![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Under $100 Recommended Soundcard
- Thread starter Fr0nt1ine
- Start date
dragonstongue
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2008
- Messages
- 3,162
Asus Xonar DX I would also recommend, the DGX I think was the pricier of the 2 new ones while not quite as good as the DX it is still very nice card. I have a DX and love it, but cannot use it right now as my motherboard was not designed so much for crossfire and still use a soundcard without the 2nd gpu heating up like mad 
. I have only had clipping audio on WoT when they botched an update for 5.1 sound, and every now and then microphone has a slight buzzing apparently but it could very well be my headset as previous headset did not have this issue at all(G330 now gamecom 367) beyond that is excellent card for its price, and Creative is no go for me, so Auzentech, HTOmega, or Asus, I went Asus for many reasons
. I have only had clipping audio on WoT when they botched an update for 5.1 sound, and every now and then microphone has a slight buzzing apparently but it could very well be my headset as previous headset did not have this issue at all(G330 now gamecom 367) beyond that is excellent card for its price, and Creative is no go for me, so Auzentech, HTOmega, or Asus, I went Asus for many reasons They have and I had no love for them either. However, my last card before my Z was an Asus DX and the Z is a much better card. The software works well and does not cause issues.
Yes, Asus driver support leaves a lot to be desired. Fortunately, I haven't had any problems since the firmware update and Uni drivers. It seems that Creative has a good thing going with the Z line, but memories are still too fresh
wait what? firmware update. have a pcie x1 Xonar DX here, this is the first i've heard of a firmware update. Already running the Uni Xonar drivers. I'll have to go digging for it once I get home.
It's under DOS section IIRC, which doesn't make any sense, but whatever... Solved some sound corruption issues, but I guess you don't have to bother if you haven't noticed any problems.
Creative Z is the best card for your budget.
dragonstongue
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2008
- Messages
- 3,162
review on the Z said that it is good, but their drivers and extra functions still need some polish and of course it truly does need a good set of cans to get the most out of it.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Creative/Sound_Blaster_Z/6.html
http://www.avforums.com/reviews/Creative-Sound-Blaster-Z-Review_445/Review.html
good look at all the raw specs of the cards
http://www.pricegrabber.com/compute...-Xonar-Essence-729047752/?ut=43c15a2e2d27153d
Just specs wise Xonar DX is still as good if not better in many ways, the "extras" are a whatever thing, it works well and is a powerful sound card, I used the newest drivers from Asus site for windows 7, I do not use GX mode, I force it to 192 8 channel through headset and 5.1 speakers and it sounds wicked nice all around.
To each their own, some diehard Creative no matter what, I decided to not for the numerous issues folks have had and still do with them over the years. DX is a solid card, DSX/DGX not as good but for their price they are better then most onboard by a large margin, the Creative Z seems all right but read very deeply on it and your intended use this can explain things better then a "get this one cause its is l33t" type thing lol.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Creative/Sound_Blaster_Z/6.html
http://www.avforums.com/reviews/Creative-Sound-Blaster-Z-Review_445/Review.html
good look at all the raw specs of the cards
http://www.pricegrabber.com/compute...-Xonar-Essence-729047752/?ut=43c15a2e2d27153d
Just specs wise Xonar DX is still as good if not better in many ways, the "extras" are a whatever thing, it works well and is a powerful sound card, I used the newest drivers from Asus site for windows 7, I do not use GX mode, I force it to 192 8 channel through headset and 5.1 speakers and it sounds wicked nice all around.
To each their own, some diehard Creative no matter what, I decided to not for the numerous issues folks have had and still do with them over the years. DX is a solid card, DSX/DGX not as good but for their price they are better then most onboard by a large margin, the Creative Z seems all right but read very deeply on it and your intended use this can explain things better then a "get this one cause its is l33t" type thing lol.
SixFootDuo
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2004
- Messages
- 5,825
Some guy is selling the Creative Soundblaster ZR for $115 every other day or so. I just bought one one he had for BIN.
Maybe I am been an ass, but I would like for you to explain the ways that the Dx is better than the Z? Not saying the Dx is a bad card, personally I think it's a better card than the D2x, but I think the Z is better. Here are my reasons for that.
1. The Z has a seperate headphone socket, you don't need to use a splitter, the front panel audio connectors or unplug the speakers to use headphones. This was a godsend for me, the ability to switch between headphones and speakers using software.
