Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[supernova777]

Sound Blaster Live! for Macintosh can best be appreciated through some of the advanced software that makes maximum use of the audio card’s features. To assist you in exploring these features, Creative has assembled an assortment of applications that demonstrate and allow you to explore the full potential of Sound Blaster Live! for Macintosh.
❑ Creative Mixer ❑ SoundFont Bank Manager ❑ Mixman® Studio Mac ❑ Cubasis AV Mac ❑ SoundJamTM MP ❑ sonicWORX Essential ❑ Deus ExT

we need to find the original cd for the sound blaster live!
.. well ok we dont need to;) but it would be nice..
did any of u find it? did u have the creative mixer installed + all working great?

[MacTron]

did any of u find it? did u have the creative mixer installed + all working great?

yea... all working (more or less) ...
but the "mixer" is just a "enhanced" sound "control panel" ...
... and only stereo inputs and outputs (no 5.1, 4.0 or whatever...)

The big thing I really miss on this card and the Mac Software is the ability of sound font management inside Cubase (as the PC counterpart), this feature will be a real game changing, as it will allow some way of PRO use of the card inside complex instrument  setups inside Cubase.

[supernova777]

i read of some people using the drivers from the Emu Audio Production Studio card for the SBLIVE
http://www.oldschooldaw.com/forums/index.php?topic=690.0

not sure if that card had mac drivers tho but apparently on the pc using these drivers was an improvement in cubase

[iMic]

mac os x users can also use these drivers
http://www.kxproject.com/down.php
for sblive with mac os x
i think

(if u have a dual boot X|9 g4 like me)

The kXProject drivers only work on Mac OS X Intel, specifically in Intel based OSX86 PCs with PCI slots.

I considered recompiling it for PowerPC, but since I haven't compiled drivers before or compiled anything across platforms, I haven't really looked into it further.

[supernova777]

are u positive? u would think they would have made some type of annotation indicating that... instead of just posting up a .dmg and saying tis for mac os x
pretty misleading if you are correct.

http://www.sonicstate.com/news/2001/03/27/creative-ships-sound-blaster-live-for-macintosh/

[supernova777]

did this include sound manager support?
if so, could a sblive card be used for pro tools free?

i guess its a moot point if its buggy + unstable... but im always looking for the lowest base point.. and these are available everywhere for next to nothing...

[MacTron]

did this include sound manager support?
if so, could a sblive card be used for pro tools free?

Yes, sound manager *only* support (not ASIO). It can be used with ProTools Free...  and System beep free ... 

i guess its a moot point if its buggy + unstable... but im always looking for the lowest base point.. and these are available everywhere for next to nothing...

Yes, it is a very basic option for Macs without audio in ...

[supernova777]

Yes, sound manager *only* support (not ASIO). It can be used with ProTools Free...  and System beep free ... 

ok thats what i thought! so this totally is a fix for someone with a g4 mac with no audio input port (digital audio/quicksilver) for pro tools free.. maybe we should update the pro tools free thread to indicate this..

creating a list of cards that feature sound manager support might be usefull!!!
surely this isnt the only one, there must be another card that has a better recording fidelity that also supports sound manager

[supernova777]

http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/OSX//audio/midiman_vs_sblive_review/index.html

heres an article comparing the audiophile 2496 with sound blaster live... im guessing the audiophile wins

Final Comments:

The SB Live could be a great card if the drivers ever mature. (apparently they did create newer drivers this article was reviewing driver version 1.0 and v1.1 was released?) Fully working drivers (outside of games) without glitches would make this a better card all around than the current drivers for the Audiophile. Due to the lack of use outside of recording for 24 bit sound and 96 Khz, and the fact most places the Audiophile costs $170, the SB live would have been the better of the two for the average user.

I’m somewhat disappointed with my experiences with Midiman Audiophile 2496. I was expecting a solid replacement for my SB Live. Instead, each card suffers from similar problems but the SB Live loses for very poor drivers that hinder complete areas of functionality and no OS X support. The SB Live sports more features than the Audiophile but the Audiophile stays true to its role as an budget professional card. The Audiophile without a doubt isn't a bad card and with Digital in as well as analog offers potential for work with DATs and other musical devices. Also important to note, the Audiophile's shelf life will probably be longer than the SB Live. As 96khz/24 bit becomes a more widely used standard such as DVD-Audio (not the DVD audio on Movie disks but DVD-Audio music disks) the Audiophile will continue look like a better investment.

The Audiophile does offer improved sound quality for those actually have sound setups that can benefit from it. For a 96 Khz/ 24bit receiver, one will be hard pressed to find one for less than $300 (assuming you'll be using the digital out) and one will also want a set of speakers to compliment the receiver. I must emphasize that 96 Khz, 24 bit looks prettier on paper than it really is… unless one owns very high quality samples and uses a soft sampler for Midi work, or will be using the Audiophile for recording high quality works.. In the case, if one is doing high quality recording one may want to invest in an external recording device since the innards of a computer is far from the ideal place do any DAC work.

I'm impressed that the SB Live and Midiman Audiophile work as well as they do in conjuction. Under OS 9, I'm currently using the Midiman Audiophile sound input and midi and the Soundblaster Live for output. If either card maker was able to provide what these do combined (no sound playback glitches, great recording, ASIO support and Midi) the Mac would have an ideal card. Sadly neither do deliver individually even though the hardware is quite capable on either card.

The main reason for soundcards on Macs now is the fact Apple doesn't ship Macs with serial bus (for midi) or Sound in anymore. For a USB Line device, expect to pay $50 and one will need a USB Midi device, which will cost anywhere between $50 to $150 depending on what one gets. Also USB Digital Out devices eat CPU cycles and cost a fair amount. If one needs two of the following items - Improved Sound out, Sound In, Digital Out, Digital In or Midi then one should most likely should get an audio card seeing one will pay nearly the same as two USB devices and benefit from the improved sound quality of a Sound card.

Conclusion

In the end I can only truly recommend one card for anyone who uses OS X or owns a newer PowerMac, the Midiman Audiophile. Otherwise Sound card buying for the Mac is optional.

[supernova777]

another possible use for a soundblaster live card under mac is...
hardware SOUNDFONT support!

from the recycle 2.0 support tech faq:
http://web.archive.org/web/20030724175844/http://www.propellerheads.se/support/recycle/rcFAQ.html

(See attached pic)

also the sampler support for 1.7:
http://web.archive.org/web/20010626012137/http://www.propellerheads.se/support/recycle/samplersupport.html
mentions:

Samplers supported via File Export

SampleCell I and II for Macintosh (Nubus and PCI) and SampleCell PC.
SoundFonts (as used in for example Create Technologies AWE-32 and AWE-64 and E-Mu APS).
Mixman track files as used in Mixman Studio and other Mixman products

the SB Live! uses the same chip as the E-mu APS....
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan99/articles/emuaudio.000.htm
e-mu 10k.. and these cards can be bought for under 10$ on ebay

In fact, Creative Labs' new SB Live! PCI soundcard also features an identical EMU10K1 effects chip to that used in the Emu APS, but there is no truth in the rumour that the two cards are the same.

The SB Live! certainly improves on the AWE64 Gold, with proper full-duplex operation, a claimed 6dB drop in background noise, 64 hardware voices (the AWE64 only had 32, with the additional 32 being created using processor-draining software synthesis), and an S/PDIF input as well as an S/PDIF output. If you're only interested in the 64-voice sampler, the SoundBlaster Live! is a bargain at its street price of £120, although its audio spec is not quite in the same league as the Emu APS.

The SB Live! and Emu APS circuit boards look quite different, and the APS has better quality converters -- the A-D is a Crystal CS5335 20-bit type (the same as is used in the Event Gina), and the D-A is a Crystal CS4329. Wading through both sets of specs reveals that the APS seems to have 3 or 4dB of extra dynamic range, less distortion, and a slightly flatter frequency response. In addition, the E-Drive gives the APS system double the number of S/PDIF inputs, S/PDIF outputs, and analogue inputs, along with mic preamps, and a headphone amplifier. Creative Labs are initially handling the support for the Emu APS, but the Emu UK Sales office (01753 630808) will help any musician needing more technical information and advice.
   

i personally have noticed the quality of sound in the echo/event gina cards... thats whyi was realy excited when i found them to be compatible with pci based graphics macs (yikes/b+W) even tho they are incompatible with the agp G4's... i wonder if the same rule applies for the EMU APS card..

https://www.thinkclassic.org/viewtopic.php?id=297
imics original post on thinkclassic

[MacTron]

As I have said in several occasions, my workflow rely heavily on virtual Instruments, usually NI FM7 and NI Kompakt, So I have tested in detail how the Sound Blaster Hardware based digital sampler (via SoundFont synthesizer engine) could improve my workflow compared with my favorite sampler (NI Kompakt).
The main advantage of the Sound Blaster sampler is that it doesn't drain CPU power because it rely on it s own CPU in the card. But its disadvantages early appears because it uses System memory to store the instruments (in Sound font format) as any virtual sampler does, so we are limited to System RAM, and there isn't any kind of "play samples from disk" technology (as Halion or Kompakt/kontakt have) that allows to load more instruments than the available System RAM. And the worst thing is that the sound fonts instruments must be load "manually" to each different project with the Sound Blaster utility, while the kompakt or Halion particular setup is automatically open in each cubase, Logic etc. project.
If you set a soundfont (a GM sound bank) as automatically load at startup, the computer always loss the amount of RAM it needs, ie if I setup a 512 Mb Sound font as startup sound font,  my system always will have this 512 Mb of ram un-avaliable for other tasks.

[supernova777]

u guys always come at everything with the perpsective of using just one computer...
which amazes me because i know u have many.

the answer is to use it in another system as u would an external module.

