I'm saving $ to buy the X-Meridiam-- to be used solely for listening to music with my headphones (HD595). I have an available PCI slot, but not sure if it is 5 volt. Read the product specs for my HP Pavilion PC, but there is no mention of the volt for the PCI slots. Is it fair to assume that my availble PCI slot will support 5 volt?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Auzentech XMeridian is finally out!
- Thread starter alg7_munif
- Start date
- Status
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
I think that all PCI slots on today's mobo can support the card without any problem. If you have a mobo that still has a ISA slot then you should worry about that.
Now I've heard the XMeridian and know why you like it, its louder LOL! No just joking. He hasn't upgraded his OpAmps so I can only comment on the stock ones. Dewd, I'm sticking with mine.
I heard it against the Elite Pro Last night and then both of them vs. the Xtreme Music today. NOT worth $100 more IMHO. The XMer can get more WOW out of Headphones than a good receiver.
Zero Difference in Digital Out 24-96 and not enough to talk about in Analog out once the Volume is Equalized. That's where the loudness comes into play. My Bud said it best. "It (XMer) is like adding an EQ and X-FI is like having only Bass and Treble.
We also noticed Distortion with the XMer. Good card and I buy on if it had an X-FI XM or b-Enspirer type price.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
If you heard a difference when using the digital out, most probably one of the cards is not set properly to give a bit matched output, if the output is already bit matched, the sound only depends on the receiver so it wouldn't matter whether an expensive X-Fi Elite Pro, a normal X-Fi, a X-Meridian, a b-Enspirer or just an AV-710 is used. The difference is the analogue output, X-Meridian is not just like adding an EQ. What you've just said is like you haven't heard the best from your X-Fi before this and you need to have the X-Meridian as a reference to properly EQ the X-Fi. I thought that you and you buds are the best when playing with the settings lol. Btw if you and your buds(the best guys with sound card's settings) can't get the best sound from the X-Fi before having the X-Meridian as a reference, I don't think that I as a normal person could EQ my X-Fi to get a same sound like my X-Meridian. I would recommend your bud to change the OPAMPs and the sound would be better, the OPAMPs are cheap, read the post by AVOpus on AVS forum for some recommended OPAMPs.
No, you can't EQ the sound to make the X-Fi sound better for Music Playback. That's NOT what I'm saying. What I'm saying is the difference isn't that great. Let's talk numbers? If I gave an X-Fi 100% for Games, I'd give the XMeridian 80%. If I gave the XMeridian 100% for music playback I've give the Elite Pro 95% and the X-fi 89%
You make it seem as if the X-Fi is just terrible. It seemed more of a question of Volume to me. I saying for the 30th time, I listen to Music via Digital Out and bit matched.
That bud is using it with his HTPC, two other traded their cars and the 4th is strictly a Headphone user, has several pair. He like the Sennheisser 600 if IIRC. He loves not have to use an Amp on his cans.
Now since you see as some kind of Super Creative Labs F@n, I'll tell you I like the X-Fi, not Creative Labs. If XMer did those things I liked, I quickly go out and buy one. Right now, I don't think so.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
So with stock OPAMPs, you found out that X-Meridian is better than Elite Pro? I've never said that X-Fi is bad for music but I've always said that X-Meridian is better and for me the difference is really worth the money I paid for it, consider the price is less than an Elite Pro and it is around the price of the Fatal1ty FPS. I would choose the X-Meridian again over those two because I can get a better sound with the X-Meridian. Btw I would give my X-Meridian 90% in games if X-Fi got 100% because the only difference for me is EAX >2.0, my X-Meridian doesn't slow my system down and it also can do 128 voices. You might say that X-Fi has Vista support and X-Meridian doesn't but for me it is still too early to speculate anything about Vista. Since PowerDVD Ultra is already out and it can decode True HD and DTS HD, I really think that the X-Meridian is really a great card for it's price. The only reason you use the digital output from your X-Fi is because your receiver can do better than your X-Fi for music playback, even my Z-5400's receiver can do just slightly better than my X-Fi but the X-Meridian can beat some receivers if it can't beat yours, I know that it beats my Z-5400's receiver and AVOpus said that it beats his Outlaw 990.No, you can't EQ the sound to make the X-Fi sound better for Music Playback. That's NOT what I'm saying. What I'm saying is the difference isn't that great. Let's talk numbers? If I gave an X-Fi 100% for Games, I'd give the XMeridian 80%. If I gave the XMeridian 100% for music playback I've give the Elite Pro 95% and the X-fi 89%
And only every single OpenAL game
I keep reminding him of that!
