X-Fi and the Elite Pro: SoundBlaster's Return to Greatness
by Derek Wilson on August 30, 2005 11:59 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Mobile
Final Words
The final verdict is that the SoundBlaster X-Fi Elite Pro is an excellent audio solution. With plenty of analog and digital I/O, the potential for improving game performance, lots of features, and better sound quality than any other consumer sound solution on the market, the SB X-Fi Elite Pro is simply impressive. Topping the performance of the Audigy 4 Pro and the Echo Gina 3G at every bit depth and sample rate, we can't help but acknowledge the superiority of the newest top-of-the-line card from Creative.The X-Fi's SRC combined with its new Audio Ring architecture alleviate Creative's past problems with sample rate conversion and intermodulation distortion. All audio sources are played with the highest clarity and quality. Playback of 24-bit / 96kHz audio is pristine even from the back of the computer. When working with lower bitrate audio, X-Fi can apply certain filters (such as the 24-bit Crystallizer) that attempt to clean up and enhance the signal. More than twice the number of hardware voices are supported in games alongside the latest in EAX Advanced HD for 3D sound. Multi-channel works perfectly, and CMSS-3D adds some advanced algorithms for HRTF, spacialization, and multiple in, multiple out up and down mixing to support any source on any speaker configuration.
At the end of the day, we were very happy with the performance of the X-Fi Elite Pro as a sound card for gaming, as part of a pro audio chain, and as the center of an entertainment system. However, we did have some complaints. Our experience with this (and all other) hardware is that audio is best played on a speaker configuration that fits the source. Creative argues that their hardware is capable of dynamically "remastering" and "remixing" audio to best fit the system at hand. We would flat out deny this claim and are shocked that Creative would even pretend that they could provide quality on par with remastered audio. Having hardware approximated the job of an audio technician in training is something that we might be able to believe, but no amount of processing will make up for a lack of data from the source. Access to all the original tracks as they were recorded at full bitrate (or analog as the case may be) gives an audio engineer infinitely more control over the final product than Creative can have with any finalized audio. That's not to say that some assistance in fitting the source to a particular setup isn't helpful in some cases. Upmixing 5.1 audio to 7.1 comes to mind as an example of an application that makes sense.
Likewise, the 24-bit Crystallizer is not something that we would leave on (or even on one setting) all the time. It is possible for the Crystallizer to clean up, brighten up, and generally make some audio files sound "better". This is especially true in the case of over-compressed or understated audio: the Crystallizer adds a punchiness and depth to these. Of course, in cases where the transients are already fully in the foreground, enabling the Crystallizer can make already punchy audio overpowering. We understand that some dynamic range is lost on 16-bit audio, but it's not always the case that hardware can determine exactly what should fill the missing bits if the final target was 24-bit rather than 16.
We are interested in the performance advantages of the 64MB of onboard RAM. Unfortunately, we don't have many games that make use of this feature, so we aren't able to talk about the real advantages here. Creative has given us some indication that they expect some very significant quality gains in games that have very little impact on the CPU and enable developers to have more freedom in how they design audio.
The only thing that we would really like to see that we don't is Dolby Digital Live (realtime Dolby 5.1 encoding for output over SPDIF to a receiver). With all the processing power available, there is no excuse for not supporting this feature, yet we have seen no mention of it from Creative. Dolby Digital Live may not be as hot a topic as it was back when NVIDIA supported the feature in their onboard SoundStorm audio solution, but we would still like to see it added for completeness (especially when even Intel's onboard solution can handle it).
The last question that we have to address is the most important. Is the SoundBlaster X-Fi Elite Pro worth the $400 price tag? If the card is destined for a machine that will be multitasked as the centerpiece of an entertainment center, part of a gaming rig, and part of a small home studio for budding musicians, then the answer is "yes" (but only if high quality speakers and possibly a very high quality receiver and amp are to be used in conjunction with the product). The SoundBlaster X-Fi Elite Pro is not a sound card to be taken lightly, and it really deserves to be pushed to its limits.
We really can't recommend this part to the average user. Not only are the quality and feature set far beyond what a normal computer user will need, but the extremely high quality audio components used in the construction of the card are beyond what any, but audiophiles or musicians, will care about. This really is a semi-pro card packed with consumer level features and should be treated as such.
