Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

So I just installed an Audigy...

Tags:
  • Sound Cards
  • HD
  • Components
  • Product
Last response: in Components
Share
June 17, 2002 6:58:17 PM

I mentioned this a while back, but I traded sound cards with a roomate (just moved in this weekend). He has an Audigy OEM, I of course have a GTXP (though now the opposite).

Installation was fine, it doesn't look like there are any driver conflicts (I didn't do anything to remove the GTXP drivers, even though I know I should).

My main reason for doing this is to experience Advanced HD. I've only played GTA3, but I thought that might be a good example, and it's the game I'm currently playing the most right now anyway.

Advanced HD is a great technology. It pleasantly surprised me, though it isn't quite as good as some have made it out to be (again, I'm basing this on a single game at the moment). It adds a new level of realism, and definitely complements the effects already in EAX/EAX 2.

That said, I still wouldn't buy or recommend the Audigy just for EAX Advanced HD. When other cards come out with it, then I'll look to upgrade. Advanced HD just doesn't make up for the Audigy's other downfalls.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

More about : installed audigy

Anonymous
June 17, 2002 7:41:35 PM

Would you by chance be running winXP?

I'm really thinking hard about a new soundcard. Right now It's probably somwhere between an Audigy and a GTXP or TBSC.

More than anything I just want full game compatibility, but system deependency weighs in heavily for me too.

I will be using the SPDIF (or other?) digital link to hook it directly to an external Dolby Digital decoder, so don't care much about analog outputs.

Would just buy the Audigy but: have a bad compatibility taste left in my mouth left from my SBLive. Not to sure I trust creative enough to give them more money. Also I keep hearing many unsettling rmors about PCI bus hogging, or something like that.

Would just go buy the SC but: I haven't been able to convince myself that this is any more/less stable than the GTXP, audigy under winXP. How about game compatibility, does it need new drivers every week just to play the new games? The hardware sure looks nice on these (GTXP, and TBSC), but how about the drivers? Did I ask which card has the best drivers?
June 17, 2002 8:14:16 PM

I have almost every worthy game known under the Sun at home. Everything i've thrown at the GTXP with 4.10 drivers has worked perfectly on the GTXP, including all the new ones like JK2, Ghost Recon, FS 2002, Combat FS 2, SoF2, and GTA3. Plays movies fantastically and comes with a very nice full version of PowerDVD. The only games i've heard of it having problems with are operation flashpoint and the Infinite engine games (Baldurs gate series). Tell ya what though, Flashpoint was one of my favorite games of all time when i played it back when i had the audigy was when it came out. I'll reinstall it tonight and see if it works on the latest drivers for me or not. Will post back tonight or tomorrow on that game.

I am running strictly windows xp pro. Audigy and GTXP both ran on it. GTXP is, however, admitted more stable i believe.

edit: if you have SoF2, install the OpenAL executable on the CD for eax to work on non-audigy cards, with that installed the game sounds incredible on the GTXP. absolutely incredible, and still runs super smooth on my 1.7 p4.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by williamc on 06/17/02 04:15 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Related resources
June 17, 2002 10:24:11 PM

I'm in pretty much the same boat as williamc. Every game I've thrown at it has performed perfectly, from GTA3 and Morrowind back to Worms World Party.

As for the Audigy, it's been running perfectly fine so far, but I've only played one game for about an hour, so I can't give a full opinion yet.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
June 17, 2002 11:23:31 PM

Quote:
Would just buy the Audigy but: have a bad compatibility taste left in my mouth left from my SBLive. Not to sure I trust creative enough to give them more money. Also I keep hearing many unsettling rmors about PCI bus hogging, or something like that.

Do you by chance have a VIA chipset? If so, I would save yourself some potential headaches and avoid the Audigy. It has some "issues" with VIA, just like the Live!.

