All these Chinese brands are competing with each other in similar price range. There sounds will be in the similar ballpark, some will do this better, others will do something else better. Its just a matter of personal taste and system synergy. With technology advancement, some might replace a slightly higher priced DACs but the real question is will they ever be able to replace the higher priced MSBs or Wadax or Lampizator or Esoterics of the world ? If they do, you have a real winner, otherwise they continue to be midfi stuff at best and there is nothing wrong with that (and I am owned some as well).
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 $$ by research, and by satisfaction with the MH-DA004. Frankly, I have been overwhelmed by the improvement; just didn't think it was possible. Fluidity, clarity, bass extension. A post to another board summed it up better than I can after listening to piano trios: "I have probably attended hundreds of classical concerts (both orchestral and chamber) in my life. I know what live sounds like in a good and bad seat and in a good and mediocre hall. All I can say is HOLY CRAP, this sounds like the real thing from a good seat in a good hall. Not an approximation of reality, but reality."
Meanwhile, during the 4 years after release of the MH-DA004, LKS (now Musetec) worked on the new MH-DA005 design, also with a pair of ES9038pro chips. This time he used more of the best components available. One torroidal transformer has silver plated copper. Also banks of super capacitors that act like batteries, solid silver hookup wire, 4 femtoclocks each costing multiples of the Crysteks, a revised Amanero board, more of the best European caps and a new partitioned case. I can't say cost NO object, but costs well beyond. A higher price, of course. Details at http://www.mu-sound.com/DA005-detail.html
The question, surely, is: How does it sound? I'm only going to answer indirectly for the moment. I thought that the MH-DA004 was to be my last DAC, or at least for a very long time. I was persuaded to part with my $$ 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."
- ...
- 1537 posts total
@debjit_g I would say the general Chinese business plan is similar to the post War Japanese one. Which is first copy, dump the product on the market and when the competition is on it's knees bring out a cheaper quality product. I would say the 005 and May and Termy are second generation products but as you say they are not absolute top end. That is coming. There are many copies of FM Acoustics Pre and Power amps available at different price ranges. I've personally heard $2k copies and they sound really good, better than they should. Even the ICBs have been copied exactly. FM Acoustics is way up there $200k+ per unit. |
@melm +1 On Goldensound, I respect the way he's stood up to dCS and the MQA scum, notwithstanding his truly excellent reviews of the May, Spring, Serene, Dave etc. The Fat German keeps defending MQA to his last breath when everyone else has proved it's a scam in more ways than one. I am disgusted by Bob Stuart being involved in MQA and doing his best to justify the scam. Shows you can't trust anyone. They're all laughing now, I believe they sold MQA and someone else is carrying the can. This is another reason Tidal calls MQA Tidal Masters. Legally different entities. |
It's my understanding that most if not all reviewers can get the accommodation price, before, during, or after doing the review. The price is typically the same as what a retailer would pay the manufacturer for the product. There have been threads already on markup, so yes, 50-60% is typical. Impossible to know if a few manufacturers try to exert influence beyond this, but if they did it would typically be with "reviewers" who operate singly and are not part of a team (e.g. publishing in the major magazines). |
- 1537 posts total