The best audio output yet!

cybuch · 05-15-2001, 08:10 PM

I went out and got a new sound card with fiber output and ran it into my Alpine 3900 external DAC and then into my head unit. My system now has the Audiophile sound I have been wanting and needing. I used to compete in IASCA sound offs in the Pro 301-600 class. I think I might go back into it, with the Carputer. I do have one question though which is better 192k or 256k, what I mean is can you tell a difference in sound? Is it worth the extra space on my HD?
Thanks,
Steve

Bigswizzel · 05-15-2001, 08:30 PM

What type of card is it?

cybuch · 05-15-2001, 10:29 PM

Well, I wanted a SB Live but I ended up with a Guillemot Fortissmo it has a Yamaha Enigine.
Steve

RaZor · 05-15-2001, 11:29 PM

i read once that CD quality is actually 172kbps and 44.1Khz. So, i dont think that you would notice a difference between 192 and 256. Although the best way to find out is to try it yourself. You might notice a small bass diff. from what i read in a car audio mag. I know that i dont though.

billthecat · 05-16-2001, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by RaZor:
<STRONG>i read once that CD quality is actually 172kbps and 44.1Khz...</STRONG>

Not on anything approaching a quality system, at least in my experience.

Sure on a basic systems with $50 computer speakers 192 Kb/s, or even 128 Kb/s is probably fine. But if you've spent the money for an outboard sound processor for your car stereo and to run fiber between it and the PC, stick to 320 Kb/s (or at the very least 256 kb/s). Spend the extra $200-250 and get the 80 GB Maxtor or 75 GB IBM IDE drive. Or get a couple smaller drivers and RAID 0 them.

Sure, 192 Kb/s or even 128 Kb/s might sound "CD" on $50 computer speakers. However I, personally, can hear differences between varying bitrates, and the actual CD, using a very good pair of AKG headphones. The system you describe is at least as good and probably better.

PS: Unless all you're going for is dB, you'll never win a sound-off using MP3s.

magnetik · 05-16-2001, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by cybuch:
<STRONG>I went out and got a new sound card with fiber output and ran it into my Alpine 3900 external DAC and then into my head unit.</STRONG>

Thats a great idea. Going through the fiber optic channel isolates any ground noise, etc that may have been passed on from the computer to the amps/etc. I wonder how hard it would be to build a simple DAC.... or is this getting to the harder end of the project scale!

cybuch · 05-16-2001, 07:12 AM

Hey, thanks, I have been encoding at 256k but I will bump it up to 320k for the better sound and I can't compete with mp3 because you have to use a cd they provide, but I can still run through my computer using my cdrom drive.
Steve

PaulzY · 05-16-2001, 10:29 AM

i think this is very overkill 192k should be perfect as long as you havent d/l a song which has glitches in them, and its harder to d/l anythign higher than 192k songs (for me anyway 56K,) as most ppl have 128.

But you guys are rippin anyway, i think some ppl are just thinking so much that they are sound experts and telling them selves they can tell the difference so much they believe it (i know caus i used to be like this).

its up to the user, you listen to it on your setup, and tell your self if you can really hear the differecne between 192 and 256,320 and decide. (im saying this without testing on a high quality sound car system but have tried good headphones and house speakers with good amp and i cant tell difference, although 192 is better than 128 at higher volumes)

Please no hate mail, no offence to any of you out there, but i just woke up to myself. Just make sure you have good connections.

gizmomkr · 05-16-2001, 12:43 PM

where did you get your Alpine 3900 external DAC , and how much ?

cybuch · 05-16-2001, 06:06 PM

I bought it about 8 years ago, it was part of the CD Max stuff that Alpine came out with in 1992 or 1993 or so. I think it was about $1200 then. I have no idea where you could find one today. I do know it was a limited production item.
Steve

nester · 05-16-2001, 06:57 PM

For superior quality over MP3, you may be interested in Ogg Vorbis which is a lot like MP3 only using a better acoustic model that is designed to minimize loss. I have been reading about it a little. There is even a WinAmp and Sonique plugin for the format.
http://www.vorbis.com/faq.html

nester · 05-17-2001, 01:36 PM

Also I want to note, before I get flamed, that this is a beta right now, so it's really not ready for primetime, but rather.... something to look forward to in the (hopefully) near future. I don't own anything really hi-fi equipment, but i can still hear certain encoders from a mile away on some blown out kraco's (Xing).. I've settled with LAME for my MP3 encoding. At 192 or 256 or even VBR! VBR implementation under the later versions of LAME is quite good and I've been very impressed. Unfortunatly Xing foobar'ed VBR in their encoder. Mention VBR to just about anyone and they cringe. That and LAME is free.

Arby · 05-17-2001, 05:18 PM

Why not go with VBR? I use the highest quality VBR when I rip my songs. It will vary between 60 and 320 kbps depending on what the songs require.

AudioCatalyst can do it, maybe a few others.

Arby · 05-17-2001, 05:20 PM

oh, and it varies several times per second, not one bitrate for the whole song.

nester · 05-17-2001, 05:31 PM

AudioCatalyst is Xing.

And yes. that's the whole idea of VBR (Variable Bit Rate).

Bah. Xing.