Why is Vista good for Computer Audio?

[Donnie27]

After failing at getting a Bud to NOT update to Vista, he did anyway. He's a big America Army Fan, some Call Of Duty/2 and etc.... I watched as he and another bud of mine tried to get surround sound in the Game. They even went as far as installing an XPlosion to see if it worked. Stereo for America's Army and even Alchemy in Call of Duty 2 sucked IMHO. The sounds just didn't seem to immerse into the action.

So even the XPlosion sounded worse. Oh well, so much for hurting Creative to helping everyone else. So we 3 seem to think this is one more swipe at getting the folks into moving to the XBOX.

 

[alg7_munif]

The sound in Vista is better because it doesn't use the same kmixer like in XP and the audio in Vista has room correction feature. It is a better platform for audio compared to XP but it takes time for software and hardware manufacturer to take advantage from the new platform.

 

[Donnie27]

http://vista-win.info/start-1120.html Pages 1 through 16 if you have time?

I'm going to wait for at least SP2 before I go to Vista. Then maybe there will be support of the LAME software processing that downgrades current Game sounds to the point of sounding like crap. No, none of the so call HD featues work=P Armerica's Army reverts to Stereo and from minimal tests, so far OpenAL doesn't work at all. Maybe it was user error or some patch was missing?

So making one device suck, does nothing to bring others up to par. Just means now they all will suck

 

[Audioguy]

Seems to put all soundcard manufacturers on a equal playing field. Forces soundcard companies to start developing again.

 

[alg7_munif]

http://vista-win.info/start-1120.html Pages 1 through 16 if you have time?

I'm going to wait for at least SP2 before I go to Vista. Then maybe there will be support of the LAME software processing that downgrades current Game sounds to the point of sounding like crap. No, none of the so call HD featues work=P Armerica's Army reverts to Stereo and from minimal tests, so far OpenAL doesn't work at all. Maybe it was user error or some patch was missing?

So making one device suck, does nothing to bring others up to par. Just means now they all will suck

I won't wait that long but I won't buy Vista yet. I'll just wait until all my hardwares especially my sound card have a proper working driver and I can get the compatible softwares that I need then I'll go to Vista. Maybe I'll go with Vista with a completely new system that will kick some butts . I really hope that the hardware manufacturers have already started working on their bloated drivers, not giving some lame excuses for their crappy products and playing the blaming game with M$ . Thankfully nVidia already has a working Vista driver for my weak platform if I want to upgrade now. You can avoid going to Vista now but sooner or later you will still need to upgrade to Vista, all new softwares, games and hardware will be produced for Vista. Later you'll not get any support for your hardware but the time is still long. I really believe that newer games will have a better audio with Vista. You can stay with your DirectX9c games but I don't want to miss the Direct3D10 feature on newer games, DirectX9c sucks compared to D3D10 . When ATi(AMD) has released their D3D10 card, Direct9 cards will be history =P

 

[phide]

Oh well, so much for hurting Creative to helping everyone else. So we 3 seem to think this is one more swipe at getting the folks into moving to the XBOX.

I don't think so, considering the audio platform is the about the same in Vista as it is in the X360. I think it's more of an effort to get more cross-platform titles out the door. I guess it really goes both ways.

Microsoft really seems to get a bad rap whenever they decide to make major changes to new operating systems. Apple has been doing this for years, and they are applauded for doing so (in many cases). Apple is not afraid to completely break applications or devices in new versions of MacOS.

You have to understand that there are going to be growing pains. Fundamentally, the audio outlook in Vista is better. Developers have a bit more room to maneuver (thanks to the user mode/session stack), and we're going to reduce dependency on Creative products to some extent, at least for a while. If the tide turns toward Vista's native audio services (utilized by DirectSound/XACT/X3DAudio) over OpenAL, we should see new technologies for effects processing, rather than EAX rehashes that only certain card owners can utilize. Creative has in fact stated that future products will utilize Vista's APOs to perform DSP in addition to the obligatory OpenAL support. This is a good thing.

 

[Donnie27]

Seems to put all soundcard manufacturers on a equal playing field. Forces soundcard companies to start developing again.

So let's break Roger Federer's leg or something similar to make Mens Tennis better, right? Oh wait, let's outlaw V12 Supercars, Corvettes and Vipers so Mazda Miatas can hang

Or the other card makers should go back and rededicate themselves to hardware. Otherwise, it would be stupid IMHO to pay almost $200 for a Conduit to connect speakers and etc.. to, that's lame IMHO! If my Processor is a doing all of the DSP duties like Dolby Headphone, MLP, DS3D with EAX 3+ or better (can't be done but just an example) and etc..., the sound card should be CHEAP, not priced like Barracuda and XMeridian LOL!