Ritesh
Anonymous
June 18, 2002 12:38:15 AM

Anybody ever compare the GTXP with the Turtlle Beach Santa CRuz in XP, like for support and compatibility? That is all I really need hardware wise, but I would spend the extra money for the GTXP iuf there were any tangible benefits other than the breakout box.
Anonymous
June 18, 2002 12:51:10 AM

Actually I ran it with a BX chipset Tyan Tiger for the longest time, and just recently switched to this IWILL XP333 (ALI chipset). The incompatibilities I mentioned were really quite rare and far between, but stayed with me when I switched systems, basically the only things I've carried over are the live and my old SCSI setup. It's not that common, but when it affects a game you play well....

There are several microsoft (motocross madness 2, crimson skies etc) games which I've just never gotten to work well in any configuration with my SBLive. It makes a kind of loose connection kinda sound, but only when all the graphical details and everything are cranked up.

Don't take this as scientific proof of anything, but I've just had this feeling that I may be experiencing the rough edges of whatever this PCI bandwidth sharing issue might cause.
June 18, 2002 1:56:58 AM

If you took away the breakout box, the Santa Cruz would be a slightly better card, both because of the drivers and manufacturing quality. I bought the GTXP over the Santa Cruz because of the breakout box, nothing else.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
Anonymous
June 18, 2002 2:21:59 AM

From there I guess it's a no brainer.

Thanks everybody for your time, and words of wisdom.
June 18, 2002 3:34:12 AM

I have had multiple Lives in multiple via/sis/amd/nvidia chipsets (all i run is amd processors) and no problems.

I have had problems with the audigy in the past but right now I am running my audigy on a kt266a (fairly new via chipset), with no problems in any games.

Athlon XP 1700+,KT266A,Geforce3, Audigy.. 'nuff said.
June 18, 2002 6:33:43 AM

Haven't heard any 3D positioning yet that beats A3D 2.0. After all these years, you would think Creative would have cought up! No wonder they went to such great expense to bankrupt the company!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
June 18, 2002 12:58:47 PM

Quote:
I have had multiple Lives in multiple via/sis/amd/nvidia chipsets (all i run is amd processors) and no problems.

Clearly I didn't say that everyone with VIA chipsets has a problem with Creative cards. But the evidence is out there, these conflicts do occur alarmingly often. In fact there was a recent thread on THG about someone with a KT266A who was having instability problems with his Audigy. It seems to happen when certain other cards are sitting on the PCI bus at the same time as the Live! or Audigy, and then VIA's bugs in the Southbridge cause the instability. These conflicts with even VIA's latest chipsets (like the KT333) have been proven time and again. The latest 4-in-1s don't fix the situation.

Ritesh
June 18, 2002 1:06:16 PM

Quote:
Haven't heard any 3D positioning yet that beats A3D 2.0.

I assume you mean with two speakers or headphones. With four speakers, it is impossible for any 4-channel sound card to have worse positioning than any other, unless they royally screwed up the basic function of where to send the sound signal. In the Creative applet when you do the speaker test, the voice says: Left Channel, Center, Right Channel, Rear Left, Rear Right. Guess what, that's exactly where the sounds come from!! Therefore, if a game sends a sound to the Rear Left speaker, *that's where it goes*. There's no such thing as inferior positioning with four speakers.

Also, there's no such thing as "3D" positioning with current technology. It's 2D. True 3D sound is only possible with a speaker above you on the ceiling and one under you on the floor. Otherwise, the vertical direction is simulated with algorithms which are only effective in fooling some people (my ears don't like algorithms).

Ritesh
June 18, 2002 2:49:22 PM

You have the bloody densest head in the world. I assume Crashman means exactly what he said, cause i tend to agree wholeheartedly. A3D kicks creative's arse.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out
June 18, 2002 2:52:20 PM

knewton, The GTXP/SC still have a minor problem with Operation flashpoint, if you enable EAX you get some constant background noises which are kinda bothersome. However, Op Flashpoint sounds just great without eax enabled so no biggie for me, you can still enable hardware sound processing (directsound hardware) so you'll get great positioning just not the environmental effects which arent all that in op flashpoint anyhow.

So, if you don't play the baldur's gate series of games then there's nothing keeping anyone from using GTXP/SC these days, they work great with everything else far as i know, i've thrown around 100 games at it without a real problem.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out
June 18, 2002 4:59:29 PM

Quote:
<i>Knewton says:</i>
From there I guess it's a no brainer.


So I assume you're going for the Santa Cruz?

Quote:
<i>kinney says:</i>
I have had multiple Lives in multiple via/sis/amd/nvidia chipsets (all i run is amd processors) and no problems.


I didn't have any problems with my Live on my KT7a-RAID, either. Well...I didn't have any hardware compatability problems.

Quote:
<i>Crashman says:</i>
Haven't heard any 3D positioning yet that beats A3D 2.0.


I think I'll put one of my Vortex2's back in when I'm done with the Audigy. GTA3 supports A3D2.0, so I can use the same game to test.

Quote:
<i>ritesh_laud says:</i>
Also, there's no such thing as "3D" positioning with current technology.


Can you explain how I know whether something is above or below me, using only headphones? It's obviously simulated, but it sounds perfect.

Quote:
<i>ritesh_laud says:</i>
Otherwise, the vertical direction is simulated with algorithms which are only effective in fooling some people (my ears don't like algorithms).


And that's true. Which cards have you listened to the positioning on, though? Some are of course better than others.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
June 18, 2002 6:10:36 PM

Quote:
I assume Crashman means exactly what he said, cause i tend to agree wholeheartedly. A3D kicks creative's arse.

Lol, I've owned and heavily used three A3D cards for at least eight months *each* (Monster Sound, MX200, MX300). I assure you that the Audigy sounds much better in gaming. :) 

Ritesh
June 18, 2002 6:31:47 PM

Quote:
Can you explain how I know whether something is above or below me, using only headphones? It's obviously simulated, but it sounds perfect.

I too have heard this with headphones, in both music and gaming. Unfortunately, to my ears the actual position of the source on the screen almost never corresponded to where I heard it. I'd hear something above me when in fact it was right behind me. Or vice versa. It was never consistent and that's why I threw simulated 3D sound out the window along with the A3D cards I had.

In music it can actually be pretty cool though! I have distinctly heard a sound above me on some music: try Joe Walsh's "Life's Been Good To Me So Far", right at the very end around when the ducks are quacking and at one point one literally sounded like it went right over my head.

I don't remember ever distinctly hearing sound on a vertical soundstage *with speakers*, however.

Quote:
And that's true. Which cards have you listened to the positioning on, though? Some are of course better than others.

Several different chips with the notable exception of your supreme panacea of positional audio, the vaunted Sensaura sound chip. It's irrevelant anyway: I use four speakers (well actually five but the center doesn't really count for positioning) and hence for me there are no positional issues with any decent soundcard. EAX is simply a reverb layer on top of the basic DirectSound audio structure and exaggerates depth to deliver more impact. EAX HD adds occlusion and a few other things to the mix to add realism. Different soundcards handle EAX differently, but the basic positioning in 4-speaker mode is the same regardless of sound card, because of DirectSound.

Ritesh
June 18, 2002 6:41:09 PM

And as mentioned above your ears don't like what most other people claim is great sound.

I've had Vortex cards and i've had the audigy, and i have the GTXP. And I, in complete contradiction to you, wholeheartedly state that Vortex A3D beats Creative EAX.

Ritesh, if you wanna beleive to your death that the audigy is king and ruler of the earth, well, fine, do so. But there's alot of guys out here with some very nice audio equipment and a good bit of sound experience and knowlege that completely disagree with you.

I fail to see how you can possibly assure anyone that the Audigy the best in this case. I am getting absolutely disgusted with reading half of your threads which say in reply to me "You fail to post any links to back your arguements" and the other half saying "The audigy is far superior than A3D or SAnta cruz for gaming". Stick it up your backside already, your welcome to your opinion but you gotta realize, not even MOST people will agree with you. And as far as i know you STILL havn't actually tried a SC or GTXP on your pc. Wake up and smell the napalm.

