Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC

Black Friday price of $2,804.15 at Shenzhen Audio.  This price is good for four days. 

@westborn 
Congratulations on your purchase.  Please share your impressions of the DAC after a few days of listening.  Be prepared though for the DAC to improve over the next few weeks as it breaks in fully.

@americanspirit 
I agree with you that the USB to I2S conversion is best made within the Musetec DAC.  There it will find SOTA conversion and about as good a power supply as can be (and unique to this DAC), using a bank of super capacitors for the digital side.  Logic should point in that direction and I have written so here.  However, at least one contributor to this thread wrote of his satisfaction using the separate, and quite old, LKS DDC.  Audio sometimes gives strange results and that is where we are.

You also write of removing the +5V pin (pin 1)  from the USB cable.  Did you remove it from the Type A connector or the Type B connector or from both?  In the past I have blocked pin 1 of the A connector without discernible results.  But my system has improved since and I will try again.

@kishan 

Contact the company if you wish, but you may find that the designer/manufacturer runs a very small operation and marketing is not its strength. 

I suggest that here on this thread there are many users, some with considerable technical expertise, who would be happy to discuss and/or explain about the DAC.  Members here have all sorts of set-ups and seem to cover almost any possible use of the DAC.

Another possibility might be speaking with the US distributer, Midwest Audio at 574-329-1850.

@kishan 

It's been argued here, and elsewhere, that the Musetec can complement any home system.  If you go in that directiion please give us your impressions.

@kishan 
What you write makes us all the more interested in hearing your impressions of this DAC.  Just give it a reasonable break-in time.

Earlier in this DAC's career the orders were probably flowing in more regularly and they usually had some complete ones in stock.  When I contacted the factory for my own, it went out the same day.  It's a modular assembly and if the circuit boards are available it can be assembled and tested easily.  This clear modular assembly seems to be the practice with many quality Chinese DACS.  It results in, perhaps, a very slightly larger case, but would have benefits if something went wrong; you just send in or replace a board.  Happy to report though, that no one has yet written of the need for any repair of the Musetec.

Hi @kishan    Thanks for letting us know of your success with the Musetec.  Break-in will make it even better.  

I'm glad you found this thread useful.  One of the principal reasons for starting it was my own experience when researching audio components.  For me the most reliable guidance on the internet were the forums where actual purchasers and users of components coalesced with some agreement about a component's quality in a number of different systems.  One could evaluate  the writers and the systems used and engage in conversations.  This has had more credibility for me than any review in print on paper or internet, or any video review.  For ALL of those reviewers IMO have motives at odds with credibility.

As for the Musitec, some of us early users came across this DAC almost by accident.  A number of us were introduced to this maker/designer through his earlier LKS 004.  Its open architecture, spacious cabinet and quality parts made it and its earlier editions modification targets.  Modifiers do a lot of writing, sharing success and searching for additional solutions, so the LKS was not hard to find.  The Musetec 005, though, has not been modified to any important degree AFAIK.  So a couple of us thought it a good idea to give it some exposure here.  The skeptics were all over us at first not believing that a DAC of this quality could come at this price.

I think you'll be getting further suggestions about improved streaming.  It was the logical next step for us all.

You attribute the terrific sound quality to "newer technology within Musetec."  As compared to your Bryston, the only newer technology is likely the later DAC chip version.  Most of us think that matters a lot less than the care with which the power supplies and analog stage were designed, along with the selection of high quality parts in every section.  The designer is a true audiophile who did a lot of listening at every stage of development before committing to some very expensive parts inside the case.  The usual Euro-American mark-ups would have made this a much more expensive DAC.

Following up on the last post, I'd like to ask if anyone is using either of the two Musetec I2S inputs with any device at all in preference to the spdif or USB inputs.  If so, are you using the RJ45 input or the HDMI input?  If you're using the HDMI input does your device have switching to match output to input, or do you have a special cable to do the matching?  Thanks for the info.

@westborn 

I've been traveling and away from audio for a while and saw your post.  Glad you find the Musetec as enjoyable as you do.  Since most of us are using USB as the digital connection and you are using spdif, I'd like to ask what your digital set-up is.  Are you connected to a DAC, transport or some other digital converter?

@westborn 

You can see by the systems of others on this thread that the Musetec can play well with a variety of streamers and other components ahead of it on the digital chain.  It will surely keep up; it will be revealing of the differences  The hard part, as usual, is getting the best value and knowing where to stop spending.  Good luck on your quest.

@mboldda1 

These two DACs are probably very good, each in its own right.  But they are very different, and really not comparable.  The Border Patrol is an R2R DAC using a NOS Phillips chip.  Its tube is a rectifier, not a signal tube.  It is much less expensive than the Musetec and its interior looks like the very small scale hand-built unit that it is.  It lacks the massive power supply and the discrete balanced analog section provided in DACs like the Musetec.  It provides what is considered to be an old fashoned sound with only modest detail, transparency and texture.  Some call this sort of performance "musical" though I do not.  The Musetec is an up to date DAC with SOTA or near-SOTA detail, transparency and texture.  It was compared here to a very well known up to date R2R (discrete, not chip) DAC.  These two are quite similar, with differences noted.

