Jump to content

rmoore

Members
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About rmoore

  • Rank
    Just Startin'

Profile Information

  • Registered Products
    1
  1. I have a software company that produces small business software. We need to record a series of tutorial videos for the software and our main requirement is that the video creation pipeline is as short as possible. What I want to avoid is recording a Mic source straight into the video capture software, and then having to go through and post process it and tweak it. The aim is to have the mic EQ'd, Compressed, De-essed etc... before it reaches the video capture software so that it can be used as-is in order to reduce the amount of editing that needs to be done. I have this working at the moment with the TonePort GX and Roland UA-FX4, but am looking to upgrade the Toneport as it's a bit basic.
  2. Presumably though I could use the UX2 into the DAW using ASIO, route the output of the DAW to an analogue output on the UX2, and then physically patch the UX2 output into the Roland. The Roland would just use Windows drivers and appear as an input to my video capture software. I reckon that ought to work. What is the PAD input? I've heard people mention it with respect to clipping on guitar signals. I would also want to connect a guitar to the UX2 as part of another project, would the PAD input help with that to reduce guitar clipping? Thanks
  3. Thanks guys. It's a slightly tricksy setup I need in that I want to do realtime processing of the mic signal straight into my video capture software. So that means I need all the audio channels to be separate devices (by devices I mean separate software devices - they appear in Windows device manager as separate sound devices). At the moment I use the following setup: Condenser mic -> Roland UA-4FX INPUT -> USB -> FL Studio DAW -> Roland UA-4FX OUTPUT -> Physical Patch Cable -> Line 6 TonePort GX INPUT -> Screen Capture Software using TonePort GX as its sound source. So if the UX appears as a single device and gets "hogged" by the DAW I don't think my scenario will work. At least not using a single bit of kit, I'd probably need the UX as an input device, and route its output to another physically separate audio device such as the Roland UA-4FX. If I get a UX, does the UX2 offer any advantages over the UX1 in terms of sound quality?
  4. Hi there, I'm thinking of buying a POD Studio UX2. In Windows, does it show as separate devices for each input / output? What I want to achieve is to have a Microphone into channel A, this will be fed into my DAW for EQ & Compression. I'd then route the processed output from my DAW to be the output of channel A, I'd patch Channel A out with a cable to Channel B in on the UX2. And I'd like to have the output of channel B as the sound source for a video capture application. The main thing I need is to be able to have each channel available as a separate device in Windows so I can do the routing I need. i.e. my DAW will grab channel A, my video capture application will grab channel B. Thanks - Rich
×