2. The Z has a headphone amp.
3. The Z gets all it's power from the motherboard, you don't need to plug in a floppy power connector like the Dx.
4. The Z has much better positional audio for games.
Also the specs on the pricegrabber site are a bit useless as it doesn't have half the details of any of the cards.
A bad one with too much gain, as I gathered from some of the discussions. Besides, most don't need one and an external one can be bought dirt cheap.
A minor issue at worst, not really worth mentioning.
How so? Most find Dolby superior to CMSS. If you mean EAX, that is dead and only has value for old titles.
DX has better quality components for superior pure sound quality.
Ocellaris
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2008
- Messages
- 19,077
Asus does even worse shit, just fewer people use them so you don't hear about it as much.
Stereo or stereo direct and either headphones or speaker bc that makes a difference. Do not try speaker mode with headphones. That is what I use and it just sounds clearer.
Some people don't want to spend more after buying a sound card. Can you post a link to some of those discussions? I would be interested in reading them because I haven't noticed any gain problems. And anyway, it's a pretty easy problem to fix, just turn it down!! LOL.
Any headphone I have tried sounds better in the Z than either the Dx or DGx.
It's a reason I went for the Z. I bought a new case and wanted to keep everything tidy. I didn't want to have to use another cable just to bring a floppy connector to my sound card. Yes, sure it might be a minor issue, but it's an issue all the same and something the OP might not know.
I don't agree with this statement at all, I think most people would find CMSS better for postional audio, better for gaming audio in general over Dolby headphone. But, that's not the discussion here as CMSS isn't used in the Z.
Having used both Asus cards and a creative fatality as well, the Z has better postional audio by far. Makes a huge difference to my KDR when using the Z.
The Dx has better quality components? It's a fine card and better than then D2x in my opinion but I don't think it has better quality components than the Z. Can you list which components are better?
I actually prefer DH to CMSS. I would say that the people whom have tried them both have preferred DH at least 50% of the time (based on my forum research, I'm saying it's at least contentious). I think the reason CMSS seems to dominate is that it is more prevalent and more heavily marketed.
I however, have not tried SBX Studio at all and have no idea if it is better/worse than CMSS. I've read stories from people saying both things. I do find it interesting that Spaceman prefers to not use it at all as the virtualization schema was one of the reasons CL was considered to have better positioning sound.
The one advantage on paper that CMSS had over DH was that it had Z-axis awareness, though.
I however, have not tried SBX Studio at all and have no idea if it is better/worse than CMSS. I've read stories from people saying both things. I do find it interesting that Spaceman prefers to not use it at all as the virtualization schema was one of the reasons CL was considered to have better positioning sound.
The one advantage on paper that CMSS had over DH was that it had Z-axis awareness, though.
Last edited:
Sorry, don't know the links, but I found them by simple "creative z vs xonar dx" or "creative z review" searches IIRC, in the top results.
If you go with the Xonar DX, I recommend these 3rd party drivers. Especially if you do any kind of sound work. The low DPC latency version of those drivers cuts the latency way down and the ASIO 1.0 version allows you to play music through foobar with ASIO and not silence all the other sounds on your computer.
dragonstongue
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2008
- Messages
- 3,162
Creative is just wicked well known as much as Intel or Nvidia is, compared to the other sound card makers.
Xonar is its own thing, any Creative card is its own. If you read the raw specs I listed then yes the Xonar DX does have slightly higher specs and possibly better components to meet up with those specs.
Word if differently, Creative has always been known for good or bad for Gaming Audio Cards, yes they can do music/movie but they are very geared towards gaming and this does give a slight edge sometimes(not extra crap just the base audio ok) Xonar however were really designed first and foremost for Music and movies with ability to do editing gaming of course is there as well.
If anything is used with the proper setup(high impedence or low stereo headset as example) or proper mix gear then this of course totally changes things. Many folks will straight up say Creative same as saying Intel-Nvidia, very rare are their issues discussed and what potential issues there might be.
The Z is a great card for Creative however it is Creative, Xonar is also a great card in ways it could be better in others it is brilliant but it is like this with everything. For the price range, Auzentech X-fi Forte, Creative Titanium and Z, and Asus Xonar D2X/DX/DSX/DGX all have their own benefits and flaws, the good thing about Asus is like the driver shows able to be "tuned" if you will and even swap op-amps if you want, benefit but also detriment to Creative is they have been doing sound for a long time BUT overall their history shows they are no better when it comes to driver support
Anywho, I am sure you will enjoy the card Front1ine. I use default drivers(newest) windows 7 64 for it and I have no complaints at all, granted I only use gamecom 367 HS, and X-540 speakers but I enjoy my games-music-movies just fine and do not bother with all the extra crap never have, positional audio for me is fine but I do not have it cranked all the way(sensitive ears)
Xonar is its own thing, any Creative card is its own. If you read the raw specs I listed then yes the Xonar DX does have slightly higher specs and possibly better components to meet up with those specs.
