[343 Grenadier]

Yeah, I guess it would be pretty choppy on a handheld console...but just the novelty of it could be appealing to certain fans.

 
Novelty wears off pretty quickly. Emulators will teach you that lesson quite painfully.
 

I'm a Final Fantasy freak, man. I likely knew about those before you did. 

 
Many of the digital FF releases can be played on PSP, Vita, PS3, and PS4.
 
What I meant was being able to play XIII, XIII-2, etc. on Vita instead of just PS3/PS4. You can hack it to do so, but it's not legal, and may be unsafe as well

 
They said they're gonna port 'em, right? Just means it'll take a while. Porting a game can take a few months given everything I said they have to do.
 

 I post so much I didn't even recall that fact at the time. XD

 
If it's any comfort, I'm doing a lot of other things at once. It's kind of hard to remember everything when you're being electrocuted in the head by Japanese headphones. Harder still when your hair catches fire.

 

[Music Alchemist]

They said they're gonna port 'em, right? Just means it'll take a while. Porting a game can take a few months given everything I said they have to do.

 
Those games have been out for years, though. I don't expect Remote Play to work until they get the "everything everywhere" plan in place, at which time I would have to buy the digital version for it to work...most likely.

 

[343 Grenadier]

Those games have been out for years, though. I don't expect Remote Play to work until they get the "everything everywhere" plan in place, at which time I would have to buy the digital version for it to work...most likely.

 
And the PS4 has been out less than a year, plus they've got a lot of extra stuff to port and iron out, not just FF. I'd say it'll happen soon, but not quite yet. As for the PS Vita, it's been out for close to three, but "Everything, Everywhere" seems to have only really gotten a lot of focus with the release of the PS4. Remember once again that these are consoles with entirely different architectures. ARM, PowerPC, and MIPS are RISC-based, x86-64 is CISC-based. Even between the RISC-based architectures, they are fundamentally different and require significant changes under the hood to work properly on other instruction sets. Accordingly I can see it happening, just not in a huge hurry. Like, I'd be pretty sure of all of the FF titles that CAN work on both the modern platforms being ported around by 2016 and maybe by 2015, but it'll be a finger-twister to be expecting it this year.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  And the PS4 has been out less than a year, plus they've got a lot of extra stuff to port and iron out, not just FF. I'd say it'll happen soon, but not quite yet. As for the PS Vita, it's been out for close to three, but "Everything, Everywhere" seems to have only really gotten a lot of focus with the release of the PS4. Remember once again that these are consoles with entirely different architectures. ARM, PowerPC, and MIPS are RISC-based, x86-64 is CISC-based. Even between the RISC-based architectures, they are fundamentally different and require significant changes under the hood to work properly on other instruction sets. Accordingly I can see it happening, just not in a huge hurry. Like, I'd be pretty sure of all of the FF titles that CAN work on both the modern platforms being ported around by 2016 and maybe by 2015, but it'll be a finger-twister to be expecting it this year.

 
Don't the digital PSone Classics (etc.) games work via a built-in emulator on the modern PlayStation systems? I would imagine it would be a matter of emulating the old games in a similar fashion instead of having to redesign anything. But you're the expert!

 

[343 Grenadier]

Don't the digital PSone Classics (etc.) games work via a built-in emulator on the modern PlayStation systems? I would imagine it would be a matter of emulating the old games in a similar fashion instead of having to redesign anything. But you're the expert!

Emulators are software. And like the programs themselves, they only work on the kind of hardware they were designed for. Instruction sets are the fundamental CPU architecture of a given type of CPU, and if they're different, they're not gonna work. Even then, emulators don't work perfectly, as anyone who has used any PC emulator for Nintendo products can tell you. To get it working flawlessly requires quite a bit of tweaking and re-coding. Like, even extremely high-end gaming PCs can have issues playing something as technologically primitive as, say, Metroid Prime on Dolphin, an emulator which has been developed for years. The Xbox emulator doesn't work for much of anything at all, and it was using an x86 CPU. To get a game working, even through an emulator, on different hardware takes a lot of work.

 

[Music Alchemist]

 

Don't the digital PSone Classics (etc.) games work via a built-in emulator on the modern PlayStation systems? I would imagine it would be a matter of emulating the old games in a similar fashion instead of having to redesign anything. But you're the expert!