That being said, audiophiles and musicians (who don't use a balanced audio setup) will be very pleased with this card, especially if they enjoy gaming as well as just listening. We also can't wait to get our hands on other X-Fi cards. Ranging in price from $130 to $280, the rest of the new SoundBlaster line-up look to be very compelling offers. The differences between the Elite Pro and the rest of the pack include onboard RAM, the quality of the audio components used, and the I/O options included. Our guess is that most users will be quite satisfied with the SoundBlaster X-Fi XtremeMusic (the $130 card).
Creative informed us that cards should be shipping as of last week, but we still can't find them online or in stores. Even Creative's own site lists the X-Fi line up as pre-order. We will have to check into the availability of these parts as we certainly don't want the recently ATI disease ("paperlaunchitis") to spread to the rest of the computer industry.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
110 Comments
View All Comments
JNo - Thursday, September 1, 2005 - link
In fact, if Anandtech could do a review of the HDA X-Mystique 7.1 it'd be appreciated as I've heard quite a few good things about this card, not least its reasonable price point and dolby digital live output.By the way, on a separate note, for all the people here giving anandtech grief, people should look at more than just one site before making informed purchasing decisions and anandtech did much better than tomshardware which was extremely partisan. Also, I would like to use and trust dedicated sound sites like www.3Dsoundsurge.com but unfortunately they are often too slow in reviewing new hardware...
DerekWilson - Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - link
you can output sound digitally ... dolby sources (DVDs) can be output to a reciever, and audio can be output via SPDIF to a reciver as well ...What you can't do is take a source that's not already dolby (like music, games and the like), encode it to dolby, and then send it to a reciver.
Lwood - Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - link
I found this on the ALSA mailing list (http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel...">http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel...:"We are not going to get any support from Creative for the X-Fi chip.
We do not get support from Creative for any Creative chip that has a DSP
in it."
It looks like we won't see a Linux driver for the X-Fi anytime soon... :-(
sprockkets - Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - link
Oh well, even nVidia's soundstorm worked in linux, and with the 5.1 encoding out.Reflex - Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - link
I've had these cards in my lab and all I can say is that this is the first time I've ever really doubted Anandtech's credibility. This reads like a spiced up piece of PR from Creative, and subjective listening would not put this as the best consumer audio solution as so prominently stated on the first page of the review.Derek - What the hell is going on here? You don't even include any results from competing products to make such a statement. The war was over before a shot was fired is the impression this review gives. The fact that Creative finally has a card to match the specs that otehr cards have had for three years now makes it a 'revolution'? Sorry, I have been working with these cards for months now and they definatly are nothing special. Just expensive.
flexy - Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - link
100% agree...tried to keep my complaints back, tho.Btw. nice nick :)
DerekWilson - Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - link
Hello,We will be looking at more cards, and including an envy24 based solution is something that we intend to do in the future.
We do include a result from a competing solution -- the Gina 3G is a pro audio card which has excellent audio quality. The Elite Pro is closer to a pro audio product in the component selection and construction.
envy24 based consumer products don't score as well as the Gina 3G from what we have seen. Granted we do have to test this for ourselves, but we would certainly expect the Gina 3G to outperform something from Terratec or M-Audio.
That being said, the X-Fi outperforms the Gina 3G in just about ever test we ran.
It is very difficult to subjectively compare audio between cards. There have been some cases (the audigy line) where there was a very clear problem with the aural experience. With the X-Fi line, we can no longer say that we can hear problems with the audio.
We spent days listening to this card, the Gina, and the Audigy 4. We frankly disagree with the statement that subjective listening does not put this card on par with the best audio solutions out there. We found no reason in our subjective listening tests to conclude otherwise.
On top of that, after simply listening to the card for days, we ran the RMAA tests. These tests showed clearly that not only was the card void of any issues, but that the quality of the output was much closer to the source than any other card we tested. These two points add up to the conclusion you disagree with.
And as we said, if this card performs better than the Gina 3G and the Gina performs better than consumer level envy24 parts, it stands to reason that the X-Fi would outperform just about everything but a LynxTWO ... and even then we would need to run some tests of our own ...
