Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC

@lordmelton, please re-read. Yes, I have listened to this DAC, and like it.

I don't recall stating that I couldn't hear the difference in cables or otherwise - did I say that somewhere?

However _IF_ it turns out to be true, I don't appreciate equipment which fails to meet published and advertised specifications. I don't think that's unreasonable.

@fl_guy FFS why are you so worried about published and ASR's measured  specs?

They do what the hell the want. Have you even listened to this DAC?

Deviation from specs is not a health hazard, and I have no confidence in Amir, he has his own agenda.

If you can't hear the difference between a $10 cable and a $1000 cable better you go back over there, because they say they cannot.

@melm, thanks for obtaining & sharing that. A thoughtful and constructive response, imo.

@sns, agree, was wondering the same thing, that’s the big question :-). It will be great to see / hear what measurement results and what changes if any Jinbo comes up with - and _especially_, how they sound of course.

I’d also be quite interested to know whether most of the units produced do meet the published specs or not. In my view, wanting or hoping for better measured performance would be one thing, but units meeting published specifications is a bit different.

Being experienced modifier of various components over the years,  I 100% concur with everything Jimbo stated! Thank you, Melm!

His statement in regard to modifying 005 to measure better very interesting. Will this affect sound quality is positive or negative manner?

I received this more extended letter from Jinbo Li this morning. He is the designer and manufacturer of the Musetec. I will comment in a follow-up post.

I wrote some words. I think it’s necessary to tell you my opinion.

The development of DA005 has undergone a lot of testing and listening. We focus more on listening tests. In my first few years in the field of audio product development, I also focused on instrument testing to study various data results of products through testing. However, it is finally found that we cannot express the actual listening feeling of audio equipment through the limited test method of audio analyzer. For example, in the process of development, it is very easy to see an interesting phenomenon that capacitors, resistors, wires and even solder of different brands or series will directly change the sound, but when these parts are changed, we can’t check the change of test data through the analyzer. Once I made two DACs and did a blind listening test with my friends to verify some conclusions. I used exactly the same circuit board, resistor, capacitor, IC, etc. in short, the two DACs are exactly the same except for the different solder. As a result, the two DACs showed completely different sound styles when replaying music, and even there was a gap in sound quality, such as their dynamic expression of sound, transparency and so on. The two DACs are made of exactly the same materials, so we can’t distinguish them by audio analyzer.

I know there is an argument that wire and fuse are metaphysics, and "burn-in" is also metaphysics.

Before I know enough about it, I also agree that these are metaphysics. But it is likely that there are some "data" that we cannot detect through the existing analyzer.

I have seriously thought about why the "burn-in" will bring obvious sound changes. Even the newly welded equipment after standing for a few days without electricity will have a more natural listening feeling than the newly welded equipment. The basic components of audio equipment - resistor, capacitor, inductor, solder, IC, etc. are composed of basic metal atoms and compound molecules. When the machine is powered on, these parts can be activated, electrons and ions migrate continuously, and even the materials inside the component vibrate due to the change of current frequency. This process will produce some changes inside the component. But it may not be a favorable change, so we need to try different components repeatedly. The goal is to find those components that are just right for the change after full activation. For example, it usually takes at least 5-7 days to determine whether a type of capacitor is suitable. If there is not enough time, the sound will be different every day.

Because of the existence of the above situation, it will directly lead to a problem, that is, the time and energy spent by listening and adjustment is far greater than the instrument test. For this reason, we usually need at least three years to update a product. Carefully update products, that is why we have many loyal customers.

I usually think that if there is a analyzer which can effectively detect these changes, the process of developing products will be much easier and faster.

I respect ASR’s test. They have excellent test equipment, even have some authority. but I don’t think this test conclusion has a direct relationship with the sound performance of the product. However, I will seek a high-performance testing instrument to review the ASR test. If my customers are dissatisfied with the instrument test performance of the product, we will update the design to the customers who need it in the next few months to make the updated product have good enough instrument test performance. We will extend the warranty period of the product in case of any delay.

@kairosman That will be good comparison!

At ASR one is deemed incompetent engineer if measurements aren't to their criteria, assume engineer can't design or execute proper measuring component. Two, if listener enjoys this incompetent component they are deemed incompetent listener. Funny, but I posted over at ASR my enjoyment of both 005 and Okto Dac (good test results at ASR), still I was deemed incompetent listener. Once your painted with incompetent brush there can be no redemption, only those whose listening impressions line up exactly with measurement protocol deemed golden ears. Point being, don't deviate from whats expected, talk about forced compliance and bias!

