RE: [linrad] Re: M-Audio Audiophile 192 Soundcard

["Robert McGwier" <rwmcgwier@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes I have tested the Lynx L-22, M-Audiophile USB, and the
M-Audiophile 192 using RMAA and other tools.  RMAA is nice since
it builds a web page automatically for the results.  I will put
these on my web site and then post a note.  I do not have the
Delta 44 results here, they are probably at work.  If I cannot
find them, it will be somewhat difficult to do them again instantly
since the Delta 44's are in Linux machines and all are in use.
I will get to it eventually.  I will re-post shortly but the
bottom line is this:

The Delta 44 was the best.  The M-Audiophile USB was second and
the M-Audiophile 192 was third in noise floor.  The 192 had
increased crosstalk out near the upper edge.  The M-Audiophile
USB noise floor and dynamic range were both 5 dB better than
the 192.

I will have to look to see what I did the wider sampling rates.



Bob


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-linrad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-linrad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Alberto di Bene
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 2:41 PM
To: linrad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [linrad] Re: M-Audio Audiophile 192 Soundcard


Jeffrey, Bob, Stan and Conrad,

  thanks for your investigations and considerations about the Audiophile 
192 sound card.
Bob, I seem to recall that you performed some extensive tests on the 
Delta 44 comparing it
to other cards. Do you have any data to back up or to deny my  suspect 
that it has a fixed
cut off frequency in its anti alias input filter? Does Linrad use it at 
96 kHz sampling rate?
What are the results? 

A second (and last) question to you all. Am I right in saying the 4 
input channels are needed
only if you want to use x-pol antennas ? Or are there other 
circumstances where having 4 input
channels can be of benefit ?  Thanks.

73  Alberto  I2PHD (Trying to understand whether buying today a Delta 44 
is a good move...)
 

Robert McGwier wrote:

>I spoke to them and to OSS (4Front) they were not terribly helpful.
>When I started OSS it called it a Delta 44 equivalent.  It did not work.
>
>The other problem as I see it is that the voltage range it covers is very
>large indeed.  The Delta 44, Lynx L22, etc. sport two ranges -10dBv and
>+4dBu (the latter being larger).  The Audiophile has a much larger peak
>to peak voltage range than +4dBu.  This means modifications would be
>required to interface to a particular piece of hardware such as WSE,
>SDR-1000, etc. to do anything that approaches using the dynamic range of
>the A/D's properly.  Gerald Youngblood, AC5OG, purchased one with the
>hopes that it would do a good job with his SDR-1000.  I am uncertain
>what he thinks about it now.
>
>For $200 or less, it is stil hard to beat the Delta 44.
>
>Bob
>N4HY
>
>
>
>.
>
>  
>



LINRADDARNIL