I like my Turtle Beach a lot better. Jaws isn't as bright sounding, but you
don't get those odd upsample artifacts or the eloquence studder that is
probably caused by such. I think eloquence runs at 11225 or something and SB
has to upsample to 48k so that's 4 times as much random data that has to be
made as what was in the audio originally. I found it to do badly when other
programs were open that used audio like winamp, which sends 44.1 standard CD
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Belew" <bill@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 11:49 PM
Subject: [bct] Re: Sound Blaster or Turtle Beach
I'm going to be trying out a M-Audio Audiophile 192 on Monday or Tuesday. You can get the Audiophile 24-96 for $95.
I've never used the Turtle Beach cards, but years ago I often heard that they were better than Sound Blaster. I'm lucky because the brother of a friend of mine only wants $50 or my Sound Blaster Audigy in exchange for the M-Audio card and, I get to try it for a while before I decide if I like it.
-----Original Message----- From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Don Barrett Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 8:33 PM To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [bct] Sound Blaster or Turtle Beach
It looks like I will have to get a new sound card to properly record voice/screen reader podcasts as the Sound Max just isn't cutting it. I have always had Sound Blaster cards, but keep hearing great things about Turtle Beach cards. Can anyone give me some reasons to get a Turtle Beach card instead of a Sound Blaster?
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.2/274 - Release Date: 3/3/2006