VOGONS


SB16 Nirvana

Topic actions

First post, by bbuchholtz

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Sound Card Senpais:

I wanted to share with you a project I've been working on. I was also curious if there were any preferences between the CT1790 or the CT2940. Before you cast any votes, here are the specs:

CT1790

  • v4.05 DSP
  • CT1703-A
  • CT1748A
  • CT1746B
  • YMF262-M

The CT1790 is a bit of a frankencard. It's the mash-up of three different sound cards. I also replaced the capacitors and audio jacks.

20200829-181500.jpg

CT2940

  • YMF289B
  • YAC516-E
  • CT2502-SDQ

I didn't have to modify the CT2940. It came with the native OPL3 chip. I only updated the capacitors and audio jacks. I was curious if this card was considered Vibra.

20200829-181609.jpg

I have my preference. But, I wanted objective opinions. I consider the CT1790 as more legacy, and perhaps a higher degree of compatibility? The CT2940 is definitely more modern and has genuine OPL3. So, what are your thoughts?

-Brian

Reply 1 of 4, by canthearu

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

The CT2940 is a PnP card, the CT1790 isn't PnP.

They will both probably have poor quality output so mixer tuning will be a must, as is common from older sound blasters.

The CT2940 is not going to work well with a wavetable due to bugs. But the CT1790 should be OK.

If the system is PnP, i'd choose a better sounding clone unless your software specifically needs a sound blaster (eg, OS/2 is just a million times easier to setup with a true SB16)

If the system is Non-PNP, the CT1790 would be a reasonable choice.

Reply 2 of 4, by bbuchholtz

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Thank you for your feedback, canthearu 😀

When you say these cards have poor output quality, is this in the context of other SB16? Or compared to SoundBlaster cards in general? I'm trying to find the ideal SB16. While I agree that the CT1790 is an older card, I view the CT2940 as a late model SB16.

I plan to use either card in a DOS-based 486 system. While non-PNP tends to be easier to setup, I'm also open to using a PNP card. The CT2940 is a very different card, compared to other SB16. I was curious if there are any compatibility concerns I should be aware of.

-Brian

Reply 3 of 4, by canthearu

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
bbuchholtz wrote on 2020-08-30, 15:25:

When you say these cards have poor output quality, is this in the context of other SB16? Or compared to SoundBlaster cards in general? I'm trying to find the ideal SB16. While I agree that the CT1790 is an older card, I view the CT2940 as a late model SB16.

I plan to use either card in a DOS-based 486 system. While non-PNP tends to be easier to setup, I'm also open to using a PNP card. The CT2940 is a very different card, compared to other SB16. I was curious if there are any compatibility concerns I should be aware of.

Output quality as in a lot of hiss, computer interference, and a high noise floor. Very poor compared to Yamaha and ESS clones I have tried (with onboard amps turned off)

Best you can do on most true SB16 cards is to adjust the mixer very carefully to minimize output noise while using an external amp to do the amplification.

Sadly, there is no ideal SB16 card., but there shouldn't be many (if any) incompatibility problems with either SB16 card on a 486 motherboard. The non-pnp card CT1790 be easier to setup, so I'd try that one first.

Reply 4 of 4, by chinny22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Are you hooking up external Midi device? if not that's one potential obstacle out the way.

Quick and dirty way to check if it's a Vibra is to open mixerset, If your missing Bass,Treble,Reverb settings its a Vibra. Not a big issue if your powered speakers.

If it was me I'd go with your preference and whatever works.
Sound clarity in dos games or any ISA card aren't great anyway.
Unless your comparing cards side by side, I doubt most people will notice the difference