View Full Version : The mobo HD audio stuff
So, is anyone else a little irked by the audio on mobos being advertised as high definition? :D
I haven't heard a mobo yet that I'd use headphones with. They almost without exception have extremely noisy analog output. I have a SBLive from 10 years ago in my work system running the kx drivers that has no discernible noise and sounds wonderful (that rear out jack is fairly amazing). At home I have a 7 year old Audigy 2 ZS in one system and an X-Fi in my TV gaming computer. I don't particularly care about the "gaming features" anymore, the quality output is why they are still in use.
The only time I use the mobo audio is if it's running some speakers and the noise is inaudible. Then it's fine and gets the job done. Or if digital output is going to be the chosen setup, in which case the problem is solved.
It's a shame that these mobo companies can't just build a riser card that isolates the DAC from the incredibly noisy mobo and run some semi-decent analog circuitry. Skip the occasional fancy & useless Creative DSP that they sometimes go with and build that HQ riser card.
I remember some company built a mb with a vacuum tube on it ;)
I think the hi-def concerns bit depth eg: 24bit audio
Davros is still waiting for holophonic encoding
I think the hi-def concerns bit depth eg: 24bit audio
Yeah it's probably like DX11 on a Radeon 5450. Although in that case the quality is still there, it's just not delivered to your eyeballs at a rate that is within the human happiness threshold. ;)
I'm satisfied with the on-board audio of my mobo. It's probably just as noisy as you say, but there's so many fans in my PCs, along with forced ventilation in the room I sit in, and a from a quality standpoint undoubtedly low-end Logitech surround speaker system (the one with the wireless rear speakers, whatsitscalled). So it just doesn't matter.
What I like is, it simply works straight out of the box. No need to install or update any drivers or sht like that. :razz: Convenience in my case outweighs quality...
One aspect of HD audio you might complain about is the dubious value in jack plug-in detection, as window apps often get confuzzled if you plug something in while the app is already running (or worse, unplug something...)
Basically, windows isn't just detecting wether the jack is plugged in or not. As far as it is concerned, the jack doesn't exist AT ALL if something isn't plugged into it, and that's the source of the problems.
Colourless
15-May-2010, 14:56
My onboard sound has an 'issue' with the front headphone jack. If I plug a USB device into the front USB ports that are next to the headphone jack, then the audio quality goes to hell and there are lots of audiable clicks. Yay for shielding, or lack there of. Other than that, the quality is pretty good. My ears can't tell the difference between it and my Audigy 2 ZS (which has been retired cause they don't work in systems addresses larger than 32 bit)
NO! Does that mean when I eventually install Windows 7 64-bit, my trusty SB Live! Value will have to be retired.
NO!!!!!!!!!
:cry:
Audigy 2 ZS (which has been retired cause they don't work in systems addresses larger than 32 bit)
You can run http://nomoregoatsoup.wordpress.com/2010/04/21/daniel_k-audigy-series-support-pack-3-8/ . I've been using his driver packs for months. He has the entire Audigy line working pretty well in 7 x64. You can find these packs on Creative's official forums too. You get the EQ, Alchemy, Audio Control Panel, Speaker Setup, Soundfont control, DD Live and DTS Live (if you pay for the license).
They originally wanted to shut him down because he is modifying their software, but customer backlash over Creative's relative lack of software for Vista/7 and it being an attack on 'the little guy' ended that. Creative is updating their driver binaries though and you can go get just the official driver release instead.
XP x64 support is still broken however.
NO! Does that mean when I eventually install Windows 7 64-bit, my trusty SB Live! Value will have to be retired.
NO!!!!!!!!!
:cry:
You can run the kx drivers. They are working in Vista and 7 now, even x64. A little buggy but they do work. Strangely you have to use the SPDIF output even for analog because the regular wave outputs are very static ridden. Creative's drivers here are still a mess so you have to go with those. The Creative drivers have a 2GB limit apparently.
A bit pathetic but better off than the other sound cards I have around from 10 years ago.
