- Joined
- Oct 11, 2018
- Messages
- 3,741
- Likes
- 6,457
Nice. But doesn't have the back panel flexibility I need (multiple analog inputs/outputs). It is less expensive, though. And certainly looks nice.The RME ADI-2 DAC has balance control.
Nice. But doesn't have the back panel flexibility I need (multiple analog inputs/outputs). It is less expensive, though. And certainly looks nice.The RME ADI-2 DAC has balance control.
Interesting. I didn't know you could get a phono stage with an optical output. I have a Project PhonoBox hooked to one of the HGC analog inputs, and use another of the analog RCA outputs to send a signal to a subwoofer.The RME ADI-2 is great if you have only digital sources (RME are a pro audio company). I still only have one analogue source because my family would not let me sell the turntable. So I feed that into a Pro-Ject phono pre amp with optical output. It works a treat.
I don't know what you mean here, but the limiting factor is more likely to be the DAC's analog output SNR, which is at best around 120dB, nowadays.as long as the digital volume control has access to the DAC's internal data path, that limitation of the noise floor is pretty meaningless (-135 dB in the ESS example)
On that, we agree.the practical advantages of digital volume control outweigh those of even good analogue volume controls.
That's pretty clever. Not expensive. And MC too on one of their boxes with USB out.
... but the limiting factor is more likely to be the DAC's analog output SNR, which is at best around -120dB, nowadays.
How did that work?
The RME ADI-2 has many virtues (such as tone and balance control, optional and adjustable dynamic loudness and some parametric filtering), but one of them is also that it has an optional auto reference level setting, for the best match between S/N and output level. And it has a very accurate digital volume control that is much better than any analogue one (and no, with modern DACs you do not lose resolution with digital volume control).
Nice. But doesn't have the back panel flexibility I need (multiple analog inputs/outputs). It is less expensive, though. And certainly looks nice.
HiRight, and you illustrated this point above very well with the graph of SNR results for different output level settings for the RME. Am I right in assuming that for most other, less expensive, DACS including those measured by Amir here to have SINAD of over 110 db or so, the output level setting is likely to be fixed? If so, is this likely to be a problem if one was to acquire a power amp that can reach, let's say, 400 watts into 8 ohms, with a balanced (normally about 4 ohm) connection from the DAC? Or would one need other information about the DAC, or the amp, before concluding that the combination is a suitable one?
I actually find the proper reference level setting between the RME and my monitor speakers to be less clear than I would like.
Yeah, it's flexible, but there is a lot of 'gray zone' in the optimization, too.
Well, I'd do the following:
Set the output range to +24dBu
Try to find the maximum level you'll want to (usually) listen at by playing with the volume control.
When you're happy, deduct the volume attenuation from the +24dBu and set the output range to the lowest range value above (or equal to) that.
Done. Never touch it again.
Don't worry. Be happy
Try at +13dBu.Yeah....that's not really great calibration when working across projects recorded at different reference levels.
Plus my monitors have variable dBu inputs:
So even if I did what you said, one then asks..."okay, but at which monitor input level?"
- +6dB = 0dBu /.775V max
- 0dB = +6dBu /1.5V max
- -6dB = +12dBu /3.1V max
Try at +13dBu.
If you don't use headphones, use the 2 front headphone outputs in "balanced phone mode" and at low gain.
That's how you'll get the best performance.
And the RME's analog stage is most probably better than the monitors' anyway, so it's probably better to use RME's gain as much as possible, and to leave the monitor in the lowest gain setting (-6dB)
But I don't think there is a bad choice.
The ADI-2 PRO fs has one analog input.Nice. But doesn't have the back panel flexibility I need (multiple analog inputs/outputs). It is less expensive, though. And certainly looks nice.
I used to work with a Revox PR99 Mk II... in 1985?Revox PR-99 RTR