Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Jump to content

Hd500 Or Ux2 As Recording Interface?


Recommended Posts

I'm thinking of downsizing my pedals (sort of) and going from the HD500 to an M9.


I don't really use a lot of the HD500 functions (no amp/cab sims) and I also have a stompbox based board with it. So I think the M9 would suit me better.  Tough decision though because I love the HD500 and had it since its release.  I use a few effects and really as a big headphone amp.


I would like to start recording soon.  Haven't tried it yet.


So my question:


Do you think I would be better off with an M9 (with my other pedalboard) + UX2 for recording and headphone play or just keep the HD500?



I've been watching the used market for awhile now and I get close to an even trade (but possibly a little cash added on my end).


What you think?



Link to comment
Share on other sites

True the value of the HD500 has gone up slightly. Testament to something that your not using by the looks of it.

The question is, how much for a ux2 and an M9 as what your essentially saying is that is all the HD500 is to you now, so financially 

would you be on top to sell the 500 and get the others for recording?


I would say if you plan on upgrading from the HD500 for an interface for recording it would be worth while. The UX2 while usable and cheap; is cheap in the pre amp dept. Noisy compared to Pro Audio Interfaces which some "mid weight, bang for buck" start at around the price of a HD500


You can get all the FX you want in software and might not need an M9.

If you are performing live and use some of the FX in the 500, the connectability, the foot switch and controller, I'd keep it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you get more experienced with recording you may want to start recording the 'dry' (unprocessed) signal from your guitar and use software based FX (like VST plugins such as Pod Farm) to process the recorded dry signal. This allows much flexibility in adjusting tonality as your song progresses, without having to re-record the guitar part. For this purpose the UX2 may be a better choice because it supports direct recording of the dry signal; the HD500 does not.


I think in your circumstances you would be better to sell the HD500 and use the M9 + your other pedal board for live play, and UX2 (or better) as your audio interface for recording.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually you can record the s/pdif out wet or dry on the 500. So it can do a Direct Out via the s/pdif.

True - thanks for the clarification.


To do this you need a separate audio interface that supports s/pdif input. You can't record dry direct with the HD500 and its USB connection as the audio interface. I was answering in the context of a recording novice inquiring about using the HD500 vs. the UX2 as the audio interface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...