Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC

@fl_guy I bought from Shenzhen Audio too, just a plain white box, can't remember about the plastic!

Currently I'm using a 0.5m WW Starlight RJ45 Ethernet cable from the LKS 100 to the 005 for I2s. I've tried using the WW Starlight Platinum but it's too detailed in a hard/harsh type of way.

The Platinum is very well suited for your Ethernet between your optical device and your streamer/source. I guess I2s doesn't like solid silver cables.

@lordmelton, thanks for the recommendation on the cable - good info. My system is a bit of a work in progress, no optical isolation as yet. I have been reading the recommendations re optical isolation with interest, and am looking forward to adding an optical segment at some point. There are a few other 'opportunities' to optimize to address as well.

Fun hobby for me, no huge hurry to get to the end (or more realistically, the next level? ;-).  This system sounds really good to me as it is and I'm enjoying music with it greatly, so it's all upside.

I received my lks 100 a week or so ago.  Recall, I previously tried a singxer su-6, which I didn't like and returned and a sonora ultradigital, which I liked very much but also returned on the hope the lks would better it.  Preliminary conclusions are the lks has a bit more ease and an ever so slight pleasing softness in its presentation, particularly on attack.  It may also, however, not provide quite the level of detail as the sonora but I need to listen more.  We are talking very very slight differences.  I have used, thus far, only hdmi, a wireworld silver starlight, which worked beautifully with the sonora.  I'm going to try a couple RJ45 cables to determine if and how they alter presentation in my system.

I also have a cisco switch on the way and may try its optical output.   

I have experimented quite a lot and RJ45 I2s is the best input on the 005.

It will need about a week to burn-in along with the LKS 100.

I can wholeheartedly recommend using WW Starlight 8 (Red) Ethernet for the I2s cable but it too needs burn-in time, so use it as an Ethernet cable for a week to allow it to break-in. I2s is only 300mv.

Once you're off the ground be interested to hear what other cables you get good results with. The I2s cable should be 0.5m or less. I tried a 0.2m cable and didn't like it, maybe it needs more burn-in. I will revisit it later.

PS Audio recommends 0.5m and I believe they are most correct in this matter, so far anyway.

Don't forget to disable PIN 1 in your USB cable, power is not required, put a small strip of electrical tape over it, better sound quality.

@boxer12 

Hey Tim, did you figure out your USB issue?

@bkeske 

Hey Brian, Not yet... having to much fun listening😁 (it is on my short list though)

Enjoy Tim 👍🏼

@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.

@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.

@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.

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...

What usb renderer is the best to use ?

@ortodox You'll hear a multitude of preferences, doubt there is a single best. I use Sonore Optical Rendu, better than Uptone and SOTM devices I previously used.

Also depends on price range you're looking at.

Fellow Musetec fans. I am in the need of a smallish DAC for my second office. I have a new headphone, the RAAL CA-1a that I will be using in this room with the Schitt Jotunheim R (RAAL only) headphone amp. It is not a great amp (6/10) compared to the RAAL VM-1a (10/10) for my headphones.

I was planning to use only a tuner with this system but last night I tried it out with my Benchmark DAC3B and it was good enough for the intended purpose.

So, I will put a low-cost DAC in this system Hopefully, not too large since I have limited desk space.

I was wonder if the Musetec 004 DAC in stock form is something to consider?

LKS Audio MH-DA004 DAC; MHDA004; D/A Converter; Remote - The Music Room (tmraudio.com)

- I am considering the following:

- Benchmark DAC2 HGC (previously sold it)

- Denafrips Ares II

- RME ADI-2 DAC FS

- Topping D90SE (previously sold it)

- Matrix Audo Mini I-3 Pro (previously sold it)

- Musetec 004

Do you need to do Mods to make the Musetec 004 shine?

The Schitt JR amp ($300 used) I am using seems a tiny bit warm.

What usb renderer is the best to use ?

I have 3 of the Sonore OpticalRendu for ROON ONLY. If I go with a Matrix Mini I-3 Pro DAC listed above I will have 1 extra streamer to sell.

I just tried my LKS 100 through RJ45 using my audioquest diamond.  Melton is right, it is better than HDMI.  The sparkle and detail I had with the sonore ultradigital is back, but with the relaxed presentation of the LKS 100 through HDMI.  I'm happy with the change.  

