If you need to know what DAC and chipset mount different soundcards take a look here http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=229391
I know that Onkyo SE-90 and Audiotrak Prodigy HD2 (who is commercialized only in Korea) was born to have only stereo output, but it don't mean that they are the best. Onkyo SE-200, for example, have a stereo output who is considered better that SE-90, because have a better DAC.
I know that Onkyo SE-90 and Audiotrak Prodigy HD2 (who is commercialized only in Korea) was born to have only stereo output, but it don't mean that they are the best. Onkyo SE-200, for example, have a stereo output who is considered better that SE-90, because have a better DAC.
Or, if your objectif is play music from a pc and send it to your external amp, you can choose an external usb stereo DAC and use it like an external soundcard.
Go here, you can find a lot of info http://www.head-fi.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=59
Go here, you can find a lot of info http://www.head-fi.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=59
Member
Joined 2003
Using a soundcard with a good SPDIF output (transformer coupled) like the M-audio Audiophile 2496 in combination with an external DAC is probably the best solution, but if you don't want to do that I recommend this. It uses the Envy24HT chipset, and a Wolfson DAC. You'll want to replace the op-amps and coupling capacitors for best analog output though.
The best ones are going to connect to your computer via Firewire, and aren't going to be called sound cards per se.
http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm
(credit to Fast Eddy for pointing this one out on another thread)
The AMR CD player could also be used as a DAC. Also Wavelength.
dave
http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm
(credit to Fast Eddy for pointing this one out on another thread)
The AMR CD player could also be used as a DAC. Also Wavelength.
dave
With due respect to the marvelous work done making USB decent enough for CD "quality" playback, there is a small but growing trend amoung the speciality publishers to offer DVD-A in a 24bit / 98k and 24bit / 192k resolution. This will certainly lead to optical media output of equal and possibly superior playback quality of vinyl. Consider EMI's recent publication here in the states ala iTunes of their almost fabulous DVD-A recordings derived directly from the studio masters. (An example: http://www.classicrecords.com/item.cfm?item=HDAD 2008 )
Since the initial thread says "best, cost no object" this discussion should begin to consider the assortment of "studio quality" devices.
1) 16 bit audio just doesn't make it. 24 bit audio is the benchmark for "studio quality". It does sound better and anyone can prove this to their own satisfaction, even if their analog system is of only medium quality, with a decent 24 bit DAC, the sound quality improvement is more than obvious, period. (This is the heart of Bob Dylan's complaint: "All CDs suck.")
2) Bandwidth is very important, without 96K Htz of bandwidth audio quality can not measure up to even medium quality analog FM radio. Again this is easily demostrated with decent DAC capable of passing 5 channel Dolby encoded audio (Dolby "surround sound" being a small sin IMOP, but the lesser evil).
3) Compression and "enhancement" technics never, ever improve the overall quality of the original digital or analog masters. Sorry, not matter how glorious or dramatic the TV stars on CSI make digital "enhancement" appear, all compression and "enhancement" technics encode and divide analog or digital, not multiply, the quality of the original information ... and thus degrade the content. This can be demonstrated easily by comparing the file sizes of various compressed or "enhanced" audio files, the larger ones invariably sounding better. (Even MP3 files ...)
4) Because the computer box is a very dirty, noisy electronic environment, the sound "card" should not be a card at all, but an external device, separated by some distance from the computer interior ... unless the "no cost" criteria includes the computer as well.
5) As mentioned, USB just does not do the trick. Neither does EtherNet. Certainly WiFi of any flavor is likewise too anemic for 24 bit / 96k audio. FireWire does a good job right now with no real competition = up to four wide channels of simultaneous DVD-A file size transfers of pure, uncompressed 96k information > in either direction <, with almost non-existant jitter and quite small latency. Legacy technologies are limited but do include SCSI. Future technologies "real soon now" are external SATA. SPDIF and varients (MADI, AES3, DIF ) in the professional world do make it and include optical cabling thus resolving much of the noise problems in #4 above. Consumer SPDIF has some pitfalls (watchout for 16 bit versions, etc.).
best "sound cards" under US$1000:
http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/FireWire410-main.html
http://rolandus.com/products/productdetails.aspx?ObjectId=731&ParentId=114
http://echoaudio.com/Products/FireWire/AudioFire4/index.php
Latest candidate for the best "sound cards" at any cost:
http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm and comparable European made studio mastering devices ... 24bit / 384K & 392k !
