Yes, but you will need to purchase a "Soundblaster Audigy SOFTWARE edition" from the dell support folks. Just ask about it and they can give it to you.
This is the first I have heard that the "Integrated Sound Blaster Audigy Advanced HD Audio" software gives you more recording options than the Sigmatel 92xx. What exactly are the new options? Do you get 'stereo mix' or what they used to call 'whatuhear'?
(By the title of this thread nthang989 seems to indicate that he or she already has the ISBAAHDA.)
No, there is no stereo mix or "what you hear..." but there must be a way to add this to the volume controls. I wonder what would happen if you used the line out to line-in... that would lose quality and is a truly stupid solution. I'll look to see if its there in some hidden option somewhere. Any idea where it is located?
Your problem has been discussed quite a bit on this Board since Dell started using the Sigmatel 92xx chip. The previous chip, the 975x, did have the other options you are looking for, but as you said your 92xx does not. The problem is that the 92xx chip is not set up to be able to internally record its own output. I have never figured out if this is a limitation of the driver or of the chip itself. Your workarounds include:
1. Total Recorder (This tip was supplied by Kalleralle):
This is an additional audio driver that captures audio and allows for recording streaming audio. You can download a demo of it and if it works for you it costs $11.95 to buy. A number of forum members have tried and endorsed it.
2. As Outvit said, connect a cable from the output jack to the input jack, then you can record anything you want.
3. Best solution, get an external usb soundcard. A Soundblaster will have all the regular recording options.
Outvit,
If the limitation is in the driver, there might be a Registry subkey whose value can be edited to enable stereo mix. I have suggested to some others to look for this but so far no one has found anything. My computer has the Sigmatel STAC975x with different registry entries so I cannot personally try to find a solution. This is the general area of the Registry where I would begin the search:
Jimco...I think it flat out isn't a feature of the chip. Dell saved a grand total of 10 cents per sound chip and it's users suffer for years to come because of an insanely short "return it" period. I personally didn't discover this until that had passed by. But all in all it's a good laptop with good battery life, but it seems I would have had this issue regardless of what Dell laptop I purchased.
My personal opinion is that we will see a lot fewer chips that support recording their own output going forward due to pressure from the music industry.
@yirm wrote:
My personal opinion is that we will see a lot fewer chips that support recording their own output going forward due to pressure from the music industry.
Interesting theory though there is no legal basis for this pressure. They are endpoints in PC audio. They aren't responsible for reading the DRMd content nor decoding it. And even though I haven't heard of a legal proceedings taking place (dell filters out the proper words) against PC soundcard manufacturers doesn't mean it hasen't happend, I suppose. I could sue you for breathing and probably win in some courtrooms. But I think in this case it's just pinching pennies.
When you say it is penny pinching you must be assuming that these Sigmatel 92xx chips are cheaper than the chips they are replacing, the Sigmatel 975x chip.
In several ways the 92xx is an upgrade over the 975x. The digital converters are 24 bit versus 18 bit. The signal-to-noise ratio is better. The 92xx supports stereo mics and universal jacks. The 975x supported only mono mics.
On the other hand the 975x had both analog and digital mixers. The 92xx is a 'mixerless' design which is probably why it won't record its own output. The 975x could do so.
Considering the improvements in the specs of the 92xx I wouldn't automatically assume Dell is saving money by using it. They might be or might not, or they might be breaking even.
We have the
Sigmatel STAC 9200... it is really cheap. The one they should include is the STAC 9250, at minimum. This is, afterall, an "entertainment--desktop replacement" laptop. Not just a normal consumer laptop that is meant to be ultra-portable and cheap.
@jimco wrote:
As far as I can tell by comparing the specs, the 9200 & 9250 are the same chip except that the 9200 supports software modems.
Jim
Yah, but the higher model numbers is what I was referring to. We have bottom of the line audio capabilities so Dell could save a few pennies. Look at the other notebook chips like the 9220/21/23 or the 9227/28/29/30. Those should be offered as options for such a high-end notebook computer. There is simply no reason to cut costs so drmatically for such a high-end notebook. True, it isn't an Alienware of a Falcon Northwest $3,000 mobile notebook or $7,000 desktop CPU laptop but it's definetly more deserving of high quality audio without faking the quality with software enhancement such as the "Soundblaster Audigy ADANCED MB (Software)."
Sigmatel isn't a sloppy company. They make good products and the two higher end notebook chips are good ones and are at least as good quality as the original Soundblaster Audigy series of soundcards. It just takes a compan willing to give their customer the a sigmatel that matches the class of product they are buying.
