Can someone explain ( sound cards)

[Sky]

Aite I wanna build a pc. Nothing much with cpu power or ram. The run of the mill mediocre sempron will do. But I want this pc to kick tail with sound recording. Now I've been looking at some sound cards online and locally. There's the SB Xfi fatat1ty, other "pro" cards like it and there's the now cheapo Audigy 2.
Now I'm looking at their specs and all share a same certain spec. 96khz sample rate and 24bit processing power. Now I remember the SB live had 24bit power/96 khz and also the basic audigy 1. Oh, they all have an snr of 108 db.
I know this is a nub question, but other than a newer chipset, what would I gain in recording if I go for a higher end card? (Aside from more connection options if available) Because wouldn't they sample at the same rate? Won't they be just as noiseless? Anyone have more exp in this area that could shed some light on it?

[996vtwin]

what hardware and software you using

[Sky]

Software: Acid pro 5.x, adobe audition, maybe fruity loops

Hardware will be built around the soundcard. This pc will be for messing around with music editing and recording, also to share files on the network.
Video doesn't matter at all. I'll only need line in, no need for xlr, spdif/optical because I have nothing to plug into them ( would be sweet tho). But I want the cleanest sound possible with the line in and above average ability to edit sound waves.

[996vtwin]

I have heard of fruity loops, basically its like a sequencer like Abelton right? I was asking if you are using any hardware mixing equipment or is everything software? I see you speak of line in, sorry for my dinosaur brain....exactly where is your source of music coming from and where is is it going into in your pc, meaning usb,...where?

I assume you want to record on your sequencer, a good sound card will absolutely make a difference with the sound but then again the source of the music, ie. format, bit rate etc. will also make a huge difference. For recording using software alone you should be focused on quality of your music source. If anything is leaving your soundcard then although I have not really tested it I am almost positive the difference will be present on different qualities of sound cards. Infact I am sure of it.

Does this answer your question?

[sham1984]

ofcourse the higer costs will mean more input into technology and better materials and stuff to create a higher quality soundcard with less jitters and better frequency sampling etc.
more money would mean a better card but if u want to compare specs, i've found a page with a few cards a guy was testing..if u want you could look for the spec sheets on your card options

http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/compare/

[Sky]

996vtwin, Sorry, my input would be a guitar processor with line out/headphone out for analog and usb for digital. I believe it's also 24 bit output. Not really fruity loops as a sequencer eh. I just said i might use it. Because all I ever used it for was drums. And Acid does that.

sham1984, thanks

pioneer, not funny.

[ru$$ell]

Sky!

expert advice from the forum's ONLY Audiophile,

http://forums.trinituner.com/forums/vie ... p?t=214878

nice,hopefully this free publicity will get someone to sell me a card like that

[Dj_Bee]

LOL....Reall baccahanal in that thread dey pios......

[Odessy]

is a card ,that makes a sound.

[996vtwin]

996vtwin, Sorry, my input would be a guitar processor with line out/headphone out for analog and usb for digital. I believe it's also 24 bit output. Not really fruity loops as a sequencer eh. I just said i might use it. Because all I ever used it for was drums. And Acid does that.

sham1984, thanks

pioneer, not funny.

Is anything leaving your soundcard?

[Sky]

Well just 7. playback. I wanted something of good quality.
But I just decided on the hardware to plug into the soundcard's line in. I just see the tech specs on it ...
24-bit 44.1kHz sample rate
Sweat buss dey I gonna get an oem Audigy 2 7.1 from supertech.
Or if the mobo has a 7.1 souncard thats not sb compatible then i'll use that. sb's sample too low.

[buzz]

^ d fwak yuh postin @ dis hr


2eh

[996vtwin]

All i can tell you is if anything is leaving your soundcard then I almost sure the card matters. I have tested it myself, huge difference in audible. If the signal or file is disturbed in anyway to be adjusted then go back to be recorded , like I said i think it would make a difference. There are external soundcards that are very good. For instance, a mixer I use Rane TT57sl I use with Serato has its own built in sound card.

[Sky]

It's a guitar processor I'm gonna use to record stuff. Just fooling around. I did some snooping and found a site that said sound blaster cards and sb compatible resample everything at 44.1khz, despite boasting 96k sometimes. ( besides a select few creatives)

Now I said the processor samples at 44.1k, bu I just realise that that's the digital side of things. if I plug it in through usb and record that's what I'll get. But if I use line out to line in on the card it'll turn to analog, then be resampled by the card. So if I DO have a card that samples at 96k or 192k, the audio wave itself will have a better quality. Then playback @ 96 or 192 would sound great
The question now is which cards really sample at that rate for both da and ad conversion....
I'll look into the products you mentioned ( din want a mixer too tho. I poor)

[Crazymofo]

I poor

whore more for Christmas

[996vtwin]

1. Recording at 24/96 yields greatly increased audio resolution-over 250 times that at 16/44.1

2. Recording at 24/96 takes up roughly 3 1/4 times the space than recording at 16/44.1

read this link. Presently I use 16 bit 44,100 as the highest. Secondly compressed using LAME at 320k or vbr192 avg (but only sourced from lame decoders using good software.) But i still prefer 320.

A lot of discussion goes into what the listener can hear and also the amount hard drive space you have. Higher rates = more space used. Cd quality is 16bit 44,100 last i checked.

http://www.tweakheadz.com/16_vs_24_bit_audio.htm