[Roller]

Quote:

Seems like other people also have had problems with OpenAL in UT3 http://forums.epicgames.com/showthread.php?t=605550 (I remember replying in a thread in the forums once ). Besides not working I've also read about crashing issues with it enabled.
 
Surrounder+ for me has worked great so far with no issues but it's not a night and day change exactly, it works better with some games than others based on sound engine but I can't even name one game where it would cause issues/worse results than not using it though.

 
You mean like doing this to work around the issue?:
 
1) Exit the game and open the Windows Explorer.
2) Open the “My Documents\My Games\Unreal Tournament 3 Demo\UTGame\Config” folder.
3) Open the UTEngine.ini file from that folder in a text editor (for example, notepad).
4) Find the [Engine.ISVHacks] section.
5) Under [Engine.ISVHacks] heading, find the line that says UseMinimalNVIDIADriverShaderOptimization=False.
6) Change that line to UseMinimalNVIDIADriverShaderOptimization=True, and save the file.
 
Oh and BTW, just because a game has a checkbox named OpenAL, doesn't mean it's always the best way to configure it, as you can trick it by making it use DirectSound3D and converting it to OpenAL yourself.

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

Well I seemed to have gotten OpenAL working as I've formatted the UT3 has no settings in registry and I'm using the "-nohomedir" switch which makes the config files etc stay in the install dir location so I had to manually copy the openal dll files to the binary folder of UT3 and overwrite those who already were there. 

 

[Roller]

Oh, I forgot to add that another great thing OpenAL enabled software has is the fact that you can load external renderers in place of OpenAL, if for some reason the developers weren't careful enough to put together a proper native sound renderer.

 

[NamelessPFG]

UT 2004 with the 64-bit patch uses OpenAL. (Can't tell if the 32-bit version also does or interfaces through DirectSound3D.) So do Postal 2 (UnrealEngine2), UT 1999 (with that Old Unreal patch I mentioned earlier), Battlefield 2 and 2142, the original ArmA (ArmA II dumped it for XAudio2), and possibly other UnrealEngine3 PC ports that predate XAudio2 becoming the standard for UE3.
 
Remember that OpenAL (as was DirectSound3D before it) is an API that presents the sound card driver with the positional audio information from the game environment with exact spatial coordinates, and the sound card driver then decides how to mix those sounds accordingly. EAX/EFX just adds additional reverb/chorus/occlusion/etc. effects depending on the game environment, though it's apparently pre-baked by the level/map designer and not generated on-the-fly as Aureal's old A3D wavetracing approach would have been. Furthermore, your Audigy 2 should have proper OpenAL support, at least under Creative drivers...but you use kX.
 
Modern game audio APIs like XAudio2, on the other hand, pre-mix everything into speaker positions before it even hits the sound card driver! This means that spatial information is limited to 7.1 at best and stereo at worst. Don't ask me why they think this is an improvement.
 
Anyway, you cannot simply just test hardware OpenAL on/off without testing CMSS-3D Headphone on/off for both settings as well, like you did with UT3. The former decides whether the CPU or the X-Fi APU does the dirty work of processing sound effects (and in the former case, EAX 3.0 and 4.0 are apparently "emulated", and EAX 5.0 isn't available), and the latter toggles the HRTF surround filter on or off (though it does work significantly better in DirectSound3D and OpenAL games for the reason mentioned above). Also remember that if it's set for stereo speakers, you get CMSS-3D Virtual instead, which is another HRTF filter configured for-you guessed it-typical stereo speakers positioned in front of the user, not right next to the user's ears.
 
I'm also not entirely certain at this point what speaker configurations are set for:
 
A) the Windows sound control panel
B) the kX control panel (other than the Surrounder plugin)
C) the X-Fi control panel (you have mentioned switching between Headphones, stereo speakers, and 5.1 speakers on several occasions)
 
Sounds like a lot to keep track of, doesn't it? It's just that sound is quite a subjective matter (as your own signature states) and you'll hear opinions all over the place regarding CMSS-3D Headphone vs. Dolby Headphone vs. stereo headphones with no HRTF surround filter set as headphones vs. stereo headphones set as stereo speakers, and so forth. (Oddly enough, nobody's mentioned that MyEars program yet in such debates, especially with its customization...) We just want this as objective as possible so that it's easier for anyone watching to decide what performs best for them and exactly what settings it takes to accomplish that.

