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

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


Blu-ray isn't an encoding format. It is simply a medium that has a higher storage density. You can store 24/96 or 24/192 on a CD (just limited to the storage limit of the CD).

I have 16/44.1 that takes up a CD and I have same album as 24/192 that takes up 2.5GB.

 


I know what you are trying to say, indeed blu-ray is just a storage medium for computer-audio. This does not count for CD, which is not only a storage medium for computer-audio but also a carrier of linear bitstream audio which can be read by a cd player. Notice the difference? A CD player is actually a purpose-built audio device while a blu-ray player or computer is not.
 




I have a specific answer to this. The noise you are picking up is due to the Switch Mode Power supply.

My Setup is thus:
I use an EMU 1212M with balanced connections to my amp.

I have a Rosewill 350 Watt Silent PSU

I have a combination of Tripplite 10 AMP 12v Linear Regulated supply and a DC to DC ATX converter.
The DC to DC ATX converter does do switching, but I think the 12v rail isn't switch mode, just inverted and filtered. The 5 and 3.3 are switched. So it isn't 120V switched down to 12/5/3.3 for starters.

The EMU has the ability to switch ananlog I/O between Balanced and Single ended.

As a test I took some well constructed bulk MIC cable and built TRS to XLR unbalanced on purpose. I left the ground floating at the XLR end of things. Switched the card to Single ended mode.

I put in the Rosewill power supply. You could hear mouse movement and HD access (if a mechanical HD, SSD was silent in this regard).

With same Rosewill supply I used balanced TRS to XLR and set the EMU to balanced output. Balanced connections did what they do best: They rejected the noise.

Now onto the Tripplite and DC to DC ATX converter:

I placed the unbalanced TRS to XLR back in the chain. I bring up my other single ended configuration on the EMU 1212M and NO NOISE. Couldn't hear the mouse, Couldn't hear mechanicals of the the spinner hard disk.

So for ~$100 I managed to get rid of the largest single complaint about computer audio: EMI from the PSU.

I run with the Tripplite and DC/DC ATX and balanced connections. My noise floor with a Crown XLS 1500 is ink black. At system idle you don't even know the amp is on.

My speakers are DIY Curt Cambell/Jim Holtz Statements for anyone that would like to look them up.

Interesting tidbit: When I was running Parasound HCA1000A (two in mono-block) there was tweeter hiss. I switched from an "Audiophile" amp to a "Pro-audio" amp and couldn't be happier.
 


CD players, Blu-Ray players, they are just devices with outputs. CD players being a 1980's technology just have fewer features.

Not sure what 'Purpose Built' has to do with the price of tea. I would take the Oppo 105 and put it up head to head with any CD transport at any price.

 
I use a mid-range external DAC with my pair of headphones. The first day I bought the DAC, I was extremely disappointed to find out that it basically sounded the same as my on-board DAC. However, my ears are now kinda used to the external DAC that I use and I can find some subtle differences in the sound output. I still cannot say which one is better, but at least I can tell them them apart. With headphones however, the difference between $5 earbuds, $300 pairs of headphones and $1500 ones is clear as day, although the price increases exponentially as you try to find better sounding headphones. I mean the difference in sound quality between $600 headphones and $2000 ones is maybe only 10% but it's significant enough for me to find the $2000 headphones more pleasant to listen to.
 
This article is worst than an audiophile trying to review the performance of a PC.Most rock and metal tunes are garbage when trying to evaluate the performance of audio equipments. Just like PC games/software, some games do better with multithread, some are CPU heavy, etc etc. It's like trying to compare two graphics card and using WOW to do it. Just like some people won't be able to tell the difference when playing games on a 24in 1080p and a 24in 1440p screen. Just saying...If you can't do it right, don't do it because you'll just mislead people.
 