Honestly, you don't need PowerDVD Ultra. Even my old 2600+ before it died with a MUSE sound card Ran MLP in software with PowerDVD 6 Deluxe, $29.95 ISO Download.
I'll put it like my Bud did with his monster system. "Well, I have to tone the XMer down while I had to boost my X-Fi's, he had both the Elite and XMusic." Now he demo-ed to a few of us Geeks just what he was talking about and I couldn't agree more with him. Sorry, no dinky wimpy stuff here.
There are CRAP loads receivers that spank mine. That's why I think Computer Multimedia speakers suck much! I crushed 680, Mega and Giga works, Klipsch of all kinds with low-end receiver that sold for $120 and used or repaired speakers, geesh, I hope I never have to go back to using computer speakers. Yet, I've had folks here heard my stuff and go, YOU PAID WHAT, WOW!
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
And only every single OpenAL game
And I need OpenAL for? Again EAX effects, like I said before, the only difference for me is just EAX effects and EAX effects don't always mean good.
Btw Donnie27, I've never said anything about MLP with PowerDVD Ultra, I said TrueHD and DTS HD can be decoded with PowerDVD Ultra
You need OpenAL for games that use the API for sound output. You can play those games, but not without a wrapper. Maybe that's inconsequential to you and maybe it isn't.
I don't like disregarding the need (or the desire, really) for OpenAL nor do I like disregarding the fact that the C-Media stuff semi-supports it (Moofasa~).
These arguments are absurd. "I like it better, he likes it better, therefore it is better". What the hell, you know?
I don't like disregarding the need (or the desire, really) for OpenAL nor do I like disregarding the fact that the C-Media stuff semi-supports it (Moofasa~).
Did he also not just spend some coin on OPAMPs (that I can't find a place to buy in quantities of less than a thousand)? You're making things extremely fuzzy here. The wording of the sentence implies that the stock X-Meridian beats out high-end preamps. You're also implying that "beating" is a very scientific, quantifiable thing and not at all subjective. What is "beating" in your terms? What is "beating" in Donnie's?alg7_munif said:
These arguments are absurd. "I like it better, he likes it better, therefore it is better". What the hell, you know?
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
Most onboard sound cards don't support OpenAL, without it, the worst thing could happen to me is just I don't get any EAX at all, big deal, a game developer wouldn't make a game that will only support sound cards from a single company. For the OPAMPs, you could try digikey.com or you can go to any diy forum, there people always buy the components in small quantities, ask them where did they get their stuffs. Beating is subjective, in soccer even having a goal less is considered beaten. I've never found a post from someone that have heard both the X-Meridian and X-Fi said that the sound is not better than a X-Fi, even Donnie27 said that it is better. What I've said is for me the sound difference between a X-Meridian and a X-Fi really worth the money I paid for the card, if Donnie27 or others don't think like that, then that's his opinion. Everyone can have their own opinion about something. It is just like I don't buy a Conroe now, not because I don't like Intel but I don't think that I need to pay for the cost of changing my mobo, RAM and CPU now for the performance increase, it is not like my system is bad. Maybe you think that AMD is bad because someone said that Intel is better, so you think that I'm saying X-Fi is bad just because I've said X-Meridian is better? I've never asked you to buy a X-Meridian. Just because you think that the price is too high for the difference, don't force others to think like that, I've never forced people not to buy a Conroe just because I think that the price is too high for the difference between a X2 and Conroe. Btw thanks to Donnie27, I've found myself a good price for a HT receiver and a pair of bookshelf, I know that I can't stay with a computer speaker forever.
In soccer, being beaten is 100% quantifiable and not one bit subjective (I assume anyway -- I don't know the sport). With sound cards, only certain aspects are quantifiable. Other aspects are subjective.
In any case, you're the one who used the term "beat" here. You're not properly defining what is your opinion and what is fact to this regard.
You may have said this before, but you just said this:
This wasn't pulled out of context, either.
When exactly did I force anyone into the thinking that the price is too high? As I recall, I said this:
"I still can't say". No force-feeding anything down anyone's throat here.
I want to say that I just read this entire thread. Whew. I don't play FPSs much anymore so I'm not that worried about the whole EAX/OpenAL issue, but I had a couple quick questions.
-----
1. Does the X-Meridian correctly occlude sounds? There seems to be some confusion on this issue. If it doesn't do it at all, this is a big issue, but if it does it as well as EAX 2.0 allows it to, but does not have the SuperAwesomeOcclude that Eax 5.0 does, then I'm not as worried.
2. Does X-Meridian's EAX 2.0 correctly position a teammate's voice chat in Battlefield 2/Battlefield 2142? The only reason I ask is because I think the feature is neat, but by no means a deal breaker if the X-Meridian does in fact have (subjectively) superior sound for music/movies.
3. If/when I do upgrade to Vista, is there any reason an eventual OpenAL wrapper will degrade quality in any way, or will it simply require more CPU cycles? Until I'm ready to get a good digital receiver and more audiophile speakers I'm in the "sound card for sound performance, not game performance" camp because if I'm really worried about my FPS in the time being I'll upgrade my graphics card.
-----
Anyway, I'm *this* close to buying a card.
-----
1. Does the X-Meridian correctly occlude sounds? There seems to be some confusion on this issue. If it doesn't do it at all, this is a big issue, but if it does it as well as EAX 2.0 allows it to, but does not have the SuperAwesomeOcclude that Eax 5.0 does, then I'm not as worried.
2. Does X-Meridian's EAX 2.0 correctly position a teammate's voice chat in Battlefield 2/Battlefield 2142? The only reason I ask is because I think the feature is neat, but by no means a deal breaker if the X-Meridian does in fact have (subjectively) superior sound for music/movies.
3. If/when I do upgrade to Vista, is there any reason an eventual OpenAL wrapper will degrade quality in any way, or will it simply require more CPU cycles? Until I'm ready to get a good digital receiver and more audiophile speakers I'm in the "sound card for sound performance, not game performance" camp because if I'm really worried about my FPS in the time being I'll upgrade my graphics card.
-----
Anyway, I'm *this* close to buying a card.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
I can't really answer that because I don't play FPS much but I'll put my bet on saying that if you have a EAX 2 sound card and you still get those effects, I don't see why you couldn't get those effects with this card since this card also support EAX 2.0. I'm also not a big fan of BF2 or BF2142 so I don't know much about them, I think that you could read more about this chip on those games if you read about the Razer's card, it uses the same chip, only the analogue is different. It is better if you buy the card from a place that you can return it if you are not satisfied with it. For the Vista question, we can just speculate what will happen. I've read that Vista's sound mixer is much better than current Windows mixer.
I was just saying that PowerDVD 6D has Solftware MLP. You asked a question, "And I need OpenAL for?" and I'll ask you, I need Music Playback for? Now, I can get great playback with a Set top, you still NEED to buy a X-Fi
EAX effects always mean good when I used them LOL. When they don't I don't use them.
SO, you have your THD cables and connections?