There is a "Live Support Pack" but it has that 2GB caveat.
http://forums.creative.com/t5/Sound-Blaster/SB-Live-series-Support-Pack-2-0-04-30-2010/m-p/556016
It's a lot easier to have your gaming system hooked up to a receiver using the HDMI output from an AMD graphics card than it is to get anything Creative working without issues under Windows 7 or Vista.
and say goodbye to any audio processing
Not true Davros. The audio stack in Vista / Windows 7 is done in software anyways, except for where Creative managed to patch in hardware acceleration. Do games still utilize OpenAL for audio or do they use Direct Audio?
well you certainly wont get any eax version over 2.0
plus I know openal can do eax 5 but only if theres an eax 5 supporting dsp
I dont think all the effects ae coded to run on a cpu
Quite a few games use OpenAL. I think everything on Unreal Engine 2 and 3 use it, for example. But yeah there isn't a whole lot of reason to go through the effort of using a Creative card most of the time. A lot of games do fancy software audio processing now anyway.
It's just that I don't like using onboard audio for headphone output due to the extreme noise that every frequently have. Reminds me of Sound Blaster 16. ;)
Richard
16-May-2010, 15:12
It's a lot easier to have your gaming system hooked up to a receiver using the HDMI output from an AMD graphics card than it is to get anything Creative working without issues under Windows 7 or Vista.
Hey, can you (or anyone else) go into more detail? I want to go this route in the system I'm building, mostly for simplifying the amount of cables, etc. etc. but not having tried it myself, what's the quality like?
Quite a few games use OpenAL. I think everything on Unreal Engine 2 and 3 use it, for example. But yeah there isn't a whole lot of reason to go through the effort of using a Creative card most of the time. A lot of games do fancy software audio processing now anyway.
It's just that I don't like using onboard audio for headphone output due to the extreme noise that every frequently have. Reminds me of Sound Blaster 16. ;)You could go with USB audio and be fully independent of mobo manufacturing shenanigans, present and future. I have an Edirol UA-1EX, and it's served me well, both as a dumb headphone amp and as a proper sound solution. I don't think it's on the market anymore though. Maybe take a look at the M-Audio Transit.
That said, the analog stereo out of my ASUS M4N78Pro sounds just fine to me.
willardjuice
16-May-2010, 22:00
r7xx/r8xx/gt300 -> receiver (through HDMI) -> real speakers
You'll never have to worry about audio quality again.
Silent_Buddha
16-May-2010, 23:16
So, is anyone else a little irked by the audio on mobos being advertised as high definition? :D
Have been overall satisfied with onboard HD audio by Realtek for quite a few years now. Moved from a X-Fi to onboard when I went dedicated Shuttle SFF's for a few years (nice being able to take your desktop with you when you travel).
The only issues I've run into in the MB's I've used is that the front audio jack is usually absolute crap in quality with line noise, and other undesirable noises. Rear audio jacks have almost univerally been great even with headphones compared to the X-Fi.
New MB's are even better, and the chipsets with Dolby Digital Live (real time Dolby encoding for multichannel through digital out) has worked flawlessly.
As well, the Realtek driven audio in the ATI series of video cards have been exceptional. Audio quality of the latest 5xxx cards is phenomenal. It was a very noticeable step up from the 3xxx cards and the audio is crystal clear over HDMI. Absolutely love the audio from my 5450, the best part of the whole thing.
Regards,
SB
Albuquerque
17-May-2010, 00:15
I've been similarly happy to SB in the RealTek solution on my Dell Inspiron E1505. Even with a good set of Denon over-ear cans, I don't get noise even at ridiculous volume. This was far better in Win7 and Vista than it was on the original XP Media Center OS though -- anything other than max-volume under XP results in "dithering" the audio output, which is complete shit.
Lonbjerg
17-May-2010, 12:07
On my motherboard I have the "ADI® AD2000B 8 -Channel High Definition Audio CODEC".
I have listen to it for about 15 minuttes, then I plugged in my X-Fi again...my ears were hurting and I couldn't take the lack of clarity any more.
People how say they can't tell a difference between onboard sound and a add-in board, theymust either be runing very,very bad cans...or need to see a eardoctor.
On my motherboard I have the "ADI® AD2000B 8 -Channel High Definition Audio CODEC".
