The audio drivers aren't allowed direct hardware access anymore on Windows Vista.
Does it mean that bit-exact playback will become eventually impossible ?
Pio brought up this question in another thread, but it seemed to have been overlooked.
I didnt think any software was allowed any direct connection to hardware in windows XP either?
I don't think you're going to have a problem with it. I use multiple RME soundcards for my professional work and they've already got working ASIO Vista drivers. If Microsoft were to disallow bypassing the Windows Mixer, they could kiss the content creation and multimedia editing sectors goodbye.
QUOTE(jimhaddon @ Jan 16 2007, 23:18) 
I didnt think any software was allowed any direct connection to hardware in windows XP either?
No, hardware access in XP was possible through the correct channels (hardware abstraction layer). In Vista, the entire audio stack runs in user mode, no hardware accesses are possible, which for example reduces the usable X-Fi features by about 90% right now. See here and click on "Impacts of change".
Looks like OpenAL is the way to go for games.
Did Microsoft shoot themselves in the foot?
Did Microsoft shoot themselves in the foot?
Yet another reason to avoid vista like the plague.
QUOTE(TREX6662k6 @ Jan 17 2007, 00:51)
Looks like OpenAL is the way to go for games.
Did Microsoft shoot themselves in the foot?
Not at all. They didn't have the games in mind, the keyword was Output Content Protection. To quote from a Microsoft document:
QUOTE
Protected User Mode Audio: PUMA
Traditionally, there has been less focus in the industry about protecting audio content compared with the video, but this is changing. We want to make the PC a safer place for premium audio content, in the same way that we’re making it safer for premium video content.
[...]
PUMA is the solution in Windows Vista for mitigating against two types of attack. PUMA is designed to:
1. Provide a safer environment for the software modules that do the audio processing and rendering. The goal is to make it very hard for a hacker to snoop the content from memory and to make it very hard for hackers to insert rogue components.
Within the Protected Environment, the content is protected from snooping from other processes. This remains true to a reasonable extent even if the Protected Environment has dropped out of high-security mode.
2. Ensure that only allowed audio outputs are left turned on—that is, PUMA is designed to ensure outputs are turned off reliably if the content policy so specifies.
[...]
The PUMA process will refuse to load any software modules found to be on the Microsoft Global Revocation List. This applies to both Microsoft and third-party–supplied modules. Replacement versions of revoked modules are typically supplied at revocation time using a Windows Update mechanism.
Traditionally, there has been less focus in the industry about protecting audio content compared with the video, but this is changing. We want to make the PC a safer place for premium audio content, in the same way that we’re making it safer for premium video content.
[...]
PUMA is the solution in Windows Vista for mitigating against two types of attack. PUMA is designed to:
1. Provide a safer environment for the software modules that do the audio processing and rendering. The goal is to make it very hard for a hacker to snoop the content from memory and to make it very hard for hackers to insert rogue components.
Within the Protected Environment, the content is protected from snooping from other processes. This remains true to a reasonable extent even if the Protected Environment has dropped out of high-security mode.
2. Ensure that only allowed audio outputs are left turned on—that is, PUMA is designed to ensure outputs are turned off reliably if the content policy so specifies.
[...]
The PUMA process will refuse to load any software modules found to be on the Microsoft Global Revocation List. This applies to both Microsoft and third-party–supplied modules. Replacement versions of revoked modules are typically supplied at revocation time using a Windows Update mechanism.
More here.
The media industry is happy, that's what counts most, i guess...
QUOTE(Creative)
Proprietary APIs such as... OpenAL
Say what?
I guess this means that some software like JACK with ASIO output will be almost necessary on Vista to get more than one pro audio application working simultaneously?
Asio/Openall still the same as before ... So no big deal.
ASIO: musicians and sound engineers
OpenAL : Gamers.
They're leaving a good stable API's to access the HAL.
I can't even begin to say the benefits of moving things to user mode for stability.
The benefits of promoting OpenAL over directsound.
They introduced ocm to audio ? Yes. But saying this was the main and only reason to do so I think is a bit anti-microsoft craziness.
ASIO: musicians and sound engineers
OpenAL : Gamers.
They're leaving a good stable API's to access the HAL.
I can't even begin to say the benefits of moving things to user mode for stability.
The benefits of promoting OpenAL over directsound.
They introduced ocm to audio ? Yes. But saying this was the main and only reason to do so I think is a bit anti-microsoft craziness.
QUOTE(tcmjr @ Jan 17 2007, 02:06)
They're leaving a good stable API's to access the HAL.
I can't even begin to say the benefits of moving things to user mode for stability.
The benefits of promoting OpenAL over directsound.
What about every game that uses EAX or is developed with EAX right now? What about game programmers who don't want to use OpenAL?
Yes, there is increased OS stability from moving all features out of kernel mode into user mode. However, i never had a bluescreen in connection with my soundcard drivers in XP, and drivers that passed WHQL normally shouldn't cause them (at least it should be very rare). Now, for that risk reduction, i am asked to give up any hardware acceleration of my X-Fi with high-end DSP for EAX, DTS, Dolby, AC3, CMSS-3D, superior SRC engine, (maybe even Crystalizer, haha..)? I'm asked to be glad that they will do all of this slower and probably of less quality in software now, so the only thing that sets different soundcards apart is their physical output quality, and my expensive X-Fi is largely useless in Vista? But i am not.
QUOTE
They introduced ocm to audio ? Yes. But saying this was the main and only reason to do so I think is a bit anti-microsoft craziness.
No, ok, not the main reason. But i imagine it was a rather big factor.
Creative is doing some trickery in their drives to ensure old games using EAX can still use EAX properly.
QUOTE(CiTay @ Jan 16 2007, 19:06)
QUOTE(tcmjr @ Jan 17 2007, 02:06)
They're leaving a good stable API's to access the HAL.
I can't even begin to say the benefits of moving things to user mode for stability.
The benefits of promoting OpenAL over directsound.
What about every game that uses EAX or is developed with EAX right now?
Either it works or Creative screwed up.
QUOTE(CiTay @ Jan 16 2007, 19:06)
What about game programmers who don't want to use OpenAL?
They should complain to Creative, or write their own effects. Ideally the latter.
QUOTE(CiTay @ Jan 16 2007, 19:06)
Yes, there is increased OS stability from moving all features out of kernel mode into user mode. However, i never had a bluescreen in connection with my soundcard drivers in XP, and drivers that passed WHQL normally shouldn't cause them (at least it should be very rare).
You're a lucky man. Sound card drivers in XP (let alone the bad old days in 2000) are generally the weakest part of Windows IMO. Vista represents a huge leap forward by getting the 90% of the market that isn't Creative into the 21 century. People should not be running what amounts to Winamp DSPs in kernel mode. And now they won't, excepting an ever shrinking number of people who buy Creative cards.
QUOTE(CiTay @ Jan 16 2007, 19:06)
Now, for that risk reduction, i am asked to give up any hardware acceleration of my X-Fi with high-end DSP for EAX, DTS, Dolby, AC3, CMSS-3D, superior SRC engine, (maybe even Crystalizer, haha..)?
No, Creative is asked to develop drivers that support these features through the proper channels. What changed is MS realized this was a terrible idea and is no longer actively helping them to do it. Effectively, these changes are MS telling Creative that they're fed up, and from now on they're on their own WRT to API development (which was more or less the case with XP anyway).
QUOTE(CiTay @ Jan 16 2007, 19:06)
I'm asked to be glad that they will do all of this slower and probably of less quality in software now, so the only thing that sets different soundcards apart is their physical output quality, and my expensive X-Fi is largely useless in Vista? But i am not.
I wish this would happen. The sooner people stop buying these retarded hardware "accelerated" sound cards with their K6-2 era performing DSPs, the sooner game audio can improve. But hey, why program for a CPU (~50,000 vector MIPS per core) when you can use Creative's "accelerator" with a staggering 1100 MIPS! Its about 1% the peak issue rate of a Core 2, and you get to have a tiny fraction of the RAM, cache and bandwidth. Sounds like a winner to me. I wonder why MS doesn't like the idea?