Emulators are software. And like the programs themselves, they only work on the kind of hardware they were designed for. Instruction sets are the fundamental CPU architecture of a given type of CPU, and if they're different, they're not gonna work. Even then, emulators don't work perfectly, as anyone who has used any PC emulator for Nintendo products can tell you. To get it working flawlessly requires quite a bit of tweaking and re-coding. Like, even extremely high-end gaming PCs can have issues playing something as technologically primitive as, say, Metroid Prime on Dolphin, an emulator which has been developed for years. The Xbox emulator doesn't work for much of anything at all, and it was using an x86 CPU. To get a game working, even through an emulator, on different hardware takes a lot of work.

 
Ha. You switched to nested replies. I disabled that because my replies were taking up half a page in busier threads. ...Oh wait, nevermind. I forgot that instead of normal quoting, you manually quote specific things in traditional forum style.
 
Well then, I am appreciative of all the hard work the game companies put into making life nicer for us. ^_^

 

[343 Grenadier]

Ha. You switched to nested replies. I disabled that because my replies were taking up half a page in busier threads. ...Oh wait, nevermind. I forgot that instead of normal quoting, you manually quote specific things in traditional forum style.  
Well then, I am appreciative of all the hard work the game companies put into making life nicer for us. ^_^

 
It's more than I can say for certain other companies, such as EA and Activision.
 
To revive the old topic a bit, I'd like to know what kind of DAC/amp and sound card setup would be a good pairing as an alternative to a premium sound card. You'd obviously want a very neutral-sounding DAC, but one that doesn't break the bank. Like, a ZxR is 190 bucks while a Z PCIe is about 80 or so. So the DAC would have to beat the ZxR for sound quality, ideally without driving the price very high up. If you want CMSS-3D, it's about 190 for an X-Fi Titanium HD, and you can't really easily find new lower-level cards based on the X-Fi chipset. I have, however, seen refurbished entry-level X-Fis for about 20-30 bucks, although I'm not sure about Auzentech equivalents. And if you want Dolby, then you're in luck since quite a few DACs come with it, but if you specifically want ASUS's featureset and drivers, a DGX is about 30 bucks. An Essence STX is 180. The STX II is out but it's not widely available yet, and where it is, it's horrifically overpriced, so we'll be sticking with the first-gen variant for now.

 

[derbigpr]

  There's plenty of threads about this, you just haven't looked very well.
 
Here's the bottom line:
 
1. Soundcards are useless, avoid them like the plague. If you need virtual surround, you can download Razer Surround for free.
 
2. If you have a fairly new motherboard (last 5 years or so), the DAC chip on your onboard audio will be just as good as any budget DAC out there and I doubt you'd be able to notice the difference.
 
3. If your headphones are sensitive and/or have a low impedance, you don't need an amp so again, your onboard audio should be perfectly fine.
 
TL;DR: In 99% of cases, you don't need anything else than your onboard audio and your headphones.
 
Of course some headphones performs better than others when it comes to positional audio. You want low bass and balanced mids and trebles.
 
Some good examples: Sennheiser's HD 518, 558 or 598, AKG Q701 and Audio-Technica ATH-AD700x.

 
 
Here's the bottom line: you should not be talking about the things you don't have enough experience with.
 
1) Sound cards aren't useless. In that case, external DAC's (exactly the same thing) are useless as well.  Razer Surround is a HORRIBLE software, nowhere near as good as anything you get with a decent 150-200 dollar soundcards. It just add a bunch of crappy EQ and effects to the sound which don't add anything to the surround sound feel.
 
2) Not true. I have a brand new Gigabyte GA-Z97X-Gaming G1 motherboard, it's one of the most expensive motherboards out there, it has a integrated sound card on it, and a headphone amp. It sounds worse than Asus Xonar D1 soundcard (60 dollars) and has less power. In fact, it can't power most of my headphones to a high enough volume level without distorting, whereas the D1 powers the Beyerdynamic T1's to a high volume level at 60%, cleanly, without distortion, and sounds pretty good. Not to mention the Asus is far superior in movies and games, gives a much better feel of virtual space. Any comparison of the G1 motherboard to a Asus Essense ST is pointless.
 
3) Amp doesn't come in handy just when your headphones aren't loud enough.
 
