The Future of PC-Audio: Interview With Keith Kowal 260
red_ed writes "The Noise Report have an interview with Keith Kowal from VIA technologies' Audio division about the future of PC audio. Here's a snippet: 'I think the next big thing will be the widespread adoption of wireless speakers and headphones--cause none of us like a tangle of wires. From a PC infrastructure point of view I can easily see support for these devices being integrated right into the PC.'"
About time (Score:2)
There's one small problem.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Aureal, Nvidia and most recently id software are all firms that have fallen foul of Creative's desire to stifle innovation. Until someone challenges these patents, we will see few developments in PC audio which has stood still for many years.
Re:There's one small problem.. (Score:2, Informative)
I guess this is the future : isochronous audio over an heterogeneous network.
Let's revitalize audio synthesizers! (Score:5, Interesting)
Then let's make some serious musical instruments like additive synths like K5 clones along with real exciting and inexpensive controllers that plug into USB and legacy slots.
It's a shame that MIDI equipment never 'took off' in a big way in music equipment sales in the early 1990s. I believe that could have revitalized the retail music store business.
But all the MIDI items offered for sale in that initial market window were completely underdocumented, poorly implememented, terribly supported, and overpriced.
The big manufacturers (Roland, Yamaha, Kawai, and Korg) should have pooled together to offer a $10 MIDI interface for the PC and given away voice editor and sequencer software (including source code) for every model that they offered.
That would have been tough on all the little software companies selling $150 voice editors for synths that sold a total of 5000 units worldwide, but it would have energized the market for synths and tone modules to the level of guitars and amps.
Today all the $100 voice editor companies are gone and the advanced $1600 synths of 1990 are sold on eBay for $50-$200. The only software still available for them is Atari ST programs run on the PC through an emulator (the STeem emulator).
The rare MIDI auxiliary device (such as controller pedals or switcher) gets sold at an undervalued price due to the uncertainity of whether it can still be used.
If I had an extra million dollars and an extra twenty IQ points then I would make a serious attempt to revitalize the MIDI industry with open-source programs and equipment selling at 1/20th the cost that it did when the first MIDI wave ended ten years ago. The fact that the music equipment industry is still run by nitwits like Roland (who are still fighting attempts to open-source the MT-32 which was obsolete 15!! years ago) just fills me with despair.
Re:Let's revitalize audio synthesizers! (Score:2, Insightful)
Synthesizers dont die, they just move to software ...
There is no need to "revitalize" the music synthesizer scene, as you suggest - it is alive and kicking. As we speak, literally hundreds of synths with all kinds of engines (additive, substractive, sampling, FM, granular etc.) are being developed, sold and given away for free. Go to KVR [kvr-vst.com] to learn more.
Admittedly, not too much open-source in that field. But if you simply want tools for music production, you can be up and running with a cheap off-the-shel
Re:About time (Score:2)
I"ve quite happy with this set up so far. I've ripped most of my CD's to flac...and right now playing via XMMS...but, will be using Myth when I finis
Wireless Speakers (Score:2, Informative)
wireless? Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok, I have a tangle of wires. A huge tangle (2 monitors, keyboards, mice, 5 computers, one printer, two KVMs, ...). But why would I get wireless speakers? Either a) they'll all waste a ton of batteries, or b) they'll all need to be plugged in to the wall. The former is way too expensive, the latter is still another wire - and outlets are at a premium here!
I was hoping this would be a story about mainstream going to surround sound support, for a more realistic audio experience (whether that's playing Doom 4, or listening to a concert-hall performance of Bach or Beethoven).
Re:wireless? Why? (Score:2)
How about hacking some battery-powered-wireless speakers up to a track-lighting system? That might do the trick nicely, plus make them easier to position and mount.
Re:wireless? Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
No not hardware, but space
Until they can eliminate the rear speakers (Carver Sonic Holography style) it will not catch on except with the people that desperately want it and are willing to sacrafice style for function.
