Hey guys, ive come from an X AE5 and generally just kept it on neutral settings as i dont like surround sound. Recently fancied an upgrade so purchased an evga nu audio which looks and sounds fantastic.
 
How do i change the gain? my x2's at 32 ohms where as my hd 599s are around 50 ohms.
How do i know what sample rate to use for my music and mainly games?
 
thanks

Anything greater than 44.1 kHz sample rate and 24-bit depth is utterly pointless.  Cranking it up higher only causes increased compatibility issues.  That's my recommendation: 44.1 or 48 kHz and 24-bit depth.
 
Every human-audible sound can be recorded and perfectly reproduced at 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz with a 24-bit depth.  There is zero human perceivable difference between 44.1 kHz, 48 kHz, or 384 kHz sample rate audio.
 
There is an easy test you can perform to verify for yourself:
Record something at 384 kHz.  Record the same thing at 44.1 or 48 kHz.  Take one, invert it in software.  Then perform an additive mix of the two.  The result will be an audio clip which is only the difference of the two.  The result?  Virtual silence.
 
For example, four identical recordings from 352 kHz 24-bit down to 48 kHz 24-bit:

 
The difference (inverted addition) of the 352 kHz 24-bit sample and the 48 kHz 24-bit sample:

 
What is the result?  Near silence.  Which means that they are nearly identical.  The only difference is a tiny bit of hiss. But the amplitude of the hiss varies with the amplitude of the audio and is 10 to 50 times smaller in amplitude than the audio signal, and is therefore normally undetectable.

There is zero reason to use high sample frequencies for gaming ... or ever. All it adds is incompatibility and frustration.

In practice, there is almost zero difference between 16-bit and 24-bit depth audio, but there is at least a rare difference when listening to music at ear-bleeding amplitudes. Therefore, I will relegate that a 24-bit audio preference does have some merit in some rare examples. But higher than 48 kHz sample rate stereo? Never merited.

usa423

ty_ger07Every human-audible sound can be recorded and perfectly reproduced at 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz with a 24-bit depth.  There is zero human perceivable difference between 44.1 kHz, 48 kHz, or 384 kHz sample rate audio.

lies

Not lies. It's mathematically proven. Well established. Did you see my demonstration images above? They are proven the same since the difference is zero.

Try it yourself for God's sake! I have already told you all of this before. Don't listen to one after the other with a gap in time in between. When you do that, you fall victim to placebo. Do an inverted addition of the two and see for yourself that they are identical. Or, do it and prove me wrong (good luck!).  You supposedly have a recording studio setup.  It should be easy for you to perform this test.  I have zero motivation to mislead you, but yet you say that I am lying for stating facts but you won't even test it for yourself?
 
Inverted addition test: record two identical audio samples at two different sample rate test frequencies (one at 48 kHz and one at 384 kHz, for example).  Then, invert one of them (doesn't matter which).  Then add them (or "mix" them) together.   The result of an inverted addition: 1 + -1 = 0 (should be zero difference if they are indeed human perceivably identical, and therefore nothing but silence should remain).  The result of an inverted mix (0.5x1) + (0.5x-1) = 0 (same thing as an inverted addition except that both samples are dropped in amplitude by half before being added together; again, should be zero difference if they are indeed human perceivably identical, and therefore nothing but silence should remain).

For the others, to recap our previous conversations:

ty_ger07

usa423

ty_ger07

ty_ger07

Again, keep in mind that can't hear over 20 kHz. As explained in the video above, all sounds that you can hear can be perfectly captured and 100% reproduced at 44.1 kHz. Higher frequency recordings are litterally needlessly larger file sizes and offer decreased compatibility for your audience. If you want to be an elitist about it and purposely limit your audience size for no good reason, go right ahead.

Not being elite about anything. I appreciate saving money whenever I can, I'm not rich, not even wealthy honestly. There is quite a big difference between this argument and 20,000 dollar house speakers IMO.

"Again, keep in mind that can't hear over 20 kHz"

Can you explain who came up with that number for hearing ability of a human being?  I wasn't aware Nyquist was credited for discovery of the frequency range of the human ear. But that is really besides the point here. As far as I know, sound waves in real life are not a series of sequentially played samples.

Larger file sizes for nothing? Is that your opinion or do you think that is a fact?

Can you hear above 20 kHz? No. Just as your eyes cannot see above and below certain wavelengths, your ears cannot hear above and below certain wavelengths. It's science.  It's physics.  It's fact. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence on the subject. I can't believe that you want to argue this fact. It's not debatable.

Ok, that being factual, the technology and math guarantees that at 2 samples per 20 kHz wavelength, all human perceivable sound can be recorded and perfectly reproduced at "just" a 44.1 kHz sample rate. Did you even watch the video?

Yes, larger file sizes for nothing. It is my opinion. But it is also fact -- would have to be true -- if you first accept the notion that 44.1 kHz can perfectly record and reproduce all human audible sound.
 