I have an Asus Xonar Phoebus connected through JRiver Media Centre with a specifically set EQ with simple PCM 6 channel 3.5 jacks to a set of Logitech z906 speakers and I've never heard anything better from an expensive rack mounted stereo system. The best thing about the PC speakers is that you can play your music loud without disturbing the neighbors and still get the full range audio spectrum because of there low wattage. But the biggest difference to testing audio is the listener. It extremely subjective, based on the listeners sense of hearing. I've founf that most people can't tell the difference between onboard sound and a great soundcard. Most people are happy with an iPod and those shitty little ear plugs. So it doesn't matter to anyone but yourself. If what you have sounds great then why spend more than you need to. People in general are pretty insensitive regarding their "5" senses. I've been in heaven listening to certain tracks in Flac with my system, only to find a blank stare on a mate, who just isn't hearing what you are. Like the new version of Devin Townsend's "Kingdom" from "Epicloud". That is insanely pleasurable to my ears, but it doesn't matter because you'll drive yourself crazy trying to share the experience. You either have a sensitive sound palette or not. So it basically comes down to whether you're happy with your sound or not.
 
Great article as I'm in the middle of remodeling the basement and putting in a decent sound system!On a side note, I'd love to see something similar done with LP's vs. CD's.-d
 
I can't believe the onboard chip wasn't more noticable. Maybe it was the listening volume, but I can hear all sorts of atrifacts using my Realtek ALC898 onboard audio. I believe they are caused by voltage draws of other components in the system, and that isolating the audio with it's own caps etc. would go a great way to alleviate this problem. I would love to see more articles along these lines, and do think that it's pertinent information for a computer site as it is one of the main components of a PC. Imagine... gaming without sound, youtube without the punchlines, editing photos without music in the background. I say more more more.
 
I build and upgrade my PCs using reports and data from Tom's Hardware, so I like to consider myself to be a PC enthusiast and an audiophile, which makes this article is really interesting. My question to the authors is what differences were you expecting to find - more bass, more treble, what exactly? The tests proved that all of the devices produce a similar sound with this PC, but that doesn't mean that they sound the same with all PCs and hardware. Would you run a blind test between an Nvidia Titan and a Radeon HD 7990 on a Pentium III motherboard - I doubt it, because you'd probably find that the motherboard and CPU are limiting both GPUs, and producing identical results? I support the comment from gaymer1984 - audiophiles aren't just looking for better sound, they are looking for realism and detail, which you don't comment on in this article. I think the thing this article demonstrates well is that most of us are happy with the sound of cheap electronics, just as we were with the cassette tape once. There's no need for expensive video cards unless you're a gamer with a pc and monitor to match - equally there's no need for expensive audio cards unless you've got the hardware, hearing and an audiophile level of interest to match.
 
I couldn't even read this article once I realized they weren't going to include a digital signal over HDMI to a quality receiver that could handle native DSD. I run my HI-DEF music straight to a Denon 4311 via HDMI, and I promise you there is a BIG difference between 16/44 and 24/96. All this article really did was compare different D/A converters, and poor ones at that!
 


I think you are missing the point. 1st this isn't a video card comparo so stop likening this to video cards.

Also it's not a test of a Pentium III.

It's a system where the only variable is the sound device with the assumption the computer (CPU, Storage, RAM, system bus) are all up to a modern standard and more than adequate to get the job of reliable play back done.

Depending on ones needs some devices have benefits. My 1212M features ADAT and AES-EBU I/O. I can go ADAT to a pre-amp and put in 8/10/12 additional channels of sound. I could easily take my 2.0 system and go 2.2.

I can add the expansion box and turn it into the 1616M and that would give me RIAA Equalized Phono input and headphones. Sometimes it's about the flexibility.

 
my digital audio setup is an optical out put from my on board sound card to an Emotiva XDA-2 (DAC) into a Marantz PM6004 (integrated amplifier) and then on to either my Monitor Audio RX1s or an appropriate headset.

At $270, the Emotiva XDA-2 is really solid buy as it supports numerious inputs (2 optical, 2 coax, 1 usb), has its own headphone output, and can function as a stand-alone digital preamp.
 
