You are not logged in. Please login or register.
RME User Forum → ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series → RME ADI-2 Pro Wiring Scheme Verification
Hello,
I was planning on purchasing the RME ADI-2 Pro soon, and just wanted to make sure if the following wiring scheme seems correct.
Note: A larger version of the wiring scheme can be found here: http://pasteboard.co/75ZfRqnPt.png
Thank you,
Nelson
Looks ok to me. Note that you have to do the routing to the Kemper and back within your DAW or whatever software you will be using.
Looks ok to me. Note that you have to do the routing to the Kemper and back within your DAW or whatever software you will be using.
Hello MC,
Thank you for the input.
Can I assume that I need to specify the routing within my DAW because I need to specify whether I want to use an analog input or digital input (as I can't use both at the same time)?
Also, can I assume that the high power headphone outputs on the ADI-2 Pro are on the rear of the unit?
Thank you,
Nelson
Interesting. You really want to forgo on TotalMix ?
For the same money (during the promotion) you could get now an UFX with more channels and options.
Especially Durec to record something in parallel on USB disk or stick and you could connect even more
outputs of the Kemper to the UFX .. If I remember right you have with the Kemper several options
to configure several outputs to have either only the dry signal (for later reamping) or the signal with or
without effects.
If you would get an UFX you would have even more options when i.e. using external Effects like a good
Lexicon to get those lush reverbs .. You could even use the UFX as Mixer, so that the Amp signal
goes directly to the output and that Effects are only mixed to it like in a parallel loop.
So this would i.e. be an interesting use case which I already tried with my UFX and UFX+
just for the case that you want to use this for Kemper or when playing through real tube amps.
See this schematics.
You could surely even get rid of the DI Box and connect guitar directly to UFX and go from there to the amp.
This is still work in progress if I have some more time.
The good thing is .. a very good audio switch for an amp would cost around €500 alone to build such a parallel loop.
With the UFX you have this capabilities directly "build-in" by clever routing of the signals.
The Sound and "punch" of the Tube amp goes this way without kind of dampening through a serial loop of effects.
It goes directly from preamp to power amp without loosing its dynamics.
The effects you mix additionally to the power amp as you like. You only need to take care to configure "kill dry" in the effects.
Then its very comfortably being able to adjust the amount of the reverb on the i.e. Lexicon with the "Input" knob.
Can I assume that I need to specify the routing within my DAW because I need to specify whether I want to use an analog input or digital input (as I can't use both at the same time)?
No, you can. But you need to send the analog input signal to the digital output via the DAW. The ADI-2 Pro can't as it does not have TotalMix.
Also, can I assume that the high power headphone outputs on the ADI-2 Pro are on the rear of the unit?
Good catch. Of course they are on the front side (I need better glasses).
nelson_a wrote:Can I assume that I need to specify the routing within my DAW because I need to specify whether I want to use an analog input or digital input (as I can't use both at the same time)?
No, you can. But you need to send the analog input signal to the digital output via the DAW. The ADI-2 Pro can't as it does not have TotalMix.
nelson_a wrote:Also, can I assume that the high power headphone outputs on the ADI-2 Pro are on the rear of the unit?
Good catch. Of course they are on the front side (I need better glasses).
Hello MC,
Thank you for the clarification.
Regarding the headphone outputs on the front-side of the unit.
Can I assume that if I wanted to drive a powerful set of headphones, that I'd only be using one of the outputs (ex. PH 1/2 for both the left and right channels) or both sets (ex. PH 1/2 for the left channel and PH 3/4 for the right channel)?
Thank you,
Nelson
Interesting. You really want to forgo on TotalMix ?
For the same money (during the promotion) you could get now an UFX with more channels and options.
Especially Durec to record something in parallel on USB disk or stick and you could connect even more
outputs of the Kemper to the UFX .. If I remember right you have with the Kemper several options
to configure several outputs to have either only the dry signal (for later reamping) or the signal with or
without effects.If you would get an UFX you would have even more options when i.e. using external Effects like a good
Lexicon to get those lush reverbs .. You could even use the UFX as Mixer, so that the Amp signal
goes directly to the output and that Effects are only mixed to it like in a parallel loop.So this would i.e. be an interesting use case which I already tried with my UFX and UFX+
just for the case that you want to use this for Kemper or when playing through real tube amps.See this schematics.
You could surely even get rid of the DI Box and connect guitar directly to UFX and go from there to the amp.
This is still work in progress if I have some more time.The good thing is .. a very good audio switch for an amp would cost around €500 alone to build such a parallel loop.
With the UFX you have this capabilities directly "build-in" by clever routing of the signals.The Sound and "punch" of the Tube amp goes this way without kind of dampening through a serial loop of effects.
It goes directly from preamp to power amp without loosing its dynamics.
The effects you mix additionally to the power amp as you like. You only need to take care to configure "kill dry" in the effects.Then its very comfortably being able to adjust the amount of the reverb on the i.e. Lexicon with the "Input" knob.
Hello Ramses,
Thank you for the input + detailed schematic.
The problem I have the UFX or UFX+ is down to quality.
Both the AD and DA on the UFX+ (and especially the UFX) are far lower in quality compared to the ADI-2 Pro.
Then there's also the circuitry involved, with the ADI-2 Pro using better capacitors, PCB, etc.
Also, the UFX+ and UFX both lack a sample rate converter, which is important as using the Kemper via SPDIF requires that the Kemper be the master clock (which would limit my DAW session to 44.1, unless I had a sample rate converter).
There's the problem with the instrument inputs being of lower quality on the UFX+ (and especially the UFX) than the dedicated DI in my diagram (which costs more than $1,000.00 alone for a single channel).
As for Totalmix, given that I'll be working with so few channels, I doubt the lack of Totalmix will be a huge deal (though I could be wrong, as I've never used Totalmix myself).
Lastly there's the headphone outputs on the ADI-2 Pro, which are far more powerful and quiet compared to either the UFX+ or UFX (which may be important, as there's a good chance I might be mixing heavily on headphones).
The UFX+ would definitely be a good option if I needed the channel count, but I really don't as I drum through a MIDI electronic drum kit and play piano through a MIDI keyboard (though it would be nice if the ADI-2 Pro had a MIDI input and output like the UFX and UFX+).
Given that I don't sing (not well at least), there's no need for a pre-amp (and to be honest with you, I doubt many would use the pre-amps on their interface unless they didn't have a dedicated pre-amp or enough pre-amps).
Du-Rec is definitely cool, but given that I only record myself, the loss of a take (in the unlikely chance that the ADI-2 Pro fails) is worth it if I have better AD, DA, circuitry, headphone outs, etc.
Thank you for all your help,
Nelson
Regarding the headphone outputs on the front-side of the unit. Can I assume that if I wanted to drive a powerful set of headphones, that I'd only be using one of the outputs (ex. PH 1/2 for both the left and right channels) or both sets (ex. PH 1/2 for the left channel and PH 3/4 for the right channel)?
You mean a set of headphones that need a lot of power...you will be using output 3/4 only, which a) gives more than enough power and b) works independent from the output 1/2, which is coupled with the rear outputs that you use for the speakers.
Also, the UFX+ and UFX both lack a sample rate converter, which is important as using the Kemper via SPDIF requires that the Kemper be the master clock (which would limit my DAW session to 44.1, unless I had a sample rate converter).
The SRC in the ADI-2 Pro decouples its input data clock. This is a perfecly working solution for example for a CD-player that can only run on its own clock. But the Kemper also has an SPDIF input (!). Does it have a SRC for that? If not then you will have the same problem on that part of the signal path again, and you are still limited to 44.1 kHz (I don't know the Kemper in detail - it can only work with that sample rate?).
nelson_a wrote:Regarding the headphone outputs on the front-side of the unit. Can I assume that if I wanted to drive a powerful set of headphones, that I'd only be using one of the outputs (ex. PH 1/2 for both the left and right channels) or both sets (ex. PH 1/2 for the left channel and PH 3/4 for the right channel)?
You mean a set of headphones that need a lot of power...you will be using output 3/4 only, which a) gives more than enough power and b) works independent from the output 1/2, which is coupled with the rear outputs that you use for the speakers.
nelson_a wrote:Also, the UFX+ and UFX both lack a sample rate converter, which is important as using the Kemper via SPDIF requires that the Kemper be the master clock (which would limit my DAW session to 44.1, unless I had a sample rate converter).
The SRC in the ADI-2 Pro decouples its input data clock. This is a perfecly working solution for example for a CD-player that can only run on its own clock. But the Kemper also has an SPDIF input (!). Does it have a SRC for that? If not then you will have the same problem on that part of the signal path again, and you are still limited to 44.1 kHz (I don't know the Kemper in detail - it can only work with that sample rate?).
Hello MC,
You're right about the Kemper, it only works at 44.1.
That being said, I do have access to Izotope RX 5 Advanced (which has a powerful software-based SRC) and use Reaper as my DAW (which can work with multiple sample rates within the same DAW session).
As long as I'm using the ADI-2 Pro's SRC on its SPDIF input to convert the Kemper's 44.1 to 96, I can then down-sample using RX 5 and send the Kemper a 44.1 signal (when re-amping).
I'm not 100% certain this will work, but it should "technically" speaking.
Thanks once again,
Nelson
No, it can't. You cannot have different sample rates on input and output in the DAW software. Reaper can handle different SR in a project by resampling them, but that's not the problem here. You need a fixed 44.1 kHz SPDIF output for the Kemper input, and that will only be available when the ADI-2 Pro runs on 44.1, which requires your DAW to run on 44.1 kHz. Like any other audio interface.
No, it can't. You cannot have different sample rates on input and output in the DAW software. Reaper can handle different SR in a project by resampling them, but that's not the problem here. You need a fixed 44.1 kHz SPDIF output for the Kemper input, and that will only be available when the ADI-2 Pro runs on 44.1, which requires your DAW to run on 44.1 kHz. Like any other audio interface.
Hello MC,
It seems you're right.
It looks like the only way around this is to send the Kemper an analog signal (rather than digital) or to use a hardware sample rate converter such as the following Behringer Ultramatch Pro SRC2496 (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ … ample.html).
Given that the Behringer is pretty cheap $200.00, and I might be able to get a deal on it, I'll probably go that route (I'll use the Behringer when sending a SPDIF signal from the ADI-2 Pro to the Kemper).
Thank you for the help,
Nelson
RME User Forum → ADI-2 & 2/4 Pro series, ADI-2 DAC series → RME ADI-2 Pro Wiring Scheme Verification
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
