need advise on 7.1 sound card

[2bighorn]

We're talking about computer audio reproduction and 3D positional sound, not just 2 chan. The Gigabyte board uses  TI Burr Brown OPA2134 op-amps. Are they bad in your opinion?

They're not bad but they're not nearly as good as 2 x LME 49710NA in ZXR. THD 0.00008% vs 0.00003%, Open Loop Gain 120dB vs 140dB, for example...

Don't change subjects now. is it or is it not possible for Gigabyte to implement similar or better quality components in the motherboard audio? Remember that the stance of the opposition is that it CANT be done. It's not only if it has been done or not.

At the moment due to pysical constraints, you can't do it, not on the same form factor MB.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I do not believe I ever said it was bad.

It is just not as efficient as an add on card and I have already explained why.

Yes I understand that in XP era. In post Vista era you get no hardware acceleration unless your hardware, drivers and software are all supported for OpenAL. I'm fairly sure most of users run in software mode most of the time.

In Windows 8 steps have been taken to enable audio hardware acceleration again.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

They're not bad but they're not nearly as good as 2 x LME 49710NA in ZXR. THD 0.00008% vs 0.00003%, Open Loop Gain 120dB vs 140dB, for example...

At the moment due to pysical constraints, you can't do it, not on the same form factor MB.

You should have read the follow-up. The Core3D is not only the DSP it contains the DAC and ADC built in. That makes it technically more or less identical to a Creative standalone card using the same chip.

Of course it's possible that Creative chose to use crappy components in their X-FI replacement card. Not very likely though.

[2bighorn]

The point is that as I just discovered, the Creative chip is an all-in-one solution with DSP, DAC and ADC and the board uses a short signal path and a known good Burr-Brown op-amp, high quality Japanese Nichicon audio capacitors in an isolated section on the board and a discrete filtered power supply.

Stop talking nonsense. Maybe as used on Gigabyte MB.
ZXR has PCM 1798 and PCM 1794 DACs. On ZXR, SoundCore3D is used only for SBX, CV and Scout mode processing. There's also huge difference in capacitors. ZXR uses Nichicon "Fine Gold" capacitors.

[Skuzzy]

Yes I understand that in XP era. In post Vista era you get no hardware acceleration unless your hardware, drivers and software are all supported for OpenAL. I'm fairly sure most of users run in software mode most of the time.

It does not matter as the method would be the same whether it is an onboard chip or an add on card.  The increase in efficiencies still apply to the add-on card.

You do understand "hardware acceleration" was a misnomer in Windows XP?  If the sound device was on the motherboard, it simply adjusted the priority the driver ran at.

If you are using an ASIO driver, all bets are off as that goes directly to the hardware, by-passing most of Windows.  You will see a huge difference in latencies between onboard and add-in card there.  My home system has a 2ms latency on my add-in card.  47ms through the onboard chip.

[2bighorn]

You should have read the follow-up.

You should read the specs...

[MrRiplEy[H]]

It does not matter as the method would be the same whether it is an onboard chip or an add on card.  The increase in efficiencies still apply to the add-on card.

You do understand "hardware acceleration" was a misnomer in Windows XP?  If the sound device was on the motherboard, it simply adjusted the priority the driver ran at.

Misnomer in which way? In Windows XP the drivers could directly utilize the hardware components in the sound card, offloading the tasks from the CPU. Since Windows Vista, the audio has been forced to run in emulation mode with no direct access to hardware. This was done because of the recording industrys demands on Digital Rights Management. To put it short, the recording industry chose to cripple your sound cards in Vista and forward to disable the ability to rip High definition audio.

Most users are not using ASIO drivers and the ASIO drivers do not have an interface to Directsound. ASIO is used primarily by pro audio software and hardware.

[Skuzzy]

It was a misnomer due to it not really using "hardware" acceleration for onboard chips.

I know all about the DRM, UAA and other nonsense in Vista which crippled the entire Windows sound system.  Windows 7 fixed a lot of it.  At least as got back ASIO support in Windows 7, and later.

Again, this does not have anything to do with whether or not an add-in card is more efficient than an onboard chip.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

It was a misnomer due to it not really using "hardware" acceleration for onboard chips.

