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

@jjss49  Correct on the Gustard r26. One takeaway from today"s audio meet up was the discussion we had on the shockingly good QPR with the r26. Credit goes where it is due in that respect. Currently, now with Chifi (as you call it) confidence at its highest, we may be seeing Chinese designed and made audio products to genuinely rival their Western counterparts. Easily seen in the lower to mid price tiers , although not as of yet, if ever, who really knows, in the high end and ultra high end brackets. 

In terms of the audio setup used in the test :

Magico A5 speakers , Innous Zen mk3 server, Pass labs xp 22 pre amp , Classe Delta monos , AQ Robin Hood speaker cable and Earth interconnects (balanced)

Post removed 

Thank you mod staff for removing the rather offensive , hate charged and genuinely hostile reply from a member, whose name will remain unpublicized. 

 

 


It never shocks, surprises, or disturbs me when someone, or some group, finds a less expensive DAC to sound better to them than a more expensive one.  Indeed, within this long thread there have been many testimonies of the Musetec bringing greater pleasure than more expensive competitors.  Personal taste, set-up, selection of tracks, kind of music, short-term vs. long term listening, comparisons to components rather than to live music, etc., may all contribute to a result that may vary from our own.  I wrote about this before, about a year ago, "No one here has ever said that the Musetec is the best of all DACs.  Like any DAC it may not be for everyone. . . . . If someone says he likes another, perhaps even less expensive, DAC better than the Musetec let's just accept that and move on."

Nonetheless, what was written here has a very unsavory ring to it.  The writing, and particularly its placement, virtually self-denies it the credibility the poster was looking for.  I say that for two reasons.  First, I find it absolutely suspicious that the post was made to this thread.  A more reasonable thing to do, I would think, would have been to start a new thread with a comparison of four well though of DACs rather than aim it at a thread dealing with one of the so-called losers.  Others on Audiogon have done similar things.  A second more reasonable place for it might be the existing Giscard r26 DAC thread here.    Seems to me if I had a comparison to share and the Musetec came out on top, I would post it here rather than to the discussion of the DAC that came in second place.  That is, unless I had a malicious motive.

The second reason I think the post to this thread is unsavory is that the poster took great pains to single out the Musetec for gratuitous extraneous criticisms.  He did not criticize any of the other DACs in a similar way.  What he wrote was (1) "Seems like a dated design," (2) a throwback design in not just aesthetics but also sonics" and (3) "the least aesthetically appealing of all 4 DACs."

About the Musetc being a dated design.  The poster obviously doesn't know that R2R (used in the Giscard) is the oldest of the digital to analog technologies.  it was used in Philips CD players more than 40 years ago at the outset of the digital age.  So talk of a dated design is just kind of ignorant.  And obviously there is nothing wrong with a "dated" design if it offers high sound quality.  The Musetec used the newest sigma-delta chip available at its birth, a fine analog section (that doesn't date at all), and a newly developed super-capacitor power supply for its digital section.  It also uses a relatively newly developed O-Ring silver plated transformer as well as newly refined clock-crystals.  Much of its architecture is fairly standard and used in some of the finest DACs of the day.

Because he has obviously has a limited understanding of what goes on inside a DAC, the poster next chooses to demean the Musetec's aesthetics.  The fellow simply doesn't like how the Musetec looks.  Well, I think it looks fine.  Being a design meant for relatively limited distribution it is a simple, even elegant, design compared to some mass produced components.  It has functional buttons and a window giving all the information needed and it comes with a full-functioned remote.  It's entirely of extruded aluminum with no sheet metal at all.  It's as solid as a brick.  

So he came HERE specifically to trash the Musetec.  I do not know why.  But no one controls these threads and he may do on Audiogon as he pleases.  However for the reasons given here, the post in question should be accorded a very low credibility rating.

When I read that post I was thinking that those guys must have some interesting hearing.