If you're lucky, you can get the XMeridian to do ONE EAX effect at a time.
Yes, X-Fi places Team members relative to your position. Their voices get are given effects that mimic their environment. Inside, outside, near an Object, and etc.... Folks try to frame their argument to downplay such features, but they are cool.
I like First Person Shooters and then Flight Sims. Driving game fans like the X-Fi as well. Polls show this.
Been following for quite a while. Sitting on the fence. Isn't EAX 1 and 2.0 only capable of 1 effect at a time anyway? If the card has the EAX 2.0 spec then it must support all the 2.0 effects and options. Occlusions and such started within the 2.0 specification and just evolved from there. Says here:
"As 3D audio became more popular, it became clear that there were other aspects of the audio environment that were critical for enhanced game-play. Most importantly this included the need to simulate the effect of a sound being muffled by objects between the player and the source of the sound. With EAX 2.0, Creative set about addressing this need by coming up with the concept of a "listener" object and a number of "source" objects for sound. Sources could be "occluded" or "obstructed" depending on their position relative to the listener and any objects in the game, such as walls, pillars etc., that lay between. EAX 2.0 can also be used to recreate the effect of varying types of materials, such as wood, glass or concrete, accurately recreating how the sounds would be masked."
EAX 1.0 is just straight dynamic reverb changing based on your location. EAX 2.0 added Occlusions to the reverb. Very straight forward stuff. Atleast this is how I understand the information.
"As 3D audio became more popular, it became clear that there were other aspects of the audio environment that were critical for enhanced game-play. Most importantly this included the need to simulate the effect of a sound being muffled by objects between the player and the source of the sound. With EAX 2.0, Creative set about addressing this need by coming up with the concept of a "listener" object and a number of "source" objects for sound. Sources could be "occluded" or "obstructed" depending on their position relative to the listener and any objects in the game, such as walls, pillars etc., that lay between. EAX 2.0 can also be used to recreate the effect of varying types of materials, such as wood, glass or concrete, accurately recreating how the sounds would be masked."
EAX 1.0 is just straight dynamic reverb changing based on your location. EAX 2.0 added Occlusions to the reverb. Very straight forward stuff. Atleast this is how I understand the information.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
If gaming is not your first priority then I'm sure you wouldn't be disappointed with this card. It is not like you can't play games with this card. If gaming is your priority, just get a XtremeMusic/XtremeGamer. Btw consoles didn't even have any EAX effects but still people play games on consoles.
Btw check out this thread, a guy got himself a few set of OPAMPs, he will try those OPAMPs on his X-Meridian and post it in a few day.
@alg7_munif
Since I don't regard myself as very experienced in matters of analog electronics I am hesitant to post this but your recent posts about opamps leave me the impression that you are merely regurgitating info from other "audiophile" sites and forums (some of which I find already questionable from a strictly technical point of view) and confusing guys who ask about them.
Opamps are not arcane ICs with marvelous properties that improve the sound, they are simple yet extremely versatile circuits that among several applications, can be used to hide the load impedance to the main circuit while applying certain gain (if the elements in the feedback loop are only resistive), to do active filtering or to desing analog computers (if there are capacitive or inductive elements in the feedback) and all that without losing your mind designing with simple transistors.
My guess is that in soundcards they use them mainly to protect the DAC from frying when you connect loads that demand a lot of current, so in the best case scenario a good quality opamp allows to get closer to the theoretical spec of the DAC. In other words it can degrade to a lesser degree the signal but it does not enhance it.
The perceived improvement is more psicological and less measurable, as phide mentioned it is more related to the coloration introduced by certain parts which make the sound more pleasurable to some people.
It is also remarkable how all these discerning guys have yet to report how some flaws in recordings became more evident after the upgrade. It is not a rule, but when you are really getting more accurate playback, some material becomes unpleasant.
