RME ADI-2 DAC

Thanks for sharing. Your impressions don't surprise me based on my experience with AKM4490 converters. I haven't had the chance to try the ADI-2 yet but I did own for a few weeks the Crane Song Solaris DAC which is the best single chip AKM4490 implementation I know of. I don't think it's worth making a thread about here but I will share my thoughts here as it may help someone else make a purchase decision.

The designer of the Solaris, Dave Hill, is obsessive and went balls to the wall with heavy emphasis on jitter reduction via R&D on a sub-pS jitter clock and ASRC up-sampling for further jitter reduction prior to conversion; custom analog and digital filters; discrete output stage; linear PSU, etc. Lots of audiophile memes for a pro audio rack-mount product priced at $1900.

What it excelled at: stereo imaging, integrity of transients, lack of listening fatigue
What it failed at: off-timbre politeness, lack of bite, dry bass, fairly flat dynamics

Coincidentally, its best attributes can be associated to the benefits of low jitter and its short-comings to the inherent 'velvet' sound of the AKM4490 chip. I can hear the same polite 'velvet' coloration which robs the electric guitar of any sort of leading edge or bite in everything from the Modi 2U to the Esoteric K-05X. Dave Hill did (IMO) everything right in the implementation and yet the result was a converter that was a great tool to work with but no fun to listen to. These sonic characteristics have been fairly consistent with every DAC I've tried using the same chip and it has been really popular in recent years due to its specsheet performance, low cost, high availability and inoffensive sound.

I've been pretty skeptical since the ADI-2's release and praise in many circles given that it is (IMO) inferior in implementation to the Solaris in pretty much every aspect (SMPS vs LPS, ICs vs discrete analog stage, stock AKM reconstruction filters vs custom). It seems more premium interface than DAC.

BTW, this is all pointless conjecture - I haven't tried the ADI-2 yet.

 

Thanks for this. Solaris has gotten a lot of praise at gearslutz though. Maybe that kind of sound is ideal to monitoring?

 

For those that are finding the RME ADI-2 DAC's output to be "flat", "dull" or that are experiencing "splashy treble", or a lack of dynamic resolution, particularly if you had the unit paired with an external amplifier, it'd be VERY useful to include in your commentary what output configuration you were using and, in particular, which filter setting you were listening with.

I didn't much care for the built-in amp in the RME ADI-2 Pro AE and only use that for monitoring. And I only just got around to adding my own ADI-2 DAC for a direct comparison. Don't care for the amp-section in that much, either. But running with no digital attenuation* into a dedicated amp, balanced output, with optimized output level settings, the results are very different (especially with regards to micro-dynamics) than otherwise.



The above combination I found to be very convincing, and rather compelling. Though I'd take a dac1421 or Gungnir MB (if space permitted) over the ADI-2 DAC in such a setup (unless I needed the EQ or DSP functions on the DAC, e.g. when not using a computer as a source).

Also, the USB input on the RME pair, while not absolutely immune to issues, does seem a lot less susceptible to them than your run-of-the-mill XMOS or Amanero based solutions. At least from my sources.

--

*The digital volume control implementation on the RME ADI-2 units is among the best I've heard, but it does make an audible difference (at least per my blind-ish testing) vs. running with no attenuation.

 

Thanks for sharing. Just make sure to clean it all up after it comes your way. Maybe keep tissue nearby.

 

how do you do that? Just set the volume to "0" when using line out?

When I AB compare it with a Bifrost Multibit, I find I have to set the RME volume to -4db to match the output of the Bifrost Multibit.

 

I'm finally settling on an EQ-setting for my stock HD800 using ADI-2 DAC for everything (while waiting for my ZDT jr. to arrive). I looked at measurements, worked against the larger dips/peaks and fine-tuned to taste after. HD800 really is a chameleon as it takes EQ so well, I find this very satisfying:

B1 +6db, 20hz, Q 0.5 (basically an opposite boost to fight the dynamic hp drop-off)
B2 -2db, 125hz, Q 2.0 (cutting mid-bass is a pet peeve of mine to tighten the lows)
B3 +1,5db, 2.5k, Q 1.5
B4 -6db, 6.5k, Q 4.5
B5 -1,5db, 7.0k, Q 0.6

This is probably the better thread to post this because it's actually about using this device.

 

Had to order it and have a proxy service ship it to me... its taking a while.

 

Yep.

Make sure you have "Auto Ref Level" enabled, also.

Differences in level outputs between DACs (or any other source, for that matter) are a real pain in the arse. I wound up building a, sadly non-trivial, box to help address these sorts of level matching issues. The only way around that, to get a properly level matched comparison, without resorting to software/digital attenuation is a suitable passive attenuator (which, of course, introduces additional variables).

 

Anyone know of a headphone amp that would be a good pair with the ADI-2 DAC? I currently have a Little Labs Monotor and while I find it to be clean (nothing stands out), it sounds... a little compressed in terms of staging (everything sounds and feels rather "in your face" kind of thing). My budget would be $1000 tops.

 

I promised to get back on the following combinations:

RME ADI-2 DAC -> headphones
RME ADI-2 DAC -> Schiit Jotunheim -> headphones
RME ADI-2 DAC -> Burson Conductor V2 -> headphones *coming later*

See my earlier post for more information.

ADI-2 DAC AIO vs ADI-2 DAC + Jotunheim
- After more careful listening, my impressions about Jotunheim somewhat correcting ADI's artificial timbre still seem to be valid
- Jotunheim seems to also be more dynamic than the internal amp
- Jotunheim is also certainly more in-your-face than the RME as AIO solution. This is partly because of the improved dynamics, but also because there is a shift in tonal balance. With Jotunheim there seems to be a slight bumb in the upper midrange. Treble gains a slightly metallic flavour without actually sounding any more sibilant.
- Sound is not as thin via Jotunheim, as there is now some additional warmth in the (lower) midrange
- Jotunheim is not able to resolve all the detail RME produces. With additional listening this is now clearly evident, as soundstage gets less spacious and more vague. Some plankton is missing, especially in the midrange. Maybe this is also the reason why timbre seems to gotten better.

