Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME) (Read 9602 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Hello,

I'm looking for some technical info about Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME). The reason is I use Sony Sound Forge and in the audio devices list I'm offered several choices:

- Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME).
- Direct Sound Surround Mapper.
- Windows Classic Wave driver.
(- ASIO4ALL which I've recently installed to test.)

On several forums I read that it was best avoiding MME because it resamples sound going through it and because it is limited to 16bit/48kHz. However I have been unable to find technical specifications about MME online . I found information describing MME as being simply an interface telling the software (Sound Forge in my case) which audio driver to use (in my case the driver of my Creative SoundBlaster soundcard). But no info regarding resampling or bit depth / sample rate limitations.

So far I was using MME because it is the default choice in Sound Forge. I tried getting some info about MME on Microsoft's community forums and from their online tech support but so far to no avail. So I thought that maybe here someone has technical info regarding MME which would help me make an informed choice (the stuff I've read on forums so far is just people repeating stuff they've read or heard somewhere else but no trustworthy source is ever mentionned).

Anyway, I hope someone here can help or point me to a place where I can find the required information.

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #1 –
I guess you don't get a definitive answer because of several things, one being a confusing naming on the soundforge options, and another, the fact that it isn't the same on Windows 3.1, Windows 95, Windows XP or Windows Vista (And now I'm not sure if it has changed again in Win 10).

I've tried to find an image on google about the audio settings, but i couldn't. So if I have to guess from the names you said:

- Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME).
  This used to be the name used to describe the default sound device using the standard MME (MultiMedia Extensions) output mode (which is compatible since Windows 3.0:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_3.0#Windows_3.0_with_Multimedia_Extensions ).
- Direct Sound Surround Mapper.
  This name is strange, because I don't know why it talks about "Surround". Also, the name of the default sound device for Directsound is "primary sound device" (Directsound is compatible since Windows 95 with DirectX installed. IIRC, Windows 98 came already with version 4 installed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectSound ).
- Windows Classic Wave driver.
  Here again we come to a strange naming. The classic wave driver IS the MME.
- ASIO4ALL which I've recently installed to test.
  Now, If it says "ASIO4ALL" and not "ASIO", then it means that it supports the ASIO driver, but directly shows the "soundcard" name.



Now, about the bitdepth and samplerate, It really depends on the operating system used, and in how it got implemented by the application.
Since Windows Vista, MME and Directsound are just wrappers above another system called WASAPI, adding support to their APIs of features that aren't available, to Windows XP and earlier, like sending audio in 32bit float.

So I believe that the answer you search comes directly from what your version of SoundForge is actually doing, having in mind that probably the ASIO interface is the better of those three (but that you might be sufficiently fine with the Directsound one).

Other factors to take care is that the implementation of MME on Vista and 7 had some resampling problems when recording audio if the target samplerate was different than the samplerate set as the system default. There was a patch for windows 7 that fixed it. IIRC Directsound was fine.

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #2 –
A Brief History of Windows Audio APIs

Quote
On several forums I read that it was best avoiding MME because it resamples sound going through it and because it is limited to 16bit/48kHz. However I have been unable to find technical specifications about MME online .
I'm not sure, but think the "specs" are up to the hardware manufacturer.   (The hardware manufacturer is "traditionally" responsible for supplying the driver.)   Of course if you are mixing sounds from different sources (as Windows can do) it all needs a common format so one or more of the sources may have to be resampled to match, as well as matching the hardware.    

The Microsoft protocol defines the way the application talks to the driver.    For example, a printing application talks to a printer driver and the printer driver takes care of any conversion,  So if you are printing an image, the resolution of the image doesn't have to match the resolution of the printer...  You can send a high-resolution image to a low-resolution printer or vice-versa, or you can send a color image to a monochrome printer, etc.

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #3 –
I use Sound Forge on daily basis, but an older version before surround mixing was added. I have seen and used Forge 9 briefly when I had a need to use ASIO input, but my memory of it is a bit rusty.

The classic wave driver most definitely can support 24-bit. Versions of Forge as old as 4.5 had support for 96 kHz, and since version 5, there was an option "try to open as 24 bit" (presumably they always try it in modern versions). They of course used only the basic wave driver then. But the drivers for your particular sound card might be limited. When I had a different sound card (M-Audio 24/96) I found I couldn't record 24-bit, but could using the E-MU 0404 (and promtly reverted to an older, faster version of Sound Forge). Here is a discussion, old but still of some relevance, about certain drivers not supporting specific sample formats requred by Vegas/Forge, and report how it silently falls back to a lower bit depth.

