blackhawk8863

I couldn't justify spending the money on Helix for those features as a hobbyist. I would rather wait out the implementation of and compare newer communication hardware/protocols such as thunderbolt3 et al to see if they offer low enough latency to just run everything through a DAW with VSTs giving the desired flexibility for a fraction of the cost. I've gotten down to 10.2ms round trip with a DAW/VSTs via USB measured with an oscilloscope, and while that latency with a guitar is borderline acceptable, that much latency significantly throws off vocal performance even when not played simultaneously with a guitar. Perhaps this is useless information... On the FX sends note, is there a way to use it mid-chain without requiring it to be routed back into the returns? Using those without muting the main outputs? ...And I think I'm starting to see where you were going with that... just use the FX sends as outputs for whatever is being processed and since it won't be connected to the returns it won't be routed to the XLR/TRS main outputs, allowing computer audio to be pushed through XLR/TRS main outs without interference from guitar/vocal signals. Is this correct? If I pan hard left and right at the mixer and have the FX sends after the mixer, it should split up the signals as intended. I don't think this would cleanly solve recording a dry input but it's a step in the right direction. I haven't used S/PDIF in years or in depth, so forgive me for the noob question here: is there any latency gained going from the POD to another interface since you are doing the AD conversion on the POD and just pushing data through buffers to the computer via USART+USB/whatever underlying protocol it is based on (I forget)? As opposed to just using the DI out and using the AD on the other device and eliminating some data transfer (S/PDIF)? I'm guessing it's implementation specific, but I don't see an advantage of using S/PDIF aside from getting both channels dry instead of just the dry guitar from the DI out. Thank you for the response.

I am curious as to whether two features that I know exist on the X3 Live also exist on the X3 Pro. I recently picked up a HD Pro X and found that it doesn't appear to have features that I assumed would exist as a result of owning and using these features on an a X3 Live. Can anyone verify that these features exist on a X3 Pro? The first is the ability to select a dry input in my DAW. Do the following inputs also exist on the X3 Pro?: Main Out (Studio/Direct Mix), Tone 1 Only (Wet), Tone 2 Only (Wet), Tone 1 Inputs Dry, and Tone 2 Inputs Dry. Are there any differences in functionality? The second is the ability to control the mix of the XLR outputs and TRS outputs independently: Can I mute or pan these four outputs independently?: XLR Left, XLR Right, TRS Left, TRS Right. This is beneficial when processing wet guitar to TRS Left, processing wet vocals to TRS Right, and using the XLR Left and Right as stereo outputs to play computer audio without any guitar or vocals signal mixed, where all four outputs can be routed to an external mixer and controlled independently. Worthy of note is that I have the pedal in the down position which turns the volume to mute on the XLR outs but allows the TRS outputs to continue outputting audio. Thanks in advance.

I received a HD Pro X today after using an X3 Live for 5+ years, and have been playing around with it for most of the day. While I like what I see and hear thus far in terms of the advances in technology, there are a few key features which existed in the X3 which either no longer exist, or I am having trouble figuring out in the HD Pro X. The first is the ability to select a dry input in my DAW. It appears that the HD Pro only has the ability to select the left and right channel (labeled Input 1 and Input 2) which is the same as the wet mix after all effects. On the X3, I had Main Out (Studio/Direct Mix), Tone 1 Only (Wet), Tone 2 Only (Wet), Tone 1 Inputs Dry, and Tone 2 Inputs Dry. I have found a ton of threads on various forums stating that you have to use the SPDIF outputs routed to another device, which would not be preferable. The second is the ability to control the mix of the XLR outputs and TRS outputs independently: On the X3, I can mute or pan those four outputs independently: XLR Left, XLR Right, TRS Left, TRS Right. This is extremely beneficial when processing wet guitar to TRS Left, processing wet vocals to TRS Right, and using the XLR Left and Right as stereo outputs to play computer audio without any guitar or vocals signal mixed, where all four outputs can be routed to an external mixer and controlled independently. It appears that this flexibility doesn't exist on the HD Pro X? Both of these features are integral to my workflow... and I'm frustrated. Any ideas here?

There appears to be three contacts in each 1/4" jack, including the guitar and phones on the front. I would expect that on the headphones connector since it's stereo, but why would all of the other outputs as well as the guitar input have three contacts?

I just got a HD Pro X in the mail, and I'm looking at all of the 1/4" outputs, which when examined with a flashlight appear to be TRS jacks even though at least two are labeled as "Unablanced Output". Also, I plugged in a TRS cable and hooked up the other end to a multimeter between all combinations of tip, ring, and sleeve to see if any of them complete a circuit when connected, which none of the combinations did. Are all of the 1/4" outputs balanced even though some are labeled as being unbalanced? Thank you