Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1nj9fqNWfc

I think it just comes down to preference instead of what is "better". At this stage in the game for me, I value smoothness/ listenability and staging. I listen to a lot of post punk, classic rock, shoe gaze, and dream pop, which we know is not all great recordings. I would probably prefer the May with those genres, but I didn’t want to spend that kind of money and got what I felt was the best DAC from there (005) and have tweaked the rest of my system to make my music sound good to me. You guys are so right about the break in period, it truly is a roller coaster. I played some Til Tuesday yesterday never heard them sound like they did, the extension, the spaciousness in the recording. The songs just made more sense on why and how they played it. This morning it sounded different, not as good.

@ja_kub_sz
In this crazy world of audio, preferences might very well not be transitive. So it is possible that a person might prefer the May over the Musetec, and the Tambaqui over the May, but yet the Musetec over the Tambaqui. The rules of logic just may not apply here and just have to be set aside.

I personally have long ago given up trying to optimize my system absolutely by buying and trading constantly. It is a process, I think, that costs too much in money and anxiety for a simple audiophile. Just content with very, very good and working around the edges to make it sound better. I love to experiment with cheap wires, for ex.

@kclone ​​@teknorob23
Preferences in DACs, or other audio components for that matter, can IMO be broken down into two categories, what I call the traditional preference vs. the modern preference. These are also reflected in tha manner that professional reviews used to read, and read today. The traditional preference is for accuracy to unamplified musical instruments. This is the "old" Absolute Sound (TAS) standard and can only be done referencing classical music as the standard as @dbb has done here and in his outstanding comparative review here.

In the "old" days reviewers were required to be regular concert goers. Generally, classical music is the only music regularly heard without the intersession of electronics and loudspeakers. As TAS’s editor HP wrote, if it is right for classical music, it will be right for all other music as well. That’s a view I adhere to.

The modern preference is simple. A component is preferred if it sounds good to the listener or reviewer. "Good" is absolutely subjective. So we have threads here that seek advice on obtaining a "warm" or "analog sounding" sounding DAC, for example. The traditional view is that "warm" (they called it yin) is a euphonic coloration to be avoided. As for me, I don’t want a DAC to sound warm. I want a piano to sound warm. I want a cello to sound warm. But I want my DAC to make a cello sound like a cello. Similarly for "analog sounding." That has come to mean, I think, a certain comfort sound, also a euphonic coloration. My reading here suggests it’s being asked for even by those unfamiliar with excellent analog systems. For I don’t even want my analog system to sound like what is here described as "analog" sound. In a thread about a DAC said to be analog sounding, there were expressions like "a relaxed presentation," "allows body relaxation," the sound was "further back in the hall," it "allows my body to relax" and even that it gives "the ability to go into a kind of meditative state." My own preference is very different. For me listening to audio is a substitute for going to a concert. When I do that, I expect my pulse to be greater at the end than when I walked in. Otherwise, what’s the point?

In any event, it’s the buyer’s money and their choices. Components will be made to fit every kind of preference, and that’s fine. But I hope this goes at least part of the way to explain differing preferences in DACs.

@melm  You stated differences in perspective perfectly.  Hearing live unamplified music these days is very infrequent for most. We are on the same page 100% in our sound preferences. I respect the idea that enjoying music has no single best method and is purely a matter of subjective preference. But, like you, I would never buy a ticket to hear the world's best record player if I could use the same money to attended a live concert. 

Well put @melm 

I'm still on the fence, but after this week should have a better idea of what I'm gonna do.

I really am enjoying my system and this is more an exercise of completing a second system for my office and another for my main entertainment space.

But I'll be honest I'm more interested in FPGA based DAC's then R2R DAC's. It's just my own personal interest. I just need to think less and listen more 😉

The language of audiophiles and/or terms and words we use to describe sound is an attempt to objectify an inherently subjective experience. Melm's one example of descriptions of 'analog like'  goes to show how it can have different meanings to different people. I presume most audiophiles know what intent of that descriptor means, yet it may not be entirely accurate in an objective sense. We can't know for a fact the person claiming to hear this characteristic in their system really knows what analog sounds like, or conforms to our definition or understanding of same.