 
"TL;DR: In 99% of cases, you don't need anything else than your onboard audio and your headphones."
Yes, if you're using headphones for 50 dollars or less.

 

[derbigpr]

   
It's more than I can say for certain other companies, such as EA and Activision.
 
To revive the old topic a bit, I'd like to know what kind of DAC/amp and sound card setup would be a good pairing as an alternative to a premium sound card. You'd obviously want a very neutral-sounding DAC, but one that doesn't break the bank. Like, a ZxR is 190 bucks while a Z PCIe is about 80 or so. So the DAC would have to beat the ZxR for sound quality, ideally without driving the price very high up. If you want CMSS-3D, it's about 190 for an X-Fi Titanium HD, and you can't really easily find new lower-level cards based on the X-Fi chipset. I have, however, seen refurbished entry-level X-Fis for about 20-30 bucks, although I'm not sure about Auzentech equivalents. And if you want Dolby, then you're in luck since quite a few DACs come with it, but if you specifically want ASUS's featureset and drivers, a DGX is about 30 bucks. An Essence STX is 180. The STX II is out but it's not widely available yet, and where it is, it's horrifically overpriced, so we'll be sticking with the first-gen variant for now.

 
 
I wouldn't say it's horribly overpriced, it's a bargain, and most people ignore it as an option before trying it, because of their ignorance and bias.
 
Look, I have the original ST, and I have had several DAC's for the similar price, none of them performed as good. I had more expensive DAC/amps, such as the Nuforce HDP or NAD D1050, they didn't perform as well trough their headphone outputs, with any headphone.
 
I've directly compared the Musical Fidelity M1DAC ($1000 in my country) to the Essence ST ($250 in my country), both plugged at the same time into each of the inputs on the Musical Fidelity M1HPAP amplifier ($1200 in my country), using two identical RCA cables, playing the same music file, volume matched with a 10000hz  tone.... and switching between the two inputs on the amp as the music plays made it obvoius the difference between them was absolutely minimal. With Beyerdynamic T1's, HD650's, K701's, DT880's 600Ohm, DT990 Pro's...any headphone I've tried.  In fact, any difference there was, was actually a sound signature difference (M1 is slightly warmer) than quality difference. In terms of detail, separation, extension in both ways...in any technical way pretty much, they're on the same level.  Not to mention that the headphone amp section of the ST sounds almost as good as the M1HPAP and powers any of my headphone with ease, with no channel imbalance or hiss, which can't be said for the M1HPAP.  So....for majority of people out there, this 250 dollar soundcard would be virtually indistinguishable from a 2000+ dollar headphone amp and DAC combo, even with high end headphones.  That to me is not horribly overpriced.  It's one of the best bargains out there.
 
And I'm not the only one saying that. There are plenty of people who agree and you can even google a few articles of people comparing the Essense STX or ST to  much more expensive DAC/amps such as the Benchmark DAC and found them to be way closer than prices suggest.

 

[343 Grenadier]

 Here's the bottom line: you should not be talking about the things you don't have enough experience with.  
1) Sound cards aren't useless. In that case, external DAC's (exactly the same thing) are useless as well.  Razer Surround is a HORRIBLE software, nowhere near as good as anything you get with a decent 150-200 dollar soundcards. It just add a bunch of crappy EQ and effects to the sound which don't add anything to the surround sound feel.

 
I find myself in concurrence here. Razer Surround was okay, but there are better options all-around.
 

 2) Not true. I have a brand new Gigabyte GA-Z97X-Gaming G1 motherboard, it's one of the most expensive motherboards out there, it has a integrated sound card on it, and a headphone amp. It sounds worse than Asus Xonar D1 soundcard (60 dollars) and has less power. In fact, it can't power most of my headphones to a high enough volume level without distorting, whereas the D1 powers the Beyerdynamic T1's to a high volume level at 60%, cleanly, without distortion, and sounds pretty good. Not to mention the Asus is far superior in movies and games, gives a much better feel of virtual space. Any comparison of the G1 motherboard to a Asus Essense ST is pointless.

 
I'm not exactly surprised the integrated audio with good onboard specs loses out in sound quality. It's why if I ever recommend that to people, I also advice them to use SPDIF out to a neutral-sounding external DAC. This, of course, assumes they prefer CMSS-3D or SBX Pro Studio. Otherwise, ASUS's products are a better deal. Personally, I seem to prefer CMSS-3D above all others, with SBX at 30% coming in at a close second.
 

