Computer Audio - How bad is it?

[RAB]

Merry Christmas Everyone

I'm glad I got a good discussion going here. Apparently ,this is something that we've needed to discuss for some time now.

MentalVacuum, I'm envious of your AQ Midnights. I've been telling people for a long time that wire does make a difference, but have never treated myself to a good set yet. Long ago, I worked in an audio store and it was quite obvious that wire does have a "sound".

Tim, I can't find a patch cable long enough to get my computer sound over to my audio preamp. The DQ10's are just too big to drag across the room. I'll have to try something else. I might end up building a set of small two-way magnetically shielded speakers for the comp. These little ACS 54 speakers are just not hi-fi enough.

Does anyone have the big Cambridge set with the Dolby digital outputs? I'd be interested to hear about them.

RAB

[Bixler]

Jord, I didn't THINK you had it that way, good to know I was right.

RAB: Aw Common! Wimp... Wusss! Drag them suckers across the room. What's a little hernia in the name of knowlege.? JUST KIDDING. I'm in the exact same layout, and have never really even thought about trying to merge the two systems. I've never found digital audio to need my NS1000s, and based on the buzz and hum I can hear in my headphones, It would just irritate me.

No kidding now, does anyone know of a comp sound card that has the courage to publish Signal-to-Noise specs? After my rant about spec chasers, I must concede thant S/N is a CRUCIAL factor...much else can get in the way, but if you ain't got a good solid 60-70db there (even more in truly high end systems,) you ain't got real HI FI.

Anyone get hold of Haig? I think he could illuminate us all about what the limits of digital audio s/n are. By definition, digital will have a limit. Analog, on the other hand is theoretically boundless (of course not in the real world...ok ok).

I think I'll post him with a link to here.

[This message has been edited by Bixler (edited 25 December 1999).]

[Thundrchez]

Re: background noise

Background noise is usually indicative that the grounds between your computer/sound card and your stereo are not matched good. Sometimes it is as simple as getting a power strip and plugging both the PC and the stereo into it. Surprisingly enough, the ground on one side of your living room is probably different enough from the ground on the other side of your living room to produce background noise.

Back in the OLD days when I had my original Sound Blaster 1.5 (all 8 bits of it), I was getting TREMENDOUS background noise. I could hear through the speakers when the PC was hitting my hard disk. The good thing about those days is that the sound cards came with a interconnect cable to connect to your stereo. I haven't received one of those since I got my AWE32, if I remember correctly.

The SB Live does a very good job at eliminating the background noise. It does much better than my original Monster Sound. I've gotta give Creative Labs a hand for such a good product.

[Jorden]

SB Live! ??? No thanks, no way to set it up with my stereo !! Tried that, been there, and rapidly switched back to my trusty old SB 32 PnP !!

Jord.

[Elemental_DH]

I read the SB live mp3+ and platinum both have "5x Mp3 Acceleration" or something to that effect. Does anyone know if this is a hardware-accelerated feature or just some BS about the software that comes with the card?
The only thing that it comes with to encode mp3's is musicmatch (musicsnatch) which is just plain homo. can the card accelerate any encoding, just one codec, or at all for that matter?

[Elemental_DH]

Re to Bixler:
Heres the only card I've seen that publishes SNR, ("less than 94db"), its a roland and im pretty sure its ridiculously expensive, and way out of the normal consumer market spectrum. I'd like to know how the average hundred dollar card matches up to this. http://www.yamaha.com/cgi-win/webcgi...R00008SW1000XG
You're right, theres too much bull information in the computer audio realm, some honest specs would be nice, just look at the "400watt" speakers you can buy for 40 bucks at computer shows and whatnot. Id like to know where the extra 399 watts came from.
To everyone:
Computer speakers blow. 400 bucks will buy you a decent entry-level, yet respectable reciever/speakers, and if you're at all serious about listening to music on your computer its well worth it.

