audigy vs live!

G

grahamware

That FAQ Guy
Hey everybody!

Heres the deal: I want to record onto my computer from my stereo mixer. I can buy either an SB Audigy or an SB Live!.

Let's compare:

Audigy: New. $60 at cheapest. 24 bit DAC (whatever that is), but 16 bit recording.

Live!: Old(er). $20 at cheapest. 16 bit recording.

My question to you, all-knowing home recording audiophiles: is it worth the extra $40 dollars to get a newer SB card? Or will an SB Live! be good enough for simple stereo recording?

If anyone has experience with both cards, please share!

BTW I can also buy an SB Live! Platinum for $65 w/an e-drive, which would give me a cool block to stick in the front of my computer. Or I could buy a Turtle Beach S.C. for $59, and get away from Creative.

Think about it...
 
Not really worth it. The Audigy isn't true 24 bit recording. Read the specs closely. The Live! will hold you over until you can get a better card, but I'd probably save up a bit more for an Audiophile or something similar. YMMV
 
It really comes down to what you want to record and how serious you are about it. An M-Audio Audiophile (or similar) card will do a significantly better job than a Soundblaster (or similar) card, but will cost at least $100 more.

If you're fairly serious about this hobby, I would second jitteringjim's recommendation of saving for a better card.

If you decide to go the soundblaster route, I'd get for the old Live at $20. It will work for you until you upgrade to something better (after you decide you are fairly serious about this recording thing). ;)
 
thanks...

Well it's not that I don't want to be serious guys...

I just don't have a lot of money to throw around! To pay $160 for a sound card, then $200 for a set of good mics, and $100 for a mixer, well, it starts to add up!

Look at it from my light-walleted perspective:

SB Live! - $20
Audiophile - $159

Tough choice...
 
Re: thanks...

grahamware said:
Well it's not that I don't want to be serious guys...

I just don't have a lot of money to throw around! To pay $160 for a sound card, then $200 for a set of good mics, and $100 for a mixer, well, it starts to add up!
Click to expand...

Yep, I'm following you man.
The problem with recording through the Live! analog input is that the converters bite, big time. I recorded with a Live! for a long time, but through the digital input - so I got better than average results from it.

Give us an idea of the scale of your project, and perhaps we can put together a decent starter rig within your budget. IE: what are you recording, how many instruments do you want to track at one time, etc.

BTW, welcome to the money pit. It never ends, believe me. :D
 
sounds like a plan

Well, I'm trying to record my jazz combo (drums, alto and tenor sax, trumpet, trombone, bass).

I have three decent mics and a mixer. The mixer puts out a stereo analog signal (RCA).

The live's converter's are crud? good to know. I MIGHT be able to sport $150 for an audiophile. hello ebay...
 
grahamware

Most everybody feels for you at this point but there is one thing that you have not experienced yet and that is the endless hassle of a soundcard that does not work when you need it to.

Take money away from this for a second and ask yourself what price you can put on not having to come back to this board every three minutes to start weaving tales of "clicks" and "pops" and all the other evils that go along with any Soundblaster product.

This topic has been discussed to exhaustion on this and many other boards. Soundblaster products are designed for gaming and listening and that's it. Don't let anyone try to tell you different.

I went through this very same thing about 2 years ago and almost spent my cash on a Soundblaster figuring it was going to be okay for audio recording. Luckily, I knew a few folks who properly steered me away and offered this advise: "If you cannot afford a pro level card now - wait until you can."

Best tip I ever got. I did not know how serious my recording would become when I purchased my current card (M-Audio Delta 66 with Omni Studio) It also felt painful to drop $800.00 CDN (this was about a year ago) on a card not know what it was going to sound like.

But when I got this thing all hooked up and started working with it...I was really thrilled that I saved my cash and waited. I am so heavily into my recording now that I started my own company and the Delta is still going strong.

Maybe I could second JitteringJim and ask just what you plan on doing. What level of recording are you at and why the urge to buy into a Soundblaster? Update when you can...

