MadMaxx
Active Member
I don't suppose RME will ever release a dac with no headphone amp?
I know, I know... a guy can dream.
I know, I know... a guy can dream.
-
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!
RME ADI-2 FS Version 2 DAC and Headphone Amp Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
That’s amazing!
BTW, he edited his post, changed from "4 weeks" to "2-3 months".
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2021
- Messages
- 2,404
- Likes
- 4,156
Oh that is great! There was a thread a while go, asking what would excite you in a DAC, and I have written ADI-2 DAC plus an app / software control. How wonderful.
Count Arthur
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2020
- Messages
- 2,249
- Likes
- 5,035
For Ubuntu too? RPi?
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2016
- Messages
- 2,874
- Likes
- 4,674
Interesting. I wonder why Pro is would be harder to implement than DAC or Pro 2/4. But "dauert da etwas länger" is very different from "leider nicht möglich," so I'll take it!
They have limited computing resources to add new features, in particular the storage space for firmware. DAC is the simplest device, so less resources are needed, whereas 2/4 is the newest model with upgraded hardware.
Aerith Gainsborough
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
- Messages
- 853
- Likes
- 1,280
Well that's certainly a neat addition.
Ralph_Cramden
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2020
- Messages
- 2,604
- Likes
- 3,517
The Lenovo Smart Tab M8 in its charging stand makes a nice, well proportioned display topper for my RME. On clearance now for $80 shipped on Lenovo’s site.
- Joined
- May 15, 2019
- Messages
- 872
- Likes
- 3,615
- Joined
- May 15, 2019
- Messages
- 872
- Likes
- 3,615
RME ADI-2 FS Version 2 DAC and Headphone Amp Review
Looking at the plots, it seems to me that author failed to compensate for the fixed propagation delay (dead time) which is sample-rate- and filter-type-dependent, and which is why the phase curves bend upwards first before later going into the expected downward slope. @KSTR to the rescue.. :)
www.audiosciencereview.com
Wonder, is there any tests performed here using HQPlayer software re-sampling and filtering? As the RME provides in my ears the superior setting Direct DSD, hence bypassing internal DSP, it allows for expernal dsp and HQP is changing this DAC from being an OK DAC to an awesome one.
I have been fiddling with this for a couple of years now, and the result perceived by my hearing is a clearly audibly lowered distortion and noise floor letting all tiny notes out in a way not possible using player 16/44.1 as is and any of the onboard filters.
Further the DAC displays differences depending from where the USB outputs. I am currently using a Matrix Element H USB controller card from my self-built passive NAA pc, using Signalyst image, possible to feed externally from linear psu, even also completely exclude the internal noisy smpsu, further reducing the perception of "fizzy" elements hiding in cymbals ringing, inside the heavily distorted metal guitars and so forth.
Further I simply cannot resist to mention the favourable SQ from using a common linear psu, feeding both the USB controller card AND the DAC DC power supply fram a common ground psu, I am not a fan of equipment with ground isolation, even though I perfectly understand that this is better off compared to a poor ground. But a performed, thought through, grounding of the entire system, leaving no interfaces "hanging" as antennas, thus feeding shield noise to the separate devices is clearly my choice.
The RME is a sweet sounding DAC, connected to an external DSP and DSD Direct mode surpasses many MUCH more expensive ones. My friends are having a hard time to understand that the music at their homes, where it is harch, sibilent and tons of "fizzy" elements masking the music, sound so sweet, soft and liberated from artifacts here.
Tracks like e.g. Peter Gabriels - Sledgehammer and Chris Rea - The Road to Hell Pt. 2, are (here in Sweden) reknown for its laser cutting, ear ripping, high mids, but is now in perfect control and is also making perfect artistic sense, finally. Massive, highly compressed, bombastic goth metal, e.g. Nightwish - Sahara, is transformed from a torture experiment to an adventure listening to all the classical influences in various parts. Madonnas - Hung-up displays nearly 10,000 error corrections from my filter shown in HQP Client! I do not like to apply stupid tone controls, whether it is cables, discrete controls or software EQ. I do favour to implement clever adaptive filters who can distinguish music from crap, and let the music play.
