This is basically the babyface pro fs. Which has everything you need. Connect an Adi 2 to it if you think you need better conversion.

You are right it would not fully  work for the ADi2/4 but would for all ADi's with 2 in 2 out.
But it was not ment as an advice or solution. More like either get an audio interfave, like the babyface ufx or ucx and if you think you need better conversion (which I don't think at least I need) add an ADI.
Maybe RME will build a low channel count, highest quality ADDA conversion audio interface, but the ADI's are not that and if a firmware upgrade were possible they would have done that, I am sure! And it would have have had that from the start.

Class Compliant Multi-channel USB Mode gives you free access to all Pro series ADI-2’s in- and outputs.

The only thing that’s missing is Zero-Latency-Monitoring.
This function is linked to TotalMix, and therefore reserved for RME’s audio interfaces, which the ADI’s don’t belong to.

With faster computers ZLM becomes lesser and lesser an issue, as very short DAW-feedthrough latencies can be achieved when tracking.

For mixing and mastering latency isn’t an issue anyway.
Whenever asked, @MC responded that TotalMix will not become part of the current ADI-2 series devices.

I always educated:
Get an audio interface as central unit of a studio, not just a converter (how sophisticated it ever might be).

So, let’s wait and see what’s up next at RME’s, as the current ADI-2 series is out-of-production now.
Rumors tell in March something new might show up.

I’m not sure why discussions about the ADI-2/4 Pro so often end up with responses from people who don’t actually use the unit, while assuming that the owner misunderstands it.

Please read my original post carefully. I’m not asking to turn the ADI-2/4 Pro into a TotalMix-based interface. I’m asking for very basic control features. Is having independent volume control really such an unreasonable request?

I use the ADI-2/4 Pro for real studio tasks, and as an experienced user I’m giving feedback to the manufacturer on how the product could be improved.

The real limitation appears when the device is used “just as a converter” together with another audio interface. In that scenario, the ADI-2/4 Pro can only work in one direction at a time unless it is connected in USB mode.

If you want to use the ADI-2/4 Pro as a mastering insert together with another interface, this workflow is simply not supported. To make it work, you have to switch the ADI-2/4 Pro to be the main device, and only in Multiple-USB mode can this be achieved. At that point, it is no longer “just a converter” - it becomes the primary interface.

What I’m proposing is that adding a few simple device-level features would make this kind of work possible in a much more autonomous and elegant way. For example, why not add additional tabs on the ADI-2 Remote for digital outputs (5/6,7/8), with basic volume control and routing? Is that really an excessive request for a flagship, mastering-grade device?

The main limitation appears in AD/DA mode.
This mode is clearly intended for using the ADI-2/4 Pro as a hardware insert. However, in this mode, the main monitor output routing becomes blocked by the predefined signal structure.

In practice, AD/DA mode only works smoothly if you have an additional audio interface that provides multiple digital I/O formats simultaneously. For example, S/PDIF → Out 1/2 (signal to monitors), AES → Out 3/4 (signal to insert path).
Only in such a scenario can you maintain independent control over monitoring and insert routing.

Another limitation is that the analog inputs are routed to all digital outputs simultaneously, and this behavior cannot be changed. There is no per-output routing definition.
In my case, I use Genelec studio monitors connected via AES. Because of that, AD/DA mode completely breaks my routing structure.
That’s why I’m proposing a small firmware update to simplify and make the device more flexible.

An even better solution would be a Custom/User mode, where the user could define routing freely and determine the device’s role depending on their workflow.

I fully understand that the predefined routing modes were likely chosen for good reasons. I’m just suggesting that adding a configurable mode would make the ADI-2/4 Pro significantly more adaptable for professional studio environments.

I think there is still a misunderstanding here. I’m not asking for anything close to TotalMix, nor for a fully flexible DSP mixer.

The ADI-2 Remote already provides this kind of functionality - just in a limited form. What I’m asking for is an extension of the existing control concept, not a new routing engine.

For example, why is it not possible to control all outputs from the top panel, including the digital ones?
The digital outputs are already internally mapped as outputs 5/6 and 7/8, and they are accessible in Multiple-USB mode. That clearly shows that the device is already capable of addressing these outputs individually.

