The Future of Sound Cards

I saw this article here earlier today, and I am very concerned about its message. I have noticed that not many new pre-built computers have sound cards, and most users seem to focus more on video than on audio.

I find this to be very regrettable, as I like having an independent sound card in my computer; doing so frees the CPU of the task of generating sound (which is also what video cards do; they free the CPU of the task of generating video) and they usually produce sound of a quality far superior to that generated by the motherboard, from my experience; plus, they may have many fascinating additional features, such as a ten-band equalizer, which my sound card has and which I have found to be immensely useful for controlling the quality and level of my computer's sound. I intend to support the sound card industry for as long as I can, and if I must spend tens of dollars of money to both achieve superior sound and ensure that companies will; still manufacture sound cards, I shall do so eagerly.

What does everyone else say? Do you believe that sound cards are unnecessary, or that companies will stop making them? Will you continue to purchase and use them, to ensure that they do not become relics of the past? I eagerly await your responses.

Honestly, the best sound I ever heard was from onboard sound. AOpen tube amp motherboard for s478. I've played F horn since my freshman year of high school and I'll be 30 this year, and I would take that over my pile of Creative cards (includes a few X-Fis) any day.

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Ha...aopenax4btube/

Read up, I'd pay money (and I mean motherboard level money) for another card (or board) like this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayin

Honestly, the best sound I ever heard was from onboard sound. AOpen tube amp motherboard for s478. I've played F horn since my freshman year of high school and I'll be 30 this year, and I would take that over my pile of Creative cards (includes a few X-Fis) any day.

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Ha...aopenax4btube/

Read up, I'd pay money (and I mean motherboard level money) for another card (or board) like this.

---

OK, That's nuts I've never seen or heard of that mobo with a tube amp 8)

I guess it all depends on what you are using the PC sound for and how critical you ear is, not much point in buying an expensive sound card just to play mp3's on it and many people won't buy a sound card if they buy a PC with onboard sound and it does all they want so fitting cheap sound cards rather than onboard sound hardly seems worth it, the sound card market is therefore limited to those who want the higher quality and extra control sound card software often has, (although some onboard sound software is surprisingly comprehensive) like many other PC parts the sound card market is limited to "The PC enthusiast".

Also with many of today's PC's having more than enough processing power for what your average user does I don't know if the amount of processing power the onboard sound uses is that noticeable?
With most onboard audio these days having various versions of surround sound for gaming or home theatre when linked to even a cheap amp and speakers they can sound pretty good and although sound cards don't generate that much heat personally the less cards and parts in a PC case generating heat the better.

I used sound cards for years until my last new PC build and thought I would just try the onboard sound on my new Asus mobo, I linked it to my Technics amp and old Wharfdale speakers I've used for years and it sounded fine so it stayed, companies like Creative are putting a lot of effort into onboard sound because they know the market for sound cards is diminishing I guess cards will be around for a while yet but you might want to stockpile a few if your that concerned and hope that some enthusiasts like yourself will keep coding drivers for them :(

I've never used a sound card myself, always onboard audio, and with decent speakers I've always been more than happy with it.

If I had a surround-sound speaker setup a dedicated sound card might be worth the cost, but I never have and doubt that I ever will.

Most mobos nowadays support 5.1 or 7.1 SS. I use onboard with a good $100 set of 5.1 speakers and life is good.

Personally, I ran with onboard sound for years until the build before my current one when I got an entry-level Asus Xonar. It is, unfortunately, a bit charred at the moment, but once I pick up a quality sound system I'll be getting another dedicated card. The kicker for me is the sound quality, which was worlds better than any onboard card I've heard (disclaimer: I've never heard that tube-amp MBB :P ), even on my pretty crappy, cheap speakers.

As for why there isn't much of an industry push for dedicated sound cards, imo it's for two reasons:
1) The affect on the CPU of driving sound is negligible these days, with our increasingly massively overpowered CPUs. The only time I ever had my system actually struggle with sound was when I was playing Crysis on my system of the time (Athlon 64 FX-55 w/ 2GB RAM). With most CPUs sold these days having at least 2 cores, if not 4 or more, and with overall CPU power currently increasing at a much faster rate than the needs of 99% of the computing population, there's just not much incentive for Joe Random computer owner to get a dedicated sound card.
2) The segment of people who can a) tell the difference and b) care enough to pay the high cost premium is a relatively small segment of the market. Dedicated video cards became popular because of PC gaming and the ever increasing processing power that modern games require to render. For good or bad, it is a lot easier for most people to look at two screens and see the difference that high quality graphics make than to listen to two audio sources and hear the difference that high quality audio hardware makes. Another part of it is market hype. I can't even count how many people I've run into over the years who have been running a super high-end GPU to drive a tiny resolution monitor....or to run their massive, high-resolution monitor at a tiny resolution because the high resolution "makes things too small". So even though they're only using a tiny portion of the GPU's power, they still think they need it. The audio market hasn't had this hype (at least not in the area of computer sound cards), so as a result the only people who buy high-end sound cards are the people who know they want them to begin with. Limited market size + limited market growth does not a booming industry make.

