Sorry, 
 
Newbie here, hope i got the correct forum.
 
I got sonar x2 on two separate laptops running on Xp & Vista.
 
Im having a problem with the recorded audio quality on my laptop which runs on Vista that I recorded from the microphone in Sonar X2 and using the Realtek High Definition Audio. Its worse than than the one running on my xp laptop with Realtek AC'97.
The quality is poor and seems like it has some source of reverb too.
Yes, I turn off all the Enchancetments on my laptop sound options.
 
As for the Realtek AC'97 running on my Xp, its great. No problem here.
 
1.
Isn't the Realtek High Defintion Audio suppose to be Better since its called HIGH Defintion ?
 
2.
How do I go about getting better quality of audio recording in Sonar x2  in my laptop that runs on Vista ?
 
 

I can't hear any difference, everything is marketed as "HD" nowadays.  There is a difference in the control interface.  e.g. on desktops, if you have the HD Audio interface connection you have jack sensing.  With the older AC97 the jack sensing is not there.  Depending on your PC, that is probably the case with the Laptop too. 
 
PC audio systems are traditionally poor for high quality recordings.  They also tend to have high latency.  Your best bet option is to get a separate USB connected recording interface unit.
 
 

Get a real interface if you plan on doing music.  A usb interface as fireberd says is a good way to be able to use both your computers.
 
@

Neither of them are any good. Any factory soundcard, usually the cheapest audio chip they can buy in bulk gets used.
 
The factory sound chips are not good for serious recording of the nature capable with Cakewalk. They tend to use the substandard audio drivers and can not process fast enough for a quality performance.
 
As was suggested, a nice USB based external professional level music interface which uses "native" ASIO drivers will allow Sonar to perform to the levels it is designed to perform. Look at M-Audio, Focusrite, Roland, and Presonus (among many others) to get it done right. Expect to pay between $100 on the very low bare bones end to $300 for a decent interface.
 
Look at what the people here use.... listen to their music, and then buy what you need after you research it a bit so you know what to buy. 
 
BTW: Soundblaster is not an upgrade from Realtek.

Hmmm,
 
I think you, all, misunderstood what I was trying to explain.
Let me try again :D
 
What I was trying to say is that...
 
Isn't the Realtek HD Audio suppose to sound better or at least the same, that runs on my NEWER Laptop with windows Vista ?
Because the Realtek AC'97 which I'm using in my old windows xp laptop sounds GREAT.
 
I rather use my Newer Laptop that runs Vista with the HD card because it has more harddrive space and faster, but unforunately, the audio recording quality is really poor.
 
It can't be my setup coz i have the same setup on my older, slower laptop that runs on windows xp and there, the quality is GREAT!
 
 
BTW: Both laptops are Sony Vaio
 
 

OH Yeah,
 
I also like to add that I also got a Home PC that i builted for video/audio/home recording.
 
I just rather use my laptops coz its convinence and its everywhere i go :D
its like a portable recording studio.
 
 

I think we do understand. What the feedback here might be in summarized fashion is this: the onboard realtek audio chips are not of high quality. With you experiencing inconsistent performance, none of us are surprised. The realtek chips work fine for what they are designed to do, play back audio files. They offer recording options but as you are seeing, they don't always work as advertised. 
 
If you are in a position to get a decent usb interface, then you could use that interface on all three of your computers if you wanted to. For instance, the Focusrite 2i2 for around $150 seems to be one that gets a lot of recommendations. The presonus 22vsl ranks higher on the recommended list by some major pc daw builders. M-audio m-box units can be found on ebay for under 100 right now. ----> I don't have any of these cards, so I would suggest reading user's experience before buying one. Any of these should be a giant step in the direction of better quality vs the realtek. 

There can be differences in the chips used, because one is newer does not make it better.  Its whatever the hardware vendor used and what features the vendor incorporated in their audio system. 
 
The "HD" is basically a marketing ploy, not a real indication of how good it is.
 
But, in the end, a separate USB interface will be needed for "quality" recording.  There are several relatively inexpensive ($150 US range) USB devices with two channels.  That is what you should be seriously considering.

realtek = headache.
 

Hmmm...
 
The issues with the Realtek, and just about any on-board audio device, even PCI card sound gear, is that they are horribly suspect to internal noise generated within a PC. As to Realtek, they use the HD moniker because they are shipping WaveRT drivers, and they allow 192K sampling. They are still 16 bits though. Some of their products have really good specs, DACs with greater than 110db SNR, but the PC environment just kills it.
 
I'd say that Realtek is ok for playback, but I would never recommend using the line-in for recording. If you want to record without purchasing an outboard interface, a decent USB microphone will do the trick.