Argh, i get so frustrated with people who do nothing but shove one item out in front of everyone and preach its greatness all day long while consistently ignoring everyone else's very qualified opinions.

I, Crashman, and many many others are firmly planted in the belief that Aureal technology beats creative's technology. And yes, we to have heard both.

And one other thing, Your audigy does more wacky processing and algorithm processing to sound than any other card yet you love it and at the same time bash A3D for using algorithmis when processing sound. This whole argument is utterly insane, do you even know what an algorithm is? Its basically a process which yields a solution. When people program they are creating algorithms to solve problems and complete tasks. "Algorithm's" have nothing to do with sound, they're just lines of code. I guaranfrickingtee your audigy uses algorithms in the code in its drivers to produce your lovely sound, just like Aureal drivers do. They're just different drivers with different code. There's nothing inherantly funny being done to your sound on Auearl cards that isnt being done on Creative cards.

And i'm sick of ranting now, god this ticks me off reading these insane replies which strike me as blatantly fanboyish.

Like i've said before, if you like it fine, but don't begrude other people their own qualified opinions.

edit: and in your next post you say several things blatently wrong. Sensura chips have better positioning than Creative's live and audigy, i don't see that is possible to argue this fact, its rather measureable in fact when you compare them on the same setup. Position of the sound is processed by the chipset which is obvsiously different from card to card and can be better on some than others. If you threw 3d sound out the windows then why do you still have an audigy in your case? The whole point of EAX and A3D is 3d positional audio, which you seem to love on the audigy and hate on everything else. fine, thats you, but its still 3d positional audio sound, the 3d can refer to the depth of the sound as well such as the environmental effects applied by both EAX and A3D.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out
Anonymous
June 18, 2002 7:36:35 PM

Well a buddies been trying to get me into OP Flashpoint, too bad about the EAX. Oh well I guess nobody is completely perfect.
Anonymous
June 18, 2002 7:47:42 PM

Yeah, Santa Cruz. I've thought about it for a while now, that looks like the card for me.

A biggie for me has been the overall system performance enhancement hardware. There looks to be some neat stuff in those with regards to data handling.

Even if I've made a wrong choice, then at least I'm learning, but it looks like these cards are a damn fine choice.

If only the phillips line were more compatible with games. Oh well, it seems like the world still has a tough choice to make between the SB's and the Cirrus chip based cards.
June 18, 2002 8:01:19 PM

Actually, no. For games, an algorithm has to compute the position of the sound and distance. Further distance has to be quieter and with a different level of reverb to simulate echo, etc. It's not like a live recording where you can say "it was recorded on this channel, it will be played on this channel".

And yes, Aureal pioneered the simulation of multiple speaker directions from a pair of speakers, but it still sounds better with four on the Aureal cards.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
June 18, 2002 8:02:19 PM

Well, like i said, Op flashpoint sounds fine without the EAX enabled, There's really not much EAX programmed in there in the first place. What is there is just EAX 1.0 and its all rather wide open anyhow in the game so there's no reverb to be had even if it did work. Seeing as the game is all outdoors on islands in the pacific there's little room for reverb either=) I heartily recommend the game even on a Santa Cruz, best combat action avialable in my opinion.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by williamc on 06/18/02 04:04 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
June 18, 2002 8:05:27 PM

Aureal's biggest mistake in preserving their technology was that they should have licenced out everything to another company BEFORE the bankrucy, instead of going bankrupt and letting Creative buy/seal it.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
June 18, 2002 8:18:45 PM

Yea, i'll agree to that one... Its a cryin shame their tech didnt keep getting moved foward. We're seeing the effects of no real competition to creative's EAX now... Things are getting rather stale in the sound market.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out
June 18, 2002 8:37:09 PM

Quote:
For games, an algorithm has to compute the position of the sound and distance.

The game code does this, *not* the sound card drivers or hardware. For positioning in 4-speaker mode, the sound card is largely a braindead butler in games because it has absolutely no idea what's going on in the game. It takes direct orders from the game. The game tells the card which channel to play the sound in and at what volume. Only when the sound card is forced to downmix the four or five channel source in the game into two channels (headphones or two speakers), do algorithms come into play.

