Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC

@batvac2

What persuaded me early on was the description of the excellent, and costly, parts used by the engineer/designer in producing the Musetec DAC. No one in their right mind, or so it seemed to me, was going to use this quality of parts but that each one made a noticeable improvement in the sound quality. I saw nothing like it in comparably priced products.

This thread, now with 110,000 views and 1300 posts, has plenty of testimonies from satisfied owners, each of whom seems to have considerable of experience in audio and with other DACs. And as you well know, the DAC has been compared carefully, and often favorably, to other far more expensive ones. Notwithstanding all that, like the owner of the print without the signature, what you are left with that would seem to keep you from enjoying this DAC to its fullest is fundamentally nothing more than a qualm. So be it!

As for "closer to reality," I can provide you with nothing better than this. If you can find a review of any DAC anywhere with this level of description against reality, I am ready to read it. I hold to the Harry Pearson dictum that if a component can reproduce classical music well, it can reproduce everything well. The full range of unamplified classical music in real space is the ultimate audio test.

I invite all followers of pseudoscience to view this object ... no measurement is reported ... so presumably it will have lower performance than Toppings

https://wadax.eu/reference/

@batvac2 😂🤣😂🤣you make me laugh, are you a flat-earther?

The signal to noise ratios rather meaningless for dacs in general, far below analog portions of our setups. Jitter measurements do have bearing on what we hear, still relatively small variations in ASR measurements really don't have much real world impact since the rest of streaming network provides much greater variability of jitter.

It would be interesting to see Wadax measured at ASR, presume it would not be stand out in overall measurements. That's what gets me most about ASR, the relatively small variability of dac measurements tell you so little about how these dacs sound in real world setups, let alone how they sound relative to each other!

Flat earther? No- academic physician, lead a large research group, teach, and have hundreds of published papers. Afraid I have drank the Kool Aid of reality.

I agree completely with sns - tiny differences in signal to noise ratio or jitter are unlikely to be audible; there is absolutely NO reason to choose a DAC based on a sinad of 130 versus 127. That was never my point. The point was that gross errors in basic measurements - whether audible or not - are worrisome for larger design and engineering flaws. Plus it feels like buying a brand new car with a ding on it.

Yes Melm that was a good review and agree that classical is probably the best for auditioning because it is typically natural instruments in space. I am generally unmoved by “quality of the parts” arguments except maybe for the analog attenuator- would be more excited if Nelson Pass or Air Tight designed the output stage.

@batvac2 

what you do or what you have has no value for me, what you are has value for me.

the way you speak shows only ignorance, presumption and a huge ego. I tell you to Socrates, you should simply understand one thing, the more you know the more you know you don't know ...

for the record, at the present time the Wadax is considered the best DAC on the world hi-end market