I am hoping that PC audio would come to a standard. all PC audio talks in X way and Y way.. all the extra stuff can talk through the OpenAL interface.
much like a video card. all video cards give you a display without a driver. why cant audio do the same?
Re:wireless? Why? (Score:2)
In general, they can. Your program just needs to talk to the sound card as if it were an 8-bit ISA Soundblaster card.
Re:wireless? Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, this gives me an excellent opportunity to rebut my own post (see how long it stays mod'd so high). First, however, I'll address Tibor's point: you're comparing apples to oranges, my friend. With phones, the wireless part is the part you carry around with you. With speakers, generally speaking (no pun intended!), you place the speakers once, and you're done. They're very, very static. Completely unlike anything that can be held in your hand (such as a phone, a laptop, camera, etc. - a camera that doesn't need a wire to hook up to your PC, now that would be useful!).
The advantage of wireless speakers really is that you can have a centrally-located PC-based home-theatre system (and I mean the entire home - a set of speakers in the den, another in the kitchen, another in the front room, another in ...). I suspect that this technology is merely for a single output - all rooms get the same sound. What would make this really useful, IMO, is to first get surround-sound output working, and then to be able to have a single wireless soundcard able to handle multiple outputs independantly.
Re:wireless? Why? (Score:2)
Slightly.
If you recorded audio in your home and you kept the workstation in a separate room from where you play your instrunment, this would help with the monitor headphones.
Re:wireless? Why? (Score:2)
Re:wireless? Why? (Score:2)
AGREED. Like cell phones, etc., but unlike speakers, headphones are a personal device which moves with your head.
Oh, and I don't particularly disagree with your coworkers ;-)
Battery? (Score:5, Insightful)
First, I'm assuming that the speakers would still have a power cord, and thus still technically be "wired", but if they didn't have a power cord, batteries would be a big issue.
Second, and most importantly for any audiophiles out there, what happens to the sound quality? God knows how much money is spent on expensive speaker cables, so what happens when it goes wireless?
Re:Battery? (Score:2)
Re:Battery? (Score:5, Funny)
Second, and most importantly for any audiophiles out there, what happens to the sound quality? God knows how much money is spent on expensive speaker cables, so what happens when it goes wireless?
It would almost certainly be a digital encoding, so there would be no quality loss at all as long as there's enough signal strength.
Of course that probably won't stop some people from buying a Monster Air Ionizer, for "reduced quantum harmonic interference for your wireless signals!"...
Induction (Score:2)
The technology exists to power speakers, mice, keyboards, digital cameras, cell phones, even LCD monitors, all without power cords.
Beneath the surface of the desk will be induction pads that power the device via induction, without the risk of electrocution, even in the event of a spilled drink.
The technology is maturing rapidly. I'd like an entertainment center that powers everything on it wireless. I
Re:Induction (Score:2)
Re:Induction (Score:2)
So it is less like radio waves and similar radiation, and less of a concern. However, we will be in rather close proximity if we are leaning on the desk all day.
It should be said, however, that the worst thing we are around, all day, every day, is CRT's, in my opinion. My eyesight can attest to that. When I became a programmer my eyesight changed qui
Re:Battery? (Score:2)
Isn't it obvious? (Score:2)
Re:Battery? (Score:2)
The real future (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The real future (Score:2, Insightful)
The main problem is that most computer speakers are made on the cheap, and no m
Re:The real future (Score:2)
I remember using a Sound Blaster 1.0 about 10 years ago to play Doom 1 in my dorm room in college, and when I cranked the volume, we actually had the police show up at one point to investigate because everybody thought that ther
I've heard that story often (Score:2, Funny)
I'm thinking particularly of the Pulp Fiction soundtrack, which had a track opened with loud gunfire and dialogue from the movie.
Anyone who hadn't seen the film might easily think gangsters had come by and opened fire... if, that is, they'd
Re:The real future (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The real future (Score:2, Informative)
Re:The real future (Score:2)
Re:The real future (Score:2)
Re:The real future (Score:2)
Re:The real future (Score:2)
Re:The real future (Score:2)
Second, if computers all go to wireless sound, I'm sure you'd see stereos hit the market that have Bluetooth (or whatever standard) receivers inside. Then you don't even need a cable.
