1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice


Discussion in 'Headphone Amps (full-size)' started by frank i, Nov 25, 2013.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
12 13 14
    Oh ok sorry for my wrongful conclusion.

    Al D
  2. Silent One
    1. No. The WA5 mono blocks are speaker amps only, no Headphone Outputs. I'm modifying these to have L/R 4-pin XLR Headphone Outputs for full mono K1000 Output functionality. 
    2. Pursuit. Though, simply splitting things up will likely add costs and nothing more. Mono blocks can provide the maker an opportunity to design a dedicated amp for a driver/speaker. Hopefully using better parts while in there, though that's not always the case. Also, monos make for shorter speaker runs. Some amps may/may not benefit from enhanced channel separation in mono config.
    But this is a quick view from a speaker amp perspective. For headphones, doubtful. So, why do it? Pursuit. If there are ideals to be had, some people will chase. Despite lacking the ability to discern any differences.
  3. ardilla
    Yes, I knew the WA5 wasn't balanced
    I was wondering about the WA5 monoblocks, if they have headphone connectors as well as speaker outbuts. The logical (since dual 3-pin XLR headphone cables are available) would then be to have speaker taps and an 3-pin XLR at the vack of the WA5 monoblock. 
    I got the impression that there were XLR in and outs from SilentOne's answer here, http://www.head-fi.org/t/691974/woo-audio-comparison-thread/135#post_10057282
  4. ardilla
    Since you loose something by having AC transformer in the same chassis, have you considered a mono-vlock with dual external PSU's?? WA5-Mono four chassis version? [​IMG]
    i would like this clllarifed , i f need be i will email woo audio. i am just wondering and i am sure it sound great either way
  6. musicman59
    SO, why using a 4 pin XLR in each monoblock? You are going to be using just 2 pins on each. You can even use 1 TRS female connection on each one and will probably be easier and cheaper.
  7. ardilla
    I would be thinking a 3 pin XLR in each (even though you only need 2 pins on each) would be practical beacuse of the availability of cables with dual 3-pin XLRs
    But I see Woo use TRS-adapters on the 234
  8. Frank I
    The WA 234 uses twin TRS adapters and I am using a single ended adapter for the headphones like show in the picture. Works well
  9. musicman59
    It can be done that way or using independent cables per side with mono TRS plug in each one to avoid the extra mechanical connection of the adapter.
  10. Frank I
    Thanks Jose 
  11. Frank I
      Western Electric tennis ball vacuum...    These are very interesting tubes. Wish there was something to play them in. Early 1900 somewhere around 1916 used for plane sin WW1. These have no base but there are a few for sale on Ebay that do have bases
  12. Frank I
    I have been kisting to the Woo DAC all day.   Spending the day today with music files

  13. Silent One
    This is only suggested and neither final or critical really. My Headphone cable terminates with male 4-pin XLR plug. Once cabling leaves split from female 4-pin XLR adapter to amps, those terminations are left to choice. My wording is for illustration purposes only. I'm even considering 5-way binding posts instead. With current Wireworld pigtails, I wouldn't have to add [​IMG]any adapters or tips. 
  14. ardilla
    I always wondered what the 5th way is?
  15. Silent One
    Same chassis... split chassis... yes, pros and cons live for both. But each have their feet tied to the same fire of design - good or bad design and well or poor execution. For example, proper isolation? In your view, what's being lost? 
    Have to admit, one night I thought I saw a four chassis version at the foot of the bed... I eventually fell back to sleep, though. [​IMG] 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
12 13 14

Share This Page