Ripping and stuff
Thanks guys,
Gives me a lot to do. I already have a decent basic setup with the OS (XP pro) set up on its own WD 30 Gig drive. I have a second WD 7200RPM 250Gig drive (New!) for system backup with a whole lot of room for music and movies. I do already have most of my stuff ripped to WAV and semi organized with many and various play lists. This stuff does take a lot of time so not wanting to have to ever redo it I have it all backed up on a USB2 hard drive. My basic system is not much but has been tweaked to acceptable performance and does make me want to go further with full surround and good video. Video card is a whole other issue, as is the display its self. But first to get the sound stuff as good as I can.
I will look into the other cards that were mentioned as well as multi channel support. Looks like some more long nights ahead!
Roger
Thanks guys,
Gives me a lot to do. I already have a decent basic setup with the OS (XP pro) set up on its own WD 30 Gig drive. I have a second WD 7200RPM 250Gig drive (New!) for system backup with a whole lot of room for music and movies. I do already have most of my stuff ripped to WAV and semi organized with many and various play lists. This stuff does take a lot of time so not wanting to have to ever redo it I have it all backed up on a USB2 hard drive. My basic system is not much but has been tweaked to acceptable performance and does make me want to go further with full surround and good video. Video card is a whole other issue, as is the display its self. But first to get the sound stuff as good as I can.
I will look into the other cards that were mentioned as well as multi channel support. Looks like some more long nights ahead!
Roger
Hi,
I think we're lucky on the video card issue.
The choices are alot simpler. You really don't need the 900$ cutting edge video card for excellent audio and even dual display with TV out is pretty standard on even basic cards these days.
100 to 200 on almost any new card and I don't think you'll be left wanting.
I have nothing fancy and enjoy watching video on it, were I to replace it now I'd get a card at least two generations ahead in the quoted price range, I'm sure it would be more than ideal, I've no current plans on upgrading that.
It's either ATI or Nvidia, as much as you want to spend.
Regards,
Chris
I think we're lucky on the video card issue.
The choices are alot simpler. You really don't need the 900$ cutting edge video card for excellent audio and even dual display with TV out is pretty standard on even basic cards these days.
100 to 200 on almost any new card and I don't think you'll be left wanting.
I have nothing fancy and enjoy watching video on it, were I to replace it now I'd get a card at least two generations ahead in the quoted price range, I'm sure it would be more than ideal, I've no current plans on upgrading that.
It's either ATI or Nvidia, as much as you want to spend.
Regards,
Chris
Forum link!
Dean,
Wow, some thread you posted. Not that much real information there but I do now have a better understanding of the problem. There were statements made that the windows software was capable of doing all the necessary decoding then passing this data straight through the sound card to get the 5.1 or whatever. If this is true it seems the computer would take a big hit in overhead allowing things like skipping to occur, or are there sufficient data buffers that would take care of this on the card. If this is done would the 24/96 DVD audio or A/V be retained intact? Does this sound like the actual situation? Would any of these problems apply to the 1212M as it is stereo only (sample rate conversion, etc)?
This issue is far more complex than I ever dreamed! One could wish for a single vendor solution of exemplary quality that didn’t cost a small fortune. E-mu has the hardware now for a comparable software package. They should offer 2 versions of the software one for home audio and one for pro sound.
Roger
Ps. I did notice how they snubbed your question in their forum, not surprised after getting to know them a bit! Closed minds! Small wonder most recordings are trash. Reminds me of my Dad, “Been doing it this way for 30 years, don’t tell me how to do it better!”
deandob said:
Dean,
Wow, some thread you posted. Not that much real information there but I do now have a better understanding of the problem. There were statements made that the windows software was capable of doing all the necessary decoding then passing this data straight through the sound card to get the 5.1 or whatever. If this is true it seems the computer would take a big hit in overhead allowing things like skipping to occur, or are there sufficient data buffers that would take care of this on the card. If this is done would the 24/96 DVD audio or A/V be retained intact? Does this sound like the actual situation? Would any of these problems apply to the 1212M as it is stereo only (sample rate conversion, etc)?