 

[phide]

You can stay with your DirectX9c games but I don't want to miss the Direct3D10 feature on newer games, DirectX9c sucks compared to D3D10 . When ATi(AMD) has released their D3D10 card, Direct9 cards will be history =P

Doubt it. The feature set has changed with SM 4.0, but there aren't that many changes that really benefit us. The major features concern executional efficiency, which doesn't mean a whole lot to us. Some effects that utilize geometry shaders (SM 4.0's main visual grab) can also be done with SM 3.0 via a combination of pixel and vertex shading.

We still see plenty of games that can be rendered identically with SM 2.0, and in fact, we haven't seen much benefit at all from SM 3.0. Geometry instancing is probably the biggest addition to SM 3.0, and it's currently under-utilized (not used in Oblivion, for example, where geometry instancing would be tremendously beneficial). Many games are SM 3.0 solely because of certain narrow advantages, such as longer shader length limits.

I really hope that the hardware manufacturers have already started working on their bloated drivers, not giving some lame excuses for their crappy products and playing the blaming game with M$

Gee, I wonder who you're talking about here.

If my Processor is a doing all of the DSP duties like Dolby Headphone, MLP, DS3D with EAX 3+ or better (can't be done but just an example) and etc..., the sound card should be CHEAP, not priced like Barracuda and XMeridian LOL!

Yes, let's get into another X-Meridian vs. X-Fi debate, shall we? Certainly we haven't talked about that enough.

 

[Donnie27]

I don't think so, considering the audio platform is the about the same in Vista as it is in the X360. I think it's more of an effort to get more cross-platform titles out the door. I guess it really goes both ways.

Microsoft really seems to get a bad rap whenever they decide to make major changes to new operating systems. Apple has been doing this for years, and they are applauded for doing so (in many cases). Apple is not afraid to completely break applications or devices in new versions of MacOS.

You have to understand that there are going to be growing pains. Fundamentally, the audio outlook in Vista is better. Developers have a bit more room to maneuver (thanks to the user mode/session stack), and we're going to reduce dependency on Creative products to some extent, at least for a while. If the tide turns toward Vista's native audio services (utilized by DirectSound/XACT/X3DAudio) over OpenAL, we should see new technologies for effects processing, rather than EAX rehashes that only certain card owners can utilize. Creative has in fact stated that future products will utilize Vista's APOs to perform DSP in addition to the obligatory OpenAL support. This is a good thing.

I wish I could agree with you here, but I just can't. XBox has a Chip Dedicated for nothing but sound and it can do OpenAL, MLP and etc...

I've played with MS's so called features, LORFLL&H or Laughed out real f%@#$%& loud long & hard! Bad drivers? You ain't seen bad drivers yet. Sound ain't broken, NO ONE in the Enthusiast market NEEDS MS's UAA. As one poster here put it, "Just another reason to not install the DRM riddled downgrade known as Vista."

None of this has Jack to do with the 87GB of Games installed on my HDD and that's small compared to folks I know. If MS moved or change the way HW/HAL and etc..works, they should have replace with something better than the crap I saw last night. I say again, even the XPlosion sounded WORSE! How in the hell is that helping things? Maybe it was drivers not being ready or something, I don't know.

Owners of any cards have a choice=P Gamers have NEVER depended on just one sound without fall backs, that would be crazy. Let's see, so some folks might think its cool to kill off Creative by screwing up something many of use CHOOSE to use. But let me ask? Who's next? What if MS decides you don't need video cards or the problems they cause?

 

[Audioguy]

PHIDE, I think your exactly right. This will be good for PC based audio in all it's forms.
CL has their ALchemy and their OpenAL but other companies can use OpenAL if they want aswell. What they did in my opinion is break up the monopoly of gaming audio cards. The industry has been so wrapped up in gaming audio that development followed whatever CL decided to release. Given this move to OpenAL any card can utilize the library and development will start again. Cards will be sold based on sound quality audio standards and audio features for a change. Of course it's just my opinion.

 

[Donnie27]

Yes, let's get into another X-Meridian vs. X-Fi debate, shall we? Certainly we haven't talked about that enough.

There ain't a damned thing to debate! If MS is moving to making everything software, why not just use Onboard sound? Do away with ALL SOUND CARDS! If some one steps back for just one second, they see that ALL SOUNDS card devalued. That affects everyone!

 

[alg7_munif]

Doubt it. The feature set has changed with SM 4.0, but there aren't that many changes that really benefit us. The major features concern executional efficiency, which doesn't mean a whole lot to us. Some effects that utilize geometry shaders (SM 4.0's main visual grab) can also be done with SM 3.0 via a combination of pixel and vertex shading.

We still see plenty of games that can be rendered identically with SM 2.0, and in fact, we haven't seen much benefit at all from SM 3.0. Geometry instancing is probably the biggest addition to SM 3.0, and it's currently under-utilized (not used in Oblivion, for example, where geometry instancing would be tremendously beneficial). Many games are SM 3.0 solely because of certain narrow advantages, such as longer shader length limits.


Gee, I wonder who you're talking about here.

I really can't say I blame Donnie for ignoring you.


Yes, let's get into another X-Meridian vs. X-Fi debate, shall we? Certainly we haven't talked about that enough.

SM 4.0 will kick SM 3.0's butt =P Gee you didn't get my sarcasm didn't you? Back on topic, changes in Vista will benefit consumers because there will be more competitions and manufacturer will produce a better product at a cheaper price. Games wouldn't necessarily sound bad without EAX. The sound will depend on the game developers, they need to create games that will sound good with Vista's platform.

 

[Donnie27]

PHIDE, I think your exactly right. This will be good for PC based audio in all it's forms.
CL has their ALchemy and their OpenAL but other companies can use OpenAL if they want aswell. What they did in my opinion is break up the monopoly of gaming audio cards. The industry has been so wrapped up in gaming audio that development followed whatever CL decided to release. Given this move to OpenAL any card can utilize the library and development will start again. Cards will be sold based on sound quality audio standards and audio features for a change. Of course it's just my opinion.

I will say it one time only. EAX, OpenAL and anything from Creative labs can be licensed=P

There is no Game sound monopoly. All Games ship with either a Generic Sound Engine, with EAX and some type of fallback software renderer for Cards that don't support EAX. Not a Donnie27 Opinion but a fact.

Creative doesn't own MLP and they license it from Dolby just as the others could. The MLP chip can process OpenAL I'm told.

So if nVidia can do OpenGL better than ATI, let's kill it so nVidia so ATI can catch up, right? Or does nVidia have a Monopoly because ATI can't do it as well?

 

[phide]

You mean the X-Fi? I'm not talking about a certain manufacturer's chips, I'm talking about the stack and the APIs. The sound output pipeline on Vista and the X360 are, at this point, basically identical.

Video cards are really entirely different animals. If you want to make the comparison reasonable, you kind of have to talk about vendor-specific functions with OpenGL. These vendor specific functions (we can equate these to EAX) are utilized mainly for performance, and are not technically part of the ARB specifications. These functions are not really utilized anymore, since only Johnny C is making OpenGL-rendered engines these days, and he uses strict ARB 2.0 -- no vendor specific functions (EAX).

If you're talking about DS3D emulation and dropping certain capabilities (like surround), that becomes a more valid point. But, again, video cards and sound cards are entirely different things. All current titles rely upon either Direct3D or OpenGL, and these are both APIs that all graphics card manufacturers support. There are no vendor-specific functions or extensions in Direct3D, as far as I'm aware. If Microsoft chose to drop support for D3D 9.0 titles, there would be an outcry. But Microsoft hasn't even dropped DirectSound support, as the emulation layer is still good enough for the basic functions. Some games will still have surround while others may not.

Like I said, breaking EAX is kind of like breaking OpenGL vendor-specific functions, but it's Microsoft's call in this case. They made the call to improve stability.

I don't think it's "cool" to kill off Creative, and certainly this isn't what Microsoft intended. If Microsoft had wanted a totally level playing field, they wouldn't have allowed for EAX extensions at all in previous versions of DS. This may end up putting Creative back into a more level state, which would be beneficial to consumers, but it might also tighten Creative's grasp. It's too early to tell.

 

[Donnie27]

I really hope that the hardware manufacturers have already started working on their bloated drivers, not giving some lame excuses for their crappy products and playing the blaming game with M$

Is why I put this poster on my ignore list! This from someone who's never had problems with nVidia Motherboard Drivers and software.

 

[Audioguy]

EAX can only be licensed up to EAX 2.0. OpenAL is just that opensourced and it's free.
There will be some mad people but it will be good for PC audio in the long run.
My opinion is the MS UAA is a good thing.
Phide you seem to understand what I am getting at and how it will be better in the long run.

