RME Digiface USB vs. MacBook Pro optical out.

[DAZZER]

Hi!
Does it make any sense to use RME Digiface USB only for playback 1 stereo channel through the ADI-2 FS in terms of quality or optical output of the MacBook Pro will deliver the same?
Thanks!

 

[Armaegis]

Why not use the usb input of the ADI-2 FS instead of sticking another conversion step in between?

 

[DAZZER]

ADI-2 FS doesn't have USB.

 

[Armaegis]

Do you already have one or both of these devices?

The most straightforward would be to get the RME ADI-2 Pro FS or any of the models that have the USB input.

If you already have the ADI-2 FS and need an optical converter (or coax would work too), frankly spending the $630 for the Digiface is paying a lot for the multichannel features which you don't need.

 

[DAZZER]

Oh, it's quite a long story. I have an ADI-2 FS and I bought it because:

• ADI-2 FS is much cheaper than ADI-2 Pro FS
• I can use ADI-2 FS as an analog preamp with my other DAC
• I can use ADI-2 FS as a "cleaner" of digital signal between source and my other DAC (though I'm not sure if I need it)

For mobile professional use with laptop on Windows I bought Digiface USB. But now I started to think that instead of the laptop + Digiface USB I could just buy a macbook.

 

[Armaegis]

Wait... so you already have all the expensive equipment that does high quality usb->spdif conversion, but you're considering buying an even more expensive macbook in order to use the suboptimal optical output? Unless you're desperate to simply your setup, I don't see the advantage here.

 

[DAZZER]

Well, IMHO Digiface USB is not so expensive convertor like Berkeley Alpha USB for example
I had Windows laptop for a long time, and MacBook will be used anyway, because new models no longer have an optical output.
The only doubt is that the built-in optical output cannot be as stable and reliable as the Digiface USB.

 

[Armaegis]

I've only heard second hand that the macbook optical output is subpar, but generally you can't expect much for built-in converters. The main appeal would be convenience and reducing the amount of gear on your table.

But seriously, the cost of the ADI-2 FS and the Digiface together aren't that far off from the ADI-2 Pro FS and then you're done to a single box solution, unless you really needed all those channels for your mobile use. Myself, I have a Babyface Pro FS that I really like and think it actually sounds better than the ADI-2 Pro, and on the side I also use that as a spdif converter to feed by SPL Mercury dac.

 

[DAZZER]

Before that I also considered the Babyface Pro FS, but I read on some forums that the ADI-2 DAC FS sounds better. I thought that ADI-2 FS couldn't sound much worse than a ADI-2 DAC FS. Moreover, I still need a preamp (i.e. attenuator) and thought about building an AMB α24.

 

[Armaegis]

Can you list your other gear? And what kind of mobile recording/digital work do you do?

 

[DAZZER]

PMed you.

 

[misterfreeze]

The optical outlet was removed from MacBooks years ago. You may have to hunt to find an older model.

 

[DAZZER]

I know it.

MacBook will be used anyway, because new models no longer have an optical output.

But it's ok for me.

 

[DAZZER]

Wait... so you already have all the expensive equipment that does high quality usb->spdif conversion, but you're considering buying an even more expensive macbook in order to use the suboptimal optical output? Unless you're desperate to simply your setup, I don't see the advantage here.

You're completely right! Sorry, my question didn't make sense from the start.