Forum
Improving your PC audio
Created 13th February 2011 @ 01:11
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Quoted from Skyride
[…]
You got that completely the wrong way round. They are very expensive (as far as headsets go) and the sound quality is absolutely awful. That’s coming from someone who owns a pair. What you’re paying for is how amazingly comfortable they are.
This. V1 sound quality seemed a lot better.
inb4 double blind trials prove there’s no perceivable difference in sound.
Last edited by Waebi,
Quoted from Waebi
inb4 double blind trials prove there’s no perceivable difference in sound.
inb4 double blind trials don’t equate the listening experience.
Quoted from skeej
[…]
inb4 double blind trials don’t equate the listening experience.
listening experience = placebo )))))))))))
Quoted from Waebi
inb4 double blind trials prove there’s no perceivable difference in sound.
inb4 double blind trials don’t equate the listening experience.
[edit] lol how did i doublepost that… but yes i fully agree with you Chris. But I’m not going to take someone’s enjoyment away because of that. If he hears it, so be it. As long as it’s not healing-psychics telling people to not get cancer treatment because the hospital will only do them wrong.
Quoted from Koeitje
Shorter guide?
1. Soundcard that never resamples the spdif output
2. Good DAC
3. Good Amp
Too much seperate equipment = only more noise.
An external soundcard with a good DAC chip and layout is a DSP, DAC, and preamp in 1. Less jitter and short signal distance.
Quoted from Comedian
while i dont care that much for an awesome headset, i am very interested in having a bit more info on good quality microphones since i am casting quite often, and if you have a lot of people watching yer casts, might be a good idea to invest in that
i do have a resonable soundcard (xi-fi platinum) but that one is by now 6 years old :D
USB condenser microphone or studio mic with cheap preamp, hook up to your line-in.
Last edited by skeej,
right, what I’m on about is something different: is it really justified to spend 100+eur/pounds on a sound system when you’re gonna listen to torrented mp3s? :)
Quoted from Waebi
right, what I’m on about is something different: is it really justified to spend 100+eur/pounds on a sound system when you’re gonna listen to torrented mp3s? :)
Yeah, mp3’s off usenet sound better.
I think the rule of thumb is that most harmonic distortion and band limiting happens at the end of the chain, the speakers and headphones. It’s hard to discern a V0 mp3 from a FLAC… I still need to do more ABX to really confirm if I can consistently hear it on my best cans. But even 128kbps mp3 benefits from better speakers or headphones imo…
Quoted from Waebi
right, what I’m on about is something different: is it really justified to spend 100+eur/pounds on a sound system when you’re gonna listen to torrented mp3s? :)
No.. its not. If you go hi-fi, you should atleast torrent .flac or something like that.
Mp3 is like jpeg, its terrible lossy.
@skeej, you are deaf if you cant hear the diff between losless and mp3.
Last edited by Martn,
Quoted from TviQ
if you are ready to spend some money buy Razer megalodon … Its really worth it promise !
It’s true. TviQ actually listen to calls with his new headset.
Quoted from Martn
[…]
No.. its not. If you go hi-fi, you should atleast torrent .flac or something like that.
Mp3 is like jpeg, its terrible lossy.
I had >1TB of FLAC a year ago. Moved to OGG Q8. I am a massive faggot audiophile. There is no discernable difference whatsoever. Good game.
Quoted from skeej
[…]
Yeah, mp3’s off usenet sound better.
I think the rule of thumb is that most harmonic distortion and band limiting happens at the end of the chain, the speakers and headphones. It’s hard to discern a V0 mp3 from a FLAC… I still need to do more ABX to really confirm if I can consistently hear it on my best cans. But even 128kbps mp3 benefits from better speakers or headphones imo…
I never heard the difference between v0 and FLAC. Then again, I never really took the trouble of actually ABX-ing or listening carefully to the differences between between v0 and FLAC. But my conclusion is that it doesn’t matter for casual listening, even on my setup)
Scan Speak Reference Monitors (build by somebody else, possibly one of the nicest tweeters I’ve ever heard)
Marantz PM-16 (Premium line, 20KG of amp)
PS Audio DL Three (not the new one, but one from the mid 90-ties. Fed from M-Audio soundcard)
And lets be honest, the better your gear the worse 90% of new music sounds. Current mastering practices are beyond shit. But if you throw in some well mastered and recorded music things come to life.
Same for me as for Koeitje (nice setup btw! even though I think I read about your setup before :D)… And even though I’m not sure if I can hear the difference, when I can get a 24/96 (or 192) of some album, I will, just because I want the best possible fidelity and least amount of dynamics/resolution loss out of the studio. The material as the artist intended. This in regard to quality recordings of course, so mostly jazz and other audiophile wankery music.
Good equipment being severe on bad recordings is also a problem of old stuff. I can’t listen properly to the jazz classic Blue Train (Coltrane) because the highs are just TOO harsh… I guess back when they mixed that stuff they had speakers without tweeters? Also old music has no bass.
Martn, have you ever done proper ABX? I’d be very careful with such claims.
Quoted from skeej
Good equipment being severe on bad recordings is also a problem of old stuff. I can’t listen properly to the jazz classic Blue Train (Coltrane) because the highs are just TOO harsh… I guess back when they mixed that stuff they had speakers without tweeters? Also old music has no bass.
.
Yeah, the real good recordings start from the 60-ties. Listen to Muddy Waters’ Folk Singer (from 1964). Sounds better than 99% of the modern stuff.
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
content rss