TLDNR:
What it really comes down to, imo, is that the majority of people either can't really tell the difference or just don't care enough to spend another $100+ on their computer.

I've been running S/PDIF for nearly 4 years so sound quality-wise I have no reason not to just use onboard sound.

The only reason I am still using my Razer Barracuda AC-1 however, is the fact that it actually has a useful control panel. It has an 11 band eq, subwoofer cutoff, processing settings, output modes and individual speaker adjustment. You don't get all that in the crappy integrated sound control panel.

Who's with me there?

-Nick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Indybird

I've been running S/PDIF for nearly 4 years so sound quality-wise I have no reason not to just use onboard sound.

The only reason I am still using my Razer Barracuda AC-1 however, is the fact that it actually has a useful control panel. It has an 11 band eq, subwoofer cutoff, processing settings, output modes and individual speaker adjustment. You don't get all that in the crappy integrated sound control panel.

Who's with me there?

-Nick

---

I agree with you one-hundred percent; when I switched from using onboard audio to a sound card, I noticed a tremendous difference in the quality of the sound that my computer could produce, and then all the extra features that the sound card had, most notably the equalizer, made it a clear choice over the motherboard's integrated sound, for me. I am using a Creative Labs sound card currently, and I am very satisfied with it.

I had an idea recently: rather than condemning sound cards to oblivion, what if the components that are used in sound cards currently were moved to the speakers themselves, and then connected to the computer with a different type of connection?

For example, a set of speakers would consist of a central unit, which may or may not contain a subwoofer and would contain an integrated circuit, similar to how monitors currently have their own circuitry. The device would connect to the computer via a hot-swappable (plug-and-play), digital, serial connection, similar to USB, DVI, or DisplayPort, which would convey information about the device (such as its name and model number) and its capabilities (such as its sound channels and maximum output wattage) through a method similar to Data Display Channel, thus allowing the computer automatically configure the settings of the speakers, just as they usually do for monitors currently. Any satellite speakers would then connect to the central device via the same type of hot-swappable, digital, serial connection, allowing the computer to automatically detect when they are attached and detached, and automatically the adjust the audio output accordingly.

I know that some sets of computer speakers currently use digital connections in the form of either USB or optical cables, but I am not certain if those connections convey data from the speakers to the computer, as do monitors or as I suggested above. What does everyone else say about my idea? Has it been done already, or is it something new?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemonDragonJ

I had an idea recently: rather than condemning sound cards to oblivion, what if the components that are used in sound cards currently were moved to the speakers themselves, and then connected to the computer with a different type of connection?
...
I know that some sets of computer speakers currently use digital connections in the form of either USB or optical cables, but I am not certain if those connections convey data from the speakers to the computer, as do monitors or as I suggested above. What does everyone else say about my idea? Has it been done already, or is it something new?

---

That's my headset (Creative Fatal1ty)

It's far better than anything running off of my integrated audio, and I only got it because I needed a headset, and newegg had it as a $20 shell shocker deal. My next build will probably include a sound card (I'll get a non-USB headset then), but that probably won't be for a while. I haven't even had my logitech surround sound hooked up for a few years, partially because I'm lazy about that kind of stuff, and partially because I like the sound quality from the USB headset so much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nevermind1534

That's my headset

---

Same here, but I have the Logitech G35s. USB headsets have their own drivers onboard, so there's no use for dedicated sound cards unless you are building a HTPC.

Kayin, I have some Cooler Master Musketeer III units. If you want to get another tube for your computer I might be talked into selling one. It's very likely not as good as the on board motherboard version, but I've liked using it in the past. I have a few brand new ones too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemonDragonJ

I had an idea recently: rather than condemning sound cards to oblivion, what if the components that are used in sound cards currently were moved to the speakers themselves, and then connected to the computer with a different type of connection?

---

That's sorta what SPDIF is, I believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by x88x

That's sorta what SPDIF is, I believe.

