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
budkine's avatar
budkine
8 posts
 

@lordmelton What 5v power supply unit are you using for the LKS 100? And, what is the amperage? 

Also, the I2s is noticeably better than through the USB input on the 005? I am currently running from my PC straight into the USB on the 005. It sounds very good through the USB, but if I can improve on that with the LKS 100 through I2s, I’m very likely to give it a try.

melm OP
1,074 posts
 

@budkine
I realize that anything that’s said here is necessarily system dependent and the use of the LKS 100 has already been discussed at some length. Without questioning lordmelton’s results I think it is fair to say that his is currently a minority view. Of course, that could change. But the 005 already provides the function of the LKS 100 (converting USB to I2S) with a very sophisticated power supply and upgraded clocks. There’s surely no harm in trying the LKS 100.

But you write that you are running from your PC straight into the USB on the 005. That is usually not optimal and can be improved upon easily, still into the 005’s USB. There are several other things you can do to yield better SQ.  If you tell us more about your set-up (like what PC and program you are using on the PC and where you store music files, or how you stream) I’m sure folks will chime in with suggestions.

sns
3,193 posts
 

@melm  +1

 

Running usb direct out of vast majority of servers or any PC is why usb gets such a bad name. USB run directly off motherboards is noisy, noisy, noisy, one must clean via various usb renderers or get the rare server with internally optimized usb, generally going to be atx/windows motherboards with Pink Faun or JCAT usb board and external linear power supply.

 

Beyond that, I can only say 005 has first class usb input, where engineering budget went for inputs. I2S supposedly has an advantage in being native protocol within dacs. As for what input is best with any particular setup depends on level of optimization of said conversion used. With so many varieties of optimization within a single format available to end users difficult to even know if one particular setup is indeed optimally optimized! I arrived at my conclusion to use usb based on level of usb optimization within 005, and the level of sound quality I'm experiencing and have experienced via usb has left me with no motivation to try another input. And this having owned Singxer SU6, one of the better DDC out there, purchased and sold without even listening to it.

jjss49's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
jjss49
6,612 posts
 

agree w @sns

usb connections for music is given a (rightfully) bad name by users with regular computers sending the signal - much can be done to solve those problems, and there are now ample well made network bridges and streamers on the market that do it right, and some at a very modest cost (not to mention usb cleaners...)

other connection methods have their issues... ethernet has noise issues, i2s hardly problem free either... anyone playing in the category of multiple thousand dollar dacs owes it to themselves to get the upstream feed clean and right...

btw, my 005 came in today, so beginning to listen and try to compare and discern...

ortodox
86 posts
 

What usb renderer is the best to use ?

More to discover