It makes me a bit leery ... that these software proposed here all work with any soundcard.
This should mean they interface with a virtual generic soundcard, the windows soundcard.
I don't know Windows driver hierarchy architecture, which at one detail boils down to the hierarchy of interrupt handlers ( Windows is after all not a real time operating system) but i am a bit suspicious.
Don't know what this means for measurement. But i wonder whether someone just plugs in any amp output to the line in of the soundcard ... which does not have ( lower priced stuff) any analog volume control, and thinks he gets some precise measurement.
I will be quite satisfied with a mere spectrum analyzer, if the spectrum follows a particularly declining curve, i know that will sound good, and that is quite ok. for me
This should mean they interface with a virtual generic soundcard, the windows soundcard.
I don't know Windows driver hierarchy architecture, which at one detail boils down to the hierarchy of interrupt handlers ( Windows is after all not a real time operating system) but i am a bit suspicious.
Don't know what this means for measurement. But i wonder whether someone just plugs in any amp output to the line in of the soundcard ... which does not have ( lower priced stuff) any analog volume control, and thinks he gets some precise measurement.
I will be quite satisfied with a mere spectrum analyzer, if the spectrum follows a particularly declining curve, i know that will sound good, and that is quite ok. for me
No, this is not the case.
In the software, you can select, which driver to use.
Whenever possible, use ASIO drivers
No influence from Windows in this case.
Quote fron Wikipedia:
Audio Stream Input/Output (ASIO) is a computer sound card driver protocol for digital audio specified by Steinberg, providing a low-latency and high fidelity interface between a software application and a computer's sound card. Whereas Microsoft’s DirectSound is commonly used as an intermediary signal path for non-professional users, ASIO allows musicians and sound engineers to access external hardware directly.
This goes into a discussion with has nothing to do with diy audio , but with Windows architecture. I do not think any significant changes were introduced after WIN95 and so I have reason to assume that those "use driver X" options cannot work as a layman may believe. But my in detail affair with Windows definitely ends with WIN95 kernel architecture so it may be... it has changed although it is a bit unlikely. In UNIX i do know how to find out for sure which drivers are actually activated and the whole interrupt handling priorities in Windows i do not. The Unix concept is in terms of "understanding/monitoring what the machine does " far superior to Windows. One has to thoroughly understand "device" in Windows , if not, he will necessarily miss the point.
So my conclusion is first a reliable interface with attenuators ground decoupling ... battery operated... that is numero uno.
Then a simple spectrum analyzer software. No thd mania at all, being aware that the story ends at fundamental frequency max 2 khz. All else is unsafe ground.
Thanks poiting to Daqarta v7.60. I will use that software.
So my conclusion is first a reliable interface with attenuators ground decoupling ... battery operated... that is numero uno.
Then a simple spectrum analyzer software. No thd mania at all, being aware that the story ends at fundamental frequency max 2 khz. All else is unsafe ground.
Thanks poiting to Daqarta v7.60. I will use that software.
Last edited:
ASIO bypasses the whole Windows audio system and gives you bit perfect transfer between the application and the soundcard. It works fine for the most part. When it doesn't, you get gross dropouts and buffer overruns, not some subtle degradation of your measurements.
The biggest problem I had with soundcards was that in a desktop PC, the DC return wiring from the motherboard to the power supply is part of a ground loop. It carries tens of amps of current modulated with audio frequency squeals and graunches. Balanced I/O on the soundcard helps a lot. Relocating the ground wire of the computer's mains inlet from the power supply to the soundcard mounting bracket was another useful hack. Nowadays I use a laptop with a USB audio interface. Hard to beat a laptop running off its battery for breaking ground loops.
The biggest problem I had with soundcards was that in a desktop PC, the DC return wiring from the motherboard to the power supply is part of a ground loop. It carries tens of amps of current modulated with audio frequency squeals and graunches. Balanced I/O on the soundcard helps a lot. Relocating the ground wire of the computer's mains inlet from the power supply to the soundcard mounting bracket was another useful hack. Nowadays I use a laptop with a USB audio interface. Hard to beat a laptop running off its battery for breaking ground loops.
ASIO bypasses the whole Windows audio system and gives you bit perfect transfer between the application and the soundcard. Nowadays I use a laptop with a USB audio interface. Hard to beat a laptop running off its battery for breaking ground loops.
bypassing whatsoever is not my point, rather, it is the concept of "device" in Windows. be advised, that concept cannot be "bypassed" in any way.
Yes laptop , battery operated, good point.
OK, so nothing from the past decade (or more), which might explain the repeated misconceptions.
As you have admitted you don't know much beyond Win95, I suspect you are 20 years behind the times. You select a device, and its device driver (say ASIO) and windows gets on with it. In fact bit perfect tends to be a lot easier in windows than Linux.
You do not understand the essential as you refer to user interface but not to device interface. You confuse application interface with device interface.
I can safely say I know more about Windows device concept than , say, the average man, because I went as a professional from semiconductor physics to operating systems architecture expert. But to explain items such as device concept is way off topic. However as a general rule if the user interface of an operating system hides "internal complexity" from you , it is a user friendly system, as you are supposed you have no intention to understand how it really works. But I think i will stop here, as I know what I am going to do.
Which is as it should be. But it's important to point out to readers here that Windows-based measurement systems can achieve great results without getting into a lot of complication, and that the worries of 20 years ago just aren't relevant any more.
Attachments
It has been changed a LOT since Windows Vista. The new audio interface called WASAPI has been introduced what means: Normal WASAPI as MMS/WDM audio will be shift trough the AUDIO mixer (mixing and also sample rate conversion).
To get 100% bit perfect WASAPI, the Exclusive WASAPI device use has to be used/implemented.
Drop outs put your spectrum to death! For measurement put always the latency to the maximum (= ASIO I/O buffer size)! IMHO for measure it made no much sence to have the minimal latency
Only using WASAPI Exclusive mode. HW connection is always an issue specially if you have to measure an none symmetric signal.
Using a USB Streamer and the I2S isolation board from JensH is a starting point.
I cannot speak for Linux... for bit perfect measurements & latest MS Windows OS use, it requires ASIO or the WASAPI Exclusive (if you do not have ASIO)
Hp
hmm, sounds very defensive. You claim to know what you are talking about yet offer not one shred of evidence as to why you are right and we are all wrong. Hint, NT kernel and Win95 kernel are completely different. Oh and if we are wrong, companies like Steinberg who wrote ASIO (and are in a few studios) are also wrong. Evidence seems stacking up...
And FWIW I think you need to understand what a device driver is in windows post NT. Note NT and onwards are microkernel architectures, Win95 was not.
And FWIW I think you need to understand what a device driver is in windows post NT. Note NT and onwards are microkernel architectures, Win95 was not.
Summing up summary...I asked for experiences with and some responses left the impression of an expert talking , others did not. No noe however has offered a comparison with results obtained with pro equipment such as those Bruel&Kjaer devices pure good ole hardware which I assume pro designers of audio stuff such as levinson or Brinkman etc. have at their disposal. I hoped someone would post such results but no one did.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.