RME ADI-2 FS Version 2 DAC and Headphone Amp Review

[C. Cook]

These last few pages feel like I’m back over at Headfi.

DAC chips that sound smoother or have better soundstage? I’m not some kind of objective purist but I come here to get away from that kind of imagination based discussion.

You likely won’t believe because most never do, but those DAC chips, in those two well implemented designs, sound the same.

Agree for the most part. The "depth" of "soundstage" and "pace, rhythm and timing" are subjective psychoacoustic perceptions turned into snake oil bullshit products and amplified by social media and the Internet. Smoother is just a natural human way of trying to quantify (or qualify?) a different type of perception. But I don't ever go as far as to say it's the CHIP that alone sounds different. Yes, the AKM chip - in as far as it's implemented within the surrounding analog circuitry by RME - does sound "smoother" and I can say that on the basis of three different AKM products from three different mfg's. (Teac, RME and back in the day Slim Devices) compared against various ESS chip implementations, mostly 9028 and 9038 (Oppo, MyTEK, Topping, and more) and many of which in the same 'systems'. But that could be the other electronics.

Personally by "smoother" I just mean less annoying to listen to at certain frequencies. Less fatiguing anyway, generally at whatever the upper limit is on my hearing as I age. So is it the DAC chip? Who the hell knows since they present basically the same specs via their own marketing and nobody is actually unsoldering DAC chips and testing them on any kind of analyzers. If DAC chips could be commodified, as Purifi and associated persons have stated they're doing with amplifiers, then why do we need multiple DAC chip makers turning out essentially the same product when you go by the formats supported and specifications? More likely it's the topology and implementation which may bear out in things like input/output impedance (by frequency even) and other circuit specifics.

Another way of putting it is that while two products may have VERY similar SINAD and other properties, when plugged into different 'systems' the sound can be noticeably different.

 

[storing]

Which one is the "B" version, the original or the upgraded 4497 version?

It's Black. And IIRC there have been sold models with both chips. Which probably doesn't matter a thing.

 

[C. Cook]

It's Black. And IIRC there have been sold models with both chips. Which probably doesn't matter a thing.

Well it must have meant something to RME if they decided mid-batch to change out the DAC chip entirely with no public announcement. Also what do you mean black? Both the RME ADI-2 that I've had are/were black. Okay maybe not mid "batch" but mid-production run. Like while they were still selling the units with the previous AKM chip, lol. Yeah I'm sure it doesn't matter a thing. Oh wait, didn't Amir get *better* SINAD and other performance measurements from the NEW AKM chip? I'm legit just asking but that's what I recall, so...

 

[Trell]

Well it must have meant something to RME if they decided mid-batch to change out the DAC chip entirely with no public announcement. Okay maybe not mid "batch" but mid-production run. Like while they were still selling the units with the previous AKM chip, lol. Yeah I'm sure it doesn't matter a thing.

Try searching this thread and you’ll find what you say is not true. You also find out the reason why they did so, and you can even read it in their manual for the ADI-2.

RME even made a YouTube clip about the change.

 

[Trell]

Which one is the "B" version, the original or the upgraded 4497 version?

There are no ADI-2 version with a AK4497 chip. They upgraded to the AK4493 for the DAC and the Pro, from AK4490.

Edit: fix typo

 

[VintageFlanker]

They upgraded to the AK4497 for the DAC and the Pro, from AK4490

There's no such thing either.

V2 used the AK4493, certainly not the 4497.

 

[Trell]

Well it must have meant something to RME if they decided mid-batch to change out the DAC chip entirely with no public announcement. Also what do you mean black? Both the RME ADI-2 that I've had are/were black. Okay maybe not mid "batch" but mid-production run. Like while they were still selling the units with the previous AKM chip, lol. Yeah I'm sure it doesn't matter a thing. Oh wait, didn't Amir get *better* SINAD and other performance measurements from the NEW AKM chip? I'm legit just asking but that's what I recall, so...

For the various ADI-2 models try read the first link in this sticky thread in RME user forum.

ADI-2 Pro/DAC, 2/4 Pro SE - Models, Differences and Release Dates (Page 1) — ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series — RME User Forum

ADI-2 Pro/DAC, 2/4 Pro SE - Models, Differences and Release Dates (Page 1) — ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series — RME User Forum —

forum.rme-audio.de

 

[Trell]

There's no such thing either.

V2 used the AK4493, certainly not the 4497.

I managed to bungle my correction in my post, I meant AK4493.

