Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC

Someone at another forum just purchased 005 from Clear Components out of Germany,

@melm This hearing of the formerly unheard continues to amaze me with 16/44, 005, network and general system improvements. My recent boutique tube purchases uncovered another layer of the lowest level details, performers in room becoming flesh and blood, more timbral color. This cannot happen if source obscures, 005 is amazingly resolving piece.

My analog setup only fell further behind with 005 in system, now presume it will take minimum $3.5K cartridge and planned mods to phono stage to get back in running. For all possible future purchasers of 005, expect to hear the  previously unheard. And not in a clinical, analytical manner, assuming one's present system not voiced in this manner.

@arafiq  Melm mentioned pretty much what I was going to say. I believe we know virtually everyone having purchased 005. See if you can find Holo May vs Terminator review, extrapolate from there. Based on my observations Holo May has generally come out ahead of Terminator. With each new iteration of Terminator, resolving powers seem to improve, Holo May always top notch here.

I have to say I may be biased against Denafrips, had  Denafrips Hyperion amp in system couple years ago, very disappointing. I just thought anyone voicing a component that way is playing flavors off one another trying to balance out sound. I prefer more neutral components. This may have absolutely no bearing on Terminator sq, as usual YMMV.

@benzman These kinds of questions are hard to answer to my way of thinking. With each of us likely having totally unique systems, generalizations hard to ascertain. Having said that, based on my experience and others, I'd say the number one or most salient feature of this dac is it's incredible resolving capabilities. Flavor is where differences may come to fore, between systems and listener's sound quality preferences come to color their evaluations. Having said that, I have yet to see someone describing this dac as warm, I'm in total agreement there. Yet, this dac not clinical or cold, and I've yet to see someone describing it in this manner as well.  So what are we left with, total neutrality? Seems really bizarre that with all manner of systems, 005 seems to continually land here, makes one wonder about the actual existence of a truly neutral sounding audio component?

My take is the 005 simply resolves at such a high level it may be novelty of sudden newfound information that mesmerizes in short term. Over the long term, as one gets acclimated to hearing what was formerly omitted, we begin to ascertain flavor. Even after nearly two years of ownership and many changes within my system I continue to have great difficulty in describing some sort of overarching flavor of this dac. There was a single short lived time where I thought it somewhat analytical after what turned out to be an ill thought change. Mostly what I hear is live performers in room, actual real organic presences, not a lot of thinking or imagination required to get this sense. So, bottom line for me, extreme resolution with natural flavor, I feel no desire to even try another dac at any price.

The strangest thing about owning this dac for me is it's relatively low price of $3k. By all rights total cost of my system should call for $10k up dac, and I often feel this bias that 005 is too cheap, couldn't possibly be the best I could do, and then next listening session eliminates that thought from my mind. At some point I may have to scratch this itch and purchase $10k up dac.

Trying to bring this back to a more general sense of interest. My active pre and amps are both directly heated triode tubes, 300BSET and 845SET, way modded Klipshcorns which are extremely resolving and great pains to provide natural timbre which stock Klipsch doesn't do so well. But then I've also used 005 with more modest equipment like Schitt Saga+ pre, Prima Luna Dialogue Four push pull amp and Musical Fidelity M2SI integrated amp. I never felt extremely deprived with any of it, and never heard sins of commission. All in all, my experience and what I'm hearing from others is 005 is just fine in many different systems. Still waiting to see the first negative review.

@benzman  Give us some context for your decision. I know you had a Briscati M3 and some other new components coming in to your system. How did you set up 005 in system, and what were particulars of how 005 didn't measure up to preferred setup?

I'm certainly interested in hearing about possible sins of commission 005 may invoke, or deficiencies versus other dacs.

Yes, this dac cannot be properly evaluated without at least burn in time on usb input.

Comparison to Briscati should be informative, Briscati formerly on my to buy list along with Aqua Formula, Holo May, Mola Mola Tambaqui, Playback Designs, and many other of the high end usual suspects.

I use Synergistic Orange fuse, never used without so can't say about value of fuses here.

I owned Okto DAC8 stereo which uses the rarely used ESS 9028 chip, I thought that dac perhaps smoother/warmer than 005. Chip related, who knows, only one part of many.

There is a distinction to be made with playback vs recording in hi res digital. Every one of my listening sessions includes both original digital and analog mastered recordings, so we're talking all recording from sometime in 80's back all being analog, 80's-90's a mix, 2000's pretty much all digital. If I'm going to generalize, I find analog mastered recordings more natural, analog like. Digital mastered generally less of this analog like nature. But then there are the standout digital mastered and analog remasters in either redbook or hi res that are superior to almost any analog mastered redbook NON-REMASTERED recording. For the analog masters this suggests the remastering responsible for sq improvement, rather than hi res aspect. As I mentioned previously, I can't say I can confidently determine sq difference between these 16/44 vs hi res remastered analog recordings. So then we come to these superior digitally mastered recordings, both 16/44 and hi res. These easily compete and sometimes exceed the best analog remasters, I hear wider freq. response, superior micro and macro dynamics, an ease and even luxurious sense of vinyl playback that I don't quite get with the best analog masters.

The main issue I hear with most contemporary digital recordings is well documented dynamic limitations. This became salient during last nights listening session, very nice analog master and remastered recordings, then going to some modern recordings, clearly heard loss of MICRO DYNAMICS, not so much the macro, but this loss made me not want to listen anymore of these type recordings. Micro dynamics is where the life of the performance lives, take this away and you have mere sound reproduction, no illusion of performers in room. No amount of dsp or hi res can bring back whats been lost in mastering process.

