Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The New iRiver AK100: A High-End DAP
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The New iRiver AK100: A High-End DAP - Page 545

post #8161 of 8668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatalethal View Post

Jitter.. scary amounts of jitter.

Really? Will test that out when I eventually get around to listening to it.
post #8162 of 8668

Key word there that is missing is potential.  Toslink can have better jitter performance than coax if done properly and always outperforms coax on electrical jitter performance since it is immume to signal noise.  Where toslink is a problem is high data rates.  24/96 is the ceiling, depending on the actual transmitter/receiver used it can be even lower, before the rise/fall times of toslink/light make for an ugly eye pattern.  Typically DACs can't lock onto 24/192 with toslink for this reason.  But 16/44, 24/44, 24/96... all fine.  All can, as measured over a decade ago with EMU/RME soundcards by Stereophile, get down to 40ps jitter over toslink.  Like most things implementation is everything.

post #8163 of 8668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

Key word there that is missing is potential.  Toslink can have better jitter performance than coax if done properly and always outperforms coax on electrical jitter performance since it is immume to signal noise.  Where toslink is a problem is high data rates.  24/96 is the ceiling, depending on the actual transmitter/receiver used it can be even lower, before the rise/fall times of toslink/light make for an ugly eye pattern.  Typically DACs can't lock onto 24/192 with toslink for this reason.  But 16/44, 24/44, 24/96... all fine.  All can, as measured over a decade ago with EMU/RME soundcards by Stereophile, get down to 40ps jitter over toslink.  Like most things implementation is everything.

Thanks for your input, Solude. Yes, I was surprised because I have a high quality 10 footer I use for connecting my AK100 to my Benchmark DAC 1. No issues there at all. smily_headphones1.gif
post #8164 of 8668

Hello, 

How is the performance with IE800 ? Did/Does anybody use it with IE800 ? 

I'm curious about this.Is AK100's ohm enough for IE800 completely ?

Or need an amp with it ? 

 

And how is the combination AK100 with IE800 ?

post #8165 of 8668
Quote:
Originally Posted by high-fidelity View Post
 

Hello, 

How is the performance with IE800 ? Did/Does anybody use it with IE800 ? 

I'm curious about this.Is AK100's ohm enough for IE800 completely ?

Or need an amp with it ? 

 

And how is the combination AK100 with IE800 ?

 

 

And the winner for most use of the phrase "IE800" goes to.....

 

LOL 

 

Sorry man...had to.

 

Will someone please answer so we don't have to read this again? 

post #8166 of 8668
IE800 impedance is linear so yes even the mk1 is fine.
post #8167 of 8668

Haha, as requested by icefalkon.  Answered.

 

IE800 are dynamic headphones and are not significantly affected by the high output impedance of the AK100.  It actually pairs well with it.  These IEMs are very clean with very low distortion, works very well with the AK100s dark blackground.  Sounds very good from all frequency ranges, top to bottom.

post #8168 of 8668
Quote:
Originally Posted by icefalkon View Post
 

 

 

And the winner for most use of the phrase "IE800" goes to.....

 

LOL 

 

Sorry man...had to.

 

Will someone please answer so we don't have to read this again? 

Ha ha.Sorry.It is my first post in here.And I didn't read pages,so I don't know other questions about IE800. 

 

If somebody give an answer,it would be good.

post #8169 of 8668

Thanks for answers. :) 

 

 

Edit:Is there much differences about MK2 and RWAK100 ? 


Edited by high-fidelity - 3/17/14 at 5:13pm
post #8170 of 8668

Yes 3ohm ;)

post #8171 of 8668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post
 

Key word there that is missing is potential.  Toslink can have better jitter performance than coax if done properly and always outperforms coax on electrical jitter performance since it is immume to signal noise.  Where toslink is a problem is high data rates.  24/96 is the ceiling, depending on the actual transmitter/receiver used it can be even lower, before the rise/fall times of toslink/light make for an ugly eye pattern.  Typically DACs can't lock onto 24/192 with toslink for this reason.  But 16/44, 24/44, 24/96... all fine.  All can, as measured over a decade ago with EMU/RME soundcards by Stereophile, get down to 40ps jitter over toslink.  Like most things implementation is everything.

I had also read that Toslink had a ceiling and didn't support 24/192 so one evening I hooked up a Toslink to a spare port on my receiver and tried it out with my AK100 MK2.  Everything I threw at it played including 24/192, which I thought would not work.  Did I miss something here?  Now my receiver is no screaming hell but all that I put into it sounded the same.


Edited by Healeyman - 3/17/14 at 8:47pm
post #8172 of 8668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Healeyman View Post

I had also read that Toslink had a ceiling and didn't support 24/192 so one evening I hooked up a Toslink to a spare port on my receiver and tried it out with my AK100 MK2.  Everything I threw at it played including 24/192, which I thought would not work.  Did I miss something here?  Now my receiver is no screaming hell but all that I put into it sounded the same.

I'm back from trying the Chord Hugo via toslink input from the AK100. No bleeding from the ears, etc. While the Hugo was admittedly good and drive the HD800, I wasn't quite as blown away as I have been told I would be. The sig is a bit sweet. Since I was using the AK100 and the HD800 as part of the chain, that could only have been introduced by the Hugo. Other significant thing I noticed was a slight echo in the soundstage. Btw I own the hd800 and have heard my test tracks out of other amps on the HD 800 before and have heard no such hint of an echo.

I will try again another day. smily_headphones1.gif
post #8173 of 8668

The technical capability for 24/192 (&24/176.2) is obviously there but it's pushing the limits of this technology, 24/96 is usually a safer standard; not that many devices support anything higher. And you need everything in the digital chain supporting it. For me, it's the AK100 on one end and the Yulong D18 on the other, but as it turns out it's picky so the cable between them was my issue (as in simply not working at all or dropping out most of the time) After getting a decent enough cable things have been fine.

 

But for me it was mostly a fun experiment, to see if I could get it working because frankly hearing any difference between 192 and 96 is in all honesty impossible as far as my ears are concerned. But I thought it was impressive that such a compact DAP could deliver this, esp. at the time of the original release.

post #8174 of 8668

Does AK100 support DSD format ?

post #8175 of 8668

With the most recent firmware, yes. Tried it myself with a couple of free clips, again more as an experiment: it does work. Not sure about longer term impact (heat, battery life) but again, makes for a competent little DAP, on a features level. Just wish it was more polished on the data management end (cover display, playlists etc.)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The New iRiver AK100: A High-End DAP