[afireinside]

It should work with your Gen 3 actually. It works with the Xmos of my other DAC. Sure they are both not the same but both are about equally older than Gen 5. I don't think it matters.

Do you see Dolby Atmos for Headphones active under the sound control panel where you can also choose from Windows Sonic (and soon DTS Ultra)? What does the Dolby Access menu say when you go through the usual steps it illustrates?

With my audio output device set to my SBX G6, I see "Dolby Atmos for Headphones is in use" below the volume slider like in your screen shot.
With my audio output device set to my Schiit Yggdrasil, I DO NOT see anything under the volume slider.
In both cases, the Dolby Access program claims that I am "set up".

Listening to the same demo back to back using both devices as output, it's blatantly obvious that Atmos is NOT working with my Schiit DAC. It sounds quite amazing using the SBX G6 (set in line-out direct mode).

 

[PurpleAngel]

Thank you I am a complete noob i just got a dt 990 and was curious if I should be using Dolby or stereo

Guess it depends on what your ears like to hear.

 

[Absolute Zero]

Hey everyone, from a pure surround sound perspective, which device is better for gaming between the g6 and the x7?

 

[PurpleAngel]

Hey everyone, from a pure surround sound perspective, which device is better for gaming between the g6 and the x7?

It could be the G6 and X7 do a lot of headphone surround sound processing using the computer's CPU and might be basically using the same software (guessing).
I would say unless you really are in need of the features of the X7, get the G6

 

[Yethal]

It could be the G6 and X7 do a lot of headphone surround sound processing using the computer's CPU and might be basically using the same software (guessing).
I would say unless you really are in need of the features of the X7, get the G6

They don't use CPU for audio processing (aside from the processing within the game engine of course), they both have a deciated hardware chip for that

 

[Absolute Zero]

So what's the verdict? I can't seem to find any comparison between the g6 and the x7 from a surround sound viewpoint.

 

[PurpleAngel]

They don't use CPU for audio processing (aside from the processing within the game engine of course), they both have a deciated hardware chip for that

If you were Creative Labs, would you not want to switch over as much audio processing functions to the main CPU, this way you could use a small and cheaper DSP chip, on the sound card?

 

[illram]

Hey everyone, from a pure surround sound perspective, which device is better for gaming between the g6 and the x7?

G6 has 7.1 vs X7 5.1. I posted a comparison in either this thread or the G6 thread a while back. Surround wise they are hard to differentiate in quality, 7.1 doesn't make a huge difference honestly, but audio quality and features on the X7 are better. But it's a minor difference, honestly it's hard to notice. For the price if you don't need the X7's features the G6 is probably fine.

 

[Yethal]

If you were Creative Labs, would you not want to switch over as much audio processing functions to the main CPU, this way you could use a small and cheaper DSP chip, on the sound card?

I wouldn't because then a powered on PC would need to be connected to the X7 at all times and it would need to run a dedicated driver. Considering the fact that DSP on the X7 runs exactly the same (minus the Control Panel) on Linux and even with a PC disconnected I find the CPU processing theory unlikely.

 

[PurpleAngel]

I wouldn't because then a powered on PC would need to be connected to the X7 at all times and it would need to run a dedicated driver. Considering the fact that DSP on the X7 runs exactly the same (minus the Control Panel) on Linux and even with a PC disconnected I find the CPU processing theory unlikely.

So it would not be possible to design software do do a lot of audio processing, do by the CPU, using Linux?

How it is, that Creative Labs sells their audio processing software (SBX Headphone surround sound), for $30, to run on Windows PCs, but the PC does not contain any of Creative's DSP chips?
Try to figure that out?

 

[Yethal]

So it would not be possible to design software do do a lot of audio processing, do by the CPU, using Linux?

How it is, that Creative Labs sells their audio processing software (SBX Headphone surround sound), for $30, to run on Windows PCs, but the PC does not contain any of Creative's DSP chips?
Try to figure that out?