But you know, the funniest thing about ASR is, while they deem some as incompetent listeners, they admit their own incompetency in stating and believing first, inherent human senses are unreliable, second, individual sensory perception is completely invalidated. So, don't trust your senses, and/or your individual perceptions of what those senses tell you. To tell you the truth, I don't even know what this means, how does one even listen without relying on one's own senses?

@car123 You probably missed it in this long thread, but I previously owned the SU6, I had the whole setup ready to go. I never felt motivated to even give it a single listen based on my great results with my particular usb setup. As a result I  recently sold it without ever having listened to it.

So, back to ASR, measurements and 005 particulars. In spite of pedantic nature of ASR and sycophants I do lend some credibility to measurements and their correlation to some aspects of sound quality. As HermannS over on headfi forum 005 thread mentioned, the discreet I/U and output stage may be responsible for the  saturation in output stage ASR measured. Add in the ESS chip "hump" and its quite possible some artifacts in sound could be exposed by these measurements. I alluded to this in prior post when I mentioned any +$10K dac I'd consider for purchase would be expected to have greater refinement than 005. While the 005 has been a very nice dac over the two years plus of my ownership and constant upgrades, I'm now coming to the end of those upgrades, subsequent burn in and long term analysis. I do hear what is a likely artifact of some of these distortion figures. My focus is beginning to be drawn to a certain stridency in massed violins, not to the point of glare, in fact much less of this than from previous dacs, and certainly recording dependent. but still it is there. Keep in mind, I'm judging this in relation to live non-amplified instruments, and various vinyl setups I've owned over the years, and finally to my aural memory of multi $100k vinyl setups. So, a pretty high standard for natural timbre.

I've not been to audio shows in recent years, so I've not heard the latest and greatest digital, but based on members here and others all over the interwebs who own top flight vinyl AND digital setups, it is stated the best digital can now compete with or exceed vinyl in every parameter. The 005 not here, nor should we expect that at $3k. So, my bottom line is I'll give the measurement crowd some due, I believe what I'm hearing correlates to some of these distortion figures. Doesn't mean I've changed my overall perspective of the dac one iota. This could be an end game dac for many, all depends on how high a mountain one wants to climb. In the meantime I'll continue to enjoy this dac without reservation, even knowing I have higher mountains to climb. This will be one of those pieces I remember fondly when it comes time to sell.

I just bought the Topping D90SE (ASR's darling DAC) as a baseline means of a/b comparisons between my Musetec, Lumin P1, and Terminator II, will be doing this experiment for some time probably before I will have something meaningful to say, will come back here to post impressions, most likely will avoid doing so on ASR. Last time I did that regarding my impressions of my new B&W 804 D4s in response to the Stereophile review was a rather unpleasant experience.

Yup.  The sonore does as does the su-6.  The sonore sounds better.

@car123 That's great I didn't know the SU6 had that feature. Good to know.

lordmelton, I set the switches pursuant to the instructions included with the su-6.  

@car123 Have you got the I2s cable setup correctly? That's why I went for the LKS 100 no cable changes involved. The Sonore Digital has it's own dip switches to change cable settings.

All can say about ASR measurements is I listen to my 005 in my system, not to 005 through Amir's equipment under his conditions.  I couldn't care less what he concludes or what is discussed over at ASR.   If they listened through resolving systems they would realize its a great DAC.

SNS, I'm curious about your statement about your expectations had you tried your SU6.  Can you elaborate?

I will burn it in some more.  But, first impressions are almost always confirmed in this hobby by further listening.  I've never started liking a piece of equipment that I wasn't fond of on first listen. 

@car123 Your impressions of SU6 allign with my presumptions of what I'd have heard if I had cared to even try my Singxer SU6. You do owe it further burn in just to be sure. Trying out LKS would give you one more point of reference.  Your usb experience not surprising in least, I'd bet on many usb renderers beating out server usb. Can't give you info on good one for less money than Phoenix, not up to date here.

As for the NON-CONTROVERSY of measurements vs listening in rating 005. Non-controversial in the sense the objectivist vs subjectivist divide only continues into the infernal. There have actually been some pretty informative arguments on this subject at this forum, believe everything that could ever be said in regard to this issue has been addressed in this forum.

