@melm, thanks for that.
Right, philosophy and approach aside, one should be able to expect that the unit should meet its published specs, under at least some - ideally normal/standard, test conditions.
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."
- ...
- 1535 posts total
I received a singxer SU-6 yesterday and immediately put it in the system in place of the sonore ultradigital between my aurender and my 005. Immediately, I noticed what I can best describe as a strident, edgy and "bad digital" character. The system remained very detailed but the realistic and pleasant character of instruments and vocals was diminished. The joy and involvement seemed sucked out of my system. I let it burn in overnight by playing music continually through it. I sat and listened late morning today. My system was better than yesterday but still not particularly engaging. A couple hours ago, I swapped back in the sonore and my system was immediately better and far more enjoyable than using the singxer. I'm going to listen to the system for a couple days and swap back in the singxer. But, I'm relatively certain I still will prefer the sonore. I may order and try an LKS USB 100. I do prefer my system using the sonore feeding the 005 through HDMI over running the aurender through USB directly into the 005. What I believe I'm learning is there are solutions that provide better sq than straight usb out of the aurender into the 005. Are there recommendations for USB renderers less costly that the innuos phoenix? I may want to go in that direction. |
@car123 Hi, What you're hearing is break-in associated noise. I had an awful time when I first installed the LKS 100. What I suggest is plug HDMI I2s and RJ45 I2s simultaneously into the 005. It's going to 4-5 days for the break-in to resolve itself but you can then compare the differences between HDMI and RJ45. My LKS is a great performer now, so much so that I'm auditioning a new USB cable. |
@fl_guy Amir's tests are not normal test conditions. They are Amir's test conditions. For example he couldn't even be bothered to put batteries in the remote, download the manual or the correct driver from the website. He sees anything priced above a couple of hundred bucks as the spawn of Satan. @toddk31 Well you got a real feeding frenzy going over at ASR, you should be very proud of yourself. However if you really are a seeker of truth and not just a smart a$$, why not break the DAC in (ASR doesn't believe in break-in) have a listen, see what you think and then for a real review send it to Goldensound. I know it's complicated but that's how great things are achieved through transparency and honesty. |
@car123 Your impressions of SU6 allign with my presumptions of what I'd have heard if I had cared to even try my Singxer SU6. You do owe it further burn in just to be sure. Trying out LKS would give you one more point of reference. Your usb experience not surprising in least, I'd bet on many usb renderers beating out server usb. Can't give you info on good one for less money than Phoenix, not up to date here.
As for the NON-CONTROVERSY of measurements vs listening in rating 005. Non-controversial in the sense the objectivist vs subjectivist divide only continues into the infernal. There have actually been some pretty informative arguments on this subject at this forum, believe everything that could ever be said in regard to this issue has been addressed in this forum.
I only know 005 will continue to have exact same sound as prior to ASR review. Jimbo addressed issue of O vs. S in stating 005 tuned by listening, no misdirection there. I haven't looked at 005 marketing measurements vs ASR, if they are not accurate he should be called out on that.
Going at it big time over this one at ASR, 11 pages and growing. Lots of people over there referring to some bashing of ASR and objectivists from this forum. There are some defenders of subjectivism on the thread. |
- 1535 posts total