[Bixler]

Elemental DH

You just hit another one of my 'buttons'. The comparison of loudspeakers on the basis of watts. Give me one of those guys in my old audio shop, and he was MINE. If I liked him/her I tried to explain what it meant, If him/her was obstinate, they got separated from their money.

"Watts" in speaker specs mean this, and only this...How much current can run through the aluminum or copper windings inside the speaker coil before it overheats and warps--thus fragging said speaker. Not how loud they would get, not how good they are on any scale of real world measurement. "Watts" are only a very misleading measurement of a speaker's ability not to die under stress. When buying, the only thing you should assure yourself of is that you are not buying speakers rated at less than 50 watts, then trying to run them with an amp that can deliver 200--and at about that ratio too.

Gotta stop here, but theres MUCH more to this issue. Maybe on the next post or two we'll discuss why speakers get burned up FAR more often due to UNDERPOWERING. That was always a fun one for the warranty dept. Now here's a fun one, dear readers.

[RAB]

Bear with me folks. This is the first time I've ever tried to load a picture into the forum and we'll see how it works.

Anyway, I finally got out my trusty $50 Radio Shack SPL meter and my old Stereophile Test CD2 to measure the frequency response of the ACS 54's. Now, this is a measurement from the chair I sit in and not some esoteric anechoic chamber. It looks horrible and if I were looking for hifi I would pass these up in a minute:



A whopping peak at 125 hz and death valley at 500 and 5000 hz. No wonder my original impression was that they were boomy and voices were hard to understand.

Now do you see why I think there is room for improvement in computer audio? Granted, there is room for improvement in my measurement technique and these are only $100 speakers and the placement of the woofer might not be ideal (up on the desk with the computer). But this is the kind of information I would like to see published. Despite the limits of my crude test equipment, it nonetheless shows the cause of my initial impressions.

RAB

[This message has been edited by RAB (edited 26 December 1999).]

[Elemental_DH]

Bixler:

I realize what you're saying about wattage, as there are 3000 dollar sets of speakers that still handle only 200 watts and of course sound a thousand times better than the 200 dollar sets handling the same power. What are the important specs to look for in speakers, and what exactly is the relationship between watts/ohms, etc? Speaker manufacturers can be so misleading by emphasizing one feature and hiding another. Like my example about the 400watt computer show speakers for instance...

[DentyCracker]

At $250 I personally think the Klipsch ProMedia v2.400 are a bargain. They are the first set of "computer speakers" that I would not hesitate to use for home use (smallish room) Their power rating is not bullshit like those of most "400 Watt" POS. This is a(n) Root Mean Square power rating and while I haven't done formal power testing, I have played them at volumes that are uncomfortably loud without hearing too much distortion (the occasional hard sound). Not buying another set of speakers for my computer again (except maybe if they come out with a 5.1 system). These speakers are good enough that I can hear the difference between CDs and mp3s encoded at 160kbps or Xing vbr high normal, on the PCI64 with a lot more consistency than before.
Make sure you can return the speakers if you can't get to hear them beforehand. Important specs otherwise are Frequency Response which usually is stated with a dB decibel range and a Noise rating (usu. THD). Speaker sensitivity in Sound pressure level produced at 1 metre distance with an input of one watt RMS. This gives you an idea of how loud your speakers will play. A peak and RMS power rating is also a good spec to look for. The real thing is to try to hear the speakers under conditions similar to what you're giong to use them in.

[This message has been edited by DentyCracker (edited 26 December 1999).]

[MentalVacuum]

Elemental DH:
Specs are more often than not meaningless, whether you talk speakers or amps or what have you. Mainstream equipment from Japan, Taiwan, etc will often time have better specs in terms of distortion and S/N R, whereas handmade Brit stuff will just be so much more musical. forget specs, and listen. The only thing I've come to realize is that weight is usually a pretty good indicator for quality. Also try knocking on a speaker; if it sounds solid, a lot of care has probably been put into the construction of it.
RAB:
That freq. response you posted killed my Christmas mood , I know my ACS where born flat in the mid-range, but that bad?!?. Did you try to play around with equalization, as that helped mine somewhat? usually I consider tampering with the signal blasphemy, but for the computer my standards are lower (so it seems are those of the comp. spk. mft's).

