some of the best CD, DVD, SACD, and Blu-Ray transports on earth, yet their foray into gaming consoles is notorious for early laser death)
Quote:
| Besides that, I'm afraid we talk at cross-purposes. You're writing something in confusing sentences about DSP, I stick with the pure D/A-conversion for now. The DSP-capabilities of a PS3 are beyond my interest here, just to prevent wrong expectances. |
my point is that any "computer" can handle audio, so saying a lone PC can't do audio is incorrect, its an assumption based upon marketing, you simply need some form of device to provide digital or analog output, for digital or analog speakers, given that digital speakers are a pain, we convert that disjoint signal to a continuous one, and feed it into conventional analog amplifiers and speakers, the DSP capabilities of the PS3 simply handle this signal generation for you, and they're quite adept at it, which is where I'm saying "PS3 is equal to modern soundcards", as its capable of more or less the same processing loads (just from a different set of standards)
[QUOTE
Compared with the equipment which was common some decades, an AC97 codec is indeed "high end". Taking such one into the past and the people would have kissed your feet, being equipped with such a quality. That this is not the end of the spectrum is beyond the need of discussion. [/QUOTE] haven't the slighest how old you're talking here, I've never viewed AC97/DC97 as "high end", because in its day, very few used their computer as a respectable transport, it was just suitable for plucking along in Quake or Doom, and perhaps sound effects from time to time, however any "audio" equipment of the 1980's or 1990's was vastly ahead in quality (although I'm sure the 1880's would've appreciated it)
Quote:
| In the case of the lossless codecs, there are only correct implementations and faulty ones. The first will lead to the original PCM data. Assuming that, it is not really important who does the decompression task since the result will be the same. No need to discuss further here. |
my point has been mistook, it isn't about an algorithm being proper or not, its about the processing power required to extract that PCM data, you can have the best software in the world for decoding lossless, if you don't have suitable processing power behind it, you aren't going anywhere, its not one sided, hardware and software are symbiant, the PS3 happens to have the power to decode these codecs into PCM, however this is rarely leveraged, as the only way to output them is via HDMI (where they're passed off digitally), such a shame really
Quote:
| I'm not ignoring jitter, I just say: It is not the transport's problem as long as the jitter stays within the tolerance according to the standard (S/PDIF for instance). It is the converter's task to handle it and the approach to reduce jitter at the source stage, is ... well in German we say "vergebliche Liebesmüh'" (according to a dictionary "forlorn hope"; I hope that gets to the point). Benchmark for instance is one of the few manufacturers that seems to be fully aware of it. Quality without voodoo. I greatly appreciate that. |
I've never said the PS3 has to deal with jitter or not, again my issue with the transport is actual hardware failure, the computer that exists as the PS3 is amazing (to say the least), however the disc transport that is paired with it, is likely prone to failure (as the previous three generations have been)
the transport should try to minimize jitter where possible, however you are correct, it isn't the transport's primary concern, it just needs to keep things (as you said) "within tolerance" (the less jitter the better, of course)
ultimately my point is, the original poster's question is valid, and its quite rude to say otherwise, the PS3 is quite suitable as both a transport and an audio processor, you're just quite limited in terms of what you can have it do (well, in all reality, you aren't, excepting local storage of a music library, which I believe it can access via a local network anyways, and I know PSX is capable of local storage as a DVR of sorts, although it relies on EE and not CBEA, and has many other drawbacks)
milkweg
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2007
- Posts
- 2,840
- Likes
- 15
Quote:
You can rip music CDs to the PS3 @256kb/s so don't need to use the cd transport at all. I can't tell the difference between lossless and 256kb/s MP3 so let's not go there next please. Sound quality from PS3>Onkyo receiver via digital sounds the same to me as PC>EMU 0404 via digital>Onkyo via analog.
I plan to put in a 500GB HDD in the PS3 and have my complete MP3 collection there and on my PC. PS3 is perfectly good source and transport device, IMO.