So, assuming we can't bring back what is lost in mastering via hi res or dsp. How about these superior recordings, how can dsp improve upon the superior master? If mastering is wonderful, why would I want to add something to an already wonderful recipe, I'm as likely to ruin it as improve it. If the dac and system sans dsp are interpreting master recording as intended there should be no need for dsp. So, I can understand there are recordings that could use some massaging, the engineer and/or producer may have created a recipe that could be improved upon. In this case I can understand the judicious use of dsp, the problem with using dsp is that the same dsp settings are set universally, that setting may be perfect for one recording, not so good for another. DSP that could be applied uniquely to each recording could be useful, how to implement this? So, to my way of thinking, dsp is useful only for system limitations. I suggest the best we can do is having a dac with global sound qualities in alignment with our preferences.

Melm, I can understand lemonhaze's use of if. There is a lot of hype out there these days, understandable that one may have doubts and or cynicism  in a general sense. We shouldn't be overly sensitive to those questioning this dac, being so only invites others to attack 005 users as fanboys. As for me, I feel self assured in my assesment of this dac, I've been around the block with audio, heard many multiples of $10k-even $100K systems over the years. I know what I hear, and feel confident this dac will hold its own against far more expensive dacs. Not saying it's best $10K or less dac, and/or only good value dac out there.

I'm just saying lets be positive here, being defensive only serves to undermine the wish that others give this dac a fair shake.

@balja Providing quality power to 005, and all components for that matter is important for extracting full potential.

@jriggy  My take on those other dacs conforms to yours. Comparing usb to other inputs on 005 or most any other dac is generally like comparing apples to oranges. Usb users will generally be streamers, other inputs generally cd transports so not directly comparible. Still, I'd assume all inputs on 005 would give you fair taste of flavor or capabilities of dac, perhaps not it's full potential.  What's most interesting to me about 005 is the difficulty of obtaining the full potential of it's resolving capabilities, never encountered prior in any source component. I'm completely out of possible upgrades and mods to my entire system, and the last mod I made wes easily exposed by 005.

Romazicon's experience just goes to show how much synergy matters in system. He has a very resolving system and I believe his impressions legitimate.

I too have seen less than stellar reviews of earlier iterations of Amamarro usb boards. I've no fault with board in 005 with my streaming setup, YMMV as Romazicon did. Just goes to show how incredibly complex streaming setups can be, some recipes work, some don't. I don't think he heard full potential of 005 in his setup just as other setups may not  allow other dacs to reach their full potential.

The one thing I found interesting is the smearing he heard,  I've tried various streaming networks since getting 005, never heard any of this. I did hear excessive precision with one setup. I'm expecting to hear a  near sota server in my system in short order, should be interesting. I'm also in process of building/modding new server at present, so another  point of reference.

While I have no skin in the game and have no plans to try Musician products, seems from all the talk on net most don't get how China business operates. They operate under total war rules, whether this is Denafrips designed is of no consequence to the Chinese, all interested parties know the game.

While the review Melm referred to was problematic, I see plenty of positive amateur reviews for their products. For those who expect Chinese to operate according to one's own views of what is fair, forget about it. Whether this bothers your conscious is only for you to decide,  I'd only say business practices, as they exist all over this world may also not conform to one's ideas of fairness.

Per usual, best practice for relying on reviews for purchasing decisions, seek out maximum number of amateur reviews over long period of time.

Based on the above, presuming I didn't own 005, I'd be wary about 005 purchase. My eyes were wide open in purchasing 005, product of totalitarian China with no reviews at time of my purchase. As for Chinese purchases, I've long been aware of the many compromises I've made in participating in capitalist system. I don't know the exact supply chain of so many products I've purchased over the years, I'm sure many lives have been negatively impacted by my participation in this system.

So right debjit_g, why I don't give so called 'professional' reviewers much credence. They mostly all have agendas, and also the other liabilities you listed. Everyone should also realize negative reviews may gain notoriety for the reviewer, and the product being reviewed  Better to be talked about than not talked about, I'm sure everyone knows about Tekton and Raven.

Beyond reviews, another good way to judge quality of equipment is many internal photos. Parts used, layout can give one a clue to quality of component, specifications can be helpful in spite of those averse to them.This is exactly the method I used in purchasing 005 without a single review.

The other thing about only relying on reviews is you'll usually find luke warm and negative reviews, in addition to the positives. Sometimes you just have to trust yourself and make a decision.

DPLL settings with 3rd button down on right side of remote. On line manual, https://sc5ce3172e4b60b45.jimcontent.com/download/version/1618737708/module/16053065324/name/MANUAL%20MH-DA005-EN.pdf

I agree with Musetec, 1, or lowest dpll setting best, if one can't attain without dropouts you have issues with network, fix your network, worth it.

Latest upgrade to network, different macmini with I7 and PCIe ssd (vs I5 and sata ssd), Uptone MMK with Uptone JS2 lps, this one even further optimized with 3rd party app wipe and SIP disabled. Next server tried will be custom build atx motherboard based with optical out. Also, 101d replacement tube burning in.  Another layer of noise eliminated, and more importantly, even more natural, life like presentation. Point being, 005 should only improve in this area with more exposure.

