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

[Grotti]

I actually get the Bluetooth thinking. Have phone, have streaming service via phone- you need nothing more with the RME eq to enjoy if you dont want to fire up your PC. Its not perfect, but its convenient given the inbuilt DSP

But I would far rather have a network connection and upnp and/or chromecast

A network connection would be nice to have but I suppose the price would increase drastically and it would need a new (bigger) enclosure. Not to talk about the engineering effort to prevent the streaming section from interacting with the DAC.

I tried to solve my need of a streaming device with a Volumio Primo Hifi. It doesn't provide Bluetooth but gives access to Tidal and Quobuz, which I don't use (yet). The app for the smartphone is usable but buggy. The fact that Volumio 3 is announced to provide a PEQ with import of data from REW prevented me from selling it. Volumio 3 is on beta testing right now and should be rolled out at the end of the year.

What I will NOT trade in for an update is my actual RME. I appreciate, that RME tries to keep the DACs performance on the given level and that they don't try to push a new model into the market every now and then. This keeps the value of all the older ADIs out there on a reasonable level.

 

[Veri]

The RME DAC is more of a tool than an enthusiast music player, I don't see it getting BT or streaming, really. Sure many audiophiles buy it but it is really made by, and for, audio "pros".

Same for the 4-pin XLR, there are some companies (JDS comes to mind, too) that just don't believe in its purpose for headphones besides audiophiles. A TRS and 3.5mm jack already covers most normal uses.

 

[Tks]

The RME DAC is more of a tool than an enthusiast music player, I don't see it getting BT or streaming, really. Sure many audiophiles buy it but it is really made by, and for, audio "pros".

Same for the 4-pin XLR, there are some companies (JDS comes to mind, too) that just don't believe in its purpose for headphones besides audiophiles. A TRS and 3.5mm jack already covers most normal uses.

Disagree that it's for Pros, the ADI 2 PRO is for Pros. The DAC was made due to the demand seen by so many people buying the PROs back in the day and using it in the home setting by -not pros- but instead enthusiasts. So it axed the ADC, and added the remote (which the PRO itself didn't have).

I don't particularly see why a "Pro" would buy a DACAMP, instead of what they usually have in the studio (a bunch of separates).

 

[Tks]

This 'revision' was necessary to keep the unit available - we don't waste our engineering time for new revisions just to annoy our customers. It is in no way an upgrade, but carefully selected to get more or less the same performance as before - exactly to avoid that 'it lowers the value of the prior DACs'. No one needs to update. If you think that the Brickwall filter is a reason to update then sorry, I don't agree. It's importance for proper music playback is not as high as some people think. This has also been discussed here before.

This revision could be passed off as such. The prior can't. It's better on paper, and it has the new remote which isn't trivial to a 2nd hand buyer.

When I speak about revisions being problematic, I meant the first revision. This one is okay as a revision because it adds nothing really new, and seemingly not even on-paper.

Also when I speak of additional features, I don't mean in a revision form. I mean simply something in a higher category. It doesn't have to be an identical priced product. I have mentioned this in my post, though I'm not sure why that part was ignored.

The notion that slight upgrades wouldn't devalue older revisions doesn't make sense. Even identical car models when compared to a model a year before have appreciably differing value. So while there isn't any difference in reality - the difference manifests in subjective tendencies among buyers and sellers nonetheless by just the thought of knowing something is "less new" and nothing else.

 

[MC_RME]

This revision could be passed off as such. The prior can't. It's better on paper, and it has the new remote which isn't trivial to a 2nd hand buyer.

Correct. Still the context is missing a bit. The acceptance and success of the ADI-2 Pro in 2016 was unexpected. Once it was clear that people like it we made the 'HiFi' version, the ADI-2 DAC, released one year later. It was an even bigger, still unexpected major success. A that point it was clear that we had to update the Pro with the technology that we now had available - SteadyClock FS and a remote. It still took 2 more years for this to happen (FS R BE).

