I have SOTA turntable & Mcintosh C34V pre amplifier. I too have Creative Sound Blaster xfi XD sound unit.
I want to record my songs played through turntable.
is it good to use Mcintosh as preamplifier for MM cartridge then to connect to line input of PC. or use Sound Blaster xfi XD for MM cartridge and directly record in pc.
what will have better recording quality.
Thanks in advance for Guidance.
I want to record my songs played through turntable.
is it good to use Mcintosh as preamplifier for MM cartridge then to connect to line input of PC. or use Sound Blaster xfi XD for MM cartridge and directly record in pc.
what will have better recording quality.
Thanks in advance for Guidance.
Wouldn't happen to be the same one I have in my "entertainment " PC =
X-Fi Titanium HD would it ?
This is the OLD original model that Creative dumped because gamers weren't looking for straight through unadulterated audio but hi-fi people were ---gamers won .
It now sells for over $1000--if you can get it.
If it is you have a very good audio card there.
Its NEVER let me down and the chips are upgrade-able but I am happy with the originals.
X-Fi Titanium HD would it ?
This is the OLD original model that Creative dumped because gamers weren't looking for straight through unadulterated audio but hi-fi people were ---gamers won .
It now sells for over $1000--if you can get it.
If it is you have a very good audio card there.
Its NEVER let me down and the chips are upgrade-able but I am happy with the originals.
Never knew about that card, i have been using the lesser gaming version "Titanium Fatal1ty Pro" for running RMAA testing amplifiers, but the HD has better specs and a lower noise floor. Dang it, you just cost me £70 on eBay 🙄
Thanks for reply mcandmar & duncan2.
Creative Sound Blaster xfi XD spelling mistake
It is Creative Sound Blaster xfi HD
Video review link of the soundcard
Sound Blaster X-Fi HD External Sound Card Review - YouTube
Creative Sound Blaster xfi XD spelling mistake
It is Creative Sound Blaster xfi HD
Video review link of the soundcard
Sound Blaster X-Fi HD External Sound Card Review - YouTube
I'd guess it's the Sound Blaster X-Fi HD for USB? (EDIT: I guessed correctly! 🙂 )
To minimize the number of potential issues, I would suggest:
Connect SB line-in to the RECORD EXTERNAL PROCESSOR: TO jacks. (Some contact cleaner may come in handy if those haven't been used in a long time.)
EQ: LISTEN
COMPANDER: OFF
Keep audible playback volume during recording to a minimum.
If you really can't keep the input out of clipping, using the regular volume-controlled outputs as a source would be worth a shot. You can come up with the required settings via the block diagram in the C34V's manual or ask again here if need be, but I don't think this will be required.
Be aware that with classic Soundblaster cards, you may have to keep track of sample rate and bit depth settings in 3 different places:
* hardware - usually via a control panel applet
* Windows - via device settings
* recording software
So make sure you set 24 bit, 96 kHz everywhere. I hope the recording level control is preset to a sensible value on this device. There must be no clipping - low levels, by contrast, are almost never an issue and easily compensated for in recording software and/or during playback (e.g. if you are using ReplayGain).
BTW, if you are planning on recording with Audacity, make sure that input/output via WASAPI is selected there, which in Windows is the only API to permit 24-bit recording AFAIK. Default sample format is controlled in settings.
If you want to export in another sample rate (say, you want 44.1 kHz instead), then you can change Audacity's project sample rate after recording; it will automatically resample at very high quality.
Definitely use the McIntosh as a preamp. With the SB line-in you don't know whether input impedance is suitable for MM cartridges, it would be substantially noisier than any half-decent phono preamp, and you'd have to apply RIAA EQ in software.
To minimize the number of potential issues, I would suggest:
Connect SB line-in to the RECORD EXTERNAL PROCESSOR: TO jacks. (Some contact cleaner may come in handy if those haven't been used in a long time.)
EQ: LISTEN
COMPANDER: OFF
Keep audible playback volume during recording to a minimum.
If you really can't keep the input out of clipping, using the regular volume-controlled outputs as a source would be worth a shot. You can come up with the required settings via the block diagram in the C34V's manual or ask again here if need be, but I don't think this will be required.
Be aware that with classic Soundblaster cards, you may have to keep track of sample rate and bit depth settings in 3 different places:
* hardware - usually via a control panel applet
* Windows - via device settings
* recording software
So make sure you set 24 bit, 96 kHz everywhere. I hope the recording level control is preset to a sensible value on this device. There must be no clipping - low levels, by contrast, are almost never an issue and easily compensated for in recording software and/or during playback (e.g. if you are using ReplayGain).
BTW, if you are planning on recording with Audacity, make sure that input/output via WASAPI is selected there, which in Windows is the only API to permit 24-bit recording AFAIK. Default sample format is controlled in settings.
If you want to export in another sample rate (say, you want 44.1 kHz instead), then you can change Audacity's project sample rate after recording; it will automatically resample at very high quality.
Last edited:
PS: Oh, the X-Fi HD does have a phono preamp that can be activated. It may be a decent enough 1-chip phonopre. I would still expect the McIntosh to be better, but you can try both.