Re:The real future (Score:2)
Maybe around $100 things change.
Re:The real future (Score:4, Insightful)
Such a profoundly untrue statement... I don't know where to begin.
Last time I went to Wal-Mart, they had *nothing* for speaker systems. Oh, they had speakers, but nothing anyone should ever pay money for. If you're comparing Wal-Mart stereo systems to Wal-mart PC speaker systems then maybe you have a point. Otherwise... just about anything Altec-Lansing will beat everything in Wal-mart. Nevermind the PC speakers put out by an actual speaker company, i.e. the Cambridge Soundworks systems from before Creative bought them, or the old Boston Acoustics sets, or hell even Klipsch.
> bigger speakers being driven by a real amp will almost ALWAYS sound better than any computer speakers
Gross oversimplification. "Bigger" speakers? There are plenty of very very large speakers that sound absolutely like crap. For examples, look at any of the floorstanding speakers you'll find in a place like Sears. I'm not sure what you'd call a "real" amp versus a "fake" amp, but there are plenty of computer speaker sets with builtin amplifiers that have very nice signal characteristics.
I'll agree with you that a nice stereo system with a nice separate amplifier will beat any pair of computer speakers you can buy. I guess my point is there are plenty of bad stereo systems and bad amplifiers out there that won't, and to imply otherwise is disingenuous.
Re:The real future/ Klipsch (Score:2)
Re:The real future (Score:3, Interesting)
Plus, there's nothing like using MIDI to make the faders on your mixer dance...
Doesn't have to be new amps... (Score:3, Informative)
I'm sitting in front of a late 70's Kenwood amp and some similarly aged 7 inch speakers. They're older than I am, yet they sound much better than most computer speakers I find at the houses of friends and family. They should sound decent, since they cost more than my entire computer in inflation adjusted dollars! Let's face it, regular amplifier and speaker technology hasn't really changed that much over the years.
I'm sure at the higher end of PC sound systems, things are different, but in th
Re:The real future (Score:2)
An optical out (SPDIF) from your sound card to your stereo will take care of that. No electricity (only light) = no grounding problems. Of course both your sound card and stereo have t
Re:The real future (Score:2)
I attempted to make do with the onboard sound in both of my new machines (gigabyte kt400 based board, and an nForce2 based board) with my Klipsch ProMedia 2.1's.... Needless to say, they are passable at low volumes, but have a high amount of noise.
What I've found fixes it is a Turtle Beach Santa Cruz. I now know why these cards are 50$ retail.... they kick butt for s/n, and I've never had a problem with mine.
I also h
Re:The real future (Score:2)
used cat5 (I know, wrong impedance) in between:
1. headphone jack to RCA connector
2. RCA-RCA connector
I used some spare "couplers" to hold the wire to (I didn't want to chop up the cables, even though they're cheap) and it works fine. I did have a slight problem with the signal being dropped when a load was placed on the electrical system of the house, but I found out (using a UPS) that the out
I don't know about everyone else (Score:3, Insightful)
But speaker wires are about the least likely cause of wire tangles in my setup. Considering power ables, mouse cables, monitor cables, ethernet cables, USB cables, Firewire Cables, MIDI cables. Even if I eliminate Mouse and Ethernet AND speaker, it still won't help much
Probably not the first post... (Score:2, Insightful)
I think this guy's right on the money. I mean, we've had AirTunes for a while now, and now we've got bluetooth stereo headsets. [sonorix.com]
If you count Macs with onboard bluetooth, and most laptops too, then his prediction is already true.
I could definitely see widespread adoption if the price came down a bit -- that bluetooth headset is $240 USD, just a bit on the steep side.
Bluetooth (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bluetooth (Score:2)
Re:Bluetooth (Score:2)
How would wireless speakers reduce cable clutter? (Score:3, Insightful)
I can see the benefit of wireless headphones, but how do wireless speakers even make sense?
