CD player vs. computer soundcard

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
I'm a beginner in diy audio and I only built my own speakers till now.

As a source, i use my laptop's soundcard, which is the simplest intel integrated audio chipset.
The result on my fostex FX120 is already excellent, but I thought the same about my old speakers before hearing the Fostex

I would like to know what is the best audio player for winXP, because I felt a huge difference between wmp7 and wmp10 concerning the sound. I saw in the forum that some people like the quicktime player and I'm testing it right now;

Another thing I'd like to know is : what is the best choice between an external soundcard and a cd/dvd player such as the pioneer DV575AS in order to achieve the most audiophile result ?
I read an article in a computer magazine that shows great numbers about soundcards, like 97dB S/N ratio or 0,0001% THD but the sound quality and detail level cannot be compared with numbers.
I'd like not to spend more than 150 $ on such peripherals so please let me know about your experiences !
 
I downloaded foobar2000 and compared it with wmp10 on different files playback : wav doesn't give a significant improvement but mp3 does : better detail level, sharper high frequencies, faster bass.
I didn't test wma right now but I suppose there can be no improvement as it's Microsoft codec.

I use mp3 the most often to save my cds on the computer but I use the best quality : 320kbs joint stereo encoded with Lame3.97 beta. at this bitrate there is hardly no audible difference even when "searching" for the details missing in the music, so I only have one album encoded in lossless format on my HDD.

For the soundcard, this one is not good for me as I need it external, for my laptop.
 
use one of the host of new compression formats. Perhaps the best is Apple's .aac (offered freely with iTunes, perhaps the most intuitive music library app available) (which is .mp4 btw), though both Apple (available on PC through iTunes) and WMP have a lossless filetype that will give you a far higher sample rate than you can hear.
 
i vote for .mpc or musepack. an older codec without too much development or popularity, but UNEQUALED sound quality at higher bit rates (200kbs+). this codec was designed for audiophile quality, not for compression stats. (unusable at higher compression)

for better sound at lower compression: ogg.
 
I heard about musepack and all these alternative formats which sound very good. I have one album encoded in .mpc at 320kbs. The only problem is I cannot use these formats everywhere I go, for example in a mp3 player or at a friend, so I use mp3 very often with Lame encoder which is known for it's good quality at highest bitrates, though the sound is awful at low bitrates.


For the soundcard, I need an external one but unfortunately, the choice is reduced : I want at least 24/96, I want an audiophile product and if possible, digital input for a correct price : This description led me to the Creative Audigy 2 NX with 7.1 and digital in, at 85euros and the Creative soundblaster Live! 24 bits with 5.1 but no digital in, at 47 euros.

Normally, the second one would be enough for me because it's cheaper, but the website doesn't give SNR and THD so I suppose they are not so good.Does anyone know something about this soundcard ?
The Audigy has nice specifications but I saw on a website it was more designed for gaming than for audiophile performance. Has anyone heard something about this product ?
 
here is a laptop sound card that would be of interest

http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16829102184

i know this is an american web retailer... but the info is good.


now about codecs, just use the lame codec with a bit rate around 196 - 256kbps. mp3 lossy is exillent for keeping files small and retaining sound quality, unless you make a audio cd from them, then the sound would be hollow and tingy. .mp3 is used every were. but if you want a lossless codec try flac, the sound is good, the compression is great, and you should be able to use any software player with it. oh and its open source too. for a player i recommend xmms or winamp 2.91 or earlier, one could usually find a plugin for winamp to play anything. ive been using 2.91 for years and never had a problem. you do need quicktime for the apple codecs though, cant get around that... but i use quicktime for web content mostly anyway. i hate getting stuck with using proprietary software. windows media audio and video has good quality, and there streaming technology is great, but i would never use there wma codec for my music playback... ever... there souce is locked, and the files are limited to there player and anyone elses hard/software that is licenses, so you pay in the long term.
mp3 is everywere, in dvd/cd players, car audio, solidstate portable devices, ect. wmv is there in SOME as well, but look at the price of two car stereos that have all the same features, but one has just mp3 and the other has mp3 and wma. in most cases the one with wma is more. licensing sucks, dont it...

for the lossless codec, flac is a good choice, it is open source, free, and i know a few ppl who sware by it. flac is also great for streaming across a network or the 'net, i personaly dont use flac very often myself, but in some cases when i rip a cd and want to make a disc later ill ether use flac or just rip to wav. besides wav file can be huge... a cd is about 650 - 700 MB. ouch...

here are a few links

flac: http://flac.sourceforge.net/

winamp: http://www.oldversion.com/program.php?n=winamp
or
http://www.download.com/3000-2139-10009814.html

an open source ripper encoder: http://cdexos.sourceforge.net/

you could use the current ver. of winamp, but i would be carefull, aol got there hands on it and it turned bloated and crappy, but thats my opinion.

if your just listening to music than i would use mp3, if your criticaly listening to an audio system or a pair of speakers than i would use flac or a high quality copy (or original) cd to listen. so... just remember mp3 is everywere, others are not. besides its just computer audio, the weakest link is giong to always be your computers layout or design, be it pci cards, motherboard design, or in this case the way a laptop is made. unless some anal audiophiles( no offence) starts working for a computer/components manufacturer. you will never get the results you would from a well made cd player, turntabe, system setup, ect.
take this as you like, ive been in to audio since i was 12, and been in to computer since i was 17. audio will always be a hobby, but computer is going to be my carrer (working on a msca, ccna, and possibly cna), everyday somewere i learn something new, this place is one of them.

well thats my 2 cents.
 