 

[phide]

There is not Game sound monopoly. All Games ship with either a Generic Sound Engine or With EAX and sound type of fallback software renderer for Cards that don't support EAX. Not a Donnie27 Opinion but a fact.

It's not a strict monopoly, no. But, unlike with video cards (as you made the analogy), you can perform the exact same processing on all video cards of the same generation, regardless of manufacturer, where it counts: in games. There are some variances, some optimizations that differ, differing speeds, and so on, but nothing like what EAX is to game audio.

You mention that you can license EAX, and this is probably true (and I guess EAX 2.0 is sans-fee at this time), but what are those fees? We've heard tell that those fees are absolutely outlandish and totally unreasonable for any company. I don't even think it's been confirmed that EAX 5.0 can be licensed at all. The fact that so many game developers utilize EAX 3.0+ extensions at this point gives Creative a monopoly on that aspect of the market. The options are generally: A) advanced processing with certain Creative cards only or B) no advanced processing at all. The fallbacks are an afterthought at best. Not Creative's fault at all, as they aren't forcing anyone into using EAX (except for id, of course, but that was the settlement).

EAX extensions are very much like 3dfx's old Glide API. All games had a software fallback, sure, but how many advantages were lost when that fallback is used? You lose bilinear filtering, performance and certain visual features. It's a substantial trade off. Would you say that we were better off with Glide or better off with OpenGL? Are we better off with EAX or better off with some other open source, possibly cross-platform means of DSP?

Why not make the fallback THE primary means? Give the same experience to everyone regardless of the type of chip on their board. Make the effects identical. Leveling the playing field was one of the largest components of SM 4.0, so why not also level the playing field with the other half of the perceptual experience?

Read up on developing with XACT, and you'll find that many fairly advanced DSP features are possible out-of-the-door. No vendor-specific extensions or complex integration required.

So if nVidia can do OpenGL better than ATI, let's kill it so ATI can catch up, right? Or does nVidia have a Monopoly because ATI can't do it as well?

That isn't fair at all. Perhaps you can explain how the X-Fi can "do" EAX 5.0 better than some Oxygen HD-based card. The analogy, in this case, is absurd.

Microsoft's intention wasn't likely to try to cripple Creative. As I said, if they wanted to do this, they would have done so before.

Phide you seem to understand what I am getting at and how it will be better in the long run.

Possibly better, possibly worse. It's tough to call at this point, but all signs point to OpenAL. OpenAL is going to give Creative the capability to do EAX as they've done before and C-Media the capability to design a chip around hardware acceleration for Vista and XP should they choose to go that route. OpenAL may give them that incentive.

 

[Audioguy]

Exactly. The way I see it is now soundcard manufacturers will be selling their sound cards based on what counts. Sound Quality, Modern Audio specifications and audio features.
Put's everybody in the same game. Large companies, small companies..etc. It just forces a soundcard war which is a good thing if your into PC based audio. One company besting the other. This is the way it's supposed to be. I think it's great bring on the UAA.
OpenAL can be implemeted in software so I am told, if I remeber it correctly it has a software mode anyhow it is part of the spec. MS didn't do anything to EAX the just removed a peice of their software. I can't see MS doing it for anybody but themselves. If your into audio in any form on the PC then I don't understand how you can't think this is a good thing. It will force development.
Creative has Alchemy for older EAX games. Newer games will either be OpenAL or the game manufacturer will create their own technology for the game. -the same way the do for graphics. This would be awsome. Every new game that uses a new graphics engine has a new audio engine aswell.

 

[Donnie27]

You mean the X-Fi? I'm not talking about a certain manufacturer's chips, I'm talking about the stack and the APIs. The sound output pipeline on Vista and the X360 are, at this point, basically identical.

Video cards are really entirely different animals. If you want to make the comparison reasonable, you kind of have to talk about vendor-specific functions with OpenGL. These vendor specific functions (we can equate these to EAX) are utilized mainly for performance, and are not technically part of the ARB specifications. These functions are not really utilized anymore, since only Johnny C is making OpenGL-rendered engines these days, and he uses strict ARB 2.0 -- no vendor specific functions (EAX).

When I did talk to a person from Creative, they said "Hardware is what stops ther other from using EAX3 or better, not software, there is no restricted license or whatever." Maybe this person lied? OpenAL is NOT vender restricted but HARDWARE restricted. Now Creative could have neat little small driver packages if the sound card were VOID of any real hardware.

So let's NOT talk about Video, here's another then NIC, good old Intel Hardware NIC vs a Win/Vista NIC, which would like?

If you're talking about DS3D emulation and dropping certain capabilities (like surround), that becomes a more valid point. But, again, video cards and sound cards are entirely different things. All current titles rely upon either Direct3D or OpenGL, and these are both APIs that all graphics card manufacturers support. There are no vendor-specific functions or extensions in Direct3D, as far as I'm aware. If Microsoft chose to drop support for D3D 9.0 titles, there would be an outcry. But Microsoft hasn't even dropped DirectSound support, as the emulation layer is still good enough for the basic functions. Some games will still have surround while others may not.

Already replied to this. NO game locks out CMedia based card because they have EAX 3+ support. I'm saying software renderer even sucked with bare DS3D. You get no;
Elevation, Obstruction, Distance effects, Occlusion, Environment Morph, EAX Voice and etc.. I'l put up with driver bloat if those drivers work.

Like I said, breaking EAX is kind of like breaking OpenGL vendor-specific functions, but it's Microsoft's call in this case. They made the call to improve stability.

I don't think it's "cool" to kill off Creative, and certainly this isn't what Microsoft intended. If Microsoft had wanted a totally level playing field, they wouldn't have allowed for EAX extensions at all in previous versions of DS. This may end up putting Creative back into a more level state, which would be beneficial to consumers, but it might also tighten Creative's grasp. It's too early to tell.

MS could have but then they would have to license it, honestly, spend that kind of money, since when? Last time I checked, to improve meant making things better, not worse! Last but not least, if there comes a time when I do move to Vista, I'll use On-Board since there'll be little need to for a discrete sound card of any kind IMHO!

 

[phide]

Elevation, Obstruction, Distance effects, Occlusion, Environment Morph, EAX Voice and etc.. I'l put up with driver bloat if those drivers work.

I would too, but I'd also like these features to be available to everyone. It's possible that Vista is a shove in that direction. For now, it's not such a good thing, especially for those of us who own X-Fis (I got an Elite Pro a couple weeks ago), but we still have XP. Dropping the HAL will have side-effects, and uniformity may be a positive side-effect.

In the long term, it's probably a good thing. It may change the way Creative operates and may also change the way C-Media operates. In time, we'll see what we're going to be dealing with in Vista as far as audio is concerned.

Last but not least, if there comes a time when I do move to Vista, I'll use On-Board since there'll be little need to for a discrete sound card of any kind IMHO!

If the sound card offers better audio quality than the on-board device, then the sound card still has an excellent advantage. You're also going to get all those things that you can't do with on-board, such as native MLP processing, OpenAL, equalization, faux-surround and so on.

 

[Audioguy]

Exactly, you can have your onboard I will keep my addin card.
Most if not all new games will be in OpenAL or some game based audio engine. Older games have the ALchemy engine. This is all brand new give it a little time to mature a bit. Things should work out fine for the gamers.

 

[Donnie27]

It's not a strict monopoly, no. But, unlike with video cards (as you made the analogy), you can perform the exact same processing on all video cards of the same generation, regardless of manufacturer, where it counts: in games. There are some variances, some optimizations that differ, differing speeds, and so on, but nothing like what EAX is to game audio.

Exactly, the other sound cards don't have Hardware to perform EAX or OpenAL. Hell, not even MLP that's licensed By Dolby. What's stopping them there?

You mention that you can license EAX, and this is probably true (and I guess EAX 2.0 is sans-fee at this time), but what are those fees? We've heard tell that those fees are absolutely outlandish and totally unreasonable for any company. I don't even think it's been confirmed that EAX 5.0 can be licensed at all. The fact that so many game developers utilize EAX 3.0+ extensions at this point gives Creative a monopoly on that aspect of the market. The options are generally: A) advanced processing with certain Creative cards only or B) no advanced processing at all. The fallbacks are an afterthought at best. Not Creative's fault at all, as they aren't forcing anyone into using EAX (except for id, of course, but that was the settlement).

That's NOT a monopoly! If any Game that supports EAX3+ has a something to fallback on for other cards, that's NOT a monopoly. Now if that sound card couldn't playback any sounds at all if you didn't have a Creative Product, then I'd agree. Lack of Hardware is NOT Creative's fault.

Just like when folks lied on Intel about SIMD and Chipset licenses. My understanding is the Industry and Standards, WTO, FTC folks will not let ANY company charge more than industry norms. Aren't there laws that govern this? Intel's ended up being $2 per chipset that nVidia b!#$hed about LOL! nVidia ended getting what they wanted, Free, hehehe!

