Live! Value vs. Audigy 2 ZS?

I've had a Soundblaster Live! Value card for ages, and for the most part
have been perfectly happy with it. I'm considering upgrading to an Audigy 2
ZS, but am not sure I need to. Putting aside the 5/6/7.1, better
efficiency, and bells and whistles, this is currently what I need it for
(and solely the factor at hand, though I'm sure I would utilize the extra
features in the future):

I'm running sound directly into the card (from a stereo to line in),
recording/editing/altering the file with Cool Edit, saving it as a .wav,
then playing it in real time back out to my stereo (and component CD
recorder). Yes, there are several reasons I'm using this process.

I'm archiving live cassettes and vinyl to CD-R, and I just want to make
sure that I get (er, retain) the best possible sound when it's manually
filtered in and out of the card. I've been converting radio shows, vinyl,
and tapes (in) to wav and MP3 without a hitch. Does anybody know or think
there would be even a slight difference between the two cards? Am I asking
for unecessary headaches with the Audigy?

System:
XP Home
AMD Duron 1.2
384MB RAM
SB Live Value sound
Altec Lansing 2-speakers + sub
Gainward Geforce4 Ti4200 128MB video

TIA!

The Audigy2 ZS has considerably better DACs with higher signal/noise ratio,
higher sensitivity, lower distortion and such, but wether you'll hear that
in the end is debatable if you're encoding the sound to a "lossy" format
such as MP3 anyway. MP3 varies from awesome to total crap depending on
the encoder you use and the parameters supplied to the same. Also, the
equipment you'll use to play back the sound matters. If it isn't of
particulary high quality, it won't matter even if your soundcard delivers
completely flawless sound, you won't hear the difference anyway.

Anyway, I have a ZS, and I am very happy with it. I think it is a very nice
sound card, and the generic version without the I/O break-out boxes isn't
particulary expensive either.

"Lenny" <> wrote in
news:q6zJc.5140$:

> The Audigy2 ZS has considerably better DACs with higher signal/noise
> ratio, higher sensitivity, lower distortion and such, but wether
> you'll hear that in the end is debatable if you're encoding the sound
> to a "lossy" format such as MP3 anyway. MP3 varies from awesome to
> total crap depending on the encoder you use and the parameters
> supplied to the same. Also, the equipment you'll use to play back the
> sound matters. If it isn't of particulary high quality, it won't
> matter even if your soundcard delivers completely flawless sound, you
> won't hear the difference anyway.
>
> Anyway, I have a ZS, and I am very happy with it. I think it is a very
> nice sound card, and the generic version without the I/O break-out
> boxes isn't particulary expensive either.


Thanks for the info. Encoding MP3s doesn't really factor into why I'm
considering a new card. I've done a lot of experimenting in that dept, and
am getting the best results I can w/out completely hogging my portable's
drive. IMO the MP3 format will have a short shelf life anyway, so it
doesn't concern me so much.

I'm strictly inquiring about audio in, saving to wav, then audio out to a
component CD recorder. I have reasonably decent equipment, as sound quality
is generally my #1 priority.

Thanks

On 15 Jul 2004 16:28:47 GMT, SideHatch <> wrote:

>I've had a Soundblaster Live! Value card for ages, and for the most part
>have been perfectly happy with it. I'm considering upgrading to an Audigy 2
>ZS, but am not sure I need to. Putting aside the 5/6/7.1, better
>efficiency, and bells and whistles, this is currently what I need it for
>(and solely the factor at hand, though I'm sure I would utilize the extra
>features in the future):
>
>I'm running sound directly into the card (from a stereo to line in),
>recording/editing/altering the file with Cool Edit, saving it as a .wav,
>then playing it in real time back out to my stereo (and component CD
>recorder). Yes, there are several reasons I'm using this process.
>
>I'm archiving live cassettes and vinyl to CD-R, and I just want to make
>sure that I get (er, retain) the best possible sound when it's manually
>filtered in and out of the card. I've been converting radio shows, vinyl,
>and tapes (in) to wav and MP3 without a hitch. Does anybody know or think
>there would be even a slight difference between the two cards? Am I asking
>for unecessary headaches with the Audigy?
>
>System:
>XP Home
>AMD Duron 1.2
>384MB RAM
>SB Live Value sound
>Altec Lansing 2-speakers + sub
>Gainward Geforce4 Ti4200 128MB video
>
>TIA!



Yes I moved from a SB Line 4.1 to a ZS and I am very pleased with it but I
do run the preferred Hardware Like Intel, Creative stuff likes Intel better,
not CRAP VIA stuff.

SideHatch <> wrote in
news:Xns95277EF4CCF2sidehatchdontemailme@129.250.1 70.84:

> I'm archiving live cassettes and vinyl to CD-R,

You rrealize that the shelf life of CD-R (any recordable CD)
is not very long. Maybe 1 to 2 years?

On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:32:56 GMT, JS <> wrote:

>SideHatch <> wrote in
>news:Xns95277EF4CCF2sidehatchdontemailme@129.250. 170.84:
>
>> I'm archiving live cassettes and vinyl to CD-R,
>
>You rrealize that the shelf life of CD-R (any recordable CD)
>is not very long. Maybe 1 to 2 years?



Crap, 300 Years for Misumi Gold Archival ones..

I have links to the Info..

On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 22:32:56 GMT, JS <> wrote:

>SideHatch <> wrote in
>news:Xns95277EF4CCF2sidehatchdontemailme@129.250. 170.84:
>
>> I'm archiving live cassettes and vinyl to CD-R,
>
>You rrealize that the shelf life of CD-R (any recordable CD)
>is not very long. Maybe 1 to 2 years?



Vebatum Azo is rated for 100 Years..