I only know 005 will continue to have exact same sound as prior to ASR review. Jimbo addressed issue of O vs. S in stating 005 tuned by listening, no misdirection there. I haven't looked at 005 marketing measurements vs ASR, if they are not accurate he should be called out on that.

Going at it big time over this one at ASR, 11 pages and growing. Lots of people over there referring to some bashing of ASR and objectivists from this forum. There are some defenders of subjectivism on the thread.

@fl_guy Amir's tests are not normal test conditions. They are Amir's test conditions. For example he couldn't even be bothered to put batteries in the remote, download the manual or the correct driver from the website.

He sees anything priced above a couple of hundred bucks as the spawn of Satan.

@toddk31 Well you got a real feeding frenzy going over at ASR, you should be very proud of yourself. However if you really are a seeker of truth and not just a smart a$$, why not break the DAC in (ASR doesn't believe in break-in) have a listen, see what you think and then for a real review send it to Goldensound.

I know it's complicated but that's how great things are achieved through transparency and honesty.

@car123 Hi, What you're hearing is break-in associated noise. I had an awful time when I first installed the LKS 100.

What I suggest is plug HDMI I2s and RJ45 I2s simultaneously into the 005.

It's going to 4-5 days for the break-in to resolve itself but you can then compare the differences between HDMI and RJ45.

My LKS is a great performer now, so much so that I'm auditioning a new USB cable.

I received a singxer SU-6 yesterday and immediately put it in the system in place of the sonore ultradigital between my aurender and my 005.  Immediately, I noticed what I can best describe as a strident, edgy and "bad digital" character.  The system remained very detailed but the realistic and pleasant character of instruments and vocals was diminished.   The joy and involvement seemed sucked out of my system.   I let it burn in overnight by playing music continually through it.  I sat and listened late morning today.  My system was better than yesterday but still not particularly engaging. 

A couple hours ago, I swapped back in the sonore and my system was immediately better and far more enjoyable than using the singxer.  I'm going to listen to the system for a couple days and swap back in the singxer.  But, I'm relatively certain I still will prefer the sonore.

I may order and try an LKS USB 100.  I do prefer my system using the sonore feeding the 005 through HDMI over running the aurender through USB directly into the 005.

What I believe I'm learning is there are solutions that provide better sq than straight usb out of the aurender into the 005.

Are there recommendations for USB renderers less costly that the innuos phoenix?   I may want to go in that direction.

@melm, thanks for that.

Right, philosophy and approach aside, one should be able to expect that the unit should meet its published specs, under at least some - ideally normal/standard, test conditions.

@melm 

Thanks for  getting Jinbo's take on the ASR measurements. This explains a lot. They seem to be so rabid and closed minded at ASR that it would probably not be useful to post it over there. 

I wrote to the designer and manufacturer, Jinbo Li, this morning to tell him of amirm’s review. He responded though it was late at night for him. I have never known whether it’s in his English or Google translate:

__________________________________________

Thank you so much for sharing. I read this post carefully.

I can explain the content of the subject test through our design experience.

It took me more than three years to design DA005. Roughly estimated, I had done nearly ten different designs. In the test, I found that if all the parameters were set according to the "best" of the instrument test, the final sound was not what I wanted.

Our development process also confirmed the widely debated idea that hiFI systems are generally not sound good or bad through test instruments. Any experienced electronics engineer can do it well, and it doesn’t require much effort or musical awareness. I don’t really want to argue too much about that. The customers who have heard about our products have the best say.

__________________________________________

I am not an electronics expert at all but do offer some comments on what he wrote.

It sounds like he’s not surprised at all, nor disappointed about the findings.

Jinbo says that it is relatively easy for an experienced electronics engineer to design a DAC that measures well. I believe him. We have seen many DACs from all over the world that seem to measure very well in the amirm tests. Some are relatively inexpensive. Their audio quality? Often, not so much.

I have thought, from the beginning, that this DAC was developed with a lot of listening. It motivated my early purchase. My reasoning was that there were a great many expensive parts inside. Those two GAD gold and silver foil capacitors, for example, cost about $95 each. I don’t think a designer puts components of that quality (and expense) into a unit without careful listening and a determination that they make a difference. For unlike a popular DAC chip, perhaps, they will not add to the marketing potential. The same may be said of the O-Ring transformer with silver-plated windings, or the bank of super-capacitors, or the . . . . there’s lots of stuff listed on the mu-sound.com 005 web page. Truly, a designer’s DAC.

He goes on to say that maximizing measured results often resulted in a reduction of sound quality in his estimation. Given the result, it’s hard to take issue with that assertion. One of the interesting aspects of the Musetec 005 design is that it achieves a very high level of audio performance with a very conventional design. By high level I mean (besides our listening) it has been compared with some very expensive DACs and while some have preferred one over the other it has never, it seems, been embarrassed by the comparison. And by the conventional design, I mean just ESS chips, no FPGA digital to analog function, no discrete R2R, no "Ring DAC", etc. Just a design that can be seen in dozens of other DACs, but refined to bring the audio that it does. An exception though for the super capacitors and associated circuitry.

My only disappointment is that he does publish technical specifications that one should be able to replicate with technical tests.

@dbb, thanks. Yep, plenty of opinions on this topic for sure.

@Fl_guy

Not everyone is a fan of Steve Gutenberg, but I think he has some good thoughts on the subject at hand.

https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/can-sound-quality-be-measured/

Fwiw, I find the difference between what I hear in some cases (including this one), and the measured results quite interesting.

If anyone knows of a place (specific forum/threads, website, etc.) where an _open minded_ discussion and exploration of this topic is taking place, I'd be interested.

Not wanting to derail this thread with either my thoughts on the matter or the ensuing discussion, please feel free to PM me with the name and/or URL(s) if you know of any. Or post it here if you think it might be of interest to this community.

I posted this at ASR:

I’ll try to state my view as clearly as I can now to avoid endless repetitive back and forth. I am not looking to be a troll or be trolled. I have only occasionally read this forum, but the impression I’ve gotten on this Musetec “review” is that not one comment was from anyone who has listened to it. How much time did Amir spend listening to it? I have owned this dac for over a year and spent many hours listening to it and also comparing it to the Holo May.

My thesis then is the tail is wagging the dog here. Why do we even care about audio equipment if not to listen to music? Please read that sentence twice.

The interesting and important question is: why do measurements of audio equipment sometimes differ sharply from what is subjectively heard by the listener? Even John Atckinson the measurement guru of Stereophile magazine has commented on occasion that his listening impression differs from what he has heard.

So, since musical enjoyment is primary, the significant question to examine scientifically is: why do measurements of audio equipment sometimes differ sharply from what is subjectively heard by the listener?

This is a scientific question, though not one confined to physics and electronic date exclusively. As far as I know at this time we do not know the answer. It is not easy to explore, but it seems to me we should look to the fields of psychology and neuropsychology. For now, again, it seems we don’t know. Clearly enjoyment of music is a mental phenomenon.

To emphasis my point, when we go to a concert, do we bring a microphone, computer, and oscilloscope? No, of course we go to listen and enjoy the music. Again, the tail is wagging the dog in this forum.

What’s going on here appears to be neither science nor a review, but a measurement report. My conclusion is that this forum might best be called not Audio Science Review Forum, but Audio Equipment Measurement Report. The data measured is of interest but ultimately only a footnote since the most significant question is: how does it sound?

I never understood ASR's methodology for determining good or bad.  I think measurements with instruments can help our understanding of what we're hearing but the whole thing is too complex to boil it down to a few types of measurements.  It's human nature to simplify our understanding of complex topics but this creates a lot of room for error.  The biggest flaw in the ASR methodolgy is to not use their best measurent tool that they have which is their ear and their brain. No man made tool can ever match this.

I’m here to report that my Musetec 005 sounds as good today as it did yesterday. So eveyone can take a breath.

It is notable that there are several people here who purchased the Musetec and compared it directly to a DAC that they had before and that ranked very high on amirm’s list. They prefered the performance of the Musetec and were happy to replace their old DAC with the Musetec.

I’m confident that there will be follow-ups to what has been written. I would choose not to ridicule the amirm post and thereby emulate the know-nothings who are responding to the amirm post by ridiculing those who find the audio performance of the DAC to be exceptionally fine, and the DAC a very good value.

@toddk31 Yes I find it sad that people cannot trust their own ears. Your example in point. KTE measures well but you sell it, nobody would sell something if it sounded good.

Goldensound has a great video about measurements.

Honestly if you learned from ASR I feel sorry for you and even sorrier if you feel you need ASR’s blessing to buy something.

I’ve seen people get roasted on ASR for buying a $120 cable.

Anyway ASR is a sad place. Amir gets on here and raves occasionally because he can’t stop people blowing ten grand or more on cables.

No I get it. I have the lks 004 an preferred it over my holo spring kte dac. Amir favorably reviewed the spring. I was pretty sure since my previous experience with lks was and is positive I would very much enjoy the musetec. His results were very surprising an fairly different from stated specs. Will be curious to see if Jimbo responds to these measurements. I have been an audiogon member for over 20 years an have learned a lot from the community over the years. I also have learned a lot from ASR an respect a lot of the knowledge there. In my view there is room for the objective an the subjective viewpoint. This anti ASR thinking I find almost humorous. No one forces anyone to believe anything. We are all free to decide what we believe and I believe there is room for both camps.  I have reached out to Jason at Midwest audio to let him know about the asr review. Hopefully he will get jimbo to respond.  

@toddk31 

Ouch, that hurt.  Some troubling measurements.

Todd you don't get it, if Amir says it's bad it usually sounds good.

Topping D90 is the best performing DAC in the world according to ASR..lol

Ouch, that hurt.  Some troubling measurements.

Well this is what you've been waiting for:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/musetec-audio-lks-audio-mh-da005-review-dac.34065/

Amir is such a total clown

@sns If you haven't tried the Purple fuses you're in for a treat.

The biggest change was in my pre-amp and surprisingly my power amp.

Give one a try they really work.

@debjit_g  Pink Faun with only RJ45 I2S output 22k Euros, I think I'll stay with the LKS 100 and my Aurender N20.

If I get the opportunity to demo them I will.

So what are qualities of sound that change with Synergistic fuse direction? I can never be sure what I'm hearing with directional changes is real, imagined, confirmation bias. This is one of those tweaks I'm no totally convinced of, I run the orange just to eliminate another unknown resulting from curiosity. Not sure I'm willing to spend more on purple based on above.

I have a mixed feeling with the SR Purple fuses. I had all Orange fuses upgraded to the Purple but now I am back to either stock or orange fuse on some of them. I would suggest that you run it for couple days and then reverse the direction - the sound will either deteriorate or improve. Run this couple of days and repeat the exercise just to make sure. When you are sure of the direction, compare it with the stock fuse (or anything you had before) to see which you like better.

I guess someone will be along soon who has a true I2s output that can be switched between I2s and USB, we live in anticipation.

They exist today - Pink Faun and Antipodes.

You can configure a Pink Faun server to be equipped with both I2S and USB board and both fitted with one of the best clock Ultra OCXO available in the market today. I wanted to fit my DIY server with their I2S card with Ultra OCXO when I had my PS Audio DS and Denafrips Terminator a while back but my current mainstream DAC doesn’t have I2S. I might spring for their USB with Ultra clock but that is almost twice that cost of the JCAT XE I am using today.

The other option is Antipodes K50.

If you really want to see the deep end of the I2S, then I would suggest that you sell your Aurender and look at either PF or the K50 :-)

@sirnui Hi, The SR Purple fuses are directional but Ted Denney, CEO of SR says that direction cannot be guaranteed.

The Blue and Orange and most other fuses do not have this issue.

Two days ago I put a Purple fuse into a DC LPS and I was sure I got it right, but last night I just got a feeling something was missing. Swapped it around and BANG big change.

I suggest you leave your fuses as you have inserted them, then after 24 hours swap them around one at a time to be absolutely sure they are in the correct direction.

Please believe me it works.

@sns I guess someone will be along soon who has a true I2s output that can be switched between I2s and USB, we live in anticipation.

Fwiw, I think it's great to have multiple really good options, and impressions from people regarding what they've found to work well in the different approaches. Good discussion, imo.

Agree 100%

Always good to learn and appreciate how various people construct their audio systems in the pursuit of better sound quality. There is a strong component of art in the mix.

Charles

I installed the three SR purple fuses last night. The way I like to do it, I burn in all system changes at the same time and then I would revert or change one thing at a time to determine if I like that one change or not.

I would like to share my methodology for initially installing the fuses. These SR fuses are directional. Based on my research, the "S" side of the fuse should connect to the Hot pin of the AC inlet. This is where the power is coming in. I used a digital multimeter to confirm which contact of the fuse housing had continuity with the Hot pin of the AC inlet. See diagram below as one looks at the AC inlet of the 005 with fuse and fuse holder removed:

           Ground

                ||
 Hot                  Neutral

  ||                         ||

Contact A       Contact B

 |-|                        |-|

In the diagram above, Hot had continuity with Contact A so I installed the fuse with the "S" side of the fuse near Contact A. I followed the same methodology for my preamp and headphone amp. These fuses are no where close to being broken in but first impressions are very important for me. I’ve never liked a system change long term if first impressions were bad.

Getting to the initial results, I’m keeping these Purple Fuses. They are the best fuses I’ve tried in my history with fuses The sound was more open and detailed. Bass and dynamics were still there if not slightly better than what I remember. On the downside, I sense more harshness from the system but I expect this to reduce once the breakin period is over.

Fwiw, I think it's great to have multiple really good options, and impressions from people regarding what they've found to work well in the different approaches. Good discussion, imo.

As a result I at least plan to try a bit of both approaches - over time. I'm curious now about the potential of the I2S interface of the DA005, so I plan to try that once I get a chance to get some cables and bits and set it up and experiment a bit. I may even try an LKS USB-100. And then eventually I will likely give either ethernet to USB a try, and/or cleaner optimized USB output directly from a server.

(All of this will likely take a bit of time as I have as I have some other priorities - both in my audio system, and elsewhere. It should keep me entertained for a while though. Fun hobby :-)

I for one have been enjoying reading about everyone's experience with ALL of the different interfaces of the DA005 and upstream approaches, and I hope that everyone will continue to share their impressions and approaches.

@lordmelton Quite the contrary, look at my prior post, I presume what you're hearing is valid. My only issue is, and as Melm pointed out, since you still have usb in stream, you're comparing two usb solutions, at least to some degree. I have no arguments with subjective best solutions. It seems you're making claim I2S input superior to usb input with 005, I find that claim dubious until you've eliminated any usb in chain.

I'm curious as to some OBJECTIVE streaming guidelines, at least as it pertains to 005. I'd like to know if I2S or usb is best input on 005. I have ability to do some comparisons, but my setup is too unique to have validity for others. For those presently using usb or I2S out of servers I'd like to see exclusive I2S to usb  setup, both fully optimized. The only generalization I can make based on my experience is vast majority of usb setups aren't optimized due to usb server flaws, this gives great usb inputs on dacs a bad name. I hear far too much bad mouthing of dac usb, I believe it wrongheaded.

As things stand, at least Melm and I are getting fine results with usb, you and others? fine results with I2S, perhaps both are indeed great inputs, ok with me.

@sns Despite several people fully agreeing that they prefer the USB/I2s setup I find it quite disconcerting that you don’t believe us. I think the LKS 100 works so well is because it’s a simple design, basically straight through with quality Crystek 957 oscillators. I’m in an extremely happy place right now.

Let me explain my setup once again.

1. 5G Optical straight into my rack, terminated in my router.

2. 1.2m Furutech Ethernet from router to Ediscreation Extreme with Galvanic via Optical isolator.

3. 0.4m WW Starlight Ethernet to galvanically isolated RJ45 input on Aurender N20

4. From N20 Crystal Clear Cables USB without power conductor to LKS 100

5. LKS 100 to 005 via RJ45 Furutech 0.6m Ethernet cable.

I listen to my ripped CDs and SACDs, played from the N20 SSD, combined with Tidal/Qobuz. I am getting excellent results with all.

Again I would like to thank @debjit_g for his WW Ethernet recommendation, it really synthesizes with the Ediscreation Extreme. I guess I’ll get the Platinum soon. The Starlight is crazily good for the price.

@lordmelton I'll never do the comparison unless I was using usb out of server, this is where my main beef with usb resides. You're still essentially using usb out of server, just switching LKS for Aurrender, to my mind you're comparing LKS and the external power supply to Aurrender usb as much or more than usb to I2S in 005.

In my setup I avoid ALL usb prior to OpticalRendu, I have totally optimized usb with total 100% galvanic isolation prior to usb using optical conversion, and have avoided any conversion schemes within server, server is only network device and place for Roon core and library. So server is minimal device, least imposition of noise or imprint on final sound, then 100% galvanic isolation of the maximally minimized noise emanating from server, and this noiseless signal being reclocked in OR using very good clocks and power supply (Uptone JS2), which is last thing in chain just prior to excellent usb board in 005.

End result for me is just incredible sound quality, so far above prior usb and ethernet schemes I've tried. I really have no motivation to ever use any usb out of a server again. If I did it would have to be custom atx build with totally optimized usb. 