But the Musetec and Border Patrol have such different design intentions that a buyer would not typically narrow his choice down to these two.

@midwesternaudio

It is unfortunate that Audiogon does not provide a search-within-thead function. For an extended thread like this one it would be invaluable. It turns out that much of what you have written has already been the subject of much discussion. It’s good though to be reminded of these important considerations.

As for the discussion in this thread and the designer’s initial response you may wish to look here and in the surrounding posts.

There has been much discussion about using the 10 year old LKS 100 USB converter, with mixed experiences. My own view is that the USB to I2S conversion is better done within the Musetec as it has more sophistication in its power supply and in its crystal clocks than does the old LKS DDC and involves one less cable. I think the unique approach to USB to I2S conversion in the Musetec is one of its great advances and contributes to its performance. On the other hand, we may agree that one can achieve theoretically better SQ using the Musetec I2S input if the USB function can be avoided as with the Jay’s Audio unit. Look here, here and here and in the discussions nearby.

@earthbound
If you’re satisfied with the Lumin u2 mini I would not worry about not using the I2S input of the Musetec. The DAC has exceptional USB to I2S conversion within it with a very special power supply and specially fine tuned crystal clocks. If you have the patience to read this long thread and see what streamers are being used with the Musetec you will see those that output USB in some very sophisticated systems. The market for streamers with I2S output is pretty limited and so some of the very best do not have that. Outputting I2S may not be all that it’s cracked up to be. Hans Beekhuyzen reviewed a streamer with I2S output a while back that did not outperform an entry level SOtM streamer with USB output.

@mboldda1
Take what I say with a grain of salt as I have lived with the Musetec and am no doubt biased towards it. First, the Musetec 005 sounds nothing like the LKS 004 which I have also lived with. They do share similar architectures in their analog output stages, but the analog parts in the Musetec have been upgraded substantially in quality (and in price). They also share robust power supplies, but on the analog side they have again been upgraded substantially in parts for the Musetec and on the digital side the power supply has been totally redesigned using battery-like super capacitors and the USB to I2S conversion uses proprietary clocks.

jjss49 has probably given a pretty good comparison of the Sonnet Morpheus and the Musetec. It comports somewhat with how Stereophile described the Morpheus saying it had limited dynamics and bass and attributed that to limitations of its power supply. I go to classical concerts a good deal and so my standard is fidelity to real instruments. Like jjss49 I am sensitive to excess treble (which IMO pervades digital components), though it can sometimes provide pleasant hi fi spatial effects. Made in Holland and offered at about the same price as the Musetec, the Morpheus it is very different inside. It is a discrete R2R DAC that is expensive to manufacture. It compensates, it would seem, in its power supply and in the use of chip op amps for its analog output stages. There are those who think that the D to A conversion is paramount. Others, me included, think it is secondary to things like power supply and analog sections. jjss49, by the way, has gone on to the $10,000 Weiss that uses the same D to A chip as the Musetec..

It never shocks, surprises, or disturbs me when someone, or some group, finds a less expensive DAC to sound better to them than a more expensive one.  Indeed, within this long thread there have been many testimonies of the Musetec bringing greater pleasure than more expensive competitors.  Personal taste, set-up, selection of tracks, kind of music, short-term vs. long term listening, comparisons to components rather than to live music, etc., may all contribute to a result that may vary from our own.  I wrote about this before, about a year ago, "No one here has ever said that the Musetec is the best of all DACs.  Like any DAC it may not be for everyone. . . . . If someone says he likes another, perhaps even less expensive, DAC better than the Musetec let's just accept that and move on."

Nonetheless, what was written here has a very unsavory ring to it.  The writing, and particularly its placement, virtually self-denies it the credibility the poster was looking for.  I say that for two reasons.  First, I find it absolutely suspicious that the post was made to this thread.  A more reasonable thing to do, I would think, would have been to start a new thread with a comparison of four well though of DACs rather than aim it at a thread dealing with one of the so-called losers.  Others on Audiogon have done similar things.  A second more reasonable place for it might be the existing Giscard r26 DAC thread here.    Seems to me if I had a comparison to share and the Musetec came out on top, I would post it here rather than to the discussion of the DAC that came in second place.  That is, unless I had a malicious motive.

The second reason I think the post to this thread is unsavory is that the poster took great pains to single out the Musetec for gratuitous extraneous criticisms.  He did not criticize any of the other DACs in a similar way.  What he wrote was (1) "Seems like a dated design," (2) a throwback design in not just aesthetics but also sonics" and (3) "the least aesthetically appealing of all 4 DACs."

