Roland V4 EX Video Mixer

Forum Pro Video & Broadcast
1

Video Enthusiasts,

I had some severe frustrating moments with my Edirol V4 and attempts to glitch ending up with blue screen experience.

For people looking for glitchproof video mixers: Roland V4 EX!

This works REALLY great! In some rare case blue screen with Structure being glitched by CBV01 alone in extreme settings.

No bluescreen at all in with CBV01 and 02 in combination - even in the hardest settings.
Upscaling via HDMI works flawlessly.

This mixer seems to be the master of all traits (analog and HDMI, great TBC, cool feedback FX, preview screen, super built quality and a small form factor):heart:

Why do only so few people are using this device compared to the V4 (price)?
You can find some Roland commercials on the internet, but that’s basically it.

Any ideas or reasons why to keep the V4?

Cheers

flo!

IMG_0417
IMG_04173794×2846 2.91 MB

IMG_0419
IMG_04194032×3024 2.93 MB

2 Likes
2

I would keep the v4 for it’s feedback capabilities. Maybe place a glitch device (like one of the Syntonie modules) in the signal path. Then you could output the V4 into the V4EX. Lots of territory that you can cover there. Maybe you’ll find a few looks that you like.

2 Likes
3

I have both V4 and V4EX.
I think V4EX has higher video quality than V4, and it’s convenient to have HDMI input/output and component output.
But V4EX does not accept 240P video from old machines…
V4 handles 240P video from old machines like NES and Amiga without any problems. :blush:

4 Likes
4

i think when they made them GLITCH was not known as an effect and they tryed to make a device that didnt glitch

5

Certainly the folks at edirol wanted to sell a product that reproduces video signals as clear as possible, however I’m convinced that the designers of the V4 must have had internal feedback in mind.

1 Like
6

I’ve been on the fence about buying a V4-EX, as it’s way, way more expensive than anything else I’m using, but you may have convinced me.

I’m getting tired of the limitations of my MX-1, and I want a more HDMI-friendly set up.

I do a lot of glitch and use the CBV001 and CBV002 quite a bit. So the fact that it has both a strong enough TBC for the glitch and all that HDMI i/o is really compelling.

1 Like
7

With CB001 and 002 it works well.

Nevertheless: I encountered blue screens driving really hard glitches on my MEZKALIN gear.

I did not regret buying the V4EX as I got it for a fair price and as HDMI integration and upscaling is really a nobrainer.

8

i have added this to the mix, the roland v1-HD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzyGCJeoNLo

9

What difference in effects does it have over the og V4? What difference is there in the quality of feedback?

10

I can’t speak to the V4 effects comparison, but I got a VGA to component cable (component when outputting interlaced) to feed the signal back into Visual Cortex (my encoder/decoder). I’ve only tried it once so far (life interrupting video synth fun), but I’d describe the feedback as kinda pixellated since the internal processing is at 480 for NTSC. I want to do more with it before deciding whether or not I like it!

11

I don’t have the EX but I do have the V8 and they share a lot of the same effects. There are a few additional effects over the basic V4 that I find useful. The built-in afterimage and feedback effects are okay but I much prefer real feedback. The Shake effect is my favourite, it displaces the whole screen around in a few patterns with adjustable speed, which can be slowed to zero, at which point the whole screen is slightly displaced, allowing for cool mixer feedback effects in any direction you lock the displacement at.