And I don't mean reverb algorithms, that's totally different. I'm just talking about positional algorithms. The A3D vs. EAX debate rests largely on differences in reverb and occlusion accuracy, *not* position. Just read the reviews out there: in 4-speaker mode, EAX does just as well as A3D in positioning (it's physically impossible not to). Now the reverb and occlusion thing is a matter of debate. I personally feel that the Audigy sounds significantly superior to any of the three A3D cards I had for 4-speaker mode in games.

Ritesh
June 18, 2002 9:27:15 PM

Quote:
The game code does this, *not* the sound card drivers or hardware.


No, the hardware does this. That's part of the purpose of Sensaura, A3D, EAX, etc. They're all hardware-based APIs.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
June 18, 2002 9:50:48 PM

Quote:
No, the hardware does this. That's part of the purpose of Sensaura, A3D, EAX, etc.

Lol, so you're claiming that a copy of Quake 3 is running on the sound card and that the GTXP knows that a guy is 30 feet above you and shooting a rocket at you at 50 meters per second?

I don't think so. Quake tells the card everything about that rocket: the digitized sample to play, the volume at which to play it, the rate at which to increase the volume as the rocket gets closer, which channels to play it from, everything. Even the sickly positional audio of your gibbed flesh shooting in thirteen different directions.

Granted, in two-speaker mode or headphones, the card will use an *algorithm* to try to remap the sound data provided by Quake into some funky combination of the left and right channel that might actually convince you that the rocket is where Quake told it to be and coming at you at the speed that Quake decides it should. But I guarantee you that your *P4 running Quake code* tells the GTXP what channels that rocket sample should go to (i.e. 82% rear right, 18% front right), because there ain't no copy of Quake running on your GTXP's lovely little Sensaura chip.

Anyway, on four speakers no algorithm is needed because the channels don't have to be remapped, they just do what Quake tells them to do by DS3D. If Quake 3 supported EAX, it would send some parameters to the EAX driver to add some reverb and delays here and there to make that rocket sound even scarier and faster that it was before. But the basic positioning would be unchanged.

Ritesh
June 18, 2002 10:14:10 PM

That's exactly what happens. The game tells the card what sound sources are where and what they are, then the card determines the volume, placement and effects to be used.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
June 18, 2002 10:32:29 PM

I expect that the murder of Aureal put the sound card industry back about 10 years in technological developement, so we will eventually see something near that quality in 8 years, but then again, the market doesn't push for quality any more, we may never see it.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
June 18, 2002 10:34:08 PM

Quote:
then the card determines the volume, placement and effects to be used.

All three are actually determined by the game:

Volume
The card doesn't understand the concept of distance and velocity and doesn't know that one second the rocket is 15 feet away and the next second it's two inches away. Quake manipulates the volume of the rocket.

Placement
The card is not running Quake and hence doesn't know that the rocket is behind me and to the right and approaching at a 43° angle. Quake continually tells the GTXP, every millisecond, which channels to play that rocket sound from as it changes its angle of approach as I move.

Effects
SOF2 tells the card's EAX HD driver that there's a brick wall here with a reverb value of x and occlusion value of y. Also, a wooden ceiling up here with a reverb of a and occlusion of b. The card simply does the grunt work of converting this large amount of data into a sound wave. If you're running two speakers or headphones, the card does the additional work of downmixing the source into two channels.

Ritesh
June 18, 2002 10:36:18 PM

As far as I know, the game uses those algorithms to computer these things, since there are no real distance measurements in games.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
June 18, 2002 11:41:17 PM

edit: take this as a reply to everyone, not just crashman.


Yea, basically, what your doing is assigning properties to objects and actions and sounds etc which are used by the EAX or A3D or whatever api to tell the soundcard how to CREATE the sound signal.