If you are concern with quality and quantity, may I recommend the portable module TVIX that can host a very large harddrive with spif out. I use EAC to rip my cd into the TVIX (with 160G) and the digital out is very very good, better than the Philips 963sa I had used before.
 
the PCMCIA soundcard seems to be the best choice for me, it has THX certification and D/A 192khz conversion, but the price is a little bit high for me and moreover, the PCMCIA connection only allows its use on a laptop, though it's less ressource demanding than USB2.

I'm a little aware that the best soundcard cannot equal the best SACD player, but I suppose you can get a more audiophile result with the same budget with a soundcard than with a whole player, as the player needs its power supply, CD drive...

Concerning FLAC I didn't know this encoder which seems great. I try it the next time I rip a CD ! EAC is also an excellent grabber, which makes a 1:1 copy and I use it every time I grab my CDs though it's unable to bypass copy control protection, so you need to mask with a whiteborad marker the second session on the disc to rip the CD ;)

I think I'll buy the Creative audigy 2NX when I have more money because I first need to build good cables for my install and eventually change my amp :xeye:
 
youyoung21147 said:
I downloaded foobar2000 and compared it with wmp10 on different files playback : wav doesn't give a significant improvement but mp3 does : better detail level, sharper high frequencies, faster bass.



MP3? :bawling:

go back to unmolested files, before quality was thrown away for file size reduction.

try WAV, FLAC, SHN or some Mac formats that are not "lossy" - at that point you can start talking about quality and compare things.

Peter
 
at this time, the improvement between mp3 and wav on my install doesn't justify the use of lossless formats that are not compatible with most devices : Lame encoder performs almost perfectly at high bitrates such as 320kbs 44,1khz joint stereo. The difference is negligible and inaudible the most often, even on my FX120s

Maybe one day, when I have good cables, a new soundcard and maybe a new amp, I'll use lossless formats on my computer because then the difference might be audible. It isn't too late anyway if this day comes as my CDs are always ready to rip :)
 
I have a 1212m running with foobar. The 1212m uses "mastering grade" DACS and is really intended to be a professional studio card.

It regularly takes the stick out and gives alot of stand alone players a good spanking - this includes a recent NAD 520BEE. It is a huge step up over my internal nforce2 ALC650 sound solution and SBLive Audigy2.

ITO Mp3 - take a look at this link

http://www.geocities.com/altbinariessoundsmusicclassical/mp3test.html

I personaly THINK I MIGHT be able to hear very slight differences - but that is only after listening to the same track for hours and even then I am not convinced. MP3 encoded with Lame -alt standard is what I normally use.

Please remember this is Opinion -
 
Nice test for the mp3 detractors ! I read in a science magazine that 256kbs mp3 had a high frequency cutoff at 17khz, which is almost my hearing limit but other subjective factors cannot be measured.
I begin to really feel the difference between mp3 and wav at 192kbs and under. 256kbs is the lowest bitrate that is acceptable for me and I always rip my CDs in 320kbs in order to be sure getting the best quality. I personaly think there is hardly no audible difference at this bitrate.
VBR is also a very good alternative to CBR but bitrate cannot exceed 320kbs anyway, so VBR is just intended to save space. I don't like it because it's not compatible with mp3 and DVD players
 
Depending on what you actually want to do with the cards there is a chance that creatives standard live card might be better value.

All creative cards resample the data stream to 16/48 before sending the 0's and 1's to the DSP chip. I think there might be a DSP bypass if you use the KX drivers on the Audigy2 but im not sure.

With the KX drivers installed you'd be hard pressed not to want to use something like a notch filter to EQ out a room node after hearing what benafits it can have on the sound, so for me the A2 would have no real advantage over a value card.

I do use an external DAC however so the better converters in the A2 would be a waste of time.

If you are going to use an A2 or any other creative card then make sure you use foobars resampler to shift everything into 48khz, creative cards do a really shoddy job.

On the plus side, my live card into an external DAC using uncompressed wavs, upsampled with foobar is a better transport then a TEAC VRDS T1, make from that what you will, but to me the difference wasnt a small one.
 
youyoung21147 said:
VBR is also a very good alternative to CBR but bitrate cannot exceed 320kbs anyway, so VBR is just intended to save space. I don't like it because it's not compatible with mp3 and DVD players

Actually, if MP3 or DVD player won't work with VBR, the fault is with the player. VBR is a standard method in MP3 and a decoder that refuses to work with it can be considered broken :)
 
youyoung21147 said:
at this time, the improvement between mp3 and wav on my install doesn't justify the use of lossless formats that are not compatible with most devices : Lame encoder performs almost perfectly at high bitrates such as 320kbs 44,1khz joint stereo. The difference is negligible and inaudible the most often, even on my FX120s

lame is a lossy encoder...

lossy= loss of data

lossless= no loss of data

mp3 is a lossy format, were data is dropped for file size.

flac and aac are lossless, were data is compressed like a file archive, were data cannot be lost do to data corruption.

if your using mp3 (lame) you are losing data in the encode process. simple as that... and vbr sucks...
 