I suppose I was lucky in a way in that my beginnings in audio were prior to information technology explosion. I had virtually no communication or access to information in regard to the sound of audio equipment. I only had my own experience listening to various sound reproducing systems to guide my own path into creating my own systems. I had very few preconceptions or biases, I didn't yet have the need to be cynical or judgemental, therefore, I was like an open book, I could easily trust my own ears/mind to judge the qualities of sound that appealed to me. And so this was my method for building my first system, and remained the method for subsequent system building.

I'm not sure I'd like to be novice audiophile today, I'd have a terrible time making decisions on which direction to pursue in everything audiophile. Who can you trust? Here we are extolling the virtues of this virtually unknown dac, I understand the cynicism of outside voices, why should any of us be trusted, what are our credentials?

And so audiophile's attempts to objectify audio language and certify themselves as experts to be trusted is highly questionable. Obviously, at some point individuals make choices as to audio equipment purchases. Based on the many requests for guidance on this forum and many others, any number of individuals are letting others guide their purchases, they are placing their trust in certain others. I further presume the more experienced of us are at least somewhat influenced by other audiophiles, even if we are consciously oblivious to that influence.

And so the point is, its very likely virtually every single audiophile makes valiant attempts to objectify an inherently subjective experience. I can't live in your shoes, and I don't have your assemblage of equipment in your room, I know virtually nothing about your audio system listening experience! And here I am extolling virtues of a dac with my unique audio language, audio system, room and ear/brain listening complex. Seems quite useless!

Which brings me back to this overly long winded spiel. I purchased 005 virtually blind, not a single review, absolutely no guidance other than internal pictures and description of parts used. My only guide in this purchase was my knowledge of audio parts gained through many years of modding various audio components. And that was hard gained knowledge, I destroyed a couple diy projects in the early days. How any of this makes me qualified to be a guide as to any dac purchase is beyond me.

Melm's honest appraisal on the subjectivity of audiophile language was food for thought here. This recent article by Roger Skoff also great stimulus, https://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/viewpoint/0322/Disagree_About_Audio.htm

@sns Great post!  And I can't agree more with the link. 

The author of the Enjoy the Music article states in conclusion: “When it's your money buying something for your system, to be used in your listening room, for your enjoyment, no opinion matters but your own.”

This is a pure subjectivist view. It is a also a truism. Of course, why would you buy something you don’t enjoy but some stranger does?

But audiophiles will never adhere to this rule because they love to talk and debate about what is best, or the king, or a giant killer, or state of the art, or superior. So objectivism creeps in after all. This is true on all maters of value judgements in aesthetics and probably ethics. Are values objective facts or whatever floats your boat or a non-rational combination? For further reading see Plato and Jeremy Bentham. I, for one, think there is an inexact baseline based on the reality of real instruments and voices. It is my preference but it doesn’t have to be yours. But if you are in the pure no reality school, don’t crow about what is best only what you personally like.

I also have my grave doubs about the value of the "Enjoy the Music" article referred to.  He takes better than 2000 words to say: Buy what sounds good to you.   Very low idea to word ratio IMO.  Some people get paid, and probably not very much, just to fill up the spaces between ads.

@ja_kub_sz 
FWIW I gave my personal view of FPGAs on the "AKM makes the best DACs" thread.

@melm  made the jump and ordered the Mola Mola Tambaqui and I'll be doing hopefully soon, A/B testing next month with it when it arrives the first week of April.

Curious to see how it all plays out.

Till then ✌

@ja_kub_sz I really don't know why you're going down this road, the UK dealer for Tambaqui changed to Musetec and you just read @teknorob23 comparison of the Tambaqui and the 005.

I've personally compared the 005 against a $40,000 DAC and there was a huge difference in the width and depth of soundstaging and nothing lacking in any other areas.

If you're not getting a good sound look elsewhere in your system. I'm a strong believer in source comes first, not DAC.

I listen almost exclusively to '60s,'70s recordings which I know by heart, so I know exactly what they sound like.

Listening to them in DSD is an absolute pleasure with the 005 but PCM is not far behind.

Just pinch yourself and believe you've got the best deal already.

