Audigy 2 question - Page 2 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 06-05-2005, 06:48 PM   #11 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,013
Send a message via AIM to DJ-CHRIS
Default

Than how come records are considered better sound quality than CD's...

And they have bad SNR's

Turtle beach IMO is better than Soundblaster series
__________________

DJ-CHRIS is offline  
Old 06-05-2005, 08:14 PM   #12 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,487
Default

Turtle beach is perhaps better for music. But if you want the best sound card for gaming then no question it's the sound blaster audigy 2 zs.

The turtle's and M-audios don't seem to have as high of sampling rates and they also don't support EAX Advanced HD 4.0. Which I believe is most important for gaming. Basically Creative offers the best support for gaming out of the sound card manufacturers.
__________________

__________________
<font size=\"1\">Intel Pentium 4 3.4GHZ HT-------------------AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Winchester
Intel Stock CPU Cooler------------------------Zalman 7700-Cu
Idle: 51C---------------------------------------Idle: 21C
Load: 72C--------------------------------------Load: 28C
ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe-----------------------GIGABYTE K8NF4-9 NForce4 4X
512MBX2 Corsair XMS 2-2-2-5 PC-3200-----512MBX2 Corsair XMS 2-2-2-5 PC-3200
ATI RADEON X800 XT Platinum Edition-------ATI RADEON X800 XL
Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS----------Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
Western Digital Raptor 37GB 10K------------2X Western Digital SATA150 Caviar SE 80GB RAID 0
Antec True 480W------------------------------Thermaltake Silent PurePower 680W
Zalman 5.1 Headphones----------------------Zalman 5.1 Headphones
Zalman High Sensitivity Microphone----------Zalman High Sensitivity Microphone
Microsoft Multimedia Keyboard 1.0A----------Logitech Media Keyboard
Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 4.0A---------Logitech MX510
3DMark05: 5,928------------------------------3DMark05: 5,000</font>
dale5605 is offline  
Old 06-05-2005, 11:05 PM   #13 (permalink)
Imperial Space Womble
 
Harper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,903
Default Re: Audigy 2 question

Quote:
Originally posted by Chankama
What are the major differences between these cards guys?.
Audigy 2 ZS, value, etc.
Thinks like the Audigy 2 Plantiums have more recording functions. As for some thing like a SB Live Value 5.1 i would not waste my money on as the sound quality between in as some on board AC 97 5.1 Sound Cards is not worth the price tag. I would only purchace a SB live Value if the my onboard sound card as 2 channel.
Audigy 2 ZS is a rather nice card if you want some thing for gaming.
__________________

"I FEEL SO GOOD I FEEL SO NUMB, YEAH!!!" -- Rob Zombie
Main Rig - AMD FX-8350x8 4.0Ghz CPU, 4x 8Gb (32Gb) DDR3 Ram, Gigabyte GA-970A-D3, GeForce GT 970 4Gb, 1x 256Gb SSD\8Tb (3+2+2+1) SATA HDD, DVDRW, SB X-Fi, Win 10 (64-bit)
Asus N61JV-JX231V - Intel Core i5 3437u (1.9 - 2.4 GHz), 12GB, 640GB, 16" Display, nVidia 325M 1Gb, DVD-RW, Win 10 (64-bit)
Mobile Phone : Samsung Galaxy 5 Note SM-N920IConsole : Play Station 4
Harper is offline  
Old 06-05-2005, 11:57 PM   #14 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

I have an Audigy 1 LS, and it is quite a good card. personally I don't care for the small sound differences between it and, say an Audigy 2 ZS. I don't record or mix music, so I don't need a card with advanced features for that. my Audigy LS does fine with my 5.1 speakers, and that's enough for me

I have a friend with the Audigy 2 Value, and it doesn't disappoint. even before he got his kickarse speakers (the Logitech Z-5500) his sound quality was really good. seriously, unless you have superhuman ears, or you work with sound editing, you're not going to notice the difference between an Audigy LS, audigy 2 value or some $5000 dollar super sound card
__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Old 06-06-2005, 07:47 AM   #15 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,013
Send a message via AIM to DJ-CHRIS
Default

I wonder who would want more recording options on a not so sound card...

