| Author |
Thread: X-Fi Analog vs Denon AVR-1708 digital |
    
New member Username: Nrgetic
Post Number: 3
Registered: Mar-08
|
| Posted on Sunday, February 15, 2009 - 08:07 pm: |
|
Hey guys...
first of all if i'm posting in the wrong forum please let me know... i figured receiver guys would know more about x-fi than x-fi would know about receivers 
so I have
Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty card... with the drive
Denon AVR-1708 receiver
Paradigm Cinema series speakers
I have my X-fi hooked up to the denon through analog component cables as well as X-fi's toslink interface... now
i mostly play mp3's in around 192kbps quality. and to be honest it's very hard for me to decide which connection is more likely to produce better sound. keep in mind i'm only talking about music... for games analog takes the cake since it's a 5.1 system and even DDL doesn't do as good job.
so my question IS... which one do you think would produce better results for music... analog or toslink? are X-Fi's DAC's likely better than the AVR-1708's?
the bass seems little weaker over toslink but i have a feeling that when using analog creative drivers are maybe overcompensating a little since it's not a creative speaker system with built in crossover. |
|
|
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abela
Berkshire
UK
Post Number: 3557
Registered: Sep-04
|
| Posted on Monday, February 16, 2009 - 11:44 am: |
|
MP3, even at 192kbps, is such a poor quality format, I'd be surprised you could tell a difference. Do you realise that 192kbps MP3 contains less than half the information on the equivalent CD?
For real quality you need PCM. CD gives you 16 bit sampled at 44.1khz which is pretty much the minimum to be able to recreate a full waveform correctly. This equates to an 800kbps throughput rate, and then using MPEG4 (aka AAC). Higher resolution formats such as SACD, DVD-A or HRx (Reference Recordings) have much higher rates, being 24 bit sampled at either 88, 96 or 176.4khz. In the latter case the throughput is nearly 8400kbps and is reportedly as close to the more natural analogue sound than anything else.
If you're really genuinely concerned with getting the best possible sound, your tracks need to be in a format that can give you that sound to start with. |
New member Username: Nrgetic
Post Number: 4
Registered: Mar-08
|
| Posted on Monday, February 16, 2009 - 03:18 pm: |
|
ahem... yes I do realize mp3 is poor quality... and I am thankful for y our response...but since i already own this equipment... i was wondering theoretically which dac (x-fi or AVR1708) would produce better results given proper quailty format.
I only tested all the way up to regular msuic cd and at that level it's a hit or miss between the two... the denon seems to have more fidelity even though i haven't equalized the sound. |
New member Username: Nrgetic
Post Number: 5
Registered: Mar-08
|
| Posted on Monday, February 16, 2009 - 10:43 pm: |
|
from my afternoon's research the 1708 seems to use 'Analog Devices AU1328' and the x-fi uses 'Cirrus Logic CS4382' |
Gold Member Username: Frank_abela
Berkshire
UK
Post Number: 3565
Registered: Sep-04
|
| Posted on Tuesday, February 17, 2009 - 02:10 pm: |
|
Sorry Bill, I didn't mean to pontificate. It's interesting that you find it hit or miss on quality formats too. I would expect to find more of a difference. Typically, I'd expect the analogue output of the x-fi to supercede the digital connection, mainly because of the introduction of jitter through the digital connection. This is exhibited as detrimental to timing and pace. However, if the DAC section is particularly better in the Denon, then other aspects of music reproduction such as soundstage and resolution may appear to be enhanced over the analogue input. If you are more susceptible to one or other aspect, you could be swung either way (ooh-err). |
New member Username: Nrgetic
Post Number: 6
Registered: Mar-08
|
| Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 03:22 pm: |
|
well... after doing a whole lot more of listening tests... i think i'm finding more of the same... denon seems to be more "trebly" by default and the CS4382 seems to be more bassy. i've gone on to manufacturers websites and by pure numbers the X-Fi dac seems to have better specs (114 dB Dynamic Range, 100 dB THD+N) where as the other is (108 dB DAC/107 dB ADC dynamic range and SNR,94 dB THD+N). i almost feel like the x-fi with a hint of noise sharepning produces a better result.... arghh... i wish there was more "scientific" way to do this haha. i guess it'd be VERY difficult to get some very specific opinions.... i've read a review of the DAC used on the highest x-fi card as opposed to analog devices dac that's one higher from my denon... and they were finding for the most part the same that... cirrus one was more bassy while AD was more trebly. |
Bronze Member Username: Chriswild87
Holden,
MA
Post Number: 18
Registered: Dec-08
|
| Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 05:24 pm: |
|
Agreed, Denon does seem to be a bit brighter. Also if you are using iTunes i tend to like the apple lossless format. iTunes also includes a feature to convert track not i lossless to a lossless format. That one perplexes me, unless it tries to reintegrate bits of information????? |
New member Username: Nrgetic
Post Number: 7
Registered: Mar-08
|
| Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 07:01 pm: |
|
i'm no expert on codec formats but generally speaking i'm not a fan of apple lossless flac for me. mind you... i've been finding myself using foobar most of the time these days.... wish it had a superior media library like winamp though. when i'm working most of the time i just listen to my premium subscription 192 kbps music stream which is not perfect as mentioned above but it does the job considering i don't have it up too loud. |
