# Adding more bass to an already existing digital set up



## lunchboxx

Hey people,
i got a z-5500 sound system, and an Asus xonar d2.

i love the sound from it, but i was just wondering if theres anyway to add an extra subwoofer? maybe a powered subwoofer somehow?

if anyone has any ideas, please tell.


----------



## Zatharus

You would simply need to add a sub to the card's analog output - easily multiplied to additional subs if you wish.  Or, you can mult the S/PDIF out to multiple decoders and then to a sub - not as trivial.


----------



## lunchboxx

Right now all i have is the Z5500 hooked up to my sound card with a *digital* coax cable.

What would be the best way to add this powered subwoofer?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882290130


Could i use those speaker level inputs/outputs? the R and L rca connections? and what is the LFE input used for?

Thanks for the help


----------



## daisymtc

Do you mean your bass is not loud enough? Or not heavy enough?
If it s not heavy enough, you could try to adjust it at the audio center


----------



## Zatharus

lunchboxx said:


> Right now all i have is the Z5500 hooked up to my sound card with a *digital* coax cable.



Correct.  That is why I was talking about possibly splitting the S/PDIF connection (Digital Coax).




> What would be the best way to add this powered subwoofer?
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882290130
> 
> 
> Could i use those speaker level inputs/outputs? the R and L rca connections? and what is the LFE input used for?
> 
> Thanks for the help


LFE "Output" is for your Low Frequency Effects channel - aka. the Sub.  You would want to use this output on your sound card to connect that Polk sub.  You will also need to make sure that your audio system can support sending a multichannel (5.1 or 7.1) signal to both the analog outputs (the LFE out) and the digital outputs that your main speakers are connected to.  Otherwise, if you can only use one or the other, you will have to make a choice and stick with either all analog (simple setup, just split the LFE between subs) or all digital (which would require a secondary decoder for that analog sub).

Edit: That z-5500 sub is quite substantial for a computer speaker system as it is.  Any particular reason for adding in the Polk?  It really sounds like you are heading into the level of audio equipment where you would be better served by using a home theater setup.


----------



## bomberboysk

Just an FYI, i wouldnt recommend polk for a subwoofer(although their speakers are excellent, their subwoofers arent that good for the cost). At that price point, the BIC Venturi V1220 or premier acoustics PA-120(I have used the V1220, but not the PA-120, on AVSforums though the PA-120 seems to be one of the favorites):
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=303-432

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...310166340243&ff4=263602_263622#ht_1647wt_1165

Also, adding a subwoofer would increase bass output, which if you want to increase your audio experience you would be better off getting better drivers for your system before delving into another subwoofer, such as a set of polk 40's.


----------



## astrallite

Polk subwoofers are not that good. I would suggest Hsu Research's STF-1. One of the most accurate small subwoofers you can buy, with flatline response down to 30hz (-4db).

http://www.hsuresearch.com/products/stf-1.html

Of course it would end up embarrassing your Z-5500 sub quite a bit. IIRC the Z-5500s -3db point is somewhere around 52-55hz.


----------



## lunchboxx

I was just using the polk audio as an example, as it seems most powered sub woofers have similar connections. 
I'm only going to be using the extra sub for things such as movies and possibly games, to add that intensity. My set up is in a fairly big room with openess all around, unlike a small room would sound different.

I can only chose one or the other when it comes to input, i'm thinking my only way is splitting the digital coax, have it run into a digital receiver and hook up the sub to that. 
Seems a bit much


----------



## astrallite

The best budget subwoofer manufacturers to me are Hsu and SVS. Velodyne would come in as a distant third with their Digital EQ series (DEQ-xR).

www.hsuresearch.com

www.svsound.com

By "budget" I mean bang for your buck. SVS, unfortunately, is probably out of your price range, their "entry level" sub is the NSD-12, which is $599. It gives you flatline performance (as seen below) to around 18hz; you would need to go to about $1,100+ minimum on retail subs to approach that kind of performance. That said, at 74lbs it's pretty hefty (SVS high end subs go up to 160lbs).







 The Hsu subs are a bit lighter while providing exceptional performance. The STF-1 ($254) is 35lbs and provides flatline performance to 30hz, and the STF-2 ($349) is 44lbs goes to 25hz. Both price and size-wise they are easier to swallow and I believe in your price range.