So the question is: why can’t these outputs be made available in other modes as well?

For the digital outputs, I’m not requesting the full feature set (EQ, loudness, dynamics, etc.). All that would be needed is:
-source selection,
-volume control,
-and basic level indication on the device display.

That does not require TotalMix-style DSP mixing. It’s simple output control - something the ADI-2/4 Pro already does for analog outputs 1/2 and 3/4.

Using an additional interface like a UCX II certainly adds flexibility, but it doesn’t address the core issue: the ADI-2/4 Pro is already very close to being a self-contained studio device, and a few small firmware-level extensions could remove unnecessary workflow limitations without changing the product’s fundamental design.

That’s all I’m trying to point out.

I think I explained the "routing" part pretty well.
For the complete use case / signal flow I didn't have time.

But the routing is like this:
For each output (not only 1/2,3/4) a Tab, where it is possible to select one or more sources for this particular output.
This is not TotalMix but fits into the current concept of having a TAB per output and an individual routing per output channel.
Comparable to submix mode, you select a TAB/an output and there you select from which sources the output shall get audio.

Regarding the implementation and operation at the device, a proposal.

A new device mode "manual" which stands for manual routing/source selection instead of Auto, AD/DA, ...
   Options -> Device Mode/DSD -> Basic Mode -> Manual

In "I/O" you can already choose between the analog outputs; there you need to add the missing digital outputs.
In the submenu "Settings," replace, e.g., "AD/DA Source" by simply "Source" and make the source port selectable.

By this, every analog and digital output can get its individual input mapped in this new operation mode, "manual".

I think from an operational perspective, at the device and using ADI-2 Remote, it would be feasible.
The question is whether this can be added to the firmware.

This is exactly what I’ve been trying to explain.

The device already has a lot of functionality, but many parameters are strongly interconnected. Because of these dependencies, there are situations where you have to choose between features and sacrifice certain functionality in order to enable another.

I want to emphasize - this is not a criticism of the device. The ADI-2/4 Pro is an excellent converter. What I’m describing are areas where the workflow could potentially be optimized.

From a user perspective, these changes may look like small adjustments. From the developer side, I fully understand that the internal logic and dependencies are much more complex than they appear externally.

Still, if there is any possibility to refine this in the future, it would make the ADI-2/4 Pro even stronger - especially for studio applications. I believe many users would genuinely appreciate that.

And of course, I appreciate that the ADI line continues to receive updates. We’ll see what the future brings.

+2

Great enhancement request!

In USB-Multichannel Mode the USB-to-physical-output assignment is fixed.

What you might consider:
Use channel 1/2 for monitoring, when switching between headphones and speakers this one is better suited, as it has independent settings for both.

Ch 3/4, with the balanced Rear TRS assigned to, can serve to feed a e.g. mastering chain the same way and quality as the XLRs.

I will say that this is not really true though.

the XLR I/O can have its levels set with electronic switches to very specific +dBU Reference levels. Its not just a varying input but an electronic switch. The Hilo has the same, you can hear it make a slight click sound when it changes. When that is perfectly aligned with an analog unit, you're making sure output level is exact and not introducing any unneeded gain. In practice its not a big deal, but in theory this would be adding changes to the audio itself. And when someone pays for mastering, they are paying for these details to be minded.

Another thing, the TRS out does not get up to +24 dBU, and some analog boxes need a hot signal.

All of these hardware features are present in the device. In fact, RME markets the 2/4 Pro SE as a pro audio unit built for mastering. And all that would need to be tweaked is simply allowing a one-line setting in the menu to allow for USB 1/2 to be assigned to either XLR or TRS outs.

Its a small thing, but would be helpful. I've met multiple mastering engineers who set up their monitors to be on out 1/2 and the analog loop to be 3/4 for the reason of avoiding any errant computer sounds in the hardware loop, I picked up the practice from my mentor.

I shouldn't need to spend an additional $1,000 to have control over which outputs are assigned.

Are there any updates on the firmware or a new version of the ADI-2 Remote?

Not yet, but is in the works.