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

The Windows speaker config has always been placed in 5.1 and when I used CMSS-3D I used headphones speaker mode in the Creative interface because people seem to recommend this kind of config for best possible result and yea I'd agree but sometimes it affects SQ too much for my liking especially with headphones speaker mode in Creative's software. I have tested using other speaker configurations too which leads to different CMSS-3D HRTF filter as you said but it lead to results that were neglible so it wouldn't sound much different than the other modes I used so didn't see any point of comparing them (read as CMSS-3D disabled). With CMSS-3D disabled I think I've always used 2.1 speakers (as it sounds better than headphones in Creative's drivers) but I've always kept the windows "speaker configuration" as 5.1. My goal is to get as great positional sound with the least impact as possible and if the impact on SQ is too huge to me personally it doesn't matter how well it handles the positioning.
 
I have a feeling ASUS Xonar STX might be a better fit for me than Titanium HD as I got experience with how Dolby Headphone sounds like whit foobar2000 and I personally think it hurts SQ very little, it does change frequency response balance but this can be EQ'd out and if you have a good enough EQ (which Xonar's EQ probably might not be the best one to bring up to the table) the SQ impact using Dolby headphone is very small/almost non-existant. I didn't quite like how Dolby Headphone sounded like with Realtek onboard but then again Xonar cards are a lot more configurable (I don't even know which of the 3 DH modes are used with Realtek onboard).
 
But as it looks like now I probably won't keep this Titanium HD card, for 158 EUR spent it's not worth it to me personally as I can get very good results (IMO at least) using kX Audio drivers. The same thing MIGHT apply to an ASUS Xonar card though I fear. I'm not dissappointed with what I have but like most people here you just want to pursue for the best possible satisfaction you can get and that's what's dissappointing me as I thought the upgraded hardware itself would lead to bigger changes than I'm experiencing, in some cases it's even worse! xD So if you got some great suggestions what might improve things then by all means share them!
 
I will probably still give at least Battlefield 2142 a try as this seems like the game where Titanium HD should be a perfect candidate for and if kX Audio drivers could keep up well in this game too then well, that's it I've had enough by then!

 

[Roller]

Yeah, maybe you should just get an external DAC and forget about gaming soundcards, because going around with "5.1", CMSS3D, DH (which sounds absurdly artificial) is definitely the further point you can be from natural sound. Just the statement of OpenAL sounding grainy left me without any hope regarding this pending review. You will never leave kX because there is no card that gives you the direct hardware control path, so just forget about it. And yeah, get a non X-Fi (read, non Creative, as your Audigy 2 ZS is quite good on its own, with Creative drivers) powered card for gaming, that will be a riot

 
EDIT: If you're going to game, you won't be that badly server with your Audigy 2 ZS, as it still outperforms all Asus and other brands competing products when it comes to games. If you want a card to do everything right, you already bought your new one, and if you want a card for music and movies, knock yourself out and get something with DH software solution.

 

[Gustoo]

@Roller
 
I thought about getting an external DAC to actually, to get as natural sound as possible.
I was thinking of getting HRT MS2 since it's supposed to have a big soundstage and a neutral sound.
Though I'm still not sure if it will work with the setup I'm thinking of getting. But in a mail I got from the MS2 company, they wrote that it should work; " I see no problem with what you are trying to accomplish. As long as the "virtual cable" is in the path, it would function as you intend.  A USB device like a Streamer is simply an end destination for any computer audio content."
 
I'm hoping to use MyEars in games with the MS2 DAC, and connect that to my STAX amp + headphones..
What do you guys think, could it work?
Would be amazing I reckon!
 
great review here of the dac: http://www.headfonia.com/the-hrt-music-streamer-ii-asynchronous-2496-for-149-95/
" Moving to the MusicStreamer II, the first impression that strikes me is how soundstage has been improved. Most notably is the soundstage depth, where the MS2 is much more three dimensional than the Audinst. The width and the open-ness of the sound is also improved on the MS2. I am liking the improvements a lot, as soundstage performance is very important to me. "
 

 

[Roller]

Hum, HRT MS2 does look like a very nice product, and having a quite good price/performance ratio. Assuming you're not planning on gaming, that sounds like a smashing setup

I'm just not sure on how you plan to connect the DAC to the amp. BTW, which headphones do you pair with that amp?