It should be easy to perform a test to see if the precision is indeed 24-bit by playing back a quiet signal with the volume cranked up. The sampling rate is almost certainly converted on the fly to the one supported by the sound card (probably 48k).

I think the DirectSound output is so named to make it clear that it is needed for "surround" playback. Winamp, Xmplay and Reaper do not make any attempt to output more than 2 channels if WaveOut is chosen as output.

Normally I would select the "mapper" virtual device only if had a portable installation of some software and moved it between computers. Otherwise there is little reason not to select the actual sound card by id/name.

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #4 –
Ok, thanks for the replies. I should have given more info about my settings. I will try to correct that.

Note: I may have made a mistake in my original post when I talked about Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME). For me "Microsoft Sound Mapper" and "MME" were the same thing. After reading [JAZ]'s reply I realize I may be wrong. Sound Forge just tells me "Microsoft Sound Mapper" (in French because my OS is in French), that's all, no MME mentionned.

I'm on Vista Home Premium 32bit (with all the latest updates).
The soundcard is a Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio (model: SB 0790 / driver: 5.12.1.2016 (latest available))
Sony Sound Forge Pro 11.0 (Build 272) which is the last version compatible with Vista.

When I open Windows' Volume Mixer I get all the settings offered by my soundcard, so everything looks like it's correctly installed (I never had any audio problem anyway, no lagging, no crakling). For recording it is set to 24/96 because I'm in the process of archiving my old vinyl records. (don't mind the "Microphone" label, Windows labels it that way by default, I forgot to change the name, the soundcard manual calls it "Line In / Mic In"):

http://imgur.com/7ELwMw2

In Sound Forge's preferences here's the list of audio devices offered to me:

http://imgur.com/1NnvopZ

In Audacity btw I get a similar list but with slightly different names (MME / Windows DirectSound / Windows Wasapi). If I select MME my soundcard correctly shows in the recording device.

http://imgur.com/aup8Oxp

The question about MME arose because of the spectrogram of one of my rips:

http://imgur.com/J4LMnuB

It shows some very quiet noise in the upper frequencies, between 43-48kHz. Someone suggested that Sound Mapper could be the cause and so started my quest for information. Since then I've tried Direct Sound and ASIO4ALL and the spectrograms look identical, so I don't think Sound Mapper is the cause.

Ok, I think I've added all the information that was missing from my original post. I don't know if it makes things clearer?

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #6 –
Quote
For recording it is set to 24/96 because I'm in the process of archiving my old vinyl records.
And you don't think 16/44.1 or 16/48 is good enough for your vinyl records?

Unless you've got a terrible soundcard, vinyl surface noise is usually the biggest quality limitation.   And, sometimes distortion, frequency response variations, and  preamp noise...   All stuff on the analog side.  

Quote
It shows some very quiet noise in the upper frequencies, between 43-48kHz.
You can't hear that!

Quote
Someone suggested that Sound Mapper could be the cause...
Noise is an analog problem.   

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #7 –
The spectrum looks fine. If there was upsampling going on, you'd see a cutoff at 22 or 24 with possibly a partial mirror image above it.

I think the device selection is done in the listbox below for each channel. To verify 24-bit recording, record silence and zoom in time to 1:1 ratio (at higher zoom factors Forge may use a peaks file of lower bit depth) and vertically using Shift-UpArrow. In case of 16 bits, you will see a stepped waveform and read 0,256,512 (or close to those sample values) on the Levels toolbar.

Use the device driver kind that is more stable, and least likely to skip/drop out with system under load. I found that Direct Sound was click-prone (despite working perfectly in games), and classic Wave driver or ASIO worked much better.

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #8 –
Quote from: bennetng on
Even ultra expensive audio interfaces like those from Lynx have similar behaviour
http://www.lynxstudio.com/
http://prosound.ixbt.com/interfaces/lynxstudio/e44/24192.shtml
Mmh this is beyond my expertise. Which graph should I be looking at (and how)?

Quote from: DVDdoug on
And you don't think 16/44.1 or 16/48 is good enough for your vinyl records? 
I knew someone would say that, lol. Personnally I think 16/44.1 is already overkill for the type of music I digitize. But Sound Forge's declicking tool is more sensitive at 24/96 and I find that useful. When I'm done cleaning the file I downsample it to 16/44.1 using the iZotope/MBIT plugin in Sound Forge. The 24/96 file is saved on an external hard drive, just in case I may need it one day (doubtful but those records were never reissued on CD and for 98% of them will never be reissued).

