Winter Audio Reference: On-Board, Consumer, and Pro Solutions
by Derek Wilson on February 3, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Mobile
Final Words
Intel HD audio quality isn't the highest in the industry for on-board design. This is fine for an average user, but if Intel is pushing on-board audio experience, they should make some enhancements to signal quality. Listening at higher volumes to quiet tracks could sometimes give the hint of a little noise that wasn't supposed to be there. Overall, the listening experience was very good for Intel's solution. And their audio enhancement software by Sonic Focus actually does a good job of delivering on its promises where all other software of a similar sort (that this reviewer has heard) falls short.
The SoundBlaster Audigy 2 isn't the best for straight audio listening. The card has IMD problems at the very often used 16-bit/44.1kHz setting (CD's, MP3's, games), which seems to produce a slight coloration of the audio. This doesn't matter as much (at all?) for movies and games, but for listening to CDs and music files, we would expect better. As a consumer card, where the target is for an entertainment systemm the Audigy 2 offers a good setup, especially when movies and gaming will be a central focus of the machine. For those who wish to dabble in recording, the Audigy 2 is certainly better than an on-board solution and offers 24-bit/96kHz recording of either analog or digital sources.
The Gina3g hits the numbers really well in some cases, but falls short in places where we'd rather see them do better. Our test would have looked better if we had an external balanced device to test against, as our loopback test created a ground loop. Listening to the Gina3g was a very clean experience, although setting up surround is interesting with the configurable ¼ inch outputs, and buying proper converters was interesting. The Gina3g is made more to be a cog in a machine than something to be listened to, but it does very well in a pinch. Of course, if the plan is to listen on the same machine as well as be used in recording, a separate audio card may be desired. The Gina3g can only maintain one sampling rate at a time and will alter all sampling rates to the most recently requested. In other words, if we're recording at 96kHz, and half way through, I double click a 44.1kHz audio track that plays on my Gina3g, half of my recording is going to sound really high pitced and fast when I play it back. This is avoidable if a separate audio card is used for playback while the Gina3g is recording (though, we would still recommend against doing this).
Interestingly, the Audigy 4 is a top performer in our tests, as the improved build quality serve to mask some of the issues that we've seen with the Audigy 2. We would still like to see balanced I/O, and truly reprogrammable sampling rates (to avoid the 44.1kHz resampling issue and IMD problems altogether). But overall, the Audigy 4 Pro is a welcome improvement to the Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Pro. Not so much that we would recommend upgrading, but if you have to choose between them, we would point in the direction of the Audigy 4.
But that is by no means a conclusion to audio here at AnandTech. The preceding was meant to cut a cross section through PC audio. We've touched on integrated solutions, consumer add-in products, and professional cards. In future audio reviews, we will be using the cards from this review as a reference point for other products in their respective categories. As audio makes a return to the pages of AnandTech, we hope to bring out reviews of products based from the likes of M-Audio, Terratec, EMU, RME, DigiDesign, MOTU, Lynx, C-Media, NVIDIA, Analog Devices, more Realtek, and anything else you can suggest to us. We will also try to include older cards (such as the SB Live! and Turtle Beach cards) for reference in future articles as well.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
89 Comments
View All Comments
DerekWilson - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
Sorry for the confusion guys,We had originally just picked on card from each end of the market (onboard, addin, pro) and then decided that we needed to do both the audigy 2 and 4 because they're so similar. It's really meant to be an intro piece on sound and a look at an example of each market segment.
We certainly weren't trying to be all inclusive, and we do want your feedback. These cards will be our "comparison point" cards in each market segment. When we look at onboards solutions, we'll talk about how it compares to the ALC880, and on the Pro side, we'll match up the Gina3G with whatever we're looking at.
And when we do a targeted review as for proaudio we will absolutely spend time setting up a workstation and running some latency tests and we'll talk about asio/gsif support more in depth.
We will be reviewing more sound cards :-)
We didn't want to review all of them at once and spoil the fun though. :-D
MarkM - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
I second #5's request -- esp concerning the onboard, which is more relevant for most new builds>on board nvidia audio would be interesting as well as an older sb live 5.1 card for reference
LoneWolf15 - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
Not a single card based on the VIA Envy24 setup...no M-Audio Revolution, no Terratec, no Chaintech AV-710 (all Envy24-based)...I can't believe Anandtech left one of the largest enthusiast chipsets out of the roundup. There's just not enough representation here of available solutions to make a good comparison, it's either Intel or Creative, and Intel isn't an option for AMD users.If you're going to make onboard comparisons, why not (even if it's a poor solution) add the ALC850 found on most Socket 754/939 boards, seeing as AMD users can't exactly get Intel/Azalia HD audio?
hondaman - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
More cards please!!! Soundstorm, older audigy/Live and m-audio sure would have made this article a whole lot better, as thats what a lot of people are using.bob661 - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
If mid-range cards are an order of magnitude better in objective sound tests than onboard solutions, I might actually go back to buying sound cards.I would like to reaquest testing the onboard Realtek's on the Athlon64 motherboards. I would be interested in seeing how they perform compared to mid-range and high-end sound cards.
EddNog - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
Yep; gotta' have at least a halfway decent setup, from head to tail. I'm pretty happy with my setup:foobar2000 kernel streaming FLAC/Monkey's Audio to
Echo Audio Mia MIDI with sample rate locked to 44.1, out via 75ohm impedance silver coax S/PDIF to
Onkyo TX-SR501, out via silver cabling to
a pair of Paradigm Studio/20 Rev. 3 sitting on
Atlantis Reference stands
"I'm lovin' it."
-Ed
OrSin - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
Most people are not gaming with 800 sound cards.I would be suprised if gamers are using $100 sound cards. When people list out thier RIGS 8 out 10 don't even lsit thier sound card. And the other 2 have $100 or less cards. I'm all for a review of $200+ cards but almost all are not using them for gaming.
Also in order to hear better sound from $100+ card you need a better and better speak system. Not just speaker, but a good in home setup. I threw down $1000 on a speak system and it sound ok. WhenI had my friend come over and setup it up right. It sounded great. It more then just buying them and plugging them in. It take a lot to get a quailty setup. High end sound cards only will not do it, so for some it just not worth going beyond a $100 card.
Araemo - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
[Self-serving]Could we get an onboard audio review for the Soundstorm on the Abit NF7-S v2? ;P[/self-serving]
Seriously though, good review.. but I'd like to know where my current system stands.
And does anybody know how much "THX Certified" is worth? I have logitech Z-2200s connected to my nForce onboard right now(My Audigy developed an odd crackling noise during gameplay that I couldn't get rid of.)
yodel - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
YellowWing - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link
What about AC3 digital encode? The next PC I build will be a HTPC, and digital encode for a single connection to my receiver is of great importance. I doubt if any of the sound systems analog sections would be used.What is the overhead of the digital encode? Does it slow a frame rate or not seem to matter?
Can you hear the difference between the digital and analog output with a good home theater setup?