RME ADI-2 DAC fs - Official Thread

Thank you “C” - this is good to read

Back in the days of my 7.1 setup. … I researched for some well build connections and this one should be decent from what I remember.

With some luck, I find the article/review/comparison I took my decision on.

Now it is on me to hide the cable running thru half of the living room tomorrow morning while my wife is still asleep

3 Likes

Both updated RME ADI-2 units together because … no good reason not to …

Yes, you can configure the remotes to work with a specific type of unit (so the left is configured for the DAC, the right for the Pro).

14 Likes

11 posts were split to a new topic: Bifrost 2 vs. RME ADI-2 DAC fs

A day spent listening with the updated ADI-2 Pro FS R Black Edition (i.e. the updated AKM 4493-based version) …

  • DAC performance is indistinguishable from the recently revised DAC-only model. Which was largely indistinguishable from the prior 4490-based version, outside some specific elements.

  • I felt the headphone output on the new DAC version was a bit better than its predecessor and almost completely did away with the occasional sense of compression (dynamic). The single-ended headphone output mode (PH 3/4) here seems identical to the new DAC model’s output.

  • In BALANCED output mode (requires a special cable, terminating in dual 1/4" TRS jacks, one per channel), the revised Pro FS R BE model here is NOT exhibiting that dynamic compression as far as I can hear. Not audible with the Focal Stellia or Utopia (which were reliable ways to hear it previously), nor with the HEDDphone (with which there is AMPLE power in this mode).

13 Likes

Ok so after a suggestion from @Torq I am now considering on getting an RME unit, but would like to have some opinions on which one, the RME ADI-2 DAC FS or the RME ADI-2 Pro FS?

I mostly will use them connected to a pair of Hedd Type 20 studio monitors with an Auralic Aries mini with SSD as a music source, as for headphones for now i use the Stellia´s, but will at some point get the HEDDphone, and at the moment i use this same setup connected to a Sony tazh1es.

If you’re going to be driving the HEDDphone, while the DAC FS version will do it, there won’t be a lot of headroom with quieter recordings. Worth trying, and if it works for your music and listening you’re done, and if not you can add an amplifier (one of the THX AAA models, a Jotunheim, a Lyr 3 etc.) and still come in around $1,500.

If you have much DSD content, that would also allow you to run the DAC FS in “Direct” (native) DSD mode - which requires an external amplifier for volume control (otherwise the DAC FS will convert DSD input to PCM so it can use its internal volume control and amplification).

The Pro FS, with a custom balanced cable, has ample power for the HEDDphone without need for an additional amplifier (though the above caveats apply for DSD replay). However, this is a +$2,000 unit, requiring a custom cable, that has a bunch of features you won’t be using, is much more complex to use, and really all it will get you over the DAC FS + amp is that it’s a one-box solution.

Using the Pro FS with an external amplifier is a bit pointless vs. the DAC FS with an external amplifier here, simply because they are going to sound identical if the amplifiers used are the same.

4 Likes

Just rambling a bit here …

I would say that for most people, if you don’t need the ADC capability of the Pro FS, you’re much better off buying the dedicated DAC FS version.

It is much easier to configure, is setup/tweaked to behave in a much more practical manner for just listening to music, while sounding the same.

One such little tweak is that content that MUST indicate a digital over (but for which there is sufficient internal headroom to avoid clipping) on the Pro FS, won’t show “OVR” on the meters on the DAC FS unless it exceeds the available internal headroom. Which is a nice touch, for the paranoid …

Another is the fact that with the Pro FS you can have completely different settings for output that are operating in parallel (which you can link, but that is only active when using a specific volume-display screen rather than, say, the analyzer display), so instead of pushing the volume dial muting the unit, instead it just changes to the next output so you can use the dial to set that.

5 Likes

Again thanks for your expertise, you rule!!
I have about 50 albuns in DSD format, so i guess that a Jotunheim paired with the DAC FS would be a good option, or is the TXH AAA better?

Thanks for the impressions! You might have seen my post on the Verite Closed thread about my quest for a new amp. I don’t have experience with the previous version of the DAC-only model, but it sounds like RME has improved the headphone amp in the updated version, which I just recently bought. What are your thoughts about the amp in the updated DAC-only model vs. the Phonitor X/XE/E or THX amps? I’m looking for something that might synergize well with this DAC and with Verite Closed and HD650. I also sometimes break out my Grado HF-2 as a guilty pleasure.

1 Like

The THX AAA amps will measure better, but personally I preferred listening via the Jotunheim. I’ve owned both. I’ve sold both … mostly because they’re not really at “my end” of the market and I have better options. But if I was buying today, at that level, I’d go with a Jotunheim.

