I use the ADI-2 as a pre to my integrated amplifier, which I use as a power amp (I bypass its pre). It's much easier to find the right volume with the digital volume control of the ADI2 and a remote (.5dB makes a difference), and it sounds a tiny bit less bloated in the low mids than the pre in my integrated amp. Plus, you get the most out of the DAC's functions (loudness, for instance).

I and almost all of my customers with an ADI-2 PRO/DAC do not use a pre-amp, always a direct connection to a power-amp or active speakers. Unless you need more than one analog input. And we all have setups of very or extremely high quality.

The RME's great digital volume control is perfect and there is absolute no coloration, perfectly neutral.

If you want a specific sound, a specific coloration you can use a pre-amp to achieve that. But no electronic and a simple cable connection is always better than a complex pre-amp circutry.

And to the question: I use ADI-2 PRO as DAC only having it connected to Parasound P5 preamp.

No ,i don t use RME as pre ,because  my integrated amp  has better pre .

Directly connected to the power amp of my monitors for me. With the performance of the unit and the smart digital volume management, I can't see what an external preamp can add... except coloration.

And 10 dB XLR attenuator here, to always be on the optimal volume range of the ADI-2 DAC.

AD1-2 (via -20db Attenuators) straight to Active Monitors/Subs.   Totally Organic.  NO Artificial Ingredients.

Pitrs.   

Perhaps we should simply agree to disagree...Yes?   On my behalf, I prefer to have something closer to the source material, whatever that may be...Good or Bad.

As one who spent years Rolling Tubes, Capacitors. etc, and knowing that Jimi Hendrix was legendary owing to his use of added Distortion as you've prescribed....well...Let's just say I'm no Hendrix.

We're delighted with our ADI-2 DAC (Room, etc) as configured and have no desire to change.

Could it also be a bit more friendly? I think the good intention of Curts post was clear. Don't put his words on a gold scale.

Firefly,

You are NOT Wrong!   There is a "certain magic" o the ADI-2  (sans Attenuators,  Tubes, Op Amps, Potentiometers, Switches, etc)  It breaks the Gain Staging Rules, but either way..(excluding the Active Circuit Contaminants)...I hear no noise.  The Silence between Tracks is Deafening.  It's a matter of "Level"   Louder is always better.

As an experiment, my Attenuators are  on the floor. Attached to nothing.

Well!   When the High Priestess of Audio comes home...we shall see.

(if SHE throws a Red Flag?? Oh oh!)

Best!!

Curt

I am pretty sure that Curt didn't want to fool himself or others by his statement.
I think you simply misunderstood him and then judged him for something that he didn't mean this way.

The only reason why I involved here was a mail from a user who was dissatisfied from your posting (same as me).
What you call factual discussion was at the end creating dissatisfaction.

We do not discuss here to "win", we share our experiences with the aim to support.

You are still young to this forum with around 24 posts. You do not know the people and the habits.

There are too many forums out there, where people are struggeling and are in competition with each other.
This is really not the spirit of the RME forum. At least this was not the case since a very long time.

Curt962:
At a very low levels it seemed to me that the sound tends to lose a bit of dynamics and clarity. That is why I started to experiment with attenuators. With them it was even worse moreover at all levels, so they are gone now. I am using ADI-2 Pro since it suits better to my system but I strongly believe that the same applies to ADI-2 DAC.
But yes, differences are small.

ramses:
Topic is "[ADI-2 Dac] HiFi : you use a preamp or not ?"
Topic is not evaluating other people.

I hope not that difficult to understand even if you (wrongly) think you are someone who can tell other people what to do. You are "smartly" giving advice how to behave on the forum without even being capable of keeping yourself in the borders of the thread topic. Hmm...

Chill out and if you have nothing to the topic, you do not need to write anything. It is not obligatory :-). This is not the place for your compulsion to evaluate others. There are too many forums out there far more suitable for your kind of posts.

We do not discuss here to evaluate others, we share our experiences with the aim to support.

With long cables, for example with active monitors, it might make a difference whether the attenuators are connected directly behind the output or directly in front of the input, because of the difference in impedance in front or behind the cable.

I would suggest to put the attenuator always "behind" the cable. Correct?

With short cables (maybe 5 meters or less) it should not make any difference.

N00b:
I had tried JTS MA-123, connected to the power amp input. XLR cable from DAC to power amp has 1 m. I did not make double blind testing since I do not have my gear twice :-), still after some 2 months of listening on a various music types and in my various mind and mood settings I could identify quite clearly whether they are in the signal path or not. Difference was subtle yet audible.

They are electronic devices, therefore they alter the signal - BTW did anyone measure the performance of any attenuators in terms of frequency range, dynamics change, phase etc.?