Word if differently, Creative has always been known for good or bad for Gaming Audio Cards, yes they can do music/movie but they are very geared towards gaming and this does give a slight edge sometimes(not extra crap just the base audio ok) Xonar however were really designed first and foremost for Music and movies with ability to do editing gaming of course is there as well.
If anything is used with the proper setup(high impedence or low stereo headset as example) or proper mix gear then this of course totally changes things. Many folks will straight up say Creative same as saying Intel-Nvidia, very rare are their issues discussed and what potential issues there might be.
The Z is a great card for Creative however it is Creative, Xonar is also a great card in ways it could be better in others it is brilliant but it is like this with everything. For the price range, Auzentech X-fi Forte, Creative Titanium and Z, and Asus Xonar D2X/DX/DSX/DGX all have their own benefits and flaws, the good thing about Asus is like the driver shows able to be "tuned" if you will and even swap op-amps if you want, benefit but also detriment to Creative is they have been doing sound for a long time BUT overall their history shows they are no better when it comes to driver support
Anywho, I am sure you will enjoy the card Front1ine. I use default drivers(newest) windows 7 64 for it and I have no complaints at all, granted I only use gamecom 367 HS, and X-540 speakers but I enjoy my games-music-movies just fine and do not bother with all the extra crap never have, positional audio for me is fine but I do not have it cranked all the way(sensitive ears)
Creative is just wicked well known as much as Intel or Nvidia is, compared to the other sound card makers.
Xonar is its own thing, any Creative card is its own. If you read the raw specs I listed then yes the Xonar DX does have slightly higher specs and possibly better components to meet up with those specs.
Word if differently, Creative has always been known for good or bad for Gaming Audio Cards, yes they can do music/movie but they are very geared towards gaming and this does give a slight edge sometimes(not extra crap just the base audio ok) Xonar however were really designed first and foremost for Music and movies with ability to do editing gaming of course is there as well.
If anything is used with the proper setup(high impedence or low stereo headset as example) or proper mix gear then this of course totally changes things. Many folks will straight up say Creative same as saying Intel-Nvidia, very rare are their issues discussed and what potential issues there might be.
The Z is a great card for Creative however it is Creative, Xonar is also a great card in ways it could be better in others it is brilliant but it is like this with everything. For the price range, Auzentech X-fi Forte, Creative Titanium and Z, and Asus Xonar D2X/DX/DSX/DGX all have their own benefits and flaws, the good thing about Asus is like the driver shows able to be "tuned" if you will and even swap op-amps if you want, benefit but also detriment to Creative is they have been doing sound for a long time BUT overall their history shows they are no better when it comes to driver support
Anywho, I am sure you will enjoy the card Front1ine. I use default drivers(newest) windows 7 64 for it and I have no complaints at all, granted I only use gamecom 367 HS, and X-540 speakers but I enjoy my games-music-movies just fine and do not bother with all the extra crap never have, positional audio for me is fine but I do not have it cranked all the way(sensitive ears)
What the hell are you saying? Your post is all over the place.
First, The How are the specs of the DX better than the Creative Z? I asked you this before and you didn't reply. The link you posted doesn't have half the specs of either card. So please answer the question, what specs are better?
Creative down through the years have made both music and gaming cards. Like the Creative X-fi Fatility or the creative extreme music, just like Asus. Creative did professional audio cards with their EMU range. The Elite pro was one of the best cards for music on the market at the time. The DAC from the Elite Pro is the one used in the Z.
And you say Asus is better because it has swappable OP-AMPs? The DX doesn't have swappable Op-amps. The ST/STX does and the Creative Zxr does.
Also what do you mean by "the drivers shows able to be tuned" ?? Don't understand what you mean there at all.
Can I ask have you even used a creative Z card?
It's a good card, I am sure you will be happy with it.