@lordmelton I needed (relatively speaking) a second DAC to finish off my second systems and came into a little bit of money with the used car-armageddon we’re living in.

Crazy times when you can sell a car for 18k more then what you owe, and by the car new for what you bought the old one for 3 years ago.

Seems insane, but I guess that worked out for me and this is a hat tip to myself for actually going through with it.

Sadly it proves that covid really screwed up a lot more then we'll ever know.

Yup sold a 1.5yo car with 15k miles for $29500 and had originally pd 24.5k. Crazy times indeed

I've contemplated selling two of my leisure only cars in this market and use the funds for audio upgrades. Originally the plan was to purchase dac in price range of $10-20K, no longer interested in using those funds on digital side of system, 005 goodness eliminates need or desire for that. Analog side needs expenditure in that range to catch up to digital. Modwright PH150 and $5k+ cartridge is what I'll need to compete.

@rsf507 and @sns 2019 Range Rover Velar with 32k miles sold for 52k and bought it 3 years ago for 70k, owed 30k on it. Got the same 2022 model for $2,500 mark up, but still walked away with money in my pocket, and a lower monthly payment after DP. Wanted my wife to buy a bigger car since we’re having our first kid (any day now). She refused and said she loved her car. Good thing we didn’t because I wouldn’t have been able to capitalize on the swap. I only really started looking  into it when the dealer was unrelentingly calling me to almost daily to "get me into a new model" and wanted to "give me tope dollar for my trade". I looked online and my jaw dropped. One week after listing it, it was gone.

Just a joke if you ask me, insane.

My Ortofon Cadenza Blue MC and SU-R1000 DSP sounded better then my 005, just nuts. I love the cartridge calibration with the Technics MC XLR phono stage, one of the big reasons I got it.

Even my vinyl is digital (some may not approve). I love it.

@ja_kub_sz 
Your DAC adventure continues and we will all be grateful for the information and comparison you will give us.  Don't hesitate to tell us that you like the Tambaqui better, if you do.  No one ever said that the Musetec is the best of all DACs.  I just wonder, though, how you came to choose  the Tambaqui from all the FPGA DACs out there.

@lordmelton 
It sounds like you're really happy with the Musetec.  It's very reassuring to those few of us who discovered this DAC early and were eager to spread the good word.  There's always the chance that other people will spend the, not insignificant, money and be disappointed.  We are just audiophiles like yourself.  So far it seems to have worked out OK.

I am taking my Musetc 005 DAC this morning to a hardware vender/musician to listen to the 005 via my RAAL SR1a headphones. He is doing some repairs on a cable I own I want him to hear the 005 because he has a great ear and tends to know the musicians in the recordings we use to demo.

For example, he has a buddy that has a deep baritone voice and when we listened to him on my old gear, he said that it did not accurately portray his voice. Changing to other gear showed me what he meant.

If he does not like the sound, he tells me. Which was great for me in the past to get rid of some gear and make changes. The 005 was the end result of some of those early listening sessions with my older gear.

I’d like to thank you all for bringing this DAC to my (everyone’s) attention. I’ve read all the posts over the past couple weeks <and have quite likely forgotten a lot of details 🙄>. I’ve got a couple questions if you don’t mind.

Is output to one pair of connections at a time, or is it capable of feeding both XLR and RCA out simultaneously?

Have any of you heard the Nuprime Evolution DAC in the same system as the Musetec? [They both use the same DAC chip.] If so, what were your conclusions? If not in the same system, but you have heard both DACs, how did they compare?

Have any of you heard a SW1X DAC III NOS tube DAC? Are you able to tell me how its sound is different from the Musetec?

For reference, I listen almost exclusively to Redbook CD quality music though I also listen to some hires music. I do not listen to DSD.

I appreciate any help you can offer.

Regards,

Michael

L.K.S. or Musetec was a lottery ticket a few years ago. The L.K.S. 004 already had an unheard of price/quality level. The successor Musetec 005 goes well beyond in terms of refinement. Just like the 004, you have to set the bandwidth (DPLL) and filter settings for best results. Because I use a separate high-end preamp the volume control is set to bypass. That gives the best results. The settings DPLL 'BW-07' and filter on 'Slow -L' can be glued as far as I'm concerned. Use the I2S input in combination with a Pink Faun streamer equipped with an I2S Audio Bridge. The only tweak was replacing the fuse with a superb ACME SB fuse with CFC.