Other point that made me grin is that "the OPAMPs can be damaged by excessive heat from soldering". I have only worked with non-audiophile opamps in DIP packages so things might be different with audiophile grade parts with surface mount package, but the linear ICs are among the hardiest and most durable, you'll burn the trace in the board before you damage them, and they will endure surges and short circuits that make TTL and MOSFET ICs literally blow in your face.
And BTW, under certain circumstances a DIP socket migth introduce parasite capacitances that could affect the signal.
Since I don't regard myself as very experienced in matters of analog electronics I am hesitant to post this but your recent posts about opamps leave me the impression that you are merely regurgitating info from other "audiophile" sites and forums (some of which I find already questionable from a strictly technical point of view) and confusing guys who ask about them.
Opamps are not arcane ICs with marvelous properties that improve the sound, they are simple yet extremely versatile circuits that among several applications, can be used to hide the load impedance to the main circuit while applying certain gain (if the elements in the feedback loop are only resistive), to do active filtering or to desing analog computers (if there are capacitive or inductive elements in the feedback) and all that without losing your mind designing with simple transistors.
My guess is that in soundcards they use them mainly to protect the DAC from frying when you connect loads that demand a lot of current, so in the best case scenario a good quality opamp allows to get closer to the theoretical spec of the DAC. In other words it can degrade to a lesser degree the signal but it does not enhance it.
The perceived improvement is more psicological and less measurable, as phide mentioned it is more related to the coloration introduced by certain parts which make the sound more pleasurable to some people.
It is also remarkable how all these discerning guys have yet to report how some flaws in recordings became more evident after the upgrade. It is not a rule, but when you are really getting more accurate playback, some material becomes unpleasant.
Other point that made me grin is that "the OPAMPs can be damaged by excessive heat from soldering". I have only worked with non-audiophile opamps in DIP packages so things might be different with audiophile grade parts with surface mount package, but the linear ICs are among the hardiest and most durable, you'll burn the trace in the board before you damage them, and they will endure surges and short circuits that make TTL and MOSFET ICs literally blow in your face.
And BTW, under certain circumstances a DIP socket migth introduce parasite capacitances that could affect the signal.
Yes and the other poster knows it
I link him to the EAX history many posts ago. Example, with EAX 2.0 you're placed in an Environment, let's pic a large ROOM or Hall, like UT1. You only hear effect of what's going on in the Room. As you leave the room, the effects of that room stops. No Transition or anything. The next room or maybe you went out side, the new environment now takes over. Even if you're standing near that previous room, those effects are lost.EAX 3.0 A-HD, you get all of the effects of the new room, you hear a transition to the new room and still hear folks following from the old one. You get wayyyyyy more sound information. Even 64 voices and OpenAL in America's Army is like Cheating. It's like have the Wall Hack or No Fog Cheat. The last time I played, I killed so many folks in the Smoke, I got kicked for having an AimBot or fog hack as the admin put it LOL!
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
It seems to me that if I said something is better, you guys will think that I'm saying the others are bad. I have a HD-595 and I've heard a HD-485 but I wouldn't say that a HD-485 is bad. I will say this once again, the X-Meridian sounds better than X-Fi but it doesn't mean that the X-Fi is bad and I get a better sound after replacing my OPAMPs but it doesn't mean the stock ones are bad, this is my opinion, if I can't give my opinion then we shouldn't have this forum. You could say the X-Fi sounds better if that is your opinion but how can you know that if you haven't heard the X-Meridian before? Like you said OPAMPs can't enhance the sound but if you use a better OPAMPs, you will get a better sound because you will get less degradation compared to the other "not bad" OPAMPs. This is the datasheet for the stock OPAMPs on the X-Meridian and this is the datasheet for the OPAMPs I'm using now. If you can judge how the sound would be just by looking at the specs then be my guest. For the damaging the OPAMPs, the OPAMP can be considered damaged not only when it blows up. If you read the datasheet of the OPAMPs I'm using now, it says that the OPAMPs can also be damaged by electrostatic discharged and the damage can range from subtle performance degradation to complete device failure. Also under the absolute maximum ratings on the datasheet is also stated the maximum soldering temperature and it is noted there that stresses above those ratings may cause permanent damage. I'm saying that it is easier to change the OPAMPs on the X-Meridian to get a better sound than the on the X-FI but I don't say that you can't change them on the X-Fi. I know that the sound is not measurable and subjective but I would rather try something that more people said is better and compare it myself than saying something that I already have is the best.