3) Amp doesn't come in handy just when your headphones aren't loud enough.  
 
"TL;DR: In 99% of cases, you don't need anything else than your onboard audio and your headphones."
Yes, if you're using headphones for 50 dollars or less.

 
Yeah, okay, once again I concur. I responded to this guy aggressively because his information was noise. As hearing is subjective, some people DO prefer paid virtualization software.
 

 I wouldn't say it's horribly overpriced, it's a bargain, and most people ignore it as an option before trying it, because of their ignorance and bias.

 
By "horribly overpriced," I meant relative to the other Essence series cards. The STX II isn't widely available yet, and it uses some improved components but overall, the sound is the same. What it has going for it is the PCIe version of the H6 daughterboard, which allows true 7.1 output to a speaker system. If you're using headphones, the STX is generally a better choice for a new system.
 

 Look, I have the original ST, and I have had several DAC's for the similar price, none of them performed as good. I had more expensive DAC/amps, such as the Nuforce HDP or NAD D1050, they didn't perform as well trough their headphone outputs, with any headphone.

 
Finally. Someone with experience between both high-end DACs and headphones. I've been looking for a direct comparison for a while now since I'm not sure if TOSLINK+external DAC beats a quality sound card for gaming, or not. Guess it doesn't.
 

I've directly compared the Musical Fidelity M1DAC ($1000 in my country) to the Essence ST ($250 in my country), both plugged at the same time into each of the inputs on the Musical Fidelity M1HPAP amplifier ($1200 in my country), using two identical RCA cables, playing the same music file, volume matched with a 10000hz  tone.... and switching between the two inputs on the amp as the music plays made it obvoius the difference between them was absolutely minimal. With Beyerdynamic T1's, HD650's, K701's, DT880's 600Ohm, DT990 Pro's...any headphone I've tried.  In fact, any difference there was, was actually a sound signature difference (M1 is slightly warmer) than quality difference. In terms of detail, separation, extension in both ways...in any technical way pretty much, they're on the same level.  Not to mention that the headphone amp section of the ST sounds almost as good as the M1HPAP and powers any of my headphone with ease, with no channel imbalance or hiss, which can't be said for the M1HPAP.  So....for majority of people out there, this 250 dollar soundcard would be virtually indistinguishable from a 2000+ dollar headphone amp and DAC combo, even with high end headphones.  That to me is not horribly overpriced.  It's one of the best bargains out there.  
And I'm not the only one saying that. There are plenty of people who agree and you can even google a few articles of people comparing the Essense STX or ST to  much more expensive DAC/amps such as the Benchmark DAC and found them to be way closer than prices suggest.

 
What I said before. Do you know any budget DAC combos which can at least come close? Just figured I'd add that in for completeness's sake. Not everyone will like internal audio, EMI-shielded or not.

 

[Music Alchemist]

By the way, I came across a great deal and may get the Sennheiser HD 800 and a budget amp/DAC combo in the near future. Once I do, you could walk me through a test of its positional capabilities in a streamlined way if you like, since I don't normally do computer gaming.

 

[haloxt]

  By the way, I came across a great deal and may get the Sennheiser HD 800 and a budget amp/DAC combo in the near future. Once I do, you could walk me through a test of its positional capabilities in a streamlined way if you like, since I don't normally do computer gaming.

Positional capabilities of equipment is how easily it allows a person to get an idea of the spatial position and distance of sounds, and obviously it is different person to person, and even time to time, i.e. learning about how gear and the sound clips in games sound which can take a lot of time to learn even with 3d dsp. Most games already automatically alter the sound of audio clips based upon distance and spatial position relative to the player's character's position and direction, and although most might not deliberately do time delay, stereo panning and volume differences are more than enough to pinpoint where objects are relative to character once you learn how different games do it. What 3D dsp's can do is deliberately exaggerate spatiality cues like panning, reverb, and delay, but not essential to figuring out spatial position and distance, and imo, they always sound worse compared to not using such dsp when using mid-fi or high end gear. With mid to hi-fi gear, it really is more enjoyable to listen to the sounds with as little DSP as possible, and let your brain acclimate and learn to tell distance and position of sound clips with the gear you have.
 
