Guy Fawkes
100+ Head-Fier
can you make a comparison with the Benchmark stack?
RME ADI-2 DAC Thread
- Thread starter NickedWicked
- Start date
phthora
Headphoneus Supremus
TLDR; Stack to stack, the Benchmark has greater resolution and clarity, resulting in more detail across the whole spectrum, while the RME has a fuller bodied, more saturated sound with wider staging. Although I prefer the sound of the Benchmark, the RME is absolutely the best value in audio I've yet experienced. While $2500 might be a lot, it's the cheapest I've seen for a DAC/amp combo that is amazing at every category of sound and can drive nearly everything. It simply has no shortcomings, no omissions, and no weaknesses, something I cannot even say about the Benchmarks. Add on its DSP features, its tiny footprint, its AIO format, its ADC capability, etc., etc., and it simply can't be beat for price to performance.
Mostly, the differences between the two are rather small, and it's only in direct comparison to the Benchmark stack that the RME sounds like I'm describing. Taken in isolation, the RME is very clean, while maintaining a full sound. It has excellent resolving ability and imaging, and an expansive soundstage.
In the bass, the RME has less impact, but more presence and bloom, giving the bass a fuller feel to it. The bass lingers around longer. The Benchmark has more control, allowing the bass to be isolated by the ear more readily, while also having more focused impact to each bass note. In the mids, the RME doesn't quite manage the instrument separation, layering, and control that the Benchmark has. On the LCD-5, my most difficult to drive headphone, the mids become a bit glaring and harsh, characteristics they don't show when played through the Benchmark. For both treble and mids, the RME isn't as detailed, especially when it comes to perceiving room effects or subtle positional cues. While the RME does seem to have a wider soundstage, it renders less specific imaging. Also, it seems to blunt the decay and reverb trails of sounds. This gives a greater sense of black background, but it doesn't sound as natural. Sort of like turning up the contrast in an image. This also negatively effects the shimmer of cymbals, especially in busier passages.
When paired with the ZMF Atticus, a headphone that I personally find sensitive to amps, the RME sounded better subjectively that the Benchmark. It sounded lusher and more inviting, softened the too bassy FR some, and expanded the soundstage out quite a bit. I enjoyed the Atticus more with the RME than any other amp I've tried, even tube amps. On the other hand, the LCD-2C came off as a slightly muffled, flabby in the bass, and kind of lifeless through the mids on the RME, which is definitely not my experience with the Benchmark. Gone was the impactful but clean bass and detailed mids. This was the worst pairing with the RME. The Arya v2 was an interesting case, as it sounded quite different between set-ups, but it's hard to say which one I ultimately prefer. With the RME, it gained some much needed warmth and fullness in the low-end and lost a little of the crispy, metallic edge it can sometimes have. On the other hand, the Benchmark, as with all my headphones, wrung out the very last bit of detail, control, and clarity. Both takes on the Arya were excellent.
As a standalone DAC, the RME wins easily, but for a weird reason. The Benchmark DAC outputs 24v at line-out, making its ouput out-of-spec many amps (this is the reason I wanted another DAC in the first place). So, I had to compare RCA out on the DAC-3B to XLR output on the RME. With my WA22 as the amp, that was an easy victory for the RME. It just sounds more dynamic and resolving, plus I could use all the DSP adjustments on the RME to tailor the output. It's possible that this all comes down to the difference in inputs on the WA22, rather than the outputs on the DACs, but I can't verify that one way or the other.
For sensitive IEMs, the differences were hard to discern. Also, I am frankly unlikely to use either over my DAP, for practical reasons and for sound quality. Given a choice, I would choose the RME for its more IEM-friendly 4.4mm output (over the Benchmarks XLR).
As a wrap up, I love both the RME and the Benchmark stack, but I give the RME the higher recommendation because in addition to its spectacular sound quality, it is ridiculously versatile. Seriously, it is the only DAC/amp worthy of being called an all-in-one. Nearly everything else is frankly just a two-in-one.
Last edited:
Simon Patten
100+ Head-Fier
Some wonderfully descriptive language there, great post.TLDR; Stack to stack, the Benchmark has greater resolution and clarity, resulting in more detail across the whole spectrum, while the RME has a fuller bodied, more saturated sound with wider staging. Although I prefer the sound of the Benchmark, the RME is absolutely the best value in audio I've yet experienced. While $2500 might be a lot, it's the cheapest I've seen for a DAC/amp combo that is amazing at every category of sound and can drive nearly everything. It simply has no shortcomings, no omissions, and no weaknesses, something I cannot even say about the Benchmarks. Add on its DSP features, its tiny footprint, its AIO format, its ADC capability, etc., etc., and it simply can't be beat for price to performance.
Mostly, the differences between the two are rather small, and it's only in direct comparison to the Benchmark stack that the RME sounds like I'm describing. Taken in isolation, the RME is very clean, while maintaining a full sound. It has excellent resolving ability and imaging, and an expansive soundstage.
In the bass, the RME has less impact, but more presence and bloom, giving the bass a fuller feel to it. The bass lingers around longer. The Benchmark has more control, allowing the bass to be isolated by the ear more readily, while also having more focused impact to each bass note. In the mids, the RME doesn't quite manage the instrument separation, layering, and control that the Benchmark has. On the LCD-5, my most difficult to drive headphone, the mids become a bit glaring and harsh, characteristics they don't show when played through the Benchmark. For both treble and mids, the RME isn't as detailed, especially when it comes to perceiving room effects or subtle positional cues. While the RME does seem to have a wider soundstage, it renders less specific imaging. Also, it seems to blunt the decay and reverb trails of sounds. This gives a greater sense of black background, but it doesn't sound as natural. Sort of like turning up the contrast in an image. This also negatively effects the shimmer of cymbals, especially in busier passages.