I think simply saying that anything above 16/44K doesn't matter is ignoring a number of things, especially the fact that there are plenty of DVDs, Blurays and digital video formats that will include higher resolution audio, too.If you're just listening to stereo music, then I would tend to agree. If you're recording or using your PC for HD video media, I strongly disagree.One thing to note is that in recording, your sampling rate determines your recording resolution, and therefore your depth of editing. It's the classic stair-step effect you see in graphics when you don't have AA or a high-res texture. Your wave suffers from the same thing, meaning your edits take a larger chunk out of the wave, your sample records a more jagged version of the audio and your end product suffers.That said, I think the average user can get by on decent on-board sound, or with an upgraded Creative card.If you're a headphone gamer, like me, the story is different: get yourself a quality card that will do USB output *or* if you're using a 1/8in or 1/4in jack headset, grab a Focusrite or M-audio studio recording device (you can get a tiny one that only has a couple inputs as you'll just be using the monitor out) and control your audio output through this. This will give you quality preamps, better output levels and a cleaner signal than you'll get from most any standard audio solution.You don't need a FW headset monitor, but in case you plan to do a little home recording later, Focusrite, M-Audio and Presonus all make viable solutions for less than $200 that will serve your headphone and recording needs better than half of the other PC-enthusiast audio crap.They're the ones making the gear the pros use for studio use, so they know their stuff.
 
@Nossy:"Kind of hypocritical for Tomshardware to say that blah blah dB at blah blah Hz is not critical, and when really comparing graphics cards that are 5fps difference (which most people won't be able to tell the difference) and claiming that one is "better" than the other."

It's a fair point. I would love to see blind A/B testing of gamers playing or at the very least watching a gaming video at full speed to see things like:

-How big a FPS drop for the entire sequence has to be before it is noticeable, starting from 60 or 100 FPS.

-Starting from X frames per second, is a 10% drop in frame rates noticeable? For how high or low a value of X?

-How low can the minimum frame rate during a sequence go before it is noticed?

-Which changes in AA, etc are noticeable at higher resolutions?

-Which genres and game engines tend to make the changes more noticeable?

To cap it off: run the tests on subjects blind to the type of difference that is being applied (just ask them which version they prefer) and also on subjects who have been coached on what to look for.I'm certain these analyses are out there, but they are kept in house by games and hardware developers.

I'd also say that Toms isn't so hypocritical. Reviews here document minor differences in performance along with the major differences, but the buyer's guides rank hardware in broad tiers and are pretty adamant about upgrades not being very noticeable unless you move up several tiers from your current hardware.
 


Nail meet hammer. These are two points that I find my self making all the time.

Higher resolution encoding allows for better editing. You can always master down but not up. Pro-Audio sound cards from all the manufacturers that you mentioned are great, no nonsense options.

I'll throw Apogee onto the pile if you are using a Mac. Also Lynx, RME, Tascam into the mix.

 
The results seem quite suspect. I have a high quality on board sound and I can tell the difference between that an a lower end Xonar card on mid-range Sony headphones.The difference is the quality of the headphone amplifier. I can let the music get very quiet and hear quiet sounds cleanly that get lost on the on board audio.So a $40 sounds card + $60 (MDR V-6) headphones can hear the differences. The point of audiophile sound equipment is basically to play the quietest sounds in music cleanly. The goal of the tests should have been to turn the music down as low as it could go and still cleanly and clearly hear nuance. It seems weird that you are also touting the fact that you have no domain experience in audio. You also boast that you don't have much experience in testing audio equipment. Clearly you have not read much in the way of equipment reviews if you think that audiophiles can not put together objective and subjective equipment testing. As far as the industry affiliation goes would you feel that you are compromised because you work on computer equipment. Would an audio magazine put together a better assessment of hard drive performance. Clearly no on both accounts. Most people can not tell 30 fps from 120fps. Experienced gamers spot this in a second. Would you expect less of audiophiles?
 
