[[email protected]]

I just have my sound hardware built into my motherboard. If I get a
card like SoundBlaster Audigy 2 or M-Audio Revolution 7.1, is that
going to make my MP3's and CD's sound better? Do they have a much
better DAC than motherboards generally come with?

Is there anyplace you can download high resolution 24 bit 192 khz or 96
khz music on the internet? Any binary newsgroups for that? Have you
guys had any luck making such hi-res recordings from vinyl records? Do
they sound better than mp3's?

Don't you guys think there should be a move towards something better
than the current mp3 technology? I wouldn't mind downloading bigger
files, like say 30 megabytes per song or something like that.

[Laurence Payne]

On 25 Aug 2006 16:48:09 -0700, wrote:

I just have my sound hardware built into my motherboard. If I get a
card like SoundBlaster Audigy 2 or M-Audio Revolution 7.1, is that
going to make my MP3's and CD's sound better? Do they have a much
better DAC than motherboards generally come with?

Do you particularly need 5.1 or 7.1? You could set your sights a
little higher than domestic/gamers soundcards. Though it won't make
much difference to MP3s :-)


Is there anyplace you can download high resolution 24 bit 192 khz or 96
khz music on the internet? Any binary newsgroups for that? Have you
guys had any luck making such hi-res recordings from vinyl records? Do
they sound better than mp3's?

Don't you guys think there should be a move towards something better
than the current mp3 technology? I wouldn't mind downloading bigger
files, like say 30 megabytes per song or something like that.

So use 16 bit wav files at 44.1KHz. Much better than MP3.

[soundhaspriority]

wrote in message
ups.com...
I just have my sound hardware built into my motherboard. If I get a
card like SoundBlaster Audigy 2 or M-Audio Revolution 7.1, is that
going to make my MP3's and CD's sound better? Do they have a much
better DAC than motherboards generally come with?

Yes, much better.

[Gordon Airporte]

wrote:

Don't you guys think there should be a move towards something better
than the current mp3 technology? I wouldn't mind downloading bigger
files, like say 30 megabytes per song or something like that.

The technology is already here - you want FLAC files. FLAC seems to be
the most popular of several lossless audio compression formats.
http://flac.sourceforge.net/
People who trade live concerts tend to use Shorten (.shn) files instead.

[Emily Railroadstation]

"Gordon Airporte" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:

Don't you guys think there should be a move towards something better
than the current mp3 technology? I wouldn't mind downloading bigger
files, like say 30 megabytes per song or something like that.

The technology is already here - you want FLAC files. FLAC seems to be the
most popular of several lossless audio compression formats.
http://flac.sourceforge.net/
People who trade live concerts tend to use Shorten (.shn) files instead.

Indeed.

[[email protected]]

Gordon Airporte wrote:
wrote:
The technology is already here - you want FLAC files. FLAC seems to be
the most popular of several lossless audio compression formats.
http://flac.sourceforge.net/
People who trade live concerts tend to use Shorten (.shn) files instead.

Sweet! I looked on my newsserver and I found a lot of flac, shn, wav,
and lossless newsgroups. Thanks! I didn't even know those were there
before. Bye bye mp3's!

[Trevor Wilson]

wrote in message
ups.com...
I just have my sound hardware built into my motherboard. If I get a
card like SoundBlaster Audigy 2 or M-Audio Revolution 7.1, is that
going to make my MP3's and CD's sound better? Do they have a much
better DAC than motherboards generally come with?

**I dumped my onboard sound for an Audigy. The results are dramatically
(aurally and measurably) better. Whilst there are better cards than the
Audigy, bang for buck is arguably poorer. Arny can probably advise you
better than I can.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message
ups.com

I just have my sound hardware built into my motherboard.

They are not all the same. First, test it yourself using this softwa

http://audio.rightmark.org/downloads/rmaa55.exe

The only other hardware you need for the test is a jumper cable with a 3.5
mm stereo plug on each end.

If I get a card like SoundBlaster Audigy 2 or M-Audio
Revolution 7.1, is that going to make my MP3's and CD's
sound better?

Perhaps.

Do they have a much better DAC than
motherboards generally come with?

Probably, but is it enough better to make an audible difference?

Is there anyplace you can download high resolution 24 bit
192 khz or 96 khz music on the internet?

Not a lot of it. the 44/16 .wav file format gets the job done, and is often
much better sounding than MP3s. However, a high bitrate well-made MP3 can
sound very good.

[DaveW]

The audio chip on a motherboard costs the manufacturer about $5. Yes,
getting a sound card will be a BIG improvement. Might I recommend the
SoundBlaster X-Fi sound cards as being of exceptional fidelity! I use one
of that series to drive my $600 computer system speakers, and LOVE it.

--
DaveW

----------------
wrote in message
ups.com...
I just have my sound hardware built into my motherboard. If I get a
card like SoundBlaster Audigy 2 or M-Audio Revolution 7.1, is that
going to make my MP3's and CD's sound better? Do they have a much
better DAC than motherboards generally come with?

Is there anyplace you can download high resolution 24 bit 192 khz or 96
khz music on the internet? Any binary newsgroups for that? Have you
guys had any luck making such hi-res recordings from vinyl records? Do
they sound better than mp3's?

Don't you guys think there should be a move towards something better
than the current mp3 technology? I wouldn't mind downloading bigger
files, like say 30 megabytes per song or something like that.

[Steve House]

High bit-rate mp3s can give you the best of both worlds. 192kbps,
256kps, or 320 kbps can give very good sound without sacrificing all
the file size savings of mp3.

On 25 Aug 2006 16:48:09 -0700, wrote:

....

Don't you guys think there should be a move towards something better
than the current mp3 technology? I wouldn't mind downloading bigger
files, like say 30 megabytes per song or something like that.

[Eeyore]

DaveW wrote:

The audio chip on a motherboard costs the manufacturer about $5.

No way that much !

Graham

[Arny Krueger]

"Eeyore"
wrote
in message
DaveW wrote:

The audio chip on a motherboard costs the manufacturer
about $5.

No way that much !

Agreed. Under a $USD