It is, but Creative hasn't done that. If they did there would be
a) a FAQ on their website explaining how to compile/load the driver
b) a kernel module listed by the lsmod command on my system
c) Driver reported for X7 would not be the stock usb audio driver

The SBX Headphone surround software does what the DSP hardware chip within the X7 and G5/G6 does. Processes surround sound into stereo using SBX algorithm. But that doesn't mean the processing that's happening within the X7 is done in software.

 

[Clean6eR]

If you plug optical into g6 or x7 and use them on a ps4 you can pipe them dolby, they decode this then apply the echo surround thingy and pipe it out all without any pc in sight! Pretty solid evidence it does it in hardware?

Sorry just saw yethal already explained this.

 

[Fegefeuer]

I've come by a used HE-4 in very good condition and that thing is actually really really good. I love the classic Hifiman line much more than the new, except for the HE-1000SE (unfortunately too expensive). Found the previous ones including the HEX V2 too soft.

The HE-4 is very different from the HE-500 and different enough from the HE-400. It's quite fast, clean, punchy, impressive width in the soundstage with very good separation, however depth (layering) is not a very strong point unfortunately. HE-400 has phatter weightier bass while as clean but the mids are less ideal, more subdued on the top, generally not as natural as I hoped (HE-500 easily bests both though, the HE-400 comes last) and the highs even more aggressive. HE-500's bass is less clean than both but it's overall a more cohorent and better balanced headphone.

HE-4's highs are north of neutral and really lively. Not Pro 900 crazy (which some people of course rightfully like) but still plentyful.

I need to find a way to tame those highs a bit because they definitely can be too much with various games. Horizon Zero Dawn for instance has a very rich (and really well made) sound environment and the crushing of ice, bursting of metal and the trails of shattering rocks, bolts and electricity are too much. BlasterX G6 -> Gungnir MB

Power wise the HE-4 is quite the hungry beast and as with most classics they can be cranked very high without them falling apart.

 

[iunewind]

So what's the verdict? I can't seem to find any comparison between the g6 and the x7 from a surround sound viewpoint.

Im have x7 and AE5 (its some kind of "internal version of G6")
Im dont see any difference by sound quality (but many audiofils say AE5 much better )
X7 its a much more functional device. Its have multichannel outputs and many others thing, als its have some functional and more accurate control panel. Control panel of G6/AE-5 its a terrible designed and cutted functionality.
In points of virtual 3d - at now (after windows vista) all games use internal HRTF by its own sound engine, so im prefer use just stereo, and imho its no point to use HRTF by sound card now - in theory internal game result must be better because game engine work with source sound and create most accurate mix. When used sound card HRTF, its double conversing: first one game make 5.1 sound for speakers, after it sound card make downmix from . 5,1 to virtual 3d in headphones.

 

[Yethal]

Im have x7 and AE5 (its some kind of "internal version of G6")
Im dont see any difference by sound quality (but many audiofils say AE5 much better )
X7 its a much more functional device. Its have multichannel outputs and many others thing, als its have some functional and more accurate control panel. Control panel of G6/AE-5 its a terrible designed and cutted functionality.
In points of virtual 3d - at now (after windows vista) all games use internal HRTF by its own sound engine, so im prefer use just stereo, and imho its no point to use HRTF by sound card now - in theory internal game result must be better because game engine work with source sound and create most accurate mix. When used sound card HRTF, its double conversing: first one game make 5.1 sound for speakers, after it sound card make downmix from . 5,1 to virtual 3d in headphones.

It would be really nice of the games worked the way you just described. Entire headphone gaming would be much simpler. Unfortunately unless a game is specifically coded to use an HRTF algorithm (like PC version of Overwatch) it's going to use stock fmod pipeline(audio middleware used by every major game engine on the planet) and render a stereo mix that's basically a widened stereo mix.