This transformation has been performed using the same DAC! The difference is meticulously treated power supplies, grounding off device and system, and a hefty external real-time remaster "motor" as HQP. Thanks to RME's option to bypass its proprietary DSP, one is free to mathematically reconfigure the bit stream and apply some serious apodizing filters and error-correction modulators. This is why I have not replaced my RME, because whatever the competition brings, I have not even revealed the existing RME ADI-2 DAC fs full potential yet and already now it performes so much better than what the review here reveals.
Try playing music using RME's Direct DSD, HQPlayer setting ADSM7ECv2, poly-sinc-xla, DSD256 over PCM, (etc). Is is mind-blowing and highly addictive.
I have been fiddling with this for a couple of years now, and the result perceived by my hearing is a clearly audibly lowered distortion and noise floor letting all tiny notes out in a way not possible using player 16/44.1 as is and any of the onboard filters.
Further the DAC displays differences depending from where the USB outputs. I am currently using a Matrix Element H USB controller card from my self-built passive NAA pc, using Signalyst image, possible to feed externally from linear psu, even also completely exclude the internal noisy smpsu, further reducing the perception of "fizzy" elements hiding in cymbals ringing, inside the heavily distorted metal guitars and so forth.
Further I simply cannot resist to mention the favourable SQ from using a common linear psu, feeding both the USB controller card AND the DAC DC power supply fram a common ground psu, I am not a fan of equipment with ground isolation, even though I perfectly understand that this is better off compared to a poor ground. But a performed, thought through, grounding of the entire system, leaving no interfaces "hanging" as antennas, thus feeding shield noise to the separate devices is clearly my choice.
The RME is a sweet sounding DAC, connected to an external DSP and DSD Direct mode surpasses many MUCH more expensive ones. My friends are having a hard time to understand that the music at their homes, where it is harch, sibilent and tons of "fizzy" elements masking the music, sound so sweet, soft and liberated from artifacts here.
Tracks like e.g. Peter Gabriels - Sledgehammer and Chris Rea - The Road to Hell Pt. 2, are (here in Sweden) reknown for its laser cutting, ear ripping, high mids, but is now in perfect control and is also making perfect artistic sense, finally. Massive, highly compressed, bombastic goth metal, e.g. Nightwish - Sahara, is transformed from a torture experiment to an adventure listening to all the classical influences in various parts. Madonnas - Hung-up displays nearly 10,000 error corrections from my filter shown in HQP Client! I do not like to apply stupid tone controls, whether it is cables, discrete controls or software EQ. I do favour to implement clever adaptive filters who can distinguish music from crap, and let the music play.
This transformation has been performed using the same DAC! The difference is meticulously treated power supplies, grounding off device and system, and a hefty external real-time remaster "motor" as HQP. Thanks to RME's option to bypass its proprietary DSP, one is free to mathematically reconfigure the bit stream and apply some serious apodizing filters and error-correction modulators. This is why I have not replaced my RME, because whatever the competition brings, I have not even revealed the existing RME ADI-2 DAC fs full potential yet and already now it performes so much better than what the review here reveals.
Try playing music using RME's Direct DSD, HQPlayer setting ADSM7ECv2, poly-sinc-xla, DSD256 over PCM, (etc). Is is mind-blowing and highly addictive.
I asked because in your ESS graph, linear phase filters are not quite linear. So I’m curious to see if it’s the same for the AKM version, and I thought you would double check that and double check the graph already posted.RME ADI-2 FS Version 2 DAC and Headphone Amp Review
Looking at the plots, it seems to me that author failed to compensate for the fixed propagation delay (dead time) which is sample-rate- and filter-type-dependent, and which is why the phase curves bend upwards first before later going into the expected downward slope. @KSTR to the rescue.. :)
HQP provides some interesting filters and modulators, but I find there's not much audibly different between them. From measurement perspective, they measure well, and with some devices can produce superior distortion results, but the improvements are mostly in the range where it doesn't matter for listening (well above 20kHz, and well below -96dB range). Just don't compare HQP to the NOS filter in ADI-2, as it's not a proper filter for audio reconstruction.