Apple seems to be working on a FireWire connected DAC, (no joy yet) ... and I just came from the Apple store with a new Mac Mini with FireWire ports (US$ 750 inc. taxes) for connection to my Echo Digital AudioFire 4 (US$400 plus taxes & shipping) ... which will have to do for me for now.
Since the initial thread says "best, cost no object" this discussion should begin to consider the assortment of "studio quality" devices.
1) 16 bit audio just doesn't make it. 24 bit audio is the benchmark for "studio quality". It does sound better and anyone can prove this to their own satisfaction, even if their analog system is of only medium quality, with a decent 24 bit DAC, the sound quality improvement is more than obvious, period. (This is the heart of Bob Dylan's complaint: "All CDs suck.")
2) Bandwidth is very important, without 96K Htz of bandwidth audio quality can not measure up to even medium quality analog FM radio. Again this is easily demostrated with decent DAC capable of passing 5 channel Dolby encoded audio (Dolby "surround sound" being a small sin IMOP, but the lesser evil).
3) Compression and "enhancement" technics never, ever improve the overall quality of the original digital or analog masters. Sorry, not matter how glorious or dramatic the TV stars on CSI make digital "enhancement" appear, all compression and "enhancement" technics encode and divide analog or digital, not multiply, the quality of the original information ... and thus degrade the content. This can be demonstrated easily by comparing the file sizes of various compressed or "enhanced" audio files, the larger ones invariably sounding better. (Even MP3 files ...)
4) Because the computer box is a very dirty, noisy electronic environment, the sound "card" should not be a card at all, but an external device, separated by some distance from the computer interior ... unless the "no cost" criteria includes the computer as well.
5) As mentioned, USB just does not do the trick. Neither does EtherNet. Certainly WiFi of any flavor is likewise too anemic for 24 bit / 96k audio. FireWire does a good job right now with no real competition = up to four wide channels of simultaneous DVD-A file size transfers of pure, uncompressed 96k information > in either direction <, with almost non-existant jitter and quite small latency. Legacy technologies are limited but do include SCSI. Future technologies "real soon now" are external SATA. SPDIF and varients (MADI, AES3, DIF ) in the professional world do make it and include optical cabling thus resolving much of the noise problems in #4 above. Consumer SPDIF has some pitfalls (watchout for 16 bit versions, etc.).
best "sound cards" under US$1000:
http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/FireWire410-main.html
http://rolandus.com/products/productdetails.aspx?ObjectId=731&ParentId=114
http://echoaudio.com/Products/FireWire/AudioFire4/index.php
Latest candidate for the best "sound cards" at any cost:
http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm and comparable European made studio mastering devices ... 24bit / 384K & 392k !
Apple seems to be working on a FireWire connected DAC, (no joy yet) ... and I just came from the Apple store with a new Mac Mini with FireWire ports (US$ 750 inc. taxes) for connection to my Echo Digital AudioFire 4 (US$400 plus taxes & shipping) ... which will have to do for me for now.
expensive though 
Many thanks to those who've replied.
Indeed, I'm surprised the Lynx has had no mention.
Any opinions regarding M-Audio AUDIOPHILE 2496 vs Emu 1212 vs any of the Lynx models. All would seem suitable, is the Lynx worth the extra £££ ?
I'm trying to keep it simple, hence the original question for only two channels - clearly that's not possible. Equally no recording facilities needed.
Perhaps I should have asked "Best sound card for 2 channel playback only"
I will use the the digital out to a Behringer DEQ 2496 - soon to be upgraded by http://www.audiosmile.co.uk
Again, TIA
Indeed, I'm surprised the Lynx has had no mention.
Any opinions regarding M-Audio AUDIOPHILE 2496 vs Emu 1212 vs any of the Lynx models. All would seem suitable, is the Lynx worth the extra £££ ?
I'm trying to keep it simple, hence the original question for only two channels - clearly that's not possible. Equally no recording facilities needed.
Perhaps I should have asked "Best sound card for 2 channel playback only"
I will use the the digital out to a Behringer DEQ 2496 - soon to be upgraded by http://www.audiosmile.co.uk
Again, TIA
i currently own an lynx 2B, and my last card was an m-audio delta 410. it wasn't as good as the 2496, but relatively close. i had a friend over when i installed the lynx and upgraded, and it was pretty eye-opening.
the m-audio and the lynx cannot be compared. they are in completely different categories. there was so much separating the cards in terms of quality, there was no need to compare them. the lynx was the clear winner, without question. the price difference is big, but well worth it.
the m-audio and the lynx cannot be compared. they are in completely different categories. there was so much separating the cards in terms of quality, there was no need to compare them. the lynx was the clear winner, without question. the price difference is big, but well worth it.
Hartono: " ... I would add optical isolation for the firewire expensive ... "
Yes, but doable within the criteria: " best, cost no object ..."
This works famously: http://industrialcomponent.com/opticis/m4200.html ... plus this: http://industrialcomponent.com/newnex/nexlclc100.html . ... About US$1000 plus tax, shipping & installation costs, depending on the length of the fiber cable. But it sure does work = total electronic / optical isolation and about 5 times faster than 1000baseT / Gigabit Ethernet ... and that's the equivelent of eight simultaneous DVD-A quality multichannel 5.1 audio tracks or eight simultaneous DVD quality video streams ... enough bandwidth to run a full bore outdoor concert with sixteen 24 bit / 96k microphone / instrument channels plus a simultaneous big screen video display with the mix down work station up to a quarter mile from the stage ... overkill for a home system, but "best, cost no object ..." for sure.
This FireWire over fiber optic scenario is used for optical isolation and long distance between the stage and the mixing / recording consoles at outdoor concerts and in high end studios ... and interconnect between multi-processing video rendering workstations ...
Pictures of a simple workstation / media center for studio mastering under US$2000 ... shortly ...
Yes, but doable within the criteria: " best, cost no object ..."
This works famously: http://industrialcomponent.com/opticis/m4200.html ... plus this: http://industrialcomponent.com/newnex/nexlclc100.html . ... About US$1000 plus tax, shipping & installation costs, depending on the length of the fiber cable. But it sure does work = total electronic / optical isolation and about 5 times faster than 1000baseT / Gigabit Ethernet ... and that's the equivelent of eight simultaneous DVD-A quality multichannel 5.1 audio tracks or eight simultaneous DVD quality video streams ... enough bandwidth to run a full bore outdoor concert with sixteen 24 bit / 96k microphone / instrument channels plus a simultaneous big screen video display with the mix down work station up to a quarter mile from the stage ... overkill for a home system, but "best, cost no object ..." for sure.
This FireWire over fiber optic scenario is used for optical isolation and long distance between the stage and the mixing / recording consoles at outdoor concerts and in high end studios ... and interconnect between multi-processing video rendering workstations ...
Pictures of a simple workstation / media center for studio mastering under US$2000 ... shortly ...
Re: lynx 2B , X-Meridian, et al sound cards.
I am very sure these all sound quite nice, unless installed in an inexpensive WinPC computer. Again, "... 4) Because the computer box is a very dirty, noisy electronic environment, the sound "card" should not be a card at all, but an external device, separated by some distance from the computer interior ... unless the "no cost" criteria includes the computer as well. ..."
Now I can't speak to the specifics of the above manufacturers' efforts to clean up PC switching power supplies, but I would bet a great deal of effort is involved. However these PCI plugin cards can not come close to an external DAC device, with or without optical isolation. I have yet to see a plugin sound card that didn't have a serious problem with the PC's noisy, dirty supply and the high frequency processor switching noise and harmonics ... you can easily see the switching noise components on a cheap 'scope and quite often hear it. Even external devices require significant effort to reduce this noise, simple separation distance seldom being enough ...
I am very sure these all sound quite nice, unless installed in an inexpensive WinPC computer. Again, "... 4) Because the computer box is a very dirty, noisy electronic environment, the sound "card" should not be a card at all, but an external device, separated by some distance from the computer interior ... unless the "no cost" criteria includes the computer as well. ..."
Now I can't speak to the specifics of the above manufacturers' efforts to clean up PC switching power supplies, but I would bet a great deal of effort is involved. However these PCI plugin cards can not come close to an external DAC device, with or without optical isolation. I have yet to see a plugin sound card that didn't have a serious problem with the PC's noisy, dirty supply and the high frequency processor switching noise and harmonics ... you can easily see the switching noise components on a cheap 'scope and quite often hear it. Even external devices require significant effort to reduce this noise, simple separation distance seldom being enough ...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.