Why does AC97 mode sound better than HDaudio mode

this is on a z270 motherboard. the older legacy intel sound mode sounds better ;/
why could this be. is it because the HD audio mode just focuses on handling more channels and is shit at it. like neets like us just really need 2channel maybe 6 at most.

Attached: Andoer-Cellphone-Smartphone-Portable-Mini-Omni-Directional-Mic-Microphone-for-Recorder-for-iPad-Appl (1000x1000, 282K)

this is with both at 32bit 192000 Hz btw.

prob another case of new tech is bad old is good. fairly common phenomenon on any thing that is not latency based

Depends on the setup really.

well I know its not nostalgia as the years I used AC97 I didn't listen to music much the music lessening years was all HDintel

or sound blaster EMC chip + Kx open source driver.

AC97 is the original PC 5.1 channel standard and the basic hardware for it has been polished smooth as glass for over 10 years.

it was remade from scratch with HD Audio front panel (intel) so no that's not true. that's the diference im experiencing maybe your motherboards sound driver lets you change it too I toggled mine and with the HD at extream which is same gain on both the AC97 is noticeably nicer.

You dont need 192khz unless :
>you're a dog
>you're a cat
>you're a mouse
>you're a fucking furfag who got surgery to get canine hearing
>you're trying to reproduce freaking audio chip/instrument artifacts
You do not need 24bit/32bit float audio either unless you listen at volumes over 96 db which are without doubt dangerous for you.

The better question is why such a recent baord still has the crappy AC97 fallback for ancient cases

was polished to glass from 90s till 2010.
reason HD intel is so bad by comparison is prob it was created in the spotify age so they focused on features not quality.

you understand every receiver the signel halfs.

so if I send it to my receiver it drops to 96khz and to speakers it drops to 46khz.

humans can hear the effect of 44khz there are standards based around this benchmark and it is noticeable even if scientifically speaking we can only receptively hear half of that again around 20khz mark. the phenomenon that halfs it is a real thing its called some thing some thing its a real thing not a audiophile thing.

every amplification or projection/process (ie speaker) I mean. I wish I could remember the name of the effect but its totally a thing.

Attached: 5421542325.png (492x342, 121K)

that's a real thing thou. if you going to a amp from sound card then speakers running that high does help

or from DAC to amp to speaker.

>old codec written by a handful of white males in the same office as part of a broad standard with the highest quality possible given hardware limitations
>new codec written by Pajeets separated by space and time coding for the lowest bid

You're confusing Nyquist with signal path loss in the analog doman.

>46
okay, i want you to pick up any device capable of performing calculations, then you input "96000 divided by 2" and i want you to read aloud the result.
The effect you meant if it's what i think it is doesn't apply to the hardware, only the the general digital presentation when converted to the analogue signal sent to your audio device.
(the frequency range of the digital audio is literally just the sampling rate divided by 2 so 44100 divided by two gets you 22050)

reliable sampling rate you mean

you can get spurious samples from above the nyquist which will fuck with your signal, which is why filtering is necessary at some point

>>you're a fucking furfag who got surgery to get canine hearing
brb putting my head in dry ice to get furfag ears!

sound waves interact with other sound waves user

the real redpill is adjusting your dac for the source material

if you're listening to a cd rip switch your dac to 16/44.1 first

dithering's a bitch

I imagine it would be quite hard to hear a difference in double-blind testing with any competent, modern ditherer, unless you were dithering to some really low bit depth or frequency or something. For example, I believe most home theater AV receivers dither to 32-bit float and process before converting audio to analog anyway.
In any case, ASIO or WASAPI on Windows and similar drivers for Linux (not sure what Mac uses) will auto-switch your DAC to the right sampling rate and skip OS dithering/audio stack, assuming your DAC supports it. And assuming the drivers are written competently.

>step on gas pedal
>wait 1 second for the computer to process the input
thanks computers

Introducing Ped.al, the cloud-based RESTful API for the CAN bus.

What sound bit rate and sample should I set in Windows defaults?

I think you're confusing 192khz (sample rate) with 192khz (pitch frequency).

Higher sample rates like 192khz have plenty of benefits, because the audio is more faithfully represented in digital form by virtue of being sampled more frequently.

It doesn't really work like that. 44 khz means that there are frequencies up to 22khz which you can hear in the music. The human hearing goes up to 22, but very small percentage of people can even hear above 18. So the frequencies that 192khz plays are almost 100, you can't hear that. It's especially funny to me when people who can't hear above 14khz ramble about hi res music. Or it's even funnier when people download hi res releases of music that was recorded in 14 bit/44.1khz.