---

I am not familiar with S/PDIF, as my current speakers do not use it, nor do very many computer speakers use that connection, from what I have observed, but I have some knowledge of it, and I have seen that a typical S/PDIF connecter has only a single pin. Can that single pin convey data between the speakers and computer, similarly to how USB (which has 4 pins), HDMI (19 pins), or DisplayPort (20 pins) can?

That "single pin" is a fiber optic connector. So yeah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayin

That "single pin" is a fiber optic connector. So yeah.

---

Can the speakers separate each sound channel (one for each speaker) from that single pin? There is a reason that most connectors have multiple pins, and that is so the data does not become distorted or jumbled. Therefore if a single optical fiber cable can carry data from as many as six sound channels (the five satellites and the subwoofer), that is very impressive. However, does S/PDIF convey data from the speakers to the computer, as does Display Data Channel with monitors? And not all S/PDIF connections use optical fibers; some still use coaxial cables, which makes me wish to ask another question: why do they use coaxial cables, when I was under the impression that coaxial cables were obsolete (they have largely been replaced by HDMI for usage in television sets) due to potential for signal loss? Would it not make more sense to develop a cable similar to USB or DisplayPort for carrying sound signals? And why must the pin or pins be exposed? That can lead to the pins being bent or broken, as I have often seen with VGA, DVI, or PS/2 connectors, which is why newer connectors, such as HDMI, Displayport, and USB, have their pins embedded in the connectors.

To change the subject slightly, if S/PDIF is better than normal analog connections, why is it not more popular? Most computer speakers that I have seen still use the same TRS connectors that have been used for many years, so I wonder why adoption of the new connector type is relatively slow compared to the adoption of other new connectors.

It's a digital signal, intended for audio use. USB also carries power, in addition to data, which is why it has four pins. Only one of them is actually for data.

Since as I started reading your post, nvm, I was preparing a post in my head about...what ended up being in the second part of your post, but in a little more detail in case electrically challenged people might be watching, it looks like it's time for...


x88x's occasionally useful and frequently annoying ELABORATION TIME:

Drumroll please. ... ..no? No drumroll? Aww. :(

...anyways...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nevermind1534

Only one of them is actually for data.

---

To elaborate, in case any electrically challenged people are watching, electrical signals require signal/reference pair (also called a 'differential pair') in order to transfer data. Basically, a point of reference is required in order to reliably transmit and receive a signal. In the case of USB, this manifests as a positive signal line and a negative signal line, in addition to the 5V positive static line and the ground. This is because in an electrical system, data is transferred usually using variations on the sin-wave (that's trig sin, not religion sin..and yes, a square-wave is a variation on the sin-wave). In an optical system, data is transferred in pulses of light, so no reference point is needed (or, rather, the reference point is the time between pulses of light). That's why USB (an electrical data transfer system) requires two lines to establish a single channel of communication and optical S/PDIF only requires one. ...you know...in case anyone was wondering...if you weren't/don't care/etc, feel free to ignore everything I just said... :whistler:

X88X owns you all.

Since I'm one of the resident audio nuts, I should chip in here.

The debate of onboard sound vs add on cards comes down to two things.. cost and quality. Decent quality (as in "good enough for almost everyone") can be had with the onboard audio on almost all motherboards now. The difference in cost between adding onboard sound or not is probably a matter of PENNIES at this point, so manufacturers might as well; it also frees up a slot for some other device.

I've been using an external USB device to feed my audio system for a few years now, rather than running a line out to the amp; I've always found that onboard audio generates electrical noise (some more than others) that I can hear through my hifi. Nothing serious mind you, a little buzz here or there, maybe a slight hum. To me, it's torture.

When I have nothing playing, I want SILENCE, even if my system is turned up to full volume. Using an outboard audio solution eliminates the potential of interference from other components, and allows for a much shorter "line level" signal cable from the audio output to the amplifier.

I'm currently using an M-Audio Mobile Pre USB device for my outboard sound. I have a very good quality USB cable from my computer to the MobilePre, and then a homemade 3mm to RCA adaptor cable (gold plated mini plug, single strand cat5 wire, silver solder, eichman bullet RCA plugs, heat shrink, and vinyl sleeving) to my Sonica Super T-Amp (15w peak per channel), which then feeds a pair of Merill Zigmahornets.

I've been watching the external USB DAC converter scene for awhile, and there are TONS of options out there for high quality USB audio. Some affordable, some not so much. The Devilsound DAC looks like good value, and reviews have been positive.

Look up some of my posts on audio to see pictures of my rig. :) It's pretty much unchanged for quite some time!

350,000 charcters and 2 pages of posts and not one mention of maximum voices that the audio cards can handle.



huge difference between 128 voices on the high end cards, and the 16 or 24 on the integrated cards.