Any users of the RME ADI-2 DAC?

[asdf1000]

1 hour ago, chetthejet said:

My only comparison of the RME ADI-2 Dac to another Dac is to the one I replaced it with:  the Benchmark DAC2 D.  In my system, the RME is a definite step up in sound quality.  I purchased the RME for other reasons (mainly the PEQ functions) with no expectations of it besting the Benchmark.  But, to my pleasant surprise,  it did...

 

Hi chetthejet, can you describe the main differences to your ears, between Benchmark DAC2 and RME ADI-2?

 

 

[asdf1000]

1 minute ago, Miska said:

Next plan is to replace Schiit Jotunheim with Benchmark HPA4.

 

Yikes. Skipping the THX 789 and going straight for the Big Daddy 😁

[asdf1000]

On 2/7/2019 at 6:00 PM, chetthejet said:

Clarity, clarity and clarity.  Realism of instruments/voices, better separation of elements in complex music (choral/orchestral works, for example Mahler 2,3,8).  Just an all around cleaner sound.

 

Hi, thanks again. Do you feed it DSD via software upsampling? Or PCM upsampling?

 

Or just bit perfect playback to the DAC?

[asdf1000]

On 2/8/2019 at 7:28 PM, Miska said:

And upsampled to DSD256 (in DSD Direct mode), even lower level and now just totally uncorrelated noise instead of PCM's directly correlated images:

 

Does the big hump which appears with DSD256 in DSD Direct Mode (and is not there for PCM705 input) affect performance in any way?

 

Or is the big hump harmless, compared with the 1st image at PCM705k for PCM705k input?

 

[asdf1000]

Hi @Miska

 

Are you planning to get the newer ADI-2 DAC FS ?

 

”The device is now available in a slightly revised version. The use of an AK4493 (previously 4490) improves the signal-to-noise ratio from 117 dB to 120 db (123 dBA). At the same time the distortion decreases by about 10 dB, to a fantastic -120 dB at full digital level. 

The sensational -118 dBu, which resulted in complete freedom from noise at the IEM output, is now even better at -120 dBu. On top there is now an additional headroom of 2.5 dB for the analog outputs XLR, RCA and IEM, which also raises the undistorted intersample peak limit to a generous +4 dBFS. While the basic features and functions of the ADI-2 DAC remain unchanged, the device comes with an extended infrared remote control, the MRC (Multi-Remote-Control) which can remote control up to 4 different future RME devices. Currently only the ADI-2 DAC is supported.

The remote control is an extended version of the previous one, with additional buttons designed for the most commonly used functions, namely switching loudness, parametric EQ, and bass/treble on and off. In addition, there are keys for direct control of bass, treble and balance. With these additional keys, all typically used functions of the device are now directly accessible. The four programmable buttons 1 through 4, a unique feature already of the original remote, can still be programmed with a personal selection of 32 commands/actions.“

[asdf1000]

On 2/8/2019 at 4:28 PM, Miska said:

The DAC performs especially nice when running at 705.6/768k rates, because then it runs twice higher than what the DAC chip's internal digital filters can do (352.8/384k).

 

Hi Miska

 

I know this DAC performs best when fed DSD256 but I’m not ready to add HPA4 for headphones just yet ($$). This is really the only headamp I would want to add (no channel imbalance issue).

 

So if I feed ADI-2 with PCM768 kHz via HQPe , do you know how this incoming PCM768KHZ will be affected  by ADI-2 DAC’s digital volume control with it’s headphone amp output?

 

If you measure ADI-2 DAC’s headamp output with PCM768KHZ with DAC’s digital volume control  does the output look like your PCM768KHZ measurement or output looks more like your PCM384KHZ measurement?

[asdf1000]

19 minutes ago, Miska said:

balanced volume control of Jotunheim

 

Thanks Jussi!

 

I need read up on what this balanced volume control is.

 

Maybe I will copy you and pair it with ADI-2 DAC

[asdf1000]

Hi @Archimago

 

I see you contributed your measurement here:

 

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/showpost.php?p=15204112&postcount=2125

 

What do you think of this test? Any flaws or accurate?

 

@Miska you have this RME too.

 

Are these results meaningful?

 

[asdf1000]

On 10/2/2020 at 1:45 AM, Matias said:

It's been almost 2 months with my RME ADI-2 DAC fs v2 and I absolutely love it. Below with his new friends, the Focusrite Scarlet 6i6 2nd gen for home studio connected by digital coax to the RME, and the Apollon nCore NC502MP based power amp.

 

 

I have Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 Gen3 , for 8 channel DSP crossover with HQPlayer.

 

Really love it's performance and Focusrite's Windows and macOS drivers are just as reliable as RME (in my experience).

[asdf1000]

47 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

To me, set of numbers that don't make much sense...

 

 

RME commented on that thread too with similar comment.

[asdf1000]

3 hours ago, Miska said:

 

To me, set of numbers that don't make much sense...

 

 

At least this loopback measurement makes more sense:

 

https://www.audio “science” review/forum/index.php?threads/loopback-measurement-of-rme-adi-2-pro-fs-black-edition.10834/

 

[asdf1000]

9 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

These numbers are the RMS of the difference waveform of the original and loopback recordings. These are somewhat useful, but they don’t account for the effect of filters and phase differences.

 

But even the "best" measure around -50dBFS to -60dBFS , in difference between input and measured loopback?

 

If an interface has SINAD of 105dB (1kHz at 0dBFS) for both it's ADC and DAC, how useful is this measurement of -50 dBFS of difference ?

 

[asdf1000]

1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

The best measurements are around -80dBFS (at least on Gearslutz site). 

 

Ah yes I missed the Eventide at the top of the list. There's quite the gap between that and the rest.

 

Lynx and Merging HAPI were top of the list for quite a while