quote:Originally posted by Martin Walker (in another thread): Since these Audigy issues are still coming up . . . I've just posted a new FAQ on all the issues in my PC Music FAQS forum.
Let me know if I've missed anything out Scott
Martin
Nice one, Martin . . . should save me some typing in the future! Actually, there is something that I think should be added to this, and it is, for me, probably one of the most annoying things about the whole deal. I have found that, while you can get the MME-WDM drivers to play 44.1 kHz files, you cannot properly apply any VST or DX effects to these files, for example in Wavelab.
If I simply want to add a little compression or reverb, or even a little bit of EQ, when I render the file with the effects, the effects come out sounding very different from what I am hearing when I monitor the file playing through the effects. The results can actually be quite extreme, particularly if I want to run more than one plug-in, in which case the rendered sound will often come out entirely (and, depending on how you look at it, comically or infuriatingly ) mangled.
Basically, many common editing functions are simply non-functioning at 44.1 kHz. Wavelab will not play a 44.1 kHz file at all using the ASIO drivers, and the above problems occur with both the Creative MME-WMD drivers and the MME-WMD Microsoft Sound Mapper drivers.
Editing samples, or editing final mixdowns for CD, etc., becomes a process of upsampling and downsampling and, as a result, in addition to the extra hassle there is always a potential for surprises, and more trial and error. While I've found the SRC in Wavelab to be very, very good, occasionally I have noticed some differences after conversion . . . though I haven't yet figured out what might be the cause in the cases where it is more noticeable.
When you consider that there is a fair likelihood that someone who is new to computer music and may have limited budgets might also be dealing with compromises in their monitoring systems, IMHO these cards with their limitations seem less and less a prudent choice for an entry into computer music . . . particularly when you start comparing prices.
Further (as we discussed in a previous thread), the fact that with the Creative drivers (the kx project drivers do seem to address this) you cannot adjust the input levels (either with a slider or a switch to change between +4/-10) can make for difficulty getting proper gain structure, and therefore a good, really clean signal path into the card if, for example, you want to run a stand-alone pre straight into the card without having to go though a budget mixer.
This is probably not a huge deal for many musicians who would buy a Fraudigy, as noise levels are still such that they would most likely be covered up in a mix, etc. but might be noticeable, for example, on a solo classical guitar recording. I ran into trouble when I wanted to do some sampling in the above-mentioned manner. Noise levels were too high to be accepted by any professional sampling house.
I have also found the various inputs to be of inconsistent sound quality and use. The Line 2/Mic 2 input seems to be noisy in a way that the Aux 2 input isn't. There seem to be some odd high frequency transients below -50 or -60 dB or so running though anything I've recorded through this input that aren't there on things recorded via the Aux 2 input. I suppose it's possible that the problem is the patch cord I used (a good quality Dimarzio guitar cord run from the unbalanced out of my Presonus Bluetube), though it seems like I have tried using a couple of different cords. FWIW, I also get this noise playing a guitar plugged directly into the Mic 2 input using the Audigy's preamp.
I have also found that I cannot turn off the hardware monitoring on the AC97 line input on the back of the card for monitoring solely through software.
So, essentially, while the Audigy does offer quite a number of I/O options, it would seem that there are no two stereo pairs alike, and each seems compromised in its own unique way.
If any of the above-mentioned problems are or may be a result of my own lack of knowledge or experience or may be coming from another part of the signal chain, I'm very open to (and indeed would appreciate) suggestions or correction.
I acknowledge that some of the things I mention above may not be a signficant issue for some musicians just getting into computer music, but I thought they should be mentioned in the interest of keeping it real with regard to Creative's . . . well . . . creative marketing claims. You can still certainly get some quite good results from these cards (apparently someone even made a hit record or two on an SBLive), but there are definitely compromises in many areas that could take time and energy away from your creative endeavors and waste it with time spent head scratching (especially at first, though it hasn't entirely stopped for me) and performing extra steps in your editing.