What is the logic behind the DLL settings? Are people setting it by listening or is there some guidance provided. I have been using the 01 setting with USB, but I just tried the 07 setting and the sound maybe a bit livelier. I need to do some more comparisons tomorrow.

*************

I met up with my musician and hardware vender friend today at his shop. We connected my Musetec 005 to his CD player via COAX and then listened on his monitor speakers.

He pointed out an issue he had at around 375 Hz where he said the sound is scooped. That is a slight dip in the frequency response. He had a Benchmark DAC3L in the shop and we compared that frequency range between the 2 DACs and the DAC3L sounded a bit better there. However, overall, the DAC3L could not go toe-to-toe with the 005. I also have the DAC3B at home and the comparisons we did today, made me want to get a second 005 to replace the DAC3B

Overall, the consensus was that the 005 was so smooth and a great DAC. He wanted me to keep the 005 in the shop for a while. I said NO.

I also listened to a new headphone amp he was bringing to market. The 005 was stunning with this amp. 

Is output to one pair of connections at a time, or is it capable of feeding both XLR and RCA out simultaneously?

I can report that it does work with both outputs connected at the same time to 2 preamps, which are connected to 2 amps.

@melm Yes thank you, I have enjoyed this DAC better than any other piece of equipment since I bought my Naim Nait 2 back in the ’80s. I remember back then that no HIFI magazines (no internet then..lol) would review Naim because they wouldn’t pay or bribe their way to good reviews, but as you know the rest is history.

I wouldn’t call the 005 a giant killer or anything else like that, what I would call it is a carefully designed, crafted and sourced DAC. I haven’t opened my 005 but just by looking at pics online you can see the build quality of the PCB. It’s on par with any of the traditional high end manufacturers. They not only built or highly modified their own Amanero board they also put an extra oscillator on it and additionally modified those oscillators to Musetec spec.

This sort of detail is completely unheard of.

Companies like DCS (which I’ve followed since Elgar), Weiss and others have had it far too easy for far too long.

As I’ve said here many times you can buy a 005 and a top flight streamer for the price of one of those over priced DACs.

The sad part about it is too many people just trust the price and not their ears. I’m not going to insult any particular users but there are many out there that just buy products for the name. They don’t want to hear the sound just look at the name.

When I listen to the 005 I hear nothing lacking or I wish was different, just wonderful sound and this is coming from someone who grew up with vinyl and knows all about analogue.

I’m getting the best sound ever now.

@mresseguie
As you know there are not all that many Musetecs out there, so the probability of comparisons especially to other DACs that also are not in very wide use is pretty remote. A review of this thread, @dbb’s comparison thread, and the Musetec thread on head-fi will probably produce all the comparisons there are in the English speaking world.

A quick look shows the Nuprime Evolution DAC looking like a nice DAC at about the same price as the Musetec. It uses one ES9038PRO DAC chip, compared to the Musetec’s two. It also seems to have rollable op amps in its analog circuit. The Musetec doesn’t.

The SW1X is far more expensive, uses tubes and an older Philips DAC chip so is in a whole different world.

It looks like any one of these might provide you with fine audio.

It is not easy to order a multi kilobuck DAC that’s not well known. Here, we’ve all been through that. But there has yet to be a report of disappointment--or a return where permitted.

Since someone on a prior post said that the setting they used was SLOW-L and DPLL BW07 I used that today on my speakers, though I did not notice much but I was not paying too much attention. However, tonight I decided to test with the SRa and with this setup there is one difference I noticed.

I am using my RAAL SR1a headphone | CODA 07x preamp | NAD M22 V2 amp | Musetec 005. The SR1a can sound bright with the wrong setup and when i was using BW07 I was feeling a little fatigue on treble intensive musical passages. I replayed those passages with the setting changed to BW01 and the fatigue I had before did not reappear.