About the Musetc being a dated design.  The poster obviously doesn't know that R2R (used in the Giscard) is the oldest of the digital to analog technologies.  it was used in Philips CD players more than 40 years ago at the outset of the digital age.  So talk of a dated design is just kind of ignorant.  And obviously there is nothing wrong with a "dated" design if it offers high sound quality.  The Musetec used the newest sigma-delta chip available at its birth, a fine analog section (that doesn't date at all), and a newly developed super-capacitor power supply for its digital section.  It also uses a relatively newly developed O-Ring silver plated transformer as well as newly refined clock-crystals.  Much of its architecture is fairly standard and used in some of the finest DACs of the day.

Because he has obviously has a limited understanding of what goes on inside a DAC, the poster next chooses to demean the Musetec's aesthetics.  The fellow simply doesn't like how the Musetec looks.  Well, I think it looks fine.  Being a design meant for relatively limited distribution it is a simple, even elegant, design compared to some mass produced components.  It has functional buttons and a window giving all the information needed and it comes with a full-functioned remote.  It's entirely of extruded aluminum with no sheet metal at all.  It's as solid as a brick.  

So he came HERE specifically to trash the Musetec.  I do not know why.  But no one controls these threads and he may do on Audiogon as he pleases.  However for the reasons given here, the post in question should be accorded a very low credibility rating.

@lordmelton 

Thanks, but your original post was a better expression of my own view.

@americanspirit 

Singxer is a Chinese company with a sterling reputation.  Their most popular product over the years has been a USB to I2S converter that is competitive with a similar one from LKS.  

The Singxer UIP-1 PRO ($280) and also the Innuos Phoenix ($3750) are USB in and USB out reclocker devices that we used to call decrapifiers or USB pipe cleaners.  Long ago I used such a device made by Intona and there are many makers of these at present.  The two mentioned here seem far more sophisticated as each has a 24MHz OCXO for a reclock of the USB data lines.  Each, no doubt, also regulates the 5V line, though that has no impact on the Musetec as it generates its own 5V and doesn't use USB line 1.  The Innuos is made in Europe and is in a large case that is filled mostly with an LPS.  There is a small circuit board, similar in size to the circuit board in the Singxer, that does the actual USB cleaning.  The board in the much smaller Singxer seems to have the advantage of galvanic isolation as there are definitely two distinct parts to the circuit board separating the USB in and out.  To make these devices comparable one would have to substitute a good 7.5 V LPS for the Singxer's wall wart at an additional cost..  

As many have written here, the Musetec seems to be optimized for USB with custom clocks in the USB input circuit as well as at the D to A stage.  Also, many of us use streamers that include reclocking.  Whether stand-alone reclockers like these can make a meaningful difference in your system can only be known with a trial.  Given the pricing, the reputation of Singxer and the descriptions of both, the Singxer looks like the better option of the two, by far.  If you try one, please pass along your impressions.

@americanspirit 

It looks like 6V is being recommended for an LPS for use with the Singxer UIP-1 PRO.  Saw this at Kitsune.

@americanspirit 

Congratulations on your purchase and thanks for your post.  Whether the $280 Singxer or the $3500 Innuos USB reclocker, each has at its core a 24.000Mhz OCXO that is placed near its USB converter circuit.  The Singxer also provides galvanic isolation just before the DAC.  Potential buyers of the Singxer, by the way, should be careful to specify the "PRO" version.  No "PRO," no OCXO.

As this reclocker worked so well for you some of us may want to try it.  It would be helpful if you would describe your set-up, especially what comes in front of the DAC showing where the Singxer fit in.  Could you do that please?  

Also, are you running it off the power supply it came with, or do you have an LPS for it?

Many of us might suppose that placing a reclocker after a streamer may provide only a marginal improvement.  But marginal may be very worthwhile given the quite marginal expense.  Comments anyone?

As reported by lordmelton, best price ever.  Sale at Shenzhen Audio ends tomorrow.

Slightly off topic but,

Musetec has produced a preamp: shown here

As usual, a complete technical description.

Probably best to take any further discussion over to "Amps Preamps"

@duchhart 

Happy that you are liking the Musetec.  It's always been surprisingly good out of the box, but will get better with time,

Interesting that you are getting good results with USB > LKS USB-100 > I2S > 005.  This has ben a topic of discussion before, that is whether the USB conversion to I2S is better done in the LKS USB-100 or on the Amanero board in the 005.  Logic suggests it should be better in the 005, but you can't deny your own ears and you are not the first to suggest a preference for the LKS USB-100.

It was suggested you try the USB straight into the 005 and report back your comparison.  If it remains better with the LKS USB-100 I might inquire with the factory why that might be so.

Also, theoretically and logically, to use the I2S input, it might be best to avoid the USB entirely with a streamer going directly from ethernet to I2S.  I have been changing my system a lot lately and also experimenting with Iancanada circuits and will soon add an I2S output to see what that yields.

Besides great music, it is a great hobby.