Bixler:
I hear you on the Watts issue. Only remotely watt-relevant spec for spk's is efficiency. comp spk's & car stereo make me either laugh, cry or suffer a rage-attack.

Aureal S/N ratio: http://www.aureal.com/newa3d/index.a...uct=sq2500.asp >98dB...well...

------------------
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." -"The Guide"by D. Adams)

[RAB]

I did play with the equalizer that came with the SQ2500, but it only allows adjustments of +-3db and as you can see, these spaekers need more than that. Still, I di get them sounding better. It sure helps to have a roadmap to follow when equalizing. I finished adjusting about 2 in the morning and haven't had a chance to rerun the freq. resp. chart yet. I'll do that sometime today and let you know how it changed on paper.

I generally agree that specs are not that useful but only if you are talking about changes less than about 2db in frequency response and distortion less than 1%. Up to that point they will give you a good idea about how thing will sound. The Freq.Resp. above is a good example.

I know that even though I can equalize the speakers, they are not going to sound the same as a set of six foot electrostatic panels with the same response. Likewise, if the sound card has less than 1% distortion, its still not going to sound like a Krell preamp.

RAB

[Gasoline]

I'm not a great sound authority, nor do I claim to know the difference in all the terms you guys are tossing around. However, before Christmas I had a Panasonic 5 Speaker Surround Sound Desktop Stereo, I thought it sounded good, but my wife bought some Altec Lansing AC54 and they sounded tremendously better.

Now my point, I had intentions of buying the Klipsch 2.400 speakers before she walked in with these, So will the Klipsch 2.4's sound tremendously better than the Altec's or is there going to be a nominal increase in sound quality.

Thanx for listening
Gasoline

[Elemental_DH]

I found specs on the SB Live:

Hardware Specifications

Frequency Response: 10Hz - 44KHz
Signal to Noise Ratio: >96 db
Noise Floor: -120dB
Sampling Rate for Playback/Recording (Stereo): 8 KHz - 48 KHz
Supply Voltage Requirement (Loading): +5, +12, -12 Volt
Current Consumption (Typical): 300, 500, 30 mA respectively
Microphone Impedance: 600 Ohms
Line-In Impedance: 47 KOhms
CD Audio-In Impedance: 50 KOhms
Microphone Sensitivity: 10 - 200 mVpp
Line-In Sensitivity: 0 - 2 Vpp
CD Audio-In Sensitivity: 0 - 2 Vpp
AD/DA Resolution: 16 bits
Output Power (Max.): N/A - available only on specific models
Environmental Specifications

Environment Temperature (non-operating): -40C to 70C
Environment Temperature (operating): 10C to 50C
Relative Humidity (non-operating): 30% to 95%
Relative Humidity (operating): 30% to 80%
MTBF: >60,000 hours
Drop Test: 30cm above concrete ground on all 6 sides
Vibration: Sine wave for X, Y and Z axis (non-operating)
5Hz to 15Hz : 0.76mm (P-P)
15Hz to 25Hz : 1.5G
25Hz to 50Hz : 0.15mm (P-P)
50Hz to 100Hz : 3G

[KvHagedorn]

The best small speakers I've heard for the money are the Phase Technology 4.5Ts ($260/pair) and the B&W LM1s ($349/pair). Both are sized for a desktop, but produce the type of sound you'd get in a higher end home stereo system. Both companies also sell powered subwoofers that would do quite well, but would take up some room. Yamaha has an excellent stand-up receiver meant for computer use, too.

The one thing to remember if you want good audio.. Go to a real audio dealer and buy from him!! You can't get the really good stuff online (legitimately), and if the guy is worth talking to, he's worth supporting by buying from him.

------------------
Kind Regards,

KvH