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

[MatrixS2000]

Looking for a new DAC that can also be used as a preamp and direct connect to active speakers. Is there any better choice than the RME? Is the preamp high gain?

I am going down the same road and will be going RME to act as the preamplifier. Another consideration for you and one that made it a slam dunk for me is how RME utilizes AutoRef. You can read about this in this post from @MC_RME.

 

[D2013]

You misunderstood … I am not referring to amplifier level gain …You still want a preamp with high gain to drive the active speaker line level inputs … often DACs with advertised volume control capability are lower gain and really not a suitable preamp replacement. Actually, is the volume control on the balanced outs also, or only the headphone out?

I wouldn't consider needing to reach line level or slightly above it high gain, I'd call that mandatory!


from the manual about volume control

The encoders can be turned endlessly, but also pressed, adding a push button function. The
current functionality of all encoders is shown in the display. The big Volume knob usually controls volume for all outputs.

each output has reference levels as well

Line Output: Ref Level
Sets the reference level for the analog outputs. Choices are -5 dBu, +1 dBu, +7 dBu, +13 dBu atthe RCA output, referenced to digital full scale level (0 dBFS). The levels at the XLR output are 6dB higher, +1 dBu, +7 dBu, +13 dBu, +19 dBu.

Phones: Hi-Power
OFF, ON. Default: OFF. Reference level for 0 dBFS is +7 dBu at the output. With Hi-Power onreference level is 15 dB higher, +22 dBu.

IEM: No choice. The output IEM uses a fixed reference level of -3 dBu.

Auto Ref Level
ON, Off. Default: ON. See chapter 19.3 for details.

 

[Sal1950]

some times you gotta do what you gotta do...

I really like a man that takes the logical approach. !!!

 

[LTig]

Actually, is the volume control on the balanced outs also, or only the headphone out?

It works on all analog and digital outputs.

 

[40th Anniversary]

Looking for a new DAC that can also be used as a preamp and direct connect to active speakers. Is there any better choice than the RME? Is the preamp high gain?

RME ADI-2 DAC FS owner. Active speaker owner (2 pairs, soon three). Passive preamp owner. Power amplifier owner. Tried headphone amplifiers as well.

Bottom line: RME is all I needed after trying many different equipment configurations, flavours and technologies. This for a preamp, headphone amp, DAC with the PEQ being a "must" have and so much more...but I digress.

The RME is quite outstanding with powered monitors as the output impedance is very low (100 Ohm RCA, 200 Ohm balanced): these drive my Genelec, Yamaha and soon Neumann powered monitors with ease.

PS: A friend of mine and I are doing test to lock the RME at higher output levels to note how this impacts musical enjoyment. We do this with a variety of external preamps such as Benchmark LA4, Schiit Kara and Khozmo passive pre): the verdict is still out. That is how good the RME is and has displaced expensive separate dac-preamp combos and not just mine, but a couple of my audiophile buddies as well.

Best of luck going forward.

 

[unpluggged]

A friend of mine and I are doing test to lock the RME at higher output levels to note how this impacts musical enjoyment.

If you don't hear noise, then you don't have any DR problem.

 

[Chazz6]

Another RME ADI-FS 2 owner here. It feeds a power amplifier with all the gain one might want.

But I currently have a preamp between the two components, and the volume controls as a pair may be of interest here.

I prefer the sound with the Van Alstine Transcendence RB 10 tube preamp in the path. So I keep its volume knob near full volume. To keep volume out of the speakers in reasonable territory, it is necessary to set the RME volume down as much as -35 dB (it depends on the source stream or .flac). If you study the RME manual, it makes a good case that audible details of the sound are not lost (unlike a typical analog pot such as the one in the Transcendence and unlike many DACs).

 

[40th Anniversary]

Another RME ADI-FS 2 owner here. It feeds a power amplifier with all the gain one might want.

But I currently have a preamp between the two components, and the volume controls as a pair may be of interest here.