 

[Gustoo]

Well sounds fantastic then!... not
 
No but as for connecting the DAC to the amp. Well with RCA cables, as the amp has an RCA input.
The Stax set comes with headphones and an amp, it's the updated version of SR-202 headphone.
It's called: STAX SRS-2170
http://www.hifiheadphones.co.uk/stax-srs2170-basic-electrostatic-system-sr207srm252s-prodid-2508.html
 
But since I am planning on playing games, you think that this wouldn't work then?
I haven't bought any of this yet, so it's just a combo that I thought looked sweet and would be a good match.
But if it isn't doable with games, then I guess I have to look for something else.
 
I should also ad, if it wasn't clear, that the quote I inluded above from the mail I got from MS2 company, was there answer to me if this whole setup could work with games.
But since I'm not that familiar with these technical stuff yet, I thought I could st also get some input from you guys aswell.

 

[Roller]

That setup you have planned does feel quite solid, but the reason I'm saying it's not put together with gaming in mind is the fact that the device that's between games and the amp+phones has no gaming features whatsoever, and while you will have very clear sound, it will be of lower quality than it could due to the DAC being unable to be recognized by games as a gaming audio device, therefore audio options available will both be lower and of lower quality, which makes the source to blame, actually.

 

[Scytus]

So it seems clear that from what I've been reading here, and many other threads, that CMSS-3D seems to affect SQ far too much to even be considered. 
 
However according to this:
http://www.overclock.net/sound-cards-computer-audio/1065344-titanium-hd-vs-xonar-d2-my.html
 
and this:
http://www.overclock.net/sound-cards-computer-audio/989286-updated-5-6-11-creative-x.html
 
It seems that the Titanium HD is a unanimous winner in terms of gaming, interestingly with CMSS-3D set to off. I don't understand how that would be possible? How I understand it, without CMSS-3D you don't achieve the simulation of surround sound; does the Titanium HD process the sound in a certain way that allows accurate positioning regardless if using CMSS-3D or not?
 
Also if that's the case, how would the T-HD w/ cmss off compare to a Xonar card with DH on?
 
My issue is that I want great positional audio for gaming, but without messing the SQ too much (which cmss-3d reportedly does), so I thought a xonar with DH would be the best choice.. although many keep saying that asus cards just cannot compare to the T-HD in terms of gaming.. which just confuses me further.

 

[Roller]

Scytus, the whole situation of soundcards regarding gaming is both a matter of performance and features. The reason why Creative cards in general and their own X-Fi series in particular does so well in games is because of their cards being the only product on the market will all the gaming features, while the competition not only lacks most features but the ones they have underperform when compared to the same lower feature tier.
 
Regarding CMSS3D, the way it changes sound is different if the output settings are configured to stereo or multi-speaker, with stereo/headphones having a different (read, stronger) effect on sound. IMHO, neither CMSS3D nor DH is really necessary and even degrades sound to boot, since as long as both the game and the system the game runs on is properly configured, you will already have accurate positional cues, full sound channels and in many cases there will actually be extra sounds that aren't available on cards that only have basic gaming audio rendering or even fall back entirely to software, therefore defeating the purpose of having a soundcard meant to game.
Surround emulation are simply additional features that can be used, but they are most certainly not a requirement for proper gaming performance. I certainly feel those virtualization solutions are put to a better use on movies, for instance. Some people like the changes on HRTF that those virtualization solutions do to sound, but I feel that there is a very significant trade-off in SQ with, IMHO, next to zero benefits, which is why I find it a no brainer.
 
So basically, for gaming purposes, any X-Fi powered card from Creative, Auzentech, etc (except any cards derived from the XtremeAudio model, which isn't a true X-Fi card, missing the hardware DSP and most features) will comply with every single audio feature a game might require for a complete audio presentation. Keep in mind that for gaming purposes, even a $50 Creative X-Fi Titanium will outperform an Asus Essence STX (for comparison purposes), that's basically how "gaming ready" Creative cards are. Now consider that the Titanium HD has SQ at least on par with the Essence STX, a stock sound with a slightly warmer (read, less harsh) signature, every single gaming feature that could be required, and is quite less expensive. And with that, you can take your own conclusions

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

I think it's invidual. The problem is that these different simulations of surround sound will work differently for every person's ears. Most people that's Creative supporters go with the fact that it's real hardware based solutions, well to me it doesn't matter as I've heard a simulation can sometimes even surpass a hardware based solution, for example Surrounder+ plugin in kX Audio drivers or Dolby Headphone to some people is better than OpenAL or vice versa. I've uninstalled my Titanium HD for now and concidering to exchange it for a ASUS ST or STX in case I find some1 willing to do the change here in a finnish forum, otherwise I'll just have to try sell it.
 