@benzman I'd agree you didn't hear 005 through it's best input, that being usb, especially if optimized at server and/or network level. Having said that I can understand your preference based on a number of things. First, 005 certainly not what I'd describe as forgiving. Over the two plus years of my ownership, component and/or parts changes have resulted in what I'd characterize as only analytical to neutral overall gestalt of 005. Analytical when breaking in/settling of new components or parts, return to the neutral or mean rest of the time. All my system improvements have been solely dedicated to greater resolving/lower noise floor since 005 purchase, and this tonal character has never changed.  During these break in times there has been a lack of refinement and/or lack of color, but going back to the mean or state of neutrality has always brought about a great sense of live performers to my room. The sheer resolving capabilities of the 005 always brings about a heightened sense of this with every system resolving upgrade.

So, on color/timbre/tonality, texture, refinement issue. My basic system is SET, DHT so high in 2nd order harmonic distortions, SS is going to be higher in odd order harmonic distortions. I'd suggest this plays role in my perception of 005 color. I'd not think, and based on my experience with various SS amps and pre's over the years, including Class A, and even battery powered SS, 005 wouldn't play as nice.

Bottom line for me is 005 has yet to commit any long term sins. My systematic upgrades in overall resolving capabilities have yet to uncover some undesired coloration. Now, I have often wondered about whether 005 is performing some sin of omission, perhaps the most salient one in my mind being the very issues of refinement, delicacy you bring up with Briscati. Perhaps there is more of this to be found in some of the highest echelon dacs, in fact I'd expect it and demand it. I can't say I've found the 005 lacking here ,at least in digital realm, however,  when I compare  present overall sound quality to my aural memory of the highest echelon vinyl setups (talking 100K to multiples of 100K), I can hear a slight lacking here.

Thanks Charles, may I return the compliment in that I find your posts generally thoughtful and insightful. Your a rare consistent asset to AG forums.

I should also add individual sensory perceptions are extremely variable. While I suggested I may not like 005 in SS system, I understand others may find the pairing complimentary. We all have our natural inherent biases, add to those ones formed from experience, result is there may be extremely different perceptions as to sound quality of any particular audio component. I'd expect diverging opinions on 005 sound quality. The one parameter of this dac I'd suggest is unquestionable is it's ability to resolve, I can't imagine this dac not being involving, this level of resolution is inherently involving, assuming system up to it. I accept color is somewhat variable here.

As some of you know, I had Singxer SU6, while lordmelton may be getting fine sound quality from I2s, I never felt a single urge to try I2s as I simply couldn't imagine I2s giving me anymore than what I had, have since sold SU6.

Adding the I2s to my system at the time meant giving up the SOTM SMS200Neo I was running as streamer at the time, powered by Uptone JS2, and AQ Diamond USB for the SU6 and it's inferior (to JS2) power supply, and inferior I2S cable, made no sense to even try.

Also, I never want to give up two computer and/or separate server/streamer solution with Roon. I find Roon to sound much better when separating core from endpoint. My next player experiments planned will involve Audirvana Studio, AudioLinux and Euphony Stylus. Each will be run on it's own PCIe SSD, comparisons will be easy since I have simple access to SSD in server. After recent conversation with Alex Crespi of Uptone Audio, I learned very worthwhile to experience different players and computer OS.

As regards flavor and/or getting full potential of 005, I know this has been mentioned previously, active preamp is a must, the higher quality the better. Pre's likely have more influence on sound quality of source components than any other component or wire in system. The gain function of 005 is essentially worthless due to bit stripping, may be ok at 90% of full volume, but anything lower and bit stripping will intrude. Even more important, pre's will definitely color source to some extent, the reason I suggest tubes here for the neutral to analytical inherent color of 005.

I feel I should expound a bit on above post. I stated 005 color as analytical to neutral. Ultimately, I feel the 005 is a neutral piece, with the possibility of sounding analytical, it will never sound warmed over. I'd describe 005 as a high strung machine, feed it well and it will perform, feed it poorly, not so good.

005 is high strung in the sense that it's resolving capabilities are still unknown to me. In the two plus years I've owned many upgrades and mods, each dedicated to max system resolution. 005 has exposed each and every single upgrade and mod, even down to the level of a few different caps and resistors in pre. Larger upgrades like MKII in Coincident Statement pre, boutique tubes in amps and pre, server and server OS mods, Jantzen inductors in speaker have scaled up sound equivalent to changes. I can't say where this all ends, the 005 continues to demand more from me in trying to realize it's resolving potential.

And probably the most amazing thing is, 005 also has SOUL. We often hear of components that resolve highly without soul, this is not that guy. I can't speak to the difficulty of reaching this characteristic with 005 as my system had soul prior to 005, based on most reviews I don't see that as issue. So, assuming one already has soul in their system, 005 is a no brainer, especially at it's price. Based on my experience, sky is the limit with resolving potential. I've reached many best sound quality plateaus since 005 insertion, the latest plateau has put my system within  realm of best I've ever heard, and I've heard many a system in nearly 30 years involved in high end audio. I'll just say the 005 is most interesting source equipment I've ever owned, not reaching what one feels is full potential of a piece makes this so.

@debjit_g Totally agree on the usb galvanic isolation. What amazes me is so many of these off the shelf servers/streamers use usb off motherboards! How do they have the nerve to charge these prices for crap usb outputs, this is what gives usb bad name. The custom server I'll soon be hearing will have optical out as well as JCAT net femto card. Both guy building custom server and I use streamers so ethernet or optical (which means 2 ethernet ports or ethernet and optical)l out is a must with our servers. Antipodes is one of the few who gets this, they also optimize other ports with their servers. You're are also correct about quality lps for everything in network. Interesting you find Windows best OS for server, not the first time I've hear this. The custom server will initially use Linux OS, we've talked about possible use of Windows at some point.

@lordmelton You don't need custom cable with SU6, as SU6 has dip switches for proper pin configuration. The other thing I've often heard about I2S is cable length critical, shortest best, I had .5m HDMI cable. I've also heard I2S can never be optimally used with any external device as I2S was developed with very short signal paths that exist within dacs. Your take on preamps is certainly a valid one, however, I'm not sure a system built entirely of neutral sounding components is possible or even desired. I certainly like my source equipment to be neutral, this makes attaining system building a less complex undertaking. One then chooses pre's and amps according to one's preferences. Lack of neutrality in source components may cause dog chasing tail syndrome, always chasing down color balances to get things right. I'm one to keep amps and pre's for long term, my present pre and amps are likely end game for me, sources always far more subject to change for me.

Well, for myself the issue is settled since I'm now totally committed to optical since hearing it's clear benefits vs. ethernet. The only way I'll ever directly connect a server to dac is if it had optical out to streamer/dac with optical in.

And I'm still not convinced Aurender usb scheme is equivalent to external usb device with quality dedicated lps. The only server internal usb I trust as optimal are those with Pink Faun or JCAT cards which run off dedicated lps.

Obtaining lowest noise floor/highest resolving capabilities with any network solution require utmost attention to every noise producing detail. This means absolute optimization of everything from modem to dac, various avenues to achieve this, but I like maximizing discrete devices as much as possible, quality power supplies, and yet keep it simple, very difficult to achieve all this at once. For me this optimal setup would look like full optical from service to dac, all components optical capable. Simple and total galvanic isolation from one component to the next.

@car123 Looking forward to your impressions. I used the Cardas usb for some time, my present AQ Diamond bettered it by large margin. I've also tried various cat config generics,various AQ, Supra, Wireworld Platinum. USB cables make a difference.

I used a Joule Electra LA100MKIII with many diy mods for years, the 300ME is very nice pre. I came very close to purchasing First Watt for my Klipschorns, would be my first choice for SS for high efficiency speakers. NIce system and vinyl setup.

The generic FMC, especially using stock switching power supplies is not especially effective, optical needs optimization just as everything else. I used all AQ Vodka when I had all ethernet setup, still using prior to server, the AQ is first rate cable.

My setup extremely unique in that I use ethernet out of server, optical conversion and usb rendering/streaming done POST server, directly in front of dac. I've tried various setups and upgrades PRE server, network upgrades much less impactful in front of server versus after. Even adding an audiophile switch with OXCO clock to feed server was not beneficial in my setup.

For extremely efficient speakers and SS, First Watt would be my first choice. Many choices of color, trusted designer, minimal circuitry, which is important for super efficient speakers, higher power ss has far too much wasted excess for these speakers. This is straight wire concept at work, same principle applies to my preference for my 300B SET vs my 845SET with Khorns.

Return to usb vs I2S. While I've seen usb bettered by I2S, this has been rather rare occurrence. Why this so, I can't state with absolute authority. The most compelling reason I can find is that manufacturers not committed to it for good reason, that being they didn't find it superior. I've seen exactly two manufacturers committed to high end I2S, those being Pink Faun I2S bridge and Euphony Summus latest model server, Pink Faun I assume best. One should ask themselves why the major server manufacturers not pursuing I2S product development. I believe we're at point where most dacs have I2S, so this not the issue. If I saw more development and products from major manufacturers, along with standardized interface/connectors, and finally, far more positive reviews, I'd be much more open to belief I2S superior to other protocols.

Audiowise has some interesting products.

@lordmelton That's exactly what I've been doing for many years. Gives one access to all usb cables rather than the more unusual usb sans power line.

@debjit_g  I would tend to agree, yes the design and the connectors are changed, the metallurgy and dialectic shouldn't change if it goes by same model name.

As for burn in, it continues for me as well, I need to get around 100 hours more on various parts and components until I'm done with this round of system upgrades. Per usual, 005 continues to expose every single change. 005 is high performance piece, needs highest quality octane. There remains a single aspect of sound that continues to intrigue me about 005, and that is ultimate refinement or lack thereof. With the many rounds of burn in I've experienced, still testing for this. Just when I hear a recording lacking in this, along comes another that really blows me away! It doesn't have to be audiophile quality, so many mediocre recordings continue to impress. So then, I have to ask myself, is this question of burn in, lack of refinement with 005, or are some recordings just not up to 005 challenge? I only know one thing, I'd not change one iota of resolution or transparency for a more refined presentation, if that is indeed fault of 005. Any potential dac I'd want to audition or purchase has a pretty high bar to reach. Based on reviews and gut feelings I'm thinking well over $10k.

As it is, I'm staying up way too late and loosing sleep, always wanting to hear another track, another artist. Zero fatigue. Haven't been at this plateau for many a year.

I feel the need to repeat myself here. The vast majority of off the shelf servers out there DO NOT optimize usb, usb port simply comes off motherboard, motherboards are extremely noisy devices, especially the all in one type, those with cd rippers and on board storage. To get optimized usb one must then also purchase a usb renderer or I can call it improver, this galvanically isolates usb from motherboard, some have built in lps, others have dc port for external power. This will cost anywhere from lets say $400 at low end,  multiples of $1k at top end. One must budget for both the server and the usb improvement to get top notch usb.

The only usb ports on servers that both galvanically isolate AND provide for external power supply are ATX board servers, these take the JCAT and Pink Faun usb cards and have provision for external dc  power. One can also NOT use the usb port out of the second rate usb port servers, and use network switch and separate streamer. There's also option of optical output servers, very few of these in market. The other option is what lordmelton did.

To finalize, if one's dac has top notch usb board, usb is most likely best route to take, but one must optimize to reach full potential of that board. Big payoff in optimizing the usb out of server. Lower noise floor provided by galvanic isolation and clean power results in higher resolution and more natural presentation. The improvement is well worth the money spent!

@lordmelton I think you have this the wrong way around. When one is optimizing usb its not the Amanero board you're supplying external PS to. What you're doing is isolating the USB OUT of server and applying dc power to it, In debjit case that JCAT card is mounted on motherboard inside server. In my case I use separate streamer (Sonore OpticalRendu) which is also usb renderer/Roon endpoint. In my case this is galvanically isolated from server by FMC which then goes to OR. My OR is dc powered by $1k Uptone JS2 and $1k power cord into my DIY modified BPT power conditioner with Oyaide R1 outlets and Mundorf caps.

So, keys are getting whatever port out of server galvanically isolated and quality power. Servers are noisy devices, usb direct off motherboard powered by motherboard power supply is second rate. One has to optimize all ports auditioned to create fair test. The Amanero usb board within 005 is already galvanically isolated.

@lordmelton  Taping over the power leg on usb has had variable results in my experience. I've continually heard less effect as my entire network has evolved, to the point where today I couldn't reliably tell you if taped off or not.

The idea of powering usb boards in dacs off external ps is intriguing, don't believe I've ever seen it done. Regardless, I2S has same liability, if indeed it is liability.

Whatever way your favored connection turns out, we do know from many users usb provides very fine sound quality from 005. If I2S sounds fine, just great, gives us another route to go with.

All 005 users also owe it to themselves to try optical solutions.

@melm On the taping thing, that makes sense for the Musetec and 004 as I had tried the tape thing with 004 prior to 005 purchase and same thing, couldn't be sure I heard difference. Now, I did do the tape thing with previous Auralic Vega, which also has very nice usb implementation, thought I heard more of a difference. Imagination or real? I came to realize over time that perhaps it was futile to tape over pin since the self powered element, still thought it better theoretically to keep whatever possible contamination out. As mentioned before, not sure I hear difference.

You are absolutely correct as to comparing one usb to another IF USB BEING USED ANYWHERE IN CHAIN. DUH, staring us directly in face.  While I couldn't recall, this was part of my thinking in not even attempting to use my Singxer SU6, it was only the Amanero internal usb I was bypassing, knew it was better than usb board in Singxer. 

@lordmelton I just looked through some threads and can't find, but I assume you couldn't use I2S directly out of Aurrender because of pin incompatibility? This would be ACTUAL  true comparison. Perhaps the entire ramifications of what you're actually doing  has escaped you in excitement to try this new setup? Sometimes the mind does funny things what with expectation bias. Do some more comparisons and report back. Theoretically, using the Amanero board should be much better than that LKS, also adding complexity. The only advantage would be the external LPS. If what you report remains true, I'd find the usb within Aurrender highly suspect. This actually fits in with my research and experience, the typical usb ports on vast majority of servers SUCK. Get the Phoenix and hear what usb is really capable of.

All above just goes to show how weak usb ports directly attached and powered by motherboards are. Even the Aurrender with it's partially optimized usb not good enough. Noise is the critical thing with streaming, until we see optimized usb vs. I2s with 005 we're relying on conjecture for which is best.

And then we have my setup which ignores any usb or I2S within server, which adds another conversion within relatively noisy server  Ethernet out of server means everything external and discreet lps powered. This setup has far exceeded my best prior optimized server usb solutions. And this prior to optical optimization with OpticalRendu, OR brought futher substantial gains. With so many options nearly impossible to have direct comparisons.

A couple other things I've learned from John Swenson and others, is one wants signal in server the least amount of time with the least amount of processes running. This means fast processor, efficient motherboard, best power and optimized OS. Noise is the enemy of streaming resolution and more natural presentation. Minimize signal contamination is name of game, the above experiences prove the validity of running processes outside server where noise can be better controlled. For those running Roon, separating core from endpoint is commonly heard as superior, again we are minimizing server processes and running them outside in quieter environment.

I remain unconvinced of superiority of ddc devices using usb, still using usb, so most salient cause of change in sound is not exactly known. Two, is the sound indeed better or simply different.  We also need direct comparison of  optimized usb chain by these users. Until this criteria met I2S not proven to be superior to usb for 005, IMO.

I'm also very skeptical about the benefit of bypassing 005 internal usb board. First, it is one of the best out there, Melm  clarified some of the details. Two, in regard to usb board contamination of dac power supply, Melm also mentioned  004 experiments with transformer, while I haven't gone back to that thread, seems to have not added much if anything, and that with inferior usb board in that dac. Three, as I mentioned previously, I've seen a whole lot of experimentation with streaming, haven't come across much if any talk about usb boards contaminating dac power supplies or interfering with dac processes resulting in lowered sound quality. Now, this doesn't mean there may be theoretical losses, I believe the present bias to addressing what feeds dac is correct.

For me, a more compelling argument for I2S superiority to usb in 005 would have to be an optimized I2S port on server direct out to I2S in on 005. 

Complex usb setups are also not optimized IME, less is better, I believe straight wire concept applies to streaming chains. So many usb decrapifiers out there, how effective they are so chain dependent. Power supplies also come in many degrees of quality and effectiveness.

Premature at this point to make blanket statements about superiority of any single streaming solution, and this just for 005. In regard to other dacs, there may be another best solution for those dacs.  I always go back to whatever solution one goes for, optimization is key, purity is other, we shouldn't mix conversion protocols. In doing such a comparison we also have to keep in mind every single unique feature of our individual streaming solutions.

Funny thing, but I can understand how everyone here has come to their preference in streaming chains. I can at least understand the theoretical advantages and disadvantages of all these setups, I don't doubt the results are valid for each user.

@lordmelton Quite the contrary, look at my prior post, I presume what you're hearing is valid. My only issue is, and as Melm pointed out, since you still have usb in stream, you're comparing two usb solutions, at least to some degree. I have no arguments with subjective best solutions. It seems you're making claim I2S input superior to usb input with 005, I find that claim dubious until you've eliminated any usb in chain.

I'm curious as to some OBJECTIVE streaming guidelines, at least as it pertains to 005. I'd like to know if I2S or usb is best input on 005. I have ability to do some comparisons, but my setup is too unique to have validity for others. For those presently using usb or I2S out of servers I'd like to see exclusive I2S to usb  setup, both fully optimized. The only generalization I can make based on my experience is vast majority of usb setups aren't optimized due to usb server flaws, this gives great usb inputs on dacs a bad name. I hear far too much bad mouthing of dac usb, I believe it wrongheaded.

As things stand, at least Melm and I are getting fine results with usb, you and others? fine results with I2S, perhaps both are indeed great inputs, ok with me.

@car123 Your impressions of SU6 allign with my presumptions of what I'd have heard if I had cared to even try my Singxer SU6. You do owe it further burn in just to be sure. Trying out LKS would give you one more point of reference.  Your usb experience not surprising in least, I'd bet on many usb renderers beating out server usb. Can't give you info on good one for less money than Phoenix, not up to date here.

As for the NON-CONTROVERSY of measurements vs listening in rating 005. Non-controversial in the sense the objectivist vs subjectivist divide only continues into the infernal. There have actually been some pretty informative arguments on this subject at this forum, believe everything that could ever be said in regard to this issue has been addressed in this forum.

I only know 005 will continue to have exact same sound as prior to ASR review. Jimbo addressed issue of O vs. S in stating 005 tuned by listening, no misdirection there. I haven't looked at 005 marketing measurements vs ASR, if they are not accurate he should be called out on that.

Going at it big time over this one at ASR, 11 pages and growing. Lots of people over there referring to some bashing of ASR and objectivists from this forum. There are some defenders of subjectivism on the thread.

Being experienced modifier of various components over the years,  I 100% concur with everything Jimbo stated! Thank you, Melm!

His statement in regard to modifying 005 to measure better very interesting. Will this affect sound quality is positive or negative manner?

One option designers use to obtain better specs is applying more feedback to a circuit. Generally, this adds a sterility the 005 certainly doesn't need. Per @fl_guy not meeting Musetec published specs is problematic. This is how China manufacturers get themselves in trouble here, we expect honesty, you don't retain your position in marketplace with marketing deception.

Still, as has been mentioned previously, the dac will sound the same today as it did prior to ASR review. While I don't much agree with ASR  philosophy, I'd rather see equipment that both measures and sounds great vs only one of the two.

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.

The reason testing crowd can't get past measurements is they simply can't get past the idea of NOT trusting their senses, or anyone else's for that matter. The one listening test they use, blind testing is so often inconclusive, which only proves the faultiness of our senses for them.  I've watched these O vs S arguments for so long, always circular, and always goes back to distrust of senses. I'd think it wise and logical for measurement crowd to measure listeners as much as the subject or component under review. For them, testing of listeners is validated by plenty of existing measurements of human hearing, the individual sensory perceptions never addressed. They invalidate individual sensory perception through a priori inability to control for it. In other word, individual biases of all kinds contaminate the results, therefore, this can't conform to good science.

Trying to apply science to audio reproduction and our individual sensory perceptions is a futile undertaking. Removing the individual sensory perception part of equation allows them to claim this is good science. I've argued at the point they have  robot or replicant  of myself, with testing apparatus built in to measure all my sensory perceptions in relation to reproduction of music over audio components I'll believe this good science.

Testing and measurements also bring to mind, analog/vinyl setups vs digital, vinyl measures much worse in some parameters, yet many consider vinyl reproduction the reference for audio reproduction. I certainly hear a difference in analog vs digital audio reproduction. Do SINAD , dynamic range, or any other measurements explain explain all these differences. And what about the instruments that produce this music, can measurements explain the texture and tonality of a Stradivarious violin vs. that of  generic,  both measure exactly the same, they HAVE to sound the same according to measurement crowd!  Well, I guess musicians have been wasting their money on these equally instruments for centuries, they're just imagining they have superior or even different sound qualities. Not hard to imagine the smugness of those who judge us as deluded and reliant on our totally faulty sensory perceptions. I can only say I'm awestruck by the textures and colors I hear at live concerts and in music reproduction on my system, the unmeasurable content makes all the difference for me!

I agree the issues ASR measurements uncovered are problematic, plenty of dacs out there, many far less expensive superior measuring.

Which brings into question; how impactful are these measurements to ultimate sound quality? With so many finding 005 sound quality to be fine, how can this be? To repeat, would the 005 be improved with better measurements? Could 005 sound quality be optimized with these exact measurments? Perhaps at some point in 005 development, measured superior, sound quality inferior?

In response to any fair evaluation of audio component, I cannot account for anyone judging product without listening. These are audio products, manufactured exclusively for listening pleasure, not laboratory equipment meant for calibration to some fixed value.

The issue with not listening is it appears as if one has an agenda, especially since this dac has received a fair amount of positive reviews. Since all these positive reviews based on subjective listening, not listening fails to even acknowledge what we find so compelling.

