Dolby Digital...???

[BBA]

WHY would anyone make a purchase decision based on Dolby Digital encoding ability?

Don't people here already know that Dolby Digital is a compression format that with decreased surround channel frequency response as one of it's benefits?

Think about it: I just dont get why anyone would want to encode full range audio into a compressed format to have it decoded again in a different device. So what if your stereo has a 'better decoder' it still got encoded from analog in the first place.

Unless your creating your own DVD movies with AC3 sound...a Dolby encoder on a sound card just sounds STUPID (I measn really...it does SOUND stupid)

 

[UnknownSouljer]

It's for ease of use. People whom use receivers and play games like having the the ability of using a single optical or coaxial cable to handle all of their audio needs. Most games don't encode to DD when using 5.1 so using a sound card that "automagically" changes that raw audio in to DD 5.1 is useful. In short it's about 1 cable vs 5.

That's the long and short of it.

 

[unhappy_mage]

Dolby Digital Live is a different bitrate than DD on dvds. Dvds have an audio stream up to 448 kbit; DDL is something like 1.5 mbit (I can't find a link...). The compression isn't as bad as it sounds, as I understand it.

 

[Xeero]

but yeah the arguement is more of the convenience of a single cable

 

[anotherguy159]

but yeah the arguement is more of the convenience of a single cable

Or my receiver which only has digital inputs.

 

[H-street]

also those with higher end receivers can use the DAC's on the receiver instead of the sound cards..

using my HDA Mystique vs my Audidgy 2, the Mystique using DDL sounds a lot better on the receiver than the audigy2 using 6 analogue outputs..

 

[lithium726]

its easy, you cant tell the difference, and its easy.

my reciver's DACs are easily better than any mainstream audio card's. therefore, sound is actually better

 

[BBA]

also those with higher end receivers can use the DAC's on the receiver instead of the sound cards..

using my HDA Mystique vs my Audidgy 2, the Mystique using DDL sounds a lot better on the receiver than the audigy2 using 6 analogue outputs..

Makes no sense.

Beside the fact your comparing two differnet sound cards to completely make your argument irrelevent...If you read my post, I pretty clearly state that no matter how good your DAC is, it still can not create a better quality analog signal than the ADC on the sound card will digitize in the first place. Thats the reason you will get better fidelity from the 6 analog connections.

It's like...hey, lets put this audio compression and frequency bandwidth reduction device and then a decompression device right smack in the middle of my analog sound connection between my source and amplifier.

The only exception is playing digital music where you use NO effects on the card itself, effectively bypassings it's DAC conversion and manipulation devices or processes.
You can do that with a card that doesnt encode in Dolby anyway.

You might as well put a tube amp in there too...

 

[Xeero]

is that adc just that damn good on any soundcard?

 

[Moofasa~]

Makes no sense.

Beside the fact your comparing two differnet sound cards to completely make your argument irrelevent...If you read my post, I pretty clearly state that no matter how good your DAC is, it still can not create a better quality analog signal than the ADC on the sound card will digitize in the first place. Thats the reason you will get better fidelity from the 6 analog connections.

It's like...hey, lets put this audio compression and frequency bandwidth reduction device and then a decompression device right smack in the middle of my analog sound connection between my source and amplifier.

The only exception is playing digital music where you use NO effects on the card itself, effectively bypassings it's DAC conversion and manipulation devices or processes.
You can do that with a card that doesnt encode in Dolby anyway.

You might as well put a tube amp in there too...

Well I can tell you first hand the DDL sounds a lot better than my audigy 2 zs with 6 analog outs. In addition I can use my receiver's effects with DDL which I love a lot and can not with analog outs. Having only one cord from my receiver to sound card is also nice. Also I am fairly sure using the analog outs uses the sound card's DAC's, not ADC's. For example, my receiver doesn't touch the six analog channels, it just outputs the sound (doesn't use the DAC's to convert back into analog, they source is already analog so the sound card's DAC is used). Therefore your ADC argument simply isn't true. Although I guess I can't be sure, maybe Mister X knows. Moreover, I'll take DDL's compression over crappy sound card DAC's any day. But it really comes down to you slamming a product that you never heard. How do you know that DDL is so much worse that analog outs, you have never heard it. While we appreciate your opinions, we would consider them much more if you had any idea what you were talking about. So please only comment on things you have heard yourself, and realize that not everything sounds the same to everyone. I can with no doubt tell you DDL has sounded a lot better than my audigy 2 zs, maybe that's different for you. But saying that our logic makes "no sense" after we told you our feelings is just ignorant. When will you people realize different people like different things.

