Justus

Arcanum eh? You think? I dunno, I don't think there's really all that much in common other than the instrumentation. Actually, I thought Arcanum's soundtrack was kind of boring, to be honest. As for piano...well, I suppose there's no particular reason I couldn't. Just the particular wild hair I had at the time happened to be layering myself on the violin, and then I submitted it on a whim. If I threw in a piano, I'd probably want to use no more than two violin parts. Hmm...but I kind of like it the way it is already, too! Besides, I could spend that time working on something new. OCRemix: Now WITH strings attached. Man...I just got an MS-2000, and I really really wanna make some cheesy dance music, but you guys twist my arm enough and I might have to do something else...cinematic.

I do this regularly. And yes, I tend to push myself way way too hard. Do this if you're trying to kick your own ass big time. Or you could just find any eurobeat for that matter. Initial D mostly used liscenced eurobeat for its soundtrack. Or if you're stuck on it being in Japanese, just use any old J-pop, which is sort of like eurobeat's retarded half-brother. Ayumi Hamasaki's Ayu-ro mix for the best of both worlds. While Dragonforce is just about the best thing to work out to EVER (though technically not game music or Asian, and with....sometimes understandable lyrics), SSH makes a strong second place, while also having no lyrics AND being from video games. www.ssh.ne.jp. Just go to "MP3" and start clicking!

Alright. Sent in the e-mail. Don't mind all the dorky marks like "eroica". I was mostly just being goofy because I didn't expect anyone else to actually look at the score...and yes, I did in fact ignore a lot of my own bowings. I thought they'd be cool when I wrote them, but when I was actually playing....not so much. So you guys just bow it however. Also, it doesn't by any stretch HAVE to be 4 violins. You could do 2-4 fiddles per part if you want, and it would still sound pretty cool. Finally, sorry for not using 8va for the high crap at the end EDIT: Oh, by the way, what school do you go to? EDIT 2: I keep forgetting this, but I have a working fax machine now, so I could even fax the score (or a revision) somewhere if you wanted.