I have listen to it for about 15 minuttes, then I plugged in my X-Fi again...my ears were hurting and I couldn't take the lack of clarity any more.
People how say they can't tell a difference between onboard sound and a add-in board, theymust either be runing very,very bad cans...or need to see a eardoctor.Or, and this is a remote possibility, they may not have exactly the same motherboard as you. Crazy, I know.
Lonbjerg
17-May-2010, 14:35
Or, and this is a remote possibility, they may not have exactly the same motherboard as you. Crazy, I know.
Onboard sound is like onboard LAN, onboard RAID, onboord graphics ect.
It's cheap, crappy and just...just useable.
Hell I can't even stand to listen to a 196Kbps MP3...I think people have never heard good sound.
I am serious here..."loudness wars" and lossy MP3's have gotten people used to subpar quality.
Any consumer audio stuff costing a couple hundred bucks tops isn't going to meet your expectations, Lon... Onboard stuff has become dominant because people simply aren't willing to pay for anything better.
Sure, it's crappier than the best that's out there, but if it fulfils peoples' needs then why would you pay more for something that isn't neccessary?
Btw, not sure what exactly you have against onboard LAN stuff. There's nothing really particulary wrong with the stuff we have today...
Onboard does vary widely. Some implementations are quite acceptable but some are really bad. My Gigabyte P35-DS3R mobo's Realtek warbles with CPU load. It's freaking terrible. I'd like to see it hit the ridiculous SNR ratings the board makers usually claim. There's equal noise to signal with that board.
Like has been said though if you run HDMI/optical/coaxial digital audio it gets you past the shitty board design. That doesn't help much if you just want headphones or computer speakers. That's when I get out the big guns and drop in the SBLive! Value and install kx drivers lol. Free, effective.
nutball
17-May-2010, 19:49
Onboard sound is like onboard LAN, onboard RAID, onboord graphics ect.
It's cheap, crappy and just...just useable.
Christ, you live in a black-and-white world. Maybe if you pulled your head our of your arse you'd realise that actually there are on-board sound, LAN and graphics solutions that are perfectly adequate for what they're intended to do. And that what they're intended to do a is hell of a lot further up the food-chain than you may expect.
It's quite possible to build an extremely competent HTPC using only on-board sound and graphics. With digital-everything-out it doesn't matter how crappy the DACs and stuff are on the board, because they're out of the loop.
As for loudness wars and compression, compression and compression, some folks have been crucified here before for going off on one about that whilst not really understanding what they're talking about. So, you know, turn it down from 11 yeah?
Albuquerque
17-May-2010, 22:12
Hell I can't even stand to listen to a 196Kbps MP3...I think people have never heard good sound.
Don't go down this road, because I'd wager you can't tell the difference.
Some dork named "2008 IQ is Unacceptable" started a similar line of nonsense a year or two ago, and I sacked up a challenge: five sound bytes, all the same section of music, one of them was lossless, the others were all varying degrees of compression, and then all of them reverted BACK to raw WAV files.
I posted all five samples as randomly named letter sequences, and linked them.
There wasn't a single person on this forum who picked the 'pure' sample as the best sounding one. Nobody. You can't tell the difference either outside of an oscilliscope paired with the original media, I'm 100% certain. In fact, if I recall correctly, he chose the 192kbps VBR MP3 file over the rest.
willardjuice
17-May-2010, 23:24
One sample is hardly scientific. Perhaps you just happened to a pick a sample that doesn't exhibit compression artifacts from the given codec.
Having said that, iirc a mp3 file properly encoded at 192kbps VBR is essentially transparent (only in the most rarest occasions is it noticeable to a few people).
MP3 encoding has improved amazingly since the beginning too. There have been some really poor encoders.
Albuquerque
18-May-2010, 01:16
There's a pretty old C'T article somewhere out there that did a big double-blind test with MP3's versus raw audio and found pretty much the same exact thing that my little impromptu forum test did. Even with trained and tenured audio experts, the 'pure' audio sample was not chosen as the favorite in the majority of tests. And this spanned multiple types of music, dozens of both trained and untrained testers, and using very high end audio equipment for playback.
