I should take 2...bitsrates are important x3

*sampling rate

*sits back in chair, tapping fingers together*

Go on?

I'm afraid you don't understand what a sampling rate is... O_o

Sorry.

Anybody else?

yep, i get messed x3

Sampling rate is how often the digital device reads an analog audio wave form and records a digital equivalent value. so in a 1 second time sample, at 192khz it will have taken 192,000 samples of the sound and played them back accordingly. The other card only takes 92,000 samples per second.

more artistic example: grab some graph paper and draw a semi circle. even divide it 5 times. Take those points and re-draw straight lines from point to point. how close does it match the circle? now do it again divided 10 times. Look closer to the circles?

That's about as best as I can sum up sampling rate. It's digital audio "accuracy"

Yay for Canadian :3

secondly, I would actually go with the latter. Although not built for headphones specifically you have all around better output options. If you're truely serious about sound quality, then a GOOD headphone amp to power your good headphones is an overall long-term investment.

Do headphone amps plug directly into the sound card, then? Or by USB?

if I read the specs correctly, your headphones use the professional-grade 6.35mm connections like my studio headphones. That said you could get a very nice amp from your local music store. It would require a wall-outlet to run on top of that.

Par example: http://www.long-mcquade.com/product.....dphone_Amp.htm

Hmm.

So.... Headphones ----> Amp

---

> Sound Card = better sound overall?

The Asus Xonar D1 is the better option because it has more features, and that headphone amp is cheap?

Would I still be able to use the "Dolby Headphone" feature?

I am certain virtually all dolby headphones are self-powered because they require a dolby input and therefore do not require an amp. They come with one.

I don't have Dolby Headphones... I meant the "Dolby Headphone" feature on the sound card. Would it be overpowered by the amp? Would the amp somehow distort the signal? Or would it simply "power" it and make it cleaner?

If you have no intention of going to a dolby surround headset, then don't frett. The amp will not be affected by the surround headphone option.

So it will just "clean up" the sound, not change it completely. Okay, thanks. :3

Dolby Headphone simulates the 5.1 surround on conventional headphones, like that binaural barber shop you showed me. Some of that effect WILL carry through a decent headphone amplifier. Both cards have Dolby Headphone.

hmm. you've made the choice tough again. What is more important to you? Crystal clear sounding headphones or full body surround for your speakers?

If you want your headphones to sound great and don't mind a cut is digital clarity (I suppose on some level the difference between 92 and 192 is almost unnoticable.)

so go with the DG if you're sticking to your headphones and your Z-5500s.

If you want your Z-5500s to do their absolutely best, then the D1 is the better option. But your headphones suffer (a bit) with an extra powered device in between.

*dies*

Talk to me on AIM!

I agree with this assessment with one caveat:
Even for professional audio, full 192KHz recordings are uncommon outside of the master file. Upsampling won't give you better sound quality (some argue it will, others argue better that it won't).
So, yes, the D1 is definitely better, especially if you go with a separate headphone amp (I could build you one, even. Something to chat about). But you must balance if it's worth 2 to 3 times the price.

*has his finger on the button, ready to order it* Hurryyyy! D:>

ARGH.

Damn formats.

I mean.... headphones > Amp > Sound card = best quality sound?

XD yes. I think you will get the best quality out of the D1 in the long run. Especially when you move to a Dolby headset.

A Dolby Headset?

But my Grado SR325i cost me $300!!! :'(

http://www.dolby.com/professional/t.....headphone.html


I'm saying that the D1 has the "Dolby Headphone" feature in the actual card itself! I don't need to buy headphones with Dolby Surround in them!

I actually use this very device for my podcast, but it's more for splitting a monitor output than single-pair amplification. it gets the job done quite nicely however.

it would help if I actually posted the link: http://www.long-mcquade.com/product.....dphone_Amp.htm

*poke* O.O

*jiggles*

Keep poking her! I like watching BlastGoggles jiggle.

she's just gotta hold her box ;3

Sampling rate is pretty good, the 7.1 feature too since is very new and the sound is awesome

From what I've read from you so far, I'd say go with option numero uno (or ichi-ban if you prefer Japanese..), since it sounds like the headphone thing is more important to you than the speakers (on account of you not wanting to vibrate the neighbor's house).

But it all comes down to what you want more. If the headphones are indeed more important, then go with Number 1, if the speakers are more important (and you don't mind giving your neighbors an easy way to make milkshakes..) then go for Number 2.

"Thanks, No-Help-At-All Man!"

"You're welcome, Jimmy!"

"My name's Johny!"

"Jeff?"

"Johny!!"

"Okay Susie.."

Cons: No 192kHz sampling rate.

Why would anything beyond 96 kilohertz matter? As far as I can tell, not even most electrostatic headphones go beyond the frequencies that 96 kilohertz can reproduce, and your ears certainly won't detect them if they did.

No offense, but I think you're giving too much merit to a pointlessly high specification.

This.

Myself, I'd go with the cheaper one LOL. Then again, I just want them for better-than-onboard quality audio with my existing 5.1 speakers. I wish that those cheap Xonar's where around when I bought my SB X-Fi card. I ended up paying around $100 USD for it

I don't know all the details, but are you building a new machine? If you are newer motherboards generally have pretty good on-board sound, to the point that most people wouldn't even need a dedicated soundcard. My really expensive soundcard recently shit out, so I just moved the plugs from the card to the motherboard and I can't tell the difference.

No, I'm just upgrading some components. I can't afford a new motherboard right now.

The thing is, you need really expensive equipment to tell the difference, like my Grado SR325i headphones. With these, you can REALLY tell the difference in sound quality.

The sound is so clear that during "Won't Get Fooled Again," during the second synthesizer solo, you can actually hear Pete Townshend fingering the guitar strings, getting ready to strike that power chord.

didn't like the x-fi's? =3

If you intend to use headphones, I'd go with the first card, and use the saved money to buy a solid state amp with a volume knob. By solid state, I mean something built around a microchip, not a tube. There's lots of $150 headphone amps out there based on tubes that sound awful compared to a $5 chip. I built my own amp from scratch, and I can't imagine living without the ability to control the volume on the fly. Damn all those Flash cartoons with clipping audio! >:(

"Headphone mode" settings really mess up audio quality, because they aren't supposed to enhance the experience -- they are supposed to compensate for limitations of the hardware (namely, bad headphones). Creative's "Crystalizer" feature works like that. I always set my sound card to 2-speaker mode and let my amp and custom EQ settings do the rest. Think of headphone mode as the audio version of ClearType. On a bad LCD monitor with a TN panel, ClearType can help make text more readable. On a good IPS monitor, ClearType just makes all your text look like they have rainbow halos, which is REALLY annoying. Trust me... if you're serious about quality, set the sound card to speaker mode, use the line-out, and use an amp. Headphones directly plugged into the sound card is a bad idea.

I can't imagine the lower sampling rate will make a difference. It's for hardware mixing purposes only, and it won't matter for 3D effects. I think Vista/Win7 still uses software mixing. I'm not too sure if MS has improved that as of late.

im perfectly fine with a 10k2 chip audigy 2, DSP built in, sounds good as hell, I would try something new, but these old audigy's are cheap and work perfectly with software I havent seen on other cards ;3