I suppose you could eliminate the cable running from the PC to the amplifier if the amplifier was wireless enabled, but you still have to have some sort of wire running to each speaker to provide power. Unless you're planning on running your speakers off of batteries... in which case they'd need frequent recharging and would not be capable of putting out enough juice for decent sound.
Re:How would wireless speakers reduce cable clutte (Score:2)
Re:How would wireless speakers reduce cable clutte (Score:2)
That's a valid point, but having self-powered speakers with a wireless audio connection means that now each speaker has to have its own power source and amp. So you've have to have some sort of nasty "wall wart" at the electical outlet, or incorporate a amplifier in the speaker enclosure itself.
To me, that definitely feels like something that would real
interesting for surround (Score:2)
Indeed, I also wonder what the fuss is about when you are talking about fixed speakers close to your desk. I have a whole lot of cables dangling from my pc, they are ugly, but hidden below the desk, and do no bother me at all.
But I can see a bright future for surround applications. The rear speakers require cables to go all the way to the other side of the room. Not so well hidden, and a risk of tripping over them
Battery Not Included (Score:3, Insightful)
Bah,
Wires. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wires. (Score:2)
Re:Wires. (Score:2)
Re:Wires. (Score:2)
1- Price.
3- Batteries.
4- Complexity / overhead. (I guess I'm old fashioned, but I'd rather put more development time into making smaller and more efficient programs rather than just upping the system specs.)
5- Performance/Reliability.
My housemate uses 802.11x for his internet connection, and I use cat5. The layout of the house prevents us from both using cat5, so we're stuck this way. When I turn on the wireless antenna in the router, I get 5
Re:Wires. (Score:2)
Re:Wires. (Score:2)
>When I turn on the wireless antenna in the router, I get 56k speeds.
Re:Wires. (Score:2)
Depends on what you're using. I personally would rather use wires for things that aren't moving - for example, monitors, keyboard, printers, scanners, and speakers.
For things that are frequently moving, like a game pad or a mouse, wireless can be much more useful.
My current setup at home is a wired USB keyboard and a wireless USB mouse. Everything else is currently wired directly to the computer. Yeah, there's a giant mess of cables behind the desk. But who cares? It's behind the desk. It's not li
32bit audio? No Way (Score:5, Informative)
Current hadware is only really able to achieve an effective ~20bit resolution due to thermal noise in the components. Unitl we take that down a couple of notches there is no reason to use anything more precise such as 32bit.
Re:32bit audio? No Way (Score:5, Informative)
When you do filtering, summation, scaling, etc., you frequently find yourself adding multiple values together, then later dividing by some number - for example a filter algorithm would involve adding 256 samples together, then dividing by 256 (roughly speaking...)
When you do something like that, you need at least 8 bits of headroom in the processing stages or else you either overflow (nasty) or have to drop least significant bits (noisy).
Running a 32 bit processing channel, even though the final result doesn't need more than 20 bits of resolution allows you to process filters with up to 4096 taps without overflow.
Sure, you can go to a floating point system, but that adds quite a bit of complexity to the system.
I work with 24 bit DSPs all the time (Motorola 56301), and frequently have to use the 48 bit long-long format in the core of my routines to prevent overflow. If they were 32 bit DSPs, that would greatly simplify my life.
Re:32bit audio? No Way (Score:2)
32-bit audio hardware will be good thing, agreed.
32bit audio question (Score:2)
Do you mean all audio components, or just PC-based components?
If it's just a PC issue, how does that affect recording vs. playback?
-- Is resolution lost (at the permanent media) when I copy & store a sound-file or stream from the net?
-- If not, then is resolution lost during playback of the stored copy? Does it depend on the playback chain (i.e. PC vs. line-out to conventional audio
Re:32bit audio question (Score:2)
Re:32bit audio question (Score:2)
Nevermind that the audible noise from the average PC will drown out most of that dynamic range. Assuming the entire hardware chain from the digital audio source to the speakers could represent even 20 bits accurately, there's no chance that a person sitting near a computer could hear that kind of resolution over the noise. Most people can't hear more than about -94-something dB in an average listening setup, so even without any noise sources the improvements are wasted.
power? (Score:3, Interesting)
My speakers will always require some wires because I don't want to power them with batteries.
To go wireless with any PC, get yourself a nice little stereo FM transmitter and tune in from the next room. Monster cable's model for cars works excellently. The cheap battery powered model from CompUSA looks great with that aluminum case, but it did not broadcast in stereo for me. I hope they fix that because it was perfect otherwise with an external power jack for an included car plug or any cheap transformer and AAA battery for walking around. You can be sure that others, such as the Belkin models for $15 at Walmart, will work or one that does will find it's way to the shelves soon.
Why did I want to buy another set of speakers again? So that someone could slip the RIAA encrypted streaming wet dream on me? No thanks.
Per application volume level (Score:4, Insightful)
not all it's cracked up to be (Score:2)
Downside is this: say you turn on winamp, and it's all good. Then you switch to your web browser - sound goes up or down. Then you switch to gaim - sound goes up or down. Or you launch a game or something and BAM - super loud, oops.
So really, it's just a pain. I'd rather have everything consistent. I also just turn off system sounds.
Re:not all it's cracked up to be (Score:3, Insightful)
It sounds like y
Re:Per application volume level (Score:2)
Well, if you're using KDE, go into the control panel...there you can go to the section for system notifications, and either turn them off...or you can set the volume for notifications to whatever level you like.
Major security issues (Score:4, Interesting)
Last thing I need is some employee using wireless audio to download corporate data to his car out in the parking lot. Worse, a virus using it to send corporate data to anyone within scanning distance.
I want 5.1+ wireless at home so I can pipe it through my stereo in the next room, but for security's sake, if you put it on the motherboard make sure I can disable it in the BIOS.
Re:Major security issues (Score:2)
Re:Major security issues (Score:2)
There have been cases of employees in the company I work for; the employees used a coworkers computer and emailed a hotmail acount some confidential documents. Sure it got flagged, but the information was at the hotmail account, which was subsequntly forwarded on. The person whose computer was used got questioned, but he was in the c
Re:Major security issues (Score:2)
Question (Score:2, Insightful)
batteries, boo, small, yay! (Score:4, Informative)
What, do people think that putting two 5-dollar cost-of-goods speakers 6 feet apart for "big stereo image" makes them sound like anything other than the crap they're made of? Good speakers are large, heavy, and permanently installed with wires hidden.
There IS, however, a use for this stuff.
If I need it wireless, it's because I need to move around.
If I need to move around, it's pretty safe to say I will piss of *everyone* if my music moves around with me (see: bumps in the trunk)
A wireless set of high-quality in-ear-canal headphones (Etymotics make some, Sony makes some, Apple too now) could be *great*.
They have very little driver travel, so the power consumption is small, and properly designed you could have a combination headset/headphone setup with passable-not-great quality. It would kick ass to be able to wear headphones under my hat and not have those pesky wires.
Anyone else use Etymotics and have the painful experience of snagging a wire on a doorknob? Accidentally yanking things out of the ear canal ain't fun.
the future of humans (Score:2, Funny)
which company is ready to build me a chip that allows this?
Yes, for VOIP (Score:3, Insightful)
Security? (Score:2)
I won't use Bluetooth, and I won't use wireless keyboards, and I'm very leary of wireless speakers and sound. Why? Security.
I have not seen one single wireless standard that actually took security seriously enough to for the protocol to be reasonably secure. They've all had glaring flaws. I have not seen one implementation of The Resurrecting Duckling Protocol [acm.org] for personal wireless devices, despite that being a decent choice that's not at all hard to set up or for lay people to understand. The state o
Re:Security? (Score:3, Funny)
The same as it is now (Score:2)
Hard drives, monitors, graphics cards - as time goes by you can find an application, game or fashion reason to upgrade. However sound cards? When was the last time you upgraded your 5.1 built-in sound card especially for a game or application?
