SB vs. Audiophile 2496

landford · Jul 2, 2006, 04:04 PM

Hello:

We are about to purchase either the latest (or not-so-latest) flavor of sound blaster or go with the M-Audio Audiophile 2496. We have used the SB line but never the 2496.

Could anyone shed a little light on what advantages there are using the 2496, if any. Any any other comparisons that may help us in our decison, we need to buy 8 of these so we are trying to make the best choice for our dollar.

Thanks-
Tom
NEW YORK

Doug W · Jul 2, 2006, 08:21 PM

Quote:

we need to buy 8 of these so we are trying to make the best choice for our dollar

Can you expain what you will be doing with 8 sound cards? Is this a class or your personal recording studio or what?

I have never used an Audiophile 2496 but I assume that it has some higher quality electronics onboard compared to an Audigy or SBLive.

Some of the older Audigy I cards (SB0090 for example), have more SPDIF ins and outs compared to the newer Audigy cards and can be found on Ebay for around $35 USD.

Maybe a combination of Audiophiles and SBLives for your setup whatever that may be. Here is Webpage I set up explaining an idea of dj_stick's for making 4 analog inputs using one Audigy card (without the breakout box)

http://www.maxminn.com/emily40/auxsc00.html

On the other hand, I only use kX compatible cards. I enjoy the flexibilty of kX. I have an Audigy I and Audigy II card in the same computer upstairs for recording. I have an SBLive in this computer. Once you have figured out how to configure a DSP you have unlimited options for setting up recording or playback situations.

jiiteepee · Jul 2, 2006, 08:29 PM

What the cards are goin' to be used for (audio/games/multimedia/...)?

Are there some minimum requirements?

jiitee

landford · Jul 2, 2006, 10:00 PM

Thanks y'all-

I have a recording studio and and run the East West Platium Orchestra across 4 machines and we have two of those systems. We have built P4 2.6GHZ, 1.5 GB RAM, 1 IDE for XP, 1 SATA for audio streaming. We use Kontakt and kompakt.

Thanks for the advice-
Tom

jiiteepee · Jul 2, 2006, 11:14 PM

Are you using digital or analog path from those sets (supposeingly digital) to what (mixer table, ...)?

But, if analog path, then the D/A stage on SB cards (even on X-Fis (excl. Elite Pro)) is not very good 'enough'.

I would get AP 192 ~US$150-170 (have seen @ US$129 too) (or ESI Juli@ ~US$130 ) instead of AP 2496 (yes, it's pricier, but since you've been willing to pay that much for 24-bit HQ sample libraries, then why to spoil the quality w/ some cheap sound cards like SoundBlasters?). But as from those original choices --> AP 2496.

jiitee

landford · Jul 3, 2006, 04:15 AM

Thanks guys-

I'm open to digital or analog - if digital it would connect to our Mac Pro Tools rig but we don't have that many digital inputs. So I was actually thinking of analog into our PT interfaces. Plus doesn't digital spdif output require more CPU power from the computer's processor?

I have tried a SB aside from the sound, the settings for latency go in steps something like: 10MS , 20 MS, 30Ms ect... then each one of those has a buffer setting. What I am finding, which kind of confuses me, is the buffer settings seems to affect the latency while the millisecond latency do not seem to make any difference. Meaning a setting of a 128 buffer with a 10ms setting seems to give the same latency as a 128 buffer setting with a 50ms setting.

This is why I thought we should go to the Audiopile 2496 as I have never seen that on a sound card before.

-Tom

jiiteepee · Jul 3, 2006, 06:19 AM

Are you talking 'bout device driver latency. W/ SB cards, you normally adjust this in software (maybe this is different w/ X-Fis).

Also, as an other more option, there is this E-MU 0404 (~US$99), which is classified as a pro card, you may want to check out.

jiitee

landford · Jul 4, 2006, 01:50 PM

Well, I wish someone would explain this then, in the software (Kontakt and Kompakt) there is a setting for latency - now is this DEVICE latency? And is there another latency? It seems there are two settings one in ms and one in buffer size. The buffer size seems to increase and decrease the latency while the ms value doesn't seem to make any difference. Is this normal? Am I the only one who has seen this?

Please help me understand this-

-TS

jiiteepee · Jul 4, 2006, 06:14 PM

Could you host a picture on that/those settings page/s --> I downloaded the Kontakt 2 demo, and it shows only ASIO panel (Audigy 2) where I can set output latency (pre set values 2, 4, 5, 10, 20, ... in ms)? The result is shown as output latency in ms on that settings page.

jiitee

landford · Jul 4, 2006, 08:30 PM

Thank-you. Yes I will, should I put a link to my FTP or is there a way to put them in the thread?

Tom

Maddogg6 · Jul 4, 2006, 08:59 PM

uploads to threads are limited to like 50KB IIRC - so only a link will prolly work.

Arent buffer settings available only when WDM is used instead of ASIO??

But as a side note - buffers = samples 'cached' = latency (through some calculations)

jiiteepee · Jul 4, 2006, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by landford

Thank-you. Yes I will, should I put a link to my FTP or is there a way to put them in the thread?

