Winter Audio Reference: On-Board, Consumer, and Pro Solutions
by Derek Wilson on February 3, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Mobile
Audio Quality: RightMark Audio Analyzer 24/96
We've already discussed that RightMark is only as good an analysis tool as the equipment on which it is run. Thus, it does a good job of presenting an overall picture of input and output. If a device shorts itself on input capabilities while maintaining good output, however, its ability test high will fall short. This pushes manufacturers to produce balanced products in order to see good RightMark scores in reviews, but also skews reviews against products that have good output, poor recording, and only use a loopback test.
The other issue that we've run into when testing with RightMark is that when using loopback, input and output grounds are not separated sometimes. This means that running line-out to line-in on the same card can add a ground loop and distort numbers artificially. We could avoid this if we had high quality transformers to build a circuit where we could isolate one side from another. Unfortunately, we don't have the components to build anything of high enough quality on hand. Furthermore, any component that we put between the input and the output of the card would affect the signal and, thus, the test.
In most cases, we can get a good enough picture using loopback, even in situations where a ground loop is created. But we've decided to run one test in a two-card setup in order to get a better picture of what's going on. This gives us a better idea of how things stack up without distorting the picture artificially. In this case, the Intel solution is not capable of recording 24-bit audio, so we set up the Gina3G to record the Intel solution at 24/96 on a separate computer. All other tests were run using loopback. As the Intel and Gina3G solutions were required to loopback to the same physical device, there is the possibility that a ground loop could have raised the average noise slightly.
For our first test, the Audigy 4 is obviously the top card in terms of noise and dynamic range. The Audigy 2 comes in second. The Gina3G wins out in the swept IMD test with its very flat response. We are sad to see that the Intel solution performed so poorly here.
| Test | Echo Audio Gina3G | SB Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Pro | SB Audigy 4 Pro | Intel HD Audio |
| Frequency response (from 40 Hz to 15 kHz), dB: | +0.01, -0.10 | +0.02, -0.10 | +0.02, -0.09 | +0.14, -0.22 |
| Noise level, dB (A): | -102.8 | -107.1 | -109.6 | -82.2 |
| Dynamic range, dB (A): | 102.7 | 106.8 | 108.9 | 82.5 |
| THD, %: | 0.0054 | 0.0014 | 0.0019 | 0.0030 |
| IMD, %: | 0.0062 | 0.0019 | 0.0023 | 0.025 |
| Stereo crosstalk, dB: | -102.8 | -102.4 | -108.6 | -76.2 |
Frequency response
Noise level
Dynamic range
THD + Noise (at -3 dB FS)
Intermodulation distortion
Stereo crosstalk
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
89 Comments
View All Comments
smn198 - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
For me personally what I would want is reviews of gaming perfomance since I used the SPDIF outputs and my HiFi so they all should so the same. I'd also like to know how much difference there really is between different EAX implementations and if it is true that a new SoundStorm board is coming out. I'm sure you know. Can't you just claim you forgot the NDA? ;)reidc - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
My main reason for a soundcard is transferring analog audio from my Turntable(remember those 12" pieces of vinyl????) to CD- or commonly referred to as "needle-drops". The higher quality DAC's and discrete components the better.When I went from my old SB-Live to turtle Beach Santa Cruz- I recevied a huge boost in quality- the drop in noise was huge.
I'd love to see how the TB SC holds up in this regard compared to the listed products.
Oh- my TB SC is currently not in a PC- as I am just getting the Intel 915 board running in a mchine. I assume by seeing the Intel HD Audio tests- I WILL be putting my Santa Cruz in.
Chris
sandorski - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
Yup, a wider range of cards would be nice.ottodostal - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
I am quit disappointed with this review as there are only so few audio cards there. There are so many of them on the market! You must definitely include M-Audio Revolution 7.1, and some card from Audiotrak Maya + Prodigy series (aka Prodigy 7.1), and Aureon 7.1 Universe or DMX 6fire from Terratec. These are of the major cards on the market and there are missing. You could also include Turtle Beach Santa Cruz, and some card from Hercules.I would also include more mid-range and maybe some even some high-en cards (like those from Aardvark or R M E or MOTU ) generally, do not concentrate on low-end cards like Audigy 2 from Creative. In graphic cards reviews you expect us to pay over 600USD for them, so why to concentrate on value cards in audio tests? BTW if you think that people are not doing such things like playing games on audio cards which cost over 800USD you are wrong :)
You should also include some external USB and Firewire cards like Audiophile USB or FireWire 410 from M-Audio (one of my friends recently brought the Audiophile USB replacing some older Audiotrak Maya and he is quit happy with it. He told that even listening to mp3 files is clearly better).
You must also include latency tests in the review and you should comment on support of main standards lide ASIO and GSIF.
DerekWilson - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
#13, ceefka,if you're refering to not calling Intel HD audio, it can do 24-bit/96kHz ... It just can't record at that bit rate. Playback is no problem. Of course, it's not as high quality as we would expect to see from that many bits per sample at that sampling rate.
#12, S0me1X,
The gina3g uses an external DAC/ADC which is one of the reasons we see a cleaner signal. Of course, the soundblaster uses a /better/ DAC, so we see lower noise and dynamic range even though the signal looks a lil shaky at spots.
external DACs are a very good idea.
Derek Wilson
ceefka - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
Any chance for one of the Terratec soundcards? I heard they're pretty good.My ideal soundcard or onboard solution should be
-96KHz/24-bit DTS/Dobly Surround and any previous standard
-optical and coaxial s/pdif input and output
-perhaps an analogue breakoutbox for simple stereo operation and additional analogue outputs.
With so many DVD-players around (even in cars), there is no need to stay in the 44.1/16 realm. 48/24 already sounds so much better than 44.1/16.
It would be nice to have onboards being taken more seriously by the manufacturers. The leads on a mobo are all quite exposed to everything else going on in there. A few efforts in shielding would probably make a real difference, even without changing the chip. I am not ready to pay for a crappy onboard solution. And don't call it HD unless it can do 96/24.
S0me1X - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
Best way to get quality sound out of a pc is to use an external DAC. I'm using a Benchmark DAC1 that I'm very happy with :)SignalPST - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
I just hope that Creative would fix the 44.1kHz resampling issue and IMD problems with the Sound Blaster Zenith sound cards thats suppose to come out sometime this year.sxr7171 - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
I don't see how the Audigy 4 is so much better than the Audigy 2 to recommend it over the Audigy 2. They are pretty much the same with the Audigy showing weaknesses and one strength in 24/96 D/A conversion. I guess internal computer audio is still not to be taken very seriously except for games (which the reviews sort of hints at).wrecktangle - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
any chance you could take a look at the m-audio revo 5.1? i've been looking for a review of this card for a long time. even a short update/comparison to the revo 7.1 would be great.on the whole, this review seems alright. kinda short though. definitely touch on recording quality in the future. maybe you could also stretch out the qualitative bit with some more music listening tests of other genres.
is it just me, or are the spectrum plots missing?