# RME Converters



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jun 6, 2015)

I've been using an RME ADI-2 for my monitors for a couple of years. I've been looking at possibly selling some gear including the ADI-2 and getting an RME interface like a Fireface UC. 

My concern is that considering that the ADI-2 costs $950 for just 4 converters and the Fireface UC $1400 for many more converters and other features, it seems like the ADI-2 converters would be significantly better.

I emailed RME and they said that although they use different converters, neither is inferior to the other so switching to the Fireface UC converters wouldn't be a downgrade from the ADI-2. 

Has anyone ever done a comparison between different RME converters?


----------



## JohnG (Jun 6, 2015)

Hi Gerhard,

I have only seen subjective comparisons of converters. They have all been rubbish (the comparisons, not the converters). Some companies just use breathless testimonials, which I find almost insultingly unconvincing.

My own experience is that a $2,000 converter is noticeably better than a $500 converter. While also completely subjective, I have read from others who sounded reasonably sensible that it takes a multiple of expense, not just incremental, for any discernible difference.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jun 6, 2015)

Just to be clear, I'm looking for a comparison between RME converters and not a comparison of RME converters with ones from other companies. 

I think the problem is comparing the 2 since 1 is only converters and the other is many more converters channels + pres + digital i/o + all the computer interfacing. The price of the adi-2 is probably hyped up a bit but I still imagine that the cost for a single converter in the Fireface UC is less than a single converter on the adi-2.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 6, 2015)

John-by that standard, you'd say there's no appreciable difference between the convertors in my MOTU Ultralite and a Babyface?


----------



## JohnG (Jun 7, 2015)

Hi Larry and Gerhard,

Not really trying to say anything too specific actually -- I just mean, with regard to the OP, that if the number of converters in one device is, say, 8 mono channels (4 stereo) and it costs $800, and another one is 16 mono / 8 stereo channels and it costs $2000, I would question whether the difference in the quality of the converters is going to be evident in any normal use.

I've used RME 9652 interfaces forever and have never had problems, but they are not actually converting anything, just passing on digital info to ProTools. I use a Lavry converter at the very end of my chain and it was noticeably better than the much less expensive one I used before. 

Even so, it's pretty hard to describe "better," at least to me, in anything but clumsy, subjective terms. More vivid, more "clear" more detailed, more three-dimensional.


----------



## Daryl (Jun 7, 2015)

TBH unless a large part of your workflow is recording great players in a great room, the standard of convertors needed is pretty irrelevant. Obviously you don't want something bad, but that's actually quite hard to find, as long as you are buying from a company that makes equipment for the professional market, rather than the domestic one.

D


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jun 7, 2015)

Daryl @ Sun Jun 07 said:


> TBH unless a large part of your workflow is recording great players in a great room, the standard of convertors needed is pretty irrelevant. Obviously you don't want something bad, but that's actually quite hard to find, as long as you are buying from a company that makes equipment for the professional market, rather than the domestic one.
> 
> D



I was using the converters on my TC Impact Twin ($400) and when I got the ADI-2 there was a huge difference. Even on my KRK Rokit 8's. Once I get "proper" monitors I believe that it would be even more noticeable. I'd just like to know if between the different RME products there'd also be a difference.


----------



## jamwerks (Jun 7, 2015)

IMO RME is going to be updating about half their line at the end of the year, when TB3 comes out.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jun 7, 2015)

JohnG @ Sun Jun 07 said:


> Hi Larry and Gerhard,
> 
> Not really trying to say anything too specific actually -- I just mean, with regard to the OP, that if the number of converters in one device is, say, 8 mono channels (4 stereo) and it costs $800, and another one is 16 mono / 8 stereo channels and it costs $2000, I would question whether the difference in the quality of the converters is going to be evident in any normal use.



The difficulty in comparing these is getting the 1:1 ratio of converter price between the ADI-2 and the Fireface UC so there's a chance that it isn't just incremental but a multiple of expense as you mentioned earlier. 

Let's say that the $1400 for the Fireface UC was only for converters. With 16 channels, that's $90/channel. With the ADI-2 having 4 channels at $950, that's $250/channel. Factor in that the Fireface has many other components such as the pres and computer interfacing, and the amount which goes towards the converters goes down. So by this logic the ADI-2 should have significantly better converters (unless they really hype up the price of the unit which is entirely possible). This is why I find it hard to believe that one's converters aren't inferior to the other's as the people at RME said.


----------



## wst3 (Jun 7, 2015)

You've picked a really difficult topic!

