@dbb
Thank you for your review of the 006 done in your usual comprehensive style. I'll have to go back and listen to Gilbert's Mahler 7.
As others are finding, notably in this thread @jc4659, the 005 responds beautifully to improvements in the overall system. In stages I have improved my speakers, my amplifier and my AC conditioning, straining my audio budget. Clearly the 005 is not the limiting factor for me and for others and I am enjoying it even more. But your review is tempting me.
Once again Musetec has filled its new DAC with some of the best interior components availble from around the world and, unlike many other manufacturers, is proud to tell you exactly what's inside. The designer, who is a music lover, tests each new part by ear. In years past we lauded such designers, by name, who mixed technology and art so well.
|
@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.
|
@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.
|
@stuartk
I thought I’d chime in here as I have followed Chinese direct or semi-direct goods for a long time. I did once send a board back to Musetec for updating. I have a very high regard for Musetec née LKS, its products and how it does business so you can keep this bias in mind.
First, it has to be said that, having followed its digital products closely from the 004 through the 005 and now with the 006 I have yet to hear of anyone having a problem that needs a repair. Musetec’s quality control seems to have been exemplary. So too the quality of its parts. The other factor mitigating any problem is that their DACs are very modular. That means that if there’s a problem, it can usually and easily be traced to a board (perhaps with the aid of an email from the factory.) An offending board can easily be lifted out (a few screws and an unplug) and sent to the factory for repair. That is how most of the direct Chinese suppliers work it even if they have a domestic presense of some sort. The domestic agent might hold your hand in the process if you purchased there. Sending the board to China and its return is no more a problem, and probably less, than sending a complete unit from one US coast to the other.
That being clear, I know that there are probably some folks who will want no part of opening up a component case and removing a board. They will either have to depend upon the very good record of quality control, the very high quality of compnents within and/or possibly the help of a more technically minded friend.
Too my mind the benefits of the high value of direct buying from overseas are clearly worth the limited anxiety. Your money, your choice.
|
@westborn
The ES9039pro (and the Gustard uses 4) is designed to run at lower power consumption than previous generations of ESS DAC chips. So overheating of the chip not likely. Something else on the Gistard boards must be running hot and may as a result have a shortened life. If it is indeed the DAC chips, that might mean an engineering problem at Gustard. One shouldn't have to run any ESS chip "hard." So one should not extrapolate from the Gustard to the Musetec.
We have not heard from dbb that the 006 runs hot. The 005 certainly does not. Early run 004s ran hot, but that was in the discrete analog section and corrected very quickly.
Interesting that the Gustards are moving well up in price approaching that of acknowledged really fine sounding DACs.
|
For instance you can often hear an ambient noise floor in a hall before the music even starts. That sound is truly natural and is my preference.
In its early days as a premier producer of great LPs, Reference Recordings used to record that ambience and fill the space between the tracks with it. So you hear no dead silence there.
|
@stuartk
My Subaru is made in Japan and can be repaired in the US. Subaru America is the importer and I bought from a Subaru deler. That is how most foreign products work when purchased in the US. Hegel is like that, but But Musetec products are not.
The difference between Musetec and Hegel is that Hegel has an American company that does its distribution here. It is Hegel America Inc, in Fairfield Iowa. It’s a wholesaler. It imports the goods. It sells to dozens of dealers all over the country. Its American distributer/wholesaler and its dealers each tack on a profit to the price of the component. So like my Subaru, one can expect repairs to be made domestically. That’s what you’re paying for.
But when you buy a Musetec you are the importer of the goods directly from China either from the factory or from an "order-taker" like Schenzhen (which takes a relatively small mark-up). There is no profit increase as taken by American distributers and American dealers. Normally people, like those participating here, are willing to do that when they sense that they are getting a great deal more value for their money than by going the usual distributer-dealer profits mark-up route.
As ever, your money your choice.
I don’t know enough about Jay’s transport and how they do business and there is too little info on the ’net right now to figure it out.
|
Just a brief word about DDCs. The Phoenix was diacussed towards the end of the Musetec 005 thread where it was compared to the far less expensive Singxer UIP-1 PRO. IIRC the Singxer has about the same clock, galvanic isolation and a simpler power supply. Singxer has a very fine reputaion for its devices. It is currently available at Amazon (US) and is returnable. So one can try with zero cost. These are USB-in/USB-out devices.
Other DDC devices that were mentiond are USB-in/I2S-out devices. These units duplicate what each of the Musetec DACs does internally. Some have reported that the device made by LKS actually outperforms the internal function in the DAC. Others, me included, are sceptical. Singxer makes a similar device.
Finally, though not usually called DDCs, are Ethernet-in/USB-out devices, better known as streamers. They avoid any use of USB at all. There are those who swear by them. Some such units also have coaxial SPDIF and/or AES/EBU outputs. The jury is out on which of these outputs is preferred by owners of them. However, the I2S can handle very much higher sampling rates than the others and even higher than USB.
|
Two corrections to my post on DDCs.
1. The Singxer UIP-1 PRO comes with a wall wart. A good power supply is necessary to bring it anywhere near the Phoenix whose power supply is ample. FWIW the device in its non-PRO version got a reasonably good review at ASR, They found a reduction in noise at the most bothersome frequencies. The PRO version has an OCXO similar to that in the Phoenix. The non-PRO version does not.
2. The last paragraph should, of course, begin: Finally, though not usually called DDCs, are Ethernet-in/I2S-out devices, better known as streamers.
Apologies. i'm feeling the effects of a Covid shot yesterday and perhaps shouldn't be posting. Hope I got the corrections right.
|
Perhaps I'm restating the obvious, but there was reporting on the 005 thread of using DDC conversion of USB to I2S outside of the 005 and comparing it to the same conversion inside of the 005. One or two people preferred it even with a rather inexpensive DDC. Others were sceptical.
What I think has not been discussed and might be of more interest, at least to me, is the use of an ethernet to I2S streamer avoiding any use of USB or SPDIF (or its siblings).
Of course I2S is more easily accomplished on the 006 as it has options for a variety of pin-outs.
|
As I wrote earlier I am also enjoying my 005. With a couple of new components in the system, I am finding it has yet more to give. Knowng the designer, and the reviewer here, as I do, I am certain the 006 is a good step up.
But I write now about the I2S into the 005, and possibly into the 006 (or other DACs). And it’s easier with the 006 as it has pin-out selectivity, not available in the 005.
I have been a sceptic of the DDC kind of approach taking the USB to I2S conversion out of the 005 (or 006) into a stand alone unit, For I think that implimentation is very well done internally by Musetec. I have always thought that a network player taking you from ethernet directly to I2S had to be the answer, bypassing any use of USB or SP/DIF for that matter. But for me an appropriate unit, without a Swiss Army Knife approach, was hard to find. But with a new device having pin-out selectivity from Iancanada I found that at a very reasonable price I’m achieving a performance level that I thought was far more expensive than I was willing to pay. And I’m only beginning--using what I would call the company’s mid-level combo and a $2 HDMI cable. I used to think this was the direction to go, and I have now proven it to myself. And there are actually several ways I can upgrade this initial set-up. And so on to a new adventure.
|
What I wrote about is a duplication of what is demonstrated here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tc_QfRTbb6U&t=1113s
But without the screen. This is very easily put together. I first built something far more modest to test the quality of the Iancanada stuff. These are very high quality boards and can run up in price. The more modest experiment had sp/dif (which is closely related to I2S) and was at least equal to my much more expensive ethernet in-USB out network player to which was attached an expensive power supply. It also had I2S out which I couldn’t use with the oo5.
One can go quite a bit further than the first video. Of course the boards are not pretty; some people build cases for them. I’ll probably build a wooden box to throw over it when I’m done.
Iancanada is Ian Jin. Word is that he is a designer of computer medical equipment and this is his hobby.
|
@dbb
I might mention that before going the Iancanada route I wanted to try the Magna Mano Ultra mk3 Farad network bridge that has both I2S and sp/dif outputs. It seems to be a very good unit (with a fine power supply) that doesn't break the bank. The problem for me was that the I2S output on the Magna requires an HDMI cable with the PS Audio pin-outs and the 005 requires the Gustard pin-outs. I looked far and wide for someone to make up a cable going from one to the other and came up empty. Since the 006 has pin-out options you also have more options.
As I understand it, the sp/dif standard takes the 4 signals from the raspberry pi (or other similar mini-computer within the device-often a raspberry pi) and combines them into the one sp/dif signal. Then the DAC internally separates them back to I2S within. Thus I2S direct avoids these two conversions. There are those who hear no difference; there are those who do.
|
@sns
Not sure I understand the value of fpga on a streamer, which should be a very simple device.
The unit I am now using also has a fifo buffer and uses 2 clocks, but I'm not sure they qualify as OXCOs. They are easily user replaceable and I am now using two Accusillicon clocks, a 45 and a 49. Though the Accusilicons are very good, I may very well move on to even better clocks. The Accusilicons, and any other clocks I may use, publish their phase noise data, which gives at least a hint as to their quality. What is known about the clocks in the Gaia? Also the PS in the unit I'm using is much like that on the digital side of the 005 and is further upgradeable.
In any event the first thing a DDC has to do is clean up the USB stream.
|
@aw118
I’m sure others will chime in as several folks went from 004 to 005. But no question, it is a real step up.
The USB to I2S implemantation in the 005 is somewhat different in the 005 and should be better. Different power supply and slightly better clocks, but same Amanero board. As i've written, I have a prefernce for avoiding any use of USB.
|
Saving $$ is always a good thing. The annual November sale brings the price of the 006 close to the standard price of the Musetec 005.
For those who think a USB in-I2S out DDC is the way to go, substantial savigs may be had by considering the Audio-GD DI20HE or Singxer SU6 in place of the Gaia. The very reliable Goldensound (who closed the curtain on MQA) suggests that each of these is at least as effective as the Denafrips unit.
|
My earlier post on DDCs referred to a report of perceived performance, not value. Notwithstanding, I have learned over the years that anything is possible in audio and only your ears can be your guide.
And now @car123 says that his LKS USB-100 outperforms the Singxer SU6. Yet the USB to I2S within the 005 (or 006) uses the same Amanero technology and seemingly has better clocks and probably better power supplies than the quite old USB-100. Yet the ear always rules.
Time was when most hobbyists used computers to manage the feeding of the digital data into the DAC. USB was the best option most of the time. USB filters of various sorts (We called them decrapafiers.) sold well. Modern DDCs have taken decrapafication to a new level, no doubt, but can it be better than taking USB out of the system entirely? Possibly so.
|
@sns
"unfortunately only Femto clock"
It seems that some of the best (and uber-expensive) clocks available for audio call themselves, or are called, femto clocks. For my I2S streamer I’m considering the purchase of 2 sc-cut crystal clocks described as femto clocks and considered bargains at $340 for the pair. Of course at $849 the Laiv is not going to have clocks like those. But "unfortunately only"?
Inside the "oven" of a Gaia OCXO there is an XO, or crystal oscillator clock. Do you know anthing about it or its performance? Could it be, in fact, a femto clock, which I assume describes the bounds of an aspect of its performance? There are OCXOs in some pretty low cost devices.
|
@sns But what is engineering? What is marketing? The bottom line is that we don’t know anything about the clocks inside the Gaia except that they are OCXOs. As I said earlier, inside the OC there is an XO clock whose properties seem a mystery. I take what you wrote to mean that the Gaia’s USB output can can outperform the Amanero board within the 006 using LKS clocks, though better performance is by I2S out. Whether that is due to the clocks or some other factor within the Gaia, including the possibility of a better PS to the clocks (which I have proven to myself really helps) may be a question.
Goldensound, who is a very serious guy, has reviewed the Gaia. In the review he says among other things, "Overall, the Gaia is an excellently performing DDC. It falls ever so slightly behind some other choices like the [Audio GD] DI20HE and [Singxer] SU6 in performance" It turns out that the D120HE uses Accusilicon clocks like the ones I am using in a new streamer; the SU6 uses Crystek clocks. These are unfortunately only Femto clocks. The clocks inside the 006 are (perhaps) LKS optimized Crystek clocks that are available from Asian sources. For all of these clocks, and for any that I have seen (including the expensive clocks that are on my shopping list) there are specification sheets available so one may compare some, if not all, of what they do. But not for the Gaia OCXOs. The bottom line, of course, is the ear.
|
@sns
First of all we agree that what matters most is the sound, and not measurements.
Obviously, what triggered my last post was your "unfortunately only Femto clock" remark. But when you are talking specifically about clocks, you are focusing on jitter (and phase noise) and that is measureable. And it would appear that the Gaia's OCXO has no partiular advantage over the ubiquitous Accusilicons and Crysteks that you seem to disparage. And there are yet better Femto clocks available! In identical set-ups simply substituting better clocks has clearly been shown to improve the sound in ways considered imprtant to audiophiles like space, air, focus, soundstage, etc.
As for I2S vs. USB outputs, I was only considering your remarks about those of the Gaia.
And last of all we agree that what matters most is the sound, and not measurements.
|
@catastrofe
The answer is that for most people USB is good enough. It also easily allows people to use their laptops directly into a DAC and a conveniently long cord. Their streamer and file storage are already at hand. We used to put a filter on the line and call it a day. And if you can make USB work as well or better than the alternatives, that's great.
For the great majority that do not use USB out to their DAC, they use a device with spdif, which is very closely related to I2S. The great majority of all the RPi hat devices output spdif. Some reviewers, Hans Beekhuyzen for one, says that for him I2S and spdif or AES/EBU (that is similar to spdif) are virtually indistinguishable coming from the same streamer. And the spdif cable can be conveniently long. The highest performing streamer he and a lot of other people have ever used is the Grimm Audio MU1. It has no I2S output, but only spdif and AES/EBU.
I don't see any reason to have USB in the mix if it avoidable. Going from ethernet to I2S is such a clear path. And so too it would seem, based on what hardware is available, going from ethernet to spdif-AES/EBU as the next best thing. No need for what we used to call USB decrapification.
|
@catastrofe
There is the music data and there is the clock signal. Together with a third they constitute what we know as the I2S streams. A Raspberry Pi has I2S data available on its GPIO pins, allowing the connection of external audio codecs or DACs that support the I2S protocol RPis are used in many streamers, including commercial ones, and RPis, or their functional equivalents, are used in virtually every streamer that has ethernet as an input. For the streamer to output spdif there is a conversion of data on the three pins to an spdif or AES/EBU transmitter chip for the spdif or AES/EBU output. Then within the DAC there is a spdif or AES/EBU receiver chip for conversion back to I2S. The spdif or AES/EBU line carries exactly the same data on one line that was on three, except that it cannot carry as much so the max sampling rate is reduced. You will notice that, almost always, a streamer having I2S output will also offer spdif and or AES/EBU outputs because they are so closely related.
The most important advantage of the I2S connection is to avoid the double conversion from I2S to spdif or AES/EBU inside the streamer and vice-versa inside the DAC. And I2S is usually associated with lower jitter than spdif or AES/EBU.
It could be that I2S needs more care in its implimentation to sound consistently better than the others. In my own system the I2S beats a spdif that I have tried and also a USB. But I cannot say that all other things were equal in those comparisons. Nevertheless an ethernet to I2S streamer is working very well for me. As usual YMMV.
|
@noelpastor
I’m a happy owner of an 005 who has only been a casual contributer to this thread. What you write is not unlike what was written by some about the 005 in the very long 005 thread. So just a comment here.
You write that the 006 "unlike the Gustard (X30) does not have any pro reviews." Let’s get serious here. Anyone with a laptop or an iphone can call himself a "reviewer." These guys are all over the internet and one thing in common is that there is no supervision by another person, a serious editor, as in the legacy publications. The first printed review that comes up if you google "Gustard X30" is written by a guy for whom each new component is the best ever, thinks he is being paid by the word, repeats much of a manufacturer’s promo material, and like others of his ilk has gotten many of his review samples as gifts rather than loans from the manufacturers. A while ago there was a lot of discussion all over about that. A good review promotes a good resale value. That reviewer, like so many other internet reviewers, does so many reviews that they use each component for just a short time. Like the old reviews in Stereo Review and High Fidelity, they are only useful to learn what knobs and connectors each one has. Moreover, they know that the moment they do a critical review no manufacturer will again send them a component for review! Asking an 005 or 006 owner if they have compared to another recent component usually comes up empty as they are not reviwers. They only know what they have used, long term, before.
In another post you ask about the possibility of a malfunction. I don’t know what your options generally are where you live. However, you should be aware that with all that has been written about the 005 and 006 I don’t believe anyone has ever written of a problem with these units. Quality parts and quality control seems to be at a very high level. I write here about the 005 since I have not examined an 006. Like many other quality units from China, it is built in a very modular way. Therefore if there is a malfunction it can usually be traced to a circuit board tha can be lifted out and sent in for inspection and repair. So one does not have to send in the complete unit. But one should be comfortable doing that. 006 owners may want to comment here.
Of course it is comforting to have read praise from the "pro reviewers" before a purchase. However many of us have found comfort in reading of long term satisfaction such as is found in threads like this even though the contributers don’t have experience with many different units. Here in the US one can buy a Gustard from Amazon with an easy return. You should do what you are comfortable with. Your money, your anxiety, your choice.
|
@sns
You write, "The lack of pro reviews is the one thing I absolutely don't get about Musetec."
It's been written many times: Small manufacturers don't want pro reviews.
A bad review and they're done. You don't have to look far to have seen that. A sterling review and they have more orders than they can handle. Then they have to deal with a crowd of unhappy folks.
|
@vinylvalet
It would be interesting to know what line stage(s)/preamp(s) you are using.
The output specs for the 005 are: RCA 2Vrms, XLR 4Vrms
The same for the Gustard X30 Quad Core ES9039SPRO DAC which is probably designed for a larger distribution: RCA 2.5Vrms, XLR 5.1Vrms. So I judge the 005 to be within a normal range.
A solution could be to install resistors in RCA cables or use a device (British, I think) with RCA jack at one and, plug at the other and resistor in between. I don't know if there's a similar device for XLR.
|
