https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=32506

https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/Ent … ses-EN-DE/

> Is the windows driver still ASIO compatible or are there any changes to that?

The only driver is the MADIface driver and this is an ASIO driver.

Yes, if you know the original model you know the current one.

You might even have a look at ADI-2/4 Pro SE that adds some features that improve studio use.

@KaiS
Sounds good,thanks. I have checked the features of the Pro SE but it looks like i would be al set with the Pro FS.
I am not 100% sure about the classification on the two analog inputs, are these "line level"?

I do realize that i would need a microphone preamp and a DI box for guitar direct recording, but for devices that have a line level output, for example a amp modeler i could simply connect it to the analog inoputs, is that correct?

@ramses
i am all about simplicity and the most straight forwared setup possible, so ithink that the Pro FS would be the better choice.

I am a bit confused about the two new headphone inputs and the labeling.
Are these two separate stereo headphone inputs that could be used in balanced mode,
or do i necesarily need to have a balanced HP?

@ramses
Ok, so i got the RME ADI-2 Pro FS R Black Edition for testing.
The unit was used already, so i probably got a retoure unit, which is OK, but might be an issue...

The initial setup was a bit janky, i had to install the driver 3 times before
the interface god finally recognized and showed up in my devices list.
The procedure was as alweays, install driver, restart the pc, connect the device, restart the pc again.

After the initial setup i was able to play back and record audio within my DAW. At this point i realized again
how great the RME drivers are. With my other "high end" interfaces, (which i can name if desired) i do not have
a "steady" performance in terms of latency. The drivers of those units always report a wrong latency and the latency
always shifts a few samples evedn thoug the project sample rate, buffer size etc. in not changed.
With the MADiface driver this is no issue aat all.

However, when it comes to simplicity and ease of use, in my opinion it is not as intuitive especially when encountering
issues that can not be explained my logic.

For example, for what ever reason the volume setting on the Main 1/2 controls the volume of my headphones (3/4)
and i can absolutely not understand why this is the case. Should it not be possible to set the volumes of the analog
outputs and the headphones separately?

I have also tried ADI-2 remote but i am confused as what the purpose of this software is, as it seems like it can not control the
hardware. My tzhought was that this software is made so that people could change settings etc easily on the pc screen instead of clicking through the menues on the small display on the unit.

Am i doing it wrong or is there jsut a misunderstanding of what the doftware is used for?

Maybe the UCXII would be better for my use?
I simply want an interface that works.

Thanks for the advice, i guess since the unit was previously used it might
have some unusual settings, so a factory reset is definitively a good idea!

I will report back!

As for the dual volume, i have read about it in the manual and i thought it was disabled.
I am doing a lot of reamping and it requires me to have the main volume at 0db to be able to have
a true 1:1 signal ratio, so it's not practical if the headphones blast at full volume at the same time!

In my experience mic preamps make a difference, not the least because of different impedance interactions with the mic.

A lot of mid-level studio interfaces have very poor (read: cheap) mic-pre designs.
EIN often just only -110 dBu (from possible ca. -130 dBu) speaks for itself.

Hi-Z for passive (no battery inside) guitars, bass and such aren’t that problematic if they are really Hi-Z (> 1 MOhm).
Still I prefer my Klark LBB 100 DIs for the job, positioning close to the musician allows shorter instrument cables.

As for converter sound:

I don’t see night and day differences, but with lower sample rates of 44.1 and 48 kHz the filters are audible.
ADI-2 has a nice selection of those.

From 88.2 kHz and up, most converters sound transparent to me, so if you’re doing a lot of analog/digital/analog back and forth, I’d suggest to produce that way.

If you already have the original 1st genereation silver face ADI-2 Pro there’s nothing to gain buying an ADI-2 PrO FS R BE.

Due to RME’s firmware update policy your machine is on the same functional level - minus IR Remote that you don’t urgently need.

I did a comprehensive blind A/B between the 1st gen. ADI-2 Pro and the latest ADI-2/4 Pro SE:
Both are that good, no quality difference was audible.

To avoid constant replugging, front PH 3/4 can be used as send for your re-amp chain.
The headphones outputs have the same audio quality as the rear connectors.
It’s just a matter of fitting cable adapters.

Regarding levels: ADI-2 can adapt to any reasonable level you need for your purpose.

Professional recording studios BTW use +19 or +22 dBu for digital full scale.
This equals the “old, analog” +4 dBu with the then used headroom of 15-18 dB above reference.

But don’t let that be your guide, it’s just a convention, not a quality measure.

For re-amping you need to set the levels that your equipment can work with, and ADI-2 doesn’t care, it just takes what it gets.

A combination of UFX III and ADI-2 Pro FS R BE gives you the best base for really everything.

https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ent … iii-en-de/

Uses the MADIface driver with down to 32 samples ASIO buffer size at single speed.

You have enough I/O ports for every kind of setup that you might need as a guitarist. Up to using the UFX III as parallel effect loop, stereo setup of guitar combos plus connecting additional analog gear like Lexicon PCM for the amp and mixing/mastering.

