[kkcc]

  I liked the pairing with the RWAK100 when I had it but I'm not sure if it would go with the stock player due to the high output impedance of the player and the low impedance of the K3003's.  Never had the stock player to be able to compare.

 
Yes I found stock AK100 pairing with my multi-BAs (w4r, tg334, xba4) or hybrids (1plus2, asg2) poor caused me to sell it to upgrade to AK120.  FWIW I've now moved on to DX50.  
 
If one really like the AK100 either get it modded or get the new AK100mk2 in Japan that have a 3ohm OI like the AK120.  (or just get DX50 and save a few nickels)

 

[frankrondaniel]

   
Yes I found stock AK100 pairing with my multi-BAs (w4r, tg334, xba4) or hybrids (1plus2, asg2) poor caused me to sell it to upgrade to AK120.  FWIW I've now moved on to DX50.  
 
If one really like the AK100 either get it modded or get the new AK100mk2 in Japan that have a 3ohm OI like the AK120.  (or just get DX50 and save a few nickels)

 
For what it's worth, I ended up getting the RWAK120 and find the K3003's to go very well with it.

 

[AlterSack]

Hi - I'm new here, so sorry if I might not know all the rules. 
 
@GerardHCH:  
I saw that nobody answered your question:  I had the same problems. (Also using MAC). 
I am also using a NAIM Superunity Streamer and this is also picky with regard to covers - therefore I am not completely sure which of the following points apply to the NAIM only and which to the AK100. I am always doing all of it since I want covers on both.
 
The AK 100 needs embedded art as far as I know.
 
1) When ripping I use XLD (Freeware) and add the cover art there. (If it is not found automatically) 
 
2) For existing FLAC files which do not show the cover art I upload the files into MusicBrainz Piccard  (also Freeware). You can also add the cover art here and then safe the files again. 
 
From here on I am not absolutely sure which point could be left out for the AK 100 
 
3) I still copy the cover in the folder where the music files are. The file has to be named "cover.jpg" - please be sure to name/rename the extension *.jpg - the file extension *.jpeg that MAC is using will not work!  
 
4) The covers may not exceed 250 x 250 in size. You can resize existing coverart with Drag-N-Scale (Shareware - it costs not much but does what it has to very well)  (I am doing the resizing BEFORE step 2) 
 
Good luck 

 

[AbsoluteZero]

Thanks for all who shared their opinions

 
Tthis purchase is such a big deal for me since it is in my opinion a pricy product and the one I am probably going to use in a long run.
 
Actually I've seen beforehand the DX50 and AK100, so I know the size of each unit. For me the width of the Fiio X3 is as much as tolerable for a portable rig and Ibasso for me seems too bulky and too big. I also have an amp (an Apex Glacier) but the only amp I see would fit the form factor of AK100 is RSA Shadow.
 
After a listening session, my buds seems to like the AK100 more than the DX50 to be honest. It was more clear meanwhile it was quite muddled with the DX50.
 
The only thing holding me back is the output ohm which will really narrow my future IEM purchase selection. As I have stated before, I don't have access for RWAK mod or any other mod of any kind (and I would think many times before adding 200-300 bucks for a mod).
 
Cheers

 

[daseinpdx]

  Thanks for all who shared their opinions

 
Tthis purchase is such a big deal for me since it is in my opinion a pricy product and the one I am probably going to use in a long run.
 
Actually I've seen beforehand the DX50 and AK100, so I know the size of each unit. For me the width of the Fiio X3 is as much as tolerable for a portable rig and Ibasso for me seems too bulky and too big. I also have an amp (an Apex Glacier) but the only amp I see would fit the form factor of AK100 is RSA Shadow.
 
After a listening session, my buds seems to like the AK100 more than the DX50 to be honest. It was more clear meanwhile it was quite muddled with the DX50.
 
The only thing holding me back is the output ohm which will really narrow my future IEM purchase selection. As I have stated before, I don't have access for RWAK mod or any other mod of any kind (and I would think many times before adding 200-300 bucks for a mod).
 
Cheers

 
The firmware of the DX50 is not quite ready.   Lot of bugs still, eg, scanning problems, battery calibration, some instability, etc.   If you decide on this, you might want to wait a while for them to get to most of the bugs.
 
Personally, despite how temperamental it is regarding IEM pairing, I still prefer the AK over the DX.   I like the form factor and the cleanness of the audio.  I agree that the SQ on the DX is murky and the trouble presentation is not very good either.  There have been a lot of complaints about that on the DX thread.  Some claim that it is better after burn in and firmware update, but I don't personally hear it.  The treble is still rough and unpleasant for me.
 
On the other hand, it is difficult to complain given that the DX50 is less than 300 including shipping.

 

[Fatalethal]

Having both DX50 and AK100, i would say that DX50 really changes sound over time. i personally believe in burn-in DAPs and Head gears.
 
 
But what i have noticed is that, when the DX50 gets warm, it actually sounds better than before.. less treble aggressive, much more smooth and tamed.
 
 
But AK100 is still my favourite.

 

[icefalkon]

  Hi - I'm new here, so sorry if I might not know all the rules. 
 
@GerardHCH:  
I saw that nobody answered your question:  I had the same problems. (Also using MAC). 
I am also using a NAIM Superunity Streamer and this is also picky with regard to covers - therefore I am not completely sure which of the following points apply to the NAIM only and which to the AK100. I am always doing all of it since I want covers on both.
 
The AK 100 needs embedded art as far as I know.
 
1) When ripping I use XLD (Freeware) and add the cover art there. (If it is not found automatically) 
 
2) For existing FLAC files which do not show the cover art I upload the files into MusicBrainz Piccard  (also Freeware). You can also add the cover art here and then safe the files again. 
 
From here on I am not absolutely sure which point could be left out for the AK 100 
 
3) I still copy the cover in the folder where the music files are. The file has to be named "cover.jpg" - please be sure to name/rename the extension *.jpg - the file extension *.jpeg that MAC is using will not work!  
 
4) The covers may not exceed 250 x 250 in size. You can resize existing coverart with Drag-N-Scale (Shareware - it costs not much but does what it has to very well)  (I am doing the resizing BEFORE step 2) 
 
Good luck 

 
Welcome Aboard! Sorry for  your wallet. 
 

 
Steve from NYC

 

[Wyd4]

Hey all,

I am considering the RWA mod (Not the RWAK100s).
How much better does it sound?
I use full sized, relatively inefficient cans (Mod Dogs).
MOST of the time I use an amp.

How much benefit am I going to get from this mod?
 
Scott

 

[kimvictor]

  Hey all,

I am considering the RWA mod (Not the RWAK100s).
How much better does it sound?
I use full sized, relatively inefficient cans (Mod Dogs).
MOST of the time I use an amp.

How much benefit am I going to get from this mod?
 
Scott

 
Not too much unless you are using low impedance hps. You should be able to get more power from AK100 though. The RWA mod fixes the amp issue, so I don't see too much purpose in doing them.

 

[Loquah]

Not too much unless you are using low impedance hps. You should be able to get more power from AK100 though. The RWA mod fixes the amp issue, so I don't see too much purpose in doing them.

I disagree. I have RWAK100 and the best thing about it is that you can use it with any earphone or headphone. You would need an amp only for insensitive or very high impedance phones.

I love the fact that I can grab (or buy) ANY earphones or headphones and know that they'll pair perfectly. I also find the sound straight from the RWAK100 to be better than via any amps I've tried because it seems to maintain an extra degree of transparency - perhaps it's the nice simple and short signal path.

 

[Wyd4]

I disagree. I have RWAK100 and the best thing about it is that you can use it with any earphone or headphone. You would need an amp only for insensitive or very high impedance phones.

I love the fact that I can grab (or buy) ANY earphones or headphones and know that they'll pair perfectly. I also find the sound straight from the RWAK100 to be better than via any amps I've tried because it seems to maintain an extra degree of transparency - perhaps it's the nice simple and short signal path.

 
Hi there,
 
I tend to agree regarding the transparency, even from the standard ak100 vs through an amp.
Surprisingly even with my MadDog's, the bass quantity/quality is even still there.  Though the overall volume lacks, the quality of sound doesn't improve with the amp that I have (GoVibe Porta Tube).
In saying that however, the portatube adds such a nice musical quality to the music that for Rock I just cant pass up.
 
I am still up in the air regarding the upgrade however.
 
Scott

 

[kimvictor]

I thought RWA mod just bypassed 22ohm resistors... not change the amp(or dac) or anything else. I wish I could demo a RWAK100. I'm kind of hesitant dropping $250 on something I haven't heard.

 

[Loquah]

  I thought RWA mod just bypassed 22ohm resistors... not change the amp(or dac) or anything else. I wish I could demo a RWAK100. I'm kind of hesitant dropping $250 on something I haven't heard.

 
You're correct. The RWAK100 (not 100s), bypasses the resistors, but also bypasses the circuit board traces between the resistors and the heaphone jack. Most of the transparency benefit comes from the original design of the AK100, but the bypassing of the circuit boards also means the signal path is very short and via high quality Cardas cable rather than the circuit board copper.
 