This issue is far more complex than I ever dreamed! One could wish for a single vendor solution of exemplary quality that didn’t cost a small fortune. E-mu has the hardware now for a comparable software package. They should offer 2 versions of the software one for home audio and one for pro sound.
Roger
Ps. I did notice how they snubbed your question in their forum, not surprised after getting to know them a bit! Closed minds! Small wonder most recordings are trash. Reminds me of my Dad, “Been doing it this way for 30 years, don’t tell me how to do it better!”
Hi,
All I get of that thread is alot of excuses. If they feel a demand for it I'm sure it will happen, but don't worry I'm not holding my breath.
Well it only took about ten minutes to get sound from it. Yes, I have the card and got it working.
I'm not happy with the given documentation, I can see the icons/buttons and I can read the pop ups over them to tell me what they are, that's about all the instructions are good for!
I haven't yet been able to get it to play at a higher sampling rate than 44khz, from what I've seen so far I may not even be able to get stereo out of it at 192khz.
I'll be looking for some tutorials online to help me figure it out before I totally condem it.
How did it sound on my homebrew 2 cent amp? I was hearing alot of detail that wasn't present before, "alot". I only listened for 2 minutes, probably less, no doubt it has to burn in as well. Can't comment further at present time.
Just thought I'd give a "first impressions" to you guys.
Card good,
Software bad.
Regards,
Chris
All I get of that thread is alot of excuses. If they feel a demand for it I'm sure it will happen, but don't worry I'm not holding my breath.
Well it only took about ten minutes to get sound from it. Yes, I have the card and got it working.
I'm not happy with the given documentation, I can see the icons/buttons and I can read the pop ups over them to tell me what they are, that's about all the instructions are good for!
I haven't yet been able to get it to play at a higher sampling rate than 44khz, from what I've seen so far I may not even be able to get stereo out of it at 192khz.
I'll be looking for some tutorials online to help me figure it out before I totally condem it.
How did it sound on my homebrew 2 cent amp? I was hearing alot of detail that wasn't present before, "alot". I only listened for 2 minutes, probably less, no doubt it has to burn in as well. Can't comment further at present time.
Just thought I'd give a "first impressions" to you guys.
Card good,
Software bad.
Regards,
Chris
First impressions?
Chris,
Long way to go yet till you really know what it sounds like. Aside from the learning curve there is the still break-in to be considered. I really don’t think sonics will be an issue, it seems getting it to function usefully will be. I will probably end up with the 1212M as it is so much cheaper and it has the same basic core. It should sound the same as yours except if you get the multi channel thing working. Please keep us up to date with the trials and results.
Roger
Ps. Checked out the latest class D thread?
Chris,
Long way to go yet till you really know what it sounds like. Aside from the learning curve there is the still break-in to be considered. I really don’t think sonics will be an issue, it seems getting it to function usefully will be. I will probably end up with the 1212M as it is so much cheaper and it has the same basic core. It should sound the same as yours except if you get the multi channel thing working. Please keep us up to date with the trials and results.
Roger
Ps. Checked out the latest class D thread?
Hi,
Yeah I'm hearing it at its worst right now, no question there, dont' get me wrong it sounds nice, different, my homebrew amp is the limiting factor more so than my lack of experience with the software. The software I'll pick up it's just dissapointingly obvious it's not meant for me.
BTW it's driving 15' of monster cable single ended. I'll get all that fixed up soon though.
The sound @44khz sampling leaves little to be desired.
I'd love to hear it at 192khz if I can figure out how to make that happen.
Really an audigy 4 would have been an ideal card for me (every day use), if it had balanced outputs. Lynx is just overpriced, the 1820M proves that.
Roger, sounds like a good choice.