Unfortunately, Creative can simply by pass all the Vista stuff in their drivers (its not like an OS can actually prevent you from accessing whatever you want once you've installed a driver), and this will be used to access their stupid DSPs, and Creative's lawsuits will continue to discourage companies that actually want to leverage CPU power to do more advanced effects then what EAXn offers. But at least the rest of the market will end up with more stable drivers, and probably less issues with bad 44.1 > 48k resampling.
http://www.penstarsys.com/reviews/sound/bl...er/b-ensp_2.htm
OpenAL and EAX is finished.
QUOTE
In speaking with developers, it seems that many are stepping away from OpenAL and other hardware implementations for their titles. The latest generation of X-Box and PlayStation consoles feature no hardware accelerated audio, instead relying on the multi-CPU/SPE architectures to handle the sound related functions. Developers currently have very little interest in utilizing OpenAL for consoles (though X-Box 360 does support it through Creative), as well as creating separate audio programming and content in their games to support EAX and OpenAL on the PC side. Instead it looks more like most upcoming titles being developed for consoles and PC’s will shun any hardware accelerated audio, and will stick with software that will instead utilize the CPU(s) to perform audio tasks. EA for instance is creating their own software audio “renderer” that will span consoles and PC games, and is bypassing OpenAL and all hardware accelerated audio.
OpenAL and EAX is finished.
I can tell you this much, EAX 5.0 and CMSS-3D are the most convincing surround effects i ever heard, hardware or software. CMSS-3DHeadphones is a real bliss for watching 5.1+ movies if you don't have/can't use (e.g. at night) a 5.1+ speaker system, and EAX 5.0 very reliably tells you where the opponents are, with its realistic environment occlusion and whatnot.
I hope they can fully reconstruct CMSS-3D in software for Vista, and keep EAX5-quality effects for games somehow. If not, i might have to set up a weird dual-boot someday: XP for movies and all the EAX games up until they start dropping support; Vista for DX10 games or new games without EAX.
I wish this would happen. The sooner people stop buying these retarded hardware "accelerated" sound cards with their K6-2 era performing DSPs, the sooner game audio can improve. But hey, why program for a CPU (~50,000 vector MIPS per core) when you can use Creative's "accelerator" with a staggering 1100 MIPS! Its about 1% the peak issue rate of a Core 2, and you get to have a tiny fraction of the RAM, cache and bandwidth. Sounds like a winner to me. I wonder why MS doesn't like the idea?
1180 MIPS is only the processing power of the Quartet DSP on the X-Fi. These following components make up for the rest of it in the audio ring: SRC: 7310 MIPS, Mixer: 1210 MIPS, Filter: 200 MIPS, Tank-Engine: 440 MIPS.
Measurements by Auctronic Computers resulted in 10,340 raw data path MIPS for the X-Fi, which is more than a P4E 560 with 3,6 GHz at 10,224 MIPS. Typical processor MIPS of the X-Fi are 30,000+.
See http://www.soundblaster.com/products/x-fi/...cture/specs.asp
I hope they can fully reconstruct CMSS-3D in software for Vista, and keep EAX5-quality effects for games somehow. If not, i might have to set up a weird dual-boot someday: XP for movies and all the EAX games up until they start dropping support; Vista for DX10 games or new games without EAX.
QUOTE(Mike Giacomelli @ Jan 17 2007, 05:25)
I wish this would happen. The sooner people stop buying these retarded hardware "accelerated" sound cards with their K6-2 era performing DSPs, the sooner game audio can improve. But hey, why program for a CPU (~50,000 vector MIPS per core) when you can use Creative's "accelerator" with a staggering 1100 MIPS! Its about 1% the peak issue rate of a Core 2, and you get to have a tiny fraction of the RAM, cache and bandwidth. Sounds like a winner to me. I wonder why MS doesn't like the idea?
1180 MIPS is only the processing power of the Quartet DSP on the X-Fi. These following components make up for the rest of it in the audio ring: SRC: 7310 MIPS, Mixer: 1210 MIPS, Filter: 200 MIPS, Tank-Engine: 440 MIPS.