Yes, there are differences between different converters within and across brands. They seem to be, by and large, related to prices, but it is far from an apples-to-apples kind of comparison.

Even if everyone used the exact same converter chips, and followed the reference design completely I think it possible that there would be audible (if not subtle) differences.

There are so many factors that affect audio performance, and sound. Component selection (a reference design may call for a 10K Ohm resistor, but it seldom specifies the manufacturer and family, or even the makeup) plays a huge role. Power supply selection and design plays a huge role. Board layout is critical. And so on.

So in the case of your specific question, The ADI-2 does seem, from a cost perspective, to have the potential to sound better than the Fireface UC - as explained quite nicely above by Gerhard.

But it is just as possible that the two devices will sound quite similar. Perhaps the RME engineers found a way to carve some cost out of their design? Perhaps they sell more Firefaces, and thus pay less for parts.

Too many variables, too many possibilities, and that precedes the most critical issues, your listening environment, and your ears.

My current listening environment is just barely suitable for basic music production for live theatre. Which is fine, for now, since that is what I do. I don't have to worry about noise floor, for example, because the audience makes WAY more noise than even cheap converters add nowadays.

My suggestion - and I am not trying to be glib - is to purchase the Fireface, but hold onto the ADI-2. Give them a little bit of a shootout in YOUR studio.

If the ADI-2 still sounds better hold on to it for monitoring, and perhaps critical recording tasks.

A caution - take some time with the shootout. On the one hand something new could sound better just because it is new, and ever so slightly different, but that difference could turn out to be insignificant, it takes time to make those decisions. It is just as likely that it may take a few hours of listening time before the difference (if there is one) becomes obvious. Tricky business this, with that whole pesky ear-brain thing getting in the way!

As a couple folks have pointed out - there are differences between converters, but for the most part dramatic differences come only with dramatic differences in prices.

FWIW, I have been downright WOWed by a couple of very high end converters over the years. But the only way to really appreciate the differences was to audition them in someone elses studio! (Man I have to fix that!!!)

Good luck!


----------



## Ryan (Jun 7, 2015)

Here the chips used. 

RME 
RME ADI-2: A/D:AKM AK5385 D/A: AKM AK4395 
RME ADI-8: A/D AK5392 D/A AD1852
RME ADI-8 DS: A/D:AKM AK5393A; D/A: Analog Devices AD1852 
RME Digi96/8 PST/PAD: A/D AK5383 D/A Analog Devices AD1852
RME HDSP 9632: A/D:AKM AK5385A; D/A: Analog Devices AD1852 
RME HDSPe AIO ADC - CS5361 DAC - AD1852 
RME FIREFACE 800 A/D AK5385 D/A AK4395(AK4396 since March 2005) 
RME FIREFACE 400 A/D D/A AK4620A 
RME FIREFACE UFX A/D CS5368 D/A PCM4104
RME Multiface 1: A/D D/A AK4528VF
RME Multiface 2: A/D D/A AK4620A

Best
Ryan


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jun 7, 2015)

Thanks for the suggestions Bill.

One thing related to what you mentioned and related to Ryan's post that I forgot to factor in is the age of the ADI-2. I believe its over 10 years old. Even if they have updated components, I got mine second hand so its probably from when they were first released. The Fireface UC is significantly newer. Surely there have been improvements in the technology in the time between the 2 so perhaps it may be similar (or even better) even though it's cheaper due to newer components.


----------



## Daryl (Jun 7, 2015)

Gerhard Westphalen @ Sun Jun 07 said:


> Daryl @ Sun Jun 07 said:
> 
> 
> > TBH unless a large part of your workflow is recording great players in a great room, the standard of convertors needed is pretty irrelevant. Obviously you don't want something bad, but that's actually quite hard to find, as long as you are buying from a company that makes equipment for the professional market, rather than the domestic one.
> ...


Well you've just proved my point. That TC thing is cheap cr*p ($400, my arse).

However, you never said you were talking about monitoring. I assumed that you were recording. Without a proper monitoring system everything is a waste really, but I would have thought that trying to see whether or not there is a discernible difference between RME convertors is a lost cause because without proper monitoring it will all be in the realms of placebo.

D


----------



## wst3 (Jun 8, 2015)

Gerhard Westphalen @ Sun Jun 07 said:


> Thanks for the suggestions Bill.
> 
> One thing related to what you mentioned and related to Ryan's post that I forgot to factor in is the age of the ADI-2. I believe its over 10 years old. Even if they have updated components, I got mine second hand so its probably from when they were first released. The Fireface UC is significantly newer. Surely there have been improvements in the technology in the time between the 2 so perhaps it may be similar (or even better) even though it's cheaper due to newer components.



