Player0
07-10-2002, 12:11 AM
Well, I received the following e-mail from someone who read my $2000 workstation article. I thought I would respond to it here, where everyone can benefit.
From Kiwi128
hi!
just read your "2000$ workstation" article.
if the audigy sounds so perfect to you it
must be for one of the following reasons:
*) you have an extremly good amp/speakers connected to it
*) your old soundcard was even crappier
*) you're hearing things because the marekting works on you ;)
> I never said the sound was perfect. I said it was the best sounding sound card I've used. I've used a bunch of them, from Live! to Yamaha, Guillemot, Phillips, etc. For a non-professional audio card, yes, the SB Audigy sounds the best to me. I use a decent JBL 2.1 speaker kit, and also a pair of HQ Koss headphones. I am not some mindless drone who responds to marketing. I find that rather insulting, and I base my opinions on what sounds good to me.
no offense, but the frequency linearity (don't knoe the
english term) is real crap. now, i'm not a thg fan, but just look
at the graphs (if you don't even know what they mean, nevermind
the whole mail and love your audigy, hehe)
> I used to design speaker enclosurers in college. I've done a lot of reading of books on the subject of sound, and even wrote a Windows application which emulates certain parameters. So yes, I do understand. THG is an iffy source at best, and I dont know whether or not to put stock in that graph. It certainly doesn't match what SB sais about the card. In all honesty, its not graphs that are important. Its how the card sounds. And yes, I've read this article long before I owned an Audigy.
i've used creative cards for the longest time, but i don't plan
to ever buy it again, because besides the crappy quality (i have
a denon avr3802 connected digitally to my pc (coaxial, because
it's better than optical) so it's rather high end), the drivers
are bloated ans not stable too....anyways, it doesn't even output
24bits although it says so on the box in big fat letters, because
it works with 16bits internally
> Parts are 24bit, parts are 16bit. Everyone knows that these days. This is because it is more of a general solution for most people. Jack of all trades, master of none. Obviously, if you are going to do any sort of serious music mixing, then get a professional class audio card. The Audigy is NOT a professional class audio card. I use the one at work to play MP3s, and at home for playing video games. As for the software being bloated, and Creative themselves...I never said I was pleased with either. I've had some real doosies of sound card drivers in the past (Turtle Beach and Guillemot), and the support was terrible. Creative is midrange.
Im certainly not going to defend the Audigy or Creative. I think the card sounds better than other solutions I've used. THG compared this card to a professional solution, and it didn't do as well. Go figgure. The terratec sucks in games, so they both have strong points and weak points. If you don't like the Audigy, don't use it. But don't say that I've been influenced by marketing because I like mine. That is unfair and untrue.
I didnt actually purchase my first audigy, but made a trade for one of my old Live! cards. I didn't get the Audigy until much later after the release, mostly because I didn't trust the 686B bugs the old SB cards used to raise. The Audigy doesn't suffer from those problems, and really performs well in the two systems I use them in (work and home now).
p.s.: i'm intending to buy a swiftech mc462w-u, did you test the
u-version?
i'm wondering because acording to your tests (ok, dT figures), the maze3
would be cooling double as well (don't know how to say that in english)
can you tell me anything? thanks
I didn't test the MCW462-U, no. My system uses 1/2" ID tubing, so I'd have to use the MCW462-UH model anyway. I tested the original MCW462 and a special MCW462 which I modified slightly (similar to the U model now in some ways). Without testing I can't say for sure, but I beleive that the Maze3 would out perform the new MCW's as well. I hope to test this someday.
The Maze3 doesn't cool twice as well as anything. Because of my unique cooling system, it is hard to say just to what amount the Maze3 outperforms other waterblocks. It DOES out perform. But what makes 10c degrees difference on my system may only mean 5c difference on your system.
What I can tell you is that both the MCW462-U and the Maze3 are top notch waterblocks, and you'd probably be happy with either one.
From Kiwi128
hi!
just read your "2000$ workstation" article.
if the audigy sounds so perfect to you it
must be for one of the following reasons:
*) you have an extremly good amp/speakers connected to it
*) your old soundcard was even crappier
*) you're hearing things because the marekting works on you ;)
> I never said the sound was perfect. I said it was the best sounding sound card I've used. I've used a bunch of them, from Live! to Yamaha, Guillemot, Phillips, etc. For a non-professional audio card, yes, the SB Audigy sounds the best to me. I use a decent JBL 2.1 speaker kit, and also a pair of HQ Koss headphones. I am not some mindless drone who responds to marketing. I find that rather insulting, and I base my opinions on what sounds good to me.
no offense, but the frequency linearity (don't knoe the
english term) is real crap. now, i'm not a thg fan, but just look
at the graphs (if you don't even know what they mean, nevermind
the whole mail and love your audigy, hehe)
> I used to design speaker enclosurers in college. I've done a lot of reading of books on the subject of sound, and even wrote a Windows application which emulates certain parameters. So yes, I do understand. THG is an iffy source at best, and I dont know whether or not to put stock in that graph. It certainly doesn't match what SB sais about the card. In all honesty, its not graphs that are important. Its how the card sounds. And yes, I've read this article long before I owned an Audigy.
i've used creative cards for the longest time, but i don't plan
to ever buy it again, because besides the crappy quality (i have
a denon avr3802 connected digitally to my pc (coaxial, because
it's better than optical) so it's rather high end), the drivers
are bloated ans not stable too....anyways, it doesn't even output
24bits although it says so on the box in big fat letters, because
it works with 16bits internally
> Parts are 24bit, parts are 16bit. Everyone knows that these days. This is because it is more of a general solution for most people. Jack of all trades, master of none. Obviously, if you are going to do any sort of serious music mixing, then get a professional class audio card. The Audigy is NOT a professional class audio card. I use the one at work to play MP3s, and at home for playing video games. As for the software being bloated, and Creative themselves...I never said I was pleased with either. I've had some real doosies of sound card drivers in the past (Turtle Beach and Guillemot), and the support was terrible. Creative is midrange.
Im certainly not going to defend the Audigy or Creative. I think the card sounds better than other solutions I've used. THG compared this card to a professional solution, and it didn't do as well. Go figgure. The terratec sucks in games, so they both have strong points and weak points. If you don't like the Audigy, don't use it. But don't say that I've been influenced by marketing because I like mine. That is unfair and untrue.
I didnt actually purchase my first audigy, but made a trade for one of my old Live! cards. I didn't get the Audigy until much later after the release, mostly because I didn't trust the 686B bugs the old SB cards used to raise. The Audigy doesn't suffer from those problems, and really performs well in the two systems I use them in (work and home now).
p.s.: i'm intending to buy a swiftech mc462w-u, did you test the
u-version?
i'm wondering because acording to your tests (ok, dT figures), the maze3
would be cooling double as well (don't know how to say that in english)
can you tell me anything? thanks
I didn't test the MCW462-U, no. My system uses 1/2" ID tubing, so I'd have to use the MCW462-UH model anyway. I tested the original MCW462 and a special MCW462 which I modified slightly (similar to the U model now in some ways). Without testing I can't say for sure, but I beleive that the Maze3 would out perform the new MCW's as well. I hope to test this someday.
The Maze3 doesn't cool twice as well as anything. Because of my unique cooling system, it is hard to say just to what amount the Maze3 outperforms other waterblocks. It DOES out perform. But what makes 10c degrees difference on my system may only mean 5c difference on your system.
What I can tell you is that both the MCW462-U and the Maze3 are top notch waterblocks, and you'd probably be happy with either one.