Measurements by Auctronic Computers resulted in 10,340 raw data path MIPS for the X-Fi, which is more than a P4E 560 with 3,6 GHz at 10,224 MIPS. Typical processor MIPS of the X-Fi are 30,000+.
See http://www.soundblaster.com/products/x-fi/...cture/specs.asp
QUOTE(treeninja @ Jan 16 2007, 13:16)
The audio drivers aren't allowed direct hardware access anymore on Windows Vista.
Does it mean that bit-exact playback will become eventually impossible ?
Pio brought up this question in another thread, but it seemed to have been overlooked.
No. Kernel streaming has been replaced with "vista exclusive mode". ASIO will still be supportable. And any other interface you care to invent and write sound card drivers for.
Mike answered exactly what I would say.
May I also add that Creative knew years before of the changes and didn't care/could develop proper drivers to support all those options with vista ?
They also had enough time to develop directsound->openal handlers to support old games.
Also knowing the changes that would take place with Vista, they pushed their X-Fi cards knowing it would be "dead" when vista launched, thanks to their own incompetence to write drivers.
The x-fi fatality with onboard ram ? I think only 1 game support using that aditional ram.
Crytek, confirmed no use for OpenAl/Eax as they'll be doing ALL the effects provided by EAX using software.
"There are no plans to support OpenAL. All effects were are using are real-time DSP effects, or reverb. That provides the same sound quality to everyone on any platform (like Vista) with any sound card." -- Tomas Neumann, Crytek Audio Programmer
[BTW, they using a modified version of http://www.fmod.org/]
Bad drive and screwed products ?
http://www.ngohq.com/home.php?page=article...&arc_id=124
May I also add that Creative knew years before of the changes and didn't care/could develop proper drivers to support all those options with vista ?
They also had enough time to develop directsound->openal handlers to support old games.
Also knowing the changes that would take place with Vista, they pushed their X-Fi cards knowing it would be "dead" when vista launched, thanks to their own incompetence to write drivers.
The x-fi fatality with onboard ram ? I think only 1 game support using that aditional ram.
Crytek, confirmed no use for OpenAl/Eax as they'll be doing ALL the effects provided by EAX using software.
"There are no plans to support OpenAL. All effects were are using are real-time DSP effects, or reverb. That provides the same sound quality to everyone on any platform (like Vista) with any sound card." -- Tomas Neumann, Crytek Audio Programmer
[BTW, they using a modified version of http://www.fmod.org/]
Bad drive and screwed products ?
http://www.ngohq.com/home.php?page=article...&arc_id=124
QUOTE(tcmjr @ Jan 18 2007, 02:30)
May I also add that Creative knew years before of the changes and didn't care/could develop proper drivers to support all those options with vista ?
I will not defend Creative here. I am equally unhappy with their late realisation or disclosure that the X-Fi will be severely limited in functionality under Vista. I can't help but notice that other firms also seemed to have started way too late with serious Vista driver development, as is evident with NVIDIA and ATI for instance, who seem to have some very serious performance issues in games, compared to XP.
QUOTE
I don't know what additional stuff they installed, but the only thing i have in the device manager is "Creative SB X-Fi", not 6 devices...
Creative's drivers have always been inferior. Stability has been a relatively recent "innovation" for them. Given that, it's no surprise at all that Vista blindsided them. It's just another symptom of dysfunctional development.
Using more of your CPU power for sound is not what I would call ideal. From the insiders I've talked to Vista is worse than XP in a whole lot of ways. Yes in part it is Creatives fault they don't have good working drivers yet, but MS has made it harder for everyone. The only positive thing I can think of is hopefully we will see some real competition in the way of sound cards. This is instead of creative owning 90% of the market.
QUOTE(CiTay @ Jan 18 2007, 19:16)
I can't help but notice that other firms also seemed to have started way too late with serious Vista driver development, as is evident with NVIDIA and ATI for instance, who seem to have some very serious performance issues in games, compared to XP.