Re:The same as it is now (Score:2)
About two years ago, I upgraded the sound card in my computer from one that only supported original Soundblaster emulation to one that supported Soundblaster 16 emulation. Older games sound so much better in 16-bit sound.
How about (Score:2)
Perpetuates myth... (Score:2, Insightful)
But I don't want to listen to my neighbor's music (Score:2)
Virtually every low-powered RF gadget I've ever bought--wireless telephones, wireless headphones, etc. have more or less worked when I bought them, then within a few years have gradually become more or less useless due to interference from similarly-equipped neighbors.
Doubtless the specs on this equipment will claim umpteen-bit DACs, 100 db signal-to-noise ratio, and 0.01% THD. And in practice
Wireless with wall plug (Score:2)
In my 14' x 20' living room I will have to run speaker wire under the house and through the attic to
Re:Wireless with wall plug (Score:3, Interesting)
So instead of wireless plug-in speakers, I propose sendi
Wires are your friends. (Score:3, Informative)
The thing about my home computer is, it always stays in the same place. I really have no objection to the CPU being tethered to the power outlet, and the keyboard and mouse and monitors and cable modem and home theater receiver to the CPU, and the coaxial cable to the cable modem, and six speakers to the receiver, because they never move. All the components stay in the same place in relation to each other and to everything else.
Bluetooth. (Score:3, Informative)
It uses the Widcomm drivers.
I bought one of those Motorola HS810 bluetooth Wireless earpieces for uses with the phone.
Just as an experiment I was able to pair the earphone with the PC. I lost the ablity to use the soundcard on the PC but I was able to hear and record decient audio from the earpiece.
Worked great, but with there was an easier way to switch between the two, or have both work at the same time. Maybe more mixer channels.
I was able to use a VOIP app with the earpiece and walk about my house even better then a cordless phone. Total cost $20 for USB->BT and $100 for BT Earpiece.
I wish someone would come out with Bluetooth speakers, expecialy if I would be able to use them from multiple PC's.
As for someone else post about security in here I do believe there is type of security implemented when you Pair Bluetooth devices.
Let's have universal Audio over IP speakers (Score:3, Interesting)
I wrote up a description of ethernet speakers and the ideal home A/V setup [templetons.com] some time ago mostly to talk about the broadcast flag's effect on the design, but it's still the right way to go.
Future of high-end tiny market share audio? (Score:2)
If the former, all this talk of wireless, 192KHz/32bit/etc could be corrent.
If the latter, forget it. The future of mass market audio is paired with the future of mass market displays - flat screen LCD monitors. They'll all have built in speakers and for everyone on the planet who doesn't read
I suppose you could look to getting wireless video and audio to your fa
standards (Score:2)
I can plug just about any PCI/AGP video card into any PC with a standard VGA monitor with any Windows OS all the way back to Windows 95 or all the way back to linux kernel 2.0 distros and at least get a 640x480 16 color screen with minimal to no work. Can the same be said of audio cards? On windows, perhaps. On linux? Hell no!
The future of PC audio should be a foundational move to provide a minimum driver model for default performance of at least one tone.
Re:Wireless speakers, is that all you've got? (Score:2)
Not to put too fine a point on it, but you already plug them directly into your ear.
At least, you're supposed to.
Cochlear Implants (Score:2, Informative)
These are essentially what you're talking about. The reason it's not well known is that the resulting sensation is primarily useful for understanding speech. You wouldn't put these in for a more direct input of Beethoven's Ninth.
In many ways the eyes are actually simpler to deal with because the information coming in isn't mechanically transformed... light is focused on the retina, nerves light up, and bing.
In the ear sound waves bounce off all the crenellations of th
Re:Wireless speakers, is that all you've got? (Score:2)
Re:Wireless clutter of wireless wires (Score:4, Funny)
Infrared/wireless device hub (Score:2)
If you have a hub to plug into, and a plug to receiv the signal, it would probably do very nicely at cutting down cord issues (the sending unit having a single thic
Re:wrong infrastructure (Score:2)
Painful, but it sure sounds great.
Re:Wireless speakers? (Score:2)