2. digital
  3. 166933-4269

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
melm OP
1,076 posts
 

@sns 
The 9028 chip is also used in the Benchmark DAC3 I think.  It's one of the more popular DACs

@sns
@charles1dad 
What I had suggested is, with a given the level of mastering, users of the various Red Book (and even DSD) upscalings of programs like Audirvana and HQPlayer claim an increase of SQ.  The explanation is that some steps of the Sigma-Delta process are taken over from the DAC by the higher power computer with a beneficial effect.  So the mastering counts, of course.  But advocates of upsampling claim that even the finest mastered 16/44 files can have their SQ enhanced even more.  HQPlayer, for one, has built a business on that proposition.

charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 

@melm

 But advocates of upsampling claim that even the finest mastered 16/44 files can have their SQ enhanced even more.  HQPlayer, for one, has built a business on that proposition.

Yes I'm very aware of those who hold this opinion (And those who do not). I haven't been committed to a deep delve to determine the proposed superiority of upsampling .

My only point was to acknowledge just how superb 16/44 Redbook CD can sound when one assembles a thoughtful system consisting of high quality digital hardware. Hardware in my observation has been the major bottleneck in exploiting the full potential of this format. 

Charles 

sns
3,208 posts
 

@melm I hope to explore this very soon via an acquaintance building serious  server dedicated to running highest level dsp with HQPlayer. I can only say my explorations with Roon dsp have been disappointing at best, I hear an 'electronic haze' or less natural analog like sound quality with any dsp engaged, even allowing Roon to control volume is bothersome for me. My experience points to 005 does better job with these digital processes than Roon, the rest of my system exposes those differences.

 

At this point not convinced of value of software dsp, typically I see great amounts of dsp used with desktop type systems. Go over to Headfi and lots swear by it, don't see it so much in high end systems. Perhaps lower quality dacs benefit more than the better dacs. It doesn't say much for one's dac if software dsp superior to letting dac control these processes. Why have a good dac if you're not using it's full capabilities? Also, it may be that only extremely transparent, resolving systems painstakingly  optimized for maximum analog like sound from digital will expose software dsp anomalies. Still, it may be that us older guys with high end systems are simply ignorant, more resistant to newer technologies. Expect I will soon uncover more knowledge with direct experience.

lordmelton's avatar
lordmelton
877 posts
 

IMO we now have such a magnitude of processing capability on tap that up-sampling is no longer necessary and I concur with @sns  that resolving systems don’t benefit much or at all from up-sampling.

When all is said and done up-sampling is fake, it’s like wearing a fake Rolex. Maybe everyone else believes it’s real but you know it’s fake.

The only up-sampling I thought was good was up-sampling to DSD but that was some time ago and the Musetec doesn’t need it.

debjit_g
267 posts
 

Up-sampling externally from s/w, like hqplayer, is only helpful when the DAC can work in a NOS mode (non over-sampling), otherwise the sound quality is mostly determined by the SRC within the DAC itself. Good candidates for nos DACs are  T+A, Holo Audio, Denafrips and this is why so many folks use HqP with these DACs. Not sure if the 005 has a nos mode as well. 

More to discover