Audigy 2 ZS or M-Audio Audiophile 2496

2004-05-01 02:51:14

I'm under the impression that i would get more features with the audigy card, the sound quality is about the same and m-audio is more stable.
Am i incorrect?
What would you choose?

Audigy 2 ZS or M-Audio Audiophile 2496

Reply #1 – 2004-05-01 05:49:09

The Audiophile is not capable of 5.1 analog output and does no hardware acceleration of 3D sound APIs. Clearly if you desire 5.1 analog output and/or 3D sound hardware acceleration the Creative product is the better choice.
 
  If you use your computer primarily for stereo listening through a hifi system, the Audiophiles' full sized RCA jacks are almost certainly going to be more durable than using an adapter on the 1/8" minijacks of the Audigy. Also, the Audiophile has a standard MIDI I/O (not gameport) and is guaranteed to be more suitable for low latency monitoring with pro audio creation software.

Audigy 2 ZS or M-Audio Audiophile 2496

Reply #2 – 2004-05-01 06:07:28

Why wouldn't you get the Revo 7.1 instead of the 2496???

Audigy 2 ZS or M-Audio Audiophile 2496

Reply #3 – 2004-05-01 06:18:34

They want the full sized RCA I/O connectors maybe?
This is the card Viper is talking about - it's usually cheaper than the Audiophile.

Audigy 2 ZS or M-Audio Audiophile 2496

Reply #4 – 2004-05-01 11:29:53

Have looked at the specs on these cards.

The 2496 does not support multichannel. It is used as a high-end studio card.

Now the Revolution 7.1 is closer to the Audigy.
Both support 7.1 and the same 96/24 24/192 etc.

I have an Audigy 2 ZS and it has some features that the Revo has not.
The Revo has no support for Decoding DTS. Only passthrough.
The Revo has no support for DTS NEO6 decoding. Only CSII
to name a few.

I also like that if you input a multicahnnel wave it plays properly through all speakers. Good for auditioning up-mixes.

Just my 2-credits worth

Audigy 2 ZS or M-Audio Audiophile 2496

Reply #5 – 2004-05-01 15:14:11

Yes, but still some sources say Audigy 2 upsamples samplerates below 48khz to 48khz causing higher intermodulation distortion. And who knows if Audigy 2 still uses AC'97 codec.

One reason for choosing Audigy 2 ZS might be gaming, as far as I know there aren't "better" card for gaming. And Revo doesn't have hardware accelerating for directsound which makes games slower. Not a big problem with new CPUs, but there are no real EAX effects only software simulated Sensaura. And if there's many sounds playing at the same time e.g more than 16, some of the sounds might be missing and decrease speed too.

If you choose Audigy 2 try to find the old OEM/Bulk model. I claim there no difference in quality, only the fact that older OEM is 6.1 and ZS is 7.1. It's not worth of extra cash IMHO, rather go for something "better".

About sound quality, there's no objective information of it like ABX double blind listening tests IIRC. I have no experience of Audigy 2, but I'd claim M-Audio would have slightly better quality. If you look the purpose of most M-Audio cards it might tell something. But it's possible that someone might like more about Audigy 2. By the way at AVSforum there have been subjective discussion about Revo and AP2496 and most people have told Revo sounds better.

BUT, You haven't told what you want from the card.

Audigy 2 ZS or M-Audio Audiophile 2496

Reply #6 – 2004-05-01 15:28:42

FWIW, I have the M-Audio 2496, and I play a lot of games. My setup is only L+R with a sub. For a 3.1 setup such as this, it works fine with games, and of course, exceptional for audio playback and recording. And having RCA connectors doesn't suck either.