IMO, 004 requires mods. 004 is epitome of analytical dac, impressive resolution, not very musical, I would have to warm that thing up considerably. I had 004,005, Auralic Vega and Okto Dac8 stereo all in house concurrently, 004 least desirable.

@yyzsantabarbara 

I had the Denafrips Ares II before buying the 005 and I was terribly underwhelmed and disappointed with the Ares II.  It is veiled and dark in its presentation and I found it lacking in detail and especially the upper-mids and treble.  I couldn’t listen to it.  I am unfamiliar with the other DACs in your list, but I’m sure you can do better than the Ares II.

I have read where many like the Schiit Bifrost 2.

Good luck!  :-)

@yyzsantabarbara
I can only comment on the LKS 004. Here’s my $.02. I’m aware that sns has never liked the 004. IMO it is a very good DAC in its stock form, but it is not particularly small. If you look at the early posts at the 004 thread at head-fi, you’ll see its performance was well received out of the box. There was also a thread at Audiophile Style when it was called Computer Audio that covered the 004 stock favorably and in detail. Google will find some other stuff. At one point during the sales life of the Musetec,005 a used LKS 004 was a real bargain. It may still be. Were I to buy an 004 used I would make sure that it has not been modified unless you have great confidence in who and how it was done. I would look for one in at least its second series. That can be identified as having the 8 FETs on the underside of the circuit board where they cannot be seen in the usual interior pictures. Ric Shultz used to do a $500 mod on the LKS. That’s about the cheapest mod ever offered. He did not think very much had to be done. If it were mine I would shield the transformers from the remainder of the circuit--very easily done.

Thanks for the feedback on the low-cost DACs. I was fooled a bit by the photo of the 004. It did not look that large. I had a feeling the ARES II maybe too dark for my JR amp. the Schiit Bifrost 2 was also considered but I think some of the DACs I listed are more detailed.

I will go with the Topping D90LE (no MQA) since I know the sound (owed the MQA version before) and it is small in size. As I mentioned before my Schitt JR amp is not that great so I will be good with the Topping which is the lowest priced of all the DACs I listed

Ric Shultz pointed me to the Musetec brand during a phone conversation.

BTW - my friend with the great audio background told me that tomorrow he will be firing up my Musetec 005 when he tests a few amps that he has in his shop ready to ship to customers. I am really interested in his feedback on this DAC with his gear.

@budkine I'm using a Plixir 5vdc 4 amp power supply with a good ac mains power cord. I also use the Plixir Reference dc cable.

The sound is significantly better than USB. I recommend a 0.5m Wireworld Starlight 8 Red, Ethernet RJ45 cable.

Even using your PC I believe you'll get a good result.

@car123 Thank you, it's also very convenient having the I2s HDMI free to connect an Oppo or PS Audio I2s. I'll get my Oppo modded soon.

Has anyone tried to connect a Schaffner filter (FN9260-1-06) to the power cable for 005? In my system, a big improvement in the image of the stage and I finally hear what the real recording sounds like. It is not expensive and the production of a short reduction is simple. Someone try it to confirm it. By the way, I also replaced the original power cord with a silver "Supra".

@ortodox
By USB renderer I assume you mean an ethernet in to USB out DDC. These are devices that can work very well. However they range in price from about $400 to over $11,000. Do it yourself versions based on Raspberry Pi computer boards can cost much less.

If you want advice I suggest you tell us more about your system and music. The more the details, the better can be the suggestions. Since you are asking here I assume you have or are contemplating getting a Musetec. Is that right?

I have tried the LKS USB Digital Interface (DDC) for a few days with  the 005. In my set up, the LKS I2S ethernet input sounded slightly relaxed with a touch less resolution than the straight USB input. I'm  not sure if I will keep the LKS DDC.

dbb, I was in about the same place a week ago.  Try RJ45.  Its better with the LKS DDC and am improvement on straight usb in my system.

@carr123  Yes. I used an rj45 ethernet cable from the DDC to the dac.

The quality of the RJ45 is greatly affected by its length.
It should be less than 20 cm long to surpass USB.

@bkeske - So I changed to the "all in one" setting on the ifi streamer & am now able to stream via UBS & Tidal. Still can't figure out Roon & UBS so I am running that via RCA for now. Thanks for the suggestion!