I don't like to diss dac's and amp's, but people reading this thread are going to get the idea that somehow sound cards might actually compete with real audiophile gear, which I think is really sad. First of all, sound cards aren't designed for sound quality, they are designed to do a lot of different things like a a/v receiver is designed to do a lot of things. That is not to say sound cards aren't useful, they will always have a purpose if people actually use them for their functions and don't mistake them as devices that have the main goal of improving sound. I started out in audiophilia with good sound cards like HT omega claro, and I can assure you, sound cards have nothing on real audiophile gear. Someone said STX sounds about the same as the $1000 benchmark dac. Yeah, that's because they both sound as flat as pancakes using cheap ass opamps and archaic designs, and imo aside from somewhat more macrodetail they are little different than mp3 players or $25 cd players. Comparing them to real audiophile gear is like comparing viewing 2d images on a roll of film vs realistic 3d images. Soundcards are suboptimal for sound quality for many different reasons and will always be suboptimal, because of things like the SMPS in a computer having orders of magnitude more jitter than linear psu's, being small enough to fit in computers, and being swiss army knives with a kajillion inputs and outputs that audiophiles will never use but which are there so people who actually want to record stuff or use 7.1 can do so through the sound cards. And if you buy a $200 soundcard for the 3d DSP SOFTWARE and not for the other functions that soundcards have, you're way overpaying.
 
People trying to decide between a sound card and a good external dac/amp for sound quality and not for the stuff offered by sound cards, then obviously go for the external dac/amp. Something like the nfb-15 or nfb-11 would be leagues ahead of any sound card. And that's not hyperbole, if you read any reviews of what happens when you stick burson or audio-gd discrete opamps on soundcards, it's usually people saying the sound difference is drastic and immediate, and even soundcards with discrete opamps can't compare to these kinds of entry level audiophile dac/amps.
 
http://audio-gd.com/Pro/Headphoneamp/NFB1532/NFB15.32EN.htm

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Positional capabilities of equipment is how easily it allows a person to get an idea of the spatial position and distance of sounds, and obviously it is different person to person, and even time to time, i.e. learning about how gear and the sound clips in games sound which can take a lot of time to learn even with 3d dsp. Most games already automatically alter the sound of audio clips based upon distance and spatial position relative to the player's character's position and direction, and although most might not deliberately do time delay, stereo panning and volume differences are more than enough to pinpoint where objects are relative to character once you learn how different games do it. What 3D dsp's can do is deliberately exaggerate spatiality cues like panning, reverb, and delay, but not essential to figuring out spatial position and distance, and imo, they always sound worse compared to not using such dsp when using mid-fi or high end gear. With mid to hi-fi gear, it really is more enjoyable to listen to the sounds with as little DSP as possible, and let your brain acclimate and learn to tell distance and position of sound clips with the gear you have.
 
I don't like to diss dac's and amp's, but people reading this thread are going to get the idea that somehow sound cards might actually compete with real audiophile gear, which I think is really sad. First of all, sound cards aren't designed for sound quality, they are designed to do a lot of different things like a a/v receiver is designed to do a lot of things. That is not to say sound cards aren't useful, they will always have a purpose if people actually use them for their functions and don't mistake them as devices that have the main goal of improving sound. I started out in audiophilia with good sound cards like HT omega claro, and I can assure you, sound cards have nothing on real audiophile gear. Someone said STX sounds about the same as the $1000 benchmark dac. Yeah, that's because they both sound as flat as pancakes using cheap ass opamps and archaic designs, and imo aside from somewhat more macrodetail they are little different than mp3 players or $25 cd players. Comparing them to real audiophile gear is like comparing viewing 2d images on a roll of film vs realistic 3d images. Soundcards are suboptimal for sound quality for many different reasons and will always be suboptimal, because of things like the SMPS in a computer having orders of magnitude more jitter than linear psu's, being small enough to fit in computers, and being swiss army knives with a kajillion inputs and outputs that audiophiles will never use but which are there so people who actually want to record stuff or use 7.1 can do so through the sound cards. And if you buy a $200 soundcard for the 3d DSP SOFTWARE and not for the other functions that soundcards have, you're way overpaying.
 