You talked about "ripples in a pond of sound" which are being lost at 44.1 kHz sample rate.  Yes, sure.  But those "ripples in a pond of sound" are imperceivable to a human in the first place, so "losing" them is losing nothing of the human sound experience.
 
Watch the video above.
 
Then watch this video (again explaining why 44.1 kHz is all that is necessary AND explaining/demonstrating bit rate/depth):

 
Really.  Watch them!  Together, it is 40 minutes of your time to dispel all of the bad information that you have learned/accepted/assumed during your previous decade of dedication to sound.  If you really care so much about sound, you cannot afford to not watch these two videos.  Your questions are answered.
 
 
If you want to hear some of the same information coming from the mouth of an "audiophile", you can watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiZqYnd5g8M .  I think that the demonstrations in the first two embedded videos above were already adequate, but the audiophile video just linked does talk a bit more about 16 bit versus 24 bit (at 29:17 ) and why 24 bit might be theoretically better, but that 16 bit in reality is almost always sufficient (and the difference often imperceptible). Skip to 44:13 to skip all the sample rate and bit rate/depth information already discussed, and listen to what really matters to audiophiles: format/compression.

If you dedicate 2 hours to the subject and watch all three videos completely, sequentially, you will be an audio expert and no longer an "audiofool" for marketing. Every question you had is covered in great detail.

usa423
I did have a trick to use the full 384k in some games like Battlefield 4 but its not working anymore.

What a waste of time and frustration for nothing.

ty_ger07
Anything greater than 44.1 kHz sample rate and 24-bit depth is utterly pointless.  Cranking it up higher only causes increased compatibility issues.  That's my recommendation: 44.1 or 48 kHz and 24-bit depth.
 
Every human-audible sound can be recorded and perfectly reproduced at 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz with a 24-bit depth.  There is zero human perceivable difference between 44.1 kHz, 48 kHz, or 384 kHz sample rate audio.
 
There is an easy test you can perform to verify for yourself:
Record something at 384 kHz.  Record the same thing at 44.1 or 48 kHz.  Take one, invert it in software.  Then perform an additive mix of the two.  The result will be an audio clip which is only the difference of the two.  The result?  Virtual silence.
 
For example, four identical recordings from 352 kHz 24-bit down to 48 kHz 24-bit:

 
The difference (inverted addition) of the 352 kHz 24-bit sample and the 48 kHz 24-bit sample:

 
What is the result?  Near silence.  Which means that they are nearly identical.  The only difference is a tiny bit of hiss. But the amplitude of the hiss varies with the amplitude of the audio and is 10 to 50 times smaller in amplitude than the audio signal, and is therefore normally undetectable.

There is zero reason to use high sample frequencies for gaming ... or ever. All it adds is incompatibility and frustration.

In practice, there is almost zero difference between 16-bit and 24-bit depth audio, but there is at least a rare difference when listening to music at ear-bleeding amplitudes. Therefore, I will relegate that a 24-bit audio preference does have some merit in some rare examples. But higher than 48 kHz sample rate stereo? Never merited.

 
 
Well then, since you want to bring God into this. I'll tell you what, if you can say to me that you are the Lord Jesus Christ, and of a truth, no one can discern and perceive a difference in digital audio over 16 bit 44-48 khz. Then I will never respond to this issue with you again. Because honestly, I feel that only the actual creator of the flesh is allowed to make such a definitive statement about human hearing and perception. That would easily trump all the math and explanations in the world.
 
I understand you ty_ger07 have given your opinion to me on this, and so have I responded to you. But I think you are actually bordering on cyber harassing me now, and that is my opinion based on your actions the time I have known you on here. Because it certainly feels to me like you are following me around on here trying to essentially ruin all threads I make or speak in (trolling?). I don't know the policies here at the EVGA forum but I will look them up, and I see many threads are gone that were here months ago. There must have been fighting here and the slate wiped clean while I was gone from this place.
 
Okay say that you stop me in a Best Buy and assure me that it has been scientifically proven that no human can perceive greater than HD t,v and it is a huge waste of time and money for me to buy a 4k tv. But then it doesn't stop there. You follow me to Wal-Mart, and to the mall, and to Target.
 
At this point, I get it, you are convinced no one alive can hear or perceive greater than 16 bit 44-48khz digital audio and that those settings can perfectly reconstitute a sound wave exactly as it appeared in nature when it was captured by a mic and a A/D convertor then processed and played back through a D/A convertor. I disagree with that, and I believe that I can perceive a difference, and that others out there can too. And I don't believe 16 bit 48khz digital audio can perfectly reproduce anything. EVGA has released a card that DOES have the ability to record @ 32 bit and 384K. Doesn't mean you have to use that "extra" gear, but its there. Perhaps in your eyes that is not needed and is utterly pointless and futile. Maybe you are right...Or maybe you are not? As an INDIVIDUAL, and if your purpose is to capture and store data, then the best possible sample would be and probably should be desired.
 
But if this is a troll war, then clearly you have won the battle today by getting me to pull the car over and listen and formulate a response to you, when, perhaps, all I should have said was...
 