Just if you have trouble installing, try using the unified drivers. You can google them. They are from BrainBit.
dragonstongue
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2008
- Messages
- 3,162
you asked meeho this not I, what you asked me was "Also the specs on the pricegrabber site are a bit useless as it doesn't have half the details of any of the cards"
My post is not all over the place if you actually take the time to read it, but whatever to you it is, that's fine.
many things I can list but I will go by the numbers you pointed out
1)DX I use for Front panel(which has slight boost) mic-headset it can only handle up to x impedance which is fine for most of us anyways, I have no trouble at all using speakers when I want or headset when I want by just going to the dx panel and toggling between speakers or FP, wow so hard, to use both at same time all it takes is an extension to rear panel
2)Mehoo stated this as did the reviewers, to much gain, maybe your experience is different but they did state with low impedance headset it was kind of cruddy, high impedance was much better so headphone amp being used isn't that great so not worth really mentioning, but is a point that you can use any other amp with DX as I am sure you can with Z difference of course $$, DX is lower cost(well here in Canada it is for me)
3)LOL, omg its so hard running a molex, the reason why they did this is bridge chip not a straight pci-e design so there was limitations, and big whoop, maybe it is to you, but I am quite sure it would not be to most, it isn't to me, it actually lets me get some wires out of the way and wrap a bit tighter so better airflow which in my books is a good thing, again, whatever.
4)Z may have better positional audio true, but this always depends on the listening equipment, drivers, user, settings, Z is more designed for gaming, DX more for movies-music/games in that order. I know myself I can hear people creeping up on me just fine if I have the sound turned up(have not taken time to tune it) however I have sensitive ears so I cannot turn up the volume for that long before I get headache.
While I admit the pricegrabber site doesn't have most of the specs, it does however have the ones that matter top most folks, channels, SNR, connectors etc. The one that is neat is DX front out(FP Headphone as example) is higher db then Z has 116 vs 105 for headphones but in all other channels is 116 to 112 mostly which is not that far off really.
while to swappable per say, they can be upgraded if one choses to do so
http://www.head-fi.org/t/339127/asus-xonar-dx-mods
dx is 7.1 Z is 5.1 so there is at least one difference
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1728104
"As for my issue, the sound was very narrow, less detailed, and quite warm in comparison to the X-Fi Elite Pro it replaced. Aka, the former High end X-Fi until the HD was released. Both the Z and XFI EP were running the same CS4398 DAC's.
Subjectively if I were to rate the soundcards I've used in the past based on that above claim, It would go something like this... (All DSP effects off)
Elite Pro> Xonar DX> Fatality Xtremegamer> Musiland Monitor 02> (Xfi GO> Xonar U3)>Z"
Hard to get side by side spec sheets you know, mostly cause the makers themselves do not always release the nitty gritty on what they did and why.
http://www.comx-computers.co.za/SB-ZX-specifications-71223.htm
http://techreport.com/review/14500/asus-xonar-dx-sound-card
user opinions
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=179218
anyways point is there is 2 sides to every coin, not everyone has the same ear, same tolerance, same patience level, what works for some does not for others that's fine. Z is a great card from Creative but they did still do some very silly choices as alluded to in the reviews, opinions and so forth like a wicked high gain that "spoils" the sound, where my DX on the other hand is pure when I use it as is, not one complaint not from drivers, not from sound/mic quality nothing.
Have I used Creative Z, no, I do not have the $ to go out and buy things just to try them, however I have had past experiences with creative in XP/Vista/early win 7 and just reading what I have on it, I am glad I went with the DX when I did and still am glad today. I don't do just gaming, and do not need the extra gimmicks instead of proper tuning on the op-amps and so forth Creative heavily relies on the software layer for the "immersion" for you to get all that positional audio, DX was tuned for more even approach no matter what you are doing.
Anyways, OP if you got the dx and running win 7 4 I use newest drivers from Asus for the DX and they work just fine, message me if you need help setting it up some.
My post is not all over the place if you actually take the time to read it, but whatever to you it is, that's fine.
many things I can list but I will go by the numbers you pointed out
1)DX I use for Front panel(which has slight boost) mic-headset it can only handle up to x impedance which is fine for most of us anyways, I have no trouble at all using speakers when I want or headset when I want by just going to the dx panel and toggling between speakers or FP, wow so hard, to use both at same time all it takes is an extension to rear panel
2)Mehoo stated this as did the reviewers, to much gain, maybe your experience is different but they did state with low impedance headset it was kind of cruddy, high impedance was much better so headphone amp being used isn't that great so not worth really mentioning, but is a point that you can use any other amp with DX as I am sure you can with Z difference of course $$, DX is lower cost(well here in Canada it is for me)
3)LOL, omg its so hard running a molex, the reason why they did this is bridge chip not a straight pci-e design so there was limitations, and big whoop, maybe it is to you, but I am quite sure it would not be to most, it isn't to me, it actually lets me get some wires out of the way and wrap a bit tighter so better airflow which in my books is a good thing, again, whatever.