I think everyone missed that point, there is no sound till you hear it. Game's are programmed to use and interface with the API wich interfaces with the hardware of the soundcard which creates an "audio" signal which is sent to the speaker which make the air move according to the signal they're sent and your ear makes what your brain calls sound by essentially decoding the air wave impacts against your eardrum. Pretty nify built in audio equipment we have in our head eh? The soundcard and game don't interface directly. The game (for the sake of simlicity) will call functions from the API, fill in parameteters and send a message to the sound card. The sound card "knows" what those functions are and uses the parameters to create that audio signal. Thus, i am afraid, the info from a game to a sound card is the same for the audigy set to EAX 2.0 as it is for the Herculees GTXP set to EAX 2.0. The only difference is in how its interpreted by the hardware and the signal created by the hardware. And a big arse difference it is.

Side note, others may hold reverb and occlusion as the biggest debate between GTXP and audigy, i however do not, for its the positioning with reverb a close second and me prefering GTXP on both accounts.

Edited: This bings up the answer to the question i posed a while back. If a tree falls in a forest with no one and nothing around to hear it, does it make a sound? The correct answer is no. And its not debatable.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by williamc on 06/18/02 07:45 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
June 19, 2002 1:33:52 AM

My Dad has the TBSC and has had NO problems with drivers, it worked in my pc fine which is running windows XP. He has it wired to the "living room stereo" and plays music that's encoded in WMA's and it sounds as good as a CD. He actually tried to convince me to get rid of my SB Live and buy the TBSC, actually if i had the $ i would...

Tom's Hardware Tested... Buyer Approved!!
Anonymous
June 19, 2002 2:05:51 AM

OK, I'm just asking for clarification, not debating. Feel free to ignore me. I won't be offended.

Isn't it true that some remotely operated equipment could create conditions for a falling tree, and accurately sample the normally heard effects of the tree falling? Care could be taken to ensure the data taken with said equipment could be used to build the evidence of this "nonsound" and even to recreate the "nonsound" very accurately.

Everybody knows a machine can't hear anything.

With fine data reproduction equipment, I bet even the most talented listeners could easily get fooled by good data.

I'm not saying I've done this, but I'd bet I could with the propper funding.

what does one call the stuff coming out of this hypothetical stimulus reproduction equipment which you say we can't call a sound?

Apparently I'm missing something. no?
Anonymous
June 19, 2002 2:08:52 AM

cool. nice to hear (see?) that.
June 19, 2002 2:45:29 AM

Quote:
Edited: This bings up the answer to the question i posed a while back. If a tree falls in a forest with no one and nothing around to hear it, does it make a sound? The correct answer is no. And its not debatable.

Heh, I'll take the bait. When you say "nothing around", do you mean the tree's in a vacuum? Then of course there's no sound. But if there's air around, may I remind you that sound is defined as the vibration of a fluid medium. So when the tree falls, if there's air around it, you'd better bet there's sound.

Ritesh
Anonymous
June 19, 2002 3:25:03 AM

most of the forests I've been to have air, but then again I'm just a hillbilly washingtonian.
June 19, 2002 5:21:05 AM

LOL Ritesh! I was hoping to stay out of the needless creative bashing but thought your last post was funny, and true. It is nice to see you lay the smack down.

People are just peeved because they cant get audigys on their systems to work or simply just didnt buy one, therefore what they own is superior which is 9/10 the case. Or maybe cuz they 'killed' aureal, so what, nv killed 3dfx and bought the lackeys out.. same type of thing here. Business as usual.

Hardware wise Audigy is #1 on the market now, everyone knows that and no one is arguing it. So essentially all we have here is a bunch of opinions that mean nothing. The fact is that the audigy is the best sound chip for gaming.

Oh and my audigy sound positioning is dead on.

Athlon XP 1700+,KT266A,Geforce3, Audigy.. 'nuff said.
June 19, 2002 1:43:32 PM

Nope, no sound, it just moves air. What is sound, Ritesh? Sound per say does not exist. Look back at the chain of events I listed required for you to hear computer sound. Your ear will translate the waves in air of certain frequencies so that you can "hear" them. Thats why we say there's no sound in a vaccum, there's no air for an object to move. Taken to extremes, its like a sonic boom from a jet aircraft. As jets pass the sonic barrier they build up a wall of air behind them, its an amazing site to see if you see a jet do this in the right weather conditions you can actiually see the wall behind it. The impact of this air is translated as a giant booming sound when it hits our ears. This is why sonic booms can actually shake buildings.

So, the bottom line is, If there's nothing around to catch the air waves and translate them then there is no sound. Just moving air.

Anyhow, the point of this whole thing was to illustrate how sound gets from code in a computer game to your brain. And to illustrate how many variables there are in the sound your hearing. Even the humidity of the air effects the sound we hear.

Enough of my rambling=) I remember one of my professor in college asking this question the firt day of class, only 3 out of 427 students got it right=) The key to realizing the answer is realizing just what sound is.

From Websters:
1 a : a particular auditory impression b : the sensation perceived by the sense of hearing c : mechanical radiant energy that is transmitted by longitudinal pressure waves in a material medium (as air) and is the objective cause of hearing.

The closest to the physics definition is A. C is the furthest. In fact, c has a couple problems with it being used as a definition for sound. The problem is you're trying to definte sound as energy or pressure which *cough* ridiculous. Thats like trying to definte energy as matter or matter as energy even though one can be translated to the other doesnt mean they're the same =) So while close, sound is actually the auditory impression you get from those pressure waves which is created by your ear.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by williamc on 06/19/02 09:56 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
June 19, 2002 1:49:40 PM

lol, man that aint true. I traded in my audigy for the GTXP and i'm alot happier with the GTXP, i can trade it back in any time but i won't. Kinney, i have nothing againt people loving the audigy=) My problem is with blatent posts claiming the audigy is flat out number 1 cause it isnt. Not even for gaming, there's enough people like me that genuinely prefer the GTXP to the Audigy that you cannot say that. If i wanted an Audigy i'd drop by compusa on my way home and buy one. If i can buy a 550 dollar headphone setup i can afford an Audigy=P So, while you can't say its flat out the best, i will grant you its an excellent card right now and the right one for many people. Just not for everyone, not even all gamers. I've actually thought about installing audigy as a second card only for games that support EAX Ad. HD. but right now being only SoF2 and JK2 i don't think its worth it. You can mod both to just use OpenAL and be done with it. Performance hit is not noticeable on my pc so i'm happy without the audigy, i would gain nothing by having it at the moment, but i would lose what i feel is superior positioning and the lower reverb which i quite like. I'll never question the fact that the audigy has great positioning, i think some of you feel thats what i'm saying. Thats not what i'm saying, i'm just saying the Sensura chip is even better than the audigy=)

By the way if anyone does want seperate cards for music and gaming, using an Audigy and an Acoustic Edge together works rather well.


The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by williamc on 06/19/02 10:01 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
June 19, 2002 2:28:34 PM

Quote:
Enough of my rambling=) I remember one of my professor in college asking this question the firt day of class, only 3 out of 427 students got it right=) The key to realizing the answer is realizing just what sound is.

From Websters:
1 a : a particular auditory impression b : the sensation perceived by the sense of hearing c : mechanical radiant energy that is transmitted by longitudinal pressure waves in a material medium (as air) and is the objective cause of hearing.

<A HREF="http://library.thinkquest.org/19537/Physics2.html?tqski..." target="_new">Sorry but your college prof wasn't the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree.</A> The scientific definition of sound is your Webster's c. The *sense* of sound requires an ear to hear it, but sound itself is simply a vibrating medium.

Ritesh
June 19, 2002 4:55:25 PM

Quote:
<i>williamc says:</i>
Edited: This bings up the answer to the question i posed a while back. If a tree falls in a forest with no one and nothing around to hear it, does it make a sound? The correct answer is no. And its not debatable.


That depends on whether you're defining sound as what we hear, or the vibrations in the air. But it's an interesting thought, no doubt.

Quote:
<i>knewton says:</i>
most of the forests I've been to have air, but then again I'm just a hillbilly washingtonian.


