[customNuts]

Quote:

Well that's good to hear.  I will be using it with a JH-3a, so I have high expectations on the sound.  All the other issues I can deal with.  The tera player at the end of the day was $1,200, and that just seemed really expensive for that little guy.

 
Quote:

 
It's an impeccable source unit (i.e. transport) to use with an amplifier like the JH-3a. I use mine with the Tralucent T1 amp which of course negates any of the output impedance issues (as will any amplifier).
 
Tm.chen's suggestion of listening to one first is always good, but you've already ordered it as I understand and depending on where you are, that can be difficult sometimes. The good news is, I don't think I've heard anyone complain about the sound from the AK100 (assuming the output impedance isn't an issue which it won't be via the JH-3a)

 
Guys, there are far better choices for the JH-3a than the AK100. The AK only has optical out & the 3a needs either usb or preferably coax to really perform well. Feeding the 3a an analogue signal just adds multiple unnecessary conversions. The 3a does all it's processing in the digital realm so feeding it analogue means the conversions are Digital to analogue (in the AK) then (in the 3a) analogue to digital, DSP, then digital to analogue again. 
It needs a digital signal so regardless of how good your analogue source, your better of with a digital one. 
So a better choice would be something like the new fiio x3 with coax out.  Much cheaper too. Also DX100 & colorfly have coax out. I have tested my 3a with very high end desktop dacs analogue signal and even usb beats it noticeably. Then a good coax, noticeably again.

 

[ButtUglyJeff]

I'm waiting for the release of the CEntrance Hifi-M8 LX, to see if it will be a good match with the AK100.  Its supposed to have some kind of S/PDIF inputs which might play nicely with the mini-optical of this player.  But I'm far from sure on this.  But if it is, these two might make a near ideal pair.
 
I'm also not sure how well the Hifi-M8 and Hifi-M8 LX will play with the lowest impedance in ear monitors....

 

[Retrias]

Quote:

 
 
Guys, there are far better choices for the JH-3a than the AK100. The AK only has optical out & the 3a needs either usb or preferably coax to really perform well. Feeding the 3a an analogue signal just adds multiple unnecessary conversions. The 3a does all it's processing in the digital realm so feeding it analogue means the conversions are Digital to analogue (in the AK) then (in the 3a) analogue to digital, DSP, then digital to analogue again. 
It needs a digital signal so regardless of how good your analogue source, your better of with a digital one. 
So a better choice would be something like the new fiio x3 with coax out.  Much cheaper too. Also DX100 & colorfly have coax out. I have tested my 3a with very high end desktop dacs analogue signal and even usb beats it noticeably. Then a good coax, noticeably again.

They are probably going to only use the jh3a as an amp and not a dac with a 3.5mm going from the ak 100 to the jh3a 3.5mm input jacks

 

[seeteeyou]

.

 

[faran]

Has anybody had any problems playing AIFF files downloaded from qobuz? I've downloaded a number of albums and none of the AIFF versions of their higher rate files would play on the AK100 but any "normal" CD quality downloads (16-bit 44.1 kHz) play without any problems.
 
Some of the albums that my RWAK100 couldn't play were:
 
Hotel California - The Eagles (24 bit / 192 kHz)
Delta Machine - Depeche Mode (24 bit / 96 kHz)
The Next Day - David Bowie (24 bit / 96 kHz)
The 20/20 Experience (24 bit / 44.1 kHz)
 
As I mentioned the 16 bit files play fine but not the 24 bit ones. Qobuz allows you to re-download any previously purchased music in any format and quality so I downloaded these in WAV format and the RWAK100 played them perfectly fine. By the way, there is nothing wrong with the AIFF versions as I am able to play them via iTunes on my Mac without any issue.
 
I have also purchased a lot of AIFF albums from HDtracks and they play without a hitch and I've never encountered any issues.

 

[GloryUprising]

Quote:

Has anybody had any problems playing AIFF files downloaded from qobuz? I've downloaded a number of albums and none of the AIFF versions of their higher rate files would play on the AK100 but any "normal" CD quality downloads (16-bit 44.1 kHz) play without any problems.
 
