RME Babyface Pro FS VS RME ADI-2 DAC FS difference in sound quality??

[bassfatcat]

If by aligning, you mean looking to have a flat frequency response, low distortion and low noise...in other words pursuing high fidelity, then I'd have to assume the answer is yes. There is no evidence anyone is trying to make them sound different, just accurate. Measurements would reveal any kind of 'voicing.'

It's roughly this concept
The remaining part involves physical A/B testing
to determine whether this argument can be validated.
There should be differences in the measurements observed through instrumentation.

 

[knkkskknk]

Are you guys sure there's no difference in "perceived" sound? Is one's soundstage / clearness not more open?

I have RME ADI-2 DAC, because I heard it has reference grade D/A conversion and mastering egineers will use the "Pro" Version which is same implementation of the D/A Chip to master records with, while RME BABYFACE PRO FS has a lesser quality D/A Conversion chip inside...

Is there anybody here who did extensive testing? I'd like to know if there truly is no audible conceived difference, as than I might as well sell the DAC and buy the Babyface Pro FS which contains the same headphone amp I believe?

 

[unpluggged]

I'd like to know if there truly is no audible conceived difference

There is no difference in sound quality that could be noticed.

sell the DAC and buy the Babyface Pro FS which contains the same headphone amp I believe?

No. ADI-2 DAC has a much better headphone amp. The HP amp in BabyFace Pro (FS) is not as versatile, and is mainly intended for use with easy to drive headphones (with dynamic drivers and average impedance and sensitivity) for tracking, not for critical listening.

And using a recording interface purely as a DAC just wastes its capabilities, leaving its main features unused (mic preamps, mixer, digital and MIDI I/O...)

 

[bassfatcat]

Are you guys sure there's no difference in "perceived" sound? Is one's soundstage / clearness not more open?

I have RME ADI-2 DAC, because I heard it has reference grade D/A conversion and mastering egineers will use the "Pro" Version which is same implementation of the D/A Chip to master records with, while RME BABYFACE PRO FS has a lesser quality D/A Conversion chip inside...

Is there anybody here who did extensive testing? I'd like to know if there truly is no audible conceived difference, as than I might as well sell the DAC and buy the Babyface Pro FS which contains the same headphone amp I believe?

From my impression, the

RME ADI-2 DAC uses AKM4490 to AKM4493 DAC chips,
while the BABYFACE PRO FS uses AKM4413.

Referring to some experiences and discussions shared by seniors,
it seems that the main differences lie in the amplifier's driving power and the DSP functionality,
while the rest remains quite similar.

 

[voodooless]

From my impression, the

RME ADI-2 DAC uses AKM4490 to AKM4493 DAC chips,
while the BABYFACE PRO FS uses AKM4413.

I think both products currently use ESS chips. Which should tell you all you need to know about how (not) important this is.

 

[bassfatcat]

I think both products currently use ESS chips. Which should tell you all you need to know about how (not) important this is.

I saw the official RME demonstration where the chip was changed to ESS.
There was an improvement in dynamic, but I'm not sure about the sound quality.
The AKM4413 was something I purchased approximately 2-3 years ago.
I apologize for being slow in updating information.

Thank you.

 

[Zensō]

Everything being discussed here is certainly and objectively well beyond the audibility threshold. You buy RME interfaces based upon functionality, not “sound”.

 

[Ricardus]

I saw the official RME demonstration where the chip was changed to ESS.
There was an improvement in dynamic, but I'm not sure about the sound quality.

Well then what IS "sound quality" exactly?

 

[Trell]

There is no difference in sound quality that could be noticed.


No. ADI-2 DAC has a much better headphone amp. The HP amp in BabyFace Pro (FS) is not as versatile, and is mainly intended for use with easy to drive headphones (with dynamic drivers and average impedance and sensitivity) for tracking, not for critical listening.

And using a recording interface purely as a DAC just wastes its capabilities, leaving its main features unused (mic preamps, mixer, digital and MIDI I/O...)

As the BabyFace Pro FS is a mobile device that can be powered from the USB 2.0 port it can't let the HP amp draw too much current, or one would risk the recording not working properly (which is the main purpose the audio interface).

If it gets loud enough with the chosen head phones the BabyFace Pro FS can for sure be used for 'critical listening'.

 

[Zensō]

mainly intended for use with easy to drive headphones (with dynamic drivers and average impedance and sensitivity) for tracking, not for critical listening.

There’s nothing in the measurements or my experience that indicates this is true.

Quoting RME about the Babyface Pro FS:

“Both headphone outputs provide the High Power / Zero Noise design of the industry-leading, reference converter ADI-2 Pro FS now. Lowest Noise achieved!

Industry-leading headphone preamp technology guarantees lowest-noise and ultra-low latency, outperforming even well regarded stand-alone headphone amplifiers, no matter what type of headphone or IEMs are used!