----------



## Zatharus

lunchboxx said:


> ...
> I can only chose one or the other when it comes to input, i'm thinking my only way is splitting the digital coax, have it run into a digital receiver and hook up the sub to that.
> Seems a bit much



Yes, that is correct.

  You will have to decode the digital signal to get the proper channel to patch to any analog gear.  This is what the Z-5500 "receiver" is doing already.  Running to a surround receiver is where you are heading anyway if you want bigger sound than what the Z-5500 can provide.  

Seems a bit much?  Perhaps.  It depends on how you want to tackle the issue. The more complicated way would be to splice into the multi-pin output cable that runs from the Z-5500 control box to the sub and split the sub output from there.  I do not have any information on the pin-outs, but I am sure that is available on the web somewhere if you really want to go that convoluted route.  Alternatively, you could just use the analog outputs from your computer and run them to the Z-5500 control box's direct inputs, splitting the Sub/Center output to your alternate sub.  Yes, it's analog, but it would simplify what you are trying to do tremendously.


----------



## bomberboysk

Not to mention, by having a Xonar and using digital, you are totally defeating the purpose of having a dedicated audio card. The DAC's in the z-5500's are of worse quality than those in the xonar, so by utilizing the digital you are bypassing the DAC's on the xonar, and instead the file is decompressed by the receiver(z-5500 speakers control pod/board inside subwoofer). If you want to use digital, onboard is going to be pretty much the same for a digital signal, but the xonar really shines in analog output. I have a set of Z-5500's myself, and sound quality is much better when using analog outputs vs digital(on a good dedicated sound card of course), as i said earlier, the sound card you paid ~$100 for is not giving you any tangible benefits by using digital output.


----------



## lunchboxx

OK, i never knew analog would sound better than digital, iv only tried it for a while until i bought a digital coax lol.
So for optimal sound quality i should use analog? i wont receive the benefits of dts digital, or is the change miniscule?


----------



## PunterCam

Lets not forget that a digital coax output cannot be supplying any 5.1 system with 6 separate channels of audio, you need to use the 3 mini-jack outputs from the sound card. That Xonar card looks properly shielded, so I'd have no problem making use of the analogue outputs, but I doubt it'll sound any better than if you let the z5500s do the decoding - it's only a £100 card, not a £1000 one.

As for adding subs to these 'integrated' 5.1 systems, I'm sure people have already given you possibilities better than I can - but generally speaking it's a hassle that's pretty much not worth it imo.


----------



## lunchboxx

The xonar d2 is a decent card. 

One of the best in the $200 price range. I also have a pair of Sennheiser hd280s, which sound ORGASMIC with the xonar d2.

So now if i ever want to add a powered sub, it will be easy. I hooked up some analog cables, i can tell there's a difference, just can decide if its better or not.


----------



## bomberboysk

PunterCam said:


> Lets not forget that a digital coax output cannot be supplying any 5.1 system with 6 separate channels of audio, you need to use the 3 mini-jack outputs from the sound card. That Xonar card looks properly shielded, so I'd have no problem making use of the analogue outputs, but I doubt it'll sound any better than if you let the z5500s do the decoding - it's only a £100 card, not a £1000 one.
> 
> As for adding subs to these 'integrated' 5.1 systems, I'm sure people have already given you possibilities better than I can - but generally speaking it's a hassle that's pretty much not worth it imo.



The DAC's are much better on the xonar or even the X-fi than the ones on the Z-5500. This doesn't change the fact the z-5500's satellites are pretty cheap units from tangbands lower end, but an increase in quality should be present nonetheless.


----------



## Zatharus

lunchboxx said:


> OK, i never knew analog would sound better than digital, iv only tried it for a while until i bought a digital coax lol.
> So for optimal sound quality i should use analog? i wont receive the benefits of dts digital, or is the change miniscule?



It depends.  If you have horrible analog cables, then you will definitely notice a difference.  Bomberboysk also raises some good points.

Technically, since that card supports Dolby Live and DTS Connect encoding, you can use it to its full potential via digital or analog.  The digital option is very convenient, as I am sure you know, in that you can get discreet surround channels through one simple connection with the proper decoder (z-5500 in your case).




PunterCam said:


> Lets not forget that a digital coax output cannot be supplying any 5.1 system with 6 separate channels of audio...



Yes it can.  See above.


