hey everybody,
 
first of all sorry for the long entry, but I want to be very clear and specific, so already thanks for your time :)
 
as I plan to buy a new laptop for making music, I have a few questions concerning soundcards (and I'm not speaking of audio interfaces, as those two seem to be treated as one and the same thing).
 
So to begin with, I'm not even sure what the main purpose of a soundcard is? Is it only there to "transfer" the sound from the computer to an output device (like speakers or headphones) or is it also involved in other things?
 
What i mean is: if I have my preferences in Sonar turned to 192khz and 24bit but I know that my soundcard cannot support such high standards, does it only affect the quality of what I will hear through my speakers or will it also diminish the quality of the audio tracks in Sonar AND the sound quality of the files that I render from Sonar (e.g. to wave or flac)?
 
Because I have read somewhere that the soundcard is to audio, what the display/monitor is to visuals and the quality specifics of audio tracks inside sonar and rendered sound files (192/24, 48/16 etc) depends SOLELY on the computational power of your cpu or what have you.
 
That would mean you could "cut off" the access to your soundcard from Sonar and you could still render a project to a 192/24 wave file, right?
 
Another thing is: I have a ****ty INTERNAL soundcard (are they call onboard?) inside my laptop. If I now connect an external soundcard (a DAC = Digital-to-audio-converter) to my laptop via USB, will all the sound be outputted through the external soundcard only?
 
 
 
So to sum up what I would like to know: are soundcards/DACs involved AT ALL in the processing of sound or is their only purpose to transfer the digital audio information (0s and 1s) to the speakers or headphones.
 
 
Thanks again everyone!

the soundcard is the most important part of the entire chain.
 
whether it's a pci card, a usb or firewire interface, whatever,
THIS is what defines the quality of your capture.
 
without quality convertors,
the discussion of whether or not to use higher bit depths and sample rates is kinda MOOT

thx for the reply
 
alright. but you are simply saying this now, you're not answering my questions. I have heard so many different things about this subject now that I am looking for the details.

the web is full of details.
if i were you,
i would focus on the current state of the art differences between computer sound cards and usb/firewire/thunderbolt interfaces first...
 
then i would study about the differences between quality of converters at certain price breakouts.....
 
if you are serious about audio,
these things i mention are only the most basic issues at hand.
 
don't re-invent the wheel.
 
just study current setups of pros and amateurs, and figure out why they are using what they are using.
 
shortest distance between two points, that kind of thing.

 I have read somewhere that the soundcard is to audio, what the display/monitor is to visuals ...

Be very careful when convolving audio and video analogies, as they are surprisingly different realms and the source of much confusion and internet mythology.
 
If you are intending to record and playback at 192 KHz, then you're right - the audio interface must support that sample rate. Although a project can be exported (saved to a file) at any sample rate regardless of whether the audio hardware supports it, there is no benefit to doing so. For example, if you record tracks at 44.1 KHz and subsequently export the project at 96 KHz, there is no increase in fidelity. It is not possible to improve upon audio quality once it's recorded (but you definitely can make it worse).
 
The audio interface consists of two separate circuits: an ADC for converting incoming audio to digital data, and a DAC for converting it back to audio for monitoring. You are correct in assuming the DAC has no role in creating digital audio files. Its sole purpose is to let you hear what you're doing. Many hobbyists create instrumental music using only virtual instruments, and those folks could be wasting their money on a high-end audio interface. They will still need some decent speakers, but the built-in audio hardware (usually referred to as "integrated audio") will serve the basic purpose. 
 
(I should have said that an audio interface often provides three distinct functions, not just the two described above. The third function is to serve as a MIDI interface. Not everybody needs that function, either. You can bring in MIDI via USB, for example, which requires no special hardware beyond a standard USB port. Personally, classic MIDI over 5-pin DIN is important to me, so I require an interface with those connections. It's just not important to everyone.)
 
No, it is not necessary to route ALL sound to your external USB-connected interface. Some elect to continue using their integrated audio for Windows sounds and video games and Skype sessions, and only use the external device for music. Personally, I disable the onboard hardware and use the external interface for everything. That can avoid some conflicts, but it is by no means obligatory. And video game audio is awesome over full-range speakers!

Your questions are pretty large to address easily by forum discussion. Some responses above refer to "capturing", where getting high quality recordings is the main focus. Of course that discussion needs to go on to include quality of microphones and preamps, as well as the digitizing (ADC) circuit of a sound card. By the way, the term audio interface is a more generic term that includes literally circuit boards ("sound cards"), onboard built-in PC audio, as well as externally housed equipment that attaches e.g. by USB or Firewire.
 
