Sound Cards
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Anyone have experience with these, like the one pictured? Are they worth it for the average user?
I like the idea of having the control module with the nice knob for volume and easy access to ports. Is the sound quality a big difference over the one on motherboards? I've got nice speakers.
>>51236561
internal soundcards are shithouse and a meme.
Get a proper external audio interface which will give you much better options for outputs.
>>51236612
Like what?
>>51236561
I really like the Surround and Crystallizer on it.
Imo not worth the 70 bucks, but I was in need of a mic too killing two birds with one rock.
>>51236657
>focusrite 2i4
>native instruments komplete audio 6
they run via USB but offer way better sound quality if you are running them through some monitors.
>>51236561
>Built in sound on dekstop board is unbalanced
>Laptop too, after changing the motherboard
>>51236708
>usb sound
>good
pick only one bruh
seriously just get a proper amp or better yet a reciever sure they're a little pricey but so is any sound card worth purchasing, and a reciever or amp gives you more versatility
>>51236804
>he's never used a proper production grade audio interface before
confirmed pleb. As an actual producer there is nothing wrong with using a USB sound card as almost all of them require it until you start going into thunderbolt territory.
>>51236561
I can't remember the brand name or model but there's an amp I saw reccomended here a while back that was only like forty bucks, to me that would be a better investment than a sound card
>>51236657
Get a receiver and plug your PC's optical audio output into it.
>>51236835
>production grade
>usb
sure bruh, I notice a distinct lack of brands or model names in your claim.
>>51236859
OP here. I do have a Denon receiver. . .
Would it be worth getting a card like I posted and then plugging that into the receiver, or would I not notice the difference from the one on the motherboard?
>>51236902
not likely to notice a difference as the reciever will be doing all the heavy lifting
>>51236876
Scarlett 2i2
http://us.focusrite.com/home?rd=1
Faggot.
>>51236876
>"bruh"
>>51236902
No difference, it's digital output. None of that audiophile snake oil applies. The DAC inside the receiver is the only thing that would matter really. But if you have a Denon receiver, it's probably good enough. As long as it has an optical input, you're golden.
>>51236940
>everything you need for professional grade production on an ipad
oh god I'm dying here
>get a receiver with burr brown DAC
>connect it via SP/DIF to bypass motherboard soundshit completely
>>51236977
That's kind of what I figured. Now what if I don't use the Denon? Just plug it into my computer speakers, which are a Klipsh 2.1, and I have a pretty nice headphones. Big difference? I really like the control module, but this thing is pretty spendy for that convenience if I am not going to get some amazing sound quality out of it.
>>51236561
I had a Xonar Phoebus with a $1000 speaker set.
It was honestly phenomenal, especially with it's built in filtering on the mic/lines.
But at the end of the day good head phones or speakers mean more than the sound card.
>>51237044
>SP/DIF
limited to stereo (when lossless)
>>51236561
>Get a home-theather amp and some neat shelf speakers
>sound through GPU with HDMI to the set
>nice
honestly, i think this is a great option.
though obviously here is someone who disagrees.
>>51237271
>implying you need more than 2.1
>>51236561
I have that card without the sound control knob. I opted against that because there were reports of it degrading audio quality. The Sound Blaster Z is perfectly fine on its own, anyway.
>>51236992
/mu/ and RIAA is shills.
>>51237341
>he doesn't have 11.1 surround sound
>>51237330
it is superior, but you are pulling hundreds of extra watts of energy so thats the tradeoff
>>51237330
>Get a home-theater receiver and some neat floorstanding tower speakers
>Sound through soundcard with coax to the receiver because not enough HDMI ports on GPU and no coax or HDMI on motherboard
>Run everything else through the receiver to my monitor with HDMI
>Nicer
is there an external audio interface that has an input for mics? I only use my Xonar Essence STX because my recordings in Mumble sound clearer with it than onboard.
>>51238020
yeah okay, there's that
>>51238040
>still stero
>>51237330
>Hundreds of extra watts
A HT receiver will use between 10 and 50 W sitting idle or playing at medium volume.
>>51238312
Yes, and ?
I run 2.0 with my Infinity Reference 61i's, senpai.
>>51238518
Life is nothing without my 5.1 anon.
>>51238630
5.1 is even more unnecessary than 2.1 desu
>>51236737
Are you sure your headphones aren't fucked?
>>51236876
USB supplies the high-quality DAC inside a external with pure PMC or DSD. Its literally the best option for sound with a PC, unless you count optical. You should go hang yourself out of shame.
>>51236876
http://www.marklevinson.com/productdetail/~/product/n585.html
>>51237271
It is still a digital signal, up to 176khz I believe. Nothing wrong with stereo out of a pair of quality speakers. 7ch is kinda memey.
>>51236561
I have that card, OP. It's 100% better than onboard audio.
>>51236561
Don't use Optical.
It's lossy 5.1 codecs are inferior to HDMI.
Just connect your GPU to the receiver and enable a 800*600 resolution fake monitor in NVCP/Catalyst and enjoy Lossless up to 8 channels through PCM and it doesn't require you to have 5.1 or 2.1 or any other locked combo to use the DTS codecs, instead you can get DTS-HD and TrueDolby or what it's called through lossless.
>>51238701
I hope you're not implying 2.1 is unnecessary.
Unessential to some, I guess, but if you're going for any level of audio quality, 2.1 is essential even if only to break up the left/right and bass.
ANYONE going mono HAS to be a complete fucking poorfag with no other option, considering even a set of $1 earphones give 2.0
>>51240983
>mono
Who runs a single speaker?
Would it be a 1.0 systems?
Or did you mean 2.0 as in Stereo?
>>51241007
I meant 1.0 as in mono just for emphasis to my point. I mean, 2 speakers 2.0 is okay when you've gotta run it, but if you're looking to improve your audio quality output, the simplest way is to simply remove the bass from the main speakers so they can focus on the highs, thus anons post confused me because it made it seem like they were saying 2.1 is unnecessary too.
>>51241029
I'm not the one you first replied to, I just wanted to make sure you really meant 1.0.
It's true what you say though.
I know a person that makes music and doesn't have a sub so his music sound WAY too basy when you actually use a sub that is correctly set up.
Not only that but having music done in 2.1, 4.0, 5.1 makes it sound so much better and it pains me that DVD audio didn't become standard now that we have online streaming instead so we could have 24-bit sound with multichannel layouts.
>>51241048
Yeah, I know that pain, so so bad.
Worst bit is I have a friend who likes to think they're a DJ/"party master", he's got a set-up which for the most part is great, but it's literally just two huge speakers connected to his mac laptop. There's no dedicated subwoofer.
So what does he do? Of course, he plays bassy shit like none other and turns it right up, thinking he's so awesome.
I just look at it and think what the fuck is he doing, because ANYONE who wants niggerbass should just go and fucking get a sub.
Most people who want it realise you gotta do that, but he reckons the two speakers are big, powerful and expensive enough that they compensate just fine and he can't afford to add a sub to his system right now.
Lo and behold, I steer clear from his little DJ gigs these days because not only is it cringe to see him fuck up so bad, its just cringe to see people trying to be the next Skrillex or something anyway.
(No, I won't insult proper, decent DJ's by saying he's trying to be the next Daft Punk or something.)
>>51236804
It's just data, you moron, actual D->A conversion happens on the chip. Am I on /g/?
I do live sound and I've always called a system mono if the left and right are linked. Mono doesn't have to mean one speaker, just one sound mix.
>do semi-pro sound
>know nothing about consumer grade stuff
Suffering.
>>51241090
Actually I said to him that he needs to get a dedicated sub and if he can, some monitors that don't really offer any decent base (uncolored sound).
He's aware of the sub problem though after he got to listen to his own music at my place that have both 2.1 and 5.0.
DALI Zensor 1 with the Zensor 12' sub and the rest of the 5,7,center Zensor speakers in the living room.
Even without bass but running full-range without any equalizer to boost trebbs or bass he got to listen and realize it himself which I hoped he managed to do so I was kinda glad I got to give him some advice since he do make very good music, it's just that he totally lacks in the mastering volumes.
>>51241103
He's right though, if you want to use sounds that way, go Firewire.
USB isn't active, it's for data packaging, not for streaming data.
Also, USB static interference is a thing.
>>51241133
>Also, USB static interference is a thing.
No worse than integral.
>not for streaming data
Are we going to pretend like 1ms monitor faggots that it actually matters?
>>51241155
I'm not gonna write a big article to a person that don't know basic facts about the importance of sound.
You know why RS232 still is used today?
When you know that you'll hopefully realize why USB isn't such a good thing when you need to stream information with it.
