Obviously we all know the SantaCruz, but now they have some new models.

I was wondering if anyone has heard anything about them. They look pretty decent for the price (after a quick once over of the specs etc.)

here's a link: http://www.turtlebeach.com/site/products/soundcards/

I'm interested too. I wonder how the Catalina would match up to an M-Audio Revolution. It's about $20 cheaper. Unfortunately, the specs don't list what kind of audio chip it uses, i.e. is it Envy24x or something else?

Edit: I remember when TB cards used to be high-end with a price to match. These are quite cheap considering what I remember from their prices about 10 years ago...

These are definitely Envy24 (probably HT or HT-S) based cards, you can actually see the ICEnsemble chip in some of the shots.

There is an important drawback I just now noticed however:

Turtle Beach has apparently decided that no one really needs a 24 bit DAC. This is extremely unfortunate, and makes the Catalina unacceptably expensive for what it is.
In fact, at $80 list it seems almost suicidal of Turtle Beach to outfit a 24 bit chip with a 16 bit DAC. Undoubtedly the ADC isn't any better.
The digital output supports up to 24/96, but that is very little solace.

This is quite sad for me because Turtle Beach writes some of the finest audio drivers I've used for consumer sound cards; relatively small, completely noninvasive and easy to use. The output quality is probably still quite good, but without a 24 bit capable DAC who will buy it to find out?

Judging by the screenshot of the mixer, Riviera is a C-Media based card, making it highly uninteresting.

Catalina is based on envy24ht-s. Given its price tag of $90, this makes it about as uninteresting as the Riviera, since Chaintech av-710, which is based on the same chip, goes for ~$30.

In a way. The Chaintech is very inexpensive because it's using the stock VIA drivers, and it apparently uses an AC'97 CODEC as the D/A converter for the front 5.1 channels as well as for ADC duties (and is assuredly using the VT1616 integrated amp instead of a dedicated opamp), while pointlessly using a 24 bit Wolfson part for the rear 6/7 channels.

If TB had included a quality ADC and a 24 bit DAC on at least the front/headphoine output plus good quality opamps, it might be worthwhile at a $60 street price (MSRP =! street price).

ediit : what makes you so sure it's the 24HT-S by the way?

Well, the specifications say it's limited to 24/96 resolution, and envy24ht has an itegrated s/pdif controller that supports sample rates up to 192 kHz. It can't possibly be envy24, since the analog outputs are limited to 48 kHz, which would be a terrible waste.

Oddly enough the Chaintech CT-AV710 claims to be a 24HT-S part in certain places (Chaintech's site claims it's the 24PT, but the picture of the card itself shows the HT-S chip) and also claims to support 24/192 digital output.
Oh well.

edit: I believe I have discovered the source of confusion!

This diagram at Via's site claims the 24PT is limited to 24/96 on Digital I/O (which is important, see below), but the 24HT-S is a 24/192 part. They also mention a 24GT which is a 6 channel variant of the 24PT with the possibility of four inputs rather than only two.

The most interesting thing about the table linked above is that Via claims the 24PT and HT-S DO NOT support analog I/O greater than 20/48. This is quite shocking to me actually, but could then explain the shortcomings of the Turtle Beach Catalina and cast doubt on the usefullness of implementing a 24 bit DAC of any sort on any HT-S/PT standalone sound card.

Assuming VIA's spec table is accurate, and I have no reason not to, it means the 24HT is dramatically superior to the 24HT-S in terms of it's capabilites in every area save digital I/O.

http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2004q1/m...er/index.x?pg=1





Chaintech's card has the Wolfson 24bit DAC also, but I'm unsure if you can use the VIA drivers as mentioned in the review with the Chaintech card. I'm wondering if the Catalina is also sporting the same Wolfson DAC..... But at that price, you might as well buy a Revo, since the Chaintech and Mad Dog cards are much much cheaper.

It's interesting to wonder whether the signal is actually a 24 bit analog signal as claimed. TR (of course) doesnt test it, and the 24HT-S is not supposed to be capable of outputting 24bit analog signals according to the table from VIA above.

So while putting a 24 bit Wolfson DAC onboard and routing the headphone output through it may sound better than using the VT1616 CODEC (big surprise), this does not really invalidate the chip manufacturers claim that 20bit 48KHz analog output is the maximum supported by the 24HT-S chip.

It would be quite interesting to discover just how VIA is ensuring that the digital signal reaching the DAC is limited to 20/48 (while maintaining SPDIF outputs at 24/96 or higher), if indeed that is what is happening.

No that doesn't explain it as evidenced here. They probably just built a card based off the VIA reference design and used VIA's AC97 codec (VT1616 or VT1617).

That's quite interesting since it directly contradicts the manufacturers own statements about their chip, which is found in the article and seen here.



And again below that:


VIA is lying about the capabilities of their own chips (this is not a reference board spec, but the chip spec) by understating their capabilities?
Very unusual.

I just read the page you linked to and they aren't lying. The Envy24HT-S supports a maximum of 24/96 over the 3 IS2 links using stereo DACs only. The MK44 II uses two 24/96 stereo DACs to power the 4 analog outputs it has. The AC97 links are limited by the VIA AC97 codecs (which I guess is necessary) which atm support a maximum of 20/48 analog output.

VIA is deliberately crippling the interface in order to charge more for the 24HT?
Why am I not surprised?
This makes it appear as if Turtle Beach has made a horrible miscalculation on it's target market.