🚀 go-pugleaf

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:

>> >At this point the facts of the matter are well known. Dormer rants
>> >and raves about errors in my tests, but in fact he hasn't exactly
>> >duplicated my tests or even come close. He's used a different version
>> >of the card, different version of the drivers, and different test
>> >conditions. Furthermore, the test conditions he's been using are
>> >irrelevant to how most consumers  use the SBLive! card most often.
>> >They play music sampled at 44 KHz and Mr. Dormer tests at 48 KHz.By
>> >doing this Dormer avoids the well-known weakness of the card relating
>> >to resampling.
>
>> As I just pointed out elsewhere, my analogue tests were performed at
>> 44.1Khz.  It said so clearly in the screen grabs I provided, and on
>> the text accompanying the hyperlinks to those screen grabs.
>
>As usual Mr. Dormer you distort the facts to suit your purposes.

Projection!

>The
>analog screen grabs I saw were made with APS drivers and MCI drivers
>that fit the description: "...different version f the card, different
>version of the drivers..."

Incorrect.  As I said "note the plots I referenced yesterday were made
using SB's current native drivers"


>> See what I wrote :
>>
>> >>For example :
>> >>
>> >>87dB signal to noise ratio, analog output @ 44Khz
>> >>http://home.clara.net/media/sblive/1KHZ-DA.gif
>> >>97dB signal to noise ratio, digital output @ 48Khz
>> >>http://home.clara.net/media/sblive/1KHZ-DO.gif
>> >>
>> >>Distortion and background noise are very low, and the dynamic range is
>> >>excellent see:
>> >>
>> >>93dB dynamic range, analog output @ 44Khz
>> >>http://home.clara.net/media/sblive/DYN-DA.gif
>
>> How much clearer could it be?
>
>Mr. Dormer where do those pictures stipulate that you used the same
>version of the card, and same version of the drivers that I did?

You seem to have the memory of a goldfish.  I have already shown you a
scan of the card, told you what drivers I am using and specified the
codec on the card.

Here is the discrepency.  Whilst you demand that I provide you with
specific information about what version of the card/driver etc I am
using, you rarely if ever mention these specifics when making
generalized statements about "the Live" or "4830" yourself.  That is
known as hypocrisy, Mr Krueger.  Worse still, by not providing this
information you are misleading the public.. especially since you now
know that your results are less favourable than can be achieved with
cards carrying the same name.

Here are some examples :

"The SB Live! audibly corrupts musical sounds played and recorded
through it"

"If asked to say what bugs me most about the SBLive!, I'd
say its the timbre changes that are obvious to me"

"I've got a SBLive! that ... adds some audible coloration"

"There is a certain sound card called the SBLive! that I like to use
as a whipping-boy... as an audio player its not even Mid-Fi."

"...the SBLive! nothing to write home about by HiFi standards."

"PCABX tests can demonstrate that the SBLive! audibly colors the sound
even using a SBLive! as part of the playback system. That means that
PCABX can demonstrate how "broken" something sounds using the
"broken" thing itself as part of the playback system!"

As the soundblaster Live obviously varies in quality somehow.. and
both myself and Trevor on soundcard.tech have demonstrated better
results than you.. I demand that you specifically make clear on the
following page that there is a known variation in sound quality
between different implementations of the "4830", and outline the
hardware revision, driver revision, codec and operating system used to
make your samples.  If you do not, appropriate action will be taken to
ensure the public is properly informed that your samples do not
accurately represent what you generically call the "SoundBlaster Live!
CT4830 PC Sound Card" soundcard.

http://www.pcabx.com/product/ct4830/index.htm

>Isn't it true that you also used a different version of the analysis
>software as well?

No.

>> >Dormer likes to tell lies about me. Every time I catch him he denies it.
>
>> That is because I don't lie.
>
>I just caught you again!
>I just caught you again!
>I just caught you again!

Krueger, you can repeat that until you are blue in the face - it
doesn't make it true.


--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t