Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Seeking help on sound card !
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:30:52 -0800, "Richard Crowley"
<rcrowley@xp7rt,net > wrote:
>"Laurence Payne" wrote ...
>> You're starting from the supposition that his question was stupid.
>
>OK, Mr. Payne. Explain what is NOT stupid about a request
>for "input and output at 48-bits / 384 KHz". And for "music
>composition", yet! This should be fascinating.
>
I have. Read my earlier posts in this thread.
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:30:52 -0800, "Richard Crowley"
<rcrowley@xp7rt,net > wrote:
>"Laurence Payne" wrote ...
>> You're starting from the supposition that his question was stupid.
>
>OK, Mr. Payne. Explain what is NOT stupid about a request
>for "input and output at 48-bits / 384 KHz". And for "music
>composition", yet! This should be fascinating.
>
I have. Read my earlier posts in this thread.
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"Laurence Payne" <NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex,com > wrote in message
news:smbkp35am8fnhnvkut40ebe9vc2c8rcc4r@4ax,com ...
> You're starting from the supposition that his question was stupid.
And if you read his supposed requirements you'd have to say it was!
MrT.
"Laurence Payne" <NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex,com > wrote in message
news:smbkp35am8fnhnvkut40ebe9vc2c8rcc4r@4ax,com ...
> You're starting from the supposition that his question was stupid.
And if you read his supposed requirements you'd have to say it was!
MrT.
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
Arny Krueger wrote:
> Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio interface that
> delivers audio at 48 bits
Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
> and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
> audio purpose.
384k sampling is clearly absurd.
Graham
Arny Krueger wrote:
> Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio interface that
> delivers audio at 48 bits
Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
> and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
> audio purpose.
384k sampling is clearly absurd.
Graham
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote in message
news:479A5101.70E6A9D6@hotmail,com ...
>
>
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> > Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio interface that
> > delivers audio at 48 bits
>
> Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
>
>
> > and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
> > audio purpose.
>
> 384k sampling is clearly absurd.
But if he's a beginner, he may be getting confused between sampling rate and
bitrate, as in .mp3s.
Peace,
Paul
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail,com > wrote in message
news:479A5101.70E6A9D6@hotmail,com ...
>
>
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> > Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio interface that
> > delivers audio at 48 bits
>
> Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
>
>
> > and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
> > audio purpose.
>
> 384k sampling is clearly absurd.
But if he's a beginner, he may be getting confused between sampling rate and
bitrate, as in .mp3s.
Peace,
Paul
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
Paul Stamler wrote:
> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> > > Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio interface that
> > > delivers audio at 48 bits
> >
> > Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
> >
> > > and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
> > > audio purpose.
> >
> > 384k sampling is clearly absurd.
>
> But if he's a beginner, he may be getting confused between sampling rate and
> bitrate, as in .mp3s.
This is true.
Graham
Paul Stamler wrote:
> "Eeyore" wrote
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> > > Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio interface that
> > > delivers audio at 48 bits
> >
> > Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
> >
> > > and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
> > > audio purpose.
> >
> > 384k sampling is clearly absurd.
>
> But if he's a beginner, he may be getting confused between sampling rate and
> bitrate, as in .mp3s.
This is true.
Graham
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"Eeyore" wrote ...
> Paul Stamler wrote:
>> "Eeyore" wrote
>> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>> > > Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio
>> > > interface that delivers audio at 48 bits
>> >
>> > Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
>> >
>> > > and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
>> > > audio purpose.
>> >
>> > 384k sampling is clearly absurd.
>>
>> But if he's a beginner, he may be getting confused between
>> sampling rate and bitrate, as in .mp3s.
>
> This is true.
Well, maybe. Note that 384k is 2x 192k
(or 4x 96k) which are all standard sampling
rates. OTOH 384k is NOT a standard bit-
rate for MP3.
"Eeyore" wrote ...
> Paul Stamler wrote:
>> "Eeyore" wrote
>> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>> > > Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio
>> > > interface that delivers audio at 48 bits
>> >
>> > Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
>> >
>> > > and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
>> > > audio purpose.
>> >
>> > 384k sampling is clearly absurd.
>>
>> But if he's a beginner, he may be getting confused between
>> sampling rate and bitrate, as in .mp3s.
>
> This is true.
Well, maybe. Note that 384k is 2x 192k
(or 4x 96k) which are all standard sampling
rates. OTOH 384k is NOT a standard bit-
rate for MP3.