The THD of both parallel phones outputs improve by 10 dB. The 3.5 mm TRS phones output power rises to 90 mW. THD of both phones outputs improved by up to 10 dB. Finally the output impedance of 3.5 mm TRS was lowered from 2 Ohms to 0.1 Ohms.”

 

[bassfatcat]

Well then what IS "sound quality" exactly?

Have you heard of the concept of "coloring" sound?
If you understand what it means to "color" sound,
it's similar to the distinct sonic characteristics found in recording interfaces of different brands.
However, by saying this, it doesn't necessarily mean you would understand the term "coloring" that I mentioned.

 

[Trell]

Have you heard of the concept of "coloring" sound?
If you understand what it means to "color" sound,
it's similar to the distinct sonic characteristics found in recording interfaces of different brands.
However, by saying this, it doesn't necessarily mean you would understand the term "coloring" that I mentioned.

Devices from RME don’t have a “sound” and that’s something they’ve said on several occasions.

 

[Zensō]

Devices from RME don’t have a “sound” and that’s something they’ve said on several occasions.

Agreed. I really don’t understand why some insist on assigning audiophile concepts to pro gear, when that gear is competently designed and objectively transparent. I suppose RME opened up that can of worms with the ADI-2 DAC FS which was their first and only product targeting audiophiles. I’m guessing it’s been a good product for their ledger sheets, but it must be a pain for their engineers and customer reps to deal with the ongoing audiophile nervosa.

 

[bassfatcat]

Devices from RME don’t have a “sound” and that’s something they’ve said on several occasions.

This was also the aspect that I was curious about initially.
There is no difference in sound.
I generally do not use its DSP functionality.
I purchased both the Babyface Pro FS and the ADI-2 DAC FS,
and the results are the same~

 

[bassfatcat]

Agreed. I really don’t understand why some insist on assigning audiophile concepts to pro gear, when that gear is competently designed and objectively transparent. I suppose RME opened up that can of worms with the ADI-2 DAC FS which was their first and only product targeting audiophiles. I’m guessing it’s been a good product for their ledger sheets, but it must be a pain for their engineers and customer reps to deal with the ongoing audiophile nervosa.

I am still most grateful for my brother sharing his firsthand experience and insights.
I have benefited greatly from it. Gratitude abounds.

 

[voodooless]

Agreed. I really don’t understand why some insist on assigning audiophile concepts to pro gear, when that gear is competently designed and objectively transparent. I suppose RME opened up that can of worms with the ADI-2 DAC FS which was their first and only product targeting audiophiles. I’m guessing it’s been a good product for their ledger sheets, but it must be a pain for their engineers and customer reps to deal with the ongoing audiophile nervosa.

Imagine the hissy fit the audiophile customers had when they changed to ESS and had to tell them that the ESS version sounded exactly the same

 

[Trell]

Imagine the hissy fit the audiophile customers had when they changed to ESS and hand to tell them that the ESS version sounded exactly the same

RME was proactive for the change of DAC IC in the ADI-2 DAC FS and made the following YouTube clip describing it.

 

[Ricardus]

Have you heard of the concept of "coloring" sound?
If you understand what it means to "color" sound,
it's similar to the distinct sonic characteristics found in recording interfaces of different brands.
However, by saying this, it doesn't necessarily mean you would understand the term "coloring" that I mentioned.

You missed my point. Good specs ARE the definition of high fidelity, so saying "There was an improvement in dynamic, but I'm not sure about the sound quality" is jjust silly. More dynamic range, lower THD, this is all GOOD SOUND QUALITY.

 

[bassfatcat]

You missed my point. Good specs ARE the definition of high fidelity, so saying "There was an improvement in dynamic, but I'm not sure about the sound quality" is jjust silly. More dynamic range, lower THD, this is all GOOD SOUND QUALITY.

Understood. Thank you.

 

[knkkskknk]

The fact I can hear a super slight difference in snare attack and tail switching between NOS and SHARP filters on the RME ADI-2 DAC already suggests there must be some audible difference.

I could see Babyface pro FS sounding almost exactly the same, but I bet a snare drum would be slightly different from the RME ADI-2 DAC

you mentioned products aimed towards professional market. I read Gearspace all the time and they're constantly debating on which 2,000 to 10,000$ d/a and a/d converters sound better and sharing their experince, there's LYNX hilo, Merging Anubis/Hapi, Lavry Gold, Prism Lyra, Crane song solaris, some even say the DCS 952 from 1995 is still top of line (still in many mastering studios btw)

from my research, you need top of the line headphones and top of the line speakers, and to learn how to listen, the differences are very subtle minuscule in that most people without trained ears and high end equipment probably can't tell a difference.

As for me, I can barely tell a difference myself, and I question the need for such high end converters in this day now after watching these videos, but I'm probably just too inexperienced to hear the sound.