I prefer the sound with the Van Alstine Transcendence RB 10 tube preamp in the path. So I keep its volume knob near full volume. To keep volume out of the speakers in reasonable territory, it is necessary to set the RME volume down as much as -35 dB (it depends on the source stream or .flac). If you study the RME manual, it makes a good case that audible details of the sound are not lost (unlike a typical analog pot such as the one in the Transcendence and unlike many DACs).

We are doing the opposite: increasing the volume of the RME and use preamps to adjust the volume as desired. Interesting discussions.

 

[40th Anniversary]

If you don't hear noise, then you don't have any DR problem.

There is more to it than noise, and this tested on two separate systems with high end components.

I think we need to make further tests and revisit some data.

In my case, and it's not conclusive, but with my RME locked at a higher volume, it "seems" to offer greater dynamics. But I need to spend more time with more material to come to a sensible conclusion. And of course my standard condition applies: just one opinion.

 

[rouzbeha]

I am looking for a dac+amp for Hifiman he1000se. Is RME ADI-2 DAC FS still the best bang for the buck around 1000,- euro in Europe?

 

[storing]

I am looking for a dac+amp for Hifiman he1000se. Is RME ADI-2 DAC FS still the best bang for the buck around 1000,- euro in Europe?

Depends on what you mean with 'best'. Dac+amp+feature-wise: probably. But if all you need is really dac+amp there are a bunch of cheaper options which perform just as well.

 

[palm]

Every now and then I see a cheaper alternative that might do the job, but in my opinion that’s still an excellent option, with many useful features, convenient and reliable. As someone who often overthink it and feel like I need to justify this kind of expense, I actually should have bought it earlier. Maybe I would go for the pro version with digital outputs.

 

[Willem]

Another REM ADI-2 DAC user here. I think it is superb. I use it as a DAC and as a preamp, or, to put it another way, as a modern preamp with digital rather than analogue inputs. It indeed has all the features of a classic preamp, such as balance and tone controls, plus a lot more, such as parametric filters, dynamic loudness, and much more. Inserting a preamp after the ADI-2 can only degrade the signal. And yes, it can produce more output than just about any preamp. What is there not to like?

 

[Labjr]

I wonder if there will be a Version 3?

 

[MKR]

Another RME ADI-FS 2 owner here. It feeds a power amplifier with all the gain one might want.

But I currently have a preamp between the two components, and the volume controls as a pair may be of interest here.

I prefer the sound with the Van Alstine Transcendence RB 10 tube preamp in the path. So I keep its volume knob near full volume. To keep volume out of the speakers in reasonable territory, it is necessary to set the RME volume down as much as -35 dB (it depends on the source stream or .flac). If you study the RME manual, it makes a good case that audible details of the sound are not lost (unlike a typical analog pot such as the one in the Transcendence and unlike many DACs).

Thanks for the feedback. But, this seems counterintuitive. You have a fully transparent and very high fidelity compenent with the RME, and then you go and add distortion back into the signal chain with the tube pre? Not knocking the sound you like in the least, we all have our personal presences, just seems a waste of money to spend on the fidelity of the RME only to effectively then negate said fidelity?

 

[MKR]

Thanks much to all for your great comments on the RME! Truly appears to be the exact solution I am looking for, not sure how one could do better if wanting a superb DAC+pre. The other solution I am considering would be the Benchmark DAC3-L as another ultra-fidelity DAC+pre. Thoughts on how the Benchmark compares to the RME?

Benchmark DAC3 L - Digital to Analog Audio Converter

Benchmark DAC3 converters are in daily use in many of the world's finest recording studios and mastering rooms. They are also enjoyed by thousands of audiophiles. The DAC3 delivers outstanding musical detail and precise stereo imaging. It employs an advanced high-headroom digital filter design...

benchmarkmedia.com

Also, I am intrigued by the mention of the Pro version with digital outs? This could be another option as my actives also have a digital input (Hypex Fusion) which would allow the bypass of the extra conversion step in the Hypex. Though I have been told by those with experience with the Hypex that there is no audible difference between using digital vs analog input. Thoughts on this option? Note I did ask Hypex directly about this and they stated it is preferebale to use the digital inputs, as this would provide the highest fidelity. Though again not sure if the difference would be audible, maybe only an instrument could measure the difference

In the case of the digital outputs of the RME Pro, I assume the RME has digital volume control? Any concern with loss of fidelity using dig vol control vs analog?