Awwe Man , Good Atempt but big Flaw , The better speakers you have the more difference you will hear in audio equipment , the STX is an awesome card for the money , Doing testing on high quality speakers like Martin Logans , Magnepans , Yg Acoustics you will definitely tell the difference from lower quality sources , Another big flaw is that JRiver studio was not used wich by itself makes a big difference , If you are running lets say an Emotiva Xpa-2 you will hear the sounds of Real instruments that trick the mind.
 
Awwe Man , Good Atempt but big Flaw , The better speakers you have the more difference you will hear in audio equipment , the STX is an awesome card for the money , Doing testing on high quality speakers like Martin Logans , Magnepans , Yg Acoustics you will definitely tell the difference from lower quality sources , Another big flaw is that JRiver studio was not used wich by itself makes a big difference , If you are running lets say an Emotiva Xpa-2 you will hear the sounds of Real instruments that trick the mind.
 
Awwe Man , Good Atempt but big Flaw , The better speakers you have the more difference you will hear in audio equipment , the STX is an awesome card for the money , Doing testing on high quality speakers like Martin Logans , Magnepans , Yg Acoustics you will definitely tell the difference from lower quality sources , Another big flaw is that JRiver studio was not used wich by itself makes a big difference , If you are running lets say an Emotiva Xpa-2 you will hear the sounds of Real instruments that trick the mind.
 
Someone Somewhere, as I said in my post, price is not necessarily an indicator of quality - and I specifically stated that I was referring to my own experience. Using a common frame of reference helps people to understand more clearly.

I believe the statements made in this article are misleading, and my post is designed to ask questions in the right direction. $2 to $2000 is a sweeping, subjective statement and given the fact we are talking about recommending courses of actions to budding hobbyists, can you not see my point? Enjoyment is not the same as quality - the mark of an audiophile is when someone enjoys hearing objective quality, not subjective. Anyone can buy a cheap MP3 player with a filter that will warm up harshly recorded sounds, and it might even sound good. Audiophiles aren't interested in what sounds good, they're interested in what sounds best, what sounds accurate. I say that as one of them.
 
As a last part of my comments...

To start off, this is what's I've gather on your conclusion (first part testing):
1) "we're PC enthusiasts, not self-proclaimed audiophiles"
2) "We are audio amateurs, not audio professionals."
3) "I sank $2000 of my own money into the DAC2 HGC last December, so I subjectively wanted it to sound better than everything else. Tests have shown that it doesn't."
4) "... a $2 Realtek integrated audio codec could not be reliably distinguished from the $2000 Benchmark DAC2 HGC in a four-device round-up."

You do know that you're actually stepping on other's tails with comments like that? The benchmark DAC is a reputable device in the Audio community. It's surprising and sad that the reviewers could not distinguish it. And based on some of the harsh comments here, you can see that there's much to improve on in a proper audio review. Hopefully your next review would include a more thorough subjective + objective review? And maybe hire some audiophiles/professional to help with your blind tests?
 
Pretty much the only reason to buy a sound card is to get different inputs/outputs compared to the onboard. Specifically for me, its Dolby Digital live encoding that is a feature that must be there. Most motherboards do not support this. Yes the codec supports it, but no, most boards did not pay for the licensing and therefore don't offer it. Just wanted to say that since this article is basically telling people: don't bother with sounds cards.
 
Im thinking about buy my first discrete audio card in decades.. I have never needed anything more than what my integrated solutions provided, but my latest motherboard has the ALC889 codec and doesnt support Dolby Digital Live or DTS Connect to run the desktop in 5.1. It works fine with my 5.1 analog speakers but not connected to my receiver with the either the optical or coax connections.. It only allows stereo on the desktop, which means all games which use the windows default will only run in 2 channel. I found a hacked driver that will allow me to enable DTS Connect or Dolby Digital Live but they dont work right in sources that dont have native 5.1 soundtracks. So movies and some games work just fine in 5.1, but with the hacked driver most games refuse to use the center channel. So, Im looking for the cheapest solution that will allow me to actually use 5.1 sound as a default. I was hoping there would be an acceptable option here, but at $190 the cheapest card is WAY more than the $50 I want to keep it under.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom