And that's not what this thread is about. Inserting a high-priced external DAC to your soundcard is "cheating".
Quote:
| Again we're stuck with the audiophile brand stigma. If Krell gear was rebadged as pro gear, and 19" rack mount handles were added, would you take it less seriously? If someone created it, customized it, or used it -- it being some component, audio or PC based, and you weren't sure if it was meant for a studio or meant for a livingroom, how would you generalize about it? We'd be right back to what matters most -- how it sounds, and either preference or technical merit. |
No, obviously I was being facetious as there will never come a day when Krell or Levinson will make a computer or a sound card. That's not the point, the point is, a product with equivalent technical prowess behind its design, coupled with the same insane level of build quality that an increased budget will allow that is not allowed in present day sound cards as commonly used around here. Quote:
| Which constraints are these? |
The ones I've discussed at least 3 times so far...
Quote:
| And yes, headphone output is compensated for everyone else here, and for most...in the design of the headphone itself. Its been customized to fit the need and the environment. You are using an opamp based amplifier -- theory would say that this would not be the best approach. Its done though. Why? It sounds good. |
Yes, it sounds good, but is there any doubt that a much more expesnive amp that did not have to rely on them could sound better? Yup. Can't afford one right now...
Quote:
| The recording studio did it. |
That's right, to achieve a specific sound and put it on the master tape for you to hear. You can't compensate for bad equipment with EQ, you will still have crappy sound that now has been further crappified with extra EQ.
This also assumes that the only difference between a cheap crummy piece of mass-market garbage and the best version of that component on the market is the way the high-end piece artificially tweaks the frequency response of whatever its playing, that you can achieve high-end sound by merely re-EQ'ing low-end equipment. Obviously, fidelity and resolution, lack of grain, lack of distortion and accuracy fall outside the realm of merely altering EQ to add some extra treble "zing" for example. If I have gear that has sufficient resolution, is accurate and high-fidelity enough to reproduce the recording properly as it was meant to be heard, there is no reason to tweak the EQ, it will sound great as is.
Quote:
| but anyway, i don't know if you realize this, but all the highest-performing solutions for computers are not soundcards!!! even my studio doesn't use a "soundcard!"--i use a Motu 896, which is an outboard solution connected via firewire to my computer. |
Then Orpheus, it looks like we are talking about two totally different things... You still haven't mentioned which high-end CDPs you've listened to for any length of time.
Quote:
| again, i dunno if you realize, but ProTools usually isn't used as just one component among hundreds--EVERYTHING is routed through the darn system. |
Yes, I do understand that. But all the vocals come through a microphone, which has individual parts in it, and then travels through a microphone cable to the recording desk, and on and on. The signal is passing through all kinds of different components. I still don't have any evidence of the degree to which the crappinness of Pro Tools over-rides the potential crappieness of any other component in any other part of the signal path.
Quote:
| your question wasn't whether the AVERAGE soundcard can better a good CDP. your question was whether ANY soundcard can. yeah, most soundcards aren't all that. that is true. |
Well, maybe I didn't state it, but I am talking about the kinds of commercially available consumer audio cards as readily available to the average person on the street as a high-end CDP (provided they have the coin). Quote:
| think of a high-end "soundcard" as a good DAC or ADC. after all, what's the soundcard's job?--to get an analog signal into the computer. well, that's in its most simple form, a DAC. now, let's look at a CDP... what is it? it's basically a DAC and a transport mechanism. now, let's look at Protools: you got the computer that acts as a transport. then you got several external boxes that are essentially the same thing as external DACs. |
Of course, yes. It performs the same function. But expecting a component with a maximum of $300 to spend on it's construction to achieve the same level of performance as something with $2000-$20,000 to spend on it is not realistic, IMO.
*whew* That's the only point I'm making, and now that I've made it 20 times, I think I'm done for the night. 'Bye.