Some of the albums that my RWAK100 couldn't play were:
 
Hotel California - The Eagles (24 bit / 192 kHz)
Delta Machine - Depeche Mode (24 bit / 96 kHz)
The Next Day - David Bowie (24 bit / 96 kHz)
The 20/20 Experience (24 bit / 44.1 kHz)
 
As I mentioned the 16 bit files play fine but not the 24 bit ones. Qobuz allows you to re-download any previously purchased music in any format and quality so I downloaded these in WAV format and the RWAK100 played them perfectly fine. By the way, there is nothing wrong with the AIFF versions as I am able to play them via iTunes on my Mac without any issue.
 
I have also purchased a lot of AIFF albums from HDtracks and they play without a hitch and I've never encountered any issues.

 
I've played Hotel California with no issues.  I got my copy from HDTracks.  Maybe you have a bad rip?

 

[Mimouille]

In response to the Fb question: I personaly think that iriver players are made for true portability. Amping them negates that purpose. Plus adding 200 to 500$ to a 1300$ player takes us to ridiculous levels.

 

[DMinor]

Aloha,
 
Any head-fi'er owner of the AK100 in Honolulu would be interested in doing a comparison with my modded ipod? I am really curious about the comparison as I have been recently surprised by the sound difference made by these particular caps I put them into the ipod.
 
Please feel free to PM me if interested.
 
Mahalo

 

[AlanYWM]

Quote:

In response to the Fb question: I personaly think that iriver players are made for true portability. Amping them negates that purpose. Plus adding 200 to 500$ to a 1300$ player takes us to ridiculous levels.

Totally agree 

 

[Loquah]

Quote:

In response to the Fb question: I personaly think that iriver players are made for true portability. Amping them negates that purpose. Plus adding 200 to 500$ to a 1300$ player takes us to ridiculous levels.

 
Quote:

Totally agree 

 
On that note, I just received my RWAK100 today. First off, thank you Vinnie for performing such magic.
 
I've tested the AK100 vs RWAK100 using UM Miracles and a DHC Symbiote SE Litz cable. There is no comparison. The stock AK100 sounds thin and a little fatiguing while the RWAK100 sounds rich and warm, but still with loads of detail and clarity.
 
I also tried the same combinations, but via the Tralucent T1 (using an 8-strand silver IC). I can't say that there's any discernible difference between the stock and modded AK100s via the amp, but I do find a difference in presentation overall.
 
Speaking only for the RWAK100 vs amped RWAK100 (because there's no point using the stock AK100 without an amp for the Miracles), the RWAK100 sounds very intimate and rich by itself. Adding the T1 seems to draw the soundstage back a bit and dries and thins the sound out ever so slightly, not in a bad way though. There are benefits to both arrangements I think. It's early days, but I feel that the RWAK100 alone may sound a bit too rich and thick on some tracks where the addition of the T1 may keep the sound better under control. That said, it could be the addition of the silver IC adding some colouration.
 
I'll try the same comparison (RWAK100 amped and unamped) with the stock Miracle cable to see how much influence the super laid back DHC cable has on my impressions.
 
My overall conclusion though is that I definitely like being able to use the RWAK100 with no additional pieces. It's just the right size and sounds brilliant by itself. Sure, amping changes the sound, but it becomes only different, not overall better.

 

[audionewbi]

I am really interested to know ho RWAK100 sounds against AK120. 

 

[Jason36]

Has anybody tried the Aurisonics ASG 1.2 with the AK100?
 
Can anybody comment as to how they match up?
 
Jason

 

[Loquah]

On that note, I just received my RWAK100 today. First off, thank you Vinnie for performing such magic.

I've tested the AK100 vs RWAK100 using UM Miracles and a DHC Symbiote SE Litz cable. There is no comparison. The stock AK100 sounds thin and a little fatiguing while the RWAK100 sounds rich and warm, but still with loads of detail and clarity.

I also tried the same combinations, but via the Tralucent T1 (using an 8-strand silver IC). I can't say that there's any discernible difference between the stock and modded AK100s via the amp, but I do find a difference in presentation overall.

Speaking only for the RWAK100 vs amped RWAK100 (because there's no point using the stock AK100 without an amp for the Miracles), the RWAK100 sounds very intimate and rich by itself. Adding the T1 seems to draw the soundstage back a bit and dries and thins the sound out ever so slightly, not in a bad way though. There are benefits to both arrangements I think. It's early days, but I feel that the RWAK100 alone may sound a bit too rich and thick on some tracks where the addition of the T1 may keep the sound better under control. That said, it could be the addition of the silver IC adding some colouration.