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt,net > wrote in message
news:13pl9sld6hvik2d@corp.supernews,com ...
> Well, maybe. Note that 384k is 2x 192k
> (or 4x 96k) which are all standard sampling
> rates. OTOH 384k is NOT a standard bit-
> rate for MP3.
Exactly, something I already pointed out.
And the fact that the OP hasn't been back only adds more weight to it being
a troll IMO.
MrT.
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt,net > wrote in message
news:13pl9sld6hvik2d@corp.supernews,com ...
> Well, maybe. Note that 384k is 2x 192k
> (or 4x 96k) which are all standard sampling
> rates. OTOH 384k is NOT a standard bit-
> rate for MP3.
Exactly, something I already pointed out.
And the fact that the OP hasn't been back only adds more weight to it being
a troll IMO.
MrT.
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt,net > wrote in message
news:13pl9sld6hvik2d@corp.supernews,com ...
> "Eeyore" wrote ...
> > Paul Stamler wrote:
> >> "Eeyore" wrote
> >> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> > > Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio
> >> > > interface that delivers audio at 48 bits
> >> >
> >> > Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
> >> >
> >> > > and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
> >> > > audio purpose.
> >> >
> >> > 384k sampling is clearly absurd.
> >>
> >> But if he's a beginner, he may be getting confused between
> >> sampling rate and bitrate, as in .mp3s.
> >
> > This is true.
>
> Well, maybe. Note that 384k is 2x 192k
> (or 4x 96k) which are all standard sampling
> rates. OTOH 384k is NOT a standard bit-
> rate for MP3.
It is, however, 3x 128k, which *is* a standard .mp3 bitrate.
Peace,
Paul
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt,net > wrote in message
news:13pl9sld6hvik2d@corp.supernews,com ...
> "Eeyore" wrote ...
> > Paul Stamler wrote:
> >> "Eeyore" wrote
> >> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> > > Bottom line, I really can't see any benefits to an audio
> >> > > interface that delivers audio at 48 bits
> >> >
> >> > Does he perhaps mean 2 channels @ 24 bits each ?
> >> >
> >> > > and 384 Ksamples per second for your, or any other
> >> > > audio purpose.
> >> >
> >> > 384k sampling is clearly absurd.
> >>
> >> But if he's a beginner, he may be getting confused between
> >> sampling rate and bitrate, as in .mp3s.
> >
> > This is true.
>
> Well, maybe. Note that 384k is 2x 192k
> (or 4x 96k) which are all standard sampling
> rates. OTOH 384k is NOT a standard bit-
> rate for MP3.
It is, however, 3x 128k, which *is* a standard .mp3 bitrate.
Peace,
Paul
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"Paul Stamler" <pstamlerhell@pobox,com > wrote in message
news:56Bmj.494012$kj1.350443@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att,net ...
> It is, however, 3x 128k, which *is* a standard .mp3 bitrate.
But can any MP3 player handle 48bit files? (his other "requirement" :-)
MrT.
"Paul Stamler" <pstamlerhell@pobox,com > wrote in message
news:56Bmj.494012$kj1.350443@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att,net ...
> It is, however, 3x 128k, which *is* a standard .mp3 bitrate.
But can any MP3 player handle 48bit files? (his other "requirement" :-)
MrT.
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
On Jan 26, 2:51 am, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:
> "Paul Stamler" <pstamlerh...@pobox,com > wrote in message
>
> news:56Bmj.494012$kj1.350443@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att,net ...
>
> > It is, however, 3x 128k, which *is* a standard .mp3 bitrate.
>
> But can any MP3 player handle 48bit files? (his other "requirement" :-)
>
> MrT.
I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds more real.
Thank you !
On Jan 26, 2:51 am, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:
> "Paul Stamler" <pstamlerh...@pobox,com > wrote in message
>
> news:56Bmj.494012$kj1.350443@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att,net ...
>
> > It is, however, 3x 128k, which *is* a standard .mp3 bitrate.
>
> But can any MP3 player handle 48bit files? (his other "requirement" :-)
>
> MrT.
I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds more real.
Thank you !
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"pg" <penang@catholic.org> wrote in message
news:358cbd0e-c714-4e7d-81a0-4e5410820f1a@e32g2000prn.googlegroups,com ...
> > But can any MP3 player handle 48bit files? (his other "requirement" :-)
>
> I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds more real.