Tom

There are free image hosting services like http://www.imageshack.us/ you can use.

jiitee

jiiteepee · Jul 4, 2006, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maddogg6

uploads to threads are limited to like 50KB IIRC - so only a link will prolly work.

Arent buffer settings available only when WDM is used instead of ASIO??

But as a side note - buffers = samples 'cached' = latency (through some calculations)

I think the units used is dependent on software developer rather than device driver type (Sonar uses ms, FL uses buffetr length in samples, etc.).

Formula: Buffer Size in Samples / Sample Rate = Latency in ms. --> 512 / 44100 = 0.0116s = 11.6 ms

jiitee

Jul 2, 2006, 04:04 PM	#1
landford DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 14 Rep Power: 0	SB vs. Audiophile 2496 Hello: We are about to purchase either the latest (or not-so-latest) flavor of sound blaster or go with the M-Audio Audiophile 2496. We have used the SB line but never the 2496. Could anyone shed a little light on what advantages there are using the 2496, if any. Any any other comparisons that may help us in our decison, we need to buy 8 of these so we are trying to make the best choice for our dollar. Thanks- Tom NEW YORK

Jul 2, 2006, 11:14 PM	#5
jiiteepee HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: FI Posts: 400 Rep Power: 0	Are you using digital or analog path from those sets (supposeingly digital) to what (mixer table, ...)? But, if analog path, then the D/A stage on SB cards (even on X-Fis (excl. Elite Pro)) is not very good 'enough'. I would get AP 192 ~US$150-170 (have seen @ US$129 too) (or ESI Juli@ ~US$130 ) instead of AP 2496 (yes, it's pricier, but since you've been willing to pay that much for 24-bit HQ sample libraries, then why to spoil the quality w/ some cheap sound cards like SoundBlasters?). But as from those original choices --> AP 2496. jiitee Last edited by jiiteepee; Jul 3, 2006 at 05:28 AM.

Jul 2, 2006, 08:29 PM	#3
jiiteepee HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: FI Posts: 400 Rep Power: 0	What the cards are goin' to be used for (audio/games/multimedia/...)? Are there some minimum requirements? jiitee

Jul 2, 2006, 10:00 PM	Thread Starter #4
landford DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 14 Rep Power: 0	Thanks y'all- I have a recording studio and and run the East West Platium Orchestra across 4 machines and we have two of those systems. We have built P4 2.6GHZ, 1.5 GB RAM, 1 IDE for XP, 1 SATA for audio streaming. We use Kontakt and kompakt. Thanks for the advice- Tom

Jul 3, 2006, 04:15 AM	Thread Starter #6
landford DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 14 Rep Power: 0	Thanks guys- I'm open to digital or analog - if digital it would connect to our Mac Pro Tools rig but we don't have that many digital inputs. So I was actually thinking of analog into our PT interfaces. Plus doesn't digital spdif output require more CPU power from the computer's processor? I have tried a SB aside from the sound, the settings for latency go in steps something like: 10MS , 20 MS, 30Ms ect... then each one of those has a buffer setting. What I am finding, which kind of confuses me, is the buffer settings seems to affect the latency while the millisecond latency do not seem to make any difference. Meaning a setting of a 128 buffer with a 10ms setting seems to give the same latency as a 128 buffer setting with a 50ms setting. This is why I thought we should go to the Audiopile 2496 as I have never seen that on a sound card before. -Tom

Jul 3, 2006, 06:19 AM	#7
jiiteepee HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: FI Posts: 400 Rep Power: 0	Are you talking 'bout device driver latency. W/ SB cards, you normally adjust this in software (maybe this is different w/ X-Fis). Also, as an other more option, there is this E-MU 0404 (~US$99), which is classified as a pro card, you may want to check out. jiitee

Jul 4, 2006, 01:50 PM	Thread Starter #8
landford DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 14 Rep Power: 0	Well, I wish someone would explain this then, in the software (Kontakt and Kompakt) there is a setting for latency - now is this DEVICE latency? And is there another latency? It seems there are two settings one in ms and one in buffer size. The buffer size seems to increase and decrease the latency while the ms value doesn't seem to make any difference. Is this normal? Am I the only one who has seen this? Please help me understand this- -TS

Jul 4, 2006, 06:14 PM	#9
jiiteepee HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: FI Posts: 400 Rep Power: 0	Could you host a picture on that/those settings page/s --> I downloaded the Kontakt 2 demo, and it shows only ASIO panel (Audigy 2) where I can set output latency (pre set values 2, 4, 5, 10, 20, ... in ms)? The result is shown as output latency in ms on that settings page. jiitee

Jul 4, 2006, 08:30 PM	Thread Starter #10
landford DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 14 Rep Power: 0	Thank-you. Yes I will, should I put a link to my FTP or is there a way to put them in the thread? Tom

Jul 4, 2006, 08:59 PM	#11
Maddogg6 Tail Razer Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Bernyurass, AZ - USA Posts: 4,027 Rep Power: 0	uploads to threads are limited to like 50KB IIRC - so only a link will prolly work. Arent buffer settings available only when WDM is used instead of ASIO?? But as a side note - buffers = samples 'cached' = latency (through some calculations)