Cheers,

Cuzin B
 
I'm not doing anything fancy - just an amateur demo recording to try and get a gig for my jazz combo at the common (what we call public greenspace in Mass.)

Herein lies the problem - i don't know how often I'm going to need this thing. Once school starts back up I won't have a heck of a lot of time. This music thing isn't my career, it's just a hobby. At some point maybe It'll be something more, but right now it's just a fun way to make some extra bucks.

This is why I was leaning towards an SB for $20. I won't feel bad if I don't record with it more than three times. $150 is more than a small investment in a hobby, its a commitment to something more.
 
grahamware

Well - looks like you have at least stated your intentions with this hobby.

Fact of life: You get what you pay for - and trust me - you will get about $20 worth of recording results from a $20 dollar soundcard. (probably less)

You mileage may vary. Good luck.

Cuzin B
 
The price of quality...

Cuzin B said:
Fact of life: You get what you pay for - and trust me - you will get about $20 worth of recording results from a $20 dollar soundcard. (probably less)

You mileage may vary. Good luck.

Cuzin B
Click to expand...

This is a bit of a misleading statement.

Sure, it's almost impossible to argue with Cuzin B's logic. You get what you pay for. (Although that's not ALWAYS the case, assume it is in this situation.) An $800 card will beat the crap out of a $20 card.

However, I must disagree with Cuzin B's statement regarding the price/performance ratio. You really can't put a dollar amount on sound quality, but less than $20 worth of recording results? No way!

I've made many great recordings (sonically, at least :)) with a really horrible, old audio card. It just takes a lot more work.

Anyway, grahamware, with either of the Creative cards, you'll have to work track by track. This is difficult for most of the groups with whom I work, and understandably so. This is an especially important issue in many forms of jazz, so you guys will have to have a pretty good idea of what's going on rhythmically and harmonically, while keeping it loose enough to avoid the ol’ studio stodginess. It'll take some practice to get the performances to sound natural this way, but with enough planning you'll be okay.

Also, keep in mind that the Audigy is a 16-bit card, and you'll have less headroom with which you can work. There have been countless times that I've overdubbed bass pops or loud snare hits on separate tracks (this is less effective with my solo acoustic guitar stuff, though). The idea is to get as much dynamic range as you can while getting as much clarity as possible. It takes quite an effort to get as much as possible out of your bits, but if you're crafty, I'm willing to bet most folks won't be able to notice that your recordings were recorded on a 16-bit card with crappy converters, even compared back to back with the latest 24-bit recordings.

Anyway, I do most of my recording with my friend's swanky 24-bit setup, mainly because it makes everything a lot easier. No more extraneous overdubbing, compressing my acoustic guitar, or doing everything one by one. And yes, it sounds better.

As I stated earlier, an $800 card will beat the crap out of a $20 card. But does it sound $780 better? I don't think so, but it CAN make things about $300 easier. ;)

So, to you I say go with Creative. Hey, your 20 dollars of recording results with a SoundBlaster have a lot more sonic potential than what you'd get with a $200 Tascam 4-track!

Cheers to all!

Jason Spatola
 
Jason,

Thanks for the update but who really cares if you think this is misleading. Our original poster asked for advise and that's what he got.

And yes - you can put a dollar amount on sound quality - obviously you don't make money from your product. I do - and a $20.00 card doesn't fly when a client is expecting high quality results.

Graham has already stated that he has about 20 dollars to spend on a soundcard. All I can say to that is - If a $20.00 card turned out high quality results then we would all use them. Hey - I would love bank 780.00 anytime.

And this statement:

"Anyway, I do most of my recording with my friend's swanky 24-bit setup, mainly because it makes everything a lot easier. No more extraneous overdubbing, compressing my acoustic guitar, or doing everything one by one. And yes, it sounds better. "

simply tells me that you are a asshole that does not use a 20.00 card for your projects. So what's your point anyway? You boast about using a high quality system and then tell us the merits of using the $20.00 card? Why don't you use a $20.00 card - Give me a frickin' break.

Cuzin B
 
whoa

HEY NOW CUZIN -
NONE OF THAT IN MY THREAD

his advice is just as valid is yours; if you disagree you don't have to call him names, just counter his argument with relevant facts.

Don't take things so personally!
 
Graham,

I am not taking anything personally. If this guy would have left out the part about using his friends "swanky" 24 bit setup, I would have been fine with it. The guy is being completely hypocritical here.

Either you are using the 20.00 card or you are not. State that and get on with it. You can't sit there and tell everyone how to make the most of the $20.00 only to quickly say you "don't use it"

Hey - I read your story and I concur. You are a hobbyist and that is great. Don't get all torn up over it .

Cuzin B
 
Hey now!

Why the hate, Cuz? Remember, we're talking about music equipment, here!

Perhaps you misunderstood my post. It's not any kind of attack, and as you can see, I'm not trying to damage your reputation or anything. I agreed with all but one statement. Let me try to make this clearer for you, and everybody else...

>< Our original poster asked for advise and that's what he got. ><

I thought I was providing advice! I mentioned that it is possible to make a good recording with a cheap card, and provided some general info and warnings regarding the use of one. If it was bad advice, you should have stated why, instead of attacking me. I'm still interested in hearing what you have to say, and I'm sure everyone else is! Like I said, I agreed with most everything in your post.

>< And yes - you can put a dollar amount on sound quality - obviously you don't make money from your product. ><

Hey, I made $3,374 and a pizza (including extra cheese, no less) with my crappy card! As I stated, the stuff sounded pretty darn good, but it took a lot of time and work, and is way better to my ears than the stuff that came out of many of my local recording studios.

>< If a $20.00 card turned out high quality results then we would all use them. ><

Of course we would! But I think Graham will get good enough results with a Creative. There's a test on HomeRecording.com that compares a crappy card to a good one, and although there are too many variables to really judge, the crappy one holds its own. And I've heard better things than that coming from SoundBlasters.

>< simply tells me that you are a asshole that does not use a 20.00 card for your projects. ><

Okay, I'm an asshole for sure, but not in this situation! The whole point of my post was to show that I got by with a tenth-rate audio card, and that one should be sufficiently adequate for Graham’s needs. As for you accusing me of not using a $20 card, did I not state that I was using an old, horrible card? Additionally, my tidbits of advice related directly to cheap audio cards. I've used plenty of sound cards in my life, and although I generally prefer the more expensive ones, I can't deem the quality of a Live! or Audigy "bad" by any means. Of course they are not as good as the expensive ones. I made this point clear.

>< You boast about using a high quality system and then tell us the merits of using the $20.00 card? ><

What? I did not boast! I simply mentioned some of the advantages. This is on-topic. As well, I think I can safely mention the merits of the SoundBlasters, because I've used both cards in question.

>< The guy is being completely hypocritical here. ><

What?!? How so? You should reread my first post.

>< Either you are using the 20.00 card or you are not. State that and get on with it. ><

Again, I've used both types, and prefer the expensive card. However, the cheap ones are pretty good if you've got a little mixing and recording skill, and are willing to work with it. I said this the first time around.

>< Don't get all torn up over it . ><

Heed your own advice.

Cuzin B, I don't really understand the purpose of your post. I found it neither informative nor entertaining, and it didn't contribute anything to the subject at hand. Most of the issues you raised were answered in my first post, and I suggest you take another look at it.

There's absolutely no reason to get bent out of shape over recording, dude. If you'd like to fight, perhaps it's best that we begin our own thread, where I'll debate anything from SoundBlasters to abortion.

Personally, I'd rather talk about making music rather than duking it out over some rather moot points.

No offense intended or taken.

Jason Spatola
 
All right move along take this somewhere else

Cuzin I am no longer "torn apart" as you say - I broke down and bought a hoontech :cool:

Go DSP 24! I know its no audiophile, but I think its better than an SB Live!.
 
Graham,

Glad to hear it. You will get some excellent results from that card.

And no hard feelings boys - just some of this banter rubbed me the wrong way.

Cuzin B
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top