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
REMF - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
i would like to see how the Via envy24 cards stack up against the newer Realtek 880 and C-media HD chips, as well as against CL gear.bbomb - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
Please read his remarks before you go off crying that this round up sucks and you didnt do this card or that card. Read some of the comments in the commetns section and Dereks response before you spew out the same crap someone else has.He stated 6 posts above you soupy that these were done to creat a refrence point for each segment for future reviews of sound cards.
Perhaps you should remove the roundup part of the article title Derek.
ElFenix - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
i'll stick with the santa cruz for a while longer, i guess.Damien - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
I was surprised to not see the nForce 4 compared, given that it is one of the newest onboard sound components to support the latest gravy.Damien
soupy - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
no EMU cards? (0404, 1212). Those are some really hi-fidelity cards this review should've included. And yeah, there really has to be a good, solid sound system for reviews like these to be based on. All in all, this roundup was pretty bad.ProviaFan - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
#15 - Aardvark is dead. Sadly, because they made some good stuff, but they're not around any more, which means no driver updates, etc. :(For pro cards, you could try the MOTU 828mkII (maybe throw in a 24I/O or HD192 on the high end if you're going to cover that segment), the Presonus Firepod, and whatever Digidesign sells in that price range (comments on the Protools software would be required also if you're going to do that ;). If you wanted to go really high end, you could look at some Apogee D/A and A/D's... :D
Jigglybootch - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
I'm surprised there was no E-mu 0404 reviewed. It goes for about the same price point as a plain Audigy 2 ZS, but blows it away in every category.Also surprised by no Revolution 7.1/5.1 review.
segagenesis - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
#19 - I second that. However, I have not seen (or rather havent looked hard enough?) something since the soundstorm that does realtime AC3 out. And yes, please include at *least* the Revolution 7.1 in a future review. Maybe you should thrown in your stock AC97 on most boards you see now (Realtek 6 channel, not Intel HD Audio) just to show the difference between them and a $100+ card.I also fail to see the real benefit of Creative cards and hardware 3D audio when to me its always sounded like the game is in a cave or some other overdone (or underdone!) effect. Ok maybe you get a few extra fps but I have always played games using Miles Fast 2D/3D audio without complaint.
YMMV
mcveigh - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
you really should have had something with the via envy 24 chipset in there. there are so many boards out with one of those variants. personally I would have liked to see M-audio (or who ever they are now) revo 7.1 AND 5.1 as the new 5.1 is supposed to have better DAC's I've heard.EddNog - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
Mr. Wilson, please don't forget to mention the importance of bypassing the Kmixer resample stage. ;-)With even a merely decent system, the difference is obvious.
-Ed