----------



## lunchboxx

Zatharus said:


> It depends.  If you have horrible analog cables, then you will definitely notice a difference.  Bomberboysk also raises some good points.
> 
> Technically, since that card supports Dolby Live and DTS Connect encoding, you can use it to its full potential via digital or analog.  The digital option is very convenient, as I am sure you know, in that you can get discreet surround channels through one simple connection with the proper decoder (z-5500 in your case).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it can.  See above.




so what do i stick with? digital coax or analog?


----------



## Zatharus

If you really want to add in only a second sub, the easiest method would be to use your cards discrete analog outputs.

Parts needed:

 - 1x stereo mini to 2xstereo mini splitter - plug directly to your center/sub out on your audio card, one side for the adapter below and the other for your z-5500

 - 1x stereo mini to split RCA stereo pair - plug into one of the mini-splitter ends

 - 1x RCA cable - connect to "sub" side of the split RCA pair and to the new powered sub input


----------



## PunterCam

Zatharus said:


> It depends.  If you have horrible analog cables, then you will definitely notice a difference.  Bomberboysk also raises some good points.
> 
> Technically, since that card supports Dolby Live and DTS Connect encoding, you can use it to its full potential via digital or analog.  The digital option is very convenient, as I am sure you know, in that you can get discreet surround channels through one simple connection with the proper decoder (z-5500 in your case).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it can.  See above.



I'm never really sure about this... There's no digital protocol that can allow more than 2 channels of digital signal down a coax line, certainly none I know of. 

So I assume these coax surround systems just use clever encoding and decoding of a stereo signal - is this actually classed as proper surround? I mean, you couldn't play 5 separate songs out of the 5 speakers on the z5500s... You could by using the analogue mini-jack inputs...

And back on DACs - they're all the same under a grand. Don't believe a word of it. The dacs are MUCH better on the xonar than the z5500s? I doubt anyone could hear any difference. It's all nonsense. I've tested dozens of converters back to back over the years - most people who've stopped in for a listen didn't have a clue. 5 year old creative something dac vs benchmark 'whateverthenumberis' dac. Difference? Yes. Relevant? Not for 99.999999% of the world. I was still visually checking what I was listening to, and that's the point. 

Speakers make a difference, and if you have literally the best speakers on the planet, whatever they may be, a set a big ATCs or something then, being nothing more than a consumer, you worry about it.

Excellent ramble, now where be my shoes...


----------



## astrallite

PunterCam said:


> I'm never really sure about this... There's no digital protocol that can allow more than 2 channels of digital signal down a coax line, certainly none I know of.
> 
> So I assume these coax surround systems just use clever encoding and decoding of a stereo signal - is this actually classed as proper surround? I mean, you couldn't play 5 separate songs out of the 5 speakers on the z5500s... You could by using the analogue mini-jack inputs...
> 
> And back on DACs - they're all the same under a grand. Don't believe a word of it. The dacs are MUCH better on the xonar than the z5500s? I doubt anyone could hear any difference. It's all nonsense. I've tested dozens of converters back to back over the years - most people who've stopped in for a listen didn't have a clue. 5 year old creative something dac vs benchmark 'whateverthenumberis' dac. Difference? Yes. Relevant? Not for 99.999999% of the world. I was still visually checking what I was listening to, and that's the point.
> 
> Speakers make a difference, and if you have literally the best speakers on the planet, whatever they may be, a set a big ATCs or something then, being nothing more than a consumer, you worry about it.
> 
> Excellent ramble, now where be my shoes...



Dolby Digital Live is just an acronym for real-time Dolby Digital encoding. You turn discrete channels into compressed 112kbps/channel DD5.1. Not exactly high fidelity.

HDMI of course is the real solution, but since PC surround sound development pretty much died after 2006, you aren't gonna see an HDMI multimedia solution anytime soon.


----------



## diduknowthat

astrallite said:


> Dolby Digital Live is just an acronym for real-time Dolby Digital encoding. You turn discrete channels into compressed 112kbps/channel DD5.1. Not exactly high fidelity.
> 
> HDMI of course is the real solution, but since PC surround sound development pretty much died after 2006, you aren't gonna see an HDMI multimedia solution anytime soon.



Wiki says otherwise



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> Dolby Digital Live (DDL) is a real-time hardware encoding technology for interactive media such as video games. It converts any audio signals on a PC or game console into a 5.1-channel 16-bit/48 KHz Dolby Digital format at 640kbps and transports it via a single S/PDIF cable.[12]  A similar technology known as DTS Connect is available from competitor DTS.