Should you use the Instr inputs for connecting 1 or 2 guitars, it might happen, that you require more mic inputs, so I added a 12Mic (UFX II/III and 12Mic have similar if not the same Mic preamps). For that purpose, MADI is ideal; therefore I recommend getting UFX III. By MADI you also have some spare channels for creating special Submixes that you can also record (via loopback). UFX III also has the advantage of supporting USB3 CC mode (if Linux might be a topic for you).

BTW .. the UFX III (also UFX II) uses the same converter, like the ADI-2 Pro FS.

In my setup a 2nd ADI-2 Pro FS R BE performs all AD/DA related tasks in front of a High End HiFi that I can use for Music playback and also as Monitor B, controlled by ARC USB.

Here 2 diagrams as an example / overview for you from the above-mentioned blog article:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/attachme … i-v002-jpg
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/attachme … op-etc-jpg

+1
Would also do it in this order, as TM FX is so beneficial, one shouldn't simply omit it. The best is the combination of both to also get ADI-specific features and its SRC can sometimes also be beneficial.

Same as ADI-2 Pro FS (AK4490), not ADI-2 Pro FS R BE (AK4493) which differs a little in technical specs.

Not only for UFX III, same for later models of UFX II, which got now the same analog and digital section as the UFX III.
The only difference is now MADI/USB3 (due to high number of channels).

Same chip, maybe little differences in the analog section, but both of high quality, see technical specs. Other differences: device-specific features of the reference converters like auto ref level and 4 (ADI-2/4 Pro SE even 5 and support for turntable and RIAA support).

Regarding D/A filter. With the ADI-2 DAC/Pro you can change A/D and D/A filter, with UFX II/III not. The reason is, that recording interfaces get the AD/DA filter which gives the best linearity, especially @single speed, to prevent that something is missing in the higher frequencies (see treble roll-off at single speed for e.g., slow filter).

I am also playing guitar. For me, it is the opposite.
I have absolutely no issues with TM FX and couldn't live with it anymore.
The concept of having individual Submixes per HW output is completely fine and covers all needs.
To click to an HW output and to move the fader of Inputs and Audio coming from PC I regard as easy and straightforward for changing a submix. Once it is set, you can store it. That's it.

With one mouse click, you can even provide the same settings as "DAW mode" and route everything in the DAW.
Same as you would get in DAW mode.
The advantage, you have still the option to route the vocals of a vocalist on the "shorter way" directly from the input to the output without having RTL over DAW.

What I did after a couple of years. Removed all routings and deployed only the necessary ones.
Additionally, I marked every channel as hidden that I do not require.
Result: even more overview, especially in matrix mode, which is perfect for reviewing the routings.

As a guitarist, I have additional comfort with TM FX: the integration and optimum utilization of two external FX, Lexicon PCM 81 and 91. With a few TM FX routings / Snapshots, I can use them either for guitar, DAW or both (81 with modulation effects for guitar and 91 as external FX in Cubase).

Also, a big win, the quality of the instrument input of the UFX III. I plug my guitar into the UFX III and can route the guitar signal to everywhere where I want and even make a backup recording using DURec.

My use cases for UFX III:
- send the signal to my booster/amp if I want to record the two combos (stereo setup).
- use the UFX III as a parallel effect loop for the amps.
- play guitar through VSTi up to an ASIO buffer size of 128 samples at single speed with a RTL of 7.3 ms (lowest RTL with 32 samples is 2,99 ms)
- reamping with the recorded dry guitar signal from instrument input

My use cases for ADI-2 Pro FS R BE
- for monitoring with closed planar headphones DCA Aeon 2 CB / active monitors
- for listening music with active Monitors / HiFi
- using dynamic loudness a lot when listening to music during work at very low levels so that it is not disturbing
- excellent sound for any content (YouTube, Games, ...)
- protection of ear and equipment, solves any level mismatches, 0dB in TM FX do not lead to excessive volume
- slow ramp-up of volume when inserting phones or switching between active monitors and phones

It helps to understand the typical flows in such a digital setup.
TM FX submix supports this ideally:
- any input signals are (with default settings) recorded 1:1, about those you do not need to care
- routing has to deal with HW outputs, you decide on a per HW output basis, what needs to be routed to there,
  either for monitoring purposes or if you want to make use of 3rd party FX
- click to a loopback button of any HW output and you can record this output/submix on the corresponding input.

Whatever you prefer, it depends on your demands and personal preferences.

My preference will always be a combination of RME recording interface and reference converter.

Therefore, I summarized my use cases above, which should demonstrate to you that a combination of recording interface and reference converter makes sense, also for a guitarist. Both in combination results in an optimum setup with the needed flexibility of TM FX and the unique features of the reference converters for monitoring.

If UFX III and reference converter are too expensive in combination, then I would think about a combination of UFX II or UCX II and ADI-2 Pro FS R BE. If only one device is desired for use in the home recording studio, then my choice would clearly be a recording interface with TM FX.

An ADI-2 Pro FS R BE or ADI-2/4 Pro SE can also be integrated into the setup at a later date.

However, if you're struggling with TM FX, it could also make sense to buy everything completely so that you only have to deal with the routing one time.