RME is certainly not a company that chases SINADs. We can use our ears and know that our units are already fully distortion- and noise-free. Still we can't completely ignore typical human behaviour and expectations taken over from other things in live (a new phone every 6 months...). When I sent the ADI-2 DAC with AKK4493 to @amirm I told him that we only changed to that chip because we didn't want the DAC to fall too much behind in ASR's SINAD table. Marketing and sales drive changes like that, in any company. But we try to not get lost in that game. It's good enough as it is now, we concentrate on other, unique features. Which you will see in the next firmware updates, bringing me back to the value of older units that stays high as we give them the same feature updates as newer ones (unless the hardware prevents that).

Must be weekend - oh yeah, it is

 

[Tks]

Correct. Still the context is missing a bit. The acceptance and success of the ADI-2 Pro in 2016 was unexpected. Once it was clear that people like it we made the 'HiFi' version, the ADI-2 DAC, released one year later. It was an even bigger, still unexpected major success. A that point it was clear that we had to update the Pro with the technology that we now had available - SteadyClock FS and a remote. It still took 2 more years for this to happen (FS R BE).

RME is certainly not a company that chases SINADs. We can use our ears and know that our units are already fully distortion- and noise-free. Still we can't completely ignore typical human behaviour and expectations taken over from other things in live (a new phone every 6 months...). When I sent the ADI-2 DAC with AKK4493 to @amirm I told him that we only changed to that chip because we didn't want the DAC to fall too much behind in ASR's SINAD table. Marketing and sales drive changes like that, in any company. But we try to not get lost in that game. It's good enough as it is now, we concentrate on other, unique features. Which you will see in the next firmware updates, bringing me back to the value of older units that stays high as we give them the same feature updates as newer ones (unless the hardware prevents that).

Must be weekend - oh yeah, it is

An update you say?

*crosses fingers for new Spectral Analyzer colors*

 

[Grotti]

Correct. Still the context is missing a bit. The acceptance and success of the ADI-2 Pro in 2016 was unexpected. Once it was clear that people like it we made the 'HiFi' version, the ADI-2 DAC, released one year later. It was an even bigger, still unexpected major success. A that point it was clear that we had to update the Pro with the technology that we now had available - SteadyClock FS and a remote. It still took 2 more years for this to happen (FS R BE).

RME is certainly not a company that chases SINADs. We can use our ears and know that our units are already fully distortion- and noise-free. Still we can't completely ignore typical human behaviour and expectations taken over from other things in live (a new phone every 6 months...). When I sent the ADI-2 DAC with AKK4493 to @amirm I told him that we only changed to that chip because we didn't want the DAC to fall too much behind in ASR's SINAD table. Marketing and sales drive changes like that, in any company. But we try to not get lost in that game. It's good enough as it is now, we concentrate on other, unique features. Which you will see in the next firmware updates, bringing me back to the value of older units that stays high as we give them the same feature updates as newer ones (unless the hardware prevents that).

Must be weekend - oh yeah, it is

You named it: "it's good enough as it is now". That's the point! No need to engage in the race for better specs. As mentioned before I own the pro fs BE and sonically there is nothing left to wish for.

Even though I am a little bit concerned about the unit running quite hot (long term stability) I take the risk. Living in its land of origin I am sure I get good good service when needed.

Just for optical reasons I would buy a streaming device from RME wrapped in a similar enclosure. So come on: design something like this around a Raspi or Tinkerboard and will place an order right now

 

[amper42]

RME is certainly not a company that chases SINADs. We can use our ears and know that our units are already fully distortion- and noise-free. Still we can't completely ignore typical human behaviour and expectations taken over from other things in live (a new phone every 6 months...). When I sent the ADI-2 DAC with AKK4493 to @amirm I told him that we only changed to that chip because we didn't want the DAC to fall too much behind in ASR's SINAD table. Marketing and sales drive changes like that, in any company. But we try to not get lost in that game. It's good enough as it is now, we concentrate on other, unique features. Which you will see in the next firmware updates, bringing me back to the value of older units that stays high as we give them the same feature updates as newer ones (unless the hardware prevents that).

Must be weekend - oh yeah, it is

Adding UPnP/DLNA to the RME ADI-2 DAC FS and a computer interface for setting up the ADI-2 DAC FS either via USB or UPnP would be be a game changer. Personally, I don't care much about BT as I didn't buy a $1300 DAC to play compressed streaming music but some will still like the convenience. A successful manufacturer's primary concern can't be with whether older models keep their resale value. Increased quality, functionality and ease-of-use are what drives customer demand.