I know all about the DRM, UAA and other nonsense in Vista which crippled the entire Windows sound system.  Windows 7 fixed a lot of it.  At least as got back ASIO support in Windows 7, and later.

Yes but I want to make things clear: ASIO support does _not_ fix emulation mode with DirectSound games. Only Alchemy and similar techniques enable the offloading. It would be interesting to know if Aces High supports Alchemy or not, at least the Creative documentation does not imply that.

Correct me if I'm wrong but a sound card that runs in software mode and there for taxes the CPU, is no more efficient or worse than a regular onboard Realtek chip for example. Things change totally if hardware acceleration is supported and the card can offload audio processing from the CPU.

[Skuzzy]

Yes but I want to make things clear: ASIO support does _not_ fix emulation mode with DirectSound games. Only Alchemy and similar techniques enable the offloading. It would be interesting to know if Aces High supports Alchemy or not, at least the Creative documentation does not imply that.

No, we do not support Alchemy, as that is a short term solution and does nothing for Aces High.  We do true positional sounds, the sounds do not need any further processing, other than simple D to A.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Stop talking nonsense. Maybe as used on Gigabyte MB.
ZXR has PCM 1798 and PCM 1794 DACs. On ZXR, SoundCore3D is used only for SBX, CV and Scout mode processing. There's also huge difference in capacitors. ZXR uses Nichicon "Fine Gold" capacitors.

Yes as used on the Gigabyte sample (among others). The main issue was not if the Gigabyte implementation was perfect in every imaginable way. It was a counter argument against 'onboard audio sucks'. In reality the more expensive motherboards have an onboard audio solution that is well comparable to most budget discrete sound cards (to the least, I doubt even they use Nichicon caps and Burr-Brown amps), especially after the fact that many games (or even Creatives own products) do not support hardware audio offloading post Vista.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

No, we do not support Alchemy, as that is a short term solution and does nothing for Aces High.  We do true positional sounds, the sounds do not need any further processing, other than simple D to A.

Thank you, this was a straight and honest answer and I appreciate that.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

You should read the specs...

Ok lets speak about specs.

What is the THD on the amplifier you use at this time? You do realize that even if your source had 0% THD and your amp introduces 0.005% THD at 1 watts, you end up with 0.005% THD?

So. Your source has 0.000005% THD. My source has 0.000008% THD. After it's played through a hi-fi amp it has 0.00505% and 0.00508% THD, respectively. After you play it through speakers at 10 watts output your amp puts out already 0.01 % THD probably. Then your speakers add another 0.1% or more.

So if I play music using my high-end amplifier and high-end electrostatic speakers that do not add the 0.01% + 0.1% THD but maybe tenth or less of that, I end up with much higher accuracy even when using a totally 'crappy' source. This is because I have addressed the biggest source of distortion in the audio chain.

Advantages of electrostatic loudspeakers include levels of distortion one to two orders of magnitude lower than conventional cone drivers in a box, the extremely light weight of the diaphragm which is driven across its whole surface, and exemplary frequency response (both in amplitude and phase) because the principle of generating force and pressure is almost free from resonances unlike the more common electrodynamic driver. Musical transparency can be better than in electrodynamic speakers because the radiating surface has much less mass than most other drivers and is therefore far less capable of storing energy to be released later. For example, typical dynamic speaker drivers can have moving masses of tens or hundreds of grams whereas an electrostatic membrane only weighs a few milligrams, several times less than the very lightest of electrodynamic tweeters. The concomitant air load, often insignificant in dynamic speakers, is usually tens of grams because of the large coupling surface, this contributing to damping of resonance buildup by the air itself to a significant, though not complete, degree. Electrostatics can also be executed as full-range designs, lacking the usual crossover filters and enclosures that could color or distort the sound.

[Skuzzy]

I do not care for the direction this thread is going, but I have to say.  THD is a minor component in what determines the quality of sound reproduction.

[zack1234]

So you can tell the difference using exspensive audio equipment?

I saw some speakers with valves in a shop

What sort of music requires such equipment

I have some £170  seinheiser momentum headphones, my mrs  bought them for me, i only found out the price other day and nearly fell over