What Does It Take To Turn The PC Into A Hi-Fi Audio Platform?

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
In case anyone thinks i am an analogue nut i am digital savvy but still prefer qulity valve amps to discrete solid state and i have built quite a few of both. Most good guitarists also prefer valve amps. A good digital source played through such equipment also sounds pretty good if well recorded. The problem with cd's (1983 if I recall) was the brickwall filter at 22KHz which seemed to rob recordings of harmonics outside the passband of human hearing (20KHz or so for youngsters but somehow perceivable to our brains.
 
Such a limited and totally BS review. You cannot focus on 1 specific part. You have to focus on the total experience. You put $50 into something vs $500 vs $5000 you can tell the difference. Above say $5000 maybe not. But you mix a cheap amp with good speakers or vice covers a and you are screwed. I'd love to have this guy over for a blind taste test on any one of my 10 systems that cost between $300 and $25,000 and then let him wite that article.
 
Look let's be honest. Speakers matter most. Spend HALF your budget here OR MORE. The increased fidelity is almost linear up to $500 per speaker if you pick the right brand. And it's very noticeable up to a few thousand $ PER SPEAKER. Amp is # 2. Spend 10% as much on your amp as you did on all your speakers combined. If you have a $1,000 boxed set of 5.1s then a $100 amp is probably a bit weak. Try $200. If you have a $10,000 set up you need at least a $500 amp. The rest is much more commodity.but let me say this I will put my Paradigm Studio Monitor 100 with center, surrounds and 15" sub w/ $700 pioneer elite Av unit against anything 5 it's price. I'LL put my self amped $500 Air motives vs that system and say it's MAYBE 70% as good.
 
I believe it all comes down to is how good your ears are i personally can tell a big difference between realtek and creative -z sound card and then i also have schiit bifrost and from schiit i can hear every detail in music instruments and now after using schiit for awhile if i go to the lower tiered hardware it feels like music is just mashed together and i hear almost no details i believe once you spend a lot of time on higher end hardware you ears get use to it and once you go down to lower quality you can tell that it is just not as good.
 
I believe it all comes down to is how good your ears are i personally can tell a big difference between realtek and creative -z sound card and then i also have schiit bifrost and from schiit i can hear every detail in music instruments and now after using schiit for awhile if i go to the lower tiered hardware it feels like music is just mashed together and i hear almost no details i believe once you spend a lot of time on higher end hardware you ears get use to it and once you go down to lower quality you can tell that it is just not as good.
 
The key to audio quality in high quality headphones is more the amp than the dac at this point. I agree with this review. Technology is at such a point where most good motherboards now have a built in dac that is more than enough when compared to the insanely expensive ones. However, there is a clear audio quality difference on some headphones when using a good good amp vs not using one or using a crappy one. For example, planar magnetic headphones sound awesome, way better than most headphones, but they need a very expensive amp to sound that good. Otherwise, you're stuck with a very expensive pair of headphones that sound the same as some other $50 pair of headphones
 


That's a very good point re blind testing computer performance, comparing gear with performance differences so small they probably wouldn't be noticed. How many people have spend extra money on areas of the computer where the performance differences probably would not pass a blind test? There are measurable differences between the hifi equipment reviewed in this article, whether or not these can be conclusively proven for the benefit of the scientifically minded to be discernable under controlled conditions is another matter entirely, and given the results of the test this methodology might not be the most fruitful way to compare equipment.

For those who have experienced high quality audio systems the differences are immediately obvious. As much as I wish my system was as good as any I have heard, there are some that simply blow mine away, and although controlled testing and sound science theory may suggest our systems sound the same, this is little comfort once you actually hear the unmistakable difference in person.
 
Wall of text incoming: I can see what is wrong with this test. And it's not down to the equipment used. It's down to people. Not specific ones, but people in general.

First off, saying that "Anything above $2 buys more feature, not better quality" is the largest load of misleading bullscrap I've ever read on this site and you should genuinely feel ashamed, unless creating controversy was the purpose of this article. Then you might as well sign up at LG to do their marketing. Once you can buy that audio solution separately for $2 and use it out of the box with no extra equipment apart from cables, I'll withdraw any objections against that statement. And you know what? I'd actually buy it and use it an all my setups. And I'm dead serious about that.

By this, I do not mean to say that people should go and buy expensive DACs (in fact, they shouldn't). I also do not mean to say that the integrated solution is a bad solution. Integrated sound went a HUGE leap over the past few years. Most people will be fine with just that. If that was the point of this test, fine. But this test may also be awfully misleading and people may wrongly assume, that audiophiles are actually just making it all up.

Let's also get one thing out of the way - buying better headphones for some people is like upgrading from IPS to a better IPS - FOR A COLORBLIND PERSON.

