[ThEvil0nE]

Got a question fir the headphone/preamp experts. Looking at buying a Burson Audio Soloist 3XP preamp & headphone amp to use with the RME DAC and Focal Shape 65 active monitors. Not that the RME by itself is bad but I could use more power and authority with both headphones and monitors. I also use a M&K 12" active subwoofer that is connected via RCA to the DAC while the monitors are running on the XLR. As you know, the balanced and single entry run simultaneously out of the RME so the sound is pretty good, with the sub providing hilarious amount of thunder and rumble. If I get the Soloist, it will run in balanced mode of course, but there's no way to connect the sub via RCA to it. So my question is, would be OK to keep the sub connected to the RME on RCA, run XLRs to Soloist and from there output XLR to the monitors? Do you think there might be some sort of delay due to the monitors being run through the separate preamp? I would control the volume from the RME DAC of course.

The Soloist got some raving reviews and I'm quite tempted but I'd hate to have to plug and unplug cables any time I switch between headphones and monitors.

You're more than fine doing it. If anything, the only change that could occur, which I don't really see any adverse effect as the Soloist is a solid product, is the quality of signal coming out of the Soloist to your active monitor.

I have the FS v2 + Reproducer Epic 5 (pc setup) and ADI-2 Pro + PSI A17-M (living room). If I ever need a headphone amp, I would be going the Soloist route myself but since I get more ear time with the monitor/mastering speakers than headphones, no amp work fine with me atm.

 

[skhan007]

Well, yes, and no. A lot of Hi Res tracks have been remastered for release on higher resolution formats. The remastering process ultimately seeks to address the shortcomings of a previous master, and in that respect the Hi Res version may sound subjectively better. Not because it's Hi Res, but because the tonality has been changed through the remastering process. Take a remastered Hi Res track and resample it down to 16/44 and it'll sound exactly the same.

Honestly a lot of Hi Res stuff is sold on secret remasters. In other words the Hi Res version has been artificially altered in secret to subjectively sound better than the 16/44 version. This happens because otherwise nobody would buy Hi Res music, and sometimes it's worth picking up a Hi Res version because the remastering really does make the track or album sound better than the original mastering. But it's nothing to do with the higher sample rate or bit depth.

Understood. So, for example, if I already own a remastered release of an album on CD it should sound the same as buying the same album as a hi-res version, as a 24/192 download file.

However, if there is a favorite album of mine that hasn't been released as a remastered CD, I could consider downloading the hi-res version, but what I'd be really hearing is the remastering and not the increased bit depth and sample rate, correct? If so, that makes a lot of sense.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

Certainly for my system, which is simply fed from my pc to the RME and using a great but not insane set of headphones (Fostex TH900 mk2).

This is a KILLER combo. And I have said many times, the RME is the best thousand euros/dollars etc. that you can ever spend on audio.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

I ordered this headphone stand. The bottom fits perfect under the rme adi 2 and it looks like 1 unit . Very clean and space saving. It was a bit short i had to space it with some spacers at the back. I wanted to share this idea with you maybe some one like it and want to do the same


https://www.amazon.de/dp/B07KWV2GW2/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_DZWVBHCGRFXWYKQHM573?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

Ah, nice one! Pretty much the same as my RME on the base of my LG monitor, it fits just fine

What's lacking on both those stands is a mounting bracket for the RME so it doesn't jump all over when you use the controls. I guess even some double-sided tape would help

It’s just such a sexy unit. How does the amp portion perform? More specifically, how does it sound compared to the THX 789? I read the 789 is better on paper and that’s the one I have (and love) but shelling out $1200 for just a DAC is a tough pill for me to swallow, even for a device as nice as this. So I would sell the 789 and just use the RME. If I pulled the trigger.

The amp is a good amp for an all in one (well, not including Violectrics). It is not a good amp compared to standalone amps. It depends on your headphones. Audeze up to LCD-3F, Fostex (not 50/60RP) are incredible. Sennheiser 300 ohm cans, meh.

 

[Wladimir]

And I have said many times, the RME is the best thousand euros/dollars etc. that you can ever spend on audio.

This is, imho, the truest statement ever

 

[skhan007]

I ordered this headphone stand. The bottom fits perfect under the rme adi 2 and it looks like 1 unit . Very clean and space saving. It was a bit short i had to space it with some spacers at the back. I wanted to share this idea with you maybe some one like it and want to do the same


https://www.amazon.de/dp/B07KWV2GW2/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_DZWVBHCGRFXWYKQHM573?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

This looks great! Can you specify what kind of spacers were needed? If I order this stand, I may have to do the same.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

I would wrap some good layers of tape around those legs so nothing shorts

 

[Slaphead]

Understood. So, for example, if I already own a remastered release of an album on CD it should sound the same as buying the same album as a hi-res version, as a 24/192 download file.

However, if there is a favorite album of mine that hasn't been released as a remastered CD, I could consider downloading the hi-res version, but what I'd be really hearing is the remastering and not the increased bit depth and sample rate, correct? If so, that makes a lot of sense.

