1. Home
  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
4,218 posts
 

@melm I agree dsd recordings have unique sound qualities, but then mine are all best of best originally analog recorded and sympathetically mastered recordings or Blue Coast recordings.

 

I've continually tried at various times to incorporate dsd conversions of pcm recordings via Roon dsp, always have preferred no Roon dsp of any kind. HQPlayer dsp reportedly superior to Roon. Sublime sound quality currently experiencing lends no motivation to incorporate HQPlayer into my streaming setup.

 

While I've not spent a lot of time critically comparing hi res  directly to 16/44, my listening sessions don't include searching for hi res recordings or even paying any attention to these particulars. I find this informative in that it doesn't bias me towards any particular format, I find no substantive differences in these solely pleasurable listening sessions. The original recording and mastering are by far the most substantial variable for sound quality. Remastering can help, but you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. I'd also suggest unless original recording done his res the differences you're hearing from recordings originally done in analog or 16/44, and then converted to hi res are likely solely due to differences in the mastering rather than the hi res itself.

charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 

@sns 

The original recording and mastering are by far the most substantial variable for sound quality. Remastering can help, but you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. I'd also suggest unless original recording done his res the differences you're hearing from recordings originally done in analog or 16/44, and then converted to hi res are likely solely due to differences in the mastering rather than the hi res itself.

👍

Charles 

 

lordmelton's avatar
lordmelton
1,181 posts
 

The ABKCO owned Rolling Stones dual layer SACDs were released around 25 years ago and then mostly their whole catalogue (the famous stuff) was released and re-released on single layer SHM SACD in Japan about 15 years ago.

The Japanese releases are superior as they made for many other artists including YES, Genesis, Cream, Clapton, Steely Dan and others.

There are also the SHM CDs to consider which were re-mastered in Japan around 2009. SHM CDs can sound bright on an unsympathetic system. The reason for this is back in the day it was very difficult to get the maximum info out of CDs. Nowadays even my CDs which I bought in the '80s sound great without any digital alchemy.

If you own an Aurender it will unpack an .ISO file to .DSF by itself without any other software necessary.

192 kHz is really wonderful but there is an air about DSD that 192 cannot quite match. However even with '80s "Special Price" and two albums on one CD the reproduction on the Musetec is truly astounding.

If I had to forego DSD and Hi-Rez I could still live comfortably.

benzman's avatar
benzman
446 posts
 

What side of neutral would you guys consider the 005 to be ? I have Persona 5 f ‘s dialed in right know with a Cary DMS 700 and cabling on the neutral side

I had a Lumin T2 in the system and sounded fantastic for 8 out of ten songs. The Sabre Dac was just too revealing with the brighter Personas and their Beryllium tweeter and midrange.
 Would really like to pull the trigger on this but just worried about returning it if it doesn’t work  

Thanks  for the input

  

melm OP
1,086 posts
 

@benzman

System matching is always a critical issue. I’ve always opted for neutrality in each component if I can find it. You may be able to compensate a bit with tubes in your preamp, the same as I use.

I think your focus on the DAC chips may miss the point. The difference between the Lumin and the Musetec is obviously not in the chips, though the Lumin uses a pair of 9028s and the Musetec a pair of 9038s. The differences would be in the power supplies and the analog stages and the differences are quite substantial. I would not expect these two DAC to sound anywhere near alike.

Now more directly to your question. I think most people here think of the Musetec as quite neutral. With a speaker on the bright side that may present a challenge. The Cary includes a streamer; the Musetec does not. Does the Cary integrate better with your system than did the Lumin? The question may be about what you are looking for that the Cary doesn’t quite deliver? You might reread @dbb’s comparative review.

Assuming you’re in the US, one thing you might do is inquire with the dealer in Indiana about a trial period. Another possibility is to communicate with Shenzhen (who are currently running a sale) with precision about their return policy. But, as I wrote earlier, no one who has tried this DAC in their system as yet wanted to return it.

More to discover