Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC


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."

melm

I didn't like audiophile switch with my setup, and suspect I'd not like any switch. I've bridged second ethernet out of modded mac mini using thunderbolt port. This way I can go direct out from server to streamer or FMC (later opticalmodule). A second ethernet port is pretty rare in servers, Antipodes and SGC I9 only ones coming to mind.

 

This direct connection to end point/streamer was pretty major upgrade for sound quality. In my setup, adding switch means signal has to detour through the added switch and another ethernet cable. 

Your setup sounds more audiophile level than mine. I am leveraging the fact that analog noise cannot travel through fibre. I use the fibre just before the DAC and do not care about anything prior to the fibre. My ROON Core is running on a noisy DELL PC hidden in a closet. Again, the fibre should kill any gremlins trying to get into my DAC.

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/55217-sonore-opticalrendu/page/27/#comment-963599 In this link John Swenson makes case for how everything in network prior to optical conversion affects accuracy of clocks in Sonore optical module and rendu, and all ethernet and optical devices. It seems the entire network important, even with FMC.

Not bothered about streaming at the moment but I've extensively listened to this fiber box and can say it's very well made and sounds wonderful. However I've never listened to the Sonore.

 

I've seen that, don't quite understand the ethernet out scheme, point of FMC is to use fiber cable. This isn't FMC, rather just a filter.