>>51241133
I'm a fan of QSC's K series stuff for low end live sound.
Even the little K8s have pretty good throw and throw 108°. Get two of those and a sub and a little mixer (don't get the QSC Touchmix or Behringers stage boxes that you mix with an iPad, get something with knobs or faders), and he can DJ all he wants. Self powered is the way to go when you're that small. You could run all three of one 15amp circuit.
>>51241180
I understand why it's important for professional use, i don't see a point to jump through hoops at home unless you can spend thousands and thousands on proper setup. But if you can, why the heck would you use PC for that?
>>51241180
>You know why RS232 still is used today?
because it can be implemented on low cost hardware?
because it works over long distances?
because some things don't/won't ever need more speed than is offered by it?
the fact that usb is packetized is not a reason against using it for audio in general, you use a buffer, take the small latency hit and you're good to go. if a bit of latency isn't a problem, then neither is usb
if you need more distance/less latency and a digital format, you'd use something like s/pdif
>>51241233
>unless you can spend thousands and thousands on proper setup
Because a Firewire DACs doesn't need to cost thousands of thousands?
Or simply use HDMI to receiver and trick it to send HDCP so you can get lossless.
>>51241247
>because it can be implemented on low cost hardware?
Because it's an active port (same way PS/2 ports support NKRO keyboards)
>because it works over long distances?
You'll need a repeater just like any other cable if you have a long enough cable.
>because some things don't/won't ever need more speed than is offered by it?
True in some way, but the point is that it's not the bandwidth speed, it's the latency that matters.
just get usb dac
there is no sound diference between $5 and $350 dacs
>>51241293
oh i see, your argument against usb is packet jitter
that is also not an issue given a suitable memory buffer
of course more buffer = more latency, but for most uses usb is still well fast enough for audio
>>51236612
Sound cards are about 20x cheaper than a comparable standalone DAC
>>51241342
note that packet jitter doesn't affect the audio itself whatsoever, only the potential latency from the buffer used to reassemble the stream
i've actually seen an audiophile site argue that packet jitter affects sound *quality*, i hope you don't believe that
>>51241247
USB has far too much complexity. I've worked on embedded systems that heavily relied on USB and it sucks. I'll take RS232 over USB whenever I can. RS232 usually works, and when it doesn't the failure modes are easily understandable.
>Play games with build in audio from mobo
Audio sounds weak and bland and offer no dynamic equalizer that is good
only 32 channels
>Buy old ass X-Fi Platinum PCI
Audio feels so much more vibrant and stronger
have 128 channels.
Your pick.
You could even find a X-Fi Platinum PCI-E for cheap nowadays.
sound cards are for inputs
you already have optical out and usb out, get an external dac
>>51241375
yea, simplicity of implementation and debugging is also a factor
>>51241361
>packet jitter
Is it still a thing? I thought 2.0 can now buffer whole track, of pretty much any reasonable size, and just smoothly push it through already prepared.
>>51241420
>I thought 2.0 can now buffer whole track, of pretty much any reasonable size, and just smoothly push it through already prepared.
i'm not sure you're following
>>51241440
What i'm trying to ask is pause between packets this big to notice by ear?
>>51241514
packet jitter is smoothed out with the use of memory buffers
>>51241546
But adds delays which ends up with stuttering.
>>51241568
the idea is to use a buffer large enough to cover any potential jitter
lets say you have +/- 5ms jitter, and a 20ms buffer, you'll never have stuttering because the worst case can be handled by the buffer
>>51241591
Exactly my point.
I run ASIO at 5ms, having to run it at 20ms kinda ruins the reason for the lack of delay.
>>51236612
this, why are internal soundcards even sold any more? what the fuck is the point? why are integrated graphic pushed in our faces and yet its 2015 and sound cards still exist? these questions keep me up at night.
>>51241602
and my point is that in most cases no one gives a shit if their audio is 20ms behind
my desktop JACK setup is setup for 10.7ms latency, on my trusty old 2003 soundcard, and it's completely unnoticable for any kind of playback, certainly worth it to be able to use some fancy JACK filters
>>51241631
obviously a niche case, but 20ms is basically the limit for writing music into a daw fyi
>>51241654
yea, not many people are actually making music
also "20ms" was just an example, i don't know what is needed for usb, i'd be surprised if it was even that high
>>51241654
And 18ms is basically a limit for monitor input lag in 90% of cases, nobody seems to notice.
>>51236612
My awe 32 was the shizzle
what about something like this?
http://amazon.com/Lepy-LP-2020A-Hi-Fi-Stereo-Amplifier/dp/B00C2P61FO/
>>51241747
Nope.
It's still running from your build-in soundcards analog port.
Go optical for lossy or HDMI from your GPU for lossless.
>>51241783
You're in the wrong thread.
This is where we talk about minor differences but we all have a firm opinion on what we use.
http://www.amazon.com/ASUS-Xonar-U7-Sound-Card/dp/B00E7QA9E0
Anyone have this? Is it good?
nigga its sound
>>51241932
>>51241882
I do, it's somewhat better than MB, amp is weak though, do not connect anything beyond 60 Ohm.
ITT: Placebo
>>51242047
>tone deaf
>>51242065
>he fell the meme
Buyer's remorse.
>>51242091
>he fell down the stairs.
Your moms remorse.
>>51242099
>You will immediately cease and not continue to access the site if you are under the age of 18.
>>51242117
That's not true because you're still posting.
>>51242126
sick burn bro :^)
enjoy your 4chan gold
>>51242142
Enjoy your Reddit gold.
>>51236708
Those are both mainly for recording.
Just get a usb dac.
Then connect that to the amp.
Since these are powered speakers, just plug the speakers into it.
To answer your question OP, the quality is awful.
Even if the DAC and AMP on it were excellent, a computer case is very noisy, awful place for those components.
>>51236612
>internal soundcards are shithouse and a meme.
People were using soundcards before the web even existed.
>>51241090
I've always found it sorta strange with a sub.
With the sub in my system, I don't feel it adds nigrabass at all.
It adds depth to the bass, and I can tell the difference in an A/B test, but the it's a very subtle difference, it's not more bass, just more extension sorta.
In games/video it's a lot more noticeable, just by the very nature of that stuff of course.
Of course, I could turn it up a good 5-10 decibels, and then yeah, still not nigrabass (I could push it further to there if I wanted), but now there's you can tell the sub is dominating the bass, it's adding volume too, rather than just extension.
Problem is, when you turn it up loud during that, if you're audio is already at something like 75-80 db, then you're sub is gonna be running at some 85-90 db, which will cause hearing damage over time.
Especially since you don't feel bass hearing damage, so even if your speakers are at a safe level, the sub could be doing damage, and you wouldn't know.
So I run my sub at the same level of my speakers, since even if I normally listen at more 65-70 levels, I don't want to risk hearing damage when I turn it up and forget about the sub.
Audiophiles will complain about internal interference but DACs are shielded pretty well.
I have an X-Fi xtrememusic and I get very clean recordings with it.
Creative used to own E-Mu systems and Ensoniq (before they were disbanded), both of whom made professional audio gear. The old Soundblaster cards were basically E-Mu samplers inside your PC.
To all the retards in this thread please kill yourself you are fucking idiots you know nothing.
>>51242357
1/45 people killed themselves.
List of people that died:
>>51242357
/45
SPDIF --> mobo --> decent receiver --> headphones, and I'm good?
>>51236561
>Are they worth it for the average user?
>Is the sound quality a big difference over the one on motherboards?
No and no. On most newish motherboards, the onboard is pretty damn good.
Unless you have noise just don't bother.
>>51236612
>>51236708
>>51236940
Wrong. Cheap USB soundcards like that Focusrite shit are the real meme.
Almost none of the actual high quality pro soundcards are USB, because USB is just not that great for pro audio. (Although with a good implementation it's fine, assuming you don't need very low latency.)
>>51242685
Change SPDIF to HDMI instead.
>>51242799
I can still use DVI for display and HDMI for sound, right?
>>51242685
most receivers have shitty headphone amps, so no.
mobo --> line out (--> headphone amp) --> headphones
headphone amp is optional, because mobo headphone out might be good enough
>>51242812
Yes.
Just make it so the PC thinks there's a second monitor and place it like this so you don't end up on the fake monitor by mistake.
>>51236902
http://densen.dk/index.php?page=densen-dendac50
>>51243211
>USB
Dropped harder than niggabass
>>51236666
>I really like the Surround and Crystallizer on it.
Those are DSP effects that you can do on Foobar2k. Heck, there are some drivers that can do the same on all soundcards (Creative cards do it on a driver level too).
>>51243434
Crystallizer is done directly on the hardware.