I have seen the thread (assuming I know the one you mean) ... and am staying well away from it, having made my point already.
I'll keep you all posted as my system slowly morphs into the realm of "high end".
Regards,
Chris
Yeah I'm hearing it at its worst right now, no question there, dont' get me wrong it sounds nice, different, my homebrew amp is the limiting factor more so than my lack of experience with the software. The software I'll pick up it's just dissapointingly obvious it's not meant for me.
BTW it's driving 15' of monster cable single ended. I'll get all that fixed up soon though.
The sound @44khz sampling leaves little to be desired.
I'd love to hear it at 192khz if I can figure out how to make that happen.
Really an audigy 4 would have been an ideal card for me (every day use), if it had balanced outputs. Lynx is just overpriced, the 1820M proves that.
Roger, sounds like a good choice.
I have seen the thread (assuming I know the one you mean) ... and am staying well away from it, having made my point already.
I'll keep you all posted as my system slowly morphs into the realm of "high end".
Regards,
Chris
Roger,
Regarding software processing of multi-channel audio, you need to install the right player software (usually audio packs from powerdvd, intervideo or theatertek) or use the free audio decoders in dscaler/ffdshow. Yes, it will take more CPU cycles but should not be a problem for a modern PC. I am currently waiting for the final bits for a AMD 3800+ machine, which is dual CPU, and should be heaps for audio and video software processing.
Chris,
Be sure to post your impressions with a better amp and as the 1820M breaks in. Also interested to see if you can see in the Windows sound driver list more than just a stereo WDM driver from the 1820 (wishful thinking).
I'm waiting to hear the initial impressions of the new Creative X-Fi card, the top of the range ($399) uses the same DACs as the 1820M and does not resample 44.1Khz. However it does not have balanced outputs and it may still screw with the sound like the previous creative cards. However the chances are high that I'll pony up for a Lynx card (second hand preferrably).
I have spent a few hours today designing a relay shunt attenuator and various switching & auxillary circuits for my new UCD amp. If I put all the effort into a top class UCD amplifier then it would be criminal to get anything less than the lynx or 1820M (which means the Lynx...).
OT - but I'm wondering if a shunt attenuator with variable input and output impedence (2K series resistor to keep noise down) will be a problem between a good soundcard and a UCD module??
Regards,
Dean
Regarding software processing of multi-channel audio, you need to install the right player software (usually audio packs from powerdvd, intervideo or theatertek) or use the free audio decoders in dscaler/ffdshow. Yes, it will take more CPU cycles but should not be a problem for a modern PC. I am currently waiting for the final bits for a AMD 3800+ machine, which is dual CPU, and should be heaps for audio and video software processing.
Chris,
Be sure to post your impressions with a better amp and as the 1820M breaks in. Also interested to see if you can see in the Windows sound driver list more than just a stereo WDM driver from the 1820 (wishful thinking).
I'm waiting to hear the initial impressions of the new Creative X-Fi card, the top of the range ($399) uses the same DACs as the 1820M and does not resample 44.1Khz. However it does not have balanced outputs and it may still screw with the sound like the previous creative cards. However the chances are high that I'll pony up for a Lynx card (second hand preferrably).
I have spent a few hours today designing a relay shunt attenuator and various switching & auxillary circuits for my new UCD amp. If I put all the effort into a top class UCD amplifier then it would be criminal to get anything less than the lynx or 1820M (which means the Lynx...).
OT - but I'm wondering if a shunt attenuator with variable input and output impedence (2K series resistor to keep noise down) will be a problem between a good soundcard and a UCD module??
Regards,
Dean
deandob said:
Dean,
If you use digital scaling of the resistors both top and bottom. You can keep the total number reasonable and still have a whole bunch of steps. This can be driven with a very simple optical encoder driving a counter register of "X" length (Probably 12 bits long). With an OR gate following the encoder you can generate up or down pulses. I would recommend having a top section as well that is driven inversely to the bottom section. This will keep the load impedance the same. It would require some cleverness to implement a log function but can be done between the register and the buffer that would actually drive the relays. Don’t forget a power on reset!