 

[xaviescacs]

I'm sure it has been asked before. In IMHO, the 7 band parametric equalizer would be even more complete if there was an option to make the Bass and Treble shelves visible on the EQ curve.

 

[storing]

I'm sure it has been asked before. In IMHO, the 7 band parametric equalizer would be even more complete if there was an option to make the Bass and Treble shelves visible on the EQ curve.

This is already the case with the last firmware update. And word is next update will have it so that the B/T shelve parameters will be part of the main EQ menu.

 

[xaviescacs]

This is already the case with the last firmware update.

What exactly? Just to be clear: I go to the EQ and I see it flat by default, even though there are active Treble and Bass shelves.

And word is next update will have it so that the B/T shelve parameters will be part of the main EQ menu.

This would go even further, finishing the complete integration B/T into the EQ. That would override my more modest request.

 

[C. Cook]

Try searching this thread and you’ll find what you say is not true. You also find out the reason why they did so, and you can even read it in their manual for the ADI-2.

RME even made a YouTube clip about the change.

Uh ok, but could you tell me/us the reason for the change if it's that simple? Like can you articulate it without referring me to a video w/ no link?

 

[C. Cook]

I managed to bungle my correction in my post, I meant AK4493.

Whatever. I wasn't focusing on the model number. The fact of the matter is that RME CHANGED fuckin' chips in the middle of a run without stating it publicly (until others noticed) and the other fact is that the SINAD (and other?) numbers are DIFFERENT between their two models with the same name.

 

[C. Cook]

I managed to bungle my correction in my post, I meant AK4493.

Who cares? Just edit your original post. 4490 vs. 4493 or (not extant?) 4497. Whatever. That's clearly outside of the scope of conversation when RME **DID** change chips on a product that they continued to name the same fuckin' thing, lol. Anyone else would've renamed or numbered the product, but RME did squat to let its customers know.

 

[storing]

What exactly? Just to be clear: I go to the EQ and I see it flat by default, even though there are active Treble and Bass shelves.

Firmware Update ADI-2 DAC 66 / 47 and ADI-2 Pro 259 / 111 (Page 1) — ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series — RME User Forum

Firmware Update ADI-2 DAC 66 / 47 and ADI-2 Pro 259 / 111 (Page 1) — ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series — RME User Forum —

forum.rme-audio.de

The current Bass and Treble setting is now always stored in the PEQ Preset. With the new option 'Load B/T with Preset', B/T are automatically loaded as well, and also considered in the Bode Plot. Phones EQ presets from e.g. Oratory1990, who includes B/T as band 6/7, are thus easily manageable. The 5-band PEQ effectively becomes a 7-band EQ. Notes: In this mode, EQ Off also turns off B/T. However, only these two can be deactivated via B/T Off. If the PEQ is not used (all bands at 0 dB, linear), the PEQ presets can also be used as pure B/T presets.

 

[xaviescacs]

Uh ok, but could you tell me/us the reason for the change if it's that simple? Like can you articulate it without referring me to a video w/ no link?

There was a fire in the AKM factory.

 

[C. Cook]

There was a fire in the AKM factory.

LMFAO no. NO. The fire was MUCH later than RME changed AKM chips.

 

[xaviescacs]

LMFAO no. NO. The fire was MUCH later than RME changed AKM chips.

Do you mean the change from AKM to ESS or some change between AKM chips?

 

[KSTR]

Who cares? Just edit your original post. 4490 vs. 4493 or (not extant?) 4497. Whatever. That's clearly outside of the scope of conversation when RME **DID** change chips on a product that they continued to name the same fuckin' thing, lol. Anyone else would've renamed or numbered the product, but RME did squat to let its customers know.

Have you ever heard of the disclaimer "technical specifications subject to change without prior notice" that comes with EVERY electronic product?
RME changed the chip to a 99% compatible and slightly better one, so what? And after the fire, used yet another one and went through all the trouble to keep the product 100% the same. It's NOT of our business to know the inner details, as those are irrelevant.

They sell a product, not a chip.

Typically, those who insist to know these details are also the most clueless about what these details actually mean... only real design engineers need to apply here, and that's why manufacturers don't ship the detailed schematic and bill of materials (besides the IP concerns) ;-)

 

[RHO]

LMFAO no. NO. The fire was MUCH later than RME changed AKM chips.

Why do you think the only reason they changed DACs can be sound? I can think of many reasons to change the chip (reliability, EOL of the previous device, cost, availability, feature set, ...). I don't know which ones are applicable here. But is shows that "sound" does not have to be involved in any way.