I will be using the BW01 setting on headphones and BW07 (and test others) with my speakers.

I realize that, though I’m the OP here, apart from descriptions of its insides and very few well chosen words in the initial post, I haven’t offered a review of the Musetec DAC. I guess I should, but as so much has already been written about the Musetec here and here I’ll do it in a slightly different way:

Musical DAC vs. Detailed DAC - A Distinction Without Merit

We all know when a new DAC provides good detail. We say we hear things in familiar tracks that we didn’t hear before. Actually, I don’t think that’s generally true. But, you respond, with the new DAC at one minute and 23 seconds into the track I heard a note on an oboe that I had not heard on this track I have listened to many times before. Well, I maintain that with your old DAC, had I alerted you to that note when one minute 23 seconds came around, you would then have heard the note. What actually happened with your old DAC is that you actually heard, but did not take notice of, the note. Why was that?

When I go to a live orchestral concert I often hear things in familiar music that I had not taken notice of at home listening to recordings. That is because at the concert, all of the instruments are there exposing their full beautiful envelope of overtones, the full texture of the instruments in their spaces. They glisten. That makes it impossible not to take notice of them. To me that’s the clue.

We often hear the expression that such and such a DAC is very musical, or something close to that. Usually, I take that to mean just that the listener likes the DAC. However, when I call a component musical, I mean something more specific. I mean that the component makes it sound like the musician is using an especially fine instrument, which by the way is often done for recordings, and that the musician is skilled at tone production, an attribute of a fine musician. For the audio component that means it is revealing the full envelope of the instrument’s overtones. This forces me not only to hear the instrument, but to take notice of it--it is no longer a colorless addition to the volume of the sound--it is more specifically a whole complex of beautiful sounds in its space setting it apart from the rest, that simply commands my full attention. Glistening. Closer to a live concert.

I’m not here writing of the associated noises that are part of much instrumental playing, the initial chuff of a strong bow pull on a violin or the clicking of the keys on a clarinet. You will hear that too. But it is the richness of tone that comes from a fine instrument expertly played that I’m focusing on.

So, as I see it, in order to have a musical DAC, it must be a detailed DAC. It must transmit clearly and correctly what we used to call the low level information. Here I am spotlighting the instrumental overtones, but exactly the same reasoning accounts for all the spatial clues. It’s the low level information. Just as it was/is for analog, by the way.

So the bottom line: you can probably write it for me. I think the Musetec 005 provides that. I don’t doubt that some other DACs provide it as well. There is no trade-off here. Musicality and detail. It’s not either-or; it’s both.  A distinction without merit.

@Melm  Very well said.  I agree.

@Melm, very good observations regarding low-level detail/musicality.  With skill, you largely overcame the pitfalls of using words to describe music and gear with respect to the topic of your post.

In my view, you left nothing out.  So the following comment is not a critique or indication of an omission on your part.

Can I add that the listening-room’s ambient noise-floor and acoustics, too high and unsorted—respectively, are headwinds that conceal the low-level detail one’s gear is capable of presenting.  

Ideally, the process of ensuring the links in the chain are as strong as possible is fun because it tends to be virtually without end.
:)




 

@rc22 
Thanks for the kind words.

You raise a very good point about the interaction of low level information, dynamic range, and ambient noise.  The equipment gets better and better.  The recordings get better and better.  The Dynamic Range of the Musetec is given at 136 db.  Recordings will not get near there.  In typical domestic environments, of course, they shouldn't.

My own experience with symphonic recordings, and it has been written of by others, is that dynamic ranges on some recordings already stretch the limits.  I could cite some BIS recordings, as have some critics in (internet) print.    Raise the level so you can hear the quietest passages clearly and the FFFs will blast you out of your seat.  Adjust for the loudest and the softest fade away.  As I hear it the Musetec provides the full dynamic range of the recording.  Perhaps I am affected in this particular way as I sit relatively close to the speakers.

@melm @dbb  Well it's been two months now since I received my Musetec 005 and I can confidently say it's fully burned in. No more nasty surprises and weird noises from capacitors giving up their goods, just fantastic natural, uncoloured sound.

