Holo may lte vs denafrips terminator 2 vs musetec da005


Greetings 

since it seems next to impossible to audition these in person, would appreciate any thoughts or recommendations between these units

 

thanks 

digitaljoseph

No doubt you will find that they each have a similar SQ and that will come down to personal taste.

However the Musetec 005 is significantly less expensive which gives you more $$$ to spend on good cables. Plus you won't need a re-clocker because the Musetec has an Amanero USB board.

My two penneth…I currently have both 005 and May. The May just edges it in most areas by a small margin, with the exception of layer separation, stage width and depth where the May is significantly better. 

I would agree with teknorob23. Here are two videos that have a lot of good info on the May.

 

 

 

@Technorob said: “I currently have both 005 and May. The May just edges it in most areas by a small margin, with the exception of layer separation, stage width and depth where the May is significantly better.”

I will throw in my thoughts. I can definitely see Technorob’s point of view on “layer separation, stage width and depth” being different on the May, but not better. (To my old ear, the other aspects were not “just edged[s]” out by the May but  too close to call.)

It is a matter of perspective, double entendre intended. Many, if not most audiophiles, highly value layer separation, stage width and depth. The underlying frame of reference for most is probably amplified non-acoustic electronically produced music that exists only in recordings, not in real space. Big clear layering and sound stage sounds great with a lot of non-accoustic recorded music and will be preferred by many.

In my opinion, the May does, compared to the 005,  provide an unreal feel of spacial separation and distance at the same time. This is like seeing an image get bigger as you walk further away. As a real concert goer, this is a distortion, even though many will love the effect. It also gains separation by missing natural sound between instruments

I will explain. My perspective is what I hear at a live unamplified concert. If you want maximum separation of instruments and voices, you would have to be very close to the stage if not actually on it. Even then the sound would only be sharply separated and layered if you were listening with your head physically in between instruments. 

Realistic perspective is similar in both sight and sound. When you walk closer to a destination the visual details in you visual field naturally become more visible and separate. It’s the same with sound. When you walk closer to the stage, the sound field gets bigger and instruments sound further apart in space. There is some layering partly depending on your elevation, but nothing in the realm of “audiophile” layering. Sound naturally blends together in the real world. Yes, 3-d palpability exists in the real world, but not in the way many audiophiles love or imagine. 

I said this in my review:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/review-holo-may-l2-dac-and-the-musetec-audio-lks-audio-mh-da005-da/post?highlight=dbb%2Bcharcoal&postid=2272784#2272784


. . . I said in the review I would report back after a few weeks. I hesitated to do that because the more I listened the more it confirmed my initial impressions stated in the review. I would not change my basic conclusions. I have very little to add. I would add this. Over time I felt I was missing musical information when I listened to the May. At times the May seemed to allow more space between instruments or musicians which at first I believed to be a good thing. I came to realize that this was because the May was omitting sound to get this effect. Much like an artist using charcoal shade to create a 3d effect. I decided to sell the May. Not because it is objectively inferior, but it does not satisfy my preference for realism which comes from concert going experience. Different strokes for different folks.