I suggest you start with your speakers then, and forget all the bullshit.
Or if your music is mainly sampled synth or sounds, get a better sound
library.
MrT.
"pg" <penang@catholic.org> wrote in message
news:358cbd0e-c714-4e7d-81a0-4e5410820f1a@e32g2000prn.googlegroups,com ...
> > But can any MP3 player handle 48bit files? (his other "requirement" :-)
>
> I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds more real.
I suggest you start with your speakers then, and forget all the bullshit.
Or if your music is mainly sampled synth or sounds, get a better sound
library.
MrT.
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"pg" <penang@catholic.org> wrote in message
news:358cbd0e-c714-4e7d-81a0-4e5410820f1a@e32g2000prn.googlegroups,com
> On Jan 26, 2:51 am, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:
>> "Paul Stamler" <pstamlerh...@pobox,com > wrote in message
>>
>> news:56Bmj.494012$kj1.350443@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att,net ...
>>
>>> It is, however, 3x 128k, which *is* a standard .mp3
>>> bitrate.
>>
>> But can any MP3 player handle 48bit files? (his other
>> "requirement" :-)
>>
>> MrT.
>
> I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds
> more real.
Look elsewhere. If your samples don't sound real, then get better samples.
"pg" <penang@catholic.org> wrote in message
news:358cbd0e-c714-4e7d-81a0-4e5410820f1a@e32g2000prn.googlegroups,com
> On Jan 26, 2:51 am, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:
>> "Paul Stamler" <pstamlerh...@pobox,com > wrote in message
>>
>> news:56Bmj.494012$kj1.350443@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att,net ...
>>
>>> It is, however, 3x 128k, which *is* a standard .mp3
>>> bitrate.
>>
>> But can any MP3 player handle 48bit files? (his other
>> "requirement" :-)
>>
>> MrT.
>
> I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds
> more real.
Look elsewhere. If your samples don't sound real, then get better samples.
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"pg" wrote ...
> I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds more real.
Then spend your $$$$ on better samples.
Or spend your $$$$ on hiring real musicians.
"pg" wrote ...
> I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds more real.
Then spend your $$$$ on better samples.
Or spend your $$$$ on hiring real musicians.
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt,net > writes:
> "pg" wrote ...
>> I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds more real.
>
> Then spend your $$$$ on better samples.
> Or spend your $$$$ on hiring real musicians.
I vote for the latter. Look at where it got Electric Light Orchestra.
--
% Randy Yates % "Rollin' and riding and slippin' and
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % sliding, it's magic."
%%% 919-577-9882 %
%%%% <yates@ieee.org> % 'Living' Thing', *A New World Record*, ELO
http :// www .digitalsignallabs,com
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt,net > writes:
> "pg" wrote ...
>> I am simply looking into ways to make my music sounds more real.
>
> Then spend your $$$$ on better samples.
> Or spend your $$$$ on hiring real musicians.
I vote for the latter. Look at where it got Electric Light Orchestra.
--
% Randy Yates % "Rollin' and riding and slippin' and
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % sliding, it's magic."
%%% 919-577-9882 %
%%%% <yates@ieee.org> % 'Living' Thing', *A New World Record*, ELO
http :// www .digitalsignallabs,com
Re: Seeking help on sound card !
On Jan 24, 7:42 am, pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote:
> I am in the process of building my own intel core-4 machine, and I am
> thinking of getting a brand new sound card for it. My current
> soundcard, the one in my old machine, is Creative Soundblaster X-Fi
> Elite Pro.
>
> My budget for the new sound card is $750
If your functional requirements are that of a SoundBlaster - two
channels in and out - on that budget, if you want the best sound
quality, there's no reason to get anything other than a LynxONE or,
for a little more money and expandability, a Lynx L22.
http :// www .lynxstudio,com
On Jan 24, 7:42 am, pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote:
> I am in the process of building my own intel core-4 machine, and I am
> thinking of getting a brand new sound card for it. My current
> soundcard, the one in my old machine, is Creative Soundblaster X-Fi
> Elite Pro.
>
> My budget for the new sound card is $750
If your functional requirements are that of a SoundBlaster - two
channels in and out - on that budget, if you want the best sound
quality, there's no reason to get anything other than a LynxONE or,
for a little more money and expandability, a Lynx L22.
http :// www .lynxstudio,com