Whatever I've thrown at this DAC it's taken in it's stride. Everytime I've changed IC's it's revealed strengths and weaknesses, the same goes with all cables, USB digital and power. It's very sensitive and revealing to any changes, which a high end component should be.

I like to listen to older recordings and find reward in revealing details that I haven't heard before. Melm, I understand what you were referring to but when you've heard a recording literally thousands and thousands of times and then you are rewarded with new insights, it's a joyful thing.

Seriously the texture of voices and instruments is the best I've heard and I've heard many more expensive DACs.

If this DAC was lacking I'd be the first to send it back and buy something else.

I've got a few hundred classical recordings, mostly chamber music but I don't really listen to them anymore. I've never liked orchestral music and a live recital or opera wouldn't interest me in the slightest.

Almost entirely I listen to 60s and 70s rock, Stones, Steely Dan, Yes, Clapton, Dylan et al.

The only thing that infuriates me is that sometimes the AES/EBU will sound better than than the USB. 90% of the time USB is best and DSD is divine. Both my digital cables are at around $1200 retail but I'd like to have a definitive input that I could go with and buy the very best cable and be done. Sadly not to be, it's going to cost double..lol.

For anyone that's interested my 005 is fed by an Aurender N20 using internal SSD ripped CD (WAV and Flac) and DSD collection.

Custom 10Mhz master clock slaving Aurender N20.

SMC Audio VRE-1 pre-amp.

Virtual Dynamics - Ultra Clear XLR ICs - OMG!

Life is good!

It is gratifying to me to hear of your enjoyment. I'm glad, along with others (especially Melm and SNS), to have helped spread the word.

I've stumbled across this thread recently and find it very interesting.  I appreciate the information,  thoughtful insight and mature decorum and behavior amongst the various posters. The Musetec 005 seems to be a very high quality good sounding DAC.  This and the Merason DAC1 (Another recent DAC discovery) are both compelling  and intriguing below the radar digital  components. My suspicion is that both sound excellent. 

@melm I  read your very recent comments and I share much with your perspective with regard to low level detail/information and what constitutes high  level "musicality ". Very well stated.

Charles 

Good dac and people, whats not to like!

In regard to low level detail and ambient noise levels. Continual improvements to my system since getting 005 about a year and half ago have resulted in ever lower noise floor and exposure of low level info. As mentioned above there should be no distinction between  low level detail and musicality, and there hasn't been with 005 in system. IME, 005 abilities or potential in both areas marches in lock step. While my ambient noise levels haven't changed, I find lower volume listening more satisfying with upgrades and resulting lower system noise floor.

With my recent insertion of Jantzen inductors in Klipschorn crossovers, all possible system upgrades I planned some years ago have come to an end, nothing more to optimize. The crazy thing is I'm sure 005, and 16/44 digital has even more to give, I feel as though I'm leaving something on the table.  No sins of commission here, only curiosity about possible sins of omission. At this point, I'd likely receive greatest benefit from lowering ambient noise floor, unfortunately, not really possible in present dedicated listening room. Getting into 20db territory really takes heroic efforts.

Is it possible to get optimal performance from this dac using rca interconnects and rca digital cable?  Thanks!

A few posts ago I was saying that the DPLL settings were sounding a little different to me, specifically 01 and 07 (a previous poster liked 07). I was getting a bit of fatigue with 07 on my headphones. However, today this is not the case. No fatigue and they seem to sound very similar. I had some sort of illness (sore throat, coughing) last week so maybe that was what made me have a different reaction to the DPLL settings.

I am now again wondering what exactly the DPLL is doing. Going back to setting 01 while I read up on DPLL.

@boukman I used the RCA and also the XLR (at the same time) when I had 2 preamps in the same system as the 005. Other than the gain I did not hear much to differentiate between the 2. I used Audience AU24SE XLR and RCA. I use XLR now since I only have 1 preamp. The interconnects used were short in length.

@yyzsantabarbara Hi, I've been through the DPLL settings and the lowest BW01 will give you the most detail and the highest, BW15 will give you a smoother more musical presentation.

The online manual recommends BW01-BW03 for PCM IIRC, and BW06 for DSD.