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif As far as sound quality goes, its hard to say, as video games generally have low quality audio mixes (its hard to do cinematic grade work, when you're talking about free-form VR), however the PS3 is generally viewed as a competent blu-ray player, so that should give some insight to its audio quality as a transport, the issue of course is that its still limited by the quality of the disc transport (and if the PS1 and PS2 are any indication, that would likely be the lowest quality part in the entire unit) |
You can rip music CDs to the PS3 @256kb/s so don't need to use the cd transport at all. I can't tell the difference between lossless and 256kb/s MP3 so let's not go there next please. Sound quality from PS3>Onkyo receiver via digital sounds the same to me as PC>EMU 0404 via digital>Onkyo via analog.
I plan to put in a 500GB HDD in the PS3 and have my complete MP3 collection there and on my PC. PS3 is perfectly good source and transport device, IMO.
obobskivich
Headphoneus Supremus
Quote:
oh I didn't actually know the PS3 let you rip content to it, I thought that was a PSX only feature, well thats another plus
nobody is talking about lossless vs lossy here, just the quality of the device for audio playback
cool to know that it supports being a media library
| Originally Posted by milkweg /img/forum/go_quote.gif You can rip music CDs to the PS3 @256kb/s so don't need to use the cd transport at all. I can't tell the difference between lossless and 256kb/s MP3 so let's not go there next please. Sound quality from PS3>Onkyo receiver via digital sounds the same to me as PC>EMU 0404 via digital>Onkyo via analog. I plan to put in a 500GB HDD in the PS3 and have my complete MP3 collection there and on my PC. PS3 is perfectly good source and transport device, IMO. |
oh I didn't actually know the PS3 let you rip content to it, I thought that was a PSX only feature, well thats another plus
nobody is talking about lossless vs lossy here, just the quality of the device for audio playback
cool to know that it supports being a media library
little-endian
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 0
Quote:
First of all, since my appeal doesn't seem to be successful: May you please use something like periods or breaks in your postings? Again, it's a impertinence to read.
Seems that we missed each other's points here, yes. It was your sentence (or should I say one part of the sentence which usually covers the whole post in your case?) "however the PS3 is generally viewed as a competent blu-ray player, so that should give some insight to its audio quality as a transport, the issue of course is that its still limited by the quality of the disc transport (and if the PS1 and PS2 are any indication, that would likely be the lowest quality part in the entire unit)" which led me to the assumption you would refer to jitter issues.
Wasn't aware of the pickup issues in the case of the PS3. To answer your question about the ownership of SCEA products: Nope, but the PSX (SCEE) was quite sufficien). I know what's your point, the CD pickup was almost the cheapest crap possible, but when working, it won't affect the audio quality hence why do you mention? Wasn't the original question who good the "sound card" of the PS3 was? How is that related to the drive issues which may still persist?
Quote:
I suppose by "digital speakers" you mean ones with integrated D/A-converters? Why should be be bad in general? Never used such kind, though.
Quote:
For me, that's a very decadent statement. Of course, the AC97 offers features which weren't common (for the mass) many years ago (like flat frequency response, higher SNR as well as dynamic range). Ridiculous to start a discussion here at all.
Quote:
What would you suggest instead to have the audio transferred?
Quote:
Maybe I misunderstood his question. I thought he would refer the analog audio capability of the PS3 compared to the one of a PC. And since a PC may have any sound card or not at all, the question can't be answered in general. That might have been a bit laconic, however definately not meant to be offending. But nice that you get upset instead of him, I was aiming to.
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif no idea where you're going here, but I agree with what you're saying 100%, so I guess I forgive? (no clue really, if jitter can be corrected at some point, its "less of an issue") I was never talking about the PS3 as high jitter/low jitter, I was talking about the device's high failure rate (for some reason Sony just can't get a qualiy disc transport (usually the laser pickups) into the PlayStation series, they build some of the best CD, DVD, SACD, and Blu-Ray transports on earth, yet their foray into gaming consoles is notorious for early laser death) |
First of all, since my appeal doesn't seem to be successful: May you please use something like periods or breaks in your postings? Again, it's a impertinence to read.
