Re: Sound card question
I actually ordered a Lexicon Omega for my son on e-Bay 2 weeks ago (still
waiting for delivery ... ;) ) ... however, it is a little overkill for my use
... but thank you anyway for your input ...
>n Sep 30 15, rlharris@oplink.net :
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:36:15 -0500
> From: rlharris@oplink.net
> Subject: Re: Sound card question
> User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.5.2 [SVN]
> X-Loop: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
> On Wed, September 30, 2015 8:55 am, Danny wrote:
> > What I would like to know is if it would be possible to send audio that
> > goes to the headphones to the Line-Out jack at the same time?
>
> I would be surprised that the case is otherwise. I always install
> "pavucontrol" (pulse audio volume control), which may be all you need.
>
> But "jack" can provide any signal routing you need.
>
> A few years back I began using a USB interface for sound on everything.
> This approach allows me to switch the entire sound apparatus from one
> machine to another with only a single USB cable, so long as the machine
> has a USB port and pavucontrol is installed. And I no longer have to
> worry about the idiosyncrasies of all various on-board sound systems.
>
> One advantage of the USB interface approach to sound is the ability to use
> professional (that is, balanced) apparatus, which, by design, eliminates
> hum and buzz. You might find balanced gear advantageous when
> radio-frequency interference (RFI) is a consideration.
>
> Entertainment and broadcast supply houses (bswusa.com, fullcompass.com,
> markertek.com, bandh.com) stock a variety of economical USB interfaces.
>
> For many in the audio business (podcasting, performance, and audio mixing
> and editing), USB sound has obsoleted bus-based sound cards.
>
> The Lexicon Alpha at less than fifty dollars is versatile and reliable,
> and is powered from the USB bus. The Lexicon design (Alpha and Omega)
> uses the mixer paradigm, and can accommodate a mix of balanced and
> unbalanced inputs and outputs.
>
> RLH
>
Reply to: