I accused no one of anything. No I did not listen to the dac. An independent review brought out a different set of specs other than was published . Again I very much enjoy my lks dac. Jason an jinbo have been upfront an admirable. Why do u people keep piling on. Did not meet published specs. They honored my return an they gained respect in my eyes. I hope if u guys bought a $3000 piece of equipment that the seller would be as upstanding as Jason. I’m done with this. It seems the only peeps upset are the ones who don’t like the outcome of Amir’s measurements. Prove him wrong please.
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 $$ by research, and by satisfaction with the MH-DA004. Frankly, I have been overwhelmed by the improvement; just didn't think it was possible. Fluidity, clarity, bass extension. A post to another board summed it up better than I can after listening to piano trios: "I have probably attended hundreds of classical concerts (both orchestral and chamber) in my life. I know what live sounds like in a good and bad seat and in a good and mediocre hall. All I can say is HOLY CRAP, this sounds like the real thing from a good seat in a good hall. Not an approximation of reality, but reality."
Meanwhile, during the 4 years after release of the MH-DA004, LKS (now Musetec) worked on the new MH-DA005 design, also with a pair of ES9038pro chips. This time he used more of the best components available. One torroidal transformer has silver plated copper. Also banks of super capacitors that act like batteries, solid silver hookup wire, 4 femtoclocks each costing multiples of the Crysteks, a revised Amanero board, more of the best European caps and a new partitioned case. I can't say cost NO object, but costs well beyond. A higher price, of course. Details at http://www.mu-sound.com/DA005-detail.html
The question, surely, is: How does it sound? I'm only going to answer indirectly for the moment. I thought that the MH-DA004 was to be my last DAC, or at least for a very long time. I was persuaded to part with my $$ 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."
- ...
- 1528 posts total
Hello toddk31, Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version) |
I just thought I’d echo what @2pol wrote. Your LKS 004, like the one I had, would probably test about the same as the Musetec 005. Yet you liked the work of the designer enough, just as I did, to order the Musetec. If you haven’t sent it back yet, have you considered giving it a try in your system? I’m certain Jason would extend his return offer to give you that chance. You’d have nothing to lose. Jason would have nothing to lose. I think you feel cheated because of the published specs, and I understand that and have written so to Jinbo. But if you have the chance to listen to the DAC in your system, you should probably take advantage of it. It’s an interesting circumstance and we’d all be glad to hear of your reaction to its sound performance. Best of luck however you go. |
Melm thank you for a reasoned post. I have already told Jason that I would entertain auditioning 005 after jinbo addresses the spec issue. After all this vitriol I’m done for a while. I’m sure jinbo will address the issues. At this point it-was just easier to return unit since Jason an jinbo agreed. Again those guys have been great about this whole mess. I do not feel cheated in any way. Sometimes things don’t just turn out the way u want them. It seems that me the guy that started this whole s**tstorm is the only one who is completely happy how that seller an mnfcter handled the issue. Everyone be happy listening to their music an gear. |
I found my 004 pretty inferior to 005, it would be very interesting to see the 004 under measurement microscope.
Three kind of purchasers, those that require good measurements together with long term listening, and those who rely solely on good measurement, or solely on long term listening. Since independent measurements not generally included in most reviews, most purchasers have to rely on the other two methods. Now, when those who purchased based solely on listening find out later measurements not so good, well, they're going to freak out or trust in their listening skills. Those who purchase based solely on measurements believe they have the upper hand since sound quality will fall in line with measurements.
My listening skills have been developed to please my individual sensory perceptions. I've owned great measuring components and relatively poor measuring components, they all have a voice that either pleases or displeases my individual sensory perception. Most components I've owned have never undergone independent testing, therefore, I rely solely on long term listening. The only purchasing method I've not used is relying solely on measurements. And I don't know why I would when some of the better measuring components I've owned are no longer with me, surpassed by perhaps poorer measuring components.
I can only say, learn to hone and/or trust your listening skills if that's your preferred method for determining which components to purchase. Being offended or insecure about 005 qualities at this point only points to one's distrust in their listening skills and/or individual sensory perceptions. One has to understand what sound qualities please their senses in order to not flounder about with insecurities. Otherwise, pursue a set of measurements for each and every component and be secure in knowing you have the best measuring system.
|
- 1528 posts total