 

[Music1969]

we concentrate on other, unique features. Which you will see in the next firmware updates

10-band parametric EQ would be epic.

The current 5+2 band is too limited.

 

[Wicky]

10-band parametric EQ would be epic.

The current 5+2 band is too limited.

I suspect there might be hardware limitations here. RME may confirm, but I expect the current DSP is using most of the processing power available in the unit

As an ADI-2 DAC owner I very much look forward to any future firmware upgrades though!

 

[mrbungle]

Honest question: can you really distinguish 10 vs 5-band EQ in proper AB testing? I see the mathematical benefit for getting close to reference tuning, but for fixing the issues, not really. That also seems to be what the RME manual is getting at.

 

[Jimbob54]

Honest question: can you really distinguish 10 vs 5-band EQ in proper AB testing? I see the mathematical benefit for getting close to reference tuning, but for fixing the issues, not really. That also seems to be what the RME manual is getting at.

Depends which 5 and which 10 I guess. If the FR needs both broad shelves and individual peaks and troughs to get where you want it could be a challenge.

 

[Geert]

Honest question: can you really distinguish 10 vs 5-band EQ in proper AB testing?

If you leave the gain on all the bands on zero, no. Meaning, it depends on what you do with the EQ. 5 bands can be to limited if you want to do room and speaker correction.

My biggest wish; a high quality DAC with a sub out, that would be a game changer. Almost no options available today (targeted at home hifi use).

 

[Grotti]

If you leave the gain on all the bands on zero, no. Meaning, it depends on what you do with the EQ. 5 bands can be to limited if you want to do room and speaker correction.

My biggest wish; a high quality DAC with a sub out, that would be a game changer. Almost no options available today (targeted at home hifi use).

I don't think that the ADI-2 PEQ was ever meant for room correction. At least it can correct the 3 (in most cases) main room modes, 2 bigger problems in FR and on top you get the shelving filters for bass and treble.

For headphones my suggestion is: if you need more than the provided filters, get a new one with less problems

 

[Geert]

I don't think that the ADI-2 PEQ was ever meant for room correction.

It probably wasn't meant for anyting specific, but the fact is that a lot of people are using it for room correction. For a lot of people it's the most straightforward and cost effective means to add some basic DRC to their setup (like people using a Logitech Squeezebox).

 

[Grotti]

It probably wasn't meant for anyting specific, but the fact is that a lot of people are using it for room correction. For a lot of people it's the most straightforward and cost effective means to add some basic DRC to their setup (like people using a Logitech Squeezebox).

I don't think so. I can't back it up by data but I suppose that the majority of owners use PEQ for their headphones and not for DRC. I use my pro version as a preamp too, but I don't think that it is common among ADI-2 owners.

 

[Geert]

I don't think so.

I've seen it mentioned on different forums, also here. What's the alternative if your on a butget and don't have a streamer with this capability? A low quality MiniDSP?

 

[Grotti]

I've seen it mentioned on different forums, also here. What's the alternative if your on a butget and don't have a streamer with this capability? A low quality MiniDSP?

It depends. When your source is your computer, there are several options. And I wouldn't call MiniDSP low quality in general. The TOTL was measured here with decent results and quite a lot of members use MiniDSP to feed their SW and solve room problems in lower frequency as well.

 

[Geert]

It depends. When your source is your computer, there are several options.

I know, but that's obviously not the scenario I'm referring to. I was referring to a source without DRC capabilities, like the Squeezebox.

And I wouldn't call MiniDSP low quality in general.

No not in general, but the option that's cheaper than the RME is. And that's your only alternative.

 

[Trell]

I don't think that the ADI-2 PEQ was ever meant for room correction. At least it can correct the 3 (in most cases) main room modes, 2 bigger problems in FR and on top you get the shelving filters for bass and treble.

For headphones my suggestion is: if you need more than the provided filters, get a new one with less problems

You don't necessarily need so many PEQs to get a pretty good room compensation (this is what Genelec calls RoomEQ). Below is what Genelec GLM AutoCal does for one of my monitors in my small office, and you see that only 5 notches are used. Just as an example that you can get pretty good results by just using the ADI-2 DAC PEQs.

GLM only notches down peaks, no boost at all, and mostly only lower frequencies.