----------



## PunterCam

diduknowthat said:


> Wiki says otherwise



Interesting... I'll have to find someone who _really_ knows. S/PDIF will usually transmit 2 channels of 24bit audio at up to 192khz, so if this dolby encoding option can transmit 6 channels at 48k, although admittedly at 16bit (which never seems to make a drastic change in disk space used, therefore surely 24bit can't use up much more bandwidth), why isn't it more widely used in pro audio? If I could bin those bloody optical cable for a couple of XLRs carrying 8 channels, I probably might. Or maybe not. Perhaps that's why they don't. That and the fact I didn't really read anything about it.


----------



## astrallite

diduknowthat said:


> Wiki says otherwise



According to your quote on wiki, it's 107kbps/channel, which is even worse than the 112kbps I mentioned.

Did you post because you wanted to point out that I was off by 5kbps?

Well thank you for the clarification, sir. I am indebted to you.



PunterCam said:


> Interesting... I'll have to find someone who _really_ knows. S/PDIF will usually transmit 2 channels of 24bit audio at up to 192khz, so if this dolby encoding option can transmit 6 channels at 48k, although admittedly at 16bit (which never seems to make a drastic change in disk space used, therefore surely 24bit can't use up much more bandwidth), why isn't it more widely used in pro audio? If I could bin those bloody optical cable for a couple of XLRs carrying 8 channels, I probably might. Or maybe not. Perhaps that's why they don't. That and the fact I didn't really read anything about it.



CDs have a bandwidth of 705.5kbps/channel, and CD Redbook is constantly lambasted for low fidelity. 107kbps/channel represents 15% the bitrate of CD quality. I can't imagine WHY it would be used in pro audio.


----------



## lunchboxx

My xonar d2 does 192khz/24bits 

So which connection should i go with for best sound quality?
gold plated analog?
digital coax?

The z5500 says it can do 96/24 and i use the "DTS interactive" spdif output on my sound card.


----------



## PunterCam

So proper 5.1 can't be transmitted down coax. Glad we got back there eventually. Or more to the point, glad I read the thread eventually. Actually, I'm not even glad.

Whoever's asking, just use the analogue outs if you want something resembling 5.1. Or just sell it and go to the pub.


----------



## astrallite

Asus HDAV 1.3 sound card running through a receiver would be the optimal setup.

HDMI can pass through 37MBps of audio through 8 channels, or 4.6MBps/channel. This represents over 6.5 times the fidelity of CD redbook. It's also much less susceptible to EMI compared to typical analog outs.


----------



## lunchboxx

PunterCam said:


> So proper 5.1 can't be transmitted down coax. Glad we got back there eventually. Or more to the point, glad I read the thread eventually. Actually, I'm not even glad.
> 
> Whoever's asking, just use the analogue outs if you want something resembling 5.1. Or just sell it and go to the pub.



DTS digital does 5.1 just fine. So i figure the Digital Coax is what will get me the best sound then?


----------



## astrallite

This thread is devolving into pure comedy.


----------



## lunchboxx

yeah that HDAV card is exactly what i need...


----------



## Zatharus

astrallite said:


> This thread is devolving into pure comedy.



Oddly enough, yes.




PunterCam said:


> Interesting... I'll have to find someone who _really_ knows. S/PDIF will usually transmit 2 channels of 24bit audio at up to 192khz, so if this dolby encoding option can transmit 6 channels at 48k, although admittedly at 16bit (which never seems to make a drastic change in disk space used, therefore surely 24bit can't use up much more bandwidth), why isn't it more widely used in pro audio? If I could bin those bloody optical cable for a couple of XLRs carrying 8 channels, I probably might. Or maybe not. Perhaps that's why they don't. That and the fact I didn't really read anything about it.



S/PDIF is just a digital audio transport specification.  It can be used for many different audio streams.  S/PDIF can carry uncompressed PCM audio at high bit and sample rates, such as 24bit/192KHz.  It can also carry a multitude of compressed, multichannel audio configurations such as:
 - Dolby Digital - Standard 5.1 surround.  Typically at a lower bitrate (more compressed) than DTS.
 - Dolby Digital Plus - This is extension of Dolby Digital supporting 7.1-channel  surround sound.
 - Dolby TrueHD - A lossless codec supporting up to 8 channels (7.1 surround) at high bit and sample rates.
 - DTS - Higher bitrate 5.1 codec.
 - DTS-HD - This is an extension of DTS supporting 7.1-channel surround  sound.
 - DTS-HD Master Audio - A lossles codec supporting up to 8 channels (7.1 surround) at high bit and sample rates.