When paired with the ZMF Atticus, a headphone that I personally find sensitive to amps, the RME sounded better subjectively that the Benchmark. It sounded lusher and more inviting, softened the too bassy FR some, and expanded the soundstage out quite a bit. I enjoyed the Atticus more with the RME than any other amp I've tried, even tube amps. On the other hand, the LCD-2C came off as a slightly muffled, flabby in the bass, and kind of lifeless through the mids on the RME, which is definitely not my experience with the Benchmark. Gone was the impactful but clean bass and detailed mids. This was the worst pairing with the RME. The Arya v2 was an interesting case, as it sounded quite different between set-ups, but it's hard to say which one I ultimately prefer. With the RME, it gained some much needed warmth and fullness in the low-end and lost a little of the crispy, metallic edge it can sometimes have. On the other hand, the Benchmark, as with all my headphones, wrung out the very last bit of detail, control, and clarity. Both takes on the Arya were excellent.
As a standalone DAC, the RME wins easily, but for a weird reason. The Benchmark DAC outputs 24v at line-out, making its ouput out-of-spec many amps (this is the reason I wanted another DAC in the first place). So, I had to compare RCA out on the DAC-3B to XLR output on the RME. With my WA22 as the amp, that was an easy victory for the RME. It just sounds more dynamic and resolving, plus I could use all the DSP adjustments on the RME to tailor the output. It's possible that this all comes down to the difference in inputs on the WA22, rather than the outputs on the DACs, but I can't verify that one way or the other.
For sensitive IEMs, the differences were hard to discern. Also, I am frankly unlikely to use either over my DAP, for practical reasons and for sound quality. Given a choice, I would choose the RME for its more IEM-friendly 4.4mm output (over the Benchmarks XLR).
As a wrap up, I love both the RME and the Benchmark stack, but I give the RME the higher recommendation because in addition to its spectacular sound quality, it is ridiculously versatile. Seriously, it is the only DAC/amp worthy of being called an all-in-one. Nearly everything else is frankly just a two-in-one.
Svperstar
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2004
- Posts
- 1,461
- Likes
- 574
I ended up getting a Schiit Midgard. Its got a lot of power on tap. B-stock so $199, beats paying $2500+ for a Violectric like I was thinking of doing.
Since you have the Pro, have you tried to only use the DSP features of the RME (essentially for EQ/loudness compensation only) and feed it into your other DAC?
That feels like such an overkill thing to do, but since it's apparently possible I'm curious if anyone has tried it...
makan
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2015
- Posts
- 942
- Likes
- 525
I feed my Yggradisil from my Pro to take advantage of the PEQ. Works well. Optical to optical and also usb to coaxial
Last edited:
Simon Patten
100+ Head-Fier
That is bad. Mine is perfect - as you would expect of German engineering. I would send it back for replacement, if nothing else it will lower its resale value.
BWythani
Head-Fier
Got my replacement RME ADI-2 and the build quality is only very slightly better. Screws are still cross threaded through the top of it. I don’t think I’ll exchange it again. Hopefully this doesn’t speak to the build quality when it comes to the electronics.
simonelvladtepes
100+ Head-Fier
Send it back again and again until you get a perfect one or they run out and give you a refund. This is just unacceptable and suspicious. Is it a reputable merchant?
Has anybody tried the Ferum Hypsos with RME ADI 2 pro FS, or other power supply of this class?
I heard good power supply improves the sound
I heard good power supply improves the sound
Guy Fawkes
100+ Head-Fier
I use the 2021 LCD-X with my ADI-2 but would like to know if anyone has seen any benefits with adding a dedicated headphone amplifier. I would be inclined to get a Violectric v202 or v222, but I have no idea if the expense will give me a step up in quality compared to the internal amplifier.
The LCD-X is very easy to drive. The RME already has many times more power than LCD-X could ever need. So is an amp justified on sound quality alone? Really only if the amp has a house sound or effect or distortion that you prefer. It might be better to your ears but it likely won't be €2000 better. A cheaper avenue to explore is a better PSU for the RME. I'm using a FiiO PL50 to good effect with my ADI2-DAC. I think this power supply offers good value and it seems to tidy up the slightly metallic upper-midrange on the RME.
(Edit: 50 other members will now post about 50 different amps that will all make a night and day difference to your listening experience. They might but it won't be cheap!)
Last edited:
evhvis
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Posts
- 332
- Likes
- 502
Gains would depend a lot on the headphones. I use a V226 after my RME ADI-2 DAC FS. Running HD650 balanced from the V226 is massively better than the RME, while running the HD650 single ended shows minor gains. Lower ohm headphones shows less gain, but the balanced output from the V226 is generally a solid step up while the single ended is typically minor gains until you turn the volume up to something like -25 on the ADI-2 and comparable volume on the V226.
The V226 on single ended has similar smoothness to ADI-2 in low Lo-Power but better dynamics and far more head-room then Hi-Power. The ADI-2 gets stressed a lot quicker than the V226, especially with bass heavy music. Personally I much prefer the Lo-Power compared to high power on the ADI-2 as it is much smoother and more relaxed, but I miss out on some dynamics compared to Hi-Power. With the V226 I get both the smoothness and the dynamics on single ended and moving to balanced output from the V226 takes the quality up a notch or two.
There isn't much difference tonally between the two when running the ADI-2 through the V226 compared to the ADI-2 on Lo-Power, but there is a bit more space and dynamics on the V226.
The V226 is an upgrade for me at least and worth the expense. Others might feel the gains do not justify the expense.
Users who are viewing this thread