The big problem is that at these incredibly low noise levels, high dynamic range, low distortion, good separation, etc... it is very difficult to hear differences in the audio. To the average person, the audigy 4 Pro, Gina 3G, and X-Fi will sound exactly the same. To a hardcore audiophile, we wouldn't doubt it if the X-Fi won their hearts. The X-Fi (in spite of its features) can provide a very true-to-the-source signal with less coloration than all but the best pro audio cards out there.
For musicians, the high quality provides a better platform for work than the rest of the pack -- unless, of course, balance audio is desired.
Show me a consumer audio card that matches the specs of the X-Fi ... From the tests other people have performed on the LynxTwo B at 16-bit/44.1kHz (the unofficial standard in PC audio quality), the X-Fi posts http://audio.rightmark.org/test/lynx-two-b-1644.ht...">better numbers in every category but frequency response (and it's darn close in that area)...
The high end components used do not make the X-Fi Elite Pro "nothing special" ... They make it nothing most people will need. And certainly, between this and other products that use good quality components, most people won't notice much (if any) difference.
We very much agree that the card is too expensive. And please rest assured that we will be comparing this card to an evny24 based solution -- and hopefully a lynxtwo -- in the future.
Thanks for the feedback,
Derek Wilson
yacoub - Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - link
Look into the BlueGears X-Mystique. It's pretty much the best PC soundcard available at a reasonable price right now - and it's not Creative so there's no assorted bloatware to install.Reflex - Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - link
Derek -I am not trying to bash you here, however you have to understand that when you start an article by proclaiming something the best in its class, but then your test does not include the other solutions in the class at all, that things seem fishy.
I work with audio devices for a living. I've worked with the X-Fi since it was a prototype(as have a couple dozen other people in my lab). Certainly it is an improvement over previous Creative efforts, and at first we were a bit wowed by the paper specs and proposal. However after working closely with it for months, I honestly can say that no one here feels its anything special. Perhaps some of that is the novelty wearing off, but in any ad-hoc test with someone who hadn't heard it before, they could rarely tell the difference between it and an Audigy, and the M-Audio Revolution generally was said to produce clearer sound. Not that our tests were scientific or anything, we weren't trying to write articles for publication.
I'd really suggest some blind tests with a variety of content. I think you may be suprised to find that while for MP3's the X-Fi sounds good, for CD's and especially SACD's the mid-range is poorly reproduced. Make certain you use a wide range of music, and prefferably classical numbers that you know very well.
Something else is you could list what type of speakers/headphones and recievers you are using, if you are testing with something like Klipsch then your credibility would go down considerably for anything but games and action movies, after all the card cannot make up for poor speakers(when measured by reproduction accuracy, not volume).
I would suggest establishing a baseline and going from there. Based on my experience, in the 'consumer' segment the M-Audio Revolution 7.1 is a good baseline, however any baseline that you could compare against would be beneficial to strengthening the credibility of the review. Granted anything audio is subjective, but when you say something is 'better' you need to at least be able to point to some specific reasons as to why.
And finally, the section that read like Creative marketing PR was your explanation of their audio architecture. There is nothing inherantly 'better' about the approach Creative is taking, it is simply different, there are both advantages and drawbacks. Furthermore, while they make the product seem like the 'next generation of audio' no one has managed to get a commitment from them to support the upcoming Windows Audio Architecture that will be a part of Vista, without that support they will be behind several others. Their lack of support for Linux is also a drawback for many.
Thank you for the effort, I hope that this feedback will help you improve your audio reviews in the future. I have read AT since the beginning and rarely doubted what is posted here, there just seemed to be some rather glaring flaws in how this review was handled. At least in my humble opinion.
DerekWilson - Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - link
Thank you very much for the helpful feedback. Some of your suggestions will absolutly make it into future audio reviews.I would tend to disagree with your assesment of Creative's architectural direction. If the intent is to very heavily process many audio streams, then the flexibility and power are helpful. This could be a boon to game designers or electronic musicisans looking for some hefty sample rate or dsp power.
For straight up listening to a single source or recording the architecture is unnecessary.
I agree that windows driver and linux support are drawbacks as well.
We absolutely appreciate and need our readers feedback. Thanks for taking the time.
Derek Wilson