I'd also think it should be of interest for measurement crowd to understand how measurements correlate to sound qualities. Do they correlate in every single component that's ever been under review? Or does measurement crowd not want to admit they may not always correlate. For any one of them to admit 005 produced quality sound would be admitting measurements don't always correlate.

Serial # MS50097, purchased 11/20.

Based on my understanding of measurement crowd, its not that they don't listen, rather its best to rely on measurements vs listening. While some of them may admit to limits of measurements, still beats human senses and our individual perceptions of those senses. Human biases of all kinds enter the equation for them, can never be overcome by training, experience, etc. Measurements always retain their superiority over listening, inconclusive results from blind testing prove this superiority. This will never change, written in stone, really is no point in arguing the point in this thread or any thread, total futility.

There is some hope though, periodically, I observe a former measurement adherent joining the dark side after having heard a component or components that resolve to the point where they hear formerly unheard sound qualities like texture, perhaps even color. At this point they now come to the understanding there are sound qualities measurements fail to account for. So, yes, I'd agree at least some of the measurement cohort has not heard extremely revealing systems. Based on the mostly relatively inexpensive components tested over there I believe this true. Now, they occasionally test more expensive components, which test middle of pack, what's the point of listening or purchasing when its far more costly than equally or better measuring equipment. The thing is I'm sure Amir has heard these much more costly components, and likely entire systems. Can he not hear differences with the much more costly components and systems? Or is it he can't or won't admit to it? You have to realize their entire argument can't take a relatively middle of pack or poorer measuring component beating out best measuring components, this would be admitting listening more valid than measuring. And then take an entire system of such components where these gains may be exponential. For those of us relying on listening, correlations or non-correlations between measurements and listening isn't surprising, upsetting, nor does it INVALIDATE measurements. Measurements illuminate the known knowns, don't account for the known unknowns. The difference is we hear the known unknowns, they either don't or won't admit to it.

And I do get lordmelton's reiteration of necessity of burn in with 005. Yes, it's sound quality changes over burn in, extremely likely measurements won't change but sound quality does. Measurement cohort can't admit to burn in changing sound since it challenges entire measurement argument. Seems to me measurement cohort has themselves in small little box, everything has to conform to this tiny little box, can't allow or explain outliers or unexplained phenomenon.

@teo_audio Well said, I too am trying to get past arguing on certain threads here. If the work futility comes to mind, I need to stay away. If one knows changing minds isn't possible what's the point. While its nice to hear from others with similar open mindedness and curiosity, we already know where most stand here.

Also, imagination is a wonderful thing, demeaning it not only shame for the arts, but also science. I attended school of Literature, Science and the Arts, imagination integral to all, curiosity and imagination form the genesis of knowledge and progress.

@dbb I don't think its that the wrong things being measured, rather they don't have the tools and/or measuring protocol to replicate the complexity of human hearing and individual perceptions of what we hear. In regard to 005, I still question whether 005 would sound better with lower jitter and better SINAD? Jitter was major issue with early digital, people weren't aware of this until they learned to measure and apply fixes, lowering jitter was important for improving digital sound quality. Perhaps 005 would be even more relaxed analog like with lowered jitter. If sound quality not improved, does that mean there is some threshold of jitter beyond which it doesn't matter for perceived sound quality?

Its kind of like my experience when I added audiophile switch, adding clock and galvanic isolation from my router should have resulted in lowered noise/better sound, not the case.  There is now new thread up in regard to poster getting similar poorer quality sound with newly added Phoenix USB, same issue I had? Is this mismatched clocks or a result of excessive clocking within streaming chain? Perhaps better measurements may in fact lead to poorer sound quality. Or is adding the device resulting in better measurements only exposing defect in other part of system? So much still to be discovered.

@americanspirit Melm condensed issue of general service computer in streaming setup very well. In regard to Nucleus, pretty nice for Roon, only issue with those is you'll need usb decrapifier/streamer/Roon endpoint for absolute best usb connection to 005. To get beyond need for the decrapifier/streamer/endpoint would require much greater expenditure to top line servers with built in optimized usb. In the end, Nucleus with quality linear power supply is about as good as it gets below $10k. The Nucleus alone will be nice upgrade over your present server, you can always get the add ons later.

For generic FMC optimization need lps on both, along with nice power cords on each lps, and going through nice power conditioner. I've tried generics with stock switching power supplies on one or both FMC, cheaper power cords into lps, no power conditioner, all don't reach full potential of FMC. And even with FMC, ethernet cables retain critical importance, anything less than Audioquest Vodka has resulted in diminished sound quality

005 potential such that every single weak link in network will be exposed. Continuing improvements to network have paid off handsomely for me. Most recent network upgrade was two more generic FMC, both with lps, VH Audio Airsine power cords on both, both going to BPT 3.5 Sig (modified) power conditioner, still retain all AQ Vodka ethernet cables. This addition goes between my modded router and modded server (already had FMC post server). Further lowering of noise floor, 005 simply sublime!  Previously, through many changes over two years of ownership, always perceived 005 as neutral to slightly analytical. With the lowered noise floor, refinement of 005 has gone up a notch, greater harmonic development.

I continue to be amazed by 005, never lets me down, continuing to explore it's full potential.

I leave 005 in standby when not in use. I have tube pre and amps so system turned off when not in use, tube warm up masks any possible 005 warm up time.

@boxer12 I've used Teradak 5V and 9v, Uptone JS-2. Presently using all Teradak (2 are 9v, 1 is 5v) with the three generic FMC in system, JS-2 presently powering server and OpticalRendu so no longer using second rail for one of the FMC. Can't directly compare Uptone to Teradak as too many changes since running one FMC off Uptone.

