Some history: I was the OP on a four year old thread about the Chinese LKS MH-DA004 DAC. It achieved an underground buzz. The open architecture of its predecessor MH-DA003 made it the object of a lot of user mods, usually to its analog section, rolling op amps or replacing with discrete. The MH-DA004 with its new ESS chips and JFET analog section was called better then the modified older units. It has two ES9038pro DAC chips deliberately run warm, massive power supply, powered Amanero USB board, JFET section, 3 Crystek femtosecond clocks, Mundorf caps, Cardas connectors, etc., for about $1500. For this vinyl guy any reservation about ESS chips was resolved by the LKS implimentaion, but their revelation of detail was preserved, something that a listener to classic music especially appreciated. I made a list of DACs (many far more expensive) it was compared favorably to in forums. Modifications continued, now to clocks and caps. Components built to a price can be improved by costlier parts and the modifiers wrote glowingly of the SQ they achieved.
Meanwhile, during the 4 years after release of the MH-DA004, LKS (now Musetec) worked on the new MH-DA005 design, also with a pair of ES9038pro chips. This time he used more of the best components available. One torroidal transformer has silver plated copper. Also banks of super capacitors that act like batteries, solid silver hookup wire, 4 femtoclocks each costing multiples of the Crysteks, a revised Amanero board, more of the best European caps and a new partitioned case. I can't say cost NO object, but costs well beyond. A higher price, of course. Details at http://www.mu-sound.com/DA005-detail.html
The question, surely, is: How does it sound? I'm only going to answer indirectly for the moment. I thought that the MH-DA004 was to be my last DAC, or at least for a very long time. I was persuaded to part with my $$ by research, and by satisfaction with the MH-DA004. Frankly, I have been overwhelmed by the improvement; just didn't think it was possible. Fluidity, clarity, bass extension. A post to another board summed it up better than I can after listening to piano trios: "I have probably attended hundreds of classical concerts (both orchestral and chamber) in my life. I know what live sounds like in a good and bad seat and in a good and mediocre hall. All I can say is HOLY CRAP, this sounds like the real thing from a good seat in a good hall. Not an approximation of reality, but reality."
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 :-)
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.
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.
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.
@toddk31Yes 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.
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.
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’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?
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
@fl_guyAmir'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.
@toddk31Well 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.
@car123Your 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.
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.
@car123Have 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.
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.
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?
@car123You 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 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.
@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.
@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.
If you follow ASR, the rule of thumb is the DAC will likely sound great if it measures poorly over there 🤣 God knows what will happen if they start measuring Pass amps and tube gears.
On a serious note, you can never win a battle over there and neither they can win a battle over here. It’s a never ending story that started ever since the dawn of the day and will continue till apocalypse ☠️
After all this is a hobby. Don’t take things seriously and personally. The sky is not going to fall apart if the published spec doesn’t meet any standards. Who cares.
@debjit_g re: ... "On a serious note, you can never win a battle over there and neither they can win a battle over here. It’s a never ending story that started ever since the dawn of the day and will continue till apocalypse ☠️
After all this is a hobby. Don’t take things seriously and personally."
I agree completely. If I may, I suggest that everyone relax - and perhaps hold off on the name calling.
Btw, also I didn't state that the DA005 doesn't meet standards, or that ASR doesn't like the measured results (which is definitely true :-).
What I pointed out was IF (and I emphasized the IF) the measured performance is correct, then it doesn't meet the specs claimed by the manufacturer. That seems like a reasonable observation to me. No?
This is my follow-up to the publication of Jinbo Li’s short letter yesterday and his more extended communication this morning. He is the designer/engineer and manufacturer of the Musetec DAC. After a day of reflection I’m becoming more and more appreciative of the normally taciturn Jinbo who says, effectively:
Any old competent engineer can design a DAC that tests well.
I’m interested in music, so what I do is try hard to design a product to sound good. Period. Measurements notwithstanding. They just fall out, and are what they are.
For example, as one user has written elsewhere, "the majority of the distortions comes from the discrete I/U and output stage. The output amplifier and buffer has no feedback (I think). Without it the distortion values cannot compete against integrated op amps."
I would not have him change my own DAC to meet the need for a better specification.
I wonder what the audiophile public will make of a product that is designed only by listening without reference to tecnical specs, and that does not publish technical specifications. One thing it may do is to define better the term "audiophile."
I did advise him that when you publish technical specifications you invite tests that should confirm those specifications. So perhaps he should revise that part of his site.
@sns
I suppose we’ll have to wait and pose the question when he puts forward an option. My guess is that it will compromise sound. I’m not certain why he is proposing to go in that direction. I know he has always felt a great obligation to his customers.
Likewise, I would prefer and choose better sound vs better spec.s if it does come down to that. I think that all of use who enjoy this DAC feel this way. Who knows, maybe his investigation just might lead to even more refinement, and further elevation of the sound quality/reproduction as @sns suggested might be possible?
Much respect is due to Jinbo imo for his continued pursuit of the best sound at reasonable price points over many generations of products. From what we’ve seen and heard of his products so far, I doubt that he would sacrifice sound quality for better measurements, but as let’s see what he finds and proposes. I look forward to his findings, and proposal if any.
i am writing from Europe and I have been following this forum from the beginning.Thanks to sns, lordmelton, melm and everyone else for sharing the experience with 005. I decided to buy 005 because the best option is price / quality / I I2s.As far as ASR is concerned - measurements are not everything.Even the hi end DAC R2R Rockna doesn't have perfect measurements, but it sounds very, very good.My current DAC Soncoz SGD 1 ($ 450) is identical to mola mola tambaqui ($ 10,000) by ASR measurements.Emotions cannot be measured =))Eventually Jinbo Li can fix the ESS hump (as did the engineer of Soncoz SGD 1)
One option designers use to obtain better specs is applying more feedback to a circuit. Generally, this adds a sterility the 005 certainly doesn't need. Per @fl_guynot meeting Musetec published specs is problematic. This is how China manufacturers get themselves in trouble here, we expect honesty, you don't retain your position in marketplace with marketing deception.
Still, as has been mentioned previously, the dac will sound the same today as it did prior to ASR review. While I don't much agree with ASR philosophy, I'd rather see equipment that both measures and sounds great vs only one of the two.
Any old competent engineer can design a DAC that tests well.
I’m interested in music, so what I do is try hard to design a product to sound good. Period. Measurements notwithstanding. They just fall out, and are what they are.
For example, as one user has written elsewhere, "the majority of the distortions comes from the discrete I/U and output stage. The output amplifier and buffer has no feedback (I think). Without it the distortion values cannot compete against integrated op amps."
Virtually all mass produced entry level DACs/CD players made by the mainstream brands follow the same recipe. Op-Amps (Inexpensive off the shelve varieties) utilized for I/V conversion and analog output stage duties.
They employ generous amounts of NFB (Negative feedback) and do one thing consistently well, they yield very good test measurements and specifications. How do they reproduce music and engage the listener? Seemingly that's besides the point. They will measure quite good, mission accomplished.
Certainly it is true to say, "to each their own". I'll chose the talented designer who makes decisions .based on extensive listening and reassessment. I do not find any particular comfort with good spec numbers on paper. It has to sound very good when listening to music.
As per some others here I feel that Jinbo should only publish consistently reproducible measurements, otherwise it is difficult for potential new customers to trust him otherwise. I get the temptation for a small company to publish attractive specs, but these days with the ASR gear measurements making their way through the hifi forums, it is better in the long run to be accurate.
Btw I have been listening to the measurements champion Topping D90SE all day and so far I have no complaints. It is many hours away from completing burn in, but I gotta say so far it is clean and yet not harsh sounding.
One actual fact that has arisen is that there are two versions of the 005. Checkout the pics below and note that one has what seems to be an off the shelf Amanero Board with two oscillators. Whilst the other has an Amanero Board with three oscillators. I believe the latter is Musetec's custom Amanero Board, so I surmise this is the later model.
Power board differences show 2 FETS and 4 FETS and minor capacitor changes.
I will not speculate on distortion or the reasons for it, my contributions to this thread speak for themselves. These boards are easily changed if anyone is so inclined, I can't detect any other differences.
@kairosman I also owned and sold the Topping D90SE. The D90SE will sound very good on speakers. It is very much like the Benchmark DAC3B. However, if you send the DAC signal to some headphones you may notice that the D90SE is a bit harsher than a DAC3B. Compared to the Musetec 005 the D90SE is much harsher on headphones.
I used the RAAL SR1a to test this out. I am not sure if there is any other headphone as revealing as the SR1a.
I had the Topping pre90 + D90SE + Benchmark AHB2 + KEF LS50 as my uber revealing setup. I sold the Topping and put back a Benchmark LA4 pre + DAC3B, which I found better in mostly features and a bit better in sound.
I use the 005 now with the Benchmark LA4 preamp. All I hear in this setup is the 005 and it sounds great. I used a CODA 07x preamp before but that colored (in a nice way) the sound of the 005. I like the naked 005 sound more.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