Until you all have heard the advantage of forgetting server conversion using usb or I2S or any other conversion scheme you won't know what you're missing. I'll mention again, the only off the shelf server with a second ethernet port I'm aware of is Antipodes, otherwise custom atx build is only way. The way most servers are built today means they are main bottleneck to getting full potential out of streaming, assuming one has good network and dac.

For someone willing to experience this, try the Antipodes K50 for all in one server, K40 or 41 for server only with one's choice of streamer.

Hello,
I am a user of 004, but I use an external USB-DDC instead of an internal USB-DDC. I use an old model called MX-U8, and make my own RJ 45 cable and connect it at a distance of 20 cm. I listened and compared many times, but the sound of the external one was better.
For your reference.

@sns Hi, The only way for you and @melm to put this matter to rest is to get a LKS 100 and see for yourselves.

All I can say is it's the best sound I've ever heard in my system and it's significantly better than only USB. We all know that USB is jitter central so there are major changes at work here.

I've learned I2s has different requirements from regular Ethernet. Firstly I2s doesn't like the Telegartner cast alloy type plug headshells. Gold plated types give much better results.

Finally it's a much better sound, everything is multiplied, detail, texture, timing, soundstage, imaging....everything, not just a different sound.

@sirnui Oh, I remember now you bought the Grimm MU1. I have heard that streamer and it gave a very delicate sound very suited to classical type recordings.

It's been a constant battle between AES and USB for me until I got the LKS 100. Now I've stopped switching between them and I've got the sound that I want.

Regarding Purple fuses, if they are the wrong way around you will realise after about two hours that the bass has disappeared and the sound is without body.

The 005 has a Chinese tuning fuse inside already so you will get an improvement but not so much, however your pre-amp should get a massive boost. Only put one fuse in at a time to make sure they are correct.

I remain unconvinced of superiority of ddc devices using usb, still using usb, so most salient cause of change in sound is not exactly known. Two, is the sound indeed better or simply different.  We also need direct comparison of  optimized usb chain by these users. Until this criteria met I2S not proven to be superior to usb for 005, IMO.

I'm also very skeptical about the benefit of bypassing 005 internal usb board. First, it is one of the best out there, Melm  clarified some of the details. Two, in regard to usb board contamination of dac power supply, Melm also mentioned  004 experiments with transformer, while I haven't gone back to that thread, seems to have not added much if anything, and that with inferior usb board in that dac. Three, as I mentioned previously, I've seen a whole lot of experimentation with streaming, haven't come across much if any talk about usb boards contaminating dac power supplies or interfering with dac processes resulting in lowered sound quality. Now, this doesn't mean there may be theoretical losses, I believe the present bias to addressing what feeds dac is correct.

For me, a more compelling argument for I2S superiority to usb in 005 would have to be an optimized I2S port on server direct out to I2S in on 005. 

Complex usb setups are also not optimized IME, less is better, I believe straight wire concept applies to streaming chains. So many usb decrapifiers out there, how effective they are so chain dependent. Power supplies also come in many degrees of quality and effectiveness.

Premature at this point to make blanket statements about superiority of any single streaming solution, and this just for 005. In regard to other dacs, there may be another best solution for those dacs.  I always go back to whatever solution one goes for, optimization is key, purity is other, we shouldn't mix conversion protocols. In doing such a comparison we also have to keep in mind every single unique feature of our individual streaming solutions.

Funny thing, but I can understand how everyone here has come to their preference in streaming chains. I can at least understand the theoretical advantages and disadvantages of all these setups, I don't doubt the results are valid for each user.

@lordmelton Right now I am not using any DDC. Over a year ago I bought my Grimm MU1 streamer and I found going straight from it to DAC with a single AES/EBU cable sounded better than my complex USB chain with multiple USB decrapifiers.  Interestingly, the MU1 has bonified DDC capabilities (e.g. it can convert toslink to AES) but I don't use it in this way for music listening.

My last experience with a DDC was a Denafrips Hermes clocked by a Denafrips Terminator Plus.  My complex USB chain fed the USB signal to the Hermes which then outputted an I2S signal via an HDMI cable to feed the T+. Testing this Hermes configuration against the MU1, I preferred the MU1. 

I would love to get my hands on a Denafrips Gaia to experiment with the MU1 and 005 but this is not high on my list.

On another topic, three SR Purple fuses are arriving today. I'm installing one each in the 005, the Benchmark LA4 preamp, and my Ferrum Oor headphone amp.  I will report back my results in a later date.