Is a soundcard essentilly a DAC?

[newtoaudio90]

I have a xonar essence ST. Do I really need to buy an external DAC?

Soundcards are essentially intertnal DACs yes?

 

[jaudere]

You do not need external sound card if you have Essence ST and if you like its sound signature. If you donot like , then you need to look at something else that will please you. A sound card is DAC (digital to nalogue converter) + ADC (analogue to digital converter). I am somewhat surprised at your question. A person buying high end card like Essence ST usually knows these things by the time he reaches stage of buying such a card. Just out of interest, I would like to know how did you decide to buy Essence ST in the first place?

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Well, newtoaudio90 is, I guess, new to audio --- if not 90! Even if not new to audio, he may be new to computer audio.

If soundcards and DACs were better understood, fewer "DACs" would be sold ...

 

[Audiodoc]

I agree with Thad however since most of us have shifted to high performance laptops (my current laptop is more powerful than my 4 year old quad core desktop) from desktops external DACs are the only choice. Both my desktops back home operated from decent soundcards Audigy 2 ZS (2004) and MAudio Revolution (2009). I newer felt the need of a DAC.

I should add if one has a high end speaker-amplifier he should try out a DAC. He will here perceptible differences.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

DAC or Audio Interface?

The first choice to be made is whether one wants a one-way street or a two-way street.

For those who are happy to have playback only, the DAC's functionality will suffice. For those of us for whom the PC has always been a recording tool, of course, it won't.

There are plenty of USB audio interfaces which may be used with laptops as well as with desktops. The more specialised Firewire interface is a bit tougher to handle. I have a PCMCIA Firewire card: you can tell than my laptop is very old! :lol:

Even though I am dedicated to the two-way street, and will remain a "sound-card man," I'm still looking forward to a combined DAC/Headphone Amp to hopefully give my headphones a chance. It's on the budget for next year (Who knows, Audiodoc... maybe something entirely new from NwAVGuy by then?)

 

[Audiodoc]

I was thinking to add something about PCMCIA interface based cards then thought that the only devices that I have seen them these days are the HP professional laptop the the Seimens engineers bring to my hospital. I am not into recording though my dell laptop can easily record from inbuilt microphone or line in. The best thing is that it supports optical SPDIF however I have the mini plug optical cable back home. Will bring it this time to test some high sampling /bit rate stuff.

Nwavguy is planning a desktop based head amp with a better power supply than the O2 and inbuilt capability of adding the ODAC. Although the big and heavy EHHA will suffice me as I love its sound so much so that I have not desired to construct a beta22.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

You have S/PDIF in on your laptop? That would be neat.

Nwavguy is planning a desktop based head amp with a better power supply than the O2 and inbuilt capability of adding the ODAC.

That, as things stand at the moment, what I'm waiting for (as well as the cash to buy it with) . Otherwise, to work with my interface, I need balanced connectors, and balanced thru-output to go to the speakers. That would be neat, but I haven't found a way to make it affordable. Then there's the possibility of getting my much-loved old RME card down off the shelf...

Mixing and maching and experimenting, budget allowing, has got to be fun, but I'm wary of buying stuff because some marketing department has convinced me I need it!

 

[venkatcr]

The first duty of a sound card is extraction of sound from the computer with least amount of noise and interference from local software/hardware entities. It's duties as a DAC are secondary, and I am sure there would be DACs available that would improve the sound quite a lot, albeit at a price.

In my case for example, I have a Core2Duo system with a Asus STX. The sound from the card directly amplified gives good soundstage, hard bass, and a tiny bit of a veil over the sound. The feeling is that my room is a large hollow chamber, and the music is coming from somewhere faaar away. Mind you, this is a very very small factor, and I am exaggerating to make you understand.

When I take digital out using coaxial or optical and play it through Arcam's rDAc or Emotiva's DAC, the veil disappears though I do feel a bit of harshness in the sound in some numbers (my favourite mention being always Madam Lata).

The difference between the two is a very small fraction, but it is certainly discernible. I can happily live with either, and I misuse the system by using the STX for Lata, Kenny G and such numbers that have high frequency, and, the Emotiva for Orchestral, instrumental, and such numbers.

Cheers

 

[theredcommando]

It's duties as a DAC are secondary

This is not really true. Sound stored in memory is pattern of bits. Any software program which can read the specified bit pattern and file format, can read this sound. Sound card is not required in such a case.

Primary duty of sound card is to convert digital representation to analog representation(such output given through either line out or in built speakers) ie. sound card is essentially a DAC. Note that quality of this conversion, may not be good. However, most modern sound cards also have ADC(so that sound can be recorded and stored). And there could be added functionalities like digital out, HDMI out, remote controller, MIDI, 5.1 support etc

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

The first duty of a sound card is extraction of sound from the computer with least amount of noise and interference from local software/hardware entities. It's duties as a DAC are secondary,

Reminder that sound cards have been around for a long time before the hifi company's marketing departments spotted their opportunity!

Since there have been as many (more perhaps!) external "sound cards" as actual internal plug-in-the-bus cards, I do prefer the term audio interface. The first duty of an audio interface is to interface between digital and audio: DAC and ADC.

There's always an upgrade path. Just as some find that an external DAC is better than the one built in to their CD players, so others find that an external DAC is better than the one built into their audio interface. That does not change the purpose of CD player, any more than it changes the purpose of an audio interface. What is better will always be a matter of personal choice: your DAC may be better than your sound-card analogue out, another sound card may be better than your DAC.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

The first duty of a sound card is extraction of sound from the computer with least amount of noise and interference from local software/hardware entities. It's duties as a DAC are secondary,

Reminder that sound cards have been around for a long time before the hifi company's marketing departments spotted their opportunity!

Since there have been as many (more perhaps!) external "sound cards" as actual internal plug-in-the-bus cards, I do prefer the term audio interface. The first duty of an audio interface is to interface between digital and audio: DAC and ADC.

There's always an upgrade path. Just as some find that an external DAC is better than the one built in to their CD players, so others find that an external DAC is better than the one built into their audio interface. That does not change the purpose of CD player, any more than it changes the purpose of an audio interface. What is better will always be a matter of personal choice: your DAC may be better than your sound-card analogue out, another sound card may be better than your DAC.

Of course, there aren't many sound cards left to choose from any longer...

with least amount of noise and interference from local software/hardware entities.

The noise of the FUD is much louder!

 

[jaudere]

What is FUD Thad? This is new term for me.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Sorry, Computer-world jargon, but I thought it had become more generally known.

The acronym is for Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. It has its origins in negative marketing campaigns, especially those where implications would be made that it was unwise to buy company A's product because company B had something much better on the way. Of course, company B's product might turn out to be vapour-ware (nothing but hot air) but the damage to Company A's sales would already be done. Equally applies to market rumours about what might be wrong with product A when compared to product B.