Well there's remasters, and there's remasters, and there's remasters. Just because you have a CD that's a remaster doesn't mean to say it's the same remaster as being offered on Hi-Res, and as I said some of these are done secretively, and by that I mean no public announcement, simply to make the Hi-Res version sound different.

Also it's quite possible that a Hi-Res track hasn't been remastered at all, so it should theoretically sound the same as the CD, right? Well it's highly possible that the ADC (Analog to Digital Conversion) used in the Hi-Res version is significantly more advanced than the original ADC that used for the initial CD - This is especially prevalent amongst CDs released in the eighties and early nineties when ADC was a bit ropey, so again you may be getting a better conversion by going for the Hi-Res version.

A lot of popular albums have been remastered god knows how many times - take Miles Davis' Kind of Blue for example. There's a new remaster of this almost every year, everytime touted to extract the most from the master tapes.

Remasters are a deep deep rabbit hole, and honestly my advice is to take the blue pill - If you like what you've already got then that's cool. All I'm saying is that for a given recording/remaster 16/44 is all you need as a listener. There are no advantages in terms of fidelity to going higher than that.

 

[ThEvil0nE]

I use these https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07PKV9D7R to keep the DAC-2 in place. Makes turning the volume and specially no.2 knob so much easier plus it adds more airflow underneath the unit. I also use them on my Roland VR-1HD.

 

[Bazaar]

Well, I've finally waded through all 268 pages . There was actually a wealth of info, especially for setting EQ; for example, I found out how to set Band 6 & 7 on the RME!

So far I'm liking what I'm hearing, fiddling w/ the PEQ a little, as I'm still trying to decide between the HD820 and the HD800S for the long run.

 

[skhan007]

Well, I've finally waded through all 268 pages . There was actually a wealth of info, especially for setting EQ; for example, I found out how to set Band 6 & 7 on the RME!

So far I'm liking what I'm hearing, fiddling w/ the PEQ a little, as I'm still trying to decide between the HD820 and the HD800S for the long run.

Any chance you can point me to which pages in this thread provide this info? Just got my ADI-2 yesterday and I’m fumbling around trying to learn the EQ settings.

 

[Bazaar]

These were some key ones:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/eq-settings-for-700-headphones.885196/
One of the key things was having someone mention that Band 6 & 7 are the Bass & Treble Otherwise, it was tough trying to transpose an 11-band to 5-band (use the first 5 bands and map to the RME PEQ).

https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq/tree/master/results/oratory1990
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the...ost-ideal-sound-for-non-professionals.796791/
https://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Graphic-Equalizer
https://blog.landr.com/eq-basics-everything-musicians-need-know-eq/

For my 800S:

• https://www.head-fi.org/threads/rme-adi-2-dac-thread.868015/post-15918545
• https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/f0od0n/rme_adi2_dac_eq_configuration_for_hd800s/

 

[Moose246]

Well there's remasters, and there's remasters, and there's remasters. Just because you have a CD that's a remaster doesn't mean to say it's the same remaster as being offered on Hi-Res, and as I said some of these are done secretively, and by that I mean no public announcement, simply to make the Hi-Res version sound different.

Also it's quite possible that a Hi-Res track hasn't been remastered at all, so it should theoretically sound the same as the CD, right? Well it's highly possible that the ADC (Analog to Digital Conversion) used in the Hi-Res version is significantly more advanced than the original ADC that used for the initial CD - This is especially prevalent amongst CDs released in the eighties and early nineties when ADC was a bit ropey, so again you may be getting a better conversion by going for the Hi-Res version.

A lot of popular albums have been remastered god knows how many times - take Miles Davis' Kind of Blue for example. There's a new remaster of this almost every year, everytime touted to extract the most from the master tapes.

Remasters are a deep deep rabbit hole, and honestly my advice is to take the blue pill - If you like what you've already got then that's cool. All I'm saying is that for a given recording/remaster 16/44 is all you need as a listener. There are no advantages in terms of fidelity to going higher than that.

Through my experience I really tried to give hi-res the benefit of the doubt when deciding which version I liked best, simply because in theory, and technically, it should be better. Sometimes it is, sometimes it's not. I go by what my ears and mind tell me sounds best. I read a quote on one of these boards once....wish I could quote who said it but I have no idea...and though not verbatim, the gist was "judging listenability by technical results [DR, etc] is like saying whether or not a woman is attractive using measurements only".

 

[Cevisi]

This looks great! Can you specify what kind of spacers were needed? If I order this stand, I may have to do the same.

https://www.amazon.com/-/de/dp/B07B...=1&keywords=m3+standoff&qid=1614574772&sr=8-4

 

[gimmeheadroom]

Through my experience I really tried to give hi-res the benefit of the doubt when deciding which version I liked best, simply because in theory, and technically, it should be better. Sometimes it is, sometimes it's not. I go by what my ears and mind tell me sounds best. I read a quote on one of these boards once....wish I could quote who said it but I have no idea...and though not verbatim, the gist was "judging listenability by technical results [DR, etc] is like saying whether or not a woman is attractive using measurements only".

All other things equal, hires is definitely better. But without comparing the same master (which is probably not possible in most cases because the streaming sources don't specify that) you really don't know. As far as the last line, see my sig for @Jandu wisdom