I mean for recording, you get a simple, cheap basic good sounding card.


And in Dale's little flame escapade, he should have brought something up like saying the the soundblasters use less CPU cycles than Turtle Beach \ M-Audio, even though this is unconfirmed.
DJ-CHRIS is offline  
Old 06-06-2005, 12:52 PM   #16 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,487
Default

My flame escapade? I was making valid points with no flaming until you flamed me. I odn't like flaming anyway, wastes energy.
__________________
<font size=\"1\">Intel Pentium 4 3.4GHZ HT-------------------AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Winchester
Intel Stock CPU Cooler------------------------Zalman 7700-Cu
Idle: 51C---------------------------------------Idle: 21C
Load: 72C--------------------------------------Load: 28C
ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe-----------------------GIGABYTE K8NF4-9 NForce4 4X
512MBX2 Corsair XMS 2-2-2-5 PC-3200-----512MBX2 Corsair XMS 2-2-2-5 PC-3200
ATI RADEON X800 XT Platinum Edition-------ATI RADEON X800 XL
Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS----------Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
Western Digital Raptor 37GB 10K------------2X Western Digital SATA150 Caviar SE 80GB RAID 0
Antec True 480W------------------------------Thermaltake Silent PurePower 680W
Zalman 5.1 Headphones----------------------Zalman 5.1 Headphones
Zalman High Sensitivity Microphone----------Zalman High Sensitivity Microphone
Microsoft Multimedia Keyboard 1.0A----------Logitech Media Keyboard
Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 4.0A---------Logitech MX510
3DMark05: 5,928------------------------------3DMark05: 5,000</font>
dale5605 is offline  
Old 06-06-2005, 06:04 PM   #17 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
HAVOC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Milford, Connecticut
Posts: 4,218
Send a message via AIM to HAVOC Send a message via Yahoo to HAVOC
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by dale5605
Yes it does, learn before YOU speak.

"In analog and digital communications, signal-to-noise ratio, often written S/N or SNR, is a measure of signal strength relative to background noise. The ratio is usually measured in decibels (dB).

If the incoming signal strength in microvolts is Vs, and the noise level, also in microvolts, is Vn, then the signal-to-noise ratio, S/N, in decibels is given by the formula

S/N = 20 log10(Vs/Vn)

If Vs = Vn, then S/N = 0. In this situation, the signal borders on unreadable, because the noise level severely competes with it. In digital communications, this will probably cause a reduction in data speed because of frequent errors that require the source (transmitting) computer or terminal to resend some packets of data.

Ideally, Vs is greater than Vn, so S/N is positive. As an example, suppose that Vs = 10.0 microvolts and Vn = 1.00 microvolt. Then

S/N = 20 log10(10.0) = 20.0 dB

which results in the signal being clearly readable. If the signal is much weaker but still above the noise -- say 1.30 microvolts -- then

S/N = 20 log10(1.30) = 2.28 dB

which is a marginal situation. There might be some reduction in data speed under these conditions.

If Vs is less than Vn, then S/N is negative. In this type of situation, reliable communication is generally not possible unless steps are taken to increase the signal level and/or decrease the noise level at the destination (receiving) computer or terminal.

Communications engineers always strive to maximize the S/N ratio. Traditionally, this has been done by using the narrowest possible receiving-system bandwidth consistent with the data speed desired. However, there are other methods. In some cases, spread spectrum techniques can improve system performance. The S/N ratio can be increased by providing the source with a higher level of signal output power if necessary. In some high-level systems such as radio telescopes, internal noise is minimized by lowering the temperature of the receiving circuitry to near absolute zero (-273 degrees Celsius or -459 degrees Fahrenheit). In wireless systems, it is always important to optimize the performance of the transmitting and receiving antennas"


Hence less backround noise for better signal and therefore a better quality sound.
Seems like someone knows how to (Cut & Paste) lol
__________________

HAVOC is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.