RME ADI-2 Pro FS R mic pre amp vs MOTU UltraLite Mk5

[bachatero]

I'm looking for something to replace my MOTU M2 because I want better mic and ADC quality.

I'm looking at the RME ADI-2 Pro FS R versus the UltraLite Mk5 because they're the best and cost doesn't matter because of a special financial situation I'm in.

So, which one has a better mic pre-amp? Other than that, there doesn't seem to by many differences between the two, and I'm all ears if there are more.

 

[NTK]

AFAICT, the ADI-2 Pro FS R Black Edition (the version currently listed on the RME web site) does not have a mic preamp. See features list:

Compared to Babyface Pro FS, the mic input is missing from the list.

 

[bachatero]

AFAICT, the ADI-2 Pro FS R Black Edition (the version currently listed on the RME web site) does not have a mic preamp.

Do they make one that does have one?

 

[NTK]

No idea. Pinging @MC_RME

 

[LTig]

Do they make one that does have one?

Not that I know if. But they sell mic preamps.

 

[Multicore]

I'm looking for something to replace my MOTU M2 because I want better mic and ADC quality.

Well, will you really notice the difference? Likely not. The MOTU is a good preamp and converter if you turn the headphones down.

I'm looking at the RME ADI-2 Pro FS R versus the UltraLite Mk5 because they're the best and cost doesn't matter because of a special financial situation I'm in.

Then by all means! And get the ADI-2/4 Pro SE or Fireface UFX II. Get one for me too, while you're at it!

But the real reason for paying the premium for RME is not so much the preamp and converter quality. It's the features, latency, and a few other performance benefits. Latency especially -- it's supernatural.

So, which one has a better mic pre-amp? Other than that, there doesn't seem to by many differences between the two, and I'm all ears if there are more.

All of them have good preamps.

 

[unpluggged]

cost doesn't matter

In this case, get the RME Fireface UFX III and the RME ADI-2/4 Pro SE. Use the latter as the monitoring front-end connected to the UFX III's AES output.

 

[rcstevensonaz]

For RME, you could get the Fireface UCX II if you want a smaller form factor. That will bring along room correction plus total mix, neither of which is available on the ADI-2 line.

 

[markstein]

RME ADI-2 Pro FS R does not have a mic preamp.

You may want to look at RME UCX or UFX devices.

 

[bachatero]

I looked at the UCX II but its ADC and DAC specs just aren't up to the standards of any of the ADI-2s or even the UltraLite.

 

[bachatero]

How about this for a preamp? https://www.rme-usa.com/quadmic-ii.html

 

[unpluggged]

I looked at the UCX II but its ADC and DAC specs just aren't up to the standards of any of the ADI-2s or even the UltraLite.

1) What are these "standards"? If they are enough for such labels as Deutsche Grammophon and Decca, they are more than enough for you and me.
2) At the DA side, as we have mentioned here, you'd still be using the ADI-series converter.
3) In my setup with the UCX II and the ADI-2 Pro, I don't even use their DACs. I connect the ADI-2 Pro to my Neumann KH 750 DSP digitally, and it's its DAC that makes the DA conversion. And I even don't know which DAC chip the KH 750 DSP has inside (there is no info available on the net). And guess what, I don't feel I would ever again want to connect the speakers via analog from the ADI-2 Pro.

 

[bachatero]

1) What are these "standards"? If they are enough for such labels as Deutsche Grammophon and Decca, they are more than enough for you and me.

It doesn't get into the Blue Zone in this chart:

 

[unpluggged]

It doesn't get into the Blue Zone in this chart:

So what? And if you didn't notice, none of these "Blue Zone" figures were obtained with microphone inputs.

Are you sure your microphone and your room can provide such a dynamic range and distortion level as to make the input's/ADC's SINAD a bottleneck for your scenario?

 

[markstein]

It doesn't get into the Blue Zone in this chart:
View attachment 457079

Totally irrelevant.

RME UFX and UCX should be sonically transparent. Their major strengths are reliability usability and professional support.

If you think you will be happier with a, e.g., Topping DAC because of few dB better SINAD, good luck...

 

[bachatero]

The usual rules don't apply with ADC SINAD because you often can't take advantage of the full dynamic range, because you want headroom when recording things. And if you want to amplify something quiet, you also amplify the noise floor, so an otherwise fine rating becomes not so fine.