Foamybrian's forum posts

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

A solid pair of headphones + DAC with Dolby Headphones would be your best bet. Just turn on the DH effects during games and you'll end up with the same virtual surround effects that you want without needing to resort to a low grade gaming headset. When you listen to music, just turn off DH and you're good to go; best of both worlds.

If you don't already have a receiver with DH (consoles) or a soundcard with DH (PC), an Astro Mixamp is a great solution that is compatible with your gaming setup at an affordable price. It's not a great DAC for music so I would avoid using it for that purpose, but in terms of gaming, it's one of the best portable solutions out at the moment.

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

I like my antec 900 but it isn't good for cable management.

LordRork

Agreed.

If I were in the market for a new case (and sometimes I hear the voices...) I'd look at one of the Corsair cases - a 500R or 600T look good.

Stop tempting me... :cry:

I've been running with an Arctic White 500R for the past few months and I must say that it's one of the best cases I've ever bought in terms of price, cooling performance, and design.

It loses to the Antec 900 and HAF 922 in terms of performance by a small margin (a few degrees celsius) but makes up for it in build quality, cable management, and ease of use. Looks a lot better too imo.; nice and refined without the "GAMERZ' look.

Anyways, I share the same sentiment: if you do not have a modular power supply, stay the heck away from the Antec 900. The HAF 922 is better than the 900 in terms of cable management but not by a large margin.

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Unless you are editing movies, music,etc.. I dont see the need for more then 4gb of ram atm for gaming.

C_Rule


No gaming PC, since last year onwards, should be built without 8GB RAM, unless there is a very tight budget involved.

While it may not be common, it also isn't rare for me to go over 4GB usage. Just running Minecraft, Opera, a media player and my background programs can put me over 4GB. And when I'm working with VMs, the usage is much higher, but I'm aware most people won't need to be running multiple VMs.

RAM is very cheap, so people should ensure they have more than enough, without going over the top.

I'm in the same boat. I run rainmeter on top of other desktop GUI enhancements such as SD's Fences and objectdock on dual monitors. Throw in perpetual messenger programs, foobar, antivirus, chrome, and my PC consumes around 3-3.5gb of ram without any games open. Having 8GB is ram is darn nifty in this case since I don't have to practice the age old ritual of shutting everything down before gaming.

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

You'll have to decide whats more important to you: isolation or the best possible soundstage. From my own experience, open back headphones are the way to go if you want the absolute best soundstage in games. Closed headphones can have a fantastic sound stage but they tend to get edged out by comparable open designs in this area.

If you plan on gaming in a setting with low ambient noise, I'd just stick with the open back designs. If you live in an annoying neighborhood, closed backs would be your best bet.

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

As far as the United States is concerned, some of the more popular "end all, be all" customs are the:JH-13/16,UM Miracle, andWestone ES5.

"Best" will always come down to preferences based on taste so your mileage will vary within the upper bracket. Aggressive adrenaline pumping in your face customs? JH16. A warm bassy signature that melds in perfectly with rock? the ES5. A middle ground between both with some astonishing mids and highs? UM Miracles. You get the idea; with designers like 1964 ears, Spiral Ears, and other custom companies up on the rise, the top end custom market is expanding dramatically in terms of product selection.

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

Crossfired 6950 2GB's should be a tad bit faster than a single 7970 but the drawback revolves around having to deal with CF issues here and there. I don't think the $600 price tag on the 7970 is worth the slight decrease in performance and increase in stability compared to 2x 6950's. If the card was priced around the $350-400 mark, it would be a lot more reasonable.

If I were you, I'd return that second 6950 2GB and hold onto the one you have right now. You won't be able to run max settings at your resolution but a single 6950 2GB should have enough power to tide you over temporarily. Just bear with your current setup for a another month or so until the 6 series is released by Nvidia; hopefully causing the prices on the 7900 series to stabilize around a cheaper price point. Who knows, the 6 series might entice you to jump ship. Overall, just be patient and you'll have more options and better leverage in your decision in a short time frame.

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

i agree, sound cards aren't much better than onboard (not the $30 asus xonar dg that I have anyways), but they do have alot of inputs and if you're listening to headphones then its also definitely worth it. But for just a speaker setup then its not necessary for a soundcard, in fact I would be pretty suprised if someone could be able to tell the difference in quality b/w onboard and the soundcard.

blaznwiipspman1

Would you be surprised if someone could tell the difference between the sound of a Luxman or McIntosh stereo/surround amp and a $250 Onkyo? Almost anybody with a decent ear can tell there is a world of difference there, as long as you're using decent speakers. The same is true of good sound cards and onboard sound. The imaging is better, there's more punch, the highs, lows, and mids are better.. There is a big difference.

Some people talk about TVs like they're all the same too. They're nuts.

you're comparing high end audio equipment that could run you thousands to a $250 onkyo. Of course the more money you spend the better audio you get, but at this point Im having trouble telling the difference between my $30 creative a220 speaker plus sub combo connected to onboard audio and my M-audio av40 speakers connected to my asus xonar dg. Audiophiles will tell me that there is a world of a difference, but sadly the difference is almost non existant. The OP can get a soundcard but I'll warn him to not expect too much out of them compared to his onboard if hes only listening through speakers.

To your ears. Sound quality is subjective; always has and always will be due to the physiological differences in hearing. Some people can recognize certain details promptly (hearing the difference between FLAC and 320kbps mp3s for example) while others cant. Different people will also have different preferences for sonic signatures. Your scenario is unfortunate but that doesn't necessarily mean that the difference isn't there. I personally can't discern the differences between FLAC and 320kbps in most cases but I do have friends who can consistently AB them in blind tests and produce accurate results.

I've never used the AV40s so I can't give any input regarding them but to me, there is a substantial difference between the Xonar Essence ST (with 2x LME49720 opamps) and my onboard realtek when using the Swan M200MKIIIs. Not only is the signature different (analytically cold vs. warm and fuzzy) but details such as depth perception, sound stage, and bass tightness also differ in contrast. Its the same ordeal when using my IEMs and headphones.

Onboard audio has come a long way in the past decade so that may be the reason why you can't discern differences between your Xonar DG and your onboard. The gap between onboard and low-midrange soundcards is becoming increasingly small.

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

Since you mentioned the S4, I'm going to assume that you like a bass emphasized signature.

If that's the case, do some research on the following and see if they fit your bill:

Hippo VBs

Fischer Audio Eterna V1

Monster Turbines

Brainwavz M2/RO3

Nuforce NE-700X

Future Sonic Atrio X

I've owned the Hippo VBs, Monster Turbines, Brainwavz M2/RO3, and the Fischer Eterna V1. The NE-700X and Atrio X are quite popular with bassheads so I named them in case you would like to check them out. I can't give an impression on the VBs or the M2 since I haven't had a listen to either in a long time but from what I can recall, you can't go wrong either one if you like plenty of bass. The VB has a very nice feature for bassheads in that you can adjust the bass plates to increase/decrease intensity. The turbines are a solid choice if you really enjoyed the S4's sound signature. I found both the turbines and S4 to be nearly identical (bassy, recessed treble). The Eterna V1 is probably my favorite out of the entire group but may be somewhat difficult to obtain since the V2 is out. It had the best presentation of all the bassy sub-$100 IEMs that I've tried. To make it short, the Eterna V1 had a balanced and detailed treble/mid combined with a great bass response that isn't overpowering (I found the bass in the S4 to be a tad bit too much for my taste).

As far as cable durability is concerned, you are going to be hard pressed to find a IEM with both excellent sound and top notch durability below the $100 range. The S4 was quite fragile in comparison to other phones in its range so you may be satisfied with any of the choices above. My advice would be to purchase a small hardshell carrying case (the S4's carrying case is subpar IMO.) for your IEMs and loosely pack them into the case during your travels. As long as you dont brutalize the strain reliefs or place a great deal of stress on the cables, you really shouldn't have any problems.

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"]

[QUOTE="Foamybrian"]

I doubt that you would be able to discern the differences between 320kbps and FLAC. To me, the difference between 128 and 320 is noticeable but the jump from 320 to FLAC is almost non-existent to my ears. In order to hear any changes, I would have to focus intensely on the details but at that point, I'm no longer enjoying my music. I'm looking to upgrade in the future to a pair of LCD-2's or Ultrasone Edition 8s. That might change things a bit but I doubt it.

edinsftw

Actually FLAC sounds significantly better than 320 kbps. CDs sound slightly better and higher quality CDs will sound a bit better than that. FLAC will always be moderately better than high quality CD; in the end 320kbps --> FLAC will radically change, IMO.

. I've got Coldplay in FLAC, as well as Pink Floyd and a David Guetta Album too, I'm telling ya the difference is there, especially with analytical headphones.

This, i feel that flac adds more texture to the song, and makes the high trebles and low bass tones much more clear,

Some people can tell the difference between 320kbps and FLAC, others can't. I fall into the latter. My current main setup is an AKG 702 & 1964-Q paired with a DAC-1. I alternate between the DAC-1 and a Xonar Essence STX (with 2x LME49720 opamps) for music depending on my mood. The latter is mainly for gaming and movies with the DT990. Despite my music collection consisting of about 80% FLAC (music converting purposes) and numerous AB testing with 320kbps files, I cannot identify a significant difference between both formats. At most, there are subtle ques (usually timbre) that I pick up with specific songs but I usually have to be paying full attention to notice it. Maybe things will change once I grab a pair of LCD-2's, but I highly doubt it since the AKGs are already quite good when it comes to detail retrieval. I'm mostly going for the LCD-2 for the jaw dropping sound stage and "organic" signature.

To be honest, I really don't mind not being able to discern the differences. It saves me a ton of space on my MP3 player :).

Avatar image for Foamybrian
Foamybrian

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 Foamybrian
Member since 2008 • 479 Posts

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"]

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"]Damn lucky you I bet they're going to blow your ears off. I would personally bring more than just an Ipod if I could, if he has a source for you to use. Max those babies out with power. DivergeUnify

I'm not bring my iPod to blow my ears off or convince me that the headphones are good, I've already heard them, I just want to make sure there isn't anything fishy or blown drivers or anything. It's very unlikely but I just can't buy anything used without making sure it's there. "high" quality Mp3 should do the trick. When I get home it'll be some high quality CD rips & FLAC ofc ;)

The D5000's are only 25 ohm so it should be a legitimate test anyways ? :P

I figured D5000s were higher impendence than that. Still, if its for the purpose of making sure they sound good, than I guess you're all set. I would still bring a laptop with source or something just to make sure( an iPod can't drive them to the breaking point) , but still... good for you bro! I don't have a problem with 320k mp3s, I think they sound just as good as FLAC, although since I've moved up in the audio world I haven't bothered to do ABX tests

I doubt that you would be able to discern the differences between 320kbps and FLAC. To me, the difference between 128 and 320 is noticeable but the jump from 320 to FLAC is almost non-existent to my ears. In order to hear any changes, I would have to focus intensely on the details but at that point, I'm no longer enjoying my music. I'm looking to upgrade in the future to a pair of LCD-2's or Ultrasone Edition 8s. That might change things a bit but I doubt it.