It seems to me (IMHO) that, while the Audigy, etc., is a good value for what it actually does, it is questionable whether they are really a good value for musicians . . . especially since soft synths and soft samplers, etc. make the onboard sampling and DSP redundant, particularly if you have anything near to relatively current computer. The kx project drivers are getting better and better, and the definitely make the card more useful, but you use those drivers at your own risk, and There are often bugs to deal with in various updates. I ran into one recently that could easily have damaged my speakers/amp/headphones with a very loud noise while switching between latency settings in Cubase. But then again there was the squeal of death issue with the original Audigy drivers, which I also ran into at one point.
I would also point out that, at least with the original Audigy drivers, I have had trouble installing them at various times (I have had to re-install them a number of times for various reasons -- some being my own experimentation and some being as a result of corrupted drivers, virus, etc.) . . . including twice with Creative tech support on the phone (they didn't know why this problem existed, only that it was a problem that came up from time to time).
I didn't really mean to turn this into a rant . . . it's just that when I start discussing problems I've had with the Audigy, more just keep coming fast and furiously to mind. Aside from some of the various problems I've mentioned here in these forums, I must admit the Audigy's been a cracking piece of kit for me.
From: Cornwall, UK
Registered: November 30, 2000 Posts: 4377
posted
Thanks for your thoughts
Phew - thanks for all that Scott
The changes in sound after applying VST or DX effects to 44.1kHz files using the MME-WDM drivers could well be the result of the ASRC. After all, as I understand it, a 44.1kHz file gets converted to 48kHz before entering the ‘engine', and that's what you hear coming out of the engine. If you then save at 44.1kHz the audio is re-converted to 44.1kHz before ending up on the hard drive.
The next time you listen to it this final 44.1kHz audio is then re-converted in real time to 48kHz again to be auditioned - its' perfectly possible that what you hear will be slightly different from what you heard previously
As for the differing sounds of the various inputs, I'm not surprised, on the Audigy 2 (and the latest ZS version) the Line Input 3 has been specially modified to avoid ground loop problems when testing with RightMark's Audio Analyser - if Creative are prepared to go to such lengths then it's quite on the cards that the other inputs could all provide different audio results. Combined mic/line inputs are also likely to provide different results with line level inputs because of the extra circuitry - switching to Line won't necessarily make this input exactly like the Line only ones.
Thanks for the reply, Martin. I sorta follow you on the whole thing with ASRC, particularly with converted files sounding different, but I'm a little hazy as to how the sound card's drivers/SRCs, etc. affect the actual processing/rendering of the VST effects.
Is it possible to explain a little bit more (without going through too much trouble), or is there an article in SOS or something else that you could point me to that might bring me a little further up to speed on this?
The thing that's got me flummoxed is not so much the relatively minor conversion artifacts (though I'm glad to know I'm not nuts in thinking I'm hearing these differences), but the fact that if, for example, I decide to add just a very tiny bit of a short (small room)reverb to a 44.1 kHz file, after I render it, it sounds like I have put it through the Millenium Dome setting with all the settings at full whack, or if I try to apply a light compression, the sound after rendering is squashed and distorted beyond all recognition, or a light boost at 2k on an eq plugin will send the entire upper frequency range to the moon.
I can monitor and get them sounding just the way I want it, but then when I render the file the sound is often mangled beyond recognition -- or at least the sound of the effects are.
A sound card upgrade is definitely . . . erm . . . in the cards at first opportunity, but in the mean time . . .
The up side of all this (I think), is that I'm learning a lot by having to work through all this bollox.
Sorry to pester you further on this . . . I would just like to get a more solid understanding of what's going on . . . and try to put the issue to ground a bit. I think this is an issue that people should be well aware of when considering these cards . . . if I had had any idea of this in the first place, I wouldn't have touched this card with a 10 foot pole.
[This message was edited by scottdrü on August 19, 2003 at 05:48 PM.]
[This message was edited by scottdrü on August 19, 2003 at 05:49 PM.]