The most common misconception in audio is that getting better stuff will give breathtaking results. Truth: It won't. And usually it's not about what's better quality but what does sound better. Because there's a great deal of people, even audiophiles, who will prefer headphones that are lower quality but more fun to listen to.
I'm one of those people who started on something as low as some "don't remember what number" cheap logitech headset and worked their way up to headphones like Ultrasone HFI-2400. I'm not an audiophile by any stretch of imagination. I just like good audio. Notice that I don't mention sources. Above all, audio is about the output device. You want the headphones to be the factor which creates a specific sound signature, not the output. While it's nice to have an output that allows you to increase bass, if you demand strong bass and your headphones aren't up for the task, you should have bought different headphones in the first place.

As for amplifiers, a great amplifier is considered something as cheap as FiiO E6 - it amplifies the signal. Again, it's not about the price, it's about what it gives. While technologically not capable of competing with the price-range you've set with this test, I dare to say it is a device that more than 90% of users will find adequate.
So let's say you have your headphones. You've run them in and now you want an adequate source. You don't take 4 different sources and try them all out. At the end of the day, it's about what you like, not how much it costs. You may pick two different sources and test them throughly. Then maybe you'll take a third one and compare it with what you got previously. And it's not unusual to end up liking two different sources equally for two different reasons. And funny thing is - you might hate those outputs with different headphones.
If you're comparing outputs, you will only be doing that on headphones which you are familiar with (this is probably the first thing at which this test fails). I've switched headphones many times - and every time you make a change, it's a very strange experience, because suddenly things sound differently. And it sometimes feels wrong. Most people will be able to relate to change of a monitor. Going from TN to IPS feels very strange at first. The colors will actually appear to be off on the IPS. The white will appear to be not-really-white. But then, one day, you'll look at the TN again and think to yourself "I used to play on this?"

Enough rubbish, let's talk busyness. So what's the problem with this test?Firstly, the problem is actually in the price-range you've set. There's a reason why most people don't buy this expensive equipment aside from the price - they actually can't tell the difference... Surprised that I'm saying that? You shouldn't be.
The real problem is that you expect a person to be capable of telling the difference in four very similar sounds based on memory. Yes, I said "very similar sounds". If you really expected there to be a great difference in sounds, then maybe it's better you're not doing audio tests (this statement is not meant in ill will - it is just a statement).
I could create a similar test and I guarantee vast majority of people would fail it miserably. I'd generate a simple sound and distort it slightly 4 times, each time differently. Then I'd assign each sound a number and then make people guess which sound they are hearing right now.

A much better test would be giving each individual two different sources, without being told which sources they are getting. The individual could listen to any track they want, they could repeat any segment they want and in the end they would tell you which sound they liked better. Why do it this way? Because that is actually how you pick your headphones and DACs. And that's what's audio about. You pick what you like, not what costs the most.

Tip for a better article: Test alleged "gaming headsets" vs. actual headphones. Because that's really the kind of test that needs to be done. Once people are buying proper headphones, we can start to worry about what sources they are using. That would also be a great opportunity to finally make a larger comparison of surround sound on alleged surround headphones with multiple speakers (which are bogus if you ask me because they still rely on SW calculation) vs surround sound on stereo speakers with large soundstage (got only two ears, right?). Such article would certainly get you a lot of visits - comparisons like these are extremely rare and often not what you expect.

Again, sorry for the wall of text and congratulations if you made it this far without skipping. As I said before, I'm not an audiophile and I'm not recommending anyone expensive audio gear. There is actually a lot of items that are upright outrageously overpriced in the alleged audiophile price-range and you should chose solely based on what you like.
Do the test the right way and I guarantee you will hear the difference. I can hear the difference. My friends who came over could hear it. Hell, even my mom could hear the difference when she was curious why I have this strange box on my desk and don't plug my headphones into the PC. But asking a person to give tags to 4 different, very similar sounds, that's just not gonna work, no matter how much you swap around your equipment.
 
I did a test on my PC playing Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallis in 24/96 and 24/192 using a non-hifi friend. She said that there was more space or air in the 24/192 reproduction.It reminded me of a famous pianist who said: I play the notes as well as anyone else, but I play better the spaces in between.With a good old-fashioned stereo recording, the 24/192 reproductions almost always seem to me to be more atmospheric.
 


what DAC and AMP combination do you recommend for the Sennheiser hd 800's?
 
