• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

Review and Measurements of RME ADI-2 Pro (comparison to ADI-2 DAC)

Hello,
I am a new guy on this very interresting forum, i plan to buy this dac (adi pro fs dac), but to be sure about the listening qualities, is someone could tell me what are the opamp used inside this box ? I cannot find this info on the web, and pictures that i find do not have enough resolution to see. I think there is some opa1602 used, but not sure.
Thank you !

Ps/ I ask because there is a lot of good measuring units that used crappy sounding opamp like 4560 or 4580 (especially motu and some rme products)
 
Does anyone hold a v0.9673 or v0.9680 driver package for ADI-2 Pro fs on their harddrive they like to share : )

Got myself a brandnew ADI-2 Pro fs unit today and cant get it installed on Win7 using the june (v0.9685) or november (v0.9700) official driver packages available on rme site and cant contact their support before the normal opening hours tommorow. The brandnew unit have "FPGA 185, DSP 90" software dated december 2018 software and could suspect or what do i know that the new driver packages cant reconize firmware that is too old relative to latest up to date firmware which looks be numbered "FPGA 213, DSP 97". So hope is using bit older driver package than what rme site is offering that package will reconize hardware and install a usefull driver so i can get that firmware updated and also return to using their latest driver package : )
 
@MC_RME is there a reason why the ADI-2 Pro does not support instrument levels and/or phantom power on its analog inputs? I know it already has tons of features, maybe there was no more space for the extra circuits? It would be very nice to use only an ADI-2 Pro without needing an input preamp for mic and instruments.
Thanks! :)
 
Mic preamps indeed need more space and make the unit more expensive. Same for adding 48V. But there is no space left on the PCB. Point is most users don't need that. And adding mic pres also would mean adding TotalMix for monitoring. That's a different unit then.
 
Mic preamps indeed need more space and make the unit more expensive. Same for adding 48V. But there is no space left on the PCB. Point is most users don't need that. And adding mic pres also would mean adding TotalMix for monitoring. That's a different unit then.
If it means anything, I'm personally happy it doesn't have mic pres to keep the cost down.
 
TotalMix for monitoring. That's a different unit then.
Hmm I did not notice this earlier. Thanks for pointing that out. I see that I need an actual audio interface and not a converter.

But the Babyface Pro FS, Fireface UC and Fireface UCX none have similar DA performance and the Extreme Power headphone output of the ADI-2... Is there an interface in your line with a similar form factor of the ADI-2, high performance DA, high power headphone output, mic preamps and TotalMix?
 
Sorry, no. Such a unit would be too expensive to become a commercial success.
 
Sorry, no. Such a unit would be too expensive to become a commercial success.

Any hope for a small 1-2 ch dedicated preamp based on what's in the UFX II to pair with the ADI-2 Pro then? Or a recommendation for one - I don't mind mixing brands :p

For a lot of us home/desktop/computer users, we only need 1, maybe 2 mic inputs, not the full 8+ of beefier setups.
 
Hmm I did not notice this earlier. Thanks for pointing that out. I see that I need an actual audio interface and not a converter.

But the Babyface Pro FS, Fireface UC and Fireface UCX none have similar DA performance and the Extreme Power headphone output of the ADI-2... Is there an interface in your line with a similar form factor of the ADI-2, high performance DA, high power headphone output, mic preamps and TotalMix?

I have a Babyface Pro (not the new FS model) and have been quite happy with it as an interface. Really low latency and rock solid, stable drivers. I would love to upgrade it to a 2 channel audio interface with specs like the ADI-2, but looks like it is not something RME will be offering. I'll be curious to see how the new Apogee Symphony Desktop measures as that hits all of the features I'd need.
 
I'll be curious to see how the new Apogee Symphony Desktop measures as that hits all of the features I'd need.
I looked at their website and could not find any measurements specs. Tried the manual, could not find. Googled it, no good. I fear that if specs are not marketing stand outs then probably they are not good... I hope I am wrong.
 
I looked at their website and could not find any measurements specs. Tried the manual, could not find. Googled it, no good. I fear that if specs are not marketing stand outs then probably they are not good... I hope I am wrong.

It has not yet been released so I guess we will see when they hit the street.
 
RME has released a new firmware update for ADI-2 Pro and ADI-2 DAC :https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?pid=168180.

A main improvement was made in the jitter performance when locked to an external source.

Here a comparision showing the (now) negligible difference in a local loopback measurement vs one where the source is another ADI-2 Pro syncing the first via TOSLINK:
Direct-vs-Toslink.png

The skirt at the bottom of the 1kHz spectral line has just a little more "belly" but that's it, no explicit sidebands seen.
 
Last edited:
Additional measurement, comparing the new firmware (250) vs an older one (214) in direct jitter reduction perfomance at low jitter frequencies.

Setup:
- ADI-2 Pro FSR (also w/ FW250) as recorder, running internal clock (not synced).
- DUT is an ADI-2 Pro FS with Firmwares 250 or 214, synced to external clock via TOSLINK, 44.1kHz, putting out a 1kHz sine at -3dBFS.
- Jitter source is AP SYS2322 (old stuff but still good for things like this), putting out 10ns of sinusodial jitter @ 50Hz.

LF-Jitter-Compare-FW250-vs-FW214.png

All the junk lines at 50Hz intervals are fully gone. A very small trade-off is made as the close-in jitter (a few Hz left and right of the 1kHz needle) is bit higher but this is audibly way more benign (masking) than those wide-spead ghost notes.

Direct jitter reduction measurement with the AP, measuring the RME's jitter suppression, injecting 100ns of jitter via TOSLINK and looking at resulting ouput jitter on TOSLINK as well:
1617207730289.png

Baam! A flat line down to the measurement frequency limit of 50Hz with the new firmware! 2.5ns is the measurement amplitude limit so the actual jitter will be way less, something like below 0.3ns (resulting in >50dB reduction wideband) as seen in (way) older measurements made by RME, see here (german only).
 
Last edited:
I understand this improvement to the Steady Clock firmware only works with external sources of clock, like SPDIF over coax or TOSLINK, but the same improvement does not happen to internal clock via USB, since USB is asynchronous anyway, right? Or does this improvement also help the USB input somehow?
 
@Matias, As @MC_RME always likes to say, extern==intern wrt to clock quality (unless the input clock is really ******).

In USB mode the clock can be internal or external as well:
DAC (a FS model) measured by a seperate, unsynced ADC (a FSR), one time with external clock for the DAC and one time with internal.
Only in direct local loopback within the device one can see a slight improvement as in this case the ADC and the DAC are in hard sync (operating from the same internal clock line).
loopback-vs-syncCD-vs-syncINTERN.png
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom