[Gintaras]

finally tried my rwak100, but had no time for long audition. first impression good, detail, instrument separation, stage width. where i was bit confused is bit lack of stage depth, wide stage but some body in sound missing, also i do not know for ak but rwak lacks bit in decay and airness, there is a bit of attempt to prject flat response at expense of mids IMHO too.

overall liked rwak sound and it clearly is a step up from Colorfly c3 alone, but i am afraid even rwak needs amp too for bringing more body to the sound. using my BH which is cheaper amp just confirmed this. i used musical fidelity iems and they immediately reveal what was lacking. i did not like EQ and prefer rwak with eq off.

perhaps i will add tralucent amp to bring more live to the sound.

anyway, very nice player indeed but it's asking price is hard to swallow.

still for portable DAP which has better functionalities and is easy to use and has better battery life Rwak is a clear winner. i just realised that some minor trade offs exist even for this price. however overall i am pleased well.

still this is first impression and i will continue playing around before can make some conclusions.

 

[toads]

Sorry but your impressions need serious qualification; how many hours on the unit....and with what IEMs ?!?

 

[Gintaras]

Toads, i am not saying anything bad, rwak performs really good and sounds nice. perhaps i was expecting just my jaw to drop when listening and this did not happen. very good sounding player for sure but some small nuances still hold it from becoming pure analogue sounding DAP.
 
mind this i said rwak sounds very good, i found only depth of stage was bit less deep than i wish for and timbre fullness in midbass was not nearly as good as i expected compared to tube rig i have at home. perhaps i wished really for too much paying its price. i am also under the impression that adding T1 i can squeeze maximum juice and will make this little gem sing like truly high end setup.
 
one more remark, while i love everything in rwak from UI and screen to speed, i found memory card slots too tiny and deep placed which creates bit hassle while swapping cards. aside from this minor issue i found rwak quality and GUI nearly perfect for me. i am also happy my rwak firmware is 1.30 and works flawlessly so i am not going to upgrade this unless iriver develops proper update.
 
i got my rwak mint condition, nearly brand new but the unit was burned in and used by previous owner.
still i have to wait for a pair of better IEMs and also perhaps some brain burn in
 
my MF is single BA and despite is very revealing i can see its limitations too, so lets wait.
 
i will post more impression when i receive my RDB+ v1.
 
but remember, we value sound per buck paid and rwak is fairly costly player. i cannot compare this vs. C3 alone because it would be silly. so if you ask me is rwak a fine sounding DAP i will surely answer bold yes, but if you ask me is rwak flawless i would say rather no.
 
i often visit live performances for the matter of fact
 
PS: i am using C3 with BH amp so i got used to amplification benefits.

 

[Swimsonny]

Unboxing Video:
 

 

[Gintaras]

oh yes!!! i was doing exactly the same last week

 
great little player with so many good things about it, and it sounds great too

 

[Jazzyfi]

Exactly how I feel Gintaras. Unfortunately I cannot compromise the lack of dynamic in this player. For me an amp is essential in driving my SE5. The RWAK100 alone is not enough. That is why the RWAK100 is now yours 

. Enjoy the RWAK100.
Quote:

Toads, i am not saying anything bad, rwak performs really good and sounds nice. perhaps i was expecting just my jaw to drop when listening and this did not happen. very good sounding player for sure but some small nuances still hold it from becoming pure analogue sounding DAP.
 
mind this i said rwak sounds very good, i found only depth of stage was bit less deep than i wish for and timbre fullness in midbass was not nearly as good as i expected compared to tube rig i have at home. perhaps i wished really for too much paying its price. i am also under the impression that adding T1 i can squeeze maximum juice and will make this little gem sing like truly high end setup.
 
one more remark, while i love everything in rwak from UI and screen to speed, i found memory card slots too tiny and deep placed which creates bit hassle while swapping cards. aside from this minor issue i found rwak quality and GUI nearly perfect for me. i am also happy my rwak firmware is 1.30 and works flawlessly so i am not going to upgrade this unless iriver develops proper update.
 
i got my rwak mint condition, nearly brand new but the unit was burned in and used by previous owner.
still i have to wait for a pair of better IEMs and also perhaps some brain burn in
 
my MF is single BA and despite is very revealing i can see its limitations too, so lets wait.
 
i will post more impression when i receive my RDB+ v1.
 
but remember, we value sound per buck paid and rwak is fairly costly player. i cannot compare this vs. C3 alone because it would be silly. so if you ask me is rwak a fine sounding DAP i will surely answer bold yes, but if you ask me is rwak flawless i would say rather no.
 
i often visit live performances for the matter of fact
 
PS: i am using C3 with BH amp so i got used to amplification benefits.

 

[Gintaras]

Jazzy, thanks a lot for the player again, i love this amazing little gizmo which i bought from you. for me it sounds great, i can forgive some limitations because they are really few IMHO.
 
i agree with you about some subtley sonics BUT... hey... i just have to realise that no player will sound like 20K tube powered rig, tubey sound is really something special, that's why we audiophiles are such suckers for tubes.

 
that said, RWAK does so many things right for me and i love its GUI, simplicity, size and else... really great product from Iriver, who could think they capable of this. the only downside is price which bites but huh... what can we do? there is no way to stop our hobby

 
as a matter of fact i almost decided on Tralucent T1 amp but if someone has better suggestions for sane price you welcome to share this with me.

 

[ace8888]

Edit: never mind it. Lol, sorry.

 

[Gintaras]

anyone can recommend amp for rwak? I saw good responses about T1 pairing nicely, any else ideas? i know ALO is good but bloody expensive. i would not want paying above 300$, thanks in advance for your responses.

 

[rudi0504]

Quote:

anyone can recommend amp for rwak? I saw good responses about T1 pairing nicely, any else ideas? i know ALO is good but bloody expensive. i would not want paying above 300$, thanks in advance for your responses.

In price range to $ 300 US above are :
Tralucent T1
headstage arrow 4 G
ortofon MHd Q 7
RSA RS 71 A 
 
in price range to 700 US 
RSA Intruder 
Pico power 
alo Rx 3 b
JL audio BAB III JE 

 

[lerxst]

Quote:

anyone can recommend amp for rwak? I saw good responses about T1 pairing nicely, any else ideas? i know ALO is good but bloody expensive. i would not want paying above 300$, thanks in advance for your responses.

I've been using my RWAK100 with an iBasso D12, using an optical cable. In the D12 I'm using the "jazz/classical" opamp from Topflight's opamp kit. It sounds almost exactly like my DX100, which is what I've been wanting this whole time. In other words, it sounds really, really, really good. And the D12 battery outlives the RWAK100's battery. I'm using it with my CIEMs, UE PRMs, which have an impedance of 21 ohms @ 1 kHz. Your mileage may vary if you're using cans.

 

[Jazzyfi]

The best amp I can recommend is the iQube V3. You can use it with RWAK100 line out or optical. IMO the DAC in iQube is far more superior than the RWAK100. If you are looking for an amp without dac, get the iQube V1. Trust me, you won't regret it. I had a lot of portable amp but in the end I always come back to the iQube.

 

[Gintaras]

thanks for suggestions.

Jazzy, iCube is not cheap at all, more like ALO top line if apply fx rate. also i am not fan of aa batteries. so i am not sure.

I also do not know if iBasso d12 via digital makes sense but price is closer to my target, just see people liking alo and tralucent but fewer opinions on this.

Tralucent is cheaper and many love it to death, its just amp.

Actually choosing amp more difficult than choosing DAP because many more good choices. But since Rwak is good on its own i do not want to overspend on amp and my portable setup is just complimenting home rig when i am not at home. I am not abusing portable because too much listen in earphones can be damaging for ears.

 

[Jazzyfi]

Well. You pay for quality. iQube is not cheap but it is still the one of the best portable amp. It's made in the Netherlands, labor is pretty expensive here.. And the designer is also a really really good electronics engineer. Google for Guido Tent and you will see what I mean. I'm working for NXP (previously Philips) and that guy has made his name in Philips before going full time with his own company.

 

[lee730]

Quote:

Exactly how I feel Gintaras. Unfortunately I cannot compromise the lack of dynamic in this player. For me an amp is essential in driving my SE5. The RWAK100 alone is not enough. That is why the RWAK100 is now yours 

. Enjoy the RWAK100.

What are you using in its stead? I hear the SE5s are pretty hard to drive. Do you know the specs? (sensitivity, impedance).