Wow you guys. I'm really not sure what to say. I have to admit, I actually expected it NOT to get accepted at all, much less with this sort of praise. As I mentioned in my original submission, this is just something I kind of threw together during a rare slow evening at the studio. It was just a fun little file on my computer, and the decision to submit it to OCR was fairly spontaneous. Kind of a "hell, why not" sort of thing, born of a more tame "I should show this to a few buddies" kind of thinking. As I was reading the judges' commentary, every time someone brought up a negative point, like the playing being flat here and there, or the short length, or how it was similar to the original at times, I found myself nodding and going "yes, exactly". Since you guys enjoyed this gimmick so much, I'm going to have to make sure the next submission is COMPLETELY different. I think I'm gonna have to dust off my DX-7 and my Roland R-8 and make some 80s-tastic dance music next! Believe it or not, I've been thinking about writing some Italo Disco beats. In the meantime, I'd love to collab with some of the other remixers. If someone wants to write me a violin part (or 4) I will gladly play and record it (or them), at least as long as it isn't impossible to play! Though sadly, the SM-81 I used to record this one is on the fritz at the mo', so I may just have to use the AKG C414EB instead. HORRORS! In all seriousness though, while I did finish a music degree, I rarely actually do music like this anymore, making this submission extra-weird for me. I run one studio that does mostly indie pop, metal, and other rock, and I work for a different studio that focuses on hip-hop, R&B, blues, jazz, and gospel, so I don't get to pull my old orchestral chops out very often anymore. What makes it even worse is that I LOVE tinkering with synthesizers, so when I do make music, it's usually cheesy electronic stuff (and I don't mean that electronic music is cheesy, just when I do it). Answers: @The Lone Ranger: Yeah, I did those weird Lufia mixes forever and ever ago, back when I just used some cheap soundfonts (and vintage dreams, which is still awesome, and which I still use on an E-mu e6400), and didn't really understand what "hardcore" was outside of a few MP3s I had downloaded called "hardcore mix". I know better now. At least I had the good sense never to submit those travesties here. @CHz: Well the Western "Touhou community" is pretty small. The Touhou Wiki at www.poshlmer.com is a decent English resource for info on the series, and the Maidens of the Kaleidoscope forums are fairly jumping small English forums to sound off about it, at least if they ever show up again anyways. There are SO MANY Japanese remixes of this music! But apparently they sell, because the fanbase is HUGE there! I've actually thought about compiling an entire album of Touhou remixes and trying to get them sold at cons over there, since there's quite a market, even if it is highly competitive. They don't even have to know I'm not Japanese that way! @Dhsu: Tinny it may be, but the man really cares about delivering a fun and relevant musical backdrop to his games. He does pretty well given that it's all done on a single $400 digital synthesizer (an Edirol SD-80, to be exact). Those who remember me from VGMusic know that I once wrote music similarly, using only an SC-8850...so I can really relate to it! It's what you gotta do if you're too poor to afford good gear, too honest to pirate software, and too busy making music (or entire video games, in ZUN's case) to dick with free crap. Really, a lot of his melodies are quite moving in the context of the game. They can be moving outside the context of the game too if presented in the right way, as I've proven given the response on this remix. Besides this one piece of music, ZUN has written dozens more every bit as majestic and catching, if one can only set aside the hatred for cheap-sounding MIDI. I'm glad I could help you see it from a new perspective! @Abadoss: Financially afford it? Dude, fire away. I'd love to collab! I mean, if it's like the solo part of some virtuoso-level concerto you're writing, then maybe we ought to talk $$$, but if you just want a couple phrases, or an easy melody part then I'm all for it! Oh, and I probably under-charge for gigs. I make plenty of scratch running my studio, so the violin thing is really just gravy for me anyways. I'd rather DO it then insist on big money for it. Recording rock bands is fun, but if I couldn't play violin, I would die! @Black Mage: My name, Justus, is pronounced "Just us". My parents, who were (and arguably still are) dirty hippies, thought that would be a really clever name to give their first born. @underthesun: That's really touching, man. I'm still floored by what happened in Viginia myself. The instrument I play on is a J.B. Villaume I inherited that came to the US with my ancestors who were escaping the pogroms in Russia. If any surreality came out of a recording made with it, it's because it's an instrument already familiar with mass murder and death. Wow, was that overly melodramatic there or what? Well, it does get a very dark tone, unusually so for a Villaume. @swordbreaker: The game itself is not free. It is in fact made, music, graphics, story, levels, programming, and all, by just one person who supports himself financially with his work. You can purchase Perfect Cherry Blossom, or any of the other games in the Touhou series from an import store such as Himeya. You can even download the demo version, with the first three levels, for free from ZUN's website. For those who can't navigate moon runes, it's on this page, and it's the link that says " 体験版 ver 0.11 フルパッケージ" and then has (9.28 MB) next to it. @Dave Harris: What's up Dave? See? You got to hear more of my work after all! As you can see, I still write small novels for posts. WHEE!! @Arek: I'd love for your orchestra to play something by me! Just promise to send a recording if it's at all possible! You guys may think I did a great job making mine sound like it wasn't an overdub romp, but nothing can truly replicate the spirit of a live performance! I could send you a scan of the sheet music. The cool news for you is that I've already done it up with appropriate expression markings and everything, so all you guys have to do is play it! But hey, do you have Finale by any chance? Or some software capable of reading Enigma files? If so, I could send you the score in that format, which is even better!

That homeworld stuff didn't sound like they were particularly wonderful samples actually. Sounded just kind of like an old Emu Proteus or something. It DID however sound like they had some great reverb dialed in on it, which you could really hear by virtue of there not being a ton of other stuff going on. So it's a matter of mixing and orchestration as much as it is one of sample quality I think. I think you could do even better though if you had a bass drum sample that included some natural hall reverb. If you can afford something like the Eastwest orchestra, then great! Otherwise, you might try a convolution reverb with an appropriate impulse sample (SIR is free!).

This. Or you could get a USB microphone. That would be a bit of a shame since you already have real mics and you just need a pre. Besides, I haven't really been all that stoked about any USB mic I've played with yet, but I will admit to being very curious about this: http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Snowball/ As has been said, there is no particularly "incompatible" mic. You just need to get the right signal in is all. Pre's CAN be expensive, but they don't have to be. They range anywhere from $30 to MANY THOUSANDS. Mind telling us what mics you've bought?

ENERMAX! Expensive, but the best. I have a 485watt Enermax Noisetaker II that consistantly specs higher than many 600 watt power supplies, and true to its name is really really quiet.

From the sound of it, you actually want a digital piano, not a "keyboard". You'll also probably need to forget about getting something with built-in speakers. Almost all keyboards with built-in speakers are just the cheapies, which usually have a less serious synthesis engine and cheaper key action (and keys). I do have fond memories of my old Casio CTK that I had in the 90s though (if you do get a cheapie, Yamaha PSRs are better than Casio CTKs any day, but I've heard that some of Casio's new lines of cheapies are surprisingly decent). Playing live, you should be able to plug your keyboard into the PA at any venue you perform at, unless it's like a small coffee shop sort of thing without a PA (at which built-in speakers won't cut it anyways). Most "digital pianos" don't have very many sounds. Most will have some piano sounds and some organ sounds, but usually not gunshots (or General MIDI, for that matter). The good news is that what few sounds it has will be GREAT. Don't forget though, if you want a greater variety of sounds down the road, you can always buy a new synth later and connect it to the piano with a MIDI cable, and don't forget that a "synthesizer" is simply any device that accepts MIDI input and turns it into audible sound, and is NOT necessarily a piano, but can be a small desktop module, a 19" rack piece, or even software for your computer (assuming you have the appropriate interface/USB cable). After all, you're not going to find something with 88 scaled hammer-action keys AND a workstation quality synthesis engine for less than a few thousand dollars. If you're a third year music student, then you probably actually realize that "serious" is not the right word to describe the purchase of any kind of $500 musical instrument. If you were truly serious, you'd be looking at Yamaha Clavinovas. Since you're just starting out on piano though, take a look at Casio's digital pianos. The PX100 certainly fits your budget, and should give you years of quality use. Watch out for M-audio's keyboards. They tend to be cheaply built, and the cheaper one they sell is NOT fully-weighted, but semi-weighted, which you'll want to avoid if you want it to feel just like a real piano.

I don't BELIEVE it should make a significant difference. Firewire, on the other hand, I've heard does...but I've also heard that's more if you buy a PCI firewire card. I just have a low-power consumption (and low noise) microfactor motherboard (Gigabyte brand) myself, and it has native firewire, and works perfectly. The only reason I bring it up is that if you're getting a whole new mobo, you should look for one that has firewire on it. Even if you decide to go with a PCI interface, it'll only open more options for you. Also, Core2Duo=luv. I'm loving my Opteron, but those are even sicker! Yeah, QLSO's chorus is a lot better sounding (shouldn't be surprising), but it comes at a price, because FL's doesn't require nearly as many resources. I think Kjaerhus' Classic Chorus is a pretty decent compromise between quality and CPU usage, and the price is definitely right too. In fact, you can download the whole Classic Series for free. They're great friends if you don't have expensive plug-ins or outboard gear.

Unfortunately, I already own QLSO Pro Gold XP, and I don't have the 8 separate computers EastWest recommends for running Platinum (though admittedly, that was written back when a Barton-core Athlon or a high-end Prescott P4 was a beast, and before dual-core got huge).

Well Sytrus isn't sample based at all. I don't know if Sample Tank directly streams or not, as I only played with the free version a little bit in someone else's home studio, but I suspect it simply caches samples in memory considering its size. QLSO CAN stream if you download the optional direct-from-disk plug-in. I would assume you'd know if you had gotten that. The plug-in is VERY optional in Silver, and shouldn't really be used unless you're combining it with other synths and really need the memory, or unless you have very little RAM. Well, you're not complaining about running out of memory to load sounds anyways, so that's not your issue. So, I think we can effectively rule out disk streaming as a culprit. You mentioned Sytrus and Sampletank as being problems, and those are indeed more power-hungry than QLSO. QLSO is great, but it isn't much of an ENGINE compared to those other two. Sytrus is a complex hybrid synth with crazy oversampling, etc., and ST, while sample-based, has some crazy re-synthesis algorithms at work. Even QLSO becomes hungrier if you engage its (surprisingly OK) onboard digital effects. So, should you get an audio interface, or a new CPU? I'd say, BOTH! Wait, hear me out on this one. I think the fact that your engine is choking on less CPU usage sometimes, and sometimes on way more indicates that your current sound engine really is choking on the number of bits you're trying to crunch at once. It just depends on how much of which synths you're using at the time. In other words, you've effectively found the limits of BOTH your CPU and your sound card. So even if you get a new CPU, it might not fix your problems much unless you ALSO got a new sound card (which is fairly likely, given that you'd probably need to get a new motherboard too). While using a newer consumer sound card with more recent drivers might help (hey, when's the last time you updated your current sound's drivers, by the way), it sounds to me like you are eventually going to be pushing the boundaries of ANY consumer sound interface. The flip side of the coin is that having a more efficient sound interface will help you conserve your CPU usage some. However, if you're getting up to 80s percentages, you're pushing it there too! If you plan on adding more complex synths and more effects to your arrangements, that will only get worse, and you'll need more power under the hood to compensate. Now, seeing as you have a 3.2 GHz P4, I'd call it fairly likely that it's a Northwood P4 in a socket478. Unless your computer is somehow Prescott-ready, I'd say the only likely upgrade you could get for JUST the CPU is to a 3.4 GHz (and even that depends on if your MoBo was designed to handle it). Hence, a real CPU upgrade likely entails getting a new MoBo, which depending on what you're willing to settle for may also mean a new power supply, or even new RAM and/or video card...though maybe not. Long and short of it: upgrading the CPU could get fairly expensive. I'd get an audio interface first and see where that takes you. I'll re-voice the earlier recommendation of an 0404, ESPECIALLY for you. I like the sound of Echo's interfaces better, but they are a tad more expensive, AND the 0404 has some onboard effects processing too, which can offload some of the CPU work for reverb and such, which makes it uniquely well-suited for you. You can get them secondhand for $80 easily, or less with a little legwork. If you REALLY wanna pinch pennies, I have seen M-audio 2496's go on Ebay for under $50 before, but not with buy-it-now.

Look at the first dozen pages of Appendix A in your manual (you can get the manual online here: WK-3500 manual) It lists all your sounds, and both the program change number as well as the bank number you need to use to access them. It looks like it's using Bank MSB, which should mean cc0 I think. So in order to use no. 10, "Modern Piano" for instance, you need to send two commands: controller0: 51 program: 1 If you need help figuring out how to use continuous controllers, be sure to mention which sequencer you're using. It may even support doing a cc0 patch change, which does both in one step!

Oops, so you did. Props, sir. Got carried away there. At least I gave him some things to try to help him diagnose so it added SOMETHING to the topic...unlike this post....OK, I'm quitting for today, see ya tomorrow. Good luck Smenelian!

You know, it actually COULD be your hard drive choking on samples. Have you tried experimenting with building a project that uses tons of CPU power but few samples? Like take some less intensive digital synths and throw lots of serious mastering plug-ins on them, or just use tons of analog-modelled synths. Try to drive your CPU use up to 80% WITHOUT using lots of samples, just to see what happens. If it doesn't choke, then it's not your drivers, but your hard drive, in which case, you ought to put all your samples on a second physical hard drive (this actually makes an ENORMOUS difference if you use lots of big samples). If you don't already have one and need to buy one, try to get one that's 7200 rpm with at least 8 MB of cache (preferably 16MB though) using the fastest bus you can. Something else to try on the unlikely off-chance that you haven't is increasing your audio buffer size, which will make latency worse, but take some load off your audio drivers/CPU. You might not need to buy something yet after all!

Well, you see... Oh, damn. Last word. I guess you win. Who the unholy hell is "compyfox"? Sounds like a furry to me, and I don't roll like dat. Oh well, everyone else here seems pretty chill so far anyways. If you're the Yoozer I think you are, then what's up good sir? If you AREN'T the Yoozer I think you are...then what's up good sir? EDIT: On-topic: It's true that there are more powerful CPUs out there, but as Zircon says, you shouldn't be getting crackling until the 90% range. I don't know for sure if it's an issue with your onboard sound, but it does seem likely. I'd also echo an 0404 for a pro interface on the cheap. I like it better than the M-audio 2496 (better sound AND better drivers, plus 1/4" balanced analog in/out, a HUGE plus when/if you decide to get decent monitor speakers or any outboard gear), but if you can find an Echo interface for that cheap (it happens sometimes), then that's even better! As you can see, there's more benefit to be had than simply "getting decent drivers". I do think it's fair to mention that there IS a sizable performance difference for CPUs though. It's not going to help you right now, since the driver's your main bottleneck at the moment, but consider this. Not long ago, I went from a well-overclocked Athlon64 3200 (a chip that's easily more powerful than the one you use right now), to a non-overclocked dual-core Opteron 170, which I don't think benches nearly as high as most Core2 Duos (too lazy to double check). As soon as I did that (after enabling the multi-processor engine in Sonar), projects that HAD used up to 94% were now peaking at about 56%. A move from a 3.2 GHz P4 to a Core2Duo ought to be even more effective, assuming the rest of your system matches the upgrade.

Yup, you're right! I've gotten into the nasty habit of referring to any process of interpolating digital resolution downwards as "dithering", when it is in fact just the addition of strategic noise before re-quantization in order to avoid quantization error. And that is a debate I'd really rather not get into. We don't need to fill this up with pages-long arguments about oversampling and mixing benefits. You can find enough of that at gearslutz or homerecording.com

OK, I think I see where you're coming from. I didn't see it because I don't think you understand what I'm testing. You're talking about digitally transferring audio, and not any kind of actual recording. Even hooking a lightpipe from my CD player to my interface and hitting record would just be transferring literally identical bits without any transformation, and proves nothing. The phase test would still be a bitch unless I used a sync to record both signals at the same mark. For that matter, my onboard sound doesn't have any digital audio inputs anyways. Even if it did, comparing results would be like trying to compare how accurately two different hard drives could copy a file. That wasn't the point of my test. The point, as I've said, is to compare the A/D and D/A converters and the internal analog circuitry of the interfaces, and hence how well they treat microphone signals and analog outboard gear (an important part of most people's music work). As I've said a few times now, it won't have any effect on software synths except for the monitoring, since the monitoring is the only part of the analog signal path. I don't know about recording it 192 DIGITALLY and dithering it down. I think that'd only have an effect on things recorded analog. In fact, wouldn't the wordclock mismatch cause the audio to play back 4.3 times too fast until I resampled it down? And even then, it would sound identical, and could indeed be perfectly phased. I suppose I could upsample it to 192 with interpolation and then dither it back down, but I think that would accomplish little other than the introduction of dithering noise. Of course this no longer relates to the OP, so the discussion is purely academic at this point. Likewise. Too many people on the internet seem likely to get up in arms about stupid BS. I know you're not being antagonistic anyways. You just don't realize that I know what I'm talking about yet. Whether or not you're one of these internet guys that will post ANYTHING to avoid admitting that someone else knows their stuff remains to be seen of course. Not many anymore, I will admit. I do most of my shop talk in the meat space with other industry professionals. I don't really care if two dozen people think their pirated version of Tracktion sounds better than their pirated version of Sonar and that anyone who uses Cubase is an idiot who couldn't possibly have a different approach to writing music and different needs. Thanks. I submitted it back in November, and it was added to the "to be posted" list in January. I didn't realize the turnaround time was like this. I'm really curious to see the judges' comments. I honestly didn't think it would be accepted. I thought for sure they'd say it was too short, could've done more with the arrangement, and could've been better performed. I guess maybe the combination of it being an uncommon game and an uncommon arrangement for the site was enough. Yup, this is true. It's nice that ASIO4all exists, but ultimately, using it with a consumer-level interface is similar to playing a Direct X 9 video game with a video card that only has DX8 support. It works, but not as efficiently. In the pro audio world, you usually really DO get what you pay for, and there's no simple way to completely outsmart the sound equipment industry. Zircon, out of curiosity, have you ever seen this? I'm dreadfully curious about it. I've thought about buying their Solo driver to see if it makes a difference (it's supposed to work with my FW1814). And they have a driver that's specifically for the Firebox, too. I get OK latency as is, about 4ms, but I usually have to bump it up once I start loading on dozens of audio tracks, and there are a couple of things I find obnoxious about M-audio's drivers anyways. Besides, it would fascinating to try chaining a second interface for more ports. I'd love to buy a cheaper RME firewire interface and use it as master wordclock while still being able to use all 18 M-audio inputs for extra I/O.