4)Z may have better positional audio true, but this always depends on the listening equipment, drivers, user, settings, Z is more designed for gaming, DX more for movies-music/games in that order. I know myself I can hear people creeping up on me just fine if I have the sound turned up(have not taken time to tune it) however I have sensitive ears so I cannot turn up the volume for that long before I get headache.
While I admit the pricegrabber site doesn't have most of the specs, it does however have the ones that matter top most folks, channels, SNR, connectors etc. The one that is neat is DX front out(FP Headphone as example) is higher db then Z has 116 vs 105 for headphones but in all other channels is 116 to 112 mostly which is not that far off really.
while to swappable per say, they can be upgraded if one choses to do so
http://www.head-fi.org/t/339127/asus-xonar-dx-mods
dx is 7.1 Z is 5.1 so there is at least one difference
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1728104
"As for my issue, the sound was very narrow, less detailed, and quite warm in comparison to the X-Fi Elite Pro it replaced. Aka, the former High end X-Fi until the HD was released. Both the Z and XFI EP were running the same CS4398 DAC's.
Subjectively if I were to rate the soundcards I've used in the past based on that above claim, It would go something like this... (All DSP effects off)
Elite Pro> Xonar DX> Fatality Xtremegamer> Musiland Monitor 02> (Xfi GO> Xonar U3)>Z"
Hard to get side by side spec sheets you know, mostly cause the makers themselves do not always release the nitty gritty on what they did and why.
http://www.comx-computers.co.za/SB-ZX-specifications-71223.htm
http://techreport.com/review/14500/asus-xonar-dx-sound-card
user opinions
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=179218
anyways point is there is 2 sides to every coin, not everyone has the same ear, same tolerance, same patience level, what works for some does not for others that's fine. Z is a great card from Creative but they did still do some very silly choices as alluded to in the reviews, opinions and so forth like a wicked high gain that "spoils" the sound, where my DX on the other hand is pure when I use it as is, not one complaint not from drivers, not from sound/mic quality nothing.
Have I used Creative Z, no, I do not have the $ to go out and buy things just to try them, however I have had past experiences with creative in XP/Vista/early win 7 and just reading what I have on it, I am glad I went with the DX when I did and still am glad today. I don't do just gaming, and do not need the extra gimmicks instead of proper tuning on the op-amps and so forth Creative heavily relies on the software layer for the "immersion" for you to get all that positional audio, DX was tuned for more even approach no matter what you are doing.
Anyways, OP if you got the dx and running win 7 4 I use newest drivers from Asus for the DX and they work just fine, message me if you need help setting it up some.
you asked meeho this not I, what you asked me was "Also the specs on the pricegrabber site are a bit useless as it doesn't have half the details of any of the cards" I asked you, not meeho, see post number 16 on this thread. I was replying directly to you, even quoted your post.
My post is not all over the place if you actually take the time to read it, but whatever to you it is, that's fine.
many things I can list but I will go by the numbers you pointed outThis post is as all over the place too. But maybe english isn't your first language, so I can understand that.
1)DX I use for Front panel(which has slight boost) mic-headset it can only handle up to x impedance which is fine for most of us anyways, I have no trouble at all using speakers when I want or headset when I want by just going to the dx panel and toggling between speakers or FP, wow so hard, to use both at same time all it takes is an extension to rear panelThe front panel isn't as good as plugging directly into the card. They are usually crappy quality and subject to interference and EMI noise. If you really are interested in sound quality, you wouldn't be using the front panel connector.
2)Mehoo stated this as did the reviewers, to much gain, maybe your experience is different but they did state with low impedance headset it was kind of cruddy, high impedance was much better so headphone amp being used isn't that great so not worth really mentioning, but is a point that you can use any other amp with DX as I am sure you can with Z difference of course $$, DX is lower cost(well here in Canada it is for me) Again, the Gain problem is easily solved, you just turn down the volume. It's not really that hard. The Oem version of the Z (without the mic) is cheaper than the DX.
3)LOL, omg its so hard running a molex, the reason why they did this is bridge chip not a straight pci-e design so there was limitations, and big whoop, maybe it is to you, but I am quite sure it would not be to most, it isn't to me, it actually lets me get some wires out of the way and wrap a bit tighter so better airflow which in my books is a good thing, again, whatever.Now this post confuses me you are saying that having to run a cable to your DX makes your case neater than having no cable at all? To my mind having no cable at all is better for airflow and keeping things tidy.
4)Z may have better positional audio true, but this always depends on the listening equipment, drivers, user, settings, Z is more designed for gaming, DX more for movies-music/games in that order. I know myself I can hear people creeping up on me just fine if I have the sound turned up(have not taken time to tune it) however I have sensitive ears so I cannot turn up the volume for that long before I get headache.The Z is better for positional audio. But why list the other stuff? Of course it depends on what you listen with, same for the Dx.
While I admit the pricegrabber site doesn't have most of the specs, it does however have the ones that matter top most folks, channels, SNR, connectors etc. The one that is neat is DX front out(FP Headphone as example) is higher db then Z has 116 vs 105 for headphones but in all other channels is 116 to 112 mostly which is not that far off really.
while to swappable per say, they can be upgraded if one choses to do so
http://www.head-fi.org/t/339127/asus-xonar-dx-modsYou can do this with most cards if you were good enough at soldering. The DX still doesn't have swabble op-amps.
dx is 7.1 Z is 5.1 so there is at least one difference
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1728104
"As for my issue, the sound was very narrow, less detailed, and quite warm in comparison to the X-Fi Elite Pro it replaced. Aka, the former High end X-Fi until the HD was released. Both the Z and XFI EP were running the same CS4398 DAC's.
Subjectively if I were to rate the soundcards I've used in the past based on that above claim, It would go something like this... (All DSP effects off)
Elite Pro> Xonar DX> Fatality Xtremegamer> Musiland Monitor 02> (Xfi GO> Xonar U3)>Z"
Yes, and it turned out he had a faulty card. How about thisThat's from a guy who hated creative until he tried the Zx (exact same card as the Z)
Hard to get side by side spec sheets you know, mostly cause the makers themselves do not always release the nitty gritty on what they did and why.I said the Dx was a good card. The specs of both seem very similar, that's why I asked you what specs are better, because I don't see any.
http://www.comx-computers.co.za/SB-ZX-specifications-71223.htm
http://techreport.com/review/14500/asus-xonar-dx-sound-card
user opinions
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=179218I read this thread, didn't seem like anyone had a Z. The users giving out about the high Gain were using a recon 3d card. If you are going to post user opinions at least post opinions from people who actually have the card.
anyways point is there is 2 sides to every coin, not everyone has the same ear, same tolerance, same patience level, what works for some does not for others that's fine. Z is a great card from Creative but they did still do some very silly choices as alluded to in the reviews, opinions and so forth like a wicked high gain that "spoils" the sound, where my DX on the other hand is pure when I use it as is, not one complaint not from drivers, not from sound/mic quality nothing.You have been lucky with drivers than, good for you. Asus drivers have been very poor for the last few years. Other than the high gain, can you tell me what other silly choices did they make with the Z?
Have I used Creative Z, no, I do not have the $ to go out and buy things just to try them, however I have had past experiences with creative in XP/Vista/early win 7 and just reading what I have on it, I am glad I went with the DX when I did and still am glad today. I don't do just gaming, and do not need the extra gimmicks instead of proper tuning on the op-amps and so forth Creative heavily relies on the software layer for the "immersion" for you to get all that positional audio, DX was tuned for more even approach no matter what you are doing.The Z is a completely new direction for Creative, they seem to making an effort to get good drivers out. And what are these extra gimmicks that the creative Z has, that the Dx doesn't? You keep saying the Dx has swappable OP-amps, it doesn't, so stop listing that as a postive for the card. LOL and your DX relies on software layer as well, I don't get your point, all gaming audio is software now.
Anyways, OP if you got the dx and running win 7 4 I use newest drivers from Asus for the DX and they work just fine, message me if you need help setting it up some.
Thanks for finally responding, I was just interested to read what you would say. There are two sides to every story like you said. But a lot of your opinion is based on previous generations of Creative cards. My last 3 cards were all from Asus, the xonar DG, Xonar Hdav 1.3 and Xonar Dx, before that I had the creative X-fi fatality. I can say without any problem that the Z is better all round card than the Dx. But again, like you said, people using crap equipment to listen with won't hear any difference. They might as well stick to onboard audio.