The settings are more pronounced when you switch from lowest to highest levels. DSD below BW06 is a little too detailed.

Anyone who is afraid that this DAC may sound too digital need not worry they can get whatever settings please them with the DPLL adjustments.

I just received my 005 from Jason at Midwest Audio.  He is a great guy, highly responsive, earnest and knowledgeable.  I highly recommend him.  He sent me a letter thanking me for my business and included a battery for the remote, which the manufacturer oddly doesn't include.

Given all the rave review by real users here and on head fi, I thought I'd give one a shot.

While I've only got a few hours on it, and haven't played much with the DPLL settings, all I can say is holy cow, this DAC is spectacular.  I concur with what everyone is saying about it.  It is extremely accurate and detailed, yet extremely natural and non-fatiguing.  I find myself being happily immersed in the music and able to shift my focus between musicians and vocalists even during complex passages.

What has stood out thus far is the presentation of details I've never heard before on familiar recordings as well as the extremely natural sounds of wood and steel strings when listening to acoustic guitar.  For example, the subtle interplay between Julian Lage and Chris Eldridge on For Critter and Cattle in the Cane (Alternative Take) from Close to Picture is evident as they play off each other and exchange lead and rhythm duties.  I've never quite heard Chris tease his strings with strokes that move slightly up and down the strings, bringing out a zingy and slightly percussive quality.  I thought to myself, I'm glad Chris is playing new strings!  That's how much information is presented.

Listening to I'm With Her play Hannah Hunt allows me to easily distinguish between the voices of Aoife, Sarah and Sara, which can be difficult to do on even a spectacular system.

In any event, I could go on.  But, if your system is resolving enough, this DAC will not disappoint.  It's early in my relationship with it but I will say I am frankly quite astonished at what it brings to my system.       

@car123 what DAC were you using before ?

Aurender A10 for streaming and a musetac bidat for redbook CDs.

@lordmelton 
Nice post.
About a month ago when some of us early users were being criticized as "salesmen" my response was that most of the favorable comments these days were coming from those who had purchased recently and were sharing.  So thanks.  For a component without advertising or commercial reviews Audiogon forum exposure has often been a means of sharing information about some terrific products.  

@charles1dad 
I appreciate your post.  I hadn't heard of the Merason DAC.  Looking at what I can find about it the DAC seems both a lot more expensive and a lot less sophisticated than the Musetec.  But you never know, and the proof will always be in the listening.

@car123 
I enjoyed reading what you wrote.  It has the elements of a terrific review, but you must write again after a full break-in.  Remember, the break-in may not be in a straight line.  I responded particularly to your comment that Chris Eldridge obviously put new strings on his guitar and that was made apparent in your listening.  Well, for a recording he most likely did, and that's exactly what you heard.  As I wrote before, classical soloists will often borrow a great instrument for a recording.  Kind of the same thing.  Well, I have probably bored some readers writing about classical, but your comment may have brought them back in.

Thanks, melm.  I will report again after break in.  Thus far, it hasn't been a straight line.  Some moments, it seems to sound better than others.  But you know how that goes, it could be my ears, electric load on the lines or the grid, a new DAC, or a host of other issues. 

After listening to the Critter/Jules recording again, I also realized that Chris is playing heavier strings than Jules, likely medium and light.  I've definitely never heard that before.

Fans of acoustic guitar who don't know about Chris and Jules should seek them out.  These young guys are world class players, with a special synergy between them.     

@melm

and the proof will always be in the listening.

Absolutely correct and that is all that matters to me. How convincingly a component reproduces music is by far the most critical criteria. I wasn’t directly comparing the 2 DACs, rather they both are similar in the praise they garner for high quality sound and lack of big brand name recognition.

I wouldn’t say the Merason DAC1 is less sophisticated, less features and flexibility? Agree, it is minimalist by design . My only interest in them centers around how well each presents Redbook CD playback. I suspect that both DACs will do this format rightful justice. My gut tells me that both would impress.

Charles

@charles1dad
In the case of a DAC that one hasn’t heard, IMO there’s still more to go on than one’s gut. A DAC, like any other component, can’t give more than it has. So, with a bit of experience, one needs to look inside, a proposition that has served me well. As I have a strong interest in the DAC category generally, and because I respect what you have written, I looked for all the information I could discover about the Swiss manufactured Merason, not all that easy to come by. Based on its insides it strikes me as closer to the LKS MH-DA004 DAC, the predecessor of the 005 and a terrific DAC itself. But even as compared to the 004 it has, let’s call them, "far less expensive" chips, and a smaller power supply. Input is limited to 192kHz PCM (LKS: PCM to 384kHz) and no DSD at all (LKS: up to DSD512). Minimalist by design? Or by cost? In any event I think this clearly justifies the "less sophisticated" characterization most especially re: the 005. At this time I believe it is short-sighted to be satisfied with Red Book alone, especially at a $5500 price. Modern DACs are doing very well with Red Book. But still, if you haven’t yet heard well-done higher resolution, including DSD, you have some good listening to look forward to.

@melm

Once again I appreciate your point of view and I do understand your perspective. One thing that I’ve come to recognize is defining what one’s objective and goals are must be thoroughly sorted out. IOW know what you want. Merason opted to forego DSD and MQA , philosophically they chose the path of PCM Redbook CD playback at what they consider a premium level.

They readily acknowledge that this is not going to find favor with everyone and these people will be better served with other DAC alternatives. I understand their product priorities and direction. In my initial post I wasn’t comparing Merason DAC1 and Musetec 005. I mentioned them as I find each individually interesting and appealing in their own way.

That’s why I openly concede that in terms of DAC features connectivity and flexibility I give the nod to the 005. Quite frankly in the marketplace they very likely appeal to different segments of listeners. I’ve heard DSD (Via a friend’s Bricasti and Playback Designs DACs ) and it is not a big deal or attraction for "my" needs. Surely it is for others. So this is strictly a personal choice scenario.

My interest and focus is achieving (Maintaining)  upper tier level CD playback so Merason’s philosophical and design approach works for me. Reading multiple posts on this thread lead me to believe that the Musetec is more than capable of achieving this task as well. In hindsight I should have been clearer in stating that I’m not directly comparing the 2 DACs.

Rather these are DACs with differing approaches and yet I find them both worthy of further attention. Just as I have no reason to doubt the very positive testimony on this thread, people who’s ears/taste I highly respect say that the Merason DAC1 sounds stunningly good. So very likely each is quite special in their respective ways.

Charles

Recently purchased this Musetec and having trouble playing. upon hooking up and auto install come for Amanero 384 is gives me "Driver Errror" for window 10 laptop. Any suggestions? 

@theatro There shouldn't be any need to update the firmware but Windows will require drivers which you can download here:

http://www.mu-sound.com/service.html

@lordmelton - BINGO!! the Driver website/download did it. 1000 Thanks! Now let see how this thing handles. 

@theatro 

Glad that you have the DAC connected.  Sometimes Windows is a nuisance.

Please write of your impressions once you have it up and running for a while.

@steakster 

This is a great thread. Sharing info about exciting new gear.

Agreed. BTW I'm familiar with the Concert Fidelity DAC and have actually listened to It. It is very good sounding.  Very organic/natural presentation with terrific musical flow and engagement. This type of DAC stands the test of time exceptionally well.

Many newer DACs (In my opinion) that place heavy emphasis on "detail"  often aren't nearly as satisfying as what you have.  There's a fine balance in achieving detail (Resolution) and emotionally involving musicality. 

Charles 

I'm continually amazed by the amount of information contained within 16/44 format. I've yet to have a system or source that's extracted full measure of 16/44. It would be interesting to hear of someone who believes they've heard ultimate limitation of this format. I suspect there still isn't a dac capable of extracting all available info here.

But then, the question becomes, how can one be sure they're hearing limitations of format rather than equipment?  Obviously, there is an objective limit to amount of info with 16/44, but how can we truly know we've reached it? We can't experience these sins of omission until we've heard that objective limitation. Knowing this spurs our never ending chase of yet higher resolution.

Early marketing of cd format as 'perfect sound forever' was thought of as laughable for decades. Respect for 16/44 continues to grow over time, not so laughable today, and many moving to digital only systems.