@boxer12

I So I changed to the "all in one" setting on the ifi streamer & am now able to stream via UBS & Tidal. Still can’t figure out Roon & UBS so I am running that via RCA for now. Thanks for the suggestion!

Very strange Tim. Have you updated the Zen Stream firmware via the app? iFi was working on their full Roon integration *after* the Zen Stream was released IIRC, so perhaps checking if an update is available may help. Seems to me it has to be something about the Zen Stream and Roon working together….but why it works with a digital cable but not the USB is strange. One thing you know is the DAC and Zen Stream can ‘communicate’ via USB using Tidal, correct? So why not with Roon? As I say, I don’t use Roon, so cannot provide any experience with that in the chain.

It has to be something simple.

dbb, interesting.  Perhaps try a usb cable.  

@bkeske - Thanks so much Brian! Updated the zen firmware per your advice & now have Roon running through USB. Sounds fantastic! 

@boxer12

Fantastic Tim!! 👍🏼

Just a note that Shenzhen is currently in the midst of its semi-annaul sale with a price reduction on the Musetec.

And while I'm at it, for our British friends, there's a used Musetec for sale on the UKAudiomart.

(26) ABA Clips: Why you need a DDC - YouTube

The above was a really good technical description of a lot of the streaming terms that are tossed around. Galvanic Isolation, I2S, et al.

***********************************

APOS price matched the Shenzhen sale price for the Topping D90LE DAC I got yesterday. Loved the DAC with my not so amazing Schitt Jotunheim R headphone amp. I think the EtherRegen to OpticalRendu streaming has something to do with the great listening experience with the brand new RAA: CA-1a headphones.

Very late to the thread and I have questions. 

I am considering getting the 005. I have had the Lks 004 in the past and while it was resolving, I found it a bit fatiguing.  Currently using a Boarder Patrol se-i.   Now the Boarder Patrol se-i has more bloom and 0 fatigue but, it doesn't have the resolution as the 004 did. Does the 005 fit the bill for something that's in-between? The bloom and oomph of the Boarder Patrol with the resolution of the 004? 

Rest of the system is Innuos zen mk3, Wireworld Platinum usb, TAudioquest Thunderbird Zero RCA, T+A integrated amp, Wireworld Eclipse Silver 8 speaker cables into Tyler Acoustic Highland H2 speakers. I am also running an EtherREGEN  on the Ethernet side into the Innuos.  

Thanks all for the help and suggestions.   

Details galore on the 005. I find it a tiny bit warm and definitely not fatiguing. For the cost, it is hard for me to find any faults with the unit. I wish it was not so large, but it likely sounds so good because it is rather large and heavy.

@erniejade This first thing you will realise is the huge soundstage, the 005 projects a much bigger soundstage than many much more expensive DACs.

Expect a 6-8 week burn-in.

The 005 IMO is uncoloured and transparent so if your system is warm or cold it will reveal those characteristics. For example you use WW cables, they are very revealing, not wrong but revealing.

I wholeheartedly recommend the 005 and many will tell you in this thread the 005 never gets shown up by putting it with expensive components and cables.

It just ups it's game and stays the course.

i have not heard an 004 but in my time so far with the 005 i would say it has as much detail as any dac i have heard...others may emphasize treble more, put info more upfront, but that isn’t more detail...

what is nice about the 005 to my ear is that there is excellent detail retrieval but it is quite refined, and also, there is a fairly rich midband/midbass foundation on which the detail rests, so it doesn’t sound overly hifi, the overall presentation quite natural, treble micro details are presented in a nice holistic context, sort of what the denafrips pontus does as well, although in a less refined, more grainy resolution kind of way...

@jjss49 Very well said. 

Clear Components, the Musetec distributer in Germany, is currently advertising it at 2999 Euros, VAT included. At the current favorable exchange rate that’s $3135. The VAT in Germany, though, is 19%. The net price therefore could be very favorable, though shipping out of the EU is not included. There's a voltage switch inside the cabinet.

I have read all the post here about Musetec 005,but not much about its bass

can it slam hard in the bass like a TAD dac or Mola Tambaqui they are very dynamic and hard hitting like nothing  else ive heard

also very curios about the new Gustard dac R26 compare to Musetec 

@daci The Gustard X26 Pro is warmer and not as detailed as the 005. I really like the Gustard and only sold it to fund the 005 purchase. If you have some bright speakers, then the Gustard could be a better choice over the 005. 