Outvit
2 Intern
•
135 Posts
0
August 12th, 2006 20:00
Jim Coates
4 Operator
•
13.6K Posts
0
August 13th, 2006 10:00
This is the first I have heard that the "Integrated Sound Blaster Audigy Advanced HD Audio" software gives you more recording options than the Sigmatel 92xx. What exactly are the new options? Do you get 'stereo mix' or what they used to call 'whatuhear'?
(By the title of this thread nthang989 seems to indicate that he or she already has the ISBAAHDA.)
Jim
Outvit
2 Intern
•
135 Posts
0
August 13th, 2006 18:00
Jim Coates
4 Operator
•
13.6K Posts
0
August 14th, 2006 01:00
Your problem has been discussed quite a bit on this Board since Dell started using the Sigmatel 92xx chip. The previous chip, the 975x, did have the other options you are looking for, but as you said your 92xx does not. The problem is that the 92xx chip is not set up to be able to internally record its own output. I have never figured out if this is a limitation of the driver or of the chip itself. Your workarounds include:
1. Total Recorder (This tip was supplied by Kalleralle):
Total Recorder
This is an additional audio driver that captures audio and allows for recording streaming audio. You can download a demo of it and if it works for you it costs $11.95 to buy. A number of forum members have tried and endorsed it.
2. As Outvit said, connect a cable from the output jack to the input jack, then you can record anything you want.
3. Best solution, get an external usb soundcard. A Soundblaster will have all the regular recording options.
Outvit,
If the limitation is in the driver, there might be a Registry subkey whose value can be edited to enable stereo mix. I have suggested to some others to look for this but so far no one has found anything. My computer has the Sigmatel STAC975x with different registry entries so I cannot personally try to find a solution. This is the general area of the Registry where I would begin the search:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Class\
{4D36E96C-E325-11CE-BFC1-08002BE10318}\0005\Settings\
Jim
Outvit
2 Intern
•
135 Posts
0
August 14th, 2006 15:00
yirm
5 Posts
0
August 15th, 2006 11:00
Outvit
2 Intern
•
135 Posts
0
August 15th, 2006 14:00
Interesting theory though there is no legal basis for this pressure. They are endpoints in PC audio. They aren't responsible for reading the DRMd content nor decoding it. And even though I haven't heard of a legal proceedings taking place (dell filters out the proper words) against PC soundcard manufacturers doesn't mean it hasen't happend, I suppose. I could sue you for breathing and probably win in some courtrooms. But I think in this case it's just pinching pennies.
Jim Coates
4 Operator
•
13.6K Posts
0
August 15th, 2006 17:00
In several ways the 92xx is an upgrade over the 975x. The digital converters are 24 bit versus 18 bit. The signal-to-noise ratio is better. The 92xx supports stereo mics and universal jacks. The 975x supported only mono mics.
On the other hand the 975x had both analog and digital mixers. The 92xx is a 'mixerless' design which is probably why it won't record its own output. The 975x could do so.
Considering the improvements in the specs of the 92xx I wouldn't automatically assume Dell is saving money by using it. They might be or might not, or they might be breaking even.
Jim
Outvit
2 Intern
•
135 Posts
0
August 15th, 2006 18:00
Jim Coates
4 Operator
•
13.6K Posts
0
August 16th, 2006 11:00
Jim
Outvit
2 Intern
•
135 Posts
0
August 16th, 2006 13:00
Yah, but the higher model numbers is what I was referring to. We have bottom of the line audio capabilities so Dell could save a few pennies. Look at the other notebook chips like the 9220/21/23 or the 9227/28/29/30. Those should be offered as options for such a high-end notebook computer. There is simply no reason to cut costs so drmatically for such a high-end notebook. True, it isn't an Alienware of a Falcon Northwest $3,000 mobile notebook or $7,000 desktop CPU laptop but it's definetly more deserving of high quality audio without faking the quality with software enhancement such as the "Soundblaster Audigy ADANCED MB (Software)."
Sigmatel isn't a sloppy company. They make good products and the two higher end notebook chips are good ones and are at least as good quality as the original Soundblaster Audigy series of soundcards. It just takes a compan willing to give their customer the a sigmatel that matches the class of product they are buying.
Message Edited by Outvit on 08-16-200610:01 AM
Jim Coates
4 Operator
•
13.6K Posts
0
August 24th, 2006 14:00
There is a driver being discussed on this thread that might be what you and others are looking for:
link
It is in the post by dhkang002.
Jim