 
"whatever man"

usa423

ty_ger07
The difference (inverted addition) of the 352 kHz 24-bit sample and the 48 kHz 24-bit sample:

And I don't believe 16 bit 48khz digital audio can perfectly reproduce anything.

Feel free to prove the mathematicians, engineers, scientists, and experts wrong.  I already provided proof, and the results of my own confirmatory experiment.  You are believing in opinion, but will not perform a simple experiment to verify if your opinion is true; I provided you the science and factual evidence. Back in the 80s, Philips chose a sample rate and a bit depth for a reason.
 

usa423
EVGA has released a card that DOES have the ability to record @ 32 bit and 384K. 

Yes, because EVGA has little choice.  They are trying to market the card as a premium product; and people like you who don't know better would think that it isn't a premium product if they didn't include gimmicky support for useless high frequency sample rate.
 
This is how it worked: back in the 80s, scientists, engineers, and mathematicians developed an awesome digital audio standard which is able to perfectly record and reproduce (guaranteed even!) all human audible sound.  The hardware was perfected, and then with mass manufacturing, the cost of production dropped.  Because of that, the technology reached stagnation and it became difficult for audio hardware companies to market their product over some other company's equally perfect and similarly-priced product.  It was easy to increase the frequency and bit rate of the audio chips.  So, the audio companies started marketing useless features -- just because it was an easy feature to add -- and customers didn't know better and would pay more money for a product which seemed to offer innovation.
 
Now, we have all of these useless sample frequencies and bit depths which people foolishly used when making recordings which "premium" companies now have to support in order for their customers to not be mad that they were left without hardware support for those useless sample frequencies and bit depths.  You yourself say that you have a recording studio and were planning to record using these uselessly high sample rates and bit depths.  This is why I was so adamant that you learn and don't contribute to the problem.
 
 
I honestly believe that you still have not watched those three videos.  Otherwise, you could not possibly still believe what you believe.
 

EDIT:

I understand you ty_ger07 have given your opinion to me on this, and so have I responded to you. But I think you are actually bordering on cyber harassing me now, and that is my opinion based on your actions the time I have known you on here. Because it certainly feels to me like you are following me around on here trying to essentially ruin all threads I make or speak in (trolling?).

I am not following you.  I have 15,000+ posts.  I have accidentally "followed" thousands of people before you.  I didn't even realize who you were and didn't even realize that we had this previous conversation until I went back looking for that previous thread with the same content and saw that it was you again.
 
The simple truth is that this one of the subjects which I am (obviously) passionate about.  The subject of the thread attracted me.  The content of the thread confirmed my interest.

I don't know the policies here at the EVGA forum but I will look them up, and I see many threads are gone that were here months ago. There must have been fighting here and the slate wiped clean while I was gone from this place.

That's semi-paranoid talk.
 
There is a simple explanation.  Again, an image is worth a thousand words.  ... And is factual scientific evidence. ;)
 

 
At the bottom of the forum, click "30 days", and then click "from the beginning".  All of the sudden you will see pages of content.

EVGATech_LeeM

AsimY
Hey guys, ive come from an X AE5 and generally just kept it on neutral settings as i dont like surround sound. Recently fancied an upgrade so purchased an evga nu audio which looks and sounds fantastic.
 
How do i change the gain? my x2's at 32 ohms where as my hd 599s are around 50 ohms.
How do i know what sample rate to use for my music and mainly games?
 
thanks

There's no "gain" button in the NU Audio Software.  The independent headphone amp is controlled through the software via the Headphone Volume slider.  Raising and lowering that has a similar effect to a gain option, but it's not a 1:1 ratio for ohm to % (e.g. 300ohm =/= 50%).  Keep Master Volume at roughly 100% and adjust the headphone volume to find the right level for your headphones.
 
If the Master Volume is at 100%, 32ohm headphones seem to be roughly around 28%-35% for standard music/gaming.  50ohm, can be in the ~40%, but it will vary from headphone to headphone.  Some are harder to drive than others, and some are more sensitive than others.  Your environment may also need a bit more adjustment.
 
Also keep in mind that soft recordings can require more volume, as well as virtual surround software (e.g. BFV's 3D Headphone mode needs ~17% more volume than other audio options)
 
Regarding sample rate, I normally use 24-bit, 192,000hz.  I don't have content that goes above that, currently.  For gaming, I normally use 24-bit, 48,000hz.  You can try for higher with gaming and other content, but most applications rely on Windows DSP, and may have their own sample rate limitations or crash points.

EVGA should simplify it for users like Sound Blaster does for headsets/headphones gain. Maybe set the default to low, to avoid people damaging any headsets.
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I think one thing that is important to remember about the whole can you even hear the difference is it’s tests done on professional audio equipment. So yeah you might not notice the difference on the NU Audio card because it processes the sound the same way. Other audio cards can do digital cleanup that can distort the audio or other audio options can have electronic noise that will distort the audio. What I will say from personal experience is I noticed a difference when I hooked up my NU Audio card.