@jjss49  That's impressive considering your chord stack, msb, Weiss. Obviously you hear 005 as I hear it, yet to find a single sin of commission. It's all balanced in a very nice way, can't think of a single thing I'd change. As more comparisons against much higher price dacs comes out, I only become more convinced any possible dac change/upgrade is of little concern. I continue with constant small changes/upgrades to streaming setup, greater resolving capabilities of system only make 005 shine all the more, not a single ugly has been exposed!

@daci  005 excels in all parameters, everything in balance. My system can hit very hard what with 104db, 15" woofer modified Klipschorns and 005, far better than previous Auralic Vega which was pretty stout in this area. Vega bass rounder, more resonant, which made it sound more bass heavy than 005. 005 has natural hard hitting, articulate bass in my setup, absolutely no complaints

@sns

imma gonna need some time to do some proper comparison listening... this is complicated by three factors -

1) so far i have found that there is some subtle deterioration of the sound of the 005 from using the volume attentuation feature, so need to run it at full volume for comparison purposes - thus need to use an integrated amp/passive pre to control volume of all dacs being compared

2) as the 005 doesn’t have a streaming function using ethernet feed, i am getting a second optical rendu so i can run two optically cleansed usb feeds into the various dacs so i am running apples to apples

3) at the same time, i also got a bricasti m1se in as well, and if you know that unit, there is a bewildering # of filters to choose from... so that is taking a good bit of time to sort through for which i prefer... ugh, too much choice is a ’hardship’ 😅

@jjss49 

at the same time, i also got a bricasti m1se in as well, and if you know that unit, there is a bewildering # of filters to choose from... so that is taking a good bit of time to sort through for which i prefer... ugh, too much choice is a ’hardship’ 😅

A friend of mine had the Bricasti M1 SE DAC for about 4- 5 years and I've heard it multiple times in extended listening sessions. Spot on with regard to numerous filter choice/settings. I have no doubt that you'll get it sorted out.

Charles

Very nice, optimizing everything and ensuring level playing field is critical in comparative evaluations

I use Coincident Statement linestage with 005, dual manual volume control via transformer (TVC). So, in order to not have to get up constantly and make fine volume adjustments via dual manual control I set Coincident volume at a level where I can make those fine volume adjustments via 005. I detect no bit loss, sound deterioration as long as I stay in upper 90% of full volume, ie. no more than -10db on 005.

No bit loss volume control is a limitation of 005 vs dacs like Aqua and Playback Design dacs with analog volume control or real linestage. Therefore, preamp/passive volume control can be considered critical and integral to fulfilling it's full potential. When considering this dac, one really needs to budget for high end volume control, perhaps then not exactly the price/performance game changer some may perceive it as. I've used 005 with a Musical Fidelity M2si integrated and Schitt Saga + passive and not quite the same amazing piece it is with Coincident linestage with all upgrades and mods I've done to it.

And for those wondering about dsp volume control via software like Roon. It sucks compared to any of the three volume schemes listed above.

@charles1dad, How did your friend's Bricasti M1 SE DAC hold up over the years against the competition? Bricasti uses a rarely used DAC chip yet gets great results.

In relation to volume control methods, the Leedh software solution has amazed the reviewers who can't believe it is more transparent than hardware solutions, Lumin is one company using Leedh.

@klh007

He was quite happy with the Bricasti (Which had replaced his previous Aesthetix Pandora DAC). I thought that the M1SE was very good. He replaced it with the MSB Select DAC. As far as I know he had no reliability or customer service issues with his Bricasti. He did not use Bricasti directly connected to the power amplifier. There was always an active preamplifier in the signal chain.

Charles

@daci 
As I don't play much rock I probably can't answer directly.  But the bass of the Musetec goes very low and is clean and clear.  Low enough to easily provide organ notes you can feel as well as hear.

Some of the best illustrations of the clean and clear bass  I am getting are found in double bass solos that I admire.  Examples are the playing of Ron Carter on Chesky JD376 "We'll Be Together Again" and David Holland on Flying Fish HDS 70701 (Untitled).  I've never before heard anything like it from digital.  The extent to which the Musetec "slams" for you (and for me) probably depends upon your sub-woofer.  The DAC will definitely supply what is necessary.  However some widely distributed sub-woofers don't go as low as you might imagine.  Before investing in a sub go over the specs carefully.  I use Rythmik.