If you use an RT of 2k this would be a real advantage from a noise standpoint. I can’t imagine that 2k is too much load for the sound card. This will give you a much lower source impedance. I was actually going to do something like this using the good Caddok res. I seem to remember they have scaled network res. asm. that would make it easier. I am sure there are a lot of app notes about similar things out there.
Roger
deandob said:
Dean-
Just curious... why don't you just use J.River Media Center's library functions to generate the dynamic playlists. That's what I've used and it seems to work pretty well. My only complaint with JRMC is that I wish they sold an audio-only version. I don't need all the other video features because I prefer apps specifically designed for video or DVD playing. I do like the audio features of JRMC. Why don't you use it...?
Hi,
Dean, there's a whole slew of driver files from creative and microsoft. Most aren't digitally signed and have no clue as to what each is for.
If you close the DSP app it turns the sound card off, so I load it at boot and find it slow, but is reasonable.
Also DSP for the card is disabled at higher sampling rates.
I played it all last night and gave it a little test during the day. I'll add I noticed only after my last post that I was initially listening to it with two FX enabled in their default config for it. Chorus and reverb, no wonder I was hearing so many "new" things.
The card sounds great. How good? I found myself turning around towards my speaker several times thinking something just happened behind me if there was an off beat sound in the recording..... it sounds very real indeed, and I can also tell there's a hell of a dynamic range there even behind my homebrew amp.
Come oooon parts...
Dean, there's a whole slew of driver files from creative and microsoft. Most aren't digitally signed and have no clue as to what each is for.
If you close the DSP app it turns the sound card off, so I load it at boot and find it slow, but is reasonable.
Also DSP for the card is disabled at higher sampling rates.
I played it all last night and gave it a little test during the day. I'll add I noticed only after my last post that I was initially listening to it with two FX enabled in their default config for it. Chorus and reverb, no wonder I was hearing so many "new" things.
The card sounds great. How good? I found myself turning around towards my speaker several times thinking something just happened behind me if there was an off beat sound in the recording..... it sounds very real indeed, and I can also tell there's a hell of a dynamic range there even behind my homebrew amp.
Come oooon parts...
Greg,
Reason for writing my own software is pretty much the same reason as building DIY audio - the chance to do things my way. I find software development a creative challenge, the IDE becomes your canvas for ideas in many ways more flexible and easier than hardware DIY. J. River is good software, but it does not have the query power that I have with a well cataloged collection and a SQL query engine querying it. This system is also part of a in-home audio system, where the ability to build powerful queries makes the in-home system more versatile.
Roger,
I'm probably being a bit anal about the attenuator but I want to keep the number of relay contacts that the signal path has to pass thru to a minimum, so varying the shunt part of the attenuator by switching parallel resistors seems the best approach, although I can only get 44db range out of 8 relays and 2db increments. As its a balanced amp (UCD modules) and I have 6 inputs, 8 x 2 x 6 = lots of relays without adding more to vary the series resistor (However I'm open to ideas!). It will be driven by a PIC microcontroller connected to the USB port of a PC - concept here is that the HTPC and amp are an integrated unit, the PC will be the centre of the home theater for control and source.
Regards,
Dean
Reason for writing my own software is pretty much the same reason as building DIY audio - the chance to do things my way. I find software development a creative challenge, the IDE becomes your canvas for ideas in many ways more flexible and easier than hardware DIY. J. River is good software, but it does not have the query power that I have with a well cataloged collection and a SQL query engine querying it. This system is also part of a in-home audio system, where the ability to build powerful queries makes the in-home system more versatile.