Those are pretty sweet headphones. We've got a couple pairs of those at one of the places I work. It's been awhile since I've used headphones for serious listening though, so I couldn't say for sure if that would have an effect. I will say that it's not necessarily a "significant" difference, but is certainly a noticeable one.However, being that you do in fact work with all software (a keyboard is part of the MIDI signal path, not the audio path, so it doesn't count), it shouldn't be that big a deal anyways. You are in the circumstance of using software and sequencing by step, so a pro audio interface doesn't really bring much to the table until you're using outboard gear, microphones, and/or realtime sequencing. You basically get the benefit of slightly cleaner monitoring, and if you can't tell the difference between the two halves of that comparison, then that obviously isn't a big issue anyways at this point of the game for you. Once you get that keyboard though, you may want something that gives you <20ms latency. I trust you've already tried playing around with the audio buffer size, right? So what changed about your setup to make the CPU start crapping on you all of a sudden anyways? Also, what kind of software are we talking anyways? A 3.2 P4 and 1 GB of RAM should be quite sufficient to play around with Fruity Loops, but may get you in trouble if you're trying to do a bunch of Kontakt stuff in Sonar 4. Thanks. I figured I should give it a try since one of my remixes is getting posted, even if it is just some BS I came up with on my violin one evening. I hope this community is chill. I think I can agree with that, in fact.. Yup. Sorry if it was confusing. You'll have to forgive me for using such a subjective buzzword. In this situation I meant the word to mean "present and intimate", rather than any specific harmonic characteristic. Both my M-audio and my onboard add no (or at least identical) coloration in the harmonic balance, as my spectrum analyzer responds to both identically. I don't think the vast majority of interfaces (pro or not) do, though I do remember hearing awhile back about some Creative soundcard with a tube in the output signal path. We're not comparing Akai samplers after all.Yet I would have to argue with having no use for coloration during recording. At a place I work (the same place), we use API pres to track vocals, which are good clean pres, but we'll often switch to an Avalon 737, which is a very colorful tube pre, and for certain vocals, it's like putting a silk tie on. Even running a synthesizer through a colorful DI can do wonders for having it stand out (if that's what's needed), and can breath some great life into an otherwise sterile sound. It depends on what you're recording. Too many people go the opposite extreme too. I'd say "it's not supposed to happen" is a more accurate statement when talking about monitoring than recording, though I'll certainly admit that one should avoid unmeasured coloration for sure regardless. No, I didn't do that. 44.1khz, 16 bits per word on both. No resampling, no dithering. The WAV file is representative of the raw work of the original wordclock in both instances, and the comparison is purely that of one A/D converter and internal analog routing vs. another under identical load. I'm hitting record by hand here, so it would be time-consuming to line up both recordings so that they are timed sample-perfect with each other. Even if I did, I'm sure a good portion of it would cancel, but it would not be a perfect 100% cancellation anyways since the actual content does in fact have differences. As for making sure they record at the same sample rate, I mean...how could I not? That would really defeat the purpose of the experiment. The whole point was to leave every variable identical and simply use different interfaces. I'm not sure what you're getting at here. If you recompress audio to MP3 continuously it does indeed become less coherent. I have no idea what that has to do with comparing phase inversion tests of an uncompressed WAV file on multiple computers, or why we'd even want to do that in the first place. And if I actually had recorded at 192 and dithered down, it would have been even MORE pristine (with the addition of a negligable amount of dithering noise of course).