Also Roller, stop saying Creative X-Fi are like the definitive solution to all gamers, there exists STX vs Titanium HD comparisions where some people would pick the ASUS. Everything's not written in stone and based on features they got support for in the paper. You're looking from the typical audiophile point of view where everything's theoretical and there's no subject to personal preferences and subjective hearing.
 
 

 

[Roller]

Right, so just because X-Fi cards have the whole gaming feature set that neither any Asus card, be it a lowly DS or ST/STX have or a previous generation Creative card, like your Audigy 2 ZS, that makes them a target to shoot down? I'd very much like to see if you would have any issues with your Titanium HD if you had configured it to work according to your actual hardware setup (or at least with far smaller configuration differences) rather than making quite odd configurations IMHO. You always have gone with subjective listening, and apparently will continue to do so for quite a long time, but when a card lacks a feature, that feature cannot be emulated through software, that's as simple as it gets. And put one thing in your head, CMSS3D and DH are software surround virtualization features, while OpenAL is an audio renderer, they have nothing in common and shouldn't even be mentioned on the same sentence.
 
The worse situation that a X-Fi powered card can be in is to almost have the same performance as different card (read, non X-Fi powered card), when all the other situations it just outperforms them, no matter how hard that is for you to believe.
 
EDIT: I keep finding amusing the fact that you won't test Creative's regular modded drivers that provide better gaming support on your Audigy 2 ZS, just because of the kX's EQ. So from that perspective, your opinion and comparison of cards becomes far more personal and more subjective, which is something worth mentioning. Oh, and no matter how much control kX drivers warrant the user, Audigy cards always have and always will be plagued by that terrible hardware resampler.
 
EDIT2: Considering you were upset with me stating the obvious, that X-Fi cards are unmatched when it comes to gaming, would you say there are any soundcards currently sold as new that have even similar performance to X-Fi cards? Yes, because Audigy 1/2/4 cards are out of production for many years now, and I can give you that Audigy 2 ZS might have similar performance to a X-Fi card if the game being played only uses gaming features up to the feature ceiling of the Audigy 2 ZS, and that specifically runs its audio at 48KHz, so under both those conditions, I might agree that its performance in on par with a X-Fi card.

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

First let me get things straight, I'm looking to get the best possible music listening experience as well as gaming sound experience.
 
How it's done is irrelevant, if a card lacks EAX for example, so what? I'm not looking to have "EAX", I'm looking to get better soundstage/positional cues while gaming, it doesn't matter if it's done in software, hardware, maybe a renderer, for me it's all the same, they all have a goal to improve the positioning and that's WHY they can be compared, which do their jobs best. I'm only interested in the result and don't care what method or whose name or whatever stands on the product, neither method can be definitely put as a winner in this case based on subjective listening which my videos would give a hint of too.
 
I'm using configurations that many other people recommends for best gaming experiences, how can that be "odd" configurations. Just because windows may list it as "5.1 speakers" doesn't mean it has to be treated like such or maybe you have the exact details of how it handles it the way I've configured? It's irrelevant what the options say, it's what heard that matters why it's always best to try it for yourself no matter what it says and then make up your mind. Depending on product it may work very differently. But yes ofc I have tested with "stereo" speaker configuration too which I did very early and it didn't sound any better, possibly a bit worse.
 
Outperform? Can you provide me some examples/demonstrations where it outperforms? Or is this yet again based on the fact it packs full EAX 5.0 support, OpenAL etc? *yawn* It's how it sounds like in practice what matters, and then comes the subjective factors into account as well.
 
The Creative's drivers for Audigy 2 ZS leads to lower quality, it's audible both for music and gaming and is certainly not limited to the EQ alone. It may have proper EAX support for example but again Surrounder+ seems to take care of my soundstage/positional cues processing in games. Maybe Surrounder+ should be named CMSS-Enhanced instead, enhnaced positioning without the sound quality impact. You may think whatever you want about Audigy 2 ZS's hardware resampler but to me based on listening tests, I've got an Audigy 1 as well which I've done comparisions in this regard with and there was very audible differences, on Audigy 2 ZS the resampling is really not much of an audible concern, like I said I hear a bigger difference between 192 kbps vs 320 kbps mp3, cables, comparing different EQ's against each other, you mention it and some of those things are even questionable if it brings differences to some people, then the resampling is even much less of a difference on Audigy 2 ZS, have you done A/B tests on this ? Well I have and I don't suggest you speak about it unless you got experiences with it.