 

[m0unds]

I love my Mystique. I can hear a positive difference in audio versus my audigy 2. I've A/B'd the two cards with a few of my friends, and only one out of 6 thought the audigy sounded better.

I thought the Audigy 2 sounded like a distorted crackly mess coming through my receiver, but the Mystique sounds much clearer and much tighter. That's all I need.

 

[BBA]

Also I am fairly sure using the analog outs uses the sound card's DAC's, not ADC's.

You are correct. Any analog signal coming out of the sound card is produced by the DAC circuits.

BUT NOW: To resample the analog BACK to digital, with dolby encoding, so your reciever can decode it, you also use your sound cards ADC.

Yes, your sound card can do digital signal processing, which if fed directly to a dolby encoder you may be able to skip the DAC circuit in the card itself.

In this case, you are still encoding into a compressed dolby signal which produces signal quality loss, just to be decompressed by your reciever.

I say skip the dolby altogether and you will be happy.

For example, my receiver doesn't touch the six analog channels, it just outputs the sound (doesn't use the DAC's to convert back into analog, they source is already analog so the sound card's DAC is used). Therefore your ADC argument simply isn't true.

Ok...I think your confusing what I said.

IF you sent the 6 anaolg channels to the reciever, then the reciever would not use ane ADC or DAC on THOSE signals, and you would have no converter and subsequent dolby compression losses.

IF on the other hand, you send the dolby encoded digital signal to the reciever, the signal obviously was generated in the sound card from it's ADC/Dolby encoder circuit. The point again is: You have no way of getting around the dolby compression process if you use the dolby encoded digital output from the sound card.

Although I guess I can't be sure, maybe Mister X knows. Moreover, I'll take DDL's compression over crappy sound card DAC's any day.

True, I hate crappy sound cards as well. I am simply pointing out the fact you want to take a clean signal and encode it with a compression algorithym just to decode it with it's inherent signal loss.

But it really comes down to you slamming a product that you never heard. How do you know that DDL is so much worse that analog outs, you have never heard it.

I am slamming no product at all. Why are you taking it that way?

I am simply again pointing out that you are processing a signal with an encoding algorithym and then decoding it, the net effect if you gain distortion and lose signal fidelity in that process. There is no arguing against that, it's science.

Oh, and I have heard just about every kind of digital and anaolg sound processing amplification and reproduction devices ever made. I'm just one of those guys. Heck, I even built my own amplifiers, both tube type and solid state.

Lets not let this come down to experience, just logic.

I can with no doubt tell you DDL has sounded a lot better than my audigy 2 zs, maybe that's different for you

There you go again, bringing in an irrelevant topic...you are playing flame wars against one product for another.

I am not. There are in fact better sound cards than both mentioned and they don't necessarily have dolby encoding built in.

 

[unhappy_mage]

no matter how good your DAC is, it still can not create a better quality analog signal than the ADC on the sound card will digitize in the first place. Thats the reason you will get better fidelity from the 6 analog connections.

I'm gonna dispute this. If you're running cables of any length from computer->reciever, the optical cable is *the* way to go. Not only is running 6 channels worth of analog cables a distance a pain, it's 6 more potential sources for noise. The optical cable (assuming you've got a decent one) will not degrade the audio any over a large distance, while it's easy for analog cables to cause degradation. Odds are you aren't even using a balanced format (xlr, etc) to send the analog data from computer->reciever.

 

[BBA]

I'm gonna dispute this. If you're running cables of any length from computer->reciever, the optical cable is *the* way to go. Not only is running 6 channels worth of analog cables a distance a pain, it's 6 more potential sources for noise. The optical cable (assuming you've got a decent one) will not degrade the audio any over a large distance, while it's easy for analog cables to cause degradation. Odds are you aren't even using a balanced format (xlr, etc) to send the analog data from computer->reciever.

