I never purchased the RME DAC, now discontinued... I eagerly await the new successor. I will be buying for sure! I just hope the price isn't crazy though!
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
ADI 2 Series Discontinued, any news on successor?
- Thread starter ShiZo
- Start date
I agree, I hope they improve everything. Bigger display, newer DAC chipset, touch screen display would be welcome, etc. Nothing against the Chinese DAC's, but I am waiting for RME's new release as the product support is outstanding.
Please no touch screen.
Sonic-Wall
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2021
- Messages
- 108
- Likes
- 82
Sorry, but that‘s for sure not gonna happen :-(
Whats not going to happen?
Sonic-Wall
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2021
- Messages
- 108
- Likes
- 82
„I hope they improve everything.“ —> Even it‘s already perfect, RME innovated again
„Bigger display“ —> yes, added bigger iPad support
„newer DAC chipset“ —> yes, if it‘s cheaper
„touch screen display“ —> yes, iPad via USB cable!
„Wireless control“ —> yes, via Bluetooth mouse
„OTA Updates“ —> are you kidding :-(
„Improved usability“ —> Yes, added assembler CLI
„Bigger display“ —> yes, added bigger iPad support
„newer DAC chipset“ —> yes, if it‘s cheaper
„touch screen display“ —> yes, iPad via USB cable!
„Wireless control“ —> yes, via Bluetooth mouse
„OTA Updates“ —> are you kidding :-(
„Improved usability“ —> Yes, added assembler CLI
Agreed. A product like this is built for a long life and touch screens are kind of antesis to that design.
I mean ota updates with bt are not too much to ask, eh
Hopefully when it is announced it actually ships within a reasonable timeframe.
The previously announced 2024 RME Firenet AIO or AIO-D
still hasn't been released yet.
As far as the ADI series: I hope they allow for the ARC USB to be used along with the remote control! I'd also suggest the remote control being able to be used with the UFX/UCX/Firenet series -that would make usability for RME products go through the roof - I'd probably never buy any other companies gear again if that happened for the usability/convenience of the ARC USB + remote option. (A thinner ARC USB wouldn't hurt either)
The DAC version is fine with it's more limited software control, but I'd hope the AD/DA version has the option to connect to totalmix - as most people buying the AD version will probably be trying to use it sort of like an interface.
I like all of the UCX/UFX/future Firenet studio interfaces - but none of them have the actual AD/DA quality of the ADI series. Most of them have more I/O than most people need. An interface like an ADI-2 Pro FS R BE with 2 to 4 mic/line/di channels and that same quality conversion would probably the perfect interface for most people nowadays. Even for listening to music only and not using it for recording: having two preamps would be nice to calibrate your speakers.
The previously announced 2024 RME Firenet AIO or AIO-D
As far as the ADI series: I hope they allow for the ARC USB to be used along with the remote control! I'd also suggest the remote control being able to be used with the UFX/UCX/Firenet series -that would make usability for RME products go through the roof - I'd probably never buy any other companies gear again if that happened for the usability/convenience of the ARC USB + remote option. (A thinner ARC USB wouldn't hurt either)
The DAC version is fine with it's more limited software control, but I'd hope the AD/DA version has the option to connect to totalmix - as most people buying the AD version will probably be trying to use it sort of like an interface.
I like all of the UCX/UFX/future Firenet studio interfaces - but none of them have the actual AD/DA quality of the ADI series. Most of them have more I/O than most people need. An interface like an ADI-2 Pro FS R BE with 2 to 4 mic/line/di channels and that same quality conversion would probably the perfect interface for most people nowadays. Even for listening to music only and not using it for recording: having two preamps would be nice to calibrate your speakers.
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2020
- Messages
- 772
- Likes
- 656
Unlikely. The reason why USB B is popular choice for pro audio products is that it is more robust + provide better shield and electrical connection. RME was pretty uncompromised/engineering based in terms of choosing the connector types in the past
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2020
- Messages
- 772
- Likes
- 656
I suspect it is likely to be USB C. But that is only because of European standards that now seem to require USB-C as universal connector.
