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
sns
3,361 posts
 

Above posts are good for voicing one's system. I also use my own voice in order to ascertain natural timbre, tonality of my system. I love to sing, sang in many choirs back in the day, so often sing within my dedicated listening room. Really belt it out with operatic voice, hearing live voice within one's own room is extremely enlightening.  Speaking, clapping, whistling, yelling can all be helpful as well, sometimes ugly sounds very telling, don't want to beautify the ugly. Used all the above in determining best use of acoustic treatments for my dedicated listening room, wide variety of music as well.

 

The one issue with using unamplified live music for voicing one's system is we then have to rely on aural memory. Not to say its not valid method, hearing a good amount of this over a lifetime certainly helps in training our sensory perceptions. Listening to live and reproduced  music over audio systems in analytical mode is a skill, practice improves this skill.  Just leaves out the insights gained from instant comparison to live voice  and/or sounds reproduced within our listening rooms.

As far as colorations within systems, I maintain my estimation of neutral voicing of 005, silver content of wiring doesn't upset in the least. In my setup silver only adds transparency, resolving capability, no brightness or spotlighting of highs, no thinning of mids and bass, in fact I'd say highs and mids sound most natural with the aprox. 50/50 copper/silver content I currently employ. Excessive copper can harden mids, close in highs to some extent, silver opens things back up, and adds delicacy and sophistication.

 

No to say, I'm unaware of downsides of sliver in some systems, I've had systems in past very sensitive to silver, spotlit highs, thinning of mids, bass, so understand not for everyone.

 

I'd just like everyone to understand 005 is not inherently allergic to silver, this dac is voiced wonderfully, while it may not be warm enough for every taste and system, it is not hifish sounding. 005 not scared of silver or even rhodium, capable of wonderful harmonic development with a variety of metals.

yyzsantabarbara
4,929 posts
 

Does anyone remember if the Briscasti DACs were compared to the Musetec 005 on this thread. The thread has gotten big and I do not follow all the posts anymore.

melm OP
1,082 posts
 

@yyzsantabarbara 

Too bad that Audiogon does not support a "search within thread" function.  it would often be a great help.

The best you can do here is to use the general search on "Musetec Bricasti".  You will come up with something.

yyzsantabarbara
4,929 posts
 

Actually I did that just now and came across some posts by the person that sold me his Musetec 005 (my second one). He compared it to the Bricasti M1 SE. I used different search terms to find the post, A’gon search is pretty lame.

The post I found was very useful and answered exactly what I wanted to know. I was considering using a Benchmark LA4 preamp with a Musetec 005 DAC on my new Livingroom system, which will use new KRELL amp(s) and KEF Blade 2 Meta. I have the 005 and LA4 already in my completed office system, with Benchmark AHB2 monos. So I know that pairing is great.

My dealer is telling me to try a different preamp from the LA4 for the KRELL. He suggested the Bricasti. Reading the post on this thread that compared the M1 SE DAC with the 005 DAC made me think I do not need the Bricasti DAC. I already have the 005 and Sonore OpticalRendu that I am sure is close to the Network streaming card of the Bricasti M12 Source Controller with DAC (mine could be even better). Though the M12 is a cleaner and simpler solution if the Ethernet streaming is as good as my Sonore OpticalRendu.

I am now thinking of giving the Bricasti M20 preamp (no DAC) a demo with the 005. Mainly to be sonically different (not better) from my office system which is Benchmark LA4 preamp | Musetec 005 | Benchmark AHB2 monos | KEF LS50 Meta + KEF KC62 sub. The office system is super clean and precise with the 005 adding some smoothness.

The Livingroom system could be a rounder and smoother sound with the Bricasti preamp | Musetec 005 DAC | KRELLL XD amp(s) | KEF Blade 2 Meta.

BTW - I just sold my CODA 07x preamp which is 1/2 the price of the Bricasti M20 and has similar features. I liked the quieter and more detailed LA4 more than the 07x, The 07x with the 005 DAC was at the far edge of smoothness for my particular tastes.

If anyone cares. Some smart guys talking about the Sonore streaming vs Bricasti streaming.

Bricasti M1 > M5 > M12: Network Player - Member REVIEW - w/OEM Response from Brian Zolner President Bricasti - Page 2 - Music Servers - Audiophile Style

 

sirnui
83 posts
 

I've had the Holo Audio Serene Level 1 preamp for a few months now. It's an excellent pairing with the 005. There is a review out there from Alpha Audio that mentions the performance of the Serene against the HPA4.  I agree with the findings from that review.  Being a former owner of the HPA4/LA4, I understand well the comparison.  I highly recommend the Serene preamp with the 005 and its cost is a fraction of something like a Bricasti M20. 

More to discover