[supernova777]

has anyone sen this daughter card for the sb live?

looks like it adds either RCA analog or SPDIF ports? not sure which

http://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?t=31269
on this page someone says it might also be for MIDI

this page calls it a digital i/o board
http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=205-4660C

heres a better image:
http://www.stuartconnections.com/7741-thickbox/Creative-Labs-SoundBlaster-Live-MIDI-SPDIF-Digital-IO-Card-CT4660.jpg

https://www.google.ca/search?q=ct4660&espv=2&biw=1108&bih=560&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAmoVChMI8_eIhqHvxwIVhzqSCh1OrAJg

https://www.google.ca/search?q=ct4770&espv=2&biw=1108&bih=560&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAmoVChMI_7nJpKHvxwIVElmSCh0_BQeu

it looks like the small 3.5"" might be the spdif in/out?

creative was so bad at using nonstandardized connectons..
i really wish they never bought emu + ensoniq!!!!!!


http://www.dearhoney.idv.tw/SoundCard/SBLive/PC2000-200002/

[MacTron]

My Sound Blaster cards don't have the Audio Extension (Digital I/O) connector. But even if they have it, probably don't work, IMHO.

[MacTron]

u guys always come at everything with the perpsective of using just one computer...
which amazes me because i know u have many.

the answer is to use it in another system as u would an external module.

I've explained in several occasions. It's my work flow, "my philosophy" ("Keep it simple and take it to the max" ).
A simple setup is easiest to maintain and troubleshooting it.
Cubase, Kompakt, FM 7 and a few effects fulfill all my needs by far. When Steinberg developed the Virtual studio technology I said wow! thats what the thing have to be!

I just open a Cubase file with five year old song, with the intention of making some enhancements, and despite is complex setup with several automations, and some custom patches etc... everything is as I left five years ago. That's really GREAT!.
If you wish to do the same, but using lots of external equipment, probably you can't. You can't make your song to sound exactly as it should.
Furthermore, We have virtual effects and synths that sound as good as hardware counterparts.
So...

[supernova777]

I just open a Cubase file with five year old song, with the intention of making some enhancements, and despite is complex setup with several automations, and some custom patches etc... everything is as I left five years ago. That's really GREAT!.
If you wish to do the same, but using lots of external equipment, probably you can't. You can't make your song to sound exactly as it should.
Furthermore, We have virtual effects and synths that sound as good as hardware counterparts.
So...

i dont agree that software synths sound as good as hardware counterparts..
one is emulation, the other is the real thing... !!  a moog VST will never sound
like a moog 100% etc but i see the value in what you are saying, but i dont want to
be able to edit something old either.. id rather make something new..  its so easy to capture a new theme + essence ..some projects are worth revisiting .. but if u are learning. chances are you are better then u were before so its better to just re-create from scratch something else !

anyway this has little to do with sb live so i will stop talking;) lol

[supernova777]

i think the two models went together. the CT4670 + CT4770

heres a list of sound blaster products listed by model number!!
http://support.creative.com/kb/ShowArticle.aspx?sid=10846
it lists the following models:
CT4660
CT4770
CT4710
CT1861
CT1860A
CT1860
interesting also is the AWTC advanced wavetable card
but i cant find a pic of this

with soooo many different models surely they cant all be of the same exact quality

[devils_advisor]

You know how old wavetable cards are? Maybe you looking at the wrong timeframe.

[supernova777]

You know how old wavetable cards are? Maybe you looking at the wrong timeframe.

i wasnt looking for info on a wavetable card.. i just happened to see it listed as i was looking up the Digital IO connector/addon for soundblaster live, that u see that i illustrated.. above

[DieHard]

Our usual thread De-railment...lol

Mactron...

I just open a Cubase file with five year old song, with the intention of making some enhancements, and despite is complex setup with several automations, and some custom patches etc... everything is as I left five years ago. That's really GREAT!.

I have used many different approaches over the last 35 years to make music with both outboard gear and computers. I think the "keep it simple" approach is something that most of us will gravitate toward eventually.  I have been also opening old projects, and the ones that I made exclusively in Cubase are a dream, everything opens just like it did    The projects that I used rewire are a nightmare since I am having trouble matching the specific versions of the song project in reason that matches the version of the song in Cubase.  Even with date and time stamps, I would save the songs several times per hour and I am getting way confused now (many years later).  I would also suggest as an addition to the "keep it simple" approach, that each virtual track is also converted to audio before archiving.  The projects that I have done this to, are the easiest to port to any other DAW later, and this also serves as a reference if the same DAW maps the track to the wrong Instrument later on.

Chris...

I dont agree that software synths sound as good as hardware counterparts..
one is emulation, the other is the real thing... !!  a moog VST will never sound
like a moog 100% etc but i see the value in what you are saying, but i dont want to
be able to edit something old either.. id rather make something new..

It is very true, the software cannot hold a candle to the real hardware; and today, many are even going back to hardware analog synths and saying the hardware digital synths lack the punch that cuts thru a mix... but IMO for most of us, the convenience and price savings of the "keep it simple" approach, far out weighs the benefits of using the real-world hardware counter parts.  Many of us have to balance out the time we have for our music projects and it is very nice to be able to pick where we left off in a matter on minutes