The other side of audio interfaces is the output section, DAC, the translation of digital to analog, which seems to me the focus of your questions. The output phase determines how faithfully you are hearing the inherent quality of the digital audio. It does not directly determine the final quality of your mp3s, CDs, or sound tracks, because normally your final output is created entirely digitally without the use of your sound card. On the other hand, when you are creating your music, you need to hear a faithful reproduction in order to evaluate the quality of your digital creation. Although the audio interface DAC is part of that, there is also the influence of your amp and speakers and the listening room. For example, an overhyped bass in your speakers or a room resonance might lead to weak bass in your tracks because you are not hearing it accurately, and vice versa.
 
When you have more than one audio interface (say the onboard s***y circuitry plus a better external USB-connected interface), you choose within Sonar which one to use at any time. Some people even prefer to let Windows send its sounds to the lesser quality audio using cheap computer speakers, while dedicating the better interface and good speakers to their DAW.
 
Maybe this will help you drill down to the most important issues for you. I'm not addressing the issue of 192KHz because that opens another can of worms.

thanks a lot,you have answered some of my questions but I guess I am not very good at phrasing, so let me try once more please. and sorry for being so repetitive but I am really close to finally getting what I wanted to know for 6 months or so :)
 
 
What I really want to know is this:
 
in Sonar (or any DAW) IF I have the preferences set to e.g. 192khz and 24bit EVEN THOUGH ALL I have is an internal soundcard (of which I know it can only support 48khz - let's just suppose it is so), would it stil be possible to CREATE sounds in 192khz quality with VSTs (that's what I forgot to mention, because I know of course that when recording via microphone the quality depends on the microphone and interface etc. that you record with) or would they be automatically downsampled to 48khz because that's the best the soundcard can do.
 
If I understood it correctly, the soundcard has nothing to do with creating digital sounds to begin with and therefore it would also have no affect when rendering the VST-created tracks to a 192/96khz wave file.
 
So I would be able to CREATE "192khz-sound" and also RENDER it in 192khz quality BUT because of the bad soundcard I would always HEAR a worse interpretation/output of the actual higher quality sound.
 
Is that correct?

Some complications regarding rendering in 192KHz:
-- there is no way to build a 192K project without a 192K sound card (and obviously no quality to be gained by creating a 192K final render from a 44 or 48K project).
-- there isn't much of a consumer-level market for final-rendering in 192KHz. Where would someone play it? Maybe downsample to 44.1 or 48K and hope that's better quality than creating a 44.1 or 48K project?
-- it has been found that some plugins and synths render better sound at higher sample rates even when final delivery is at 44.1 or 48K. Sonar has built-in functionality for upsampling to double the project rate (or up to 384K) and then downsampling back to the project sample rate as audio passes through selected plugins, even when the sound card and project are at 44 or 48. Read this for example. For many people, for some plugins, this provides the one useful benefit of 96K or above.
-- as to whether a project in 192K is better quality than 44.1 or 48k, there are opinions ... Perhaps, study those opinions to decide whether you think it's worth having a 192K audio interface. My guess is that plugin upsampling will do whatever you need.

If I understood it correctly, the soundcard has nothing to do with creating digital sounds to begin with and therefore it would also have no affect when rendering the VST-created tracks to a 192/96khz wave file.

 
That is true
 
The sound card has no bearing on the quality of the "bounce" or mixdown or export from the DAW.  That is entirely an internal process with the "audio engine". Though with 48kHz limits on the hardware, it may make it impossible to even work in a 192kHz session because sample rate matching is required for audio playback to function. 
 
But you could be using a $30 soundblaster or a $3000 interface and achieve the same results as far as the export is concerned.  The soundcard or "interface" is simply an capture and playback device. 

But you could be using a $30 soundblaster or a $3000 interface and achieve the same results as far as the export is concerned.  The soundcard or "interface" is simply an capture and playback device. 
 
I'm not exactly sure this is true. I believe the quality of the audio drivers has a huge impact on the stability of your audio system overall. I think this is the heart of the OP question, He is wondering if one laptop would be better than another based on the on board sound chip quality I think.?
All I know is it's certainly a PITA to try and use a laptops on board to get any serious work done in Sonar. SOlution will always be an external interface (or buy a Mac. :)   
 
I use 44.1 because it keeps life simple , always works and I will never hear the differance , If I up my rate I'll not go higher than 48. I've read hundereds of articles and there seems to be no real sold reason to go further being that most people will be listening on sub par systems anyways.