Crazy Washingtonians...
(I just moved from Washington back to Oregon)

Quote:
<i>kinney says:</i>
People are just peeved because they cant get audigys on their systems to work or simply just didnt buy one, therefore what they own is superior which is 9/10 the case.


I agree that most people recommend against something when they've never owned it. I don't fall into this category, however.

Quote:
<i>kinney says:</i>
Hardware wise Audigy is #1 on the market now


You mean the specs Creative lied on?

Quote:
<i>kinney says:</i>
everyone knows that and no one is arguing it


Oops.

Quote:
<i>kinney says:</i>
The fact is that the audigy is the best sound chip for gaming.


No it's not.

Quote:
<i>kinney says:</i>
Oh and my audigy sound positioning is dead on.


Want a cookie?

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
June 19, 2002 6:08:48 PM

edit: this is for you too kinney.

Sound and pressure Waves = two different things. Sound is what you hear, sound waves are vibrations in a fluid mediuml. If sound was vibrations in a fluid medium then the entire language would be fubar. The idea of sound existed long before we knew all about sound waves and vibrations in fluid medium.

The point i've been trying to get across is how we hear sound from a computer, because that has everything to do with these dicussions about what exactly sound cards do and do not do and how we can measure them. The idea here is to get everyone on the same page as far as what sound cards are doing. They use an API to interface with games which input variables in functions the sound card can relate to via the API such as EAX and Directsound. The SC then sends a signal to the speakers. The real point here being that a game sending eax parameters to a SC doesnt change its output from an audigy to a GTXP neccessarily. What does change is how the chipset on the card processes that signal and the quality and accuracy with it does so and the signal it sends to the speakers. Also, since all these are doing is sending an electronic signal and the (for the peace of the worlds sake) STUFF we hear is actually determined by our ears, everyone will hear sounds slightly differently or maybe even very differently in some cases. The reason is obviously, because no two people are the exact same.

Back to dealing with peoples favorite soundcards, the result of all this is its entirely possible that certain cards will be better for different people. The object of recommending a soundcard is to try to recommend the card that will most likely be best for a specific user based on what he wants to use it for. Its also quite possible that while one person can tell a difference in 3d positioning or something between two cards that another person, through no fault of their own, cannot.

All that said, i prefer one type of sound card, some of you agree with me, some disagree rather violently. All of us need to spare everyone a lil bit and stop making blatent blanket statements about a certain soundcard being unarguably the best out there. Because, there's obviously no such thing right now.

I'm personally a little miffed that some of you continue to say again and again that the audigy is the only real option for gaming out there. I'm quite definite in my personal testing that i prefer the GTXP for reasons i've stated millions of times and this whole diatribe has been to show how people can honestly different in opinion.

Now, in closing, There is no sound when a tree falls in a forest and there's no one and nothing around to "hear" it. =P The point of which is to get you to think about the whole process of creating sound.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by WilliamC on 06/19/02 02:09 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
June 19, 2002 6:31:22 PM

What if you had a tape recorder? Was there sound when the tree fell because of it or was there no sound then and just the recording of the sound waves? Not trying to be obtuse, just curious.

MStakem
June 19, 2002 6:45:08 PM

I think you should come to your own conclusion. I'm sure i'll get flamed more than enough for what i've already written=) Obviously there's room for some debate due to the nature of science. When i said it wasn't debatable that wasn't true as everything is debatable=) I brought this up as a way to get a point across.

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out
June 19, 2002 7:21:30 PM

wheeee....is the cat dead or alive? I think the poor pussy cat is dead, but that's just me.

MStakem
Anonymous
June 19, 2002 7:36:15 PM

if he is dead he must be getting awfully stinky by now.
June 19, 2002 7:52:42 PM

god thats awful smelling, did you have to kill the cat?

The itsy bitsy spider climbed up the empires state building, along came goblin, wiped the spider out
June 19, 2002 8:28:24 PM

I know..I know...I should never have put her in the box to begin with sorry :( 

My signature's on strike.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by MStakem on 06/19/02 04:31 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!