dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1527
share rss forum feed


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2

Creative Sound Blaster Audigy SE Vs. ALC892

Will i see any difference in performances with Creative Sound Blaster Audigy SE compared to Realtek ALC892?. My OS is Windows 7.


Dogg
Premium
join:2003-06-11
Belleville, IL
Reviews:
·Charter
Many of the older Creative chipsets (including the Audigy line) have Win7 driver issues. With that said, install it and test for yourself. Regardless of any "ratings" or recommendations you read here or anywhere else, audio is very subjective and "quality" will depend largely on the speakers. Most people don't have computer speakers of sufficient quality to hear the difference between onboard or addon sound chipsets, especially in the case of old chipsets.
--
Google is your Friend


Tirael
BOHICA
Premium
join:2009-03-18
Sacramento, CA
kudos:2
reply to Oleg
Unless you have digital out with your on-board sound card (and are using it), then the Audigy SE is going to be better. Last I read, the S/N of the ALC892 is 95dB and the Audigy SE is 100dB. That is a tick in favor of the Audigy. However, like Dogg See Profile said, the sound card is only half of the equation. You still need good speakers (Bose, Klipsch, and etc) for it to really matter.
--
“Reality doesn't bite, rather our perception of reality bites.” - Anthony J. D'Angelo
»www.chaoticconfused.com


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2
reply to Dogg
I have Logitech Z623 speakers. »www.logitech.com/en-us/product/s···tem-z623

By the way i am an Audiophile so sound quality and also video quality is very important to me.


Tirael
BOHICA
Premium
join:2009-03-18
Sacramento, CA
kudos:2
Then get a better sound card than either of those, like an ASUS Xonar Essence STX.


Dustyn
Premium
join:2003-02-26
Ontario, CAN
kudos:11
reply to Oleg
I have the ALC888S. Never noticed a difference between this or an add on sound card.


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2
What kind of sound card have you tried and what speakers do you have?.


koitsu
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:23

2 recommendations

reply to Oleg
I'm one of the people who switched back to a sound card due to problems with on-board audio. I moved from the on-board Realtek ALC887 to a PCI Audigy SE due to continual problems with clicking, popping, and stuttering during Google Hangouts and Skype (I work remotely and online video/audio collaboration is a good portion of my day). I was even able to use the "Stereo Mix" (e.g. "What You Hear" or audio loopback at the driver level) feature to record the clicking/popping/stuttering, which means it was absolutely a driver-level problem. Trust me -- it becomes infuriating very quickly.

The problems in question are/were almost certainly driver-related, but the problem is that the end-user has no way to rectify those. I'm not going to sit around screwing with Control Panel features and essentially playing with my ballsack to try and work around bad design in Realtek's drivers. Besides, I think everyone knows by now I'd love for Realtek to collapse. (I'll take a moment to note some of Gigabyte's new motherboards are using actual Intel NICs -- oh thank the heavens, someone actually LISTENED!).

Is Creative Labs awesome? No. They have an awful history of writing garbage drivers as well, just garbage in a different way. Their Windows 7 debacle (what Dogg See Profile refers to) was utterly insane, especially considering a highly technical end-user figured out a way to "hack" their drivers to work properly. And clearing your system of Creative's drivers is a pain -- their uninstaller does not remove them fully (ever!). The card I chose just happened to be inexpensive and rectified the problems I was having with Realtek's garbage.

So why didn't I go with something else, like an Asus Xonar card? I tried in the past, and guess what? Yup, driver bugs.

A mantra I've held for years: it doesn't matter how good your hardware is, what features your ASICs offer, what kind of hardware offloading you have, when the software side of things (drivers) suck. It's really that simple.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2
O yea. I would never install drivers from a CD that comes with the hardware. I am always downloading the latest drivers from manufacturer's website.

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
reply to koitsu
It's not just realtek, I've found package systems have a cirrus logic based controller under the name Conextant that is just as bad. For example the besides occasional popping I found a serious problem that the software cannot fix. If you use the front jacks on some of these desktop systems it's automatically considered the rear channels like a dolby pro-logic setup, and the main sound like the person speaking isn't put through this output even though you're using headphones while the hardware disables the rear output when you're connected to the front, effectively making the front a useless output.

I make due with onboard audio, but if I did any real serious audio work I would consider an asus card.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.


kvn864

join:2001-12-18
Sun City, AZ
kudos:1
reply to koitsu
Isn't Realtek making not only sound chipsets but ethernet ones also for vast majority of motherboards, vast, 95%? I personally won't use their sound if I can put a dedicated card in. My opinion: any sound card that cost more then 20 dollars will sound better than any Realtek.


Ctrl Alt Del
Premium
join:2002-02-18
kudos:1
reply to Oleg
said by Oleg:

I have Logitech Z623 speakers. By the way i am an Audiophile so sound quality and also video quality is very important to me.

Then get an external DAC and invest in a separate amplifier and speakers. Logitech is good, but not great.

Or get one of these, which connect directly to your PC via USB, and do the digital to analog conversion and amplification in the speaker itself: »audioengineusa.com/Store/Powered···Speakers
--
less talk, more music


Oleg
Premium
join:2003-12-08
Birmingham, AL
kudos:2
It's not worth it for over $200 i better buy a better set of speakers.


aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1
reply to Oleg
I have this card: »www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/A···496.html -- better than either one.
--
.sig


banditws6
Shrinking Time and Distance
Premium
join:2001-08-18
Frisco, TX
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
reply to Oleg
Depending on the other specs of your machine, with onboard audio you may experience slowdown while seeking through music tracks and other performance annoyances which the SB Audigy would likely alleviate. If you had to choose between one of those two chipsets you listed, try the Audigy first and see if the drivers work for you.

I used an Audigy for some years, on Windows 7, without many (if any) problems.
--
"The counsel of fools is all the more dangerous the more of them there are." -?lafr H?skuldsson


C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Tempe, AZ
reply to Oleg
I'll be perfectly blunt and just say that onboard audio - especially for the last couple of years - can really just get on its knees and blow me.

The last onboard audio that seemed a viable competitor in terms of "just working" and solid quality has been the nvidia soundstorm... back in the days of the original nforce2.

Creative's drivers are annoying to properly remove. But despite the issues others have, I've been mostly trouble free with their stuff. So long as you stick to a supported OS and product. Big thing for me is basically support for all the current and legacy codecs, and that's one thing that I can say creative has in spades over everyone else.

I've read the reviews of stuff like Asus' Xonar having some similar workaround for those old DirectSound/EAX games, but I've yet to see a single review actually compare this (or any other competitor's offering) to the likes of a proper X-Fi with ALchemy or something. So I can't speak for how well it works. If indeed these other solutions worked at least as well as the ALchemy offering, I'd happily open up my options.

As it stands now, I find myself considering the Audigy Rx/Fx simply because they seem to be re-badged X-Fi's with current-gen software.
--
Because, f*ck Sony


Ctrl Alt Del
Premium
join:2002-02-18
kudos:1
reply to Oleg
Also, if you connect your PC to a receiver via HDMI or optical, you bypass the DAC/sound card anyway, and the DAC in your receiver does all the work. This is what I've done with my home theater Mac mini. I just run HDMI into my preamp processor which has a much nicer DAC. Then analog RCA to the big amp then to my stereo speakers and sub.
--
less talk, more music


DarkLogix
Texan and Proud
Premium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3

1 edit
reply to Tirael
said by Tirael:

Then get a better sound card than either of those, like an ASUS Xonar Essence STX.

Forget that get a good USB DAC instead.

like this
»www.amazon.com/Lexicon-Omega-Des···002E4Z9G

Since you say you're an audiophile then why are you going to use any audio DAC that's inside your computer, get it external so its away from that RF in the case

if I had the space and money I'd do something like a nice audio receiver that has USB for an input plus a sweet set of kliptch home theater speakers.
--
semper idem
1KTzRMxN1a2ATrtAAvbmEnMBoY3E2kHtyv


koitsu
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:23
The problems I ran into with USB DACs is that most of them do not offer "simple" things that people have come to rely on, such as:

1. Microphone input (including where your own voice can be heard in the audio stream used for playback/output). A lot of USB DACs don't offer this, and those which do often do not implement what I put in parenthesis.

2. Headphone output impedance mismatch; I've been bit by this more times than I can count (but not specific to USB DACs either; happens with anything really).

3. "Stereo Mix" or "What U Hear", where what's being output is essentially software/hardware loopbacked and thus can be recorded.

4. Complications involving output jacks vs. speakers; quite often what speakers have do not match what the USB DAC outputs to (physical jack-wise)

The 3rd item can be accomplished using a physical loopback cable, but almost always results in volume/amplification issues where you're having to "fine-tune" volume settings in two places (input and output) constantly so things aren't over-amped/clipping.

These, combined with the problem of even more cables (good USB DACs are often AC powered, while some can be powered off a 9V battery), often drive general people away (myself included).

Just my $0.02 when dealing with PC audio nonsense. All the above is why I just stick to physical sound cards.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.


Ctrl Alt Del
Premium
join:2002-02-18
kudos:1
reply to DarkLogix
said by DarkLogix:

Since you say you're an audiophile then why are you going to use any audio DAC that's inside your computer, get it external so its away from that RF in the case

Not only that, but an external DAC also usually has better surrounding/supporting chips and better power supply. Yes, law of diminishing returns and all that, but a good external soundcard/DAC is appreciably better than onboard.
--
less talk, more music


DarkLogix
Texan and Proud
Premium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3
reply to koitsu
Well that's likely just due to a few things.

1. internal sound cards are much more popular so issues are likely to be found/fixed.

2. the category of USB DAC, (IE basic junk vs recording studio gear vs home theater gear)

I hear the one I linked and its lesser counter parts is good and I have been considering getting it but can't decide if its worth it and also I've been thinking of using a USB DAC with VMware ESXi to give a VM an audio in/out.
--
semper idem
1KTzRMxN1a2ATrtAAvbmEnMBoY3E2kHtyv


DarkLogix
Texan and Proud
Premium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3
reply to Ctrl Alt Del
said by Ctrl Alt Del:

said by DarkLogix:

Since you say you're an audiophile then why are you going to use any audio DAC that's inside your computer, get it external so its away from that RF in the case

Not only that, but an external DAC also usually has better surrounding/supporting chips and better power supply. Yes, law of diminishing returns and all that, but a good external soundcard/DAC is appreciably better than onboard.

Ya an external DAC when targeted at recording studio gear should have better SNR rated chips, better supporting parts maybe an external powersupply so it can distance any RF/EMI the AC/DC conversion might have from the board or be powered via USB.
--
semper idem
1KTzRMxN1a2ATrtAAvbmEnMBoY3E2kHtyv


Ctrl Alt Del
Premium
join:2002-02-18
kudos:1
For my home theater I simply got a preamp processor with a good DAC (Cirrus) built in: Emotiva UMC-200 »emotiva.com/products/pres-and-pros/umc-200
--
less talk, more music


C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Tempe, AZ
reply to Ctrl Alt Del
said by Ctrl Alt Del:

said by DarkLogix:

Since you say you're an audiophile then why are you going to use any audio DAC that's inside your computer, get it external so its away from that RF in the case

Not only that, but an external DAC also usually has better surrounding/supporting chips and better power supply. Yes, law of diminishing returns and all that, but a good external soundcard/DAC is appreciably better than onboard.

Sounds like good advice, but there is one big issue there that pertains to why I can't take any USB based sound solution seriously...

