> But I wonder, is the M-1610 Pro comparable to the conversion of the Adi-2 Pro FS?
Kai found in a blind test that for him there was no audible sound difference between the ADI-2 Pro FS with AK and the ADI-2/4 Pro with ESS converters, see https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.ph … 0#p195160.
In contrast, for him, the choice of a certain D/A filter resulted in a difference for percussive sound material, see https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.ph … 41#p186341
It is also often mentioned that the converters in and of themselves have less influence on the sound than the implementation of the analog circuitry behind them. Configurable D/A filters deliver only subtle differences.
Looking at 8-32 ports studio converters now, IMHO the focus is more on recording all frequencies as linearly as possible and other things. However, unless I have missed something, I have yet to see an 8, 16 or 32 port converter with adjustable A/D and D/A filters.
I'm uncertain if this is just for cost reasons or just because for recording tracks and summing you first need only one D/A filter that records and plays back all tracks in optimal quality. Linear frequencies, avoiding phase shifts over frequencies, less latency.
Probably all the reasons that lead to the SD Sharp filter being the default for the ADI-2 DAC/Pro. However, here you also read in the manual that at frequencies above 192 kHz the filter selection is disabled and a fixed Slow Filter is used. Why, I have not thought about it yet.
What I'm getting at is that for the usual studio work, you just need to get a good AD/DA converter from RME, all products focus on transparent A/D and D/A without any mojo or house sound. So, you should get equal quality from them, regardless of which product you choose. Perhaps with some differences in terms of technical data with the newer products, as converter technology improves (converter latency, …) or regarding features, whether you can set ref levels per port.
Additionally, though, I would think about investing in an ADI-2 Pro as well, to take advantage of certain benefits of the unit here for monitoring in stereo.
A first thought was to combine both and drive the two stereo speakers of your 5.1 and 7.1 setups via ADI-2 Pro FS and the remaining speakers via an additional purchased converter.
But I'm not sure to what extent that might have a negative impact if you were to use converters with different runtimes, although the differences are getting smaller and smaller with the latest products.
I think the M-1610 Pro is a great product, as forum colleague Robin Walsh uses it in his studio and is extremely happy with it. However, he also got himself an ADI-2 Pro FS for monitoring additionally. Maybe you can ask him about his experiences and about differences between M-1610 Pro and ADI-2 Pro FS R BE -> https://forum.rme-audio.de/profile.php?id=22951
In short, I would recommend trying both, M-1610 alone and ADI-2 Pro FS R BE for monitoring sound material in stereo.
Another use case for the ADI-2 Pro FS R could perhaps be recording the final stereo sum from an analog summing box, see converter shootout video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doHG32aXBDY
This is my opinion on the subject, I hope I could give some useful suggestions.
UFX+, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub12Pro