Unless they add support for 384K, in which case I believe the ADI-2 Pro series (AD/DA) will require the added bandwidth of USB-C for the multi-channel USB mode.
Luckily european standards applies only for changing port of portable devices.
There is an official RME video answer about USB versions and bandwidth:
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2020
- Messages
- 772
- Likes
- 656
According that that video, the bandwidth is Sample Rate x Bit Depth x Number of channels. And USB 2.0 is limited to 480Mbps, though actual usable bandwidth will be lower for asynchronous audio channels.
Assuming ADI-2 Pro adds support for 384kHz/24 but continues the same # of channels for multi-channel USB (6 send, 8 receive), that works out to: 384,000 x 24 x 14 = 129,024,000. So based on their video and RME's engineering quality, that should still fit on USB 2.0. Cool.
Not this one again…
USB-A and USB-B are only required to be designed to survive 1500 mating cycles. USB-C is required to survive 10,000, just because it’s bigger and chunkier doesn’t mean it’s more robust.
Sokel
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2021
- Messages
- 11,668
- Likes
- 12,953
Agreed, if both are officially certified their specs may hold true.
Can you point me to a (EU, it matters) UCB-C certified cable?
Roland68
Master Contributor
That is the difference between theory and practice.
Throughout my life and my career in IT (spanning over 20 years), I have dealt with thousands of cables and devices featuring USB-B ports and connectors. I can recall, at most, a mere handful of failures—all of which were triggered by someone tripping over or snagging a cable. In most of those instances, the devices themselves were even knocked over.
The same holds true for USB-A connectors and ports.
Their rated number of insertion cycles is routinely far exceeded without any resulting contact issues. I have worked with plenty of notebooks, hard drives, CD drives, printers, measuring instruments, keyboards, mice, and the like that underwent anywhere from 2 to 10 insertion cycles *every single day* for five years—and were subsequently retired while still in perfect working order. That amounts to a total of between 3,000 and 18,000 insertion cycles.
USB-C connectors and ports, however, are far more delicate due to their compact size and the sheer density of their contact pins.
You need only look on eBay, at surplus dealers, and similar outlets to see just how many devices featuring USB-C ports have failed—often while still under warranty—and are now being sold as defective. The volume of such failures is many times higher than was ever the case with USB-B or USB-A.
I own three high-end microphones—priced between €250 and €500—as well as an equally expensive USB-C audio interface; I purchased all of them for roughly 10–15% of their original retail price, and when they were less than six months old, because they suffered from defective USB-C ports. After replacing the faulty USB-C ports, everything now functions flawlessly again.
No one can convince me that devices like these would accumulate 1,000 insertion cycles within a mere six months to a year. To verify this, you need only ask the tens of thousands of mobile phone, tablet, and laptop repair shops worldwide how many devices they repair every day that have defective USB-C ports—devices that are less than 5, or even 3, years old and are nowhere near reaching 10,000 or even 3,000 insertion cycles. These are, by far, the most common defects encountered during repairs.
However, the biggest problem lies in the cheap USB-C ports and connectors that are typically installed.
These components are 5 to 10 times cheaper than high-quality USB-C ports and connectors, and even cheaper variants have since appeared on the market.
Furthermore, the figure of 10,000 insertion cycles applies only under laboratory conditions; in reality, the Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) sits at around 3,000 cycles, with various reports citing inflated figures of 2,000 to 5,000 cycles in everyday use.
The cheap ports, however, typically average only 500 to 1,500 insertion cycles in day-to-day use.
One would have to bury one's head very deep in the sand to deny the existence of these problems.
Fletcher–Munson
Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2026
- Messages
- 9
- Likes
- 4
Tired of waiting for the new ADI-3 series.
If RME does not release them soon, i will have to find something else..
If RME does not release them soon, i will have to find something else..
Similar threads