EAX extensions are very much like 3dfx's old Glide API. All games had a software fallback, sure, but how many advantages were lost when that fallback is used? You lose bilinear filtering, performance and certain visual features. It's a substantial trade off. Would you say that we were better off with Glide or better off with OpenGL? Are we better off with EAX or better off with some other open source, possibly cross-platform means of DSP?

But OpenAL is just that, OPEN just like OpenGL that I liked better! You do know that cheap Tile and or software based cards/chips that couldn't do OpenGL. Full circle?

Why not make the fallback THE primary means? Give the same experience to everyone regardless of the type of chip on their board. Make the effects identical. Leveling the playing field was one of the largest components of SM 4.0, so why not also level the playing field with the other half of the perceptual experience?

So, if ATI sticks with only SM 3.0? Would killing SM4.0 would be acceptible?

Read up on developing with XACT, and you'll find that many fairly advanced DSP features are possible out-of-the-door. No vendor-specific extensions or complex integration required.

That isn't fair at all. Perhaps you can explain how the X-Fi can "do" EAX 5.0 better than some Oxygen HD-based card. The analogy, in this case, is absurd.

Not quite! Do me a favor, look up how many MIPS the Oxygen HD-based cards can process per sec? How fast is it. It's said that even the Cell that's on PS3 is only 200MHz and does its Job as well as X-Fi since it only performs one task, thats sound.

Microsoft's intention wasn't likely to try to cripple Creative. As I said, if they wanted to do this, they would have done so before.

Possibly better, possibly worse. It's tough to call at this point, but all signs point to OpenAL. OpenAL is going to give Creative the capability to do EAX as they've done before and C-Media the capability to design a chip around hardware acceleration for Vista and XP should they choose to go that route. OpenAL may give them that incentive.

Maybe you're right

 

[Donnie27]

Exactly, you can have your onboard I will keep my addin card.
Most if not all new games will be in OpenAL or some game based audio engine. Older games have the ALchemy engine. This is all brand new give it a little time to mature a bit. Things should work out fine for the gamers.

Right now, both OpenAL games reverted to Stereo last night. The so call Universal Audio isn't that universal. To varying degrees, older games are hit and miss. None sound as good as they did with WinXP to us.

I use a Set Top to listen to music.

Just got a new DVD Audio Disc for my Birthday today. Can't wait to see what it is this evening.

 

[Audioguy]

You use a set top to listen to music great. Alot of people play games on a console. You see it as bad for gaming audio that is a small part of PC based audio. Might be bad for gaming audio in the beginning but it will be great for PC audio in the long run.
Personally I like using the PC for music playback you can do so much more the a set top could ever think of. The debate isn't gonna bring back EAX. Everybody see's thing differently.
I think it's good for PC based audio. If you think it's bad, that's OK. -This is a never ending debate as it's based on personal opinions. I say good, you say bad. Just opinions.

 

[Moofasa~]

Right now, both OpenAL games reverted to Stereo last night.

I don't see how an OpenAL game would revert back to stereo. AA should work exactly as it did under XP. Your friends are doing something wrong.

 

[alg7_munif]

Not quite! Do me a favor, look up how many MIPS the Oxygen HD-based cards can process per sec? How fast is it. It's said that even the Cell that's on PS3 is only 200MHz and does its Job as well as X-Fi since it only performs one task, thats sound.

70% of the MIPs on X-Fi is used for SRC because the DSP is locked at 48kHz... You don't need a MLP chip to play a DVD-A on Vista.

It is a bit of a touchy subject, but UAA supports audio content protection schemes. This should allow PC systems to playback protected audio content such as DVD Audio discs. Unfortunately, Realtek is the only provider of hardware content protected high definition audio solutions.

Btw why do you like to mention about MLP chip? Just because you don't understand the meaning of Meridian it doesn't mean that Meridian refers to MLP. DVD-A is not going to be a main medium, not yet maybe.

 

[Donnie27]

I don't see how an OpenAL game would revert back to stereo. AA should work exactly as it did under XP. Your friends are doing something wrong.

That's quite possible as I said, it could be user error!

 

[Donnie27]

You use a set top to listen to music great. Alot of people play games on a console. You see it as bad for gaming audio that is a small part of PC based audio. Might be bad for gaming audio in the beginning but it will be great for PC audio in the long run.
Personally I like using the PC for music playback you can do so much more the a set top could ever think of. The debate isn't gonna bring back EAX. Everybody see's thing differently.
I think it's good for PC based audio. If you think it's bad, that's OK. -This is a never ending debate as it's based on personal opinions. I say good, you say bad. Just opinions.

I use my PC for gaming, not XBox or Consoles. When it comes to the PC for Games IMHO, there's no substitute. For listening to music most set tops will do and I don't need a PC for that. I'll put up with the slight difference in Music Playback than the larger difference is Game sounds!

I do use my PC music too. I like to slow down tracks without loss of tone. Ever try that?

For me, EAX ain't gone anywhere because I'm not going to install Vista any time soon Since you like listening to music so much, be on the look out for DRM in Vista?

Yes, we can agree to disagree, that is

 

[Audioguy]

I won't be moving to Vista any time soon either it is way, way to new. There will still be bugs beyond bugs in that and I am not into bug hunting for MS. I will wait until the majority of the first release bugs have been killed perhaps the first service pack etc, then I may try it out.
I think alot of people proabably think the same way. I have a 100% stable XP system. I can't remember the last time I seen a error message or a BSOD. Why do I want to move back to buggy software right this minute. I can wait. MS is notorious for releasing software to meet a deadline and the product is not ready.

 

[Donnie27]

I won't be moving to Vista any time soon either it is way, way to new. There will still be bugs beyond bugs in that and I am not into bug hunting for MS. I will wait until the majority of the first release bugs have been killed perhaps the first service pack etc, then I may try it out.
I think alot of people proabably think the same way. I have a 100% stable XP system. I can't remember the last time I seen a error message or a BSOD. Why do I want to move back to buggy software right this minute. I can wait. MS is notorious for releasing software to meet a deadline and the product is not ready.

I agree!

 

[phide]

That's NOT a monopoly! If any Game that supports EAX3+ has a something to fallback on for other cards, that's NOT a monopoly. Now if that sound card couldn't playback any sounds at all if you didn't have a Creative Product, then I'd agree.

I said it wasn't a strict monopoly. I said Creative has a monopoly in that aspect. The aspect is hardware accelerated processing of DSP via a proprietary set of extensions which may or may not be licensable and that are used as the only means of hardware accelerated DSP by game developers. That's the stranglehold.

But OpenAL is just that, OPEN just like OpenGL that I liked better! You do know that cheap Tile and or software based cards/chips that couldn't do OpenGL. Full circle?

I don't know of any such chips that exist today. If the chip supports what is outlined in the ARB specifications, it can utilize OpenGL for no cost to the manufacturer. Not so with EAX 3.0+.

So, if ATI sticks with only SM 3.0? Would killing SM4.0 would be acceptible?

Bum argument. Hardware manufacturers do not have to license DirectX technology. The APIs are platform locked, but they're also free to integrate. You have to pay for the pleasure for EAX 3.0+. I'm also not talking about crippling advancement -- I'm talking about allowing for everyone to have the same experience. I don't understand why you assume that I want to take seventeen steps back from what we have available in EAX 5.0 to level the playing field.

Not quite! Do me a favor, look up how many MIPS the Oxygen HD-based cards can process per sec? How fast is it.

Wasn't talking about the processing speed of the chip at all. I was referring to the fact that the chip cannot do EAX 3.0+ at all. Even if the processing capabilities of the next C-Media chip far surpasses that of the X-Fi, would that automatically enable EAX 3.0+?

Even if the chip had the capability, it still wouldn't be able to utilize EAX 5.0 unless C-Media licenses it. R600, for example, can utilize D3D10/SM 4.0 and OpenGL freely.

What I'm talking about is an open standard for software or hardware accelerated effects, not some vendor-locked, "maybe" licensable set of extensions that only works via one API. OpenAL could pave the way, but I believe Creative has far too much control over the direction of that supposedly "open" API. I believe Creative is intentionally crippling its capabilities regarding effects sending and returning (OpenAL has a very limited sort of bussing system) because they want to maintain the lock on EAX.

So, you would get the same effects whether or not they are hardware accelerated or performed entirely by the CPU. I'm not talking about stifling the advancement of sound.

 

[Donnie27]

I said it wasn't a strict monopoly. I said Creative has a monopoly in that aspect. The aspect is hardware accelerated processing of DSP via a proprietary set of extensions which may or may not be licensable and that are used as the only means of hardware accelerated DSP by game developers. That's the stranglehold.

I don't know of any such chips that exist today. If the chip supports what is outlined in the ARB specifications, it can utilize OpenGL for no cost to the manufacturer. Not so with EAX 3.0+.

Bum argument. Hardware manufacturers do not have to license DirectX technology. The APIs are platform locked, but they're also free to integrate. You have to pay for the pleasure for EAX 3.0+. I'm also not talking about crippling advancement -- I'm talking about allowing for everyone to have the same experience. I don't understand why you assume that I want to take seventeen steps back from what we have available in EAX 5.0 to level the playing field.

