First impressions of new MH-DA006, Musetec flagship

I must modify my conclusion on tonal balance. I changed streamers to the ifi Zen Streamer. The lower mid- range and upper bass are back to being warm and rich. The highs are still more forward than the 005. It seems, as stated by @sns that the dac will clearly reveal the sound of each component in your system. My conclusions must be seen subject the sound of my components (and yours if you buy it).

@dbb 

One can almost see Bernstein dancing his way through the second movement tango.  The 1964 Columbia recording is remarkable.  My go-to version, since its release, has been the one by Kirill Petrenko with his former orchestra.  

@yakbob 

You don't have to wait for the ASR review.  I'll give you the result right now.  The latest DAC reviewed by ASR is a $99 Topping.  It scores very high at ASR because it is designed to do exactly that.  And of course, as a consequence, it gets ASR's highest purchase recommendation.  You can be sure that ASR's Topping measurements will outscore both the 005 and the 006 DACs each of which will score about the same as the other and the 006 will not be recommended by ASR.  The ASR reviewer does not report ever listening to the Topping, nor the 005 for that matter.  And it would make no difference anyway as he does not hear very well.

As I wrote elewhere: The designer of the 005 and 006 has written that he designs by ear and not by measurement.  He says designing for measurement is relatively easy for a professional engineer.  At various stages he says he made changes to the 005 that could improve measurements but reversed them if the sound quality, as he heard it, was not as good.  If that makes people very uncomfortable, they should probably look elsewhere for a DAC.  Over the course of this audio hobby, and some of us have been into it for a long time, that approach to design used to be lauded.  The designer has given an example in the lack of any feedback in his analog stage.  A lack of feedback is often advertised, and is generally understood to yield better sound quality but poorer measurements.  Op amp chips with feedback are thought to yield a kind of clean but sterile sound, well recognized in all too many DACs on the market.   In other areas of audio, decisions are often made in favor of devices with better sound and poorer measurements than alternatives.  That would include tubes and analog sound generally.

I'm curious about how this dac would measure vs. 005, certain Musetec aware of ASR thread. Would they care about measurements with this dac knowing some make purchases solely on specs, others require both high measured performance and sound quality. Is it possible 005 would have even higher sound quality with better bench performance?

The way I read Musetec's take on 006 measurements is when their speaking to the reasons for choosing certain parts, specifically they mention the Duelund caps. So yes, the Duelund caps will measure essentially exact to any other cap, this would not affect bench performance. Point is I don't see how changing out parts that all measure the same would affect bench measurements. Circuit design has far more to do with measured performance than the parts used, the boutique parts used in 005 should not have impinged it's bench performance.

I think we can all assess sound quality as the most important criteria by which to judge equipment, good bench performance is generally consistent with proper design. I do hope the 006 measures better than 005, I'd expect it does with the information and visuals provided. I suspect some of the changes made from the 005 were made with measured performance in mind, but then they leave things somewhat in air by repeating they tune by ear, not by performance.

@sns

It was said many years ago about audio that if your measuremens don’t correlate with what you hear, you’re measureing the wrong things. As far as I understand ASR has never presented any studies that correlate their measurements with sound quality. Given their overall philosphy, that would probably be impossible as it would call for the addition of what they would no doubt call "subjectivity" to their arsenal.*

As for any proposed correlation between certain "industry standard" meaurements and sound quality, I can think of no better test of that proposition than what I will now propose as the "sns" test. In early 2021 and for some time thereafter you wrote of the audio quality of the 005. And IIUC you have it connected to an audio system of considerable sophistication. All of this was without benefit of the less than glowing ASR review. QED. There is no such correlation and/or the correlation is not particularly strong. In other words, if good sound is what we’re looking for, there is no particular reason to consult ASR.

Better, perhaps to consult sns. Or a well considered review of dbb. Or read of a good many other users who write of their systems, their experiences with other DACs and their musical tastes. Or look at the track record of the company which proposes a new DAC.

I interpret the advertising copy on the Musetec site that you quote to be almost the same as the communication to me at the time of the ASR 005 review. That is to say, the Musetec designer is a music lover and he designs by listening and that is that.

You can hope that the 006 will measure better than the 005, but if dbb is correct, what difference would that make? I, for one, hope that the designer continues to do exactly what he has been doing--turning out terrific components at prices well below that of competitive sounding units.

*Just for the record, in the day, HP denied that the reviews as then done in TAS were subjective.

@melm I agree the subjective is far more important to me than the objectivity of some measurements when it comes to audio equipment, especially dacs. I rereading ASR 005 thread it just reinforced how objectivists don't trust their senses. I'm curious to know if there is any area or thought processes in which these objectivists trust their senses?

The two major areas in which 005 bench performance suffered in respect to their reference were distortion and jitter, the distortion measurements not really a concern as these figures relatively low in comparison to other components in our systems. Jitter more of a concern, jitter has long been known to affect sound quality.

I'd suggest most of the unique sound qualities of 005 come from the parts chosen, ojectivists simply can't fathom film caps that measure the same could have unique sound qualities. This is where they completely miss the boat on the possibility dacs that measure the same or close may have different sound qualities.

So, giving measurements some credibility, I'd certainly like to see lower jitter measurements from 006, usb input looks to be improved. Lower distortion figures if indicative of greater resolving capabilities would be nice.

As things stand I will continue to base my opinion of 006 solely on sound quality, without a set of measurements I have no other choice. ASR won't admit their measurement protocols are without fault or fail to measure the unique sound preferences of individuals. They assume we are merely listening instruments, the ability to hear differences between components that measure the same is held in contempt, written off as faulty sensory perception colored by bias.

I do believe ASR makes valid point when measured specs didn't match published specs, something Musetec didn't directly address. Publishing optimistic measured specs alludes to Musetec being concerned about specs, not meeting those specs is misleading at best. Publish honest specs and clearly state intent of designing to preferred sound qualities vs specs, this would be more credible on Musetec's part. As things stand I could understand a subjectivist reticence to purchase any Musetec product after reading ASR thread. Honesty in published specs should be important to everyone.