We do have lots of examples of audio quality Opamps and while you cannot measure and graph sound quality as we all know, better sound quality will be agreed upon if using better quality opamps. The opamps in the X-Meridian while good are not by any means top quality, it was a judgment call to save money on the price. The idea you cannot improve sound by using better quality components is a new one to me. I suppose you can word it that they are not making the device sound better it just the others made the device sound bad. It still equates to better sound quality across the board which can be percieved by any who listen to the device. The circuits are also working more within the designed specifications aswell which would also "help" improve the percieved sound quality. Is that idea your trying to get at?
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
I don't really understand what your question is but what I'm saying that right after the digital signal is converted into analogue, the analogue sound will then depend on the components of the circuit. Normally "audiophiles" will just use the digital connection and let the digital signal to be converted into analogue by an external device. The analogue sound will then depend on the circuit and components of the external device. They did this because they are using an external device can do a better job with the analogue sound than a sound card. Normally their external device will also cost more than the X-Meridian or Elite Pro but by using the external device, they don't need to use an expensive sound card, they just need a card with digital output like the AV-710. The only problem with the external device is you can't get a surround sound through a single SPDIF output without a compression. Either you use a compression or the analogue output of your sound card. Which is better depends on which sound card and which receiver you are compairing to.
My preivious comments were for the user HSF, I was merely commenting on what the other post said about not being able to make the device sound "better". The idea that you cannot make a circuit sound better by using better quality components is a new concept to me. It is just the way it's worded.
I know folks who call themselves Audiophiles, they don't use computers as their Source Player=P Many trash Computer users who claim they're Audiophiles when they bring up their computer as a source player. Many Computer users laugh at folks using the rear DAC on the POS AV-710 because that limits the hell out of their sound system for Games, DVD/-A, recording-A to D conversions and etc........
It's what's done to the processed sound data prior to reaching the DACs that's more important for Games. A Mid-Fi ranged receiver and half-assed decent speakers will kill almost ALL computer multimedia speakers.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
There is a reason why some "audiophiles" use a computer as their source, I know that these "audiophiles" like to listen to musics so they wouldn't just listen to DVD-A all the time because most titles are still on CDs. Sometimes they rip all of their collections with lossless format and save them on their harddrives, it is much easier than handling and caring a physical disc.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
I don't think you know what you are talking about, AV-710 is one of the most common card mentioned in head-fi forum.Yet, many of those folks wouldn't use a POS AV-710
Could you please explain at what point I wrote something about the X-Meridian or the X-Fi? how can you turn a "opamps are not magic" post into a "red vs blue" post? I'm just stating that all that opamp fetish is mostly unfounded. For instance when I was making a portable amp I noticed that an "audio oriented" opamp with run of the mill components could sound worse than a lowly LM602 paired with a precision power source and precision resistors/capacitors.
It is you who generates the buzz so others think that differences are staggering and who minimizes every shortcoming or criticism. You will never see a post of mine saying I love or hate an inanimated object.
Did you even read the datasheets you linked? storage temperature is from -40 to 125°C so you have to literally bake those opamps to damage them with heat. Let me ask you a couple of direct questions, have you ever used or even heard of operational amplifiers before you changed them in the soundcard? and have you ever used a soldering iron?
It is you who generates the buzz so others think that differences are staggering and who minimizes every shortcoming or criticism. You will never see a post of mine saying I love or hate an inanimated object.