Wasn't talking about the processing speed of the chip at all. I was referring to the fact that the chip cannot do EAX 3.0+ at all. Even if the processing capabilities of the next C-Media chip far surpasses that of the X-Fi, would that automatically enable EAX 3.0+?

Even if the chip had the capability, it still wouldn't be able to utilize EAX 5.0 unless C-Media licenses it. R600, for example, can utilize D3D10/SM 4.0 and OpenGL freely.

What I'm talking about is an open standard for software or hardware accelerated effects, not some vendor-locked, "maybe" licensable set of extensions that only works via one API. OpenAL could pave the way, but I believe Creative has far too much control over the direction of that supposedly "open" API. I believe Creative is intentionally crippling its capabilities regarding effects sending and returning (OpenAL has a very limited sort of bussing system) because they want to maintain the lock on EAX.

So, you would get the same effects whether or not they are hardware accelerated or performed entirely by the CPU. I'm not talking about stifling the advancement of sound.

With all that said, it still comes down to dumbing down Creative to make others look or in the case sound not ass good. Just as I gave the example of hurting Roger's leg to make Tennis more competitive. The other players are no better than they were.

Data and Busses, processor is done on the Card to lessen Latency. That thread has been done. Making discrete sound card simple conduits while removing feature sucks IMHO! I reserve saying anything else until my contact gets OpenAL fully working.

 

[Audioguy]

You sound paranoid again. MS changes the audio spec in Direct X becasue that's there right. I seriously doubt they gave any thought to Creative labs or EAX at all. Not dumbing down Creative labs sound capabilities. We already know there are cards out there that sound better then Creative labs cards in certain tasks. I think it's more about making the audio standards open to other manufacturers to drive development again. -That's how I see it. You did read the UAA specification right?

 

[Donnie27]

You sound paranoid again. MS changes the audio spec in Direct X becasue that's there right. I seriously doubt they gave any thought to Creative labs or EAX at all. Not dumbing down Creative labs sound capabilities. We already know there are cards out there that sound better then Creative labs cards. I think it's more about making the standards open to other manufacturers to drive development again.

I must admit I'm very paranoid after removing rootkits and etc... Sure it's their right to change whatever they like. My right to say to them, I'm not buying it There are cards that play music back slightly better. Creative cards hands them their ass with Games though. Yes they are dumbing down these cards and the other cards stay at the same level, NOT get better. I say again, for whatever reason, patch, user error or whatever even the XPlosion sounded worse in Vista as well.

 

[Donnie27]

You did read the UAA specification right?

Yes I did!

 

[phide]

I don't understand the "cripple Creative" perspective. Even if that was Microsoft's intention, wouldn't that drive developers away from DirectSound? EAX extensions are now OpenAL only, and most would assume that it would drive adoption of OpenAL -- which is exactly what Microsoft doesn't want. They want developers to utilize DirectSound, XNA, XACT and X3DAudio so that they'll have a greater lock on titles. If the primary sound path of a title is OpenAL, that means that DirectSound is the cheap fallback.

Microsoft wants DirectSound to be the primary path. If they could have maintained EAX via DS, they would have done so, because the alternate path would still be DirectSound. This gives them the platform lock. They chose a different direction, and it's a much-needed change.

I also wasn't talking about crippling anything in my grand idea of an open source effects library/extensions. The goal with that would be to match or to surpass the capabilities of EAX 5.0, while giving users the option to choose hardware acceleration (via an open source DSP design) or CPU processing. I'm not sure if that's what you were referring to, though.

 

[Donnie27]

Bare DS3D doesn't sound as good as DS3D + EAX. It seemed bland! Maybe we get OpenAL to work correctly and this will change for that at least.

 

[Audioguy]

Yeah they are "slightly" better in music playback and Creative cards are "slightly" better in gaming. - I serously doubt you evern heard one or you wouldn't use the word slight. -beside the point The UAA seems a direct result of manufacturers putting out cards then releasing drivers that are subpar. -This is another subject I read from the UAA. They are taking alot of the driver control away from the manufacturer. Some companies can't seem to write them properly so they figure they need to do it I guess. Just by reading the UAA specification you can tell which way MS wants to take audio. They seem to want to take it way from the gaming audio niche it's become caught in and develop it to what it should/could be.

 

[ellover009]

http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/759/759538p1.html

Audio on Vista is not that good.

 

[Audioguy]

Yeah that is what we have ben talking about the last two pages. Goodbye EAX hello OpenAL.