Ok, 6 cables will pick up some interference.

Analog cables will not lose fidelity of the sound that is lost in the process of converting an analog to digital to dolby encoded and then decoded back to digital and converted back to analog process does.

 

[Moofasa~]

I am simply again pointing out that you are processing a signal with an encoding algorithym and then decoding it, the net effect if you gain distortion and lose signal fidelity in that process. There is no arguing against that, it's science.

I understand that you lose some quality, but I am saying currently it is the best solution available to me because cards like the Audigy 2 ZS has shitty 5.1 dacs that sound worse than the DDL solution. Whether it is "science" or not, I am telling you that DDL is better than using 6 analog outs. Which answers your question before "WHY would anyone make a purchase decision based on Dolby Digital encoding ability?", because it sounds better to us. Plain and simple, you don't have to read any more into that. You can claim "compression loss" or "signal loss" till you're blue in the face, it still doesn't change my opinion that a card supporting DDL is the best sound card I can purchase today. I know it's not the best solution (obviously DDL with no compression would be the best), but it is the best one right now.

 

[BBA]

I am saying currently it is the best solution available to me because cards like the Audigy 2 ZS has shitty 5.1 dacs that sound worse than the DDL solution.

Good for you, I'm glad you like the way it sounds. It would sound better running 6 analog cables to your reciever, provided you don't use crappy unshielded cabling.

Whether it is "science" or not, I am telling you that DDL is better than using 6 analog outs.

Refer to the above statement.



As for the best use for Dolby encoding, it simply is designed to minimize bandwidth and therefore data rate of multiple audio channels. It does have it's uses when media throughput capacity is limited, such as mass media distribution or storage.

It has no advantages for sound quality.

 

[Moofasa~]

Good for you, I'm glad you like the way it sounds. It would sound better running 6 analog cables to your reciever, provided you don't use crappy unshielded cabling.



Refer to the above statement.



As for the best use for Dolby encoding, it simply is designed to minimize bandwidth and therefore data rate of multiple audio channels. It does have it's uses when media throughput capacity is limited, such as mass media distribution or storage.

It has no advantages for sound quality.

No it wouldn't. It does have advantages for sound quality, maybe not directly, but it does. I already pointed out I can use my receiver's effects with DDL which I can not live without. In addition it actually has working bass manangment, unlike the analog outs on my Audigy 2 ZS. So while it may not effect sound quality directly, it deffinately improves my audio experiences. So for the third time, no it would not sound better to me using 6 analog cables. Period.

 

[BBA]

So what your really saying is you dont care about audio fidelity, losses or distortion as long as you can use your boom enhancing digitized processing on your high end reciever?

Gotcha.

 

[Moofasa~]

So what your really saying is you dont care about audio fidelity, losses or distortion as long as you can use your boom enhancing digitized processing on your high end reciever?

Gotcha.

Yeah but there isnt a noticable loss or distortion using DDL. The sound quality is the same on pcm as DDL. While technically due to compression it will not sound as good as pcm, but this simply is not the case. I am sorry but I simply don't hear the audio quality drop while using DDL, as does the other DDL users on this board. And yes I use uncompressed .wavs as my source, not crappy mp3s. Maybe you should stop and think, hmm three people on this board said they prefer DDL to 6 analog cables, there seems to be some pattern here... So once again to answer your question, "WHY would anyone make a purchase decision based on Dolby Digital encoding ability?", because there is no noticable (whether "scientifically it's there or not) drop in audio quality and it allows us to use our receiver's effects and gain bass managment and still get 5.1 in games. I don't understand what is so hard to comprehend?

 

[BBA]

"WHY would anyone make a purchase decision based on Dolby Digital encoding ability?", because there is no noticable (whether "scientifically it's there or not) drop in audio quality and it allows us to use our receiver's effects and gain bass managment and still get 5.1 in games. I don't understand what is so hard to comprehend?

I got it man, thanks.

 

[Mister X]

I got it man, thanks.

Cool... that means there is no need for this flamebait.... err, thread to live any longer then it already has.