I don't think the poor performance in games is Nvidia's or ATI's fault. Vista Nvidia drivers were first sighted on the 24th Feb 06. Vista isn't officially out yet!
So apart from output quality, flaky EAX support, and ASIO. AC97 is on par with an X-FI?
It would be interesting to see CPU usage between the two.
AFAIK any game that supports EAX5.0 utilizes X-RAM too. BF2 and BF2142 are games that I know that use X-RAM. Creative has a list on their site.
OpenAL isn't proprietary and why would Microsoft promote it over Directsound?
CPU requirements are gona go up too for games because of the lack of hardware acceleration. And my frag scores are gona drop too because EAX is big help
QUOTE
The only positive thing I can think of is hopefully we will see some real competition in the way of sound cards. This is instead of creative owning 90% of the market.
What competition is there now? Soundcards are more or less gona be the same. Creative were great for gamers (just don't talk about their drivers, but those problems were in the past for me)
The advantage of putting everything in software means driver hacks galore.
QUOTE
Unlike any OS before, we're driving Windows Vista as a true gaming platform, complete with a broad marketing campaign that introduces the Games for Windows brand, complemented by ground-breaking branded titles from Microsoft Game Studios as well as from many of the world's leading game developers. We are also investing in a more consistent brand presence at retail that will create a true category that will easy for the consumer to discover and navigate.
How can they say that without EAX (and other audio technologies)?
Which is why I replied about them shooting themselves in the foot.
Full Article
Update:
Creative ALchemy
QUOTE(TREX6662k6 @ Jan 23 2007, 21:01)
How can they say that without EAX (and other audio technologies)?
EAX is just an additional set of effects for DirectSound3D. There can be well enough 3D sound without EAX, so good riddance, EAX. It's mostly just a stupid marketing scheme of Creative to sell their crappy hardware, anyway.
QUOTE
No. Kernel streaming has been replaced with "vista exclusive mode".
Partially wrong. On Vista, kernel streaming works just fine on WaveCyclic/WavePCI drivers, but it chokes on WaveRT drivers. The exclusive mode seems to be bugged, because I haven't seen a single output plugin yet which supports the exclusive mode / WASAPI.
QUOTE(spockep @ Jan 19 2007, 00:21)
Using more of your CPU power for sound is not what I would call ideal.
Even advanced DSP effects have a miniscule impact on today's processors.
QUOTE
How can they say that without EAX (and other audio technologies)?
Um, because EAX is completely non-essential for a gaming platform? It's just some basic DSP.
Vista will encourage developers to switch to software solution like the Miles Sound System or FMOD, which provide far superior effects to anything Creative ever offered with EAX.
I like the idea of having the DSP's done in software.
I'm using onboard audio on my pc, and it sounds good enough (no noise etc like people expect). This motherboard actually has the "onboard sound" on a removeable card, for stuff like noise etc.
What's rediculous with games, is how i can have 7.1 speakers plugged in on XP, but at best i'll get stereo... (hey maybe randomly the speakers will output on all channels, but a clone stereo thing, least i get some bass then). <--- for games, stuff like foobar can play nicely with it, actually that's why i first converted to foobar
.
Currently it's rediculous cause if you want some kinda of surround sound you need creative's EAX? (ergo, the latest creative cards as it seems to go through a few versions..). That hardly sounds friendly to games/gamers/competition...
Course i could be wrong.
I'm using onboard audio on my pc, and it sounds good enough (no noise etc like people expect). This motherboard actually has the "onboard sound" on a removeable card, for stuff like noise etc.
What's rediculous with games, is how i can have 7.1 speakers plugged in on XP, but at best i'll get stereo... (hey maybe randomly the speakers will output on all channels, but a clone stereo thing, least i get some bass then). <--- for games, stuff like foobar can play nicely with it, actually that's why i first converted to foobar
.Currently it's rediculous cause if you want some kinda of surround sound you need creative's EAX? (ergo, the latest creative cards as it seems to go through a few versions..). That hardly sounds friendly to games/gamers/competition...
Course i could be wrong.
QUOTE(bojo @ May 29 2007, 06:18)
Course i could be wrong.
and indeed, you are.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.