Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC

@debjit_g I would like to clarify and reword my last post.  

When I wrote that post, I had in mind what melm said: "I believe what I am reading about here IIUC is not a comparison of the USB input with the I2S input. It seem to me rather a comparison of 2 USB inputs, one using the internals of the Musetec USB system and the other using the separate LKS system, both feeding I2S into the internals of the DAC."

Viewing the comparison in that way is interesting and it made me think what in my experience would explain why the L.K.S Audio USB-100 DDC could sound better than the Amanero board built inside the 005. 

Some potential advantages I see are:

1. As viewed from the DAC chip, the electrical noise from the DDC will be less than the electrical noise from the built-in Amanero board because the DDC is farther away from the DAC chip.  
2. The DDC has its own power supply and this has a number of benefits including...
   1. The DAC's power supply is freed from the task of powering the USB to I2S function, which should allow it to better supply power to other parts of the DAC.
   2. The electrical noise generated from the DDC should have a smaller impact to the DAC's power supply compared to the Amanero board because the Amanero board is connected to the DAC's power supply and the DDC is not.
3. The DDC has a singular task to convert one digital signal to another and if its fed by a very good power supply, it alone will take full advantage of that power supply.  Usually, the better the power supply, the better the performance of the DDC.  In this way, the performance of the DDC is scalable and its theoretical performance ceiling may be higher than a static built-in solution like the 005's Amanero board.
4. The addition of a DDC means adding a reclocker and if the DDC has a well built clock, this can have benefits downstream to the DAC.  Signal integrity may be better.

I can list the drawbacks of the DDC as well but in my experience, choosing the right Digital-In to Digital-Out type devices can create wonderful sonic improvements.

For these types of devices I look for a great clock usually of the OCXO variety and a special built power supply that is built inside the device itself to eliminate external DC cables.  It's a winning combination and the sonic improvements have not been subtle for me.

@lordmelton As you know, I no longer use USB but if I ever do go back to it, I would strongly consider buying back the Innuos Phoenix USB.  I would rate it as one of the most joyful USB devices I've owned.  When I first installed the Phoenix USB, I already had the opticalRendu streamer and the Uptone ISO Regen chained together.  I added the Phoenix USB to the end of that chain and the joy factor went up a notch or two.  The improvement was obvious and the music became even more addictive.  I may be overstating it a little here but everything improved.  The Phoenix USB was the device that taught me the power of a great clock and a well built internal power supply.

@sirnui Hi, So are you also using the L.K.S. DDC or another DDC?

Great write up BTW.

Talking about clocks many people say an external master clock only works for SPDIF but if I disconnect it from my Aurender everything gets deflated.

I'm only using USB out to the L.K.S. now and with some SR Purple Fuses in my system I'm getting the best sound ever.

melm:

I am comparing ethernet into the Aurender with its USB out to the Musetec (obviously bypassing the Aurender's DAC) with ethernet into the Aurender with its USB out to the Sonore and its I2S into the Musetec.  Even given the additional complexity and cabling, the sound is better using the Sonore.  

I would love to try the Innuos Phoenix but I don't feel like spending that much cash on a DDC.   I did order a Singxer SU-6.  It may take a while to arrive but hopefully it will get here within the Sonore 30 day return window.

I recognize that not everything in audio is predictable and also that different does not always mean better to all listeners. That being said, my own biases lead me to try to make full use of the USB to I2S in the Musetec with the advantages that its designer has given us. These advantages include an excellent USB board, three exceptional clocks, a sophisticated battery-like DC power supply, and the shortest possible I2S connection.

At one point in my own DAC adventure I looked carefully into devices that went directly from ethernet to I2S. Such a device would bypass any USB connections, cables, etc. I quickly learned that while such a device might provide a theoretical benefit, in practice it would likely provide less than I already had. Beekhuyzen got the same result.

So my own road has been to try to provide very high quality USB signal into the DAC. I keep my media on a NAS and I use JRiver on a small lap-top. This has eventually led me to digital bridges (ethernet in, USB out) run as DLNA devices. My first was using an Oppo 501 (though coax out) much as car123 was using his Aurender, the only difference perhaps being the DLNA control through JRiver. Not saying here that the Oppo is equal to the Aurender, but each used in this very odd way they might be comparable.

I soon discovered that this route into the DAC could be improved dramatically using devices more sophisticated, and with USB out, than using a small part of a DAC-streamer. I eventually wound up with an SOtM sMS-200ultra Neo and an SBooster power supply for it. Under the control of JRiver this device reclocks and otherwise decrapifies the data from the NAS and sends it directly to the DAC. It is hardly the last word in devices performing this function, but I am delighted with it. Furthermore, it makes full use of what the Musetec provides.

The other part of this puzzle is the section of a USB cable, and they can be very, very different. More on this later, with at least one surprising result.