alternatives to Line 6 UX2 and usb latency by using audio in on a pci sound card?

What are your Record & Playback I/O  buffers set at?  Sometimes they are set at like 64 or 128, try jacking them upto 512 or 1024 and see what that does

You shouldn't be using 2 audio interfaces especially not 2 completely different models. That can give you timing problems. Disconnect the USB connection from the UX2 and connect the analog outputs to the inputs on the Audiophile. You'll need 2 cables with a 1/4" phone plug on one end and an RCA plug on the other (or you can get adapters, but that's not as good.) Here's a good one: http://www.musiciansfriend.com/accessories/hosa-cpr-201-dual-rca-1-4-3.3-cable

If you prefer to use the Audiophile as your main soundcard, you could connect the SPDIF out from the UX2 to the SPDIF input of the 2496.  I once had a similar setup with an Audiophile 192 and my UX2.

But I suspect that the problems that you are experiencing with the UX2 might be due to other things running in the background on your PC, rather than with the UX2 itself.

You definitely do want multiple audio interfaces plugged in and trying to use ASIO drivers.

If the UX2 is not cutting it for you then unplug it and re-insert your M-Audio interface.  Make that the default audio device for your system and try playing something through Windows Media Player once you are using the M-Audio interface, and then post back the results.

IF that works OK, then since your M-Audio does not have any 1/4" jacks for plugging in your guitar, you would need an adapter (Radio Shack sells those for like $3-$5 I believe) to allow you to plug your guitar into your M-Audio interface.  Then you can configure Sonar to use the M-Audio, in ASIO mode - I suggest setting the Sample rate for both Sonar and the interface to 44.1, with a bit-depth of 16 for starters.  Then try to see if you get decent latency and sound quality with no effects on an audio track for your guitar.

Even before you were to go out and pick up an adapter for plugging your guitar in, you could still check the sound quality with Sonar and the M-Audio interface by starting a new project, inserting an audio track, selecting that audio track, importing an MP3 to that track, and simply hitting play.    If everything is cool, you should hear the MP3 playing back with no dropouts or crackles.

Please give the above a shot and post back with the results.

Bob Bone

orth noting that both the Audiophile and the UX2 can work in WDM mode, although the UX2 will lose some of its recording functionality.

The UX2 is a USB 1.1 audio interface.
As such, it uses a large hidden safety buffer (which raises round-trip latency) to help prevent dropouts/glitches.
If you monitor via the on-board hardware DSP, latency is low (like playing thru a POD).
If you try to monitor via software (to play thru 3rd party plugins in realtime), the round-trip latency will be too high. 
If you monitor thru the onboard DSP, you can increase the ASIO buffer size to help prevent dropouts/glitches.


USB-2 audio interfaces (if you choose the right one) offer low round-trip latency on par with the best PCI/e audio interfaces.
RME are excellent for low round-trip latency, as are the new Presonus VSL units, and the MOTU hybrid series.


The Audiophile 2496 offers low round-trip latency (5ms at a 64-sample ASIO buffer size/44.1k)
If the I/O suits your needs, by all means, install/use it.


You can have both the Audiophile and UX2 installed... and switch between them as needed.
I wouldn't try running both simultaneously... as they each run on separate clocks... and will be out of sync.

Im not familiar with X1 Essentials but are both the 2496 and UX2 checked in your Preferences for Devices as being used.  

Try unchecking it all except for the UX2 and see if your dropouts stop. Im kinda thinking along the same lines as Davey and Jim.

Jim Roseberry

Its the terms used and my inexperience. Are you saying when I use the UX2 I can change the way I hear the sound back (monitor it)to reduce the drop-outs I'm getting? Monitor through the UX2's headphone socket and reduce the usb traffic? Apologies, I'm not understanding.

If you monitor via the UX2's onboard DSP (refered to as Tone-port I believe), you'll be able to monitor with the UX2's onboard EFX/processing with minimal latency.  In this scenario, you can increase the ASIO buffer size, and it won't affect monitoring latency.

The Pod Studio UX2 is basically just a USB audio interface which acts as a dongle for enabling Line 6's Pod Farm fx software.


Line 6's "Tone Direct" feature is misleadingly named, due to that their "recording" interfaces like the OP's Pod Studio UX2 do not actually have any onboard DSP fx processing, but rather, all the fx are host-based (performed by software running on the computer) and thus subject to significant latency when monitoring the effected sound even through the ASIO drivers using "Tone Direct".

This is the big downside of the reliance on the Pod Farm s/w for providing the fx, compared to, say, playing guitar through a basic Pod fx unit (one actually having onboard DSP fx) and feeding the Pod's outputs into your audio interface while monitoring it via the Pod's headphone output or your interface's "low latency" input monitoring facility.


Iirc, it should however be possible to monitor the "dry" (non-effected) guitar sound more-or-less directly with the UX2 without noticeable latency (this may need to be set up in the Pod Farm software's monitoring mixer), although then you won't get the "feel" of playing through the fx. Dunno though, might be wrong about that, didn't really spend any more time with those Line 6 budget interfaces once I'd realized all the fx ran on the host PC.

The Pod Studio UX2 is basically just a USB audio interface which acts as a dongle for enabling Line 6's Pod Farm fx software. Line 6's "Tone Direct" feature is misleadingly named, due to that their "recording" interfaces like the OP's Pod Studio UX2 do not actually have any onboard DSP fx processing, but rather, all the fx are host-based (performed by software running on the computer) and thus subject to significant latency when monitoring the effected sound even through the ASIO drivers using "Tone Direct".

The processing IS native based, but the latency is significantly lower using Tone Direct rather than straight ASIO.  
Latency using Tone Direct is no worse than playing thru a hardware POD... but (again) the only EFX/processing you can monitor at lower latency is the "onboard" included stuff from Line-6.
For anything other than Tone-Direct monitoring, the UX2 has huge latency.

  Goddard said:
This is the big downside of the reliance on the Pod Farm s/w for providing the fx, compared to, say, playing guitar through a basic Pod fx unit (one actually having onboard DSP fx) and feeding the Pod's outputs into your audio interface while monitoring it via the Pod's headphone output or your interface's "low latency" input monitoring facility.

This is pretty much my original question. My only reason for having the UX2 is so I can record my guitar playing (in Sonar) using the UX2 (Tone Port)amp sounds.
Am I going to be better off recording my guitar in Sonar using a Pod 2.0 with its on-board amp effects and connecting that to my audiophile sound card?

his is pretty much my original question. My only reason for having the UX2 is so I can record my guitar playing (in Sonar) using the UX2 (Tone Port)amp sounds. Am I going to be better off recording my guitar in Sonar using a Pod 2.0 with its on-board amp effects and connecting that to my audiophile sound card?

In my opinion you can just use the UX2, but don't connect the USB cable and use it as a soundcard. If you prefer the effects in the Pod over the UX2, then go with that, but don't expect to use the Pod as a soundcard, just as an effects box. 

Unfortunately it's not possible to use a UX2 without it being connected via USB.

Ah... I didn't know that. Nevermind. 

pod UX2, Pod Xt and Xt live are all USB1.1. The Pod 3 series is USB 2.0. the best part about those is all the amp models are included. over 96 amp models. These can be found for pretty cheap these days. I believe the HD series is also 2.0. These devices are much faster then the UX2.

The thing I like about X2 is that it comes with a version of TH2 that is really pretty good. It rivals the Pod amps for quality. I use Pod pro 3 which is a rackmount unit that has USB2.0

The other nice thing about having a newer Pod is having access to Pod Farm 2. Much better then Pod Farm 1.

I know it is a matter of switching audio devices when you record your guitar tracks. you may just need to use the 2496 and use the plug in for pod farm. You need to plug in your UX2 to unlock Podfarm so it will work as a plug-in. That is what I did when I had my UX2.

The V-100 is my main interface. I plugged in the UX2 to unlock the software. It was never used to record anything.

Just copy and paste the dll files from the line 6 folder into the default cakewalk vst folder and you should be good to go. Use pod farm as a plugin from within sonar and avoid the ux2 all together.

  Still hoping one of you guys is going to spell out to me if a Pod 2.0 connected to my audiophile card's Analogue In, is likely to bypass the drop-outs and latency I've been having with the UX2 and the usb route.


Bob, I re-installed the audiophile and it plays an .mp3 (sounds fine) both in and outside of Sonar. I tried the same with the UX2, and _now_ there isn't much difference. :-/

Jim Roseberry

I get 5.8ms easily without ever experiencing any dropouts and I find this perfectly acceptable.  How low do you need to go?

One way latency... yes (playback or when playing soft-synths)
It's when you're dealing with round-trip latency that the UX2 is "problematic"... because it has high round-trip latency.  
Only an issue if you're trying to play/monitor in realtime thru any 3rd party EFX/processing (not the included Tone-port)

OK, but what I'm getting at is that I believe that the USB1.1 issue is a red herring here, i.e. the OP's problems with his UX2 do not stem from the fact that it is USB1.1, but are due to something else in his setup.