People trying to decide between a sound card and a good external dac/amp for sound quality and not for the stuff offered by sound cards, then obviously go for the external dac/amp. Something like the nfb-15 or nfb-11 would be leagues ahead of any sound card. And that's not hyperbole, if you read any reviews of what happens when you stick burson or audio-gd discrete opamps on soundcards, it's usually people saying the sound difference is drastic and immediate, and even soundcards with discrete opamps can't compare to these kinds of entry level audiophile dac/amps.
 
http://audio-gd.com/Pro/Headphoneamp/NFB1532/NFB15.32EN.htm

 
I was just assuming 343 Grenadier would be able to walk me through a test of its abilities for gaming.
 
The HD 800 is often said to have the best imaging of any headphone. If the definition of "the sense that a voice or instrument is in a particular place in the room" is to be taken at face value, it would appear that imaging and positional ability are synonymous.
 
Yeah, I'm not interested in sound cards, but then again, I'm not a PC gamer.
 
As for amps/DACs, a flat frequency response is desirable for some people, especially if you are pursuing a neutral, accurate sound. Some go so far as recommending a neutral source, then using EQ to tweak the sound to your liking, instead of spending a lot more on a colored tube amp or whatever. Maybe you weren't referring to frequency response itself when you said "flat as pancakes."
 
Do you know how the NFB-15 and NFB-11 compare to the O2+ODAC? They're about the same price.

 

[343 Grenadier]

By the way, I came across a great deal and may get the Sennheiser HD 800 and a budget amp/DAC combo in the near future. Once I do, you could walk me through a test of its positional capabilities in a streamlined way if you like, since I don't normally do computer gaming.

 
Honestly, given the kinda gaming I've gotten the impression you do, I don't expect it to matter much. Positional cues are most important in shooters and have value in strategy games (Somewhat, but not important.) and stealth-action games. Now on the other hand, if you play a shooter that implements virtualization like L4D2, Call of Duty, or Battlefield, you'll benefit from it. The trick is just to turn on the virtualization and...play. Listen for gunshots, footsteps, character communication, anything that hints to the position of something or someone in your vicinity. Some games have rendered this tech useless or at least made it a chore to get working, though. Counter-Strike titles don't have it enabled by default. You have to toy around in the developer's console to get it working at all.
 

 The HD 800 is often said to have the best imaging of any headphone. If the definition of "the sense that a voice or instrument is in a particular place in the room" is to be taken at face value, it would appear that imaging and positional ability are synonymous.

 
Imaging is important but generally, gamers seem to focus on having a wide soundstage as it highlights the direction of a sound, especially in shooters. I'm not sure about this but based on what I've read, imaging is mostly useful for determining distance, which is important but secondary to soundstage in most shooters. It's also worth noting that virtualization can kill imaging: CMSS-3D is, to my ears, VERY accurate directionally, but it makes everything sound fairly close. Then again, I AM using headphones with crap imaging but a wide soundstage, so that could just be me.
 
Quote:

Positional capabilities of equipment is how easily it allows a person to get an idea of the spatial position and distance of sounds, and obviously it is different person to person, and even time to time, i.e. learning about how gear and the sound clips in games sound which can take a lot of time to learn even with 3d dsp. Most games already automatically alter the sound of audio clips based upon distance and spatial position relative to the player's character's position and direction, and although most might not deliberately do time delay, stereo panning and volume differences are more than enough to pinpoint where objects are relative to character once you learn how different games do it. What 3D dsp's can do is deliberately exaggerate spatiality cues like panning, reverb, and delay, but not essential to figuring out spatial position and distance, and imo, they always sound worse compared to not using such dsp when using mid-fi or high end gear. With mid to hi-fi gear, it really is more enjoyable to listen to the sounds with as little DSP as possible, and let your brain acclimate and learn to tell distance and position of sound clips with the gear you have.

 
Enjoyability is not functional value, it's an aesthetic. "Not essential" does not mean "Not helpful." If it was unquestionably superior for practical purposes only, I wouldn't have made this thread. We're talking straight-up competitive gaming value at any cost to the sound quality. I don't care if it sounds like peanuts dropping on a tin can as long as I can tell with more accuracy where the sound came from. DSPs seem to work well for that. If the solution you're recommending is better for that and that in particular, please explain.
 