As for DSD …

For me that would depend on two things … first, what fraction of my library 50 albums constituted and second, if I thought “native” DSD playback actually conveyed any advantage.

In my case, 50 albums isn’t even a rounding error. I would not make any special accommodation for that few a number of albums (but bear in mind I have 12,000+ vinyl LPs, at least as many CDs and so on). And I don’t find “native” DSD playback to really be much of a benefit with most DACs (there are exceptions, but they’re rare, and the RME unit isn’t one of them).

So, for me, I’d just leave the RME unit in its default mode and let if convert DSD to PCM and listen that way, without an external amplifier.

4 Likes

Will accept your suggestions, and since you still own the RME that means something wright? :grin:

I still prefer both the THX AAA and, by far, the Phonitor amps with the DAC FS (4493) vs. its native output. Just by a smaller margin than I did with the prior version of the DAC FS (4490).

There’s a reason that I have both the new DAC FS and Pro FS R BE sitting next to a Phonitor X, and if I’m doing solid-state listening that’s not straight out of my DAVE, that it’s via the Phonitor X.

But as I say to pretty much everyone … as long as the headphones you’re using aren’t pathologically power-hungry, if the RME DAC is the DAC you want, try it as an all-in-one before spending more on an amplifier to go with it.

You can ALWAYS add an external amplifier to it

The Vérité are more than capable of letting you hear the differences. But if it was me, I’d probably do something like the DAC FS (if that’s the DAC you’re settled on) for solid-state drive, and pair it with a nice tube amplifier, so I had the best of both worlds …

5 Likes

It means I still own the RME unit … :wink:

I think it’s more telling that I just upgraded to the 4493 version AND bought an updated Pro FS (4493) version as well. Though outside IEM use on the DAC FS unit, these two units are generally used to feed other amplifiers (in the studio it is different), at least when listening for pleasure.

Though even then, 99.5% of my at-home-for-pleasure listening is via the Blu-Mk2/DAVE combination.

5 Likes

Just another question regarding the ADI 2 PRO FS can be used to play guitar? As i see there are 2 line in inputs…

If that´s possible I could then eliminate my Focusrite, as i only use it when i play/record guitar at home

You might need a preamp between your guitar and the RME unit, since instrument-level signals are lower level than line-level signals. And bear in mind that the first thing the RME unit is going to with ANY input is to digitize it (via its ADC).

The Focusrite stuff generally supports, mic, instrument and line-level, since it has the necessary preamps built in and selectable for each input.

1 Like

For instruments, Guitar, you want an I/O interface with a hi-Z interface for instrument support.

Do you know if you also wish to connect a Mic for Vocal or Mic a cab? If so, you want Mic Pre-amp with phantom power support as well.

For this, If you’re going to stick with RME, the Babyface Pro FS or Fireface UC or UCX will work. I use Universal Audio Apollo interfaces for recording guitar and vocals. If you are looking for an entry-level I/O interface a Focusrite is a good brand

3 Likes

I’m not sure why your response is to me, or what the Blu-Mk2 quote is about (has no relevance here).

I have my own studio, so I get how all that works.

I just don’t know exactly what @Fsilva’s guitar chain is. Depending on what the instrument is routed through (pedals, effects boxes, existing pre-amps etc.), the end result may be line-level already.

Did you mean to respond to someone else?

1 Like

I was looking at the manual on the RME ADI 2 Pro another option would be to put something like Strymon Iridium, Line 6 Helix or a Kemper on Analog Inputs as the guitar input. This would address the issue in Section 5.6 of the manual. I use UA OX into my UA Apollo ( this would also work) for recording silent off Two-Rock Classic Reverb and the Marshell JMP and JTM45

  • Preamp: Analog in to Analog out (internal digital out to in). This mode is active when no digital input signal and no USB is detected.

5.6 Analog Recording

For recordings, via the analog inputs, the corresponding record device has to be chosen.

The combo XLR/TRS sockets are designed for line signals. Sources that require higher input impedances, like guitars, need an additional impedance buffer in front of the ADI-2 Pro.

1 Like

@torq It was not for you. I hit the wrong button for the reply.

On Blu MK-2 I think the forum reply picked up what was in my clip buffer, I was going to looking it up you mentioned in a different section of the forum, Weird. I will fix the post.

My question was just to try to get another reason in order to justify the price difference between the ADI-2 Pro and the ADI-2 DAC FS, again @Torq has been more that explicit with his explanations/recomendations!

You Sir are a true Enlightener!

2 Likes