To my ears (and I owned both AK100 and RWAK100), the sound from the RWAK100 is essentially the same as AK100, but it stays 100% consistent from one headphone/earphone to another because there is no influence from output impedance. The AK100 needed an amp to reach optimal quality with a lot of HPs / EPs, which also introduced some degree colouration and reduced the overall transparency (unless you spend a lot of money on a portable and and interconnects). The RWAK100 performs the same (i.e. excellent) with every device I've paired it to (short of maybe REALLY power-hungry cans) and costs a lot less than AK100 + TOTL portable amp and interconnect. It's also really tiny for what it does.
 
Final point is that the majority of portable headphones and earphones that I've found won't pair optimally with the AK100 (without an amp) due to either impedance variation across the frequency range or a low nominal impedance and therefore damping issues causing the bass to get a bit loose and flabby.
 
For some reason I like to hear headphones as they were designed and never feel right about buying a headphone that sounds better because of poor impedance matching. To me, that's still an imperfect solution and I feel like somewhere something's not right with that kind of setup, but that's just me - not saying others should feel the same.

 

[kimvictor]

   
You're correct. The RWAK100 (not 100s), bypasses the resistors, but also bypasses the circuit board traces between the resistors and the heaphone jack. Most of the transparency benefit comes from the original design of the AK100, but the bypassing of the circuit boards also means the signal path is very short and via high quality Cardas cable rather than the circuit board copper.
 
To my ears (and I owned both AK100 and RWAK100), the sound from the RWAK100 is essentially the same as AK100, but it stays 100% consistent from one headphone/earphone to another because there is no influence from output impedance. The AK100 needed an amp to reach optimal quality with a lot of HPs / EPs, which also introduced some degree colouration and reduced the overall transparency (unless you spend a lot of money on a portable and and interconnects). The RWAK100 performs the same (i.e. excellent) with every device I've paired it to (short of maybe REALLY power-hungry cans) and costs a lot less than AK100 + TOTL portable amp and interconnect. It's also really tiny for what it does.
 
Final point is that the majority of portable headphones and earphones that I've found won't pair optimally with the AK100 (without an amp) due to either impedance variation across the frequency range or a low nominal impedance and therefore damping issues causing the bass to get a bit loose and flabby.
 
For some reason I like to hear headphones as they were designed and never feel right about buying a headphone that sounds better because of poor impedance matching. To me, that's still an imperfect solution and I feel like somewhere something's not right with that kind of setup, but that's just me - not saying others should feel the same.

 
OK. This is quite interesting. I wanted RWAK100 because of portability, not SQ. I always thought AK100+Leckerton UHA-6S.MKII will be better than RWAK100. If that's wrong, RWAK100 is a definitely a great mod.

 

[Wyd4]

   
You're correct. The RWAK100 (not 100s), bypasses the resistors, but also bypasses the circuit board traces between the resistors and the heaphone jack. Most of the transparency benefit comes from the original design of the AK100, but the bypassing of the circuit boards also means the signal path is very short and via high quality Cardas cable rather than the circuit board copper.
 
To my ears (and I owned both AK100 and RWAK100), the sound from the RWAK100 is essentially the same as AK100, but it stays 100% consistent from one headphone/earphone to another because there is no influence from output impedance. The AK100 needed an amp to reach optimal quality with a lot of HPs / EPs, which also introduced some degree colouration and reduced the overall transparency (unless you spend a lot of money on a portable and and interconnects). The RWAK100 performs the same (i.e. excellent) with every device I've paired it to (short of maybe REALLY power-hungry cans) and costs a lot less than AK100 + TOTL portable amp and interconnect. It's also really tiny for what it does.
 
Final point is that the majority of portable headphones and earphones that I've found won't pair optimally with the AK100 (without an amp) due to either impedance variation across the frequency range or a low nominal impedance and therefore damping issues causing the bass to get a bit loose and flabby.
 
For some reason I like to hear headphones as they were designed and never feel right about buying a headphone that sounds better because of poor impedance matching. To me, that's still an imperfect solution and I feel like somewhere something's not right with that kind of setup, but that's just me - not saying others should feel the same.

 
Thanks for the in depth description.
I think it currently sounds fantastic (AK100) with the Mad Dogs in its own right.
If it had ever so slightly more volume I would not use an amp at all.
 
It is so close that I am actually debating whether or not to offload my amp entirely and just pocket the money/put it towards the RWAK100 upgrade.