Firstly let me apologise in advance for the tone of this post but I cannot stand people who fill excellent forums like this with disinformation, and state it as though they were absolutely and unshakably confident in their responses.

sid216 -
flac and aac are lossless, were data is compressed like a file archive, were data cannot be lost do to data corruption.

AAC IS lossy! Data cannot be lost due to corruption? I am not sure what kind of hardware you run but NO file archive format I am aware of can prevent data loss due to corruption. The best I have found they are able to do when corrupted are to inform you that they have been corrupted. Please explain further.

I think you miss the point behind compression. Listeners don't listen to data - they listen to music.

What reason have you got for saying that VBR "sucks".

youyoung21147

MP3 lowpass filterering "high frequency cutoff" is not determined by the bitrate at which the file is encoded but rather by the profile used to encode the file.

A usefull resource with regards to understanding MP3 fully is http://www.hydrogenaudio.org

ITO vbr not playing on certain mp3 / dvd players - I think that you will find that most do in fact support this type of file even if they don't state it. I recently tested some VBR's (Lame alt standard through to insane) on a very cheap chinese player (Probably about 40 - 50 Dollars), on a Sony
DVP-NS575PB , on a JVC Car Deck KD-S785 and on a Pioneer DVD Player - can't remember the model. None of them had a problem playing these VBR MP3's.

I would agree with 5th Element though ITO if you have an external DAC - The sound card doesn't matter THAT much. A good choice for this as well is a Chaintech AV-710 - I think a $25 card.

PS Me likes da 5th Element - Have you seen any other movies doen by Luc Besson. THe Proffesional, THe Big Blue, Taxi (THe French version) etc. Love them all
 
Byrd said:


A very interesting article, that kinda confirms my personal opinion on the compressed audio question.

My 2 cents:

You only want to Rip & Encode your Music once, especially if you have a large CD collection. (I'm guessing that most people here do.) If your music will only ever live on a PC, then fine use whatever format you like that satifies your taste for quality or storage space. On the other hand, if you take your music with you on a personal player, or in the car, or if you want to share it (naughty), then MP3 is the obvious choice. - WMA is being supported more now, but MP3 is the defacto standard.

Personally, I didn't bother with compression until I realised that my toddler son was destoying my CD collection.:bawling:

I used LAME and encoded all my CD's with -alt preset extreme, just to be sure that any quality loss was small. I don't claim to have golden ears, but I can't tell the difference, which is good enough for me.

Foobar 2000 is the best player software, unless you prefer your player to look better than it sounds - it also uses about 1/3 of the CPU time than Winamp...

Steve
 
Byrd said:
Firstly let me apologise in advance for the tone of this post but I cannot stand people who fill excellent forums like this with disinformation, and state it as though they were absolutely and unshakably confident in their responses.
im not sure how to take this... a personal attack maybe?

AAC IS lossy! Data cannot be lost due to corruption? NO file archive format I am aware of can prevent data loss due to corruption. The best I have found they are able to do when corrupted are to inform you that they have been corrupted. Please explain further.
this i now know ( http://www.mp3developments.com/article4.php) i sware i read some wear aac was lossless, my mistake sorry. aac is lossy... happy?

and yes data can be lost due to corruption. when you zip a file and later unzip it, when the program tells you the archive is corrupted, is data not lost? i also typed my responce poorly, i should have wated till i got home i was pressed for time, "were data cannot be lost do to data corruption" yes i said this, but it should have said were data cannot be lost do to POSSIBLE data corruption. as in when poeple compress lets say a wav file for archiving or playback, and dont want to lose any of the data in the file, will compress it in a lossless format so one could make a new copy to cd or what not with minimal loss of data and quality. when you use a lossy format, you lose data, example: 16bit wav to 196kbps mp3 to wav, when ever you go this route you lose data which is also quality loss, just becouse data gets corrupted does not mean that the file will still not work to some point... in other words, if i convert some mp3's to wav files to make an audio cd, and the sound quality is not as good as it was, than IMHO the data has been corrupted, also i have a few zip files that are corrupted, when i decompress them they get half way done and the program tells me the archive is bad, but i still get about half of my data. figure out that one! ehh...

I am not sure what kind of hardware you run but
mine is from Taiwan... yours?

I think you miss the point behind compression. Listeners don't listen to data - they listen to music.
what the hell do you think the little 1's and 0's on a cd, harddrive, or any DIGITAL media is? DATA, which in turn is then decoded to music or video or what ever...


What reason have you got for saying that VBR "sucks".
everytime i encoded mp3's using vbr, i always get artifacts in the sound, every time. i know a few ppl that dont like vbr for the same reason. so no luck here... if vbr works for you, more power to you, that is just one or many individuals opinion(s)...
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.