BTW - some attention may still have to be devoted to the elimination of ground loops / grounding in the entire setup. It depends on what else may still be attached to the preamp and the kind of computer used.
BTW - some attention may still have to be devoted to the elimination of ground loops / grounding in the entire setup. It depends on what else may still be attached to the preamp and the kind of computer used.
Have you made a decision on the sampling frequency you're going to use? I've settled on 192kHz/24bit and down sample/transcode when I want to fit things into smaller spaces.
The McIntosh certainly give you better SQ than the SoundBlaster and it should survive a good ADC if sampled at decent rates.
Consider a separate ADC connected to the McIntosh. If the Schiit Jil was still available I'd recommend that, but it isn't :-( Others here will have their own favourites. When I'm recording, I plug my phono pre directly into the Jil.
The McIntosh certainly give you better SQ than the SoundBlaster and it should survive a good ADC if sampled at decent rates.
Consider a separate ADC connected to the McIntosh. If the Schiit Jil was still available I'd recommend that, but it isn't :-( Others here will have their own favourites. When I'm recording, I plug my phono pre directly into the Jil.
Thanks sgrossklass & StevenCrook for your guidance.
I understand that "It is better to record at 192khz\24 bit."
Now i will look what good ADC available.
I understand that "It is better to record at 192khz\24 bit."
Now i will look what good ADC available.
No need to go overboard here. The X-Fi HD should be plenty adequate already. CS5361 ADC (a pretty decent midrange part), does 24/96, so a more than decent amount of oversampling as-is - even CD-4 quadrophonic recordings would still just about fit in, at a maximum of 45 kHz.
Loopback results suggest generally good to very good performance except IMD (swept) a little on the mediocre side towards the high end, but I mean, you want to record vinyl, where high-frequency IMD is off the charts anyway, so I'm not in the least worried about that.
Make the most of what you have, and you should be able to get very good rips out of it.
People have looked into this years ago, and found that fancy ADCs mostly excelled by basically not degrading at all when going from 96 to 48 kHz, and not all that much at 44.1 kHz. More typical consumer-grade hardware would show a lot more degradation, but was fine at 96 kHz either way. So at one time, 96 kHz was considered well into diminishing returns territory already. In fact, when 192 kHz capable hardware first became available, that was widely considered a gimmick.
This is basically still true today, though several ADCs introduced after 2010 have made some steps backwards in digital filter quality (in the interest of lower latency) and as such may benefit from sample rates as high as 384 kHz (the MOTU M2/M4 with their AK5552/4 come to mind). Yes, I said backwards. There's a reason why 15-year-old parts like CS4272, CS5361 or CS5381 have remained quite popular to this day. That wouldn't have happened in the '90s!
So what you're trying to do (consumer-level recording of analog sources) has basically been a solved problem since about the mid-late 2000s at least. My first vinyl recordings were made on far more modest hardware (think some CS4231 job at 44.1 kHz), and they still sounded alright.
Loopback results suggest generally good to very good performance except IMD (swept) a little on the mediocre side towards the high end, but I mean, you want to record vinyl, where high-frequency IMD is off the charts anyway, so I'm not in the least worried about that.
Make the most of what you have, and you should be able to get very good rips out of it.
People have looked into this years ago, and found that fancy ADCs mostly excelled by basically not degrading at all when going from 96 to 48 kHz, and not all that much at 44.1 kHz. More typical consumer-grade hardware would show a lot more degradation, but was fine at 96 kHz either way. So at one time, 96 kHz was considered well into diminishing returns territory already. In fact, when 192 kHz capable hardware first became available, that was widely considered a gimmick.
This is basically still true today, though several ADCs introduced after 2010 have made some steps backwards in digital filter quality (in the interest of lower latency) and as such may benefit from sample rates as high as 384 kHz (the MOTU M2/M4 with their AK5552/4 come to mind). Yes, I said backwards. There's a reason why 15-year-old parts like CS4272, CS5361 or CS5381 have remained quite popular to this day. That wouldn't have happened in the '90s!
So what you're trying to do (consumer-level recording of analog sources) has basically been a solved problem since about the mid-late 2000s at least. My first vinyl recordings were made on far more modest hardware (think some CS4231 job at 44.1 kHz), and they still sounded alright.
Last edited:
Thank you very much for explaining so elaborately sgrossklass.
So X-fi HD is ok. Is it better to use Mcintosh for MM input then connect line out to X-fi HD or directly use X-fi HD which has got MM input built in.
So X-fi HD is ok. Is it better to use Mcintosh for MM input then connect line out to X-fi HD or directly use X-fi HD which has got MM input built in.
I would also go no higher than 96K. Any higher just isn't needed for LPs. And depending on the sound card, there can be more noise at 192K than 96K. Of course the LP will swamp that noise, but why add it if you don't need it?
Much like @StevenCrook I would assume that the built-in phonopre gets the job done but isn't anything special either, and that the McIntosh is likely to perform better.
If you are serious about this, you'd need a test record with a frequency sweep to determine actual frequency response flatness (as a function of cartridge, cartridge loading of cable + input impedance, and preamp RIAA accuracy).