If you don't do the comparison in a blind test, where you don't know whether HQPlayer is involved in the playback chain or not, you're wasting your time. Your perception is extremely likely to find differences even if there aren't any. I've done this with HQPlayer where all the "obvious" differences I heard during months of testing vanished into thin air as soon as I couldn't see whether HQPlayer was playing or not.
The difference is not subtle at all, there is in some cases a massive impact. I have had the pleasure of meeting some of the persons with whom I'd disussed this topic with and listened to their hifi rigs, and the common denominator has been lack of silence. The total level of noise produced in those rigs, for various reasons has been clearly audible, even from listening position in some cases, and I experienced the same problems as they had to pin-point the HQPlayer impact at their places.
That is not equal to saying that your rig is noisy too, but I do say that there may be numerous reasons why HQPlayer impact is hard to detect. I do not find it hard, especially when leaving the so called hifi nerd music played at every demo session and turning to the music I like the most, genres in progressive rock, hard rock and metal, late 1960, -70, -80 and -90.
But knowing the results of inferior noise decoupling and resonances in electronics, the coloration of the signal is in most cases very obvious. It is strange for me as an engineer to see cables with shields, when the shields is later connected to the in and output stage pcb's and not to chassis grounds. This has been a part of hifi device white paper for decades, and still the ground USB port metal shield, RCA, XLR, among others, are soldered to pcb ground plane and are subsequently highly contagious due to stray in almost any DAC/other hifi device I pop the hood on. That is only for starters. There are numerous areas of design flaws in hifi electronics, also at highend level. Most of them made in areas of noise decoupling, power supply circuitry as well as power regulator design. So, sorry if rocking the boat, but not being able to detect the HQP impact is probably depending on other things than HQPlayer performance according to my personal opinion. It is so obvious to me that at a few rare occasions I have accidentally not reloaded the HQPlayer settings I find optimal, I start to question my rig/sound/my ears until I start fault tracing and eventually find out I have not reloaded the settings after e.g. an HQP update. So for me it is not just HQP, it is the very specific setting of error correcting modulator and apodizing filter.
Sorry, but the claims about "not subtle" differences when sighted evaluations are made are not very convincing. Science is clear that such tests are extremely unreliable, and people are very frequently convinced of "not subtle" differences without there being any differences at all. So, try a proper blind test before going down further in claiming what you can or can't hear.
Audio Blind Testing - You Are Doing It Wrong! (Video)
Just uploaded a video on the basics of performing controlled tests in audio. It was motivated by saving myself text in having to write all of this down when telling someone who to do these tests right. And as a counter to a few online personalities to keep saying they do "blind" tests yet when...
www.audiosciencereview.com
We can simply agree to not agree. You persue the question of blind test as I have not performed it. I have done it, to my friends.Sorry, but the claims about "not subtle" differences when sighted evaluations are made are not very convincing. Science is clear that such tests are extremely unreliable, and people are very frequently convinced of "not subtle" differences without there being any differences at all. So, try a proper blind test before going down further in claiming what you can or can't hear.
Audio Blind Testing - You Are Doing It Wrong! (Video)
Just uploaded a video on the basics of performing controlled tests in audio. It was motivated by saving myself text in having to write all of this down when telling someone who to do these tests right. And as a counter to a few online personalities to keep saying they do "blind" tests yet when...
Trell
Major Contributor
- Joined
- May 13, 2021
- Messages
- 2,752
- Likes
- 3,286
Sorry, but the claims about "not subtle" differences when sighted evaluations are made are not very convincing. Science is clear that such tests are extremely unreliable, and people are very frequently convinced of "not subtle" differences without there being any differences at all. So, try a proper blind test before going down further in claiming what you can or can't hear.
Audio Blind Testing - You Are Doing It Wrong! (Video)
Just uploaded a video on the basics of performing controlled tests in audio. It was motivated by saving myself text in having to write all of this down when telling someone who to do these tests right. And as a counter to a few online personalities to keep saying they do "blind" tests yet when...
He claims to be an engineer (of what?) so that should be straight-forward for him to do, not that I think he'll do that anytime soon.
Edit: He claims to have performed "blind tests", not that I've much confidence in that.
Similar threads
