Setting for satisfying the VSTi's sound

[eigenfable]

I've used RME's UCX from 3 years ago.
I usually monitor the VSTi's sound using Headphone and
UCX's headphone output.
But I hardly satisfy the VSTi's Sound.
(I think hardware synth sound is better)

Recently, I buy Musical fidelity's V DAC2(DAC) and
V CAN(Headphone amp).
I'm so surprised.. because of its sound.
I feel VSTi's sound is more fat and has clear image.

If I have no necessary for recording external sound or vocal,
it is sufficient to set the home studio.

How do you guy think about this?

[zerocrossing]

I'm not sure what your question is... or if there is one. Yeah, everything contributes to your final sound, that I know. I remember I had the idea to play on my long train ride to work and I thought, "These VSTs sound like crap." However, upon plugging in my modest audio interface at home revealed the issue was with the laptops's built in audio. I think all my instruments, hardware and software, sound better though my monitors than my headphones, though the headphones can sound very good. (the ones I currently own are a bit too bright for my tastes.)

Do hardware synths sound better? Sometimes, but after testing a Virus Snow and Nord Lead 2 next to some software synths, I can say that I felt software sounded better.

Now, where you'll find more difference is in analog synths, but even those have gotten very good in software. Everything by XILS-Labs, Oddity 2, etc. I still keep some hardware around, but it's more because of the character of those particular synths than the sound quality.

[eigenfable]

I mean that low - cost DAC+Headphone amp are appropriate to
monitor VSTi's sound than high price audio interface in
home studio.

I think higher price multi-channels audio interface's DAC performance is not better than dedicated 2 channel DAC.

[lfm]

You are comparing a dedicated headphone amp for $250(V DAC II) and a complete audio interface.
And running usb you probably don't have low latency drivers good enough for use with recording software.
If using audio interface digital out, is probably better.

If audiointerface put that money on headphone amp alone, well it would cost quite a bit more.
And which type of headphones you use, also makes a difference if headphones interface is performing well or not - and then it's more to do with analog electronics then DAC itself.

There is a big differences in DACs, I've used external DACs since beginning 90's.
And also modified DAC exchanging capacitors onboard to hirated one, huge difference that alone.
Also removed the onboard opamp, since it was not good enough, it sounded better single ended from dac chip with a little lower level as penalty.

[eigenfable]

I use 3 headphones.
1. beyerdynamic DT-770 monitor
2. AKG K710
3. Sony MA900

I feel difference under all of 3 headphone conditions.

I thought RME UCX doesn't need external DAC and headphone amp before because it is very expensive (over $2000).
But UCX is good 'Interface' not a 'monitoring HW'.
So I recommend you guys to use external DAC and Headphone amp.

[lfm]

I got you, thanks for clarification.
Maybe RME count on users using other gear in studio beside this UCX, in this pricerange - and it being wasted to interface hiend phones.

Here is a little shootout what chips are used on different interfaces:
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/geekslu ... isted.html

I use an analog preamp from RME HDSP 9632 phones out, just to be able to drive HD650 to it's potential.
And also get a volume knob.

I've run the RMAA software and testing loopback on RME, and they look good from that point of view. But that is only part story of course.

[eigenfable]

Thanks for your opinion.