From: Cornwall, UK
Registered: November 30, 2000 Posts: 4377
posted
More thoughts from MW
Scott - your mangled beyond all recognition description does sound more extreme than the differences I've heard due to ASRC, and I'm not sure why it's happening with VST/DX effects.
Thinking it through a little more carefully, and as I understand it, the 44.1kHz data in your WAV files will be streamed from the hard drive into system RAM, treated by your processor using the algorithms of the software plugin effects, then be sent into the soundcard's RAM buffers, and finally enter the Audigy engine, where the ASRC will convert it in real-time to 48kHz and send it through the D/A converters at this sample rate for you to hear on your monitors.
When you render your effects to the file the Audigy engine shouldn't be involved at all - you're modifying an existing 44.1kHz file, so the data shouldn't be altered by your soundcard in any way. Only when recording at 44.1kHz using the MME drivers will the engine up-convert the incoming signal to 48kHz on the way in, and then down-convert it to 44.1kHz on the way out to the hard drive.
That Creative engine certainly takes some getting your head around
Has anyone else suffered from Scott's mangling (so to speak )?
quote:Originally posted by Martin Walker: Thinking it through a little more carefully, and as I understand it, the 44.1kHz data in your WAV files will be streamed from the hard drive into system RAM, treated by your processor using the algorithms of the software plugin effects, then be sent into the soundcard's RAM buffers, and finally enter the Audigy engine, where the ASRC will convert it in real-time to 48kHz and send it through the D/A converters at this sample rate for you to hear on your monitors.
Thanks for your input, Martin. That's basically what I was assuming, which is why this thing has me entirely flummoxed. It wouldn't necessarily be a terrible thing having to convert once and then was able to continue editing at 44.1 kHz. I have had situations where I felt that the 48-44.1kHz conversion had actually warmed the sound slightly . . . in a good way. I decided that it still needed a little tweaking afterward, but I could not do the editing taking the conversion artifacts into consideration.
This also means the card is not particularly useful for editing samples on any kind of serious or professional level, because I also cannot edit samples that have been downsampled to save on RAM, etc.
Has anyone else run into these problems with these cards? There has to be someone here who has tried to push a Soundbastard/Fraudigy to do some of these things?
On the other hand, maybe by the time the Audigy came out the word was well out on the Creative cards, and none of the more experienced/pro guys have ever bothered to mess with them.
Martin, I really appreciate that you have taken some interest in this (even enough to bump the thread ). Just thought I'd update.
Ethan Winer says he has been able to edit 44.1 kHz files on his Soundbastard (though he uses Sonar, and therefore might not have had occasion to use VST plugins . . . but I'm sure he must use DX plugins).
One thing I think seems rather odd is that, in Wavelab, I only seem to have the option to choose the MME-WMD drivers or the Creative EMU 10kx drivers, whereas in Cubase I have more options, including an ASIO DirectX Full DUplex driver, etc. Could this be part of the problem?
Also, to put things further into perspective, I have contacted Creative tech support on this (I cut and pasted the majority of my explanation above), and I would like to include their reply below:
Because the Audigy samples all audio at 48 kHz you are going to have this problem. Most burning software programs do allow you to burn audio CDs at 48kHz. Best Regards
G--------- (name witheld) Technical Support Creative Labs Americas -------------------------------
This is entirely typical of my experience with Creative tech support. I've emailed back, clarifying the issues and my needs and making more urgent the appeal . . . we'll see what happens. As I've said many time to others, if you buy this card for music, you are on your own for support. Flapping in the breeze. Themajority of their tech support people just don't seem to know anything about it.
I'd be more than happy to find out that the problem is me . . . at least then I can fix it.
I've got a partition with the kx project drivers up and running now, though I think I still need to do some tweaking. They claim to have added some 44.1 kHz support for ASIO (though not for recording). I'll have to give this a try. The kx project folks really do seem to be getting a lot more out of these cards than Creative can be bothered to implement . . . even though they are the ones who made the initial deceptive claims in their marketing -- at least with regard to the first version of the Audigy.
[This message was edited by scottdrü on August 27, 2003 at 12:00 AM.]
Next installment from Creative Tech Support: ------------------------------------- Dear Customer,
For General editing purpose yes you can do this. But when adding the effects is where this does not work because of the resampling of the audio. When you are adding the effects like reverb and other effects and these get resampled is when this happens. This is mostly a program glitch not a sound card problem. Wavlab has always had problems with resampling audio. [Anybody else found this to be a problem?? -- Scottdru]
Best Regards
G------------- Technical Support Creative Labs Americas
Original Message Follows: ------------------------ Thanks for your reply G------. I'm a little lost with this issue, because, while I understand the 48 kHz lock on the card, I have generally been under the impression that VST and DX plug-ins, when they are rendered to the audio file in Wavelab or other audio editing applications, the work is being done by the processor and should not be going through the 10kx chip's audio engine . . . So I am now rather confused. Am I incorrect in my assumptions? Can you clear this up for me as to how and why this is happening?
As to CDs, CDs and CD players operate at a standard 44.1 kHz. As I am mastering my music and samples directly on my computer, I want to know exactly what the files sound like BEFORE they go through the SRCs and incur artifacts. This is why I wish to be able to do some final mastering/editing before burning to CD, and I'm not particularly keen to end up with surprises in the end, which means a lot of trial and error and wasted time for me.
So, if at all possible, I would like a more complete and definitive explanation with regard to this. ----------------------------------
So, while the explanation is a little incomplete and I am none the wiser, really as to WHY it would be, Creative seem to agree with me that applying VST and DX effects to 44.1 kHz files does not work if you are using this sound card/drivers. See also the next post.
Thought this might be of interest with regard to my question about the alternate drivers to the Creative EMU 10kx ASIO and the MME-WMD drivers: ------------------------------------ Dear Customer,
The option that is in Cubase is only for Audio with MIDI not just audio only.
Best Regards
G--------- Technical Support Creative Labs Americas
Original Message Follows: ------------------------ Just to add to my previous email, I would also like to point out that in Wavelab I only seem to have the option to choose either the Creative EMU10kx drivers or the MME-WMD drivers . . . I cannot choose ASIO Full Duplex Direct X drivers, etc., as I can in Cubase. Why is this, and is this a contributing factor to my difficulties applying VST and DX effects plugins to 44.1 kHz files?
In addition, I asked them what firewire chipset was used in the Audigy, as I wanted to check compatibility with a number of different pieces of gear. He refused to tell me, claiming that Tech Support didn't have this information, but rather had only a list of firewire products that have been tested with the Creative FrAudigy. This is garbage, and entirely unhelpful if they haven't tested the product.
I didn't tell him that the reason I was asking was I was curious to see (for the future) if it was one of the chipsets compatible with MOTU hardware. Somehow I suspect these have not been tested for compatibility with a Creative card.
Martin . . . didn't you say you were doing a test of MOTU stuff on PCs for an SOS review? Any chance you could squeeze this info outta Creative in time for the review?
This is really a very frustrating pattern with Creative. They advertise all these wonderful features, and then they go to great lengths to keep people from using to full potential the features that attracted them in the first place. How silly is this?
From: Cornwall, UK
Registered: November 30, 2000 Posts: 4377
posted
My head hurts
Also, if you'd spent the same amount of time busking as you have investigating the Audigy problems, you could probably have got enough money to replace it
Sensible bit: my Motu tests were on the PCI-424 products (24 I/O, 2408 Mk3, and HD192) not the FireWire ones. Sorry
As for the Creative FireWire chip, I think it's proprietary.
quote:Originally posted by Martin Walker: Also, if you'd spent the same amount of time busking as you have investigating the Audigy problems, you could probably have got enough money to replace it
You have a very good point.
Hopefully, at least, my blogging my trials and tribulations here will give some other people a little bit better information as to whether or not they really want Creative card.