Well that's an interesting thought!

With an answer, I'm afraid, of "it depends"...

Yes, there have been advances in converter technology, and chip fabrication, so from that end things are getting better, and less expensive.

But there has been a shift from "professional" applications to low power applications. Many more converter chips are sold for personal music players than studio interfaces, and the goal for those folks is low power! So the supply voltages continue to drop, and the power draw does too, and neither of those things is good for our purposes.

There are clever designers working around these limits... but there are also companies using the reference designs without a lot of thought. I believe RME falls into the first group.


----------



## chrysshawk (Dec 28, 2016)

Gerhard Westphalen said:


> Thanks for the suggestions Bill.
> 
> One thing related to what you mentioned and related to Ryan's post that I forgot to factor in is the age of the ADI-2. I believe its over 10 years old. Even if they have updated components, I got mine second hand so its probably from when they were first released. The Fireface UC is significantly newer. Surely there have been improvements in the technology in the time between the 2 so perhaps it may be similar (or even better) even though it's cheaper due to newer components.



Hi Gerhard,

To kick open this discussion again, what did you end up doing, and with which result? 

I am in somewhat the same situation as yourself, I basically just want to get an AD converter. Either I then get the ADI-2, or get the Fireface UC and replace it with my current internal soundcard (RME AIO). I agree with what you say above, converters do make a difference although it's pretty hard to compare when you don't have this gear easily at hand.

Any feedback would be appreciated!

Cheers,
Chris


----------



## jcrosby (Dec 28, 2016)

wst3 said:


> Well that's an interesting thought!
> 
> With an answer, I'm afraid, of "it depends"...
> 
> ...


To take that further proper monitoring is only "proper" in a well treated room... Great monitors and converters will sound like shit in a poor, untreated room and middle of the road monitors will sound a lot better in a well treated one... Treating your room should be much higher on the priority list than converters or monitors (if in a poorly treated room.)


----------



## URL (Dec 28, 2016)

I can recommend RME QS- Raydat -but I have a "treated" room.


----------



## jamwerks (Dec 28, 2016)

There's a new high-end ADI-2 Pro with great specs. It's available in Europe but not yet visible in the states. NAMM is coming so there will be other novelties also!


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Dec 28, 2016)

chrysshawk said:


> Hi Gerhard,
> 
> To kick open this discussion again, what did you end up doing, and with which result?
> 
> ...



I ended up doing a converter and clocking comparison a couple of months ago. I found that I couldn't tell the difference between any of them or cheaper converters like the ADA8000 so I think that my testing method was flawed. I was basically always routing out of the ADI-2 and then going into different converters and recording that. The files come nowhere near to nulling but I couldn't hear a difference. I recently plugged in different converters to by monitors and the difference was immediately noticeable which is why I think my testing was flawed somehow with recording the audio. 

I ended up selling my ADI-2 for a low price since I wasn't using it and it was starting to have issues so I chose to just get the money. Now I somewhat regret that because I'd be interested in comparing again with it connected directly to my monitors.

I'd suggest getting the Fireface since you'll get so many more features and I/O and the converter difference will probably be small. 

The new ADI-2 Pro looks interesting and potentially having really nice converters. Some day I'd like to get either the ADI-2 Pro or the Antelope Pure 2 but I should get better monitors before spending that much on converters. I'm interested in the Antelope since they seem to have the best clocking (although this doesn't include the atomic clocking built-in) and Greg Wells uses the Pure 2. It is cheaper than the ADI-2 Pro so I'd be curious to see which sounds better.


----------



## jamwerks (Dec 28, 2016)

In Europe the ADI-2 Pro is about 25% less than the Pure2.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Dec 28, 2016)

jamwerks said:


> In Europe the ADI-2 Pro is about 25% less than the Pure2.



My bad, you're right. I missed one of the currency exchanges when going to CAD.


----------



## chrysshawk (Dec 28, 2016)

Cool - and thanks you guys! The main reason I'm contemplating this is that I'll be getting the Slate VMS which lacks AD conversion. If I could get an ADI-2 relatively cheaply, that would be my preferred option. However, I think life would be simpler if I'd get an RME unit to handle as many tasks as possible. At the moment I just have way too many dedicated units for everything.

So, then the research starts on which soundcard to get.....


----------