Seems that we missed each other's points here, yes. It was your sentence (or should I say one part of the sentence which usually covers the whole post in your case?) "however the PS3 is generally viewed as a competent blu-ray player, so that should give some insight to its audio quality as a transport, the issue of course is that its still limited by the quality of the disc transport (and if the PS1 and PS2 are any indication, that would likely be the lowest quality part in the entire unit)" which led me to the assumption you would refer to jitter issues.
Wasn't aware of the pickup issues in the case of the PS3. To answer your question about the ownership of SCEA products: Nope, but the PSX (SCEE) was quite sufficien). I know what's your point, the CD pickup was almost the cheapest crap possible, but when working, it won't affect the audio quality hence why do you mention? Wasn't the original question who good the "sound card" of the PS3 was? How is that related to the drive issues which may still persist?
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif analog speakers, given that digital speakers are a pain, we convert that disjoint signal to a continuous one ... |
I suppose by "digital speakers" you mean ones with integrated D/A-converters? Why should be be bad in general? Never used such kind, though.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif haven't the slighest how old you're talking here, I've never viewed AC97/DC97 as "high end", because in its day, very few used their computer as a respectable transport, it was just suitable for plucking along in Quake or Doom, and perhaps sound effects from time to time, however any "audio" equipment of the 1980's or 1990's was vastly ahead in quality (although I'm sure the 1880's would've appreciated it) |
For me, that's a very decadent statement. Of course, the AC97 offers features which weren't common (for the mass) many years ago (like flat frequency response, higher SNR as well as dynamic range). Ridiculous to start a discussion here at all.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif as the only way to output them is via HDMI (where they're passed off digitally), such a shame really |
What would you suggest instead to have the audio transferred?
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif ultimately my point is, the original poster's question is valid, and its quite rude to say otherwise, |
Maybe I misunderstood his question. I thought he would refer the analog audio capability of the PS3 compared to the one of a PC. And since a PC may have any sound card or not at all, the question can't be answered in general. That might have been a bit laconic, however definately not meant to be offending. But nice that you get upset instead of him, I was aiming to.
obobskivich
Headphoneus Supremus
the point on the PS3's transport being garbage is that you're locked into using the disc drive on the PS3 (if anyone out there has a PS3 and can clear this up 100%, that'd be great) as your input device for any media, so while the transport might not be a problem while its working, if it bites it, you're gonna be in for a world of hurt (meaning I wouldn't view the PS3, on the whole, as a reference transport, due to reliability issues)
by digital speakers, I mean digital speakers, Digital speakers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I really don't feel the AC97 to have "flat frequency response", but I understand now what you're comparing it to (*looks over to see AWE32 on the shelf*)
my issue with the HDMI connection is that while the PS3 has massive DSP power to decode these lossless data containers, and could likely do it faster and cleaner than some equipment its connected to (i.e: higher fidelity), instead it just hands them off via HDMI (in other words, I'd rather have it done inside the PS3, as its got the processing power to do it right, if you're using it as a transport you likely don't own a $1000+ receiver (because most who do, also have discrete players as well) or D/A processor to handle things)
the analog audio capability of the PS3 is a joke, I'll give you that, but I assumed the poster was asking in terms of "can it process the audio and keep up, tech wise", I generally view the actual "output ability" as secondary (can you tell my background is in CS, not EE?), who really cares where the data is going, as long as its getting processed right
by digital speakers, I mean digital speakers, Digital speakers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I really don't feel the AC97 to have "flat frequency response", but I understand now what you're comparing it to (*looks over to see AWE32 on the shelf*)
my issue with the HDMI connection is that while the PS3 has massive DSP power to decode these lossless data containers, and could likely do it faster and cleaner than some equipment its connected to (i.e: higher fidelity), instead it just hands them off via HDMI (in other words, I'd rather have it done inside the PS3, as its got the processing power to do it right, if you're using it as a transport you likely don't own a $1000+ receiver (because most who do, also have discrete players as well) or D/A processor to handle things)
the analog audio capability of the PS3 is a joke, I'll give you that, but I assumed the poster was asking in terms of "can it process the audio and keep up, tech wise", I generally view the actual "output ability" as secondary (can you tell my background is in CS, not EE?), who really cares where the data is going, as long as its getting processed right
little-endian
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2007
- Posts
- 82
- Likes
- 0
Quote:
Okay, I have no problems with the drive so far, but I'll pay attention.