Did you even read the datasheets you linked? storage temperature is from -40 to 125°C so you have to literally bake those opamps to damage them with heat. Let me ask you a couple of direct questions, have you ever used or even heard of operational amplifiers before you changed them in the soundcard? and have you ever used a soldering iron?
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
I always use a soldering iron and I know that it is much hotter than boiling water because it can make a soft metal melt. I know that I can make the copper strip gets off from certain PCBs if I apply the heat too long and I know that I wouldn't want to know how hot it gets by touching it again . Btw I didn't turn your "opamps are not magic" post into a "red vs blue" post, but your post seems to me like you think that I'm saying the stock OPAMPs on sound cards are bad just because I said changing them is better. Why did you guys think that when I say something is better I would also say the other is bad, sucks, and etc. When it is better then it is better, how much better is another thing and does the price worth the difference is more subjective than the sound difference IMO. This is an article over a soldering iron from wikipedia.
. Btw I didn't turn your "opamps are not magic" post into a "red vs blue" post, but your post seems to me like you think that I'm saying the stock OPAMPs on sound cards are bad just because I said changing them is better. Why did you guys think that when I say something is better I would also say the other is bad, sucks, and etc. When it is better then it is better, how much better is another thing and does the price worth the difference is more subjective than the sound difference IMO. This is an article over a soldering iron from wikipedia.Based on this and the datasheet, I know that soldering iron can do some damage to the components if you are not careful.
It is also true that using better spec components will improve things just up to a point. Using your reasoning, attaching an Orpheus set to a 1985 walkman would make it sound better.
When the "quality" of those components is so close, it is mostly in your head. As it has been stated, each of those IC has its distinctive coloration, and that is what makes people say it has a better sound quality but in fact its just different and more suitable to those people preferences.
If you tell me that altough the specs are identical X type of opamp have a tighter tolerance to variations, I'll concede, but if you use terms like warm, punchy, airy, roomy then it is all in the personal perceptions.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
What is a better sound quality to you? A higher SNR? It is just a ratio between the sound and noise level, just like a contrast ratio of a LCD monitor, the ratio between black and white. Can you tell how the colours will look like just by looking at the ratio? For me a better quality monitor will have a better image(colour, sharpness and etc) and I can know the quality by compairing them myself, if I want to compare each and every monitor, it would take forever so what did I do, I choose a few candidates based on other people's comments.
@HSF, Your Walkman analogy is amusing but I never said anything like that.
Th other info is very true indeed. The person is using words to describe what they hear in the "coloration"
I don't know why so many people seem to swear by those OPA627's for audio, expensive.
I guess you are right in that respect but audio is subjective and alot of what make up audio is perceptive. Each amp type has their own colorations -but isn't that a way of saying they affect the frequency range in a different way? I have heard amps that have a definatley "tighter" bass end. I hesitated to use that word because it describes a perception. I guess you right though that is how I percieve the response. You do have to admit though that some amps have very,very nice coloration and other do not. That is all I was saying. If any of this could be measured and/or graphed it would be simple to pick the right amps for a certain job.
I have done alot of reading on the subject and most of it is perception and subjecitve. I know people do give certain frequncy ranges names like "warmth", "punch" "air" and "brightness" I think that helps people understand what area of the spectrum people are reffering to. Though it is more common in mixing.
I am not disagreeing with you I just see it alittle differently. I do find though that this subject itself, what can be heard as opposed to what can be measured and how it all relates to sound "quality" is a subject of very much debate on alot of different audio forums. I was in no way trying to start this debate here.
Th other info is very true indeed. The person is using words to describe what they hear in the "coloration"
I don't know why so many people seem to swear by those OPA627's for audio, expensive.