Roger,
I'm probably being a bit anal about the attenuator but I want to keep the number of relay contacts that the signal path has to pass thru to a minimum, so varying the shunt part of the attenuator by switching parallel resistors seems the best approach, although I can only get 44db range out of 8 relays and 2db increments. As its a balanced amp (UCD modules) and I have 6 inputs, 8 x 2 x 6 = lots of relays without adding more to vary the series resistor (However I'm open to ideas!). It will be driven by a PIC microcontroller connected to the USB port of a PC - concept here is that the HTPC and amp are an integrated unit, the PC will be the centre of the home theater for control and source.
Regards,
Dean
Hi Chris,
Your new toy sounds promising. What homebrew amp are using? Classd4sure!!
Have a listen to some of Roger Waters later discs (like 'amused to death') where there is some form of holographic processing. On my new tripath & tangband system, the sounds really do sound like they are coming from the side and behind, quite unnerving really.
Regards,
Dean
Your new toy sounds promising. What homebrew amp are using? Classd4sure!!
Have a listen to some of Roger Waters later discs (like 'amused to death') where there is some form of holographic processing. On my new tripath & tangband system, the sounds really do sound like they are coming from the side and behind, quite unnerving really.
Regards,
Dean
Hi
Dean why use a volume on the amp at all? The sound cards do all this ? You have to control the rest of it from the computer anyway. That's my plan at least, the bonus is it's cheaper and there's no middle men in the signal path at all, how's that for anal?
I know I gave you an update a few minutes ago but I just turned the amp on again... seriously the sound is incredible, that's it I'm stuck with this card. I certainly agree about the anything less would be criminal thing on an all out UcD.
Regards,
Chris
Dean why use a volume on the amp at all? The sound cards do all this ? You have to control the rest of it from the computer anyway. That's my plan at least, the bonus is it's cheaper and there's no middle men in the signal path at all, how's that for anal?
I know I gave you an update a few minutes ago but I just turned the amp on again... seriously the sound is incredible, that's it I'm stuck with this card. I certainly agree about the anything less would be criminal thing on an all out UcD.
Regards,
Chris
Hi Dean,
It's a homebrew single ended UCD!!!!! Of all things
It was built mostly out of scrap and I only ever made one channel, so that's all I'm hearing right now. ~35 watts, but my speakers are highly efficient, I still have to keep the volume right down.
It's just got a not so hot noise floor due to the single ended home brew construction, and the 15' of input cable.
So yeah the card is very promising I expect it will be mind blowing when my real amp is finished, very soon.
Just trying it with the first lossless wav.
If I had to sum up the impression in a single word, precision.
Regards,
Chris
It's a homebrew single ended UCD!!!!! Of all things
It was built mostly out of scrap and I only ever made one channel, so that's all I'm hearing right now. ~35 watts, but my speakers are highly efficient, I still have to keep the volume right down.
It's just got a not so hot noise floor due to the single ended home brew construction, and the 15' of input cable.
So yeah the card is very promising I expect it will be mind blowing when my real amp is finished, very soon.
Just trying it with the first lossless wav.
If I had to sum up the impression in a single word, precision.
Regards,
Chris
Chris, your setup sounds promising, once you get your amp sorted, use lossless compression and the amp/soundcard breaks in. Some people believe it is not possible to have a high end home audio setup using a computer source, which is wrong.
Reason why an analog volume control is better is because the soundcard will lose bits in a digital volume control, which truncates the # of bits to acheive digital attenuation. If you use 16 bit sources (as most of us do), you can increase the bit depth to 24bit or even more with players like Foobar, then you can truncate up to 8 bits for attenuation before you start to affect the original bit depth. However an analog volume control if well implemented is more versatile (eg. Microsoft Windows Media Centre can't increase the signal bitdepth when playing back DVD).