I don't like to diss dac's and amp's, but people reading this thread are going to get the idea that somehow sound cards might actually compete with real audiophile gear, which I think is really sad. First of all, sound cards aren't designed for sound quality, they are designed to do a lot of different things like a a/v receiver is designed to do a lot of things. That is not to say sound cards aren't useful, they will always have a purpose if people actually use them for their functions and don't mistake them as devices that have the main goal of improving sound. I started out in audiophilia with good sound cards like HT omega claro, and I can assure you, sound cards have nothing on real audiophile gear. Someone said STX sounds about the same as the $1000 benchmark dac. Yeah, that's because they both sound as flat as pancakes using cheap ass opamps and archaic designs, and imo aside from somewhat more macrodetail they are little different than mp3 players or $25 cd players. Comparing them to real audiophile gear is like comparing viewing 2d images on a roll of film vs realistic 3d images. Soundcards are suboptimal for sound quality for many different reasons and will always be suboptimal, because of things like the SMPS in a computer having orders of magnitude more jitter than linear psu's, being small enough to fit in computers, and being swiss army knives with a kajillion inputs and outputs that audiophiles will never use but which are there so people who actually want to record stuff or use 7.1 can do so through the sound cards. And if you buy a $200 soundcard for the 3d DSP SOFTWARE and not for the other functions that soundcards have, you're way overpaying.

 
Flat is good for positional audio, yes? Which is the entire point of this thread. Enjoyability is a secondary -tertiary, really- consideration to a highly competitive gamer, judging by the crap they usually buy to gain an edge in the fight. The impression I've taken away so far is getting a cheap DAC/amp combo along with an entry-level sound card for the DSP is a cost-effective solution, but this previous poster (Who, I should note, has actually compared the Essence cards with the DACs he was referring to) seems to think that for the price, they're actually good deals, although obviously you don't need them for just the DSP/software. By the way, he said they're close, not at the same level, and that most people won't hear much of a difference. Nowhere did he say they were equal.
 

People trying to decide between a sound card and a good external dac/amp for sound quality and not for the stuff offered by sound cards, then obviously go for the external dac/amp. Something like the nfb-15 or nfb-11 would be leagues ahead of any sound card. And that's not hyperbole, if you read any reviews of what happens when you stick burson or audio-gd discrete opamps on soundcards, it's usually people saying the sound difference is drastic and immediate, and even soundcards with discrete opamps can't compare to these kinds of entry level audiophile dac/amps.  
http://audio-gd.com/Pro/Headphoneamp/NFB1532/NFB15.32EN.ht

 
And what is "the stuff offered by soundcards?" Positional audio? Or something else? If it's the former, then, once again, that is the entire point of this thread. I apologize if you're simply here to correct something erroneous that Derbigpr said but most of this seems irrelevant to this thread's topic. If it's not, clarify, please.

 

[Music Alchemist]

 

Honestly, given the kinda gaming I've gotten the impression you do, I don't expect it to matter much. Positional cues are most important in shooters and have value in strategy games (Somewhat, but not important.) and stealth-action games. Now on the other hand, if you play a shooter that implements virtualization like L4D2, Call of Duty, or Battlefield, you'll benefit from it. The trick is just to turn on the virtualization and...play. Listen for gunshots, footsteps, character communication, anything that hints to the position of something or someone in your vicinity. Some games have rendered this tech useless or at least made it a chore to get working, though. Counter-Strike titles don't have it enabled by default. You have to toy around in the developer's console to get it working at all.

 
I don't do PC gaming at all. I was just offering to share my own insights, if you were willing to walk me through what to do when the time comes. For example, downloading a free game in the style you want, showing me what to do to get samples of the type of sounds you want to test, etc. I could compare with other headphones on hand too. I believe we discussed this earlier.
 

Imaging is important but generally, gamers seem to focus on having a wide soundstage as it highlights the direction of a sound, especially in shooters. I'm not sure about this but based on what I've read, imaging is mostly useful for determining distance, which is important but secondary to soundstage in most shooters. It's also worth noting that virtualization can kill imaging: CMSS-3D is, to my ears, VERY accurate directionally, but it makes everything sound fairly close. Then again, I AM using headphones with crap imaging but a wide soundstage, so that could just be me.

 
The HD 800 has one of the widest soundstages of any headphone. Additionally, the drivers are angled to make them sound more like speakers.
 
Imaging is the sense of knowing the exact location (therefore position) of a sound. If you know the position of two things, you know the distance between them.