Every time someone tells me that they can unequivocally tell if it's an MP3 gets automatically distrusted by me.
Onboard audio chips can be quite good these days, certainly beating my old SBLive Card. Course not all are equal, but get a brand-name board with an ALC 889 and you should have fine quality (http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-373-2.htm). Just dont expect to get no noise from the front-audio connectors, the wires typically arent shielded.
If thats not good enough you will likely need to use the digital output for further improvement, in which case you wont need a soundcard either.
There's a pretty old C'T article somewhere out there that did a big double-blind test with MP3's versus raw audio and found pretty much the same exact thing that my little impromptu forum test did. Even with trained and tenured audio experts, the 'pure' audio sample was not chosen as the favorite in the majority of tests. And this spanned multiple types of music, dozens of both trained and untrained testers, and using very high end audio equipment for playback.
Every time someone tells me that they can unequivocally tell if it's an MP3 gets automatically distrusted by me.
What if it's a 32 kbit MP3? :razz: </smartass>
Lonbjerg
18-May-2010, 09:00
Don't go down this road, because I'd wager you can't tell the difference.
Some dork named "2008 IQ is Unacceptable" started a similar line of nonsense a year or two ago, and I sacked up a challenge: five sound bytes, all the same section of music, one of them was lossless, the others were all varying degrees of compression, and then all of them reverted BACK to raw WAV files.
I posted all five samples as randomly named letter sequences, and linked them.
There wasn't a single person on this forum who picked the 'pure' sample as the best sounding one. Nobody. You can't tell the difference either outside of an oscilliscope paired with the original media, I'm 100% certain. In fact, if I recall correctly, he chose the 192kbps VBR MP3 file over the rest.
I'd like to hear those files? :)
Blazkowicz
18-May-2010, 09:10
Onboard audio chips can be quite good these days, certainly beating my old SBLive Card. Course not all are equal, but get a brand-name board with an ALC 889 and you should have fine quality (http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-373-2.htm). Just dont expect to get no noise from the front-audio connectors, the wires typically arent shielded.
If thats not good enough you will likely need to use the digital output for further improvement, in which case you wont need a soundcard either.
I had trouble understanding your post, it seemed contradictory (is it noisy or not noisy? :razz: ).
until I understood that front-audio meant connectors on front of the PC case. (maybe you can wire them up yourself). front audio also means to me front channel, i.e. green mini-jack hole, i.e. what you use for analog stereo.
I still use the SB live in analog stereo with swapped front/rear outputs (gives the better signal/noise ratio).
entity279
18-May-2010, 09:19
I'd like to hear those files? :)
Me too.
I've been using onboard audio since Nforce 2.
My Nforces were fairly inclined to crackle but later mobos I've had have been perfectly adequate for my needs.
I think the audio on my new mobo is a bit better than my old one but marginal if at all.
I'm no audiophile though <shrug>
PS: I use the headphone jack on the centre unit of my Logitec 5.1 speakers, mainly simply because its closer than the case.
Eww, just actually tried plugging headphones into my front jack, squeal & wail yuck (though I may have put the wrong header on, the case header has two options, mobo manual not clear, I'll try swapping them later).
I had trouble understanding your post, it seemed contradictory (is it noisy or not noisy? :razz: ).
until I understood that front-audio meant connectors on front of the PC case. (maybe you can wire them up yourself). front audio also means to me front channel, i.e. green mini-jack hole, i.e. what you use for analog stereo.should have said mean Front-Panel Connectors. Using headphones through the FP I can easily hear noise when the audio is muted, cant hear that when I use the connector on the back.
I dont know of any case that has shielded wires for the FP, and changing them can be tricky as the connector typically is a "single piece" with the wires.
Colourless
18-May-2010, 15:10
Got an old Antec Sonata case (which i use as a media centre pc) that has shielded front panel connectors. I'm sure there are more out there that do too.
Lonbjerg
18-May-2010, 15:42
Interesting link..from 2006 to 2010..20 pages...
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=174494
I've been using onboard audio since Nforce 2.
My Nforces were fairly inclined to crackle but later mobos I've had have been perfectly adequate for my needs.