Would I recommend Jotunheim as an external HP amp for ADI-2 DAC? No. If you generally like how ADI-2 DAC sounds, IMO you'd need to use something more resolving. I did evaluate the sound quality with my Genelecs too, using Jotunheim as a preamplifier ( makes no sense to use it like this though ). Findings above are valid here too.

 

Thanks for updating us on those impressions. That conclusion is exactly what I have been interested in. I want to get the RME for its feature set and use as a DAC. While I mostly use tube amps, I have other headphones that would benefit from a good solid state, but it has been hard to get an idea of how good the built-in amp is compared to standalone solid states and how high up the ladder you need to go to get a significant improvement. I was wondering if Jot would be enough so that is helpful to know it probably isn't worth it. While @Torq's setup with that SPL Phonitor X looks incredible and I'm sure an excellent improvement from the built-in amp, the price tag is a bit much for me. I am wondering if there is a sweet spot in price/performance somewhere between Jot and Phonitor X that is a worthwhile solid state upgrade without breaking the bank.

 

Definitely don't need to go as far as the Phonitor X (which isn't mine, it's on loan for an audition) ... I just showed that pairing as that's what I was fiddling with when the RME unit showed up yesterday.

While I've not tried it with the pure DAC version yet (just the Pro AE), the iFi Audio Pro iCAN is also an excellent pairing. With the added bonus that you can add some tube-flavor if you want with that combination - though there's some redundant functionality if you go that route. If you're patient the Pro iCAN can sometimes be found for $1,299 vs. it's normal $1,799 asking price.

Having heard the Lyr 3 with the dac1421, and triangulating between that and the RME unit, I suspect that'd be an interesting pairing with the RME unit as well. But that's just me theorizing.

Otherwise, without getting into very silly territory, I only have amps like the MCTH, LCX and EC ZDT Jr. around at the moment. Those all work well enough, and sound better than the internal amp, but do so with some loss of detail/resolution and/or the addition of some colorization.

 

@Torq Whatever settings you found on it when you opened the box were the settings I tried. Those were also the settings I found to be the most favorable. I tried multiple permutations of filter and crossfeed and never liked any of them on my headphone setup. That was balanced out to an Auralic Taurus MKII and balanced or single ended to Focal Clear and Focal Elear. I used exclusively USB and I tried an iFI Power wart in addition to the stock power supply. The worst offense I experienced with this DAC was no dynamics and a generally deflated sound signature. There was very little depth or width of sound stage and everything seemed to have the "wall of sound" presentation which I absolutely do not care for.

I didn't mind the RME as a DAC-Pre feeding a single-ended Audio-GD Precision 3 amp and ELAC Unifi B5 speakers. However, this is just a bedroom setup so the extent of my critiquing was only a passive analysis as I folded some laundry. It still lacked dynamics but the smoothness of the ELAC speaker was still a joyful experience.

 

You don't find the ADI-2 clips when you set its level to 0? It must be mild clipping since I don't hear it, but 0 makes the volume number flash red for me on some tracks.

 

@Torq is that because you prefer the built-in amp for your monitoring needs? Or because your monitoring needs don't require a more...capable(likeable?) amp?

 

For a few tracks, pretty much limited to modern electronic pieces, in a few places, I'll occasionally see the meters peak red and show "OVR" at 0 attenuation.

I have not found this to be at all audible.

I suspect this is an artifact of "intersample overs" with regard to the reconstruction filter, coupled with the meters operating purely in the digital domain. While 0 dB is a hard limit for incoming PCM sample data, the same limitation doesn't automatically apply once you start processing the data nor is it necessarily a factor on the analog side of things. There's PLENTY of analog headroom in the output stages of the RME ADI-2 units to handle the resultant overshoot.

 

"Monitoring", to me, means "making sure the right thing(s) is/are playing/recording and levels aren't fucked". It is more validation/gross error check than it is anything qualitative. So my needs there are not very demanding. The built-in amp is quite convenient for this, and I'll generally use the built-in amp on any interface I'm using (if available) for that purpose.

Mixing (on headphones, when I do it there, which isn't always) is another matter. And tracking is also another factor, though one that I have far less qualitative concerns on, once again; isolation and volume are bigger concerns for that.

 

I did a factory reset as I was powering it up the first time, so I have no idea what was on there. Didn't even occur to me to look at it!

...

People like different things, so I was mostly curious to see who was running what configuration and if that lead to a generally preferred setup that had good correlation among different users/listeners. Just my morbid curiosity.

 

There is also the Phonitor e which gives you the same headamp performance for around 1k. It's especially good with dynamic headphones. @gbeast has an excellent review up at earphiles, I just think his final rating is too low considering its sonic qualities. The Phonitors single ended output sounds better to me than the balanced output btw. It's a very transparent amp so it matters what source you use, I think that's the reason why reviews on various forums are all over the place.

As for the RME unit it's more clinical than I like and lacks plankton compared to the Meier Corda Daccord I usually use. The Daccord has more room around instruments and better resolution, the RME unit has a slight edge in macrodetail.
The RME and the Phonitor combined have a technical performance with very good imaging, seperation and (macro)detail and without glare or treble nasties or fatigue.

 

@I_want_all_the_tacos

I was very surprised at the performance of the iCAN. Hindsight being 20/20, I can say that its the best solid state amp I've heard but, my experience is somewhat limited. It seems to do a very good job at making the DAC that its hooked up to sound great.