I used to think getting a good pro audio card didn't make much difference other than latency, efficiency, and having advanced routing options too. Then I did some back-to-back testing between my generic onboard soundcard and my M-audio FW1814, and was actually rather shocked by the results! I plugged the same synth into both cards one after the other, and made sure to set the recording levels to where it was hitting both at the same volume. The recording sounded significantly better when done using the M-audio! And that's recording line-level, so the quality of the mic pre doesn't have anything to do with it! And when I say "significant", I mean it. It's difficult to tell if you don't literally try both back to back, but the pro card recorded the same source with a far more natural sound and more robust dynamics. For lack of a better term, it sounded more "analog", more real. There was also a noticable drop in background noise when listening at loud volumes. It's not just recording either. The same difference in quality can be observed just in playing sound back! Here's a WAV I compiled real quick to demonstrate: I played my Ys 3 CD in my CD player, and recorded results from the same passage on both my onboard sound and my FW1814. The first half is the onboard, and the second is the 1814. http://www.justusjohnston.com/temp/compare.wav You can hear that during the second half, the strings sound warmer, the drums are fuller and punchier, the bass is better defined, and....well, the whole thing is just better. What's really funny is that M-audio makes about the cheapest professional audio interfaces money can buy, and they're also...well, I hesitate to use the word "crappiest", because they really truly do give good bang for your buck if you're looking to "go pro" on a budget, and I definitely recommend them as an entry level professional interface....but I'll put it this way: when I did the same back-to-back test comparing this M-audio FW1814 to an RME Hammerfall, the difference was just as striking as the one between the M-audio and the onboard! Why is there such a difference? The quality of the electronics for one. Even if the ultimate goal is a digital recording, there's still plenty of internal analog signal path involved. This will also have a significant effect on the device's self-noise. When recording or playing back audio on either my onboard or FW1814, the onboard has audibly louder noise when not routing audio, and by about 10 decibels at that, according to sound forge's meters (this means it literally makes twice as much noise for the same amount of healthy signal). Admittedly, part of that is because the M-audio is an external firewire device located on a grounded, noise-isolated rack, and plugged into a power conditioner, whereas the onboard is a series of connections and DSP chips inside a computer surrounded by fans and attached to other computer bits with power flowing through everything, but still. The other reason there's a difference is the quality of the converters, the interface's ability to change analog to digital and vice-versa. Better converters mean that the device generates a more accurate wordclock for more accurate analogesque performance and superior dynamics. So the big question: What does this mean for you? If you're a normal guy who just likes playing games/watching movies/listening to music, then not much unless you're a perfectionist. Even though the playback quality on a pro interface is audibly better, most people (including myself, I'll admit it), grow accustomed to minor quality differences over time, so the experience itself is not significantly enhanced. If you're into recording and mixing on the other hand, it makes a WORLD of difference. First, consider monitoring a mix. Even the most minor differences in listening back will have a profound effect on mixing. You'll use different levels of compression, different EQ settings, different reverbs, etc. The noise level is also a big deal. Trace amounts of on-track noise that you'd hear and fix using a good clean interface would be masked by the self-noise of the cheaper one. If you use lots of outboard gear, then the quality of the converters come into play in a big way! It may seem like we're being nit-picky about the quality of signal that comes in, but consider this: a single sound in a typical mix goes through a good half-dozen or more processes before the final master, each of which further digitizes the sound (a snare drum, for instance, which might have a meter change, EQ, compressor, reverb, sub-grouped with the other drums for another meter change, EQ, compressor, then yet another meter change at the master fader, with yet another EQ, compressor, and maybe even a peak limiter). Each of those processes will exacerbate any flaws in the original recording. The effect is further compounded when you consider that there may be several dozen such tracks in a mix! On the other hand, if you only produce electronic music using software on a computer, then you can throw out everything I just said except for about monitoring. But then there's always the efficiency (how fast it plays with the rest of your machine), and latency. At 46 ms, you must not be doing any real time MIDI sequencing or you'd probably find that quite unacceptable unless you're monitoring direct from an outboard synth's outputs. It's also no good for recording live performers with a monitor mix.