Namely, all that traffic over USB? Yea, no. The amount of processing overhead would be even worse than any given onboard audio on the market. On a similar parallel, I know that people here love to poo poo on the Killer NIC idea, but at least I can appreciate their principle of trying to offload as much of that data from your system as possible, which is more than a 20¢ onboard NIC chip most of the market uses could ever do.
--
Because, f*ck Sony


DarkLogix
Texan and Proud
Premium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3
said by C0deZer0:

Namely, all that traffic over USB? Yea, no. The amount of processing overhead would be even worse than any given onboard audio on the market. On a similar parallel, I know that people here love to poo poo on the Killer NIC idea, but at least I can appreciate their principle of trying to offload as much of that data from your system as possible, which is more than a 20¢ onboard NIC chip most of the market uses could ever do.

A good USB dac would be doing the same offloading as a sound card, and audio isn't bandwidth intensive.
--
semper idem
1KTzRMxN1a2ATrtAAvbmEnMBoY3E2kHtyv


Ctrl Alt Del
Premium
join:2002-02-18
kudos:1
reply to C0deZer0
said by C0deZer0:

Namely, all that traffic over USB? Yea, no. The amount of processing overhead would be even worse than any given onboard audio on the market.

The CPU processing overhead used by a USB DAC is nothing. USB 1.1 (yes, I typed that correctly, USB one-point-one) can support streaming up to 96-kHz/24-bits by itself, and that's higher than CD's 44.1-kHz/16-bit. And you're worried about the processing overhead? You might as well disconnect your USB mouse, because that puts the same strain on your CPU as a USB DAC.

»www.ayre.com/usb-dac.htm
--
less talk, more music


DarkLogix
Texan and Proud
Premium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3
said by Ctrl Alt Del:

96-kHz/24-bits

Gasp what if I want 192khz/24bit?


C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Tempe, AZ
reply to DarkLogix
said by DarkLogix:

A good USB dac would be doing the same offloading as a sound card, and audio isn't bandwidth intensive.

Yes, just like all those USB modems were also supposed to take care of that before broadband was more readily available.

Theoretically, yes; in practice, I've yet to see one that wasn't completely horrible at it, in the wild or in any actual review.

Case in point, my first real non-dialup internet was provided via a USB ADSL modem... it was consistent, until I tried to launch any given online game. Latencies were all over the place as soon as I connected, and the only solution came when the ISP allowed me to swap for a PCI modem at the time.

It's also well repeated that if you are stuck on dialup, the only type of modem that doesn't whore out the CPU like its (G/M)Hz are refined crack cocaine are those that use a serial port, because USB modems are even more guilty of the processing overhead than even a PCI WinModem.
--
Because, f*ck Sony


DarkLogix
Texan and Proud
Premium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3
well that's modems and the cheap DACs


Ctrl Alt Del
Premium
join:2002-02-18
kudos:1
reply to C0deZer0
Your experience with shitty winmodems from 15 years ago have nothing to do with how USB Audio works.

Firstly, USB Audio is actually built into the USB spec: »www.usb.org/developers/devclass_···io10.pdf

Secondly, any OS worth a damn has built in support for USB 1.1 audio (class 1). Windows, Mac, and Linux support USB 1.1 audio out of the box with built in thin drivers. The overhead to package audio and send over USB 1.1 is smaller than TCP/IP's overhead.

And better OSes have built in support for USB 2.0 audio (class 2). Mac OS X Snow Leopard (and later) is able to stream 10 channels of 32-bit audio at 192 kHz to and from a USB Audio 2.0 device: »developer.apple.com/library/mac/···dex.html That's higher quality and more channels than CD, DVD, or Blu-ray can offer.

Again, if you're concerned about the CPU overhead caused by a USB audio device, then you need to disconnect your USB mouse and USB keyboard, because those are just as taxing to your precious CPU.
--
less talk, more music