@americanspirit Very nice! You're hearing exactly what we hear, 005 has ability to present music and/or live performers in room without artifice.

You're assumption it may compete with dacs ten times its price may be correct. Since adding the FMC prior to server I've reconsidered my priorities as to next possible upgrade, top tier server, a la $10k and above now rises above $15K+ dac. With the added refinement I'm hearing now, this dac has no discernible weakness in my setup.

I’ve heard the DAC in my system, it sounds lovely, pure as a pure thing, no hint of any distortion.

This from Rich Trussell of Network Acoustics fame, he sold his MM.

@branislav I was perhaps the first or one of the first people in North America to purchase 005 two and a half  years ago, purchased totally blind without a single review I was aware of. I had previously purchased LKS004 with intention to fully modify based on headfi 004 thread. Shortly after 004 purchase I discovered 005 which appeared to have far more potential than any modded  004 could possibly attain. At this point I purchased 005 and posted my impressions on headfi. Both Melm and Dbb  purchased 005 shortly thereafter, both posted positive impressions as well. At some point I mentioned posting reviews over here, the rest is history.

When first purchasing 005 blindly, never expected much more than upgraded 004, something I could live with for a couple years at best. Virtually instantaneously I could hear 005 would be far more than intermediate step to something better. When I posted my initial impressions on headfi I had no idea others would trust my impressions, this being Chinese dac, relatively inexpensive relative to my over the top impressions, and being new poster at headfi. Obviously, some made their own calculations, purchased 005 and heard the same overachieving sound qualities. The rest is history.

I wonder how long this thread can go on?  Between new owners posting positive impressions and longer term owners making systematic upgrades it seems to live on. If I could think of one thing that keeps it going for longer term owners its the extreme resolution of the dac. We upgrade our systems, new information uncovered, always seeking to uncover more of it's potential. That it does it with soul is really the more amazing thing, high resolving powers without soul gets old pretty fast.

Still waiting to hear this dac comparatively reviewed against the upper tier, thus far its held its own against dacs up to $10k. Specifically, I've seen short term comparisons to Mola Mola and Holo May..

Yes, the one thing lacking in this thread is where 005 lies in context to other top tier dacs. At this point, only Holo May Kitsune Edition would be option under $10k for me, this based on comparison reviews up to this point.

My perception of dacs jjss49 listed is, Chord Dave on it's own analytical, only top tier if tied to Mscaler, Weiss uses same chip family at much higher price, on paper doesn't entice me, AudioGD, interesting, lots of conflicting reviews, msb, I'd choose Playback Designs DP8 or 5, EMM Labs DA2V2, Aires Cerat Helena or Kassandra over the msb.

@jjss49 Your input should be valuable. I'd actually like to have every dac I listed above to compare in my system. I'd like to know what 005 doesn't do because I hear no sins of commission. I have heard the Holo May has better sound staging. I can only presume this dac may commit sins of omission compared to best?

Making generalizations about usb cables, as you mentioned is system specific. I experimented with usb cables prior to 005, the one generalization I could make is, the more silver content the better for me. All my ethernet cables silver clad copper, AQ Diamond usb,pure silver wire. I find silver content in  streaming system cables superior to pure copper, with many of the sound properties you speak of. Pure copper always dull and less involving in my streaming setups.

I do think the usb rendering device is far more important than the usb cable, and imparts far more of it's signature than the cable. So, for me, key is get best usb rendering device one can afford, I'll reiterate for the umpteenth time, forget about usb direct out of vast majority of music servers, dedicated or general service computers. If usb is not optimized within server, must get nice streamer/usb renderer, various usb cleaners alone won't result in optimized usb. Once you get usb feed in order, which usb cable to purchase becomes most salient.

I presume non-optimized usb solutions would sound best with pure copper or mostly copper usb wire, silver or silver clad copper far better chance with optimized usb. Silver in cables, in general,  will expose every single mid high to high freq. anomaly in one's system, bass can also be somewhat thin compared to copper. Get your system right and the mid highs to highs will sparkle in a most natural non fatiguing manner. Point is, get the noise out streaming chain, silver is wonderful, noise is silver's worst friend. 

@melm ,Yep, the 005 will expose virtually all changes. Try some quality ethernet cables, easily heard improvement over many generic iterations in streaming setup from many years ago, meaning I heard this in much lower resolution setup.

Update on 005 in my system, it only gets better with continuing burn in of various parts and components, now within 20-25 hours of what I'd consider full burn in. Re-dressed  all cabling in system, paying extreme attention to separation and best routing, Reset of all streaming components with better isolation, footers and shelf, DIY Helix Image power cable to 005 changed to balanced configuration via VH Audio Airlock on both hot and neutral vs. only hot prior. Result is even more analog like sound, timbre a bit more natural, this is where the harmonic development kicks in, something I thought a bit lacking in 005. Seems I under rated 005 in this regard, expecting this only from much more expensive dacs. Greater soundstage depth another byproduct of these changes.

Continue to plumb full potential of this dac. Next up are Sonore OpticalRendu to replace generic FMC and Network Acoustic Muon ethernet filter.

Just noticed I misspoke in last post, meant to say OpticalModule to match my OpticalRendu. OpticalModule replaces generic FMC, less self generated noise and much better clocking with module vs generic. The Muon will replace two generic FMC PRIOR to server, comparing optimized ethernet vs optical.

As for DDC, I saw a Denafrips for sale at another website, looks to be a most impressive piece, even more than my now sold Singxer SU6.

@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.

@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.