One negative on the RME for me is the headphone capability, which I do not need, so paying for feature I would never use, but not a deal breaker for sure.

And to throw a wrench in the spokes, I must say the Hilo 2 also looks very interesting, albeit much more expensive and with more capability than I would likely ever use …

Hilo 2 - Products - Lynx Studio Technology, Inc.

We engineer the finest tools to help audio professionals create even better sound.

www.lynxstudio.com

Thanks all!

 

[Chazz6]

You have a fully transparent and very high fidelity compenent with the RME, and then you go and add distortion back into the signal chain with the tube pre? Not knocking the sound you like in the least, we all have our personal presences, just seems a waste of money to spend on the fidelity of the RME only to effectively then negate said fidelity?

1) The RME has a five-band parametric equalizer. I use it, although not with a full-fledged room correction hardware and software kit. I look at the frequency response curve of the speakers and get to desired settings by trial and error listening.

2) The RME has a high-quality digital volume control, a balance control, a stereo/mono control, etc.

Since most of my music is digital streams and files, I need some kind of DAC. The RME hits an excellent quality/features/price point for me.

So, why the tube preamp? As you observe, we all have our preferences. Just as people bend the sound with treble and bass and such, so does the preamp. Considering that someone mixed the recording, and considering that no listening room duplicates the concert hall or studio environment, it seems to me that "fidelity" is a squishy notion. To be sure, measurements of things like harmonic distortion will show more of it with the preamp in the signal chain. Well, the harmonic distribution changes throughout the whole process of making, recording, mixing, and reproducing music.

 

[MKR]

1) The RME has a five-band parametric equalizer. I use it, although not with a full-fledged room correction hardware and software kit. I look at the frequency response curve of the speakers and get to desired settings by trial and error listening.

2) The RME has a high-quality digital volume control, a balance control, a stereo/mono control, etc.

Since most of my music is digital streams and files, I need some kind of DAC. The RME hits an excellent quality/features/price point for me.

So, why the tube preamp? As you observe, we all have our preferences. Just as people bend the sound with treble and bass and such, so does the preamp. Considering that someone mixed the recording, and considering that no listening room duplicates the concert hall or studio environment, it seems to me that "fidelity" is a squishy notion. To be sure, measurements of things like harmonic distortion will show more of it with the preamp in the signal chain. Well, the harmonic distribution changes throughout the whole process of making, recording, mixing, and reproducing music.

Thank you, truly appreciate your intellectually honest and well reasoned response … and indeed, “fidelity” can be squishy. What I implied by my use of the term is the highest transparency possible to the source and what the recording engineer intended for you to hear. By adding distortion to the signal chain I am sure you would agree that you are modifying what the recording engineer originally intended. But of course all of us “audiophiles” massage the signal in many different ways (sometimes intended, sometimes unintended) whether it be tubes or EQ to make the sound more pleasant to OUR ears. In the end the only thing that matters is that YOU are happy with what YOU hear, no matter what anyone else thinks

Derailing a bit, sorry for that, back to our regularly scheduled programming …

 

[MatrixS2000]

In the case of the digital outputs of the RME Pro, I assume the RME has digital volume control? Any concern with loss of fidelity using dig vol control vs analog?

I already have an RME ADI-FS 2 that I have been using it for about 3 yrs with no concerns at all. This experience with RME is why I am going to be using an ADI Pro once I have my active speakers selected, not even considering anything else.

 

[Pouyoux]

I wonder if there will be a Version 3?

the ESS version is the v3 even though it's not official ( v1 = AKM 4490, v2 = AKM 4493).