>>51243434
Didn't know Foobar could alternate game sounds and use ASM to make silent sounds like footstep have a higher volume so you can hear people easier.
I have an Asus Xonar DG which has a much better DAC than my motherboard does and the sound that comes out of it is very good.
I use an old receiver which has no digital inputs.
>>51241353
And that's why they suck
>>51242324
>>51236612
I need some help on this. For as long as I've been building my own computers, I've felt it necessary to have a dedicated sound card to take the load off the motherboard.
Explain DAC and how I should be building a computer with good sound.
>>51244710
>to take the load off the motherboard.
Now that's a meme if I ever saw one.
Also, USB soundcards (aka "DACs" as retards call them) use more CPU than PCI soundcards. That's just how USB works.
>>51242686
You're a great exemple of not knowing what you're talking about but still openly giving bad advices.
As a sound and electronics engineer I've seen and experimented that nowadays almost every sub 1000 "IC preamp only" audio interface (like cheap 1in/2out up to expensive 8in/out) have the same preamp topology, like with the same components. So, very low THD, very flat frequency response, and fairly good converters, IMO the best if you want to be flexible in post. People tend to pay more to get tubes, transformers and old transistor topologies, that actually fuck the sound up.
I've been using firewire audio for a while now, and it's very good for big interface. But USB? usb is really good, hell even some crappy USB 2 would handle 24 x 24bit 192KhZ signals (it's about 14MB/s, USB2 is 60MB/S theoretical), and I actually tested 10x24x192 and it worked like a charm.
About latency, no problems at all, could go down to 256@192k samples without a problem (this is 64@44k1 which greatly overcomes any USB controller lag).
I'd be more concern with your computer's usb/firewire controller for reliability, i've experienced shitty behaviours just because I didn't have a Texas Instrument chipset on board
>>51244623
We knew that the earth was round at least since the ancient Greek
It was some dumbass during the 19th century that made up the fact that we thought that the earth was flat
>>51236561
I just want a sound card so that i can use digital audio for 5.1
whats a good card for this?
>>51244853
>usb is really good
It's good enough to get the job done in most cases.
But objectively speaking it's still worse than any other interface for audio. Besides the "comfort" factor because USB is ubiquitous.
Also
>thinking buffer sizes are all when it comes to latency
You have some things to learn, anon.
Go read this for starters:
http://www.michalkaszczyszyn.com/en/tutorials/latency.html
>>51244949
Thanks for the link but i didn't find anything new on here, I clearly stated that being able to go really far down with the buffer size could overcome any fixed lag introduced by the controller.
For the added drivers latency,
>I'd be more concern with your computer's usb/firewire controller for reliability, i've experienced shitty behaviours just because I didn't have a Texas Instrument chipset on board"
and even more simply with your CPU performances so it doesn't drop audio at low buffer sizes.
USB is good enough in most cases and often cheaper so for OP who was thinking into buying a shitty meme internal soundcard, it's almost overkill.
From my experiences, firewire isn't greatly (if not at all) better than USB. If you want to go pro and really kill the latency, then go for pcie/dsp based interfaces like Avid's HDX system or MOTU Pcie, but you'll eat water for the next 2 years.
Also for latency this link is cool: https://www.presonus.com/community/Learn/The-Truth-About-Digital-Audio-Latency
>>51241616
because people buy it..
>don't buy sound card anon it is memecard
>DACs are cheaper
>"buy sound card bro you want that better sound quality and extra fps don't you?"
>>51244710
Sound cards taking a load off the rest of your system for gaming and such hasn't been a thing since Vista thanks to how audio works now. They can still use the hardware for some effects like virtual surround, equalizers and a few other things but EAX and the like are dead and gone. The benefit was pretty damn minimal anyways.
Their biggest benefit now is being better than onboard sound, especially if like me you get a shitty buzz from onboard. Newer cards now are also coming with so-so headphone amps now too and along with their normal 5.1 or 7.1 output.
If you just use headphones or stereo speakers then I would give a sound card a pass and get a good external DAC and amp instead but if you also use a surround sound speaker system they they are pretty handy. It's also less stuff to clutter your desk.
>>51244599
You're actually retarded
>>51237271
We have 2 ears, let's do this shit properly and use 2 channel audio.
>>51245097
Internal soundcards are usually cheaper than USB for the same DAC line out performance, if that's what you're after.
Especially when you consider second hand stuff.
>>51245198
getting a soundcard really used to be an argument for "moar fps", back when sound processing/mixing in software was a notable strain on the cpu
nowadays we have cpus fast enough that sound processing for gaming purposes is a rather insignificant load, not to mention games are much more gpu-bound than they used to be
>>51236561
my issue with that one pictured is the absence of a linux driver that will allow usage of anything other than the front of case mic and headphone jack through the internal header...
>>51246066
We also have MOAR CORES now, sound cards made a big difference and allowed for a lot more effects in games back in the single and maybe early dual core days.
>>51245499
>no evidence to prove the contrary
>ad hominem to prove my dominance on this conversation's maturity level
So how do you set up a computer with good sound? I always believed in a nice sound card which had all the audio ports to plug in a stereo system and that was that.
How do I set up a DAC? What is a good brand? For /g/ approved standards, not what some random site tells me is good.
>>51236561
new integrated cards are better than soundblaster z or the other model with the dongle and only way to disable the red leds is to remove them from the card
>>51247088
>So how do you set up a computer with good sound?
With modern computers there's nothing to set up. You just plug the speakers/headphones in.
The sound is good out of the box.
>>51238020
No you're not, not unless you're playing at extremely loud volume, then it's to be expected.
My stereo amp pulls <30W at comfortable listening volume.
Why can't they put an amp on these things and make them actually useful?
>>51247779
Which things, soundcards?
They do have a headphone amp, usually.
The problem is that they're usually high impedance outputs, but that's a problem with most headphone outputs in the world.
>>51247853
headphone amps in sound card are usually pretty shit
A modded $50 amp is significantly better
>>51247853
just like a little 20-30w amp with speaker cables out would make them a lot more appealing
Seriously, how hard can it be? Just use the spdif coax output on your mobo and a good dac
>>51248983
>dac meme
Or he could, you know, use the analog outputs which are probably just fine.
>>51249041
The HDMI/SPDIF/COAXIAL don't have noise
>>51249820
Neither do the analog outs on new motherboards.
>>51249984
and? I should I take the analog output?
>>51250081
>I
*why
>>51250081
>>51250097
Why did you reply to >>51249041
if it's not related?
>>51250138
You don't answer. Why you think I should use the analog output if I have the S/PDIF one?
>>51240983
>Unessential to some, I guess, but if you're going for any level of audio quality, 2.1 is essential even if only to break up the left/right and bass.
Essential if you're using shitty speakers that just push everything through a shitty midrange unit.
>tfw speakers each have 2 woofers, 1 mid, and 1 tweeter
There is literally no point to having a sub in this setup. I've tried, I own both an active and a passive sub, and they add roughly nothing to the audio.
>>51236561
>Snake oil
>>51245401
Also it's likely that some component of your onboard audio can fail.
I have to use my front jack because the left channel is gone on the rear one. It left the factory that way and there isn't enough space for a GPU, a wifi card, and a sound card.
>>51245198
The only memecards are the OEM Creative ones you can get for $2 from secondhand shops that don't have drivers beyond Windows XP.
Great hardware and sound, but making them work with 7 is pain in the dick. The difference in sound quality between the onboard audio and the card is really noticeable, even on these old cards, and I'm not an audiophile by any means.
Still got an SB LIVE kicking in my Slot A Win98 rig.
>>51239020
>usb post processing is da best man
you're the one who should be dying out of shame bruh
>>51241103
no usb sound is generally virtualized by software
>>51241233
because the pc is where all my media is stored and optical storage is obsolete
>>51250527
learn to use KX drivers, it's not that hard
>>51250527
So sound quality didn't get better than 10-14 years ago?
Why would I buy something for 100$ that I can get for 2$? Why wouldn't I just cut and solder in a diy metal box to shield from EM-noise?
>>51250752
>So sound quality didn't get better than 10-14 years ago?
It did. Modern onboards are better than old SBlive (except for features, if you use KX drivers you can do a lot of crazy stuff).
>Why wouldn't I just cut and solder in a diy metal box to shield from EM-noise?
Because that would be stupid since EM noise is not a real issue.
>>51244710
>take the load off the motherboard
This tb.h, I put my computer in a vacuum chamber so it doesn't have to hold up to the pressure of the air around it.
>>51236561
Anyone help with this?
>>>51250763
>>51250820
>Because that would be stupid since EM noise is not a real issue.
People say that is also why DACs work better