Quote from: DVDdoug on
Quote
It shows some very quiet noise in the upper frequencies, between 43-48kHz.
You can't hear that!
I know, that's why I never bothered with it. Until someone mentionned it and got me worried about my settings. Was I really doing 24/96 or was Windows resampling/upsampling behind my back?

Quote from: j7n on
To verify 24-bit recording, record silence and zoom in time to 1:1 ratio (at higher zoom factors Forge may use a peaks file of lower bit depth) and vertically using Shift-UpArrow. In case of 16 bits, you will see a stepped waveform and read 0,256,512 (or close to those sample values) on the Levels toolbar.
I tried to do that but all I get is a flat line. My soundcard is unchanged to 24/96, new file in Sound Forge is also 24/96. I recorded about 10 seconds of silence (didn't start the turntable) then used the shift-uparrow to zoom vertically and in the View menu chose > Zoom Time > 1:1

http://imgur.com/oHVQlMy

Am I doing this correctly?

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #9 –
Quote from: Psychotic Unicorn on
Quote from: bennetng on
Even ultra expensive audio interfaces like those from Lynx have similar behaviour
http://www.lynxstudio.com/
http://prosound.ixbt.com/interfaces/lynxstudio/e44/24192.shtml
Mmh this is beyond my expertise. Which graph should I be looking at (and how)?
So you know there are noise because the color of the spectrum changed at around 43-48khz in Audacity right?

The graphs I posted are just another type of spectrum graph. Look at the Noise level graph and notice the line raised from around 50khz.

Here is another test from another model of X-Fi which is similar to yours. There are more noise at higher frequency as well.
https://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/pila/sound_blaster_x-fi/RMAA/Sound%20Blaster%20X-Fi%20XtremeMusic%2024-96.htm

You can just google terms like delta sigma and noise shaping to learn more about this behaviour.

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #10 –
Quote
I tried to do that but all I get is a flat line.
The input appears muted... I'll let someone else who has this exact version answer. Ignore me.

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #11 –
Quote from: bennetng on
Quote from: Psychotic Unicorn on
Quote from: bennetng on
Even ultra expensive audio interfaces like those from Lynx have similar behaviour
http://www.lynxstudio.com/
http://prosound.ixbt.com/interfaces/lynxstudio/e44/24192.shtml
Mmh this is beyond my expertise. Which graph should I be looking at (and how)?
So you know there are noise because the color of the spectrum changed at around 43-48khz in Audacity right?

The graphs I posted are just another type of spectrum graph. Look at the Noise level graph and notice the line raised from around 50khz.

Here is another test from another model of X-Fi which is similar to yours. There are more noise at higher frequency as well.
https://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/pila/sound_blaster_x-fi/RMAA/Sound%20Blaster%20X-Fi%20XtremeMusic%2024-96.htm

You can just google terms like delta sigma and noise shaping to learn more about this behaviour.
Ok thanks, I think I understand now. I noticed that in the upper frequencies on the graphs the line was rising but I wasn't sure that it was the same thing as what I was seeing on the Audacity spectrogram.

I tried googling audio tests for my soundcard but couldn't find any, it's usually for later models (XtremeMusic was a previous model to mine I think). My computer gear is in need of an upgrade but as long as everything runs fine I'll keep going with it. And I'm broke anyway...

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #12 –
Quote from: j7n on
Quote
I tried to do that but all I get is a flat line.
The input appears muted... I'll let someone else who has this exact version answer. Ignore me.
My bad, I never had to record silence before so I just hit "record" as I usually do . It seems that to record silence you have to "arm" first then click "record". Here's a screenshot of the resulting soundwave: http://i.imgur.com/p9fodWC.jpg I saved it so if you need me to zoom more/less let me know.

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #13 –
Ok, if there are no more replies I suppose I'm good to go. The waveform on the last screenshot looked fine to me, no "steps", so it looks like I'm really recording in 24bit, no resampling is done behind my back.

Thank you all for the time and answers, that was very helpful :)

Re: Microsoft Sound Mapper (MME)

Reply #15 –
Reply #14 – 19 May, 2016, 08:04:26 PM

Quote
Psychotic Unicorn on 15 May, 2016, 04:36:53 AM
Quote
Sound Forge's declicking tool is more sensitive at 24/96
It is? Does anyone know why/how that would be true?

The spectrum of music on a LP tends to be strongly concentrated in the audible range, but tics and pops are often more like impulses that have spectral contents that go well beyond the normal audible range.

A wider transcription bandwidth combined with a wider bandwidth playback systgem provides the opportunity for the differences between music and noise to be greater, and thus noise removal/reduction software may be more effective.

YMMV