Quote:
Alright. So the conversion takes place in form of the actual driving of the speaker. However, totally strictly speaking, the term "digital speaker" is misleading because digital information exists on the logical stage only. Even if driven more or less according to discrete values, the real signal will be analog and vary within the tolerance and be it as small as one may imagine. Hence there is actually no "digital transmission" by strictest definition either.
Quote:
That's highly subjective of course. If you'd prefer a compact cassette (most people used before the CD became popular) instead, this is totally okay.
Quote:
Unfortunately, I don't get your point here. What would you like the PS3 to take care of in addition except extracting the lossless data to PCM? Processing stuff like delays, echo, etc. should be the task of a AV-amplifier, right?
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif the point on the PS3's transport being garbage is that you're locked into using the disc drive on the PS3 (if anyone out there has a PS3 and can clear this up 100%, that'd be great) as your input device for any media, so while the transport might not be a problem while its working, if it bites it, you're gonna be in for a world of hurt (meaning I wouldn't view the PS3, on the whole, as a reference transport, due to reliability issues) |
Okay, I have no problems with the drive so far, but I'll pay attention.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif by digital speakers, I mean digital speakers, Digital speakers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia |
Alright. So the conversion takes place in form of the actual driving of the speaker. However, totally strictly speaking, the term "digital speaker" is misleading because digital information exists on the logical stage only. Even if driven more or less according to discrete values, the real signal will be analog and vary within the tolerance and be it as small as one may imagine. Hence there is actually no "digital transmission" by strictest definition either.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif I really don't feel the AC97 to have "flat frequency response", but I understand now what you're comparing it to (*looks over to see AWE32 on the shelf*) |
That's highly subjective of course. If you'd prefer a compact cassette (most people used before the CD became popular) instead, this is totally okay.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif my issue with the HDMI connection is that while the PS3 has massive DSP power to decode these lossless data containers, and could likely do it faster and cleaner than some equipment its connected to (i.e: higher fidelity), instead it just hands them off via HDMI (in other words, I'd rather have it done inside the PS3, as its got the processing power to do it right, if you're using it as a transport you likely don't own a $1000+ receiver (because most who do, also have discrete players as well) or D/A processor to handle things) |
Unfortunately, I don't get your point here. What would you like the PS3 to take care of in addition except extracting the lossless data to PCM? Processing stuff like delays, echo, etc. should be the task of a AV-amplifier, right?
milkweg
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2007
- Posts
- 2,840
- Likes
- 15
Quote:
Yea, it is cool and Sony made it easy to put in any mobile HDD so much cheaper to upgrade the HDD than it is with a 360. It will only cost me about $130.00 CAD to put in a 500GB mobile HDD.
| Originally Posted by obobskivich /img/forum/go_quote.gif oh I didn't actually know the PS3 let you rip content to it, I thought that was a PSX only feature, well thats another plus nobody is talking about lossless vs lossy here, just the quality of the device for audio playback cool to know that it supports being a media library |
Yea, it is cool and Sony made it easy to put in any mobile HDD so much cheaper to upgrade the HDD than it is with a 360. It will only cost me about $130.00 CAD to put in a 500GB mobile HDD.
obobskivich
Headphoneus Supremus
little-endian, my point is that if I'm buying PS3, I'd like to get my FULL dollars worth out of that much processing power, with my desktop PC, I can have it drive analog 7.1 out to amplifiers/preamplifiers/etc and handle ALL of the processing, I'm saying I'd prefer to see a solution like that for PS3, instead of it just passing the un-processed DTS/Dolby tracks off (it isn't converting them to PCM for HDMI, its passing them off as DTS/Dolby containers)
milkweg, one more Q about the PS3, can it stream media over a network? (curious)
milkweg, one more Q about the PS3, can it stream media over a network? (curious)
Users who are viewing this thread