Yup I've used the endlessly touted NVAPU/Soundstorm too. That hardware had some serious problems with some games. One of my friends was playing EQ2 on it and it would crackle and pop like crazy. The drivers were very rarely updated. The analog quality wasn't so hot but if you used the digital output you were ok. However, as few seem to realize, DDLive is lossy.
I still think that Xbox was the only reason NV built that sound processor. It works flawlessly in Xbox so probably could blame Windows and the game APIs for its issues on the PC. The AGP video cards could cause PCI problems too actually because the drivers will crank the PCI latency of the AGP slot to maximize video performance.
This is my experience of onboard vs standalone.....not sure if it is agreeable..the difference in onboard is the lack of punch...depth...warmth..you can say the 3D expressionist of sound..that is understandable.... IIRC, standalone has more opamps and cap-filters to bold up the sound....
But i also experienced my older Audigy..while sounding more expressive, do not sound to be playing more simultaneous instruments..the sounds are not expansive..not enough panning width compared to my new ALC889 codec...so to speak..latest onboard HD is not a total lose. You have more realtime processing (via CPU) but loses out on the individual quality.
I trust my Marantz and Monrio/AE set in a properly set up room more. :wink:
*Personally* I find it pretty futile to be so serious on audio quality while you are at the comp. Fans, bad cans (and I still like good bookshelf speakers more than good cans), and the possible notion that your PC is essentially a lot of interference even with shielding... who really cares about the source at this stage?
Oh and not to mention the majority of the time I find it hard to go into the music while multitasking, like now on the keyboard. Saving the elitism for good music in good situations. :lol:
the maddman
19-May-2010, 23:11
It really seems to depend on the care taken laying the mobo out. Here at work we have HP business grade desktops, and they all have extremely clean analog outs. I get less noise from the onboard than I did from the SB Live I used before we upgraded to Win7.
I think the variance you see between motherboards is much higher than with a dedicated sound card, since more care is taken to make sure the card works.
Pretty much these days, I only listen to music either through my Blackberry or the PS3's optical out, so the sound on my laptop is for games only, and I don't really expect more than to make the noises.
eastmen
20-May-2010, 03:32
I was using onboard for a lnog time but i invested in some decent cans and then bought a forte 7.1 for its on board amp. The diffrence is night and day esp with the cs3d orwhatever its called helping to reproduce surround sound with it. I can more easily tell where sounds are coming from.
I think the saving grace on sound cards is that the x-fi is a good 4 years old. So buying a sound card once every 2-3 computer builds is really not a huge investment.
Lonbjerg
20-May-2010, 08:17
Why is everyone comparing onboard to the Creative Live! soundscards?
They are from 1998...12 years ago.
Is that the only way present onboard sound can keep up...if you compare it to +10 year old tech?
Try comparing it to cards based on the X-Fi, CMI-8770, CMI8788, Envy24HT-S or anything from this millenium...
Silent_Buddha
20-May-2010, 12:46
And they compare quite favorably as long as you don't enable the sound distorting features of the X-Fi that subtly alter the sound before it is output so that is is more pleasing to those who aren't audiophiles.
Turn off the sound processing/distortion, and it sounds virtually identical to a good MB implemention of the AL88x series of Realtek HD audio chips. Even when using purely analog out.
Just avoid the front audio jacks like the plague in most cases. As mentioned previously it's extremely rare for front audio connector cables to be shielded.
And if you are like me, that either use HDMI (HTPC to Onkyo TS-SR606) or 5.1 channel through TOSLINK (S/PDIF on game computer to Logitech Z-5500) connector then pure audio quality is often better than 5.1 through X-Fi. Again without all the sound altering processing/distortion.
I toss my old X-Fi in the case every now and then to see if I'm missing anything. But other than the sound processing, it's not worth it. Onboard audio has progressed greatly the past 5 years while the X-Fi has been pretty much stationary.
Had Creative not killed EAX by making it proprietary starting from version 3.0, there might still be a reason for me to use it, but meh, no need.
Regards,
SB
Lonbjerg
20-May-2010, 12:54
And they compare quite favorably as long as you don't enable the sound distorting features of the X-Fi that subtly alter the sound before it is output so that is is more pleasing to those who aren't audiophiles.
