🚀 go-pugleaf

Roj <rojramsey@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>And above all, I'm still going to say that the sound of the **entire**
>>>CL line is decidedly substandard to that of the Turtle Beach and
>>>Hercules offerings (not hard - the Live! is essentially a technical
>>>piece of junk with the exception of the MIDI portion of it).
>>
>>Piece of junk?  Roj.. this does not seem to equate to a balanced
>>opinion :-)
>
>It is if you know what you're talking about and can back it up as I
>have in my eight or nine pointer before I left.

Roj, please define what you mean by 'piece of junk'.  I see lot's of
posts from Live! users who have no complaints.  Are you hoping to
spoil their day or what? :-)

>>Not strictly bad advice, my conclusion pretty much concurs with yours.
>>The Live excels in one respect, it is an excellent value MIDI
>>interface/sampler (**also note : low latency ASIO/cubase compatible
>>card with APS drivers**).  In most other respects there are better
>>alternatives for slightly more outlay.
>
>Yup - definitely.

At least we agree on something!

>>However, the Live is not as crippled as you make out.  Considering
>>it's low cost it has an extremely impressive spec on the outputs (at
>>least in the case of my sample), even beating the Santa Cruz in
>>several important areas (analog and digital - cf pcavtech data).
>>
>>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
>
>Pity none of this comes out in listening tests.  It may have nice
>specs on paper but audibly it's junk.

Not to my ears, Roj.. and I do use them professionally.  Your findings
are not consistent with mine, especially wrt "tinny".

>And what price do you pay elsewhere for using APS drivers?

Relevance?

>Bottom line - at the very least they need to build better drivers.

Agreed.

>Then there are the hardware incompatibility issues which are a volume
>and a half on their own...

We cannot be sure about all those issues until they do build better
drivers.

>>The general consensus seems to be "must try harder" particularly with
>>respect to drivers and compatibility.  Yet for many people the card
>>will work to their benefit, without hitch, and provide many hours of
>>entertainment and pleasure with great sound and features at low cost.
>>End of the world stuff.. huh?
>
>Great sound?  Only if you have at best "average" standards (tongue
>squarely in cheek).

Without wishing to be too provocational <G> isn't the same also true
of the only-marginally-better Santa Cruz?  Why don't you be done with
all this namby-pambying about and buy a semi-professional card or
better, huh? :-)

>Remember that little review I quoted?  I have
>heard the same things he did and long before he ever committed his
>viewpoints to print (at least five months, if the truth be told - the
>day I installed the card, in fact).  The sound is just not there to be
>heard.

Refer you to Mr Kreugers bullshit on 'placebo effects'..


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