*BSD News Article 75185


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!newsgate.duke.edu!agate!news.ucsc.edu!ruby.cse.ucsc.edu!not-for-mail
From: eric@cse.ucsc.edu (Eric Rosen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc
Subject: SoundBlaster alternatives
Date: 31 Jul 1996 21:04:34 -0700
Organization: Image Processing & Multimedia Lab (UC Santa Cruz)
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <4tpaci$ak1@ruby.cse.ucsc.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ruby.cse.ucsc.edu

I'd like to collect feedback from any and all who have attempted
to use sound cards other than Creative Lab's SoundBlaster under BSD/OS 2.x.
I will post a summary if I get enough information, so e-mail is fine.
I am particular interested in A/D and D/A usage.

The Gravis UltraSound, for which an unsupported driver is distributed
with BSD/OS 2.1, offers significantly better signal quality than CL's
SoundBlaster.  I know of one person who has lightly used an original GUS
under BSD/OS with good results.  

Turtle Beach's card have even better SNR stats, but these cards operate
as SoundBlaster compatibles using a software (DOS/Windows) driver and hence
won't work with the sb driver under BSD/OS 2.1 (at least, we have not been
succesful in getting a high end TB card to work with the sb driver).  An 
exception *may be* the Turtle Beach Monte Carlo card.  Has anyone tried this?

--Eric