Turn off the sound processing/distortion, and it sounds virtually identical to a good MB implemention of the AL88x series of Realtek HD audio chips. Even when using purely analog out.
Just avoid the front audio jacks like the plague in most cases. As mentioned previously it's extremely rare for front audio connector cables to be shielded.
And if you are like me, that either use HDMI (HTPC to Onkyo TS-SR606) or 5.1 channel through TOSLINK (S/PDIF on game computer to Logitech Z-5500) connector then pure audio quality is often better than 5.1 through X-Fi. Again without all the sound altering processing/distortion.
I toss my old X-Fi in the case every now and then to see if I'm missing anything. But other than the sound processing, it's not worth it. Onboard audio has progressed greatly the past 5 years while the X-Fi has been pretty much stationary.
Had Creative not killed EAX by making it proprietary starting from version 3.0, there might still be a reason for me to use it, but meh, no need.
Regards,
SB
Not enough:
http://www.xsreviews.co.uk/reviews/audio-cards/auzentech-prelude-71/4/
Why is everyone comparing onboard to the Creative Live! soundscards?
They are from 1998...12 years ago.Likely because I had one and the output was way worse than onboard audio. I had (still might have) an Audigy but I couldnt hear a difference to onboard with my plain ears.
Is that the only way present onboard sound can keep up...if you compare it to +10 year old tech?I linked this earlier (http://"www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-373-2.htm)
Not enough:
http://www.xsreviews.co.uk/reviews/a...-prelude-71/4/ (http://www.xsreviews.co.uk/reviews/audio-cards/auzentech-prelude-71/4/)
Any why do you post a review that doesnt even notes the onboard audio used? Realtek has a broad range of chips, not all are equal and Mobo layout matters aswell.
Here you have the values from a good Mobo with onboard sound (http://www.ixbt.com/mainboard/msi/rmaa/p55-gd65-alc889.htm), you will note that the values are quite competitive.
I dont think anyone claims that soundcards dont beat onboard, but the difference aint that big (good onboard is atleast on par with soundcards a couple years old) and you need expensive equipment to be able to hear a difference (and then its most likely a placebo effect). Which aint much of a point as if you got expensive equipment just use the digital output and the quality concerns are gone.
Why is everyone comparing onboard to the Creative Live! soundscards?
They are from 1998...12 years ago.
Why not? The analog audio circuit design quality is what matters here unless you're using digital output. DSPs don't get much use anymore with Vista/7. An old sound card can be bliss if it has nice and clean circuitry, as good as anything recent.
A nice aspect to the Creative cards is they're great for DOSBox with their hardware MIDI synth.
Also, it feels like a little triumph to eek more life out of what I already own.
I dont think anyone claims that soundcards dont beat onboard, but the difference aint that big (good onboard is atleast on par with soundcards a couple years old) and you need expensive equipment to be able to hear a difference (and then its most likely a placebo effect).
Only if you use digital output. For analog output, onboard audio varies wildly in quality. Sometimes onboard is pretty amazing in quality, but other times its a warbly noisy mess even today. All I ask for is a noise floor that I can't really hear. ;)
Sigfried1977
29-Jun-2010, 12:31
I use an Asus Xonar PCI-E 1x card under Win7 64 bit. Works great and is a noticeable improvement over the built in HD Audio on my mainboard, especially since I have a lot more control over the individual channels. Everything sounds a lot fuller now as well, and since I'm using a 5.1 Headset, the lack of noise is definitely very much appreciated.
No hassles with drivers, either. (which is why I didn't go with Creative. I heard the driver situation is a real pain under Windows 7, especially if you want true surround sound output)
Albuquerque
29-Jun-2010, 18:07
I will say that I've got some pretty terrible onboard audio in the Dell Optiplex 960 at my office. It's quite tinny, and has big problems with isolation on the front channels. I used the little applet to change my 2-channel audio output so that it uses the rear channel jack, and that seems to have fixed the ground isolation issues. It's still a very crappy sound though, the EQ on my media player is all whacked out looking to get it sounding even close to right.
My X38 board at home has like 100x better onboard sound, and I'm still only talking about the analog out.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.