Ok, so here’s my review of the ADI-2 DAC fs. I’m not a pro reviewer or wordsmith like you guys, so… bear with me.
First off, the audio chain. I am comparing the ADI-2 DAC fs (henceforth called 2DAC) against the Bifrost 2 DAC from Schiit (henceforth called BF2). The ADI-2 was set to 2V output on the line out - to match the BF2 output - via the following settings:
- Volume Lock = On
- Volume = +1.0 dB
- Auto Ref Level = Off
- Ref Level = +7 dBu
- All other settings = OFF (De-Emphasis, Dual EQ, M/S-Proc, etc.)
- DA Filter = Slow (Adjusted later to compare.)
Both DACs connected to my Windows 10 PC via Wireworld Ultraviolet USB A to B cables. Both DACs were connected to my Eddie Current Zana Deux Super via identical AQ Evergreen RCA cables.
Software used was Roon pulling songs from Qobuz. Both devices configured to use WASAPI (exclusive mode), were then grouped into the same zone, and were output the same signal simultaneously. Comparisons were then made simply by switching between input 1 and 2 on the ZDS. No DSP was used in the DAC2 or BF2 in Roon, and the PEQ was disabled on the DAC2.
Confirmed both were at the same level using janky smartphone app.
Headphones used: HD650
Test tracks used:
https://open.qobuz.com/playlist/2568985
https://open.qobuz.com/playlist/2568980
Review:
I’ve compared a few DACs during my time in this hobby. I started collecting audio gear and listening to home stuff seriously around 1998. My first “serious” headphone purchase was a Headroom mini DAC and amp paired to the HD650 in 2003. Anyway, enough about me.
I’ve found that most DACs can sound alike, but there are quite a few that really stand out and disprove that “they all sound the same” mentality rampant on reddit. For example, the differences between the Schiit Gungnir A2 and a Yggdrisil A2 are just blatantly obvious. At the very basic differences, the Gumby is much more “neutral” and in some places borderline sharp, and the Yggy leans to a more “warm” tone with a noticeable improvement in staging and slightly better resolution. This isn’t something you need a blind ABx system to hear.
In my comparison of the 2DAC and BF2, the differences were less obvious, but still discernable in direct comparison.
Overall, the BF2 seems to convey a more dynamic and holographic presence to the music. Mids have more texture to them. The entire bass and mid range seems to pop out of the track in a fluid and coherent way. Decay and resolution were easier to hear. Stage depth seems closer (more in your head than out in front of you), but the width is wider. Cymbals and your other typical upper treble percussion has more bite and attack. Detail retrieval is better. I listened to my entire Test Tracks playlist switching between the two from time to time.
Something Good Coming by Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers - The subtle cymbal hits in the background are more apparent on the BF2, and they seem to sustain a little longer before you can’t hear them any more. Tom Petty’s voice has a little more texture to it when he sings, like when he prolongs the Ssss sound in the words Most, Kids, Chance, etc. Guitars seem a touch more present as well.
Tin Pan Alley by Stevie Ray Vaughan -
The BF2 renders subtle detail better, like fingers moving up and down the fretboard, the hum of Stevie’s Marshall stack. Pick attacks on strings are sharper. The bass guitar seems more up front in the track. This track is one of my favorites, and I’ve heard it a million times. I really think this track is as good as your system lets it be.
Miss Ida B by Buddy Guy - The BF2 gives immediate and sharper impacts to the snare hits at the beginning of the song. This is one song where the differences between DACs were much more obvious. Buddy’s voice holds more weight.
Billie Jean by Michael Jackson - Again with the cymbals. At the start of the song, on the BF2 they are crisper, more defined. This entire album is just so well mastered you can hear everything so well. The Bf2’s vivid rendering of this song is fantastic, but might actually approach shouty on bright headphones.
ADI-2 DAC -
The 2DAC takes a more even-handed philosophy to it’s presentation. It seems to me that it isn’t trying to present anything with any emphasis, which by comparison to the BF2 made it sound like it was holding things back instead of truly being more “neutral”. Honestly, my over all thought is that it was just a little more dry and a bit less resolving.
With that said, it did do a few things better. Instrument placement was a little more accurate and defined. Stage depth was a little better than the BF2, as things seemed to be just in front my my eyeballs instead of behind them. I tried switching filters several times, and settled on the SD-Sharp as being the most “musical” while the “slow” filter seeming the most… digital. NOS was not my cup of tea, as it seemed smudgey.
(That’s a new word now. Smudgey. It’s mine, but you can use it. For example, to use it in a sentence: “The guitar notes were blurry, akin to a pencil mark smeared across paper, and presented a less refined and smudgey sound.” You’re welcome, audiophile world, for my awesome contribution to your vocabulary.)
Despite all of my remarks favoring the BF2, I would NOT call the 2DAC boring, flat, or uninteresting. It hangs with the BF2 as a very good sounding DAC. I believe that in it’s basic performance it just does not bring out the last 10% of sound quality the BF2 can. Here is the game changer though…
Where the BF2 is extremely WYSIWYG, the 2DAC has so many features you can configure it will make your head spin. I’m not going to list them all. Go RTFM if you’re curious. 
Considering it almost BEGS you to connect studio monitors to it, use it as a fully configurable pre AND headphone AIO box, with a seriously capable parametric EQ… It really brings quite a strong value to the table if you need something that is more than just a DAC.
The 2DAC’s headphone amp is good, but kind of plain Jane sounding. Again, I think RME is playing it safe here, and keeping true to their professional audio roots by trying to keep things like distortion and emphasis out of the picture. It sounds clean and has a good amount of power. It has a dedicated IEM jack, although I didn’t use it. I think it would suit as a perfectly capable amp for a great many people, especially given the PEQ the DAC section has.
Another thing to note are the little creature comforts that you rarely - if ever - find on other products. For example, if you plug your headphones into the DAC2, it mutes the line outs BUT it also brings the headphone volume up slowly so you don’t blow your ears out. This is a very nice thing to have.
So… I’ll wrap this up now. RME ADI-2 DAC fs… should you buy it?
How the hell should I know? I’m not psychic.
My opinion is that if you simply need a DAC, then… well… no. There are better sounding DACs at the $1100-ish price point, and a few slightly better sounding ones for less.
However, if you need something that is broadly capable of doing many things in your chain, then this thing is a little gem. Mine is connected to my nearfield monitors, and it’s already proven to be a blessing for configuring how hot the line out is, getting rid of a few dips and peaks in the frequency response, and helping to adjust bass bloat from the left speaker with rear bass ports that is stuck 6" away from the corner of the room.
Thanks for reading. Please enjoy a terrible smartphone picture:
