What Makes My PC Sound Card Converters "Bad"?

R

Ryan Teasnob

Member
I was just looking at the specs for my on-board sound card on my computer, which is a RealTek. It says it uses 16-bit 44.1KHz conversion, which sounds like it should be fine for creating decent quality audio. So what makes it suck compared to, say, the converters on an interface like an M-Audio Fast Track or something? Even using 16-bit conversion on the M-Audio the RealTek results still suck in comparison. What makes the difference?

Thanks.

Ryan
 
The components and converters on a sound card are generally the very cheapest thing they could possibly find that'll do the beeps and boops of an arcade game. Trying to choose for quality of sound is a secondary consideration.

Whereas M-Audio is produced for the specific purpose of 'best sound possible for the price'
 
Thanks Lt Bob. I suspected as much. I don't supposed you could expand on some of the specifics as to why "cheap" equates to bad? I mean, if the analog sound is being converted at the same bit rate and sampling frequency, shouldn't the audio sound equally good in theory?

Ryan
 
Ryan Teasnob said:
Thanks Lt Bob. I suspected as much. I don't supposed you could expand on some of the specifics as to why "cheap" equates to bad? I mean, if the analog sound is being converted at the same bit rate and sampling frequency, shouldn't the audio sound equally good in theory?

Ryan
Click to expand...
well ..... I'm more of an analog guy so the very specifics of it someone else will have to give you BUT:

It's not simply a matter of bit rate and sampling freq or all good converters would sound the same ........ they don't.
So just like one amp can sound very different than another amp built on the same specs .... so can converters and the other things involved in producing sound.
Don't forget ..... once that digital stuff gets turned to analog ...... that means there's an amplifier in there somewhere and we all know amps ..... whether guitar amps or amps on a chip designed to get levels up to a decent voltage ..... can sound very different.

Hell ...... I've read about very poor converters that would actually produce the wrong pitch for a digital input!! :eek:
 
40 to 50 cents worth of chips with high latency drivers and no asio.

Made for gaming, not for music production....
 
Ryan Teasnob said:
Thanks Lt Bob. I suspected as much. I don't supposed you could expand on some of the specifics as to why "cheap" equates to bad? I mean, if the analog sound is being converted at the same bit rate and sampling frequency, shouldn't the audio sound equally good in theory?

Ryan
Click to expand...

What he is trying to say is that you can play a song on a $50 no name guitar or you can play a song on a classic Fender Strat, the song still can be played on the cheap guitar as they both have 6 strings and the same tuning, but which one sounds the best?

Alan.
 
Lt. Bob said:
well ..... I'm more of an analog guy so the very specifics of it someone else will have to give you BUT:

It's not simply a matter of bit rate and sampling freq or all good converters would sound the same ........ they don't.
So just like one amp can sound very different than another amp built on the same specs .... so can converters and the other things involved in producing sound.
Don't forget ..... once that digital stuff gets turned to analog ...... that means there's an amplifier in there somewhere and we all know amps ..... whether guitar amps or amps on a chip designed to get levels up to a decent voltage ..... can sound very different.

Hell ...... I've read about very poor converters that would actually produce the wrong pitch for a digital input!! :eek:
Click to expand...

To add to what Lt. Bob said. It's not just the converter chip/rate ( ie.. 16 bit 44.1khz) that makes a converter sound good/bad, it's the analog circuit design around it..That's why some of the good converters set at 16 bit/44.khz sounds better than some of the less better/cheaper ( is that good English..?.(lol)..) converters set at higher bit/sample rates ( ie 24/44.1,24/88, etc.)..
 
Let me count the ways:

1. As noted, things like Realtek use a few cents worth of low quality components.

2. They're located right in the middle of the computer's mother board, one of the most electrically noisy environments that can be imagined. Have a look at the back ground noise on your recordings.

3. They use an unbalanced 1/8th inch mini jack for the connection to the outside world rather than industry standard balanced XLR connectors.

4. They're generally optimised for relatively high impedance cheapie mics of the sort used for Skype calls, etc. This will affect levels and frequency response when trying to use better mics.

5. Based on 4 above, headroom for recordings is generally poor.

6. No phantom power to allow the use of decent condenser mics.

7. (Usually) no ability to accept line level signals from keyboards, external mic pre amps, etc. etc.

Shall I go on?

Basically, simply saying 16 bit, 44.1kHz sampling is only giving a fraction of the spec. You can make a CD spec digital copy of a truly appalling analogue signal. To be meaningful, there's a whole raft of other specifications needed--and ones on which a Realtek will fail dismally.
 
Bobbsy said:
Let me count the ways:

1. As noted, things like Realtek use a few cents worth of low quality components.

2. They're located right in the middle of the computer's mother board, one of the most electrically noisy environments that can be imagined. Have a look at the back ground noise on your recordings.

3. They use an unbalanced 1/8th inch mini jack for the connection to the outside world rather than industry standard balanced XLR connectors.

4. They're generally optimised for relatively high impedance cheapie mics of the sort used for Skype calls, etc. This will affect levels and frequency response when trying to use better mics.

5. Based on 4 above, headroom for recordings is generally poor.

6. No phantom power to allow the use of decent condenser mics.

7. (Usually) no ability to accept line level signals from keyboards, external mic pre amps, etc. etc.

Shall I go on?

Basically, simply saying 16 bit, 44.1kHz sampling is only giving a fraction of the spec. You can make a CD spec digital copy of a truly appalling analogue signal. To be meaningful, there's a whole raft of other specifications needed--and ones on which a Realtek will fail dismally.
Click to expand...


8. They are not optimised for duplex recording and playback (i.e. listening to stuff while you record new stuff)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top