From: clemson, sc, usa
Registered: October 23, 2002 Posts: 218
posted
Scott, my internet machine (PentiumIII 800Mhz) has audigy 1 mp3 on it, and I hooked up my MOTU 828mk1 on it it worked without a problem. And my PC has SIS chipset on it MOTU is a little tricky with the installation on XP. It was giving contantly new hardware found message whenever I booted up, but once it's got it going, it was fine. And the sound on MOTU is far better than audigy. I think, I can hear the difference on a blindfold test too
hehe . . . whodathunkitt? Thanks, pronoise. This is one thing I didn't think anyone had ever tested. I like the sound of the recent MOTU stuff that I have heard (i.e., I know how much better it is than the FrAudigy ), and from time to time I see some of the older units going fairly cheaply. At this point I'm trying to figure out ways to get to some good, clean 24/44.1 multi-tracking ASAP, as cheaply as possible . . . so this is one avenue I have been considering.
I've gotten to the point where I don't really even care that much which company makes it, as long as it's clean, quiet and sounds good. I'm sick of waiting. I will also need to work with some 24/96 stuff at some point, but I may not need a lot of I/O for that, so I may just get an Echo Mia or something in the short term and then get something more extensive later.
I still want to do some soundfont editing here and there, so I feel I still need to keep a soundbastard of some sort around.
From: Bradford, West Yorkshire, England
Registered: December 21, 2000 Posts: 4140
posted
I am so glad I didn't upgrade from my SB Live! Value to the Audigy after hearing of the hassle Scott and many others have gone through. Despite this and also my research over the past year or two into which is the best 2 in 2 out soundcard, with low ASIO latency and 44.1kHz, 16/24 bit specification...I am still no wiser even though many people here have posted about their positive experiences with various popular cards.
I currently use a ASUS TUSL2-C and I know that SOS use the same motherboard in one of their machines, so I would be VERY interested to hear which in their opinion, is the best soundcard to use with this motherboard in the £50 to £200 price range.
I tend to use a handful of simultaneous VST instruments and FX, along with about eight to twenty audio tracks and a few MIDI tracks. My PC is a Intel Celeron 1.2GHz (100FSB & 256KB Cache), 512MB PC133 SDRAM, GeForce 2 MX-400 64MB AGP, Maxtor D740X ATA-133 7200rpm 80GB and so on. I don't need more than two inputs and outputs so a simple card would be fine. I don't want a card that records at 48kHz though!
NCGM - excellent thread by the way and Scott's Audigy info over the past year, has been invaluable.
Ever curious, I have to ask this, NCGM . . . have you had similar experiences with applying VST effects, etc. to 44.1 kHz files, or haven't you tried doing it? I'm just wondering if this is mainly a driver thing (as Ethan Winer said he has been able to work with 44.1 kHz files on the Soundblaster)?
I've been playing around again with the kx project drivers, but haven't tried doing this . . . and I have not yet tried the APS drivers.
Anyway . . . glad my spouting and sputtering has been of some use to at least a few people.
From: Cornwall, UK
Registered: November 30, 2000 Posts: 4377
posted
MW Reply to NCGM
quote:Originally posted by Neo-Classical Guitar Man!: I currently use a ASUS TUSL2-C and I know that SOS use the same motherboard in one of their machines, so I would be VERY interested to hear which in their opinion, is the best soundcard to use with this motherboard in the £50 to £200 price range.
NCGM - I've got the Asus TUSL2-C in my studio PC, and have used it to test all the soundcard's I've reviewed over the last couple of years. Any problems I had during the review I always comment on, but it's generally regarded as extremely compatible with most devices (which is the main reason I bought it - anyone reviewing soundcards has to have a compatible PC )
I think most people know I ended up with an Echo Mia card, and have been very happy with that too.
Topic Closed
Next
Actually, there is something that I think should be added to this, and it is, for me, probably one of the most annoying things about the whole deal. I have found that, while you can get the MME-WDM drivers to play 44.1 kHz files, you cannot properly apply any VST or DX effects to these files, for example in Wavelab. 
Somehow I suspect these have not been tested for compatibility with a Creative card. 