Well, I saw this. Firstly these are manufacturer's numbers, not independently measured. And secondly it tells really a few, not sufficiently. According the data sheet the distortion is not THD as you are assuming, but just some undefined "distortion" without any details. So it is just a very non specific number. Other measurements are missing. It tells nothing about the real behaviour of that device from the technical point of view.

Sonically its presence in the signal path is noticeable.

I have measured these several times, THD is below the measurable limit, around -140 dB (0.00001%). Their numbers show the usual problem of getting more noise into the measurement the lower the level.

These are simple resistor dividers that don't change the frequency response, do not add noise nor distortion. The achieved attenuation might be some dBs off due to the source devices' output impedance, but that's for overall volume, and not sound changing.

On JTS website, they say the attenuation is within ±1dB at -10, -20 or -30 dB...
And I've checked with a dB meter app with a 1000 Hz sine: it's the same dB left or right for me with -10 dB set (I do not have the decimals, but I know its is 1 dB or less on mines).

Maybe we can agree on, that the topic is to support other people and try to be fair to each other
(also not to piss somebody off, to make your list more complete).

I am personally looking forward, maybe we all can learn from mistakes of the past and try to make it better the next time.

I tried Rothwell (-10dB) connected to the power amp input and as I already said, it was almost awful.
I am trying now IMS/Monacor ILA-1029 set at -20dB and I must say it is neutral and no degrading the sound at all (and may be the opposite).

I have the opposite experience, my Rothwell XLR -20dB attenuators do not degrade the sound in any audible way.

"Clearly degrading" are very big words and there's absolutely no scientific reason that attenuators, when properly engineered and built, colour and/or degrade sound. That would mean that every component in the audio chain (pre-amp, dac, amp) that have resistors in the signal path degrades and/or colours the sound. Sheer nonsense. It's a pity that many (read: almost all) audio forums are being polluted with sheer snobbery like your remark.

By the way: there is nothing "factual" in your remark, absolutely nothing, let alone "purely factual". Would like to have some facts that support your bold assertion that attenuators clearly degrade sound. As you mentioned "This is technical forum" I would expect you to adhere to your own standards and provide technical proof (including measurements) that attenuators degrade sound quality. I'm curious...

I use Primaluna Prologue Premium preamp (with Mullard and RCA NOS tubes), sounds much better than RME pre. Connected to Nord class-D power amp and Focal speakers. Unfortunately Prima has only RCA inputs, im sure XLR would bring few benefits (new Prima pres have XLR inputs).

Im not measuring instrument, i listen with my ears. And after owning many many preamps, tube gears and whatnot, i learned that "best S/N ratio" and other measuring stuff means almost nothing in terms of sound quality (for stereo listening).
RME is natural and accurate, but for many other characteristics Prima is a clear winner (related to tube sound, that no transistor can match: holographic imaging and sound stage, more natural color in human voices, mid bass "body" etc).
Then take Pass pre+power combination for example, and that sounds 5x better than RME and Prima combined, in my optinion.

As a musician I can really appreciate this! ;-)

Well, you can have your own opinions, but you cannot have your own facts.
1 I don't think there are more transparent and resolving speakers than Quad electrostats.
2 I am not denying that you hear differences, the question would be if you still hear these under controlled conditions, i.e. level matched and in double blind abx.
3 if you still hear differences between two piece of gear, we have to decide by what criterion we choose: accuracy, or taste.
4 De gustibus non est desputandum, but for accuracy we have criteria, like frequency response (probably the most important one), lack of distortion and noise, etc. We can measure these.
5 it is my contention that on the electronics side, the sonic differences between competently designed units are very small, or often non-existent, and have been for a long time. This has been demonstrated by many controlled listening experiments (I once participated in one and at the time the result surprised me as well), and it is also obvious if we combine the results of measurements with the audibility thresholds for distortion, flatness of frequency response etc that have been established experimentally. There is quite simply nothing better than audibly perfect.
6 none of this implies that you are not perfectly free to prefer a sound signature that deviates from the classic criterion the late Peter Walker once formulated for amplifiers: a straight wire with gain. The cheapest way to create such a personal sound would be to use the tone controls on your amplifier.
7 to return to the RME ADI-2 DAC, it is sonically well beyond sonic perfection, just like a number of competitors. If you don't like the sound, that is a different matter, but sonically these are indeed just straight wires.

Well, as always, it is about the whole system not about particular components. So with your class D amp (usually sounding very accurate, fast, technically), and Focal speakers (very detailed, analytical, dry sound), using tube pre with its typical pleasing warmly coloration makes pretty much sense. I can easily imagine that in your system tubes sound much better than rather neutral RME DAC.

Of course it is far from ideal to balance one deviation from neutrality of one component with the opposite deviation from neutrality of another component. But no one lives in the ideal world.

Side by side standalone Primaluna vs RME DAC would clearly show RME transfers the signal better, with less distortions. But no one listens to standalone pre.