Edit: And...if you are familiar with the old ADAT Optical spec, that handles 8 channels PCM 16/48k audio on a single connection.


----------



## astrallite

You are confusing s/pdif with digital audio in general.

s/pdif does not fulfill the spec to pass HD audio.


----------



## PunterCam

astrallite said:


> This thread is devolving into pure comedy.



evolving dear sir, evolving.


----------



## lunchboxx

astrallite said:


> You are confusing s/pdif with digital audio in general.
> 
> s/pdif does not fulfill the spec to pass HD audio.




I'm using digital coax on my sound card, which says "spdif output: DTS interactive", and runs to my z5500 which says onscreen "DTS digital"

I don't need "4.6MBps/channel HD audio", i just wanted to know which connection would be best for sound quality with what i currently have.


----------



## astrallite

lunchboxx said:


> I'm using digital coax on my sound card, which says "spdif output: DTS interactive", and runs to my z5500 which says onscreen "DTS digital"
> 
> I don't need "4.6MBps/channel HD audio", i just wanted to know which connection would be best for sound quality with what i currently have.



I was talking to someone else.

LOL comedy continues.


----------



## Zatharus

astrallite said:


> You are confusing s/pdif with digital audio in general.
> 
> s/pdif does not fulfill the spec to pass HD audio.



Do you actually know what S/PDIF is?  

It is a digital audio transport specification - which I did mention.  It can handle _*ALL*_ the bitstreams I mentioned in my prior post.  And yes, if you notice, those do include what is commonly considered "HD" audio formats, both compressed and uncompressed. 


Lunchboxx: As has been mentioned several times, you have a great audio card that can produce fabulous sound quality in both digital and analog formats.  Since you are already using the DTS connect setup, you may not notice any difference switching to analog.  Give it a try, though, the analog outputs will not be compressed - as the digital DTS output is.  You may like it better.


----------



## astrallite

Zatharus said:


> Do you actually know what S/PDIF is?
> 
> It is a digital audio transport specification - which I did mention.  It can handle _*ALL*_ the bitstreams I mentioned in my prior post.  And yes, if you notice, those do include what is commonly considered "HD" audio formats, both compressed and uncompressed.




From wiki:

s/pdif: Sony Philips Digital Interface

A common use for the S/PDIF interface is to carry compressed digital audio as defined by the standard IEC 61937. This mode is used to connect the output of a DVD player to a home theater receiver that supports Dolby Digital or DTS surround sound. Another common use is to carry uncompressed digital audio from a CD player to a receiver. This specification also allows for the coupling of personal computer digital sound (if equipped) via optical or coax to Dolby or DTS capable receivers. This only supports stereo sound, unless the personal computer supports Dolby Digital Live or DTS Connect

Audio Signal: Digital audio bitstream. Originally limited to 48 kHz at 20 bits. Extended to support all modern formats, except Dolby Digital Plus, TrueHD, and DTS HD audio streams.

*Cool Story Bro*

P.S. By the way, HDCP is Sony's baby. They exclusively pushed the new standard onto the hdmi format. s/pdif is not a protected audio path which is why they explicitly never allowed development of HD capability (no commercial s/pdif transmitters/receivers meet the spec of HD audio anyway). You also realize Sony is the pioneer of S/PDIF? Thanks for playing.


----------



## Zatharus

Ha ha ha - you, sir, are correct about the HD encoded (and copy protected) formats, my bad. Those options should not have been in that prior list.  I was wrong.  Eh, it happens to us humans.

S/PDIF does carry high resolution stereo PCM and lossy surround audio, though - which some people also consider high definition.  Agreeably so, the lossy surround formats are not as good as the newer lossless "HD" surround formats (DTS-HD Master Audio and Dolby TrueHD).  I understand now that you were only referring to these encoding options as HD and not options based on high bit and sample rates.

Sorry for the confusion everyone!:good:


Edit: And, sorry about the rhetorical from my prior post.  That was rather out of character.


----------



## dark666apoc

all you need to do is a little know how of subs and enclosures 
remove the plate amp already installed on the z5500 

buy yourself some MDF form home depot lowes w/e
a good quality sub with an rms power of about 150  
and a large area for a sub to be placed in your home just one of my subs is 6 cubic feet 

if you need any help with finding what you'd want pm me and ill help you get what you need


----------