I love 24 bit sound. Have not tested DSD, but run 24BIt flac files. There is a very noticable difference between 16 and 24 bit sound..especially in the higher frequencies.Using my raspberry PI as my transporter and my pc as a NAS device...and an qnktc dac from the PI to my AMP...works great. Dont waste money on soundcards...neither for speakers or headphone use. Use a USB dac,.. and an headphne amp (for pc use)
 
I love 24 bit sound. Have not tested DSD, but run 24BIt flac files. There is a very noticable difference between 16 and 24 bit sound..especially in the higher frequencies.Using my raspberry PI as my transporter and my pc as a NAS device...and an qnktc dac from the PI to my AMP...works great. Dont waste money on soundcards...neither for speakers or headphone use. Use a USB dac,.. and an headphne amp (for pc use)
 
Thanks - what do you think of the Xonar Essence One? Do know any other 2 in one usb DAC/Headphone amp solutions.

I currently have a Asus Xonar Dx with audio technica ath-m50 headphones, the clarity is great however I could use a little bit more volume. I know that the DX will not be enough if I get the Sennheiser HD 800's because they are high impedance headphone & will lack volume.
 
Being someone who has a moderate amount of audio gear and who loves beautiful music I just decided to go try out some different options with my system (Cary 300b tube integrated amp, Coincident speakers, some ok cables, an old rega planet CD player because my better Cary CD player is currently dead, approximately $15000 since price seems to mater here). I used a mini to RCA cable to connect to a Lenovo X1 laptop and then compared to a Microstreamer DAC/amplifier with the volume turned up all the way. For reference, it would be really nice if the Microstreamer would preform better than the Rega CD player so I don't have to go to the trouble and expense of fixing my Cary. This was a non-blind test similar to probably what most audio review 'experts' do. I did not yet try though my Sennhieser 600s. 1) I found that the the headphone out on the Lenovo is noticeably worse than either other option. I'm pretty sure anyone would hear the difference in a controlled blind test. 2) I found it very difficult to discriminate between the Rega and the Microstreamer, if you know which one it is playing through you can hear perhaps that the Microstreamer is more refined and natural while that Rega is smoother and perhaps colored, but honestly it is difficult even if you are not blind. 3) I think I got some insight into this test as well: long term audio memory is, at least for me, not very good at all. I think it would be very difficult to train yourself so you could reliably hear differences between different pieces of gear even if each one sounded very different (better or worse). However, if doing very quick switching on certain musical phrases (for me 10 second or so), then the differences become much clearer. So, the cynic asks 'if i can't remember the difference does it mater?' Personally, I think that when listening to music that is more 'musical' I enjoy it more. Basically, I think this test is under conditions that are so difficult that only an expert could perform well, but I still think that differences which would take an expert to reliably identify might actually mater. Of course, they might not matter as well...PS. Tom's please stop using so many scripts, 46 on one page??!!
 


Focusrite. They make both a the best mic preamps for the money in a USB or FW interface and a very nice headphone amp. Their on-board headphone amp is decent, but if you need more of a boost Nady and Furman also make decent 8-12 channel headphone amps for under about $200. Nady has an 8 for $120.

If you're not going to spend more than $50 for a headphone amp, go with a Livewire or another "cheap" brand and it will work fine.

I have a set of the HD800s and they're pretty nice headphones for the money.
 
I will look into your suggestions thank you! The HD 800's better be good for the money at the retail price of $1599. lol


I tried a pair at the store and they are my favorite head phones by far.

What Dac/Amp combo do you use for your HD 800's?
 
I was told by a mastering engineer with dozens of Grammy awards that the Acoustic Sounds version of Thriller uses a different mastering than the HD Tracks. He said the Acoustic Sounds uses the LP mastering, while the HD Tracks uses a one-off from the master tapes.
 


The point is on-board, add-on vs external. Not some sound card showdown. There are plenty of other resources for that sort of stuff.More importantly this article is a little subjective. The editor doesn't even do 3d audio gaming comparisons. As each technology uses a vastly different audio engine.
 
In my situation,having a small form factor Acer desktop and an Apple Macbook pro,i had to buy an external soundcard for the desktop. I connected it through th SPDIF connector and it works as good as I can expect it to work based on my less than stellar equipment. I was able to find an external card for under 100 bucks,and works great.Huge improvement over the onboard audio.
 
"the popular ALC892's specifications are inferior to the ALC889." OK, so why wasn't that popular chip tested? I'd be interested to know where the break is between "You can't tell this $10 (retail, not the $2 "OEM quantity") chip from a $2000 (retail) solution." I'd want to know where to draw the line. I spent a lot of money on my stereo, and think I have the ALC892 in my PC (which is NOT hooked up to my stereo, and may remain so.)
 
Unfortunately for me,the majority of info here is helpful to me simply because I haven't gone to this extent to improve my PC audio as of yet.I wish I could offer some info to all of you,but for now,you're educating me on this stuff,which I'm glad to be able to find out about. One thing that I have found out for certain is Ausio makes no difference in the quality of the audio that come from my PC so I no longer even fool with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.