Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (
More info?)
normanstrong wrote:
> "Codifus" <codifus@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:cjc98l$1mgv$1@news.interpublic.com...
>
>>Geoff Wood wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Phil Wilson" <pdjwilson@whatever.net> wrote in message
>>>news:fOD5d.113806$yh.63426@fed1read05...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Here are Arny's tests. It doesn't look quite that bad to my
>
> untrained
>
>>>>eyes/ears:
>>>>http
/www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/compare/index.htm
>>>>--
>>>>Phil Wilson
>>>>
>>>>"W. Forsk" <newsgroup@only.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:2ro4oaF1brim4U1@uni-berlin.de...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>A friend of mine recommended the Turtle Beach Santa Cruz audio
>
> card...
>
>>>but
>>>
>>>
>>>>>he's not someone I would take seriously, so I figured it wouldn't
>
> hurt to
>
>>>>>come and ask here.
>>>>>
>>>>>How does this card compare to Echo or M-Audio cards?
>>>>>
>>>>>And aren't Turtle Beach cards severely outdated?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>It a reasonable '20 bit-ish (or is it 18 ?) card. It is also one
>
> of the
>
>>>few left that take a 'Waveblaster' hardware synth card such as the
>
> Yamaha
>
>>>DB50XG.
>>>
>>>Still better sounding that any Soundblaster.
>>>
>>>geoff
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I've owned the Santa Cruz and upgraded to an Echo MIA. The Cruz is a
>
> 16
>
>>bit card that internally processes the signal at higher bits to make
>
> a
>
>>more accurate 16 bit representation. When I upgraded to the MIA, I
>
> got a
>
>>soundcard which offered me much more headroom when recording in 24
>
> bit
>
>>mode. I didn't have to max out the recording levels just to get the
>
> best
>
>>dynamic range from my recordings. The Cruz is a good starter card,
>
> but
>
>>if you're somewhat serious about audio, The MIA or Audiophile would
>
> be
>
>>the way to go.
>
>
> I own--and still use--the Santa Cruz card. I see no reason to upgrade
> unless there is some extra-audible consideration, like bragging
> rights, etc. For $50 it's hard to beat.
>
> Norm Strong
>
>
To me, there deifnitely was some extra-audible consideration. Recordings
done on the MIA, I do mostly to vinyl or anything analog to CD, had
better dynamic range, even though it's been argued that both the Cruz
and the MIA can capture all that vinyl has to offer. Some can attribute
the extra dynamic range to the extra headroom that the MIA affords me
when recording, but I think it's that and also that the MIA may have a
more linear response, especially down low. This could be due to the
drivers. The Cruz uses WDM drivers whereas with the MIA, I had the
option, which I took advantage of, of using Purewave drivers which
bypass alot of the WDM stuff like the kernel mixer, so you get a more
pure signal from the card to the driver.
In order for the Cruz to do try to capture the dynamics that the MIA
catches in one go, you'd have to record twice. Once to find the largest
peak in a track, then a second time to adjust your levels to that peak.
With the MIA, I record once, let the meters peak at -10 to -6 db, and
when I finished with all the processing, normalize up.
CD
9tml0h8jcvnp177njk67b42bhaksl3bur@4ax.com...
Facebook
Twitter