Regards,
Dean
Reason why an analog volume control is better is because the soundcard will lose bits in a digital volume control, which truncates the # of bits to acheive digital attenuation. If you use 16 bit sources (as most of us do), you can increase the bit depth to 24bit or even more with players like Foobar, then you can truncate up to 8 bits for attenuation before you start to affect the original bit depth. However an analog volume control if well implemented is more versatile (eg. Microsoft Windows Media Centre can't increase the signal bitdepth when playing back DVD).
Regards,
Dean
Hi Dean,
Great reply thank you.
BTW I do plan on checking out the song you mentioned once my system is setup.
So it seems the drivers given with the card do not support a higher sampling rate than 48khz. Maybe I'll give foobar another try. I agree people do they say that and they are wrong, I got this card partly to dissuade that argument.
I notice a big difference from 44.1khz to 48khz, it seems to gain more presence.
Can't wait to try 192khz.
I find the sound from it as it stands is already far superior to the commercial stuff.
I don't imagine you intend on having 8 amps or more in a single case. Had you considered something like Profibus instead of USB to network your volume controls?
Seems criminal to put Creative's new FX processor into an inferior card.
Regards,
Chris
Great reply thank you.
BTW I do plan on checking out the song you mentioned once my system is setup.
So it seems the drivers given with the card do not support a higher sampling rate than 48khz. Maybe I'll give foobar another try. I agree people do they say that and they are wrong, I got this card partly to dissuade that argument.
I notice a big difference from 44.1khz to 48khz, it seems to gain more presence.
Can't wait to try 192khz.
I find the sound from it as it stands is already far superior to the commercial stuff.
I don't imagine you intend on having 8 amps or more in a single case. Had you considered something like Profibus instead of USB to network your volume controls?
Seems criminal to put Creative's new FX processor into an inferior card.
Regards,
Chris
Chris,
The drivers with the card should support more than 48Khz. Regarding upsampling, personally I'd prefer an integer multiple of 44.1Khz to ensure that the reconstructed samples are accurate. The creative cards are well known for messing up the 44.1Khz to 48Khz sampling however foobar has an excellent upsampler and allows a number of interpolation schemes including a high quality sinc scheme which I find works well. With my EMU card I still prefer 44.1Khz it sounds a bit more natural to me, yet with the Delta 410 and Creative Audigy card upsampling sounded better.
If using the PC volume control, definitely keep the Windows volume at 100% if the sound card will allow separate volume control, and select Kernel Streaming or ASIO as the output. This avoids any alteration of the bit stream in Windows, which will slightly distort the sound due to scaling performed in the Windows audio mixer.
I do plan on having 6 amps in 1 case, the UCD amps are small and heat efficient, however the volume control and switching will be controlled by a microcontroller receiving commands from the PC, significantly simplifying the hardware logic.
Still waiting on a sound review from audiophiles on the verdict of the new creative card. www.head-fi.org seems to be the most active community in this space.
Regards,
Dean
The drivers with the card should support more than 48Khz. Regarding upsampling, personally I'd prefer an integer multiple of 44.1Khz to ensure that the reconstructed samples are accurate. The creative cards are well known for messing up the 44.1Khz to 48Khz sampling however foobar has an excellent upsampler and allows a number of interpolation schemes including a high quality sinc scheme which I find works well. With my EMU card I still prefer 44.1Khz it sounds a bit more natural to me, yet with the Delta 410 and Creative Audigy card upsampling sounded better.
If using the PC volume control, definitely keep the Windows volume at 100% if the sound card will allow separate volume control, and select Kernel Streaming or ASIO as the output. This avoids any alteration of the bit stream in Windows, which will slightly distort the sound due to scaling performed in the Windows audio mixer.
I do plan on having 6 amps in 1 case, the UCD amps are small and heat efficient, however the volume control and switching will be controlled by a microcontroller receiving commands from the PC, significantly simplifying the hardware logic.
Still waiting on a sound review from audiophiles on the verdict of the new creative card. www.head-fi.org seems to be the most active community in this space.
Regards,
Dean
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.