I'll try the same comparison (RWAK100 amped and unamped) with the stock Miracle cable to see how much influence the super laid back DHC cable has on my impressions.

My overall conclusion though is that I definitely like being able to use the RWAK100 with no additional pieces. It's just the right size and sounds brilliant by itself. Sure, amping changes the sound, but it becomes only different, not overall better.

Difference in amped sound was 100% from the IC, not the T1 amp.

 

[Currawong]

I figured out how to create playlists on my Mac and put them on the AK100. It's a bit of a PITA but it works.
 
First, I use Markspace Android Sync to copy the iTunes playlists and music I want to my micro SD card. I first set that up to tell it the types of files that can be played, as the default doesn't include m4a, and others. This re-creates the playlists in a folder/directory named Markspace/Playlists on the SD card and puts the music in Markspace/Music. 
I open up those playlists in BBEdit and change the paths from "../Music" to "/mnt/SD0/Music"
Then I eliminate all the M3U lines using the find and replace option with "grep" in BBEdit, as those lines all start with "#EXTINF:-1". Specifically, searching for "#EXTINF:-1.*\n" and replacing it with nothing.
I save the files to "AK100/Playlists".
 
The problem I had then was that even though the path listed for each file was correct, the AK100 had all the entries in each playlist greyed out. This stumped me, but on examining the file I made compared to a playlist made by the player, I found that the AK100 wanted CRLF (Windows) line endings, not LF (Mac). 
 
 
 

 Playlist 1.pls: ASCII English text, with CRLF line terminators Radio Nights.pls: ASCII English text

 
"Playlist 1.pls" was made by the player. "Radio Nights.pls" is one of my converted playlists.
 
The solution was BBEdit's Text Factory (File -> New -> Text Factory) which can batch change encodings and line endings. Changing all the files to CRLF allowed them to be read properly by the AK100.
 
Now I just have to script this lot and I can auto-fix it all the next time I run the Markspace software.

 

[Gintaras]

On that note, I just received my RWAK100 today. First off, thank you Vinnie for performing such magic.

I've tested the AK100 vs RWAK100 using UM Miracles and a DHC Symbiote SE Litz cable. There is no comparison. The stock AK100 sounds thin and a little fatiguing while the RWAK100 sounds rich and warm, but still with loads of detail and clarity.

I also tried the same combinations, but via the Tralucent T1 (using an 8-strand silver IC). I can't say that there's any discernible difference between the stock and modded AK100s via the amp, but I do find a difference in presentation overall.

Speaking only for the RWAK100 vs amped RWAK100 (because there's no point using the stock AK100 without an amp for the Miracles), the RWAK100 sounds very intimate and rich by itself. Adding the T1 seems to draw the soundstage back a bit and dries and thins the sound out ever so slightly, not in a bad way though. There are benefits to both arrangements I think. It's early days, but I feel that the RWAK100 alone may sound a bit too rich and thick on some tracks where the addition of the T1 may keep the sound better under control. That said, it could be the addition of the silver IC adding some colouration.

I'll try the same comparison (RWAK100 amped and unamped) with the stock Miracle cable to see how much influence the super laid back DHC cable has on my impressions.

My overall conclusion though is that I definitely like being able to use the RWAK100 with no additional pieces. It's just the right size and sounds brilliant by itself. Sure, amping changes the sound, but it becomes only different, not overall better.

Loq, cannot agree on this, sorry. I have RWAK and T1 and i find this pair hard to fault.
You right in saying RWAK can perform well on his own, and i love it since not every time i want to carry amp.
However when i add T1 it helps a great deal to blacken background space and magically removes some stress from RWAK. The player itself can sound a bit edgy in treble and will go messy on busy recordings and complex transients, if you doubt this please play YES album Magnification compositions 2, 3 and 9 if my memory is correct, you will note what happens to RWAK on the composition called Dreamtime and then perhaps you will better see my point. Otherwise you are welcome to try soundtrack record from movie Eyes wide shut, which is one of my favorite albums to test pricey gear, fun for me and often helps to turn sellers into pale

So i would say T1 for me is not thining out anything but helps to remove small digitis stress from RWAK presentation and blacken space that helps air and timbre and brings naturalness to decay.