I guess you are right in that respect but audio is subjective and alot of what make up audio is perceptive. Each amp type has their own colorations -but isn't that a way of saying they affect the frequency range in a different way? I have heard amps that have a definatley "tighter" bass end. I hesitated to use that word because it describes a perception. I guess you right though that is how I percieve the response. You do have to admit though that some amps have very,very nice coloration and other do not. That is all I was saying. If any of this could be measured and/or graphed it would be simple to pick the right amps for a certain job.
I have done alot of reading on the subject and most of it is perception and subjecitve. I know people do give certain frequncy ranges names like "warmth", "punch" "air" and "brightness" I think that helps people understand what area of the spectrum people are reffering to. Though it is more common in mixing.
I am not disagreeing with you I just see it alittle differently. I do find though that this subject itself, what can be heard as opposed to what can be measured and how it all relates to sound "quality" is a subject of very much debate on alot of different audio forums. I was in no way trying to start this debate here.
No, it is completely wrong.
SNR describes the proximity to the original. (one of many criterions)
It cannot be compared with the "contrast ratio".
In a analogy. At the analogous TV would describe the SNR the quantity of the picture visual noise
Less visual noise, higher SNR, better picture quality.
A better signal quality ist that the signal is nearer at the original. It is not a question of the personal taste.
This is a good analogy, but again, we can measure nearly everything about an LCD (save from its physical appearance, which is 100% subjective). If you're just eyeballing them, it can then be somewhat subjective if you don't have some sort of accurate reference.
Also, unlike an LCD, we cannot compare snapshots of audio in time. When we listen to a CD, our brain is attempting to compute 44,100 snapshots each second (and our brain does something of a sloppy job at it). It's almost like trying to tell how a game looks while it's blasting by at thousands of frames per second. At that point, it's something of a wash of colors and shapes, and we may like it or we may not.
It is for this reason that audio is totally subjective. We can measure its aspects over time very accurately, and these measurements give us a good idea of the "audio quality" (I tend to equate audio "quality" to be the level of difference between a perfect reference, and I grow more attuned to what the reference may sound like on a daily basis). When you step back from audio quality, however, you have audio subjectivity. This is the gross unmeasurable measurement. It's the measurement of subjective goodness.
Vacuum tubes can't achieve the same "audio quality" as a solid state equivalent (in many cases), but do many prefer vacuum tubes? Absolutely. The recording studio would be a very boring place for me were it not for antiquated vacuum tubes, magnetic tape and vintage microphones, and the recordings would reflect that. Just as I don't want a drum track quantized to a grid, I don't want perfection from my audio output. I crave pleasurable distortion, coloration and sonic personality. I want my components to breathe their own life into the signal (that's why we buy certain components), but I don't want my source to do so. I don't want to listen to what the ideal equipment sounds like in an anechoic chamber.
Now maybe the X-Meridian is the card for me, and maybe it isn't. However, in the following quote, you define so-called audio quality for everyone:
Please stop defining what product globally sounds better. Use qualifiers to state that it is your opinion that the X-Meridian offers better so-called sound quality. "I think", "in my opinion", "as far as I'm concerned". Stop defining what is and what is not an "audiophile". Stop assuming that the X-Meridian is better than anything else. Stop neglecting to necessarily clarify your statements so that we don't have to keep jumping on you for unintentionally (or otherwise) misleading.
This topic will keep going back and forth if this stuff doesn't stop. In fact, the discussion has been stagnantly doing so for a while now, and it's tedious as hell.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
Did you miss it? I will be more than happy if someone that has heard both cards and tell us that he thinks that he likes the sound from X-Fi more than X-Meridian. Maybe you could say that in games X-Fi sounds better, I'll agree with that if you think that it sounds better with those effects but again that doesn't mean that the X-Meridian is bad for games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snr
Yes. More information of the original signal. You misunderstand it as a volume.
Noise is always a condition without information.
Higher SNR, less noise, more information of the original signal.
Very simple.
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
SNR=(RMS amplitude of the signal/RMS amplitude of the noise)^2
I think that RMS amplitude is equal to the loudness/volume
- Status